this post was submitted on 02 Oct 2026
399 points (98.8% liked)
Technology
88390 readers
3047 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Generally a good approach, but...
Good thing the planet's not dying.
Yeah, I'm not sure how to feel about it. On the one hand, it's obviously wasteful. On the other, if dickheads get their money wasted enough, maybe they'll knock it off. Probably not enough happening to make them stop, though, so probably just a waste.
With the way society is going, that may not be a bad thing.
The planet won't die. Humanity might, the planet will live on and heal.
Unfortunately, this line of thinking ignores the elephant in the room: inertia.
There have been prior climate change events that have gotten up into the +8-12℃ range (which, BTW, means palm trees at the poles and the extinction of any land species over 45Kg/100lbs), but the difference there is that they have taken many hundreds of thousands of years to get there, allowing whole ecosystems to migrate across entire continents while continuing to sequester carbon.
Our changes to date have - when compared to the very-next-fastest event in history - compressed over 150,000 years of climate changes into less than 75.
This means that not only is there a massive amount of inertia involved with our changes - several orders of magnitude greater, which will force CC to continue on well after humanity completely ceases adding to the problem - but ecosystems are just going to die in place. They simply aren’t being given the time to migrate or adapt, leading to significantly unoptimal/degraded CO2 sequestering, compounding the problem.
Or, in other words, this inertia is destroying the brakes that could slow and eventually reverse CC.
Finally, as the sun ages over the millennia, it throws off more and more heat. The global average needed to cause a runaway Venus Scenario has slowly been creeping down over the last few billion years, and may have already crossed the +12℃ level.
Which means that, even if humanity just ceases to exist today, there may be enough inertia to kick off sufficient feedback loops (methyl hydrate eruptions, permafrost eruptions, etc.) to push the planet into that Venus Scenario, extinguishing all life on Earth.
Sweet dreams.
Source: BSc in Physics & Math, former classmates in the CC & biology fields. I read the pre-print evidence they are collecting and can see where it points.
If humanity dies off despite our exceptional adaptability and the help of technology, you can bet your ass millions of other species will die long before us.
Idk about you, but I'd consider a future that kills all puppies to be "a bad thing".
Well I for one plan to go early in the apocalypse, because if there is a heaven, I want to stand by the gate watching all the asshole "good Christians" get rejected. Standing there laughing for all eternity will be my heaven.