World News

37342 readers

2694 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect!
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

Lemmy World Partners

News [email protected]

Politics [email protected]

World Politics [email protected]

Recommendations

How to spot Misinformation and Propaganda

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

657

Don't overstate 1.5 degrees C threat, new IPCC head says (www.dw.com)

submitted 11 months ago by assassin_aragorn to c/world

280 comments fedilink hide all child comments

In short, we aren't on track to an apocalyptic extinction, and the new head is concerned that rhetoric that we are is making people apathetic and paralyzes them from making beneficial actions.

He makes it clear too that this doesn't mean things are perfectly fine. The world is becoming and will be more dangerous with respect to climate. We're going to still have serious problems to deal with. The problems just aren't insurmountable and extinction level.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] firlefans 24 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

1.5C was never a threat, it was a target. The IPCC produces simplified "stakeholder" report, it would be a superior use of one's time to just give it a skim than spend time reading clickbaity website titles. https://www.ipcc.ch/assessment-report/ar6/

Policymaker summary report: https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg3/downloads/report/IPCC_AR6_WGIII_SummaryForPolicymakers.pdf

If I may indulge myself one more edit (and then get back to work), why 1.5C is a natural question. As far as I recall it was the middle scenario for the end of the 21st century as calculated much earlier (easy to check if you go back to the early 2000s reports). We've since reached ~1C of warming. In the above summary, they state that the most realistic scenarios: (C7= 4 degrees by 2100), and C6 = 3 degrees by 2100), do not have peak warming by 2100. The reports never seem to stretch beyond 2100, and I wish they would to illustrate this point properly. My biggest fear (though not one I want my kids to have nightmares about) would be that warming continues towards 5C, which apart from everything else, brings the climate close to conditions experienced during the Permian-Triassic mass extinction:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Permian%E2%80%93Triassic_extinction_event#Increase_in_atmospheric_carbon_dioxide

[–] Lenins2ndCat 14 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

I think the peak 4 degrees this century is extremely possible. A lot of the community studying this now thinks we have underestimated feedback loops, much of what is currently happening was not supposed to happen as quickly as it has.

[–] firlefans 8 points 11 months ago (1 children)

I agree, our track record since the establishment of the IPCC has been only very slightly better than "business as usual" scenarios. The current decline of the AMOC current was not predicted to happen as quickly as it has, and the early 2000s IPCC reports didn't even factor in Greenland ice sheet meltwater. I'm not a climate scientist, I think if we have one or two in this community, their input would be fascinating.

[–] Lenins2ndCat 11 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

It's terrifying.

We won't get to 2100 before things really get awful either. We'll get to 2035-2050 and then things like cascading crop failure will happen, causing a global collapse in the food supply.

If we reach that event occurring it will functionally prevent governments from cooperating to reduce carbon emissions. They will all be focused internally on turmoil and massive unrest generated by mass famine. Many will turn up the carbon dial in order to try and address this. Others will simply have revolutions that take considerable time afterwards to stabilise making organised effort unviable.