this post was submitted on 06 Jun 2026
664 points (99.4% liked)

Science Memes

20379 readers
2886 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 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] raptir@mander.xyz 201 points 13 hours ago (10 children)

Kids these days don't even know about the hole in the ozone later.

[–] pupbiru@aussie.zone 1 points 56 seconds ago

in australia we absolutely do

we take skin cancer very seriously down here

[–] starlinguk@lemmy.world 5 points 2 hours ago

Trump wants to bring it back.

[–] LillyPip@lemmy.ca 14 points 5 hours ago* (last edited 5 hours ago) (1 children)

We managed to dial things back a bit, so that became a smaller problem.

We used to see regular news reports of actual rivers on fire. Things are still way too bad, but we forcefully throttled some things as we saw how quickly the damage was compounding.

Women’s hair doesn’t defy gravity without lots of help.

[–] Obi@sopuli.xyz 1 points 43 minutes ago

Oh my god I needed your comment for it to finally click, I was thinking "they stopped putting their hair up to protect their shoulders from the increased UVs"? But of course, it was referencing the sprays!

[–] Madzielle@lemmy.dbzer0.com 55 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

I just told my kid about how we fixed acid rain through regulation just this morning

[–] MoffKalast@lemmy.world 36 points 9 hours ago* (last edited 9 hours ago) (1 children)

Well it's understandable, the concept of being able to actually cooperate and do something about the environment on a world scale instead of just blindly pretending it's not a thing until it kills us all is a bit hard to believe for younger generations for obvious reasons.

[–] ironycanal@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 4 hours ago (2 children)

I don't understand, why would it sound implausible? Isn't that what governments are FOR?

[–] Skullgrid@lemmy.world 2 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

But government BAD! Taxes BAD!

[–] scratchee@feddit.uk 1 points 43 minutes ago

I know, the government is bad, so if we put a bad man in charge it’ll be a double negative and become good, right?

Not when all governments have been captured by oil tycoons it isn't.

[–] its_kim_love@lemmy.blahaj.zone 182 points 13 hours ago (4 children)

It's kinda our last big environmental win.

[–] MonkRome@lemmy.world 5 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

iirc ~1/4 of the worlds energy production is renewable. More than 90% of all new electricity capacity worldwide came from renewable sources in 2024. Doomers want you to believe it can't happen again while we are in the very decade that is likely to change the world. Public policy doesn't even matter at this point, renewable energy is cheaper, so nearly all new investments are in renewables.

[–] Bluescluestoothpaste@sh.itjust.works 1 points 34 minutes ago* (last edited 33 minutes ago)

We could stop producing all greenhouse gases today, and the planet would continue warming for 100 years. it's a pretty tough problem we have on our hands.

[–] Dettweiler42@lemmy.dbzer0.com 104 points 13 hours ago* (last edited 13 hours ago) (4 children)

There's been some conservation wins that I know of. Okaloosa Darter fish came off of endangered status, and eventually off of threatened The Red Cockaded Woodpecker was elevated from endangered to threatened a few years ago.

Controlled burns in the US long leaf pine forests have also lead to a return of the quail population.

Just trying to sprinkle a little good news out there.

[–] starlinguk@lemmy.world 1 points 2 hours ago

None of that is worldwide.

[–] mic_check_one_two@lemmy.dbzer0.com 21 points 10 hours ago* (last edited 10 hours ago) (2 children)

American Bison, too. The repopulation of American bison (often mistakenly called buffalo) is one of the most successful repopulation efforts in history. The reason you’re able to order buffalo (again, not actually buffalo) burgers at your local hipster burger joint is because American bison is no longer endangered. The population has come from less than 1000 total bison (all privately owned by a handful of conservationists) to over 400k today.

[–] Skullgrid@lemmy.world 1 points 3 hours ago

I saw on Ted Turner's wiki page that he helped with that.

[–] its_kim_love@lemmy.blahaj.zone 6 points 9 hours ago

I had a Bison meatloaf once that was so good. It's so much lighter than beef. It was like eating a meat cloud.

[–] Texas_Hangover@lemmy.radio 38 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

Cockaded Woodpecker

Now your just making shit up.

[–] Signtist@bookwyr.me 19 points 10 hours ago

Winner of the "most penis euphemisms in one name" award.

[–] ruuster13@lemmy.zip 8 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

The irony of all ironies is how similar the words "conservation" and "conservative" are.

[–] halcyoncmdr@piefed.social 4 points 5 hours ago* (last edited 5 hours ago)

That's because the root of both is to conserve. To keep things the way they are.

Politics gets in the way of that reality since they don't actively want to keep it the same, they actually want to regress back to previous times they can exploit personally.

[–] DeadDigger@lemmy.zip 29 points 13 hours ago

The thing is it kinda isn't. The ozone layer still needs about 20 years to get back to 1960 levels and the number of problematic states for this increasing again

[–] Midnitte@beehaw.org 12 points 13 hours ago (2 children)

Tbf, its not even yet a win technically.

TCO is expected to return to 1980 values around 2066 in the Antarctic, around 2045 in the Arctic, and around 2040 for the near-global average (60°N-60°S). - Source

[–] psud@aussie.zone 1 points 28 minutes ago

If we turn around climate change, even if we fail to avoid quadrillion dollar sea level rise, I'm going to call it a win

I hope we don't lose too much before we do win though, or after we do

[–] jaybone@lemmy.zip 4 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

So is that good news, that we’re moving in the right direction?

Though the very next sentence from that linked source says

The assessment of the depletion of TCO in regions around the globe from 1980-1996 remains essentially unchanged since the 2018 Assessment.

[–] Midnitte@beehaw.org 3 points 10 hours ago

2018 to 2022 didnt see much change (and given how far until its fully returned to normal, I think you can see qhy - it takes a long time to fully heal), but we're certainly pretty far into success compared to where we were.

[–] BurgerBaron@quokk.au 6 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

Well not to worry, all these internet swarm satellites might cause another one.

[–] PotatoesFall@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 2 hours ago (1 children)
[–] BurgerBaron@quokk.au 2 points 2 hours ago

Video overview: https://youtu.be/oKK0dgDIxKY

There's many studies, so here's two:

https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2024GL109280

https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1029/2025EF007229

Article: https://www.sciencefocus.com/space/how-elon-musks-dying-satellites-could-hurt-the-ozone-layer

tl;dr: the massively increased rate of rocket launches and re-entry satellite burn-ups is creating a significant amount of pollution that is probably damaging the Ozone layer.

[–] Eternal192@anarchist.nexus 5 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

Most don't know that we have an ozone layer let alone that there is a hole in it.

[–] mnemonicmonkeys@sh.itjust.works 10 points 8 hours ago (2 children)

One of my coworkers insists that the hole in the ozone layer is an iris that expands and contracts for regulation. When I asked him what it was regulating, he just shrugged and gave a look that said "I don't know, you tell me"

He also claimed that believing that humans were capable of changing the global climate was pure hubris, despite the USSR deleting the Caspian sea decades ago.

And he thinks the wind turbines that have been installed in the past 10 years are making tornadoes worse, contradicting his claims that humans can't change the climate

[–] vaultdweller013@sh.itjust.works 3 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

I think your coworker may be a lost cause, do you think you could convince him that anti-freeze and turpentine will make him see god?

[–] psud@aussie.zone 1 points 26 minutes ago* (last edited 25 minutes ago)

Engineering a death by misadventure doesn't seem ethical to me

Just wait for the people he follows on the internet to tell him

[–] chonglibloodsport@lemmy.world 1 points 5 hours ago

“For regulation” is a pretty weird take, but it is self regulating (in the absence of pollution from humans). When the ozone layer is thin, more UV gets through from the sun. UV from the sun ionizes O2 and splits it apart, creating oxygen free radicals which recombine and create ozone. Thus, less ozone leads to more ozone, hence self-regulation.

[–] Kolanaki@pawb.social 17 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

ozone later

Well that's because we're at now, not at later.

[–] someguy3@lemmy.world 10 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

We've had one ozone yes, but what about later ozone?

[–] jaybone@lemmy.zip 6 points 11 hours ago (2 children)
[–] Triumph@fedia.io 4 points 7 hours ago (2 children)
[–] jaybone@lemmy.zip 3 points 6 hours ago (1 children)
[–] eyelevel@lemmy.world 1 points 57 minutes ago* (last edited 56 minutes ago)
[–] someguy3@lemmy.world 3 points 11 hours ago* (last edited 11 hours ago)

[gets hit on head by aerosol can.]

[–] Flyberius@hexbear.net 8 points 13 hours ago

Oh don't worry, it's coming back

[–] jaybone@lemmy.zip 0 points 11 hours ago (2 children)

I thought the aerosols that affect the environment refer to the tiny aerosol particles at higher levels in the atmosphere.

Everyone in the 80s seemed to confuse the with aerosol hairspray, which wasn’t really a huge contributor. Still aren’t most sprays today generally not this so called aerosol style anymore?

[–] mic_check_one_two@lemmy.dbzer0.com 25 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

It was the Chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) that were used as the primary propellant in aerosol sprays. More commonly known by the brand name Freon. Notice that basically every aerosol can manufactured today has a “CFC Free” badge somewhere. Refrigerant systems also moved away from using actual Freon, and now use alternative refrigerants.

CFCs were actually invented by the same guy who invented leaded gasoline, Thomas Midgley Jr... He is probably the single most environmentally destructive chemical engineer in history.

[–] mnemonicmonkeys@sh.itjust.works 7 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

On the plus side, one of his inventions killed Thomas Midgley Jr., arguably the most environmentally destructive chemical engineer in history

Name me another chemical engineer that could be argued did more harm. I don't think all of Monsanto with agent orange and Roundup has done more than the TEL and CFC fuckup.

Where's he buried? How long is the line to piss on his headstone?

[–] marcos@lemmy.world 1 points 5 hours ago

Late 80s hairsprays and other canned aerosols were a sizeable contributor.

They were an easy fix, and stopped being a problem almost as soon as people decided to do something. That was way before the problem reached mainstream media, so when people started talking about it, they weren't a problem anymore. But they surely were a problem for some time.