/sci/ - Science & Math

>the 60s
>the biggest environmental movement in history
it's present day people that don't give a fuck
But you're right we're in too deep, at the same time there's still hope if we cut our losses and do as much as we're willing to while still looking for some revolutionary idea(s) to fix it
if all fails we can just do some large scale geoengineering (like using aerosols to increase albedo) so we're actually gonna be ok (not great) but the ecosystems will be fucked if we do nothing

>>9553238
>Might as well just die instead of change.
We could easily change. Of course it requires a radical change but so do all our other ecological (social) problems.
Literally we just need to end corporate command economies and states.

>>9553259
It will never happen though. Even the people who cheer for it,most of them are hypocrites who wouldn't actually want to give up their luxuries.

>>9553272
We don't have to give up any luxuries.
Corporations, the bourgeois, and states need to be dethroned.
It seems you are caught up in the ethical consumerism nonsense, what needs to happen is the powers that force consumer economies into existence need to be crushed, which could easily happen if sheeple would just WAKE UP.

>>9553238
on the bright side we have a pretty good answer to Fermi's paradox, probably all technological civilizations alter their homeworld's climate past its tipping point and kill themselves

No, we just need to kill most of people. Climate change will do it anyway.

>>9553319
> Corporations, the bourgeois, and states need to be dethroned.
Leftypol, please, leave. We all know that this actually means putting 90% tax on white male while finding women in science programs.

>>9553238
Why is the narrative always about "stopping" it rather than mitigating it? Nobody seems to realize that the differences between a 1.5 degree increase, a 2 degree increase and, a 2.5 degree increase are quite significant. Anything we do to bring down that number is beneficial.

>>9553238
People will die, some people won't
It's for the best, evolution always is right

>>9553363
Taxation is theft.
I don't see how you could possibly think that when I'm clearly not a statist.
I could just as easily be a traditionalist for all you know(I'm not though)

>>9553368
that's like saying gravity's always right
Idk if it's right, it just is

>>9553238
Yes it's unstoppable at this point. It's possible we'll survive, but many people will die when it really kicks off. I can only hope we will find a way to increase complexity and energy use after the crash.

>>9553450
>anarchists still not realizing in the year 2018 that removing the state gets you less, not more, freedom

>>9553466
What are you trying to imply here?

Invest in China so they become a Developed country. After that we all work together to fix global warming.

>>9553576
>invest
>in this economy
You must be joshing me.

Yes it's too late and we're all going to die. Oops.

>>9554482
We were always all going to die anyways.

Can space colonies save us?

>>9553576
chinks need another 3 or 4 great leaps foward

>>9555858
maybe for a few generations, but the moment things start breaking down due to old age, all the colonists will die horribly

>>9555891
>science and engineering just stop entirely in space

>>9556071
they won't be able to replace everything, and everything will start breaking after a hundred years
one mistake or just bad luck with multiple failures is enough to kill everyone in a colony that has to keep pressurized atmosphere, water and food

>>9553238
>can't stop all global warming
>therefore can't do anything
Gee, really makes me think... that you're a shill.

>>9556092
So you really think there's no way in a century that anyone will get off their space ass and do anything? We're not talking about the ISS, we're talking about a self-sufficient space colony designed to allow humanity to survive without Earth.

>>9556127
without having a breathable atmosphere, a biosphere and help when they really really need it to fall back on, i doubt it can last more than a few generations
maybe by having more than just one, but then after a few hundred years maybe the morons will start fighting eachother

>>9556227
>everything will start breaking after a hundred years
>the moment things start breaking down due to old age, all the colonists will die horribly
>then after a few hundred years
Which is it?

>>9556249
all of them, don't you see that one fuckup, one or two things breaking at the wrong time, one insane guy and the whole thing goes up in flames, and a lot can happen in a hundred years
isolated and permanently self-sustaining on another planet with no atmosphere i think is impossible, but it doesn't have to be isolated or completely self-sustaining

>>9556290
It's that they all die in a hundred years and then start infighting years after that?

>>9556318
shit dude, you got me, now they're all gonna live happily ever after with nothing bad ever happening

>>9553319
>Corporations, the bourgeois

Why /sci/ is so anti-semite?

>>9553238
We could stop it, but not with a carbon tax.

But we can stop all global warming; most estimates predict that using sulfur aerosols like picture related could stop any plausible warming effect in less than a year, at a cost of ~$20 billion annually. Granted, there would still be weather shifts, and this process would need to be continued for as long as there is excess CO2 in the air, since the aerosols wash out in six months or so. And there are other methods like sea brightening that would have a similar effect.

I fully expect the chinks to start doing this if their coastal cities are threaten by sufficiently serious flooding.

>>9553319
bourgeois does not mean what you think it means

>>9553450
>taxation is theft
Then paying for anything is theft. Paying 100 dollars of tax to the government is identical to paying 100 dollars to your mechanic ; currency exchanged for goods or service.

>>9556992
The difference is you can pick and choose which mechanic you want, or even if you want or don't want the mechanic's services.

You wouldn't want the mechanic's services if they took your money and destroyed your vehicle.

>>9553238

Nuclear, lots of it.
Synthetic gasoline. I hope.
Negative emissions via the quicklime basalt method.
http://www.theenergycollective.com/roger-arnold/2381301/the-carbonate-solution-part-1-brute-force

Excepting the negative emissions, it might not even be that expensive.

Best way to stop AGW.

>>9558098
>Nuclear, lots of it.