148
Earth’s climate is approaching irreversible tipping points (www.economist.com)
submitted 1 year ago by to c/futurology@futurology.today
49 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 5 points 1 year ago (10 children)

So, now will people get out of the way of geoengineering research? Or do we have to wait for the actual famines to start killing people?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 10 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago* (8 children)

    Why would I trust the people who did this with the task of geoengineering our way out of this? Because that’s who is pushing all of it. All of the major polluters are pushing that bullshit because funding research into nonsense is cheaper than reducing emissions. Sorry filks, we aren’t gonna stop pillaging the planet, but how about we reduce the sunlight that piwers the entire natural world instead? It’s the same as the many failed attempts at introducing species as biological controls, just on a grander scale.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (7 children)

    Why would I trust the people who did this with the task of geoengineering our way out of this?

    No, it's not the same people.

    And if nothing is done massive numbers of people will suffer and die. You're advocating for just letting that happen?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago* (6 children)

    How is it not the same people? What type of geoengineering are you referring to? The main thing I’m referring to is the use of sulfide (I believe, something along those lines) particles to dim the solar input. Which is being pushed by Bill Gates and co., which fuck him by the way. Other options include dumping chemicals into the ocean that would absorb more co2 and precipitate to the bottom, funded by oil companies and sounds just as terrible as blotting out the sun.

    No, I’m not advocating for that to happen, I’m saying there is currently no method of geoengineering proposed or in development that is going to help anything. ‘We should geoengineer’ is no different than ‘let the ai centers burn up the planet, they’ll solve the climate crisis.’ It’s more delay tactics when we need to just sop the consumption.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (5 children)

    How is it not the same people? What type of geoengineering are you referring to?

    Solar geoengineering seems like the most promising. It's largely being studied by climatologists. The people who are putting carbon dioxide into the atmosphere are industrialists.

    Which is being pushed by Bill Gates and co., which fuck him by the way.

    So because one particular person you don't like is involved, screw the science? Let the world burn rather than have it be saved with the involvement of people you don't like? Wonderful attitude.

    Bill Gates is a major philanthropist, BTW. Not sure why you pick his name out as specifically hateworthy.

    Also, describing solar geoengineering as "blotting out the sun" suggests you're not really familiar with how this stuff actually works. So when you say you don't think any of the proposals will help anything that doesn't give much weight to your opinion.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago* (4 children)

    You want to give me a brief rundown of how it works then? Cause all I’ve ever heard is using particulates flown into the atmosphere or using some form of cloud seeding to reduce solar load. The particulate one got tested in Turkey maybe? India? I forget, but the only thing I ever heard from that was it pissed off nearby nations and would require constantly dumping more particulates into the atmosphere. Purposely altering cloud formation as the other alternative I’ve heard of seems foolish. I’m not in favor, but I’d love to hear more details of what you think would work.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (3 children)

    No, I don't want you to give me a rundown. I read the works of those climatologists to find out about that stuff, they're professionals who understand what they're talking about.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Ok, then give me a rundown. Or name a study or author whose work you like. I am willing to be sold on the idea, because apparently my description is inaccurate.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (1 child)

    It's a very broad field. You could start with the Wikipedia article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_radiation_modification, it's got links to specific sub-articles about the various types of approaches as well as sections on who's working on this stuff (and who's opposing it).

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago*

    Cool, thanks. Yeah, after going through that I still think that’s a dead end with far more potential to do damage than to actually help, and stand by my statement that it is being pushed as a delay by the ultra rich, much like like superloop was to the california high speed rail or the vegas edition w the underground teslas.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago

    This, yes if the world did not pollute and all of us changed tomorrow it would have been the best, but let's not lie, this ship has not changed direction. I really think this will give us time and save the most we have to eventually change the ship's direction. We have basically already geoengineered our way here, let's geoengineer our way to a better world

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent