- Auteur
- Datum
- op 11-12-2009 18:51
- Reacties
- 4
Extra materiaal: Na het zien van End of the Line
End of the Line is een documentaire die veel discussie oproept. Kijk hoe Redmond O'Hanlon na het zien van de film in gesprek raakt met filmmaker Rupert Murray en de wetenschappers Mardik Leopold, Katja Philippart en Els Vermeulen.
End of the Line is woensdag16 december te zien op NL 2, rond 00:25 uur, in VPRO's Import.
Meer posts van Beagle Crew
- Gerelateerde items:
- › Dossier: Dossier: Redmond O'Hanlon
- › Dossier: Dossier: Wetenschap
Reacties (4)
If all this is true and I have no reason to doubt it, then it's very depressing. But looking at the cause of the problem I keep coming back to overpopulation. I do not have a solution how to solve this in a proper way, but if we keep going on like this, the future will be very bleak.
Overpopulation can be directly related to almost every environmental problem, but even in Copenhagen it is carefully avoided. At least I didn't hear it mentioning.
To many politicians are mainly busy with there reelection and long term solutions don't make them very popular, so they keep to minor short term solutions which are mainly cosmetic.
Really solving the problem asks for a very large scale cooperation between states with revolutionary solutions which go much further then Kyoto or Copenhagen.
Dear Beagles and Bert,
I love the discussion in the video. I listened to it with a keen interest. The more so as it really brings the problems that are going on in the oceans out clear and straight, and it also gives number of the right solutions for better management of our waters. So one can only wonder why we are not yet working on them or, even better, that we are having them in place more. It would not only benefit the oceans, but also the people and the fishermen. The only reason I can think about for this is that not so many people have known the ins and outs of everything so well, and what you do not know is also something that you cannot do anything about. In addition to this our politicians also have other interests and are far too busy with many other things. The result of this is that there is compromises time after time that do not make the difference that is really needed. Consequently it can only be you and me, and all the other people on this planet, who can turn the tide by speaking up and requiring the right solutions. Not in antagony, but with the right arguments. After all it is where democracy is about. It is not for the benefit of big companies or special interest groups, but for the people. And there is nobody who can say that it cannot be done because history has proven more than once that it can be done, if we only work together. So I think more and more that this is exactly what the people around the world have to do, but before you can do that you have to educate so that we know what we are talking about. I am glad to see, read and hear that this is exactly what Beagle is doing.
And, if this still would not work, I have only one other solution: Redmond for president! -Just kidding, but also quite seriously, because I know it can work and I have heard others say it on Beagle too.--
At Bert: I can read your concern for the environment, but maybe the above also has some answers in it for you. I know that the world's population can't grow endlessly. Scientists have already said that in the sixties, so it may be our biggest challenge to tackle yet. The more so because it actually is pretty unloving to every child, if we would continue to ignore this. The reason for this: Children have a right to a good future.
Fair Winds and keep on sailing,
Gerty Bataille, a sailor of Clearwater from Amsterdam
Hello Gerty,
Well spoken, but we are running out of time.
Whatever solution we come with, it has to be fast. It is pretty clear, the planet can't take much more and still a lot of influential people are questioning the global warming because it interferes with there economic interests. The demand for almost everything has to go down. Whether it is fish, energy, water, space, etc. it all comes down to the same: the demand is to big. So either we must accept a considerable downgrading of our luxurious life or the numbers have to decrease. If we can't do this in a controlled way, we will have an increasing number of conflicts about all those things which are in demand. I hope that you and I can make enough difference to leave a proper inheritance, in the shape of a clean environment, to our children
If overpopulation would be the main problem it could be solved in several ways. But as long as the enormous forces released by the urge to have a growing economy and wealth I fear none of these solutions can ever make it. Many solutions need heavy investments and the laws of present economics tend to put the load on who is in the best position to bear it. The bad thing is that economic growth causes future generations to be increasingly richer, hence they grow in increasingly better positions to make the investments!.What better reason could you find for procrastination... Economists call this 'discounting the future' and I get sick alone of the global fights over what percentage to apply. I recommend every policy maker and environmentally worried citizen to read Mike Hulme's book "Why we disagree about climate change" which makes you understand why we disagree on almost everything. At present the the western economic model shows it weaknesses so clearly so now we have a chance tomake a real change and abandon economic growth. Richard Douthwaite in his book "The Growth Illu$sion" shows it can be done if only the political will was there. This could for instance quickly lead to lay heavy taxes on every wild fish brought ashore and low taxes on farmed fish, even before we could agree on who owns what part of the ocean (which will probably lead to war). Another heavily underrated and realtively simple too imply item is to make a serious global effort in educating women. It has been proven they bear less children ...