4 ms·
Awesome, good for them. More should oppose the insane climate propaganda and not cave to ideological mob pressure.
by PKop 3y ago
Awesome, good for them. More should oppose the insane climate propaganda and not cave to ideological mob pressure.
- andsoitis 3y ago> insane climate propaganda In a nutshell, what is the climate propaganda?
- blooalien 3y ago"Climate propaganda" is any statement that places environment, life, or literally anything else above the idea that our filthy rich overlords desperately need more money even if it kills us all. More money for the filthy rich is the only thing that matters in the entire Universe. If you believe otherwise, you're a filthy heathen heretic hippie tree hugger.
- smolder 3y agoThe ideology of wanting humans to not send themselves to extinction like we're doing to so many other species. How horrible!
- monero-xmr 3y agoHumans will not send themselves to extinction if the earth gets a few degrees warmer. That is the propaganda. We survived ice ages, and with our modern technology we will survive warming. I'm not saying there won't be negatives, but to say we are all going to die, is absurd to the extreme. Unfortunately that is common today, however it is merely one in a long line of apocalyptic movements which have been common in every century in recorded history.
- smolder 3y agoI didn't say we are all going to die. I still have hope that despite all the recalcitrant folks constantly bemoaning every attempt at collective action to curb the coming problems that we will survive. But it won't be thanks to said people crying "climate propaganda!" The attitude espoused by OP here is worse than useless. It's thanks to propaganda from ideologues who OPPOSE collective action on climate change that there are huge swaths of people who think it's not an issue at all, or some kind of commie plot. Stop the buffoonery, and stop demonizing people who want to prevent future suffering and ecological degradation.
- PKop 3y agoWe can't all make it either, that is utopian thinking. There will be winners and losers.
- monero-xmr 3y ago> I didn't say we are all going to die. But you said: > The ideology of wanting humans to not send themselves to extinction It seems pretty clear you are implying we will literally go extinct because of global warming. This is crazy.
- smolder 3y agoThe nuance you and others are missing is that I didn't say it was a definite thing. I didn't even say it was likely. I implied that the ideology he was complaining about is made up of people who don't think we should accelerate towards extinction: not an extreme stance at all. Given even a slight, non-zero risk of us doing that, if you have the stance that we shouldn't, it's reasonable to take steps to reduce the risk. I could have been way more succinct and less sarcastic with my original comment, but it hardly seems worth the effort when replying to a post like theirs.
- vasco 3y agoThe stance is extreme because it's doomsday speak, of the kind only people on top of a box in the park used to say when I was a kid. Humans will be here, maybe less of us, on boats, in constant air-con personal pods, whatever, we'll figure something out. We're not going extinct any time soon unless someone decides to launch nuclear weapons.
- waiseristy 3y agoOf course the globe warming 3 degrees isn’t going to cause human extinction. But it will kill hundreds of millions due to inevitable war and genocide over the changing landscape. Thinking that mass famine/flooding/heat events in Africa, India, or South America isn’t going to affect you is incredibly naive. Instability ain’t good, and we can’t just welcome it with open arms. Shit that happens in Wuhan, Donetsk and elsewhere do affect you
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- missedthecue 3y agoGlobal warming is going to increase food supply because carbon is an input to photosynthesis. Several studies have shown that increased carbon in the atmosphere increases crop yields and increases water usage efficiency by reducing plant transpiration. https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/2016/nasa-study-rising-carbon-dioxide-levels-will-help-and-hurt-crops https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/2016/nasa-study-rising-... On social media I've noticed a trend where people attribute every bad thing that immediately comes to mind to climate change. War, extinction, famine, disease and pestilence, I've even seen people confidently throw increases of rape in there when describing the impending hellscape sure to befall humanity in the next x years due to climate change, citing some very dubious chain of correlative logic. The truth is that a warming planet will change things but not all changes are bad for humans, and those that are bad are not all catastrophic or unmanageable. I think it will do everyone some good to take a step back and look at things with an analytical and curious eye, and reject the urge to panic or spread addictive but harmful fear porn.
- waiseristy 3y ago> For wheat and soybean crops, in terms of yield the median negative impacts are fully compensated, and rice crops recoup up to 90 percent and maize up to 60 percent of their losses. That’s quite a buried lede. At best it evens out all the bad effects I honestly don’t know how to reconcile our worldviews here, and I envy your optimism. But “just wingin it” isn’t what brings about good change. Those with curious and analytical eyes should see that our actions vis a vis climate change and other things have consequences. Good or bad, who really knows. But why are we committing ourselves before knowing? Seems pretty dumb
- brewdad 3y agoHumans didn't exist during the last Ice Age. We've never survived an Ice Age and you certainly can't say anything for certain about our future. Technology has gotten into this mess. We can hope it also brings our salvation but I wouldn't bet the species on it.
- monero-xmr 3y agoYes we did? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Last_Glacial_Period https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Last_Glacial_Period
- userbinator 3y agoThat's what they want you to believe. Harnessing fear itself has proven to be a powerful tool of controlling the masses. Realise the truth and it will set you free.
- smolder 3y agoThis has strong Poe's law vibes. If you're serious: pretend I sent you an eye-roll emoji.
- PKop 3y agoWhichever group/nation abstains from consuming better energy sources will just get run over by the the nations that don't make that mistake. ESG et all are national suicide pacts, look at Europe. They are declining, and will be a weaker power as they use less energy than their competitors. Human history and the human condition is conflict and competition, you have to win the game against others, not voluntarily lose it.
- smolder 3y agoThis is kind of a shallow take. Building for sustainability makes a nation STRONGER in the face of declining resources. It's investing in the future.
- steve_adams_86 3y agoIn a global system like the one we have, is there really only one game to play in order to succeed?
- specialist 3y agoTransitioning from natural gas to renewables will make Germany weaker?
- nixass 3y agoNo but moving away from nuclear power will.
- specialist 3y agoJust checked and yes indeed, the German govt has and will continue to shut them down. Darn. I really thought they were going to pause and keep them running, for a while longer at least. I don't pay much attention to stuff outside of the USA. We've got so many problems of our own. But, in case you're interested, I did find this episode interesting. "Germany's current energy situation & its past energy choices. A conversation with German energy economist Claudia Kemfert." 2022/11/09 https://www.volts.wtf/p/germanys-current-energy-situation https://www.volts.wtf/p/germanys-current-energy-situation
- missedthecue 3y agoThere is no threat of extinction, this is silly.
- MentallyRetired 3y agoYES, let the fascism wash over us. More profit. Forget the people and the polar bears. As long as the imaginary bank account number grows and grows and we're beating the other rich people, none of that stuff matters. We're building a rocketship anyways and we won't be here much longer. We'll leave them all gasping for air in the wake of our plumage. Yesssss Bezos Yes.
- harry8 3y agoYeah look there's nothing in the above I'm actively disagreeing with here. What I am disagreeing with is the way you've said that. It isn't productive. It doesn't shed any light on things. It doesn't assume the best of the person you're replying to. It goes nowhere. There's plenty of other places where this kind of response is welcome. Also @dang will get cross and we can't have that.
- js8 3y agoThere is this liberal idea (nicely explained in https://slatestarcodex.com/2018/01/24/conflict-vs-mistake/ https://slatestarcodex.com/2018/01/24/conflict-vs-mistake/) that all disagreements are about facts, i.e. if we all understood reality well enough, we would surely agree (mistake outlook). But some disagreements are about values. That's the conflict outlook. In this case, some people simply value ecological future more than short-term profit.
- harry8 3y agoThere are as many different ways of disagreeing as there are pairs of people. I don't know what this kind of naked abuse with no substance achieves but whatever it is, there are /plenty/ of places to do it. It's been a thing discouraged here in house rules. Making no progress without it seems no worse than making no progress with it to me. I find especially when I just /know/ I'm completely correct about something important and feel emotionally engaged in that, someone is right there to use that to exploit it. So even though I'm right, and obviously so about something deeply, deeply important to the world, remaining calm and rational has value for me and for the proper prosecution of the thing I believe in so strongly. The road to hell is paved with good intentions and all that. Ymmv. Anger and rage have their place.