this post was submitted on 07 Oct 2023
240 points (98.0% liked)

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

7136 readers
375 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 19 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] ColeSloth@discuss.tchncs.de 21 points 2 years ago

This graph is terrible, since it gives no scale. A person with no knowledge beforehand wouldn't know if that's a 0.1 degree shift or a 20 degree shift.

[–] blazera@kbin.social 21 points 2 years ago (1 children)

That is a bizarre and confusing graph

[–] Techmaster@lemm.ee 11 points 2 years ago (1 children)

A normal distribution graph is confusing?

[–] blazera@kbin.social 12 points 2 years ago

Extremely vague units on both axes, throwing in the years on top makes horizontal also look like a timeline but its not.

[–] SARGEx117@lemmy.world 9 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Around here, it hasn't gotten above 100 in many years, so people like to point at that to say nothing has changed.

Never mind the fact that spring is starting earlier and earlier, dropping shitloads more rain than normal, and it's October and people still have A/C on...

[–] CptOblivius@lemmy.world 3 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I still need to mow, in northern ND in October. I swam outside in a pool last week. This is crazy.

[–] SARGEx117@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago

I actually just mowed three days ago, and while the nights have made pools too cold, it's certainly still warm enough during the day.

Yesterday was the coldest it's been mid-day since spring, and it took two days of rain and cold fronts to get there.

[–] guriinii@lemmy.world 8 points 2 years ago

Summer? It's autumn, 20°C, and native wildflowers are flowering again.

[–] callyral@kbin.social 6 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (2 children)

what's up with that graph? why not just have temperature on the Y axis and time on the X axis

edit: what about the scale too? how big is that shift?

[–] silence7@slrpnk.net 9 points 2 years ago

They're trying to show a change in probability distribution, not just a temperature change over time. I agree that scale and such would be helpful.

[–] krashmo@lemmy.world 5 points 2 years ago (1 children)

No fucking shit. How many articles do we need saying this same damn thing?

[–] silence7@slrpnk.net 24 points 2 years ago

Only when people paying attention to an issue are completely sick of seeing the same message again and again does it start to sink in with the general public. So a lot.

[–] mojo@lemm.ee 2 points 2 years ago

I don't need to look at a graphs, I can just go outside or read the daily news of "new record heat temperatures!"

[–] pinkdrunkenelephants@sopuli.xyz 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)
[–] silence7@slrpnk.net 2 points 2 years ago

It's gift link so you shouldn't hit the paywall