New and experienced climbers over 50 #30

Nick Goldsmithwrote:

Its good to be as green as you can manage but at the same time I agree with you. Its the last dance. Party on and live it up but don't fckn litter.  You have to at least try to leave a decent planet for Kieth Richards and Willie Nelson. 

That's the spirit, Nick!   

Tim Schafstallwrote:

I kinda started this thread a couple months ago and would love to come, but I just can't bring myself to be at the Gunks on the busiest weekend of the year. I'd steel myself for the crowds almost any other weekend.  I'll be up a lot in October, but during the week when the crowds are smaller.  Y'all have fun !

Good point,  I don't climb in the Gunks on ordinary weekends much less the Columbus Day weekend.  Maybe Friday the 11th would be ok.  I might still drop by the AAC campground for a visit.

Randywrote:

Wow, that is the most pathetic excuse for not doing anything.

https://medium.com/@afuturehabitat/the-limits-of-individual-responsibility-in-achieving-a-sustainable-future-043a3a01bf03

djkyotewrote:

https://medium.com/@afuturehabitat/the-limits-of-individual-responsibility-in-achieving-a-sustainable-future-043a3a01bf03

While there is truth in the observation that government action is essential to regulating industry, the above piece presents a somewhat fallacious (or at least grossly incomplete) argument that individual action (responsibility) is a diversion tactic that will not precipitate change, and even more so, it falsely posits that individual actions promote the continuation of the status quo. 

In our consumer based capitalist society, if a significant number of consumers eschew certain products and change their consumption habits, it dramatically affects what and how corporations offer and manufacture. 

Don't get me wrong, government regulation and incentives are vital to steering us toward a less impactful and sustainable future. But, absent buy in from consumers and changes in consuming habits, it is only a part solution. 

Getting buy in from consumers is incredibly difficult, which is perhaps the largest obstacle to changing the interplay between manufacturers (and commodity suppliers) and the consumer. Most people do not see any connection between their personal consumptive habits and the increase in pollution and carbon released into the atmosphere. We have become so used (addicted) to an instantaneous delivery of throw away items that we do not demand that even expensive products be repairable, reusable, recyclable or sustainably manufactured. Cheap has become everything - even though the real cost of inexpensive and poorly made products is far greater (when viewed over time) than well and thoughtfully made items. It is a pervasive and insidious cycle.

Since energy production remains one of the most significant contributors to climate change, a reduction in individual use will obviate (to an certain extent) the need to build more power plants -- though it appears that AI has become a major contributor to increase in power usage. And, lets be frank, for the average person AI has become a fun way to enhance your social media presence -- hardly a rousing argument.

The premise that there is no point for individual action is a cop out and false. Rather, it is an essential element in systemic change.

Individual action is critical. We must conduct ourselves in the best way that we can however that jennie  ain't going back in the bottle. It's a done deal. Live life like there is no tomorrow when possible.. 

Randywrote:

While there is truth in the observation that government action is essential to regulating industry, the above piece presents a somewhat fallacious (or at least grossly incomplete) argument that individual action (responsibility) is a diversion tactic that will not precipitate change, and even more so, it falsely posits that individual actions promote the continuation of the status quo. 

In our consumer based capitalist society, if a significant number of consumers eschew certain products and change their consumption habits, it dramatically affects what and how corporations offer and manufacture. 

Don't get me wrong, government regulation and incentives are vital to steering us toward a less impactful and sustainable future. But, absent buy in from consumers and changes in consuming habits, it is only a part solution. 

Getting buy in from consumers is incredibly difficult, which is perhaps the largest obstacle to changing the interplay between manufacturers (and commodity suppliers) and the consumer. Most people do not see any connection between their personal consumptive habits and the increase in pollution and carbon released into the atmosphere. We have become so used (addicted) to an instantaneous delivery of throw away items that we do not demand that even expensive products be repairable, reusable, recyclable or sustainably manufactured. Cheap has become everything - even though the real cost of inexpensive and poorly made products is far greater (when viewed over time) than well and thoughtfully made items. It is a pervasive and insidious cycle.

Since energy production remains one of the most significant contributors to climate change, a reduction in individual use will obviate (to an certain extent) the need to build more power plants -- though it appears that AI has become a major contributor to increase in power usage. And, lets be frank, for the average person AI has become a fun way to enhance your social media presence -- hardly a rousing argument.

The premise that there is no point for individual action is a cop out and false. Rather, it is an essential element in systemic change.

 

So is your premise that if everyone - individuals, cooperations and government - behaved "perfectly" that climate change/global warming could be reversed?  In other words that we are not past the tipping point and we can tip it back?

Eric Engbergwrote:

So is your premise that if everyone - individuals, cooperations and government - behaved "perfectly" that climate change/global warming could be reversed?  In other words that we are not past the tipping point and we can tip it back?

That we beyond doing anything that may mitigate the worst effects of climate change is not a given.

This convo sounds suspiciously apathetic.  We didn't do anything when we could, and now... 'too late!' so we still won't do anything.  As Randy said, it's not a given that the destruction of our planet is a forgone conclusion.  

What I can say is that, when I read through the first portion of Project 2025 there was NO mention of, or acknowledgment of, the state of our global endangerment.  I mean, shockingly to me... it is as though climate change is the brainchild of the 'elitist Left'.  Science, and global scientific agreement, all seem to have lost any power.  

"The next conservative President should go beyond merely defending America’s energy interests but go on offense, asserting them around the world. America’s vast reserves of oil and natural gas are not an environmental problem; they are the lifeblood of economic growth. American dominance of the global energy market would be a good thing: for the world, and, more importantly, for “we the people.” It’s not just about jobs, even though unleashing domestic energy production would create millions of them. It’s not just about higher wages for workers who didn’t go to college, though they would receive the raises they have missed out on for two generations. Full-spectrum strategic energy dominance would facilitate the reinvigoration of America’s entire industrial and manufacturing sector as we disentangle our economy from China. Globally, it would rebalance power away from dangerous regimes in Russia and the Middle East. It would build powerful alliances with fast-growing nations in Africa and provide us the leverage to counter Chinese ambitions in South America and the Pacific. Locally, it would drive billions of dollars of private investment to the communities that have been hammered by globalization since the 1990s. And it would clarify our intentions to Beijing that the next President can ensure that a large part of America’s reindustrialization is in the production of the equipment we will need to dissuade future foreign meddling with U.S. vital interests."

---

Thinking locally... I'm not ready for Joshua Tree to burn to the ground, or for fires to take out the Southland.  I do think we should have better options than 'rake more leaves'. (although our leaves here are sorta weird).  

As a most admirable, trailblazing, dedicated group of people here... I think we can help change this narrative.  

They've just arrested an arsonist thought to be responsible for the Line Fire-- and he is under investigation for possible additional arsons. His home was full of burglarized items. He may not be the only one implicated in these recent fires.

One of the wildfire experts mentioned that because of the tremendous snow load of early 2023 storms , a large number of limbs broke off of trees and shrubs which really added to an explosive fuel load on the ground. How is that for irony? 

These fires are not caused by "global warming " but more likely arsonists, coupled with 150 years of  fire-suppression. Now that there are so many homes adjacent to wild areas, fire-suppression on any meaningful level is mandatory, not optional. Even several controlled.burns in recent decades have led to large destructive fires . In prehistoric times Native Americans would deliberately start fires to harvest game. The fires would continue burning for weeks. 

In the real world the global warming industry is not fueled by good intentions,  but rather by politics and money. One party in particular has been using global warming and environmentalism as a grifters scam for decades, designed to bundle high amounts of taxpayers money out to their friends who operate phony start-up corporations that are total scams from the get-go. In return for playing their role in this money-laundering racket, taxpayers get to be called uncaring  dolts who hide their heads in the sand. 

Some of you folks who dash off on a moment's notice and drive hundreds or thousands of miles on an optional feel-good gas -belching climbing trip , oughta calculate who or who isn't authentic  on this subject.

Just sayin

Donald Thompsonwrote:

In the real world the global warming industry is not fueled by good intentions,  but rather by politics and money. One party in particular has been using global warming and environmentalism as a grifters scam for decades, designed to bundle high amounts of taxpayers money out to their friends who operate phony start-up corporations that are total scams from the get-go. In return for playing their role in this money-laundering racket, taxpayers get to be called uncaring  dolts who hide their heads in the sand. 

In the real world, the fossil fuel industry is not fueled by good intentions, but rather politics and money. One party in particular has been denying global warming as a grifters scam for decades, designed to bundle even higher amounts of money out to their friends who operate petroleum companies. In return for playing their role in this money-laundering racket, Americans  get to be gaslight on the effects that fossil fuels have on our world.

On a climbing note, I’m still lifting myself up with  70 pounds attached on 25mm and it’s no warmup. After 40+ hangs, 10 three stages pull-ups, weighted hangs then weighted pull-ups.

After this warmup, I’m melting off 5.10d gym climbs and V4 gym climbs.  

Hoping with another month of this warmup, that I’ll actually be able to climb better.

Lori, As Donald's post above makes clear, yes, the 'right' does really believe that climate change  is the 'brainchild of the elitist left' and that such things as the devastating western fires of recent years are just the workings of a few arsonists ( l'm not denying that arson has played a role in certain fires, but strongly dispute that it is the underlying cause of the situation that exists and makes the fires so widespread and damaging).

Concerning the issue of aging. While we were just up in Quebec, we spent part of a rainy afternoon visiting the small but very informative Laurentian Ski Museum in Saint Sauver. A good portion of the exhibit focused on an individual known as 'Jackrabbit' Johansson---a Norwegian emigre who, during the first half of the 20th Century,  basically introduced cross-country skiing to North America, especially the northeastern corner of the continent. He lived to the ripe old age of 111!!!! and the museum had film of him skiing ( with great technique), canoeing, and chopping wood well past his 100th birthday. Really amazing and inspiring---no doubt much good living and exercise, but undoubtedly great genes ( sorry that the exhibit didn't provide more information about the lifespans of his ancestors and descendants---but it is a ski museum not one focused on biology!!!) and some element of luck were the most crucial factors in his active longevity. Still, his example gives me hope!!!!

Also relevant, in the brand new issue of Summit Journal ( received it yesterday), Laura Waterman has an article basically about aging out of climbing. Being of a 'certain age', I found it both inspiring and depressing.

Gary Thomaswrote:

In the real world, the fossil fuel industry is not fueled by good intentions, but rather politics and money. One party in particular has been denying global warming as a grifters scam for decades, designed to bundle even higher amounts of money out to their friends who operate petroleum companies. In return for playing their role in this money-laundering racket, Americans  get to be gaslight on the effects that fossil fuels have on our world.

The petro industry is fueled by you and billions of others who use their product. There is no gaslighting or money laudering. You open your wallet and give them your money. 

I think In most parts of the country a gallon of gas is about the cost of a gallon of milk. You should be grateful.

Donald Thompsonwrote:

The petro industry is fueled by you and billions of others who use their product. There is no gaslighting or money laudering. You open your wallet and give them your money. 

For years, decades, and strongly continuing today, the fossil fuel industry ( and their well-financed political allies) have worked very hard to stymie alternative energy sources, with great success until recent years, when some progress on alternatives has finally begun. But as ( poorly) 'articulated' by Trump last night, and by many of his MAGA minions, and as clearly stated in Project 2025 as Lori quoted earlier, the fossil fuel industry is continuing to fight hard to turn back even those modest gains.

Alan Rubinwrote:

For years, decades, and strongly continuing today, the fossil fuel industry ( and their well-financed political allies) have worked very hard to stymie alternative energy sources, with great success until recent years, when some progress on alternatives has finally begun. But as ( poorly) 'articulated' by Trump last night, and by many of his MAGA minions, and as clearly stated in Project 2025 as Lori quoted earlier, the fossil fuel industry is continuing to fight hard to turn back even those modest gains.

Fight hard= grifting in this case. Just look at the poor information many people are getting about alternative energy as the big example.  

If anyone has ever spent time in an off grid house with electric lights, refrigerator, boiler etc you start to understand who is grifting and who is not.

Alan Rubinwrote:

For years, decades, and strongly continuing today, the fossil fuel industry ( and their well-financed political allies) have worked very hard to stymie alternative energy sources, with great success until recent years, when some progress on alternatives has finally begun. But as ( poorly) 'articulated' by Trump last night, and by many of his MAGA minions, and as clearly stated in Project 2025 as Lori quoted earlier, the fossil fuel industry is continuing to fight hard to turn back even those modest gains.

I don't think the fossil fuel industry is fighting that hard, frankly. They don't really have to . This suppression narrative has been used by the left for years. So-called " alternatives" is a load of crap and everyone knows it. Most of them don't work on the scales that are necessary and are giant scams. Sorry. Maybe one day a retired antifa guy sitting around blow -drying his black uniform will stumble on something that actually works. Until then you'll have to be realistic.

No Shit. My solar powered van is absolutely fantastic. All my dumb as fck (situational) redneck  friends love their Milwaukee cordless tools but go apeshit over the thought of an electric vehicle. They have been brainwashed. Otherwise very smart dudes suddenly become dumb as shit when it comes to letting politics/faux news tell them how to think about health care, alternative energy and climate change. 

Gary Thomaswrote:

In the real world, the fossil fuel industry is not fueled by good intentions, but rather politics and money. One party in particular has been denying global warming as a grifters scam for decades, designed to bundle even higher amounts of money out to their friends who operate petroleum companies. In return for playing their role in this money-laundering racket, Americans  get to be gaslight on the effects that fossil fuels have on our world.

Gary Thomas, do you want to catch up with Europe?

According to https://commission.europa.eu/document/download/97e481fd-2dc3-412d-be4c-f152a8232961_en?filename=The%20future%20of%20European%20competitiveness%20_%20A%20competitiveness%20strategy%20for%20Europe.pdf:
"EU companies still face electricity prices that are 2-3 times those in the US. Natural gas prices paid are 4-5 times higher."

Donald Thompsonwrote:

The petro industry is fueled by you and billions of others who use their product. There is no gaslighting or money laudering. You open your wallet and give them your money. 

I think In most parts of the country a gallon of gas is about the cost of a gallon of milk. You should be grateful.

The fossil fuel industry has known for 50 years that climate change was happening yet chose to lie, deny and obfuscate it to the public. That's textbook gaslighting.

Despite making trillions in profits, the oil industry still gets tens of billions in subsidies. There's your tax dollars going up in smoke.

Insurance companies and our military have been adjusting and changing strategies due to global warming. They are doing so because they have to deal with facts and reality. We should be doing the same. 

Gary Thomaswrote:

Despite making trillions in profits, the oil industry still gets tens of billions in subsidies.

Gary Thomas, could you please provide a link to support your claim?

So far I had a perception that oil and gas companies were paying taxes and that renewable energy companies got subsidized by a government.