this post was submitted on 19 Jun 2024
166 points (96.1% liked)

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

5393 readers
577 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 2 years ago
MODERATORS
silence7
166
Stonehenge covered in powder paint by Just Stop Oil protesters - BBC News (www.bbc.co.uk)
submitted 6 months ago by sabreW4K3@lazysoci.al to c/climate
100 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 4 points 6 months ago (2 children)

If you put more focus on the act instead of the reason you don't have your priorities straight. People should be out in the streets and destroying a shit ton of monuments important to the rich with what's happening in the world right now.

[–] Telorand@reddthat.com 2 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Agreed. The key there is "important to the rich," not "important to humanity." Break all the rich people's toys, make some noise. Go sabotage a SpaceX rocket or something.

But the fact that I'm focused on the act despite being effectively on their side means a ton of other people who aren't on their side are too, and I can almost guarantee they can't see past the act to really grasp the impetus behind it.

[–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 4 points 6 months ago

You think the Louvre and what's inside isn't important to rich people? Stonehenge isn't important to rich people?

You and me shouldn't give a fuck that these things get destroyed because if things keep going the way they are there won't be any humans from the working class to enjoy them anymore in a century, so what's the point of preserving them in the first place?

Destroy all that shit so people have to face the fact that our governments and rich people are ready to spend billions to restore a church in Paris while people in the same city are starving.

[–] tobogganablaze@lemmus.org -1 points 6 months ago (1 children)

If you put more focus on the act instead of the reason you don’t have your priorities straight.

So you would be totally fine if people took a shit on your front porch as long as it's to protest climate change, right? Clearly you wouldn't get upset about the act if there is a good reason.

[–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 0 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

Is my front porch a destination to international visitors on which we spend fortunes in order to preserve it while people are starving? 🤔