Burn, baby, Burn

[Yzermandius19]

fake environmentalists don't get it, who knew?

[August1991]

On 8/19/2021 at 7:07 AM, myata said:

That concept indeed applies to our natural environment. It's not infinite....

Myata, as I say, you suffer from zero-sum thinking.

Life, the universe, is not zero-sum. Thank God!

Edited August 22, 2021 by August1991

[August1991]

On 8/19/2021 at 9:38 AM, Yzermandius19 said:

that's all part of the scam

claim that if we don't destroy the economy

the world will end

invoking disaster to sell...

 

Here, I disagree with you, Yzermadius. And possibly I agree with Myata.

=====

In summer 1914, there were many cities like mine now where unilingual people lived side-by-side. Protestants who could only speak German lived beside Catholics who could only Polish or Slovack. Jews spoke their own language but dealt with all.

This was the European world before 1914.

And then, this civilized world ended. 

====

Why? How?

I suspect that ordinary people at the time believed/trusted their authorities. At the time, people said

"Pour la patrie"

"Do your duty"

Edited August 22, 2021 by August1991

[ironstone]

On 8/17/2021 at 3:26 AM, cougar said:

?  This is really what you believe ?

Buddy, the way things are going, I think salmon will disappear in the next 20 years.

If you and me are still around we can revisit this subject and find out who had it right.

20 years from now no salmon? I'm pretty sure the climate alarmists in the US like AOC to name just one have stated we have only 12 years or so unless drastic action is taken. And according to you this drastic action is not happening.

Ocasio-Cortez: 'World will end in 12 years' if climate change not addressed | TheHill

I wouldn't be surprised if many of the forest fires are deliberate by radical climate activists.

This is not to say I don't take pollution seriously but when so called developing nations like China or India are let off the hook I can only shake my head. China and India with nuclear weapons and space programs no less.

There are serious issues to deal with but the world will be in existence much longer than 20 years from now.

[myata]

Sure, we've disappeared commercial cod fishing that could be caught with buckets when settlers arrived.

Soon to be disappeared at the current rate is all old growth forest, as quoted there are about twenty protected areas left some ridiculously small to be called that, in a country that was a forest coast to coast a dozen generations back.

Salmon stocks are rapidly depleting there are news, meetings and conferences, but when have they solved any of such problems. For commercially fished wild stock I would not be surprised if it would be less than two decades.

A third of species has gone extinct. But of course it's meaningless for those of us who will see the rake only when it hits them, and a few times hard at that. Maybe irreversibly hard but sigh, there seems to be only one way to find out.

[Yzermandius19]

18 hours ago, August1991 said:

Here, I disagree with you, Yzermadius. And possibly I agree with Myata.

=====

In summer 1914, there were many cities like mine now where unilingual people lived side-by-side. Protestants who could only speak German lived beside Catholics who could only Polish or Slovack. Jews spoke their own language but dealt with all.

This was the European world before 1914.

And then, this civilized world ended. 

====

Why? How?

I suspect that ordinary people at the time believed/trusted their authorities. At the time, people said

"Pour la patrie"

"Do your duty"

what is your disagreement?

all I see is non-sequiturs

[August1991]

On 8/23/2021 at 12:08 AM, Yzermandius19 said:

what is your disagreement?

all I see is non-sequiturs

Yzermandius, I simply don't know why the Austrian-Hungrian Empire, this multicultural, multilingual society collapsed.

Why did Europeans start killing each each other in 1914?

(My current theory: Europeans are violent - but it takes a generation or two before they remember a war. Once anyone born around 1650 forgets the Thirty Years War, there's the Napoleonic Wars - and so on.)

[August1991]

12 minutes ago, August1991 said:

Yzermandius, I simply don't know why the Austrian-Hungrian Empire, this multicultural, multilingual society collapsed.

Why did Europeans start killing each each other in 1914?

(My current theory: Europeans are violent - but it takes a generation or two before they remember a war. Once anyone born around 1650 forgets the Thirty Years War, there's the Napoleonic Wars - and so on.)

My other theory: Ordinary people in 1914 believed/trusted what the elite told them.

In English, "Do your duty".

=====

I'm old enough to have spoken to a man who fought in World War I. I recall asking him why/how he did that. I recall his answer, and I suspect that it will resonate with any soldier.

"I did it because I had my fellows beside me."

=====

Many years later, much older, I was teaching in Russia.

I looked at this motley group of students, men/boys around 18 years old, and it ran through my mind: if I had to pick a random group of men on this planet, guys you need, I could not pick a better bunch to trust.

  

Edited August 24, 2021 by August1991

[Yzermandius19]

2 hours ago, August1991 said:

My other theory: Ordinary people in 1914 believed/trusted what the elite told them.

In English, "Do your duty".

=====

I'm old enough to have spoken to a man who fought in World War I. I recall asking him why/how he did that. I recall his answer, and I suspect that it will resonate with any soldier.

"I did it because I had my fellows beside me."

=====

Many years later, much older, I was teaching in Russia.

I looked at this motley group of students, men/boys around 18 years old, and it ran through my mind: if I had to pick a random group of men on this planet, guys you need, I could not pick a better bunch to trust.

  

and what does that have to do with comments?

[August1991]

On 8/24/2021 at 6:54 AM, Yzermandius19 said:

and what does that have to do with comments?

This particular OP started with the admirable intent to ensure that life on this planet would be sustainable.

I moved the OP towards whether life would be civilised. 

 

[Yzermandius19]

8 hours ago, August1991 said:

This particular OP started with the admirable intent to ensure that life on this planet would be sustainable.

I moved the OP towards whether life would be civilised.

why are you even quoting me?

you are talking past me entirely

about something I'm not even talking about

your responses have nothing to do with my responses

and don't seem to have any point to them whatsoever either

pure gibberish

Edited August 28, 2021 by Yzermandius19

[August1991]

On 8/28/2021 at 9:10 AM, Yzermandius19 said:

why are you even quoting me?

you are talking past me entirely

....

Yzermandius,

You are like a sophisticated European in, say, 1911, a citizen of, say, Lemberg or even Konigsberg.

You live in a multicultural society and you may even speak several languages. 

Your 19th century world is civilized. But to use a 21st century word, is it sustainable?

Edited September 2, 2021 by August1991

[Yzermandius19]

8 minutes ago, August1991 said:

Yzermandius,

You are like a sophisticated European in, say, 1911, a citizen of, say, Lemberg or even Konigsberg.

You live in a multicultural society and you may even speak several languages. 

Your 19th century society is civilized. But to use a 21st century word, is it sustainable?

more sustainable today than in the 19th century

the more highly civilized are the only ones who push sustainability

the less civilized are the more environmentally rapacious ones

less civilized is less sustainable

economic success and environmental sustainability are far from mutually exclusive and it's an obvious false dichotomy to suggest otherwise

Edited September 2, 2021 by Yzermandius19

[August1991]

29 minutes ago, Yzermandius19 said:

....

the more highly civilized are the only ones who push sustainability

the less civilized are the more environmentally rapacious ones

less civilized is less sustainable

....

You don't seem to understand my comparison between civilization and environment.

Is the western world sustainable as a civilized society?

=====

Environmentalists fear that the physical world is not sustainable.

I fear that our human societies are not sustainable. 

[Yzermandius19]

14 minutes ago, August1991 said:

You don't seem to understand my comparison between civilization and environment.

Is the western world sustainable as a civilized society?

=====

Environmentalists fear that the physical world is not sustainable.

I fear that our human societies are not sustainable. 

you don't seem to understand that the western world is more sustainable than any other world, not less

the societies that have the most fear about sustainability are western societies, not non-western societies

the problem is not western civilization, but lack of civilization

perfect is the enemy of good

blaming those with the best environmental records

for destroying the environment

as if they are the biggest offenders

is asinine

Edited September 2, 2021 by Yzermandius19

[August1991]

24 minutes ago, Yzermandius19 said:

you don't seem to understand that the western world is more sustainable than any other world, not less

...

Like the Austrian-Hungarian Empire or East Prussia in 1910, coastal America, 21st century Hollywood narratives and Western Europe today seem to believe their world is also, uh, sustainable.

Then, despite what the experts say, the Titanic sinks.

[Michael Hardner]

3 hours ago, August1991 said:

 

Then, despite what the experts say, the Titanic sinks.

Didn't you just say in another thread that Western enlightenment values make us stronger?

 

Isn't that essentially the reason that more want to come here from Russia, China, Cuba and Afghanistan than the other way around?

Liberal values and economies?

[Yzermandius19]

4 hours ago, August1991 said:

Like the Austrian-Hungarian Empire or East Prussia in 1910, coastal America, 21st century Hollywood narratives and Western Europe today seem to believe their world is also, uh, sustainable.

Then, despite what the experts say, the Titanic sinks.

saying that western civilization isn't perfect on sustainability

doesn't mean they aren't the most sustainable civilization around

every other Titanic is more prone to sinking

[cougar]

On 9/2/2021 at 3:32 AM, Yzermandius19 said:

the most sustainable civilization around

Nope.  It is a system based on growth, which means expansion based on population growth, exploiting more lands and resources and converting the natural habitat into a wasteland.

There is nothing sustainable about it.  The fact some people realize that and put their voices out there, does not mean they can do anything about it.

After the carbon tax, we can introduce a salmon tax, then a bear tax, then a moose tax, then a caribou tax and so on.  The taxes will fix it all !

[cougar]

On 8/19/2021 at 6:02 AM, Yzermandius19 said:

you can see this even today, as the poor nations have the worst environmental records and the wealthy nations have the best environmental records

Best records???     Past three years I was not able to fish for chinook salmon - never was a closure in the years before.  This year they tell me I will not be fishing fort steelhead in the winter either; despite it is a catch and release fishery.  Never has this happened before.   While I was in Kamloops, the Thompson steelhead population went from about 800 fish down to 200 fish in 6-7 years.  Now they have about 150, from a historical population of 10,000 fish a year.   And this is only fish.  It mirrors what is happening with all other species - caribou herds, grizzly bears, cougars, birds, reptiles, insects - all is going down the drain fast.

By the way don't you know that the environment of the poor countries is often destroyed and polluted by the wealthy nations, who are there to pillage and plunder taking advantage of lax or non -existent environment regulations?

On 8/19/2021 at 6:02 AM, Yzermandius19 said:

wise up, myata

 

I think it is you who needs wising up.

Edited September 5, 2021 by cougar

[Yzermandius19]

if you can't name anyone who is better

you have no argument

saying the west is bad is meaningless when everyone else is worse

[cougar]

18 hours ago, Yzermandius19 said:

if you can't name anyone who is better you have no argument

 

Really?

My objective wasn't to compare apples, oranges and pineapples.

My point is that what you call "best records", "best practices", "sustainable"  is a rotten system unable to protect the environment within its own borders, let alone serve as an example and provide guidance support and leadership to other nations.

Lets call it for what it is  - a bullshit system headed by bullshit leaders.

 

[Yzermandius19]

2 hours ago, cougar said:

Really?

My objective wasn't to compare apples, oranges and pineapples.

My point is that what you call "best records", "best practices", "sustainable"  is a rotten system unable to protect the environment within its own borders, let alone serve as an example and provide guidance support and leadership to other nations.

Lets call it for what it is  - a bullshit system headed by bullshit leaders.

perfect is the enemy of good

just because those with the best environmental records aren't perfect doesn't mean they aren't the best

it's a better example than any other example being set

Edited September 6, 2021 by Yzermandius19

[cougar]

12 hours ago, Yzermandius19 said:

perfect is the enemy of good

just because those with the best environmental records aren't perfect doesn't mean they aren't the best

it's a better example than any other example being set

Again, you want to work with relatives like "worse", "good", "better" or "the best".

I work with actual results and what the measures actually achieve.  I focus on our country as there is no need to compare with anyone else.

Again, we have a bullshit system where nothing is protected and no one is held accountable; take Mount Polly as a prime example, although wherever you look , examples abound.

 

[Yzermandius19]

17 minutes ago, cougar said:

Again, you want to work with relatives like "worse", "good", "better" or "the best".

I work with actual results and what the measures actually achieve.  I focus on our country as there is no need to compare with anyone else.

Again, we have a bullshit system where nothing is protected and no one is held accountable; take Mount Polly as a prime example, although wherever you look , examples abound.

you work with an imaginary perfect standard that will never be met

I deal with reality and actual results

I'm the realist, your the naive idealist

you ignores reality to tunnel vision on a lack of perfection, only able to see the negatives and ignoring all the positives to wallow in misery

if the entire world's environmental record was as good as those doing the best, the environment would be a lot better off

yet you blame them for lack of perfection which is petty nitpicking while ignoring the elephant in the room

why don't you start focusing on criticizing those doing the worst instead of ignoring them and focusing on criticizing those doing the best as if they are worst?

Edited September 6, 2021 by Yzermandius19