this post was submitted on 10 Apr 2024
404 points (98.6% liked)

World News

39011 readers
2739 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

“There’s no ambiguity about the data,” said Gavin Schmidt, a climatologist and the director of the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies. “So really, it’s a question of attribution.”

Understanding what specific physical processes are behind these temperature records will help scientists improve their climate models and better predict temperatures in the future.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] silence7@slrpnk.net 0 points 7 months ago (2 children)

Kinda sorta; they're responsible for more than 80% of scope 3 emissions, which counts what happens when fossil fuels they extract and sell are subsequently burned. Individually, what you do is tiny, but as you show people around you that it's possible to live without fossil fuels, it changes behavior in the aggregate.

[–] ITypeWithMyDick@lemmy.world 2 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

When the vast majority of people are struggling just to survive on their ever weakening paychecks, where often even personal health becomes ignored, people dont have the economic, mental, or physical capability to do that. Or they may not even have the literally time available by working numerous jobs.

If it was going to happen, it would have already happened years/decades ago when scientists and environmentalists were already raising the alarms.

This is waiting until the entire kitchen in engulfed in flames before even considering turning off the oven. That option is long past. People are going to die. A lot of people. I cant stress how bad it is. A lot of fucking people are going to die, and many many more are going to suffer.

[–] bloodfart@lemmy.ml -1 points 7 months ago (1 children)
[–] silence7@slrpnk.net 1 points 7 months ago (2 children)

Sorry, but you'll need to bring evidence for that kind of statement

[–] ITypeWithMyDick@lemmy.world 2 points 7 months ago

Like every scientific journal/report/study since back to 20 years ago? And since the current data is so much worse than original models, all of this below is understating the serverity.

Frankly I just think youre a troll, or head stuck in the ground not wanting to face reality.

https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/climate-change-and-health

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10426332/https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10426332/

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/rcna125187

[–] bloodfart@lemmy.ml 1 points 7 months ago (1 children)

The opposite is true. If you want to credibly assert that fossil fuel consumption at the point of extraction can be controlled by consumer behavior it is you who needs to bring evidence.

Even discounting that boycotts cannot work without accompanying violence.

When the plastics industry, an industry concerned with the mere byproducts of fossil fuel extraction, realized that public opinion was turning against their products, they created a multibillion dollar campaign to convince everyone that those plastics were fine and would be recycled even though the technology was never available or cost effective for large scale use and all that plastic waste was just getting dumped in landfills and shipped across the ocean to foreign landfills.

That misinformation was the accepted wisdom for thirty years.

That’s what the industry concerned with the unavoidable byproducts of extraction and refinement of fossil fuels did when everyone started to turn against them after literal decades of grassroots propaganda around litter.

They gaslit the world into believing that it was okay to use plastics for packaging because they could be recycled.

Even if you still believe that you and all your friends can change the course of the main event, the most powerful wealth extraction industry ever known in human history, and keep from being turned against each other, made into pariahs, expelled from society and keep the points of your own knives aimed away from yourselves simply by deciding not to buy fossil fuels, what do you think they’re gonna do?

They’ll just load em up in a tanker and send em over to a place where someone will.

And sell you plastic doodads that run on electricity that is still made by burning fossil fuels.

I don’t need to provide evidence that we can’t change the path of the extractive industries with boycotts, I’ve spent my whole life living in the outcome of that reality.

[–] silence7@slrpnk.net -1 points 7 months ago (1 children)
[–] bloodfart@lemmy.ml 1 points 7 months ago (1 children)

I don’t know what that means.

You made a claim, I said nuh uh, you said prove it, I said you ought to be proving your claim since the entirety of history about your claim in the broadest sense shows the opposite, in the specific sense you’re making it we have an example of your claim being wrong in our living memories and even if somehow your claim were actually true it wouldn’t lead to the result you try to show.

Put up or shut up. Explain how showing people around you that it’s possible to live without fossil fuels will change behavior in aggregate.

[–] silence7@slrpnk.net -1 points 7 months ago (2 children)

So you have no evidence for your position.

[–] bloodfart@lemmy.ml 1 points 7 months ago

If it’s not clear that I have provided plenty of evidence:

You said

Individually, what you do is tiny, but as you show people around you that it’s possible to live without fossil fuels, it changes behavior in the aggregate.

I said nuh uh, you said prove it and I said

When the plastics industry, an industry concerned with the mere byproducts of fossil fuel extraction, realized that public opinion was turning against their products, they created a multibillion dollar campaign to convince everyone that those plastics were fine and would be recycled even though the technology was never available or cost effective for large scale use and all that plastic waste was just getting dumped in landfills and shipped across the ocean to foreign landfills.

That misinformation was the accepted wisdom for thirty years.

That’s what the industry concerned with the unavoidable byproducts of extraction and refinement of fossil fuels did when everyone started to turn against them after literal decades of grassroots propaganda around litter.

They gaslit the world into believing that it was okay to use plastics for packaging because they could be recycled.

I showed evidence that boycotts won’t work. Show me evidence that they will.

[–] ITypeWithMyDick@lemmy.world 0 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)
[–] silence7@slrpnk.net 0 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

So let's summarize:

  • You make a dubious claim
  • I ask for evidence
  • You claim that I'm the one responsible for evidence
  • I point out how you're trolling
  • You say again that I'm the one who is supposed to give evidence
  • I point out that this makes it clear you have none
  • You tell me that I'm a troll

If you had evidence, you'd have shown it by now. But you don't.

[–] ITypeWithMyDick@lemmy.world 0 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Except I already did provide evidance/links, never claimed you needed to provide evidance (though you never did provide any to back up your claims).

So yeah, above is wildly untrue.

Troll.

[–] silence7@slrpnk.net 0 points 7 months ago (1 children)

And now you pretend to have had evidence. You didn't

[–] ITypeWithMyDick@lemmy.world 0 points 7 months ago (1 children)