this post was submitted on 18 Sep 2023
97 points (99.0% liked)

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

5052 readers
506 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 1 year ago
MODERATORS
[email protected]
97
Climate Protesters March on New York, Calling for End to Fossil Fuels (www.nytimes.com)
submitted 1 year ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
42 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] -2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

so you have conjecture. you should have just said that instead of stating it as indisputable fact and then trying to snow me with data that doesn't prove your position.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I have:

  • a history of people actually voting for the Greens
  • polls where registered voters say they'll do so instead of voting for Democrats
  • a party ideology which could attract Democrats but which would be antithetical to Republicans
  • a history of Republicans funding Green party candidates as spoilers
  • an Election system which causes them to in fact serve as spoilers

It's pretty compelling when taken as a whole

[–] [email protected] -2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

i'm of the opinion that democrats spoil green party elections, and if the democrats weren't on the ballot, greens would have won every election for the last 30 years. and i have just as much proof as you do.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (2 children)

The Green candidates are all complete dorks. We have studies on what voters like in a candidate and they have none of those qualities.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

We have studies on what voters like in a candidate and they have none of those qualities.

you aren't providing any of those studies. further, as i said, a hypothesis framed like this cannot actually be proven (or disproven), so i don't know what good those studies would do.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I'm not gonna waste my time on your bullshit the way Silence will.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago

this is not a refutation of anything I've said

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago

"bullshit" would be making a clear claim, then presenting anything except evidence when challenged on it.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago

The Green candidates are all complete dorks.

this is a nonsequitur