Fuck

>>25656226
People call us hippies for having common sense where they lack it.

>>25656541

Yeah, well, it won't unfuck us unless everyone feels this way.

File: image.jpg (57KB, 438x645px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 438x645px

>you aren't crazy, you're pathetic.

Everyone "could" do a lot of things. Grow up and realize oil isn't going to run out for a long fucking time. Realize like everything, this earth is going to burn to cigarette dust. And maybe you should spend your time blowing, instead of sucking

>>25656226
>best diet for a human is high fat, low carb (mostly from fibrous vegetables and fruit in season), and a diet rich is well-raised meat

>>Falling for the paleo meme

Brotip: don't take dietary cues from a group of people who's life expectancy maxed out at 35.

File: Ivanov-art-5.jpg (272KB, 900x681px) Image search: [Google]

272KB, 900x681px

>>25656803

Relying on a finite resource is still a stupid plan. I don't care if we don't run out for another thousand years - it still is not tenable.

The earth is not going to 'burn out' for another good few million years. Between then and now I would prefer to clean our waters, land, and sky for future generations. We have in one generation done more damage than all of humanity up until this point. We have somehow even managed to kill half the fish in the ocean. HALF of the god damned ocean in a single generation.

>don't worry bro, we got oil. We just need to constantly be at war with a nation or destroy our own land to harvest it.

>>25656226
Should we all just commit sudoku then?

>>25656935
> Russia before they discovered alcohol.jpg

>>25656922

>Falling for the average lifespan meme

The only reason that number is so low is because of infant mortality. Adding a shitload of 0s to a group of numbers tends to bring the average down. People also commonly died of war/infections/killed by animals and if you can avoid those things you will life to a ripe long age.

A diet high in carbohydrates causes constant inflammation and increases your risk for dementia, Alzheimers, diabetes, depression, and pretty much all the "first world" diseases.

File: Ivanov-art-7.jpg (213KB, 900x678px) Image search: [Google]

213KB, 900x678px

>>25657005

This dude's art is amazing!

>>25656984

No. Plant food forests, plant wildflowers and perennials instead of lawns, stop destroying everything, stop thinking we need technological 'innovation' as often as the market demands, source our resources better.

>>25657082
If that is so I'd like to see the math and understanding that lead you to think that is viable.

>>25657242
>math and understanding that lead you to think that is viable.

That what is viable?

>>25657356
The way you suggested we source our resources.

Sounds like you want societal collapse.

I want it too.

>>25657859

I'm not a numbers guy nor educated on resources, but if the only way to harvest something is to destroy our land, the resource's importance should be reconsidered.

Oil, for one, should be outright abandoned or vastly minimized. We actually have alternative to everything that runs on oil, but we continue to use it. We even build out homes so that they need ac/heating or they will be unlivable - why?

File: Ivanov-art-2.jpg (232KB, 900x677px) Image search: [Google]

232KB, 900x677px

>>25657909

No, I want a society that provides for itself.

Look at agriculture (an obvious passion of mine) - go to a grocery store and find the produce grown in the USA. If you can find it, try to find something grown in your own state or even the next one over. Is your state not capable of growing broccoli/spinach/cabbage/etc? If it is, why are we sourcing it elsewhere? Why are we paying for all that gas, truckers' wages, foreign workers when we can produce it right at home?

Why don't we all have small gardens, or a large one inside a neighborhood? What disadvantage would their be if people took a few minutes every day to tend to a small crop? Why can't a household/neighborhood/town/fucking state even produce all its own fruit?

We have done this for thousands of years. I don't want a society to collapse, I want a society that in the event of a collapse can feed itself without relying on others.

File: IMG_20160109_195557.jpg (9KB, 400x400px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 400x400px

>>25656226
>tfw you tell people this all the time and they call you a Luddite and laugh
>tfw they are so closed minded I explain all of this to them and they still dismiss it because they think the government wants to keep them healthy
>they actually think I am crazy
>mfw

File: Ivanov-art-6.jpg (152KB, 900x673px) Image search: [Google]

152KB, 900x673px

>>25658111

A fucking hard feel, brother.

Yeah man you're all right. Fuck all this shit. Let's all jump down this fucker boat

>>25658072
I agree that we should use our lawns to nurture as much of our diet as possible. I still think that despite doing that most of humanity will need to largely rely on the efficiency of oil based agriculture. Dabble in stem subjects more by the way, it is a tremendous tool for sorting out the logistics, avoid the traditional education system though.

>>25656226
>tfw without modern medicine I'd be a burden to others unless my condition killed me.

I couldn't take it.

File: Ivanov-art-15.jpg (245KB, 900x674px) Image search: [Google]

245KB, 900x674px

>>25658448
>I still think that despite doing that most of humanity will need to largely rely on the efficiency of oil based agriculture.

Research permaculture. We don't need oil based agriculture to feed the world, we need more farmers (and not even that much) it's silly to put the pressure of feeding 99% of the population on 1% of the population. And we need farmers that don't make acres and acres a huge mono-culture. Despite what you may think most of our farmland is underutilized. Even if we do produce a shitload of corn, that's only 3-4 months out of the year. Most farms lay fallow for the other 9. In that time we could plant cold weather grains to increase productivity. But we should still get the fuck away from mono-cultures.

Acre per acre nuts actually produce more calories/fat than any grain and with zero input from chemicals. They will also do this for hundred of years. Livestock can eat nuts as a primary forage along with ground covers. Now image we replaced all the corn belt (which is just used for feed livestock) with oaks, filberts, chestnuts, and walnuts. Here's the best part - you can add more - under-story fruit trees, herbs, fruit bearing bushes, etc. Some of this will require hand-on harvest, but it would produce a lot more food, create better livestock for meat/milk/eggs, and we can actually raise the feed and the animals in the same place. And all the nitrogen needed to grow food - it comes from the manure of the animals.

We need a huge change in thinking and we need it soon. Overpopulation only happened because of oil-based agriculture. We have an almost artificial amount of humans on this planet and when the oil runs out, or gets too expensive, even going organic and sticking to mono-cultures will fuck us.

File: Ivanov-art-12.jpg (228KB, 900x683px) Image search: [Google]

228KB, 900x683px

>>25658589

I'm not condoning regression, we can do this without setting ourselves back to the 1500s. There is a balance we are missing.

I think one of the biggest problems is the nuclear family propaganda. So much resources are wasted to make more houses for very few people. Imagine how much more people would be able to afford if it they weren't paying for an entire extra set of bills when their parents basement is unused and just sitting there with electricity and heating.

>>25656935
>>25656226

>The oil is gonna run out!!!! Oh my god! Peak oil, we're all gonna die!

There are alternative energy sources that actually work. The big oil companies buy up patents on how to implement/obtain them. Why? Because they are going to milk the earth for every last drop of oil, and when it runs out, they will simply move into a new industry, which will still be under their control.

That is, if you can't just create oil in a lab by the time the natural oil runs out.

>>25657005

More like Russia before they discovered communism.

File: Ivanov-art-9.jpg (254KB, 900x676px) Image search: [Google]

254KB, 900x676px

>>25658961

I both agree and disagree. For one, when you buy a house you are really just making realtors/bankers more wealthy (not to mention paying for over payed workers who likely used the bottom of the barrel materials). Any given house is probably actually worth about half what you're even paying before interest. Not to mention location bringing up the price. Ideally men should be building their own homes, but I know that seems like a luddite idea.

We do have a capabilities to make modular housing that an individual could assemble in a week or so and pay a lot less. This would still be made of plastic or basic materials, but not too much worse than what they make houses out of now. Ideal homes should be well insulated so you can cool it with a bucket of ice and warm it with a candle. Earthships are one method of construction, but they haven't really caught on. We should also position them dependent on sunrise/sunset instead of where the street faces. For a home to have a big south-facing window in the summer is just fucking dumb.

As for the nuclear family - I like it, but it's a cultural thing. I sure as shit think most 18 year olds just can't afford to actually go out and get their own place like in the 50s and before.

>>25659022
>The big oil companies buy up patents on how to implement/obtain them. Why? Because they are going to milk the earth for every last drop of oil, and when it runs out, they will simply move into a new industry, which will still be under their control.

This is obvious, but still highly unethical. My point is that we are so much better than this. If the technology exists now we should prioritize not harming our planet as much.

Also, alternative energy only provided energy. Oil and petroleum is still used for a shitload of common products (plastics, Styrofoam, fertilizers). These will be more difficult to replace.

>>25658794
Thanks for introducing me to this concept, it is very intriguing and I've only just skimmed the surface. I would do away the need for livestock to supply our diet, feeding an animal something to feed us is a waste of energy unless they are there to consume waste food. The amount of energy the plant needs to survive is dictated not only by the fruits it bears but also by the number/type of cells it hosts, generally shorter stockier plants host are better for your suburban homes (like your bushes), taller trees are generally good for clocking up more sunlight hours to generate their fruit. Having said all of this, our medical system will be under a lot more strain to provide for the hardships of physical labor and less skilled labor to build structures.

>>25656226
>tfw your existence will mean nothing