This time they are sending ALL of us to the ovens.

  • AllonzeeLV@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    48
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Well I, myself, am not currently personally on fire at this particular moment, which proves conclusively that climate change is a hoax and that our glorious, benevolent job creators deserve another tax cut and, fuck it, give em a bailout too just for the hell of it!

    Just don’t anyone dare give one of our innumerable homeless “people” in our innumerable tent cities a sandwich. That would just enable them to keep being poor. In fact, lets give people of net worth higher than a hundred million an annual, national civic award for occasionally having to see the homeless out of their car and limo windows, as a thank you for allowing the nation to bathe in the owner’s divine affluent light, that just feels on theme for us.

  • solstice@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    26
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    I was stuck in a waiting room for two hours today and the tv had the weather channel on. They covered the fires thoroughly, as well as record high temperatures all across the country, and the fact that before now such and such area only had five 100+ degree days and this year it had 11! Etc.

    The part I really noticed though is the number of times they actually said the phrase: climate change. ZERO

    Sigh

    • Queen HawlSera@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      The fact that they keep having to say that climate change isn’t real kind of makes me think climate change is real

      • solstice@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        1 year ago

        It didn’t come across as denial to me. It was pretty on the nose, they just wouldn’t come out and just say it. The knuckle dragging mouth breathers need it spelled out word for word.

    • FarFarAway@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      25
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      They don’t care. But they also don’t realize that those paid armies are gonna turn on them real fast. What are they gonna pay the guards with when money is useless? Even if they hold some leverage, I bet most would crumble if the guards violently pried it away.

      • Maajmaaj@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        There was a really good article by a consultant under NDA who spoke with some of these rich idiots about the guard dilemma. Consultant basically said rich idiots would have to treat the guards like family or face torture/execution. Rich idiots were not trying to hear that. I wish I could find the article.

    • alvvayson@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      They’ll just move to the most inhabitable, least affected, parts of earth. Perhaps New Zealand, Argentina or Scotland.

      They don’t need bunkers. This is what the billion dollar yachts, private planes and multiple homes in many jurisdictions are for.

      Anyway, I don’t think it’s fair to blame only the rich. We live in democracies with free speech and accessible information.

      I know a lot of anti-nuclear activists and those people are not rich, but are definitely more guilty of causing catastrophic climate change than the millionaires and billionaires.

      Every advanced country could have achieved the 5 tons per capita that France and Sweden achieved in 1990 by using nuclear energy. And that would have solved most of the climate change problem. The reason it is so bad now, is because we squandered the past 35 years and increased our emissions instead of reducing them.

      • Taleya@aussie.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        1 year ago

        I’m 45 years old, an average schmuck and my carbon impact across my life is nowhere near that of a top percenter. I will absolutely blame them.

        • alvvayson@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          8
          ·
          1 year ago

          You do you. If you are western, you are probably emitting 10-100 times as much as the average world citizen, and even multiples of what your (and my) grandparents emitted.

          Sure, there is always going to be one guy emitting even more, so everybody will always point to someone else.

          I prefer to point to the anti-nuclear activists. Because they are the only reason we aren’t all like Sweden and France.

      • asg101@lemmy.worldOP
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        They don’t need bunkers. This is what the billion dollar yachts, private planes and multiple homes in many jurisdictions are for.

        They will need bunkers when the oceans turn into giant vats of methane infused bouillabaisse.>

      • possibly a cat@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        They’ll just move to the most inhabitable, least affected, parts of earth. Perhaps New Zealand, Argentina or Scotland.

        I’m not sure there will be any. I recall someone mentioning an issue with NZ (other than the kiwis re-appropriating bunkers) but I’ve forgotten it now. Argentina is suffering from drought and large wildfires, and is expected to see tropical diseases expanding their territory (already happening in many places). Scotland and the whole region is going to suffer from intensely cold weather due to the AMOC slowdown, but I expect this will result in chaotic hot/cold weather extremes because the Earth’s Energy Imbalance (EEI) will still be extraordinarily high.

  • ZooGuru@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    1 year ago

    Honest question, what was the role of climate change in the Hawaii fires? Are they having a particularly dry summer?

    • Neato@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      A very rough interpretation: Climate change puts more CO2 into the air. This traps heat into the air. This also allows more water into the air. Water is a great heat sink so it allows more thermal energy into the atmosphere.

      All of this drives more extreme weather. Hotter summers, more extreme weather fluctuations, which leads to colder winters (hotter on average but can get more extreme), higher winds due to temperature disparity, and generally more precipitation. All of this drives more visible fluctuations like more and bigger tropical storms (hurricanes, typhoons), changes weather patterns leading to droughts, etc.

      You can see trends for things like storms, wildfires, droughts, etc all going up.

      • ZooGuru@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        Thanks. I understand the mechanisms of climate change on a basic level, I just hadn’t thought what occurred in Hawaii was due to extreme weather caused by climate change.

        • possibly a cat@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Dry and windy, as another said. It’s just exacerbating the weather extremes and making them more common. There were 70+ MPH winds blowing embers everywhere in this instance.

          There’s been at least one study in Nature describing increased winds due to climate change. It seems likely that effect contributed here. Assessing contribution from climate change to individual weather events is a headache, though. If anything on this one ultimately gets published, then I think it will take awhile longer before it happens.

    • Zorque@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      That’s not just something they turned it into, that’s the inevitable result of a system where profit defines success. Because, no matter how good your product is, or how great the service is, if you don’t make as much money it’s not good enough.

      As long as profit is the defining characteristic of our economy, this will never change.

    • Mic_Check_One_Two@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      A week or two wouldn’t do anything in the long term. They’d just spend the time breaking strikers’ kneecaps, because they made general strikes illegal so they’d have justification for violently breaking up any attempts.