58 ms·
> Nobody in power has cared, instead mocking those who do as "snowflakes" and "anti growth" and "anti progress" and so on. All to make more money. I'm the type
by onlyrealcuzzo 2y ago
> Nobody in power has cared, instead mocking those who do as "snowflakes" and "anti growth" and "anti progress" and so on. All to make more money.
I'm the type of person the Trumpers call a "Soy Boy", and I'm so sick of this hyperbole.
The main solution, if we listened 20 years ago, was that we should all stop using non-renewable energy (basically all energy at the time) and eat bugs.
We are at a point now where if we don't do anything, there's a decent chance current trends take us to a nearly ~100% renewable future in 40 years (if you count nuclear and hydro).
>90% of people on the planet will take the climate change that is most likely to come from our 20-years prior fossil fuel use and the coming 40 years, than to have gone back to living like indigenous people 20 years ago and remained there forever.
There isn't really a world in which we all stopped using fossil fuels and industrial farming and arrived at all the renewable tech we have today, and the ability to produce it at the scale we do now.
Climate change is real, so is progress. Most people are willing to make the trade.
We are so inferior to be able to turn this planet into Venus, like most of the climate Doomers say we're going to.
We likely won't even bring the Earth back to it's typical temperature range - which is MUCH hotter over the last ~450M years than it is now.
If you're telling me we're going to cataclysmically destroy the planet because we might bring temperatures close to their average over the last ~450M, I'm going to be skeptical.
- 01HNNWZ0MV43FF 2y agoDo we have to eat bugs? I'm vegan
- boothby 2y agoYou eat bugs. Be they flour mites, dust mites, eyelash mites, fruit fly eggs, parasitic wasps... your home, body, and food all have a nonzero chance of hosting bugs small enough to escape your attention. They inevitably end up going down the hatch from time to time.
- barbazoo 2y agoObviously not what people mean by that.
- antifa 2y agoTBH landshrimp doesn't sound so bad, I'm kind of surprised nobody has reached mass market with that kind of product.
- palata 2y ago> We are so inferior to be able to turn this planet into Venus, like most of the climate Doomers say we're going to. This is absolutely beside the point. We don't remotely need to turn the planet into Venus for our civilization to collapse. The question is: how do you feel about probably living in a state of global instability (including war) and famines before the end of your own life? Because that's what seems to be the most likely if we don't magically start giving a shit.
- onlyrealcuzzo 2y ago> The question is: how do you feel about probably living in a state of global instability (including war) and famines before the end of your own life? Because that's what seems to be the most likely if we don't magically start giving a shit. That's pretty typical for the global civilization. We have a recency bias to the post-ww2 is the norm. That was a highly atypical peaceful time. It would be surprising that trend continued - even in a climate vacuum. How do we know that wouldn't happen anyway just given how many people have been born? How do we know that the planet getting 2C hotter is the cause, and exactly how much of the cause it is?
- wat10000 2y agoMaybe it would happen regardless. Do you think massive disruptions in agriculture would make it more or less likely?
- onlyrealcuzzo 2y agoWe've had massive distributions in agriculture for the last 40 years. Are the going to offset productivity gains, and new areas being more productive? We could almost feed 50% more humans if we had less livestock (or even just more efficient - like more pork instead of beef). Livestock takes up almost 80% of ag land... We're not all going to starve to death if crop yields go down slightly.
- jfim 2y ago
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- wat10000 2y agoAnybody saying “destroy the planet” is being silly, but the average temperature over the last half a billion years is entirely irrelevant to the survival of modern civilization, or even modern biodiversity. How do you know most people are willing to make the trade? People don’t have a choice. This stuff is driven by systems vastly larger than the individual. Nobody can decide to opt out of progress so they can also opt out of climate change. Even if I could opt for a zero-emissions lifestyle, climate change would continue with no detectable difference.