this post was submitted on 24 Jul 2025
789 points (94.8% liked)

Science Memes

15991 readers
2556 users here now

Welcome to c/science_memes @ Mander.xyz!

A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.



Rules

  1. Don't throw mud. Behave like an intellectual and remember the human.
  2. Keep it rooted (on topic).
  3. No spam.
  4. Infographics welcome, get schooled.

This is a science community. We use the Dawkins definition of meme.



Research Committee

Other Mander Communities

Science and Research

Biology and Life Sciences

Physical Sciences

Humanities and Social Sciences

Practical and Applied Sciences

Memes

Miscellaneous

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Iapetus@slrpnk.net 0 points 10 hours ago* (last edited 10 hours ago) (1 children)

This study is dangerously stupid.

We are rapidly running out of resources for survival.

Global fresh water demand will exceed supply by 40% by 2030 and 90% of topsoil is at risk of depletion by 2050.

We are already over capacity on fresh water demand for the amount of humans alive on this planet.

Top soil is what food grows in. Without top soil we can't grow food.

Billions of people will die this century. The planet cannot support any more people. Don't have kids.

[–] LoreleiSankTheShip@lemmy.ml 1 points 41 minutes ago

No, we are not over capacity for survival. We waste a ton of water on stuff we don't need, like having lawns in the desert or choosing to grow almonds during droughts when people have to ration water usage at home. . Top soil is the same, we could, collectively, switch from beef and to a lesser extent pork to focus on much more efficient chicken, thus freeing a lot of land used to feed livestock.

Stop this Malthusian nonsense, we have enough resources for everyone. They are just severely mismanaged to the point of killing us all. We could live sustainably if we wanted to, we just choose not to.

It is true there are too many billionaires. We can provide everyone, if some of them also need 10 private jets.

[–] buddascrayon@lemmy.world 53 points 1 day ago (2 children)

This is one of the things that pisses me off about the Star Trek "fans" who point to the Replicator tech (which wasn't introduced until the Next Generation series) as the reason humanity was able to end scarcity. No, it absolutely was not what ended scarcity in the Star Trek universe. What ended scarcity was the absolute end of capitalism. We have now and have had for over a century, the capability to end world hunger and provide housing for every man woman and child on the planet. We don't do it because it would remove the overinflated value of those things as well as the obscene wealth of the rich.

[–] interdimensionalmeme@lemmy.ml 9 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Capitalism requires scarcity as its engine.
When scarcity is threatened, it is called the capitalist dirty word "commodity".
It means there is no more profit in that.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] kepix@lemmy.world 5 points 1 day ago (1 children)

what about food and place to live? seems to me we are stealing too much land from nature.

[–] ILikeBoobies@lemmy.ca 9 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Build upwards instead of outwards

Replacing all forms of power generation with nuclear would protect a lot of land but war exists and blowing up a nuclear plant causes longer lasting damage than a solar farm

[–] theTarrasque@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago (2 children)

And where do we put all that radioactive waste?

[–] ILikeBoobies@lemmy.ca 4 points 1 day ago

In my backyard

[–] rwdf@lemmy.world 6 points 1 day ago
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›