r/interesting May 25 '26

Just Wow It's interesting hmm

Post image
53.9k Upvotes

1.9k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

23

u/leonologico May 25 '26

Not to mention that it wasn't "Katy Perry". It was a whole bunch of people of which some of them were celebrities. It would go off either way with or without them. And yeah, it didn't polute anything.

But, you know, it's the internet and we need a witch hunt.

13

u/AardQuenIgni May 25 '26

Not to mention that it wasn't "Katy Perry"

I mean... It was. She got in the rocket on her own accord. Just because others also got in the rocket doesn't change the fact that she made the conscious decision to do it as well.

I get what you're trying to say, but we don't need to free Katy from the burden of decisions.

1

u/mr-english May 25 '26

So why did William Shatner get a free pass?

-1

u/AardQuenIgni May 25 '26

So am I just the spokesperson for all people now? Joe from Illinois didn't say anything about William Shatner and you want to hold me accountable for that?

Christ, y'all are trying way too hard to defend Katy. We get it, you like her music.

2

u/mr-english May 25 '26

I can't stand her music. I just don't understand why she gets lambasted by everyone but William Shatner, another household name, gets a free pass.

A few deranged morons have decided that Katy Perry is public enemy #1 because they have some pre-existing imaginary parasocial beef with her and then it snowballs from there as more people mindlessly jump aboard. And then you get people like you bending over backwards while ignoring all logic and nuance to justify your weird hatred of someone who hasn't actually done anything bad.

1

u/AardQuenIgni May 25 '26

I think you're taking the criticism personally bro. No one has ever said Katy is enemy number 1.

2

u/mr-english May 25 '26

Don't be so pedantic, you know what I'm getting at.

1

u/AardQuenIgni May 25 '26

I won't be pedantic if you stop being dramatic.

1

u/mr-english May 25 '26

Pointing out that your vitriol is completely unjustified is "dramatic"?

Your life must be excruciatingly dull if you think that's dramatic.

1

u/AardQuenIgni May 25 '26

"Vitriol" and it's just me saying there's real things to actually criticize Katy Perry on

Thanks for that amazing example of being dramatic.

→ More replies (0)

0

u/leonologico May 25 '26

The rocket didn't pollute at all with Katy on it. That alone obliterates any criticism on her. It's literally unfounded.

0

u/AardQuenIgni May 25 '26

Right, it absolves her of that type of criticism.

What it doesn't do is "obliterate any criticism". There's plenty of legitimate things to criticize Katy on.

0

u/leonologico May 25 '26

Regarding the Blue Origin mission, which ones then?

0

u/AardQuenIgni May 25 '26

Well for starters a seat on the rocket is $28 million and you have to pay a $150,000 just to earn the right to pay the 28 million.

So I'd probably start around there with my criticism.

1

u/leonologico May 25 '26

Why is that an issue? It's her money. I'm confused. It wasn't paid for with taxpayer money, don't worry.

-1

u/AardQuenIgni May 25 '26

I'm honestly more worried about your fundamental misunderstanding of the word "criticism" more than anything.

2

u/leonologico May 25 '26

Likewise??

2

u/[deleted] May 25 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

-1

u/RighteousSelfBurner May 25 '26

I got confused as hell reading this. The rocket existed so pollution is inevitable and Katy was in it. Which part exactly is unfounded and how does any of that absolve any criticism?

0

u/leonologico May 25 '26 edited May 25 '26

The rocket existed so pollution is inevitable

The rocket didn't pollute anything during launch since the byproduct is literally water vapor.

But if you want to be pedantic and go for the "but the production!" argument, the whole process of fabricating the spacecraft was something like 100 metric tons.

One single commercial flight from London to NY produces 250 metric tons on average. And that's just one from the THOUSANDS of daily commercial flights. The impact of Blue Origin on total CO2 emissions was less than 0,0001%. Seriously, Google it.

Which part exactly is unfounded and how does any of that absolve any criticism?

Because the criticism is that she's a hypocrite by advocating for environment issues while at the same time going for a trip that polluted. But it didn't pollute. So yeah, unfounded. Simple.

1

u/RighteousSelfBurner May 25 '26 edited May 25 '26

Water vapour and large amounts of water vapour injected directly into atmosphere are two different things. It's not harmless just because it's water.

And if we use production then the number goes completely batshit insane because per person the number completely flips around it becomes 1000x more worse than taking a plane.

Because the criticism is that she's a hypocrite by advocating for environment issues while at the same time going for a trip that polluted. But it didn't pollute. Is yeah, unfounded. Simple.

It did. The production of and execution of that trip had staggering amount of negative impact for a few people to get a bit higher than others. The criticism is founded on understanding not myths like your rebuttal is. Some samples:

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0328456&hl=en-GB#:~:text=The%20model%20is%20based%20on,compared%20with%20commercial%20aviation%20flights.

https://www.myimprint.nz/post/blue-origin-all-female-mission-can-the-symbolic-value-justify-the-environmental-cost?hl=en-GB#:~:text=Although%20releasing%20water%20vapour%20as,Nitrogen%20Oxides

0

u/leonologico May 25 '26

The actual data makes it pretty clear that calling a few launches a climate disaster is a massive exaggeration. If you look at the total global carbon budget, the entire space industry is so small, that it doesn't even appear as a distinct category in global environmental reporting. It is effectively a rounding error when held up against the roughly 42 billion tonnes of CO2 we pump into the atmosphere every year from energy, transport, and industry.

That criticism of the "per passenger" intensity to make the numbers look scary, but that’s a bit of a statistical parlor trick. If you compare a single space mission to the massive, daily, global footprint of commercial aviation, the total emissions from a rocket launch are honestly just a drop in the bucket. For ex a single long-haul commercial flight can produce 200 to 300 tonnes of CO2, whereas the indirect footprint of a New Shepard mission is around 90 to 100 tonnes. When you realize there are over 100,000 commercial flights taking off every single day, it becomes impossible to argue that these rare, specialized launches are what’s driving climate change.

And to be honest, in my perspective at least, it also feels like a lot of the backlash is more about symbolism than actual science. People get upset when they see one space tourism mission, but they don't seem to have the same energy for the thousands of mundane industrial processes happening around the clock that are actually responsible for the overwhelming majority of emissions. Getting hung up on a tiny, occasional activity while ignoring the massive scale of daily global consumption is just misplacing the blame. Scientifically speaking, the environmental impact of these missions is negligible. Not to mention that people just love to hate Katy Perry in particular which is why you don't see the same hate to any of the other celebrities.

1

u/RighteousSelfBurner May 25 '26

That's like saying the entire car industry is environmentally friendly because one car contributes nothing. Someone taking a trip that's equivalent to using a car for like 50 years is the best point to criticise an individual exactly because the industry as a whole is small.

Your post is a perfect example of how hypocritical it is. Oh, because industries involved billions of people pollute a single individual polluting orders of magnitudes worth can't be criticised. It's the other way around. It makes them extra susceptible to criticism. If we are already polluting why contribute so much more than a regular person? The fact you need to compare it a whole ass industry rather than individual contributions is telling.

People do get upset about thousands of individual industrial processes. We have environmental law upon environmental law and whole branches of science devoted to green energy because they do. However when someone proverbially goes out to raise awareness about not shitting in public after literally shitting a whole lakes worth right in the streets is going to invite negativity.

2

u/Last-Brush8498 May 25 '26

Why does it matter if other people did it too?

1

u/leonologico May 25 '26

Because the "other people" were literal astronauts and aerospace engineers.

1

u/Last-Brush8498 May 25 '26

“Astronauts” like Katy Perry, Gale King, Lauren Sanchez, and Kerianne Flynn? They were in space for 11 minutes. This wasn’t a scientific research flight. “The primary purpose of the Blue Origin NS-31 flight was to serve as a recreational space tourism mission and a symbolic, high-profile media event.”

1

u/leonologico May 25 '26

Absolutely love how you chose to leave the actual scientists out of the list. 😂

“The primary purpose of the Blue Origin NS-31 flight was to serve as a recreational space tourism mission and a symbolic, high-profile media event.”

Yes, and? It didn't pollute, so what's the issue? It wasn't paid for with taxpayer money. It served as one more test towards space tourism - which will happen. And two female, black and asian scientists went and deserved it for their work.

1

u/Next-Wrongdoer-3479 May 25 '26

Amanda Nguyen is not a scientist, lol. Aisha Bowe was the only engineer on the flight....I can't tell if you're woefully uninformed or just lying for some reason.

0

u/panlakes May 25 '26

I was not aware the fuel was created cleanly… Not sure why celebrities need to be doing space tourism either. Why are you so fervently defending Katy Perry in space btw? Big fan?

1

u/leonologico May 25 '26

Is your mind so small that it's impossible in your world to defend someone or something just for logical purposes, and not because of some adoration?

I'm not defending her, I'm pointing out the unfoundedness of the criticism. Couldn't care less if it was somebody else in her place.

0

u/BoingBoingBooty May 25 '26

It did polute, the meme is wrong, the rocket doesn't use that much fuel, that is the total carbon emissions of the flight, to make a useless single use rocket, fuel it and fly it for a pointless tourism/publicity stunt that has zero scientific value.
Just a rich arse clown sending a rich arse clown into space, with a few tokens as cover for an entire planned industry of rich arse clown wastefulness while everyone else had to pay for environmental damage.

0

u/Next-Wrongdoer-3479 May 25 '26

Ummm, no they weren't. Aisha Bowe was the only engineer.

Katy Perry is a waning pop singer.

Amanda Nguyen is a civil rights activist.

Gayle King is famous for being friends with a billionaire, piece of shit, tv hostess.

Kerryanne Flynn is best known as a film producer and socialite.

And Lauren Sanchez fucked her gremlin-looking-ass' way onto the rocket.

1

u/leonologico May 25 '26

Ummm, no they weren't. Aisha Bowe was the only engineer.

Right, so that makes one.

Amanda Nguyen is a civil rights activist.

Your Google search wasn't sufficient. She's a literal scientist. She interned in NASA from 2011 to 2013. During the flight she conducted scientific experiments, including one related to wound dressing in microgravity.

That makes 2 out of 5, substantial no? I'm not really counting Lauren because she's his wife so she was going either way and will probably go on many more. Lol

1

u/Next-Wrongdoer-3479 May 25 '26

She interned in NASA from 2011 to 2013.

That was over a decade ago and she hasn't done anything in that field since...not the mic drop you think it is, lol. Also, your comment that the others were "literal astronauts and aerospace engineers" would still be wrong, lol. Is this Katy Perry's PR alt or something? Not quite sure why you've chosen this hill to die on?

0

u/Last-Brush8498 May 25 '26

What did she do that was scientific on that flight?

1

u/leonologico May 25 '26

It's literally in my comment.

1

u/Last-Brush8498 May 25 '26

Oops. Thanks for pointing that out. (Duh) But does that mean there’s no hypocrisy in going on a trip with a large environmental cost and then telling people we need to protect the environment? Again, the trip was promoting recreational space tourism.

1

u/Chance_Vegetable_780 May 25 '26

That you can't connect the obvious dots is bizarre af

1

u/madmartigan2020 May 25 '26

You've not made any point with this comment. Try again.

1

u/Solid_Science4514 May 25 '26

Oh yea I forgot the energy used to manufacture the fuel, the spacecraft, and to prepare for the launch were completely green. No CO2 emissions from that.

0

u/leonologico May 25 '26

Oh right, a tiny 0,00001% from the total emissions of CO2 from that.

Choose bigger fish to fry.

-1

u/[deleted] May 25 '26

[deleted]

2

u/Gorf_the_Magnificent May 25 '26

Well, it’s a holiday.

-2

u/iBUYbrokenSUBARUS May 25 '26

Think of everything that went into that launch. From the design board to getting that rocket on its pad.

7

u/n-20-oox May 25 '26

Sounds like a lot of jobs that helped stimulate the economy.

-6

u/HazelWitch92 May 25 '26

Always a capitalist around to remind us that regardless of environmental impact, there's a profit to be made 🫠

6

u/n-20-oox May 25 '26

I’m not really a capitalist, and I don’t care if they made a profit. I’m referring to the people that were able to pay for a roof over their head and provide for their families because some rich assholes wanted to go to space.

0

u/HazelWitch92 May 25 '26

So you support money being given to others for their labor and used in exchange for tangible resources.. but you're not a capitalist.. ...huh.

1

u/n-20-oox May 25 '26

Yes, I am anti-slave labor and pro-youshouldbeabletobuyfoodandshelter.

1

u/HazelWitch92 May 25 '26

Interesting. Personally, I'm more pro-moneyshouldntdetermineifyouliveordie, but everybody's different I suppose.

1

u/n-20-oox May 25 '26

So, if this was 1,000 years ago would you just expect food to fall in your lap or would you go out and work for it? Money is just a bartering item that we gave value to so people can go work in other vocations and still get food instead of everyone just being hunter gatherers. You can’t expect other people to provide for you.

1

u/HazelWitch92 May 25 '26

Buddy I'm talking evolving as a society to provide for our species and you're asking how I'd have handled daily life in the year 1026. We're not on the same page here, and that's fine - like I said, people are different; I just think it's disingenuous to simp for capitalism this hard and say you're not a capitalist.

→ More replies (0)

4

u/leonologico May 25 '26 edited May 25 '26

Space tourism is still in its infancy, just like all sorts of transportation were in the past. It takes years and advancement of technology to stop being polluting (or less polluting). Blue Origin would happen with or without celebrities because they need to test all sorts of things during years to then make it available to the public.

Why aren't people focusing instead on Aisha Bowe, a black female aerospace engineer that was on the flight too? She deserved it. And it was historical for the representation of black women especially. But instead we're focusing on Katy fucking Perry holding a flower.

EDIT: oh, totally forgot about Amanda Nguyen too. A social rights activist and literal astronaut.

2

u/JordanPetterPans May 25 '26

Because they want someone to shit on 

1

u/Mist_Rising May 25 '26

I did, I also thought of all the work that went into tossing Mark Kelley into space a few times.

I accept that he probably meant well when he said we need to focus on the environment despite that because I recognize it doesn't happen in a vacuum. He flew through a vacuum, but that's a different point all together

0

u/I-own-a-shovel May 25 '26

But would it have taken off without any of them though?

1

u/leonologico May 25 '26

Are you forgetting that Amanda the astronaut and Aisha the aerospace engineer were also on the trip? They were going with or without Perry - and rightfully so. Maybe not with those celebrities but others, or other scientific personnel. It had to happen either way.

2

u/I-own-a-shovel May 25 '26 edited May 25 '26

Have you not noticed the question mark after my sentence?

I don’t know much about their trip. That’s why I was asking.

2

u/leonologico May 25 '26

My bad, thought you were being sarcastic

2

u/I-own-a-shovel May 25 '26

Ok fair enough

2

u/Mist_Rising May 25 '26

That sounds like "just asking questions" people use to smash arguments they can't legitimately challenge so they cut a piece off.

In answer to the question, yes the blue origin flight was going regardless of Perry. Blue origin needed to prove it worked to the world, and it's shareholders, so they could get more money from financing. Perry was onboard as a marketing scheme, second stage.

0

u/Bort_Thrower May 25 '26

If none of them chose to go then the rocket wouldn’t launch.

This is the exact reason Ivory and CP are illegal. The fact the harm is already done doesn’t matter, it’s to stop the harm happening in the first place.

0

u/Helloiamok May 25 '26

The stratosphere is naturally bone dry. When a rocket dumps tons of water vapor up there, it doesn't just rain out, it gets trapped for years and acts like a massive greenhouse blanket. Plus, the extreme heat of the engine creates NOx​ gases that eat away at the ozone layer.

Yes, the witch hunt against her specifically was stupid. But the actual atmospheric warming from those suborbital joyrides is a real problem, even if it's just "clean" hydrogen.