this post was submitted on 19 Aug 2023
63 points (97.0% liked)

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

5194 readers
1278 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]
63
White House is torn over Joe Manchin’s fury at climate law he crafted (wapo.st)
submitted 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
35 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

As White House officials weigh how much to give in to his demands, rift grows between president and senator from West Virginia

It's worth leaving a comment to let the Biden Administration know that you want the greenhouse gas reduction measures in the Inflation Reduction Act preserved

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

Pollsters also said Hillary Clinton was going to win in a landslide

No, that's another commonly believed distortion of reality. Pollsters concluded that there was a high probability that she would win the popular vote, which she did.

That the polls were about the EC and that they mentioned anything about the size of victory is gross misunderstanding at best and much more likely a convenient way to deliberately sow doubt about data that proves leftist policy positions much more popular than your own, whether you're a Republican or Republican Lite like the Dem leadership.

It's pretty hard to believe that bona-fide progressives wouldn't vote for a bona-fide progressives

Which means that bona-fide progressives, especially young voters, were discouraged by the constant fawning of the media constantly declaring someone who was NEVER a bona-fide progressive the inevitable winner and didn't risk their job or jump through a ton of out of state voting hoops (in the case of college students) to vote against someone that both the commentators and the referees had already all but declared the winner.

DID vote for both Hillary and Biden in the general at MUCH higher rates than Hillary's followers did in 08, though.

..and the rest of what you said was also as if it was taken directly from the notes of Neera Tanden, so I'm just gonna stop wasting my breath now. Have the day you deserve.