|
self unaware posted:why not? Because we aren't even in the same universe as that happening look at the loving graphs dumbass. Point me to a single instance of large increases in standards of living that occurred without massive increases in cc emission. Go on, find it.
|
#
?
May 28, 2018 18:12
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 12:12 |
|
|
tsa posted:Because we aren't even in the same universe as that happening look at the loving graphs dumbass. All the instances of increases in standards of living prior to industrialization? idk
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2018 18:24
|
|
|
Flowers For Algeria posted:All the instances of increases in standards of living prior to industrialization? idk But there is "dematerialisation". Maybe the future will be much more people being happy with reading stuff on ebook readers, writing each other texts instead of visiting so often, eating stuff that's tasty because you found a good recipe on the internet instead of fancy ingredients, living longer due to life hacks learned on youtube. Probably not though.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2018 19:52
|
|
|
Cingulate posted:I’m more concerned about dolphins and great apes than about ants fool
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2018 22:45
|
|
|
ha ha wow i loving love climate change https://twitter.com/StarTribune/status/1001152875437977600
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2018 22:51
|
|
|
Bloomberg has upped their projection of electric vehicle cost parity with ICE vehicles from 2026 to 2024, 6 years from now: https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2018-05-22/more-luxury-electric-vehicles-will-soon-be-available-for-lease Future coming quickly!
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2018 02:02
|
|
|
...what is your point?
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2018 06:04
|
|
|
It's been a nice change from watching people who fundamentally agree argue vehemently about minutia having realtalk blunder in here and oh so public poo poo their pants. Real talks posts have been the funniest things I've read in a long time. Climate Change: Come for the depression, stay for the laughs
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2018 13:43
|
|
|
tsa posted:Because we aren't even in the same universe as that happening look at the loving graphs dumbass. I mean, there's basically no difference in standards of living between France and the US, but the former emits about 1/3 as much CO2 per capita. In fact they emit about 2/3 what China does per capita, despite having an average household income that's several times higher. There's definitely a correlation between wealth and emissions but really no reason at all to believe it's impossible to decouple them.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2018 13:48
|
|
|
Cingulate posted:...what is your point?
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2018 13:59
|
|
|
this broken hill posted:you're a narcissistic face-seeker who can't empathise with anything unless it has a recognisable mouth, you know approximately nothing about ecology, and furthermore you are a wretch who will be harshly judged "Although the most acute judges of the witches and even the witches themselves, were convinced of the guilt of witchery, the guilt nevertheless was non-existent. It is thus with all guilt." Forget your outdated sense of shame and join your fellow last men as we make the world small: Nature posted:Global economic response to river floods We're destroying natural ecosystems and replacing them with much lamer systems of linked mutual dependence. On the subject of flooding: FourLeaf posted:https://twitter.com/JeremyHarrisTV/status/1000845163478925312 There's a well-established process, with post-Katrina New Orleans and Puerto Rico being recent high profile examples. Areas that are still viable or populated by by rich white people are rebuilt while impoverished regions are left to decay and eventually abandoned as you suggested. It's the same thing that happens to rust-belt communities that are no longer viable for economic reasons, so we're nothing if not consistent. Apparently in the US the National Flood Insurance Program is unnecessarily drawing out this process, but my knowledge doesn't extend beyond the John Oliver video. I don't know how you fix this without destroying a low of homeowner wealth in the process, making it politically a non-starter.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2018 14:41
|
|
|
FourLeaf posted:https://twitter.com/JeremyHarrisTV/status/1000845163478925312 Good read on this: http://40yrs.blogspot.com/2018/05/i-am-fine-i-am-dry-and-this-was-not.html It was a fairly intense storm, but beyond a few flooded basements, it should not have been a disaster. The flooding was caused by reckless and uninformed real estate development: ELLICOTT CITY FLOOD: STOP CALLING IT A NATURAL DISASTER For 200+ years the flooding in Ellicott City came from the rising of the Patapsco River and was mostly limited to lower Main Street. During major rain storms the water was absorbed into the ground in the surrounding woods north and west of town and the Tiber River, which runs east along Fredrick Road, was wide enough to handle the overflow that ran through town. (rivers have the uncanny ability to be just as wide and deep as they need to be) In the past 20+ years developers and Howard County zoning board have banded together to pave over all of those woods with medium and high density housing. The yellow area is mostly new construction built in the last two decades. When you pave over the natural terrain and add sewers and roads that lead directly to Main Street (red area) you get a high speed rollercoaster for the water to ride right through town. This “top down” flooding has nothing to do with Mother Nature. This is a man-made disaster caused by greedy and/or uninformed people who decided that building homes above this wonderful city was worth the risk of destroying it. ……… The county executive may be right that this is a “once in a thousand year storm” but anyone who has ever been on Main Street in a rain storm knows that flooding is a common occurrence since the construction above town became so out of control. Now, in perfect irony, The state and county will spend more money than they earn on tax from new construction to fix the damage it created. This is a horrible disaster but nature had nothing to do with it. This problem was foreseeable, and there have been plenty of indications of a problem even before the last flood 2 years ago. I am not sure what can be done to fix this now, though requiring the replacement of driveways and parking lots with porous surfaces could not hurt. ----- I spent a year+ working in the general area. This was a lovely town with some nice cycling paths.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2018 16:37
|
|
|
I'm sure most goons are familiar with groverhaus, but one goon who lives in Ellicott city got his house flooded in 2016, the same day he was hosting a goonmeet bbq, so they started calling it floodhaus. He was finally in the process of moving but had a decent amount of stuff still there that all got destroyed in this flood. There's a nice 15 foot deep sinkhole full of water outside the door now.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2018 19:13
|
|
|
Oh man that sucks 
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2018 19:20
|
|
|
this broken hill posted:you're a narcissistic face-seeker who can't empathise with anything unless it has a recognisable mouth, you know approximately nothing about ecology, and furthermore you are a wretch who will be harshly judged That's simply because human lives are really, really important. Ants, meh.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2018 21:24
|
|
|
Cingulate posted:Human lives matter. Ant lives primarily matter insofar as they matter for humans. The intrinsic value of ant lives is rather low, compared to that of humans. Important as decided by who?
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2018 22:50
|
|
|
Cingulate posted:Human lives matter. Ant lives primarily matter insofar as they matter for humans. The intrinsic value of ant lives is rather low, compared to that of humans. Well I can tell this guy isn’t a loving ant.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2018 22:53
|
|
|
ThatBasqueGuy posted:Important as decided by who?
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2018 23:17
|
|
|
that's a nice way of saying "it is because I say it is", rolling coal may have intrinsic moral value for the people who do it, doesn't make it any less stupid I'm not saying you're wrong, but your justification is pretty shaky atm for what it's worth I largely agree with you, biodiversity is good because it's beneficial to humanity, not because it has "intrinsic moral value" or whatever from a purely utilitarian standpoint it makes sense to preserve as much biodiversity as possible there's no reason to bring intrinsic moral value into the equation 90s Rememberer fucked around with this message at 23:24 on May 29, 2018 |
|
#
?
May 29, 2018 23:20
|
|
|
self unaware posted:that's a nice way of saying "it is because I say it is" self unaware posted:I'm not saying you're wrong, but your justification is pretty shaky atm  self unaware posted:for what it's worth I largely agree with you, biodiversity is good because it's beneficial to humanity, not because it has "intrinsic moral value" or whatever I mean, I too am not disagreeing with you here, just being precise.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2018 23:39
|
|
|
Cingulate posted:I explicitly said intrinsic value does not come from any authority. Except you, since you're the one claiming that it exists. quote:Utilitarianism is the theory which assigns intrinsic value exclusively to some measure of utility (e.g., pleasure or preference fulfilment). Alright but just saying "It has intrinsic value" doesn't mean anything. Why is the question people are looking for you to answer.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2018 23:42
|
|
|
self unaware posted:Alright but just saying "It has intrinsic value" doesn't mean anything. Why is the question people are looking for you to answer. Two bears, one is about to attack a deer, one is about to attack a human being. You have one bullet. Which one do you shoot? Don't goonsay about your aiming ability or whatever. This is an allegory about intrinsic value. Hello Sailor fucked around with this message at 23:47 on May 29, 2018 |
|
#
?
May 29, 2018 23:45
|
|
|
Thug Lessons posted:I mean, there's basically no difference in standards of living between France and the US, but the former emits about 1/3 as much CO2 per capita. In fact they emit about 2/3 what China does per capita, despite having an average household income that's several times higher. There's definitely a correlation between wealth and emissions but really no reason at all to believe it's impossible to decouple them. This is essentially where I'm at. Globally speaking we haven't decoupled carbon emissions from standards of living enough, but that doesn't make it impossible. Solutions/mitigation to climate change is almost guaranteed to be "never attempted before" so if your requirement for solutions is "things that have already happened" I wouldn't hold your breath.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2018 23:45
|
|
|
I would much, much rather my children be able to see birds in the trees than have one more human on this earth, though
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2018 23:45
|
|
|
Hello Sailor posted:Two bears, one is about to attack a deer, one is about to attack a human being. You have one bullet. Which one do you shoot? Depends on the person I mean, I agree that human lives have more worth than deer lives. But it's not because humans are intrinsically more valuable than deer, it's because humans are just more valuable than deer period (unless they are dead, in which case the deer offers more value probably since you can eat it). 90s Rememberer fucked around with this message at 23:48 on May 29, 2018 |
|
#
?
May 29, 2018 23:46
|
|
|
Hello Sailor posted:Two bears, one is about to attack a deer, one is about to attack a human being. You have one bullet. Which one do you shoot? myself, to spare myself the inevitable hellfuture
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2018 23:49
|
|
|
gently caress your retarded allegories and gently caress your stupid rear end kids that will only ever be worthwhile to someone else as a consumer and advertising absorber Lecture to us some more as you wear your Bangladeshi child made T-shirt about how every child deserves a good life
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2018 23:50
|
|
|
self unaware posted:Depends on the person More valuable as decided by who? I suspect you don't understand what "intrinsic" means in the context in which Cingulate is using it. call to action posted:gently caress your retarded allegories and gently caress your stupid rear end kids that will only ever be worthwhile to someone else as a consumer and advertising absorber I don't normally see your posts, but it turns out they show up when I'm replying. You're a worthless shitposter and can go gently caress yourself.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2018 23:54
|
|
|
call to action posted:gently caress your retarded allegories and gently caress your stupid rear end kids that will only ever be worthwhile to someone else as a consumer and advertising absorber i only post nude 
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2018 23:57
|
|
|
Hello Sailor posted:More valuable as decided by who? As decided by whomever the person is. My reason for valuing human lives has nothing to do with "intrinsic" value and everything to do with the practical value. But yes, the problem is that I don't understand the definition of intrinsic and not that you and a bunch of other lazy thinkers can't think of a reason outside "it just is!" for why humans could be more valuable than an ant or a deer. Like hell, you can even use the word intrinsic. The question is still "why does this have intrinsic value" (which can be answered, despite your protests and stupid allegories) 90s Rememberer fucked around with this message at 00:05 on May 30, 2018 |
|
#
?
May 30, 2018 00:01
|
|
|
self unaware posted:As decided by whomever the person is. My reason for valuing human lives has nothing to do with "intrinsic" value and everything to do with the practical value.  You don't know the person and don't know the deer. What practical value are you assigning to the human's life over the deer's? e: self unaware posted:Like hell, you can even use the word intrinsic. The question is still "why does this have intrinsic value" (which can be answered, despite your protests and stupid allegories) This right here indicates that you don't understand what "intrinsic" means.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2018 00:07
|
|
|
Hello Sailor posted:I suspect you don't understand what "intrinsic" means in the context in which Cingulate is using it. Cingulate's problem in this case is that the foundation of everything he's saying is pretty questionable. He specifically isn't saying, for example, that there isn't enough evidence that non-human animals are sentient or whatever. He's saying their experience is different than ours or possibly similar but lesser in some way. That's a lovely as gently caress place to start from because it's not really clear where the cut-off is or why it should exist at all. And to be clear, I obviously agree that human lives are worth drastically more than other lives as a general rule. Even with that being the case I'm still having a really negative reaction to the arguments that Cingulate is trying to make here.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2018 00:11
|
|
|
self unaware posted:Except you, since you're the one claiming that it exists. self unaware posted:Alright but just saying "It has intrinsic value" doesn't mean anything. Why is the question people are looking for you to answer. I couldn't prove them wrong there. They'd simply have professed their values. Their terrible values.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2018 00:14
|
|
|
This is a pretty dumb derail even by this thread's standards.Thug Lessons posted:I mean, there's basically no difference in standards of living between France and the US, but the former emits about 1/3 as much CO2 per capita. In fact they emit about 2/3 what China does per capita, despite having an average household income that's several times higher. There's definitely a correlation between wealth and emissions but really no reason at all to believe it's impossible to decouple them.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2018 00:15
|
|
|
Paradoxish posted:Cingulate's problem in this case is that the foundation of everything he's saying is pretty questionable. He specifically isn't saying, for example, that there isn't enough evidence that non-human animals are sentient or whatever. He's saying their experience is different than ours or possibly similar but lesser in some way. That's a lovely as gently caress place to start from because it's not really clear where the cut-off is or why it should exist at all. Option one: you agree that you, too, think humans have intrinsic value. Option two: anything else. Right now, some of y'all are going for option two. Not a good look imo
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2018 00:15
|
|
|
Hello Sailor posted:More valuable as decided by who? The parents have logged on
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2018 00:31
|
|
|
Cingulate posted:I'm not trying to prove to you, or to convince you, or making an argument, that humans have intrinsic value. I am simply claiming they do. Now you have two options. Option two is actually the correct one if you take "intrinsic" to mean "for no reason". Spoiler alert, it doesn't and you're just lazily avoiding answering the question of why. You're almost as bad as the guy who tried to die on the hill of "what does 'externality' mean" 90s Rememberer fucked around with this message at 00:43 on May 30, 2018 |
|
#
?
May 30, 2018 00:41
|
|
|
self unaware posted:Option two is actually the correct one if you take "intrinsic" to mean "for no reason". Spoiler alert, it doesn't and you're just lazily avoiding answering the question of why. But that's not what "intrinsic" means. I do like that you're referencing another argument where you didn't understand the terminology being used and arbitrarily declaring the other person as bad. In both cases, the problem has been you.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2018 00:49
|
|
|
davebo posted:I'm sure most goons are familiar with groverhaus, but one goon who lives in Ellicott city got his house flooded in 2016, the same day he was hosting a goonmeet bbq, so they started calling it floodhaus. He was finally in the process of moving but had a decent amount of stuff still there that all got destroyed in this flood. There's a nice 15 foot deep sinkhole full of water outside the door now. poo poo. gently caress.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2018 00:50
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 12:12 |
|
|
Hello Sailor posted:But that's not what "intrinsic" means. Yeah I don't know how to tell you any more clearly than when a guy says "according to who" he's not looking for a "well, intrinsic value means it isn't decided by an authority" he's asking what the justification for the statement is. But I guess you're hell bent on not arguing in good faith and would rather dunk on the guy than answer a harmless question. Boring rear end pedantry if you ask me.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2018 00:51
|
|