Thank goodness my second child isn’t due today.
I’m 42 and I’ve been told this like every 5 years or so.
And have you not seen things heading in that direction? I’m 57 and I sure as hell have.
Oh yes definitely I’ve seen it slowly going from bad to worse, I guess i meant to say that I’m tired and exhausted from it. And from no one in power actually wanting to do anything about fixing it.
Fun fact! The people who control who is in power!
The people don’t want change. They want their luxury, their excess. Even at the cost of the world.
Bernie Sanders has been screaming consistently about it for decades.
That’s on the people to vote for people who actually care.
Green parties rarely win, and that’s on us.
deleted by creator
This is actually optimistic. They think kids are going to grow up.
They think people these days can afford to have kids.
It’s gonna be awesome when we’re old and need end of life care and the younger generations are too poor to help us and too stupid to help us even if they weren’t poor.
We’re headed into a very, very stupid and depressing future. And it’s 100% avoidable.
Welcome to COSCO, I love you.
Maybe that was a little too much Patrick
Millennials been saying this since we were teens but were told to shut up and sit down
It’s why I’m not having kids tbh
And we did…
GenX been hammered this since we were kids ain’t nothing changing because we are all addicted to this course we are on including you and your generation.
The sooner we all admit it’s our habits that have collectively caused this the sooner we solve it but we all know that shit isn’t gonna happen so here we are. I feel sorry for my kids and hope one day it gets bad enough that we all agree to change it.
Do not blame private citizens for the actions taken by large corporations and governments agencies.
There’s plenty of blame to go around.
Private citizens are supporting shitty companies and electing shitty governments.
When there are only two shitty options to choose from, picking the least shitty option doesn’t mean they were the ‘good’ one.
issue is some countries and areas have viable affordable alternatives to planet destroying lifestyle habits, but people still chose to destroy the planet
The sooner we all admit it’s our habits that have collectively caused this the sooner we solve it but we all know that shit isn’t gonna happen so here we are. I
Can we acknowledge that most consumer habits are directly driven by the media and large corporations influencing people through news and advertising? Or that corporations have done their best to offload the responsibility for polluting the biosphere onto consumers, even as they knowingly peddled products that had direct damage to ecosystems and pushed habits that did nothing but make consumers feel better about the shitty products they consume (see plastic recycling).
Sorry but no. Many understand and hate this path yet there is little choice when the alternati-e is homelessness, starvation and/or jail
And we’re STILL not willing to reign in capitalism.
We doomed ourselves. My pity is reserved for all the species we’re taking with us in this murder/suicide for short term profit for the avarice diseased. Those capitalists are by far most to blame, but no one that contributes to the capitalist machine, myself included, is without blame for the effectively permanent destruction of our COMMUNal habitat.
Unless you’re an eco-terrorist who has been actively trying to destroy the capitalist machine, the precious few good guys as far as I’m concerned if your goal is a viable habitat for our species at all beyond the next couple decades, we’ve all been seeing this oncomming train heading towards us our entire lives and done nothing of note.
We can’t keep living like we’ve been living, as gluttonous consumers with 78 kinds of plastic packaged cereal made a thousand miles away in any form AND survive as a species, and it’s clear which choice we’ve made. We aren’t willing to live closer to the land, to farm the food our community eats, to live small lives understanding we are subject to earth and not the other way around, so we gotta go so life can go on without us.
Humans are pretty resilient. I don’t think we’re going to go extinct, unless we do the nuclear winter thing, which I personally believe is inevitable on a long enough timeline. Short of that, we’ll see mass death and an extreme decline in quality of life, but we’ll probably, unfortunately, continue on as a species. Either way, we’ll end up destroying this planet eventually. We simply cannot exist in symbiosis with nature.
I’m not really on the fence about the bright vs dark future thing anymore, as you can see by my name. It’s pretty much guaranteed we’ve chosen the dark future option.
Blah blah ecofascist doomerism. We can live harmonically with nature and have for most of our history. Our current consumerist society isn’t compatible with sustainable and responsible practices but that isn’t a forgone conclusion or intrinsic to human behavior. That’s not to say that we aren’t on a bad path, we absolutely are and a great many organisms are going extinct because of us, but ascribing a moral value to our very existence is the wrong move.
Not true. Humans always reproduced to the absolute limit (set by their agricultural technology and the bodies of women). The reason why this didn’t wreck the environment is because that limited population was too small to turn 50% of land into farmland, they didn’t know how to burn large amounts of coal and they didn’t have the technology to produce harmful chemicals.
But i agree that humanity (or any other species) has no value. Saying humanity has value is like saying the white race has value. It’s pure aestethics, it’s not worth it to make anyone suffer for that.
Humans always reproduced to the absolute limit
My understanding is that this is not true. The big factor seems to be infant mortality, as that drops so does the average number of children per breeding pair.
Turns out you are right. At least on the surface.
- While the actual birth rate was 4.5 to 7.5 before 1800, the effective birth rate was about 2.
- Women’s mortality was also not the problem. The probability to die in child birth was '‘only’ 0.5%
But if we dig deeper, we find that only 10% of children made it to their 20s, and the reason for that was famine and disease.
So those that kept the population growing lived under conditions where the reason why their children died was because they could not feed them or keep them healthy. And if we take the 0.5% of maternal mortality, and apply it to those responsible for the population growth (those that made it into their 20s), we get a rough estimate of 50% effective maternal mortality. So it was the agricultural technology in combination with war, disease and child birth that kept the population low.And that’s what i meant: They lived in a situation where 80-90% of their friends had died of famine, disease and war, and under these horrific conditions they still produced 4.5 to 7.5 children per woman, which kept the population growing (slowly). As soon as that limitation was lifted, the population shot up.
Personally, i don’t see any planning in that. They just had as many children as they could before they died, not worrying about how they would feed them.
Stop having kids. No, it won’t prevent the climate from going to shit. Yes, it will prevent you from creating new victims.
The only thing Evil (aka. suffering, disease, war,…) needs to exist is that ‘good’ people continue to have children.
But… but… who will grow the economy so we can get the first trillionaire? Humanity has never existed with less than 2 billion people. Suggesting that lower than replacement birth rates are possible is eco fascist!!1 /s
But… but… in US, you get a whole $5,000 usd hehe
And a $20,000 bill for delivery
YES WE FUCKING KNOW
So uh what do I call what we are living in right now?
The calm before the storm.
What we’ve got now is peanuts compared to what kind of future we’re looking towards.
yay.
Umm actually this is just woke and we should have more children for racist reasons /s
In an analysis of human exposure to climate change extremes — such as heatwaves, floods, droughts, wildfires, cyclones and crop failures — researchers found that children born in 2020 are two to seven times more likely to face one-in-10,000 year events than those who were born in 1960.
Why pick (great) grandparents as the reference point?
Wouldn’t it be more practical to compare them with their parents?
Edit: the actual study does show comparative data for other cohorts (i.e. every decade since 1960). Unless the average LiveScience reader is in their 60s, they just picked a weirdly unrelatable way to describe the study.
We will have to teach that there are five seasons now: spring, summer, inferno, autumn and winter.
Storm, Flood, Heatwave, Fire, Dust, Blizzard
With our powers combined, we call Captain Pollution.
Naw, where I am we mostly have SMOKE
No really
Smoke is part of every depiction of hell, so ‘Inferno’ is still applicable.
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
Don’t worry, they are not growing up
Stop eating animals! Proof that you care and commit to change a destructive habit.
I’ll do that if you remove every part of your life that touches anything even remotely having to do with oil.
I try, but it is hard! Eating lentils instead of animal tissue for protein is very easy. Putting soy milk in your porridge instead of udder milk is very easy. You just buy a product that tastes slightly different next time you go shopping. BÄM! ⅔ less co2 emissions, water pollution and land use from your meal. Well done! It’s the single most powerful thing you can do effortlessly by yourself.
My point is more that this is like someone arguing that a person should stop spilling their drink of the floor of the titanic while it’s sinking.
This doomer attitude will get us nowhere, it drags everyone into apathy and indifference. Your politicians like you like that. But every decimal warming counts. Please give meaning to your existence and stand for something. Not because your impact is so great, but because it’s the right thing to do. Don’t just roll on your back and give up just because you like cheese too much.
Just like all the companies that told us we need to recycle more rather than they having to change anything they were doing. You’ve got an agenda, that’s fine but maybe be a little more circumspect in delivering it.
Oh I want corporations to pay for what they do to us and our childrens lifes! And I agree recycling is (mostly) a scam. But stop eating animals is not a distraction from systemic change, it fuels it. Animal Agriculture is a vile industry build on exploitation and destruction, the evidence is only a click away if you dare to look at it. And you, Lobotomo, pay this industry daily to keep going. Destroying ecosystems, polluting communities, exploiting workers, killing sentient being by the billions. You could exclude your family from this today, but you deliberately choose not to. I’m asking you to take the most obvious babystep out of the global suicide machine. It’s a big FUCK YOU to Corporate Farming as well and everybody likes that. :)
I know it’s not the solution, I’m not an idiot. Please keep fighting, you can do both! But no solution will be enough without us changing what we eat.
Why pick something super difficult?
We are the extinction event
