Recent comments in /f/UpliftingNews

littlespawningflower t1_jb2jm61 wrote

“Reminder: this subreddit is meant to be a place free of excessive cynicism, negativity and bitterness. Toxic attitudes are not welcome here.

All Negative comments will be removed and will possibly result in a ban.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.”

I don’t know as I’ve ever seen so much negativity in this sub as I’m seeing right here in this thread. Unbelievable.

10

SometimesFalter t1_jb2ck7v wrote

> two elderly women taking a bucket list trip is barely a scratch on the surface compared to other sources of pollution

Unfortunately air flight is very carbon intensive per passenger. One single flight can be equivalent to a person's carbon emissions for an entire year, per passenger. So if they visit 18 countries on 7 continents, for the two of them its possible this trip alone could generate up enough emissions as if they lived for 25 years longer each. Obviously they aren't directly generating it, but they're supporting the business nonetheless. This article itself is promoting air travel.

That said, we currently live in a very fortunate time where its possible to curb your emissions and legitimately offset your emissions. Flying to Europe for example and then taking advantage of the very large high-speed train network only for example. There are also carbon offset companies that directly pay farmers for carbon offset projects, or you could plant some trees yourself, growing large gardens, etc. It will take time but I say they probably have enough time and the means to offset their contribution.

2

dumbidoo t1_jb29w0s wrote

If 30% is literally the bare minimum required to avoid environmental collapse, it's obviously not enough. That leaves no leeway, no room for error or accidents, man-made or natural, even IF everyone actually abides by it. It's pure human hubris to also assume these calculations are 100% accurate when dealing with such complex systems or that some new factors couldn't change things. You don't park a car on the very edge of a cliff and then get to be shocked that something happened to it when you could have easily parked it at a safer distance.

1

dumbidoo t1_jb291sc wrote

If 30% is literally the bare minimum required to avoid environmental collapse, it's obviously not enough. That leaves no leeway, no room for error or accidents, man-made or natural, even IF everyone actually abides by it. It's pure human hubris to also assume these calculations are 100% accurate when dealing with such complex systems or that some new factors couldn't change things. You don't park a car on the very edge of a cliff and then get to shocked that something happened to it when you could have easily parked it at a safer distance.

0

RedDragonRoar t1_jb27r5t wrote

The United States does not have active claims to the territory of another sovereign state or any claims outside of the territory it currently controls. Claiming otherwise either shows serious delusions or is intentionally misleading.

Furthermore, I did not comment on the outcome of the Vietnam War, only that after the US had left the region, regardless of why they left, that the PRC proceeded to invade Vietnam in an attempt to annex its sovereign territory.

1