this post was submitted on 31 Aug 2023
159 points (82.7% liked)

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

7057 readers
535 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
all 18 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Exeous@lemmy.world 105 points 2 years ago (4 children)

This is the same study posted somewhere else. The survey is flawed in that they asked what people ate in the last 24 hours.

That simply means that those people ate a lot in the last 24 hours. Should have been over a week or a month to get a better distribution.

“We analyzed 24-h dietary recall data from adults (n = 10,248) in the 2015–2018 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES).”

[–] persolb@lemmy.ml 18 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Exactly. In a world where people at a big steak dinner once a week, you’d see a similar result.

[–] Steeve@lemmy.ca 2 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

Why would everyone be eating the big steak dinner the day before they were asked this survey question though?

[–] Steeve@lemmy.ca 4 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

I don't totally agree. I'd be interested in grouping the data by "response day of the week", but given that the sample size is 10k (which is huge in nutrition science) and that they didn't all respond at the same time, there's definitely enough response time variability to reduce short term seasonality.

Honestly if you asked over the previous week or month you'd probably just get less accurate responses and it'd skew the data even more.

[–] Anticorp@lemmy.ml 2 points 2 years ago

That's such a leading method for gathering the data. You just ate the one cheeseburger you have every couple of months right before the study? Welp, I guess you're the person responsible for all the beef purchases now!

[–] Modern_medicine_isnt@lemmy.world -4 points 2 years ago (1 children)

If that was all that was flawed... who actually takes time to do nutritional surveys? People who care about nutrition. And the current fad is that you should eat less meat. So a disproportionate number of them are going to under represent how much meat they eat. So it should say, only 12% of people who answered this survey were honest.

[–] makegeneve@fosstodon.org 30 points 2 years ago (1 children)

@pizzaiolo I first read this as 12 individuals. Thought that seemed excessive then remembered some eating contests I've seen in Texas...

[–] Kstile@midwest.social 7 points 2 years ago

Glad I’m not the only one that read it that way. Shame on me for reading the internet before the coffee kicks in.

[–] aDuckk@lemmy.world 14 points 2 years ago

Burgers Georg, who lives in a cave and eats over 10000 burgers a day, is an outlier and should not have been counted.

[–] Pons_Aelius@kbin.social 8 points 2 years ago (1 children)

This just sounds like another version of the 80:20 rule or the Pareto principle.

"The Pareto principle states that for many outcomes, roughly 80% of consequences come from 20% of causes"

[–] SkyNTP@lemmy.ml -3 points 2 years ago

It is. This sounds like a hit piece. You could use this argument to make anything sound bad.

[–] silence7@slrpnk.net 8 points 2 years ago

FWIW, I'm not a huge fan of MDPI; they've got something of a reputation for being shoddier on peer review than some other journals. I'd look for replication elsewhere before fully trusting this.

[–] gnygnygny@lemm.ee 3 points 2 years ago

Does guys eat beef for breakfast

[–] hakase@lemmy.ml -5 points 2 years ago

I'm doing my part!