wtdata

You are just validating my point with that "per capita" narrative.

The point is simple: you want to pretend your are saving the planet by allowing China and India to increase their emissions, more than USA and EU will ever be able to cut them (even if they cut it to zero).

Explain how that can possible save the planet please.

I know I will be downvoted for stating a fact but I agree with you.

The gist of the so called environmentalists is (factually, these really are their proposals when you look at their numbers): ok USA and EU, you have to urgently stop your emissions, even if that means total economic breakdown. China and specially India, it's ok you can continue your emissions, and increase then by even more than the all 1st world will cut theirs (even if they cut it to 0), that's just fine since your are entitled to it because you didn't do it in the past.

End result: a planet with even more emissions than today and a destroyed economy in the western world.

But somehow, this will save the planet according to people pushing this catastrophic scenario.

Sorry no, these people aren't pushing major climate action to save the planet, they are doing it because they think it's hip to push this idea that the Western way of life should be destroyed to give way to their political ideology.

I am also old enough to remember how the Ozone Layer would doom us all and that even if we stopped all CFC emission immediately, it would still take 4 centuries to recover.

Reality: Even with China still misbehaving about CFCs emissions, the Ozone Layer already recovered quite a bit and it's set to be fully healed by 2060.

But well, on the bright side, at least that time, ALL nations comited to stop using CFCs. This time, the idea is: stop all emissions in the western world, and allow Asia to keep increasing theirs.

And add the problem with plastics with the fact that this marketing stunt with pyramidal tea bags, occupies about 3x more volume and as such take 3x more resources to store and transport than traditional tea bags.

There is no going back about cleaning plastics by traditional methods now unfortunately.

The only real solution I see is if we bio-engineer some bacteria/microorganism capable of decomposing it and release it in the environment. It might be a danregous proposition, but (expect the even more advanced and potentially dangerous proposition of nanites) I can't see any other way of getting rid of all the plastic we already put into the environment even if we stop producing it.

Well, it's very good for still images, problem is, it doesn't work well on videos, since the way it works is not temporally consistent.

Well, my agenda is about reducing global CO2 emissions so that we can save the planet.

But, there is nothing wrong with you having your agenda... just don't go around pretending you are pushing it due to environmental concerns.

> The poor in India should increase their emissions, because otherwise they'll die. Life expectancy has risen from 40 to 68 years since the 60s.

So, you are saying that CO2 emissions are actually good for the population and the way forward is to actually increase them even more. Interesting turn of events from an environmentalist.

> You want them to die because of the choices their parents made.

Funny thing to say, since you want the West to pay for the choices our grandfathers made and descend into deprivation, so that the rest of the world can go on polluting even more.

Here is the thing, people with your discourse aren't interested in saving the planet but into forcing your ideological agenda - which is got nothing to do with environmentalism but with your personal concepts of morality - upon the rest of us under the threat of environmental catastrophe. And the worst part of it? It does nothing to tackle climate change.

P.S.: > If you excuse me, I'm going to go take a shower. I honestly can't believe I'm having this conversation on HN.

Go easy on that shower, it's a big toll on the environment and, after all, you just spent the last 24h telling us all how those resources actually should belong to be used by people in India and not selfishly by me or by you.

When is enough just enough? Do the costumers really care about reducing a further 1mm from the thickness of a laptop sacrificing: keyboard usability, battery life and number of ports?

> They are doing what everyone else has done in the same circumstance.

We already established those aren't the same circumstances at all:

- 1st: we didn't have even 1/4 of the Indian population density when we were having the same birthrates.

- 2nd: When global warming became clear and urgent action was needed, we started reducing our emissions while India during that time already increased them by 400%, and is going to increase them by another 100% in the next decade.

It's not by keep repeating the same lie that you are going to make it a reality.

What do you mean?

It's not your racism that has you stating that someone in a country with a very good track record when it comes to CO2 emissions (and a number of other environmental aspects) should stop having children, so that someone in a overly populated country, with an appalling record when it comes to all kinds of pollution can have even more children?

If it's not racism from your part that makes you ask for that, than you should clarify what it is. But one thing is for certain, it's not environmentalism for sure.

I also had a hunch that you interest isn't really about saving the planet but in supporting the implementation of your ideological agenda.