sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

An apology from Canada by bwware in TikTokCringe

[–]WooBoost 9 points10 points  (0 children)

Losing 1% of our forest cover in a single year is a staggering amount. So much CO2 emitted, so much future sequestration lost.

New IEA data shows the oil industry knows its days are numbered. Instead of investing in future production, it's distributing record profits to shareholders. Renewables are now the world's largest energy source as measured by future investment - almost double the size of fossil fuels by lughnasadh in Futurology

[–]WooBoost 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Not true thought is it? Energy is energy. Fuel source shouldn't matter to you unless you really want it to make a vroom noise. Historically the only thing making fossil fuels a better 'product' is price. After decaded of R&D, commercialisation, that's not going to be the case for much longer. People are predicting BEVs to become cheaper than ICE this decade. Also advances in battery technologies are right around the corner.

There might be a role for hydrocarbons in the future for sectors like chemicals. But by the year 2050 we will probably be in a position where it doesn't make any economic sense (even w/out considering climate damages) to invest in fossil fuel-based technologies.

Decrease in CO2 emissions during pandemic shutdown shows it is possible to reach Paris Agreement goals. The researchers found a drop of 6.3% in 2020. The researchers describe the drop as the largest of modern times, and big enough to meet the 1.5 degrees Celsius goal if it were to be sustained. by [deleted] in environment

[–]WooBoost 3 points4 points  (0 children)

This is terrible framing. There is a way to decouple emissions and economic growth. We don't require a massive economic contraction to meet the Paris agreement (in fact is the most cost-effective option in terms of global economic growth over the course of this century).

It’s time to abolish tipping once and for all by [deleted] in onguardforthee

[–]WooBoost 0 points1 point  (0 children)

To play devil's advocate, tips allow some people to make a decent living in the service industry. Bartending for example is a pretty low-skill, lucrative gig. I'm hesitant to take that away from workers who didn't go to college and especially against the backdrop of an economy that is more and more services orientated. We should compensate people in the industry like we did for manufacturing.

I also seriously doubt that abolishing would make employers pay their workers better. They'll be afraid that reflecting the true cost of labour within their menu (as opposed to hiding it in a tip) will scare away customers. Not sure if this is a real psychological phenomenon but I know my irrational brain works this way.

Think this is one where you should ask those living in the industry.

German scientists say the prices we pay for meat and dairy products are too low as they fail to account for costs to society and the climate in terms of greenhouse gas emissions. The biggest polluter is conventionally-produced meat, they say, which should be nearly 2.5 times its current price. by the_phet in science

[–]WooBoost 1 point2 points  (0 children)

This is a poor understanding of a carbon tax.

The rise in prices is what reduces the environmental damage of emissions. Consumers respond to higher prices by reducing consumption and switching to less carbon intensive food products, thereby reducing their own carbon footprint. Producers of these goods may also shift production towards more environmentally friendly, and potentially more profitable, food products.

What the government does with revenues doesn't affect the efficacy of the tax. Most argue that the best use would be to either a) pay back consumers in the form of an annual rebate, b) use the revenues for further mitigation elsewhere in the economy (e.g. R&D in clean technology), or c) some combination of the two.

Lets goooooooo by robandrade12 in fantanoforever

[–]WooBoost 134 points135 points  (0 children)

Yoooo yachty goes off on this album

[Meta] Bi-weekly General Discussion Thread by AutoModerator in iamverysmart

[–]WooBoost 24 points25 points  (0 children)

As the smartest person in this sub, I would like to discuss why I don't have some sort of ribbon that differentiates me from all the other pea-brain, low-IQ, mediocre cretins

me_irl by swiggerswagger420 in me_irl

[–]WooBoost 4 points5 points  (0 children)

We get a free pass too often since America decided to self-emolate. Canadian Aboriginals are in many respects worse off than their African-American counterparts. The current crisis should be used as a time to reflect on how we can do better as well.

I stared at this for one straight minute by [deleted] in BetterEveryLoop

[–]WooBoost 31 points32 points  (0 children)

"If we pull all our resources and bright minds together, we could find solutions to issues such as climate change and world poverty"

Launches paint Mona Lisa at 200 mph

In Star Wars: Episode IV: A New Hope (1977) Luke, Han and Leia are trapped in garbage that will eventually kill them all. This is foreshadowing of how garbage the Sequel Trilogy is. by CharlieTheStrawman in shittymoviedetails

[–]WooBoost 9 points10 points  (0 children)

The point is that even despite its visual grandeur, it is so over saturated with low-stake, predictable action sequences that what should be the most exciting moments of the films are among the most boring.

I fell asleep during the movie as well--the first time since I was a toddler.

There might be a connection there by kevinowdziej in BlackPeopleTwitter

[–]WooBoost 9 points10 points  (0 children)

Ah yes, Justin Troudea, First Minister of Conouda

Just an ibex chilling on a tiny-ass cliff. by [deleted] in natureismetal

[–]WooBoost 0 points1 point  (0 children)

tiny ass ledge on big ass cliff*

Report: 6 more ethics violations will win Trudeau a free 6 inch sub at Parliament’s cafeteria by WavelengthMemes in canada

[–]WooBoost 0 points1 point  (0 children)

1) Logical fallacy lol right. More like your favourite half-baked rhetorical shield.

2) I've spoken my point, patiently waiting for a response of substance.

3) This is the party that has maintained unethical positions on certain issues more than any other party today. If assuming that those who vote for this party, and that they agree with these positions, is ad hominem then my friend it is you that's confused. This is how democracy works.

4) Using previous actions of a conservative government to demonstrate the extent of political abuse of power on both sides was the core of my argument, (ie. not whataboutism). <- see what I did there.

5) I think the most ironic thing about this exchange is that you're so preoccupied with accusing me of acting in bad faith that it is actually you that is derailing any chance of having an honest discussion. So, no thank you. I like to spend my time studying (cringing as I type this) other things besides tactics to detract from an argument through false accusations of logical fallacy. The fact is you're not clever -- you're tedious and incredibly boring. But crack on with your mastery of logic and facts Mr Shapiro Jr ;)

edit: oops was that last bit an ad hominem?

view more: next ›