Beastimus

Golf sucks, we should eliminate it. Recycle the land into multiple uses, e.g. housing, green/park space (which it currently isn't), commercial space, and if the course is located in such a place where it makes sense to put a solar farm (not too close to dense housing), solar. It need not all be one thing. Realistically, this won't happen in most places without a lot of other stuff happening first. But if we see it, that would be frickin' awesome. For normal people, just start to de-normalize it as a pass time, disk golf is a good alternative that requires less space and usually coexists with nature.

My brother made this one

I see a lot of people saying build up not out, but you still need a place without houses to build denser housing (parking oceans should be place #1). I would keep way more of the green space than they do (and add in some community gardens?), but this might be a good option depending on the surrounding (sub)urban context. Its certainly not a good option for every (or probably most) golf course, but its going to be the best option sometimes.

Yeah, special commercial zoning, if we can't eliminate restrictions on small businesses in neighborhoods entirely, which should be the end goal. But yeah we desperately need anything we can get.

Well carp.

I can only hope some of them move over here. This seems like the right kinds of conversations to be advertising into (when people are already thinking about moving away from the oligarchy platforms.)

Ok, correct me if I'm wrong, but this guy doesn't seem to have any credentials, which seems like a huge red flag to me. Especially since he spends a lot of this article shitting on mainstream climate science. I don't know enough about climate science to know whether this is actually bunk, which is deeply distressing to me.

But either 1, its legit and we're headed for the literal end of the world (not as we know it, like, all life goes extinct in the scenario he poses, there is nothing left).

Or 2, its not legit and we're headed for the end of the world as we know it and the deaths of a distressingly large amount of the human population.

Either way, I'm going to be doing all the same things, and we all need to do all the things we'd do if we were heading for 6.5 as if we were heading for 3, this doesn't change anything to me, and it certainly doesn't change anything in the minds of the biggest polluters..

Absolutely

We're probably not heading into over 4.8 though. Probable outcomes are between 2.5 and 3.5 (both of which are horrific.)

Well, you've got to keep in mind that Native American societies (like Communist ones btw) faced constant cultural and physical genocide from Capitalists wherever the two systems touched. This is exactly like the "well, Communism lost so Capitalism is better" argument, when Capitalism was violently enforced (in favor of dictatorships, against democracy) wherever Communist revolutions took place.

Going vegan is a relatively small difference from going vegetarian, which is a small difference from just drastically cutting back on meat. The big thing is that our current systems are unsustainable for animal rights and the environment and everyone needs to cut back on meat drastically at the least. But I imagine that if you could stop driving a car entirely, that would be a bigger difference than losing a reasonable amount of meat from your diet. Though, cutting back on meat is an important step that all of us can take with much more ease.

Yeah, I agree that detached houses should be an option. But the degree to which they are the option is inane. We (in USAmerica at least) need to be building like a third the detached houses we are and like a hundred times the mid-density housing we are.