4 ms·

Do you think people think that Humanity will go extinct because of climate change? I certainly don't. However people DO think that in the near future HUNDREDS

Do you think people think that Humanity will go extinct because of climate change? I certainly don't. However people DO think that in the near future HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF PEOPLE will either die from climate change, or worse ([citation needed]), become refugees and a drain on the parts of the world that will not have the resources to keep them alive and maintain a high standard of living for everyone else. Our children and our children's children in the west will have a meaningfully worse standard of living, and an insane amount of calories will be burnt on trying to figure out how to act reactively to changes to the sea levels, temperature spikes, extreme weather events, loss of fresh water, (and yes, those climate refugees). Instead of just acting proactively now (and really, yesterday) to reduce fossil fuel usage.

swader999 3y ago
If anything, life and human life will do better a few degrees warmer
- heavyset_go 3y ago
  Billions of people live in places that will be underwater, or subject to disaster-prone extremes, because of those few degrees of warming.
titzer 3y ago
That's fundamentally a humanist argument. What about all the other intricate little forms of life we snuff out thoughtlessly? And I don't mean the ones we directly eradicate either due to killing them off or eating them all, but the hundreds, thousands, maybe millions of species that choke to death on our waste products, are crushed under the wheels of the economy, or are fried/frozen out of their niches, or have their food supplies evaporate because of the same. We're committing ecocide at a massive scale that has no upside except more consumption for more humans to hate and rue their lives. I find myself unable to identify with humanism anymore, because humanism has become equated with this crazy, unsustainable economic system with an absolutely enormous footprint on this planet. If it were some reason level of human population that reached some kind of equilibrium with nature, I could be a humanist again. But I don't see that happening in my lifetime, so I am pretty down most of the time, TBH.
- deanCommie 3y ago
  If the only way for humanity to continue to exist was to eradicate every single other species on earth, I would do it. There IS something distinctly unique about humans, and it's ludicrous not to acknowledge. We're the only species having this abstract conversation. We're the only species that is capable of leaving this planet, and thereby surviving a cataclysmic event we have no control over like an incoming asteroid. Now, I think that some humans take this chauvenism too far and actively resist restraining themselves - consuming anything and everything, as if it was placed there for our taking. I happen to believe that's simply unprudent. The quality of life of humanity on Earth where we're the only other form of life would be too horrifying to imagine. But I still maintain my original premise that if that was the ONLY way for humanity to continue existing, it would be worth it. There is no dignity in extinction. If our blip on the universe was simply to be born, briefly experience consciousness and self-awareness, and then disappear, it would've been for nothing. The universe's greatest tragedy is it's tendency towards entropy, and we're the only part of the universe that is actively working against entropy, trying to reverse it. We must survive, grow, and take control of the universe - in conjunction and partnership with any other equally sentient beings we discover.
  - titzer 3y ago
    > If the only way for humanity to continue to exist was to eradicate every single other species on earth, I would do it. I know this is an absurd hypothetical, but you can't really be serious. Your gut is colonized by hundreds, if not thousands, of species of microorganisms that cooperate to digest the broad array of human diet--to the extent that the human digestive system cannot function without these colonies of microorganisms. We literally do not have the genes that even code for the molecular machinery to break down our own food. Eradicating all that life is like sawing off the tree branch on which we stand. The whole premise of this statement is just bonkers. It's like a CPU declaring "I am the most important circuit! I will obliterate all other circuits and we will be pure CPU from here out!" What do you think all the support circuits, peripherals, memory, buses, even the medium of the boards themselves, connectors, displays, communication chips, power regulators, capacitors, fuses, cooling system, battery, do? How do you think CPUs spring into existence? They don't self replicate! Not to mention the entire bulk of humanity that designs CPUs, memory systems, disks, and networks and runs factories that make them. It's typical house-cat attitude: utterly dependent on a system beyond its understanding and yet fiercely asserting, ignorantly, to be a free conquering agent with no dependencies. It's just laughable. Humanity is one example of the millions of diverse genetic arrangements that survive. We live in symbiosis with a biological system--the biosphere. Trying to separate us from the rest of life on Earth as if we are some separate, special thing just won't work. As if a brain could live without blood, oxygen, sugar, or a wolf could survive without the whole damn forest and food pyramid it produces. > There is no dignity in extinction. If our blip on the universe was simply to be born, briefly experience consciousness and self-awareness, and then disappear, it would've been for nothing. The universe's greatest tragedy is it's tendency towards entropy, and we're the only part of the universe that is actively working against entropy, trying to reverse it. > We must survive, grow, and take control of the universe - in conjunction and partnership with any other equally sentient beings we discover. This is just more assertion of the same humanism without a single new justification, just still the same humanity-centric viewpoint that just can't countenance another, and must reject it. > We're the only species having this abstract conversation. Heard this many times. Turns out that research keeps turning up new evidence that other species can have a sense of self, feel grief, mourn, play, fear, enjoy, recognize themselves in the mirror, etc. These "humans are so special" assertions keep turning up false. And its clear that closely related hominids that are now extinct were probably as "special" as we are, w.r.t. these cognitive reflections you cherish. I AM NOT A HUMANIST. THE PLANET ISN'T EITHER. I still take umbrage at the thoughtless destruction of nature for our vapid consumerism. Like, obliterating 100 acres of woods to put up a shopping mall to sell people stuff they don't even enjoy is some kind of crime. Doubly so when those "oh so reflective" humans don't even bat an eyelash about the life they snuffed out to do it. Systems with asshole species like ours are not robust, they crash, and the asshole species goes with them.

swader999 3y ago

If anything, life and human life will do better a few degrees warmer

heavyset_go 3y ago
Billions of people live in places that will be underwater, or subject to disaster-prone extremes, because of those few degrees of warming.

titzer 3y ago

That's fundamentally a humanist argument. What about all the other intricate little forms of life we snuff out thoughtlessly? And I don't mean the ones we directly eradicate either due to killing them off or eating them all, but the hundreds, thousands, maybe millions of species that choke to death on our waste products, are crushed under the wheels of the economy, or are fried/frozen out of their niches, or have their food supplies evaporate because of the same. We're committing ecocide at a massive scale that has no upside except more consumption for more humans to hate and rue their lives. I find myself unable to identify with humanism anymore, because humanism has become equated with this crazy, unsustainable economic system with an absolutely enormous footprint on this planet. If it were some reason level of human population that reached some kind of equilibrium with nature, I could be a humanist again. But I don't see that happening in my lifetime, so I am pretty down most of the time, TBH.

deanCommie 3y ago
If the only way for humanity to continue to exist was to eradicate every single other species on earth, I would do it. There IS something distinctly unique about humans, and it's ludicrous not to acknowledge. We're the only species having this abstract conversation. We're the only species that is capable of leaving this planet, and thereby surviving a cataclysmic event we have no control over like an incoming asteroid. Now, I think that some humans take this chauvenism too far and actively resist restraining themselves - consuming anything and everything, as if it was placed there for our taking. I happen to believe that's simply unprudent. The quality of life of humanity on Earth where we're the only other form of life would be too horrifying to imagine. But I still maintain my original premise that if that was the ONLY way for humanity to continue existing, it would be worth it. There is no dignity in extinction. If our blip on the universe was simply to be born, briefly experience consciousness and self-awareness, and then disappear, it would've been for nothing. The universe's greatest tragedy is it's tendency towards entropy, and we're the only part of the universe that is actively working against entropy, trying to reverse it. We must survive, grow, and take control of the universe - in conjunction and partnership with any other equally sentient beings we discover.
- titzer 3y ago
  > If the only way for humanity to continue to exist was to eradicate every single other species on earth, I would do it. I know this is an absurd hypothetical, but you can't really be serious. Your gut is colonized by hundreds, if not thousands, of species of microorganisms that cooperate to digest the broad array of human diet--to the extent that the human digestive system cannot function without these colonies of microorganisms. We literally do not have the genes that even code for the molecular machinery to break down our own food. Eradicating all that life is like sawing off the tree branch on which we stand. The whole premise of this statement is just bonkers. It's like a CPU declaring "I am the most important circuit! I will obliterate all other circuits and we will be pure CPU from here out!" What do you think all the support circuits, peripherals, memory, buses, even the medium of the boards themselves, connectors, displays, communication chips, power regulators, capacitors, fuses, cooling system, battery, do? How do you think CPUs spring into existence? They don't self replicate! Not to mention the entire bulk of humanity that designs CPUs, memory systems, disks, and networks and runs factories that make them. It's typical house-cat attitude: utterly dependent on a system beyond its understanding and yet fiercely asserting, ignorantly, to be a free conquering agent with no dependencies. It's just laughable. Humanity is one example of the millions of diverse genetic arrangements that survive. We live in symbiosis with a biological system--the biosphere. Trying to separate us from the rest of life on Earth as if we are some separate, special thing just won't work. As if a brain could live without blood, oxygen, sugar, or a wolf could survive without the whole damn forest and food pyramid it produces. > There is no dignity in extinction. If our blip on the universe was simply to be born, briefly experience consciousness and self-awareness, and then disappear, it would've been for nothing. The universe's greatest tragedy is it's tendency towards entropy, and we're the only part of the universe that is actively working against entropy, trying to reverse it. > We must survive, grow, and take control of the universe - in conjunction and partnership with any other equally sentient beings we discover. This is just more assertion of the same humanism without a single new justification, just still the same humanity-centric viewpoint that just can't countenance another, and must reject it. > We're the only species having this abstract conversation. Heard this many times. Turns out that research keeps turning up new evidence that other species can have a sense of self, feel grief, mourn, play, fear, enjoy, recognize themselves in the mirror, etc. These "humans are so special" assertions keep turning up false. And its clear that closely related hominids that are now extinct were probably as "special" as we are, w.r.t. these cognitive reflections you cherish. I AM NOT A HUMANIST. THE PLANET ISN'T EITHER. I still take umbrage at the thoughtless destruction of nature for our vapid consumerism. Like, obliterating 100 acres of woods to put up a shopping mall to sell people stuff they don't even enjoy is some kind of crime. Doubly so when those "oh so reflective" humans don't even bat an eyelash about the life they snuffed out to do it. Systems with asshole species like ours are not robust, they crash, and the asshole species goes with them.