• SupraMario@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    20
    ·
    6 months ago

    They won’t, it’s just musk hate. I can’t stand the idiot either, but starlink has done more for rural and underserved homes than all the telcoms have in the last 30 years.

    • spidermanchild@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      21
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      6 months ago

      It may be true that Starlink is a great service, but that’s entirely irrelevant to the point of the article and any ozone destruction that the satellites cause.

      • SupraMario@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        15
        ·
        6 months ago

        Way more tons of meteorites burn up entering the atmosphere than the amount of shit starlink will even remotely produce.

          • Kalcifer@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            6 months ago

            Meteorites do contain aluminum. The issue is with the concentration of aluminum in the atmosphere, as well as its rate of increase. If there’s an increase in the atmospheric burn up of artificial satellites accompanied by an increase in the problematic particulate in the atmosphere, then it’s certainly fair to consider that the two are correlated. This is especially so if there is no increase in the burn up of objects from any natural source — eg meteors.