Anonymous #2 1w

No, we want them to start voting for green policies and holding large corporations accountable, also increasing in recycling would definitely help.

11

Anonymous #2 1w

Pretty sure like 5 companies are responsible for 50% of global emissions or something insane like that. Everyone driving Teslas isn’t the answer

16

Anonymous #2 1w

People driving teslas or other electric cars wont do shit when big corporations put god knows how much CO2 in the atmosphere a day

2

Anonymous #5 1w

…I mean you could also look at the very clear deterioration of the ozone layer plus the literal visual effects shown from climate change such as the loss of coral reefs, acidification of the ocean, and the melting of the ice caps, but sure all of that is just us being over dramatic

3

Anonymous #3 1w

Agree with #3

4

Anonymous OP 1w

US is also the 2nd largest current contributor to climate change and the largest all time

1

Anonymous OP 1w

That’s actually surprising, I know we aren’t exactly helping but I’d have thought it be India and China for first and second.

1

Anonymous #3 1w

Last I check china is the current #1 and India is 3rd. Might be different depending on the source

1

Anonymous OP 1w

Huh, now that is surprising. You know, it’s kind of a shame, we have the opportunity to be one of the cleanest, our population density isn’t super crazy like most developed nations, we more than hold the capabilities to change our infrastructure to fix all our problems in a clean and effective way.. we just don’t…

1

Anonymous #3 1w

And I’m not denying any of that but it’s not as significant as people claim. People claim the world will end tomorrow if you don’t buy a 100k EV tomorrow. Also the argument that nuclear is bad and we should all spend 40k and put solar panels on our roofs. Y’all really don’t see this? Sure there’s natural climate change and industrial lifestyles increase this but it’s not that significant as people claim.

3

Anonymous #5 1w

Nuclear isn’t bad at all, and I think what happened here is you’ve fallen for some of the propaganda of the climate deniers. The world won’t end tomorrow, but it will become far worse in less than a generation, it already has. Plus, it’s gotten worse for the planets other living creatures. By making the concerns of climate change seem like this tin foil hat crack pot idea when it really is a genuinely serious threat it undermines the threat entirely.

4

Anonymous #5 1w

If you focus on what the hardcore climate alarmists are saying then yeah, you’re right. They hate nuclear and think we’re on the brink of collapse. If you focus on the bulk of the data climate change is objectively costing people money, ecosystems their biodiversity and societies their stability. Just cause some dude on Twitter says EVs are the only answer and nuclear is horrific doesn’t negate the scientific proven reality of what happens when co2 is emitted and trapped in the atmosphere.

1

Anonymous #6 1w

I could overconsume or forget to recycle or use unsustainable food and energy for a life time but it likely wouldn't have any effect compared to what entire industries do on a daily basis

3

Anonymous #3 1w

I’ve taken many environmental classes and have written many meta-analysis papers on the subject. Are you saying my school in a very blue state and city are propagandizing me? Got it.

1

Anonymous OP 1w

You know what would solve the co2 problem? Trees. Plant more trees! My biggest beef with all of this is how people negate it because they want to cut those trees down to make a plant to make solar panels and wind turbines. Also, fun fact, I actually have an internship this summer with a wind turbine company as a data scientist.

5

Anonymous #5 1w

The plant more trees thing is beneficial but we should consider any native plants that grow in that area before just planting trees everywhere for biodiversity reasons

2

Anonymous #5 1w

I’m not studying environmental science so I won’t pretend to know as much but from everything I’ve heard the whole plant more trees thing to solve climate change is a myth

1

Anonymous #6 1w

Definitely don’t argue with that. I’m not saying random people just plopping trees down. Lmao there’s forestry and biologist that would handle that.

2

Anonymous #5 1w

Then you of all people should know better than this, saying its not a big deal is ignorant of the many problems that are already occurring

1

Anonymous OP 1w

I’m not saying it will solve it but it would help improve it. Cutting out gas cars and everything polluting wouldn’t even solve it. You even breathe out CO2 so what you’re going to stop breathing??? Can’t fart either! Oh smoking weed??? Oh definitely can’t do that.

1

Anonymous #3 1w

It’s not as drastic as people claim it to be. They blow it way out of proportion for what it actually is. If anything, it will just increase the amount time left we have till the next ice age. If there’s another mass extinction, it’ll probably be in the ocean and not very much of it will be human-caused. I mean, look at algae or a volcano… the Permian-Triassic or the end-Permian extinction. Happened 250 million years ago, we weren’t around then.

1

Anonymous #5 1w

It does have the potential to displace a lot of coastal and small island populations with rising sea levels but that is more an economic issue than an actual extinction threat nowadays

1

Anonymous #5 1w

Funny you should bring up algae considering how algae blooms are yet another problem caused by climate change that are effecting the environment

0

Anonymous #3 1w

And how exactly is driving a gas car correlated with algae blooms? I know that the algae will cover the ocean and make it more acidic. And don’t give me that dumb statistical shit, give me the actual statistical analysis.

1

Anonymous #5 1w

I’m not talking about a gas car, see this is what I’m talking about you keep comparing legit and very visually accurate concerns with people who thinking driving a gas car will cause the planet to explode.

3