9
noyb
291d

This climate crisis is slowly getting into my head guys😠. The shit bolsanaro and all other govs are doing is effecting my mojo.

I am working here and trying to do my best to deliver quality code while i must fight the feeling that ppl are betraying me (the govs). Its not my job to remind them of not fucking us over. I try to help by not becoming a criminal and getting forward with my life. Wtf is wrong with those in charge of govs?! On any project if you ignore the signs, u'll end up in refactoring hell or the project just dies. Getting out takes serious commitment.
Is everyone just gone crazy?

Here we all will get fucked, if we fail with project earth. 🤬😖👿

Comments
  • 2
    unfortunately the world is so oil dependent that the issue has to be handled with kid gloves else we will risk seeing a global catastrophe of a different variety long before global warming leads to own.

    The only way the leaders of the world seem to know how to get the general population to handle things that way is by pushing ppl to the polar opposite ends of the debate so that everyone argues and the changes occur at a snail's pace.

    In other words, whether they admit to it or not, I don't think many officials actually believe that global warming is a hoax anymore, rather they're now just stalling to allow the oil and transportation companies time to hedge their bets with another means of income and energy
  • 8
    A lot of the "science" and media coverage are actually exaggerated or outright lies, though. The Amazon burning is a great example: many of the fires were on already cleared land and are done intentionally to keep the land available for farming, and several of the most-used photographs of the "fires" were taken by a photographer who died several years ago (so they obviously weren't pictures of the fires this year).

    When I took chemistry at university, one of the books "examples" for one of their concepts was how automobiles actually do produce more greenhouse gasses than volcanoes. Except the data for cars was 10 years newer than that for volcanoes (with the older date hidden in a footnote).

    This doesn't mean that we shouldn't be concerned and do out part to take care of things, but I am very skeptical about any form of public scare tactic, as those are usually politically motivated and not actually anywhere near as bad as they make it out to be.
  • 3
    Well it’ll be all fine until big energy crisis when we deplete earth from minerals or make temperature grow so much most of people will die starving from the lack of water and food.

    Anyway both probably won’t happen in my lifetime.

    Still hoping for zombie invasion.
  • 1
    @vane The biggest problems are always caused by people who don't think about the future and only seek to maximize their gains in the present. There's a balancing act in the middle where we can be responsible without being greedy or controlling, it's just really hard to maintain.
  • 1
    @vane right? that might even be kinda fun. At least if we're talking walking dead type zombies and not the real life zombies that make up the general population now. They're so pitiful it would zap all the fun right out of it.

    Except for maybe some of the twitter personalities, that could still be kinda fun, but most seem to be out west so I doubt any would be left by the time I made it out there.
  • 2
    @powerfulparadox 99% of people don’t think about future that’s why banks and insurance companies are big conglomerates.

    Even social networks grow in recent times is based on here and now lol

    People in charge usually tell what most of people want to hear and do nothing to change it that’s why they’re in charge.

    Zombies would solve most of today’s problems.
  • 2
    @M1sf3t yeah walking zombies at least could bring back fun to this planet for a moment until some zombie rights fighting organization will be established.
  • 2
    @vane ya know I somehow don't feel like that would be a thing for very long unless you count those sympathizers that managed to somehow hang onto their banners after the zombie they were hugging turned around and bit them.
  • 1
    @M1sf3t people can sympathize with lots of things and no zombie movie can prepare us for it.
    It’s obvious someone would establish zombie porn industry, zombie rights organization and zombie park.
    Deviants are everywhere.

    When internet was young nobody cared same thing will happen with zombies at the beginning and it can be fun for 10-20 years.
  • 0
    @M1sf3t I imagine patended clean energy and water tech in the future and maybe air in cans...??

    Somewhere in asia ppl are already flocking to hospitals to get oxygen via machines, because of tight smoke covering their cities from farm fires.

    I dunno its hard to concentrate on code if you think the world around u is on fire... anybody recalling that meme.😑
  • 3
    Climate change agendas have always been about making money. Just follow who is cashing in on this. It has nothing to do with protecting the environment. Any proposed legislation has been about taxing the hell out of people. People have made billions off this racket.

    Is the climate changing: yes, the world is NOT a static system. Is this change predominately human caused: no, the world has many complex factors leading to this change. Are we capable of negatively impacting climate: yes, look at all the trash and waste. Can we make the world better: yes, and we should do this, but not in a panic stricken, head cut off manner (which is what most legislatures are proposing). Should we care: yes, but the world is NOT ending. Don't be a dumbshit.

    The ultimate solution to climate is pursuing space. We need another space race. We learn to: live with less, use less, live in smaller spaces, produce more in smaller spaces, use less energy, and because SPACE FUCKING IS AWESOME!
  • 2
    @noyb i don't about you but the world has been on fire for as far back as I can remember.
  • 1
    @vane truth, I was just alluding to the need for them to make concessions at least in the form of muzzling them, otherwise they'll become a zombie themself.
  • 1
    @M1sf3t Why ? Zombies need freedom also freedom of zombies will make world a better place.

    When people will have natural enemy on the planet everything will get back to normal.
  • 1
    @Demolishun I don't know where you're getting your info, but frankly, you are wrong.

    On one side, you have a bunch of scientists and academics who earn scientist salaries (i.e. not very much thank you), and renewable energy/climate change mitigation startups and enterprises that do not enjoy but a tiny fraction of the 5 trillion dollars of annual fossil fuel subsidies.

    On the other, you have the Koch brothers, the Murdoch media empire, and any number of extremely wealthy and powerful fossil fuel companies.

    It is beyond any measure of reasonable doubt that humans are the primary force behind the increase in atmospheric CO2 levels and ocean acidification. These levels have no parallel in the history of the human species.

    It is also beyond any measure of reasonable doubt that the disruption of the climate that we have seen so dramatically over the last twenty years is due to high CO2 levels.

    There is overwhelming scientific consensus on these points.
  • 0
    @halfflat Historically consensus has been a poor indicator of fact. After doing a little impromptu research I found what looks like a juggling of figures to make a consensus result that is actually around 1.6% look like a consensus figure of 97%. I don't get my information from headlines. I have a severe distrust of media outlets and a lot of the institutions. They have shown not to have my best interest and in many cases outright hate me. Why would I place any stock into what they say?
  • 0
    @Demolishun I would recommend starting with https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... and then chase the citations and links if you would care to examine the evidence of scientific opinion.

    But in terms of the facts regarding climate change: the simple explanation is greenhouse gas emissions from human activity. Absent a more complicated model, higher concentrations of greenhouse gasses are expected to increase temperatures and thus disrupt the climate, by the very physics of what it means to be a greenhouse gas. Observed GHG concentrations correlate with and are easily explained by anthropogenic emissions and changes in land use.

    More sophisticated models are of course necessary, but the onus is on those who deny the GHG-model to provide an alternate explanation for the observed changes in our climate, given that it is counter to what one would expect.

    No such alternative theory though has been successful in explaining what we observe.
  • 0
    Its not "governments", its china.
  • 0
    @halfflat Based on the data from the wikipedia page they surveyed 12K papers. Of which 4K had an opinion. 4K/12K is not 97%. To go further this person analyzed the data and was even generous as to what papers he counted in favor. Yet he still ended up with 1.6%. Had he not been generous it would have been 0.5%. So I maintain that the 97% is a fabricated figure:

    https://econlib.org/archives/2014/...

    None of the in favor articles and papers show the numbers curiously.
  • 0
    @Demolishun You are misrepresenting the Wikipedia statement:

    "A 2013 paper in Environmental Research Letters reviewed 11,944 abstracts of scientific papers matching 'global warming' or 'global climate change'. They found 4,014 which discussed the cause of recent global warming, and of these '97.1% endorsed the consensus position that humans are causing global warming'."

    97% of the papers which discuss causes, attribute that cause to human activity. If the paper does not discuss causes, it is clearly not relevant in such a survey.
  • 0
    @noyb @M1sf3t yeah but the planet was cool and we at least pretended to make it better. Now everything bout facts have been replaced by opinions and idiots in suits really think they can go on like its 1990.
  • 0
    For reference, the original paper describing this survey is here: https://iopscience.iop.org/article/...

    It is a very straightforward read.
  • 0
    @halfflat I don't agree.
  • 0
    @Demolishun Come on. If I'm talking about some matter X but neither mention the causes of X nor make statements about X which demand particular assumptions about the causes of X, then what I say is neither here nor there on the topic, and nothing more about my position on it can be inferred.

    Otherwise I could say that every paper on lung cancer that doesn't discuss or rely upon theories of its etiology contributes to a reduced assessment of the confidence in the medical community of the role of smoking. This is ridiculous.
  • 0
    @halfflat The genesis of the global warming movement has been a lie from the beginning. I still maintain it is continuing that lie for the justification of many atrociously evil things. Nothing I say is going to convince either of us of the others opinion. I have already wasted enough fruitless conversation on this matter. We are going to believe what we are going to believe regardless of the "facts". Have a great day.
  • 0
    @Demolishun I can't have a great day when I read these sorts of statements. I truly believe that you believe what you say you believe. But it is wildly at odds with reality. Collectively, such beliefs are dangerous because they help enable the continuation of activities that are having serious and observable deleterious impacts on our climate and ecosystem.

    Please consider reassessing your opinion in light of the various parties involved in the consideration of global warming in the media, and their relative economic power and interests.
  • 0
    @Demolishun @halfflat u guys should meet for a beer. Had the same type of discussions often on forums and whatsapp, always exhaustive at the end. Maybe the internet beckons more than anything else that in the end we all need to come together to solve "It".
Add Comment