this post was submitted on 08 May 2024
142 points (97.3% liked)

Climate - truthful information about climate, related activism and politics.

5212 readers
696 users here now

Discussion of climate, how it is changing, activism around that, the politics, and the energy systems change we need in order to stabilize things.

As a starting point, the burning of fossil fuels, and to a lesser extent deforestation and release of methane are responsible for the warming in recent decades: Graph of temperature as observed with significant warming, and simulated without added greenhouse gases and other anthropogentic changes, which shows no significant warming

How much each change to the atmosphere has warmed the world: IPCC AR6 Figure 2 - Thee bar charts: first chart: how much each gas has warmed the world. About 1C of total warming. Second chart: about 1.5C of total warming from well-mixed greenhouse gases, offset by 0.4C of cooling from aerosols and negligible influence from changes to solar output, volcanoes, and internal variability. Third chart: about 1.25C of warming from CO2, 0.5C from methane, and a bunch more in small quantities from other gases. About 0.5C of cooling with large error bars from SO2.

Recommended actions to cut greenhouse gas emissions in the near future:

Anti-science, inactivism, and unsupported conspiracy theories are not ok here.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
[email protected]
142
‘Hopeless and broken’: why the world’s top climate scientists are in despair (www.theguardian.com)
submitted 6 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
19 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

cross-posted from: https://lemmynsfw.com/post/11288860

Instead, Cerezo-Mota expects the world to heat by a catastrophic 3C this century, soaring past the internationally agreed 1.5C target and delivering enormous suffering to billions of people. This is her optimistic view, she says.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 3 points 6 months ago (1 children)

I think your idea is a very fine idea but at the same time very naive.

One can start advocating what you did. Looking at classes like poor and rich, the poor are definitely the majority, so theoretically one should be able to plant the seed of thought.

But in praxis that doesn't necessarily work that way. I believe one will immediately be called 'too extreme' if not 'terrorist' and struggle to gain supporters. It doesn't help that much of the media is owned by few people.

At the same time the rich showed already that they have no intention to stop poisoning our life basis if that would mean less money for them.

So even if one gets people to follow the idea and starts to get political attention, rich corporations that have a threat to their income have also shown many times that it is not too difficult for them to make people disappear or that they 'tragically die' somehow.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 months ago (1 children)

I don't think it's particularly niave, if anything it's just pointing out the obvious solution. I'm not expecting it to change, clearly the ruling class will run this ship into the ground, if the 'people' were going to rise up and demand change it most likely would have happened already.

I just think it's an interesting reality that we're living in.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 months ago

You are right. I kind of read your first comment like "Why don't we simply take matters in our hands" instead of "it's strange that many accept this exploitation of environment and even humans as perfectly normal".

It is interesting and depressing to look at. It's also fascinating to see how many people seem to be successfully brainwashed or whatever the reason is they vote against their own interest.