5 ms·

Kind of tired of hearing this. Citing one initiative from 50 years ago is the definition of cherry picking, I'm sorry. The trend is that humans are incapable of

Kind of tired of hearing this. Citing one initiative from 50 years ago is the definition of cherry picking, I'm sorry. The trend is that humans are incapable of long term global initiatives. I'm sure some game theory guy could prove it.

squigz 2y ago
> The trend is that humans are incapable of long term global initiatives Doesn't this sort of assertion leave no room for the possibility of learning to do so?
- AlecSchueler 2y ago
  No, trends can be broken.
  - nozzlegear 2y ago
    Though the constant doomerism one encounters when they speculate about breaking such trends can discourage anyone from thinking it’s worth pursuing.
    - AlecSchueler 2y ago
      This sounds like a way to free yourself of personal responsibility. "We could have done so much if the doomsayers hadn't discouraged us!"
      - squigz 2y ago
        You can't personal responsibility your way out of large-scale societal issues...
        AlecSchueler 2y ago
        And this is a bit like saying your vote doesn't count because it's just one of many. Society is built of people. Changes can only come from people.
        squigz 2y ago
        I don't think anybody suggested otherwise. But funny you use the plural there...
        AlecSchueler 2y ago
        Feel free to make a counterargument, but your dismissiveness comes across as very rude.
      - nozzlegear 2y ago
        Don’t get me wrong, I’m very much an optimist when it comes to things like fighting climate change, fixing the ozone layer, etc. and I take plenty of personal responsibility. More than the average person does, I think. The point of my comment was to call attention to the pessimism and doomerism that’s rampant any time you try to discuss saving the planet — case in point, the comments in this very thread. I think those kinds of comments can be discouraging for the layman who wants to help the planet but maybe isn’t well versed enough in the topic to argue with the doomer. More sinisterly, I’ve often wondered how much doomerism is pushed by oil companies and other businesses that stand to benefit from the status quo.
secondcoming 2y ago
We also solved Peak Oil, Acid Rain and saved the whales.
- borbulon 2y ago
  Though we have yet to shoot the seals Edit: context https://youtu.be/s95mEchLZEA https://youtu.be/s95mEchLZEA
- mandmandam 2y ago
  In what way did we solve peak oil - by continuing to burn more every year? Climate scientists are going out of their minds. Is PFAS rain that much better than acid rain? Rainwater is no longer safe to drink anywhere on Earth. As for the whales, that's nice they got a reprive... But we're still extinctifying species at 100-1,000x the background rate. And the people responsible for all of this are not strung up, nor even imprisoned. They're fucking around on mega-yachts and private planes (environmental atrocities in themselves).
  - secondcoming 2y ago
    Peak Oil was about the world running out of oil.
    - mandmandam 2y ago
      Ah, so we 'solved' it by finding so much more oil that life on Earth would be burned to a crisp long before we used it all, then just burning more every year. All while subsidizing oil companies to an absurd degree, even as they make record profits and avoid liability for environmental disasters. So glad we 'solved' that. How great for us, and what an interesting example of how we come together to solve global scale crises that was. Maybe we can solve PFAS rain by coating everything in Teflon so the PFAS don't stick.
freshpretzels 2y ago
Then why is there a global supply chain and global agriculture systems and internet
- MaxBarraclough 2y ago
  Gall's Law speaks to this: > A complex system that works is invariably found to have evolved from a simple system that worked. A complex system designed from scratch never works and cannot be patched up to make it work. You have to start over with a working simple system. Gall uses the web as an example. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Gall_(author)#Gall's_law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Gall_(author)#Gall's_law
  - heavenlyblue 2y ago
    Sounds like Gall's own invented horseshit with not much proof to it. Albeit believable.
fsloth 2y ago
Strong disagree. When there is sufficient political will complex policies can and will be enacted. What is missing in climate action is not some psychological deficiency of our species, it’s lack of strong enough political consensus. ”We can’t do this” is both inaccurate and harmfull. I believe ”We are not currently fixing this” and ”there is a need for stronger political alignment” are the more accurate descriptions of the current malaise.
- groestl 2y ago
  > it’s lack of strong enough political consensus But this _is_ the psychological deficiency of our species.
  - fsloth 2y ago
    No, the fact people can have different opinions is a richness. The point of political activity is to align these opinions.
    - AlecSchueler 2y ago
      The rich culture of climate denial will be our undoing.
    - groestl 2y ago
      If the outcome of the process of consolidating different opinions (politics) conflicts with the existence of the human species, and the human species has only itself to blame for emergently designing a political process with this faulty outcome, than it's the psychological deficiency of the human species which causes its extinction.
    - epgui 2y ago
      Yes, opinions about which foods people prefer. Not “opinions” on the factuality of scientific knowledge (which is a large part of what feeds into discord at the political level— avoidably so).
      - 2y ago

squigz 2y ago

> The trend is that humans are incapable of long term global initiatives Doesn't this sort of assertion leave no room for the possibility of learning to do so?

AlecSchueler 2y ago
No, trends can be broken.
- nozzlegear 2y ago
  Though the constant doomerism one encounters when they speculate about breaking such trends can discourage anyone from thinking it’s worth pursuing.
  - AlecSchueler 2y ago
    This sounds like a way to free yourself of personal responsibility. "We could have done so much if the doomsayers hadn't discouraged us!"
    - squigz 2y ago
      You can't personal responsibility your way out of large-scale societal issues...
      - AlecSchueler 2y ago
        And this is a bit like saying your vote doesn't count because it's just one of many. Society is built of people. Changes can only come from people.
        squigz 2y ago
        I don't think anybody suggested otherwise. But funny you use the plural there...
        AlecSchueler 2y ago
        Feel free to make a counterargument, but your dismissiveness comes across as very rude.
    - nozzlegear 2y ago
      Don’t get me wrong, I’m very much an optimist when it comes to things like fighting climate change, fixing the ozone layer, etc. and I take plenty of personal responsibility. More than the average person does, I think. The point of my comment was to call attention to the pessimism and doomerism that’s rampant any time you try to discuss saving the planet — case in point, the comments in this very thread. I think those kinds of comments can be discouraging for the layman who wants to help the planet but maybe isn’t well versed enough in the topic to argue with the doomer. More sinisterly, I’ve often wondered how much doomerism is pushed by oil companies and other businesses that stand to benefit from the status quo.

secondcoming 2y ago

We also solved Peak Oil, Acid Rain and saved the whales.

borbulon 2y ago
Though we have yet to shoot the seals Edit: context https://youtu.be/s95mEchLZEA https://youtu.be/s95mEchLZEA
mandmandam 2y ago
In what way did we solve peak oil - by continuing to burn more every year? Climate scientists are going out of their minds. Is PFAS rain that much better than acid rain? Rainwater is no longer safe to drink anywhere on Earth. As for the whales, that's nice they got a reprive... But we're still extinctifying species at 100-1,000x the background rate. And the people responsible for all of this are not strung up, nor even imprisoned. They're fucking around on mega-yachts and private planes (environmental atrocities in themselves).
- secondcoming 2y ago
  Peak Oil was about the world running out of oil.
  - mandmandam 2y ago
    Ah, so we 'solved' it by finding so much more oil that life on Earth would be burned to a crisp long before we used it all, then just burning more every year. All while subsidizing oil companies to an absurd degree, even as they make record profits and avoid liability for environmental disasters. So glad we 'solved' that. How great for us, and what an interesting example of how we come together to solve global scale crises that was. Maybe we can solve PFAS rain by coating everything in Teflon so the PFAS don't stick.

freshpretzels 2y ago

Then why is there a global supply chain and global agriculture systems and internet

MaxBarraclough 2y ago
Gall's Law speaks to this: > A complex system that works is invariably found to have evolved from a simple system that worked. A complex system designed from scratch never works and cannot be patched up to make it work. You have to start over with a working simple system. Gall uses the web as an example. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Gall_(author)#Gall's_law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Gall_(author)#Gall's_law
- heavenlyblue 2y ago
  Sounds like Gall's own invented horseshit with not much proof to it. Albeit believable.

fsloth 2y ago

Strong disagree. When there is sufficient political will complex policies can and will be enacted. What is missing in climate action is not some psychological deficiency of our species, it’s lack of strong enough political consensus. ”We can’t do this” is both inaccurate and harmfull. I believe ”We are not currently fixing this” and ”there is a need for stronger political alignment” are the more accurate descriptions of the current malaise.

groestl 2y ago
> it’s lack of strong enough political consensus But this _is_ the psychological deficiency of our species.
- fsloth 2y ago
  No, the fact people can have different opinions is a richness. The point of political activity is to align these opinions.
  - AlecSchueler 2y ago
    The rich culture of climate denial will be our undoing.
  - groestl 2y ago
    If the outcome of the process of consolidating different opinions (politics) conflicts with the existence of the human species, and the human species has only itself to blame for emergently designing a political process with this faulty outcome, than it's the psychological deficiency of the human species which causes its extinction.
  - epgui 2y ago
    Yes, opinions about which foods people prefer. Not “opinions” on the factuality of scientific knowledge (which is a large part of what feeds into discord at the political level— avoidably so).
    - 2y ago