this post was submitted on 14 Feb 2025
493 points (100.0% liked)

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

6262 readers
335 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
 

The visualization presents monthly global temperature anomalies.

https://svs.gsfc.nasa.gov/5190

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 16 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (2 children)

Iirc, if you're 60 today, around 75% of human CO2e emissions were created during your life time. The number may be a little off, but the point is: since emissions have steadily increased, it's very likely that the majority of emissions were emitted during your life time. Which also explains why shit is getting crazier very right now, as emissions are on a level never seen before and still rising.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 month ago

But the rising is slowing down! Yes we're still emitting more and more everyday, we're atleast emitting less more

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 month ago (5 children)

This is why I think we need to have global battle Royales. Thin the herd. Keep the population lower so we don't have to work the earth as much.

Maybe a nuclear war and the following nuclear winter would be a good reset for ol mother nature lol.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 month ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

.... You want me to nuke first? Or were you saying me first to the battle Royale thing? Because I think you need more than one person for it to be a battle Royale. I was thinking we group people into random groups of like 10 people each. Then they fight to the death. The survivor gets to live.

We would need to split the genders so we don't end up with a planet of exclusively jacked dudes. After than we drop from from 8 billion people to 800 million. Now everyone has for sure got a house. We got plenty of food for everyone. Everyone definitely gonna need a job.

Guys I think I just fixed everything.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Nono. He is saying you should eliminate yourself first from the equation.

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

Well aren't you guys just a bundle of joy

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 month ago (1 children)

What, its only okay if other people die first? Whenever some advocates for "thinning the herd", they should always start with themselves :)

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I never said I wouldn't participate in the battle Royale. I'm a big advocate for practicing what you preach.

I either get to live in my new paradise or I'm dead and it's no longer my problem. Win win.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 month ago

Nono, i am adressing the reason for the battle royale. People who are obsessed with overpopulation should really start with themselves :)

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

A bird flu pandemic would do that too. Without ruining the environment.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 month ago

Yeah but where's the fun in that.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 month ago

No need for nuclear war. Looks like Captain Trips is being brewed in the US bird/cattle/human populations at the moment. M-O-O-N spells pandemic.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 month ago

De-growth in general would save us without population decline but the world economies collapse when there's de-growth.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago

Population is not even the issue here. We are capable of sustaining the amount of people we have we just refuse to do so efficiently because it benefits rich people.