this post was submitted on 23 Apr 2024
1788 points (98.8% liked)

Science Memes

14589 readers
508 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
 
(page 2) 38 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago

If you start with the assumptions that Earth is regulated by YHWH by divine intervention and that all other planets are gifted to humanity by the same to do with as we will, this absurd belief follows naturally.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago

"Surviving" is one thing. Why can't we also continue to enjoy life like you guys got to do? You wouldn't have been able to last a day in the world you left for us. Which is why as it got closer and closer to affecting you too, you just pushed harder and harder to keep it away from you, doing more and more damage for the rest of us to feel instead.

[–] [email protected] 42 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Politicians are extremely shortsighted. Many cant even see past their own noses

[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 year ago (1 children)

They can track down your money by smell, though

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

Does this guy even understand what Energy is mostly about? What does he want to happen to all of this country's nuclear infrastructure?

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

The reality is that Republicans cannot determine any difference between surviving and thriving.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Hundreds of millions

Even without climate change I doubt that humans would survive more than 1-2k years from now.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago (2 children)

The only way humans' progeny will exist for millions of years is if we manage to make it through the great filter and spread out to other planets, assuming we can find planets suitable for open-environment habitation.

We're quite good at making more of ourselves than is sustainable, so the only way of keeping ourselves going that long is to spread out.

Of course by then I'm sure several new species of humans will have emerged.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 year ago

Overpopulation doesn't usually lead to extinction. Mass die-offs sure, but not extinction.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 143 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (6 children)

2015:

Like other Republicans, Paul would repeal Obamacare, partially privatize Social Security, move Medicare to a " premium support" system for future retirees, and block-grant Medicaid and food stamps. But he's also proposed budget cuts of 20 percent or more to NASA, the National Institutes of Health, the FDA, and the EPA — and cuts of 60 percent or more to the National Science Foundation, State Department, and Interior Department, among many others. Plus he's proposed eliminating the Departments of Energy and Education entirely. "It's the most detailed expression of what a libertarian approach to budgeting would look like to date," Matthews writes.

Off to a great start!

[–] [email protected] 21 points 1 year ago (5 children)

Yeah, start terraforming other planets please... but don't use money to do it, I want the money. I'll give it to my friends instead, but please go terraform other planets for me.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] [email protected] 12 points 1 year ago (1 children)

DoE is responsible for maintaining american nukes, military is not having it

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago

I love that you don't even have to specify which department of "E" that is, you need both for that purpose

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

He wants to terraform planets with no spatial budget? What does he propose, sending a flask of germs with a trébuchet?

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 60 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I'll ask that guy, if I ever want to make a country as shit as possible for everyone but the rich.

[–] [email protected] 31 points 1 year ago (4 children)

The rich don't stay rich without peasants to work for them and buy their shit. If everyone else dies or leaves, the rich are in trouble too.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 56 points 1 year ago (7 children)

I maintain that we have a battle of world views going on here. In some ways it's about the myths we believe in. Most environmentalists believe in what I call the Hobbit Paradigm: we live in a beautiful garden, and if we grounded ourselves in relationships with our communities (including nature) we would have a good and sustainable life. Many technocentrists believe in what I call the Star Trek Paradigm: humans are limitlessly ingenious, technological solutions will save us, and Nature is viewed with an anthropocentric utilitarian ethic.

I do not believe in the Star Trek Paradigm. It's hubris. I also don't think it's a very pragmatic paradigm. We live in a world we evolved to live in. Not worrying about this world because we think terraforming other planets and setting up space bases might be a possibility is not comprehending the Good or risk very well, IMHO.

I suppose a third paradigm is cold-blooded, individualist Realpolitik; It's a dog eat dog world, fuck you, I'm just trying to get mine as hard as everyone else is. In this case Space Colonisation is just a beard to disguise a callous and usurious relationship to the beings is this world.

That makes the conflict one of story, of myth, which means no one will have their minds changed by facts. They're belief systems. We need to expose those fundamentally short -sighted or selfish beliefs. We need to tell better stories, and expose the ridiculousness of the other stories.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago

I suppose a third paradigm is cold-blooded, individualist Realpolitik; It’s a dog eat dog world, fuck you, I’m just trying to get mine as hard as everyone else is.

This secret third one is the one that basically everyone has, yeah, it's pretty depressing.

I dunno, at this point I'm more given to a kind of blade runner, or maybe mad max paradigm, of like. Even if the star trek future is the shit, right, even if they come up with and use terraforming technologies, which we could probably do at least for offsetting carbon emissions if the theoretical short term proposals are anything to go by, we don't have any real way of understanding what the real knock-on effects of those short term solutions would be. We would probably be just as likely to increase ocean acidification by a couple points in our quest to sequester carbon by dumping a shit ton of iron oxide in the ocean, and then end up killing a bunch of sea life which is connected to everything else. It just becomes a kind of whack a mole style game where you trade one consequence for another at the expense of the environment, and if that ends up happening, I expect pretty quick humanity will attempt to totally shutter off any consequence which might pose a threat to humanity or capitalism, and put them off onto the broader environment instead, and the people who are reliant on those environments to survive. I.E. you get put into a horrible blade runner future, where the survival of humanity isn't in question, but humanity's humanity has gone extinct.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago

I figured that both sides are eventually going so far to their side they meet halfway. The good ol' horseshoe theory.

In this case tech would go so far with genetic engineering while resource depletion forces them to go bio-punk and arrives at basically high tech treehouses.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

There’s also a fourth attitude. We live on a planet uniquely suited to the kind of life it gave rise to, such as ourselves. The climate of it before we began pumping tons and tons of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere was generally tolerable. Sometimes we had great periods like the medieval warm period and sometimes we had natural devastation like the little ice age. We’re in the process of going from bad to worse and if we don’t let up with our emissions soon we’re gonna have to get a lot better at every form of engineering really fucking fast

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago

we’re gonna have to get a lot better at every form of engineering really fucking fast

Unfortunately that’s what we humans are really fucking good at. Nothing quite like a deadline, a sprinkling of procrastination, and a daunting technological existential hurdle to inspire a half-baked, good enough for now solution.

[–] [email protected] 25 points 1 year ago (3 children)

You can easily be an environmentalist and still believe in the Star Trek paradigm. While we, that is mankind, might have the ingenuity to find technological solutions to most of our problems, we do not have the political or economic systems necessary to actually put these solutions into reality.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 year ago

Or just that we should start small with the immediate existential threat on the planet that people already are on

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago

also, the ability to do stuff is the ability to make problems. if our societies do not advance at pace with our technology, we will die. see: outside

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 55 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

The issue is once you educate yourself in science and engineering, you realize that teraforming planets isn't something you just do. And you can't realistically rely on a technology that doesn't exist. The real problem here is one of education. The facts and the seriousness of climate change do not support his dumbass argument, and we'll all be dead by the time everyone comes to an agreement and realizes, oh shit nobody is going to save us from climate change but us.

[–] [email protected] 17 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (4 children)

We can't keep astronauts aboard the ISS indefinitely, even with constant restocks from Earth, and we're supposed to go even further out of our orbit to the moon or Mars and they're going to be fully independent? Why not save the cost and try to make a human terrarium here on Earth?

edit: not arguing your point, just extending it a bit.

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

The closest thing to a self sustaining thing is that Neom city they're trying to build. It's basically an arcology. And it's already failing.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I gotta imagine making the Sahara Desert habitable is a lot easier than making Mars habitable. The Sahara at least has breathable atmosphere, a 24 hour day, solar intensity that our plants are well adapted to using, and is relatively close to resupply from population centers on Earth.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago

And Sahara was a jungle pretty recently.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Yeah, I won't knock people trying to leave the earth. I work in space stuff, and I would love nothing more than to see us realize multiplanetary habitation. but I definitely think we need to be good stewards of our planet. We don't exactly have a plan b. And realistically, we may never have a plan b. Science is hard.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 167 points 1 year ago (1 children)

"humans will survive for hundreds millions of years. But I'll be long gone in like 40 and I'll have gotten everything I every wanted. So change nothing, and fuck you."

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›