• 3 Posts
  • 21 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: January 12th, 2024

help-circle


  • also - sorry for ranting but this is a perfect time for it - people who wear earrings are stupid. they want to be pretty so they wear earrings, though if people like you because you wear earrings, better distance yourself from these people. also, the make-up economy is harmful. make-up contains hormone-like substances, they are a means of extracting money out of unwitting women, make women feel like shit if they don’t wear make-up, and distort perception of what a normal human looks like through advertisement. women become dependent on that stuff because if nobody used it, neither would they have to.










  • gandalf_der_12te@discuss.tchncs.detoMemes@lemmy.mlshit...
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    I really agree with your point. However:

    First of all, it’s reduce, reuse, recycle.

    Nobody implied that recycling would solve everything. (at least i didn’t, i don’t know about what other people said)

    Secondly, plastics is actually less of a problem than people think. Plastics is essentially non-toxic, or has a similar toxicity than wood, grass, and other carbohydrates. So essentially non-toxic. The fact that there is traces of it in your blood is not surprising, because our detection systems these days are very sensitive and can detect even the tiniest amounts.

    The additives are the problem, and they should either be forbidden or strictly regulated.


    The point that “chemical recycling is infeasible” is wrong. It used to be financially infeasible because the energy required to recycle was many times more expensive than just buying crude oil and making new plastics. Nowadays, however, that might change, depending on how cheap solar energy turns out to become over the next 10 years.


    Furthermore, i guess Aluminum and glass are actually often worse for the environment, because while they could be recycled close to 100% when properly collected, such a good collection system is totally unreasonable and off the bat IMO. Consider: if there’s one stupid guy who throws a lead acid battery into the recycle container, all of you now have lead poisoning for the rest of your lifes. It’s a medical hazard.


    Additionally, the problem with plastic waste in the environment is a problem of insufficient regulation, not with the plastics itself. Plastics can be burned very close to 100%, so it leaves no traces. Different than say nuclear which leaves back toxic waste. Additionally, burning plastics releases close to 100% of the energy stored in it, so it could be used as a fuel. In the future, optimized plastics power stations might burn plastics in the winter to generate energy to compensate for lower solar energy. That’s why i’m actually in favor of collecting all plastics in gigantic landfills, because it might become a very valuable resource later on.



  • sry i’m too tired rn

    maybe another time :D

    here’s a short summary:

    plants produce life out of the four elements (water, air, sunlight, earth), so they are producers of life. animals/fungus are consumers of such life (they eat fruit) and decompose it into urine, air, shit, and heat/energy. so it goes full-circle.

    what, however - you may ask -, is in it for the plants? why produce food only for animals to eat it? it is because the plants get something for it, and that is that animals transport the seed in the fruit around and drop it somewhere far away. so plants get movement or transport from the animals. and that advantage is, in fact, large enough for the plants for it to even bother producing food in the first place. so quite big. that’s not really pseudoscience btw, more real biology done by real biologists, but still interesting :D




  • Also if you have a million dollars or more and put it into the most generic stock/index imaginable, then it will grow by a few percent annually, while you do jack-ass nothing. Therefore it is only fair to introduce a wealth tax to tax these unearned-profits by maybe, let’s say 3% annually. That money could well go towards society, i.e. the people.



  • Uff, i have a lot:

    Life on earth is a huge organized organism. It created intelligent humans deliberately sothat we can spread life to other planets. Living beings (plants, insects, other animals, fungi) could not do that otherwise.

    All life is sentient. Sentience doesn’t come from the brain, rather it comes from the hormones in your bloodstream. When we sweat, these hormones enter the air (apparently within the fraction of a second) and other people can smell them. That is how we can instinctually know how others are feeling.


    Also i have a lot of mythology:

    Heaven (realm of all ideas, knowledge and forms) and Earth (origin of mass and material) are a love pair. Because they couldn’t easily meet (there was an insurmountable gap between them), they created a bridge, which is life. This way, heaven supplies the shape (genes), and Earth supplies the body, and these two can be together in this way.

    Viruses are books. They have a cover (shell) and contain scripture (RNA/DNA). We humans let them in because they are nature’s messengers and have a specific purpose, which is to exchange some information.


  • I can think of a good reason but i’m not sure whether you’re willing to buy into it.

    people naturally don’t think of themselves as individuals. people think of themselves as a group/society.

    People recognize that under a republican US government, they’re significantly more likely to go to mars and have prosperous offspring. while if they’re stuck on earth, a recession and decline is waiting for them. they can’t verbalize it and probably aren’t even rationally aware of it, but i guess they can feel it with their heart.

    of course lots of you folks are gonna immediately chime in and say “nooo i saw a youtube video that explained that it’s impossible to live on mars”, and honestly, you should reconsider why you’re so eager to deny a topic that you’ve clearly not put in as much effort to think about than the people who actually do care about this project. and also, assuming it does work out; what will you do then? be ashamed of your wrong prediction? because if you’re not, that means you don’t stand to your prediction, and therefore the prediction is worthless. i’m not sure whether i was too direct about this and somebody perceived it as rude, but i’m tired of this feeling of being stuck. we need to think long-term again.