Climate Education is Screwed Up!


The very fact that the governments, businesses, and policy makers have failed to act will govern our citizens into action. The more years pass, the hotter our planet gets, the more discord there is among us. We’re in a calm before the storm not just in terms of climate, but also in terms of civil unrest, revolution, lawsuits, extremism and chaos that will result from it. (Music) I’d like to thank you all for coming to another ScientistsWarning TV program. My name’s Stuart Scott. Victoria Hurth, at the other end of the table, is our co-host and we’re coming to you live from COP-24, the Conference of Parties in Katowice, Poland. Victoria is an Associate Professor of Sustainable Business with the University of Plymouth. I’m the Executive Director of ScientistsWarning.org and a member of Climate University, shall we say? Today’s guests, we have with us: Victoria, Leone, Elina, and their teacher, Bruce Phillips, and they are all attending or teaching at the International School in Berlin. And today’s program we’re calling “Climate Education is Screwed Up!” Take it away. This is the current situation. The countries you see behind me in red are currently unsustainable. This is the total ecological footprint and the largest chunk of the red you see there is the carbon footprint. The countries in green are currently sustainable. The question is for how long? All the while we’re using fossil fuels. Every country that’s currently green is going to go red. The countries that are already in red are going to get redder. Eventually, they’ll go from being in deficit into debt. And we’re all aware that the ‘for how long’ question specifically refers to Brazil, well among other countries, where they’ve just elected a right-wing president who has promised to destroy the Amazon for for business — for money. Human civilization — all of humanity is being held hostage by our economic system. I say this every chance I get. Our system of money and economics is killing us. Martin Luther King once said, “There’s no human circumstance more tragic than the persisting existence of a harmful condition for which a remedy is readily available.” So, how do you remember Martin Luther King? As shallow? As power insatiable? No. Thinking back to his ideologies, he was courageous, appreciated, and at that time — innovative. Back then Dr. King realized that many millions of people were either essentially ignorant of our conditions or refused to face unpleasant truths. “Those who hope that the Negro needed to blow off steam and will now be content, will have a rude awakening if the nation returns to business as usual.” (Clapping) We’re talking about an important and alarming observation that has been made over 50 years ago. Since then fashion has progressed, technologies progress, pretty much anything has progressed, but not governments’ effective response to global issues. Like school students, you rely on procrastinations, but you’re not dealing with a paper that can be written out before the deadline. You’re dealing with the whole planet populated by seven point six billion people and organisms that support our survival. Even if humanity’s thinking often does not exceed a single generation, the damage is evident today, which is not a surprise to anybody here. So, being completely aware of the imminent severe dangers, let’s take a look at your responses in reducing fossil fuels. Are you kidding? This is the world that you leave behind to your families, to your future children. This is just shameful. I have no words. I want to emphasize — we’ve been talking for 25 years and all the time our fossil fuel use has been going up exponentially. Talk talk talk. When are we gonna stop talking and start doing something? The rate at which we use renewable energies does not function as a compensation for this, and renewable energies do not serve as an alibi for governments to appear like they’re combating climate change. First and foremost, they have to replace and thereby reduce the emission of fossil fuels to a minimum. Does this graph depict such action? No. The results are just as futile as your promises. The fact is that eventually we will have to change to other energy resources and then it’s going to be too late, because there will be no civility that requires your economic and political organization. If the value of humanity and the natural world is not enough and you continue to increase fossil fuel consumption at this rate, you’re shooting yourself in the foot. “I don’t know what else to do. This is the only option I have left to play my part and deal with this problem, so I’m prepared to be arrested for it. I don’t know what else to do now, so here I am.” Here, I have the United Nations climate change Secretariat progress tracker from October 22nd, 2018. The only thing that says is develop, update, convene a facility of dialogue among parties. I mean, is that what my existence depends on? I mean, this is not valuable at all. Conference after conference you invite students to speak and urge you to take action. Our question is: When will you actually start hearing our cries for help? When will our words finally matter to you? If you are unwilling to take action, make way for someone who isn’t afraid to tell it like it is and then act on it. Martin Luther King wouldn’t have sidestepped the facts and neither will we. We Millennials will be the bearers of the damage that collective inaction has caused. When we imagine our future, we fear a world of poverty, degradation, and critical resource depletion. We fear a world where changing weather patterns threaten the resources that our very lives depend on. Being aware of our future responsibility to combat negative impact on climate change, we’re not only confronted with your past frivolous actions, but also the lack of accurate knowledge. As students, we cannot stress enough how much importance and responsibility the education of climate change carries, since embedded information and ideology is the base of our future actions. Or are you seriously expecting us to turn the Titanic from the iceberg without giving us a compass and the map? Even if the whole of humanity would follow the suggestions manifested in current textbooks, the outcome will be ineffective. This is not us being pessimistic. This is us realizing initial reasons for weak outcomes. Doing the individual actions recommended for mitigating climate change the multiple school science and geography textbooks from some of the highest emitting countries These are familiar to everyone who’s had an education use countries, but there is a major problem here. Ok, so since the late 1980s and 1990s when I was at school – this is actually my textbook. Ok from the 80s and 90s I was gonna bring a modern textbook but the advice that’s in here is exactly the same as it was 30 years ago. The vast majority of textbooks mention recycling. Behind me you can see the tons of CO2 equivalent avoided per year for one person undertaking this action. Ok, recycling was mentioned the most. Plant-based diet wasn’t mentioned at all — not in one textbook. Buying green energy wasn’t mentioned in any textbook. Avoiding one long-haul flight or avoiding flying was only mentioned in a couple of textbooks — two out of ten, and don’t own a car was barely mentioned at all. But one thing that is missing from this list that has a greater impact than all of these put together, and this is a big problem because at the moment our education of students in schools is totally ineffective, telling them to recycle when it only saves 0.21 tons of CO2 equivalent ok and bear in mind we all live in or away from Berlin. Bear in mind it’s around 8 to 10 tons per person. Changing your light bulbs or recycling is going to do diddly squat. It’s going to make no major significant difference. My students went away. They went out –they did their research. They looked up this paper Vines/Nicholas from the Environmental Research Letters from last year 2017. This is what they found out — the biggest single action one individual can take and we’re not telling students: 58.6 tons That’s greater than all of the other actions that were mentioned in every textbook that we looked at. We looked at 26 different actions in textbooks. The vast majority of the ones that were mentioned are ineffective. And how many times is this mentioned? None — not a single textbook that I could find from the last 30 years. Not a single one. Now bear in mind that this is looking particularly at high emission countries, okay, high emission countries. This is looking at the richest countries. It’s a huge, huge thing and none of my students know this. I went round earlier. I showed people a piece of paper with this on, without the 58.6 tons on, without the information on. Now, I said, what is this big question mark what’s missing here? And I couldn’t find a single person here that could answer that question correctly. It’s also a very … a very cultural thing isn’t it? You know, having … having children and having a certain number of children is… is a norm that’s passed down through society and is quite a hard one. Having one child myself and hearing all the questions about why I’m not having more, I realize how strong that norm is. Yeah, I mean the interesting thing about this we were looking ok, where could we act on this where it’s a win-win situation? And one of the interesting things is, I don’t if you’re aware of this, in the United States, for example, the unintended pregnancy rate is 45%. That adds around a million unintended births, not necessarily unwanted, but unintended pregnancies in one year. That’s an extra million US footprints per year added and this is something that people don’t necessarily want. I think this is a case of poor sex education. I think it’s a case of the not reliable enough contraceptives and this is very much in rich countries that aren’t getting this right. So to reiterate, not once was choosing to have one fewer child mentioned in one of these textbooks — not once. Governments, you are fucking up our education. But as bad as that might sound, we’re simply adding too many people to this planet through unintended pregnancies and for people being unaware of how their choices impact this planet. If you’re convinced that you can deal with climate change while we’re adding the equivalent of the entire population of London every single month, then, as Sir David Attenborough has said, you’re either madman or an economist. I know some say they’re worried about their populations aging, but being brutally honest, not only does climate change outweigh the risks of an aging population, but if it becomes as bad as expected, there won’t be an aging population at all. If we tackle the problems of unintended pregnancy and family planning access, would not only make our climate solutions easier would also see multiple positive benefits for many of the UN sustainable development goals, which all of you adopted. With less unintended pregnancies inequality and conflict over resources such as food and clean water would fade simultaneously diminishing civil unrest. The government’s expenses for education will decrease, educational opportunity will rise and unemployment and crime rates will recede. This action of making sure every pregnancy is intended and education of proper solutions will help us reach the goal of this conference — climate change action. People are empowered to stand up for their rights, their lives and their … their ideologies. May I remind you that the role of every government is to protect their citizens and there will be consequences once people don’t feel protected anymore. Then security will either weaken the authoritative position of a government due to the faded trust or a populist power will take advantage of the civil unrest and repeat the mistakes of the 1930s. Do not underestimate the wrath of a feared humanity. Anger feeds on fear and we are afraid. I didn’t …I didn’t expect it to be this powerful. Could we perhaps ask you on an individual personal level, having gone through this process of understanding the situation we’re in, going from a situation from what I understand where you almost knew nothing about climate change until one teacher took it on themselves to teach you. What do you feel as a result of that has changed about you personally and in your lives? Has it changed your future direction and what you do and what you think you will be doing? Well, for me personally it was a very reflective experience because I tend to view myself as a very conscious person and I always thought that recycling and changing light bulbs would be good enough. But hearing something so radical, something that changed my entire viewpoint made me reflect on a multitude of factors on my life, and it was really a yeah, a reflective experience because it changes your complete viewpoint of a matter and kind of shows you that there is never something that you know enough about, and that there is always external factors that you should learn about. For me, I feel obliged now to spread this information, spread the news, because and if it is a surprise for me and for us then it’s probably and if many of you … of people were not able to tell what the biggest impact on climate change was, then it’s our duty for those who know what it is to inform you, to enlighten you, and this is why we’re also here. This is why we embarked on this journey to to tell you about this so you can reflect on… on this issue, and we will also be more engaged in our school and inform them. And I encourage everyone watching this, if you’re still in school strike on Fridays. If you have children, encourage your children to strike on Fridays. Our children are trying to wake us up now and we’re not getting it. We’ve got to get it. We’d like to thank these organizations for helping us produce these shows, and if you speak two languages please help us translate the videos that we’ve got. There’s an email address to contact us. Again, thank you very much for Victoria and myself and our guests. There’s a contact address for us and we’re coming to you live from the UN climate negotiations in Katowice, Poland. (Music)

68 thoughts on “Climate Education is Screwed Up!”

  1. Folks if coal,oil,fracked gas, and nuclear power along with the Arctic circle thawing permafrost isn't addressed directly your dead by 2037-2040

  2. Sorry to say that the highway ahead looks rather bumpy both physically and emocionally.. be wise and prepared for a hard wall at the end of the road.. and don't think for a minute that it will be a long journey; science told us of so many tipping points ahead, so our best shot appear to be aware and live fully every day with people we appreciate and, if possible, with a satisfying job or occupation as well.

  3. Education controlled by governments. Expecting people who are working hard just to make ends meet to get the message is beyond futile. The system must change or oblivion is the result. Great speakers.

  4. Other parts of the world where this message and voice will resonate in millions sooner if not too later …Great effort.
    Your videos are visible in spain inside youtube. Yet the website does not show up and leads to a "Well, this is awkward. The site you're looking for is not here.." Dreamhost…

  5. Modern economics with perpetual growth and perpetual exploitation of the earth and the perpetual production of wast and especially plastic waste aren't even mentioned, – or only by the host, Stuart Scott – though it surely is, together with the population bomb, the biggest problem, and belief that's going to break us up. As long as we believe in this capitalist system, that regards everything on earth secondary to money, profit and divident, even human lives are, we are screwed and we humans will not survive: None of us, rich, middle class or pour!

  6. And what you guys and gals wanna do? The economy runs on oil, if we truly do something the economy greedy humans created will collapse. If industrial activity stops we gonna get hit with global dimming. Not sure how hard that hit will be but it won't be a weak one.

    I call what we live the modern industrial civilization train. There is no stopping this train. So I'm just gonna ride it out until it falls.

  7. Climate education is most certainly screwed up, much of climate information is held back. Why is global dimming never mentioned, nor factored in when speaking of emission cuts? You have to factor it in no matter how inconvenient it is. Also feedback loops are barely mentioned. CO2 levels would continue to increase regardless of emission cuts, because of all the feedback loops that have kicked in.
    I think they're never mentioned because they're too inconvenient.

  8. Ocean Mechanical Thermal Energy Conversion makes civilization sustainable. The Gulfstream is up to the task so much so professor Peter Wadhams is excited about it. Scroll to 7:55 to end of video. https://youtu.be/x1cXfInQ9no

  9. Textbooks, regardless of the subject, are simply reflections of the dominant cultural ethos, that is, predatory market capitalism.

  10. we should focus all our energy on decommissioning nuclear reactors and dealing with the waste as best we can, while we still can. the precautionary principle. when it all goes completely pear shaped the last thing the planet needs is those things going critical.

  11. …and still nobody mentions the 140 million people joining the middle class every year around the world (Brookings).That is another China every 10 years or a Thailand every six months. Next problem: Everyone just assumes that addition of renewables reduces emissions. It is not that simple. However, a Carbon levy on all fuel as it enters the economy, returned equitably to households puts direct downward pressure on emissions, and spurs investment into low carbon energy sources. If that happens, molten salt reactors can start powering the world in around 10 years time. Or much sooner if anyone really cared enough to make an Apollo project out of it. But even that may not be enough to save us given today's stratifying (slowly dying) oceans. A solution has been proposed even to that, which mimics mother natures' cooling action during the ice ages, but unsurprisingly even small-scale research has been blocked by ideologically driven 'environmentalists'. Wake up folks, things are going downhill fast now, but there may still be time if enough people get their heads around the problems and Strong solutions. Www.ironsaltaerosol.com

  12. i think a stronger message along with population growth and reductions of emissions
    should be sent to all those thinking of bringing new life into our Worlds current ongoing situation.

  13. I hurt for the kids. I was one. A clueless one at that, ( on climate change) and boom. I blinked and here we are. In the storm no one told us about…50 years later.

  14. You know what else would lower emissions? Eliminating the elites and forcing them to live live the rest of the people on Earth. We rarely hear how a very small percentage of the worlds population (THE ELITES) waste the Earths resources while they spend time telling the middle class how we could reduce our emissions by not eating meat or having children. I say FUCK OFF, we the middle class and the poor don't make the laws we follow them, and if the ELITES want to save themselves they better pass laws that bring them to our level or they will suffer like the rest of us. Let's start where no one suffers and then I will do more to make our goals happen. What I see now is people much better off then most people telling others how they can make a difference and I don't buy it. START WITH THE HOARDERS AND GREED MONSTERS AND WORK OUR WAY DO THE COMMON PEOPLE. These conference are a waste anyway since they only reach the converted the rest are too busy trying to live a decent life or too rich to care because no one talks about their abuse of the planet and others for their personal gain.

  15. The signs of youth revolt (absolutely justified) began. They refuse the suicidal attitude of adults. They already understood and realized that they have nothing to lose ! We are all born in captivity. Manipulated, subjugated and crushed and we will continue as long as the responsible's remains in power: the oil cartel (climate change) and the industrial cartel for programmed obsolescence (natural resources). All others are derived from these and only serve to distract us.
    Evidence's confirms that they always knew every dramatic consequences. They are sociopaths in complete alienation … my generation has achieved nothing, God protect our children and young people who are fighting for all us.

  16. There is only one solution. Place the scientific method at the center of civilization. We cannot exploit the planet for profit any longer. These students need to offer the right solution. Capitalism must be dismantled. https://www.resourcebasedeconomy.org/

  17. Millennials need to back and support the Resource Based Economy idea. If they do not change our economic system into an RBE, they will see all food systems break down and massive starvation.

  18. Recycling does not work because it still involves electricity, industry, and transportation. Things must be built to last and then shared.

  19. Since when were teachers instructed to teach nothing that upsets GDP? This is effectively what is happening: an imposed neoliberal education. Not only should parents encourage their children to strike on Fridays but teachers and parents should demonstrate solidarity by marching with them and take back the education system to focus on an 'ecological' approach to education. A 4 day week would force governments to listen.

  20. This is great, it shows why we need to see that people know just how bad climate change is and why we should remove the failed greedy climate denying fossils from politics.

  21. If you take the US GDP from 2000 to now minus US inflation, the US has gone backwards. I think the Millennials have woken up to the BS.

  22. Deniers warned us this was all a conspiracy to install communism and take our freedom but they can relax since everything indicates the opposite will be installed. However about that freedom…

  23. At last, some signs of some people starting to get it, and even young people too. I've been waiting 30 years for people to start to get this. Early in their speeches I thought these were the usual worthy self important head-girl types that I want to stop and ask how many babies they intend to make, but these girls are for real. If we were a rational lot we'd view conceiving a second child as a sex crime, and a crime against humanity.But, 2145 views so far, and that's why we're screwed.

  24. Solving the climate crisis without solving the wealth inequality crisis will only benefit the very very wealthy, and I do mean ONLY. "1984" is coming true, as is "RoboCop," "The Terminator," "Mad Max," etc. Now if "Blade Runner" (1982 version) comes true, that could be interesting. Which begs the question: When are we going to get flying cars?

  25. Recycling is actually an energy-intensive process and has only been advantageous to industries dealing in plastic, metal, and paper. In fact, the organic leftovers of recycling plants are used for fuel. The oil companies are sucking up every last dime even from our attempts to mitigate the consequence of our waste. They are sneaky bastards. For decades the human populous has been made to argue amongst itself about climate disruption whilst big oil continues to happily march us to destruction. I suggest all chambers of commerce should promote only 0 emission new businesses and raise the tax on energy drawn from fossil fuel. If they don't then you'll know where the so-called leaders of our "modern" society's heart layeth.!

  26. This what you can do about it and what I doo:
    I'm 28 and I don't owe a car.
    I do most things on my bicycle or walking. I know people who are using their car for little things they buy at their nearest supermarked every day.
    I grow some of my own food and eat wild edibles. I gather and preserve my own wild fruits and nuts and store them for later while I constantly re-use my bottles. I also experimenting with DIY renewable energy devices and I do research to alternative abondent sucker sources for bioethanol.
    This is the way of life which has almost no carbon foodprint and you are also automatically a prepper for something bad that may happen such as cataclystic climate change, peak oil, a EMP or a financial collapse.

  27. The species designation identifying humanity namely Homo sapiens sapiens all considered regarding our present dilemmas is a bit of a misnomer so in order to have a more correct identifier of our species I thin’ a name change is in order ….now sapiens means wise and that’s not true , not really , some people are but collectively …no …so …

  28. Brazil, green? Do not believe that. All of our biomes are seriously damaged except for some regions of the Amazon.But wait a little, we Brazilians are trying to bravely destroy everything.

  29. Great stuff. I'm fully in favor of the idea of being more conscious about population growth. All the same, some of the stuff is … incomplete. I am no climate change denier, I do want to keep the discussion down to facts and realistic in terms of what to expect. I like the arguments that were presented, but some of the stuff isn't thought through to the end.
    Please keep in mind that "Limits to Growth" (1972) already pointed at TWO limits to growth: population growth (world population then: ~3.8 M – now: ~7.7 M) and use of resources. Since then, we've expected the world to end based on the ozone hole, peak oil, nuclear wars, nuclear power and for a ton of other "resources"-based reasons, but – as is rightly being pointed out – never for population growth. I'm very happy to finally see population growth appear on the radar.

    – 35 years ago, the original calls for recycling didn't have anything to do with greenhouse gases. I'm positively surprised that recycling has a positive impact at all, but being a child of the 70's and having consciously witnessed all the hypes of environmentalism, the connection is new to me. I had assumed recycling is a good thing in its own right.

    – The bulk of aggregated insight on climate change is coming from ~ between 2007 and 2013 (*). It is misleading to show a chart (~5:23 into the video) that suggests that the the problem was UNDERSTOOD since 1900. OK, we started to create the problem back then with the beginning of industrialization… actually, even a century earlier with the invention of steam engines, power looms and railroads in the late 18th century, but that is very different from understanding that there is a problem and starting to look for solutions. From that perspective, the graph rather supports an idea of how hopeless the situation is: we (primarily the "first world") have used more than two centuries to build our dependency on industrialization, and this is also about the timespan it took to build the problem. It is not exactly surprising that a tenth of that, 20 years, are not sufficient to rebuild the entire infrastructure of our civilization. Based on the last 20 years, I'd move to claim: it is unrealistic to expect to re-build the technological foundations of our civilization in decades when the creation of the original network of interdependencies has taken two centuries.

    – While the carbon footprint of a child in "the first world" is clearly as big as it can get, there are two more sources of such huge carbon footprints:
    (1) migration (a person in Ghana had a carbon footprint of 0.32 tons in 2006 (source: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/datablog/2009/sep/02/carbon-emissions-per-person-capita – newer data will not change the essence of the argument), if that person migrates to Germany, he/she will sooner or later get a German average carbon footprint, 10.4 tons (same source) – a factor of 30 Numbers for Syria: Footprint of ~2.7 tons, factor of almost four. In a nutshell: Migration increases the carbon footprint by a huge factor.
    (2) the population in the "developing world" currently has a MUCH lower carbon footprint than us in the "first world". They also have a lot less luxury than us. Obviously, they want our luxury, and that will necessarily come with a significant increase in carbon footprint.

    – It is certainly a good idea and low hanging fruit to aim for unwanted pregnancies in the "first world". That said, the elephant in the room is elsewhere: population in the "first world" has been fairly stable for decades if we account for migration. But if we need to take (2) above into account: the world average carbon footprint is ~5 tons per year, per capita. While the carbon footprint of the entire "first world" is relatively stable (not good enough, but a step in the right direction), the carbon footprint of the "developing world" is growing in two directions at the same time: Africa and Asia are where the majority of population growth is happening. At the same time, these are also the regions where people work hardest to achieve a "first-world" lifestyle – which goes with … say … double, triple, quadruple the per capita carbon footprint. Consequently, we must not limit the "population growth" argument to unwanted pregnancies in the first world. It's the low hanging fruit, but it is FAR from the necessary action to get this dimension of greenhouse gases in order.

    The hard truths are: population growth is a major problem everywhere on the planet, not just the unwanted pregnancies in the "first world", and migration is – in the short term – aggravating green house gas problems by step-changing the carbon footprint of migrants.

    The panel in the video either hasn't thought their own arguments through completely, or they are committing the same mistake that they are accusing the governments of: aiming for low hanging fruit while leaving out politically unpleasant truths.

    (*) In the "scientific opinion on climate change" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_opinion_on_climate_change, a lot of research is cited from the 90's, but it seems to not have been brought together into a first coherent call for action until 1993, and the majority of material cited was published between ~2007 and 2013)

  30. I wish you all the luck in the world, because I think "The Companies" will resist this way past the point where thousands of people are dying of hunger, flooding, hypothermia, heat stroke, because it's not profitable……….

  31. I agree that humans must reduce population. This fact was established by Paul Ehrich's book "The Population Bomb" published in 1968. He was not the first to warn us about dangers of over population. We have maybe 10 years to get CO2 to a sustainable level before it is irreversible. Lowering population is critical but doing it with birth control or will power will take decades. A pandemic or world war will likely do it faster. Oh, and FYI, birth control will not work as well as abstinence.

    The big elephant in the room that no one talks about is the huge amount of energy consumed by the data centers for Facebook, Amazon (AWS), Google (includes youtube), Apple, Microsoft, IBM and the NSA (data collection snd storage by spy agencies). These SEVEN global data centers used roughly 416 terawatts, or 3% of world energy. Add precious metal, and Bitcoin mining to that and it goes to nearly 5%. Add to that all of the telecom cell towers and their data centers so our tech is using closer to 6% of world energy.

    The chart comparing action with CO2 reduction is misleading and irresponsible. First, agriculture produces much more CO2 than is indicated. Changing humanity to plant based diet will have a huge and immediate influence on levels of CO2, methane, nitrous oxide, and biodiversity. Changing to slow food, local and seasonal food, no til, organic, and permaculture techniques (iow, no Monsanto, no ADM, no Ciba Geigy) could keep us below a 2.0 degree tipping point in temperature. Eating food from 2000 miles away has to stop.

    The chart is missing the huge and immediate impact that reducing heating and airconditioning could have.

    The chart does not account for levels of CO2 produced by age or gender (a 10 year old living with parents will use less than a 30 year old living on their own) and it does not show the percent of world population you are talking about in the biggest circle.

    Your chart is over simplified and missing factors like needless consumption, disposable products, planned obsolescence, over sized McMansions, endless and needless yearly purchases of new smart phones, deforestation to create shipping pallets and cardboard for the Amazon shipments, retail product packaging, junk mail, building contruction, retail building remodeling (every five years), expanding and maintenaning highways, and finally cement, brick, drywall, and concrete for construction. Production of cement is almost as bad as agriculture.

    Students, you need to understand that your education is your lifelong personal responsibility. The research, the books and info are all out there so stop relying on the system to feed you the correct info.

  32. We have a social system that kills us. It is time for an alternative social system – ecohumanism. A social system capable of solving accumulated and already unmanageable social and environmental problems. "ANOTHER WORLD IS POSSIBLE" is an online book on the Ecohumanworld website, which indicates what kind of social development we should establish if we want our technological world to survive on a biological planet. It will not be easy, but we must make every effort to build such a world. Human, socially just and ecologically responsible.

  33. I have no children an wont be having any at 57. But people asking people to not allow more people is very hypocritical. How about 7 billion of us just take ourselves out to make room for the future generations. Or we could agree to take ourselves out let’s say at 40 years of age. So what if there is a mass die off? I mean, really. Why worry about children you would not be allowed to have?

  34. There should be nothing cultural about having children but there is and has been for too long. Culture has usurped biology. Now the conflict against family planning and women's rights is parallel with all the other waring and hostility in the world. That includes willful polluting and degradation.

  35. The fiscal cost of having a child is huge for such a desired little newcomer. For profit healthcare wants more new births than any at the party but capitalism in general demands and enforces rampant procreation. When a species feels threatened or endangered it procreates. This is the irony of ironies in the tragic case of Homo sapiens in which a crushing poverty and war are familiar to most of its numbers.

  36. Maybe our ego is too big. The experts say we are too many people on earth, and the only solution is to reduce the population. If we don't do it, nature will. I think the greed of the world is too great for us to solve these problems otherwise. We adore money and forget about life. I think we have to change.        https://www.ishafoundation.org/?global

  37. Why did they label Australia as sustainable? Australia's biggest export is coal. Most of the electricity is from coal fired plants. Australia has one of the highest deforestation rates in world. Most of the land is farmed for cattle. Over half the Great Barrier Reef died in 2016/2017.

  38. Thanks 4 t great video !! Congrats 2 mr. Phillips & his students.A long
    time ago I decided to hv 0 children,
    barely drive etc.. I always felt it was strange how ov pop is almost
    nev addressed .The elephant in t room is RELIGION.Almost ALL religions want a bigger "flock" & so
    they nv go there.The Bible says "be
    fruitful & multiply" ( when there were few ppl, many diseases & ver
    hi infant mort this may hv bn some
    what valid, but that was then,this is NOW.) I say "REMEMBER ONAN"
    ✔ it out in ur bibles…Any1 want 2 start t Remember Onan society & or discussion group ??? Thomas

  39. Well, almost. You have to be a little careful there… Here in the United States, according to Social Security Administration and the 2014 U.S. Census data, about half of all Americans (and American households) are in poverty (for instance, unable to afford to rent a place to live without excessive work). They, and their children are all well below 50 tons per year per individual. The "average" U.S. carbon footprint (20 tons per person per year) includes folks like DiCaprio (who has 20,000 tons per year carbon footprint – Anderson, et al.; Chancel/Piketty [2015]; OxFam [2015]), Gore, etc. Thus, half of all Americans (using the SSA and US Census data) are much less than 20 tons per person per year – most children here are raised in de-facto poverty and thus have a much lower carbon footprint. The figure cited of 50 tons per child per year may apply to more egalitarian countries in the E.U. Thus, the only viable hope here is that the Gores and DiCaprios can be dealt with (i.e., the top 10% or so of Americans – the ones named are the super-wealthy).

  40. At 9:05: "Avoid owning a car; 2.4 tonnes year saved in CO2 equivalent". That figure seems unrealistic. To emit 2.4 tonnes with your car, you'll have to burn 1043L of gasoline each year, that is 20.000km /year in a small car. However I presume that the car is replaced with another mean of transport with its own footprint, so the 2.4 tonnes is a relative saving. That means that the supposed car owner is driving around 100.00km /year???
    This figure seems highly dubious. I drive 6400km/ year which results in 900kg CO2. However I never commute in my car and never drive alone in it! Because of that it is only 4-5% of total household emissions, and that includes the fact that our car is our airplane, in that we never fly and around 1/3 of the yearly km are on holidays.

  41. OOps looks like we're "Donald Ducked". Seems we have a choice. We can be nice to each other for the few years we have left. Or it's buisness as usual. Yup; buisness as usual & the smart money is on ; Swords, so sell ploughshares' and make we'll make a killing. So much for the "Enlightnement". The love of money is the root of all evil." Fractional Reserve Banking". Somone opened the temple doors and let loose Mammon & the dogs of war. God is dead & we killed him and no ammount of water will wash away the stain.

  42. Great video! Thank you for your work. I am an educator and am always working to improve my program. I've got some great ideas from this!

  43. We can't save this planet with the current monetary system still in place, money leads to greed and people will do almost anything to get it. The only way would to stop the system and start again with a resource based economy and the world would have to work as one…Sadly, i can't see this ever happening and it would have to happen now. Professor Guy Mcferson is on point and I wish that I had discovered his teaching years ago as I am much happier now because I cherish every day and live my life the best that I can.
    I'm also in the process of planting 1000 hardwood trees around my area.

  44. I’d change one line in the speech. They aren’t shooting themselves in the foot. They are shooting us in the head.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *