Cuttlefush posted:

people have somehow mixed up doomposting with unironic eco-fascist turbo hitler posting. a guy got 6er'd for making a classic malthusian argument and people freaked out and defended it. that's bad.

quote:

Using a seafloor-exploring robot, the UW team learned that the bubbles "were just a minor component of warm, chemically distinct fluid gushing from the seafloor sediment." "They explored in that direction and what they saw was not just methane bubbles, but water coming out of the seafloor like a firehose," Evan Solomon, a UW associate professor of oceanography and seafloor geology specialist, said in the school's statement. "That’s something that I’ve never seen, and to my knowledge has not been observed before."

mawarannahr posted:

lol if you live in the PNW https://futurism.com/leak-bottom-ocean

Car Hater posted:

Ecofascism is explicitly about keeping the right humans alive by purging the undesirables and restoring a mythical preexisting state of nature though


Being misanthropic to the point of "we'd be better off omniciding ourselves now to forestall the larger omnicide of mammals etc" is not that


If you want to say I'm even more evil for it sure I'm fine with it but it's definitely not ecofascist

Goa Tse-tung posted:

can you please stop lying? MHD gave a 24 hour probe, and there was no argument, it was a shitpost!

mawarannahr posted:

lol if you live in the PNW https://futurism.com/leak-bottom-ocean

kiss your rear end goodbye before bed every night

Cuttlefush posted:

no it isn't. god drat just look up ecofascism and deep ecology. even the wikipedia page. you are making textbook arguments.

"we'd be better off omniciding ourselves now to forestall the larger omnicide of mammals etc" is exactly that, you dumbass. "omniciding ourselves" is not what you're actually advocating. keeping a few humans alive does not make something worse than keeping no humans alive. you're still purging the undesireables whether it's all the humans or almost all of the humans. what the gently caress

mawarannahr posted:

lol if you live in the PNW https://futurism.com/leak-bottom-ocean

kiss your rear end goodbye before bed every night

quote:

suggests that the almost-fresh water leaking out of it may be a sort of tectonic lubricant
[...]
"the fluid is coming straight from the Cascadia megathrust"
[...]

Zodium posted:

mixing and matching completely incommensurate sciencey sounding words that come to mind ftw

Mola Yam posted:

Zodium posted:

you can't imagine a viable future, and you surmise this to be a function of the problem's intractability rather than a function of material limits to your imagination or to knowledge more generally.

Iron Crowned posted:

Speaking of, here's an update on my front door birbs

Car Hater posted:

I looked it up and that's explicitly what it said, the ecofascists are fash wearing green, and the deep ecology folks are all about some woo-woo "balance of nature" paganism with plenty of clean habitat and living in harmony blah blah ahistorical nonsense.


Unfortunately life has no inherent balance and sapient hominids are too good at outcompeting all other members of a biome and stripping it of the potential to support life, which is why history is composed of a bunch of population booms and busts and now this is gonna be the biggest one

Car Hater posted:

Humans = Biosphere collapse idk what else to tell ya

If the goal is biosphere not collapsing the humans gotta go, can't have your cake and eat it too, the grain farming is too intense

Car Hater posted:

Ecofascism is explicitly about keeping the right humans alive by purging the undesirables and restoring a mythical preexisting state of nature though


Being misanthropic to the point of "we'd be better off omniciding ourselves now to forestall the larger omnicide of mammals etc" is not that

Car Hater posted:

I point back to my record of multiple years of advocacy for the immediate nuclear annihilation of all mankind in response to the notion that I have any cracks left to ping

Car Hater posted:

I also fail to see how you can post seriously that rapturing all the humans wouldn't help the rest of the living things relative to literally anything humans will do with our remaining time

DEEP ECOLOGY AND POPULATION CONTROL posted:

In the platform co-authored by Arne Naess and George Sessions, we find the following, startling statement related to population control:

deep ecology dudes posted:

The flourishing of human life and cultures is compatible with a substantial decrease of the human population. The flourishing of non-human life requires such a decrease.

Note the chilling phrase a substantial decrease of the human population. The term substantial means to a large degree. Does this imply half, oreven two-thirds of the world’s population? Note the next statement aswell, that non-human life today requires such an ample decrease inhuman numbers. The word requires implies that the speedy culling of our mammalian species is a matter beyond dispute.

These two sentences alone expose the dark heart of deep ecology. The goal of the movement is not just zero population growth, but a serious decline in the number of people on the planet. That this point was left in the public platform when other controversial principles were taken out for the sake of consensus reveals how non-controversial among certain classes is the desire to see the world’s population plummet.

Car Hater posted:

Why would there be? It's a thermodynamics problem, overpopulation is a key aspect of our energetic throughput being totally ridiculous.

Car Hater posted:

Overpopulation is a cause _and_ an effect of the systems that are destroying the biosphere though. What viable solution can you possibly envision that is not "human population low enough to be supported without industrial civilization"?

Car Hater posted:

Billions of lives are utterly dependent on the systems (mechanized agriculture, refrigerated shipping, resource extraction, mass manufacturing, etc) that characterize our predicament is what I'm saying.

I also hate the fascist impulse, but what it seems like/how some people react to overpopulation, and what it really means (we've been over capacity for centuries) are different things

Car Hater posted:

Lmao "Limits? To growth? Unacceptable!"

Also I would like to have an honest discussion of population control (because it is mandatory for intelligent species in the long term on any world), but people for some reason (not wanting to confront the universe?) conflate it with growth rates and development when there should never have been this many people/this much consumption/this much society in the first place. Our ecosystems can't sustain us now, how can one think we're going to grow our way out of the problem?

Car Hater posted:

I remain amazed that I managed to acquire a dual ME/Physics degree and didn't come out of it a drooling machine-brain tbh

Car Hater posted:

I empathize with your commitment to humanity, but degrowth or not isn't really a choice at this point, civilization is too big and resource-intensive to achieve homeostasis. We have to do triage. And as to it being white privilege to entertain, just...what? My best case scenario as a white dude already in the north is to get the equivalent to a remote south American jungle village going and adopt a ton of refugees.

MightyBigMinus posted:

i'm not reading any of that

please go back to d&d

MightyBigMinus posted:

i'm not reading any of that

i find carhaters edgelord nihilism annoying

but only like 2% as annoying as the "everything is ecofacism" tone police and their meltdowns

please go back to d&d

quote:

To paint or not to paint?

That is the question that many homeowners are facing as their dreams for perfect turf are battered – whether it’s from inflation pushing pricier lawn care options out of reach, or droughts leading to water shortages.

Increasingly, many are turning in the spreader for the paint can, opting, according to a report in The Wall Street Journal, for shades of green with names like “Fairway” and “Perennial Rye.”

Where does this yen for turning the outside of the house into a trim green carpet come from?

What I found was that lawns extend far back in American history. Former presidents George Washington and Thomas Jefferson had lawns, but these were not perfect greenswards. It turns out that the ideal of perfect turf – a weed-free, supergreen monoculture – is a recent phenomenon.

The not-so-perfect lawns of Levittown
Its beginnings can largely be traced to the post–World War II era when suburban developments such as the iconic Levittown, New York, had its start.

Levittown was the brainchild of the Levitt family, which viewed landscaping – a word that only entered the English language in the 1930s – as a form of “neighborhood stabilization,” or a way of bolstering property values. The Levitts, who built 17,000 homes between 1947 and 1951, thus insisted that homeowners mow the yard once a week between April and November and included the stricture in covenants accompanying their deeds.

But the Levitts took the obsession with the lawn only so far. “I don’t believe in being a slave to the lawn,” wrote Abraham Levitt. Clover was, to him, “just as nice” as grass.

Engineering perfection
All of which is to say that the quest for the perfect lawn did not come naturally. It had to be engineered, and one of the greatest influencers in this regard was the Scotts Co. of Marysville, Ohio, which took agricultural chemicals and created concoctions that homeowners could spread over their yards.

Formulators like Scotts had one great advantage: Turfgrass is not native to North America, and growing it on the continent is, for the most part, an uphill ecological battle. Homeowners thus needed a lot of help in the quest for perfection.

But first Scotts had to help lodge the idea of perfect turf in the American imagination. Scotts was able to tap into postwar trends in brightly colored consumer products. From yellow slacks to blue Jell-O, colored products became status symbols and a sign that the consumer had rejected the drab black-and-white world of urban life for the modern suburb and its kaleidoscopic colors – which included, of course, the vibrant green lawn.

Architectural trends also helped the perfect turf aesthetic take root. A blurring of indoor and outdoor space occurred in the postwar era as patios and eventually sliding glass doors invited homeowners to treat the yard as an extension of their family room. What better way to achieve a comfy outdoor living space than to carpet the yard in a nice greensward.

In 1948, the perfect lawn took a giant step forward when the Scotts Co. began selling its “Weed and Feed” lawn care product, which allowed homeowners to eliminate weeds and fertilize simultaneously.

The development was probably one of the worst things ever to happen, ecologically speaking, to the American yard. Now homeowners were spreading the toxic herbicide 2,4-D – which has since been linked to cancer, reproductive harm and neurological impairment – on their lawns as a matter of course, whether they were having an issue with weeds or not.

Selective herbicides like 2,4-D killed broadleaf “weeds” like clover and left the grass intact. Clover and bluegrass, a desirable turf species, evolved together, with the former capturing nitrogen from the air and adding it to the soil as fertilizer. Killing it off sent homeowners back to the store for more artificial fertilizer to make up for the deficit.

That was bad news for homeowners, but a good business model for those companies selling lawn care products who, on the one hand, handicapped homeowners by killing off the clover and, on the other hand, sold them more chemical inputs to recreate what could have occurred naturally.

The “perfect” lawn had come of age.

The meaning of grass painting
By the early 1960s, homeowners were already looking for ways of achieving perfect turf on the cheap.

A 1964 article in Newsweek pointed out that green grass paint was being sold in 35 states. The magazine opined that because a homeowner “needs a Bachelor of Chemistry to comprehend the bewildering variety of weed and bug destroyers now fogging the market,” paint was becoming an attractive alternative.

So the interest in grass painting is not entirely new.

What is new, however, is that the recent interest in painting the lawn is taking place in a context in which a more pluralistic vision of the yard has taken root.

People fed up with corporate-dominated lawn care are turning back the clock and cultivating their yards with clover, a plant that is resistant to drought and provides nutrients to the lawn, to boot. And so the clover lawn has been making a comeback, with videos on TikTok tagged #cloverlawn boasting 78 million views.

Together, the return of grass painting with the resurgent interest in clover lawns suggests that the ideal of the resource-intensive perfect lawn is an ecological conceit that the country may no longer be able to afford.

AceClown posted:

Wakko posted:

i agree with cuttle and am p. upset people would suggest reducing the human population when we’re already rocketing past Pliocene co2 concentrations. we are doing a speedrun here and need everyone we can make to pitch in.

AceClown posted:

Mayor Dave posted:

Humans might not live on fossil fuels but the current mode of industrial agriculture is impossible without them, and in turn current population is unsustainable without it, so

Wakko posted:

i agree with cuttle and am p. upset people would suggest reducing the human population when we’re already rocketing past Pliocene co2 concentrations. we are doing a speedrun here and need everyone we can make to pitch in.

Wakko posted:

yes that’s why i encourage everyone to have kids. your kid could be the next thomas midgley jr. we cant afford to take the risk of them not being born.

Wakko posted:

yes that’s why i encourage everyone to have kids. your kid could be the next thomas midgley jr. we cant afford to take the risk of them not being born.

Goa Tse-tung posted:

Cuttlefush is really engeged here, wow, wonder what his solution to this problem is!

Car Hater posted:

Ecofascism is explicitly about keeping the right humans alive by purging the undesirables and restoring a mythical preexisting state of nature though

Car Hater posted:

Oh and for the real kicker what woulddo if I could idk wave my wand and prepare humans for 2200 is make it all the darkest-skinned people possible up in the triage zones where a minimally impactful technological society is maintained. The methane thinning the ozone layer is going to be hellish long-term in a biased way.