Of protecting Earth's ecology

[Sabretooth]

Yes, that is a good idea.

Secondly, the very idea of "Work" must be redefined. For example, citizens of a certain neighbourhood can contribute, in a week, to duties in the Vertical Farm or in the local police station. The education system must provide for a well-rounded education that should teach all aspects of human existence.

You certainly are an idealist but unfortunately, the idealist will be labelled lunatic just like Greta Thunberg.

 

[SIPRA]

You certainly are an idealist but unfortunately, the idealist will be labelled lunatic just like Greta Thunberg.

He (@jamahir) certainly is. He is still attached to Marxism, while most of the erstwhile Marxists, of the third world, have already migrated to US and west, for greener postures, and settled there.

 

[Dante80]

I know that. Bit answer my question to the point. How is 0.01% CO2 rise any relevant? If it was massive increase in CO2 like 0.5-1% then I can understand. But 0.01% is too small to have any effect. So, it is fake news

Over the past 800,000 years ice core data shows that carbon dioxide has varied from values as low as 180 ppm to the pre-industrial level of 270 ppm.

It currently sits at around 415ppm. This is not a rise of 0.01%, as you can plainly see.

 

[jamahir]

He (@jamahir) certainly is. He is still attached to Marxism, while most of the erstwhile Marxists, of the third world, have already migrated to US and west, for greener postures, and settled there.

Well, Marxist thought is just one of the paths to Ultimate Socialism whatever shape that might be.

In India, Socialist ideals have seen a minor revival among some youth who were fired up by progressive youth leaders like Kanhaiya Kumar, Umar Khalid and Shehla Rashid, who are all student leaders in the JNU ( Jawaharlal Nehru University ) in Delhi.

In Pakistan too, there is still Socialist idealism among the likes of the music band, Laal, the journalist Nadeem Paracha, and the activist Malala Yousafzai.

@Bilal9 can say more on the progressive scene in Bangladesh.

 

[Smarana Mitra]

Over the past 800,000 years ice core data shows that carbon dioxide has varied from values as low as 180 ppm to the pre-industrial level of 270 ppm.

It currently sits at around 415ppm. This is not a rise of 0.01%, as you can plainly see.

The CO2 was about 300ppm and rose to 400ppm. The rise may be 35% but comparing to the atmosphere gases totalling 1000000 ppm, 100ppm rise is juat 0.01%

 

[SIPRA]

Well, Marxist thought is just one of the paths to Ultimate Socialism whatever shape that might be.

Sometimes, it just comes to my mind, that a new form of socialism (neo-socialism), may emerge, in somewhat distant future, from extraordinary advancement of discoveries and technologies, where possibly suppression and exploitation of a group of people, by another class, would no more remain viable and tenable. But, perhaps, it is merely a wild imagination and idea.

But, we have gone off-topic.

 

[Hamartia Antidote]

You certainly are an idealist but unfortunately, the idealist will be labelled lunatic just like Greta Thunberg.

Ironically it is due to people like Thunberg that the third world has serious pollution problems. Pressure from zero tolerance environmentalists to ban land/air/water hazards in the late 1960s and early 70’s to clean up the LOCAL environment opened opportunities to push these hazardous things to poorer countries that had almost no environmental controls. So the net benefit to the world was actually a net loss. it made things worse for the planet.

 

[RealNapster]

Hello all, this thread is partly the result of being inspired by student / climate-activist Greta Thunberg's recent speech and partly by my own concern about the human-created pollution that is destroying the ecology of this planet which at least for the next 15 years will be our main home even if some people move to Mars.

I live in India which houses the most polluted city in the world, Delhi. And I know that India, China and USA are among the most polluting societies in the world.

What I want to present here and start discussion among PDF members is the solutions on how to preserve our ecology and remove the very real global pollution which cannot be rejected even by those who don't believe in Climate Change.

I request PDF moderators / administrators ( @waz , @Dubious and others ) to make this thread sticky because this topic goes beyond things like nationalism, civil wars, regime-change and inter-country wars / rivalries.

My first presented solution is for a gradual global ban on all privately-owned cars and two-wheelers which must be replaced with mass public transport vehicles like buses and for certain occasions like car-taxis. Plus, workplaces and educational institutions must provide bus facility to their employees and students. Not only this, the fuel that will power these vehicles will also have to be ecologically good, whether it be battery-stored or on-the-fly electric generation like the QUANT car. Again, even if ecologically-good fuel systems are used to fuel privately-owned vehicles, the pollution created by mass-production of these vehicles will defeat the very purpose of ecologically-good vehicles. So, Elon Musk is incorrect in pitching privately-owned Tesla cars as replacement to privately-owned petroleum cars.

My second presented solution is for agriculture. Not only is the 60's agricultural generation method harmful to ecology, it is also the cause of diseases like cancer. In the Indian state of Punjab, many farmers suffer from cancers because of the chemical pesticides and insecticides they use on their farms. And then, the traditional system of having agricultural lands in rural areas and consumers mainly in urban areas is also incorrect. What is more scientific is creation of Urban Farms and especially maximum five-storey Vertical Farms. These two solutions, when enabled for every urban neighborhood-level allow food production at literally the door-step. Combine these with Socialist-style Collective Farming and converting rural areas into urban areas ( say, combine the populations of ten villages into one new urban-cultured township ), it all enables ecologically-good food production. And there is the added advantage of converting, especially in South Asia, regressive-cultured villages into a more evolved city life.

My next presented solution is for mobile communication and data consumption ( cell phones, laptops and tablets ). It has become a modern semi-tragedy that so many people are consumed by their silly hunger for owning the latest cell phone and manufacturers providing the consumers with only enough advanced cell phone ( with a small screen ) that will make the consumer bored with the new device in some months and then create a desire to newly buy yet another small-screened cell phone. Instead, what phone manufacturers companies should develop is a mobile device with a rollable screen, like this device shown in the film, Red Planet. The film was released in year 2000. Such a device can be stored on a person in a specially sewn pant / skirt pocket on the leg.

My next presented solution is a simple one. Abolish the world's militaries. Security for people can be provided by police forces. Let the world be governed by simple Direct Democracy Socialism because only True Socialism is the ideology that is truly harmonious with ecology.

Okay, these are what I can write for now. I will write more when I can. I ask the members to please contribute to this important topic.

Add to the list

1. No space tourism. Rockets still emit alot of gases into atmosphere during launch. If someone want to go to mars or moon, please go. But don’t plan to return.

But, banning privately owned car mean death of some 10+ trillion economy , or should i include the millions of barel oil producing industry too. Just 1 company aramco is worth 1 trillion USD plus. This mean industries loose almost 400-500 billion dollar annual ... now in some cases countries own industries while in others industries own countries. So banning PRivately own cars is not an easy/practical/affordable thing.
Instead

2. Each Countries must produce the “whole electricity requirements of its Electric cars” ,whole capacity through solar.

 

[Bilal9]

Well, Marxist thought is just one of the paths to Ultimate Socialism whatever shape that might be.

In India, Socialist ideals have seen a minor revival among some youth who were fired up by progressive youth leaders like Kanhaiya Kumar, Umar Khalid and Shehla Rashid, who are all student leaders in the JNU ( Jawaharlal Nehru University ) in Delhi.

In Pakistan too, there is still Socialist idealism among the likes of the music band, Laal, the journalist Nadeem Paracha, and the activist Malala Yousafzai.

@Bilal9 can say more on the progressive scene in Bangladesh.

Quick links, I shall return to discuss...

https://www.dhakatribune.com/bangla...all-for-boosting-marxism-to-combat-capitalism

 

[Dante80]

The CO2 was about 300ppm and rose to 400ppm. The rise may be 35% but comparing to the atmosphere gases totalling 1000000 ppm, 100ppm rise is juat 0.01%

Now I understand the misconception. You think that you need a vastly larger percentage of the atmosphere to be CO2 for the climate to be impacted in any significant way.

To give you some context, in the Jurassic period (when almost the whole world was a tropical jungle), the level of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere was around 1900ppm (about 5 times what it is now).

Please read the underlying science before declaring it as fake news. The feedback effect needs pretty minuscule (according to your criteria about absolute percentage of gases in the atmosphere) quantities to trigger.

Reading about the Tipping points in the climate system may help.

 

[Type59]

I downloaded ecosia search engine. Just by searching for the past year, I believe I have planted more then 50 trees. Its safe and millions of people already using it.

https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.ecosia.android

Personally I have stopped eating beef. Drink oat milk, trying to avoid soy and palm oil because mainly grown in the tropics. Even a slight change in lifestyle can help.

 

[Smarana Mitra]

Now I understand the misconception. You think that you need a vastly larger percentage of the atmosphere to be CO2 for the climate to be impacted in any significant way.

To give you some context, in the Jurassic period (when almost the whole world was a tropical jungle), the level of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere was around 1900ppm (about 5 times what it is now).

Please read the underlying science before declaring it as fake news. The feedback effect needs pretty minuscule (according to your criteria about absolute percentage of gases in the atmosphere) quantities to trigger.

Feedback mechanism can't go out of control in mere 0.01 (100ppm) increase in CO2. The 0.01% increase is negligible and one can't simply claim that it is responsible for increasing average temperature of earth by 1 degree celsius (average temperature is in the range of just 14-15 celsius, by the way). There is simply no evidence to say this. Also, the increase in temperature since ice age os not something you can correlate with increase in carbon dioxide. So, even if there is climate change, it is only natural and nothing that man can do about. Climate of the earth is known to change naturally over time and is not something man can be blamed for

 

[Dante80]

Feedback mechanism can't go out of control in mere 0.01 (100ppm) increase in CO2. The 0.01% increase is negligible and one can't simply claim that it is responsible for increasing average temperature of earth by 1 degree celsius (average temperature is in the range of just 14-15 celsius, by the way). There is simply no evidence to say this. Also, the increase in temperature since ice age os not something you can correlate with increase in carbon dioxide. So, even if there is climate change, it is only natural and nothing that man can do about. Climate of the earth is known to change naturally over time and is not something man can be blamed for

There is actually ample and comprehensive evidence to the contrary. As well as broad scientific consensus on this matter. It seems though that you are viewing this predominantly with a political lens, so I'm going to concede the discussion. Thank you for the insight.

 

[Smarana Mitra]

There is actually ample and comprehensive evidence to the contrary. As well as broad scientific consensus on this matter. It seems though that you are viewing this predominantly with a political lens, so I'm going to concede the discussion. Thank you for the insight.

Where is evidence of 100ppm (0.01%) rise in CO2 being a cause for major climate changeif 1 degree celsius. Temperature fluctuation on earth has happened for thousands of years but the fluctuation is limited to a maximum of 15 degree Celsius band and not beyond that as otherwise life would stop existing. The band of 0-100 celsius water cycle temperature is the only range where life can exist and even there the temperature has to be reasonably above 0 and significantly below 50 celsius for life to survive. Saying that temperature rose by 1 degree celsius in 40 years just by 100ppm carbon dioxide rise is a bit too drastic to be reasonable

 

[SIPRA]

It seems though that you are viewing this predominantly with a political lens, so I'm going to concede the discussion.

Good, that you realized it timely.