GASP

Sunrise

Both are an excellent way to get involved

GASP

Go to college, earn a degree in environmental science, then come up with a realistic way to solve the problems we have instead of annoying random people in public. I know I know, it's much easier and self-fulfilling to chant things and annoy people, but it is producing the opposite results.

Oh and if any of you want to argue go read up on psychology and counter-productive activism before you flap your gums. It will literally do the world a favor.

Maybe this person can’t afford to go to college. Who knows? It’s nice to see that people would like to get involved.

Or are too old to go to college (I am interested in this and at age 64, well, it's just too darn late...)

Horrible take lol

Political organization and pressure work. Progress is made in a variety of ways and organization at a grassroots level is one of them.

Bad take imo. All major societal change in this country has been marked by, at the very least, loud public protest. And it often escalated to vandalism, disruption and even riots. It's not like we're just a scientific breakthrough away from solving all our problems; American exceptionalism won't help us here. We also need a public that's educated and cares, and that puts consistent pressure on policy makers through whatever means necessary.

People made the same complaints as you about the sufragettes, civil rights movement, stonewall riots, etc. But it wasn't just an educated few in those instances that enacted change.

It’s not too late! You can try this program https://www.olli.pitt.edu/

I know about this-- I've taken (and taught) Olli courses before! 😊 But I no longer have years to go to college, get a degree, then a job and and experience and THEN have the time to make a difference. Alas.

>It's not like we're just a scientific breakthrough away from solving all our problems;

We absolutely are at this point. Finding a viable way to store energy will break us from our current need to constantly produce energy.

It's a political problem, the only solution is to win political fights and that happens not least through protest and activism

That doesn't solve all our problems. There are already a variety of things we could be enacting on a mass scale if the existence of a better option were all it took. A sudden, miraculous, break through source of energy doesn't solve the car dependent infrastructure that's responsible for so much pollution, it doesn't remove Koch and Exxon's financial grip on our legislators, it doesn't magic away the wasteful presence of the livestock industry, etc.

Are you saying you want to do away with eating meat?

Edit: Can someone help me understand why me clarifying someone's comment is controversial in any way?

100%. 15% of our annual anthropogenic GHG emissions, the single largest cause of deforestation, a huge sink of land, water and resources, and you know, all the animal cruelty and what not, that is not necessary for human existence. I don't value temporary human pleasure over stopping any of that.

It's funny what people say when they think they are morally right. Getting rid of coal, natural gas, and livestock are all their great goals. The lack of power, heat and protein are not their concern though.

It is hilarious that you say an energy storage break through wouldn't help with cars when we have so many hybrid and full electric cars now. Developing a viable energy storage and transfer system is essential to expanding their use.

Of course you have to bring up the Koch's though because that is your real goal which is silencing the right at all costs

I will stake my bet in technology

I can attest at least to "lack of protein" or in this case, a complete lack of that being a real issue rather than a hand waiving attempt by people who seek to make no improvements to either their environmental impact or to live a more humane life. Plant protein is readily abundant, easy to prepare, easy to store and constantly available in new forms as the years go on.

It's also less of thinking I'm morally right than knowing it. In what universe is directly contributing to animal abuse not morally reprehensible? It's weird how quickly we condemn other acts of violence towards animals for not necessary purpose, like dog fighting, but apply the same logic to our reprehensible treatment of livestock and you want to pretend it's actually not an issue?

I didn't say it wouldn't help. I said it wouldn't solve all our problems. Electric cars are also not the solution to that problem. Less cars are, mass transit is, denser, more walkable and bikeable cities are, removal of zoning restrictions that artificially reduces the amount of dense housing that can be created, driving the cost of the few walkable cities we already have through the roof is. Electric cars are a very well packaged bandaid on a festering wound the public chomps right up because it's a solution that causes no real disruption to their day to day lives.

>Of course you have to bring up the Koch's though because that is your real goal which is silencing the right at all costs

Oh it is? Thats news to me. If you equate removal of this absolute abhorrent presence of these lobbyists' influence on legislators with "silencing the right", well, you've said more about that party than I have. But pick any of them you'd like.

I knew you people would go to the civil rights movement lol, you always do. Look the civil rights movement was A. this is a problem B. This is the solution. Harassing racists to stop being racist makes sense, its still undemocratic and borderline terroristic, but it makes sense. Harassing joe smoe over the climate when you have no real solution to the problem just makes you an asshole. Joe needs his fucking car to go to work and earn money, joe has no ability to stop corporations from polluting, joe doesn't even really believe what the fuck you are yelling about.

It's self-serving nonsense. Nor do any of you educate anyone about anything as most of you have no clue what you are talking about and have no right to forcibly educate anyone on anything. You unbelievably narcissistic human being you.

Utopian thinkers don't think ABC the only see the ends and feel they can figure out the means on the way, it's a psychological trait. It's how communism always turns into killing people. The adverse is dystopian, where they focus on each individual cause and effect to avoid doom. It's why right-wing people are bad conceptual thinkers and left-wing people are bad practical thinkers.

You are conflating multiple issues, why you are doing it is to manipulate the conversation to make yourself look right.

I can safely say aside from the animal abuse stuff, you have no idea what you are talking about and are not a fan of reading things you don't agree with. Science kind of took a big dump on your world the last 10 years you should read up. Start here>

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0065211309030016

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0261561420306567

https://www.worldwildlife.org/industries/sustainable-agricultureFun quote

"Agriculture is the leading source of pollution in many countries. Pesticides, fertilizers and other toxic farm chemicals can poison fresh water, marine ecosystems, air and soil. They also can remain in the environment for generations. Many pesticides are suspected of disrupting the hormonal systems of people and wildlife. Fertilizer run-off impacts waterways and coral reef.

The agricultural sector consumes about 69 percent of the planet's fresh water. Without creative conservation measures in place, agricultural production consumes excessive water and degrades water quality. This adversely impacts freshwater systems throughout the world."

It is not as simple as you are making it, you have no real plan for any of the massive amount of problems you would create by doing what you think should be done. Period. So stop lecturing people like you have it figured out, you don't.

Or go find arguments to those that aren't case studies. Good luck.

Oh and go look up what droughts and famines are. Figure out how to feed the planet without killing half of it, while being environmentally friendly and there is a Nobel Prize waiting for you. Yelling and lecturing is easier though right?

No it's a practical and scientific problem wtf are you talking about? No one has figured out how to actually implement the things you are yelling about and the people yelling about have no clue what they are talking about. Politics? WTF? Who has figured out how to do anything you think will fix it? Show me.

Every solution so far has worse byproducts than the problem trying to be fixed. For example batteries are really really really bad for the environment, also they require precious metals, that are not called precious because they are cute.

Science has made leaps and bounds fixing these problems, you people have done nothing.

Go be an activist scientist, chanting in groups is easier though right?

Idk that's a risky bet against people with no idea what they are actually talking about.

GASP, Sunrise, Sierra Club

prove it.

Its funny how none of you have anything to say about counter-productive activism lol. Just skip right over that.

Oh and this person can take out a loan.

I mean you’re pretty spot on

Technology only gets implemented through politics, genius. We have the technology to largely abandon fossil fuels in our daily lives now but that doesn't mean it magically happens. In fact, there is currently overt political resistance to doing so!

Man you have no clue what you're talking about

Not even close

I’ve been in the trenches fighting fracking and can tell you yelling and screaming helps nothing

That's nonsense. Nobody is saying it's not the whole solution but the movement against fracking in PA does not exist without angry people standing up. Eventually they end up electing politicians who take steps to reduce drilling - that's exactly how it works. It's not like scientists have stopped fracking here lol.

There's folks who get shit done and then there's folks who go to brunch.

Anias Peterson is the latter, so try to make sure that you are going to the groups that are doing the work and not the circle jerks, because there are a ton.

THIS!!!! Thank you

When you hyper focus on a potential problem and blindly don’t focus on the repercussions. Millions dead from lack of heat, transportation, etc etc. Who cares, temperatures won’t potentially rise by a few degrees over the next couple hundred years. Good logic

>Millions dead from lack of heat,

What? People are fleeing countries where it's too hot.

Are you insane? Like literally that thick? You think you could survive a winter in pittsburgh without heat? This is the illogical thinking that gets environmentalist no where. Please don’t use your heat this winter or for cooking. Let me know how it goes. Let’s not even get started with the fact you prob drive to work and go to the grocery and how all that food gets to the grocery stores…. Im waiting.

And what countries are they fleeing? Name one

https://osipt.com/blog/2017/11/26/how-cold-is-too-cold-to-be-outside/

Holy smokes, dude...why so angry?

Climate change is the No. 1 issue we face in the world.

Your rage speaks volumes about western Pennsylvania's provincialism.

Center for coalfield justice

>I knew you people would go to the civil rights movement lol, you always
do. Look the civil rights movement was A. this is a problem B. This is
the solution. Harassing racists to stop being racist makes sense, its
still undemocratic and borderline terroristic, but it makes sense.
Harassing joe smoe over the climate when you have no real solution to
the problem just makes you an asshole. Joe needs his fucking car to go
to work and earn money, joe has no ability to stop corporations from
polluting, joe doesn't even really believe what the fuck you are yelling
about

Ah yes, we all remember the famous end to the civil rights riots following MLK's assassination right? When all the Joe Schmoes decided to stop being racist? No major legislation to help enforce the equality of citizens being driven by the large scale pressure of an enraged populous here! Lmao

>I can safely say aside from the animal abuse stuff

Which should be enough for anyone to not support something so barbaric that is not necessary to live, but love glossing over that lmao

>https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0261561420306567

Do you have the actual data and conclusion drawn by the article? Because this is an abstract with no value statement or results accessible through the link lmao. Can you at least pretend to read the sources you cite?

​

>https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0261561420306567

Given that somewhere between 99.6% and 94% of the US's population is non vegan, and 94% are deficient in one or more vitamins, even if we place every single vegan within that camp, that leaves at minimum 88% of carnists and vegetarians being vitamin deficient. This is not an inherent shortcoming of the concept of the diet in either case, and the study you cited and definitely, totally read notes that low micro and macro nutrient intake is not inherently linked to health problems. Plant protein is still incredibly abundant, and benefits from being one of the few healthy protein sources typically found even in food deserts due to the prevalence of tinned beans.

>"Agriculture is the leading source of pollution in many countries. Pesticides, fertilizers and other toxic farm chemicals can poison fresh water, marine ecosystems, air and soil. They also can remain in the environment for generations. Many pesticides are suspected of disrupting the hormonal systems of people and wildlife. Fertilizer run-off impacts waterways and coral reef.
>
>The agricultural sector consumes about 69 percent of the planet's fresh water. Without creative conservation measures in place, agricultural production consumes excessive water and degrades water quality. This adversely impacts freshwater systems throughout the world."

...Is this supposed to be a gotcha? Not sure if you know this chief, but livestock don't photosynthesize. Livestock feed accounts for the majority of space taken up in our arable land. If you want to reduce the effect of agriculture on the planet, the firs thing to do is stop pumping most of our food into a stupendously less efficient source of food just because it tastes better. Literally all negative traits of our agricultural practices from pesticide use to runoff are simply magnified by the existence of livestock.

>It is not as simple as you are making it, you have no real plan for any of the massive amount of problems you would create by doing what you think should be done. Period. So stop lecturing people like you have it figured out, you don't.

It's actually more simple. Plant based calories (yes, on a per calorie basis) take up less land and less water

>Or go find arguments to those that aren't case studies. Good luck.

What do you think case study means, exactly? And we're excluding them, because...?

>Oh and go look up what droughts and famines are. Figure out how to feed the planet without killing half of it, while being environmentally friendly and there is a Nobel Prize waiting for you. Yelling and lecturing is easier though right?

Ok, stop feeding plants we could be eating to livestock and feed those to people instead. Again, all complaints about the nature of our agricultural practices are magnified by livestock, not replaced by. Stop dedicating the majority of our arable land to livestock. Now that we've done that, what's the next step, kiddo?

Are you stupid? Why do you think migrants from Central and South America are coming to the US in DROVES?

"In the 1990s, health officials noticed that chronic kidney disease was on the rise in Central America. An epidemic seemed to be raging among farmworkers who toiled in sugarcane fields on the Pacific Coast in El Salvador and Costa Rica — one of the hottest areas in the region. To date, more than 20,000 people have died in the epidemic, and thousands of others have had to go on kidney dialysis to survive."

https://www.vox.com/future-perfect/2019/2/15/18213988/chronic-kidney-disease-climate-change

[removed]

It's good to have science behind you. Evidence based claims are crucial. But you don't win by having the best ideas. (Hello, have you seen US politics over the last 50 years??) You win by building a movement, i.e. through organizing.

In a nutshell, "building a movement" = "building power," just to be clear. If you don't have money power, organizing is the way to build people power.

You don't win by having the best arguments, nor "yelling and screaming." You win through organizing: building power. If you have enough people willing to go to the mat on an issue, you can shut. shit. down.

Anger by itself does nothing. You need strategy, persistence, and people who have enough hope to believe that change is possible.

Take a look at the early labor movement in the US. Folks didn't just protest, they organized together, they stood in solidarity with each other, and when the bosses wouldn't negotiate they wielded their power by withholding their labor.

Wow, you started a little fire here, haha.

I'm here because I'm very interested in this issue as well, and interested in getting involved. I just moved here a few months ago. In Seattle I was involved in housing justice work - which, there, was closely aligned with climate justice work.

Good. They need a fire lit under their asses.

Welcome to Pittsburgh, where we're living 20 years behind the times.

I don’t know what to say to you…. You aren’t acknowledging what I am saying. Winning an election doesn’t do shit if there is no plan to do anything.

No, no it isn’t.

Should be easy to correct me then

Thank you them taking offense to this really shows their intelligence and what it is really about.

I like that you are actually telling someone who does something that they don’t exist and are wrong based on nothing lol

Rhetorical nonsense

How does shutting shot down solve climate issues? This isn’t the Vietnam war. No one is hiding the solution or stopping it, it doesn’t exist.

Lol what on earth are you babbling about

You're clearly too far gone

Sure showed me.

You arguing against common sense and reality.

Lol please go shout into the wind on somebody else's comments

he was talking to me and you interjected there crazy projection machine.

Man you're just full of silly complaints

you are not a fan of reality and self-awareness.

No idea what you're still going on about but you seem awfully confident about it so don't let me stop you

last word, gotta get it right? You know I recognize your name right. Is this going to be a thing?

Maybe because I’m talking about organizing, not electoral politics. Organizing is how you build power to put pressure on decision makers, whether they are in elected or corporate positions of power.

ETA but yes, you need a plan. Organizing gets you a say in what decisions are made.

The only thing you could possibly win here is my assumption that you all plan on going around being annoying assholes to “raise awareness”. Which I have yet to be disproven on, and you certainly are not convincing me otherwise.

I don’t think you understand how this country works or how politics or legislation works.

Or what the consequence of “pressure” are. Back to counter productive activism.

You don’t even know what you are pressuring for or how to achieve it. As the solution to what you want does not exist. What is so hard about that concept. Who are you pressuring, and for what purpose?

Ok, great. Have a nice day.

If you have no plan and no hope, why do you want to do anything about climate change? Or maybe you don’t? I can’t tell.

Lol

I support people who aren’t annoying obnoxious morons and are actually DOING positive things, as opposed to being annoying and self righteous. I like to live in reality and not terrorist hippy hypocrisy land.

How about you actually get educated on what you so passionately believe in and present it in a way where people won’t think you’re a stupid asshole? Crazy logic right?

So when people ask you questions you don’t have to rely on hyperbole, rhetoric, and nonsensical solutions to defend yourself.

Who do you think looks at your groups and says we should listen to these people? Who? Why would they?

Answer that, why should people care what you have to say? Because you are yelling?

Steve Irwin, huge activist, everyone loved the dude, did massive good, changed the game on animal conservation. Wasn’t an annoying obnoxious chanting idiot. Passionate and educated. Be like him.

you don't support shit.

Damn. You’re right. I’m just a total moron. :::sadface:::

Ok, sarcasm aside. Do you think a dismissive and insulting comment like that is going to have the effect you’re going for. Whatever that is…because I can’t tell. From where I’m sitting you just look like an asshole.

Projection.

Thanks, Sigmund.

You should read some Freud. Maybe this wouldn't have had to go past the counter productive activism point you all conveniently leaped past.

I’ve read a lot of Freud. Lacan too.

Lacan eh? Are you a Marxist? They have a long history of misinterpreting him is why I ask. I find it hard to believe that you are a fan of psychology but feel acting like an asshole in public somehow furthers your cause.

Depends on what you mean by “Marxist.” Like Freud’s work, Marx and Engel’s work is mostly useful today for cultural studies analysis, rather than psychology or economics, respectively. In that sense, yes I’m a Marxist but not a pure Marxist. I don’t adhere to the materialism/idealism binary. I have graduate training in cultural studies - ABD because I became a union organizer instead of an academic. That’s how I know that organizing can win meaningful material change for real people. It has been kinda fun sparring with you but it’s Monday now, and I have work to do. Ciao.

Unions have a purpose. A+B=C

Crazy how I figured that out though huh? Almost like I know what I am talking about.

Never said you didn’t. That was what you said about me, remember?

I still don't believe you do and you have done nothing to show me otherwise.

I guessed you are into marxism based off your citing Lacan and your blatant belief in revolutionary activism, when Marxism failed the same way you guys always do. One not having a real plan, and two, thinking people are just going to agree with rhetoric blindly. It's why communists had to kill millions of people and people deliberately eat more meat and buy gas guzzlers to piss you off.

Collective utopianism is a failed ideology, it doesn't work. Radicalism creates reactionaries.

If you disagree with any of this go find any video on here with activists "putting pressure" on random people and find me one where people are supporting their actions. More importantly, find one where there was a successful outcome.

I think I have the measure of you. There’s no point in talking further.

mmmm authoritarianism. I didn't have to figure you out, remember that and I can safely assume whatever you think is wrong. I don't fit in boxes, by design.