• mo_ztt ✅@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    21
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    1 year ago

    Bro

    • Indulgences
      • Investment: Money
      • Supposed impact: Escape hell
      • Problem: They’re a scam
      • Actual impact: Nothing
      • What you could do instead: Save your money
    • Carbon offsets
      • Investment: Money
      • Supposed impact: Escape climate crisis
      • Problem: They’re a scam
      • Actual impact: Climate crisis anyway
      • What you could do instead: Save your money but also stop killing the planet

    The comic, and my entire comment replying to it, wouldn’t make sense if carbon offsets weren’t a scam. IDK why Lemmy is so full of people who want to explain to me things that were the underlying basis for the very thing they’re replying to, but yes, carbon credits are mostly a scam.

    • Rhaedas@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      IDK why Lemmy is so full of people who want to explain to me things that were the underlying basis for the very thing they’re replying to

      Let me explain this - that’s how the internet has always…no, it’s not even the internet, as people in general have been that way even before. It’s just more apparent when you have many people all connected and discussing all at once. This isn’t a Lemmy thing. Or a Reddit thing. Or whatever forum you want to use. It’s people.

      What it really is though - not everyone knows everything, so when someone misses the point, helping them understand it is more constructive than belittling their ignorance. Guaranteed that where there is one vocal of their confusion, there are many others lurking who can benefit. And you did at the end, that’s a decent link to why offsets are a scam. Just could have started there instead.

      I guess I could have done the same and just linked to XKCD’s Ten Thousand which makes the same point quickly.

      • mo_ztt ✅@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        What it really is though - not everyone knows everything, so when someone misses the point, helping them understand it is more constructive than belittling their ignorance.

        Yeah, maybe I was sorta rude about it. IDK, it’s just an overall vibe I’ve specifically noticed on Lemmy that people tend to assume that the other people they’re talking to probably don’t know things. It’s a really toxic feature in a community. I do it too, and I make a concerted effort not to, and when I see something that looks like that’s getting pointed at me I get irritated about it. Probably for reasons of my own.

        I think you’re right that my message was a little more pointed about it than it needed to be. It would have been pretty easy for me to say “Oh 100% they’re a scam in most cases, here’s a video about it, that’s the whole point of what we were saying.”

    • LwL@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      The way carbon offsets currently are made available to people are often a scam. The concept is not (though it would likely be not feasible to offset all carbon everyone produces, so the comic still works bc better than offsetting is not producing in the first place).

      I can for example donate money to restore a local bog, and that will have a very real climate impact.

      • mo_ztt ✅@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yah absolutely. Cap and trade actually has worked quite well for a while – I think the difference being that the caps were being imposed from outside according to a specific finite limit, not just something anyone can make up and start selling. Carbon offsets basically go by Calvinball rules with no oversight whatsoever as far as I’m aware.

    • frezik@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Indulgences do absolutely nothing without relying on a deity.

      Carbon capture could work, and we’ll probably need to do it in some form. It’s just that the popular ways to do it are all scams.

      It’s the difference between investing in a perpetual motion machine, versus investing in a spray can that a guy in a commercial says can improve your house’s energy efficiency, versus investing in actual new insulation and windows. The third one is expensive, but it’s the only one we can take seriously.

    • Lemmilicious@feddit.nu
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I understand the comic wouldn’t make sense, but it does seem I misunderstood your comment, so I’m sorry about that! When you write “if God were real” I just assume that you also meant indulgences would work in that case. But yeah with more context I see you didn’t mean to imply that

      • mo_ztt ✅@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Yah, that makes sense. In all honesty, the idea that God could be real, but also not disgusted by the Catholic church (i.e. the indulgences would work) just honestly had never even occurred to me. I feel like if God were real He would hate the indulgences-era Catholic church more passionately than any mere mortal ever could.

        Anyway it’s all good I hope, sorry about being sort of a dick in my response.

        • SokathHisEyesOpen@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Considering his son chased the money changers out of the church by whipping them with a rope, in possibly the only display of Jesus being angry in the entire Bible, I’m pretty sure God would not be happy about indulgences being sold for money.

          Edit: in keeping with the theme of your original comment, I’m agreeing with you, not trying to explain to you that which is the underlying premise of your statement.