Skip to main content

View Diary: A Bill O'Reilly Fan Recants: Dramatic Video (271 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  It is. (25+ / 0-)

    I never expected to be moved enough by an amateur movie review to write an off-the-cuff diary, but obviously I was.  

    I hope more people like her see this movie.

    © cai Visit to join the fight against global warming.

    by cai on Tue Nov 27, 2012 at 08:50:31 PM PST

    [ Parent ]

    •  i think that the American people need to be asked (42+ / 0-)

      to rise up to the challenge of addressing man made climate change.  i know that there is a belief among our national political leaders that you can't ask the American people to give up comfort for a cause, but how many natural disasters, such as tropical storm Sandy, have to happen before we come to terms with the fact that when things go wrong the American people leap into action to help each other.  

      i don't believe that Americans are just selfish.  i believe Americans are not challenged.  the first thing the woman in the video determines to do when she walks out of the movie is to make a difference.  

      so long and thanks for all the fish

      by Anton Bursch on Tue Nov 27, 2012 at 10:26:46 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  that's a great comment (12+ / 0-)

        Americans have met challenges before.

        People are MUCH happier dealing with a problem than pretending it doesn't exist.

        Right now it is bad for our mental health.

        An ambulance can only go so fast - Neil Young

        by mightymouse on Wed Nov 28, 2012 at 03:19:47 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  Will not happen until they're in the middle of it (4+ / 0-)

        ...and I mean here "when they are litterally sinking"! Until then, every measure will be looked at as "a cost", hence better stick the head in the sand, call it a hoax, and save at the gas pump...

      •  How many? (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        stormicats, kyril, mrkvica
        how many natural disasters, such as tropical storm Sandy, have to happen before we come to terms with the fact that when things go wrong the American people leap into action to help each other.  
        Before the American people are willing to make the kind of changes involved in trying to actually stop the planet from warming up and the ice caps from melting, there are going to have to be a lot more storms like Sandy... and a lot of other severe consequences that directly impact a wider swath of the population.

        Yes, Americans do have an impulse to help in a crisis -- short term. For example... fundraising and getting volunteers for an animal shelter -- it is always an ongoing battle, but when one burned to the ground and 200 dogs and cats died in the fire, the flood gates of generosity opened and help and support flowed in ... for a few months, everyone wanted to help rebuild the facility and try to heal from the pain and loss. But soon enough it was in the past for most people, and the lack of interest in helping returned to normal levels.

        Yes, Americans do and want to open their wallets, stand in line to donate blood, and send care packages to victims of disasters. But making sustained, permanent changes and sacrifices in their own lives to help others or the next generation? That is not something people are going to line up for. They are too concerned, often with good reason, about their own short-term survival in the current world. Trying to find or hang on a job, worrying about how to obtain and afford health and medical/dental care, caring for elderly relatives as they age -- we have a lot going on. I don't mean it to sound critical that people are not readily able to think in long-term, global ways and make sustained changes that hurt in the short term. I understand it and think it's normal for humans, which is why something like climate change is such a challenging problem to address. It requires people to prioritize long-term threats over immediate ones, and we are not mentally designed to do that. Evolution has favored the ability to respond to immediate dangers and fight for personal survival as a survival skill. Changing that is not easy.

        As long as people need jobs to survive economically and they are scarce, and have to worry about how to get medical care if they get hurt or sick, and how to pay for both kids and parents needs too, dealing with climate change in an real way is not going to happen. We are a long ways from making those kinds of changes as a country, much less on global scale. This is why I feel that 'stopping' climate change is an unrealistic goal. Even slowing it significantly may be beyond humans' capability at this time.

        So while 'believing in it' is great, that's the easy part. The facts are obvious: the ice is melting, temperatures are up and storms are getting worse and more frequent. But believing that human beings have the power and ability to actually stop all this from happening -- to intentionally and successfully control the climate of the planet and stop it from changing --- well, that's a bigger leap. At this point I am very skeptical that is possible.

        I think we are going to see it happen, and the consequences will unfold around us. The next generations are going to live on a warmer, different world. Adapting to that is going to be the challenge in the future, starting now. Too many of our major cities and financial centers are located in highly vulnerable areas where either flood or earthquake is virtually certain to destroy them, at some point.

        What people need to be convinced of is not that change is happening, but that we as a species on this planet can realistically stop it. I just don't see how that will happen.

        •  But what individuals can do (6+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          kpardue, mkor7, Laconic Lib, TiaRachel, cai, mrkvica

          is MINUSCULE. The things that need to be done need government. They need coordination, and lots of resources, and will generate lots of jobs, but they're NOT things that individuals can do.

          I can buy a newer, more efficient car (if I have money), I can retrofit my house (if I have money), I can take public transit (if it's even an option where I live) - but those things, expensive as they are, won't even really make much of a dent.

          This needs to be tackled at a higher level than the individual person.

          The individual can pressure companies and government to move, though.

          •  Although I don't have statistics handy, I've (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:

            been surprised and impressed by what a huge difference conservation could make if everyone got serious about it.

            Yes, government action is necessary, but if everyone individually cut back on their energy use (and their beef-eating), we could make a serious dent in the problem.

            Some people fight fire with fire. Professionals use water.

            by Happy Days on Wed Nov 28, 2012 at 08:09:23 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  So that's what people need to be told (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:

              They need to be told "if you eat x less beef, and replace x lightbulbs, we save x or reduce emissions by x"

              And then, somebody needs to track it. They need to have some kind of running graph that shows emissions compared to last year, or over the last few years.

              Because unless somebody puts out something that shows people that what they're doing HELPS, they won't do it.

              We have a wind turbine. It just sits there, and takes up a little bit of space. If you really want to, we have a link on the website so you can check the power generated.

              But what hammers home that it was a good investment is the article that says how much MONEY we've saved on electricity since we got it (we got a grant to put it up, I think).

              That's what people need to know - that the little inconveniences WORK. That they help, even a little.

        •  The way we'll have to prepare for climate change (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:

          Is to not have children.  
          That means not only the Chinese, the Indians, the poor, but everyone in the First World since we use so much more in resources.  Yes, there will be considerable wailing and gnashing of teeth from those who don't feel they have enough of a family.
          Until they can't feed those they have.
          The planet can't support eight billion humans, since there's no indication anyone in the Developing World can be dissuaded from the pursuit of an American Dream life.  Or just a life free of strife, hunger, terror.
          The best we can hope for at this point is to blunt the troubles to come some.
          We have to try, and we have to start right now!

          •  It's the opposite! (0+ / 0-)

            If more people had an American Dream life, we would have the resources to build the technology to support a world with 8 billion humans.

            It's when we "split wood not atoms" that we definitely won't be able to support even a fraction of that.

            What we need is economic stimulus to build the more advanced infrastructures of the future.

        •  Well, a couple things. First, as McKibben said: (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          sharman, Calamity Jean, mrkvica
          If you were a betting person, you might bet we're not going to win this one, because the science is getting pretty dark and things are moving pretty fast.  But I don't think you're allowed to make that bet.
          We have to fight this, not because it's an easy victory, but because it's all we can do.

          And second, the recent reports about where we'll be at the end of the century -- up 11 degrees Farenheit -- those are not "adaptable" temperatures.  That's apocalyptic.  Our world would be unrecognizable.  Just to take one example, there's no way we feed 7, let alone 10, billion people in that world.  No. Way.

          I'm not sure we feed millions.

          © cai Visit to join the fight against global warming.

          by cai on Wed Nov 28, 2012 at 12:53:49 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

      •  And people are told they can make a difference (4+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        mkor7, TiaRachel, cai, Calamity Jean

        but the only ways they're given are either expensive or impractical (in many cases).

        Tell me to take public transit - it doesn't go where I need to go, costs more than driving, or takes 3 times as long. That's not PRACTICAL.

        Tell me to replace my old appliances, or heater, or car - that's EXPENSIVE.

        Tell me to install solar panels - that's EXPENSIVE.

        Tell me to upgrade my insulation in my house, or put in a green roof, or buy locally made goods or foods or something - the house parts are expensive, may not work for me, and I might not be able to find any locally made stuff, which will likely be pretty expensive.

        Until the govt subsidizes some of these things (like efficient cars, so we can replace old ones) or improves infrastructure, so I can have a smart meter on a smart grid that helps me reduce my electric use; or gives tax breaks for things like working from home so companies will push it more, it's going to be hard to get people to DO much of anything, because the things that will really make a difference aren't in the scope of things they can actually do.

        But if movies like this get people to pressure govt and companies to do the other things, the things that need massive resources to do, then they can help.

        •  Takes 10 times as long for me (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:

          A 10 minute drive and park is an hour plus about 10 to 20 minutes wait time.

          Thank you to jayden, Dr Erich Bloodaxe RN, Aji and everyone in the Daily Kos community involved in gifting my subscription and gifting others!

          by Nulwee on Wed Nov 28, 2012 at 09:51:11 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

    •  I am sobbing. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      This video is very powerful.

      Senate rules which prevent any reform of the filibuster are unconstitutional. Therefore, we can rein in the filibuster tomorrow with 51 votes.

      by homunq on Wed Nov 28, 2012 at 10:38:02 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site