TADEAS: Tak teoreticky mohou být kdekoliv, to jak to osobně vnímají se nepromítá do veřejného vystupovaní, nebo zákonů (bavíme-li se o fosilním průmyslu, politicích, CEOs, bankéřích...), osobně si myslím, že dost z nich bude mít alespoň nějaké povědomí, vzhledem k tomu, jaký je zájem o nemovitosti na Novém Zélandu, podzemní bunkry, zemědělskou půdu,.. což může být spojeno s více než jen klimatem, ale i konflikty a dalším.

Ještě mě napadl termín "willful ignorance", nevím zda by přímo seděl na skupinu, o které se bavíme (jisté aktivity jsou opakem ignorování), ale dost lidí žije v tomto "úmyslném ignorování" reality.

Willful ignorance occurs when someone intentionally avoids information about the negative consequences of their actions. A new meta-analysis found that 40% of people will choose to remain ignorant of how their decisions affect others. The evidence suggests that willful ignorance provides people with a built-in excuse to act selfishly.

CHOSIE: a v jake fazi jsou ti co vedou&vedli (dez)informacni valku potom co se ze svych vlastnich studii dozvedeli o co jde?

PAN_SPRCHA: Na nastenku, at to za tech 5-10 let muzem overit.

vsechny velky us banky opousteji net zero alliance

Big American Banks Ignore Climate Change At Our Peril
https://www.forbes.com/sites/mayrarodriguezvalladares/2025/01/13/big-american-banks-ignore-climate-change-at-our-peril/

TADEAS: to je sice hezký, ale kdykoliv se potkám s nějakým denialistou, po pár větách zjistím že je to jen ignorant.

TADEAS: s tímhle si dovolím nesouhlasit. Po mnoha a mnoha zkušenostech jsem naprosto přesvědčen že i kdyby zasáhl střední Evropu pětka tropický hurikán tak třetina lidí bude řvát že se nic takového vlastně nestalo protože u nich to zrovna jen sundali pár střech jako normální vichřice, třetina že je to přirozený jev který tady vždycky byl a třetina začne opatrně připouštět že možná by na tom mohlo něco být.

TADEAS: staircase to hell

As a Climate Scientist, I Knew It Was Time to Leave Los Angeles
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/01/10/opinion/la-fires-los-angeles-wildfires.html


Climate Scientist Peter Kalmus Fled L.A. Fearing Wildfires. His Old Neighborhood Is Now a Hellscape
https://youtu.be/mMYvuY_MLMQ?si=0HnVb1GwLOr5hY2f


Multiple neighborhoods have been completely burned down, including in the town of Altadena, where our guest, climate scientist and activist Peter Kalmus, lived until two years ago, when increasing heat and dryness pushed Kalmus to leave the Los Angeles area in fear of his safety. "I couldn't stay there," he says. "It's not a new normal. … It's a staircase to a hotter, more hellish Earth." Kalmus discusses an op-ed he recently published in The New York Times about the decision, which he says was toned down by the paper's editors when he attempted to explain that fossil fuel companies' investment in climate change denial and normalization has only accelerated the pace of unprecedented large-scale climate disasters. "This is going to get worse," he warns, "Everything has changed."

z obecnejsi duskuze o politice asset managementu


There was a phenomenon where in the five or six years after the Paris climate agreement, which was in 2015-2016, there was significant hope amongst large parts of the population and the professional classes that governments were getting serious about climate. The belief was that they were going to take measures, whether that's significant carbon taxes or whatever else it might be, that would really entail a shift away from fossil fuel capitalism.

I think that what's happened over the last three or four years in particular is that the realization has kind of dawned—and people don't want to say it explicitly, but I think people are sort of implicitly seeing it—that it's not happening and that the governments are actually not serious about taking the types of actions that are necessary to keep temperatures at two degrees, two and a half degrees. You know, forget 1.5 degrees—governments aren't serious about keeping temperatures to two and a half degrees. I mean, of course they're not going to say that, but no, I don't think they're remotely serious about it.

I was in Norway recently, and in May 2021, the International Energy Agency came out with this really, I think, incredibly significant report which they called "Net Zero by 2050." They basically said, look, for the energy sector, which is obviously the very heart of the climate problem, to be able to be net zero—not actual zero, net zero—by 2050, this is the kind of path it has to take over the next 29 years, whatever it was (it was 2021, so the next 21 years). And basically, for that to be possible, there can be no new approvals of oil and gas field developments and no new approvals of coal mines anywhere in the world from this day forward—none, zero—to have any chance of hitting net zero by 2050.

And so, as I said, I was in Norway a few weeks ago. Over 160 approvals of new oil and gas field development licenses have been approved just in Norway since May 2021. So no, the governments aren't remotely serious. Oil and gas field development licenses have been showered like confetti around the world since then, and so I think the investment world looks at what governments are doing and they say, "Governments, which have to be the ones that take the lead, are not serious about this, so why should we be serious about this? If governments are not taking the types of actions that will make fossil fuel investments less profitable and green capitalism much more profitable, why would we bother with ESG?"

Woke Capitalism Just COLLAPSED. Here’s Why. | Aaron Bastani Meets Brett Christophers
https://youtu.be/W98jFzvl7q4?si=z-IvmiNHhTV3cSML