Anthropogenic Negative Climate Change (ANCC)

[Pargat Perrer]

Further to our discussion of tipping points.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lIEu...ab_channel=CNN

Did you see what the close captioning says at 2:34?

"....we should be hostile to human life and indeed to most of the life on Earth today."

It should say

"....which would be hostile to human life and indeed to most of the life on Earth today." It is referring to the tipping point.

I did like the reference to topless urgent care centers! LOL

I don't know if I agree that 25% minority is enough to get society to change, especially on something as fundamental as this. For many it's really coming down to a choice, would you like to die this way or die that way? i.e. from environmental catastrophes or from economic catastrophes.

[Bob Gillanders]

For many it's really coming down to a choice, would you like to die this way or die that way? i.e. from environmental catastrophes or from economic catastrophes.

This is a false choice. Much can be done with decisive action to push back the dates on those tipping points.
Before I die, I would like to see the humans at least make the effort.

[Bob Armstrong]

Hi Bob G, Pargat and Brad:

The problem is that the saving actions required (radical) do not rely on the "will of the people"!

The people would have to peacefully demonstrate (Hoping their legislatures had not yet made it a criminal offence), turn to civil disobedience (They will at minimum be arrested, charged, convicted, and sentenced), and/or choose violent revolution in the streets to replace the current governments of all nations.

Do any of you expect these to happen? Secondly, if they did, would the Capitalist Establishment be successful in maintaining the status quo, even if it required the shooting all the revolutionaries? If Capitalism wins...... then Climate Suicide will happen.

The problem is that "legal authority" is best to bring about the radical societal changes needed to avoid climate change suicide. This legal authority is held by our "representative", mostly capitalist, governments.

Are these governments really listening? They merely do lip service to the issue. They want to continue in power, and to do this they see keeping the economy going as the best way (Maybe minimally reduce the polluting, etc.). They do not really want to significantly impact on the world economic system. They tout programs getting to X by 2050.......they ignore all the science on the "Tipping Point" and that,, to quote, "There is an emergency......our house is on fire".

I go back to the opening post on this thread, Post # 1 - we are already toast; the necessary changes will not happen in the timeline required, given current evidence on our trajectory.

Only a "miracle" will save us! I proposed one possible one in the originating post.

BUT........I say: Don't live your life waiting for a miracle. All you are really doing is "Wishful Thinking".

~ Bob A (T-S/P)

[Bob Gillanders]

Only a "miracle" will save us! I proposed one possible one in the originating post.


~ Bob A (T-S/P)

New book out exploring the greed of Capitalism. Forget the aliens, COVID might be that miracle you are looking for if it triggers a world wide revolution.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EpNq...emocracyNow%21

[Pargat Perrer]

This is a false choice. Much can be done with decisive action to push back the dates on those tipping points.
Before I die, I would like to see the humans at least make the effort.

Perhaps it is a false choice, referring to the choice between dying from environmental catastrophes versus dying from economic catastrophes (brought on by climate change restrictions). I can't argue if it is false or not because I don't think anyone really knows for sure.

So Bob, if you were in a position of power and influence, how would you get the message across to the masses that this is a false choice?

I ask because I think if the masses see it as this choice, false or not they will shape their actions and beliefs that way and they will push back against restrictions on fossil fuel use for example. Perception is everything in this battle. So how would you try and change the perception of the masses?

Right now I think the masses really do see it as this choice. Think for example about the GTA. We have not had in our area any really bad effects from ANCC. So for the vast majority of the residents, there is no imperative to do anything, and their is resistance to upsetting the status quo.

I think this is a key question Bob: how could you or anyone in a position of power and / or influence change the perceptions of the masses?

[Bob Gillanders]

I think this is a key question Bob: how could you or anyone in a position of power and / or influence change the perceptions of the masses?

If humans are to survive the next 20-50 years and avoid a dystopian future, we don't just need to tackle climate change but other threats as well.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6WwH..._channel=Spark

We must begin to value life over money.

[Bob Armstrong]

Anthropogenic Negative Climate Change (ANCC)

The Dual "Tipping Points"


1.Nature's Tipping Point: avoid passing at all cost

2. Society's Tipping Point: achieve ASAP at all cost

Bob G's very good video link on this is (Posted here earlier): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lIEu-OW9_YA

The science quoted maintains that a sea change in a view society holds, will ONLY occur if the radical proposal gets a fully committed 25% of the society on board.

This can be achieved by the minority speaking up loudly and demonstrating in the streets, etc.. We saw such a sea change in the USA re the Vietnam War!

Questions

a. Do you feel the active minority concerned about climate change are doing enough to reach a 25% support level (Society's tipping point) in our general global world?

b. If yes, when do you expect this "Tipping Point" of society to be reached? Will the date of this sea change in society leave sufficient time to avoid passing Nature's tipping point, to re-balance the Earth's and atmosphere's systems so humans continue to survive?

c. If no, what more needs to be done by the minority to reach society's tipping point? Can they, by this increased intensity of action, get the sea change needed in time to avoid passing Nature's tipping point?

d. Do you project that the existing world governments will take the sea change steps needed, in time, to avoid human climate suicide?

e. Is the goal of getting a majority on-side re radical societal changes, to take power through the ballot box, replace existing governments, and then to legally start the reversal process?

[Note: my reading of scientific report summaries is that "Nature's Tipping Point" (After passing it we can never get back the historical balance needed by us to survive) is likely, on current trajectory, not decades away, but ONLY 9 years from now: around Jan. 1, 2031!!. Some say it is already too late; that we have already passed Nature's tipping point, and that we are now toast. I will stick with my projection.

Anyone who has articles challenging this date is invited to post them here!]

~ Bob A (T-S/P)

[Pargat Perrer]

If humans are to survive the next 20-50 years and avoid a dystopian future, we don't just need to tackle climate change but other threats as well.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6WwH..._channel=Spark

We must begin to value life over money.

You totally avoided my question.

Sure, we need to value life over money, we need to be more humanistic, agreed.

But HOW do you get the masses who are not willing to upset the apple cart by drastic steps such as restricting dramatically worldwide fossil fuel usage, because they are afraid of the economic repercussions, to say to hell with it and DEMAND such steps be taken? So that you can get to this 25% threshold you mentioned?

[Bob Gillanders]

You totally avoided my question.

Sure, we need to value life over money, we need to be more humanistic, agreed.

But HOW do you get the masses who are not willing to upset the apple cart by drastic steps such as restricting dramatically worldwide fossil fuel usage, because they are afraid of the economic repercussions, to say to hell with it and DEMAND such steps be taken? So that you can get to this 25% threshold you mentioned?

Well now, I did avoid answering your question directly. I do have ideas rattling around in my skull, but as I tried to compose a list, a general theme coalesced. Thus, my answer “We must begin to value life over money” is meant as a thought-provoking concept.

We have over 8 billion people each making thousands of decisions every day. Collectively we have the power to overcome all our self-inflicted wounds if enough of us are rowing in the same direction. The future is not yet written, apathy and despair are not the answers.

I could be more specific, but for now being vague is so much more satisfying.

[Bob Armstrong]

Hi Bob G:

The almost 8 billion on this little fragile planet MUST come to agreement with you that "People, and the planet, MUST be valued OVER money (Read capitalist "profit")".

I for one, would like to know what unformed thoughts are rattling around in your brain about how we, the minuscule minority of positive climate change promoters, ever reach this massive majority, which is effectively living denial?

Bob A

[Dilip Panjwani]

Hi Bob A and Bob G,

Capitalism is bad because:
1. In capitalist systems those with capital have an unfair advantage over those without, in being able to be productive.
2. It enables those with capital to keep the government politicians in their pockets and make laws which benefit them at the expense of others.
3. It enables them to also keep in their pockets those charming smooth-talkers easily mislabelled as 'experts' and loved by the media, harming the unsuspecting audience.

The solution lies not in adopting socialism or communism, which are even worse, but in
1. Enabling free access to capital for all with ideas, talent, ability and work-ethic
2. Limit the powers of the elected governments (which are primarily interested in accumulating funds and power to dominate the media and hire the influencers, for the next election)
3. Learn to investigate and think for yourself, rather than blindly following so called 'experts' proliferating on the media.

[Peter McKillop]

"THE ORIGINAL PREFACE (1549)

ALTERED IN 1552 AND 1662 CONCERNING THE SERVICE OF THE CHURCH


THERE was never any thing by the wit of man so well devised, or so sure established, which in continuance of time hath not been corrupted"

The above was part of the Church of England's first Book of Common Prayer, the writing of which was attended to and supervised by Thomas Cranmer. Cranmer went on to suffer an unhappy ending - he became kindling in a Roman Catholic bonfire. Cranmer was an intelligent fellow who clearly had a solid understanding of the basic nature of human beings. And so have many thousands of others over the centuries.

Hi Bob A and Bob G,

Capitalism is bad because:
1. In capitalist systems those with capital have an unfair advantage over those without, in being able to be productive.
2. It enables those with capital to keep the government politicians in their pockets and make laws which benefit them at the expense of others.
3. It enables them to also keep in their pockets those charming smooth-talkers easily mislabelled as 'experts' and loved by the media, harming the unsuspecting audience. ....

I offer this clarification: capitalism is not bad per se; capitalism is bad because it's a mechanism devised by humans.

....
The solution lies not in adopting socialism or communism, which are even worse, but in
1. Enabling free access to capital for all with ideas, talent, ability and work-ethic
2. Limit the powers of the elected governments (which are primarily interested in accumulating funds and power to dominate the media and hire the influencers, for the next election)
3. Learn to investigate and think for yourself, rather than blindly following so called 'experts' proliferating on the media.

Way too general, don't you think? Maybe I've asked you this before but are there books you would recommend that would go into a lot more detail on the above?

[Dilip Panjwani]

"[B]

are there books you would recommend that would go into a lot more detail on the above?

Try:

• The Myth of Capitalism
• Monopolies and the Death of Competition
• Written by: Jonathan Tepper, Denise Hearn

[Bob Armstrong]

Hi Dilip:

Nice hammering of Capitalism.

We'll just have to agree to disagree that Libertarianism is the best option for change, to improve our somewhat, at the moment, impotent position.

For my money, only Democratic Marxism would have the freedom as a government to legally make the radical societal/economic changes needed to avoid the start of climate change suicide around Jan. 1, 2031. Its parties will be totally transparent in their campaigns, and tell the public exactly what pain is necessary for the species to survive.

Do not be quick to opine that such an honest party could never get elected. Our environment is quickly going to get more and more hostile, and there will be great dislocation. The mindset of the majority is going to assess reality more accurately, and recggnize that some tough medicine will be required to save the situation. They will start to vote for a party that is giving them the straight goods.

~ Bob A (T-S/P)

[Peter McKillop]

Try:

• The Myth of Capitalism
• Monopolies and the Death of Competition
• Written by: Jonathan Tepper, Denise Hearn

Thanks, Dilip. I've reserved a copy at the library.