this post was submitted on 07 Mar 2024
30 points (100.0% liked)

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

7116 readers
311 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@slrpnk.net
30
Scientific Leaders: "No Anthropocene" Vote Was a Sham (www.hillheat.com)
submitted 1 year ago by silence7@slrpnk.net to c/climate@slrpnk.net
3 comments fedilink hide all child comments
top 3 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Ledivin@lemmy.world 9 points 1 year ago (1 children)

What a fucking stupid piece of drama. Why the sham vote? Why go to the papers with a result? Literally no average person could give less of a shit about this, what on Earth were they even trying to influence?

[–] silence7@slrpnk.net 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Their fossil fuel industry benefactors

[–] zerakith@lemmy.ml 4 points 1 year ago

Agree, a headline of "Humans aren't dominating the climate" does the damage of subtly suggesting climate change/human impacts on environment isn't a big deal or is overblown. Even if there is legitimate disagreement about whether we can say it has definitely technically begun or not.

If that were the case it could have been communicated as "Human Interference in the biome is at an unprecedented scale but scientists aren't clear if it dominates natural systems... Yet"