3 ms·

> We, as a species, are on the verge of collapsing on Earth, Humanity is not on the verge of collapsing on Earth. Not even close. There is billions of us and o

> We, as a species, are on the verge of collapsing on Earth, Humanity is not on the verge of collapsing on Earth. Not even close. There is billions of us and our number is going up. Even with the worts climate change predictions the threat is not that we will all die, but that some of the places where we live now becomes uninhabitable and that our descendants will have a worse time living in the future. > We literally are failing to survive on Earth. That's literally not true.

t43562 2y ago
If we cannot achieve Mars colonisation now then in a "worse time" we won't be doing it either.
palata 2y ago
> There is billions of us and our number is going up. You don't understand the meaning of "collapse", do you?
- krisoft 2y ago
  I believe I do. If you disagree you have to explain your position with more words, because I don’t feel like guessing.
  - palata 2y ago
    For one, the fact that the population is growing is obviously not saying that we are not on the verge of collapsing. If anything, more humans means more emissions, which makes the problem worse. Second, you talk about "the worst climate change predictions". That's completely absurd. Quite obviously "the worst climate change prediction" implies that we all die. Finally, you say "some of the places where we live now becomes uninhabitable and that our descendants will have a worse time living in the future". Not sure if you are aware of that problem or if you are just mentioning it because you quickly read it here. If we reach 4 degrees of warming (and that's a prediction if we don't change anything, knowing that we have already passed 1.5 earlier than expected), a large part of Earth around the equator will become unlivable (not as in "there is no more food, you have to import" but as in "you can't survive outside without life support). We're talking billions of people. What happens when half of the population of the planet has to relocate while the other half has issue growing food (because of course, the rest of the Earth is also impacted), do you think? That's wars, global instability, lots and lots of deaths, and the end of society as we know it. That's collapsing.
    - krisoft 2y ago
      > Quite obviously "the worst climate change prediction" implies that we all die. If you understand "prediction" to mean "any bullshit made up by anyone" then yes. But if you mean by "prediction" what we think is likely to happen based on available data and knowledge then not. > Not sure if you are aware of that problem or if you are just mentioning it because you quickly read it here. I'm aware of the problem. That is why I wrote what I wrote. > If we reach 4 degrees of warming (and that's a prediction if we don't change anything, knowing that we have already passed 1.5 earlier than expected), a large part of Earth around the equator will become unlivable Correct. And that is really, really, really bad. So bad that we don't have to overstate how bad it is. > That's wars, global instability, lots and lots of deaths, and the end of society as we know it. That's collapsing. That's societal collapse. That's really really bad. But you were talking about species level collapse. Let me quote you "We literally are failing to survive on Earth." That's not the case. We don't have to overstate our case. Extinction is not the danger we are facing here. It is continued living on the species level in a much more precarious, dangerous, unpleasant way. It's failing to thrive, not failing to survive.
      - palata 2y ago
        > If you understand "prediction" to mean "any bullshit made up by anyone" then yes. I don't have to go that far, really! The IPCC models are systematically observed to be optimistic. 4 degrees is not particularly pessimistic. > That's societal collapse. That's really really bad. But you were talking about species level collapse. Even nitpicking here doesn't work. If you lose 90% of your population, as a species, it's collapsing. I understand the point you are trying to make: "it's not clear that the humans species will disappear, just most humans". And I'm not saying it's clear. I'm saying it is a risk. Because we are not wild animals. Most humans, if you don't give them prepared food in a plastic bag, can't survive. And we're talking about surviving in a much harder world (4 degrees means that growing crop is harder in many ways). But again it is a moot point. What's the point of going around saying "Guys don't be scared, we won't disappear as a species. Most of us here will die, still, but that's not as bad". Now, let me address your nitpick: We as a society are on the verge of collapsing, and we as a species as well. With a non-zero risk that the entire species will go extinct.

t43562 2y ago

If we cannot achieve Mars colonisation now then in a "worse time" we won't be doing it either.

palata 2y ago

> There is billions of us and our number is going up. You don't understand the meaning of "collapse", do you?

krisoft 2y ago
I believe I do. If you disagree you have to explain your position with more words, because I don’t feel like guessing.
- palata 2y ago
  For one, the fact that the population is growing is obviously not saying that we are not on the verge of collapsing. If anything, more humans means more emissions, which makes the problem worse. Second, you talk about "the worst climate change predictions". That's completely absurd. Quite obviously "the worst climate change prediction" implies that we all die. Finally, you say "some of the places where we live now becomes uninhabitable and that our descendants will have a worse time living in the future". Not sure if you are aware of that problem or if you are just mentioning it because you quickly read it here. If we reach 4 degrees of warming (and that's a prediction if we don't change anything, knowing that we have already passed 1.5 earlier than expected), a large part of Earth around the equator will become unlivable (not as in "there is no more food, you have to import" but as in "you can't survive outside without life support). We're talking billions of people. What happens when half of the population of the planet has to relocate while the other half has issue growing food (because of course, the rest of the Earth is also impacted), do you think? That's wars, global instability, lots and lots of deaths, and the end of society as we know it. That's collapsing.
  - krisoft 2y ago
    > Quite obviously "the worst climate change prediction" implies that we all die. If you understand "prediction" to mean "any bullshit made up by anyone" then yes. But if you mean by "prediction" what we think is likely to happen based on available data and knowledge then not. > Not sure if you are aware of that problem or if you are just mentioning it because you quickly read it here. I'm aware of the problem. That is why I wrote what I wrote. > If we reach 4 degrees of warming (and that's a prediction if we don't change anything, knowing that we have already passed 1.5 earlier than expected), a large part of Earth around the equator will become unlivable Correct. And that is really, really, really bad. So bad that we don't have to overstate how bad it is. > That's wars, global instability, lots and lots of deaths, and the end of society as we know it. That's collapsing. That's societal collapse. That's really really bad. But you were talking about species level collapse. Let me quote you "We literally are failing to survive on Earth." That's not the case. We don't have to overstate our case. Extinction is not the danger we are facing here. It is continued living on the species level in a much more precarious, dangerous, unpleasant way. It's failing to thrive, not failing to survive.
    - palata 2y ago
      > If you understand "prediction" to mean "any bullshit made up by anyone" then yes. I don't have to go that far, really! The IPCC models are systematically observed to be optimistic. 4 degrees is not particularly pessimistic. > That's societal collapse. That's really really bad. But you were talking about species level collapse. Even nitpicking here doesn't work. If you lose 90% of your population, as a species, it's collapsing. I understand the point you are trying to make: "it's not clear that the humans species will disappear, just most humans". And I'm not saying it's clear. I'm saying it is a risk. Because we are not wild animals. Most humans, if you don't give them prepared food in a plastic bag, can't survive. And we're talking about surviving in a much harder world (4 degrees means that growing crop is harder in many ways). But again it is a moot point. What's the point of going around saying "Guys don't be scared, we won't disappear as a species. Most of us here will die, still, but that's not as bad". Now, let me address your nitpick: We as a society are on the verge of collapsing, and we as a species as well. With a non-zero risk that the entire species will go extinct.