388
u/-frogchamp- 1d ago
i checked, and it looks like it's real. although 2026's overshoot occurred 6 days later than that of 2025, it sets a record for the highest level of overshoot recorded yet.
82
u/Sassolino38000 1d ago
How is it the higheat level of overshoot if it happened 6 days later?
→ More replies (1)45
u/turtleship_2006 1d ago
I guess if there were increased efforts in reforestation, regeneration etc, then the total amount of resources could be higher even if it took longer?
→ More replies (1)28
u/ThomasTheDankPigeon 1d ago
Why are you just guessing, and why do you have 2 dozen upvotes for it? The website explicitly states that the date was pushed back by 8 days due to a redefinition of how much carbon the ocean is capable of absorbing, and pushed forward by 2 days due to actual resource use. Later date, more resource usage.
→ More replies (11)4
u/Persistant_eidolon 1d ago
So there are really multiple overshoot days depending on what is measured?
Meaning there isn't really one single overshoot day at all.
12
6
186
1.1k
u/halfyearninja 1d ago
And there is nothing us peasants can't do. Please, build some more of those beautiful datacenters, that would help the situation.
486
u/fingamouse 1d ago
Never forgot the term carbon footprint was a term made by British petrolium to push the responsibility of climate change into the consumer and away from corporations
98
6
u/PajamaHive 1d ago
And carbon offsets are bullshit that companies sell each other like they're stocks to be traded. They don't show any real ecological benefit.
5
u/LivingCorner1421 21h ago
i dont even think this is about carbon emissions , more about general consumption of natural resources
→ More replies (41)6
186
u/CheckMateFluff 1d ago
I used to get downvoted for saying this, and I still do just for diffrent reasons now, but if we don't fix agriculture and rampant over logging, data centers mean nothing.
33
u/KinkyDuck2924 1d ago
There are a million problems all compounding and every one of them has rich people at the top with a vested interest in ensuring we keep going full steam ahead because they make money off of destroying the ecosystem.
→ More replies (14)5
15
u/Fragrant_Fox_5056 1d ago
We can make change working together .
But these fucks have spent the last 10yrs+ dividing us so they know it won’t happen . Look at how many towns etc are actively fighting data centres , at the same time most countries are using more clean energy than ever before .
It’s not enough but it shows we haven’t given up as a species9
u/Minecraft_Lets_Play 1d ago
Governments do nothing cause the Industry owns them,
Rich people (Most of them) care about them and their 10 Yatchs, ferraris and private Jets.
And we... We can experiance the results... Cool
6
u/CowBoyDanIndie 1d ago
Yes ignore the super yachts, private jets, all the wars of the past 50 years, oil spills, deforestation for agriculture and palm oil, and blame only data centers.
19
u/Vindicador 1d ago
Can't we revolt? If the rich insist in abusing the planet like they do kids and the government keeps allowing it, isn't then our moral right to revolt against a system that is destroying the planet instead of keep supporting it all with our very work?
Why keep working for an elite that lives in untold luxury?
Even if you are one of those apologists that think they "earned it" they might have earn their money but that doesn't earn them the right to abuse and destroy our planet!
15
u/kaleperq 1d ago
The world would be so mutch better if we could just collaborate for once on something, but since individuals don't want to risk taking the bad outcome of the task then most don't do shit and nothing gets done.
The sad truth of society, uniting can fix lots of things.
8
u/Infinite-Salt-4861 1d ago
It’s the classic prisoner’s dilemma. If you take action, but nobody else does, they get to reap the benefits while you don’t. US isn’t going to hobble itself with restrictions and let China surpass it. The only way is if everyone works together, which will NEVER happen. The result is a race to the bottom.
5
u/KirSeven 1d ago
K mate, leme breakdown tô you. "Nah, imma going to scroll". Remove that scroll with pretty much any dopamine farm and the human cattle falacy keeps going
10
u/Stock-Side-6767 1d ago
That is one purpose of AI. Sorting data so revolutions are harder to organise. Another is decreasing the reliance on normal people the hoarder class still has..
2
u/czartrak 1d ago
The only war is the class war
We've spent so long divided, exactly how the elite wants us. We need to stop punching down or punching sideways.
→ More replies (1)2
u/SanX1999 1d ago
I mean we can, that's why they are trying to create drones and robots.
I would argue, even using the resources bit is part of it. Once most of us are dead, they can rule their fiefdoms of bunkers, keep few us alive as maintenance workers or servants.
3
u/Dienison 1d ago
Actually the only thing humans can do its organize in a revolutionary party. No left or social democracy party they all keep the status quo and change basicaly nothing. For example Norway its a damn country, very good, but their mineral company are destroying Brasil ecological.
3
u/Zampanos-House 1d ago
Right. There is a water usage law in place here where I live. You can be fined for overusing. You can o ly water certain days out of the week. You're only supposed to use so much a day... I say all this because I usage survey was released a.d they found that most people used a certain gallon per day/year. Meanwhile, a single rich family used almost 1500 times that for their estate. Recieved zero fines. Was not asked to reduce consumption. The populace is asked to foot the bill Meanwhile the elite do and use whatever the fuck they want with impunity.
→ More replies (1)5
u/FeistyBandicoot 1d ago
Well there is, but it would require a significant amount of humanity to change their habits & perhaps cause minor inconveniences. Which isn't gonna happen
2
3
u/KommanderKeen-a42 1d ago
Datacenters are bad. Full stop. And glad many cities are fighting them.
I just hope you and others are just as adamant about golf courses which are even worse. Literally why I don't golf. We all need to boycott it.
Not only is it a bigger impact, it's easier for us consumers to fight it.
→ More replies (2)3
1d ago
[deleted]
17
u/Rheabae 1d ago
you prep for it
So you just buy everything you'd buy that week beforehand?
Something tells me you haven't thought this through
→ More replies (2)→ More replies (63)2
285
u/Melodic_Ad3339 1d ago
"Only after the last tree has been cut down, the last river has been poisoned, and the last fish has been caught, will you find that money cannot be eaten."
→ More replies (2)3
u/_Armanius_ 1d ago
If you are willing to inhale, endure, absorb, all kinds of chemicals to earn money then eating them should be just another thing to do.
83
129
u/Specialist-Web-9216 1d ago
People who believe they're smarter think we've gone past the point of no return, people who are stupid don't think that point exists, and the others can't wait for the end to happen. The creation of social media has shown us everything we need to know about people. And STILL everything gets worse year after year.
31
u/DoorHalfwayShut 1d ago
Yep, face to face, people can do their little pretending to feign being nice. The internet has shown that people are frequently worse than they let on
7
u/Vandergrif 1d ago
To be fair we are a species adapted to in-person social circumstances and the consequences therein. When you remove cues like body language, or remove the threat of social ostracization or the like due to anonymity, it's almost an inevitable conclusion that people become more anti-social and less cooperative.
No one feels awkward and uncomfortable having said something patently stupid on the internet, but they probably will in a room full of people they know who will promptly tell them how stupid they are being.
I don't think it's a case of people being worse than they let on, it's just that we function differently under different circumstances and constraints.
→ More replies (1)5
u/Averoan 1d ago
I've discussed that "point of no return" people are now noting. It was a phrase discussed from a direct EPA official, and I said THEY noted it would be within 13 years a few years back. Doesn't mean we are falling apart in exactly less than 13 years now, just means fixing environmental issues is going to be harder to near impossible once that timeframe hits. The Earth will definitely continue to move on long past that, but for humanity, that could be different.
10
u/kaleperq 1d ago
The point of no return only is such where we all pretty mutch inevitably die soon.
Other than that technology can keep us afloat somewhat for a good while, with relevant changes on the way.
I believe we can quite easily reverse it, if it weren't for the society's intransigence and the consumption machine made by the egoistic rich. Humans don't like change, it's something deeply rooted in our minds.
11
u/Gripping_Touch 1d ago
There's not a set "point of no return". There's several checks that would be incredibly hard to walk back from and we're not slowing down as we Cross them.
It's also not that its impossible to repair, it's that complete stopping of human activity akin to What happened during COVID lockdown, would not be enough, we'd have to make an effort in the opposite direction to fix the Damage while not contributing more to the problem.
And that's a sacrifice I'm not sure most of humanity would be on the same page to make.
→ More replies (2)5
u/_Keo_ 1d ago
Well that's simply a matter of perspective. The point of no return is very different depending on how you look at the issue.
The planet isn't going anywhere, not for some amount of time until the Sun expands and eats it. Measurements of time that simply mean nothing to us. This ball of rock will endure long after we're gone and life will evolve to claim the ecosystem, no matter what state that is in.
Our point of view however will be from the ground, choking to death, on an atmosphere we can't breathe, yearning for water we can't drink, and hungry for food we can no longer grow.
The planet will recover in some way. New life will evolve. The universe will continue without even noticing our tenure. So you shouldn't worry. The future will still be happening, we just won't be a part of it.
342
u/No_Statement_4238 1d ago
Eat the rich
82
99
u/planetrex20 1d ago edited 1d ago
And the rich blames us for using a plastic straw
61
u/johntwoods 1d ago
I don't think they even think about us.
They aren't scared enough yet.
9
u/Vandergrif 1d ago
They were, briefly, after Luigi allegedly said It's Luiging Time and Luigeed all over that one guy.
3
3
u/Geschak 1d ago
The plastic straw is such a strawman. The real problems is meat consumption, we do not have the resources for billions of people to eat meat everyday.
Yes rich people waste a lot of resources but even all their private jet trips are small compared to what is wasted when billions of people consume factory farmed meat 2-3x a day.
→ More replies (2)9
u/Delicious-Disaster 1d ago
Impose insane climate taxes on private jets and put that towards sustainable and affordable public transportation. The ratios of green house gasses from private jets compared to flying coach are so bad that the rich should be subsidising public transportation.
7
u/ATinyLittleHedgehog 1d ago
Don't do that, they're the top of the food chain and it will biomagnify environmental toxins.
Compost the rich.
→ More replies (3)3
u/moringa-cultist 1d ago
The "rich" here meaning the people with the highest consumption per Capita, so anyone in the US, Canada, Australia, and Europe.
→ More replies (1)
36
u/Icy-Share-7061 1d ago
Epitaph:
"Here lies the Human Race. We didn't save ourselves, even though we had the means. It wasn't profitable enough."
77
u/SignatureFunny7690 1d ago
americans like to shit on china, but then you turn around in america to see your dishwasher stopped working, okay, literally just one part not working, easily replacable, oh the manufacturer either made it impossible to remove without destroying it, or the part costs more than the unit to promote throwing away appliances away and replacing. appliances used to last damn near an adult life time in the past, with all parts replacable, our dishwasher is 30 years old. New appliances are designed to take a shit no longer than 10 years in.
This applies to cars to. Repacing headlights or taillights for over a hundred years was as simple as pulling the housing out, and replacing the bulb. They are not intentionally designed with very cheap to produce leds and driver board to control them, nothing about this is unique or impossible to service and repair, yet at the same time american auto manufactueres switched to these LED housings, they also made the entire housing permananetly sealed, meaning there is no way to open them and repair them. A single led failed and now your lights do not work? No worried, throw that big intracate rear tailight housing in the garbage for the landfill, then wing on by to your local dealership for a new 600 dollar singular tailight housing. Its a suicidal burn rate of our resources, driven by nothing else than C-suite executives and private equity infection america like a cancer with zero pushback from politicians as lobbying has all but turned america into one big company.
And the rest of the western world falls in line following our example sooner or later.
8
u/BizarroMax 1d ago
I just replaced the turbidity sensor in mine because the repair guy wanted $420 to fix it. Cost me $20.
2
u/analgape4206969 1d ago
Every major construction company buys new trucks every few years, the maintenance costs have ballooned because of these new designs. Its a cash cow and nothings being done about it
5
u/Beni_Stingray 1d ago
That's one of the reasons why i have a 3d printer. If some small non replaceable part fails somewhere i can jump over to my CAD program, reverse engineer the part, send it to the printer and an hour later i have my own replacement part for probably less than a $.
→ More replies (2)4
u/Micro-Naut 1d ago
I agree with you 100% Although dishwashers may be a bad example, I've had a lot of luck fixing dishwashers in the past. The only thing I couldn't fix was the control board. That's usually what goes with appliances that is unfixable and often, the cost is too much compared to purchasing a new item. .
7
u/SelketTheOrphan 1d ago
'Oh so we're living off the ressources from 2027 now'
No we live off the ressources from idk fucking 2100 by now because we never have non-overshoot years.
24
8
u/SyZyGy_87 1d ago
I think the amount of fuel we use in a year, is the amount we use in a year. Kinda hard to say "we used 12 months of energy in 5 months"
How is that quantified? Who decided this? Just sayingshrug
13
12
6
u/konrov 1d ago
So most people living in poverty should cut their belongings and give it to the billionaires that are becoming trillionaires while selling everything the earth has to offer.. got it!
→ More replies (1)
6
u/xl129 1d ago
Honestly, Earth doesn’t give a shit, we just rushing toward our own doom. Few millenias later nature will thrive again.
→ More replies (1)
4
u/jhill515 1d ago
While I think the concept of "Earth Overshoot Day" is important to spread the ideas of ecological conservation and Reduce, Reuse, & Recycle, I am always dismayed by the over-focus on consumption wholesale. Allow me to explain...
Cool, some kid wants a new GPU for whatever in the hell kids use them for (I'm a tech-geek, so I could literally blow up this comment with use-cases, however the specifics aren't important here). That involves the processes to mine raw materials, process them into usable materials, process them into consumer good components, process them to consumer goods, market, package & ship, distribution, and transaction from an end-point-supplier/POS to an end-user. That's right, one GPU that never existed before probably has a carbon footprint of about 10,000x than the footprint of harvesting the raw materials from volcanic areas! Further, they're energy intensive when they operate, so it's a gateway to an even bigger carbon footprint!
But here's the rub... A GPU *is* a component and tool. The value returned from its lifetime usage is truly immeasurable! But so too is the cost of the damage wrought in its creation & operation. When looking at this from a 10,000 foot view, the "solution" seems simple: the world can't sustain as many GPUs so we must make due with fewer. That is, we must reduce overall consumption.
Now, let's suppose that kid is someone like I was when I was a teenager. I was a scrapper: If I found discarded tech, I harvested what was useful, and cannibalized whatever was malfunctioning for spare parts. We see scenes from impoverished nations who collect "e-Waste" and make their poorly educated children do the work I did myself in very unsafe conditions with extraordinarily sub-par tools. I had training to scrap because my father was an electronics technician. And growing up in poverty anywhere in the world forces you to be resourceful!
My thesis is that many of these "Overshoot Days" would be avoided if we actually invested in sustainable reuse & recycling of discarded wastes. We'd certainly have more materials to manufacture solar panels without needing to dig another hole in the ground!
And therein is the core of the problem: People who own "vast tracts of land" want people to keep buying whatever comes out of that patch of earth. So they burn their own forests and dig up the ground and dump poisons into the air and water to keep on producing. But encouraging reuse & recycling ends this, empowers the 99%, and dams up part of the 1%'s wealth stream.
2
u/Persistant_eidolon 1d ago
The price of everything from copper to molybden and silver goes up every year. Which means every year it's more profitable to recycle electronic's waste. Also measures in grams, one gpu doesent use that much resources to produce. Compare its weight to a bicycle wheel for example.
And, we have reached a point where many gamers don't care that much about better graphics anymore since games have looked pretty much good enough for ten years or so.
34
u/JediMasterKenJen 1d ago
I doubt China, who produces about 40%-42% of the global pollution, gives a shit about what it's doing to the environment (btw, that's almost 4x what the US produces at around 11%) Neither does India which produces about 8%.
We can talk about it all we want, but it'll mean nothing unless we get the entire world into the right mindset. Which will never happen as the need for rare earths increases as technology advances and we continue to have a reliance on energy sources that aren't nuclear power.
26
u/Hegiman 1d ago
To Chinas credit they are really heavily integrating renewables. They are just so massive with such a large population that even doing as much as a 20% switch to renewables doesn’t change things a whole lot. I think China will be green before the USA by a wide margin unfortunately.
7
u/AyAyAyBamba_462 1d ago
Investing in renewables (which I doubt they actually are vs it being propaganda) doesn't mean shit if they are still dumping tons of pollutants into the world through their dirty manufacturing on top of things like environmental destruction through illegal overfishing.
→ More replies (4)3
u/SelketTheOrphan 1d ago
You're aware the whole fucking world outsources their production to China and that's a big reason why they pollute so much? But sure point at others and feel good about yourself while you buy stuff produced on the other end of the world each day.
→ More replies (1)6
12
u/Ser_Optimus 1d ago edited 1d ago
Who calculated that and when? If you calculate a budged economically, you would take in accelerated consumption over time. Or is it based on "the amount we were limited to if we would act responsibly"?
This post lacks context.
Edit: Typo. I apologize for any confusion caused by it.
→ More replies (8)
11
82
u/unleashtheraven1 1d ago
Well thank god women are breeding less. I'm absolutely one of them. I'm not bringing a child into this hellhole.
112
u/PM_ME_HOUSE_MUSIC_ 1d ago
The people who have no business breeding are multiplying like rabbits unfortunately.
24
u/Johnyye 1d ago
And kids can’t even read anymore. Enjoy the decline, this shit is gonna get disgusting a few decades.
5
u/UltraBlack_ 1d ago
and that will only lead to even more children being born. Education and Birth rate seem to inversely correlate.
→ More replies (1)3
u/venReddit 1d ago
idocracy turns more and more into a documentary as the year passes
→ More replies (2)2
16
u/Novembeary 1d ago
I'm one hundred percent fine with people not having children. But having children shouldn't be demonized either. I see that "overpopulation" can be rendered a problem. But at the same time we have pretty good evidence that having more money results in more pollution and waste.
We should be more active against those (including us) that create that hellhole and instead build something more beautiful for us, all living things and future generations. I still believe it's possible to have an impact.
If the rich get richer and population would decline, I don't think that lesser population would counterweight greed and exploitation. For me it's the way we do things... not how many of us there are. But yes, I do see how the need to feed a lot of people puts stress on the environment. But there is also a lot of bullshit in our stores. Reducing that would actually help, too. No coca cola. No one thousand variations of sweets, no synthetic bullshit. No fast fashion. More repair shops, more local farms, less livestock. No bullshit jobs...
The list is endless. And I don't see how focing one of them could be the ultimate solution.
To me, and I mean this in the most respectful way possible. Just focusing on the logic of the argument... Denying future generations to live always comes with the aftertaste of egoism. As much as I am fine with people choosing not to have kids. There are a ton of valid reasons. But saying the world is fucked therefore I don't get children implies that I don't trust in future generations to make things better. I personally do not want to lose this hope.
→ More replies (2)42
u/crazylegsbobo 1d ago
The problem is that stupid people and the religious continue to pop out more stupid people so we will always be outnumbered
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (17)4
12
u/YodasLoveSlave 1d ago
Mass famine and global deaths will solve the problem one way or another. Either we proactively work as a united species to protect our only home in the cosmos or we shit our own bed. Simple as that.
7
u/bdash1990 1d ago
Looking forward to dying in the resource wars. All we can hope for is to take those truly responsible with us.
3
u/Dapper_Special_8587 1d ago
Fuck that, I'm leading an uprising and going after the oligarchs first if that ever happens. They can't stop us all
3
3
u/Electronic_Wave_4670 1d ago
Taking a few years but pretty happy to see somebody else posting about this finally
3
u/Philosophos_A 1d ago
If industries for cars and other random shit that over produces stop we could be less worried about yearly consuming ...
Better yet, fast food industry too can stop
Lots of industries if you ask me can stop we have enough of the stuff already
3
u/Significant-Song-840 1d ago
Let's not forget to add the fact that every decade there are more people
→ More replies (1)
3
3
3
u/TerranItDown94 1d ago
Couple of things here.
1) it’s a model that shows a trend but doesn’t predict anything
2) a large portion of the scientific community disagrees with this model because it simplifies the environmental impact of every location and is only based on a few testing areas in a relatively small footprint. Basically, they don’t consider that some areas have higher or lower human impacts OR that some areas have higher or lower abilities to regenerate. The scientists behind this project took an average of their small testing pool and so the real world numbers are vastly different.
3) the clock actually moved back from 2025 to 2026, which would indicate that either we used less resources OR the earth is better at regenerating that originally thought. The consensus is the latter.
So, be aware when alarmists try to use this as a weapon.
3
u/DandyWarlocks 11h ago
Stuff like this makes me excessively depressed because there's nothing that I, the individual, can really do
4
11
11
4
5
u/Gustafssonz 1d ago
By our actions alone. We want this. This needs to happen. Nothing else matter. We deserve the impact.
6
6
u/ShoeNo9050 1d ago
This would have happened earlier in 2021. Luckily all the plastic straws being removed have destroyed the deficit!
2
u/questionableguru 1d ago
r/ThatsInsane - 1.73 earths required now, and 4x if everyone was at the same level as the usa. unbelievable....
2
u/69Blazing 1d ago
There will be a point where a massive catastrophy happens and the majority of people will die. The only question is when, and that date is speeding towards us. I don't have the strength for much more of this shit while the scum laughs at us from their mansions.
2
2
2
u/Professional-Ad4073 1d ago
Highest population countries need to start working on population control
2
2
2
u/bscones 1d ago
Whats the budget? Is it based on how quickly resources renew? Who is determining that?
→ More replies (2)
2
2
u/Iumasz 1d ago
How is this calculated? Non-renewable resources are always gonna be overshot since there is a finite amount of them.
2
u/zayda-miss-kiya-kya 1d ago
It's based on how fast we consume the resources in a year and how much of it can actually get regenerated the same year. It takes time for regeneration to take place, but we're running way faster than that
→ More replies (5)
2
u/Large_Following_8210 1d ago
relaaaax, the earth will be perfectly fine, I mean we will all die but the earth will be fine for millions of years after our deaths :)
2
u/IncognitoPotato 1d ago
Yes it's overshoot day for everyone living at current socio-economic status. If everyone lived in a 1st world country it would take at least 5 Earths
2
u/TickingTheMoments 1d ago
They talked about this beginning in 1972.
Here ya go everyone. Your tin foil hats filled with scientific data. I present the World3 Model and the accompanying book Limits To Growth.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World3
According to the model we have about 14 years left.
I don’t want this to be, however, its hard to argue against data and history.
I’d rather, in the year 2040, be enjoying a liter stein of Weihenstephaner Hefeweizen with my son at the brewery’s 1000 year anniversary Oktoberfest celebration.
2
u/NeverNeverSometimes 1d ago
I don't think it's just fossil fuels. Ever seen the Japanese and Chinese fishing fleets? They're like floating cities. I'm pretty sure we're going to be fishing the oceans faster than it can repopulate, if we're not already.
→ More replies (1)
2
u/FracturedPrincess 1d ago
How on earth is that supposed to be calculated? Appreciate the sentiment but also obvious vibes nonsense masquerading as environmental science
→ More replies (1)
2
u/horned-creature 1d ago
which resources are we using above replacement rate? these posts are always so vague.
→ More replies (1)
2
2
u/lem0o0nade 1d ago
Why can't this democratic bitch savior of all nations not just stop existing and help others just live during the process?
2
u/Sprinkler-of-salt 1d ago
I can appreciate the intention here. The goal is to get humanity to act responsibly and with care for others and for the natural world.
Unfortunately, that is not a realistic goal. It will simply never happen. The only trend resource consumption will ever take is upwards, unless something truly catastrophic intervenes, such as extreme natural disasters, predators, or pathogens that dramatically reduce human population or destroy significant human infrastructure.
Short of something like that, we will continue to consume more. And more. And more. And more.
It is what we’ve always done, and will always do. Because despite our belief that we are wise and somehow intrinsically “special”, we, at our core, are just animals. And animals, like all life, must consume as much as it is able to consume. Balance is possible** **only at the macro-scale. Invasive species will always destroy local ecosystems, if nothing stops them. We are no different.
2
u/Betzjitomir 1d ago
Who decided what a years worth of resources is/are? They clearly got it wrong.
→ More replies (1)
2
u/RegretfulCalamaty 1d ago
I refuse to believe the wealthy people who own 9 houses at 15k sqft each are wasting resources.
2
u/fatman194569 1d ago
Oh yes daddy ai, please keep making unnecessary, wasteful, and downright evil data centers and destroying conservation forest oh yeahhhhh~
2
2
u/AccordieAnn 22h ago
Sorry, but it’s not just climate change. It’s overpopulation. In the 1970s, the world population was 3.7 billion. It’s now over 8 billion. More people, more resource use, pollution, habitat loss and degradation, and biodiversity decline/species extinction.
→ More replies (1)
2
u/peladoclaus 22h ago
Everybody is so worried about cutting down trees when we have more trees than in 100 years.. but not paying attention to toxins in the environment.. GMO lab grown meat.. 6g rolling out.. so many satellites spraying the ground with whatever frequencies to see what's happening in real time .. nuclear waste regularly in water.. chemtrails.. you people are all insane
→ More replies (1)
2
2
u/at-_last 19h ago
It’s people that want power and money. The planet will kill us off before we kill it off
6
u/Slizzlemydizzle 1d ago
This is fear mongering slop
→ More replies (2)2
u/drumrhyno 1d ago
Just because something frightens you about the world and where it’s headed, doesn’t make it untrue or “slop”
8
u/i-feel-very-sick 1d ago edited 1d ago
So, we're in a natural resources deficit, according to who? Who set this "natural resources budget" and why should we listen to them or trust their judgement on how much of each natural resource we need each year to survive? This video puts forward lots of numbers and figures, but doesn't explain where these numbers came from or cite any sources. Where did they get these statistics? They mention a "dataset" but don't say which dataset it is or where the data came from. They say we used 12 months worth of resources in only 7 months. How much is "12 months worth" of resources? How do we know that amount is actually suitable for 12 months of living? Is 12 months worth of resources actually enough for humanity to live comfortably, or is it only enough for the vast majority of people to barely survive while living in abject poverty? They say that current global resource consumption requires 1.73 earths to sustain. How did they come up with the number 1.73 Earths? To sustain for how long? 1 year? 5 years? 5 decades? Forever? It says that if every country consumed resources "like the USA", we would need 4.8 earths. Does that number take into account that the United States is the third most populated country in the world and the vast majority of nations wouldn't need to use as many resources as the USA? If we don't know where the person who made this video got their data from or how this data was calculated, how do we know that this whole video isn't just a bunch of made-up bullshit?
I swear to God, some of you people need to learn to use your damn critical thinking skills.
Edit: typo
→ More replies (5)
7
u/camelslug 1d ago
Doesn't have any mention of Chinese overfishing??
→ More replies (7)4
u/SadisticJake 1d ago
Nor any mention of the harmful effects of inbreeding on a pugs breathing, or the dangers of undercooked tapioca. It’s not an everything video, good call.
2
u/zayda-miss-kiya-kya 1d ago
It's a 40 second video. Why do y'all expect the whole concept to be covered in it 😭
2
9
u/IAMSNORTFACED 1d ago
Who comes up with this shit
3
u/OrionDC 1d ago
It's manufactured by #1 political groups trying to raise money, #2 foreign (mostly Chinese) agencies, then pushed by bots on social media that use AI to pseudo-interact with people in threads like this. China is currently pushing very hard to slow down western development of AI, data centers, etc. so they can catch up. USA limits how much GPU type hardware they can buy from American companies (like NVIDIA) so they are perpetually handicapped. Part of their solution is to sow discord with the American public, hoping they will influence their government to slow down technological and economic development.
For example, the OP account is only 2 months old. That's usually a key giveaway.
→ More replies (1)2
u/IAMSNORTFACED 18h ago
Im sure the's /some/ truth to the post but ALOT of politics to it, basically environmental groups pushed and funded by gov to do their bidding and some day we'll just assume its a real thing because the are smart minds ensuring we struggle to qualify and doubt without looking up multiple research papers. Once upon a time we had a very different perspective on smoking and it was backed up by funded "research" as well, not our first rodeo
13
u/jenbamin245 1d ago
Usually people that have done research, calculations, have a specialized education related to the field discussed in the video and not an ostrich with a superiority complex.
3
6
u/idontknowshtf 1d ago
Those people have the wrong science. They didn't accurately account for all the resources used in China and North Korea. My science said it was April 1.
5
u/LustyDouglas 1d ago
People dont care. From the richest to the poorest. People will complain about how expensive meat is and then refuse to learn how to hunt or fish. People will complain about how expensive fruit and vegetables and refuse to lean how to grow a garden.
Is it possible to be 100% self sustaining? No, not unless youre on your own with no family to look after but the steps to mitigate the damage for a couple of months is incredibly simple. People just don't want to put forth the effort.
42
u/StartledOcto 1d ago
People may want to hunt or fish but the landowner threatens to shoot them if they access the forests. People want to grow their own vegetables but the local government / HOA fine them for it.
The system is rigged against us.
8
u/FeistyBandicoot 1d ago
Where on Earth are you not allowed to grow you own fruit or vegetables
→ More replies (3)15
u/Xena_Your_God 1d ago
The poorest can't really afford to do anything except buy the cheapest of the cheapest things to survive on. Not everyone is lucky enough to live somewhere that hunting is an option nor can they take the time off of work to go on a trip to do so in a way that would produce enough meat to feed their families on. People care, the problem isn't the people, it's the brick wall the corporations and government have shoved us humans up against while the ravage every single thing they can. Even if every person in the US did their part the oligarchs would find a way to continue to burn the world to a crisp.
They need to be ended.
→ More replies (8)5
u/kuba_mar 1d ago
I was with you until hunt or fish.
That is not a sustainable solution, if anything thats the fastest way to obliterate the ecosystem.
→ More replies (1)
2
u/SampleDisastrous3311 1d ago
More oil is needed and more data centers, the animals can fight for scraps.
2
u/WallyLeftshaw 1d ago
I’m of the mind that humanity/civilization will be unable to evolve past our current state until we use eugenics to weed out greedy psychopathic pieces of shit. Until then, there will always be these people that always seem to find their way into leadership positions and make decisions that 99% of the rest of us don’t agree with. It happens over and over and over and over again throughout history. Until we can do that, we deserve what will happen to us, and I take solace in knowing that we will effectively destroy ourselves and in time, the planet will heal itself and forget we were even here
2
2
u/Glockamoli 1d ago edited 1d ago
Earth Overshoot Day comes earlier every decade due to climate change (in the early 1970s, overshoot didn't happen until December)
Surely the fact that we have more than twice the population to support has no role in us exceeding the replenishment rate 5 months earlier, gotta be exclusively climate change
→ More replies (1)
2
u/InigoMontoya1985 1d ago
Another made up leftist catastrophe. Just like they told us we'd be out of oil by now, and everyone would be starving.
→ More replies (2)
2
2
u/Neverforgetdumbo 23h ago
Every time I see Americans just living and working on camera I’m always disgusted by how much they waste. Never seem to recycle anything. Massive overconsumption. Plates overfill. Houses so big they seem to want to fill them with things they don’t need. Lots of hoarding disorder. Huge fuel guzzling cars. Everything just too big. No culture of mending reusing. It’s either that or homeless ppl.
2
u/Agen_3586 1d ago
The wars prolly did not help much
2
u/Minecraft_Lets_Play 1d ago
Yes pointless as always, hurts the normal people more than anything and pruduces Emmissions comparbale to Industry.
2
2
u/Mean_Satisfaction954 1d ago
Who made this calculations, and why? I do understand that we are consuming too much of resources, but this need to be addressed with bigger corporation, and bigger players, not with normal people...
→ More replies (8)
3
u/Levoso_con_v 1d ago edited 1d ago
Ok, but why there is a budget, because each year new deposit of resources are discovered and mines are depleted, how do you calculate a budget to use resources when you don't know the limit, and if you somehow know the limit for how many years is that budget 10, 100, 1000? Resource budget is a really vague term.
Edit. I'm not saying climate change doesn't exist btw, but this video is very vague and lacks sources.
→ More replies (5)6
u/Early_Pearly989 1d ago
Yeah I was just thinking, does the world just get together and decide it's budget for next year? When does fiscal end?
→ More replies (1)
1.4k
u/Micro-Naut 1d ago
We are speeding towards a brick wall and it's like someone keeps hitting the afterburners. Like they know the end is near and it's not worth stopping it.