this post was submitted on 31 Jul 2025
1527 points (98.2% liked)
Microblog Memes
8894 readers
1762 users here now
A place to share screenshots of Microblog posts, whether from Mastodon, tumblr, ~~Twitter~~ X, KBin, Threads or elsewhere.
Created as an evolution of White People Twitter and other tweet-capture subreddits.
Rules:
- Please put at least one word relevant to the post in the post title.
- Be nice.
- No advertising, brand promotion or guerilla marketing.
- Posters are encouraged to link to the toot or tweet etc in the description of posts.
Related communities:
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Imagine finding that people your own age ignored it too, like they're doing right now.
I am almost 70. I am very anecdotal, I understand.
In the 80’s after the fake energy scare (gas shortage one) that was all over the news saying we will have an ice age and other lies by the government I no longer listened or believed a word they said.
I tried to tell friends, family and anyone else I could (I was all pumped up after watching Carl Sagan’s Cosmos and his dire message) that we have to take better care of the planet etc. I was laughed at, told to shut the fuck up you stupid hippie and other such stuff. I gave up trying. Did my own thing to help a bit. Never bought new anything like cars, clothes, tech etc. Still the same to this day.
I see the same thing now by the majority of young folks and most others just like back in the day.
Hopefully at some point there will be a major shift in people’s thinking about our planet …
I read a stat like 70% of all carbon emissions come from like 10 sources, and our individual efforts is basically like pissing in the sea, its not going do much.
This is like the "both sides" argument in politics.
It resonates with people and encourages apathy supporting the status quo.
Its true that the actions of an individual aren't very impactful. Its also true that large corporations are responsible for the vast majority of the problem.
However, if no one bought products from those companies, or owned their shares, then they would exist.
While "no one" is not possible, what if everyone just used 5% less, or 5% of people switched to an "ethical" 401k / pension funds that didn't invest in these companies.
We dont need a few people doing climate mitigation perfectly, we need everyone doing climate mitigation imperfectly.
It sounds like such a small change, yet we're unable to achieve it.
For example, here in Australia our conservative party is presently trying to discard our pathetic carbon emissions targets saying they're unachievable.
Ah, but is it apathy to support the systematic teardown of these major sources? Like actually destroying private jets for instance
It's the truth
Oh please. It's like you didn't even read my comment. Your claim may be "true" but it's precisely what governments and polluters want you to be thinking and saying. "I personally can't do anything about this."
In Europe, 40% of emissions come from private cars. If we remove all other emissions, we still can't reach the factor of 4 just because of cars. Are you sure your source isn't BP?
Consumer use of private vehicles and air conditioning / heating absolutely have a non-negligible impact.
The glorious thing about climate change is it increases the NEED for air conditioning. There are populated places right now that you will die if you have to be outside without water for too long.
As a group, yes...per individual not really.
I actually am 70 and remember the "oil crisis". It would be great if there were a major shift in people's thinking, but the vast majority of people don't seem to do squat until they really have to. I think that force has driven a lot of history.
I’m still trying to figure out The timeline of when it switched from ice age to global warming. Most likely after scientists figured out the real reason.
Imagine seeing this and not immediately going full Avalanche blowing up reactors n shit...
Reactors would be helpful in this situation honestly. They only emit steam
Like the ffvii reference, don't like your hippie lib attitude. Downvote
Yeah nuclear isnt the immediate or root problem here.
Note that the "reactors" are, in-game, energy plants that convert literal life force into electricity.
https://www.quora.com/Are-any-gamers-bothered-by-the-fact-Final-Fantasy-VII-Remake-features-radical-left-wing-terrorists-as-the-good-guys
I like Joshua's answer here. The mental gymnastics is insane
I really don't see how slaying the planet in a magical way is so different than slaughtering the planet in a greedy astroturfing way? After giving mass ff7 lore he just convulse into rants about how bad antifa is and nobody even asked. The megacorps and their lobbyists ARE killing our planet and using faschism and world order war.. the fucking boreal is our Mako. If they burn, similarly no new soul will be born.
He also wraps it up with a bit of climate denial, so he thinks the real problem is imaginary.
Extra mental gymnastics as he interpreted reports of significantly improved pollution when we shut down everything as proof, somehow, that humanity didn't really make that much of a difference... So either a difference is observed and that means it's the rest of the way reversible so it can't be that big of a deal or no difference would've been seen and he would have concluded humanity must not make a difference because no difference was seen..
Wow, I couldn't get through that... Feel like it's a sign of some mental issues to produce that much word diarrhea in a Quora answer...
But yeah, "the bombings in the game and their collateral damage including death of civilians are good, but you know what is truly evil? Some people that mostly just hold up protest signs and stand around protesting Trump."
Sorry the actual discourse hasnt risen above the level of thirty year old video games, it's really hard to tell sometimes.
My employer, employing 90 people, a lot of which are in their 20s and 30s, has decided to organise the yearly seminar event in a place where most of the company needs to board a plane to go. I immediately said I wouldn't go if I needed to take a plane, I was not the only one to say it. The company offered to reimburse any alternative journey (train+boat) which is a bit more expensive, but way way longer (14h transport vs 3h on plane, not taking into account the time in between train and ferry: I'll be traveling for more than 24h in total between start and end, and same for the return journey). I said I'd do it, the others that spoke out: not so much, they are either not coming or taking the plane... In the end I think I will be the only one, we'll see.