Kids From At Least 112 Countries, Including the US, Go on Strike To Protest Climate Change 339
It started 29 weeks ago when 16-year-old Swede Greta Thunberg began skipping school on Fridays to protest climate change by standing outside of her nation's parliament building. Today, kids from more than 110 countries, including the United States, are following Thunberg's lead and will play hooky from classes for something they think is ultimately more important: preventing the warming of their planet. Live updates, from The Guardian. Further reading: Thousands of scientists are backing the kids striking for climate change.
Hell, yes! (Score:2, Insightful)
Time to stop creating climate policies based on the personal opinions of old people with only a few more years to live.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Screw that... (Score:2, Interesting)
I'm just thinking how envious we should be that a kid found a way to play hooky that has the publicity and backing to keep them out of detention.
Wish I'd thought of this when I was in high school (the assholes in charge would never have let it fly though!)
Re:Screw that... (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm just thinking how envious we should be that a kid found a way to play hooky that has the publicity and backing to keep them out of detention.
Wish I'd thought of this when I was in high school (the assholes in charge would never have let it fly though!)
Huh?
Standing outside parliament all day long would be a dream day off school for you.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Hell, yes! (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3)
Yep. Standing outside parliament all day long is every schoolkid's dream day off.
Re: (Score:2)
So, would you say the same of my generation, when we were teens... who were out in the streets protesting 'Nam and the draft?
Or the kids a bit older than me, who literally risked their lives to protest in the South for voting and other civil rights?
Go back to watching sportsball, and stay off the 'Net.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Something similar happened in the Netherlands when schools allowed children to attend. One of the school's principals was interviewed, and stated that it's good to encourage children to demonstrate and voice their opinion in this manner. Then, in an unbelievably rare case of a jo
Re: Hell, yes! (Score:2, Interesting)
This is about climate change, not about pollution.
Re: Hell, yes! (Score:4, Insightful)
This is about climate change, not about pollution.
Anonymous Coward, the definition of pollution is "the presence in or introduction into the environment of a substance or thing that has harmful or poisonous effects."
So yes, dumping carbon dioxide into the atmosphere is pollution.
Re:Hell, yes! (Score:5, Insightful)
What are you afraid of, economic catastrophe?
Yes. I am afraid of economic catastrophe and you should be too. If you think that is something not to be afraid of speaks volumes. Everything is secondary when the economy is crashing down and people are unemployed. Every high ideal you can think of will be put on hold and forgotten when people are feeling economic pain.
Cheap energy has helped poor people. Nearly every solution I have seen to climate change will in some way increase the cost of energy which will be mostly felt by the poor. That is not a good solution for the poor. Would you care about what happens in 100 years if you go to bed hungry every night? It reminds me of conservation biology. Using endangered species for food is like burning the Mona Lisa for warmth. It's tragic but anyone would do it if they had to feed a family.
Please do not disregard economic concerns because you are affluent and extrapolate what you can personally afford with what others can afford. Taxes are not the fix all to every problem and raising taxes can backfire. Every solution must have an economic understanding.
Re:Hell, yes! (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
When life gives you lemons you make lemon-aid. That doesn't mean you purposefully make life hard for people to push a specific agenda.
Re:Hell, yes! (Score:5, Informative)
Yeah, economic catastrophe... like 2008? You don't *like* lots of new jobs being created in renewable energy... as opposed to, say, coal[1]?
And what do you think the economy's going to do, when bad weather screws the US heartland, and there are worldwide food shortages[2]?
Or maybe those climate changes, like overuse of water and drought are some of what's causing conflict around the globe, and mass migration?[3]
Gee, think of all the folks who'll lose their job in the buggy whip factories.
1. 1972, the coal industry employed about 780,000 miners; coal output rose until about 15 years ago... but employs about 78,000 as of 5-10 years ago, due to strip mining and mountaintop removal.
2. I don't suppose you know about the food riots in Mexico and Central America, when too much of US corn production was diverted to ethanol, and there were shortages for bread and tortillas.
3. Do you have any clue about how major subsurface water, in the Central Valley of California, in the midwest, are being played out, not refilling, because of current weather, location, and agribusiness techniques?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I am not sure what you are saying. Purposefully manufacture economic crisis and disregard economic impacts of solutions because it may push toward a goal you want? Do you understand how unethical and fucked up that is?
Re:Hell, yes! (Score:5, Insightful)
Yes. I am afraid of economic catastrophe
Then why not do something about climate change? The economic catastrophe that climate change with wreak upon the earth is unfathomable.
Re:Hell, yes! (Score:5, Insightful)
Because he'll be dead by then, duh. Today's climate obstructionists are simply putting the pain of taking action onto future generations, multiplied many times over by the delay.
They're basically stealing shit from the future, in a very inefficient but cheap way, for their own personal gain.
Re: (Score:2)
You live a cushy and luxurious life because of cheap energy. Why is it wrong to recognize that others want that life too? Why is it wrong to recognize that if your solution impacts the well being of others then it is not a good solution?
Re: (Score:2)
Well you're being quite presumptuous to think that I have a cushy and luxurious life or access to cheap energy, but clean energy doesn't have to be more expensive. Renewables plus storage are already at the heels of the price of fossil fuels, and that's with fossil fuel production being subsidized in many countries officially, and unofficially through "defense" spending. And again that fossil energy isn't even as cheap as it appears - part of the price is being left to accrue compound interest for future ge
Re: (Score:3)
Based on whose projections? There is a known and guaranteed cost today of mitigating potential future climate change. The costs of the future are unknown and unknowable. So yes, they could be an economic catastrophe, but they could also be an economic boom. Maybe a warmer climate will increase valuable oceanfront property? Maybe a warmer climate will reduce cold weather costs like snow removal and ice melting? Maybe a warmer climate will make areas of current tundra open to agriculture? Maybe a warmer clima
Re: (Score:2)
Then why not do something about climate change? The economic catastrophe that climate change with wreak upon the earth is unfathomable.
It's easy to say that hunting Bushmeat is bad. It's easy to say that the damage is unfathomable. Now put yourself in the shoes of the people that do hunt Bushmeat and then show me it is easy to see your family go hungry because some affluent westerner wants to virtue signal on the internet.
Re:Hell, yes! (Score:5, Insightful)
The whole point of reducing greenhouse gases emissions is that it is cheaper than the consequences of not doing it. Which will, by the way, affect the poor.
The real poor (as in under developed countries) use very little energy by the way. It's us, the rich (and you don't need to be that rich as long as you live in a rich country), with heated + air conditioned homes, hot water, green lawn, driving 20+ km to work in alone in their SUV and flying for vacations who do.
Re: (Score:2)
The real poor (as in under developed countries) use very little energy by the way. It's us, the rich
Which kind of undermines the whole point of "Then why not do something about climate change?". Those developing nations have every right to get electricity and for the cheapest possible price. Nothing I can do will change the outcome of that fact. The only thing that will change the amount of CO2 those developing nations will produce is if the economics change enough to make clean technologies cheaper than fossil fuels without government regulation. A developing nations government is under no obligation to
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
policy that basically every informed expert on the planet agrees must be undertaken
No, you are wrong. There is no consensus among experts about what we should do to stop climate change. Some want to build nuclear power plants immediately to replace coal, some want to fund clean energy technology research, some want to transfer money to developing nations, some experts think we should do nothing and wait for solar to become cheap enough, some experts want to keep burning
Re:Hell, yes! (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
We know that adding CO2 to the atmosphere will have some effect on global temperatures. We have absolutely no consensus on what to do about it.
We can try a bit of each of the proposed solutions, see what works best (or maybe a combination is the correct answer).
Sitting on your hands and going "neener neener" runtil there's a 100% guaranteed solution down to the last detail never fixed anything in the past and it sure as hell won't fix this.
Re: (Score:2)
What are you talking about? The overwhelming consensus among climate scientists is to reduce the combustion of fossil fuels. But don't ask a climate scientist whether nuclear or solar should win because he or she wouldn't be an expert on that.
Re:Hell, yes! (Score:4, Interesting)
But we don't have scientific consensus that the cost of mitigating it today is lower than the cost of dealing with it in the future. From an economic and human prosperity standpoint it's entirely possible that doing nothing today is the best course of action because it lifts the most people out of poverty and advancing technology will allow us to live in a warmer global climate more comfortably than we live today.
Re: (Score:2)
But we don't have scientific consensus that the cost of mitigating it today is lower than the cost of dealing with it in the future.
That wasn't what I was discussing. I realize that there is an economic impact that is in dispute, but I was referring to the consensus that we are causing our climate to change.
From an economic and human prosperity standpoint it's entirely possible that doing nothing today is the best course of action because it lifts the most people out of poverty and advancing technology will allow us to live in a warmer global climate more comfortably than we live today.
Sure, it's entirely possible that we "learn to live with it". It's also entirely possible that a drastically changing climate wipes out the human species. And I bet you wouldn't have to look too long to find an expert that can make convincing arguments for both sides. Again though, how we pay for it wasn't my point.
Re:Hell, yes! (Score:4, Interesting)
Policies that limit pollution. What are you afraid of, economic catastrophe? Mommy telling you what to do?
My college roommate was an environmental engineer. The actual tenet of the field is: "there is no such thing as too little pollution, but there is such a thing as too little production".
Something to consider. If it's free of hard tradeoffs, it's not engineering.
Re: (Score:3)
Something to consider. If it's free of hard tradeoffs, it's not engineering.
The problem is that many people wants pollution to be free.
It should be a trade off. You emit X tons of CO2. You pay $Y.
Re:Hell, yes! (Score:4, Insightful)
I have some friends who joined this protest. The kid quoted in the article said, "my life is literally on the line." It's not
Their physical life may not be on the line but the potential quality of their future life definitely is.
They don't want to spend their lives dealing with the consequences of the current policies.
Re: (Score:2, Troll)
So they'd rather spend their lives dealing with the consequences of new policies? Namely, a possibly slightly cooler planet with extreme levels of national debt to pay for the potential mitigating policies that have been proposed?
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Hell, yes! (Score:4, Insightful)
So your plan is to promise to pay people for their work and then stiff them in the future? That sure sounds like a great way to save humanity... Debt isn't made up, it's owed to somebody. It's not just on a computer screen. If that's all debt is and it can be canceled out with no consequences, I hope you have a lot of physical resources at home because all your savings and assets are just numbers on a computer screen too.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
How will a carbon fee and dividend [citizensclimatelobby.org] increase national debt?
Fat drunk and stupid is no way to go through life (Score:2, Funny)
Go to school, kids. If you want to protest, do it in more productive ways--like cornering Diane Feinstein and asking her why she hates puppies.
Re:Fat drunk and stupid is no way to go through li (Score:4, Insightful)
Go see your optometrist, myopian; apparently your prescription is so out-of-date that you can't see past your own nose anymore.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Who cares about anything that's going to happen 100 years from now? Only what happens the next election,
100 years from now? The world's going to end in 20 years! Or so I hear every few years. Nuclear war between the US and Russia was a real threat to all humanity. Everything panic after is at most "meh".
But. yeah, the Dems and GOP are both almost-entirely owned by the .01%. They only actually disagree about things that don't matter to the economy. Everything else is for show (e.g., Republicans crossing the aisle to stop the wall being built - can't let the economy be affected by that pesky democracy!).
I
Re: (Score:3)
Myself, I think pollution is where we should start. Most pollution is plastic(fossil). It has clogged our rivers and oceans. It seeps into our ground water through either our land fills or trash left on land.
If we were to move away from plastic products, don't you think our co2 or what ever other pollutant that contributes to global warming would decrease?
Most western nations
kids love having an excuse to cut classes (Score:2)
School administrations are not going to get in the way of the cause du jour. The ensuing recreational outrage will not be worth it.
Fridays off (Score:5, Funny)
3 day weekends in the name of justice!
Hmmmm..... I may need to implement this policy for myself....
Are those kids willing to sacrifice something? (Score:5, Insightful)
It doesn't take much to get a kid to decide not to go to school. But are they willing to make real sacrifices for the environment? Probably not. You have to give up meat. You can't buy electronics devices. You can't use plastics. Can't drink milk or consume many other animal products unless they are expensive sustainable varieties. You have to give up on shopping at the mall and do all your clothes shopping at thrift stores buying only highly durable clothing that lasts more than a season. Give up any sports or extracurriculars that require you to travel by bus.
When kids do those things, they will be standing on firm moral ground.
Re:Are those kids willing to sacrifice something? (Score:5, Insightful)
It doesn't take much to get a kid to decide not to go to school. But are they willing to make real sacrifices for the environment? Probably not. You have to give up meat. You can't buy electronics devices. You can't use plastics. Can't drink milk or consume many other animal products unless they are expensive sustainable varieties. You have to give up on shopping at the mall and do all your clothes shopping at thrift stores buying only highly durable clothing that lasts more than a season. Give up any sports or extracurriculars that require you to travel by bus.
When kids do those things, they will be standing on firm moral ground.
I've had similar conversations with my kids. They are just as willing to give up their conveniences as wealthy people are willing to give up the private jets they use to get to the next climate junket.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
They'll sacrifice you and your lifestyle, as long as they get to keep theirs.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Substitute socialists for kids and you still have a true statement.
Most kids are socialists, and rightly so: they've only lived in a way where an authority provides for their every need. Socialism is the only thing they've known. And that's fine, but eventually one should grow up.
A. Occasionally Coherent
That's pronounced "occasional cortex".
Re: (Score:2)
That's stupid. Look, if everyone else is willing to join me in doing things to prevent global warming, I am too. But I'm not going to deprive myself if the world is on fire anyway. See also, I'm willing to pay higher taxes, but only if everyone else does.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You have to give up meat.
And vegetables too. Not just palm oil, I mean, huge swaths of land once were forests and swamps, but they are now agricultural land full of pesticides. If someone doesn't want to hurt nature too much, he/she should get back to the hunter-gatherer lifestyle (and if he/she REALLY cares, just gatherer, you know).
Re: (Score:2)
But are they willing to make real sacrifices for the environment? Probably not.
They are doing what they can which is voicing their opinions to those who actually make decisions for them. After all you did correctly identify they are kids. What are they going to do? Vote out governments?
You have to give up meat. You can't buy electronics devices. You can't use plastics. Can't drink milk or consume many other animal products unless they are expensive sustainable varieties.
Man cut the hyperbole. There's metric shit-ton of stuff you can do for the environment that doesn't involve any of that and has far more impact than any of the things you just mentioned.
Give up any sports or extracurriculars that require you to travel by bus.
Their parents could learn a lot by example of people using a bus. That alone would be a good for the environment.
When kids do those things, they will be standing on firm moral ground.
They
You have no idea (Score:3)
First off, 7 companies are responsible for the bulk of carbon emissions. Climate Change is an industrial problem. We need to get mega business to clean up and we need to switch to clean renewables. Not eating hamberders isn't going to help. The companies making those hamburgers will just pollute the same with vegetables. Cow Farts are overrated to make climate change sound silly.
As for the Kids, I don't know about the rest of the world but
Re: (Score:3)
It doesn't take much to get a kid to decide not to go to school. But are they willing to make real sacrifices for the environment? Probably not. You have to give up meat. You can't buy electronics devices. You can't use plastics. Can't drink milk or consume many other animal products unless they are expensive sustainable varieties. You have to give up on shopping at the mall and do all your clothes shopping at thrift stores buying only highly durable clothing that lasts more than a season. Give up any sports or extracurriculars that require you to travel by bus.
When kids do those things, they will be standing on firm moral ground.
I wish TFS had bothered to link another Guardian article from earlier this week, that was specifically about Greta herself [theguardian.com]. Because.. yes, she did do those things. And not only did she make those sacrifices, she convinced her parents to as well. She even got her mother to give up flying, which had a severe impact on her career, for example.
So yeah, at least in Greta's case, she's practicing what she preaches. Her whole family is.
Re:Are those kids willing to sacrifice something? (Score:4, Interesting)
The problem of meat is not its energy density, but the amount of energy required to grow, especially beef and lamp. Pork and chicken are much better for the environment.
Re: (Score:2)
Kids believe in stories (Score:2, Informative)
Someone told these kids a story about the future and they believed it. Childrens' belief in stories about the future is not a reason to do anything one way or another.
People should stop pretending they know the future. They don’t.
The reality tends to be different (Score:2)
In my country of birth there were no tornadoes in the recorded history. Until a few years ago.
Sure people have heard of them and seen them on TV, but never experienced them, so the first time one happened, they did not know what it was.
Yes, and kids in that same country did hear the story about the Wizard of Oz.
Do you think they believed that they were about to meet the Tin Man and his friends?
Or that global warming may have something to do with what they experienced ?
Re: (Score:2)
Just curious - how long is "recorded history" for that sort of thing where you were born? In the USA, "recorded history" for tornadoes in Kansas only goes back about 150 years, for instance....
Re: (Score:2)
Well, the Romans did record the history for a couple of hundred of yearrs.
Then the Dark Ages followed until historical records re-started around 800 years ago.
That is from before the Mini Ice Age. During the Mini Ice Age a lot of battles took place simply because armies could cross frozen rivers.
That particular sort of thing I was born in had many natural distasters recorded in it history.
Said recorder hstory started before the establishment of the Emirate of Granada, and runs until today.
The USA by contras
Re:Kids believe in stories (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3)
It's tax free.
Re: (Score:3)
They are probably being trained by whoever it is trying to get the voting age lowered to 16 so children can dictate adult policy.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I say why the hell not, plenty of old people vote like children anyway.
Re: (Score:2)
I say why the hell not, plenty of old people vote like children anyway.
People who never did anything for anyone want to decide things. If you want every institution in society to be even less legitimate, that's how you achieve that.
When there's a crisis and you need people to come together to achieve a common goal, they won't. Better hope nothing ever goes wrong.
Re: (Score:2)
People who never did anything for anyone want to decide things.
What does that have to do with 16-year-olds voting in particular?
When there's a crisis and you need people to come together to achieve a common goal, they won't. Better hope nothing ever goes wrong.
As opposed to the status quo? Again, show me a downside of letting 16-year-olds vote compared to not letting them vote.
Re: (Score:2)
Scientists don't pretend to know the future.
Which children talked to which scientists?
We don't get to talk to scientists. We get edited videos and media reports that turn everything into a story.
In other news (Score:3)
Wind up toy jitters around after key is turned.
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Missing 20% of your school days doesn't seem like a good way to achieving their goals. If you don't have a good education, how do you expect to be able to effect positive change in the world? Fixing things takes more than good intentions.
If your education being good depends on 20% of attendance you've already lost.
Speaking of good intentions you are absolutely right. The problem is most of the stupid shits running the world don't have the least bit of good intentions.
The world keeps on spinning (Score:5, Insightful)
Kids aren't doing this because they genuinely give a damn about Climate Change.
They're doing it because it's a convenient excuse to get out of school.
Fail those who exceed the maximum number of days they can miss in a School Year.
Once you introduce consequences into the equation, you'll figure out who is serious and who isn't.
( Those who are willing to watch their friends move on to the next grade level while they repeat it are the serious ones )
Adult lesson of the day:
It isn't much of a strike / protest unless you risk something in return.
Re:The world keeps on spinning (Score:5, Insightful)
Who's coordinating this? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
....Or the more likely scenario that there is no massive conspiracy waiting to be broken open here.
Re: (Score:2)
So you're one of those weirdo coincidence theorists, huh? It is far more likely that this is being conducted with adult supervision, but whom? Youth have extended childhoods today, often going on until well into their 20s. You're going to tell me they can do complicated political activism, the kind that most adults can't get right, without any expert assistance?
Even if it's not there, I would feel more comfortable if this is thoroughly investigated by people we trust the most: journalists. In fact, tha
Re: (Score:3)
"It is far more likely that this is being conducted with adult supervision"
No it's not. Kids don't need adult supervision to ditch school.
" You're going to tell me they can do complicated political activism, the kind that most adults can't get right, without any expert assistance?"
Not at all. What I will tell you is that they will ditch school and/or take advantage of an excuse to be self righteous on a whim. It should surprise no one that a bunch of kids acted on perfectly open social media calls to ditch
Re: (Score:2)
When Nancy Pelosi wanted to fly to Brussels on that junket during the government shutdown, did you happen to notice what was going there on that day?
By some amazing coincidence there was a major children's march to raise climate change awareness among political leaders around the world on the day she scheduled a layover in Brussels. Nancy wanted to just happen to be there to stand in front of the cameras posturing as if she's a leader of some sort. Then Trump took away her plane ticket.
How shameful (Score:3, Insightful)
Manipulating kids on a global scale to push a political interest while pretending it's grass-roots and then reporting it that way in the news.
It's time we call this what it is every time we see it. It's all about consolidated control.
The people in charge of these movements don't give a rats ass about the environment, in fact they intentionally trigger and prolong real environmental disasters to justify more regulation. That's why the BP disaster in the gulf took so long to plug and rivers in Indian reservations were intentionally polluted by the EPA.
They have to make each of us feel guilty in an individual basis too push their agenda. That's why stuff like this news article gets published.
You want to really clean up the environment on a personal basis? Bring back deposit bottles, less manufacturing overhead and it gives kids and homeless something to make some money with. Stop the single use craze by buying in bulk and from farmers markets. Intentionally but things with less packaging.
Want to address the larger scale? Legalize newer nuclear reactors that are less dangerous, like pebble bed reactors. Recycle the existing spent full no matter how Jimmy Carter feels about it. Get the ethanol out of our has engines. Start making Sterling Engines that run in ethanol to keep the corn lobby happy and to fuel local backup power and even supplement the grid. Use it to purify water while you're at it.
This is propaganda people, recognize it, shine a light on it.
Eh, Manchester kids are blocking the trams (Score:2)
Eh, Manchester (UK) kids are protesting by blocking the trams, one of the friendliest to the environment mode of transportation available for the city. If they don't realize the stupidity of that now, they sure won't in the future by missing more school...
Did they? (Score:3, Funny)
...or should the title really be "Kids skipping school opportunistically use some current cultural thing as excuse to avoid punishment"?
I'm not sure I'm going to really follow the 'moral leadership' of a group who had to be repeatedly told to STOP EATING TIDE PODS.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not sure they're going to really follow the 'moral leadership' of a group that repeatedly fell for the claim that they were eating Tide pods.
So Stupid (Score:2)
Ugh. Sooo stupid. I don't have words.
1. Kids don't produce anything, striking saves resources
2. Education is for their benefit
3. Their parents may be liable for them not going to school
4. This is obviously mostly done because of they want to skip class. That is why it is a Friday.
5. Who are they are they trying to influence? You protest at a bank because of the policies of the bank. Schools are not causing CC
6. Are they doing "productive" things during the time? Or just playing games or whatever?
Ok.
My head hurts (Score:4, Insightful)
Half the arguments these days tend to go something like:
Employee: "I'm taking Fridays off to protest global warming!"
Boss: "How is that related to global warming?"
Employee: "I can't believe you'd say something so racist!?!?!"
Boss: "That had nothing to do with racism, and if you don't come in Friday you won't get paid."
Employee: "How could you try to deny my existence!?"
I'm not going to deny that global warming exists, but to speak bluntly: it doesn't much matter if we dump X amount of CO2 into the atmosphere in 100 years or 8000 years. On a global/geologic timescale they are approximately equal. Regardless of how fast we do it, every single fossil fuel on this planet will be used up and burned. All we can really do is cross our fingers and hope that however much CO2 that happens to be isn't so much that it kills everyone.
If it's below that threshold, then we'll eventually create renewable energy sources out of necessity - essentially that will be our way of evolving through this change. If it's not, then whatever does survive will evolve to live in whatever new climate the planet settles into.
Ok so there is a Climate Change Issue, so...... (Score:2)
The few (some fraction of 1% or the 7.5 + billion population) who are controlling the correction of the climate issue need to get their ass in gear and get it done instead of just talking about it all the time. For certainly they are not allowing the rest of us, the mass majority of the population to participate, otherwise http://3seas.org/Voice_of_Glob... [3seas.org] would happen. Isn't it Obvious?
I am shocked! Kids can (Score:2)
Just my 2 cents
Like boycotting school is actually going to help.. (Score:3)
The carbon problem will be solved by people who stay in school, get themselves a solid STEM education, and manage to get energy and sequestration projects going in places where the student activists can't "deplatform" them.
Re: (Score:2)
Do you? Go watch this: https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/... [pbs.org] if you really think that's 2 hours of lies and bullshit and so-called 'libtards' and their 'liberal agenda' then you don't belong on slashdot or in any science or technology-based career, go to seminary and become a goddamned priest.
Great, so you know there is a problem. Now how about a science based solution...as in nuclear...anything else is just a rounding error and a feel good solution that does nothing. The first step is knowing there is a problem. But that's not the stage we are at right now. We know there is a problem, we just can't get anyone to invest in a realistic solution. Instead we get feel good solutions that do nothing to solve the core problems and likely make things worse in the long run. Until you (and your sid
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Troll)
Well, obviously a liberal education lets people actually learn how to spell... which suggests that, based on your post, anyone should trust you about as much as a drunken bum on a corner selling Rolex watches.