- cross-posted to:
- climate@slrpnk.net
- cross-posted to:
- climate@slrpnk.net
cross-posted from: https://slrpnk.net/post/3153498
The study is this one
You must log in or # to comment.
Capitalism. Because money is more important than life.
Economic system so good it caused a mass extinction event
We’ve looked at the data. It looks grim and concluded that it costs too much to avoid extinction.
Would you be willing to take minimum wage pay for the rest of your life if it meant you would save the earth a fraction of a percent?
Not that Soviet Union, Eastern European socialist states, China etc have been great for the environment.
That’s not true, but I don’t care to refute a talking point from 1991. Google it .
I don’t know why you’d even bother to make a reply at that point
Just googled it. None of the top 10 countries are socialist.
Maybe so that people don’t just die of existential despair?
It is very depressing to see our planet go to hell.
I feel like we’re reminded every day on here, it gets tiring to a point we don’t pay attention anymore.
As usual the mainstream journalists don’t understand what the paper is about and produce hysterical headlines.
If you read the paper it does in no way say the earth is going to be uninhabitable. It does say that they have modelled which bits of the earth will become less habitable and they are areas of high population density, and also that the risk is reduced sognificant of climate change is limited to 2 degrees. That’s starkly different from the headline.
That is also without any critical appraisal of the paper. My first thoughts are how accurate is transfering static lab based measures of habitability to dynamic open environments?
This research is mildly interesting but like most research frankly it is of limited scope and utility, and unfortunately a great deal of research is actually unreproducible dross.
On top of that a lot of journalism is unthinking dross. This makes a good headline to feed the beast that is the internet but it does not reflect the reality of the climate crisis.
Because news is sales, and this doesn’t sell. In fact, it will likely hurt sales. And almost everyone can’t do anything meaninful about it on an individual, immediate level. So it’s hard to think about and hard to act on.
Bad for business, hard to digest = out of scope for corporate or government media.
Well, there is a really simple, meaningful thing we could do:
We could all go vegan.
If we stop paying for these products we’d solve 25% of the climate catastrophe tomorrow. But you don’t want to. The rich, smart, educated people in the west won’t even give up cheese to save their childrem from collaps.
It’s in the news every day. What are you on about?
The same news that is obsessed with Donald Trump 24/7?
I just don’t understand why people aren’t taking climate change seriously?/s
Not good for profits, so it’s swept under the rug while we deal with the bloated cheeto craziness as a diversion for something else even shittier happening.
because we know
We can’t cost the shareholders.
The problem is we know but we are still making it worse! Capitalism has proven it can’t fix this situation only speed it up!
I dunno. But I have vowed to kill everyone I know who denied climate change as being a thing. Looking forward to that.
Be cause there is still enough plausibility of denial, for now…
Where are the other bones ? The skeleton?
Because it’s not new(s). badumtiss.jpg
Define uninhabitable. That’s not what I’ve heard from reputable sources on the topic.
