Ironically most parents are so terrified of what "might" happen to their kids when they are out and about these days that they are happier keeping them home with video games and the internet.
An environmental psychologist studied how far away from home kids would go to play 30 years ago and then compared it to now and the results were pretty stunning.
http://www.buzzfeed.com/kasiagalazka/invisibilia-episode-two-fearless#.mh96JvX1n

some nice environmental destruction there.

OK
#1. Your study quote which said no mechanism had been discovered.
#2. "but the drivers, magnitude, timing and location of methane consumption rates in High Arctic ecosystems are unclear."...LOCATION UNCLEAR MEANS NOT FOUND.
#3...this does not make sense, "this feedback will be moderate: of a magnitude similar to other climate–terrestrial ecosystem feedbacks" is self contradictory, since many terrestrial ecosystem feedbacks are NOT moderate...depending on the definition of "moderate". If less than 10 deg C is moderate, then they're right.
#4. You can tell them 98%+ of scientists in the field of climatology say side effects of industry/technology will cause "X" at a minimum in 100 years, and it has already caused "Y" (warming, weather changes, ocean acidification, environmental pollution, rising cancer rates, water shortages, other indisputable factors), send him back with proof of those effects, and I think same result..."no thanks".

I misunderstood I guess. If you did that, he would just be in a rubber room for claiming to be a time traveler, not seen as a visionary. ;-) If he could offer proof of the time travel, the state of the planet, and the environmental trends showing every issue is seemingly getting worse leading to cluster f*ck, it would not be a hard sell in the least, IMO. At least not to people with an IQ over 90. You don't have to abandon all those things (coal, yes), you would just have to design them better. Electric cars were often the norm before Ford in towns. Planes might be electric dirigibles, and satellites might be put in orbit by rail guns.
If you don't think 1/3 of the planet's population (a reasonable guess if water shortages continue the current trend) being migrant doesn't warrant 'panic' (which I never suggested, I will say it warrants concern even by those in the '1st' world) then I don't know what to tell you.
Citations:
#1. It may be unfishable in 15-20 years (I was off by 5 years) at current acidification rates.
http://www.ipsnews.net/2012/05/climate-change-threatens-crucial-marine-algae/
"By 2040, most of the Arctic Ocean will be too acidic for shell- forming species including most plankton. Significant areas of the Antarctic Ocean will be similarly affected, oceanographer Carol Turley from Plymouth Marine Laboratory in the UK previously told IPS."

#2. by 2025 it's estimated that 2/3 of people worldwide will live in a water shortage.
http://www.foodandwaterwatch.org/water/interesting-water-facts/
"Unless we change our ways, two-thirds of the world’s population will face water scarcity by 2025"

#3. Northern India/Southern China is nearly 100% dependent on glacial melt water, glaciers that have lost 50% in the last decade
http://www.foodandwaterwatch.org/water/interesting-water-facts/
"Rapid melting will reduce the Tibetan glaciers by 50 percent every decade, according to the Chinese Academy of Sciences
More than two-thirds of Chinese cities face water shortages"

That's rather the point of the video, isn't it? BP are the ones who were all "¯\_(ツ)_/¯ ... sorry".

This event and others like it happened because someone thought it was worth the risk for money.

Actually a lot of people did; the company, whose major decision-makers will only be concerned if it affects the value of their beach properties, and even then may not notice.

The government, which for various reasons allows the exploitation of natural resources like this. Those reasons range from direct cash deposits in offshore accounts, to the general notions of what's "good for the economy" held by our corporate-entertained politicians.

Environmental risk management should be done with zero regard to the likelihood of said risk; assume it *will* happen and work from there.

But no, that's sandal-wearing, beard-and-vegetable-growing lib*/greenie/hippy talk.

I would love to spend less time thinking about the US and how messed up parts of it are. Unfortunately, I live in a world where that's not possible.

At least until China buys you out, the US is still the biggest influence on the rest of the world.. economically, politically and militarily.

Right now, NZ is part of the TPPA talks that will directly affect the way country is run.

So yeah, I comment on the US.

Besides, this is the 21st century. The people in my life are not decided by anything as archaic as national boundaries or even geography. I have friends and family all over the globe.

And @Mordhaus Norway has
- 6th highest per capita income (US is 10)
- 3rd highest educational attainment (US is 5)
- 5th highest on the anti corruption index (US doesn't even make top 10)
- 10th on environmental health (again, US doesn't make top 10)
- 8th in the "Good country" index (US is 21)
- 7th on Forbes list of "best for business" (US is 18)

On pretty much any ranking you look at, Norway is rated as a great place to live. Objectively, it outperforms the USA on almost every metric. As does NZ and Ireland

The US is actually a great country. It has an amazing natural landscape, has fantastic science and technology and the people are (for the most part) incredibly friendly. But it's held back by its refusal to acknowledge its faults and its frankly appalling political system. You do lots of things extremely well, but self-reflection is not one of them.

Kids in the Hall sketches are also more thought provoking than SNL. SNL is more of a contemporary pop culture reference machine like Mad magazine and Family Guy.

The pop cultural references in KitH are to things of higher value like early cinema classics (Citizen Kane), Nietzsche, Morrison Hotel, surrealism, film noir; and with heavy pro LGBT, pro environmental (the beaver!) and anti corporate themes; displaying the frivolity of office politics, and the HARDCORE Canadian law enforcement.

What does SNL give but a couple'a chuckles, eh?

This is what I imagine the future of transport will be like - I get in my electric vehicle in the morning, and sit down as it takes off toward the destination I want to go. I spend the ride checking email, listening to music, or just relaxing, as the correct route is dynamically updated to avoid construction, traffic jams, etc. At the end of the journey that's cost me very little, gotten me safely to my destination, and had minimal environmental impact, my vehicle moves on to pick up other passengers BECAUSE IT'S A GODDAMN BUS AND BUSES HAVE ALWAYS WORKED LIKE THIS.

Engineering meets environmental friendliness; absolutely amazing idea!

Not just TPP.. TTIP is the same but for Atlantic countries, EU - USA. They both also have clauses that prohibits boycotting or giving out negative reviews, anything that may cause loss of profit. They also have parts dedicated to copyright, denying free-for-use and to demanding the highest prison times for anyone sharing anything, denying the rights for stripping DRM from material you own...

I would be here the whole day if i would type each and every ridiculous thing those two "trade agreements" have but essentially they both deny independent nations to make ANY laws that may cause loss of PROJECTED profits.. Not just loss of profits but profits they might lose in the future..

And the court that solves these problems.. wait for it.. is independent jury with three private sector lawyers, no rights to defend nor to be even present, decisions are all secret. In practice three guys selected by corporations make a decision based on the evidence presented by corporations... It is sick and twisted "trade agreement" that is designed to maximize profits, to strip away environmental laws, regulations, worker rights, demands that nation HAS to privatize all of it's services if any corporation so wishes or face the "court"..

yeah, really don't have a lot of love for the palm islands.

They're an environmental nightmare.

Nothing was moved or interacted with in the entire clip, so it leads me to believe that all of the lighting and shadows were simply pre-calculated and baked on as a texture. In the same manner, the reflections are most likely environmental cube maps, rendered in 3D animation software with all the settings turned up and then saved as an image. If something besides the camera were moving then I would be impressed.

I'm upvoting because the explanation of how fracking works is (as far as I know) accurate.

There is room to dispute a few of the word choices, and how safe the process is portrayed. The companies that do it (probably) don't actually intend environmental harm. I think that fracking is (probably) mostly safe, but not 100%. What comes of this is that the (real) risks are downplayed.

Agree with @Fairbs...this is total self serving fracking propaganda and nothing more.
It is good they take some steps to not pollute.
It is ridiculous and terrible that they pretend the steps they take are fool proof and all inclusive. They have failed repeatedly (almost consistently) causing irreversible damage FAR more expensive than fracking is profitable. If they had to pay to really completely clean up even one contaminated aquifer, it would cost more than they could ever make off of the entire US gas reserves, and would never be completed because it's impossible to do.

15% of the fluid recovered means up to 85% of the toxic fluid is being pumped up through fractures, some of it into the water system. Even if only 10% makes it there, that's millions of gallons of unknown, poisonous contamination of our water systems.
True, aquifers may sit mostly at higher levels, but they have channels and fractures that reach below the level of the fracking, making a channel for the toxic drill fluid to enter the water table. Pretty simple to understand.
Also, the method used to fracture the rock is pulsing huge pressures through the tubes. Under those conditions, steel 'casings' flex (and sometimes rupture) and concrete fractures, destroying any 'seal' it could have made or, at best, creating channels outside the casing for the toxic fluid to travel up and out of.
I see many reasons this is not a viable industry without exemptions from legal and environmental regulations, which should never be granted to anyone.

"The letter to the Environmental Protection Agency from Attorney General Scott Pruitt of Oklahoma carried a blunt accusation: Federal regulators were grossly overestimating the amount of air pollution caused by energy companies drilling new natural gas wells in his state.

But Mr. Pruitt left out one critical point. The three-page letter was written by lawyers for Devon Energy, one of Oklahoma’s biggest oil and gas companies, and was delivered to him by Devon’s chief of lobbying."

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/07/us/politics/energy-firms-in-secretive-alliance-with-attorneys-general.html

Yet the word "corruption" makes no appearance within the article...