this post was submitted on 28 Oct 2024
554 points (97.8% liked)

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

5189 readers
437 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
[–] treefrog@lemm.ee 43 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (6 children)

So if someone is polluting the air my child and I breathe, and destroying the environment in which we live, and I use physical force to stop them, is that self-defense?

[–] SelfProgrammed@lemmy.world 30 points 1 week ago (3 children)

At this point, it feels less "morally allowed" and more "morally required" that we defend ourselves.

[–] reksas@sopuli.xyz 7 points 1 week ago

if we dont, we definitely deserve all we will get

[–] treefrog@lemm.ee 7 points 1 week ago

It's certainly feeling that way.

[–] Kalkaline@leminal.space 16 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

If you cook the rich over a wood burning fire, it would be a net savings in carbon emissions, hypothetically speaking.

[–] qupada@fedia.io 6 points 1 week ago

My cauldron uses an induction stove powered by renewable energy.

Braised in wine, the way they're accustomed to. Attempting to roast the rich doesn't achieve a great result.

[–] Notyou@sopuli.xyz 9 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Usually but because it's the environment then you would get labeled as a terrorist instead of being able to claim self defense. Sorry it looks like the corporations were more forward thinking and got some laws passed to label anything trying to protect the environment is now eco-terrorism.

Only kinda /s

Here is how ethics works:

  • if I push a boulder on you I'm a murderer
  • if I push a boulder that squashes you but on the way down the hill it grinds some flour your death is an externality and I am industrious.

Since we are in the latter case, it is not self defense. Too bad, so sad.

[–] jaggedrobotpubes@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago

Yes.

It's going to take the courts awhile to catch up.