The climate change consensus extends beyond climate scientists

[litesong]

Originally Posted by RustyLugNut

.....we bought a bit above the expected sea level rise.

They also bought property above the expected sea level rise:
https://www.joemygod.com/wp-content/...n2-660x330.jpg

[redpoint5]

Anyone saying we've got an obligation to accomodate "displaced" people or that they will be coming at us with pitchforks are either corrupt or ignorant.

We won't just wake up one day with the seas being a foot higher. It incrementally raises over generations. If people can't get out the way over the course of generations, that's on them.

I could easily move to any number of baren locations in the US tomorrow, and the cost of living would be extremely low. Instead, it's the corrupt people who say that the "poor" have the right to live in places like Miami, and that we also need to make sure the seas don't rise and inundate the city. Neither of those statements is true or remotely resembles anything approximating rational thought.

[sendler]

Originally Posted by redpoint5

Humanity will never choose "simple" on a large scale, or for long periods of time. Simplification would be a social fad, not something integrated into the DNA of our being.

Of course, we can't consume what doesn't exist. To that end, simplification may not be a choice, but then again I don't think it ever was.

We would choose simplification if we were truly sapient and woke to the reality of limits to growth on a finite planet. If we don't or can't it will be forced on us unwillingly eventually in an uncontrolled manor as the resources that allowed this "Great Acceleration" inevitably slip away.

[freebeard]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drop_City

[sendler]

Originally Posted by freebeard

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drop_City

These communes are great but I always wonder how many of them and how much land is needed to relocate Tokyo, Moscow, Jakarta, ect.

[redpoint5]

The problem is that excess is what drives innovation and exploration. If we simplify, we don't go to Mars. Going to Mars probably isn't immediately important or clearly beneficial to humanity, and I'm only using Mars as a representation of the many things we won't discover (or won't discover as quickly) if excess isn't leveraged. We've solved so many problems with technology precisely because we aren't spending 90% of our time farming. The larger and more productive our farming operations, the more time we get to spend being creative.

[sendler]

Originally Posted by redpoint5

If we simplify,

I know you could grasp this if you wanted to and have come close at times. It's not a matter of if we simplify, but when. And whether it is done under control or forced on us via collapse.
.
.

[freebeard]

Originally Posted by sendler

These communes are great but I always wonder how many of them and how much land is needed to relocate Tokyo, Moscow, Jakarta, ect.

The problem isn't the land, but the mental spaces they inhabit. Make sandstone out of sand and you can reclaim Saharasia: https://throughthesandglass.typepad....sign-idea.html

If you have seawater instead of sand, then all the natural elements are available:
Biorock

[redpoint5]

I realize there are external circumstances which threaten to simplify, and I'm quite for efficiency which is why I'm on this forum. I'm simply pointing out that our increasing ability to do more with less (efficiency) is directly related to consumerism.

Though I lean Libertarian, I'm not a Libertarian, and I accept that artificially influencing an otherwise free market is sometimes necessary. I'm open to the idea of slowly and progressively increasing the federal tax on fossil fuels, for instance.

What I'm not ok with is subsidizing particular industries (EV incentives) or banning plastic grocery bags at the supermarket. Those ideas are retarded (not of developed quality).

... and I've always wondered why humanity hasn't figured out how to live on the sea in larger numbers. If it covers most of the surface of Earth, then it seems we should be utilizing more of it.

[freebeard]

Originally Posted by redpoint5

Though I lean Libertarian, I'm not a Libertarian, and I accept that artificially influencing an otherwise free market is sometimes necessary....

What I'm no ok with is subsidizing particular industries (EV incentives) or banning plastic grocery bags at the supermarket.

What works is anarcho-capitalism. Witness Internet. A recent example was set by Fisher Industries. They built something on an 'unbuildable' site that's best in class for a fraction of the cost. Over the weekend.

Their example shifted discourse in Congress, in case you didn't notice.