re: #98 freetoken

Yes, but with quick returns that could be seen.

This just isn’t true. There are hill forts, for god’s sake, from Stone Age Britain that were built by hand, growing a tiny bit every year, starting from a flat, flat plain. If you are willing to call a small, tactically useless hill of dirt an ‘immediate return’, then sure, but there’s plenty of environmental things that can be done that also have immediate return. From re-greening an area to erecting a wind tower, there’s very fast benefits from a lot of ‘green’ solutions to problems.

What you seem to be mistaking is the layer of abstraction—that AGW is a slow, slow process that needs to be understood through proxies—with a lack of commitment of human beings to build for the long-term. The latter isn’t true at all, but it is true that AGW is very hard to perceive and very abstract. That alone is sufficient to explain human inaction on it.

Hell, just the fact that we do have thousands, millions of environmentalists who understand this and work to change it disproves your point. Those are ‘humans’ too.

re: #99 wheat-dogghazi

Especially if it requires us to change our way of life, even just a little.

Humans have also massively changed their way of life rapidly throughout history.