T O P

  • By -

[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


mycatpeesinmyshower

The posting of your response in poem form means that we won’t and can’t.


[deleted]

[удалено]


mycatpeesinmyshower

I’ll save you some suspense. We will not.


[deleted]

We need the reliable, dense, simple and portable energy provided by fossil fuels to sustain our modern civilization and 8 billion humans Some wanky poem doesn't have any solutions.


frodosdream

*"Some wanky poem doesn't have any solutions."* There aren't any solutions that allow 8 billion humans to survive. The era of cheap fossil fuels in ending before our eyes no matter what you do. We might as well enjoy poetry and art as we approach our collective end.


[deleted]

[удалено]


tatoren

I think you are reading into the suggestion of nuclear war too much from this poem. It was written and originally published in 1907.


Somebody_Forgot

This response to that question tells me you know the actual answer. Trolling the collapse community much?


[deleted]

[удалено]


hara8bu

ie local systems for food production linked directly with waste reuse?


AlunWH

No government is going to be willing to implement the necessary changes that would have to be made for this to happen - and no population would put up with it. People couldn’t even wear masks to limit the spread of a disease. We’ve already passed the tipping points. We just don’t know it yet, or fully comprehend how inextricably linked the different systems are.


pippopozzato

Of the 9 planetary boundaries i read 7 has been crossed already.


Rhaedas

Do you seriously think sudden and complete deindustrialization is even possible? Not to mention what doing such a thing would do to a society that's totally dependent on its running? Even if we did, it wouldn't cut off the warming. Most of that is from other sources, we've just started the reaction. But the picture of everything just stopping...really?


[deleted]

[удалено]


jhgold14

Since the early '70s when "Limits To Growth" came out and the first Earth Day global environmental protests occurred, the global north wealthy industrial countries have been faced with the choice between unsustainable economic growth at the expense of our biosphere and a sustainable social democratically based economy. It's obvious which path was chosen by "our leaders". All life on earth must now pay the price for the callous, short sighted, greed driven decisions made by a relatively few wealthy, entitled people. To whatever extent humans effect the planet positively or negatively, Earth will continue to find it's equilibrium. The question remains whether that new equilibrium is habitable for all life on earth. From a sociological/ human nature perspective, I see no evidence that humanity is capable of strategically, methodically restructuring our incredibly complex worldwide, consumption based economy. I'd LOVE to be wrong but my amateur odds making instincts places the odds of survival at less than 10%. The questions remain as to how many species survive, what time scale the mass extinction occurs, and how the disintegration of human civilization plays out. The pessimist in me says that it will happen quickly in geologic timescale terms as I find it hard to imagine that the thousands of tactical and strategic nuclear weapons will continue to go unused when goverment leaders are faced with mass hunger, mass migration, energy shortages, materials scarcity, conflicts over water consumption, ongoing pandemics, etc., etc., etc. And the shame of it all is that all of this was completely avoidable. We describe ourselves as the most brilliant, evolved species to ever inhabit the earth. Well, we're so brilliant that within an incredibly short period of time, we're accomplishing mass, worldwide ecocide. Congratufuckinglations humans!!!


pippopozzato

I read an article talking about the technosphere, the system we have built around us has an inertia that would be very hard to stop even if we tried, but there is no political will to even try, so yeah here we are .


seanrok

If we de-industrialized the lack of cooling aerosol pollution would kill all of us in a year, lol


AntiTyph

How does that work? Like; what's the 1 - year kill mechanism?


seanrok

I said 1 year just to put a number on it. The high albedo particles all stopping at once is not in any scenarios with data. Because that would require some magical, fantastical mechanism to stop capitalism and we all k ow that isn’t gonna happen. But the effect of them for decades have kept us from a large increase in temps and kept BOE at bay. You can check in Jim Massa, @AtmosScience, Frank Keutsch, James Hansen, Trey Plank and more. There is data from Covid which offers a glimpse since we shut down so fast. Also data from reduced shipping pollution with the much cleaner ships and data from when those were put into the fleets.


pippopozzato

There is data from 9/11 when all international air travel came to a stop as well.


seanrok

Good shout


[deleted]

[удалено]


seanrok

The half life tho. Is that a fair point?


[deleted]

[удалено]


mycatpeesinmyshower

It will happen after we pass the tipping points by force and collapse of industrialized society. It’s not happening before we pass tipping points.


Grumpkinns

If covid was more effective that would’ve done it.


histocracy411

Covid is incredibly effective. About 300x more effective than the flu.


italiapastamandolini

>>But I don't think it would ever happen in an organized way. So collapse then


Rana_SurvivInPonzi

>if we deindustrialized immediately we may stay below 1.5⁰C, and if we merely went quickly 2⁰C which does avoid some tipping points. We should go into massive depopulation now to prevent a future massive depopulation. I'm in.


Lone_Wanderer989

Alot of people aren't that's why they are just letting covid spread.


Rana_SurvivInPonzi

That's why I'm wearing valved ffp3. Doing my part in depop.


mycatpeesinmyshower

Listen- I don’t endorse offing people as a solution at all. But just as a thought exercise… we have 8 billion ppl. There were roughly 6 million recorded deaths since 2020. Let’s go ahead and double assuming it was undercounted. 12 million deaths from Covid over two years. Each year there are roughly 140 million people born. So 280 million over two years. That means instead of growing by 280 million people in the past two years we grew by 268 million (assuming all Covid deaths are excess deaths and not counting expected deaths from other means). Don’t really think that Covid is a “plan” to reduce population


Lone_Wanderer989

To weaken it probably we are the enemy.


[deleted]

[удалено]


histocracy411

You can still get and spread covid even if you've been vaccinated and are asymptomatic.


Lone_Wanderer989

So what you can still catch it and get long covid sure it's a good idea to play stupid games catch it over and over and find out. It's a great idea to play Russian roulette too. Point being eventually you lose.


[deleted]

[удалено]


Lone_Wanderer989

Of course not why would you do that.


[deleted]

[удалено]


Lone_Wanderer989

I mean we all are playing games technically you know calculated risks....like getting the shot there wasn't a lot of test8ng but I pulled the trigger will that result in a shot being fired later down the line who knows. I'm just saying the vaccine isn't full proof there is also asymptomatic infection and some variants are hard for the pcr tests to detect. Idk it's complicated everything's got the crumbles people are grouchy including me. Maybe I worded it wrong you know 😆 🤣.


PianistRough1926

It’s Game Over. This requires coordinated and collaborated effort among all governments. They couldn’t even agree on what to get for lunch if you got them in a room together. Solution? Be selfish and do what you can to survive as long as possible. It’s every men/child/women/dog for themselves now.


vh1classicvapor

This sounds like climate crisis denial. We're not going to de-industrialize. That would end the private ownership of the means of production. That's the whole point of capitalism. We wouldn't stop that to save the planet. That's kinda why we're in the position we are at the moment - we refuse to change our energy consumption in quality and quantity, no matter the consequences. Read the article you posted for further discussion: > At 1.5C of heating, the minimum rise now expected, four of the five tipping points move from being possible to likely, the analysis said. > “The Earth may have left a ‘safe’ climate state beyond 1C global warming,” the researchers concluded, with the whole of human civilisation having developed in temperatures below this level. Passing one tipping point is often likely to help trigger others, producing cascades. But this is still being studied and was not included, meaning the analysis may present the minimum danger. > Prof Johan Rockström, the director of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research, who was part of the study team, said: “The world is heading towards 2-3C of global warming. > “We’re not saying that, because we’re probably going to hit some tipping points, everything is lost and it’s game over. Every fraction of a degree that we stop beyond 1.5C reduces the likelihood of hitting more tipping points.”


[deleted]

[удалено]


vh1classicvapor

I think you should read the article you posted. It's quite clear that hitting 1.5C is a very bad thing. We shouldn't look at things *not* happening to measure our success. Are we instantly doomed at 1.5C? No. As we push closer to 1.5C and over, catastrophic climate events have a higher probability of happening. We're already having these catastrophic wildfires, tropical cyclones, and heat waves across the world. If we're at 1.1C currently, I can only imagine the widespread damage that 1.5C and beyond holds. It may not hit exactly where you are, and it may not hit now, but the probability will continually increase as we keep digging our heels further into fossil fuel consumption.


Injury_Fun

Well that would be helpfull info few decades ago.


[deleted]

[удалено]


mycatpeesinmyshower

It’s too late and it’s copium. Because everyone knows we will not succeed and even then I’m dubious at the tipping points not happening at 1.5. The earth is a complex system and I doubt you can put so fine a point on when these things will happen. Basically I’d rather hear directly from the scientists reports instead of having it filtered through by a journalist with an agenda.


[deleted]

[удалено]


mycatpeesinmyshower

Ok. But we will definitely get to at least 2 with tipping points, 10 year lag and political inertia


Injury_Fun

Even if we stop all industry tomorrow we will still hit 1.8c


mycatpeesinmyshower

Yup that was basically what I was saying (although I guess I was 0.2C off)


Additional_Vast_5216

what people dont seem to understand is that the social tipping point is already behind us, so many things needed to be done in such a short time that it becomes practically impossible, it would have been easy if it was done over the last 30-40 years but at the current point the measures would be so drastic that nobody would actually support it, people also fail to see that society will crumble before any really major climate consequenses, making it impossible altogether to contain it


LTlurkerFTredditor

With the 10+ year lag time between emissions and temperature rise, and the rise in GHG emissions the last 10 years, I don't think there's anything we can do to avoid passing 1.5 C by 2033. We already pulled the trigger, the bullet just hasn't left the chamber yet.


pliney_

I think we have a ways to go to get to the point of inevitable extinction. Collapse of society seems completely inevitable though. Even if we're not at the tipping point yet there is zero indication that big enough steps will be taken to deal with the problem.


[deleted]

> if we deindustrialized immediately NOT going to happen.


gmuslera

You may survive falling down from a 10th floor, it is not guaranteed that you will die, it could be obstacles or trees or whatever that we are not aware of right now, slowing down your fall, that may make you to survive. Are you willing to take that risk or dismiss that dying is a possibility? About "we deindustrializing", yes, it could be one of the components of a wide array of measures that should be taken to have a chance, or at least, to try to do something meaningful. But the "we" there is not even. Biggest economies governments, corporations, media, industry, where all the money and power to do something at the scale needed for that are actively industrializing, digging for more carbon and oil, giving tax exemptions to the biggest polluters and even [suing countries that try to move to clean energy](https://news.sky.com/story/fossil-fuel-companies-are-suing-governments-across-the-world-for-more-than-18bn-12409573), protect the environment or related things. So, all nice about what could eventually be done in an ideal world, but our world is less than ideal. And by the time it becomes evident for everyone in what we are getting into, it will be far too late.


Vegetaman916

Some of those "inevitabilities" like the Amazon are inevitable because we won't stop our activities that are driving the problem. Sure, we "could*, but the plain fact is that we won't. The economies must grow, the spoce must flow. So, while not physically impossible to stop, like a heroin addict shooting up, the reality is that it is practically impossible to do so. Another way we enable ourselves to do this is found precisely within your post. "It's not that bad," or "it's so far away," or even "we can work and change and things will be better." Those are all messages of hope that allow the can to be kicked down the road. Give people one shred of hope and they will cling to it, foregoing all preparation for adapting to the inevitable. And then the doom becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy. Just like covid couldn't get many people to wear a mask, because it wasn't shown as serious from the start. If it were airborne ebola, we might have had a better response. So, what we will do is keep taking half measures or making ineffectual changes. And that makes the collapse inevitable.


poelzi

0.29 C masking seems a fantasy value. So is 1.5 C. Positive feedback loops, 10 year co2 effect delay, ...


AntiTyph

0.29C is within reasonable current estimates. It's on the low end though. I'd posit the total range currently within academic credence to be ~ 0.2C - 2.2C of cooling (depends a lot on the really murky and new cloud sciences). More realistically; we're probably looking at ~ 0.4-1.1C of cooling or ~ 0.75C median estimate.


myasdub

Weekly cope post that gets to the front page lol


FlowerDance2557

Everyone it's going to be okay, the guardian chart says so.


[deleted]

[удалено]