Losing Earth: The Decade We Almost Stopped Climate Change
102 replies, posted
Climate change is making the developing world and parts of asia uninhabitable. Be it crops dying or actual temperature/humidity combinations that kill you. Probably doesn't need to be repeated but think about this: People are already clinging to life on nearly nothing. It won't take much more for them to face a choice between moving away or death. They'll come to Europe and russia and the usa...
The far right WILL USE and IS USING this growing crisis to validate itself and gain numbers. The way that people talk about things is already shaped this way.
Syria's crisis is a first taste of their politics and radicalization. On top of the environmental stuff, climate change causes nazis.
What if that's why the far right doesn't believe in it? Besides the usual greed
The consequences are they wont be in the ground, they'll be in the ocean.
What? No. That mindset is why this happened in the first place.
A 3 degree change will be disastrous, but it won't be the end of the world.
Unregulated capitalism is going to end up held up as bad as, if not worse, than communism in terms of the final death toll.
It's honestly tragic how these people stay in power.
is now the time to start preppin'?
Frankly, at this point, I can't see a way to dodge global warming without worldwide martial law or something similar. We have long passed the point where we can both stop it and maintain anything close to our current quality of life.
maybe we can use lash copies of his useless submarine together to form a great floating colony, to live in the oceans after all the cities are flooded
The number 1 priority of any human being on Planet Earth should be the protection of mankind itself. I disagree with Republicans on virtually every issue, but if Republicans and Democrats swapped stances on climate change, I'd vote for Republicans. I'd vote for fucking Trump if he took a hardline stance against climate change and his opponents were climate change deniers. Know what? Fuck it. I'd vote for Hitler as ruler of the world if he had a stance against climate change and his opponents didn't, assuming the fascist state was overthrown at any point in the future, even if it's centuries or literally millenniums later. Almost anything is preferable to outright human extinction.
I don't think it is silly.
In the context of that statement, to be a good man in a tough time means you want to change it and correct. Once you've done that, the people born into that world don't have to overcome the challenge that their forefathers did, and don't have as much respect for the society they inherited.
Someone could stuff the convo from this thread into a fallout mod and literally no one would bat an eye.
It's weird now that we're right in the middle of the stage where climate change is transitioning from a distant threat looming on the horizon to a storm over our heads
I wanna see polls about how many people believe in climate change these days.
Global warming is somewhat a self-solving problem. Mass droughts, famines and deaths of billions because of a lack of food?? No problem because entire polluting industries will die off allowing the Earth to cool again provided there's still enough humans to go plant some trees.
The numbers going down on all but one poll makes my heart hurt.
Denial is easier.
I would normally post some kind of a cheeky ass joke to lighten the mood but this thread is so fucking grim that I don't feel it would even be appropriate, it's like laughing at a funeral.
Humans don't inherently deserve to live as a species. You shouldn't set an absolutist bar from ethics for the sake of mere survival.
I'm going to be 26 on the 8th, and I'm so lost and already feel so helpless on my future as is, Hell I feel i wont even make it to 30 in some instances.
But this completely fills me with dread and rage against those responsible. Is it wrong for me to want to want to fight them and force them out? What can a guy like me do? Wait and see who gets elected on the chance that they aren't a greedy fuck? I'm not very educated in politics but knowing we are gonna be cornered and fucked makes me want to desperately fight back.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6z2mf0kjEP8
A storm is coming...
We are living in a paradoxical morbidly comical scenario where the only people who are interested in power are those who are interested in abusing it. Human civilization has this weird cognitive dissonance where the people who are interested in power and leading should never under any circumstances allowed any power or leadership. And those who do not want any political power should be forced to have it.
Something has to end the idiotic cycle of gullible people electing sociopaths with clever tongues which has been the downfall of literally every single human society so far.
Extinction is the worst thing that can happen to us in the long term. Anything else can be reversed. Extinction can't. It is absolutely valid to set the protection of the human species as the number one moral goal of humanity (not counting science fiction scenarios where we'd be changed to the point of not intellectually resembling humans any more, like the Combine). I'd really like to hear your arguments against it.
I don't value the what-ifs of people whose parents haven't even been born. We should care more about being moral to those in the present instead of sacrificing ALL of our morals for the sake of allowing others to potentially be born into situations of lesser suffering. Your argument is analogous to saying humans have a duty to procreate and not use contraception, for the mere sake of life itself.
No it isn't. It's not analogous to that at all. We are the highest intelligent life that we know of that exists in the universe. For all we know we might be all that exists that's like us. We have a duty to protect ourselves and continue to survive for our continued evolution if at all possible. There's more to morality than just a ratio of happiness to suffering.
What makes evolution a moral imperative, against tangible lives and loss? You're pushing for this romantic idealization of destiny without giving any reasons.
what? it's every species goal to continue existing
There's no "romantic idealization". I've honestly thought about it and I can't argue for humanity's survival as a moral imperative because it's axiomatic. It's like asking someone why they believe preventing suffering is a moral imperative. You could go into how it's human nature to want to prevent suffering, the same way it's human nature to survive. If someone asks "why is it better or humans not to suffer" you really can't go any further than "it just is". And to me I think the human race is a precious thing that must be protected at any cost, and there's no way for me to prove that because morals aren't objective. You can't prove moral axioms. You can only prove whether or not certain moral decisions, in general, lead to the moral axioms you want.
As humans we have bias when deciding anything involving morality. There are no objective moral axioms. Even if you made the statement "we shouldn't torture every newborn child to death" that's a moral statement that's biased by our nature as humans, the human nature to protect children and prevent suffering. There is nothing in our universe that cares about suffering, other than us living creatures.
Everything is arbitrary so your metrics are as well.
Try to not base them on emotional impact and more on reason.
I get why he's arguing the human race should continue to exist.
I also get your argument that life is sacred.
There should be more effort put into it than "you're an absolutist" to see the grey ground that exists to be discussed, and not mad about.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
