• PugJesus
    link
    fedilink
    1110 months ago

    The core issue of CO2 emissions isn’t “People now communicate, travel to, and trade with each other across the globe” but “Massive use of fossil fuels where they are not necessary due to corporate lobbying”

    Cargo ships and planes combined emit ~5% of our CO2 output. The major offenders are elsewhere.

    • @NocturnalMorning
      link
      -1310 months ago

      I’m not going to argue about this. We need to reduce our emissions to zero, that is not zero.

      • JJROKCZ
        link
        1010 months ago

        We’ll never reduce to zero, stop engaging in fantasy delusions. What can do is make realistic effort to curb the largest offenders, which ocean shipping isn’t a part of. If you think we’re going to go back to the age of sail and multi-year journeys for items to reach destinations then you’re high

        • @NocturnalMorning
          link
          -410 months ago

          It’s not a fantasy, it’s literally the only thing that will save us. Scientists have been very very clear zero emissions is the only thing that will stop climate change. I live with one for God sakes. Don’t call me delusional. It’s the only rational thing to do, anything else is fucking crazy bcz it’s the difference between livable conditions here, and not. But don’t trust me, we’ll all see the consequences of our dumbest arguments in about a decade.

        • @NocturnalMorning
          link
          -310 months ago

          It’s actually the only thing that’s going to save us. It’s not only rational, it’s the only logical conclusion one can come to from the overwhelming data on climate change. If you think burning fossil fuels is more important than having a habitable planet, then you’re not thinking clearly.

            • @NocturnalMorning
              link
              -310 months ago

              Actually we survived without energy use for hundreds of thousands of years before electricity was invented. So, that’s kind of a ridiculous statement to even make.

              • conciselyverbose
                link
                fedilink
                2
                edit-2
                10 months ago

                No, we didn’t. Humans discovered fire a hell of a long time ago.

                And unless you’re willing to exterminate thousands for every one that lives, “go back to fire” isn’t theoretically possible either.

                • @NocturnalMorning
                  link
                  -310 months ago

                  You know burning a fire isn’t the same as driving cars, planes, busses, heating houses with natural gas, oil, coal, etc right? You’re just being obtuse now, on purpose, and I don’t know why…

                  • conciselyverbose
                    link
                    fedilink
                    210 months ago

                    For your batshit stated goal of “zero emissions no matter what”, they absolutely are the same thing. A fire is emissions.

                    But again. Even theoretically going back to fire would only be possible if you exterminated the overwhelming majority of humanity.

      • BraveSirZaphod
        link
        fedilink
        410 months ago

        So, you exhale CO2 when you breath.

        Draw whatever conclusions from that that you like.

        • @NocturnalMorning
          link
          -310 months ago

          Yeah, and trees also exhale oxygen. What’s your point?

      • PugJesus
        link
        fedilink
        410 months ago

        We need to reduce our emissions to zero

        What, literally zero and not net zero? That’s anprim bullshit.

      • @yuriy
        link
        210 months ago

        You’re not going to argue because you literally can’t, your back is against the wall and the only thing you have left to cling to is “buh not zero!”

        Go change the world somewhere else.