DanForArkansas
35487
1122
16
Sep 16, 2026 4:36 PM
DanForArkansas
35487
1122
16
CobainsSarcoma
looks like a great time for more tax cuts
tinydog
That NOAA department's budget is about to be cut. No data, no problem!
cousteau
It's just a cycle. /s
egoAristippos
This one I am afraid, is for all of us.
BuckRavers
RedDeadPrevention
Great punk track name: "These were hot summers; this is cimate change!"
gronzilla
Very "Watching while Rome burns"
kirmokum
regional ecological collapse expected in to start in 5-10 years. the doomsday clock should be one second after midnight. today is doomsday. https://phys.org/news/2026-02-uk-climate-intelligence-quietly.html
pinkmansaidthebest
W0Nt sOmB0Dy pLeaSE tHinK ab0uT tHe sHaREh0lDeRs!?!?!?!
Otomasoteraph
Middle of September and the summer won't quit.
user2000
And Norway (North) had 0 summers days this year. (1 summerday=24h above 20C)
Otomasoteraph
May I come? It's since May that we don't have a day under 25°, I almost forgot how cold feel (and I love cold weather)
camn333
NepLeet
Targe0
tylerlarson
There was a time when companies were owned by people. Making money for the owners was a given and a lot more transparently parasitic.
But it came with responsibility. If the company broke the law, the owners went to prison. If the company was bad enough, the owners got dead about it.
charliethewizard
Another indication of the liminal nature of the world millenials grew up in.
IMakeLotsOfReferencesAndRemakes
Briefly as a child things seemed normal and hopeful. Then before the majority could vote shit was fucked beyond recognition... But at least we had those days of hope and I will continue to push to get some semblance of that world back. Its never going to be the same... but it can be better than this.
4thwalled
https://media3.giphy.com/media/v1.Y2lkPWE1NzM3M2U1MzF3MDlsc2J0NzFxZWs3c3BsZmVibzM1MmdpZHExdHp1bGpqdXJpdiZlcD12MV9naWZzX3NlYXJjaCZjdD1n/NLOBLsnXupUZmIzdKS/200w.webp
BuckRavers
Don't worry, the human race will absolutely end because of this, and while a lot of life on earth will die, LIFE will adapt and continue - just not humans.
sauronater
But if you try to show climate deniers any data, they are like.. WeLl ThERe arE NAtuRAL cYcLeS LiKE thAt ThAt HaVE AlWAys bEeN ARoUnd. It's so frustrating cause an elementary school student could figure this stuff out
ByThePowerOfSCIENCE
It doesn't help that the explanations skip the part that the anomaly is of a _global, year-round_ average which is neither this morning's 15°C nor the 22°C in the afternoon, nor just where we're standing now, but the whole friggin' planet, sometimes smoothed over several years depending on what time scale we're studying.
That's something that took me a minute to consider the first time I heard that 1.5°C was really bad news.
BeaverOnFire
So glad I decided not to have kids. 😐
fastjeff
Here in BC, we don't have summer anymore, it's called "Fire season".
So fuck all y'all.
HypnagogicHallucinations
The movie, An Inconvenient Truth, was 20 years ago.
bourbonandbaddecisions
They have known a lot longer than that. There is an article published in 1912 that speaks about industrialization and how it influences the environment. https://findanexpert.unimelb.edu.au/news/50445-for-110-years--climate-change-has-been-in-the-news.-are-we-finally-ready-to-listen%3F
ByThePowerOfSCIENCE
We knew that CO2 was a greenhouse gas and the implications of the concentration growing; we didn't have hard data, let alone CO2-temperature models, until several decades later.
It's a bit like the difference between your doctor telling you to eat better and getting your first chest pain.
ObjectivePragmatistWithHope
Yep. There was A LOT of speculation, going back to the steam engine years, but no studies or peer-review agreement on any of it until the 1950s. That was when samples over time were taken, weather balloons & such were used, then a Jpn Meteorologist & Physicist did the math & predicted with obscene accuracy everything that's been happening, from he fucked up weather to the fires. While every real, peer reviewed, study since has said the same shit. Now we're just watching our own extinction. -_-
ByThePowerOfSCIENCE
I don't think we're going to die off, but there's going to be a fair amount of avoidable suffering because we've become dependent on parts of the world that will become unfit for their current use (living or producing food).
ObjectivePragmatistWithHope
We've passed like 7 of supposedly 9 different environmental extinction event lines. We're not only gonna go extinct, will likely take most if not all mammals with us. Besides shit like uncontrolled widespread fires, massive coastline loss from water rise, along with Supercells spitting out tornadoes & storms that wipe out major cities, we're fuckin up baseline food plants & crops, which are VERY particular about weather. Then there's the bees collapsing. We're in the middle of the next "Event".
dev3383
But the Orange man said it was a hoax!
Bulmero8
Huh, I JUST finished watching the episode of Futurama with a similar graph, where they keep having moments of silence for the people of our time, and being shocked that we all saw the graph and did nothing...
fastjeff
Sorry kids.
ObjectivePragmatistWithHope
After we Easy Bake Oven ourselves into extinction, which we've been KNOWINGLY doing since the fuckin 1950s, my money's on higher Corvids (smart lil'dragons) &/or the cooler octopus taking over. Especially since it's neither of their first Rodeos, & they've both survived worse than us. If Reagan hadn't taken Carter's Solar Panels off the White & sucked Bush Oil family dick so much, shit would have prolly been fixed by now. Yet now we are GUARANTEED to see massive population death in near future.
Sorrontis
ah. the age of "founding out" is in full fledge. Didn't even get to enjoy the age of "fucking around"
Targe0
Because that was 100 years ago.
Because the emissions would have gotten us to this point back then, it's just takes awhile for things to build up with trapped heat.
So the fucking around stage was WW1 basically. What we are doing now will impact people in about 3 generations. Unless we can pull a fuck ton of Co2 out of the air real quick.
lonelyrangerofthedreams
That is accelerated and impossible to reverse climate change
cytherians
MAGA: "Stop telling me the truth!"
Swedishbouldering
Didn't trump fix yhat issue allready by just not measuring anymore?
Jace99
I wonder if AI or global warming will be on humanity’s COD card.
pr0t34n
I just want everyone to know, I had nothing to do with this.
user2000
https://media2.giphy.com/media/v1.Y2lkPWE1NzM3M2U1MGJ5ZzVtaGx6MWRtbGNvNGJveGNyNDFrM3ZyZHRycmxqaDRnNXZxbCZlcD12MV9naWZzX3NlYXJjaCZjdD1n/7q3qtWdpIeSQw/200w.webp
EstoyPoopis
Much love, random citizen.
DrLOAC
We need a better chart. Idiots be like 1.2 degrees that’s nothing.
What we need to do is take the Ocean Heat Content chart and update the Y axis from joules to Billions of A-bombs worth of heat. That the idiots might understand.
(It’s an increase of about 6 billion a-bombs over the last 50-55 years BTW)
Colopty
Thing is that it's strictly speaking more than 1.2 degrees, these charts work based on an average that has already shifted upwards due to climate change.
mjperk
The idiots still still not care unless you put it in direct, tangible terms that affect them directly. They only care about themselves. If you can frame the issue in a way that shows them what they stand to lose (something they care about, like gas prices) then you might stand a chance. Might. They'll probably still call it woke, leftist propaganda.
cousteau
Yeah, problem is that people think that +1.2°C means "it's slightly warmer", when it really means "pockets of formerly cold water are now warmer, drastically changing the path of ocean currents, which are the ones that control the weather at a global scale, breaking their equilibrium in a chaotic and unpredictable manner, causing droughts and floods and snowfalls and wildfires in places where there weren't droughts and floods and snowfalls and wildfires before and everything and everyone dying."
Ree81
HypnagogicHallucinations
Yeah, but zero-index the chart. The problem is bad enough that it doesn't need to be manipulated to look worse. That just creates distrust.
Ree81
The line doesn't become more clear with a bunch of white space below it. It's still a ~5x difference in the natural variability that happens across 11k years, which is bad.
BuckRavers
I agree with you, though some of the challenged members of our species can't apply their sense of object permanence on numbers, and will just say that the graph is manipulative at a glance. -.-
Ree81
I've heard it from others too. It's because they've been told "all graphs that don't start at zero are misleading", which is .... misleading. :P
PredictablySilly
Also, that's 1.2 degrees Celsius, which is 34 degrees Fahrenheit
cousteau
I am so inconceivably angry right now.
DrLOAC
Good one.
WarThunderLeakedMySpecs
It’s not ignorance, it’s willful ignorance. They don’t believe it’s true, so no amount of data changes that.
cousteau
Or rather, they don't WANT to believe it's true.
DrLOAC
Well at least we can use this to apply a lower bound to the amount of A-bombs required to get through their thick skulls - more than 6 billion.
OutboardOverlord
Thanks, capitalism and corpocracy.
Targe0
While they are making things worse now.
Most of that raise was banked 100 years ago.
We were always in for this heating because we have an emissions debt of 250 years. And it was born of innovation of new technology. All we do now is limit how bad it will be for the future generations. Our future is not going to be changed.
DiracsDelta
This is false. More than half of all accumulated greenhouse gas emissions since the industrial revolution have been released since 1990. We are putting out more than we ever have before, and the current situation is far more a result of what have done in the last 20 years than what we did 50 years ago.
Targe0
Yes and the warming effects we are seeing only needed the pre 1990s levels to produce the effects we are now seeing.
The climate works slowly because it takes time for energy to get stored into the earths system.
The effects of warming have decades long lead times because of that.
Philocrates
No. Put a gun in your lying mouth and pull the trigger.
spinymouse
To add: we have technologies to fix this now. Alternative energy sources that don't fuck it all up so much, tech solutions to reverse some of the damages. And what do we do? De-regulate coal power plants and lobby to buy gas from russia. Really? Reallyreally? That's how we'll go down? Bilge rising, bucket in one hand, ax in the other, chopping more holes into a sinking ship. Brilliant.
pastelteapot
So China, who is not a capitalist country and pollutes infinitely more than we do is not to blame? Plenty of green initiatives were started because of capitalism also. ie EV cars. It isn't as simple as just saying it is capitalism's fault.
alluro2
Let me guess - those initiatives will "trickle down" any moment now?
OutboardOverlord
Who is the "we" you are referring to? Are you coming down on me for generalizing and then using generalization yourself? Also, China isn't only capitalists, they have WEAPONIZED their capitallism and they are using it to hijack every part of production of everything and anything they can get their hands on. China has also been one of the biggest implementors of, and become the absolutely biggest manufacturers of ALL the stuff we need in order to be able to even START going green.
Affray
1)China is arguably the most capitalist country in the world. You aren't a teapot and they sure as fuck aren't socialist like they claim.
Affray
2)Also, the electric engine predates the combustion engine by a few decades. EV never got off the ground because oil barons wouldn't make
Affray
3)money on it and here we are a hundred and forty years later just now having electric vehicles be mainstream. The more you learn about the
Affray
4)the world and our collective history the more you see that capitalism is in fact to blame for most problems we have today.
EstoyPoopis
Jesus fking christ. I can't today, with these propagandized uninformed idiots.
pastelteapot
My guess is you "can't" any day.
Toqom
They are pretty capitalist, running under a dictatorship. The fact the people live in communist like conditions doesn't make it communism. Most workers make slave wages at best, in a true communist society everyone shares everything but they have super wealthy people who do almost no work for it. Calling it communism is literally propaganda
pastelteapot
Ah the true communism has never been tried trope.
Arbitrarynamehere
Name a classless, moneyless, stateless society.
LordSutter
Ah the ignore the good point trope.
Philocrates
More like "That's the fucking reality of the situation" trope, dumbfuck.
AsheLake
Even the CCP says they haven't achieved communism. It isn't a "No True Scotsman" when you're the only one insisting that the name applies. It's just stubborn ignorance.
GeneralAnubis
Ah, the "I don't have a real argument so I call yours a trope" trope
pastelteapot
You hate capitalism. The US isnt even capitalist. Real capitalism hasn't even been tried.
whyforetho
More than half the CO2 emissions produced by humans are from the last few decades, AFTER it became well known and widely accepted that CO2 is changing the climate. AFTER NASA scientist James Hansen's told congress that it was no longer just a future prediction, that it had become measurable. AFTER the IPCC asserted a "discernible human influence on global climate."
After all that, people *literally* doubled down on emissions, and it only got worse. Makes me doubt it will ever get better.
bamblebimble
Dont worry, it'll get better. After all humans die off eventually it'll go back to normal
FelixT93
Or just become another Venus.
pravetz
The good news is that: wise politicians supported solar and wind energy back fifteen and twenty years ago. Now it’s far cheaper to do the right thing than to keep burning fossil fuels. And we have a dictator that invaded oil producing countries so the rest of the world is finally getting off oil. The US will keep burning for as long as the dictator wants but everyone else is onto solar and batteries.
SleazyBijou
And then it got worse…
SavageDrums
We have to start collecting scalps of the CEOs.
johnxbear
Unless a bunch of rich people die of lead poisoning or something we are all dead soon.
samwyze
Money junkies will kill us all to get their next fix.
UprootedGrunt
Yeah, but the profits!
FuzzyX
Well since we are in dire times going past 1.5c then governments are currently working a lot more on carbon capture technology to remove carbon from the atmosphere directly.
cytherians
We've crossed the Rubicon.
The Glacial Age we've been enjoying (living with actual glaciers existing on Earth) is slipping away and there's really nothing we can do to stop it now. Not unless some savant comes up with an economical way to alter the greenhouse gases problem in unprecedented time. But that's unlikely, as another problem looms -- permafrost melting releasing trapped methane from eons ago.
brownribbon
Nah, that’s just woke bullshit
/s
Vrh101
To think of this as CO2 ppm going from ~280 in 1850 to 300 ppm in 1980.. and then in just 46 short years going to 425+ ppm where we are today
FelixT93
This exact thing happened when it became known that the great awk was critically endangered.
Their dwindling numbers made their skins and down all the more valuable so hunters raced for every last one to sell to museums and such.
yyzyyz
Also after economists in the 80s stated the cost to address it is less than the cost of doing nothing, and the cost of doing nothing will go up astronomically
BrickSprickly
I study climate change exclusively at uni, and I have the same doubts. The data is just.... staggering
livingonagiantfireball
Oh it does gets better, but not for humans or other lifeform
WackyWavingInflatableArmFlailingTubman
After America decided to get out of the Paris Agreement essentially telling the rest of the world that America thinks climate change is a hoax
Frobizzle
Mass industry is not sustainable, and neither is providing for 8 billion people.
elucca
I don't think that's true. Industry and large human populations will inevitably have environmental effects, but producing tens of gigatonnes of CO2 a year is firmly in the category of things that are not necessary for it. We could get to net zero if we had actually cared.
spooksterz
So what do you make of that? Kill off 7 billion people?
8 billion exist we need to deal with it. This gives a carbon budget of 2t per person per year. This does mean lowering consumption in many ways, but it can still be a sweet life.
I think your statement is very dangerous
emu314159127001
Haven't we passed a point where it will be impossible to avoid the 1.5C warming effects? The three years ending in 2025 all breached this threshold. https://e360.yale.edu/features/1.5-degrees-tipping-points
Elsuave
It's not climate change, it's global warming. Climate change it's a name some negacionists made up to make it look less terrifying
zagibu
It's not that either, it's just us. Humanity is the problem.
cytherians
Global warming —→ Climate change —→ Climate instability —→ Ecological disasters
cousteau
Yeah, half of it like in the last 40 years or so :(
cousteau
(horizontal is year AD and vertical is atmospheric ppm CO2, but I was lazy and didn't label the axes)
Evi1Gav
And who do the politicians blame and regulate? Everyday people in cars. What vehicles produce vastly more exhaust pollutants than all the cars in the planet? Industrial shipping. What isn't regulated? Industrial shipping emissions.
TheMuellmann
Yes but: What products are being shipped? What do the industries that those products are being shipped for produce? Where do the transport chains lead, eventually?
These things don't exist in total separation from consumers. We are part of that system, and without us taking action, industries have no need to change their ways whatsoever.
spooksterz
This is absolutely not true. CO2 emissions from shipping is almost an order of magnitude lower than the car fleet (at least on a global scale). Ships do pollute more in the sense that they use non refined fuel, so emitting more NOx, SOx, or metals. But this has nothing to do with CO2 emissions.
Anyway, car and shipping are significant. We need action on both.
MikeRInternetTraveler
The response was “Well… it’s going to hell anyway, so we may as well make as much money as possible before the planet lights on fire.”
LicensedAdHominem
It was a bit different. 1. we're either going to hell, or through monumental effort avoid it. 2. the second thing is unlikely, so best invest with the first thing in mind 3. the second thing is technically possible, but sabotage is cheap. 4. engage sabotage 5. hell achieved 6. massive profit from everything ensured and propped up by the climate cataclysm, up to and including mass surveillance to suppress the poors who didn't even invest in the planet dying, how fiscally irresponsible!
NotAllowedToArgueUnlessYouPay
It helps to characterize "the response" in more detail.
XEtAl
When adjusting by population, China produces about half the CO2 as the USA. Additionally, when adjusting for traded goods (emissions measured by where the product is consumed, not produced), that gap widens even further.
These graphs rarely tell the full story, and is why a single set of numbers/facts are rarely sufficient to draw strong conclusions.
NotAllowedToArgueUnlessYouPay
If we are to expect that other countries will increase CO2 until they are at parity with US on a per-capita basis, then the future is truly grim. But, that is human nature. Much of the world is just trying to get by. They will use whatever energy is most economical. The answer doesn't lie in shaming or trying to regulate the entire world. The answer lies in developing cleaner alternatives until they are indisputably more economical and fossil fuels lose favor.
XEtAl
This is true. The best thing we can do is be a strong supporter and producer of renewables and broker deals with developing nations to support their deployment of clean alternatives to fossil fuels. They benefit, and we benefit, but alas, this is not the timeline where we do that.
As for your last point, renewables already are economical, and that's without receiving equivalent subsidies that fossil fuels receive. Sadly, seems our priorities are aligned with protecting the status quo.
QuartzPoker
It's been getting better. We've officially averted the worst case scenario and adoption of renewables is accelerating faster than projected. People also didn't just "double down", the infrastructure to stop didn't exist yet. The technology did but infrastructure takes time to build.
brownribbon
Oh, it’s official? Is it notarized or something?
QuartzPoker
https://rcei.rutgers.edu/why-scientists-retired-the-dire-climate-scenario-used-for-over-a-decade/
Ye!
TheMuellmann
There has been and there still is MASSIVE resistance to any significant change in infrastructure towards more environmentally friendly technology.
And could you elaborate on which worst case scenario has been averted? Last I heard was that we've officially failed to keep global warming below 1,5°C or probably even 2°C, with worse outcomes still being very possible.
QuartzPoker
You are correct, we're definitely going past 2°C. However, the RPC8.5 model which predicted increases over 4°C has been retired. https://rcei.rutgers.edu/why-scientists-retired-the-dire-climate-scenario-used-for-over-a-decade/
Projections currently have us capping out around 3°C before various effects which have already started lead to a correction, including a previously unmodeled way the Earth sheds excess heat - a hotter atmosphere puffs up, increasing its surface area, so it radiates faster
TheMuellmann
Thanks! Hadn't seen that one yet. So technically correct (the best kind), the worst case scenario is out, which I agree is good.
My optimism remains dampened, since capping out at 3°C will still mean massive ecological and societal crisis' over the next generations, starting years ago.
LSamaMama
Trump has stopped the building of windmills, got rid of the EPA, and pulled out of the Paris agreement. Shit is NOT getting better.
QuartzPoker
Solar panels are now so much cheaper than coal infrastructure that we are seeing coal plants get cancelled in favor of solar farms across the planet, and the US currently has enough renewable energy projects on the dockets to double our national energy output, they're just waiting on the power line upgrades to carry the extra power
Makerofroads
We are lead by death cultists. Christian extremists that are banking on the end of the world before they are held accountable. Or, that they will die before the consequences of their actions are apparent enough for them to be dragged into the street and pulled limb from limb by a furious mob that knows their children will die before they get to have kids.
cytherians
JD Vance just admitted it the other day, about embracing end times.
Whirlednews
And yet people continue to reproduce in droves…
ThrowAwayAcct0000
Look at the population replacement rate numbers. Most countries are dropping.
Affray
1)My religious brother in law just had his fourth kid and doesn't seem to be slowing down. His wife is a stay at home trad wife and he has
Affray
2)one job, if that. His whole family is cooked but they're just trucking forward dreaming about a bright future that isn't coming.
Vrh101
I remember having a t-shirt in the 00s that said "save the planet, kill yourself"
torisenblack
As long as you recognize that by "people doubled down on it" you mean the couple dozen corporations that produce 90-95% of all CO2 emissions.
It's not and has never been you and me driving to work or using single-use plastics, the vast majority of the damage is being done by industrial practices.
icouldntthinkofabetterusername2
Industrial practices keep going as long as we, the majority, keep buying all the useless crap that’s being produced. There’s a lot of rot in monopolisation etc but you can’t just blame the companies as if the choices of billions of regular people don’t matter.
LordSutter
Industry doesn't exist in a vacuum.
What you've written above is absolutely supported by those industries, as it keeps people shopping and disregarding their own influence.
If they're not well regulated, and people keep buying their stuff, they'll keep operating as normal. Simple as that.
spooksterz
I don't, look around you: almost everything that you use and own in everyday life is transformed petrol (carbon) requiring energy to be produced. Any non dirt poor westerner has a responsibility in the current situation. Seeing that the Paris agreement objective is 2t of CO2 emitted per year and per person, ask yourself what is your current footprint, and what a 2t life would look like for you.
But there are also systemic changes that need to come from the top, I can agree with that
Rhythmaster
What are you talking about? Firstly, Its 100 corporations, not 2 dozen, that produce the majority of emissions, those companies are all oil companies, and 90% of those emissions are literally "consumer side emissions". Yes, that means the cars, trucks, tractors, airplanes etc.. I would encourage you to read the "Carbon Majors" report that you seem to be referring to. You are wildly misinformed about where the emissions are coming from. I made a post about it, I will link that below this comment.
Rhythmaster
/gallery/8kwXgm0 you're willfully blinding yourself if you think that industry, the oil industry specifically, operates and pollutes by itself in a vacuum and has no link with regular folks consumption patterns. All their wealth, power and influence directly comes from selling oil to consumers that the consumers burn and that is what causes the emissions. Our world runs on oil and gas, sadly. It's supply and demand and they've forced us to use oil and suppressed alternatives.
Ree81
This is the most horrifying graph I have:
Affray
Yup, that's a spooky one.
cousteau
OK, yikes.
Korrd
Yep. The temperature lagging behind the CO2 is... frightening. With the CO2 we've already put into the atmosphere we're committed to centuries or more of rising temps even if we ceased all emissions tomorrow. We'd have to go net negative to undo it.
I think we found a Great Filter.
PteradactylStevens
Xkcd also has a pretty good representation of how unusual the last few years have been.
https://xkcd.com/1732/
trigonman3
Oh good, it's undated.
brownribbon
What? No it isn’t.
trigonman3
What date was it made, based on the information presented in the image?
"Everyone knows what a horse is"-level assumptions abound. Was it really too difficult to put in a date?
Lazy data presentation is lazy.
brownribbon
Just because you don’t know how to read axes doesn’t mean you’re right.
Ree81
It is, but since CO2PPM is above 400 you can tell it's recent. Currently at 430.
cousteau
It says "thousands of years before present". "Present" in these studies is 1950. I don't know why but it's 1950.
cousteau
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Before_Present
icouldntthinkofabetterusername2
And even if climate change is recognised as a serious problem in the news nowadays, the very next article is worried that the economy is not growing fast enough.
ChelVanin
How else do you expect to able to make tools to combat climate change? /s
kirmokum
which is extra frustrating because not doing anything is VERY OBVIOUSLY way more economically crushing and expensive than creating and investing in new industries to slow/stop/reverse climate change. we are already losing billions every year to climate change.
prosper020
“But if I change right now I could loose millions!” -too many of them.
kirmokum
none of those capitalist big brains actually know how to innovate to make money. there's billions sitting on the table and they're too inept, stupid, and cowardly to reach for it.
functyou
Having a flourishing economy and battle climate change doesn’t need to be contradiction. There could be plenty of new industries and work that aim to improve the planet. The problem is lack of vision, old industries that have a lot of money doing whatever they can to prevent change. It’s greed and fear of losing any wealth one has.
Affray
It's definitely the current money holders not wanting anyone else to make money in any economy. They'd rather keep it and doom a whole world
cytherians
The problem is obsessive, insatiable greed. Companies would rather go full steam ahead for maximum profit than do the right thing and achieve 10~20% less profit.
Meanwhile, everyone would be fine with less profit than the max, because we've been just fine before the massive rise of capitalized wealth. It's greed. Pure, primal, insatiable greed.
michiyl
"Something has to change, but everything needs to stay the same!"
Sticklebrickk
"Deviation from the norm will not be tolerated unless it is exploitable."
Ex: Rudolph the Red Nosed Reindeer
arthonnen93
"Something has to change, but not at the expense of our record breaking profits for the .01%"
gaggedandgooped
Every mammal on this planet instinctively develops a natural equilibrium with the surrounding environment, but you humans do not. You move to an area, and you multiply, and multiply, until every natural resource is consumed. The only way you can survive is to spread to another area. There is another organism on this planet that follows the same pattern. Do you know what it is? A virus. Human beings are a disease, a cancer of this planet, you are a plague…
gypsyspot
Many animals will over populate then collapse. Unlike humans, few animals have the ability of global travel, so work within their environment, but a good corollary might be invasive species, which quickly spread and out competes or over consume in their environment. Humans are fucked, and what we are doing is fucked, but let's not play into some false narrative. It's unnecessary and irrelevant to the concern at hand. I'm glad you've watched the matrix, but it's more complicated than that.
gaggedandgooped
It’s just a quote from a movie, bud. Settle down.
cjandstuff
Oddly enough, a large group of humans wants to find and live in that equilibrium. But many want to own, conquer, and pillage everything they can.
CALAMOSCOPYJANE
Our economic system sure is a plague. Capitalism and the current way consumerism is structured - definitely a plague.
Fortunately, there is a way out. Unfortunately it means a lot of the psychopaths running our current industries will make less profit, and they're too greedy to let that happen, so we will all suffer as a result.
prosper020
Oh, a bunch of those shitbags think they can keep their current lifestyle and get out of it, by letting as much of the 99% die off as possible. If they remove billions of people putting out one kg each of CO2 each year, then they can continue to put out millions of kg each of CO2 each year.
It’s akin to maha being antivax to get “the weak” to die off from disease. They all want to cull. It’s their only acceptable option, others dying.
CALAMOSCOPYJANE
True dat. Their reasoning is even sadder and stupider, because we have the technology to shift to renewables and to support the current population; but it would require actual leadership and some small sacrifices of the global 0.1% to create this shift, so we know that's not going to happen.