Posted: Apr 17, 2018 3:17 pm
by Cito di Pense
THWOTH wrote:
Alan B wrote:11 billion living 'sustainably'?
Define 'sustainably'.

Does this include reducing methane and carbon dioxide producing animal and vegetable food sources that contribute to AGW?
(Not forgetting that these 11 billion will also contribute methane and carbon dioxide as bodily functions...).

If so, what will these 11 billions live on?

Sure, it's almost impossible for one person to live 'sustainably' let alone 11bn. But surely one person can live more sustainably than they currently do by making small changes and some different choices? Isn't the point to understand the issues and make a move towards greater levels of sustainable living rather than baulking at the seemingly overwhelming prospect of 11bn people somehow living totally sustainable lives? If we accept that our way of life is unsustainable in the long run shouldn't we be trying to do something about that now?

Do you know what most people say? You first!

I'm childless. That's like saying "I gave at the office."

I'm fucking childless. I don't own a fucking automobile. I'm no globetrotter, like macdoc is. How difficult is all that to comprehend? You want me to take care of macdoc's kids? Good fucking luck with that.