|
you people are all insufferable and i hope you drown e: not you, friendbot  (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2018 21:59
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 12:35 |
|
|
friendbot2000 posted:Then invite them for a board game night? There are a lot of options available to be a good neighbor and building community.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2018 23:14
|
|
|
incredible flesh posted:i'm going to set my own rear end on fire Have some chutney. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VEBLMJeVNVU
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2018 23:32
|
|
|
what am i allowed to wish upon people when they're being completely hapless and tragic? please leave me one option from the following list, that i may have a weapon against the debilitating forces of this thread 1) death 2) a plague that spreads disease (i.e., rats, malarial mosquitoes) 3) a cute plague (frogs etc) 4) dust storms 5) wildfires with or without complete loss of property and possessions 6) sexual disease 7) sexy disease 8) spine grows a second, smaller spine
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2018 05:44
|
|
|
incredible flesh posted:what am i allowed to wish upon people when they're being completely hapless and tragic? please leave me one option from the following list, that i may have a weapon against the debilitating forces of this thread I'm ok with these.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2018 05:48
|
|
|
incredible flesh posted:what am i allowed to wish upon people when they're being completely hapless and tragic?
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2018 08:51
|
|
|
Lightning Knight posted:I'm ok with these.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2018 09:11
|
|
|
A Pox of Puppies upon your houses, goons
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2018 11:27
|
|
|
aphid_licker posted:A Pox of Puppies upon your houses, goons Absolutely unrelated but still wonderful thing this reminded me of: We used a pox of puppies, basically, as a fundraising thing for a local animal shelter. The winner of a raffle at a wine-tasting got to sit in the big playpen of puppies (after washing / sanitizing his hands) who were there for adoption and play with them during the event, and people would stop by to refill his glass if he wanted. The shelter seriously raised like $5,000 with that one off of $20 raffle tickets. It was amazing. (I didn't win.  )
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2018 22:00
|
|
|
Sundae posted:Absolutely unrelated but still wonderful thing this reminded me of: We used a pox of puppies, basically, as a fundraising thing for a local animal shelter. The winner of a raffle at a wine-tasting got to sit in the big playpen of puppies (after washing / sanitizing his hands) who were there for adoption and play with them during the event, and people would stop by to refill his glass if he wanted. The shelter seriously raised like $5,000 with that one off of $20 raffle tickets. It was amazing.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2018 22:20
|
|
|
This gives me a little hope that change in public opinion is happening fast: https://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/418887-poll-nearly-two-thirds-of-republicans-now-acknowledge-climate quote:The poll found that 64 percent of Republican respondents said they believe that Earth's climate is changing, up from 49 percent in 2015. There's still quibbling about whether it's because of humans, but it's still a tick in the positive direction. Might be too late, but- quote:Thirty-seven percent of Americans polled said the environment and human activity contribute equally to a changing climate, while 29 percent place greater blame on human activity and 10 percent blame natural environmental changes. 
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2018 23:51
|
|
|
I'm having a little trouble finding the article/poll right now, but a big problem is that less than half of the people who believe that climate change is real also believe that it's already affecting them or that it will affect them within their lifetimes. If you want an attitude that we really need to work on changing, that's it right there. A big part of making action happen right now is going to be convincing people that their own comfortable lives are at stake and that this isn't a problem for their children to solve.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2018 00:30
|
|
|
The main thing to bring up when advocating eco-terrorism is to remind people that no amount of direct action a small group of people do, is nothing compared to the amount of violence created by climate change deniers or causers. And like another poster said on this page or the previous a small group of like-minded individuals with a solid plan can harm a relatively minuscule number of people to change the world forever.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2018 01:20
|
|
|
yea if you truly "believe" that a 4C world will lead to multiple consecutive staple crop failures then pol pot's bodycount is a nothingburger
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2018 04:21
|
|
|
Doorknob Slobber posted:The main thing to bring up when advocating eco-terrorism is to remind people that no amount of direct action a small group of people do, is nothing compared to the amount of violence created by climate change deniers or causers. Doorknob Slobber posted:And like another poster said on this page or the previous a small group of like-minded individuals with a solid plan can harm a relatively minuscule number of people to change the world forever.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2018 05:00
|
|
|
Flannelette posted:You can justify anything with this logic though, I lack the knowledge to properly explain why but I'd guess because it has no real upper limits.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2018 05:03
|
|
|
I encourage Americans to call their Rep and Pelosi's office to voice their support of a Green New Deal. As well as tell Nancy Pelosi to demand Machin be passed over for the Energy and Natural Resources Committee. Just keep calling and dont loving stop.
friendbot2000 fucked around with this message at 05:32 on Nov 30, 2018 |
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2018 05:09
|
|
|
twodot posted:What's an example of a bad thing that can be justified with this logic? Anything you want that stops the possible future "big bad" and is less bad than the "big bad". It's too loose and undefined and ties the problem to a single solution too much.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2018 05:53
|
|
|
friendbot2000 posted:I encourage Americans to call their Rep and Pelosi's office to voice their support of a Green New Deal. As well as tell Nancy Pelosi to demand Machin be passed over for the Energy and Natural Resources Committee. Just keep calling and dont loving stop. Joe Manchin is a Senator and Nancy Pelosi is a Representative.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2018 05:55
|
|
|
Epitope posted:it will similarly result in tragedy and zero progress. Progress towards helping climate change or whatever the goal would be. The "action we can't speak of" is, same as eating less beef, not going to accomplish anything without being part of a larger global effort. You're not going to organize a global Monkey Wrench Gang on somethingawful dot com. You're just going to get yourself or the website in trouble, or maybe even cause something terrible to happen. This is demonstrably untrue as billionaires have massive carbon footprints and capitalism needs to go unless we're just hoping for a literal deus ex machina.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2018 05:58
|
|
|
Flannelette posted:Anything you want that stops the possible future "big bad" and is less bad than the "big bad". It's too loose and undefined and ties the problem to a single solution too much. twodot posted:What's an example of a bad thing that can be justified with this logic?
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2018 06:05
|
|
|
How are u posted:Joe Manchin is a Senator and Nancy Pelosi is a Representative. I am aware of this. That doesn't mean you can't make your voice known on multiple fronts. When I say call your Reps. I mean call loving everyone. Plus, it sends a message that Blue Dog obstruction will not be tolerated in the Climate Change fight.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2018 06:19
|
|
|
Zeno-25 posted:billionaires have massive carbon footprints and capitalism needs to go unless we're just hoping for a literal deus ex machina. I tend to agree, so not sure what you're taking exception to. I'm not arguing against direct action or revolution or whatever unspeakable thing. I'm arguing against the idea that direct action is "the only actual solution" and everything else is worthless
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2018 06:27
|
|
|
Epitope posted:I tend to agree, so not sure what you're taking exception to. I'm not arguing against direct action or revolution or whatever unspeakable thing. I'm arguing against the idea that direct action is "the only actual solution" and everything else is worthless My mistake then, I misread your comments as being far more pacifistic than I should have.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2018 06:28
|
|
|
twodot posted:Like just write down a bad thing you think can be justified with that logic, I think the problem with it is it relies on the fear of the bad outcome and how we must avoid that instead of a hope of better future and ways to get to it. So instead of building forward to the future you want you're knocking things down backwards away from the one you don't want.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2018 06:46
|
|
|
Zeno-25 posted:My mistake then, I misread your comments as being far more pacifistic than I should have. I mean I am trying to pacify goons, cuz seriously, if some goon tries to save the world through violence, think what that would actually turn out as
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2018 07:02
|
|
|
Flannelette posted:Kill 99% of humans with a virus, environment saved but did we need to kill that many? Doesn't matter because the outcome (preservation of biodiversity) is better than if we did nothing.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2018 07:05
|
|
|
twodot posted:Can you name the poster who thinks that destroying 99% of humans via virus is better than humans destroying the environment No but I'd imagine there are more people thinking about it now than 40 years ago. twodot posted:(consequently preserving the remaining biodiversity of Earth, and doing effectively nothing to affect the biodiversity of the universe at large)?
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2018 09:47
|
|
|
Flannelette posted:Kill 99% of humans with a virus, environment saved but did we need to kill that many? Doesn't matter because the outcome (preservation of biodiversity) is better than if we did nothing. Its not actually clear that some sort of mass-death scenario would actually be better for the climate than whatever path we're going to take. Our damage and risk is such that it requires more management, not less to walk us away from further damage. If everyone just died the natural gas storage fields would leak, fires would burn through cities, desertification would continue apace, etc. People in an apocalyptic plague will stop caring about emissions controls or long term consequences. If everyone died today you'd basically be achieving a carbon neutral economy in 20-30 years but that might be offset by the uncontrolled potential for emissions in the 20-30 years it takes for our stuff to rot, leak, or combust.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2018 10:40
|
|
|
Killing off 99% percent of humans currently would make me feel worse than global warming killing of 100% of us in 50 years - and that's even if I get to be one of the 1% left to live out my life as a hunter-gatherer or w/e. Any solution that doesn't preserve society as we know it today is not something people will get on board with, I think.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2018 11:06
|
|
|
Flannelette posted:Kill 99% of humans with a virus, environment saved but did we need to kill that many? Doesn't matter because the outcome (preservation of biodiversity) is better than if we did nothing. With all due respect, why? Why are we valuing non sentient life ahead of sentient life? Animals kill, rape and destroy the environment as much as humans, we just have a bigger capacity to do so but that is redeemed by our awareness that it shouldn't. Why the gently caress would you want to kill mankind to save bugs? What use is the beauty of life if none of the beings left can APPRECIATE it? AceOfFlames fucked around with this message at 11:15 on Nov 30, 2018 |
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2018 11:08
|
|
|
^ That too, yea. I think the ideal and actually somewhat realistic scenario would be to convince world governments to go wind/water/geothermal/nuclear as fast as we can & regardless of cost. Second option would be to invest heavily into relevant science and hope someone stumbles onto some piece of miracle tech.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2018 11:13
|
|
|
Avalerion posted:Any solution that doesn't preserve society as we know it today is not something people will get on board with, I think. AceOfFlames posted:What use is the beauty of life if none of the beings left can APPRECIATE it? TACD fucked around with this message at 12:04 on Nov 30, 2018 |
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2018 12:01
|
|
|
TACD posted:Society as we know it today (i.e. globalised for-profit on-demand unlimited mass consumption) is the problem, and one way or another will be vastly altered by the end of this century no matter what. But “just shut it down now” is not a solution that will be accepted by anyone. Just getting rid of cars isn’t happening, but switching to electromobiles might - though even that is going to be insanely difficult.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2018 12:38
|
|
|
Mexie has a great channel that very often touches on climate change and how our current system drives it. She also has a pretty good video on violence that's worth a watch for sure https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VEKUVff7fLk
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2018 13:07
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:Its not actually clear that some sort of mass-death scenario would actually be better for the climate than whatever path we're going to take. Temperatures would also rise by .5 within a few years due to reduced dimming, and end in the ballpark of 2~2.5C by the end of the century just from historical emissions.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2018 13:37
|
|
|
This is a really instructive plot for temperature changes. https://twitter.com/ed_hawkins/status/1068113206525202433
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2018 17:55
|
|
|
twodot posted:Can you name the poster who thinks that destroying 99% of humans via virus is better than humans destroying the environment (consequently preserving the remaining biodiversity of Earth, and doing effectively nothing to affect the biodiversity of the universe at large)? I mean, if somebody put me in front of the big red button that would do this I'd probably hit it, if I'm being honest.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2018 18:16
|
|
|
How are u posted:I mean, if somebody put me in front of the big red button that would do this I'd probably hit it, if I'm being honest. I would hit the button but only if it was 100%.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2018 19:24
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 12:35 |
|
|
twodot posted:Can you name the poster who thinks that destroying 99% of humans via virus is better than humans destroying the environment (consequently preserving the remaining biodiversity of Earth, and doing effectively nothing to affect the biodiversity of the universe at large)? It is me, I have said this at least a dozen times in this thread and it's predecessors over the years. Admittedly I'm more on the 50%-60% side of things to ensure we don't sterilize the planet from nuclear meltdowns and someone is left to clean up other messes and build some space infrastructure.  (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2018 20:17
|
|
