87
submitted 1 year ago by silence7@slrpnk.net to c/climate@slrpnk.net
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] MdRuckus@lemmy.world 29 points 1 year ago

I feel sad for those stuck there. Those who graduate from college there will have less work options. Non-Maga states will be hesitant to hire them because of their lack of actual knowledge due to indoctrination.

[-] whatisallthis@lemm.ee 7 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Tons of the country are dumb people who live in red counties.

Actually if you teleported to a random location in the country, the odds are that you’d land in a red county most of the time.

They’ll find jobs from conservative business owners who believe the same wrong stuff they do.

[-] silence7@slrpnk.net 8 points 1 year ago

But people aren't uniformly distributed across the land; they're disproportionately concentrated in cities. So the average person holds very different views form the average location.

[-] SkepticalButOpenMinded@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 year ago

Even conservative business owners want engineers from Berkeley and doctors from Harvard. It’s no coincidence that the strongest economies are all blue states with great universities. The only red states that can compete are petro-states. Conservatism is bad for the economy.

I think that the teleportation thought experiment shouldn’t be reassuring to a conservative. Statistically, you’ll end up in rural Alaska, given its massive surface area. A lot of rural red areas have sky high unemployment and low wages. If you actually go to where the jobs are, getting a bad conservative education puts you at a disadvantage.

[-] Uranium3006@kbin.social 2 points 1 year ago

yeah, if you adjusted the randomness to land you in the front door of a person you're more likely to be on the doorstep of a liberal's home than a conservative's. liberals get less of a vote because land gets a vote in America

load more comments (1 replies)
this post was submitted on 07 Aug 2023
87 points (97.8% liked)

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

5237 readers
287 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