StinkyFingerItchyBum

  • 0 Posts
  • 151 Comments
Joined 11 months ago
cake
Cake day: February 26th, 2025

help-circle



  • StinkyFingerItchyBum@lemmy.catoScience Memes@mander.xyzGreat Mug
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    edit-2
    12 days ago

    If we look at the way the universe behaves, quantum mechanics gives us fundamental, unavoidable indeterminacy, so that alternative histories of the universe can be assigned probability.

    • Murray Gell-Mann

    “it posits that the universe functions according to predictable rules”

    • you

    Not quite. Cosmologists accept a certain distribution of predictable phenomena within known parameters while leaving the door open to chaos, outliers, the as of yet unknown and unknowable.

    Complexity theory is a model that posits components interact in multiple ways and behave according to local rules. From quantum physics to cosmology and the aspirational yet elusive grand theory of everything, science is prepared for a world weirder than we understand, and possibly weirder than we can understand.

    Just because empirical evidence and the development of predictable rules are a very fruitful line of inquiry doesn’t mean we believe that is truth.

    Philosophers of Science have rather lengthy volumes of work on the subject. I’m just a novice on the topic, but my take on the state of the subject is that we don’t accept science and even it’s laws as absolute truth, just a very practical, reliable, utilitarian form of inquiry and understanding which includes uncertainty (Heisenberg), probability, complexity and chaos. Scientists are prepared to abandon everything in exchange for something better.

    Look at newtonian physics. No one thinks it’s the truth, it’s just simpler and useful for everyday engineering.




  • The problem is Discrediting by Association. Any meaningful, impactful movement that challenges the growth paradigm and threatens profiteers is disingenuously categorized as ecofascist.

    Reddit/r/collapse wouldn’t talk about population at all for years because of the knee-jerk reaction to lump it in with eugenics and genocide. They grew up and now it is carefully moderated and discussed well. It seems Lemmy ain’t there yet.

    If you are an ecology dude like me you remember I=PAT. How can we discuss solutions when we self censor ethical and moral discussions around the P pillar?




  • Ok, I’m not gonna ask how you force a world to stop having children and rapidly reduce the population.

    Force? Take a moment to step out of your body and listen to the nonsense you are saying. Lol! Have you seen birthrates around most of the world? I have to do exactly … nothing! It’s already happening. Ta-da!

    Some public relations and education around the purpose and benefits of degrowth would be helpful, but it is entirely voluntary. If someone wants to have 10 children, that’s their choice, but they should have no illusions to the world their children will be raised in. That is part of the education.

    All children born have equal rights and are taken care of by the state, community and families, even the family with 10 kids. Support for family planning and abortion services should be frictionless, but that’s the norm already in civilized countries. It’s the shithole countries you have to worry about. Trade blocs of degrowth countries can encourage them with trade rules, aid and sanctions.

    Most state subsidies would have to go to redirecting the economy to brace for an aging population then a smaller steady state economy. We have to build the world of the future for the smaller civilization to endure. We need leaders who have a clear vision of what sustainability actually looks like.

    This means efficient quality housing (passivehouse) built in walkable cities with extensive public transit. Everything powered by renewables. With less mouths to feed, marginal agricultural lands can be rewilded. There is a principle in ecology that you can save 80% of species by protecting 50% of the land. This is almost easy with a small population. With a large and growing population hoping for a technical miracle breakthrough hail mary, it’s a death sentence.

    Also, agricultural techniques can adapt to environmentally sustainable models like permaculture and silvopasture and alleycropping thus rebuilding soils, retaining moisture and soil carbon amd biological activity. This is not currently possible because our population exploded based on monoculture dependent on pumped groundwater from rapidly depleting aquifers, pesticides that are poisoning humans and wildlife and the plastic packaging meant to maximize short term yields. A world where climate change is a major factor, the loss of major breadbaskets when aquifers run dry at the same time as a drought will guarentee millions and millions of deaths by poverty and famine and conflict over remaining resources.

    Degrowth says that when these inevitable things happen, do you want a large population to discover there is no room for them on a dying planet, or do you want a small population who can life full healthy meaningful lives restoring the biosphere we broke.

    Manufacturing is already being automated, and so is defense. The economy doesn’t want youth for this type of work and with drones and ai it’s only accelerating. Automation and social services will be big employers, as will the infrastructure projects that will bring a sustainable population to light.

    Do you want your kids and your nations youth building a sustainable future for mankind, or do you want them dying from pollution, famine and war?




  • Degrowth sides with eugenics, racists, and psychopaths.

    Nope. That just a deliberate mischaracterization driven by those who have a stake in growth and consumption.

    You could be called a nazi for no reason too, it doesn’t discredit the ideas, its just meaningless noise. “Discredit by association” is what you are doing and it’s a popular trick by disinformation agents. Are you the agent or the useful idiot who fell for it?

    Degrowth is very clearly and unequivocally a moral and ethical plan to right size humanity to where its ecological footprint can be carried sustainably by the earth. No technological miracle hail marys required. No deaths, no racism, no deprivation or suffering or state sponsored goonsquad progroms. Just shrink until you fits where you sits.



  • There is a point burried in there that is drowned out by all the fallacious added baggage. Its disingenuous bullshit.

    Indigenous Chinese or Indians or Nigerians are not protectors of the earth, just like every other industrial nation. The picture meant to frame “Indigenous” as what Canada calls the indigenous First Nations peoples. It’s relying on the racist trope of the noble savage, forgetting that First Nations aren’t against industrializing their lands, as long as they are included as partner beneficiaries and they don’t maximize returns via egregious environmental destruction on their lands. They also generally want industrialization and trade including water treatment, sanitation and all the other goodies like internet, tv, playstations and the like.

    It also targets “capitalist” without looking at the eco-horrors of every other 'ism on earth. Go have a cool tall glass of Ganges, Nile or Yellow river water and tell me how refreshing it is.

    This is a shitpost carefully designed to be a lopsided attack.