In "Bible Genesis", God saw that the descendants of Adam and Eve, who were expelled from the Garden of Eden, covered the earth. They were greedy and tyrannical. For their own survival and desires, they hunted animals and destroyed the ecology. Triggered a flood to clear everything, but before he was ready to cleanse, he felt compassion, and decided to tell the good ordinary man Noah the prophecy of the destruction of the world, and also told him how to survive. Noah built Noah's ark according to God's instructions before the flood, and brought all animal species to the ark. Finally, the flood came, the earth was submerged, and Noah's family escaped through Noah's ark.
If this story takes place in modern times, it is not God, but we humans who cause the flood; it is not the whole earth that is submerged, but our favorite department stores and trading terminals; it is not a kind-hearted promise who can board the ark Asia and species, but extremely powerful politicians and capitalists and everything they need. And all we can do is find a way to evolve gills and fins.
Why do we cause floods? The immediate cause is to break the carbon balance of the earth. Because we emit too much greenhouse gas and absorb too little, too much greenhouse gas left in the atmosphere heats the atmosphere and dissolves glaciers, causing sea level rise to inundate coastal areas and islands. Why are we breaking the carbon balance? Because we consume a lot of fossil fuels to turn on electricity for air conditioners; green spaces are turned into farms to eat tender beef; tropical rainforests are turned into plantations to produce palm oil.
As the United Nations environmental protection ambassador, Leonardo DiCaprio spent more than two years traveling around the world, witnessing changes in global warming and visiting people from all walks of life, from the Pope of Christ to ordinary people in India, to visit them Views on global warming. The documentary begins with the melting of glaciers, and sees the scene of humans setting fire to forests for development, the scene of coral dying due to global warming, the attitude of developing countries China and India towards the use of fossil fuels, and the support for fossil fuels. The capital group behind the fuel and its usual tricks, understand the specific and predicted impact of global warming on our environment, understand that carbon tax and new energy are the most practical and reliable ways to get out of the current predicament, the climax of the documentary: The Pope Comes Out Calling believers to pay attention to climate issues; Sweden, as a developed country, finally decided to give up all fossil fuels through a bottom-up proposal by its citizens; more than 100 countries finally reached the Paris Agreement after intense discussions. At the end, Leonardo returned to the podium at the beginning of the film. He stood on the podium of the Paris Climate Change Conference. As the United Nations environmental protection ambassador, he delivered a speech on the Paris agreement that has been reached. Finally, he encouraged everyone to take action for global change. Warm and do what you can. It's a perfect ending for a movie, but unfortunately the reality doesn't. As the United States tore up the Paris Agreement, this massive and united movement was hit in the head, casting a cloud over its future.
The most important factor in breaking the earth's carbon balance is the use of fossil fuels, which emits large amounts of carbon dioxide. The essence of the Paris Climate Change Conference held in 2015 is that leaders of various countries negotiate to limit and reduce carbon emissions, and reach an agreement on different countries to set different carbon reduction goals. What does carbon reduction mean for a world with a fossil fuel-dominated energy framework? For China and developing countries, it means forcibly changing the energy structure, slowing down the growth rate of infrastructure and GDP; for developed countries such as the United States and Europe, it means lowering the quality of life and delaying economic recovery; for Trump, it means nothing at all. Not American first. So Trump withdrew from the Paris Agreement six months after taking office.
Although more than 70% of scientists support the conclusion of global warming, and the documentary also expressed their support for global warming, in reality, there are still 30% of scientists who oppose it, and we still need to listen to the views of opponents. The documentary reminds us to pay attention to the political intentions behind the anti-global warming theory, so we should also pay attention to the political intentions behind the global change theory. Anti-climate changers don't think our planet is warming, or even if it's warming, it's our carbon emissions, their reasoning is that the planet has had interglacials and warm periods, and this little bit of temperature The change is not surprising at all. Indeed, the surface of the earth 4.6 billion years ago was still a hot soup of tumbling magma, and the earth also had an ice age when the surface was covered with ice. The earth has not always been as suitable for our survival as it is now. If global warming is not affected by our objective actions, then we can do nothing; but if our actions cause global warming, then if we don't stop our current actions, how are we different from suicide? Looking at the problem from this perspective, why don't we stop the current behavior and reduce carbon emissions?
So, are we still there? The answer given by the documentary is: as long as we (Americans) choose a president who cares about global warming; as long as we eat less beef or replace beef with chicken; as long as we travel less by car and walk or bike more; as long as we invest more New energy and reduction of fossil energy subsidies. The reality is: no.
An American president who cares about global warming? Do you look like Trump? Don't think that the President of the United States is just a puppet of the capital consortium. He is also the representative of the main will of the American people. In the documentary, Obama's change from opposing same-sex marriage to supporting same-sex marriage is the embodiment of the main will of the American people, so instead of choosing someone who cares about global warming President, it's better to make the majority of Americans understand the reality of global warming. In the documentary, American economist Mankiw mentioned: Compared with the moral questioning of what people have done to the climate before driving every day, a carbon tax is the most effective carbon reduction measure at present. It has also been levied various pollution taxes to pay for environmental governance. This system is quite mature and perfect, but companies and all American citizens are completely different interests. The documentary also said that no president who implemented a carbon tax bill will be punished. Passed, and no presidential candidate will use the carbon tax as the slogan, no matter whether the carbon tax is a tax increase or a tax change. As for new energy, as Tesla President Musk said, as long as 100 super solar cell factories can solve the problem of sustainable energy, if what Musk said is true, then the energy crisis will be solved permanently. Borrowing from the documentary, Professor Naran of the Indian Science Center asked Leonardo: "China and India are both doing so much to develop new energy. The per capita carbon emission is 32 times that of Indians and 10 times that of Chinese people in the United States. What have people done?" Yeah, what have we done? Leonardo was also thinking about this on the drive back. In the face of a highly developed capitalist society based on the pursuit of profit, new energy without mature technology will not be favored by capital, not to mention its opponents are cheap, mature and stable fossil fuels.
So how do we start with ourselves? Originally, things like politics and capital cannot be changed by personal power. We should implement environmental protection education on everyone, so that people can protect the environment spontaneously. But the reality is often that it is not realistic to require moral conscience to restrain things that are difficult to restrain even by laws, regulations and capital market rules. Today, carbon emissions have formed a prisoner's dilemma among the people: only if everyone becomes a low-emitting person can it be possible to curb global warming, but as long as some of them continue to enjoy a high-emission life, everyone will be finished. According to the point of view of game theory, all In the end, people will only enjoy high-emission life and become high-emissioners.
You watched this documentary today and saw the scars of the earth and the ugliness of human beings. You decided to protect the environment from me, and made up your mind to stop eating beef, reduce driving, and save water and electricity. After two days, you will go to a beef hot pot restaurant to eat a lot because you are in a bad mood; you will drive because the weather is too hot; you will eat fast food in a disposable plastic box at the company because of working overtime. You've just been heartbroken by images of tropical rainforests being burned by palm oil plantations, and made up your mind to stop using palm oil-containing products, and in two hours you'll see the latest season of cool short sleeves online Out of the oven, if you think that this short-sleeve fits well with the pants you bought last week, you will move your fingers to place an order, and the cotton that makes this short-sleeve comes from the shortage of raw materials due to the mass production of fashionable fast-moving consumer goods, and has been sprayed with excessive pesticides. and growth hormone, the land has been heavily polluted. Two days later, you wear your newly bought short-sleeved sleeves and go to the street to participate in the environmental protection movement. The movement organizers will give you a sign that reads "No pesticides, return me to pure land". You hold the sign and follow the parade. Back home, posted a photo online with today's parade, with the text: "Protect the Earth."
Who does the earth need to protect? Mount Everest is the highest peak in the world. Humans have named the act of climbing to the top of Mount Everest as Conquering the Top of the World. Therefore, with the vigorous development of climbing equipment and communication equipment in recent decades, various people have used various reasons for this. To climb Mount Everest, these people go up one after another, and only a few can survive. Most of the people who go up have the courage to face death and the desire to challenge the limit, but these seemingly noble spirits will only add corpses, feces and plastics to Mount Everest. Because the low temperature of Mount Everest keeps these bodies, feces and plastics intact for decades, and of course, pathogens. Today, Mount Everest has become the world's highest garbage dump and the highest pathogen breeding ground, and has become a potential source of water pollution for billions of people downstream, forcing Nepalese to organize teams called Mount Everest scavengers to go up the mountain to clean up garbage and eliminate potential water pollution. pollution source. Did Everest itself become a dump and a potential source of pollution? A human being with a noble spirit. Are the scavengers going up to clean up dead bodies and trash to save Everest? to save humanity. Mount Everest doesn't need anyone to save it, and it doesn't even dislike those pathogens that may take human lives; the earth doesn't need anyone to save it, only human beings need to be saved.
Most of the world's people live on the coasts, not next to logging farms in tropical rainforests, next to Indian farmers whose crops have been wiped out by extreme weather, or above melting Arctic glaciers. When we open our browser, we see a story about an entrepreneur bribing the government for forest land reclamation rights, as well as countless entertainment news and photos of cute cats and dogs; we search for movies at home on weekends and we see this film by the movie star Leonardo starred in the documentary "Before the Flood", as well as more than a dozen superhero movies. In this age of information explosion, no one cares about global warming. Now the UK is concerned about Brexit, Europe is concerned with refugees, the US and China are concerned with the Sino-US trade war, Syria is concerned with the civil war, in the face of these things, the environment does not matter, even if it can be fatal. Without being truly immersed and deeply victimized, human beings will not be afraid, and they are still human beings who have been dominated by consumerism for decades and have no idea what fear is.
View more about Before the Flood reviews
