How many people would you consider blind before you start asking if you're the problem?

I mean if it's all so simple then why are capitalists like the Koch brothers pumping so much money into confounding the narrative around climate change? Doesn't that telegraph that no matter the reality of the viability of fixing climate change the actors causing climate change and who have disproportionate influence on climate policy at best have no interest in an honest public discussion on climate change and at worst are actively sabotaging climate change reform?

... You brought up climate change. I spoke on climate change. Now you say it's just one factor and it's human consumption that needs to stop. But yeah. You're definitely not giving up on humanity. We just need to Genocide 90+% of the population and go back to living in mud huts. **** outta here.

All of humanity could try to tell me that you can deplete resources faster than they’re being renewed and remain sustainable and I would stand completely alone and entirely correct.

don't think I or anyone else said is simple at all

The chances for failure are definitely better than the chances for success

But it's not impossible to address through intensive govt research and development. That is not an easy or particularly feasible political goal in this country. But I've yet to hear a better or more feasible idea.

Which resources are you referring to? I assume it isn't electricity. Are you specifically talking about food and water?

You’re advocating an approach that will kill 100%.

That last ten percent is infinitely more important than the preceding 90% since it’s the difference between something and nothing.

.... **** the 10%

If it takes the kind of genocide you think is necessary for us to survive in some limited state it's not even worth it. So either the ship goes down with all of us or it doesn't.

Coral reef, rain forest, non-human mammals


**** we cannot survive without

Human population was bottle necked at around 2000 just 100,000 years ago.