As a huge fan of Campbell’s work, I want to hate you with the hate of 10K suns! And yet, reality is reality. Science is what it is IMO, and if I’m wrong, then I’m wrong. (oof)

That said, however, I wonder if the alleged ‘takedowns’ of Campbell’s work aren’t a bit invested upon the desire to believe. And one thing that I know for sure, however wrong Joe could arguably be about this or that, he was also absolutely correct upon a bunch of other stuff. About our Naked Ape chronic desire to believe, and the way we all tend to invent shockingly similar mythos. In order to meet the needs of our chronic insecurity, that is, and we are absolutely LOADED with such insecurities.

So as I see it, you can tear down Campbell’s work upon this or that angle, and yet it would be a fool’s errand to try to erase his main point, and he has many of those, after all…

I’m still looking for an online tool that will auto-arrange text in to speech bubbles. That used to be a feature on the old “Red Meat” comic creator, but it seems strangely hard to find these days…

Carbon capture technology was always some kind of excuse that execs had to pollute today because we could theoretically fix it in the future.

You’re exaggerating. While that’s true, and fits a pattern of such executive / corporate behavior, there’s more to it from what I know. That is, various science researchers around the world really have been studying CC tech as a potential helper to mitigation, if not as a primary solution. That goes back to the late 70’s if I understand correctly.

And carbon isn’t our only problem. Methane is a way worse greenhouse gas, and we keep releasing it to the atmosphere because it’s cheaper than trying to control it.

Last I recall, methane is ~20x more potent than CO2 in the GH effect, and arguably represents one of the more potent tipping points.

Even if we stopped producing CO2 tomorrow, and suddenly enough carbon capture facilities to capture carbon at the same rate we were releasing it appeared, it would still take decades to make a meaningful change.

My original point was about if CC tech could make a dramatic difference in the CO2 we’ve already placed in the atmosphere. Not just do a ‘working offset.’ I think that still presents problems in mitigation, I’m just not sure why from a science standpoint.

I played in college
💡!

nothing, nothing we do now will stop the warming.

What if (theoretically speaking, because I don’t think we’re close yet) we rolled out carbon-capture technology and implementation on a massive scale? How much useful impact would that have on mitigating CC versus how much of that is still out of our hands?

Excellent.

500-600Myrs ahead (all while everything gets hotter and hotter, outpacing species ability to deal with it), photosynthesis as we know it will stop working.

Bullshit.

Our “technology,” culture, practice and morality keeps proving that the rich are obsessed with their wealth, power and privilege, and don’t give a flying fluff about future needs nor adaptation.

Your presumption is that age-old one that naively assumes that new tech = betterment of reality for the human condition. But it rarely actually works that way outside of stuff like vaccines.

No it won’t.

In 500-600Myrs, life under known parameters will be completely impossible.

I miss their work on the OOCC comics sublemmy.

Do you have an acct on any platform whatsoever in which your posts / comments can be read?

I’d be curious to see what your contributions look like.

Haha, true, Drumpf is only a 2nd-gen immigrant… not so German anymore.

Bonus points for learning about “potato noises!”

The American / German ones are the ones that reproduce very fast and can take over very quickly.

Especially the ones with botched, blond hair transplants that keep getting elected by an army of doofuses.

Wow, that site’s been up for almost 20yrs, now. It’s pretty fun, and helped me do a little bit of language-learning over the years, but is nowhere comprehensive for such a thing. Still, it’s casual fun, and seems to be legit:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freerice

Wow, how does that work?

I thought for sure a PF acct was necessary!

You’re actually using it as a Lemmy user posting to Lemmy communities? oO

PieFed absolutely has a post scheduler, which I use all the time.

By the same token, OP’s posted ~1100x across 11mos on their Lemmy acct, so it seems quite possible they’re using some kind of Lemmy scheduler. Since you say it’s not in Lemmy proper yet, I’m guessing they might be using one of these:

https://github.com/RikudouSage/LemmySchedule
https://github.com/stevenvergenz/lemmy-scheduled-post-bot

I’d done posts in advance

Oh, does Lemmy have a scheduler, now?

Hmm, good to know!

Generally catastrophic failures happen when a battery is damaged

I’m not a chemist or ‘battery scientist,’ but I understand that Li+ ion cells can indeed be heavily damaged without showing any outward traces of such. That is, internal filaments can build up over time, and a damaged cell can be at risk when charging (as you note above, I believe).

That said, there may be associated swelling that tends to indicate such damage, but I’m not sure that’s always true. A cell with a cheaply-made casing would be a combined risk.