Rising rocket launches linked to ozone layer thinning
Technology
24
Beiträge
20
Kommentatoren
23
Aufrufe
-
So the billionaires escaping climate collapse into space will cause more climate collapse? That's a bit ironic but not really a problem since the important people will be in space anyway, right?
But this can also encourage more billionaires to escape into space creating a feedback loop and new tipping point we have to worry about so maybe it actually is problematic.
The billionaires’ various acts of performative space tourism are dumb to be sure, but they’re just a drop in the ocean for this specific issue.
-
The billionaires’ various acts of performative space tourism are dumb to be sure, but they’re just a drop in the ocean for this specific issue.
I know, I meant more the general goal of billionaires to profit from space while ignoring any negative consequence of them doing so. Escaping earth and leaving all of us to die in the mess they created is just their wet, objectivist dream.
-
So the billionaires escaping climate collapse into space will cause more climate collapse? That's a bit ironic but not really a problem since the important people will be in space anyway, right?
But this can also encourage more billionaires to escape into space creating a feedback loop and new tipping point we have to worry about so maybe it actually is problematic.
Don't worry. Once we are no longer useful to them, something the billionaires are actively working on, and once they have successfully insulated themselves from the resulting conflict, they will start to kill us all off and they will say they are doing it to "save the planet". They still care about the planet. Just not with all of us poor people still on it. It deserves to be returned to nature. Except for the billionaires and their friends, of course.
-
This post did not contain any content.
As if we didn't know this already.
Space launches disrupt ozone layer, contribute to air pollution and global warming, waste a lot of resources, and produce tons upon tons of space debris.
We should be careful with this industry and technology, and use it when it makes sense. But hey, why not launch billionaires and their cars into space for leisure and launch hundreds of satellites under different brandings all promising the best Internet ever or whatnot?
Also, massive launches such as Starlink should be approved by international bodies, not national organizations. Cool, US has greenlit the launch, but now it's a global headache.
-
As if we didn't know this already.
Space launches disrupt ozone layer, contribute to air pollution and global warming, waste a lot of resources, and produce tons upon tons of space debris.
We should be careful with this industry and technology, and use it when it makes sense. But hey, why not launch billionaires and their cars into space for leisure and launch hundreds of satellites under different brandings all promising the best Internet ever or whatnot?
Also, massive launches such as Starlink should be approved by international bodies, not national organizations. Cool, US has greenlit the launch, but now it's a global headache.
we should be careful with.....
Yeaaahhh, you're talking to humanity here
-
we should be careful with.....
Yeaaahhh, you're talking to humanity here
Yep, and I understand how little this message changes in the world
But at least it's good to highlight the basics to ensure people understand the dangers and shortcomings
-
we should be careful with.....
Yeaaahhh, you're talking to humanity here
Yeah what about the economy? /s
-
As if we didn't know this already.
Space launches disrupt ozone layer, contribute to air pollution and global warming, waste a lot of resources, and produce tons upon tons of space debris.
We should be careful with this industry and technology, and use it when it makes sense. But hey, why not launch billionaires and their cars into space for leisure and launch hundreds of satellites under different brandings all promising the best Internet ever or whatnot?
Also, massive launches such as Starlink should be approved by international bodies, not national organizations. Cool, US has greenlit the launch, but now it's a global headache.
Plus all the space debris (like hundreds of Starlink satellites) burning up in the atmosphere. Without searching for sources, I’m pretty confident that this isn’t good for the atmosphere either
-
Plus all the space debris (like hundreds of Starlink satellites) burning up in the atmosphere. Without searching for sources, I’m pretty confident that this isn’t good for the atmosphere either
Kessler syndrome enters chat Don’t worry I will fix it ～(つˆ0ˆ)つ｡☆
-
This post did not contain any content.
Yeah, cows used to be blamed for everything, now Elon and Russians are blamed for everything.
-
Yeah, cows used to be blamed for everything, now Elon and Russians are blamed for everything.
Don't remember cows using hairspray
-
As if we didn't know this already.
Space launches disrupt ozone layer, contribute to air pollution and global warming, waste a lot of resources, and produce tons upon tons of space debris.
We should be careful with this industry and technology, and use it when it makes sense. But hey, why not launch billionaires and their cars into space for leisure and launch hundreds of satellites under different brandings all promising the best Internet ever or whatnot?
Also, massive launches such as Starlink should be approved by international bodies, not national organizations. Cool, US has greenlit the launch, but now it's a global headache.
I'd argue we need to advance spaceflight technology at as fast a pace as possible. Yes it does add CO2 to the atmosphere, but we've also gained some great advances through our exploration of space.
We're doing a lot of things wrong on this planet, a whole fucking lot. But rocketry is one of the few things we're starting to do right and the bottom line is this, the situation on earth is not great, and it could get worse. Ultimately, the situation on earth will get a lot worse when a huge, life ending, continent obliterating asteroid hits the planet (and not if it hits earth, but when it hits earth). We should absolutely continue living on earth and striving to make it a good place to live, but we also, desperately need to get a foothold off of earth. When the next global calamity occurs (and it will), I would prefer if it didn't end all known intelligent life in the galaxy.
-
As if we didn't know this already.
Space launches disrupt ozone layer, contribute to air pollution and global warming, waste a lot of resources, and produce tons upon tons of space debris.
We should be careful with this industry and technology, and use it when it makes sense. But hey, why not launch billionaires and their cars into space for leisure and launch hundreds of satellites under different brandings all promising the best Internet ever or whatnot?
Also, massive launches such as Starlink should be approved by international bodies, not national organizations. Cool, US has greenlit the launch, but now it's a global headache.
Yes, but in today's geopolitical landscape, some countries would tie the allowance of such launches to weird requests.
Israel denies the launch of European rockets, until support for Palestine is outlawed as "antisemitism", and pledge to donate weapons to IDF for free.
Russia doesn't allow rocket launches to other countries as long as said countries not outlaw "Russophobia", which includes "recognition of Ukraine, the Ukrainian language, and Ukrainian people, as separate from Russia in any way of form".
China demands the returning of its political refugees, or they will not allow rocket launches.
-
This post did not contain any content.
Again? GOD DAMET!
-
So the billionaires escaping climate collapse into space will cause more climate collapse? That's a bit ironic but not really a problem since the important people will be in space anyway, right?
But this can also encourage more billionaires to escape into space creating a feedback loop and new tipping point we have to worry about so maybe it actually is problematic.
Let's just launch all of them into space preemptively!
-
I'd argue we need to advance spaceflight technology at as fast a pace as possible. Yes it does add CO2 to the atmosphere, but we've also gained some great advances through our exploration of space.
We're doing a lot of things wrong on this planet, a whole fucking lot. But rocketry is one of the few things we're starting to do right and the bottom line is this, the situation on earth is not great, and it could get worse. Ultimately, the situation on earth will get a lot worse when a huge, life ending, continent obliterating asteroid hits the planet (and not if it hits earth, but when it hits earth). We should absolutely continue living on earth and striving to make it a good place to live, but we also, desperately need to get a foothold off of earth. When the next global calamity occurs (and it will), I would prefer if it didn't end all known intelligent life in the galaxy.
To me, there are two reasons we're doing it too soon;
- We don't really have technology needed to build a self-sustaining colony anywhere outside Earth; say, a colony on Mars is inherently dependent on Earth's supplies, and will quickly die out as Earth does too; the technologies needed can largely be developed on Earth;
- The chance of some asteroid obliterating Earth in the coming millenia is so minor we might as well focus on much more real threats.
-
Don't remember cows using hairspray
Or fridges.
But I suspect we're over-thinking this comment. Its more dumb right wing attitude more than actual link to the ozone hole.
Environmentalists point out the massive damage done by expanding the beef industry - through deforestation, effluent pollution of water systems, methane release, etc. Conservatives: stupid greenies are blaming cows for their problems lol.
-
To me, there are two reasons we're doing it too soon;
- We don't really have technology needed to build a self-sustaining colony anywhere outside Earth; say, a colony on Mars is inherently dependent on Earth's supplies, and will quickly die out as Earth does too; the technologies needed can largely be developed on Earth;
- The chance of some asteroid obliterating Earth in the coming millenia is so minor we might as well focus on much more real threats.
Yeah, every time I see someone say go to Mars as an answer to the earth getting ruined, have to keep in mind that Mars is pre ruined, and whatever calamity that ruins earth will be easier to survive than colonizing Mars
-
To me, there are two reasons we're doing it too soon;
- We don't really have technology needed to build a self-sustaining colony anywhere outside Earth; say, a colony on Mars is inherently dependent on Earth's supplies, and will quickly die out as Earth does too; the technologies needed can largely be developed on Earth;
- The chance of some asteroid obliterating Earth in the coming millenia is so minor we might as well focus on much more real threats.
It's not a zero sum game. I'd rather keep space research going to lower the risk as fast as we can. If you want to focus on the climate then we should end fast fashion which is much much worse for the environment.
Also, space colonies are a chicken and egg problem, you cant just wait until the tech magically appears, you have to spend money inventing it.
[Insert famous JFK quote about going to the moon here] -
Yeah, every time I see someone say go to Mars as an answer to the earth getting ruined, have to keep in mind that Mars is pre ruined, and whatever calamity that ruins earth will be easier to survive than colonizing Mars
Exactly
Or those "terraform Mars" fantasies
TERRAFORM THE DAMN EARTH FIRST
