>>16945
i don't think her protests had much effect... for example, here in the united states, i imagine that a lot of people would not like her due to our indulgent and anti-intellectual culture.
do you know how popular she is in europe?

>>16960
I think that a lot of kids likes her and her message. Basically it's an age thing. Time preference and so on.

What's amazing is certain people's tendency to flock to minimum effort, maximum virtue ideas.

Less worried about stopping climate change since its probably too late, but could the effects be prepared for?

>>17005
On a personal level? Sure. Learn how to live off the land, buy a homestead in an area that's not going to be flooded/desertified/on fire in 20 years, and get to know your neighbors because you'll be relying on each other to survive. Places that are cold now will be temperate by the end of the century, so like northern Canada, Alaska, Iceland, Norway are good. Anywhere tropical is bad. Anywhere not isolated from large populations of people is bad.

On a societal level? No, civilization is fucked with a capital F. Most likely, in 10-50 years, most world governments will lose order from a variety of pressures like millions of climate refugees, food web collapse, possibly resource wars. Wherever you are, the power and water will go out and will not come back on. The internet and phone service will cease to function. Nobody is going to pick up your garbage anymore and the stores will all be empty with nothing to restock them with. We're talking full Zombie Apocalypse levels of collapse.

And as for humanity as a whole, it's donezo. We had one chance, and it was squandered. All the easy resources (surface metal deposits, coal and oil) have already been consumed. The technology required to get the rest of it requires it to exist, so once those machines are gone, there is no way to rebuild. We've taken apart the lower steps on the staircase to make the upper ones, so if you fall off, there's no getting back up.

"...On a societal level? No, civilization is fucked with a capital F. Most likely, in 10-50 years, most world governments will lose order from a variety of pressures like millions of climate refugees, food web collapse, possibly resource wars..."

This is complete and utter nonsense. The only way this happens is if the global homo psychopaths that are presently trying to control everyone win. Then yes that could be exactly the path that we take but it doesn't need to be.

Here's a plan that can house every person on earth with first world food resources in 15 years. A caveat, I myself would rather they be nuclear powered and built like huge boats.

Exponential Remediation of Civilization's Footprint

http://jimbowery.blogspot.com/2014/05/introduction-extinction-of-human-race.html?view=sidebar

Genetic engineering and especially CRISPR technology which allows very precise control over inserted genes and where they are inserted. This will effect food in a massive way. I'm not sure why there isn't a lot of talk about genetically engineered symbiotic cultures for food yet as it seems obvious to me. The basic Kombucha tea is a "symbiotic culture of bacteria and yeast". Running on sugar there's no technical reason this can't make rib-eye steak or wheat or whatever. Once the recipe is engineered in DNA the cost is super low. There's a huge business in this sort of thing. Photosynthesis is a very inefficient way to make food,(like 3 to 6% of total solar radiation), with the symbiotic culture and another new technology of growing food with electricity, air and a splash of minerals the cost will plummet.

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/innovation/making-food-electricity-180964474/

Solar power is getting better and there are new processes that have super high efficiencies(60%). Not there yet but if you can build it in a lab 10 or 20 years from now it will be a product and these are cheap. Real cheap. Even cheap solar panels right now crush plant efficiencies. Not only that but batteries are being made from carbon, also cheap which will close the loop on cheap energy from the Sun.

Combine cheap solar cells with engineered bacteria creating whatever type food you wish at much higher efficiencies and put the grow plants any where there's Sunlight and you get...abundance.

Add to this additive manufacturing which is coming down in price every day. It's takes a lot less resources to additive build up products instead of starting with large chunks of material and whittling away what you don't want. It will not be long before most houses will have one of these that runs all day making stuff.

A major energy source has been stopped for decades, nuclear power. Molten salt and other reactor technologies are far safer and cheaper but have been cut off at every turn. Now the Chinese, not being idiots, collected every damn bit of the research we did on these and are moving full steam ahead so now to keep up, others in the west are doing the same. Finally. We could have been light years ahead but the fossil fuels industry bankrolled anti-nuke activist and tied the whole thing in knots.

As for metals we can get all we want from space. Space travel is not all that expensive if you can reuse the spacecraft over and over like an airplane. The cost to get to space if you just consider the energy cost is about the same as going from the west coast of the USA to Japan or Australia. I found a graph that said that weight shipped by air freight is over 220,000(million ton-km) in a year. WOW! So we're talking about 34 million tons a year to low earth orbit if we moved it at the same rate as we move air freight. To get to the asteroid belt would less than half that number. One little pissy asteroid would supply the whole earth with high quality stainless steel for decades.

Our major problem is not what can be done or resources it's the globalhomo central banking Oligarchy that just can not stand not slurping up every single resource and dollar they can get their hands on even if they have no use for it. They don't want anyone to have one thin dime that they are not shaving a penny off of it. All these assholes will spend every penny they have suppressing and attacking people.

>>17102
>The only way this happens is if the global homo psychopaths that are presently trying to control everyone win
They already have. They already own and control everything. Haven't you been paying attention? Big Oil knew that anthropogenic climate change was happening since the 1970's, and instead of doing anything to stop it, they started propaganda campaigns to shut down any legislation that might get in the way of their profits. The trigger was pulled a long time ago, dude; we're just waiting for the bullet to hit.


>nuclear powered
Impossible. You don't know what you're talking about. Read this, and then rethink what else you don't know. It's simple mathematics. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/0096340212459124


>Genetic engineering and especially CRISPR technology which allows very precise control over inserted genes and where they are inserted. This will effect food in a massive way
You're assuming something with zero evidence. This is like claiming that you have a computer, therefore you can definitely make an artificial intelligence smarter than a human. A tool is just a tool, not a magic wand. Basic physics and chemistry means that plants can't perform photosynthesis above certain temperatures and concentrations of CO2. Thinking that scientists can just put genes into a plant that prevent that is like thinking they could put a gene into you that would suddenly enable you to breathe water.


>Solar power is getting better
Renewable energy all takes large concentrations of rare-earth elements. Since they're not on-demand power, it also requires massive banks of batteries. There isn't enough lithium on the planet for all the batteries we need, nor the economic demand to build them.


>asteroid mining
Science fiction, no more. You don't have the slightest idea what kind of logistics is involved with space travel. Familiarize yourself with the implications of Tsiolkovsky's rocket equation, and then get back to me. People think that asteroids are just big balls of solid precious metals; all you have to do is fly up, scrape some off the surface, and you'll have tons of whatever you need. It doesn't work that way. Like on Earth, all of it is going to be bound up in various compounds and ores that have to be heavily processed to extract and refine them. Whole factories will have to be built and then placed into orbit, and there is ABSOLUTELY NO WAY to even power them with current technology.


But the real issue is time. All of this stuff could probably get solved in 100 years or so. But we don't have that time; collapse isn't some kind of distant future or even something that will start happening in 20 years - it's happening RIGHT NOW. The arctic ice is melting right now; the clathrate gun is going off right now; the bees are all dying right now; the soil fertility is falling right now; the water aquifers are running dry right now. The temperature could be going up a half-degree every year with no sign of stopping. What do you think is going to happen when two billion people across India, Africa, and the Middle East suddenly start seeing weeks in summer where the temperature is over 140 degrees and people are dying by the thousands?

It'll happen in our lifetimes, and precedent suggests the timing is always "sooner than you think".

>>17111
>It'll happen in our lifetimes, and precedent suggests the timing is always "sooner than you think".
You sound like an extinction rebellion activist I know.

The irony is she'll jump in her car and drive across the country to attend demonstrations. Refuses to use public transport or car-share because it's "inconvenient".

>>17113
I don't know what extinction rebellion is. If I had a standing that actually resulted in action (rather than the reality, which is standing back and doing nothing) it would be as an accelerationist with an end-goal of primitivism. That is, I believe collapse is imminent and totally unavoidable, but my goal isn't to delay it, but to SPEED IT UP. People have their various reasons for this, often malevolent (they want humanity to burn), but for me it's more like tough-love.

I see humanity like a plant that has outgrown its garden and is dying from lack of nutrients. Since transplantation is impossible (in this case, going to another planet), the only way to save it is to prune it. This requires decisive action, because waiting too long will only make things worse. If things toddle along in a slow collapse until the end of the century, the environment and depletion of natural resources will be much more severe and the world will be much bleaker for the survivors. Contrast this to the opposite logical extreme, which is a massive nuclear war happens tomorrow and 7 billion people die by the end of the year. The difference is, in this case large-scale carbon emissions immediately cease, plastic stops being dumped into the oceans, useful materials stop being taken from the earth and converted into meaningless and redundant electronic gadgets that will quickly get thrown away, and biodiversity stops being hunted to extinction.

Make no mistake; I fully realize that there is no hope for a future "recovery". I don't think that if collapse happens now, some future civilization will be able to arise and rise again. That ship has sailed, so to speak. The only hope for humanity is to return to living off of the land as small, isolated hunter-gatherer tribes. Hence the "primitivism" side of things. This has the added benefit of resulting in a world that humans originally evolved to live in, meaning they will be physically healthier and psychologically happier.

By the end of the century there will probably be less than a billion people left alive, scattered and broken, no matter what the fuck we do right now. The difference is, how much of an Earth are they going to have left to live off of?

>>17111

Everything you wrote was extinction panic buffoonery. I'll just cover a few.

"psychopaths that are presently trying to control everyone"

"They already have. They already own and control everything."

Somewhat true but this could all be changed. There's not that many in charge.

">nuclear powered
Impossible. You don't know what you're talking about. Read this, and then rethink what else you don't know. It's simple mathematics. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/0096340212459124..."

That whole paper is silly and goes completely overboard in cherry picking reasons that you can't have nuclear. They mention several rare earth materials but not all nuke plants use these in vast quantities. There are several huge rare earth mines shut down in the US due to the EPA. The reason is they have Thorium mixed in. What we have done in the past is bury the stuff in drums in the desert. If we have thorium reactors we could burn the stuff and make copious power. That we don't have enough rare earths is a POLITICAL decision not material.

They also mention neutron hardening of thorium reactors that use components made of a nickel-based alloy called Hastelloy-N. We may not even need this. If you understand insulation we could put ceramic bricks on the inside and regular steel on the outside. Molten salt reactors are not pressurized. There's lots of other paths but Hastalloy is just the only one we've looked at.

moltex nucular is just one example

https://www.moltexenergy.com/

The whole nuke paper you linked is probably sponsored by some oil company it has so much cherry picked fear mongering. I mentioned that solar is picking up. So I'm talking about using nuclear as base load for industry.

CRISPR technology which allows very precise control over inserted genes and where they are inserted. This will effect food in a massive way

"You're assuming something with zero evidence..."


???? what. zero evidence. Hardly. CRISPR is far along enough that it becomes incumbent on you to explain why you can't do genetic engineering with it. We have already done research on what are the minimal genes needed for a yeast to grow. I'm not saying this will be easy but there's no reason we can't add genes to grow what we wish.

"...plants can't perform photosynthesis above certain temperatures and concentrations of CO2..."

You totally missed the point. You don't understand. The solar would be used to make "sugars" to feed the yeast which would improve efficiency.

"...There isn't enough lithium on the planet for all the batteries..."

Not necessary. Carbon batteries have already been built. The price of carbon fiber is also plummeting leading to flywheel storage. These have been built but cost need to come down and since carbon is everywhere and has a lot of effort into lowering the price it will and is right now happening.

">asteroid mining"

Just because you don't have the imagination on how to mine asteroids doesn't mean anyone doesn't. There's tons of ideas on this. Lots of separation can be done with density like tornado vacuum cleaners for your house work. Metals can be refined to a much, much higher level than on earth with solar "Zone melting" refining and cheap solar mirrors. It's how they make silicon right now for semiconductors. Look it up.

"...collapse isn't some kind of distant future or even something that will start happening in 20 years - it's happening RIGHT NOW..."

Nonsense. Either you are some sort of hack, maybe you've been tricked by the deep State doom mongers who want you to believe that because they want to fuck everyone over there's no other way out or you're just stupid. There's a vast amount of info on this out there. Try to look some of it up.

>>17148
>cherry picking reasons that you can't have nuclear
The reason is scale. Extremely simple. Doesn't require either of us to make uneducated assumptions about either the availability of rare-earth elements or the construction of nuclear reactors. Although, I'm going to go out on a limb here and assume you DON'T KNOW WHAT THE FUCK YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT, because if you really knew how to construct nuclear reactors, you'd be a nuclear physicist and doctorate-level materials engineer, and (going out on another limb here), since we're on fucking 7chan, you ain't!

The simple fact of the matter is there would require too many nuclear power plants to power the world. One being built and another decommissioned every day. Or if we scale this down to 10%, one every ten days. It's still an impossible pipe dream. If you understood nothing from that article (and clearly you had some trouble), just focus on that part. There are too many humans for the resources on this planet; that's just the reality.


Everything you're talking about is in "could happen"s. CRISPER could be bioengineering amazingly hardy plants. Thorium reactors could work out. Carbon batteries could be a replacement for lithium. Asteroid mining could happen if one has enough imagination (because imagination can surely overpower fundamental laws of physics and math!). We could be overthrowing the bourgeoisie psychopaths ruling the world.

But none of that is happening! It's just like viable fusion power that the scientists have been saying is "right around the corner" since the 60's. Maybe you just haven't lived as long as I have, so haven't had enough time to realize that they keep on promising amazing shit but never deliver on it. In the meantime, the climate is still warming, the oceans are still filling with plastic, the oil and coal keeps burning, and the politicians are still stealing your money.

That's the difference here. That's why I say what I claim is reality, while what you claim is fantasy. It doesn't matter a lick what CAN happen if it DOESN'T. You COULD be a billionaire. So why are you here instead of doing it?

"...The simple fact of the matter is there would require too many nuclear power plants to power the world..."

This is exactly what I mean about cherry picking facts. I mentioned presently operating solar cells in the 60% efficiency range but you claim that to have nuclear ALL POWER PLANTS MUST BE NUCLEAR. So you're lying by omission. And even at that your wrong about the impossibility of running all power with nukes. You provided one paper full of scare mongering that does the same thing you are doing and cherry picks stuff related to many different types of nuke plants and applies it to all nuke plants. Serious lies and propaganda.

"...Carbon batteries could be a replacement for lithium..."

Yes that's correct. We already have carbon fiber flywheels. The cost will come down with the cost of carbon fiber or graphene. This is a given. It's 100% this cost will come down. This guy here makes carbon batteries small scale some of which have better KWh power density than than lithium. He has already sold intellectual property to the Edison company related to graphene batteries. He's built these from hemp, old tires, leaves coal. All kinds of carbon sources.

https://www.youtube.com/user/RobertMurraySmith

And that's not even close to all the sources of materials we can use for batteries. In fact there's a new way to make solid state batteries being worked on now with much higher power per weight made of sodium, lithium or potassium and I think glass. He's a bit vague about the exact mixture. Of course you will say it's not here RIGHT NOW but the guy whose doing this work is the Nobel prize winner who INVENTED lithium batteries we use today. Maybe next you'll invent some way we will run out of salt and glass.

https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2019/04/sodium-batteries-are-one-step-closer-saving-you-mobile-phone-fire

"...Asteroid mining could happen if one has enough imagination (because imagination can surely overpower fundamental laws of physics and math!)..."

You're once again spouting nonsense. I gave you exact examples on how to separate materials in space. That you don't understand them is hardly my fault. There's lots of studies where they are using basic separation principles based on mass, heat conductivity and one to get highly refined products I mentioned zone refinement. Look this up. There's even games that specialize in asteroid mining.

https://wiki.eveuniversity.org/Asteroids_and_Ore

"...CRISPER could be bioengineering amazingly hardy plants..."

No ARE being used to... do many things right now. Judging by you muddle headed thinking you will be glad to know they are using it to defeat mold on weed.

https://www.ganjapreneur.com/crispr-gene-editing-used-to-create-mildew-resistant-cannabis/

Billions are being spent on this right now and some products are already made.

https://www.fooddive.com/news/how-crispr-is-changing-the-food-industry/432848/

Your making broad statements with little evidence to back it up. You shoe horn every single thing into one place then concentrate on it. I notice you never said a word about the exponential growth in islands with vortex chimneys.

I suspect you're just trolling me. You've made no effort to understand anything I've said nor look at what level the tech I'm talking about is at.

I suspect I may be older than you. If you're so old then surely you have seen the vast change in computer technology. There's also very dramatic improvements in lots of fields that aren't so visible.

I do believe we would be a lot farther along if we did not have such idiot corporate leaders who run things by spreadsheet. In fact you sound a lot like them. Any thing that is not HERE RIGHT NOW. If it's not right there in front of them they can't imagine it.

The US would not have been a wealthy country if it had not been for a lot of forward thinking executives in the 50's, 60's and earlier that invested in fast moving technologies. If you ran things we would still be, living in caves and it seems to be what you want to go back to.

I goofed on the link about the solid state battery. It's the same sort of stuff but not the exact links I wanted

https://electrek.co/2017/04/06/ev-battery-breakthroughs-are-usually-bull-but-this-guy-won-nobel-for-lithium-ion/

https://electrek.co/2020/04/23/work-on-goodenoughs-breakthrough-solid-state-ev-battery-moves-forward/

>>17153
It's math. It's just fucking math. You can't deny math. There isn't enough uranium or any other non-renewable resources on the planet to power it for much longer at the rate it's being used. The fact that you can't even comprehend something as simple as this means you're a complete moron, and there is no point debating you.

>There's even games that specialize in asteroid mining
You're actually serious? There's a game where you have magic and can fight dragons, too. Are you going to suggest next that magic and dragons are also possible? What a joke.

You're obviously Jewish. Yes it's that easy to see. That being so there's point in talking to you.

>>17166
Wow.

You've been so thoroughly outdone that you reached deep, deep into your mind and came up with your last argument

Anti-semetism and name-calling.

Wow. Dude you're a fucking genius. Hey EVERYONE come over and take a look at how much of a genius this guy is. When you've been made to look like a complete moron, just call him a Jew and you won the argument!

God, I fucking love imageboards.