331–340 of 439 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
And how exactly would introducing communism avert climate disaster? How did the environment fare in Soviet. Which country is the largest CO2 emitter in the world? Do you even consider what you're writing before you post it?
The person that you replied to already wrote that “It’s not an observation about communism-vs-capitalism”.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
the US can barely manage to pass its annual budget, I'm not hopeful
A large portion of the US populace wants to maintain/increase fossil fuel usage just to stick it to their perceived enemies. Also not hopeful.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You are delusional. That could happen in a single event, let alone "ever" as your comment is implying.
The World Meteorological Organization estimates that in the 50 years from 1970 to 2019, deaths from climate dropped to one-third[0]. That's not one-third the rate; that's one-third of the absolute number of deaths, even as the world population more than doubled in that time period and atmospheric CO2 went from ~325ppm to ~410ppm. In my opinion, this reduction in deaths is mostly due to the increasing ability of the d…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>the resolution of time in archaeological records are generally not this granular, and a lot of short-term trends are being smoothed. We have precise records from antarctic core samples that can say with near absolute certainty what our climate looked like for hundreds of thousands of years. I won't argue any further about basic chemistry. >very likely that the younger dryas had a much sharper shift in temperature. .…
> Wrong. We have precise records from antarctic core samples that can say with near absolute certainty what our climate looked like for hundreds of thousands of years. Cool story, bro. The antarctic ice cores contain valuable information, but they do definitely not tell a complete story of neither temperatures, nor anything else across the whole globe on a granular time scale. > ...which was a catastrophic event for…
> Two main factors are at play in driving temperatures to such extremes: their inexorable increase from burning fossil fuels and an El Niño event that is shaping up to be a strong one. It would be quite educational to attribute in more detail the impact of these two factors. The degree of "El Nino" influence is presumably known, and if its strength is not related with global warming in complicated and unknown ways it…
I would like to see solar activity included in the discussion as well. But anytime I bring it up I'm called a climate denialist. But we're seeing auroras very far south and those days it's no issue mentioning the sun is currently in an active phase. Why is that detail always omitted when it comes to global warming, sorry climate change?
> Two main factors are at play in driving temperatures to such extremes: their inexorable increase from burning fossil fuels and an El Niño event that is shaping up to be a strong one. It would be quite educational to attribute in more detail the impact of these two factors. The degree of "El Nino" influence is presumably known, and if its strength is not related with global warming in complicated and unknown ways it…
vs
> feeling skeptical for legitimate reasons
I think it's just your bias showing. This is 2023, people who are "skeptical" of the climate change aren't there for legitimate reasons. And frankly I'm less and less convinced that we need to engage these people.
Can someone help me understand why when there’s a record cold month, there’s a convo like this > non-believer: “see global warming doesn’t exist” > believer: “you can’t measure this on a monthly scale, it’s too slow of a process” But often when the case is reversed, it’s used as evidence of global warming? I know global warming is real and I am a firm believer in it but this duality seems to cause a lot of issues whe…
If it makes you feel any better, this September may have been the hottest of the past 100 years, but it will probably be the coldest of the next 100 years.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because the correct answer from the believer is "it's called climate change not global warming and it's expected to cause new extremes in both directions"
Well, sort of. It's still global warming, it just makes things weird enough that you'll see local extrema in either direction. Globally though, we're only seeing extremes in one direction.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Asking people to have less, experience less, and do less isn’t an argument that can ever win. Yes and no. I agree that if your approach is to ask people to do this, you aren't going to win the argument. But instead you can reframe the argument. Does that $70,000 truck that you have to make payments on while you do back-breaking or soul-crushing work to afford it really make you happy? Do you really get use out of t…
The people that I know with those $70K trucks seem to really enjoy them and get a lot of use out of them. Especially for towing trailers they work really well. If they didn't buy those trucks I don't think they would work any less. They would just spend the money on something else.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Asking people to have less, experience less, and do less isn’t an argument that can ever win. Yes and no. I agree that if your approach is to ask people to do this, you aren't going to win the argument. But instead you can reframe the argument. Does that $70,000 truck that you have to make payments on while you do back-breaking or soul-crushing work to afford it really make you happy? Do you really get use out of t…
>> Does that $70,000 truck that you have to make payments on while you do back-breaking or soul-crushing work to afford it really make you happy? Cars, apart from their direct purpose, also serve as status symbol. This might justify the investment.