#10741 ·
If you ask me, Mexicans are the ones actually responsible for global warming—just thought everyone should be aware of that fact.
Offside Chat Archives (2014-2021)
Started by Morgan Williams · · 👁 1.4K views · 18K replies
Participants
…
…
#10742 ·
There are roughly 7.5 billion people on Earth right now, and that number might climb past 9 billion by 2050. I guess there isn't really one shared goal here; collective human behavior doesn't seem to have any long-term purpose, nor has such an undertaking ever been clearly defined. Maybe what all societies share is this obsession with constant growth. We chase growth in consumption, population, productivity, manufacturing, stock indices, life expectancy—just growth in everything. Even FIFA seems to be pushing for more expansion with the World Cup, probably until they eventually invent 500 different countries just so everyone can play. But I wonder, growth toward what? Is there actually a numerical target for anything? How much should the average person consume, and for what reason? They say it’s for pleasure or happiness, but science suggests that happiness doesn't actually scale with more spending. It seems happiness is just how the brain interprets incoming data through certain hormone activations. It feels physically impossible to be a million times happier than someone else; the body just doesn't have that kind of capacity. Plus, that chemical high fades so quickly. Chasing infinite growth doesn't seem to make logical sense because if the goal is infinity, you can never actually reach it. It sounds a bit philosophical, I know, but looking at how we live, it feels like we're chasing something that doesn't exist since everyone eventually passes away without ever catching that ultimate state of bliss.
It might be difficult for people to voluntarily give up the high-tech versions of their lives because we're so hooked on them. Things like recycling, electric cars, biking, taking trains instead of planes, LED bulbs, cutting out plastic, or energy-efficient appliances—those are all good things in themselves, I suppose. They aren't bad. But they also create massive new industries that, in their own way, consume resources, energy, and land. So, we're just back to seeking more growth. I think true change would have to be radical. Real change wouldn't be electric cars; it would be having no cars at all. No planes, no massive cargo ships. Imagine if travel only happened on foot or by carriage. Or if plastic simply didn't exist. If lightbulbs or pesticides weren't part of the equation. If we didn't produce inorganic waste or need international shipping for goods and services. That kind of world would feel like living on another planet compared to today. Maybe it's possible in the far future, but I doubt people today would choose it voluntarily because it's just not what they want. Perhaps we could start with small behavioral shifts that might eventually evolve into radical changes. As for me, I drive a car, I fly, I buy products made all over the world, and I use electricity, water, gas, and generate plenty of waste. We all do it, and I guess it's just an integral part of our modern lives.
It might be difficult for people to voluntarily give up the high-tech versions of their lives because we're so hooked on them. Things like recycling, electric cars, biking, taking trains instead of planes, LED bulbs, cutting out plastic, or energy-efficient appliances—those are all good things in themselves, I suppose. They aren't bad. But they also create massive new industries that, in their own way, consume resources, energy, and land. So, we're just back to seeking more growth. I think true change would have to be radical. Real change wouldn't be electric cars; it would be having no cars at all. No planes, no massive cargo ships. Imagine if travel only happened on foot or by carriage. Or if plastic simply didn't exist. If lightbulbs or pesticides weren't part of the equation. If we didn't produce inorganic waste or need international shipping for goods and services. That kind of world would feel like living on another planet compared to today. Maybe it's possible in the far future, but I doubt people today would choose it voluntarily because it's just not what they want. Perhaps we could start with small behavioral shifts that might eventually evolve into radical changes. As for me, I drive a car, I fly, I buy products made all over the world, and I use electricity, water, gas, and generate plenty of waste. We all do it, and I guess it's just an integral part of our modern lives.
#10743 ·
Climate change is a natural phenomenon that has existed as long as the planet itself.
I believe human influence is minimal right now, if it even exists at all.
No sane person wants to pollute nature or destroy the resources that sustain us, but I'm not worried about it.
Humans evolve just like everything else. Technology will follow suit, giving us more while causing less pollution.
If mass pollution ever actually happens, people will start dying off. The strongest and most capable will survive, the Earth will reset itself, and everything will start over.
I believe human influence is minimal right now, if it even exists at all.
No sane person wants to pollute nature or destroy the resources that sustain us, but I'm not worried about it.
Humans evolve just like everything else. Technology will follow suit, giving us more while causing less pollution.
If mass pollution ever actually happens, people will start dying off. The strongest and most capable will survive, the Earth will reset itself, and everything will start over.
#10744 ·
Ashley Bailey6 said:Climate change is a natural phenomenon that has existed as long as the planet itself.
I believe human influence is minimal right now, if it even exists at all.
No sane person wants to pollute nature or destroy the resources that sustain us, but I'm not worried about it.
Humans evolve just like everything else. Technology will follow suit, giving us more while causing less pollution.
If mass pollution ever actually happens, people will start dying off. The strongest and most capable will survive, the Earth will reset itself, and everything will start over.
Preach. Basically what a fundamentalist would say.
#10745 ·
Jessica Gonzalez said:There are roughly 7.5 billion people on Earth right now, and that number might climb past 9 billion by 2050. I guess there isn't really one shared goal here; collective human behavior doesn't seem to have any long-term purpose, nor has such an undertaking ever been clearly defined. Maybe what all societies share is this obsession with constant growth. We chase growth in consumption, population, productivity, manufacturing, stock indices, life expectancy—just growth in everything. Even FIFA seems to be pushing for more expansion with the World Cup, probably until they eventually invent 500 different countries just so everyone can play. But I wonder, growth toward what? Is there actually a numerical target for anything? How much should the average person consume, and for what reason? They say it’s for pleasure or happiness, but science suggests that happiness doesn't actually scale with more spending. It seems happiness is just how the brain interprets incoming data through certain hormone activations. It feels physically impossible to be a million times happier than someone else; the body just doesn't have that kind of capacity. Plus, that chemical high fades so quickly. Chasing infinite growth doesn't seem to make logical sense because if the goal is infinity, you can never actually reach it. It sounds a bit philosophical, I know, but looking at how we live, it feels like we're chasing something that doesn't exist since everyone eventually passes away without ever catching that ultimate state of bliss.
It might be difficult for people to voluntarily give up the high-tech versions of their lives because we're so hooked on them. Things like recycling, electric cars, biking, taking trains instead of planes, LED bulbs, cutting out plastic, or energy-efficient appliances—those are all good things in themselves, I suppose. They aren't bad. But they also create massive new industries that, in their own way, consume resources, energy, and land. So, we're just back to seeking more growth. I think true change would have to be radical. Real change wouldn't be electric cars; it would be having no cars at all. No planes, no massive cargo ships. Imagine if travel only happened on foot or by carriage. Or if plastic simply didn't exist. If lightbulbs or pesticides weren't part of the equation. If we didn't produce inorganic waste or need international shipping for goods and services. That kind of world would feel like living on another planet compared to today. Maybe it's possible in the far future, but I doubt people today would choose it voluntarily because it's just not what they want. Perhaps we could start with small behavioral shifts that might eventually evolve into radical changes. As for me, I drive a car, I fly, I buy products made all over the world, and I use electricity, water, gas, and generate plenty of waste. We all do it, and I guess it's just an integral part of our modern lives.
For crying out loud, man, enough with the bullshit about lightbulbs. You're taking this to some insane extreme. 🤦
So what, the alternative is just being cavemen? How would a healthcare system even work in that world? Doctor Miles performing surgery with recycled tools disinfected in pig fat?
#10746 ·
Jessica Gonzalez said:There are roughly 7.5 billion people on Earth right now, and that number might climb past 9 billion by 2050. I guess there isn't really one shared goal here; collective human behavior doesn't seem to have any long-term purpose, nor has such an undertaking ever been clearly defined. Maybe what all societies share is this obsession with constant growth. We chase growth in consumption, population, productivity, manufacturing, stock indices, life expectancy—just growth in everything. Even FIFA seems to be pushing for more expansion with the World Cup, probably until they eventually invent 500 different countries just so everyone can play. But I wonder, growth toward what? Is there actually a numerical target for anything? How much should the average person consume, and for what reason? They say it’s for pleasure or happiness, but science suggests that happiness doesn't actually scale with more spending. It seems happiness is just how the brain interprets incoming data through certain hormone activations. It feels physically impossible to be a million times happier than someone else; the body just doesn't have that kind of capacity. Plus, that chemical high fades so quickly. Chasing infinite growth doesn't seem to make logical sense because if the goal is infinity, you can never actually reach it. It sounds a bit philosophical, I know, but looking at how we live, it feels like we're chasing something that doesn't exist since everyone eventually passes away without ever catching that ultimate state of bliss.
It might be difficult for people to voluntarily give up the high-tech versions of their lives because we're so hooked on them. Things like recycling, electric cars, biking, taking trains instead of planes, LED bulbs, cutting out plastic, or energy-efficient appliances—those are all good things in themselves, I suppose. They aren't bad. But they also create massive new industries that, in their own way, consume resources, energy, and land. So, we're just back to seeking more growth. I think true change would have to be radical. Real change wouldn't be electric cars; it would be having no cars at all. No planes, no massive cargo ships. Imagine if travel only happened on foot or by carriage. Or if plastic simply didn't exist. If lightbulbs or pesticides weren't part of the equation. If we didn't produce inorganic waste or need international shipping for goods and services. That kind of world would feel like living on another planet compared to today. Maybe it's possible in the far future, but I doubt people today would choose it voluntarily because it's just not what they want. Perhaps we could start with small behavioral shifts that might eventually evolve into radical changes. As for me, I drive a car, I fly, I buy products made all over the world, and I use electricity, water, gas, and generate plenty of waste. We all do it, and I guess it's just an integral part of our modern lives.
People are easily manipulated, and right now, they haven't just fallen for it—they're being led there on purpose. Back in my marketing psychology classes, we studied how business cycles work: if there isn't a demand, you manufacture one. Then, to satisfy that need, you have to buy something. Once you consume it, there’s an emotional crash, leaving you feeling just as empty as before. That triggers the whole cycle all over again. It's why consumerism feels so much like an addiction; you're constantly chasing short-term fixes, like a hamster on a wheel that never actually reaches a destination. The point isn't to arrive; it's just to keep running...
It's the same thing with meat consumption. Recycling is easy because you aren't giving anything up, but here, you're giving up backyard BBQs and burgers. Why change now if you don't have to? The link between environmental damage and the meat industry is huge. Every year, about 150 billion animals are slaughtered in the meat industry (not counting fish, if I recall correctly), often raised in incredibly cramped conditions. Is that really ethical or sustainable? Not to mention the health implications...
Just a small thought for the discussion regarding whether a Star Trek-style economy is even feasible 😉
#10747 ·
It isn't about consumption at all.
It’s simply part of our nature.
The real issue lies in how we produce things and how we consume them.
Take the ozone layer, for instance. It was in serious trouble. Once we realized the damage we were doing, we phased out CFCs, and the ozone layer began to recover.
That doesn't mean people stopped using refrigerators. We just started manufacturing different kinds of refrigerators.
Then there’s asbestos. Once the experts realized it was lethal, it was banned. Did construction stop? Of course not. People just started building with safer materials.
I am certain we will follow the same pattern with oil. We have recognized its impact. We will replace it with something else—wind, solar, hydro, nuclear energy. The possibilities are essentially limitless.
Right now, the only sectors where we lack a truly viable alternative are food production and land usage. Everything else is achievable; we just need the collective will to do it.
It’s simply part of our nature.
The real issue lies in how we produce things and how we consume them.
Take the ozone layer, for instance. It was in serious trouble. Once we realized the damage we were doing, we phased out CFCs, and the ozone layer began to recover.
That doesn't mean people stopped using refrigerators. We just started manufacturing different kinds of refrigerators.
Then there’s asbestos. Once the experts realized it was lethal, it was banned. Did construction stop? Of course not. People just started building with safer materials.
I am certain we will follow the same pattern with oil. We have recognized its impact. We will replace it with something else—wind, solar, hydro, nuclear energy. The possibilities are essentially limitless.
Right now, the only sectors where we lack a truly viable alternative are food production and land usage. Everything else is achievable; we just need the collective will to do it.
#10748 ·
Man doesn't really drive pollution, yet somehow temperatures just start skyrocketing right after the Industrial Revolution—especially once the whole car craze took off, I suppose.🙏🙏
Someone made a good point once... it’s such a shame CO2 is colorless. If it were purple or green or something, maybe we'd actually see how much of it is hovering all around us.👍
Someone made a good point once... it’s such a shame CO2 is colorless. If it were purple or green or something, maybe we'd actually see how much of it is hovering all around us.👍
#10749 ·
bluebison47 said:Man doesn't really drive pollution, yet somehow temperatures just start skyrocketing right after the Industrial Revolution—especially once the whole car craze took off, I suppose.🙏🙏
Someone made a good point once... it’s such a shame CO2 is colorless. If it were purple or green or something, maybe we'd actually see how much of it is hovering all around us.👍
There was way more CO2 two thousand years ago, so how do you explain that?
#10750 ·
bluebison47 said:Man doesn't really drive pollution, yet somehow temperatures just start skyrocketing right after the Industrial Revolution—especially once the whole car craze took off, I suppose.🙏🙏
Someone made a good point once... it’s such a shame CO2 is colorless. If it were purple or green or something, maybe we'd actually see how much of it is hovering all around us.👍
And the best part? We actually understand the mechanism by which greenhouse gases drive up the temperature.
We even have a clear example within our own solar system (Mars).
We've measured the rise in temperature ourselves.
But no, according to the skeptics, this is all just a conspiracy cooked up by scientists with their own secret agendas—and apparently, almost all of them are lying.
Wildlife is struggling, countless species have already vanished, and many more are teetering on the edge. But again, that’s just something scientists made up to serve their hidden motives.
The bison in the USA disappeared because of natural Earth cycles, not humans. Tigers, mammoths, certain whale species, rhinos... it’s all just part of the Earth's natural rhythm. Human activity has nothing to do with it.
#10751 ·
Ashley Bailey6 said:Climate change is a natural phenomenon that has existed as long as the planet itself.
I believe human influence is minimal right now, if it even exists at all.
No sane person wants to pollute nature or destroy the resources that sustain us, but I'm not worried about it.
Humans evolve just like everything else. Technology will follow suit, giving us more while causing less pollution.
If mass pollution ever actually happens, people will start dying off. The strongest and most capable will survive, the Earth will reset itself, and everything will start over.
I’m signing on to this, along with Paul Sanders5. It particularly irritates me when animal rights activists blame the entire human race for everything. Sure, we made mistakes in the past, but I trust we've learned from them. Let's stop ignoring the fact that without human intervention, certain species would have gone extinct on their own or due to other predators anyway. Take pythons in Florida, for instance; they spread out and started wrecking the entire ecosystem, so humans stepped in and started hunting them heavily because they're invasive. Regardless of how many animals went extinct throughout history without any human influence...
#10752 ·
We honestly could've ditched conventional power plants ages ago. I mean, at least the developed West had the actual cash to pull it off. Just imagine how much lower pollution levels would be right now... seriously. Plus, EV tech would probably be lightyears ahead because we'd basically have an infinite energy supply at our fingertips.
But hey, screw it, right? It’s all green vs. red politics. Nuclear is "baaaaad," so just keep burning coal while forcing everyone onto renewables. Because, obviously, the wind blows whenever you feel like it and with whatever intensity you want, and the sun shines 24/7, 365 days a year—and hey, the further north you go, the better it gets, right?
But hey, screw it, right? It’s all green vs. red politics. Nuclear is "baaaaad," so just keep burning coal while forcing everyone onto renewables. Because, obviously, the wind blows whenever you feel like it and with whatever intensity you want, and the sun shines 24/7, 365 days a year—and hey, the further north you go, the better it gets, right?
#10753 ·
Noah Roberts46 said:I’m signing on to this, along with Paul Sanders5. It particularly irritates me when animal rights activists blame the entire human race for everything. Sure, we made mistakes in the past, but I trust we've learned from them. Let's stop ignoring the fact that without human intervention, certain species would have gone extinct on their own or due to other predators anyway. Take pythons in Florida, for instance; they spread out and started wrecking the entire ecosystem, so humans stepped in and started hunting them heavily because they're invasive. Regardless of how many animals went extinct throughout history without any human influence...
So, where did those Burmese pythons in Florida even come from?
LOL
Didn't people likely bring them there in the first place?
You're essentially contradicting yourself here.
EDIT:
I decided to dig a little deeper into this.
Pythons are apex predators in Florida, whereas they aren't in Burma.
Do you know why?
It’s because there aren't any large cats left to hunt them.
There used to be jaguars in the southern parts of the US that would hunt massive snakes like these.
Do you know when the jaguars disappeared from Florida?
Roughly 11,000 years ago.
Let's play a game of connect the dots: what else happened around the same time the Florida jaguars went extinct? The rise of human civilization, wouldn't you say?
#10754 ·
Matthew Young35 said:And the best part? We actually understand the mechanism by which greenhouse gases drive up the temperature.
We even have a clear example within our own solar system (Mars).
We've measured the rise in temperature ourselves.
But no, according to the skeptics, this is all just a conspiracy cooked up by scientists with their own secret agendas—and apparently, almost all of them are lying.
Wildlife is struggling, countless species have already vanished, and many more are teetering on the edge. But again, that’s just something scientists made up to serve their hidden motives.
The bison in the USA disappeared because of natural Earth cycles, not humans. Tigers, mammoths, certain whale species, rhinos... it’s all just part of the Earth's natural rhythm. Human activity has nothing to do with it.
#10755 ·
wiredrider9 said:There was way more CO2 two thousand years ago, so how do you explain that?
I mean, there’s a massive difference between natural fluctuations and growth caused directly by humans, I suppose. 🙏
Why didn't this spike happen five hundred years ago, but instead happened right in the last century? 🤷
It’s almost too obvious... you have this direct cause-and-effect link that lines up perfectly with the timeline, but no—apparently, those wicked scientists just made it all up because they want to throttle American progress and industry. 🙏
#10756 ·
Really eye-opening lecture on wind turbines—showing how they’re actually pretty brutal on the environment and us humans alike
#10757 ·
I mean, it’s honestly insane to try and deny how much humans influence everything, but look, if we hit a mass extinction, what then? You might have survived a few close calls—maybe three, I don't know—but so what? Species die out, new ones take over, and eventually, some other group is just going to step in and replace us too.
Look, if we actually want to be smart about this, we need to unite as a single human race and actually build something meaningful, because if we don't, the planet is just going to hit the reset button on all of us. It’s that simple. We aren't special, and we certainly weren't "chosen by God." Plus, it would be pretty stupid not to use our resources, it's just that people are incredibly arrogant and lazy. Most people are just "dirty"—I'm talking about those people who steal little bags of fruit at the grocery store and all that crap.
But unfortunately, the problem isn't just us, though again, how can we even judge anyone else when nobody ever steps up to clean up after themselves? 🤷
And honestly, humanity is just pathetic.
Look, if we actually want to be smart about this, we need to unite as a single human race and actually build something meaningful, because if we don't, the planet is just going to hit the reset button on all of us. It’s that simple. We aren't special, and we certainly weren't "chosen by God." Plus, it would be pretty stupid not to use our resources, it's just that people are incredibly arrogant and lazy. Most people are just "dirty"—I'm talking about those people who steal little bags of fruit at the grocery store and all that crap.
But unfortunately, the problem isn't just us, though again, how can we even judge anyone else when nobody ever steps up to clean up after themselves? 🤷
And honestly, humanity is just pathetic.
#10758 ·
bluebison47 said:I mean, there’s a massive difference between natural fluctuations and growth caused directly by humans, I suppose. 🙏
Why didn't this spike happen five hundred years ago, but instead happened right in the last century? 🤷
It’s almost too obvious... you have this direct cause-and-effect link that lines up perfectly with the timeline, but no—apparently, those wicked scientists just made it all up because they want to throttle American progress and industry. 🙏
And how do you even know if it's "natural" growth versus what we're seeing now? It's all just guesswork, man.
#10759 ·
Peter Thompson4 said:I mean, it’s honestly insane to try and deny how much humans influence everything, but look, if we hit a mass extinction, what then? You might have survived a few close calls—maybe three, I don't know—but so what? Species die out, new ones take over, and eventually, some other group is just going to step in and replace us too.
Look, if we actually want to be smart about this, we need to unite as a single human race and actually build something meaningful, because if we don't, the planet is just going to hit the reset button on all of us. It’s that simple. We aren't special, and we certainly weren't "chosen by God." Plus, it would be pretty stupid not to use our resources, it's just that people are incredibly arrogant and lazy. Most people are just "dirty"—I'm talking about those people who steal little bags of fruit at the grocery store and all that crap.
But unfortunately, the problem isn't just us, though again, how can we even judge anyone else when nobody ever steps up to clean up after themselves? 🤷
And honestly, humanity is just pathetic.
God, I see this all the time. These people can't even handle a damn grocery bag without making a mess, meanwhile, I always carry my own reusable cloth bag to the store.
#10760 ·
wiredrider9 said:And how do you even know if it's "natural" growth versus what we're seeing now? It's all just guesswork, man.
I mean, that would have to be some sort of absolute, goddamn coincidence, right? Like, just perfectly timed to look like the truth when it actually isn't. I guess.👍
It’s honestly like saying, oh, there was corruption at LA Galaxy forty years ago too, so how do you know it’s specifically Mamić at fault and not just the usual suspects being thieves and frauds? Maybe.🤣
🔗 Similar threads
- Group chat drama and the "truth in Off-topic · Jul 29, 2026
- Is everything becoming just another AI chatbot? in Software · Jul 29, 2026
- Is the "Empty Chat" era officially dead? in Random / Off-topic · Jul 28, 2026
- Private Chat for Me and My Inner Circle Only. Chapter III. The Return of the King. in Off-topic · May 7, 2023
- ChatGPT in IT Support · Apr 21, 2023