|
old beast lunatic posted:I've been a casual reader of climate doom articles for like 20 years and I swear I remember 3c being the magic we're hosed number and taking a lot longer than 2080. when most of the reports talk about 2-3 C they mean global average temperature, that study is referring to local temperatures in the arctic rising by 5-9 by 2080. still horrible but its not the same as 5-9 C globally.
|
#
¿
Mar 14, 2019 18:21
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 26, 2024 13:09 |
|
|
Taintrunner posted:think of how awesome it’s gonna be when we shoot down the rich people spaceship trying to escape earth there was one of those discovery channel "documentaries" which was like, what if a neutron star collides with earth, and in it the rich people lead by not-elon musk decided to make an unsafe antimatter rocket and it blew up on the launch pad yeah that absolutely would happen
|
|
#
¿
Mar 19, 2019 02:11
|
|
|
Admiral Ray posted:owned by south park
|
|
#
¿
Mar 20, 2019 07:34
|
|
|
General Dog posted:Climate reform could have happened if it had public buy-in like the pro-gun and anti-abortion causes had. Ultimately, the public was indifferent and voted against any kind of policy that would be inconvenient. we came real close in the 80s to having actual buy-in on climate change policies, especially after the relative success of getting everyone on board the CFC ban. then the money started flowing in
|
|
#
¿
Mar 26, 2019 23:10
|
|
|
the reality may be grim and perhaps unsaveable but that's all the more reason to fight when you can to at least make things a bit more livable while we're here
|
|
#
¿
Mar 28, 2019 03:02
|
|
|
SymmetryrtemmyS posted:then there was an intelligent species before us on this planet that was wiped out in an event and no recorded evidence of them because it happened a billion years ago, and then the same thing is happening to us now, except now that a billion years later there will be another intelligent species using us as fossil fuel to repeat the process of dooming their civilization until the sun explodes the cool thing is that there's only about 600-700 million more years before the increasing solar luminosity over its lifetime renders the earth uninhabitable anyway
|
|
#
¿
Mar 29, 2019 06:47
|
|
|
love to pretend that people making faster computers and smartphones means technological progress can solve all environmental problems and solve all energy consumption issues we're about at the height of what we'll ever achieve technologically. there's no going past where we are now - every possible "advancement" everyone promises is just around the corner to enable us to keep gorging resources is either physically impossible (fusion power probably lies in this category), or would require a level of resources and cooperation that is impossible under a market system. thermodynamic limits don't care about your economics models. the only carbon capture worth a drat is forests and ocean plant life, technological solutions won't ever reach what biological ones have already achieved but we keep tearing them down to feed the stock market. god knows the billionaires will throw money at bullshit geoengineering schemes that either won't work or will somehow make things worse once they can't rationalize away changing climate any longer economic growth has to stop, the world economy has to shrink and what remains has to be more evenly distributed. the first two are going to happen no matter what anyone wishes, we can either choose to manage its decline or have it collapse on us
|
|
#
¿
Apr 2, 2019 08:03
|
|
|
vyelkin posted:its like if it was a cool birthday party trick to just whip out a barrel of oil and light it on fire somewhere in texas a man just smiled upon reading this
|
|
#
¿
Apr 8, 2019 10:02
|
|
|
it seems to me like the real risk from "AI" is trusting machine learning to run everything and it just crashing the economy and impoverishing the world or going haywire and radicalizing people to turn into fash- gently caress anyway all these effective altriusm assholes are just turning charity into another "efficiency-focused" market
|
|
#
¿
Apr 10, 2019 08:20
|
|
|
Bhodi posted:Hope none of you are addicted to coffee because the coffee belt is vanishing, at the minimum expect it to double or triple in price. It IS a luxury, technically not essential to human life: thank god, now coffee snobs will be able to shut up
|
|
#
¿
Apr 14, 2019 23:11
|
|
|
Rime posted:It is vastly easier to stop destroying our entire loving biosphere than it is to kickstart a new one on a dead rear end planet like Mars. even if we utterly trash our CO2 levels and temperatures rise 10 C it will still be easier to live on earth than mars, the whole idea that we have to terraform some other planet rather than live here is absurd unless this planet literally got sucked up by a black hole
|
|
#
¿
Apr 15, 2019 20:42
|
|
|
Stairmaster posted:The simple answer is to just to develop brain uploading and become insane cosmic machine gods little do you know is that’s what happened but the simulation glitched and that’s why we have Trump
|
|
#
¿
Apr 16, 2019 01:57
|
|
|
Addamere posted:do people not get that the entire point of protest rallies is to be disruptive and thereby compel the powers that be to acquiesce to their demands pretty sure they do understand this and just don’t want people to force them to change things. by being peaceful and respectful nothing will ever get done and they’ll get to feel good about themselves for not hating the quiet protesters
|
|
#
¿
Apr 18, 2019 00:23
|
|
|
Taintrunner posted:drat it’s gonna own when the real poo poo starts popping off. the rich are gonna get theirs so hard wasn't there some article about some SF tech types buying shelters in new zealand and also stashing guns and a motorcycle so they could escape town "in case of a zombie apocalypse" yeah the first sign of open revolt against the rich they are going to gun people down if they don't have drones stashed away that will just launch bombs on protestors and people gathering to attack them
|
|
#
¿
Apr 20, 2019 00:47
|
|
|
Zeno-25 posted:So which one of you guys put together this beauty? i'm sure those companies and individuals only produce purely for themselves and not because people are using their products no, they're not blameless and they have some responsibility in how people consume products because that's what advertising is, but at the end of the day people are consuming the products they create. it's going to take collective efforts to stop consumption and if everyone wants to just sit at home and not change their habits because "it's not MY fault, its these companies producing the products that are entirely to blame" then nothing's ever going to change while we careen into ecological catastrophe the online left is getting really lovely about not accepting any responsibility as a collective society to change habits so we stop consuming so much, instead we're just waiting around for someone to post lists of execs that will subsequently do nothing because the left doesn't have the brain rot and sociopathy that the right does when they do certain events at churches and mosques (NOT IMPLYING ANYTHING, PARODY PARODY)
|
|
#
¿
Apr 28, 2019 23:14
|
|
|
Addamere posted:individual reductions accomplish pretty much nothing hmm yeah getting a movement of millions of people to all reduce their resource consumption will do nothing at all, no sir everyone who says this is also out there telling white people that they need to change the way they talk to people of color because it's their responsibility to change their actions, why is that logic ok for fighting white supremacy and not for fighting climate change
|
|
#
¿
Apr 28, 2019 23:17
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:this lovely analysis starts to fall apart when those hyper rich oil execs use their power and money to bury the evidence on climate change and lobby against any attempt to regulate their industries our lifestyle is toxic to the environment, yes the oil companies and car companies had a big hand in designing society to make that so but the way to fight that isn't to just say "it's actually OK that i live in a mcmansion and drive to work because the companies made me do it!", it's to get everyone on board with changing their housing, commuting, eating habits while fighting to regulate those industries because when they talk about regulations hurting their industries, it's ALWAYS couched in terms of "it will make your commute and house more expense". that's how they sell it to people, and if you are ok with staying in those housing and commuting situations most people are always going to be convinced to fight regulation because it hurts them immediately. the way to fight this is to make it so you don't need to care if gas prices double because you don't drive anyway
|
|
#
¿
Apr 28, 2019 23:23
|
|
|
Addamere posted:what percentage of people live in mcmansions and commute from the suburbs to work i'm not placing blame on the global south here, it's almost entirely america and europe doing this. mcmansions are the most egregious example but really anyone who owns a home larger than, say, 200 sq/ft per person, owns a car and uses it to get to work, eats meat etc, is culpable in this those 300 million people in the US alone are using more resources than the bottom few billion. the bottom billion shouldn't be asked to suffer for it because they're already living more or less ecologically sustainable lives, but nearly everyone in america is living beyond what is reasonable for the environment with the way things currently are
|
|
#
¿
Apr 28, 2019 23:37
|
|
|
"i didn't own slaves, do mortgage redlining, or personally fire a black person, therefore i have no culpability in white supremacy or reason to change the way i treat black people" see how ridiculous that sounds?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 28, 2019 23:46
|
|
|
Addamere posted:like i live in a rent-controlled efficiency apartment and take the train and other people i know live in bigger apartments and bus or drive depending on distance and others i know live in a suburb and commute as well as drive everywhere and it is not by any of the three groups described, or the people like us, choosing more biodegradable bags or opting out of plastic straws or any other peformatively eco conscious thing we can do on top of whatever else we may already be doing that any meaningful change would be accomplished not even if literally all of the people like us did it any effort to actually stave off climate change is going to cost dozens of trillions of dollars between direct spending and indirect losses to the economy. its' going to hurt because we've simply lived far beyond what this world can actually support (we as in the first world, the global south is blameless in this) those billionaires are never going to change their ways, they need to be fought through a mass movement of people who are willing to make the sacrifices this society needs to live sustainably. it's not helping that they fight every step of the way with billions and billions of dollars of lobbying efforts and advertising, but even eliminating their political power and redistributing all of their money to climate change efforts alone will not be sufficient to stave off catastrophe. we need to rebuild the way we live
|
|
#
¿
Apr 28, 2019 23:54
|
|
|
A Big Fuckin Hornet posted:this is just wrong and why that image needs addresses too if you thanos snapped every one of those individuals, not a god drat thing would change. the system is self-perpetuating and others will come up to replace them. the system itself is the problem
|
|
#
¿
Apr 28, 2019 23:58
|
|
|
A Big Fuckin Hornet posted:the point is that it wasnt the average citizens of the global north who one day just decided to be dependent on fossil fuels, and you are putting the onus back on us, who have never had any say in this process in the first place do you really think i'm just saying that capitalism's ok? no i'm saying even if we abolished capitalism tomorrow our society would still be overextending itself because no one on the online left barring basically maoists at this point wants to make the lifestyle changes. if we had worker communes running everything, giving every laborer in america complete democratic control over resources, if we all decided that no one needed to make sacrifices we'd still be mining the poo poo out of coal and fracking everything. people need to acknowledge that simply getting rid of capital's control over society isn't enough, we all need to change the way we approach our resource consumption the people who voted for trump because he said he'd bring the coal jobs back would still exist under socialism, they'd just be agitating for more democratic control over the coal mines
|
|
#
¿
Apr 29, 2019 00:12
|
|
|
vyelkin posted:Plus, outside of the pipe-dream scenario where we all lead zero-emissions lives because of individual choice, the vast majority of people aren't presently willing to consciously choose to make their own lives more expensive and less convenient. Something like half the population are happy to make choices of conspicuous consumption that make extremely minor cuts to their emissions, but only when it doesn't affect their lives at all. "Oh I'll take my drink without a straw because I wouldn't drink through the straw anyway. But no way am I giving up my two intercontinental vacations a year!" And the other half reacts to movements to reduce emissions by increasing their own emissions out of spite. "Oh are you not taking a straw? Well then give me two straws! Triggered yet lib?" Both those groups of people will need to change their behaviours if we want to survive, but trying to coax them into choosing greener choices is completely ineffective, and the coercive power of the state to make certain behaviours more expensive or outright banned and other behaviours less expensive or outright free will be absolutely necessary to get people actually behaving the way they need to behave if we want to survive. If you're concerned about climate change and want to build a mass movement about it, it will be far more effective to dedicate your energy to political change and electing politicians who are willing to use the power of the state to fight climate change on a societal level, than to spend that energy fighting plastic straws and plastic bags and single-occupancy vehicle use. I get that things aren't able to change instantly and someone who can't afford to live in a city because it's way too expensive have no choice but to commute from suburbs, but to just pretend that your excessive resource consumption is OK because it's not your INTENTION, it's all those corporations making you do it, seems like it's just going to shield people from actually thinking about how their lifestyle is a problem and organizing to change society so they don't have to keep living that lifestyle. Socialism that only focuses on workers ability to get a good wage, but does nothing to actually attack the greater problem of how we live, is going to end up just the same environmental hazard as our current system.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 29, 2019 08:25
|
|
|
Xaris posted:well yeah im not disagreeing, i just think lots of americans would still opt to drive because its 5 minutes faster and freedoms/racism, not even if its a matter of $2 bus ticket (or $0 bus ticket) vs $6 to drive. gas prices should be like $6-8/gallon like it is in europe and most of the world. get rid of lots of street parking, diet roads down to 1-lane each way, put in bus-rapid transit and light-rail and bike paths everywhere to replace them and connect all cities with high-speed rail i get extremely pissed when people talk about taking a 10 minute uber ride instead of taking a 25 minute train ride, rideshare is slowly bleeding public transit dry and its all because your loving lazy rear end doesn't want to plan ahead
|
|
#
¿
Apr 29, 2019 10:00
|
|
|
dream9!bed!! posted:What's funny is that in cities like Denver, all the minorities live in suburbs because they can't afford to live in the city center. And yet everyone is still stuck in this weird 90s white flight from the cities mentality.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 29, 2019 20:04
|
|
|
Notorious R.I.M. posted:Midgley tbh counterpoint: sending a nuke back to 1600s New England would solve all of these problems and more
|
|
#
¿
Apr 29, 2019 20:20
|
|
|
Stairmaster posted:won't we just get owned by cia funded death squads that's old hat, the cia is funding white people to make podcasts about milquetoast socialism so they are too busy posting online to do anything
|
|
#
¿
Apr 29, 2019 21:50
|
|
|
vyelkin posted:lmao nice we're about to get an 1,800 page report on biodiversity loss that says we're all hosed even if we stop climate change because we just cant stop paving over wild land *looks at the world’s leaders, stares into camera*
|
|
#
¿
May 3, 2019 16:19
|
|
|
Moridin920 posted:If you want something more specific, monkeywrenching is a cool and good way to turn things unprofitable which is what they really care about in the end. If you can spike a ton of trees from your hovel and gently caress up the machinery then great. If there's a pipeline near you then you can often take a wrench start turning things. It's illegal, obviously. if you really think about it spending all day on your employer's dime posting instead of working is basically monkeywrenching so we're helping demolish the system
|
|
#
¿
May 6, 2019 23:12
|
|
|
StabbinHobo posted:got the title, used the money to buy a condo in a walkable neighborhood across the street from a train station in cash, and then went ahead and retired* now since its not gonna be an option in 2050. besides retiring in your late 60s was always a poo poo deal anyway you just got to lay around and suffer some illnesses for a few years till you die.
|
|
#
¿
May 7, 2019 00:07
|
|
|
Ayn Randi posted:the thrust of it was why are people still working their regular rear end jobs and not living it up pursuing their dreams given that the former is inevitably a dead end and that is the answer. most people posting on a dead gay Internet forum have neither the skills nor the desire to eke out a subsistence life in the wilderness. people need money to continue remaining alive here and now even if in the future they will not have money or be alive a subsistence living in the wilderness will be even more difficult under the sort of climate change this thread is recognizing will happen. we've hosed the planet too much and it will take groups of people living in mututally beneficial situations to survive it. people already discuss why the idea that someone can just wait out the apocalypse in a bunker are going to end up hosed because at the end of the day surviving takes collaboration even in the worst of situations i'm going to keep working and just do so until i can go no longer. i don't see retirement as being an option for anyone under 40 (401ks steal all your poo poo in fees anyway and all of the gains people in BFC keep bragging about probably aren't even real except for the already well-off), but even beyond its feasibility, the thought of being there just doing nothing of any substance all day except living a life of leisure apparently just rots your brain as evidenced by all of the fox news watching chuds in The Villages (or for the boomer liberals, watching rachel maddow talk about russia nonstop)
|
|
#
¿
May 7, 2019 01:56
|
|
|
Moridin920 posted:Meanwhile Europe has millions of refugees from Syria due to a civil war largely brought on by a massive drought. ain't guatemalan refugees primarily fleeing because their farming land is utterly gutted by drought brought on by climate change? we're already seeing mass migration from climate change and its making us more fascist lol
|
|
#
¿
May 7, 2019 23:38
|
|
|
bawfuls posted:To be clear this was the worst of "carbon capture" tech. Their plan was to turn coal into gas, burn that to make power, capture the CO2 exhaust, and pump the CO2 down oil wells to sequester it but also improve oil yields. Even if working as designed it isn't a carbon-neutral process, let along a negative emitter. where are they getting the energy to do the co2 capture? it's probably not a net reduction in co2 once you account for energy barring entirely renewable or nuclear.
|
|
#
¿
May 8, 2019 00:53
|
|
|
Fried Watermelon posted:You forgot we are in the hell dimension so the menace is actually Canadian maybe canada should take this as a sign to repeat 1814
|
|
#
¿
May 8, 2019 09:31
|
|
|
but you don’t get it, we have to keep providing shareholders with value and growth
|
|
#
¿
May 8, 2019 17:25
|
|
|
not again, I hate it when threads get sent to the mod gulag and I can no longer remove them from the favorites
|
|
#
¿
May 8, 2019 18:46
|
|
|
the problem is even if we had full socialism with workers councils running everything tomorrow, how many people work in industries which have an outsized negative influence on the environment those people aren't going to quietly accept the loss of their employment and their wages because their jobs directly hurt the environment, they're going to push back against good environmental stewardship too
|
|
#
¿
May 8, 2019 21:30
|
|
|
bawfuls posted:hence the need for a federal jobs guarantee which can funnel people into work that is productive towards the goal of decarbonization and regeneration of the natural world Okay but what if they just do what they did when Obama told them they could retrain into clean energy jobs (yes, horseshit in the end) and they threw a massive fit saying they wanted to do what their parents and grandparents did and worked in the coal mines or the auto factories? They're still going to fight something simply because it's unfamiliar to them.
|
|
#
¿
May 8, 2019 21:41
|
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:https://beltmag.com/appalachia-coding-bootcamps/ That's a fair point but who's to say you can even create enough jobs in these places that will give everyone a decent living? If you don't create jobs and instead give everyone the basic survival necessities like housing, food, healthcare, and education that's great, but if you do nothing else people will sit around all day slowly losing their minds at being simply unnecessary or having no purpose in daily life. Are the workers councils society would be organized around going to be ok with this? Yes, there's plenty of infrastructure work that needs to be done all over the place, but infrastructure work isn't simply work anyone can pop in and out of. It's skilled labor that takes time for people to train in.
|
|
#
¿
May 8, 2019 22:18
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 26, 2024 13:09 |
|
|
jobson groeth posted:Don't mine jobs pay well because of decades of unionisation and fighting for workers rights? Could that possibly have any implication for how to get better pay for workers now? Those unions are going to try and protect their members' jobs as is their purpose. Good for the workers, but the unfortunate reality that their industry is a bad one isn't something the union is going to sacrifice their main mission for.
|
|
#
¿
May 8, 2019 22:23
|
|
