this post was submitted on 20 Jun 2024
568 points (96.3% liked)

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

5282 readers
513 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
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Maggoty@lemmy.world 26 points 5 months ago (2 children)

The guys doing Stonehenge at least tried. They used a powder they thought would just come off in the rain.

[–] nova_ad_vitum@lemmy.ca 11 points 5 months ago (2 children)
[–] Maggoty@lemmy.world 15 points 5 months ago (4 children)

The Stone Henge people are saying that the water, lichen, and powder would have reacted badly. I do not have the education to know if that's true or not.

Strangley, 2 days ago they said they'll have to get the experts out to have a look at it, before they can tell.

What a very quick turnaround that, apparently, was......

[–] Crikeste@lemm.ee 6 points 5 months ago

They’re probably just a bunch of upset babies blowing everything out of proportion, of course they would go to the most unlikely and extreme outcome.

Meh.

Their job is to defend stonehenge at all costs. They wouldn't let people look at it if they could get away with it.

Of course they're going to say that the powder is reckless and could potentially upset the lichen or something.

It's hard to believe that this stunt could have any measurable impact in another 10 years or so.

[–] njm1314@lemmy.world 2 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Nor did the protesters I would guess.

[–] Duamerthrax@lemmy.world 9 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

Neither do the media outlets, but that's the story their running with because the oil companies run ads on their networks.

[–] frazorth@feddit.uk 14 points 5 months ago

It hasn't rained yet.

[–] phoenixz@lemmy.ca 0 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Tried what?

Give rich oil producer execs something to laugh at and say "See how silly they are? THAT is supposed to show climate change is real? It's all nonsense, pass the coke"

You want to get attention AND piss on the right people? Then go after their big toys. Go after their airplanes. That's something humanity could get behind, not you trying to destroy priceless art, or historical sites.

[–] Maggoty@lemmy.world 1 points 5 months ago

Nobody cares what the oil executives think. A protest isn't going to make them stop producing and selling oil. And if they tried the system would dump them and bring in the next guy. Protests like this are about raising the public's awareness and you seem pretty aware now.