this post was submitted on 19 Aug 2025
496 points (89.2% liked)
Comic Strips
18855 readers
1405 users here now
Comic Strips is a community for those who love comic stories.
The rules are simple:
- The post can be a single image, an image gallery, or a link to a specific comic hosted on another site (the author's website, for instance).
- The comic must be a complete story.
- If it is an external link, it must be to a specific story, not to the root of the site.
- You may post comics from others or your own.
- If you are posting a comic of your own, a maximum of one per week is allowed (I know, your comics are great, but this rule helps avoid spam).
- The comic can be in any language, but if it's not in English, OP must include an English translation in the post's 'body' field (note: you don't need to select a specific language when posting a comic).
- Politeness.
- AI-generated comics aren't allowed.
- Adult content is not allowed. This community aims to be fun for people of all ages.
Web of links
- !linuxmemes@lemmy.world: "I use Arch btw"
- !memes@lemmy.world: memes (you don't say!)
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
We need a button like this but it clearly and in common language states the levels of technology and quality of life we can expect.
Humanity globally votes on a spectrum of these agreements until we find a suitable level.
My pitch is; we maintain enough electronic production to keep us all online at a basic desktop computer.
We get one new phone each decade, and one replacement phone should it break.
Other than that, what do we really need? Electricity and farming, a mild amount of houses to be constructed.
We should minimize R&D to things that lower power costs or energy usage/efficiency.
But we don't need a space program. We don't need excessive military spending. We don't need Formula One races, or joy rides in helicopters. We don't really need tourism. We only need a limited amount of mining and manufacturing. We don't need plastic toys.
We need a global shift in culture, lifestyle and cooperation... We need to be the techno-amish-collective.
I love most of it.. But we definitely need a space program. That's how we learn to be more efficient, and the cost is incredibly low
In the future I want to be a Space Amish
I don't think it is, have you seen how much rocket fuel we use? That stuff is not great for the environment. Also it's all tied up with the military industrial complex and there's basically zero chance of us going anywhere good.
We should learn to terraform here before even thinking about mars.
GPS, Weather, atmospheric changes, ozone depletion, carbon and methane emissions, Continental drift, tracking chemical spills, catching climate criminals, it's not necessarily about going somewhere. Without satellites we are blind. Not to mention all the things we only have today because they were invented in the pursuit of space exploration like memory foam, space blankets, phone cameras, infrared thermometers (I'm especially thankful for that one), scratch resistant lenses, water purification, cordless power tools, cochlear implants and TONS of other medical technologies, SSDs and Flash memory, the more I look into it the more there is.
Yeah, a lot of that sounds... Kinda bad for the environment. I feel like you're off track on the purpose here - it's to downsize our collective way of life to AVOID Global Warming, not inventing more synthetic crap we don't really need in order to accelerate it.
Amish, not Elon. But yeah, I guess you've proved why my plan is unrealistic. There's always gonna be people like you demanding all the latest modern conveniences and an army of lazy minded people to go along with that.
It's that kind of convenience cost that has a labubu and nintendo switch in every kids hands and factories churning out smog and toxins. You made one big pile of here-we-go-again.
Maybe read the comic again?
You don't need big blow the fuck up rockets for that man.
To get these extremely important satellites into space? Yes, yes you do. The big blow the fuck up rockets are a stepping stone to better, more efficient technologies. I agree that billionaires using these rockets to fuck around in space is absolutely abuse of our shared resources, but your conflation of space exploration with consumerism is just plain misguided and wrong. There is nothing more important and beneficial to humanity than hard science without a profit motive.
The comment was about stopping climate change, not "consumerism". I don't know how many times I have to say it. Also, I don't think weather and communications satellites are "extremely important". We had a global phone network before satellites, and have plenty of land and sea based weather monitoring techniques.
I'm trying to prevent climate change, not aid it via giving all nations the right to launch as many rockets a year as they like to monitor it (and stir up spy shot and surveillance concerns between neighboring states). Like I said earlier rocketry a) burns a shit load of fuel pollution and b) is too tied up with the military industrial complex - tauting "The great new technologies for you pairing back of technology" isn't an argument against those points.
For the last time it's about climate change, not isms. About saving the planet by using and doing less, not about preserving your particular love of a scientific field.
You brought up consumerism, I just named it. That said, you claim you want to counter climate change, but you want us to scrap the tools that allow us to monitor and track climate change and catch major polluters? Those tools along with those that allow us to catch weather phenomena in time to evacuate areas and save lives are extremely important no matter how you feel about it.
The industrial revolution didn't get us into this mess, just exacerbated it. Going Amish isn't going to reverse climate change, just stall it slightly. And, most importantly, it's a pipe dream. We have to be willing to meld both philosophies together. Science can't save us alone and neither can international agreements to go back to the stone age.
No, the COMIC I was replying to already says CLIMATE CHANGE. You're just here trying to derail shit out of vanity.
Just read your fucking line there and think of how fucking arrogant you sound. Trying to decide the topic like an asshole.
Oh you fucking cottoned on to that finally, the entire premise of the whole fucking planet just voluntarily choosing to descale their societies back to a workable quality of life didn't clue you into the fact the scenario is a pipe dream? A made up scenario about someone wanting a world that aligns with a healthier quality of life for the planet and hence humanity...
That didn't clue you in that it's someone's idea of a climate utopia, so you still had to come in like world-leader pretend and say "But we should still have rockets"... before you figured out it was a pipe dream?
WTF?
...I can tell ya mate, if you couldn't figure out this global scaling back of humanity's quality of life is a pipe dream then your brain probably ain't up to doing much rocket science. You know you might not be the sharpest tool in the shed.
Simplifying human existence to avoid climate change doesn't mean having paranoia satellites photographing the weather. It means sometimes we get hurricanes but at least we're not contributing to the processes that make them worse (eg. All the large scale power usage and technological basis behind a rocketry program).
Grow up, I'm talking huts and communities of subsistence, The Shire - not flaming tubes of carbon emissions blasting through the ozone layer.
It's a low tech pipe dream, not a pipe dream but with all your favourite technologies still progressing.
Damn dude. Bad faith arguments and ad hominem arguments are not conducive to productive discussion and will only serve to turn people off of your ideas.
You don't think we need a space program. Fine. I was just trying to express how it has and continues to benefit society. You meanwhile haven't really made any arguments to support your side, you just seem to be increasingly angry with me and space programs. I'm just left wondering why? Why die on this hill? Why do you think environmentalism supercedes science and awareness? You say it's a low tech dream, but earlier on you mentioned everyone still having a desktop and internet access, but where do you think those technologies come from?
There are far more harmful things humans do that you could rail against as angrily as you're coming at me about space, that would actually be productive to be rid of. Animal agriculture is by far the largest contributor to greenhouse gasses and it's not even close, but I haven't seen you mention it once in your pipe dream plan.
Animal AG vs space, climate-wise: animal agriculture dwarfs space programs by miles, with roughly 30% of all greenhouse gas emissions (≈16 Gt CO₂e/yr), thanks to methane, nitrous oxide, and deforestation/ land-use. Rocket launches are tiny in comparison, with less than 1% of greenhouse gas emissions, which are by the way many orders of magnitude below aviation.
Most in the field of environmental science (which I have an undergraduate degree in and many contact, but do not work in, just for transparency) agree that the priorities for reversing climate change in this century would be to first curb ruminant methane, stop deforestation, and cut food waste; all of which are achieved by placing limits on animal AG. Meanwhile, setting targeted rules to limit rocket soot/choose cleaner propellants are the most pressing issues in space travel, but again the impact isn't even close.
Anyway if you want to call me a stupid fuckhead and rant some more keep it to yourself. If you want to have an open conversation about how we can daydream a better society I'm all for it. I am however extremely tired of being told that the single greatest achievement of mankind (so far) is a pointless, harmful waste of money, especially by those who still support factory farming.
Me: My utopic pipe dream for a global downgrade of quality of life in society.
You: Space exploration is productive!
I still don't think you get the premise, and I don't care to keep explaining it to you. I just don't think you can grasp the basic concept here.
None the less to say; you're having a conversation with yourself about some other topic here now. Good luck talking to yourself about that. I was saying we need to pick a lower level of tech and stick to it. It's just a totally different topic to you.
Don't hit reply on this comment please. Please scroll up to your previous comment and reply to that instead. I think your topic is "How to have your cake and eat it too, space rockets edition". Good luck with your mass manufacturing projects.
Yes, we are having two different conversations. I’m talking data-driven ways to cut emissions; you’re pushing a downshift fantasy and lashing out at anyone who mentions trade-offs. I’m debating climate policy; you’re role-playing a civilization downgrade and calling names. I brought numbers; you brought insults, but policy runs on evidence, not ire.
Corporations and greedy whales are using up all our resources and you want to go after scientific exploration. The whole idea is completely insane, and you've proven to be its match. So, yeah, I'll bow out and you can celebrate your little victory while I go focus on changes that move the carbon math. And hey, if you catch someone glaring at you, don't worry, it's probably just your reflection.
Hello Chat GPT please tell me a good cupcake recipe.
I say that because you're back to thinking my pipe dream is actually a "climate policy debate" I swear you're illiterate.
Yeah... we discussed this already. Of course the whole world coming together for a vote to downshift was always a fantasy. You're proof that downshifting is impossible. Too many illiterate "smart people" like you who think it will involve an advanced rocketry program and massive amounts of technological "productivity"...
...you want the downshift that's not a downshift.
Still not getting it are you buddy. The world voting on a lower level of technology to adopt (aka a downshift) was always a fantasy. Yes.... Not sure why you keep bringing that up. We've discussed and agreed that at length now.
What fucking victory? The world coming together to decide only a lower tech was always a fantasy... It was never about holding a "climate policy debate" with you.
I guess I'll celebrate being right about the impossibility of global cooperation that produces a downshift. It's obviously an irrational dream.
Haha, cool... Have fun with that. I'll contact the world leaders when you're done. We'll print some voting forms together. Hahaha.
No, I Understand it's a fantasy. The problem is it's both inconsistent and counterproductive; preserving industry while kneecapping the sciences that generate mitigation tools won't cut emissions, it just blinds us to them.
Someone's fantasy is wrong on the Internet! You're a meme dude.
Also, running certain industries at a minimum level of progress and output whilst completely killing off others would definitely cut emissions.
Anyways your ears are firmly blocked and you're basically saying drastic cuts to Co2 won't cut emissions unless we're monitoring them from orbit.
It's totally stupid "I need a number" to know sciencism. Truly the kind of person who thinks trees don't make a sound when they fall unless there's someone listening with a Db monitor.
Meanwhile your recommendation requires an incredibly high amount of a technological base to what - launch 300 tonnes of Co2 emissions into the air per launch, when weather balloons, ground radar and weather station will suffice.
You're being ridiculous.
We don't get new tech without pushing boundaries. We'd forget how to make phones in a single generation if we stopped... We've forgotten how to get to the moon already. Space X is just continuing cancelled NASA projects, but they had to basically start over
You want to learn to terraform here? We've only got one shot. The only current idea that makes any sense is to just stop releasing CO2 and hope everything bounces back... But we might be past the tipping point. If you want to find out, you need satilites
You only get to keep our level of technology by growing new engineers. They need goals and toys, and they need challenging problems
You want to learn how to terraform the earth, safely? You want to maintain GPS and the Internet? You want to learn how to better clean sewage and the air?
It's not either or. You can do everything you said while also letting the best and brightest play with rockets. You can shoot for Mars to save the earth
You just can't do it for profit
One rocket launch expells 350+ tonnes of carbon. Just to allow some elites to play with rockets?
That's a no from me dawg. Go suck "the best and the brightest" off somewhere else. If they're so bright they can focus on fixing climate change in a different way. Do that and they get to "play with rockets" again later.
Yeah, I'm calling bullshit. Hydrogen-oxygen rockets cannot possibly emit that much carbon
Russia used highly toxic UDMH, SpaceX uses kerosene + LOX (huge amounts of Co2), as do India and China (kero the cheapest and most popular rocket fuel, pollutes the highest level of the atmosphere and lingers... Some are now using methane which is a worse greenhouse gas).
Liquid Hydrogen and Oxygen are just for specific stages.
But we're talking 140 or more launches a year. I'm about as down for that as I am for keeping global tourism alive.
We don't need satellites to track the weather or capture air quality data. The air, weather balloons, weather station, and radar is all we need.
The whole point of downsizing is to use less resources.
Good tourism is how you avoid wars. No cruises, yes local, trained guides. It's harder to hate what you know.
Good racing got us the TGV. Formula One is a testbed for hybrid vehicles and efficiency. I don't know enough to say NASCAR brings no benefits at all, but pretty close to useless.
The current race for resources on the Moon is awful, but unmanned space exploration has helped us learn a lot about our own planet, including the mechanisms of climate change.
What makes you think this is about wars ....the comic ends with "no more climate change"... Not "no more wars".
But also you're spouting Neo-Liberal propaganda. Italy no doubt hosted international races before being fought against in WW2, and Climate Change is obviously going to have more resource wars than before.
But why does no one here understand my pitch is CLEARLY UTOPIAN. It proposes global solidarity on climate change. Which is obviously a UTOPIAN pitch about climate change.
CLIMATE CHANGE.
Dude... Take a chill pill, look at the sky, and then re-read my comment under a non confrontational light.
No, it's my utopic idea. I say we don't need a space program in it...
What part of downsizing our reliance on technology leads everyone to comment and say we need a space program. Why you all so illiterate?
Clearly if I'm talking about downsizing to a scaled back version of society I'm NOT on team rocket.
All you confrontational assholes aren't going to get me to choose rockets over halting climate change.
I don't think that vote is going to come out like you're imagining. Most people either don't get it at all, or are just too egoistic.