« Remedy du Jour -- February 23, 2013 | Main | I'll Have The Red Snapper! »



Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Alexander Ač

Thanks Dave

And there is some update on proposed solutions (from other authors) to "global environmental challenges" in the journal BioScience:

"Social Norms and Global Environmental Challenges: The Complex Interaction of Behaviors, Values, and Policy"


BTW it is Barnosky, not Barnofsky,



Thanks, I corrected the text -- Dave


Ha! Thanks for the black humor, Dave and Alex!
Should keep me going for another day or two.


Re. Alex's reference to 'Social Norms and Global Environmental Challenges', I was over the moon to read these boffins' conclusions:

"There is room for optimism. In much of the world, there is growing awareness that we face potentially catastrophic global environmental problems and that significant shifts in policies, technologies, and behaviors will be required to address them. Therefore, many people are primed to accept solutions that evoke social norms involving our shared responsibility to the environment and to other people, and many policymakers are searching for policies that can have long-term impacts on behavior and environmental outcomes."

Everything will be all right then. On whatever planet these guys live on.

Alexander Ač

Reed and Oliver,

yeah, I agree their conclusions are a bit optimistic (unrealistic)... I just wanted to show this level of debate - at least there is some!, maybe somebody will find it useful (not me, though)



Frank Furcsa

Yeah ! Unrealistic That guy is ASLEEP ! who is this some university professor ?, You kidding me and this kind of people are teaching in the schools of higher learning ?? Lame ! No wonder it is as it is now this guy is just a part of the establishment trying to make validate his useless presence telling you some half truths but not rocking the boat .. Or he just doesn`t have a clue how critical the situation is better see someone who doesn`t pretend he is so smart but who actually gets the point http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MbMBIP_PPUo&feature=related


Quotes like Elizabeth Hadly's are truly heart-warming. In her view, all we need is to industrialize the third world, providing "infrastructure" and "reproductive choices". Hadly, of course, is a member of the Stanford cult, the Millennium Alliance for Humanity and the Biosphere (MAHB), which is the brain child of Paul Ehrlich, author of "The Population Bomb". These people are obsessed with the world's population, and they seem to think that if we get enough Depo-Provera shots to the third world, carbon emissions will fix themselves. I'm not sure they ever did something so cursory as to check the per capita carbon emissions for third world countries vs first world, noting that it takes, oh, about ONE THOUSAND of them to equal one of us. We could render all the Ethiopes and Nepalese for green biodiesel and not make a dent in the world's carbon emissions. Industrializing them would make it far worse.

Alexander Ač


it is always easier to find "solutions" for specific problems, if you dont care that you fu*k up other people/parts of the worlds. Therefore, best solution seekers are people with very narrow world view /sarc

Anyway, one cannot save everyone and solve everything, right?


The comments to this entry are closed.