this post was submitted on 17 Aug 2025
459 points (94.4% liked)

Comic Strips

19387 readers
2522 users here now

Comic Strips is a community for those who love comic stories.

The rules are simple:

Web of links

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] girsaysdoom@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 month ago (1 children)

At least dealing with some portion of the problem is a good start and we're still inventing new methods of dealing with microplastics, so until nearly all the trash is gathered larger trash cleanup efforts are worthwhile. Apparently 92% of the mass is made up of larger objects, so these need addressed first anyways.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Pacific_Garbage_Patch

[–] Whats_your_reasoning@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

At least dealing with some portion of the problem is a good start

larger trash cleanup efforts are worthwhile.

I’m confused, where did I say anything to imply otherwise? I stated that this particular device doesn’t filter microplastics, as well as that microplastics are a huge problem that needs to be addressed. Which part of that implies that larger garbage pieces aren’t worth cleaning up? After all, larger pollution breaks down to produce smaller pollution (which I also stated.) Denying large pollution while acknowledging micropollution wouldn’t make any sense, so I’m not sure where this argument is coming from.

I’m reminded of that “Twitter” meme, where someone can’t talk about pancakes without people arguing that they must hate waffles. It’s just as absurd to assume that if someone is talking about microplastics, that means they’re fine with larger garbage.

[–] Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

He was referring to the OP's post that was worried about plankton because they didn't read the link that was posted. He was agreeing with you.