izentrop wrote:I was thinking of the inappropriate measures taken by governments to fight against global warming and the consequences of a water deficit which is getting worse all over the world, but which will improve in the tropics. https://www.lepoint.fr/monde/secheresse ... 490_24.php
Fortunately otherwise it would be a nice mess!Obviously, it seems that changing civilizations voluntarily, quickly and in anticipation is not our forte.
!This kind of non-choice generally ends in an extinction of the most fragile species and in priority the humanOn the other hand, if we are forced by nature to do so, we will be obliged, we will not have the luxury of choice.
These hypotheses of 65 M years ago (unprovable) are only part of OUR system of national and even international education/cramming now, by mimicry.In the same vein, it's a bit like the dinosaurs and the meteorite of 65 million years ago. Nature made quick choices for them.
Vain hope, illusion of the mind which refuses to face reality. Cultures are tough and hardly change even in an emergency. We will see what it will be in a century!You have to know how to be so quick in such a case!
On the contrary ! We are in a type of society based on profit as the end of life and that is not about to disappear... on a short scale in any case.It's not that complicated to move towards sustainability, voluntarily and on a large scale.
Current science? No glop!We would know how to do it, just that we don't have the motivation, not enough confidence in the predictions and reports of science.
You apparently according to what you wrote! And especially little children who marvel at their parents' lies. A good example for their future!Sixth mass extinction all the same, RC in progress too, scarcity of concentrated resources....
Who really believes in Santa Claus?
Neither one nor the other of course! A biblical maxim (which could also come from elsewhere) says: woe to the man who puts his trust in man, his end will be his perdition »the apathetic one who thinks everything is going to be fine or the one who still has a little hope in humanity?
Janic wrote:...
Remundo wrote:still in the charcuterie department, an exclusive image of Mr Simply edged
simply_sharp.jpg
he was called simpleton, the innocent of the village.......An exclusive image of Janic posting:
Ahmed wrote:...the weight of words, the shock of images...
What debate? When a point of view relates to different points, there is no other solution than to respond to it point by point and therefore “sausage”. You didn't learn that in school and you pretend to teach children? Pov kids!, but these "diced up" responses are also detrimental to the "debate".
Supposedly crap for someone ignorant of both vaccines and theology. But with a donkey you don't make a good horse!And again, we escaped (this time) a bullshit parallel with vaccines... We weren't far from a bit of creationism, but hey...
Of course, if you don't know how to analyze a text, you are a little and even a lot limitedSo, coming from someone who often recommends me to "go back to school" to learn "text analysis", I just find that a bit borderline...
Ah good, you know how to synthesize the essence of several different subjects? Champion the simpleton! Show us a credible example!If you are not able to synthesize the essence of what you want to say other than by responding point by point to your interlocutor (who in this case was not me) by cutting up your text, you avoid give lessons...
To represent you? Yes keep it carefully!I keep the image, it can be used again....
Back to "Society and Philosophy"
Users browsing this forum : No registered users and 162 guests
