this post was submitted on 30 Jun 2025
424 points (99.3% liked)

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

6862 readers
493 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
424
The Trump budget proposes $0 for climate research in 2026 (www.commerce.gov)
submitted 4 days ago by silence7@slrpnk.net to c/climate@slrpnk.net
108 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] knightly@pawb.social -1 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

Are you today's explanation?

Are you today’s right-winger cosplaying as a lib?

Always a good sign when you start off with a strawman/ personal attack.

Right‽ Also, why would you make such an honest admission? It isn't doing anything to help your argument.

Ok where do we start. Well first off we're talking national level, not mayoral candidates or safe districts.

Are you trying to tell me that the governor of Rhode Island has more pull than a mayor of America's biggest metro with 8x as many constituents? This is a supremely weird way to open up your response.

A bunch of nonsense about electoral history, blaming Clinton's loss on climate change, failing to acknowledge that Gore actually won his election, etc.

Lol.

So how do you get them to move left? By giving them victories first.

I think you should try that plan. Start with Mamdani.

[–] someguy3@lemmy.world 1 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

Right‽ Also, why would you make such an honest admission? It isn’t doing anything to help your argument.

Asking if you're today's explanation is neither a strawman or an attack, if that's what you meant. If you meant something else I can't figure it out.

A bunch of nonsense about electoral history, blaming Clinton’s loss on climate change, failing to acknowledge that Gore actually won his election, etc.

Ah you're straight to ignoring with no response to anything. Glad we had this conversation. Ciao.

[–] knightly@pawb.social 1 points 3 days ago

Asking if you're today's explanation is neither a strawman or an attack

Reducing people to a perspective you can feel free to ignore is, in fact, an attack.