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:
How much each change to the atmosphere has warmed the world:
Recommended actions to cut greenhouse gas emissions in the near future:
Anti-science, inactivism, and unsupported conspiracy theories are not ok here.
It's easy to be in denial if your job, wealth and lifestyle depend on it.
Watched a great episode of Paul Santenello's show where he tours West Virginia. As always, his shows are eye opening, showing us people and places we've never encountered before.
WV is a wasteland of poverty due to the collapse of coal. You can imagine how they feel about continuing coal mining. It's all they've known, for 3 generations.
They didn't try to pivot to any other sort of economy and now they're buried alive. WV is the most beautiful place I've ever visited, bar none. Damned heartbreaking.
And while I'm at it, let me stump for his channel. Take a look at the linked home page. He goes into places most have never seen. East LA, Compton, Appalachia, Mississippi, nowhere does he shy away from the people. He's as neutral as they come, isn't afraid to ask hard hitting questions, no sensationalism, just straight investigation and reporting.
"climate disruption"? lol 🤡
Your regularly scheduled climate will return shortly. Probably.
In fairness, One Nation voters can't read, so we can't expect them to understand anything. And 60% is still a majority. But doesn't feel good being down with UAE and Nigeria :(
60%? So what you are saying is a majority of people.
This "majority" of a 60 / 40 poll is what the US constantly does too in their news articles. It's just flowery language that make the situation sound better than it actually is.
So what you are saying is a majority of people
I mean, I guess, technically, yeah... But geez, for something that's been settled science for well and truly over two decades now, that's a pretty appalling score.
"Well and truly over two decades" is definitely true...
Exxon had a report in the 80s talking about a 1°C rise in "40 years" ie literally right now
So, the point in time that I was trying to point to was not just when some science had been done, but when the amount of research into the area was so overwhelming, and so widely available, that any lay person who even just casually reads reliable news sources cannot possibly not be familiar with it. The point at which there is no longer any excuse for not knowing about and accepting the science, beyond wilful ignorance. A deliberately vague concept that can't be pinned down to one specific date, but that has, as its absolute upper bound the Kyoto Protocol, which was first signed over two decades, but not quite three, ago.
Yeah fair enough, I didn't mean to contradict you, more add on to your comment
Well, England didn’t send their best and brightest…
I'd steal a load of bread too if it took me from Birmingham to Bondi