7 ms·

Yeah when 99% of people don't care about this sort of issue or are unaware of it and keep cutting trees down it doesn't matter if a few people are doing all the

Yeah when 99% of people don't care about this sort of issue or are unaware of it and keep cutting trees down it doesn't matter if a few people are doing all they can. I go home to my parents' neighborhood in Florida and more and more of the trees are disappearing in a 100-year-old neighborhood. It's not even new houses being built. These are 50-year old houses. There is 1 house in the entire neighborhood (has to be at least 1,000 houses) that had a "no mow may" sign for the bees and isn't a purely St. Augustine grass yard. This is an upper-income higher education neigborhood too. The culture is changing to be even less tree friendly from what it was a few decades ago. Honestly I don't have hope in general for our future environment. I do not think we will be able to stop what is coming (both temperature-wise and species-wise). Humans are desperate for money and unfortunately making money means making things as easy and convenient as possible to get/buy.

flagrant_taco 3y ago
The planet will bounce back one way or another, short of a global nuclear war I don't see how we can do more damage than the asteroid that took out the dinausaurs. Humans just may not be here to enjoy it if we can't get out of the way and stop consuming natural resources for the sake Of GDP growth.
- bobbylarrybobby 3y ago
  Right, no one cares about the planet, and rightfully so. The planet will be fine. It's humankind that's at stake.
  - guerrilla 3y ago
    And all the ecosystems and species we depend on*
  - bmitc 3y ago
    > The planet will be fine. It's humankind that's at stake. This is oft repeated, but it fails short of anything meaningful. The planet, as in a rock floating around in space, will be fine, yes. But what about the untold amount of species of plants and animals that are suffering and will continue to suffer in our wake?
    - zerodensity 3y ago
      They will adapt or die and something will replace them. Diversity will go down for a while and then back up again. It's almost impossible to sterilize Earth and as long as something lives on it will eventually flourish again. It will never be the same but something else will flourish.
      - sgu999 3y ago
        Isn't it part of the question of whether life existed on Mars? If it did and got wiped out, it would mean that something else doesn't always flourish.
      - Theory42 3y ago
        True, but we're talking about millions of years of possible desolation before that happens.
    - flagrant_taco 3y ago
      Hopefully many of them outlast us regardless of what stupid things we do, but yes this is a very real risk and we could take down a huge portion of diverse life on the planet with us.
    - kjkjadksj 3y ago
      All of life comes at the cost of other life, whether it be a human or a wolf or a kudzu vine.
- adrianN 3y ago
  Humans are the only chance Terran life has of surviving the death of the sun.
  - DontchaKnowit 3y ago
    are you so sure? there are intelligent species other than humans. Perhaps they are simply human-like species in their nascent evolutionary state.
    - adrianN 3y ago
      It's unlikely that a second industrial revolution can happen, since we already consumed all the easily mined resources.
      - debaserab2 3y ago
        Only the ones useful to us
      - oefnak 3y ago
        But we left them on top, right?
        mtsr 3y ago
        Materials yes, but easily accessible sources of large amounts of energy are mostly gone.
        zerodensity 3y ago
        I mean they will still have the sun.
        badpun 3y ago
        Producing solar panels requires an advanced technical civilization being in place. You cannot jump from middle ages tech to producing solar panels with skipping dependence on fossil fuels in the intermediate steps.
- bmitc 3y ago
  Of what use is this argument? It always comes up. The entire planet is suffering.
  - flagrant_taco 3y ago
    I can't speak for anyone else that may have said something similar, but for me this is an observation rather than an argument. I don't want this to be what happens, I simply haven't seen any meaningful number of people actually willing to make the types of changes that would reverse this course. Getting rid of or drastically reducing oil use would be a huge step in the right direction, and probably one of the most meaningful things we could do today. That will never happen by choice though, we're way too dependant on cheap energy and the conceniences (and economics) it provides.
- aziaziazi 3y ago
  It’s not about the planet being fine or not, it’s about the planet being a nice place to live for our descents. Your ascends made a nice job to get you a better life. Removing birds species won’t help in that direction, as well as a ton of other direct and indirect stuff we make happening here.
  - flagrant_taco 3y ago
    I completely agree and in no way do I like what we are collectively doing to this planet. I try to live a pretty minimal life and limit my impact on the environment. But the fact is that we seem hell-bent on running the planet for our own gain and it would take a miracle at this point for us to pull out of the tailspin, even if we actually had the will. I can only speak to the people I've engaged with in the US and parts of Europe, but people aren't really willing to make the changes that really seem most important to me. Drastically reducingoil use, for example, would make a big difference but would destroy the GDP measure that many countries value so highly and would cause a huge shock to most every industry in the world. We've grown too dependant on industrialized food, easy access to products, and the power of leveraging cheap energy to go back to doing most things manually or with the help of animal power.
    - sgu999 3y ago
      Once you've established that and, luckily, don't fall into the camp of the ones who don't give a damn and just profit. How do you cope? It's a very depressing thought that puts in perspective absolutely everything, including reproduction.
      - flagrant_taco 3y ago
        That's a great question and really the ultimate trick. For me the situation is oddly a bit of optimism and hope in an otherwise totally screwed up system. I find peace in the idea that the planet will go on one way or another, if we humans cause too much damage it will get rid of us like a bad cold and move on. That can absolutely be depressing as well, but that's where I have to remind myself that the environment functions on the scale of thousands of years rather than decades. This planet and the life on it is an absolutely amazing thing, and amazingly resilient. I hope we can pull out of this nosedive so that we can continue to see what humans come up with, but I rest assured that we can't literally destroy the planet and that "the end" for us will be well down the road. In the meantime, I just try to do my part to minimize my impact and partner with nature rather than fight it. I want to enjoy my life, and for me part of that is pushing myself to the point of some frustration and discomfort. I live in a small house with simple utilities and hope to have it off grid soon. Yes I still have a car and buy some things from Amazon or the grocery store, but I do without when I can and at least a few times a week I get annoyed that I don't have more storage in my tiny house. I figure if I'm feeling a bit of that pain I must be doing something right and can better enjoy the good parts of life.
- bryanrasmussen 3y ago
  >Humans just may not be here to enjoy it if we can't get out of the way and stop consuming natural resources for the sake Of GDP growth. Humans may be the only species to understand the concept of a species, and it seems some members don't care at all if the whole species disappears, as long as 'the planet' is fine. Intelligence may be an evolutionary dead end.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
- PhasmaFelis 3y ago
  Nobody said otherwise. I don't understand why someone always has to respond to climate apocalypse discussion with "but actually the planet will be fine."
  - flagrant_taco 3y ago
    The GP I was responding to did actually allude to a future of inevitable climate issues and species collapse. For me the fact that the planet will love on regardless is a sign of optimism though, not doomsday apocalypse or some kind of perverse nihilism. It's like looking up at the stars, it reminds me of how small we are and that we're just a part of history rather than the start and end of it.
eastbound 3y ago
I suspect it’s common that my city (France) requires 1 thick-trunk tree per ~80 square meter (9m x 9m). Also there is a ratio of concrete-vs-earth of 10% (posh neighborhoods), 15% or 20%, and parking spots per living surface. My yard is 30x50m => 1500sqm => 1275sqm must be kept as earth, I must have 18 trees (thick-trunk) (and 2 parking spots and the street must have 0.5 guest parking spot).
- 1over137 3y ago
  Wait, you have tree requirements, but you also have mandatory car parking requirements!?
  - dryrun 3y ago
    I don't know about the tree requirement, as I don't believe I have that in my hometown, but we do have a mandatory 2 parking slots rule, within the limits of the property. The idea is to ease the parking space (less traffic jams, less people turning around searching for a place, less pollution also), avoid cars being on sidewalks and general security (better view of the surroundings when driving)
    - sgu999 3y ago
      Yes, abstracting away that if people can conveniently park and use their car, they will use it for absolutely everything. That's why France is also champion of surburbia in Europe... We're are ruining our landscapes and cities with single family homes, only for that stupid summer bbq we've all seen on every bloody ad since childhood, and PSA's profit of course.
      - eastbound 3y ago
        As soon as people have a house, they will have a car. Be realist. Building without parking space means they’ll invade the street parking. On the other hand, I know places where companies can’t rent a house, they must stick to commercial-zoned areas. THAT’s enforcing the 10km-every-morning-to-go-to-work rule. But again, suburbia is a pleasant lifestyle, we wouldn’t have to ruin landscapes if we could live downtown, but you guys make it horrible (Oh, hi Grégory Doucet). Sometimes intolerance bears a cost.
debaserab2 3y ago
It's common in a 50+ year old neighborhood for trees to be diseased or dead or have a root system that is growing into the foundation of buildings or other infrastructure. It's not that people don't want trees, it's that people don't want trees that are a liability during the next storm (which I'm guessing is especially true in a place like florida).
- bmitc 3y ago
  But just think about that. Imagine someone just up and moving into your yard, without your permission, and then they decide to bulldoze your house because it's getting in the way of <x>. I do understand the practicalities and constraints of homeownership, but I do wish we, as a species, did a bit more thinking ahead and had more empathy for literally anything else besides us.
  - debaserab2 3y ago
    I doubt that it's people lack empathy, it's more that if a tree root starts cracking up your concrete or a dead branch falls on your roof in a storm it will likely cost you a lot more than just dealing with the tree in the first place.
    - giantg2 3y ago
      It might cost you your life if it's a large tree.
  - giantg2 3y ago
    "Imagine someone just up and moving into your yard, without your permission, and then they decide to bulldoze your house because it's getting in the way of <x>." Sure, it sucks. That's called eminent domain.
- jjallen 3y ago
  it doesn't matter why people don't want trees. It's humans sacrificing trees for their needs/wants that matters. It's getting rid of trees and other natural things in general that is the problem. Humans' mere existence causes this.
ztetranz 3y ago
>There is 1 house in the entire neighborhood (has to be at least 1,000 houses) that had a "no mow may" sign for the bees That would be a huge HOA violation in many places.

flagrant_taco 3y ago

The planet will bounce back one way or another, short of a global nuclear war I don't see how we can do more damage than the asteroid that took out the dinausaurs. Humans just may not be here to enjoy it if we can't get out of the way and stop consuming natural resources for the sake Of GDP growth.

bobbylarrybobby 3y ago
Right, no one cares about the planet, and rightfully so. The planet will be fine. It's humankind that's at stake.
- guerrilla 3y ago
  And all the ecosystems and species we depend on*
- bmitc 3y ago
  > The planet will be fine. It's humankind that's at stake. This is oft repeated, but it fails short of anything meaningful. The planet, as in a rock floating around in space, will be fine, yes. But what about the untold amount of species of plants and animals that are suffering and will continue to suffer in our wake?
  - zerodensity 3y ago
    They will adapt or die and something will replace them. Diversity will go down for a while and then back up again. It's almost impossible to sterilize Earth and as long as something lives on it will eventually flourish again. It will never be the same but something else will flourish.
    - sgu999 3y ago
      Isn't it part of the question of whether life existed on Mars? If it did and got wiped out, it would mean that something else doesn't always flourish.
    - Theory42 3y ago
      True, but we're talking about millions of years of possible desolation before that happens.
  - flagrant_taco 3y ago
    Hopefully many of them outlast us regardless of what stupid things we do, but yes this is a very real risk and we could take down a huge portion of diverse life on the planet with us.
  - kjkjadksj 3y ago
    All of life comes at the cost of other life, whether it be a human or a wolf or a kudzu vine.
adrianN 3y ago
Humans are the only chance Terran life has of surviving the death of the sun.
- DontchaKnowit 3y ago
  are you so sure? there are intelligent species other than humans. Perhaps they are simply human-like species in their nascent evolutionary state.
  - adrianN 3y ago
    It's unlikely that a second industrial revolution can happen, since we already consumed all the easily mined resources.
    - debaserab2 3y ago
      Only the ones useful to us
    - oefnak 3y ago
      But we left them on top, right?
      - mtsr 3y ago
        Materials yes, but easily accessible sources of large amounts of energy are mostly gone.
        zerodensity 3y ago
        I mean they will still have the sun.
        badpun 3y ago
        Producing solar panels requires an advanced technical civilization being in place. You cannot jump from middle ages tech to producing solar panels with skipping dependence on fossil fuels in the intermediate steps.
bmitc 3y ago
Of what use is this argument? It always comes up. The entire planet is suffering.
- flagrant_taco 3y ago
  I can't speak for anyone else that may have said something similar, but for me this is an observation rather than an argument. I don't want this to be what happens, I simply haven't seen any meaningful number of people actually willing to make the types of changes that would reverse this course. Getting rid of or drastically reducing oil use would be a huge step in the right direction, and probably one of the most meaningful things we could do today. That will never happen by choice though, we're way too dependant on cheap energy and the conceniences (and economics) it provides.
aziaziazi 3y ago
It’s not about the planet being fine or not, it’s about the planet being a nice place to live for our descents. Your ascends made a nice job to get you a better life. Removing birds species won’t help in that direction, as well as a ton of other direct and indirect stuff we make happening here.
- flagrant_taco 3y ago
  I completely agree and in no way do I like what we are collectively doing to this planet. I try to live a pretty minimal life and limit my impact on the environment. But the fact is that we seem hell-bent on running the planet for our own gain and it would take a miracle at this point for us to pull out of the tailspin, even if we actually had the will. I can only speak to the people I've engaged with in the US and parts of Europe, but people aren't really willing to make the changes that really seem most important to me. Drastically reducingoil use, for example, would make a big difference but would destroy the GDP measure that many countries value so highly and would cause a huge shock to most every industry in the world. We've grown too dependant on industrialized food, easy access to products, and the power of leveraging cheap energy to go back to doing most things manually or with the help of animal power.
  - sgu999 3y ago
    Once you've established that and, luckily, don't fall into the camp of the ones who don't give a damn and just profit. How do you cope? It's a very depressing thought that puts in perspective absolutely everything, including reproduction.
    - flagrant_taco 3y ago
      That's a great question and really the ultimate trick. For me the situation is oddly a bit of optimism and hope in an otherwise totally screwed up system. I find peace in the idea that the planet will go on one way or another, if we humans cause too much damage it will get rid of us like a bad cold and move on. That can absolutely be depressing as well, but that's where I have to remind myself that the environment functions on the scale of thousands of years rather than decades. This planet and the life on it is an absolutely amazing thing, and amazingly resilient. I hope we can pull out of this nosedive so that we can continue to see what humans come up with, but I rest assured that we can't literally destroy the planet and that "the end" for us will be well down the road. In the meantime, I just try to do my part to minimize my impact and partner with nature rather than fight it. I want to enjoy my life, and for me part of that is pushing myself to the point of some frustration and discomfort. I live in a small house with simple utilities and hope to have it off grid soon. Yes I still have a car and buy some things from Amazon or the grocery store, but I do without when I can and at least a few times a week I get annoyed that I don't have more storage in my tiny house. I figure if I'm feeling a bit of that pain I must be doing something right and can better enjoy the good parts of life.
bryanrasmussen 3y ago
>Humans just may not be here to enjoy it if we can't get out of the way and stop consuming natural resources for the sake Of GDP growth. Humans may be the only species to understand the concept of a species, and it seems some members don't care at all if the whole species disappears, as long as 'the planet' is fine. Intelligence may be an evolutionary dead end.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
PhasmaFelis 3y ago
Nobody said otherwise. I don't understand why someone always has to respond to climate apocalypse discussion with "but actually the planet will be fine."
- flagrant_taco 3y ago
  The GP I was responding to did actually allude to a future of inevitable climate issues and species collapse. For me the fact that the planet will love on regardless is a sign of optimism though, not doomsday apocalypse or some kind of perverse nihilism. It's like looking up at the stars, it reminds me of how small we are and that we're just a part of history rather than the start and end of it.

eastbound 3y ago

I suspect it’s common that my city (France) requires 1 thick-trunk tree per ~80 square meter (9m x 9m). Also there is a ratio of concrete-vs-earth of 10% (posh neighborhoods), 15% or 20%, and parking spots per living surface. My yard is 30x50m => 1500sqm => 1275sqm must be kept as earth, I must have 18 trees (thick-trunk) (and 2 parking spots and the street must have 0.5 guest parking spot).

1over137 3y ago
Wait, you have tree requirements, but you also have mandatory car parking requirements!?
- dryrun 3y ago
  I don't know about the tree requirement, as I don't believe I have that in my hometown, but we do have a mandatory 2 parking slots rule, within the limits of the property. The idea is to ease the parking space (less traffic jams, less people turning around searching for a place, less pollution also), avoid cars being on sidewalks and general security (better view of the surroundings when driving)
  - sgu999 3y ago
    Yes, abstracting away that if people can conveniently park and use their car, they will use it for absolutely everything. That's why France is also champion of surburbia in Europe... We're are ruining our landscapes and cities with single family homes, only for that stupid summer bbq we've all seen on every bloody ad since childhood, and PSA's profit of course.
    - eastbound 3y ago
      As soon as people have a house, they will have a car. Be realist. Building without parking space means they’ll invade the street parking. On the other hand, I know places where companies can’t rent a house, they must stick to commercial-zoned areas. THAT’s enforcing the 10km-every-morning-to-go-to-work rule. But again, suburbia is a pleasant lifestyle, we wouldn’t have to ruin landscapes if we could live downtown, but you guys make it horrible (Oh, hi Grégory Doucet). Sometimes intolerance bears a cost.

debaserab2 3y ago

It's common in a 50+ year old neighborhood for trees to be diseased or dead or have a root system that is growing into the foundation of buildings or other infrastructure. It's not that people don't want trees, it's that people don't want trees that are a liability during the next storm (which I'm guessing is especially true in a place like florida).

bmitc 3y ago
But just think about that. Imagine someone just up and moving into your yard, without your permission, and then they decide to bulldoze your house because it's getting in the way of <x>. I do understand the practicalities and constraints of homeownership, but I do wish we, as a species, did a bit more thinking ahead and had more empathy for literally anything else besides us.
- debaserab2 3y ago
  I doubt that it's people lack empathy, it's more that if a tree root starts cracking up your concrete or a dead branch falls on your roof in a storm it will likely cost you a lot more than just dealing with the tree in the first place.
  - giantg2 3y ago
    It might cost you your life if it's a large tree.
- giantg2 3y ago
  "Imagine someone just up and moving into your yard, without your permission, and then they decide to bulldoze your house because it's getting in the way of <x>." Sure, it sucks. That's called eminent domain.
jjallen 3y ago
it doesn't matter why people don't want trees. It's humans sacrificing trees for their needs/wants that matters. It's getting rid of trees and other natural things in general that is the problem. Humans' mere existence causes this.

ztetranz 3y ago

>There is 1 house in the entire neighborhood (has to be at least 1,000 houses) that had a "no mow may" sign for the bees That would be a huge HOA violation in many places.