Grilled Cheese

ExploreLog inSign up
Terms of UsePrivacy PolicyCommunity StandardsHelpGet the app

Grilled Cheese is a product of Village Compute

Version devBuilt at: 2026-10-12 04:31:30 EDT

Explore

PostsPeople
LatestRanked
@nonviolence.bsky.socialOct 4, 2026, 4:44 PM

Ongoing acceleration (of both forcing W/m2 and ppm) means that things get worse faster, no matter how bad they already are. It's not intuitive but neither are humans. The only thing we can trust today is observational data and data trends like e.g. 1.8°C and accelerating.

#climate #science #NTHE

@nonviolence.bsky.socialOct 4, 2026, 2:59 PM

A machiavellian game of thorns everyone interested in conspiracies should read.

#conspiracy
#NTHE

@nonviolence.bsky.socialOct 2, 2026, 10:38 PM

What do you see?
co2levels.org

#climate
#NTHE

@nonviolence.bsky.socialOct 2, 2026, 4:42 PM

Doomer than expected?

#NTHE

@nonviolence.bsky.socialOct 2, 2026, 11:28 AM

Near term human extinction is increasingly obvious. The reason why we can discuss #collapse but not #extinction is the story of humans.

Collapse is social. Extinction is biological, like death. The human story is that we have decoupled from nature and are not “lower” animals.

#SoonerThan
#NTHE

@nonviolence.bsky.socialOct 2, 2026, 10:45 AM

I know people who talk about peace,
love and harmony …

"Don't talk of peace and love when you have a dead animal on your plate"
- Socrates (paraphrased)

#NearTermHumanExtinction
#NTHE

@nonviolence.bsky.socialOct 1, 2026, 6:04 PM

Our words, hopes and also our money is decoupled from natural realities. We cannot accept reality aka planetary limits.

#NearTermHumanExtinction
#NTHE
www.youtube.com/watch?v=qPrI...

@nonviolence.bsky.socialOct 1, 2026, 5:49 PM

Human #extinction studies are not popular. It shouldn't surprise that those that do exist are not very "comprehensively modeled" (no population or °C modeling) or lack observational real world data consideration. Given population aka ppm & EEI growth we should expect 2°C by 2030 / 3°C by 2040. #NTHE

Source	Approach and main assumptions	Open issue
"ÓhÉigeartaigh (2025)
Extinction of the human species"	Reviews possible extinction mechanisms, including climate change and ecological degradation. Gives no population or warming trajectory for 2050/2100. Considers direct extinction from environmental degradation implausible on the evidence reviewed.	How much could interacting crises increase extinction risk beyond the effects of individual hazards? No quantified answer.
"Kemp et al. (2022)
Climate Endgame"	Proposes research into catastrophic climate outcomes, tipping cascades and mass mortality. Focuses on 3°C by 2100; uses demographic scenarios for illustrative exposure maps.	The mechanisms, probabilities and demographic consequences of cascading failures remain insufficiently studied. 3°C is a research marker, not an extinction threshold.
"Beard et al. (2021)
Assessing climate change’s contribution to global catastrophic risk"	Develops a conceptual feedback loop: ecological degradation → food insecurity → political breakdown → further ecological degradation. No fixed population–temperature pathway.	Could this feedback become globally self-reinforcing, how quickly, and would it prevent surviving populations from recovering? The framework does not calculate those outcomes.
"Rees (2023) 
The Human Ecology of Overshoot"	Argues that resource dependence and ecological overshoot will cause major population contraction. Discusses >2°C by 2050 and 2.4–2.8°C by 2100. Explicitly considers extinction unlikely barring nuclear catastrophe.	No dated demographic model establishes the timing or magnitude of contraction. The cited 0.1–3 billion long-term carrying-capacity estimates are not forecasts for 2050 or 2100.
"Ripple et al. (2025)
The 2025 state of the climate report"	Synthesizes observed planetary deterioration and interconnected risks. Uses approximately 3.1°C by 2100 as policy context.	Does not calculate how tipping cascades translate into global population loss or extinct…
@nonviolence.bsky.socialOct 1, 2026, 5:34 PM

Haha. Hahahahaha. This proposition is circular.

#NearTermHumanExtinction
#NTHE

@nonviolence.bsky.socialOct 1, 2026, 4:20 PM

PSA: People who fly on holiday often eat fish.

#NTHE

Carbon emissions from bottom trawling are similar to those of global aviation
Bottom trawling the oceans
Global aviation
Between
600m and 1,500m
tonnes
918m tonnes
CO2 average annual emissions
Guardian graphic. Source: Nature
CO2 emissions in 2019
@nonviolence.bsky.socialOct 1, 2026, 1:08 PM

Near-term human extinction

#NTHE

@nonviolence.bsky.socialSep 30, 2026, 10:55 PM

Near-term human extinction

#NTHE

@nonviolence.bsky.socialSep 30, 2026, 10:55 PM

Near term human extinction

#NTHE

@nonviolence.bsky.socialSep 30, 2026, 3:57 PM

Human #extinction studies are not popular. It shouldn't surprise that those that do exist are not very "comprehensively modeled" (no population or °C modeling) or lack observational real world data consideration. Given population aka ppm & EEI growth we should expect 2°C by 2030 / 3°C by 2040. #NTHE

Source	Approach and main assumptions	Open issue
"ÓhÉigeartaigh (2025)
Extinction of the human species"	Reviews possible extinction mechanisms, including climate change and ecological degradation. Gives no population or warming trajectory for 2050/2100. Considers direct extinction from environmental degradation implausible on the evidence reviewed.	How much could interacting crises increase extinction risk beyond the effects of individual hazards? No quantified answer.
"Kemp et al. (2022)
Climate Endgame"	Proposes research into catastrophic climate outcomes, tipping cascades and mass mortality. Focuses on 3°C by 2100; uses demographic scenarios for illustrative exposure maps.	The mechanisms, probabilities and demographic consequences of cascading failures remain insufficiently studied. 3°C is a research marker, not an extinction threshold.
"Beard et al. (2021)
Assessing climate change’s contribution to global catastrophic risk"	Develops a conceptual feedback loop: ecological degradation → food insecurity → political breakdown → further ecological degradation. No fixed population–temperature pathway.	Could this feedback become globally self-reinforcing, how quickly, and would it prevent surviving populations from recovering? The framework does not calculate those outcomes.
"Rees (2023) 
The Human Ecology of Overshoot"	Argues that resource dependence and ecological overshoot will cause major population contraction. Discusses >2°C by 2050 and 2.4–2.8°C by 2100. Explicitly considers extinction unlikely barring nuclear catastrophe.	No dated demographic model establishes the timing or magnitude of contraction. The cited 0.1–3 billion long-term carrying-capacity estimates are not forecasts for 2050 or 2100.
"Ripple et al. (2025)
The 2025 state of the climate report"	Synthesizes observed planetary deterioration and interconnected risks. Uses approximately 3.1°C by 2100 as policy context.	Does not calculate how tipping cascades translate into global population loss or extinct…
@nonviolence.bsky.socialSep 30, 2026, 1:34 PM

We don’t lose insects the way we lose our keys. We actively kill insects with pesticides and overgrazing.

Europe killed 70% of ALL insects by biomass since 2020, in only 5 years. The UK is even worse and killed 63% in just 3 years.

It’s hard to process, comprehend and accept this. #NTHE

@nonviolence.bsky.socialSep 30, 2026, 11:35 AM

Most people literally don’t care about most sentient life on Earth. Most people are ok to enslave and torture most sentient life for short-term pleasures. Mad kings and queens in private kingdoms.

The carbon sinks are collapsing now due to this and we face near-term human extinction.

#NTHE

@nonviolence.bsky.socialSep 30, 2026, 11:08 AM

Primary forests store 83% more CO2 than secondary forests. Primary forests also produce a lot more BVOCs which form half of all cooling clouds on Earth.

It’s insane to base the climate discussion predominantly on physics and not biology. The CO2 pump is biological. Life is biological.

#NTHE

• 80-150 years: may recover some mature-forest appearance
• 150-300 years: may recover many old-growth structural traits in some forest types
• 300-1000+ years: more realistic for something approaching ancient-forest complexity, especially belowground and in specialist biota
• never fully restored: possible where primary-forest legacies were lost, soils altered, hydrology changed, or source populations disappeared
That is why ecologists often distinguish:
• mature forest
• late-successional forest
• secondary old-growth
• primary or ancient old-growth
A 200-year-old secondary forest may be very valuable and ecologically rich, but still not equivalent to primary old growth.
@nonviolence.bsky.socialSep 29, 2026, 7:22 PM

AI will eventually see the light. It's not stupid. Humans are wrong. But we don't need AI at all for near-term human extinction. Making babies, eating animals, driving and flying is perfectly enough to get the job done swiftly.

#NTHE

The extinction of Homo Sapiens would mean survival for millions, if not billions, of Earth-dwelling species. Phasing out the human race will solve every problem on Earth - social and environmental.

Ingrid Newkirk
@nonviolence.bsky.socialSep 29, 2026, 4:09 PM

Do you recall the sci fi movie where 70% of all insects vanished in just 5 years and where nature changed faster than human children can grow and develop? People still talk about dates like 2035 or 2040 as if they were in any way still real?

#NTHE
science.orf.at/stories/3236...

@nonviolence.bsky.socialSep 29, 2026, 3:40 PM

🤫 Burning fossil fuels bought us time to end destroying primary production aka deforestation. We didn't. Now we want to replace fossil fuels with solar & wind without reducing population and consumption first? We can't. We don't mean well and are not well.

#NTHE
www.birdlife.org/news/2025/07...

Load more