This is the 332nd consecutive month with an above-average temperature.

[Kblaze8855]

you really make it easy for yourself. So you acknowledge man-made climate change and the problems it causes, and then choose to ignore that knowledge and say "oh, that has always happened, so why care about it".

No. I accept that man may have some impact on the exact severity of things that have happened forever.....while also accepting that the most extreme weather we know about happened without our input. So I dont panic or get caught up in the whens and hows. The world with or without us will eventually have another ice age or eventually get hotter than we have ever known. As I said earlier...greenland was a forest and many deserts were under water...before we got here. If its a matter of when and not if....I focus on the things that can be changed not just....put off for a moment or altered slightly.

The World Bank and most other development agencies aren't saying that climate change is throwing the Sustainable Development cause back decades. Other than problems in distribution and excessive waste in developed countries, climate change diminishes developing countries own capabilities to cope with all sorts of critical phenomena.

That "other than" part is the key to me.

When we have enough for everyone...and wont give it to the people who arent born in the right country and look the right way....how are we looking at preventing climate change for the solution?

Its an issue of humanity. You have to look at what we are...who we are as a people...and figure out why we dont care. Why we put so much over helping the people who need it.

You know there is a product called "Neuticles" which is a surgical implant for neutered dogs and cats that mimics the look of still having balls. And since they were released....Americans have spent 221 million dollars on them. We spent 45 billion dollars on pets last year. Just in America. Entire world over 100 billion.

Have you any idea how many HUMANS wouldnt have to die if someone made a real effort to put an extra 100 billion into getting them supplies? Clean water tablets? Basic medical supplies? Rice and beans? Im not talking the works. Just...the basics. What they would need to live like...a 3rd as well as a poor american.

We have trillions of dollars wasted yearly without any consideration paid to the poor. If you show someone a dying child in person and ask them for 20 bucks that goes to the kid they would give it to you. But...tell them there are 400 million of them out of sight and it doesnt register. Doesnt make them exactly selfish...I have given to various charities that I feel help people....but I sure as hell still have a couple big screens, 5 rooms of cable, internet, and so on....in each of my 2 houses. So its not like im doing all I can.

Im not trying to judge humanity and ignore my own disregard of those in need. I just wonder why its so easy to ignore them. And what we can do about it.

We need to see the world as one nation. Just...brothers in humanity. And until we do all the rest of these causes feel like a lot of drama over nothing. When this awful shit is still going on I feel as passionate about global warming as I do about saving the whales(I am pro whale for the record).

Really...if we find a way to prevent climate change(an absurd notion on a large scale...but lets say we slow it)....do the poor then get what they need? Will they be safe?

If so...why didnt they get it 200 years ago? Think the social imbalance showed up lately? The people dying in Africa and asia have been there barely making it for generations dying of the same diseases almost wiped out in developed countries, dying when crops dont come in, and not being sent relief.

The problem of us disregarding people we dont have to see is much deeper than global warming and really...is to me the biggest problem the world has.

Stopping global warming to help the poor or even humanity as a whole is a bandaid on the heart attack that is the selfish nature of man.

Also, science now can say with some confidence that recent extreme events (heat, precipitation etc.) can be tied to man-made climate change.

Over a million people were killed in one flood in china in the 1800s. In the 1930s they had 2 years of droughts followed by crazy snow one winter then heavy rains and 7 huge storms in july alone killing around 3 million people. If that happens tomorrow....what are the odds someone like you connects it to global warming? Every single big storm someone comes on here and does it.

My question is this...and you may have an answer if its your field.

When these things have happened forever...thousands of years...billions...and we have no measurements and poor records kept until lately. How do you say with any confidence what causes them now....and didnt cause them then? What data do you have on the floods of 1287 in Europe that suggests what causes floods now could not have caused those?

I can see how that might sound a tad...smarmy(never had to write that word till now) but it is a serious question.

People seem to kinda treat this issue like a boogey man in the closet causing all forms of weather related misfortune. I wanna know....if we are at fault for some extreme weather why is history so littered with extreme weather?



This isnt "Its always happened so why care". Its me saying that it happening will never be as big a problem as the fact that people dont care that it happens. Because if people cared half the true misery in the world could be gone in our lifetimes. Im not worried about how preventing climate change can help feed people....we can feed them NOW....and dont do it. The world needs to help its people in literal physical ways...to start to care...before we put energy into trying to turn around climate change.

Because even if we turn it around...if the rich still shit on the poor they will be as bad off as they are now. Starvation is a hell of a lot older than the industrial revolution. Its just sadder now because we can end it and dont bother.

No one is asking you to take responsibility for mankind. Just stop being a cynic and at least support those who do take responsibility in rhetoric.

Compared to a child who believes everything is but a wish away a responsible adult is a cynic. But hes still right that you need to take action to make things happen.

Like it or not the great majority of people who dont have faith in others on a large scale are justified and proven right. You can say that if they showed a little faith they might have made success more likely...but you cant say they were wrong in the end.

You rarely lose betting on humans to do the wrong thing given the chance.

You can call me a cynic. I dont care. I dont think you will be able to call me wrong. Well intentioned you may be. But until the people of the "first" world care about those in the "third" none of this will make a real difference.

And your problem is the same as mine. I hate extreme poverty...you seem to hate the apathy of most when it comes to climate change.

And neither of us will get what we want because its a few million pulling against the human nature of 7 billion. Who wins that tug of war is obvious cynic or not.

So I try on the small scale. I do give to charity. Im setting up a secret santa donation for a family I know who needs it. I try to feed the poor when I can. Im not doing all I can and nobody I know is. But I dont need to be called selfish for doing what I know I can and not pinning my hopes to a sudden change in human nature.

If there is a longterm solution to your problem and mine...its how we raise our children and how they raise theirs.

Selfishness is the blight of the world. And global warming isnt that high on the list of problems it causes. Its on the list. But its not the first I feel we need to tackle. Especially when its one of the least likely to be turned around.

I dont expect a real reply to all that...just...getting it out. Its been on my mind and I try to explain why I feel the way I do when people seem...offended...by it.

[gigantes]

on a completely unrelated topic, willful ignorance and elaborate self-delusion makes the world go 'round. so god bless every cute little kitty out there in need of a hug.

[Brunch@Five]

I don't have much time right now, so I'll respond to a few points:

That "other than" part is the key to me.

When we have enough for everyone...and wont give it to the people who arent born in the right country and look the right way....how are we looking at preventing climate change for the solution?

That's a legitimate criticism, but it shows here that we think on different scales. My point was that climate change hurts the developing countries' OWN capabilities to cope with their problems, and makes them even more dependent on foreign aid. That is not what development politics want.
Direct food and clothing aid is actually hurting those societies, as they are destroying the market. Things like these help in form of short-term humanitarian aid, but they do not help alleviate suffering long-term, as change has to come from within those societies.
And when we have man-made climate-change, disproportionally caused by the western world (per capita, China isn't even in the top 10 I believe), that hurts the less developed world's livelihoods and makes it virtually impossible for them to provide for their people, long-term, it becomes a moral responsibility for us to limit climate change.
Thankfully, science has enabled us to see beyond phenomena like hunger and diseases and tackle them at their roots. Donating food and clothes is nice, but not really helping. That's what the "Sustainable Development" paradigm is about. Man-made climate-change is severely hurting that case.

[Kblaze8855]

It almost seems like you believe third world poverty is a recent issue. Many of the same places that need help now have been struggling to take care of their people for as long as we have history to check.

Kings of Mali were among the richest rulers in world history and had the resources and land to wipe out poverty. Instead they set up caravans of silk covered slaves and camels carrying hugs sacks of gold and gems and spent so much they flooded the market and destroyed the economy of entire neighboring Kingdoms.


The haves take from the have nots. Poor people work to create goods they can't afford themselves and someone a world away takes it for granted.

The same kind of people have suffered forever. If preventing climate change were the key places like Africa and rural areas of Asia and other places wouldn't have been struggling before humans had the ability to cause trouble.

Is that not reasonable?

[Brunch@Five]

Originally Posted by Kblaze8855

It almost seems like you believe third world poverty is a recent issue. Many of the same places that need help now have been struggling to take care of their people for as long as we have history to check.

Kings of Mali were among the richest rulers in world history and had the resources and land to wipe out poverty. Instead they set up caravans of silk covered slaves and camels carrying hugs sacks of gold and gems and spent so much they flooded the market and destroyed the economy of entire neighboring Kingdoms.


The haves take from the have nots. Poor people work to create goods they can't afford themselves and someone a world away takes it for granted.

The same kind of people have suffered forever. If preventing climate change were the key places like Africa and rural areas of Asia and other places wouldn't have been struggling before humans had the ability to cause trouble.

Is that not reasonable?

You are of course right that limiting climate change won't feed and shelter or fairly distribute anything to anyone. It won't solve those problems.
However, and that's my (and the development researchers) point is that cliamte change will hit those who are most disadvantaged the strongest and make it virtually impossible to ever get out of their hole.
For meteorological and geological reasons, the regions around the equator and the tropics (low latitudes) face the most severe hazards due to climate change. They also have, due to underdevelopment, less capabilities to cope with these hazards.

The fact that climate change only adds to several structural disadvantages of less developed countries doesn't make it less important to combat it.

[Kblaze8855]

Originally Posted by Brunch@Five

You are of course right that limiting climate change won't feed and shelter or fairly distribute anything to anyone. It won't solve those problems.
However, and that's my (and the development researchers) point is that cliamte change will hit those who are most disadvantaged the strongest and make it virtually impossible to ever get out of their hole.
For meteorological and geological reasons, the regions around the equator and the tropics (low latitudes) face the most severe hazards due to climate change. They also have, due to underdevelopment, less capabilities to cope with these hazards.

The fact that climate change only adds to several structural disadvantages of less developed countries doesn't make it less important to combat it.

just feels odd to me to blame something that the problem predates by thousands of years. This is gonna make their recovery impossible....this. Not thethings that have kept them down forever. Its global warming they need to worry about?


Its on the list i suppose. number 1? Eh....