How is what I said vague? Also George Carlin's viewpoint isn't especially helpful and are sort of defeatist. Also: satire.
Your question is "how can we save the planet?" There's no such thing as an answer to that. If you were to ask, "what can an individual do to diminish their carbon footprint?" Or "how can we conserve and distribute our global fresh water supply?" -these are still big questions but they're more likely to have a specific answer as they're not vague. I wasn't insulting your question. As for Carlin, it's definitely satire, but there is truth in jest. He's right, the planet will be just fine. WE (humans) are potentially screwed. It's a great observation imo.
Why do people say that? Of course there is a solution. And that is to use all the solutions. We have to diminish our foot print, use renewable clean energy, reverse the damage, we have to be more than we have been as a species and invest ourselves in our survival instead of in profit or oneupmanship. I understood that you weren't insulting me and thanks for welcoming me here. So far this place is far nicer than reddit.
I guess what I'm saying is that there isn't an answer. The planet will not disappear, even via what seems at times like our best efforts to destroy it. So, there are better ways to ask what I think you are asking. That's all. semantics? Maybe, but if you want serious answers, you have to ask serious questions, right?
Now I don't understand what you're saying. How is this question not serious? For instance: it is more or less implied that we would have to get people inside of these institutions to help in this struggle. Scientific breakthroughs are suppressed by big companies all the time. The electric car could've been way more developed. There are ways to clean the water etc etc