/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.10020811]

Boycott consumerism
>Boycott physical copies of music and movies (in favor of digital)
>Boycott gas automobiles (in favor of biking, public transport, or electric)
>Boycott meat with high environmental impact like fish and beef (in favor of vegetables, beans, eggs, and chicken)
>Boycott the wasteful fashion industry (in favor of buying very few durable and reliable 100% cotton clothes that you use for years)
>Boycott conservative movements that are anti-science like Republicans and Tories (in favor of Democrats and Labor, or Independents and the Green Party)

What other little things can we each do to try to contribute our 0.00001% to helping prevent climate change?

[Anonymous No.10020923]

>>10020811
Support nuclear power. Keep the nuclear plants we already have running.

[Anonymous No.10020929]

>>10020811
Stop breeding and sterilize ourselves

[Anonymous No.10020931]

>>10020923
Good point, liberals are often anti-nuclear power because they're scared of the environmental impact, and this is a good thing to be scared of because it's catastrophic when it does happen, but Joule for Joule it's the safest

[Anonymous No.10020934]

>>10020811
I think you forgot
>Boycott fossil fuel energy generation
which is like the biggest one
I feel like even if you did all that stuff climate change would still happen if we keep powering the world on fossil fuels.

[Anonymous No.10020937]

>>10020931
more people die from choking and more damage environment from condoms in toilets. pulling out is key.

[Anonymous No.10020939]

>>10020811
i do all of this already... i think my physicsfag friends do also to some degree

well... the one thing i make an exception for is gas automobiles. i walk to work every weekday, but on weekends, taking my car out on a good drive is so great; it soothes the soul to be able to explore and find new places and visit remote parks and stuff....

anyhow i think you're right across the board, but to be dogmatic about it is silly.

you have to let people do what they want to do, within some reasonable boundaries, otherwise we become totally emasculated

[Anonymous No.10020941]

>>10020811
>>Boycott meat with high environmental impact like fish and beef (in favor of vegetables, beans, eggs, and chicken)

Fuck off dirty hippie.

>Democrats, Labor, and the Green Party
>not antiscience

top kek.

[Anonymous No.10020943]

>>10020931
>lel anyone critical of nuclear power is just afraid ad hominem

5 cents has been deposited to your account

[Anonymous No.10020945]

>>10020931
>Joule for Joule it's the safest
That might just be because it's not used as much so things go wrong less often. And I'm sure all the casualties of the fossil fuel industry are on the oil rigs as opposed to at powerstations where they actually burn the fuel.

[Anonymous No.10021000]

>>10020945
>And I'm sure all the casualties of the fossil fuel industry are on the oil rigs as opposed to at powerstations where they actually burn the fuel.
Is this sarcasm? I can't tell. Both extraction and fossil fuel pollution claim lives. Coal produces toxic metal bullshit, both at the mine and power plant. Oil extraction kills some significant amount of workers annually. And particularly, petrol for cars is well known for the detrimental health effects of air pollution from exhaust. Natural gas is perhaps the safest fossil fuel in terms of direct deaths, but fugitive methane and the resultant GHGs from burning still make it a shit option if the goal is to reduce warming from fossil fuel combustion.

[Anonymous No.10021116]

>>10020943
Way to pretend like I'm making an ad hominem when I'm actually not. Nice straw man.

[Anonymous No.10021119]

>>10020945
Yeah, because nobody running the social cost per Joule studies thought to include basic externalities like "environmental effects of pollution" despite the fact that anyone with half a brain can think this up after a mere cursory consideration of the topic /s

[Anonymous No.10021141]

>>10021000
>>10021119
You can't include that in the thing and then compare them
Then it's apples to oranges
Wtf

[Anonymous No.10021147]

>>10021000
The oil industry doesn't tell you how to use the oil they just sell it to you
None of that is their fault

[Anonymous No.10021152]

>>10020811
Actually banning new developments is the best way.

[Anonymous No.10021154]

>>10021141
Why not? You have to include it because it's part of the cost. The same way you have to include the external effects of nuclear disasters.

[Anonymous No.10021157]

>>10020811
Yes reddit! Own nothing and vote for communism!

[Anonymous No.10021166]

>>10021157
Nice straw man, thanks for matching the conservative stereotype perfectly.

[Anonymous No.10021168]

>>10020811
> anti-science like Republicans and Tories (in favor of Democrats and Labor, or Independents and the Green Party)

Reminder me of those parties stance on racial differences in humans, sexual dimorphism and sexual identity.

[Anonymous No.10021172]

>>10021166
> strawman
> "rent music"
> "rent transport"
Idiot

[Anonymous No.10021174]

>>10021172
I didn't say to "rent" music I said to purchase digital rather than physical, which includes mp3 downloads not mp3 rentals, who has ever rented music before? As for renting transport, I didn't suggest doing so, I said to use public transport which overall is cheaper than owning your own car in most major metropolitan areas, where most Americans live. Think before you speak

>>10021168
The internet isn't reality, most democrats don't care about these issues, stop pretending like these are the issues that matter. I'm democrat and strongly anti-feminist and anti-extremist-sjw just like you are retard.

[Anonymous No.10021179]

>>10021154
But that's not their fault, that would be the car industry or whatever.
Not that I'm pro-oil, I just want to be objective.

[Anonymous No.10021181]

>>10021174
Public transport is renting transport. You temporarily pay for the use of someone else's property. Streaming services too are rental. If you mean torrent that's just theft, not something particularly advisable on a societal level.

[Anonymous No.10021184]

>>10021154
And I definitely think coal is the most retarded thing ever.

My whole opinion is: no non-renewables. Fossil fuels aren't renewable but neither is nuclear. It's switching from crack to cocaine.

[Anonymous No.10021190]

>>10021179
You're wrong, because ALL energy based use cases for their product, oil, result in formerly trapped carbon being released into the atmosphere due to combustion. They wouldn't have a market this big if not for that use-case. It's like saying an externality of pharmaceutical companies pushing doctors to push opioids -isn't- an increase in opioid addiction. Of course it is

>>10021181
I mean purchasing digital music, not purchasing streaming rights or torrenting. Purchasing digital copies. Can't you read?

And okay, if you want to define renting in that way then what's so bad about it? Using a shared resource to increase the efficiency of fossil fuel usage is a good thing even if you hate the word "rent"

>>10021184
Don't let perfect be the enemy of good. Nuclear is far more efficient, safe, and sustainable as a holdover until we develop sustainable energy.

[Anonymous No.10021191]

>>10021174
> The internet isn't reality, most democrats don't care about these issues, stop pretending like these are the issues that matter. I'm democrat and strongly anti-feminist and anti-extremist-sjw just like you are retard

You are unbelievably stupid. Not only are these issues central to the parties you advocate but they're the least of the issues in a wider sense, greater econonic and social regulation is universally associated with worse economic performance and cultural stagnation. You have to be under 20 to be so naive of history and economics.

Keep sticking up for your "pro science" side. I'll give you a hint for the future, rhe side against freedom of speech is always the anti-science one. https://quillette.com/2018/09/07/academic-activists-send-a-published-paper-down-the-memory-hole/

[Anonymous No.10021200]

>>10021190
You never specified purchasing digital music actually, but I'll let you admit a lazy mistake. As for renting it is only ever viable in specific circumstances, over enough time and use it costs money and leaves you econonically vulnerable. I have a case in point from my own life. I bought my first home at 24, it's gone up in value by £6,000 in the 4 years since.

I have a friend who with his gf, not wife, so i guess he's essentially renting her too, rents his house and car. Wanting to act like an adult couple they did lots of work on the house to make it their own and recently the owner wanted to convert it and sell it so they lost all the work and at 28 are living with parents and the car's gone back as they no longer need it. They have accrued zero value in the 4 years.

[Anonymous No.10021203]

>>10020939
>you have to let people do what they want to do

Then they'll just continue doing the same thing over and over.

No, you need to properly educate and communicate why X is bad and should not be done. Give reasons.

Remember, not everyone undestands irony or has the intellect to sweep through contradicting research to find a deeper truth.

[Anonymous No.10021205]

>>10021203
Ironic post

[Anonymous No.10021208]

>>10021157
Better than taking everything, killing people in the process and calling it "capitalism".

[Anonymous No.10021209]

>>10020811
OP i want to join the new socialists movement but doing so requires me forgetting a lot of science to join the pro-science green party. How can i unbuy memories?

[Anonymous No.10021210]

>>10021205
How so?

[Anonymous No.10021213]

>>10021208
> wealth is distributed and not generated
I had no idea i was talking to an utter moron. Have a little read on poverty and economic freedom, points of learning would be the acceleratory development of the west and invention of the middle class with the introduction of capitalism, china bringing over 50 million people out of poverty with capitalism and econonic freedom and deregulation being consistently correlated with quality of life and economic success.

[Anonymous No.10021216]

>>10021210
Suggesting you are intelligent and people need to be educated to avoid their mistakes when you are notably stupid and naive.

[Anonymous No.10021217]

>>10021200
Your friend who rented a house and fixed it up sounds like an idiot, good thing I never advocated renting houses and instead I advocated using public transport, which you're now somehow equating to your friend who rented a house and put money into it. Nice going

[Anonymous No.10021220]

>>10021209
Top kek

[Anonymous No.10021222]

>>10021209
Yeah, black people tend to have lower IQs due to worse living conditions and social ostracization during their entire time living in the US, since the majority of their ancestors were literal unironic slaves not more than a couple centuries ago. You're so intellectually deficient that you actually think your post is meaningful

[Anonymous No.10021224]

>>10020945
>That might just be because it's not used as much
France makes like 80% of its electiricty with it
they alone have like a fifth of all commercial nuclear reacors in the world
never had a single meltdown

[Anonymous No.10021225]

>>10021217
But buying homes is as consumerist as it gets. It is the largest world market and routinely involves commodiziting land, denying free passage and excluding some people from accomodation.

[Anonymous No.10021226]

>>10021213
That's true, economic freedom and a free economy is great, but don't fall for the appeal to extremes. A complete lack of regulation is also just a bad and results in dystopian corporate overlordship, look up sharecropping and indentured servitude, which required market regulation and the redistribution of resources to fix.

[Anonymous No.10021227]

>>10021213
There are more people living in poverty worldwide now then at any other time in human history.

[Anonymous No.10021231]

>>10020811
>Democrats and Labor, or Independents and the Green Party
Because moving people from Africa to countries like Finland Id ecological?

[Anonymous No.10021235]

>>10021222
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minnesota_Transracial_Adoption_Study

OH NO NO NO

Also next care to then answer why black IQs are the same across all nations they are in, regardless of history of oppression and slavery. Why black home nations have a terrible historical record. Why black IQs haven't changed chronologically in the west despite huge social drives and changes in "racism" prevalence. I could also point out that western slavery as a whole was beneficial to the blacks and actually saw an individual's quality of life improve markedly from what he could expect in africa, but that would be just extraneous to need.

[Anonymous No.10021236]

>>10021190
>You're wrong, because ALL energy based use cases for their product, oil, result in formerly trapped carbon being released into the atmosphere due to combustion. They wouldn't have a market this big if not for that use-case. It's like saying an externality of pharmaceutical companies pushing doctors to push opioids -isn't- an increase in opioid addiction. Of course it is
Maybe I'm stupid but idk what that means
>>10021190
>as a holdover
But it won't be a holdover. It'll be the same problems all over again. You're too optimistic.

[Anonymous No.10021238]

>>10021236
What same problems? These problems are less, the rare nuclear meltdowns are less harmful than fossil fuel carbon emissions.

[Anonymous No.10021239]

>>10021227
Amazing, can you let me know what that is as a proportion so i can tell my next young labour meeting?

[Anonymous No.10021240]

>>10021213
>an utter moron.
Really does you no justice to start an argument with personal insults.

> wealth is distributed and not generated, Have a little read on poverty and economic freedom

I did. Your economic freedom comes at the expense of the people who have none. This is how money works, it is entirety fiction and you can only have what other people can't. Ever played monopoly?

>points of learning would be the acceleratory development of the west

You mean Menchester capitalism? What lead to socialist ideas in the first place?

>and invention of the middle class with the introduction of capitalism

There's no such thing as a "middle class".
Capitalism has not invented families.

>china bringing over 50 million people out of poverty with capitalism and econonic freedom

Life like Hong Kong? You call that freedom?

>and deregulation being consistently correlated with quality of life and economic success.

Quality of life has nothing to do with economic success, despite what western education has endoctrinated you to think.

[Anonymous No.10021241]

>>10021227
>there are now more people than there were yesterday
HOLY SHIT!!!!
also, fuck you, overal global povery is decreasing and it has been that way for the past TWO FUCKING CENTURIES

[Anonymous No.10021243]

>>10021238
We're just going to get dependent on nuclear like we are carbon right now. And nuclear water is harder to get rid. So we'll be dealing with legacy pollution from the fossil fuel industry AND legacy pollution from the nuclear industry down the line.

[Anonymous No.10021244]

>>10021216
Care to show me my mistakes?

[Anonymous No.10021247]

>>10021243
Okay fair enough, actually you may be right, if we invested in nuclear infrastructure it may stall solar. We can't just switch to nuclear overnight, even though it would be better if we could.

[Anonymous No.10021248]

>>10021226
Yes but the evidence bears that the optimal point is less regulation than any western nation currently has. There is no evidence that monopolies sustainably exist and things indentured servitude were not as dramatic an issue as often portrayed and i say that as an irishman. Most regulation comes from cultural will first, legal pen is just illustration.

[Anonymous No.10021249]

>>10021243
never mind the typos
I'm sober but retarded

[Anonymous No.10021251]

>>10021243
except nuclear will be gone in a blink of the eye once you account for population growth and the costs of dealing with carbon legacy pollution. this civilization is done. blame everyone who believes in "economic growth".

[Anonymous No.10021252]

>>10021248
Let's say your right, how does your argument support the current types of specific deregulation that US conservatives support, such as the repeal of net neutrality and large corporate tax breaks that resulted in nothing more than tax buybacks, which objectively did not benefit the typical American since most of them don't own any stocks?

[Anonymous No.10021253]

>>10021252
>tax buybacks
stock buybacks*
Anyway you're talking about theoretical ideals here when the real hard evidence from history shows that conservative deregulation results in serious economic issues, which only recover after periods of liberal policies

[Anonymous No.10021255]

>>10021240
You are off the reservation. "Money is just fiction", ah a teenage philosopher! I won't bother responding to that.

As for capitalism leading to socialism, not really. The latter and communism just gained clarification and name when an opposing system came about. Marx may gave called it a fourth system but it was essentially enacted de facto prior to capitalism.

There is a middle class, im part of it and it unironically has invented families with the population increased made possible only with it.

Life in hong kong is great, i believe the point you may be trying to make is that it's not as free as some nations? Well for one it actually is quite, it has separate governance and econonic laws to the mainland and more importantly the learning point was the transformation of china as it moved away from communism, that in no way entails it is an example of as far as one should go.

Quality of life has a lot to do with economic success because without the latter you have poor sanitation, poor healthcare, starvation and worse amenities. Bizarre to think otherwise.

[Anonymous No.10021259]

>>10021227
both as a raw number and as a proportion of the total population, you are aboslutely and utterly wrong
in 1980, half of the human race lived in destitute poverty
today it's like 8%

[Anonymous No.10021261]

>>10021255
Life is not great in Hong Kong for the average person, it's so crowded that real estate is impossible to come by, since the HK government owns all land and refuses to let new developments form because land ownership is their only form of extracting money from citizens, for instance plots of land go for exorbitant amounts of rental costs to apartment complexes, so they then have to charge tenants exorbitant amounts to live there. Guess what, the companies benefiting from a lack of taxes funnel most of that money to executives, who aren't hurt by high rent costs and in fact often benefit since they can be land "owners" (renters) which they then rent out for even more money. But it hurts the common man. I find that conservatives tend to completely lack empathy for the bottom trodden upon rungs of society, often blaming those people despite pedigree and inheritance playing a large part in the wealth of many "successful" people.

[Anonymous No.10021263]

>>10021259
>In the BC era most 90% of people were destitute, so it's okay that only 50% are now, let's not improve
That's how you sound. The remaining 8% is a result of obvious corruption on the part of politicians

[Anonymous No.10021264]

>>10021252
I don't know much about net neutrality but as for the latter it encourages more corporate growth, with companies moving to the US improving it's trade capacity and lowering internal cost of goods, with more jobs, less government use of funds and more innovation as a result. There's has almost never been an example in history where more taxation and regulation of corporate entities benefited an economy and consequently the population.

[Anonymous No.10021267]

>>10021253
There's literally zero evidence of deregulation causing econonic hardship. Literally zero. I wouldn't associate Conservative parties with deregulation though as they are often as keen on it as left wing parties, just in different aread.

[Anonymous No.10021270]

>>10021263
>4 billion people were lifted out of powerty in 40 years
>let's not improve
are you on fucking drugs?

[Anonymous No.10021272]

>>10021261
I know plenty of people there who aren't wealthy and they love it. Also quaint that your argument is that government ownership is the problem with capitalism.

As for your final comment, not really. IQ is a better indicator of lifetime wealth than socioeconomic birth. The chinese said wealth only lasts three generations and they were over generous if anything.

[Anonymous No.10021273]

>>10021267
Really, so for instance removing anti-monopoly regulation and allowing Walmart to acquire every retailer then raise prices would be good for the economy?

Removing health standards regulation wouldn't result in companies returning to how they acted before health regulations, filling foods with non-food materials like wood chips to increase profit per ounce? Get real, you have no idea how greedy some people are, and some of these people are CEOs

[Anonymous No.10021275]

>>10021263
Is this bait?

[Anonymous No.10021276]

>>10020811
Bad goy

[Anonymous No.10021280]

>>10021255
>"Money is just fiction", ah a teenage philosopher!

But it is. It is just paper. Even worse, today it is just a number in a big excel sheet.

>As for capitalism leading to socialism, not really. The latter and communism just gained clarification and name when an opposing system came about. Marx may gave called it a fourth system but it was essentially enacted de facto prior to capitalism.

I never claimed this would happen. No sane man will let go of his power and wealth, especially if he has not earned it.

>There is a middle class, im part of it and it unironically has invented families with the population increased made possible only with it.

Families exist for at least 3000 years. The thinking in terms of "class" is relatively new.

>Life in hong kong is great, i believe the point you may be trying to make is that it's not as free as some nations? Well for one it actually is quite, it has separate governance and econonic laws to the mainland and more importantly the learning point was the transformation of china as it moved away from communism, that in no way entails it is an example of as far as one should go.

I cannot imagine life in such artificial steelcages as "great", maybe we have different ideas what a great life is, but being trapped inside a giant labyrinth of concrete and pollution seems like a punishment to me.

[Anonymous No.10021281]

>>10021273
Go ahead and find me a single example of a durable monopoly resulting from deregulation. Doesn't happen, it's a bizarre socialist fantasy that in a free system a company can take charge, deliver punitive and inefficient services and not be challenged.

As for health, once again preceeding almost any government push on safety regulation is public calls. After a scandal, report or incident. Asbestos usage was banned after the health effects became known and people outraged, currently a huge amount of food companies advertise low sugar, no additives or straight up organic all without any current legislation. Proactive legislation is often wrong and inaccurare, after the fact legislation often unnecessary. Things get on just fine with a few government officials.

[Anonymous No.10021284]

>>10021280
Ill let people decide what is great for them and won't insist they don't know what they like. I guess that deregulation of desire makes me a fascist.

Class is not new and has existed for longer than 3,000 years. Look at india where it is cemented in biology.

As for the other points i think you misunderstood my wording but they are quite boring so ill only respond if you want to keep them going.

[Anonymous No.10021286]

>>10021281
That's funny, because I live in an area with only one ISP which raises its prices yearly despite literally lowering its quality of service. They conveniently also lobby local politicians to prevent smaller ISPs from trying to open, and it works.

[Anonymous No.10021287]

>>10021284
Class is always biological. The higher IQ succeed, earn more, live longer and commit less crime. They then move in social circles with like people and have children with them.

Even in somewhere like the UK there is a real genetic difference between the upper classes and working class, even if not major.

[Anonymous No.10021290]

>>10021286
Again you point out government regulation as an example of free market failure.

[Anonymous No.10021293]

My first comment

[Anonymous No.10021294]

>>10021290
Are you saying all government regulation is the same? This is pro-big-business regulation hurting the economy. What we need is pro-small-business and pro-consumer regulation.

[Anonymous No.10021298]

>>10021284
>I guess that deregulation of desire makes me a fascist.

More likely a hedonist.

[Anonymous No.10021302]

>>10021294
I dont advocate for zero law, just near zero economic regulation. With the economic regulation being to prevent politicians being influenced to change the law. We don't need specific pro small or pro big business rules. In a healthy system the best wins out. In your case the ISP stops being sustained by local government and smaller companies can either compete or offer alternative services, which is better will overtake or if not perhaps the service in it's current form is best etc.

[Anonymous No.10021305]

>>10021298
Not remotely. I live in the countryside, I'm married and have a first kid. Im a doctor and literally lift, box and shitpost for fun. I have a gut disease that stops me drinking so i don't even do that. The only thing that stops me leading an ascetic life is not being religious.

[Anonymous No.10021310]

>>10021281
>Doesn't happen, it's a bizarre socialist fantasy that in a free system a company can take charge, deliver punitive and inefficient services and not be challenged.

microsoft during the 90s, facebook, google?

[Anonymous No.10021312]

>>10021310
None of those were either monopolies nor offered poor services. Lately the latter two have and like clockwork their market share is reducing.

[Anonymous No.10021313]

>>10021305

But you are advocating for people to enjoy the things they enjoy, which makes you advocate hedonism, in my opinion. Fits much better than "fascism".

[Anonymous No.10021319]

>>10021312
Windows 95 and 98 was not poor service? It crashed two times a day.

[Anonymous No.10021327]

>>10021313
Saying fascism was a joke

[Anonymous No.10021336]

[Anonymous No.10021338]

>>10021336
I agree with the sentiment of this image, but not everyone is stressed out by work. I use my work to uplift me, I get to work on challenging intellectual problems on large complex systems that I wouldn't otherwise get to work on. I've now saved up enough money from my job that I live in a state of peace knowing that I could go retire if I wanted to, but I don't feel the need to yet.

[Anonymous No.10021473]

Well this thread didn't seem to go well for OP

[Anonymous No.10021474]

>>10021240
>wealth is a zero sum game

[Anonymous No.10021478]

>>10021473
It went fine if you ignore the anti-science posting from /pol/

[Anonymous No.10021479]

>>10021474
>Wealth is infinite
>Just print more forever because resources are eternal
>They never run out
Thanks for saying you're against the planet.

[Anonymous No.10021482]

>>10021478
This, they're all uniformly easy to spot, stupid, and most interestingly - stupid in the same way. It's almost bizarre.

[Anonymous No.10021485]

>>10021479
Wealth is created.
The materials are almost the same quantity as they were thousands years on earth yet wealth is now greater.
Also you have no privilege neither agency on determining what is "pro or against earth, you leftist prick.

[Anonymous No.10021487]

>>10021478
I've perused and literally saw the exact opposite. I'm not joining the discussion but that's how it looks to me passing by.

[Anonymous No.10021496]

>>10021485
>Phosphorus is infinite
>Keep using it and it'll never run out
Actual scientists have predicted it's the limiting factor and is likely to run out soon but not you conspiracy theorists. You have no degree. You have nothing except the fact that you're white.
Funny enough that's not enough to make your opinion worth more than a scientists.
Go back to your anti-science board.
I bet all researchers are scam artists to you. And real "science" is just IQ testing and infographs that say "human achievements have only been discovered by whites"

[Anonymous No.10021502]

>>10021496
Are you having flashbacks or something? What does my race has to do with the economic discussion here?
Boy I'm not even "white".

[Anonymous No.10021504]

>>10021496
Ah you constant failing on economics, politics and science makes sense now you've outed yourself as a literal sub race.

[Anonymous No.10021508]

>>10021504
You're not a scientist. Being a /pol/tard doesn't make you a scientist. Read a book you cretin.

[Anonymous No.10021510]

>>10020811
Lay off the weed OP it's turned your braim into swiss cheese.

[Anonymous No.10021513]

Boycott consumerism
>Boycott physical copies of music and movies (in favor of digital)
>Boycott gas automobiles (in favor of biking, public transport, or electric)
>Boycott meat with high environmental impact like fish and beef (in favor of vegetables, beans, eggs, and chicken)
>Boycott the wasteful fashion industry (in favor of buying very few durable and reliable 100% cotton clothes that you use for years)
>Boycott [bad goys] and vote for [good goys].

What other little things can we each do to try to contribute our 0.00001% to helping prevent climate change?

[Anonymous No.10021515]

>>10021508
Reduced to bad mouthing after being proven unsuccessful to provide an argument to back up your opinions is frankly unsightful.
You came here not to discuss but to instigate turmoil.

[Anonymous No.10021522]

>>10021515
>Proven unsuccessful
Uh when

[Anonymous No.10021523]

>>10021515
Your discussion is nothing but conspiracy theories and your definition of success is plunder of the earths resources. That is what this thread is about.

[Anonymous No.10021524]

>>10021496
>Actual scientists have predicted it's the limiting factor and is likely to run out soon
how the fuck is 300 year reserve "running out soon"?
we'll be mining asteroid belt by the time we can't dig more phosphate rock over here

[Anonymous No.10021525]

>>10021523
>He just doesn't want the economy (i.e. stock market) to succeed (i.e. transfer the economic gains from the labor of the workers to economic rent seekers)
>He just doesn't want the world to be an every man for himself free-for-all where the strongest one wins
>He just cares about pussy things like nature, flowers, and bees, more than he cares about real scientific progress like letting BP make more money and letting farmers spray carcinogenic pesticides all over

Honestly I'm so fucking sick of this shit, it's starting to get SO old, who the fuck are these people? Honestly fuck these people, they're fucking losers

[Anonymous No.10021528]

>>10021524
But then the earth is no longer important. Eventually it'll be nothing but desert with no eco system and no metals and everyone will move off world.
The birthplace of humanity will have no worth. If you wanna mine asteroids do it first before ending the earth.

[Anonymous No.10021529]

>>10021496
>is likely to run out soon

The only thing in danger of running out is oil, and even that is questionable with advances in oil sand extraction. We are not going to run out of any element because they are not destroyed in the process of their use and at worst can be recycled.

[Anonymous No.10021530]

>>10021240
>Quality of life has nothing to do with economic success

Most retarded thing I read all week, congratulations for the honor.

[Anonymous No.10021531]

>>10021529
Most stuff can't be recycled. Sometimes stuff is dispersed in such small pieces into the environment that it can't be brought back.
Like how iron turns into rust and is dispersed. We will run out of important elements and then computers will have to be made of biological lifeforms.
And people will forever lament that they have no phosphorus that they could have used

[Anonymous No.10021532]

boycott crapitalism

[Anonymous No.10021533]

>>10021319
and was still the best available operating system at the time

[Anonymous No.10021534]

>>10021529
How do we extract tiny scraps of copper from garbage dumps? Using powerful machinery, powered by what exactly? Oil? What about after we run out of oil? I don't think you have any fucking clue what you're talking about fucktard

[Anonymous No.10021535]

>>10020811
>Democrats, labour, green party
>Not also anti-science
I wish there was a real party that put space colonisation and asteroid mining as the highest priorities. At least, for all their flaws, the trump administration is in favour of a space force and also the Lunar Orbital Platform.

>>10020923
Also this, and have the government officially support molten salt reactors and fusion tech research too

[Anonymous No.10021539]

>>10021535
Would still take another 100 years or so and we'd run out of important stuff by that time.

[Anonymous No.10021542]

>>10021539
What kind of stuff?

[Anonymous No.10021543]

>>10021531
Phosporus can be recycled, tough. Most stuff can, it is just a question of price point and developing relevant technology.

>Like how iron turns into rust and is dispersed.

We are especially not going to run out of any metals. We have barely touched metal deposits on ocean floor and deep metal deposits located kilometers underground. Humanity as a whole has literally scratched the surface of Earth resources.

[Anonymous No.10021546]

>>10021534
>Using powerful machinery, powered by what exactly? Oil?

Renewables and nuclear you retard. Those are not going to run out for millions of years.

[Anonymous No.10021549]

>>10021528
I don't understand your logic.
We should close down our pitmines and keep that shit in the ground so that people have to go offworld to mine it elsewhere, so that they don't move offworld?

what the fuck?

[Anonymous No.10021551]

>>10021549
>so that they don't move offworld
No I just want the earth to remain valuable

[Anonymous No.10021553]

>>10020811
If anything you are harming earth more, greater the need better the solution you dirty hippie. I seriously hope you will die from AIDS.

[Anonymous No.10021554]

>>10021553
>muh P

[Anonymous No.10021566]

>>10021534
>using powerful machinery, powered by what exactly? Oil?

largest land vehicle on the planet is powered by electricity
electicity can be generated by boiling water with fission and running the steam through turbines
the more you know...

[Anonymous No.10021568]

>>10021566
How big is that machine?

[Anonymous No.10021583]

>>10021568
225m long
~14,000 metric tons
moves 300,000 tons of earth every day on 16.5MW of electricity

note that existing NPP's produce something like 400,000MW of electircity, just 11% of ~6,200,000MW total

[Anonymous No.10021685]

>>10020811
Have white children and raise them with those tenants.

Otherwise me and my rich buddies will just import negroes from Africa and give them basic income, because they make good consumers and are easily manipulated.

[Anonymous No.10021820]

>>10021685
Literally zero interest in your racism

[Anonymous No.10021845]

>>10021820
I don't care either, we employ more than a couple of handful of goans and cape verdeans in our automobile furnishing factories, all on minimum wage.

I won't lose, not me, I'm not middle class, I have money. I don't need to move or work a day in my life if I want, tomorrow I'll do whatever the fuck I want and so will I the next day and the next day and the next weeks, months, years, decades.

You are the one who will go extinct, you are the middle class which our economic climate and speculation is going to extinct, extreme inequality will rocket launch after the millennial generation dies off, massive losses of population, and guess who we are likely to choose to replace you? Would you think we would rather have a smart population that is capable of frugality for the sake of frugality, delaying gratification and self analysis or a population that is solely dependent on the state, is only smart enough to work in non technical jobs and whose rate of economic spending eclipses you by a margin of 3? Have you ever looked at South America?

Only my group and the group we import will be left, your group is already extinct, the math is clear.

[Anonymous No.10021847]

>>10021820
Apologize for my foul language, was in jest.

[Anonymous No.10021971]

>>10020923
One of the pretexts for not advancing fission tech was that more safety meant more cost, such that if the risk of disaster is low enough to be acceptable, the price of electricity would be unacceptable. All that did was unnecessarily delay research, which has since proven many of the critics' assumptions to be false. (Not that I blame them for erring on the side of caution, since policymakers need a little push, just like the rest of us.) It's also good to see how much more seriously fusion research is taken by people in big governments, who are increasingly aware that a lot more than prestige is at stake, since no matter how effective renewable sources get, they won't be anywhere near enough to meet existing demand, never mind what's to come.

[Anonymous No.10021997]

>>10020943
>Lovely, lovely oil money
THAT'S an ad hom

[Anonymous No.10022010]

>>10020945
>That might just be because it's not used as much so things go wrong less often.
No, he said JOULE FOR JOULE: the amount of energy produced is irrelevant.

[Anonymous No.10022084]

>>10020811
>>Boycott the wasteful fashion industry (in favor of buying very few durable and reliable 100% cotton clothes that you use for years)
Is there no better material for clothes that will last longer? I know when it comes to shoes I always try to buy water-proof or with gortex.

[Anonymous No.10022116]

>>10020811
>Boycott conservative movements that are anti-science like Republicans and Tories (in favor of Democrats and Labor

Literally, a middle school level understanding of politics

[Anonymous No.10022221]

ITT: bloated sellout consumers rationalize their gluttony.

[Anonymous No.10022236]

>>10021535
>I wish there was a real party that put space colonisation and asteroid mining as the highest priorities.

[Anonymous No.10022250]

>>10020811
>>Boycott physical copies of music and movies (in favor of digital)
Dumbass, this is what brought power to the cyber jew in the first place. Amazon, Google (youtube), Apple Store/Microsoft Store/Android store are all the result of people refusing to buy CDs/DVDs. Meet the new boss, legit worse than the old boss. I want to go back to the 90s.

[Anonymous No.10022256]

>>10020811
Ethical consumerism is absolutely the most retarded shit imaginable, you aren't "changing the system" you're participating and reinforcing it and in some cases ie Whole Foods and "ethical food/clothing sources" are paying a premium to make yourself feel better not because it helps poverty or the environment or some shit.

[Anonymous No.10022301]

>>10020811
Population is the core cause of climate change. It's already being remedied. What could we have done and been?
-Thorium reactors
-Turn lawns into gardens for decentralized food production and less need for transportation, have AI tend these gardens because people are either wage slaves without the time. or won't do anything. Community farming plays in.
-Less livestock.
-Better load balancing for electrical grids supporting decentralized energy production.

I'm actually going to stop there. The whole problem is our current social and economic layout, as well as our corrupt idea of "progress" and our cultural regulation of what types of progress are acceptable and when, which has to do with maintaining existing power structures. Without low level revisionism the conversation is left at "how do we keep doing the same stupid thing, and being the same stupid thing, better." You don't. It doesn't work and it'll always be hell. It's all broken.

[Anonymous No.10022307]

>>10022301
Thorium you say?

[Anonymous No.10022308]

>>10022307
"LFTR".

[Anonymous No.10022316]

>>10022308
Liquid Florium Trap Reactors. Traps will sabe us all.

[Anonymous No.10022319]

>>10021535
The best way to support nuclear power is with a carbon tax.

[Anonymous No.10022320]

>>10020811
ONLY CONSUME STUFF I APPROVE OF!!!

Fuck, also, off.

[Anonymous No.10022321]

>>10020934
Ha, good luck with that.

[Anonymous No.10022322]

>>10020945
>joule for joule

Do you just not understand what that means?

[Anonymous No.10022323]

>>10022320
you don't exist in a vacuum. Other people have to deal with the effects of your actions.

So either people can tell you what you ought to be doing, or they're allowed to use force. Take your pick, kiddo.

[Anonymous No.10022324]

>>10022316
>>10022308
Ohh I got excited for a second; I thought you were talking about cobalt thorium G.

[Anonymous No.10022326]

>>10022319
Not unless you couple it with some changes to existing laws and regulations artificially inflating the costs of nuclear.

[Anonymous No.10022328]

>>10022319
carbon tax and liquid florium trap reactors will sabe us all!

We can hab ecomomic grof foreber!

[Anonymous No.10022329]

>>10022323
Thanks for presenting that beautiful false dichotomy. I reject both options.

Fuck, also off, also again.

[Anonymous No.10022332]

>>10022326
nuclear is cheap as dirt
frogs make billions selling electricity abroad because it costs them fucking nothing to make it

[Anonymous No.10022334]

>>10022329
Logically it's false, functionally it isn't.

[Anonymous No.10022337]

>>10020811
>telling 4chan to boycott consumerism
>no one uses physical copies of shit here, it's all pirated
>most 4channers don't have anywhere to drive to or can't afford cars because we have a large concentration of NEETS
>like 4channers could afford fish and beef outside of fast food
>who on 4chan /sci/ would wear expensive clothes? Neither stacies, sportards or business men go to 4chan /sci/
>Democrats = Republicans

[Anonymous No.10022368]

>>10020811
You could just bio-engineer a virus to kill most of humanity

[Anonymous No.10022371]

>>10022337
But fast food is actually more expensive than meat and fish most of the time, especially stuff from good local butchers

[Anonymous No.10022958]

>>10020811
You left out:
>Boycott electronic copies of music and movies
>Boycott electric automobiles, biking, public transport
>Boycott vegetables with high environmental impact like most modern agricultural products
>Boycott all clothing. Only use clothing produced by shaving the wool from sheep you raised.
>Boycott democrat movements that are anti-science like Democrats and Labor, or Independents and the Green Party
>Boycott all pro-science and humanist movements

Get a small collective of people together, pool your resources and skills and become sustenance farmers or herders. Sustenance farming and Animal husbandry are the only truly redpilled lifestyles.