#overpopulate

[theonlinevegan]

[outer-space-youtube]

AI Realist? 

An AI realist would say, don’t worry; it will all be for the better of humanity. ‘That’s as good as a prophecy?’  Look at the world’s history. Yes, there are bad characters, along with the good actors. The good actors stay to make the world a better place.  We should worry about the Cows; they will kill us when we stop eating them. Too many cows will make too much methane.  ‘We got to eat them…

[pangur-and-grim]

I had two colonies! my scabers were in a beautiful planted terrarium with a bark wall. unfortunately after I went on a trip, they suffered a colony collapse - I'd asked my housemate to spritz them with water in my absence, but I'm guessing she either spritzed more or less than I usually do, and the shock killed them.

a third of them survived this event, so I gave the terrarium away to someone with invertebrate knowledge.

and then there's my vulgare colony! they thrived for years - at one point, there were so many that the ground oscillated like water when I lifted the lid up. and then.....within a month this year, they all died. no clue why. I didn't change any part of my care.

unfortunately, if I don't understand how I killed them, then I won't be able to prevent their deaths in the future, so I'm done with invertebrates for now. they brought me a lot of joy while they lasted, though!

[probablyasocialecologist]

There is a strange idea in some environmentalist circles that human population is the main cause of ecological breakdown, and that humans have an intrinsically negative impact on ecosystems. Both claims are incorrect. First, human ecological impact is entirely a function of the system of production and provisioning. It depends on what is being produced, under what conditions, and how the yields of production are distributed. For instance, an economy that uses mostly public transit, renewable energy, multi-unit housing and plant-based protein can meet human needs with a fraction of the impact of an economy that produces a lot of SUVs, fossil fuels, mansions and industrial beef, and which allocates a bunch of totally unnecessary production to service the fantasies of overconsuming elites. Remember, we know it is possible to provide decent living standards (DLS) for 8.5 billion people with 30% of current global energy and material use, by ensuring efficient technologies and focusing production on socially necessary goods and services. That much is fairly straightforward. But one might say that, even so, every person will always have some negative impact. This too is incorrect. Again, it depends entirely on the production system, and specifically, what people are mobilized to do. Under capitalism, labour is mobilized overwhelmingly to produce things that are profitable to capital. But labour could just as easily be mobilized instead for regeneration. Using straightforward public finance mechanisms, we can fund massive programmes to reforest barren lands, regenerate degraded ecosystems, restore biodiversity, advance agroecological methods, etc. Under these conditions, it is possible for societies to not only have minimal negative impact on ecology, but to have a net-positive impact, actively improving ecological indicators. People buy into the myth of the intrinsic destructiveness of humans because we have come to take capitalism for granted. But it is 100% possible to organize production and labour differently. Under capitalism, we are compelled to produce whatever is most profitable to capital, even if it is destructive to humans and nature. Under conditions of economic democracy, we can produce what we know is necessary for well-being and ecology.

Jason Hickel

See this paper for the "decent living standards (DLS) for 8.5 billion people with 30% of current global energy and material use" stat

[iyuhni]

with this man, i hereby promise to worsen the overpopulation in our planet that nasa might actually speed up the process of making mars habitable.

[fizzyrodeo]

saw a critical post that made me realize IMP is extremely lucky that all of their human victims are already predestined for hell, otherwise they'd have surely made enemies with more heavenly beings by now. even without that luck i feel like they should be getting more backlash from heaven soon��� and i hope they do, because are we forgetting they killed at least 50 humans in spring broken? you're telling me all 50 of those humans belonged in hell??

[darklight-owl]

Playing metroid when im an ecologist irl is really funny actually. I'm out here shooting everything that moves with an arm cannon and driving species to extinction which has been proven in-universe to have devastating consequences on the environment and I'm still like "okay❤️yay"

[entities-of-posts]

I think humanity is very corruption coded. We change the earth, poison it, fight with it. We overpopulate and need so much food for the population that we created giant dust storms. We put light in the sky so no one can ever see the stars, we put oil and trash into the ocean so much those who reside in their depths choke. We choke on our own fumes. The streets run like a colony insect and crowds are swarms. I wish humans didnt exist, and i wish i wasnt human so i could see the world without.

Classic Extinction avatar self righteousness. Idiot doesn’t even know they’re feeding what they hate the most.

[starberry-cupcake]

the best part of the mark of gideon was the entire crew ready and willing to go fist fight the federation, starfleet and planet representatives if they tried to stop them from getting jim kirk back

bones literally materializes on the bridge the second jim disappears

scotty is about to throw hands with the gideon representatives

bureaucracy is being annoying about it so spock decides 'fuck this, I'll do what I want' and bones is like '10/10 choice, no notes'

but spock doesn't let him go with him to the jim-fetching mission, so he's angry again

spock couldn't care less about the dire situation of the planet or the dying girl jim wants to help, he's just there to fetch jim and nothing will stop him

also these overcrowded spaces with staring people were insanely terrifying for me and my ocd, absolutely worst planet to date tlt name similarity notwithstanding

[asturlavi]

to regain what had been lost, to remember what had been forgotten

[eelclaw]

bristlefrost(paw) before her life goes to shit :(

rereading tbc and she's such a passive character and it's frustrating because she could be used for so much more

in my head, she has a much more active role in the imposter's reign. she truly believes that codebreakers need to suffer to bring starclan back. so she runs the imposter's errands, dutifully, because he's her leader, and clan cats are trained to obey the leader's word.

but her doubts grow as her assignments grow increasingly personal. the breaking point comes when she's ordered to attack her kin, shadowsight (who she would have an actual friendship with). she obeys, and dumps his body in the ravine, but her faith is shaken.

she doesn't find out that bramblestar is a fake until it's revealed to all five clans. like shadowsight, she dedicates herself to making up for her crimes. in the end, she gives her life for shadowsight, i guess, to be true to canon.

[dalandduh]

doodl a 100 with 1 pls

The Great Numberland Cycle with mama

Alarming implications with mama

mama why are we leaving home,,, mama

[zcattop]

Feel free to read it

[probablyasocialecologist]

Given the support that Roser enjoys from billionaire oligarchs at the pinnacle of the capitalist system, one wonders if it is a coincidence that so much of the data he headlines for public consumption happens to valorize that system. The chief narrative that OWID deploys is that progress is due to economic growth driven by profit-seeking private enterprise and breakneck industrial productivity. He has made this view explicit in his essays published on OWID’s website. No mention that poverty mostly has been alleviated by the power of the state regulating capital, redistributing wealth, and providing services, counter to a system of immense inequities. Roser never mentions the labor, civil rights, and anti-colonialist movements that have pressed for social welfare benefits, safety nets, legal protections and political liberation for the poor. In his superficial telling, “The history of economic growth is the history of how societies leave widespread poverty behind by finding ways to produce more of the goods and services that people need.” While in the vast piles of data at OWID you will find no mention of political movements that have bettered the human condition by challenging the supremacy of capital, you will also find nothing that reveals the complex realities of what happens when societies outside the vaunted system of economic growth are absorbed into it and made to conform to its rules.

[c3lsthe]

my take on Jin itadori and (kenjaku) kaori

infatuation can count as obsession