Still confused about climate change...

Post Reply New Topic

^^
Yes, true; I understand and agree. I live my life in such a way that I give at least as much as I take with the details in mind of what you describe above. I sleep well at night, when i feel the need for sleep. It's a peaceful way of life for me; that much I do know for sure. :)

Then what is wrong with wishing others could as well if it would make things more comfortable for all the earth's inhabitants. To me, this sounds more like having empathy than granting everyone the privilege to do whatever it is they want without any concern for anything else.

Slow down human populating growth plus using alternative energy would help.Good luck trying to stop people from breeding like rabbits.I'd secretly sterilize half of them but people frown on that for some reason

Women tend to use birth control when they have access to it; birthrate is robustly (across many studies) inversely proportional to female literacy and access to bc. It's called the demographic shift. The problem is religious and/or patriarchal idiots trying to prevent women from having access to the tools to control their own futures.

It would be such a boon to the planet and people if there were free clinics everywhere that provided free birth control and sterilization to all.Dream on.

Yeah. My christmas present to myself (and to sympathetic family members) is donations to various family planning/women's health programs overseas.

Well I have already addressed this issue because I know exactly what you mean. I do not want to traumatize people by dictating stuff to them. I would rather take the sly, under the table, gene altering approach and start from the beginning, like at conception, rather than try to force a system on an older population when it goes against the nature of their genetics.

As for getting people to have less kids, I would start a media campaign lauding people who decide not to have kids. I would hold such individuals in high esteem and encourage society to follow suit. I would opt for inclusion. That way, people who do not necessarily want to become parents, and there are plenty who don't, would feel good about their decision to not have them. This would help out the rest of the population.. I would encourage an average of two kids while frowning on any more than four per person and I am not doing this to be a big fat meanie. I am being practical and thinking about the needs of the planet and other species that inhabit it.

Nothing is wrong with it all, it is the same i wish for too, and try to effect change too, in whatever small way i can. :) I just accept what I can't change and don't let it bring me down, as well. :)

And to be clear I am not saying you are doing anything different as you seem like a strong, brave, and empathic person too. :)

And I also agree with eliminating the restrictions of birth control from religions that control the ideology of people; however, that change must come from within, and yes I am on the inside working with my Catholic Monsignor to do whatever I can to incite that change with many others from within. If the Catholic church would change that one policy, the world could be a less populated place along with less human suffering too, overall.

I'd bait them up with the offer of a free smart phone.Get sterilized and you get one,and a year of free service.They will line up I bet.

I wouldn't target older people because they get all jealous of their rights and start wigging out and thinking it's a fascist state. I would start with the genetic thing first, then work on that generation after I have started with the genes. I know it's folly to try to get adults to accept stuff. They don't want to accept anything. They are set in their ways, pretty much, and they will say their rights and freedoms are being taken away. If someone doesn't crave a certain thing, they won't mind if it's not there.

There would be this generation of calm, meek, humble rational, thinkers who would like nothing more than to sit outside and read books or solve complex equations despite all the turmoil their parents create around them. They would be resistant to parental brainwashing, too, so no matter how hard the parents try to ruin them by making them be just like the parents - just as destructively consuming and lost as the parents - it wouldn't work. The youth would simply watch the folly with smug amusement only to return to their books completely unphased leaving their parents scratching their heads in wonder and, perhaps, amazement. Imagine a generation immune to the ill effects of negative programming!! !

Hmm, ok I get it now. Your plan for world 'domination' does not exclude the potential for in effect, cloning of Internet Ana. ;)

(bolding by me)

Are you not seeing the irony of literally programming people to behave exactly as you want them to and then calling that "immune to the ill effects of negative programming".?

Everyone is gonna be programmed. It's how we live. You gotta pick the programming that will help the most people, and other inhabitants of the planet, live healthy, successful lives. I aim for that type of programming. Consumerism is a gluttony based program and gluttony has traditionally been considered a bad thing.

^^

One issue though is no matter what our genetics are at birth there is the potential for epigenetic effects and neuroplasticity from the environment that can make even identical twins seem like polar opposite people in many areas of life.

I myself, have moved from 44 to 45 on the AQ test to an 11; 195 to 92 on the Aspie quiz; the mid 50's to 95 on the Emotional Quotient test; and additionally, a move from an INTJ personality to an ENFP personality in just the span of a few months as a result of novel environmental stimulus.

And no, there is really no way to control the environment in foresight; it is always going to be unpredictable depending on the cultural changes at hand.

So in effect, any substantial genetic changes could be trumped by the stress of environmental change required for basic human survival.

And nah, scientists don't even yet understand the full mechanism that makes anti-depressants work or not work.

The human brain is really not something to play around with too much, in my opinion.

And beyond that, it is the extroverts who are usually, overall, in control, of political leaning policy changes, and they are not likely going to allow something like that to happen, as they know how fun it is to be an extrovert.

And some folks like me who have moved to polar opposites do most definitely agree too. I love being out in the public with other loving folks, more than I can imagine ever keeping myself in a room with either a computer, TV, or even book, now.

I thrive off of people now; they most definitely motivate me to higher aspirations and happiness in life.

Honestly, while I didn't always feel this way, even the thought of your genetic suggestion actually coming to fruition, sounds depressing to me, as for me all human diversity is the spice of life. I try to escape 'the same', more than anything else. But that's just my opinion, from living in both worlds now, and yes, sometimes almost at once, still. :)

^^I am talking about genetic predisposition and this makes inclinations very strong. It is a much greater influence than you think. Take one person who is able to handle a lot of stress and another cannot. You can find the reason why in their genes, a lot of time. So much is genetic. More than we realize.
Even in identical twins, there could be very minute, subtle differences in their DNA, enough to produce these different temperaments. Perhaps they are not truly identical, they are just very similar looking? Sometimes, siblings, even fraternal twins, can look very similar even though they are not truly identical and this would create an error when people say they are identical when they aren't really. I would suspect genetically identical twins to be very similar in all ways. If a pair of twins look very similar, a doctor could be fooled into thinking they are identical when they are in fact fraternal.