158
submitted 2 weeks ago by silence7@slrpnk.net to c/climate@slrpnk.net
top 21 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] henfredemars@infosec.pub 28 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

The plan has been voluntary terraforming catastrophe for briefly high stock prices for many years.

[-] 211@sopuli.xyz 14 points 2 weeks ago

A little or a lot more every year. Though humanity is pretty resourceful and nature has tardigrades, "never say never" to some post-apocalyptic 10k populations of one or the other surviving somewhere.

[-] Carmakazi@lemmy.world 13 points 2 weeks ago

Right, collapse of modern civilization doesn't necessarily mean the extinction of humanity. We certainly won't be able to support 8-10 billion people, and not at the level of technology and luxury we enjoy, but I could see countries or cities with several million soldiering on.

[-] arrow74@lemm.ee 5 points 2 weeks ago

I just fear those surving peoples will be under authoritarian rule for generations

[-] blakenong@lemmings.world -2 points 2 weeks ago

Depends on the authority I guess. Controlled by science or controlled by god?

One is bad, and depending on who you are, it could be either.

[-] arrow74@lemm.ee 10 points 2 weeks ago

You forgot option 3 controlled by people that want to maintain their power

[-] PlutoniumAcid@lemmy.world 4 points 2 weeks ago

That's probably the most likely.

[-] SoftestSapphic@lemmy.world 9 points 2 weeks ago

Everyone in a position of power wants the planet to burn

If they wanted a different outcome they hold all the power and accountability.

[-] HubertManne@piefed.social 7 points 2 weeks ago

It the year was the first time trump got elected. The permafrost was melting and we went in the wrong direction. Its not so much if now as when.

[-] SoupBrick@pawb.social 7 points 2 weeks ago
[-] yeahiknow3@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 2 weeks ago

There are many reasons to dread the future. An opportunity to watch the destruction of Florida is not one of them.

[-] Cygnean@slrpnk.net 1 points 2 weeks ago

Wouldn't it, essentially, become a giant sand bank of sorts?

[-] Lucky_777@lemmy.world 5 points 2 weeks ago

Of course. This will hold back humans getting off the planet for thousands of years. We got kind of close this round, will probably need another 3000-5000 years before the rock is left behind.

[-] LuigiMaoFrance@lemmy.ml 4 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

good. Humanity should rot in this hellhole. Other solar systems are better off without us. My only worry is human-built machines spreading our way of thinking in our stead.

[-] Lucky_777@lemmy.world 3 points 2 weeks ago

I would hope by the time we get interstellar, we would have a different mindset. But you're right. Knowing humans we would strip mine most planets and kill all life that gets in the way.

[-] Cenotaph@mander.xyz 2 points 2 weeks ago

If we dont kessler syndrome ourselves and get stuck here first

[-] Carmakazi@lemmy.world 2 points 2 weeks ago

If petroleum ends up functionally depleted and it cannot be extracted from our cycle's detritus, it's more likely to be millions of years. Likely we will never leave this rock again.

[-] Diplomjodler3@lemmy.world 3 points 2 weeks ago

Civilisation is overrated anyway.

[-] death@infosec.pub 3 points 2 weeks ago

Aw man I glanced at that chart thinking "oh that's pretty good!" before reading.

[-] jagged_circle@feddit.nl 2 points 2 weeks ago

350 came and went. Were doomed. The only question is how badly.

[-] heyWhatsay@slrpnk.net 1 points 2 weeks ago

Hold on, this roller coaster is just climbing up to the peak.

this post was submitted on 14 May 2025
158 points (95.9% liked)

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

6608 readers
494 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