The climate change consensus extends beyond climate scientists

[Fat Charlie]

If you set a man on fire, you warm him for the rest of his life.

Originally Posted by redpoint5

To some degree, expecting an individual to solve their own problem is beneficial to that individual, so long as they eventually solve their problem. People tend to live up to the standards that are imposed upon them.

Sadly, where that falls short is that many people solve their problems in a way that is benificial to themselves and detrimental to the community. Which is why, sadly, the community (AKA Big Government) has to impose standards on people that are simply trying to solve their own problems. There's a balance, but there's a big place for burdensome regulations.

[All Darc]

Observing chimpanzees and their empathy, we see they are only good or care to their prole/babies or to the ones that can offer something. Small comunities fight with other small comunities.

Humanity evolution will need genetics to change our instints and make us a better, less savage species.

[Fat Charlie]

Originally Posted by freebeard

IIRC the Federal response was:

I remember this response more clearly.

[niky]

Originally Posted by All Darc

Observing chimpanzees and their empathy, we see they are only good or care to their prole/babies or to the ones that can offer something. Small comunities fight with other small comunities.

Humanity evolution will need genetics to change our instints and make us a better, less savage species.

Humans aren't chimps.

And chimps do exhibit altruistic behaviour without expectation of reward, as do humans.

Charity of the apes

We both have the capacity for either savagery or altruism. Like many intelligent mammals. Dolphins, for example, have shown altruistic behaviour towards both humans other intelligent cetaceans, while at the same time exhibiting hostile and sometimes deadly intent towards same.

Yet the fact that the savagery exists does not erase the fact that *most* people in a population are benevolent in nature. Civilization would not exist otherwise.

You're looking at it as laws guiding human behaviour. Laws haven't been around as long as people have. Laws merely codify social conventions that were there in the first place.

[sendler]

Humans evolved for survival over 2 Million years to the current form 200,00 years ago as hunter gatherers. Altruism evolved to advance small tribes of related individuals. Outgroups were competitors. We have only become super social in the last 10,000 years and still have stone age neuropsychology in our modern skulls. Feel good transmitters that used to fire when we found and ate a rich food source now give instant gratification from greasy fast food and seeking out the purchase of the newest gadget, car, yacht. Outgroups are blamed for anything that goes wrong.

[niky]

Originally Posted by sendler

Humans evolved for survival over 2 Million years to the current form 200,00 years ago as hunter gatherers. Altruism evolved to advance small tribes of related individuals. Outgroups were competitors. We have only become super social in the last 10,000 years and still have stone age neuropsychology in our modern skulls. Feel good transmitters that used to fire when we found and ate a rich food source now give instant gratification from greasy fast food and seeking out the purchase of the newest gadget, car, yacht. Outgroups are blamed for anything that goes wrong.

True enough.

But it is possible to make humans see others as part of the in-group.

Connectivity.

It has been shown that travel and exposure to others lessens racist tendencies.

Social Media has the potential to make us all one big "tribe"... however, the biological imperatives you talk about do get in the way.

We'll figure it all out eventually.

Or die trying.

[All Darc]

Subconscient it's the key...
The autruistic behavior it's for the ones of their group, cause in the deep of their minds they know they need each other in a comunity.
I saw a documentary showing even canibalism among chimps of different groups, killing for the domain of a fig tree.

Humans are more than 99% chimps, in genetic terms.
Human history it's dirty enough.

Originally Posted by niky

Humans aren't chimps.

And chimps do exhibit altruistic behaviour without expectation of reward, as do humans.

Charity of the apes

We both have the capacity for either savagery or altruism. Like many intelligent mammals. Dolphins, for example, have shown altruistic behaviour towards both humans other intelligent cetaceans, while at the same time exhibiting hostile and sometimes deadly intent towards same.

Yet the fact that the savagery exists does not erase the fact that *most* people in a population are benevolent in nature. Civilization would not exist otherwise.

You're looking at it as laws guiding human behaviour. Laws haven't been around as long as people have. Laws merely codify social conventions that were there in the first place.

[Xist]

I have always heard that the last thing people want after a disaster is a President, his entourage, Secret Service, etc., getting in the way of putting their lives back together.

[Xist]

Climate Science Goes to Court Next Week

[freebeard]

The narrative drives the science, which drives the narrative.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PQmN38vm9D0