this post was submitted on 19 Mar 2026
50 points (98.1% liked)

Climate

8459 readers
160 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
50
Don’t panic: A field guide to the runaway greenhouse | the Earth may eventually turn into Venus, but not anytime soon (www.theclimatebrink.com)
submitted 1 day ago by silence7@slrpnk.net to c/climate@slrpnk.net
11 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

There is unfortunately a huge amount of harm we can do to the capacity of the Earth to support human life, even if we can't actually boil off the oceans like Venus.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] The_Che_Banana@beehaw.org 3 points 1 day ago (2 children)

as someone whose work has catered to the Epstein class I can tell you: no. They see food as something required through the day that is just a nuisance, a power move or status signal. They do not enjoy food, it can be amazing or slop, as long as it serves their purpose they'll down it.

[–] 5715@feddit.org 3 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Not to you, but for the argument let me rephrase that: Do you enjoy having access to food at all?

[–] The_Che_Banana@beehaw.org 3 points 1 day ago

I honestly think (from my experience) the people who would guide our species into extinction really don't have the capacity to understand that question at all. They only think in short term gains/gratification, and long term wealth/power accumulation.

Food is something they have to endure, not something they like, so if it was a protein/carb, vitamin paste and it was better than yours, it would work for them.

[–] StillAlive@piefed.world 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Epstein class as in new money people? For some reason I always thought the old money people at least attempted to appreciate art, food, and other fine things in life. New money, on the other hand, is obsessed with proving itself. 

[–] The_Che_Banana@beehaw.org 2 points 22 hours ago

Epstein class as in 'can do anything without consequences'.

Food used to be the more exotic the better as a status symbol (look, I'm the Queen of England and I got a mango, I have 2 servants cooking dinner for the two of us, etc). but that's long gone.

Also, this is purely anecdotal, and based on my own experiences.