Gloomy

The talking point this time around seems to be that they are just destroying those chemical gas weapons and military infrastructure. Can’t have that with Islamists. I have seen one person call this “forward defending” unironically.

They don’t call it a Quarter Pounder with Cheese?

After several days of what I can only describe as ill-informed pro crab propaganda posts all over lemmy I realy needed this. Thank you.

Lol, I feel ya :-)

Thanks for that and quite interesting. Then it is indead cultural thing, or a generational one.

So people watch movies with the subtitles on? Like, is that a thing? Might be cultural thing, but I’ve almost never encountered that.

Most, as you put it, “experts” point to inflation as a consequence, but I know shit about economics and don’t know the mechanism behind it.

https://www.newsweek.com/what-does-rubles-sharp-fall-mean-russias-economy-1992933

Spoiler much?

Great question! The reason why I was using the 2017 report is that the Guardian arrival you originally referred to was from 2017, so I looked at the report they were working off of.

That is sensible, yes.

I regards to the graph you posted, it shows how emissions from private comps is have fallen and emissions from nations and nation owned companies have rissen. I think this is a relevant distinction to make, because the meme and the report as they are show a one sided picture (capitalism is the sole drive of climate change) whilst, looking at the complete data, a more nuanced picture emerges (like the role of nations in upholding the capitals system).

Why are you using data from the 2017 report?

You are referring to page 15, which shows emissions in 2015. In the up to date 2024 report this has been replaced with emissions after the Paris climate agreement, so 2016 till 2022.

As you can see, the same picture emerges as I stated in my first post: the top actors are Nations or state owned producers. The contribution to global Co2 emissions is listet, but still only refers to fossil fuel and cement Co 2 emissions.

https://mander.xyz/comment/15166141

I’ll refer to this comment where I showed why the article quoted here is very missleading.

This meme is not true and missleading. I know it fits the narrative of “companies bad”. But it’s not based on fact.

It’s based on an article by the guardian.

Just 100 companies responsible for 71% of global emissions, study says

The article is based on the Carbon Major Report.

It describes itself like this:

Carbon Majors is a database of historical production data from 122 of the world’s largest oil, gas, coal, and cement producers. This data is used to quantify the direct operational emissions and emissions from the combustion of marketed products that can be attributed to these entities.

As you can see, they speak about “entities”, not companies. Who are said entities?

75 Investor-owned Companies, 36 State-owned Companies, 11 Nation States, 82 Oil Producing Entities, 81 Gas Entities, 49 Coal Entities, 6 Cement Entities

As one might realize, only 75 are Companies. Most of them are either States, or producers of Oil, Gas, Coal and Cement.

The 71 % is not at all about global emissions. This is wrong.

72% of Global Fossil Fuel & Cement CO2 Emissions

So it’s 100 entities that are responsible for 72 % of the world’s fossil and cement Co2 emission.

https://mander.xyz/pictrs/image/05dfb9e1-ace2-4072-9fc5-7ed6f6eddfb2.png

Looking at them you can see how the top emitter are very much not companies. Also, it’s historical Co2, a fact made prominent by the former Soviet union beeing the top emitter.

Let’s look at some more findings:

The Carbon Majors database finds that most state- and investor-owned companies have expanded their production operations since the Paris Agreement. 58 out of the 100 companies were linked to higher emissions in the seven years after the Paris Agreement than in the same period before. This increase is most pronounced in Asia, where 13 out of 15 (87%) assessed companies are connected to higher emissions in 2016–2022 than in 2009–2015, and in the Middle East, where this number is 7 out of 10 companies (70%). In Europe, 13 of 23 companies (57%), in South America, 3 of 5 (60%) companies, and in Australia, 3 out of 4 (75%) companies were linked to increased emissions, as were 3 of 6 (50%) African companies. North America is the only region where a minority of companies, 16 of 37 (43%), were linked to rising emissions.

Here the report mixes state and private companies. The rise is most prominent in countries with state owned companies. Privote companies, as seen in Europe and North America, haven’t increased that much.

So, all in all: The idea that 100 companies are responsible for the destruction of earth is plain wrong.

I know the ideas that companies are responsible and to blaim for the current state of affairs fits our world view (it fits mine!!), but please don’t run into the trap of believing everything you read just because it does.

Im not a native English speaker and I thought “lost my legs” was an idome of some sort, especially because you wrote it in the same sentence as beeing a single father.

But no. You lost your legs. Litarly.

In regards to the rest of your post, absolutely 100 % on your side. I met my wife 2 years ago and it is the most beautiful relationship I ever had, mainly because we treat each other with the same amount of respect.

Sort of, ay.

The judge said Kurtaj’s skills and desire to commit cyber-crime meant he remained a high risk to the public.

He will remain at a secure hospital for life unless doctors deem him no longer a danger.

The court heard that Kurtaj had been violent while in custody with dozens of reports of injury or property damage.

Doctors deemed Kurtaj unfit to stand trial due to his severe autism so the jury was asked to determine whether or not he committed the alleged acts - not if he did so with criminal intent.

This is so fucking cringe that it hurts my brain every time they say it.

And this is it. This is how we arrived where we are now.

Nature? KILL IT! EXTERMINATE IT!

We’ve spend 2000 years slowly beeting nature to our wims. It has destroyed the planets ecosystem on a scale only seen by planet wide desasters in the past. We have driven countless species into extinction, and still counting. We take without any regard or resecpt for anything then our own needs.

That is exactly the mindset the comment I am replying to has to me.

Yeah, but try saying something slightly to nuanced about the Israel - Palestine situation almost anywhere here and you get nuked.

I agree completely.

It comes down to wanting the best for yourself and only for yourself. There can’t be any other motivation for destroying a whole planet in order to get a live with vastly more money than you could ever spend.

Good point. If the wizard did this you also would never know that such a song existed. Hence your “worst song in the world” spot would be filled with a different song the instant the spell hits.

It shows how such categories as “the worst” and “the best” are only constructions of our mind.

Let’s say it’s a postmodern interpretation of the meme idea.