|
Mozi posted:What I've learned from following the Larsen C thing is that a quarter the size of Wales is twice the size of Luxembourg which is about the size of Delware.
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2017 13:53
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 02:17 |
|
|
call to action posted:This one goes out to all the haters out there: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/11/climate/mass-extinction-animal-species.html It's worth remembering that there were armadillos and sloths the size of cars rolling around North and South America as recently as 20000 years ago. The natural world that we're familiar with was already a historical anomaly following the large-scale global extinction of megafauna after the end of the last ice age. We're currently causing mass extinctions in already depleted ecosystems. StabbinHobo posted:reminder for whatever page we're on: if you live in a detached house and drive a car your reduced-meat diet is you telling everyone around you "i'm smug as gently caress and bad at math!" My bank emits three times more carbon than the fruit I eat?! As if there weren't enough reasons to dislike the financial industry. edit: VVVVVV It's a reminder that the ecosystems we live in were already reeling, and we should be treating them with extreme care as opposed to pushing them to their absolute limit. Honestly online discussion is so hobbled, there was nothing in my post implying we shouldn't care about the ongoing mass extinction. Also my inner 10 year old is just disappointed I'll never get to see the car armadillos. Nocturtle fucked around with this message at 14:41 on Jul 12, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2017 14:00
|
|
|
Nocturtle posted:It's worth remembering that there were armadillos and sloths the size of cars rolling around North and South America as recently as 20000 years ago. The natural world that we're familiar with was already a historical anomaly following the large-scale global extinction of megafauna after the end of the last ice age. We're currently causing mass extinctions in already depleted ecosystems. Why is that worth remembering? Some animals were made extinct by natural processes at some point in the past, therefore we shouldn't care about the ones we're making go extinct now? On another note, this data indicates the main problem is industry and electricity generation, in terms of GHGs: https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/sources-greenhouse-gas-emissions call to action fucked around with this message at 14:32 on Jul 12, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2017 14:30
|
|
|
call to action posted:Why is that worth remembering? Some animals were made extinct by natural processes at some point in the past, therefore we shouldn't care about the ones we're making go extinct now? Also it's pretty widely thought that humans hunted those animals to extinction, so it's more of an extension of a current issue than anything.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2017 14:41
|
|
|
call to action posted:Why is that worth remembering? Some animals were made extinct by natural processes at some point in the past, therefore we shouldn't care about the ones we're making go extinct now? Megafauna extinction was anthropogenic. Their disappearance actually serves a good indicator of early human movements as we spread out from the horn of Africa.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2017 14:47
|
|
|
Nocturtle posted:Also my inner 10 year old is just disappointed I'll never get to see the car armadillos. oh they didn't go extinct, the mana level just sunk too far you'll see cute lil car sized Juggernaut babies once the Sixth World starts on August 17
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2017 14:51
|
|
|
Quandary posted:Also it's pretty widely thought that humans hunted those animals to extinction, so it's more of an extension of a current issue than anything. I don't know about armadillos and sloths, but everyone knows that humans hunted dinosaurs to extinction!
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2017 14:57
|
|
|
enraged_camel posted:I don't know about armadillos and sloths, but everyone knows that humans hunted dinosaurs to extinction! Even though they were Our Lord and Savior's choice of mount! For which we suffer to this day.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2017 15:00
|
|
|
Nocturtle posted:My bank emits three times more carbon than the fruit I eat?! As if there weren't enough reasons to dislike the financial industry. "finance" = bitcoin mining rigs
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2017 15:02
|
|
|
StabbinHobo posted:reminder for whatever page we're on: if you live in a detached house and drive a car your reduced-meat diet is you telling everyone around you "i'm smug as gently caress and bad at math!" So more than half of your carbon footprint can be eliminated by basically just moving to a city with public transportation. Very cool chart.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2017 15:27
|
|
|
Potentially stupid question but I'm struggling to find answers with google... you know how when the glaciers that covered North America receded, some of that glacial movement melted and formed the Great Lakes? Is it possible with the geography of Antarctica that some of the glaciers covering it would just melt and stay on the land mass of Antarctica to form big rear end lakes rather than floating out into the ocean and causing massive sea level rise?
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2017 15:38
|
|
|
Burt Buckle posted:Potentially stupid question but I'm struggling to find answers with google... you know how when the glaciers that covered North America receded, some of that glacial movement melted and formed the Great Lakes? Is it possible with the geography of Antarctica that some of the glaciers covering it would just melt and stay on the land mass of Antarctica to form big rear end lakes rather than floating out into the ocean and causing massive sea level rise? If all of Antarctica's ice melted I'm sure there would be some lakes left on it, yeah. Not enough to prevent literally hundreds of feet of sea level rise, but some would remain, no doubt about it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2017 16:27
|
|
|
Burt Buckle posted:So more than half of your carbon footprint can be eliminated by basically just moving to a city with public transportation. It's more like a little bit less than a quarter, at least according to that chart. But yeah, not driving everyday is easily the biggest thing that any given person can do to reduce their own footprint.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2017 16:31
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/AmichaiStein1/status/885072176906477568 This finally happened.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2017 17:21
|
|
|
Burt Buckle posted:Potentially stupid question but I'm struggling to find answers with google... you know how when the glaciers that covered North America receded, some of that glacial movement melted and formed the Great Lakes? Is it possible with the geography of Antarctica that some of the glaciers covering it would just melt and stay on the land mass of Antarctica to form big rear end lakes rather than floating out into the ocean and causing massive sea level rise? Antarctica is an archipelago rather than a continent, due to the pressure of ice causing the landmass to sink. Your answer would depend on whether than landmass can rebound faster than the ice melts (probably not).
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2017 17:21
|
|
|
Paradoxish posted:It's more like a little bit less than a quarter, at least according to that chart. But yeah, not driving everyday is easily the biggest thing that any given person can do to reduce their own footprint. That chart is for the average person. So e.g. driving is a blend of people who don't drive or at least only drive a short distance (who score near to 0 on the driving), and those who drive a lot, who score way higher than 4.7. So I can believe it's cutting down by about half if you move from the latter group to the former group.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2017 19:42
|
|
|
OhFunny posted:https://twitter.com/AmichaiStein1/status/885072176906477568 Thanks for posting, we had not seen it seven times already.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2017 20:38
|
|
|
Nice video on that one, at least. Big thing is big!
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2017 20:42
|
|
|
Conspiratiorist posted:Ever heard of civil defense? Counterpoint: the bundy gang. They still seem to be kicking despite how many armed standoffs at this point? Clearly this is more complicated than you are making it out to be. I mean we don't have to guess, there are countless historical examples where poo poo hit the fan and it always turned out pretty loving poorly for the people who just decided to rely on community support. Katrina is a perfect example actually, but i think the tribal warfare in early America is a better example of how things would actually function in the hypothetical doomsday scenarios people are talking about. But really though? The life of most 1st worlders living today isn't going to be affected much by climate change unless something really bonkers happens and it hits much harder and faster than the models are predicting. The disdain shown towards technologies that will mitigate cc or reverse it is nutty, unfounded, and frankly anti - intellectual. It's like the people 20 years ago who said competitive green energy was impossible-- actually you just have to put the time and research in.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2017 22:59
|
|
|
Squalid posted:I go on and off meat, imo the trick is just easing into the diet and not sweating the odd roast served by grandma. Chicken is actually a lot better for the environment than a lot of the things you mentioned. If people just reduced beef and lamb consumption you'd be 90 percent of the way there, and additionally chicken is an incredibly efficient protein that can be made nearly anywhere and requires very little land use. Another thing that people forget is that the carbon footprints of things are variable. If everyone switched to only eating soybeans tomorrow, the per calorie carbon footprint of it would increase by a significant amount for a variety of reasons, one of the major ones being that you would have to vastly increase the amount of crops and arable land is a location specific and limited resource. Increasing the use of sub optimal farmland for a crop inevitably leads to higher carbon use. But besides that chicken wings are delicious.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2017 23:13
|
|
|
Burt Buckle posted:So more than half of your carbon footprint can be eliminated by basically just moving to a city with public transportation. exactly. every time you hear someone say "but what can I do" its simple "move to a condo or townhouse and take the bus or train to work". thats it. this is where they give you the litany of crybaby excuses of why it would be moderately inconvenience for them to change their lifestyle so blah blah nihilist-escape-hatch.
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2017 00:11
|
|
|
it is not at all a coincidence that this breaks down on left/right barriers. buses and trains are shared transit. parks are shared yards. adjacent buildings are shared walls. the solution to climate change is SHARING YOU GREEDY FUCKS.
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2017 00:13
|
|
|
StabbinHobo posted:exactly. every time you hear someone say "but what can I do" its simple "move to a condo or townhouse and take the bus or train to work". thats it. this is where they give you the litany of crybaby excuses of why it would be moderately inconvenience for them to change their lifestyle so blah blah nihilist-escape-hatch. That's not the full implication of that chart, which is actually much worse. If we want to avoid the catastrophic climate change scenarios that chart needs to show 0t C02e for every North American extremely quickly. Even if you forced everyone into cities, scrapped their cars and mercy-killed every factory farm cow we'd still be nowhere near zero emissions. Our infrastructure needs to be completely overhauled so that even our food production doesn't emit carbon. This doesn't even get in to the challenges involved getting the developing (ie China and India) down to zero emissions. It's an immense challenge, it would in fact be far easier if we could solve climate change by simply razing the suburbs. StabbinHobo posted:it is not at all a coincidence that this breaks down on left/right barriers. buses and trains are shared transit. parks are shared yards. adjacent buildings are shared walls. the solution to climate change is SHARING YOU GREEDY FUCKS. This isn't wrong.
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2017 00:25
|
|
|
StabbinHobo posted:exactly. every time you hear someone say "but what can I do" its simple "move to a condo or townhouse and take the bus or train to work". thats it. this is where they give you the litany of crybaby excuses of why it would be moderately inconvenience for them to change their lifestyle so blah blah nihilist-escape-hatch. Now if only I could get a job that paid me enough to afford to move there and live in an apartment building.
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2017 00:31
|
|
|
Just spend 70 percent of your income on an apartment in the inner-city or you're a part of the problem. No, you can't live farther away and pay less for housing because the buses don't go to that neighborhood and it's irresponsible to drive to work.
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2017 00:38
|
|
|
pacmania90 posted:Just spend 70 percent of your income on an apartment in the inner-city or you're a part of the problem. No, you can't live farther away and pay less for housing because the buses don't go to that neighborhood and it's irresponsible to drive to work. Maybe the problem is a systemic one regarding the way we regulate and subsidize our land use and transportation systems to make car ownership and suburban living vastly more affordable than any other way of life!
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2017 00:47
|
|
|
*only builds enormous freeways and sprawling single family home suburbs for the last sixty years* "There is no demand for any other type of development!"
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2017 00:50
|
|
|
Quote!=edit
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2017 00:51
|
|
|
cue the litany
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2017 01:04
|
|
|
give a nearby intersection or throwaway address for where you work. i will find a 2br apartment you can afford within 1 hour public transit of it with ten whole loving minutes of google and craigslist. edit: :WARNING: YOU MIGHT HAVE TO LIVE NEAR BLACK PEOPLE :WARNING: StabbinHobo fucked around with this message at 01:09 on Jul 13, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2017 01:07
|
|
|
White folks being afraid of black folks is the only reason I can afford to live in a city (and soon, own a house) so if other white folks would keep being terrified until after I've paid off my loans that'd be nice.
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2017 01:19
|
|
|
For reference I'm on board with razing the suburbs, I'm just saying it's not the solution to all our problems.
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2017 01:25
|
|
|
StabbinHobo posted:give a nearby intersection or throwaway address for where you work. i will find a 2br apartment you can afford within 1 hour public transit of it with ten whole loving minutes of google and craigslist. To be fair, an hour commute (assuming you don't mean round trip) is more than double the average US commute. That's a hell of a long time to spend getting to and from work, even if you can do it on a bus or a train.
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2017 01:26
|
|
|
Relevant Tangent posted:White folks being afraid of black folks is the only reason I can afford to live in a city (and soon, own a house) so if other white folks would keep being terrified until after I've paid off my loans that'd be nice. Otoh that's why we don't have effective public transit in many communities because it allows "those people" to use "our services." That was the argument people made in an attempt to remove the bus stops in my neighborhood growing up. And where I live now white flight is why the electric trolley system that used to connect an entire metropolis is laying unused in ruins. So it is a mixed bag.
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2017 01:33
|
|
|
if your posts starts with "to be fair" u r denying
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2017 01:35
|
|
|
Paradoxish posted:To be fair, an hour commute (assuming you don't mean round trip) is more than double the average US commute. That's a hell of a long time to spend getting to and from work, even if you can do it on a bus or a train. I did a 1.5 hour commute each way for a few months. It takes its toll mentally and physically on a person and I cant imagine having to do it for much longer than I did without needing a massive pay raise to move closer. An hour is still way too drat long to commute for what amounts to a net zero or loss when you factor in the drastic rise in housing costs as you move closer to the giant city cores. Our cities, especially here in North America, are just so poorly thought out that it would takes billions of dollars to make the necessary changes and no one is going to jump on that political landmine sadly. Also thats assuming people go along with it. Most boomers would rather die than give up their suburban dream home. 
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2017 01:42
|
|
|
dead boomers are a huge part of adressing global warming
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2017 01:49
|
|
|
StabbinHobo posted:if your posts starts with "to be fair" u r denying anyone can do it! if you spend two hours per day commuting isn't very convincing is all I'm saying
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2017 01:52
|
|
|
Even in North America, the best solution to many problems is vast amounts of people dying. Global super pandemic can't come soon enough.
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2017 01:53
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 02:17 |
|
|
Rime posted:Even in North America, the best solution to many problems is vast amounts of people dying. Global super pandemic can't come soon enough. Just don't tell anyone at your diybio meeting that and you should be fine. At home DNA printing has come a long way...and pirated CRISPR will be on the market soon enough.
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2017 01:56
|
|