• FictionalCrow@yiffit.net
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    8 months ago

    While funny. This has always been a rather retarded take. Semantics. I for one value a biosphere capable of supporting humans > “the people”

    • AllonzeeLV@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      Nah, I take solace in knowing that if we destroy ourselves or collapse all civilization with our own self-destructive nature, life will go on and Earth will renew. We’re fuck ups to be sure, but even we can’t fuck up enough to completely sterilize the planet.

      Maybe everything in all existence isn’t about us. Honestly I hope not.

      • Daxtron2@startrek.website
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        8 months ago

        The runaway greenhouse effect causing a collapse of the biosphere would take out more than just humanity. It’s already killed a huge number of species and it’s not going to slow down as it gets worse.

          • Daxtron2@startrek.website
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            8 months ago

            While they’re better suited to hostile environments, they too are affected by global temperature increases. Their metabolic rates increase significantly in higher temperatures, causing them to need more food and more O2, both of which will be significantly reduced in a runaway greenhouse scenario.

            • AllonzeeLV@lemmy.worldOP
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              8 months ago

              That said, the Earth’s biome is more than capable of self-repair. Even we lack the capacity to sterilize every crevice of the Earth, life overall is too hearty for that, there’s innumerable species thriving where our technology barely lets us see that relies on geothermal vents more than solar radiation to keep entropic decay at bay.

              Earth will rebuild when the dust settles, as it has done many times, even from one other time that we know of aside from ourselves when a costly, destructive mistake of evolution caused a mass extinction, the Devonian period, where trees captured too much carbon because the efficient means of their decomposition hadn’t evolved yet, causing the opposite of what we’re doing leading to an ice age.

              We have already summarily executed swaths of entire ecosystems of species to build strip malls, parking lots, and oil refineries. And we’ve effectively ended many species we lock in cages for our amusement, wholly dependant on us breeding them having destroyed their natural habitats. Those species are ghosts, dead already, living trophies.

              Long term, the species we take with us in our seeming dedication to self-annihilation will be a small price for the Earth to either be rid of us or more likelihood diminish us back to warring tribes having to subsist in a far less hospitable era of the world than the one we crawled out of and played pretend that we owned and could bend to our will. Most species that have ever lived came and went long before we arrived. Long periods of abundant life thriving in interconnected, interdependent ecosystems is whats important. Maybe it will one day birth something as remarkable, noble, sapient, and intelligent and we told ourselves we were one day, who knows? As long as theres life, there’s hope.

              Am I supposed to feel bad for the bully in this story?

              • Daxtron2@startrek.website
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                8 months ago

                It’s capable of self repair up to a certain point. A fully fledged runaway greenhouse effect is well past that point. The atmosphere would begin to be actively hostile to carbon/water based life. I mean just look at Venus, it experienced a similar runaway greenhouse effect and while we don’t know if it ever supported life, it certainly never will now.

                • AllonzeeLV@lemmy.worldOP
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  8 months ago

                  I give Earth more credit than that. The Asteroid that killed the dinosaurs cut the earth off from photosynthetic solar radiation for 15 years and filled our atmosphere with toxic dust and ash, life suffered greatly, but it was nowhere close to the end for Earth life. There’s literally bacteria that makes it’s habitat in pools of acid. Humans are a weak, fragile species defended only by our ability to discern and invent the tools to do so, but Earth life in general is Amazingly robust, it grows in just about any crevice you show it. I just recently saw a story about worms that have adapted to shrug off the radiation of Chernobyl. Have you seen what a fucking tardigrade can be exposed to without dying?

                  Even our mother will eventually die, most likely from changes in our sun’s life cycle, and the universe will eventually suffer heat death, but our species will take itself out in fairly short order. Just smart enough to be dangerous to itself, and too stupid to know better.

    • PhreakyByNature@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      8 months ago

      I don’t think it’s “prioritise humans over the planet” but more “we should be able to look after one another as a base level of being human. If we can’t figure that out how the hell can we focus on bigger things like the planet”. Not saying what we should and shouldn’t do but just throwing shade at our ability.

      • FictionalCrow@yiffit.net
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        8 months ago

        Honestly at this point I’d accept eco fascism. Arguing about “taking care of each other” while life support is failing and we enter triage levels of failure is inane

        • mojofrododojo@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          8 months ago

          the problem there is it requires a power base to enforce - and all the power bases seemed determined to drive off the cliff (some are tapping the brakes but the rest are full throttle and rolling coal for lulz) at one speed or another - and a military industrial complex large enough to be strategically effective would be (like the US army) one of the largest polluters in the world.

          I want something to change, I just don’t see ecofascism ( a really bad term btw ) as a possible avenue.

          Victor Von Doom levels of resources/soverign agency might be able to. I think us humans are going to be a sad end note in some other species’ extraterrestrial archeology, after so many of them run into our radio and other emissions.

      • lud@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        8 months ago

        Since “general learning disability” and “Intellectual disability” is no longer called “retardation” does it matter?

        I doubt anyone that says “retard” (or any variation) are actually referring in any way to ID and more to its original meaning of slow or stupid. I personally see no problem with calling people stupid (if warranted obviously).

        You obviously shouldn’t call people with ID “retards” though. But imo that’s something entirely different.

        • Nudding@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          8 months ago

          I wonder if they get as offended when people use other outdated medical terms like idiot and imbecile.

          • mojofrododojo@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            8 months ago

            I’m hoping Cretin makes a comeback, it’s got a certain feel I just think should be applied more often.

            FAS baby could be used for offensive reasons but I also think it’s a pretty accurate description of tons of folks in the public sphere who very much aren’t helping our society writ large.

            I’m probably going to hell for this post. I’m not a good person.

  • mommykink@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    8 months ago

    Oh, Carlin. On one hand I wish you were still here, but in the other hand I’d hate to hear what you thought if what we’ve become.

    • Notyou@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      Like with most things in comedy, you will need to hear his timing, context, and the cadence of his voice. You can still not think it is funny, but there clearly was a joke being told.

  • Mickey7@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    8 months ago

    Try asking those who believe Man has a significant effect on global warming a simple question. Tell me exactly and specifically what changes you propose. And then tell me exactly and specifically what results we will see and in what time period due solely to those changes. File this under makes you feel good about yourself but accomplishes nothing but higher energy prices.

      • Mickey7@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        8 months ago

        When they cannot debate with facts they threaten those who dare disagree with them

          • Mickey7@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            8 months ago

            Honest discussion means… you have to totally agree with my position. They are incapable of having a debate of facts and proven outcomes. You would think that if a person firmly believed in a policy that they would be glad to prove those who disagree wrong with facts.

    • AllonzeeLV@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      If our species cared about our species’ future, we would live with whatever energy generation our only habitat could environmentally tolerate/sustain, and we clearly wouldn’t have bred to the point that the planet is pushing back. Instead we STILL demand growth/metastasis. “growth or die!” Oh the delicious gallows irony. Homeostasis should have been our species’ business, but that ship has sailed.

      Humans are so self-important that we don’t even seem to care about how fragile our situation is, and we all know at some level we’re going to be our own end.

      • Nudding@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        8 months ago

        I’ve been calling it human exceptionalism. If we found an organism that drives 150 other species extinct a day we would do our best to eradicate it permanently, but it’s us so we ignore it.

    • Nudding@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      No more children allowed. The problem will solve itself in a hundred years and the earth can begin its millions-of-years recovery process.