this post was submitted on 28 Feb 2024
714 points (98.8% liked)

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

5205 readers
646 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]
714
Exxon-Mobil CEO flips from "it's too soon to act on climate" to "it's too late" as a means of discouraging decarbonization (fortune.com)
submitted 8 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
90 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

“we’ve waited too long to open the aperture on the solution sets in terms of what we need, as a society, to start reducing emissions,” Woods told Fortune

Archived copies of the article: ghostarchive.org web.archive.org archive.today

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] -1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I definitely just ignore or block "durr prove it" types.

Nah I'm not going to waste my time and energy compiling sources and whatnot just for some asshole to go "nuh uh fake news LuLuLuLuLuLz"

[–] [email protected] 1 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

You don't do that for the poster. You do that for other readers.

When someone makes a completely stupid comment, like "Drink bleach to kill viruses," I won't go and reply "no you wrong!" I'll reply "For anyone reading, that's a dangerous advice and here's why [citations]." I don't care if the poster then replies with "nuh uh, fake nooz."

(I didn't downvote you, by the way.)