• lustyargonian@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    9 months ago

    Why wouldn’t one be anxious about impending environment crisis and inability of institutions to act quickly enough.

    • Ryan@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      9 months ago

      Because it is a slow moving event that will unfold over the next century.

      It cannot be both so incredibly anxiety causing and also lacking in any urgency at the population level simultaneously.

      • Chaotic Entropy@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        9 months ago

        Even to generously concede your statement… you’re referring to the course of their lifetime, that century. By the end of which, apocalypse.

        • PhlubbaDubba@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          9 months ago

          Not really, the apocalypse scenario was averted by the banning of CFCs, which were a much worse greenhouse gas that were on track to cause a 4+ degree rise instead of the 2 we’re on track for now.

          Also, it was an apocalypse scenario because the damage it was doing to the natural atmosphere was liable to pair that temperature rise with everyone getting every kind of skin cancer imaginable from unfiltered solar radiation.

          Watch “The Human Future” by Melodysheep, it gives a real perspective moment on just how hard life would be to dislodge even in a major die out scenario.

          An event which wipes out 99% of all humans alive now would still leave the earth populated by 80 million people, which is a larger number than the total global population was for a massive stretch of our history.

          • Chaotic Entropy@feddit.uk
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            9 months ago

            Glad to hear that you wouldn’t describe a 99% die off of the human population as apocalyptic, let alone all the life not able to adapt to rapid change. Whilst the remaining 1% sits in the wreckage of a blighted environment now incredibly hostile to life. Let’s hope the remaining 80 million are fairly centrally located and don’t just starve, freeze or kill each other in the wasteland, to round out that non-apocalypse.

            Don’t forget to have kids, Gen Z, we need more fodder for the impending mass death event.

            • PhlubbaDubba@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              9 months ago

              Tell me you drove your literature teacher into day drinking without telling me you drove your literature teacher into day drinking.

              Get off the internet and learn some reading comprehension skills angsty.

      • JasSmith@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        9 months ago

        I just think they lack any real issues. I grew up poor and constantly insecure. I had real issues, and it has given be perspective. I’m grateful for every day I have food and shelter. I don’t have a lot of bandwidth to care about stuff which might affect people 100 years from now.

        Of course I’m glad that they grew up with such privileged lives. I just wish they’d care a little more about poor people today.