I wouldn't say so. Lots of people acknowledge that capitalism is bad for the planet.
I wouldn't say so. Lots of people acknowledge that capitalism is bad for the planet.
theres plenty an individual can do, it's just that imagining nations will stop destroying the environment to expand is tantamount to believing corporations will stop seeking profit"not much we can do"
shut the fuck up there are hundreds of things we can do the help the environment, this sort of defeatist rhetoric is really just laziness dressed up as wokeness.
Fair enoughI wouldn't say so. Lots of people acknowledge that capitalism is bad for the planet.
The planet will survive fine lolIt's too late to salvage this planet. We're probably the last or second last generation to enjoy it before it goes to hell.
Grab the infinity stones.
I remember these simpler days when every now and then I would read the Wikipedia page about the future of the universe and find it depressingly bleak. Now it gives me hope lol2020: "Two thirds of the wildlife has been lost"
2021: "Trump swears in for second term"
2022: "The ice caps are melting."
2023: "Super-Cancer has become airborne and contagious"
2024: "Where has all the water gone? It was here yesterday. Loads of the stuff."
2025: "Is it just me or is the Sun getting bigger?"
It's kind of mind-boggling to think about the fact we're living through a mass extinction that's on course to beat out the one that killed the dinosaurs.
I still find the inevitable decline and extinction of complex life on Earth in 500 million to 1 billion years pretty bleak.I remember these simpler days when every now and then I would read the Wikipedia page about the future of the universe and find it depressingly bleak. Now it gives me hope lol
The biggest fish on display in 2007 was a shark, and sharks, Loren calculated, are now half the size they used to be in the '50s. As to weight, she figured the average prizewinner dropped from nearly 43.8 pounds to a measly 5 pounds — an 88 percent drop.
It's no big surprise, I suppose, that fish in the sea are getting smaller. The curious thing, though, is that people who pay 40 bucks to go fishing off Key West today have no sense of what it used to be like. Had Loren not found the fish photos, there would be no images, no comparative record of what used to be a routine catch.
In her paper, Loren says that the fishing charter tours are still very popular. The price of the tour hasn't dropped (adjusting for inflation), only the size of the fish. Looking at the photos, people now seem just as pleased to be champions as those "champs" back in the '50s, unaware that what's big now would have been thrown away then. Loren says she suspects that people just erase the past "and will continue to fish while marine ecosystems undergo extreme changes."
Daniel Pauly, a professor at the University of British Columbia, has a way of describing these acts of creeping amnesia. He calls the condition "shifting baseline syndrome," and while he was talking about marine biologists' failure to see drastic changes in fish sizes over time, it's a bigger, deeper idea. When you're young, you look at the world and think what you see has been that way for a long time.
When you're 5, everything feels "normal." When things change in your lifetime, you may regret what has changed, but for your children, born 30 years later into a more diminished world, what they see at 5 becomes their new "normal," and so, over time, "normal" is constantly being redefined to mean "less." And people who don't believe that the past was so different from the present might have what could be called "change blindness blindness."
Because these changes happen slowly, over a human lifetime, they never startle. They just tiptoe silently along, helping us all adjust to a smaller, shrunken world.
Neither: it's that the average population decline in the species they were tracking is 68%. So for example, if you were tracking two species, one common and one rare, and the rare one went extinct and the common one declined by 40%, the average decline would be 70%, although the absolute decline would be closer to 40%. However it's worth noting that this report is tracking something like 21000 species in ecosystems all over the globe, so it's a staggering figure regardless.Does this article mean 2/3's of species have been knocked out or that we literally thinned the number of animals on Earth by 2/3?
Cuz that seems pretty drastic and like something we would have noticed in just our daily lives by now.
To go with this, it's also not just about the extinction rate, but how current animals are being transformed thanks to our carelessness of the ecosystem:
Big Fish Stories Getting Littler
She found them in the Key West library: an old stash of "Look at What I Caught!" photos, proud fishermen showing off their big catch of the day back in the 1950s, '60s, '80s. As she looked, she noticed something odd. Something important.www.npr.org
I know I mentioned fish sizes, and yeah that was me seeing years of fishing competitions over the years, and what the big prize winners are now compared to decades ago, but *whew* this takes the prize right here :/ Not sure if those are the same fish species, or if it's just a case of those large fish all got fished out/don't live there anymore.
vote to hold corporations accountable