• WhatAmLemmy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      30
      ·
      1 year ago

      Luckily, we can choose to reject reality and believe whatever makes us feel better.

      I feel best believing the biosphere is gonna force humanity to “find out” for the last century of fuckin around with a recklessly unplanned terraform.

        • Striker@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          15
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          You can always find these people and make them find out. They are actively committing genocide against the human race.

            • minorsecond@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              6
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Why does it seem like there are a ton more conservatives here on Lemmy than there were on Reddit?

              • Bleeping Lobster@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                4
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                Happy to have them here. I almost never agree with them, but not only is it good to have your opinion challenged (though often wearying to have to repeat yourself), it’s good for THEM to have their opinion challenged too. Maybe only 1/100 will change their opinion after being challenged and seeing that their opinion is very much in the minority, but that’s 1/100 more than if we were all chatting away in a safe space with no opposing views.

                (and to be clear, no I don’t think shit like nazis, devout racists etc is an ‘opposing view’ that deserves any debate)

                • minorsecond@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  7
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  I don’t know how I feel about it. On one hand, it makes for less of an echo chamber. On the other hand, their thoughts are fucking stupid and it hurts my brain to see them.

              • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                5
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                1 year ago

                For every person that choose to leave reddit…

                There’s 5-10 “conservatives” who were ip banned and dont have a choice between Reddit and Lemmy.

              • ShakyPerception@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                They are not getting down-voted into nothingness for refusing to tow the party line.

                I appreciate the variety of opinions presented here. Plus (in my experience) the conversation has been civil.

                • Refurbished Refurbisher@lemmy.sdf.org
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  Yeah. I hardcore disagree with conservatives as a libertarian socialist myself, but I always want to hear what people who disagree with me (and people who agree with me) are saying, and engage in civil conversation with people who actually believe what they say.

                  The problem for me comes when shills (people who don’t believe what they say but get paid to say it) come into the conversation, or when people use outright disingenuous arguments (usually strawmans).

                • minorsecond@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  I mean, I think they’re definitely still in the minority. It seems like there’s a larger proportion of them here than on reddit. I see more of their opinions here. Maybe that’s just how the algo works here regarding upvotes & downvotes and how comments are displayed.

                • very smart Idiot@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Man I am kinda sorry, that I invade your worldview.

                  But rich people don’t have all their money stored in a vault like Dagobert Duck. It’s all stocks.

                  And boy, if one of the companies make losses, then their money goes downhill. It’s volatile.

                  And due to immense concurrence in innovation in the tech sector, every investor has a huge interest in innovation.

                  And with many investment, the start of a company is ensured.

                  The current capitalism is the system that works best.

                  Especially the US capitalism is one hell of a driver in innovation. I live in Germany and many companies wouldn’t be possible here. Even though we have capitalism, it’s much softer than its US counterpart.

                  The downside of course is poverty for cheaper labour.

                  And that’s brutal, but it’s the reality we live in.

                  Though I wouldn’t want to live in the US without healthcare, on the counter side I wouldn’t want to start a company here in Europe.

            • very smart Idiot@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              4
              ·
              1 year ago

              I give you that. Just a few were directly involved in innovation.

              But the rich do quite successfully create the framework conditions for innovation and development. Mostly driven by profit, but a world based purely on goodwill fails at the first doubter, the first who does not want to participate. So capitalism is what we got. And so far it has proven to be more resilient than other systems.

              • Refurbished Refurbisher@lemmy.sdf.org
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                The demand side of the economy is the consumer population. The consumers decide what they do and do not want to purchase, therefore driving demand.

                “Infinite need” implies that infinite supply could exist, or that infinite growth is sustainable, both of which are not true. Infinite need also doesn’t exist.

                I will argue that people (for example) needing clean water increases the demand for clean water. This is why companies like Nestle are profiteering off of selling bottled water, and why the CEO said that water should not be a human right.

                • very smart Idiot@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  arrow-down
                  4
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Wait. But someone has to bottle the water, right? Or is nestle supposed to do it for free?

                  Furthermore they have to compete with tap water. So the value of bottled water can only be the water itself + bottle + energy used to fill bottle + interest because their “service” is not for free. There is a justified interest to make a profit from one’s efforts.

                • very smart Idiot@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  English is not my primary language. I believe it was explosion motor what you have written at first.

                  And while I am no expert of the workings of a modern combustion engine, I do indeed have an understanding of how a combustion engine works.

                  I also know what reaction takes place and I know the average fuel consumption of an average European car.

    • angrymouse@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      1 year ago

      My uber driver said that global warming is actually true but have literally nothing about human influence.

      Some years ago these persons were saying that global warming was a hoax, now that only the human influence is a hoax.

      • LetMeEatCake@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        1 year ago

        I always hated that argument from people.

        Even if they’re right — which we all know they are not — it wouldn’t matter. Climate change is going to devastate human life if we do nothing. If, somehow, the source of the warming wasn’t human-caused, we’d still need to find a way to counteract it. It’s not our fault doesn’t prevent it from being our problem.

        • SkyeStarfall@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          “it has nothing to do with human influence”

          “Ok, then let’s prepare for the inevitable, strengthen infrastructure, prepare for mass migrations, improve our crops to sustain bigger variances in weather, evacuate people from flood danger zones, ensure our supply chain doesn’t collapse, fund poor countries so they can survive better, etc. You know, prepare for the crisis”

          :|

          >:(

        • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          I had a guy tell me once that maybe climate change is just the Earth getting closer to the sun, and we should send an astronaut up to the Hubble telescope so they can look through it and measure the distance to the sun…

          I’ve known this guy for over a decade, and it’s not that he’s stupid, he’s just completely ignorant about climate change and doesn’t put in any effort to learn about science.

      • atzanteol@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        1 year ago

        Ahhh, yes. The conservative backpedalling.

        It’s not happening. It’s happening but it’s all cyclical. It’s not cyclical this time but it’s not our fault. It’s our fault but global warming is good ackshually. Global warming is bad but there’s nothing we can do about it. We could do something about it but it’s too expensive/late. Maybe it’s not too expensive but THE CHINESE!

        • Juris_LLM@feddit.nl
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          1 year ago

          In stage one we say nothing is going to happen.

          Stage two, we say something may be about to happen, but we should do nothing about it.

          In stage three, we say that maybe we should do something about it, but there’s nothing we can do.

          Stage four, we say maybe there was something we could have done, but it’s too late now.

        • SaltySalamander@lemmy.fmhy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          but global warming is good ackshually.

          My dad unironically used this argument when we were talking about this last week. Some people have their heads so far up their own ass, it’s just sad.

      • corey389@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        The sad thing is we’re supposed to be in a ice age. The plant is further away from the sun about the same plane since the last ice age.

      • Sjatar@sjatar.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Had a argument with a person on YouTube, he thought that increased CO2 in the atmosphere would be beneficial. It would help plants grow better!

        Also that humans was not behind it.

      • Hup!@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        I’ve found a clever way to counter those folks is to say, “you might be right, and as the apex species it’s our moral obligation to seize control and protect the natural order of things for as long as we are able to slow the coming of hell on earth. Just like our right to shoot guns. Yee haw.”

    • Pisodeuorrior@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      What I hear some acquaintances say is like “who cares, I’ll go to the beach, turn the AC on, what’s the big deal” .

      As if the floods we had in Italy this year, or the wild fires, or the storms, or the draughts, or the Alps without snow, the glaciers disappeared, the sea turned green, the invasion of jellyfish weren’t connected.

      Some people, most people, are just too fucking stupid.

      • QuadratureSurfer@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        To be fair, I think both sides blow it out of proportion and that can stifle discussion. It won’t be the “end of the world” where everyone will die, but we will have the “end of the world” as we know it.

        I think one of the main points that need to be stressed to the kind of people in your example would be droughts.

        Droughts will continue to get worse and will affect everyone. With a bad enough drought, we won’t be able to feed entire cities. And that’s when things really start to fall apart.

        • persolb@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          As an example of this, the North America wildfires this year don’t really seem to be due to climate change… but people keep tying the ideas together.

          The extreme weather swings and the droughts are bad enough. And it is guaranteed to get worse. No reason to stretch the truth.

    • reverie@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      If you don’t choose to believe in it, it can’t hurt you. That’s verified fact

  • sgtgig@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    46
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    Next year is going to be worse. And the year after that even more so. And it will continue like that for decades, probably centuries.

    Even if I could tolerate dumbasses who don’t think CO2 emissions (and destruction of multiple natural CO2 sinks) are the driver of all this, it’s still infuriating that they don’t seem even concerned that the world is getting hotter and more deadly and are focused on some nonsense topics that no one in their right mind would give that much of a shit about.

    • TWeaK@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      It’s not just CO2, though. For example, SF6 is regulated under the Kyoto agreement and a much more potent greenhouse gas. SF6 is used extensively in high voltage electrical switchgear, simply to keep the size down by having busbars closer together. There’s so much of it out there that the small fraction that leaks is very significant. SF6 takes ~20 years to get from the ground and up into the upper atmosphere. Its use has been and continues to grow exponentially across the globe.

      • sgtgig@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Very interesting! Also methane, of course. Should have shorthanded to GHG.

  • SpringMango@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    46
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    This absolutely terrifies me, especially since so many people deny climate change. What is it going to be like in 5-10 years?

    • Texas_Hangover@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      21
      ·
      1 year ago

      How long have they been recording? I assume there’s no records from all that long ago. Being as how humans, and measurement especially are a fairly new thing.

        • cantstopthesignal@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          18
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          It’s actually worse than that. We are not in the predicted path, we are in one of the worst estimated predicted paths. Understandable as that comic was made in 2012.

      • SCB@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        1 year ago

        Per NASA, accurate global readings go back to 1880 and historical localized temperatures go back to the 1650s

    • migo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      This is super scary, more than the atmosphere. We know this was happening but this fast means accelerated extinctions and faster disruption of the world ecosystem.

      It would’ve been so easy to fix it if we didn’t live in a profit driven society.

      • Boddhisatva@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        It is. The oceans are the the Earth’s heat sink. They can absorb a tremendous amount of heat without changing temperature much. They have soaked up much of the heat captured by greenhouse gasses over the decades and these temperatures may suggest that they cannot absorb much more.

    • Ultraviolet@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      31
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      The most relevant part of the boiling frog experiment is the only frogs that stayed in the pot are the ones that had their brain removed prior to the experiment. This explains why climate denialists are all conservatives.

  • FapFlop@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    35
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    I used to be subbed to /r/collapse. I see world news is covering that for me.

    • sgtgig@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      1 year ago

      Personally I just want more trees and for big mega parking lots to be ripped out

      • Samuraipizzacat@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yes plz. We need more carbon sinks. Less trees means less oxygen, which means more co2 and more of these crazy weather patterns. There are cooperations that only see profit and sadly a lot see it only in the short term. Were is my green city where the walls have vegetation on them. Eco friendly and probably insulates pretty well.

    • SeaJ@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      1 year ago

      Recycling metals is good, especially aluminum. Recycling glass? Not bad. Recycling plastic? That is literally something the oil industry forced by having their resin codes look almost exactly like the recycling symbol. People understandingly confused the resin codes to mean it was recyclable and flooded recycling centers with plastic. So instead of throwing it in the garbage and telling people plastic is not recyclable, they did what they could to recycle it. Sorting and cleaning was a pain in the ass and made it not worth it…in the US. China was happy to accept it for a couple decades until a few years ago. Now most recycling centers only accept plastic with a reason code of 1 or 2. But people do not really check the number on the symbol. A lot of it is 5 which is not recyclable in the vast majority of places but people still toss that into recycling because they think it has the recycling symbol on it. So recycling centers have to sort that shit out and send it to the landfill. It is a massive waste of resources that the oil companies are fine with since people think they are doing their part.

      Recycling in general though was not supposed to be a fix for climate change. While recycling things like aluminum is significantly more energy efficient than mining, the bigger issue there is the mine itself.

    • SCB@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Recycling does not have any impact on climate change and was never suggested to have any impact on climate change

        • SCB@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          If we cure climate change tomorrow and do nothing about garbage/sustainability in packaging, we all still die - its just more disgusting.

          Captain Planet focuses on the entirety of the environment, not just climate. That’s why he whooshes bulldozers into the air in the Amazon.

          • Coreidan@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            We’re all dead no matter what. Climate change or not, humans don’t have a good ending.

              • Coreidan@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                4
                ·
                1 year ago

                Oh ok. What happens when the sun explodes? What happens when the universe collapses?

                Go on keep strong disagreeing.

                • SCB@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  The universe “collapsing” has fallen largely out of favor as a theory. The sun isn’t going to explode, at all.

    • dx1@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      In general I feel like no one really takes a holistic view of this and everyone just points fingers. If indeed all the models are correct and human-produced CO2 is causing global warming, it’s not just “corporations” or “the rich” or just individuals, it’s the whole of the machine of humanity hacking away at the tree branch they’re sitting on, and we need to radically shift our energy production to eliminate greenhouse gas externalities, and ideally figure out, what’s it called, CO2 sequestration or whatever, to bring it back to normal.

      And to the degree we can’t shift immediately, we shouldn’t just be burning fossil fuels towards ends we don’t even need, like dumb luxury goods or just driving in circles. It does come down to all of us as individuals - some of us have more power than others (yeah, more or less proportionally to wealth), but the buck has to stop somewhere.

      • PersnickityPenguin@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Of course it is, but consumers generally don’t make the decisions about resource procurement and manufacturing. They only drive the demand. However, demand is also heavily shaped by both the cultural zeitgeist as well as marketing, which is in turn funded by corporations.

        So in effect, it all comes down to corporations.

        • dx1@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Well - corporations are funded by everyone, under the legal framework of the ostensibly democratic government, to which extent it’s not democratic, it’s at the mercy of the population choosing to continue perpetuating its existence. My point here is that the entire thing is just humanity working in a self-destructive way, and even when there are power imbalances in practice, real power - think of it like potential energy in physics - is truly democratic.

          • PersnickityPenguin@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Corporations are certainly NOT democratic. If anything, their corporate hierarchy of management and ownership is… capitalist. It’s a top-down structure that concentrates wealth in the ha ds of a few to the detriment of the workers, always resulting in class conflict.

            Democracies allow them to exist because it’s the only efficient way for civilians to organize profitable industry.

  • HeavenAndHell@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    23
    ·
    1 year ago

    Someone at work said “If climate change is real, then why don’t rich people sell their beach properties?”

    And before you ask, yes they are a boomer.

    • bloopinator@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      19
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      Just about as much time as the Democrat candidate spends actually doing anything about it.

      US politicians will probably mandate that people can’t set their AC below 80 degrees before they dare stop subsidizing the oil industry.

  • Magzmak@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    24
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    I’m ready for companies to do their ad campaigns about how they are saving the earth with their new policies and products.

    Fuck it, please just profit from saving the earth. I dont care if its just doing what we’ve been asking them to do for the past 30yrs.

    • Blackmist@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      21
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Oh, they’ll do the ad campaigns and raise the prices in the name of green-ness.

      Don’t expect them to actually contribute in any meaningful way though.

      They know the game over screen is coming as much as we do, they’re just going for the high score first.

      • TWeaK@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Oh, they’ll do the ad campaigns and raise the prices in the name of green-ness.

        A classic example of this is electric utilities charging more and saying “all our electricity comes from renewable sources!” while ignoring the fact that renewable energy is typically cheaper for them to buy on the market.

        • Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Nothing wrong with saving money by doing something objectively good, so that’s frankly a lousy example…

          • TWeaK@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            1 year ago

            You misunderstand. I’m saying the end user energy company justifies being on the more expensive side by advertising that they use renewables, but actually when they buy electricity renewables is cheaper for them. So they’re paying less but charging the end user more.

            The cost saving of renewables is rarely passed on to the consumer.

            • Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              1 year ago

              Ah ok, NOW I see what you’re getting at! That IS pretty scummy!

              Still not as scummy as still relying on fossil fuel now that there’s literally no good reason to, though…

              • TWeaK@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                I mean there is some reason not to, at least until proper alternatives are set up. I work in the HV industry, and in my opinion we’ve rushed to close larger, relatively efficient coal plants and replace them with smaller, far less efficient diesel and gas generators that can be hidden behind tall fences in industrial estates. These pollute far more per MW than coal plants, but they’re out of sight, out of mind.

                We definitely should be going hard into current renewable technology to fill out demand. That’s the fastest way to net zero in many regions. There is something to be said for big rotating generators though, ie large turbines, as these provide voltage and frequency stability - renewables are often inverter driven, even wind turbines, so these are always following the grid and can destabilise if voltage or frequency goes. Meanwhile, a large machine has inertia so it will want to keep spinning and maintain the same output when large loads switch in and out. This sort of thing can be provided by nuclear power. So if we build lots of renewables now to get clean, then build nuclear to fill out, that might be the best solution.

                • Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  I could go into detail about the many ways in which you’re wrong, but it’s frankly not worth the time and effort, especially with the detailed back and forth that would inevitably follow, so I’ll just cut to the chase and summarise:

                  NO

  • Smacks@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    20
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    I’ve essentially given up that our planet, or the human race is gonna survive another few generations. It literally all feels so empty and I have no desire to have kids who will ultimately have to live through the boiling temperatures. Either population collapse, or the planet dying off will result in society falling apart.