this post was submitted on 18 Oct 2024
155 points (99.4% liked)

Canada

7203 readers
380 users here now

What's going on Canada?



Communities


🍁 Meta


πŸ—ΊοΈ Provinces / Territories


πŸ™οΈ Cities / Local Communities


πŸ’ SportsHockey

Football (NFL)

  • List of All Teams: unknown

Football (CFL)

  • List of All Teams: unknown

Baseball

Basketball

Soccer


πŸ’» Universities


πŸ’΅ Finance / Shopping


πŸ—£οΈ Politics


🍁 Social and Culture


Rules

Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage:

https://lemmy.ca/


founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

There’s already been a vetting process to weed out some resolutions, but this one made it through, which suggests β€œsomeone in the party thinks that this is worth debating,” Young said.

β€œI think this reminds us that the base of the UCP is host to a pretty substantial group of people who do not believe that climate change is real, or they don't believe that it is driven by human activity, and they think that any actions taken to transition away from fossil fuels are unnecessary.”

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Lauchs@lemmy.world 67 points 4 weeks ago (1 children)

"It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it."

[–] SamuelRJankis@lemmy.world 11 points 4 weeks ago (1 children)

Fair assesment for the politicians and lobbiest.

What about their supporters, is defunding of education plus the governments doing nothing against misinformation enough to justify their actions?

[–] Lauchs@lemmy.world 6 points 4 weeks ago (1 children)

*lobbyists.

For the supporters, in Alberta, where almost a quater of gdp is oil and gas, and culturally the pride is in their meat production, you can't imagine why they don't want to believe in climate change?

[–] SamuelRJankis@lemmy.world 4 points 4 weeks ago (18 children)

There's a distinction between believing something exists and ignoring it's long term ramifications vs "celebrating carbon".

If people want to run things into the ground I can't imagine someone be called anything other than a idiot if you don't have a exit strategy. Also something to be said about the division of profits .

[–] foggenbooty@lemmy.world 2 points 3 weeks ago

Money is the exit strategy. I hear this kind of misunderstanding a lot when conservatives double down on something that seems against their self interest, like "they're still Albertans, they want a prosperous future for their children too, they just disagree on how to get it"

That's true for the average uninformed propaganda regurgitating voter, but it's not true for the people actually making money from conservative policies. The money they collect makes them hyper mobile. If Alberta crumbles in the future from doubling down on oil and gas they'll just... leave. When you have millions nothing ties you to where you live. They can ditch their property and move to another province, another country, no big deal. That's why they focus on extracting as much value as possible from the land and the populace, because it's expendable to them. They just want to make the most money now while they can.

So they use the idiots, but I don't think the people pushing this line of thinking are the idiots.

load more comments (17 replies)
[–] undercrust@lemmy.ca 36 points 4 weeks ago (2 children)

Fucking UCP government just deep in the pockets of Big Oil. Just rename yourself The Oil Sands Political Party and at least be honest about it, ya fucking loser assholes.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 15 points 4 weeks ago (1 children)

Of all the places on earth that might conceivably come out slightly ahead on climate change, Canada and Russia are two of the biggest.

Can't help but feel these two countries consistently being some of the worst on per capita emissions isn't a coincidence.

[–] jerkface@lemmy.ca 14 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

Canada was created as a colonialist apparatus, that exists to facilitate the extraction of natural and human resources, and transfer them to private ownership. It's literally the reason the country exists, and it has never been reformed. We just cover it up with PR. We don't emit greenhouse gasses because we are trying to terraform the planet, it's just the most profitable way to exploit our resources right now.

[–] nova_ad_vitum@lemmy.ca 6 points 3 weeks ago

They're not so much in the pockets of big oil so much as they literally are big oil. At least a part of it.

[–] BlameThePeacock@lemmy.ca 33 points 4 weeks ago (1 children)

Let's just release some extra CO2 into these people's homes for a few weeks and see how they handle such an abundance of such a "foundational nutrient" on their health. Not too much, maybe a little over 5000 ppm or so should be good, I'm not suggesting we kill them or anything.

[–] Rhaedas@fedia.io 17 points 4 weeks ago (3 children)

It's not even breathing that's the problem, it's the claim that higher CO2 is great for plants. It can be, however the plants that grow from higher CO2 levels (particularly crop plants) produce their plant mass differently than with less CO2 unless compensated for, like in a controlled greenhouse. Directly because they are getting a different ratio of nutrients and gases.

Add that to all the other factors that threaten food supplies thanks to warming. Someone at some point saw that plants get green at high CO2 levels and thought it would work as an argument against climate change, not understanding the details (or not caring because it suits their purpose).

[–] masterofn001@lemmy.ca 17 points 4 weeks ago (1 children)

Also, plants don't grow well in floods, or when on fire, or in 50Β° C.

[–] jerkface@lemmy.ca 1 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (1 children)

Flooding and fires are in fact exploited by many plants, even necessary for some.

[–] masterofn001@lemmy.ca 4 points 3 weeks ago

Oxygen is necessary for animal life.

It can also explode.

[–] Classy@sh.itjust.works 4 points 4 weeks ago

Also, faster and more voluminous growth =! better quality growth. See: new vs old growth lumber.

[–] BlameThePeacock@lemmy.ca 2 points 4 weeks ago (2 children)

Are humans not part of "All life on earth"?

[–] masterofn001@lemmy.ca 6 points 4 weeks ago

Not for much longer.

[–] Rhaedas@fedia.io 1 points 4 weeks ago

Yes, but plant growth reactions to higher CO2 happen at much lower levels of increase than your example of being harder to breath.

[–] psvrh@lemmy.ca 23 points 4 weeks ago (1 children)

"I think this reminds us that the base of the UCP is host to a pretty substantial group of people who do not believe that climate change is real, or they don’t believe that it is driven by human activity, and they think that any actions taken to transition away from fossil fuels are unnecessary."

Or they're just jerks who know it's real, but don't care and are looking to virtue (vice?) signal their right-wing bona fides.

[–] GreyEyedGhost@lemmy.ca 6 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

I have a coworker that says we need more CO2 in the atmosphere. πŸ™„

[–] psvrh@lemmy.ca 5 points 3 weeks ago

If these were the kinds of people who also planted a thousand trees a year and are seriously into conservation, I'd believe it, but they usually aren't.

It's like anti-abortion people who run maternal- and children's-welfare agencies and give a ton of money to help orphans, work school-lunch programs, etc. They're about the only ones who are allowed to have that opinion, and they're vanishingly rare, dwarfed by the kind that just a) hate women and/or b) want to vice-signal.

[–] nik282000@lemmy.ca 2 points 3 weeks ago

you know, you really are a moron

usually puts a damper on all future interactions with those kind of people.

[–] wise_pancake@lemmy.ca 18 points 4 weeks ago (1 children)

What happened to those facts over feelings?

[–] lobut@lemmy.ca 12 points 4 weeks ago
  • subject to certain facts and certain feelings
[–] swordgeek@lemmy.ca 18 points 3 weeks ago

My thought process:

"Hah! The Beaverton really went beyond silly this time.

Oh, fuck..."

[–] theacharnian@lemmy.ca 10 points 4 weeks ago

Ok, I'm convinced, let Alberta separate.

[–] blindsight@beehaw.org 10 points 4 weeks ago (1 children)

β€œCO2 is presently at around 420 ppm, near the lowest level in over 1,000 years.”

what now?

They mean the lowest over the next 1000 years

Just nuke the whole province and start over

Sincerely, An Albertan

[–] nik282000@lemmy.ca 4 points 3 weeks ago

The CO2 day balloons are gonna suck. They just lay there on the ground.

[–] phoenixz@lemmy.ca 3 points 3 weeks ago

Time for some potholer54

See https://youtu.be/HhAX42dT09w?si=0DXdW2bD138ky8ff and so much more

load more comments
view more: next β€Ί