this post was submitted on 05 Feb 2025
794 points (99.5% liked)

solarpunk memes

3227 readers
14 users here now

For when you need a laugh!

The definition of a "meme" here is intentionally pretty loose. Images, screenshots, and the like are welcome!

But, keep it lighthearted and/or within our server's ideals.

Posts and comments that are hateful, trolling, inciting, and/or overly negative will be removed at the moderators' discretion.

Please follow all slrpnk.net rules and community guidelines

Have fun!

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
(page 2) 20 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] TempermentalAnomaly@lemmy.world 18 points 1 week ago (5 children)

Humpback means so many things in this post.

[–] wise_pancake@lemmy.ca 8 points 1 week ago

Look at the bottom whales smug face

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] Majorllama@lemmy.world 14 points 1 week ago (4 children)

That chart specifically says "sightings". So does that actually mean there are more whales or does that mean there are more humans than ever and specifically more humans with cameras than ever before?

Not saying it's lying I'm just curious if the wording is being used to be intentionally misleading or if the real data doesn't look so peachy.

[–] spankmonkey@lemmy.world 6 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

More whale sightings is a good indication that there are more whales. Cameras have nothing to do with sightings.

[–] Majorllama@lemmy.world -4 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Wait does "sightings" literally just mean someone says they saw a whale?

So that could just be one whale that got into a shipment of cocaine and went on a breaching spree. /s

I get that there's not much incentive for people to lie about having seen a whale, but I feel like we have the technology to have a more accurate number than just "Ted said he saw one".

[–] sigmaklimgrindset@sopuli.xyz 4 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Aren't you the guy who started a flame war in the lemmy.ca instance for not understanding US/Canadian trade relations?

Yeah, I'd bet you probably don't understand how more independent sightings of whales along their known migratory paths would point to higher numbers in their population. You don't really understand numbers or history.

[–] Majorllama@lemmy.world -3 points 1 week ago (2 children)

I didn't intentionally start a flame war. I stated some facts and lightly insulted some Canadians and they all collectively lost their minds. That was a 1v50 scenario and I seemed to be the only one having any fun in there. Its a real shame they locked the thread.

And yes I am able to understand how more people saying they are seeing whales would lead scientists to believing there are probably more whales. I literally never said anything to contradict that.

All I said was that we as a species have better technology and could feasible come up with a way to get a much more accurate number than just trusting peoples word.

I never said it would be cheap or easy. Just that we could hypothetically come up with a better system than just trusting that Ted said he saw another whale.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] spankmonkey@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

Wait does “sightings” literally just mean someone says they saw a whale?

Yes

I get that there’s not much incentive for people to lie about having seen a whale, but I feel like we have the technology to have a more accurate number than just “Ted said he saw one”.

You have zero understanding of the scale of the ocean.

[–] Majorllama@lemmy.world -5 points 1 week ago (4 children)

.... We have sensors along all of our coasts that can detect basically anything in the water. Obviously it's mostly looking for submarines from enemy nations, but they routinely "spot" whales.

I feel like using literally any actual measurement tool would be better for data collection that just a bunch of people saying they saw one.

Hell we have enough satellites to track whales. Especially since they have to surface to breath.

I understand the ocean is vast, but it's not like we are trying to count giant squids. These things come to surface all the time and they frequent areas often occupied with humans. We could absolutely have more accurate numbers than "sightings".

[–] spankmonkey@lemmy.world 4 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

I feel like using literally any actual measurement tool would be better for data collection that just a bunch of people saying they saw one.

Cool, cool. You are wrong though. Science says you are wrong.

Hell we have enough satellites to track whales. Especially since they have to surface to breath.

No, we don't have enough satellites to track every time a whale surfaces to breathe. Nor do we have the ability for satellites to know if it is the same whale.

[–] Majorllama@lemmy.world -5 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Yeah.... And they used to scramble peoples brains with an ice pick to try and fix people with depression. Then they learned there is a better way to do things. Science can always be improved. It's incredibly naive to think the method with which we use to count whales currently could not also be improved or made more accurate in any way.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] SnotFlickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone 6 points 1 week ago (3 children)

Hey, I calls em like I sees em. I'm a whale biologist.

[–] retrolasered@lemmy.zip 5 points 1 week ago (1 children)

So if I tell enough people to eat shit?

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] wise_pancake@lemmy.ca 0 points 1 week ago

For me it was Kony 2012

load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›