Looks like there are also open source solar tractors! (hm I think I’ll post this one to the EV community)

To my understanding, by talking about 2 origins of life he means that the bacteria and the archa according to the new findings they did not just split off from LUCA instead they evolved completely independently.

Personally, I found this quite amazing and this is why I posted it. So may I ask, what do you think of the LUCA hypothesis after all?

It seems like we’ve spent the last 300 years studying the puzzle pieces and now we’re nearly capable of putting them together,

That’s the thing tho, it looks like it was never a puzzle after all. The Newtonian era model of “the universe is working perfectly like a clock” didn’t turn out to be a viable model to explain everything, because the messiness of quantum physics blew it away. Which is not messiness really, it’s just very contrary to how mechanical clocks work. Something like that.

So can systems thinking bridge between those levels? Is it supposed to?

For me the example with the funnel [around 12:20] worked great. If I got it right the further down you are the less things are to bridge, the further up you go the more parameters come into play.

I need to read more about solarpunk as a social movement.

There’s link at the mo, at the very top of our front page. Here it is: ☀️ New to Solarpunk? Click here.

You might find this documentary interesting: Hollow Water | 2000 | 48 min

The way I see things, law enforcement and military are there to serve and protect those who are higher up in social hierarchies, as well as their wealth, even tho we are fed the story that they work for us, common people. In reality, they are a top-down structure, full of corruption, racism, sexism etc, and I really don’t feel safe around them.

So in order to answer your question, I would need to reframe it. It could be something like: how do people and areas can be protected, from other people or groups of people who are bad actors, within a society that does not have hierarchical structures, meaning that is organized in a horizontal way?

For me, the answer is not a sweeping rigid model that will be applied everywhere, all the time. People from different places see things differently, so local solutions need to be applied. Cultures worldwide have dealt with things. For example, one solution would be to look into their examples and find ideas that would fit for our community’s needs, and take it from there.

(If the questions was about the justice system, I would suggest to look into restorative justice, as well as transformative justice)

I don’t know why other people downvoted it, the reason why I did can be found here:

https://slrpnk.net/post/40650941/23482875

I second that! I am not too sure about hops tbh, in the sense that they don’t seem to thrive/survive where I live, but the idea of using vegetation is helping greatly to cool the microclimate. The downside is that you will need at least a balcony, the bigger it is, the more vegetation you can have, and the more you have, the cooler it will be. If you have a garden, it’s a whole other level, in the best possible way.

This approach is also great because you can plant eatibles, and have your own veggies and fruits.

Lula also this:

Brazil’s president Lula has greatly escalated his pressure for approval of oil drilling in the mouth of the Amazon River

The hypocrisy of Lula’s claims that the oil project will finance an energy transition

[source]

Waving to you :)

OP, I have the impression you will also like the following communities, so I thought of adding them here in case you feel like checking them out. Hope you enjoy!

https://slrpnk.net/c/conservation

https://slrpnk.net/c/biodiversity@mander.xyz

I am saying “isn’t earmarked for the federal government” and you come up with a fact check saying that it is not earmarked for military use. Which is the same thing.

No. “Isn’t earmarked for the federal government” is not the same as “isn’t earmarked for military use".

Any links to back what you say would be highly appreciated.

I’m really sorry that this is what you got from what I wrote. I definitely don’t think we should keep using fossil fuel. On the contrary, I am all in for phasing out extractions and usage.

Cuz the US strategic oil reserve isn’t earmarked for the federal government

According to a factcheck site it looks like the U.S. Oil Reserve Created for Supply Disruptions, Not Strictly Military Use. So maybe your statement is wrong? Otherwise could you share the source you got this from?

the share of the military energy usage in the federal energy usage is entirely meaningless tot the oil consumption of the US economy

I don’t understand what you are saying, could you please explain and/or share a relevant link? Btw maybe I should clarify that by talking about “consumption” I was not talking in economic terms, just in the sense of “utilizing”.

I have watched only a few minutes of this vid so far, as well as the timestamps and I must admit I don’t agree with this approach because of something I learned today.

He says around 2 m something like: the strategic US reserve of oil even tho the number of barrels sounds huge, they could sustain the US only a month of our current use. From the context my understanding is that he implies that this is due to casual, everyday-people consumption.

Well, it looks like the Department of Defense is the U.S. government’s largest fossil fuel consumer, accounting for between 77% and 80% of all federal government energy consumption since 2001. So why is this huge percentage missing from this long analysis?

Anyways, if he talks about the US military petroleum consumption, please let me know. Or if I got something wrong with this new info I got about the US military, let me know too.

I tend to agree with several things you talk about, but I have the impression we see things differently. For example, on one hand I agree with you when you say that we cannot let the Rich-Super Rich Economic Classes/Owners to just produce even a single new piece of plastic, but on the other hand for me the root of the problem is that the extraction of oil worldwide is still expanding instead of phasing out. Meaning that, as long as this is the case, more and more plastic will be produced.

Apart from that, of course bacteria eating plastics sound like a great option, but they are not the only way to get rid of plastics. Some alternatives would be fungi that “eat” plastic, or mycelium that replace plastics. Here are some relevant articles.

This podcast is about organising, solidarity, and ways that bring people together. Legal action part of their repertoir, but they don’t just do that.

Of course cultural appropriation of spiritual indigenous narratives from westerners is something that has been happening for decades. And I totally see the point of your analysis.

In a way, what I was trying to say is that even tho this kinds of appropriations need to be fought so they don’t take over the political discourse about ecology, by itself this doesn’t seem enough imo. In order to fight the power imbalance that colonisers have created throughout the centuries, I believe there is also a need to consciously take into consideration, as well as incorporate the suggestions and approaches of indigenous people in the relevant discourses in western politics, ecology, and their intersections. Certainly, without the element of appropriation, but as as equals.

I tend to agree with this article, but it is also a very slippery slope.

We must be careful not to erase once more indigenous/local narratives because we don’t like the vocabulary used. We risk to contribute into reproducing the colonisers’ power imbalance by disregarding local knowledge, just because it is presented in non-western way (i.e. cultural burnings).

I only know that it is both casually used as a park and that they are also regularly doing stuff there.