Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Sojurn83 t1_iucys8o wrote

Reply to comment by Cosmonaut15 in Ozone Hole Continues Shrinking in 2022, NASA and NOAA Scientists Say | Annual Antarctic ozone hole over the South Pole was slightly smaller than last year and generally continued the overall shrinking trend of recent years. by yourSAS

Either solve it at consumer side, which seems unlikely as there’ll always be meat fanatics. Or charge carbon tax and drive it out of profitability, which also doesn’t seem very likely due to lobbying. Would be nice if everyone agreed on the problem so we could solve it rapidly, but it looks like a lot more change management is needed here.

3

Cosmonaut15 t1_iuczm78 wrote

I love the idea of a carbon tax. The key really is political corruption. Neither party would hurt their corporate donors like that. Even as the oil industry sells us out with price gouging, even as they lie about the impact of emissions, both parties leadership upholds this suicidal status quo. HOW CAN THEY SLEEP AT NIGHT???

I will say firmly and adamantly that the leadership of both parties are knowingly complicit in our extinction. This is genocide. The US oligarchy must be destroyed.

People need to rise together and demand or remove financial incentives and corruption from our political system. People need to demand accountability for our attempted murder. THAT'S THE ONLY WAY WE SURVIVE.

6

Sojurn83 t1_iuczsep wrote

Yep. But not enough people are doing that. Until it’s done, business will continue to do what businesses are designed and incentivised to do, increase profits at the cost of long term sustainability.

3

Cosmonaut15 t1_iud18qf wrote

No time to waste. That's why I support people throwing soup at paintings because most of us do not get the severity of the issue or the difficulty in changing it. Or they don't care which is just suicidal and dumb.

−5

LoquaciousBumbaclot t1_iud8se9 wrote

> No time to waste. That's why I support people throwing soup at paintings

Thanks for that, the most idiotic thing I've read so far today.

2

Cosmonaut15 t1_iud99y0 wrote

I just explained how politicians are paid off by oil lobbyists to purposefully fail to act. If the media was accurately portraying the severity of the issue, the public would in a total rage. The media ignores these issues, and whether you care to admit it or not much of the media STILL pushes misinformation that climate change even exists going so far as to ridicule the idea. The US public is COMPLETELY disarmed in terms of information and awareness. They are sleep walking onto a busy highway.

Those Activists are desperately trying to make headlines to bring attention to this critical issue which that powers at be choose to ignore for profit every single day.

Now explain what's idiotic about that be specific. If you're here to deny the immediate threat of climate induced extinction then feel free to carry on.

3

LoquaciousBumbaclot t1_iudapm2 wrote

And you think some scraggly hippies throwing soup at a painting is going to change any of that?

It may come as a surprise, but when the average person sees that on the news they don't think "gee, you know what, that girl with the tattoos and dreadlocks sure changed my mind by vandalizing that painting!" No, they think "what a bunch of fuck-heads," and carry on with their lives.

1

Cosmonaut15 t1_iudfjdh wrote

Your entire argument is just insulting the Activists who are risking their freedom. How weak.

I commend their bravery.

1

LoquaciousBumbaclot t1_iud8ohm wrote

> I will say firmly and adamantly that the leadership of both parties are knowingly complicit in our extinction.

Even if the worst predictions of the kookiest climate doomers were to come true, I can assure you that mankind would not go extinct. Pockets of population would survive (as they always have) and adapt to the changing conditions through technical means. On a longer scale, evolution would kick in and produce humans that are biologically adapted to live in the new climate.

−1

Cosmonaut15 t1_iud9ol2 wrote

Ok. That's still an unfathomable, dire scenario full of untold suffering for all life on the planet. Have some humanity.

We have to address overconsumption first. We can't innovate around the fact that western society is consuming far beyond their needs while feeling the LEAST impact compared to poor countries with competitively nonexistent emission levels. Again, have some humanity.

2

Shadow_Lazer t1_iudal1r wrote

Brilliant logic, with no signs of logical fallacies.

Humans will survive because they always have.

Humans will survive because technology.

Humans will survive because evolution.

#1 we have not always existed, and we are mortal.

#2 our technology requires a lot to function, it breaks down, need new parts, stable power, etc

#3 evolution doesn't work as fast as the environment is changing

Just more hubris for the pile

2