this post was submitted on 26 Jun 2024
233 points (93.0% liked)

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

5249 readers
583 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
silence7@slrpnk.net
233
Biden’s Record Is Full of Climate Wins — So Why Don’t Voters Know It? Environmental groups are making a concerted effort to educate voters about President Joe Biden’s climate policies before election (www.notus.org)
submitted 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) by silence7@slrpnk.net to c/climate@slrpnk.net
53 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world -2 points 4 months ago (1 children)

There is a line where something ceases to be a difference in politics and becomes a person advocating for and justifying the eradication of a people.

That's you.

Your on the other side of that line.

Its no longer a difference of politics but a question of if you regard other humans as humans or not. and your on the wrong side of that answer. And like with the "paradox of tolerance", if you aren't willing to accept the humanity of other people being inherently valuable, no one should be obligated to treat yours as much. In other words, if you can't accept the humanity of another people and this genocide is "justified" to you, no one is obligated to respect you as a human, because you've betrayed that social contract.

[–] MindTraveller@lemmy.ca -1 points 4 months ago

I didn't accept the genocide of Palestinians. In fact, I'm trying to stop the West Bank from being bombed as well. And you're not.

Also you didn't answer my question. Are you saying I have a mental illness?