Why politics on Lichess?

There is this statement of Greta Thunberg: Our house is burning!
It's a flashlight on the environmentalists' basic error. It assumes, that we are living as kind of guests in a house. We are allowed to live, sleep and eat there, but not to destroy it.

This is plainly wrong. The truth is:

Nature is *not* a house.
Nature has never been a house.
Nature has always been a dynamic, ever changing construct, that requires everybody, who is part of it, to permanently adopt. Adoption is the magic word of evolution. Every form of life permanently adopts, and thus changes the milieu for all the other forms of life, forcing them to adopt. This is, how life works, this is the reason for the diversity of life.

I accept what sience says about climate: It changes and the human activities are the main reason therefore.

However, I do not accept the prediction of apocalypse. We can adopt to a changed climate and will find as many advantages as disadvantages. It's not the end of life and not the end of mankind. Trying to stop it or slow it down can easily do more harm than the climate change.


With the apocalypse is a thing.
It all reminds me to a chessgame the world is playing.
We are blundering the queen this is not the end of the game. We can fight on.

From the perspektive of "fighting" it does not help to come into panic. Like in a chess game in a bad situaiton.. keep calm and make good moves.
To make good moves understand what the situation is.
But that is really hard to see.

One question is how good the trees will be able to adapt to temperature change. I heard that there are difficultiesfor trees to evolve fast enough to adapt to the changing temperature. Waldsterben?
We should not ignore this possibility. It happened before in germany in the 80s.

@sheckley666 We might or might not be able to adopt, but the truth is that other species are already dying in masses. How do you think that helps diversity?

@Sputnik_Monroe This is the big question: Which move blunders the queen? I think the desperate attempt to save the climate will blunder the queen.

Waldsterben? I remember, old enough. Germany still exists.
What do you mean with evolving trees? There are already trees which are growing in tropical areas. And besides, I have heard, that the climate change shall lead to lower temperatures in europe, because of the Gulf stream changing.

@Chess-exe There have been times when the diversity reduced drastically, and afterwards it became higher than ever before. It is not human responsibility to help diversity. Nature does it in itself, we are just one of many players. We do what every species does.

Note that mankind in a whole is *not* an intelligent being that could be responsible for anything. As little as one billion transistors on a hew produce automatically are a microprocesser, 7 billion intelligent humans are not automatically a kind of superintelligence. Every attempt to make mankind act like one resonsible being leads to a totalitarian society.

Relax...every specie that over-stresses it's survival environment goes,drink and make merry,for tomorrow we die.


Guess why?

Acid rain is/was real. We prevented/stopped the "Waldsterben" because desulphurisation of the exhaust became mandatory for all companies...

People, people. Basics!

"Waldsterben: Begriff, der ursprünglich aus der Forstwirtschaft stammt. In den 1980er Jahren wurde er als Drohszenario in der öffentlichen Umweltdebatte aufgegriffen und dominierte diese. Im Kampf gegen das Waldsterben bildeten sich breite gesellschaftliche Bündnisse. Das große öffentliche Interesse löste umweltpolitische Reaktionen aus: Neben regelmäßigen Waldschadenserhebungen rückten Maßnahmen zur Verringerung von Schadstoff-Emissionen in den Vordergrund. Allerdings blieben die Waldschäden im weiteren Verlauf konstant auf einem Niveau, weshalb sich die Forschung uneinig ist, ob die verschiedenen Maßnahmen die Entwicklung stoppen konnten oder die bedrohlichen Prognosen der 1980er Jahre übertrieben waren. " @Sarg0n