[yor_on]

Here's a example " The German-backed Nord Stream pipeline is “a Russian geopolitical project intended to divide Europe and weaken European energy security”, the US secretary of state, Antony Blinken, has warned. "

Why doesn't he react over the implications for a 'green' future?
The game don't care about that.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/mar/18/us-warns-nord-stream-pipeline-is-russian-geopolitical-project

[yor_on]

We become extremely stupid in our anthills, playing the same game, all the way to our extinction.

[yor_on]

With you nodding, thinking that 'yes, this is a serious matter''

And you're correct, for our game it is. It's about geopolitics, assets, and profits.
It's not about global warming.

[yor_on]

This is very good, and fits a lot of the geopolitics and real politik we produce.

" “There’s a development paradigm playing out in Rwanda which goes quite deep and it’s sinister. It’s this idea that the west can deliver development irrespective of what the local government is like and that you can strip the politics out of the development agenda by focusing on education, health, mosquito nets, vaccination rates.

“But the local politics are the only thing that matters. There’s something profoundly uncomfortable about insisting that a government which has a deteriorating human rights record and has committed egregious war crimes is a worthy recipient of aid because it performs well on aid metrics yet is busy killing journalists and rounding up and disappearing critics.” "


https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2021/mar/19/we-choose-good-guys-and-bad-guys-beneath-the-myth-of-model-rwanda

[yor_on]

COP26 was it?

" The first: global net zero. I want to put the world on a path to reach net zero by the middle of the century, which is essential to keeping 1.5C within reach."

Really?

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/mar/18/climate-crisis-cop26-president-global-targets

[yor_on]

A dumber world.

" Tiny plastic particles in the lungs of pregnant rats pass rapidly into the hearts, brains and other organs of their foetuses, research shows. It is the first study in a live mammal to show that the placenta does not block such particles. "

Yours.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/mar/18/plastic-particles-pass-from-mothers-into-foetuses-rat-study-shows

[yor_on]

And this is too late
2050

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/mar/18/uk-cop26-alok-sharma-world-get-on-track-net-zero-by-2050

[yor_on]

This is funny    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-56452474

[yor_on]

And this?

"  The human right to a healthy environment – encompassing clean and balanced ecosystems, rich biodiversity and a stable climate – recognises that nature is a keystone of a dignified human existence, in line with a wealth of scientific evidence linking human welfare and the natural world. People depend on thriving ecosystems that clean water and air, yield seafood and pollinators, and soak up greenhouse gases. Recognising this link legally can greatly strengthen human rights.

But equally important, Cordero notes, is that the right provides a powerful basis to protect nature itself. In a worsening global environmental crisis, some legal scholars have argued that the right to a healthy environment acts as a crucial legal pathway to protecting the natural world, both by encouraging governments to pass stronger environmental laws and allowing courts to hold violators accountable. Especially when installed into constitutions, such rights are taken seriously by many judicial systems and become hard to undo, creating an enduring force counteracting the interests against protecting nature.  "

No, won't work.

Reservations for us not nature. You can call it another ban of sorts.
That would work, if it got implemented.

But it won't.
Nobody takes nature seriously. It just happen to be there to be exploited, by us, the crown of existence.

https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20210316-how-the-human-right-to-a-healthy-environment-helps-nature

[yor_on]

And that was all from the BBC.

[yor_on]

So what do you want, babies encased in plastic, just so you can keep your modern facilities?
A future for them?

It doesn't matter for you, but it will for those kids, and their kids.

[yor_on]

Then again, presuming that nature saw no need for plastics and micro-plastics in our evolution it doesn't really matter, does it. We're stupid enough as it is.

[yor_on]

You know what a 'food chain' is I hope. You also know the 'thumb rule' for how it increases toxic and other substances, as they wanders up in that food chain? It becomes about ten times stronger by each step. I just point it out, it hasn't to do with this specifically. Although it will for micro plastics.

This is on another matter, but it connects to food chains also, plankton of all sorts becoming the first step in the marine food chain, all the way to your dinner plate. And they are losing their shells today, acidity.    Everything interconnects.

so not only plankton but your food fish.

https://phys.org/news/2020-02-global-extinction.html

[yor_on]

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/07/science/climate-change-mass-extinction.html

[yor_on]

They connect to each other. The one linked before 'The New York Times' is recent, 2020.

[yor_on]

You need to demand this democracy before it becomes too late. If you can't we will fail.

[yor_on]

So, how well can we make the greenhouse emissions fit our consumption?

[yor_on]

One example.





"  Description

Black Curve: Seasonally adjusted monthly average atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration versus time at Mauna Loa Observatory, Hawaii (20 °N, 156 °W) where CO2 concentration is in parts per million in the mole fraction (p.p.m.). The line through the dots is a spline fit to the data.

Red Curve: Fossil fuel trend of a fixed fraction (57%) of the cumulative industrial emissions of CO2 from fossil fuel combustion and cement production. This fraction was calculated from a least squares fit of the fossil fuel trend to the observation record.

Data from Scripps CO2 Program."

And " Least Squares Fitting.   A mathematical procedure for finding the best-fitting curve to a given set of points by minimizing the sum of the squares of the offsets ("the residuals") of the points from the curve. The sum of the squares of the offsets is used instead of the offset absolute values because this allows the residuals to be treated as a continuous differentiable quantity.  "   https://mathworld.wolfram.com/LeastSquaresFitting.html

[yor_on]

You need to look at what they do, not at what they say.

[yor_on]

And no, it's not Scripps I'm questioning here.