SURVEY: What is the biggest problem facing us?

[lovelomsak]

The stupidity of the masses they are lead so easy.

[Spidey]

1 minute ago, lovelomsak said:

The stupidity of the masses they are lead so easy.

Quite agree. Can't believe the stupidity of Americans who have been led to believe, by their leader, that there's no such thing as climate change caused by burning fossil fuels.

[zydeco]

5 hours ago, pegman said:

American Imperializm is by far #1 on my list. It's expansionist policies started not long after it's domestic terrorist founders took over. Fortunately my family escaped north from their Durham County, Vermont home after arriving from Bedfordshire, England 150 years previous. I've seen timelines that show the USA has been in near continuous war since those times. Jimmy Carter's years as president the only exceptions. 

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars_involving_the_United_States

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_imperialism

 

A distant #2 would be man-made climate change. 

Oh, look. This list is even longer and more pervasive.  https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars_involving_the_United_Kingdom

[spidermike007]

The millennial population. The extraordinary lack of social skills is downright frightening.

 

As far as population goes, I am seeing charts showing China's population growth slowing to the point where they are expecting rather severe depopulation over the next few decades. The biggest problem area is the Muslim world. If you look at the countries with the most population growth, 95% are Muslim. Something needs to be done to slow that trend. Education is a start. Cultural assimilation would be helpful too. 

 

With the environment, we have alot of work to do. We can start with limiting our consumption of plastic. My feeling on plastic?

 

A change in consciousness must start at the most basic level. Most Thais think plastic is the best thing ever invented, and the percentage of Thais that even consider the negative ramifications of plastic is incredibly small. This requires some education. I always do two things to avoid the consumption of plastic.

 

1. I bring re-usable bags with me every time I go shopping. I use the larger shopping bags I buy in the US, which are made of recycled materials. Most of the clerks have to be dealt with. Even when they see my bag, they still start putting the stuff in plastic. I always mai sai toom. No plastic! Then they start loading up my bag. Most look at me like I am from Mars. Do I care? Not one iota. About 1% thank me, and get it. Not many do. My Thai wife does not like bringing the bags to the store. I force her to. By now, she expects it, and sometimes even asks if I have any bags in the car, or on the motorbike. Same with the water bottles. It used to embarrass her. Now, it is second nature, as I have been doing this for so long, she expects it. So, if a Thai can be conditioned to follow these simple principals, then anyone can. 

 

2. I bring a bottle of water with me, every time I go to a restaurant. I refill my plastic bottles from the 20 liter bottles at home. It is easy. I never buy bottled water at a restaurant. This saves 300-600 bottles a year. I use a plastic bottle dozens of times. I never get any flack from the restaurants. Only once did someone say something to me. She said you cannot bring you own water. My response was if you serve the water in a glass bottle, and I do not have to consume a plastic bottle, I am happy to pay for that. She was lost. I told her to leave and get me my food. She went away. 

 

We simply cannot say we are concerned about the environment, and then do nothing about it. Action demonstrates commitment. Lack of action demonstrates nothing. Lastly, restaurants can demonstrate their commitment, by serving drinking water from the 20 liter bottles. It saves alot of plastic. They lose a small amount of revenue, by not selling thousands of bottles of water. But, their operation is still profitable, and they are making a real difference. There really is not need to be consuming water in plastic bottles. At least not often. There are alternatives. Those damn bottles are a real culprit, when it comes to fouling the environment. What can we do, if we say we care?

 

 

[GalaxyMan]

14 hours ago, owl sees all said:

I've been stupid in my life. One of the reasons I'm here.

 

 

If a person is lucky, they learn from their stupidity, if not, then they practice that other form of insanity; doing the same thing over and over again expecting a different result.  ????

[Grusa]

14 hours ago, sirineou said:

Ha Ha Ha , what a bunch of Maroons!  Everyone knows that Zombies eat brains. The more you think about this, the tastier your brain becomes.  I have systematically set up to destroy every one of my brain cells (a few more and I am done) No self respecting Zombie will have anything to do with me.

   After you are all etten by the Zombies I will become their King. 

 

I guess they'll bypass LOS then.....

[Scott]

I am not sure what the biggest problem facing humanity is, but it appears as if some on the forum are not taking their meds as directed!

[zydeco]

3 minutes ago, Scott said:

I am not sure what the biggest problem facing humanity is, but it appears as if some on the forum are not taking their meds as directed!

Price of my meds went up 20 percent across the board a few months ago. With the new income rules for extensions and the possibility of a health insurance requirement, you need to cut out something.

[Spidey]

56 minutes ago, zydeco said:

Oh, look. This list is even longer and more pervasive.  https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars_involving_the_United_Kingdom

Doesn't include the "Hundred Years War". England v France. Our proudest moment. Remember Agincourt?

[steve73]

43 minutes ago, spidermike007 said:

Snip..

 

1. I bring re-usable bags with me every time I go shopping.

 

...sometimes even asks if I have any bags in the car, or on the motorbike.

 

 

Mike, whilst I applaud your efforts by reusing bags and bottles, your admittance to using cars (and to a much lesser extent motorcycles), probably makes your effort little more than a token gesture.

If you fly anywhere, then this exacerbates your contributions.. and if you enjoy an occasional beef steak, then you're the devil incarnate...

 

Not specifically getting at you, but merely pointing out that there are many things that contribute much more the (perceived) problems "we" face... Photo's of plastic bags & bottles washed up on a beach is just an easy way to target a minor problem. 

[Cryingdick]

We seem to have become sidetracked by what is the worst thing for the world and what bothers us personally. There was three original choices so none of them fit my real opinion but I made my choice. The polls on this site are so limited in scope that they provide nothing but arguments lately. 

 

For example I do not really believe that global warming and cooling is unnatural. I don't have anything to say for or against it and it isn't a debate I get heated up about. But I chose too many people because whether or not I believe in the latest scientific data or think that Noah could put two of every animal in a boat is feasible, it doesn't matter.

 

There are bizarre ideas on all of these things. There are still places that use snake healing in the county I currently live. lol 

 

The posting here has become in many ways so ineloquently vulgar on all sides of every political argument on this site and on social media to a larger extent that maybe the most dangerous thing has become ourselves.

 

The noble global Netizens.

 

i just realized that's a good name for a band as well.

Edited January 7, 2019 by Cryingdick

[Cryingdick]

sorry weird problem with an edit. 

Edited January 7, 2019 by Cryingdick

[kannot]

stupidity

[kannot]

On 1/6/2019 at 10:07 AM, Bluespunk said:

Climate change is the greatest threat.

 

If we don’t deal with it overpopulation and environmental damage will be solved by the fact the planet will not support human life. 

less people less co2..............

[soalbundy]

32 minutes ago, Spidey said:

Doesn't include the "Hundred Years War". England v France. Our proudest moment. Remember Agincourt?

No, I wasn't there. Human beings everywhere have a propensity for identifying with events that have nothing to do with them. England won the world cup, no England didn't win the world cup, the team playing did, England didn't triumph at the battle of Trafalgar, the men fighting did. I can only be responsible for my own actions and have no right to put on the coat of glory that someone else manufactured. Every era should be a new start otherwise divisions are created for what our fathers and grandfathers did or did not do.

[soalbundy]

2 hours ago, Spidey said:

Quite agree. Can't believe the stupidity of Americans who have been led to believe, by their leader, that there's no such thing as climate change caused by burning fossil fuels.

Most don't, in fact despite the redneck in chief, many if not most firms in the USA continue to operate as if the Paris accord is still valid for America.

[Hummin]

14 minutes ago, kannot said:

less people less co2..............

Im sure in the dinosaur ages, they farted and eat all vegetations, and created a clima crise as well ???? 

[amexpat]

33 minutes ago, Cryingdick said:

whether or not I believe in the latest scientific data or think that Noah could put two of every animal in a boat is feasible, it doesn't matter.

There's a big difference.

 

Religion requires faith and a will to believe.  The science is true whether you believe it or not. 

 

[Cryingdick]

Just now, amexpat said:

There's a big difference.

 

Religion requires faith and a will to believe.  The science is true whether you believe it or not. 

 

I was making the point that from my perspective I try not to judge too much. I was trying to say I welcome all view points and then you showed up to tell me how wrong I am.  I don't have an opinion one way or the other as I have already asserted in my original post.

 

The weather is good and the gas is cheap.

[Bluespunk]

1 hour ago, kannot said:

less people less co2..............

It's not humans breathing out CO2 that is the main cause of climate change.

 

However, that said there are a number of actions that could and should be taken to reduces CO2 in the atmosphere and these would more than counterbalance the breathing of humanity.

 

Human driven climate change can be mitigated, but only if we take action to do so.

Edited January 7, 2019 by Bluespunk

[puukao]

2 hours ago, amexpat said:

There's a big difference.

 

Religion requires faith and a will to believe.  The science is true whether you believe it or not. 

 

not all science is true.  most is, but some science has been proven to be garbage

[amexpat]

Reevaluation based on new evidence is called progress in science.

In religion it is called heresy. 

 

[canuckamuck]

Materialism

[spidermike007]

5 hours ago, steve73 said:

Mike, whilst I applaud your efforts by reusing bags and bottles, your admittance to using cars (and to a much lesser extent motorcycles), probably makes your effort little more than a token gesture.

If you fly anywhere, then this exacerbates your contributions.. and if you enjoy an occasional beef steak, then you're the devil incarnate...

 

Not specifically getting at you, but merely pointing out that there are many things that contribute much more the (perceived) problems "we" face... Photo's of plastic bags & bottles washed up on a beach is just an easy way to target a minor problem. 

And your attitude is a very easy excuse to say I will not do anything about the issues that plague the world. It has to start somewhere. 

[steve73]

3 minutes ago, spidermike007 said:

And your attitude is a very easy excuse to say I will not do anything about the issues that plague the world. It has to start somewhere. 

I do far more than I suggested...

I recycle plastic bags and bottles (as well as helping to clean my beach of these and other rubbish that others so casually dispose of).  I use a bicycle in favour of a motorcycle for those short (<10km) shopping trips, and only rarely use a car.  I've not flown for over 3 years.  I limit my beef consumption to just a couple of times per year.  I don't use A/C - a fan and open windows is adequate even in the peak how season.  My energy footprint is a fraction of most (and with it my CO2 and other pollutants).  And my overall "consumption of unnecessary stuff" is minimal.

 

I wear a condom so as not to add anymore to the worlds population.   

 

And I try to educate others that it's more than just bags and bottles...

 

[VincentRJ]

On 1/7/2019 at 5:09 PM, amexpat said:

Reevaluation based on new evidence is called progress in science.

In religion it is called heresy. 

 

Good point! However, my impression is that most people do not have sufficient understanding of the 'methodology of science' in order to apply skepticism when skepticism is appropriate.

 

If the situation is very complex, and even chaotic, involves long time periods before a consistent trend can be observed, is unable to be repeatedly tested under controlled conditions, changing one variable at a time (such as CO2 levels) and observing the effects on climate, then a degree of skepticism is justified.

 

Perhaps the greatest threat to the planet and our future well-being, is the general gullibility of the masses who lack a basic education in science, and who treat science as a type of religion.
In other words, the naive belief that there is a 97% consensus among all scientists that CO2 is the main driver of climate change and that such a change in climate will inevitably be bad for the planet. If one can believe that, what else can one believe?? Oh, my God! ☹️

[amexpat]

3 hours ago, VincentRJ said:

In other words, the naive belief that there is a 97% consensus among all scientists that CO2 is the main driver of climate change and that such a change in climate will inevitably be bad for the planet. If one can believe that, what else can one believe?? Oh, my God! ☹️

Well, for example one can believe that scientists dropped a probe precisely, exactly, where they wanted on Mars which is 44 million miles away and spinning at about 800 feet per second. 

So I think I'll go with their opinions on environment rather than yours.

 

And why is it naive to believe there is consensus?  Chinese hoax as dRump says? 

[VincentRJ]

5 hours ago, amexpat said:

Well, for example one can believe that scientists dropped a probe precisely, exactly, where they wanted on Mars which is 44 million miles away and spinning at about 800 feet per second. 

So I think I'll go with their opinions on environment rather than yours.

 

Where did you get the idea that scientists and engineers who design and test rockets are also climatologists? Rockets, and planes that carry millions of people every day, have to be tested very thoroughly, in real time, before they are used.
Those testing procedures, which eventually result in a reliable product, cannot be applied to the effects on climate, of minuscule increases of CO2, because we only have one Earth and we cannot simulate the complexity of the Earth's Biosphere in a laboratory.
 

And why is it naive to believe there is consensus?

 

Just as it would be naive to take a new medical drug which had not undergone the usual testing procedures on mice, rats, or chimpanzees, and finally groups of humans.
Of course, such a drug would not be allowed to be marketed before it had passed certain rigorous testing procedures, and for very good reason. It would be naive to think there could be a 97% consensus among biologists and chemists that such a drug would be effective and safe based only on computer models and experiments in petri dishes and test tubes.

 

The 97% consensus on the dangers of rising CO2 levels is obviously a fabrication for political purposes.

[amexpat]

1 hour ago, VincentRJ said:

Where did you get the idea that scientists and engineers who design and test rockets are also climatologists?

Of course they aren't. But they and climatologists use scientific methods unlike your rectal extraction system.

 

1 hour ago, VincentRJ said:

 

The 97% consensus on the dangers of rising CO2 levels is obviously a fabrication for political purposes.

Oh, you mean politicians gain favor by telling the public they must consume less, re-use more, carry canvas bags, etc? 

 

[VincentRJ]

2 hours ago, amexpat said:

Of course they aren't. But they and climatologists use scientific methods unlike your rectal extraction system.

 

The point is, they don't use the same scientific methods. Are you not aware of the distinction between 'hard' science and 'soft' science?

 

Oh, you mean politicians gain favor by telling the public they must consume less, re-use more, carry canvas bags, etc?

 

You seem to be confusing environmental pollution and degradation with CO2 emissions. CO2 is not a pollutant. It is essential for almost all life and most plants thrive on increased levels of CO2.