32 ms·

I've been seeing content on Tiktok where even 100 miles away they're seeing small dead fish which is apparently according to the folks making the videos a massi

• m000 4y ago
  A number of rescued foxes and other wild animals were also affected in the nearby area [1]. [1] https://www.newsweek.com/fox-dies-owners-arms-after-ohio-train-crash-releases-toxic-gas-1780529 https://www.newsweek.com/fox-dies-owners-arms-after-ohio-tra...
  • ASalazarMX 4y ago
    [flagged]
    • adammichaelc 4y ago
      [flagged]
      • joseph_grobbles 4y ago
        [dead]
        • frereubu 4y ago
          https://samf.substack.com/p/its-not-a-dead-cat https://samf.substack.com/p/its-not-a-dead-cat
      • katbyte 4y ago
        jokes are discouraged here.
• smcl 4y ago
  Are you: - weary of these getting downplayed (pron. wee-ree = you are tired of it) - wary of these getting downplayed (pron. way-ray = you are suspicious of it)
  • missedthecue 4y ago
    I think people combine leery and wary in their mind and end up with weary, which they don't intend. I see it a lot. In the case of the parent comment however, weary does work.
    • whamlastxmas 4y ago
      The rare occasion that it does work both ways
    • nerdponx 4y ago
      And/or they've seen the word "weary" and assume it's pronounced like "wary", so they spell the word "wary" as "weary".
      • smcl 4y ago
        This is it - if you hear the word "wary" and know the verb "to wear" before encountering the written word "weary" it's totally understandable to assume that is how "wary" is written and to mix them up. What I wanted to do with my comment is show this without coming across as a mean or pedantic - especially since in the context both work ok. I've no idea if I accomplished that, I probably come across as a dick but I hope I don't.
  • BalinKing 4y ago
    Isn’t “grow weary” a common phrase, though?
    • ska 4y ago
      so is "grow wary", which is the potential problem.
• mbostleman 4y ago
  I'm finding it extremely hard to separate signal from noise in the social and legacy media spheres right now. I'm waiting for things to settle.
  • seafoam 4y ago
    Yeah, I used to do that. Then I realized that it is always a conspiracy theory until it is too late. If you are potentially impacted, you have to do your own homework, and learn from your mistakes.
    • s1artibartfast 4y ago
      I think it is still a good heuristic that most people should follow. Step 1: do I need to have an informed opinion Step 2: Do I need that opinion NOW Step 3: WHAT do I need to know NOW There is a vast amount of conspiracy theorizing that people could avoid by following this approach.
      • deleted 4y ago
        [deleted]
      • pathartl 4y ago
        Absolutely. I live in a completely different state and I'm pretty unaffected by this whole tragedy/negligence. I could sit and speculate about what actually happened, but what does that do other than spend energy on something that I'm not actually involved with?
        • s1artibartfast 4y ago
          Yeah, There is something to be said about genuine curiosity, but in the face of a emotionally changed misinformation blizzard the best option is to take a step back. If you decide you are curious and actually want to care about railroad safety, dont react to the current crisis, "hit the books" and read some actually informative material about past events.
• anotherman554 4y ago
  "I've been seeing content on Tiktok where even 100 miles away they're seeing small dead fish which is apparently according to the folks making the videos a massive red flag." I wouldn't bother watching a Tiktok video unless the video maker is an environmental professional. Otherwise this is just the blind leading the blind. Here's a legal definition of environmental professional used by developers when they do a environmental assessment, from Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phase_I_environmental_site_assessment https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phase_I_environmental_site_ass...: Someone with: a current Professional Engineer's or Professional Geologist's license or registration from a state or U.S. territory with 3 years equivalent full-time experience; or a Baccalaureate or higher degree from an accredited institution of higher education in a discipline of engineering or science and 5 years equivalent full-time experience; or have the equivalent of 10 years full-time experience.
  • vkou 4y ago
    You are correct about that, but it's also worth noting that there's also no point listening to a corporate press release that's telling you everything is fine, either, because we don't put press officers in prison for lying.
    • mauvehaus 4y ago
      We also usually don't have environmental professionals also working as press officers. If the press person even consulted with an environmental professional, the content has been filtered by both their lack of domain knowledge and their desire to put a good spin on things.
      • vkou 4y ago
        I will say the same thing about an environmental professional on the company payroll. The problem I'm concerned about isn't ignorance, it is cynical CYA-ism and a giant conflict of interest. You need a culturally-trusted institution to handle this sort of thing. I am not sure Ohio currently has one that can handle this, so I expect to not know anything until the lawsuits settle over the next decade.
• EGreg 4y ago
  Many peopl say that capitalism should be laidsez-faire and government should leave us alone. But actually, government is on the SIDE of capital and corporations, and they constantly work together to keep the public distracted and divided enough to actually force these corporations to change: https://magarshak.com/blog/?p=362 https://magarshak.com/blog/?p=362
• laurentbh 4y ago
  yeah, it's not that bad when you are in DC or on Wall Street
• ly3xqhl8g9 4y ago
  A tad of Yes, Minister wisdom [1]: "The Four Stage Strategy: Stage 1. Nothing is going to happen. Stage 2. Something may happen, but we should do nothing about it. Stage 3. Maybe we should do something about it, but there's nothing we can do. Stage 4. Maybe there was something we could have done, but it's too late now." [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nSXIetP5iak https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nSXIetP5iak
  • AutumnCurtain 4y ago
    [flagged]
    • gnulinux 4y ago
      Anything involving government really. This is the decades old "starve the beast" [1] mindset. Let's make sure government is absolutely ineffective at every step of the way, and then later point out how ineffective the government is and propose an even more ineffective, under-resourced government. It's a vicious cycle, and a self-fulfilled prophecy. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starve_the_beast https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starve_the_beast
      • olivermarks 4y ago
        The argument against hyper capitalism causing more and more derailments is credible if you look into 'precision scheduled railroading' practices, aka shaving expense by eliminating unnecessary costs and 'optimizing Assets'. Sadly this has little to do with 'conservatives' or 'the left' and a lot more to do with our apolitical global oligarchy who own the politicians in power and many lobbying groups including 'climate change' and environmentalists who are strangely silent on this major disaster as they were when the Nord Stream pipeline was destroyed.
        • briantakita 4y ago
          Climate Change & the war on CO2 has sucked the oxygen out of the room wrt pollution with dangerous chemicals. Many in the environmental community are optimizing a single metric, CO2 emissions, & not focusing on the myriad of chemicals that cause widespread ecological damage. That coupled with the ongoing doomsday hysteria over CO2, it is easy to lose focus on pressing issues & the complexities in dealing with these other environmental issues. The core tension here is should we narrow focus on a single metric or widen focus on the entire system? Also, Que bono for the different approaches? Instead of focusing so much on CO2, it would benefit humanity to adopt a more well rounded approach that addresses all pollutants, prioritizing the safe handling of extremely toxic chemicals & reducing the amount of toxic waste emitted by industry. Also, it would be helpful to take the approach that novel substances should be proven safe instead of assuming these substances are safe until proven unsafe.
• RajT88 4y ago
  > It seems to constantly follow the pattern of people saying "It's not that bad" and then only years later do we actually see the horrific health and environmental effects of these sorts of things play out when it's too late for the folks that have been impacted. I recently learned that smaller versions of this even happen in the Lasalle/Peru area in Illinois with some regularity. It makes the local news, and maybe some Chicago news, but hardly a blip on national news. And this is people telling me they live miles away from the incident, and are experiencing fuzzy orange snow. It's curious, because this is getting more press coverage, and at the same time the conspiracy wingnuts are claiming the press is covering it up.
  • iso1631 4y ago
    Imagine a world where journalists have enough time in the day to participate in a coverup
    • samstave 4y ago
      >"journalists" You keep using that word. I do not think that word means what you think it means. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q_hGKT5FI78 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q_hGKT5FI78
      • RajT88 4y ago
        There's a lot of self-styled "Citizen Journalists" these days of wildly variable quality. See: Jessica Reed Krause
  • TurkishPoptart 4y ago
    Better to be a labelled conspiracy wingnut, as someone who maintains justified suspicion of those who hold power in our society (media, corporate barons, politicians), than to be too trusting and assuming all is well.
    • rootusrootus 4y ago
      > labelled conspiracy wingnut, as someone who maintains justified suspicion If your suspicions were justified then by definition you wouldn't be a conspiracy wingnut. But most of the wingnuts think everything is a conspiracy, which makes them no more useful than a broken clock.
• kritiko 4y ago
  Moral Mazes has many good examples of how this happens. Aaron Swartz quoted one excerpt about an industrial accident towards the bottom of this blog: http://www.aaronsw.com/weblog/bizethics http://www.aaronsw.com/weblog/bizethics Management deferred replacement of a $6M battery and the cost of its failure was 100-150M. >People are always calculating how others will see the decisions they make. … They know that they have to gauge not just the external … market consequences of a decision, but the internal political consequences. And sometimes you can make the right market decision, but it can be the wrong political decision.
• panick21_ 4y ago
  > It seems to constantly follow the pattern of people saying "It's not that bad" and then only years later do we actually see the horrific health and environmental effects Yeah but most of the time the panic spread on social media actually does get it wrong. I am familiar with nuclear matter and the amount of insane social media post about any little nuclear thing is pretty crazy and have no scientific bases.
• kevin_nisbet 4y ago
  > In general I grow super weary of companies and the government downplaying these sorts of things. It seems to constantly follow the pattern of people saying "It's not that bad" and then only years later do we actually see the horrific health and environmental effects of these sorts of things play out when it's too late for the folks that have been impacted. This isn't really the same, but I've been thinking in similar areas a lot lately in the context of climate change, and the debate around climate change, although debating any topic doesn't change many minds. If you bet on the scientific majority around climate change being wrong / non-existent / something we can't control, and end up being wrong, then the worst case scenario we make the planet uninhabitable (I'm going to the extreme here). If you bet that climate change exists and is man-made and end up wrong, we've unnecessarily invested a huge amount of money into reducing pollution, more efficient buildings / manufacturing / transport, and reduce the dependence on a limited set of oil producers to be able to hold supply of oil over nations. For something more immediate like health concerns with this derailment, is should the officials be more willing to be wrong? And message as such?
  • danaris 4y ago
    Unfortunately, the problem here is that for the individual politicians, if you bet that climate change exists, the worst case scenario is that the big money turns against you and you lose office. If you bet that climate change doesn't exist or can't be fixed, so we might as well go on with the status quo, the worst case is that you get voted out by environmentally-conscious voters...after getting scads of campaign contributions from the big money, and with a good chance of getting a cushy lobbying post from them afterwards. These are the incentives we need to change.
  • junofan 4y ago
    You’re betting other people’s money in the second case, and they have a say.
    • bakuninsbart 4y ago
      That money was granted to them as a reward for contributing to society. Society has a say in how it can be spent.
• swordsmith 4y ago
  > I've been seeing content on Tiktok where even 100 miles away they're seeing small dead fish which is apparently according to the folks making the videos a massive red flag. It's interesting that you mention that you saw this on TikTok. In the last two days, the Ohio train derailment has become one of the hottest topics in ALL of Chinese social media (Weibo, tiktok, Little red book, etc), 10 days after its happening. I was confused when my Chinese friends started asking me about this event, which I saw on the news the day it happened. Why the huge lag? Oh yeah, because of the Chinese "balloons" -- nationalist citizens are mad that CCP has taken a "soft" stance in the face of US shooting down Chinese balloons. Chinese official statements are along the lines of "how dare you shoot down my balloons, they are just passing through on accident", then stating that American balloons have entered Chinese airspace previously and that's unacceptable. This entire thing is a mess, so here comes the typical media manipulation to focus both Chinese and non-Chinese negative attention on America, even though American media has been giving this event no less attention than something like this usually receives.