/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.15953141]

>It's your car and those cow farts

[Anonymous No.15953171]

[Anonymous No.15953217]

>>15953141
The point that air travel is a major contributor to climate change is a valid one.
However, a pic of jet contrails is not a good way of illustrating this. Contrails have more of a reflective and cooling effect than a warming one

[Anonymous No.15953310]

>>15953217
how come? what are contrails made of?

[Anonymous No.15953460]

>>15953310
Clouds

[Anonymous No.15953488]

>>15953141
>billions of cars
vs
>a few hundred private jets
Hmmm... I wonder which one pollutes more.

[Anonymous No.15953682]

>>15953488
wait till white boys hit you with the 'per capita' crap, brotha

[Anonymous No.15953707]

>>15953488
>t. bootlicker

[Anonymous No.15953714]

>>15953707
Said the oil shill.

[Anonymous No.15953837]

Capitalism downplays the effects of climate change and disingenuously peddles ineffective half-solutions not because climate change is made up, but on the contrary, because capitalism is constitutionally incapable of addressing the problem's root causes, that is, the very systems that prop up capitalism. By deflecting responsibility onto the individual consumer, idealised as a rational actor within a "free" market, capitalism obscures the true nature of the problem, reaffirms the dominant ideology as not only viable but desirable, and generates profit through the commodification of moral culpability.

This is how capitalism has approached every major social problem in recent memory.

[Anonymous No.15953929]

>>15953217
>has no idea at all what is being sprayed in the air by airplanes 24/7 for 30 years
>assumes it cools things

[Anonymous No.15953932]

>>15953837
>capitalism
Tell me you are an idiot without saying it.

For the lurkers who aren't drooling retarded.
The above poster IS A CAPITALIST.
He has no other way to accrue wealth or build anything.
He is his (deranged) mind. He's born with a body, this body is his capital.
A baby uses it's whines and cries.
A women uses her tits.
A man uses his hands.
You are and have no other way to produce or gain than through using your own capital.

Dig a ditch. The shovel is capital. What about your hands?
Ask someone without hands if your hands are capital.

What he is truly seething about is his own inferiority in gaining said produce.
So he lashes out at what? HUMANITY. He hates humanity and labels it "capitalism."
He hates himself of course as well.

There is capitalism where YOU OWN YOURSELF.
And there is capitalism where YOU ARE OWNED.
Take your choice.

[Anonymous No.15953933]

>>15953932
>The above poster IS A CAPITALIST.
>He's born with a body, this body is his capital.
lol

lmao

usually sophists at least try to be a bit subtle

[Anonymous No.15953939]

>>15953933
>doesn't have a response at all
Dig a ditch without hands and tell me your hands aren't capital.
You can't.
It's just an extension like a shovel.

There is no way to behave but by using capital to produce something.
You CAN'T beat this logic and will now run.

[Anonymous No.15953943]

>>15953939
>uhhhh you're a capitalist because uhhhh actually everything is capital
>uhhh wait fuck no everything isn't capitalism it's uhhh humanity, you don't hate capitalism
You're juggling definitions in order to deprive words entirely of meaning and deny the possibility of honest debate.
I love humanity, in the actual sense of the word, which is why I hate that which is antithetical to it, the dehumanising system of capitalism, which robs people of their value. And so should every person who loves themselves.

[Anonymous No.15953946]

>>15953943
>juggling definitions
Walks right into it.
I'm a collector of antiquarian books and especially dictionaries.
It was Marx and his ilk who juggled definitions and stole a word that they wanted to mean "Anything bad someone does if I don't like it.

But no, IT HAD A MEANING. And you sick fucks won't be allowed to do so on my watch.
>the dehumanizing system of capitalism
Now you are getting somewhere by admitting that there is a capitalism that doesn't do this.
That this isn't part of the definition. You've just tacked it on.

The dehumanizing part of it is the part where you don't own yourself. Where someone else OWNS YOU.
That's state capitalism, or more frequently referred to as, communism and/or socialism.

[Anonymous No.15953962]

>>15953217
This is true.

https://globalnews.ca/news/2934513/empty-skies-after-911-set-the-stage-for-an-unlikely-climate-change-experiment/

[Anonymous No.15953966]

>>15953946
>I'm a collector of antiquarian books and especially dictionaries.
I'm a linguist.
>Now you are getting somewhere by admitting that there is a capitalism that doesn't do this.
no, I'm clearly not. You are twisting my words just like you love to twist words in general. I guess it goes to show you don't need to appreciate something or be knowledgeable about it to be a collector.
>state capitalism, or more frequently referred to as, communism and/or socialism
Take your heaviest dictionary and bludgeon yourself repeatedly until things go black. That's the best thing it'll ever do for you.

[Anonymous No.15953980]

>Um ackchually everyone is a feudal lord, the fiefdom they own is their body, the real problem is state feudalism aka colonialism where someone else owns your body
Fascinating politico-economical theory

[Anonymous No.15953982]

>>15953966
>i'm a linguist
>insists on a modern definition
>deflects
kek
I'm better than you at your own thing. How many 200+ year old dictionaries do you have?
None. Jesus fucking Christ zoomers and "higher education."

[Anonymous No.15953985]

>>15953980
It's funny how hard zoomers will deflect to avoid really thinking about something.

Your mind controls you. I have a step mother is a coma after a stroke. Her body is now useless.
Your body is a form of capital and denying this becomes VERY hard when you compare say having an arm to not having an arm.
It becomes very similar to having a shovel or not having a shovel.

Big people can lift more wood. Why is this? Is ti because their body is a tool or can do things?
Or is it a magic bit of our imagination?

[Anonymous No.15953987]

>>15953982
>I'm better than you at your own thing.
No, you're a delusional rambling schizo who fetishises dictionaries but gives no indication of ever having cracked open a single book.

[Anonymous No.15953991]

>>15953987
I am sitting in a personal library of 1000+ books and own a bookstore.
It's a side gig for the community where I stock westerns for teenagers mostly.

Now, explain the delusion I'm in.
From my perspective, you have deluded yourself into thinking you are a "linguist", yet have no dictionaries and don't bother to compare meanings through time.
That takes QUITE the imagination. So I'm interested in more of your thoughts.

What method and what CAPITAL did the slave owners use to pick cotton?
Human bodies can't be capital according to you, so I'm at a loss for how the cotton got picked.

[Anonymous No.15953994]

>>15953985
No, you know what's funny? Someone who brags about his dictionary collection and insists on accuracy in definition and then comes out with gems like
>Marx defines capitalism as "anything bad someone does if I don't like it" but I define it as HUMANITY

You're like a "spiritual" book shop owner with SERIOUS OPINIONS on quantum mechanics and like, aliens and stuff man. You have no idea how hilarious you actually are to people who are knowledgeable about these things you dabble in, you hobbyist.

[Anonymous No.15953998]

>>15953987
>>15953980
>>15953966
Here's a good book by one of the popular PRO SLAVERY MARXISTS of the time immediately following the civil war.
He has a fine understanding of capital and capitalism which is why he advocates FOR slavery very well. His understanding that the humans are the capital allows him to avoid mis logic and traps typical Marxist commies fall into.

Even in modern day corporations have "Human Resources" departments. Their (slaves) employees are directly labeled as a resource, no different than a shovel or forklift.

[Anonymous No.15954004]

>>15953994
That was a comment specifically designed to troll you and it worked.
I said you, and marxists, lash out at HUMANITY, by calling it capitalism.

You really don't read well.

Read here though since you've been brought in >>15953998

[Anonymous No.15954006]

>>15953998
I'm not denying that a human body is a form of capital, retard, I'm denying that having a body makes you a capitalist.
See what you're doing, again (and again, and...)?
>Here's a Marxist who's good because he's not a Marxist because Marx is wrong but this Marxist is right but he disagrees with Marx but he's a Marxist so Marxists should agree
You seem to have an encyclopedic knowledge regarding the existence of obscure texts but a surface level understanding of anything in them. You're a name-dropper.

[Anonymous No.15954010]

>>15954004
>I said you, and marxists, lash out at HUMANITY, by calling it capitalism.
YOU call humanity capitalism, idiot. Explicitly.

Anyway if you want to argue definitions then give me any indication that you've read Marx and can give his actual definition of capitalism. Until then this conversation is over. You're allowed to quote directly.

[Anonymous No.15954019]

>>15954006
>I'm denying that having a body makes you a capitalist.
You can only do so by choosing to use the irrationally and retarded definition created by Marx.
Stop doing that and your thoughts will clear up to what is actually happening.
He's obfuscated what's happening by calling it "capitalism" when it's really the only way possible to behave. So you condemn everything and nothing when you use the word that way.

The point is that a definition has been used to cloud your thought process and you use the word flippantly.
You are destroying your own ability to think by using such a word to stand for pretty well "whatever humans do that I don't like."

I've made you think very clearly.
And no, it's not name dropping, it's the sign of someone who has read and thoroughly investigated a topic.

[Anonymous No.15954028]

>>15954010
>any indication
Marx' definition waffles and makes no sense. That's the point here. Kapital is an insufferable read because of it.
He does not recognize that humans are capital because he's afraid to as it reveals the absurdity of the entire thing.

That's why the pro slavery marxists are able to make sense. They acknowledge that humans are capital.
A horse and a slave are the same to the OWNER.
Do you want to own yourself or have someone else own you?

What I'm positing at the root here son, is that you are allowing language to make you owned by someone else.
You condemn "capitalism" but what that means nowadays is that you are advocating and supporting for yourself to be owned by someone else.

And no, I did not call humanity capitalism. Read back.
You are VERY poor at parsing language.
I said marxists hate humanity, so they label it with an assumed perjorative (capitalism).

[Anonymous No.15954059]

>>15953141
ive seen planes fly perpendicular twice since ive lived here 3 years never in my life have i seen that before. it looked like they would crash into eachother

is that normal flight behavior?

[Anonymous No.15954409]

>>15954028
>He does not recognize that humans are capital because he's afraid to as it reveals the absurdity of the entire thing.
It's a basic part of Marx's analysis that the lower bound for the price of labour power is determined by the reproductive cost of labour, that is, what it costs for someone to maintain their body and ultimately the total body of labourers. That in no way detracts from the part of the analysis that points out that they are not compensated the full value of their labour, that the surplus value is stolen, and that this surplus value accumulates with people who thereby accrue vast stores of , get this, capital which produces a massive power imbalance between them and people who are therefore forced to sell their labour power, the only commodity that they have, at a price lower than its true value. Which is not to say that capitalism, in a Marxist analysis, means "bad"; it is also acknowledged to be a vast improvement over feudalism and, at its outset, a force of progress, albeit a destructive one in many cases.

>And no, I did not call humanity capitalism. Read back.
>You are VERY poor at parsing language.
You are very bad at writing it. You do not even seem to understand the meaning of the literal words that you type yourself so it's no wonder that your "analysis" of any random topic sounds like something drooling fatfingered facebook cattle would bash into the comments of a Fox News video. You have no business telling me what I "really" mean when I say capitalism or socialism because you have no idea what anyone means by any of the relevant terms.

[Anonymous No.15954413]

>>15954028
>>15954409
PS anyone who claims to have read Marx and concluded that capitalism is used by Marx as a synonym for "bad" forfeits the right to tell anyone they are bad at parsing language. Was it an "insufferable read"? Or are you just an insufferable reader, one who thinks he already knows everything and skips all the parts that aren't immediately clear to him because he can't imagine they contain anything of value?

You owning a bookshop is like a vegan owning a butchery.