this post was submitted on 20 Dec 2023
761 points (96.8% liked)

Science Memes

10950 readers
2000 users here now

Welcome to c/science_memes @ Mander.xyz!

A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.



Rules

  1. Don't throw mud. Behave like an intellectual and remember the human.
  2. Keep it rooted (on topic).
  3. No spam.
  4. Infographics welcome, get schooled.

This is a science community. We use the Dawkins definition of meme.



Research Committee

Other Mander Communities

Science and Research

Biology and Life Sciences

Physical Sciences

Humanities and Social Sciences

Practical and Applied Sciences

Memes

Miscellaneous

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
761
i <3 statistics (mander.xyz)
submitted 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
 

Disclaimer: This is a joke. Ecofascism is obviously bad, kids. Don't be that guy.

https://theconversation.com/8-billion-people-why-trying-to-control-the-population-is-often-futile-and-harmful-194369

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 37 points 10 months ago (5 children)

I feel like this argument is way too imprecise, to the point of being basically untrue. That's probably based on the average emissions or something like that, but people are not the same and "emission responsibility" is wildly different.

Imagine killing 34k exploited African people, the world's climate won't even notice that. On the other hand, killing 34k middle class Americans or Europeans would probably be a little more effective, but still won't fix anything. Now, killing 34k high-profile megacorp executives would definitely be much more effective, but would also collapse some economies, leading to various climate unfriendly events (like riots, war and shit).

But the simplest empirical evidence is: COVID killed 6 million people and the climate is still shit.

Source: I made it the fuck up, I'm talking out of my ass

[–] [email protected] 16 points 10 months ago (3 children)
[–] [email protected] 10 points 10 months ago (1 children)

It looks like my ass is very knowledgeable. Definitely a good source

[–] [email protected] 2 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Do you have long horns and an average testosterone level of 2.7 ng/ml?

[–] [email protected] 3 points 10 months ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 2 points 10 months ago

Bulls, implying that their ass "is a good source" for bullshit. 🤓

[–] [email protected] 7 points 10 months ago (2 children)

Bullshit.

The investments of just 125 billionaires emit 393 million tonnes of CO2e each year – the equivalent of France – at an individual annual average that is a million times higher than someone in the bottom 90 percent of humanity.

That is to say, if you multiply the emissions of the gasoline sold by ExxonMobil by whatever percentage of ExxonMobile that's in Bill Gate's portfolio, you get an absolutely ridiculous emissions number.

But that seems to assume that if it weren't for those dastardly billionaires investing in oil companies, we'd all be living in 10-minute cities with incredible subways connected by high speed rail, powered entirely by renewables, and heated by geothermal heat pumps. And I honestly don't beleive that.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

Considering that the oil companies bought up the trolley companies, and shut them down, I would argue that without those particular billionaires, we would still be building walkable cities the way we did for centuries, until they decided that cars should be essential, but a luxury at the same time.

Edit: this is specifically applicable to the US

[–] [email protected] 2 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Sure - blame Rockefeller, Henry Ford, etc. for that. Also e.g. Robert Moses, not that he was a billionaire. But they're all dead. They've been dead.

Is America's suburban sprawl the fault of Bill Gates in particular? Or Bezos, Musk, or Dell?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 months ago

Do they have any investments in the oil sectors? And Musk is absolutely trying to keep cars and kill mass transit. He admitted it. Bezos definitely has invested in making our cities the unwalkable hell scape that the oil companies started.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 months ago

Are you not responsible for the things you own?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 10 months ago

well well well

[–] [email protected] 7 points 10 months ago (2 children)

The meme is about saving oxygen, not reducing CO² emissions.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 10 months ago

Interestingly, every CO^2 molecule consumed 2 oxygen molecules from the atmosphere. CO^2 emissions are the cause of the loss of oxygen.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Which is even further off because that's not the problem.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 10 months ago

It's a meme ffs.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 10 months ago

I kind of appreciate your sourcing. The same citation is used by many, without disclosure.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

Ayy, you had me at "killing 34k high-profile megacorp executives". 🤌🏼 Got a newsletter?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Planting 20 million trees wouldn't have much of an effect on the climate. Definitely not for the next 10 years.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

Hemp/ Cannibis/ Marijuana are the best crops for carbon capture. Not only do they store 80%+ of the carbon in their roots, one acre of hemp will capture 10 times the amount of carbon as one acre of trees, provided the hemp is harvested at least once a year, and the roots are stored at the bottom of the ocean or something. You can harvest that acre up to 4 times a year in some parts of the world, and hemp can be used for food, fuel, clothing, rope, paper, shelter, concrete, and a ton of other stuff.