531
some old news
(slrpnk.net)
The effect may be considerable in a few centuries
Hahahaha
ha
:c
We see this even now. In 50 years, in 100 years in X hundred years. If its one thing we know the predictions have always been to conservative and we have been tracking the worst case scenario.
That they failed to predict our CO2 output would jump up to 35 billion tonnes a year is probably not their fault back when the Ford model T had just entered production a couple years ago.
What I hate about almost every prediction I've ever read is that it's couched as such-and-such will happen by 2XXX (3°F by 2050, 30 meter sea level rise by 2100 etc.) and then there's no hint that shit will continue to get worse geometrically. Even as bad as these events are going to be, people can imagine adjusting to the new situations as long as they stabilize - which they won't.
Yeah I remember when you would get so many posts about "safe" places. The pacific northwest being a first guess. With severe storms combined with extended droughts nothing is not going to suffer. Its crazy we are going in the opposite direction in the us with a emphasis on coal of all things. Its long passed maintaining and now is about having the least amount of suffering.
I'm at the "hoping I die before shit gets really bad" stage.
I read an article a while back about how scientists know those predictions are wrong, but if you tell people the truth they'll just give up completely instead.
Jokes on them. We also give up completely on the weak sauce.
It does seem like some folks go from its fine so no reason to change anything to its to late so no point in changing anything with nothing in between. Its almost like they don't want to do anything different and just making excuses.
Well, they released 7M tons of CO2, so they thought they had some time. In 2023 humanity released 37,000M tons of CO2 pollution.
For anyone else who doubted the authenticity of this, it's real.
The first ever mention of this phenomenon was in the 1830s IIRC. All it required was scientists 1) understanding the effect of atmospheric carbon dioxide on heat retention, and 2) understanding that burning shit produces carbon dioxide.
I was rewatching the office a few months ago and they talked about climate change. That show is over 20 years old at this point.
This makes me feel old as shit and also deeply concerned that kids don't know that climate science is not something that came up in the past decade. It was widely known and understood by the general public even in the 80s and 90s but fossil fuel lobbies successfully stalled any action on it and muddied the waters for enough people. There was even a disaster movie about climate change called The Day After Tomorrow that came out in 2004 based on a book that came out in 1999. Captain Planet came out in 1990 and it had an eco friendly superhero fighting villains polluting the earth with greenhouse gases. I know it's kind of hard to imagine if you're a kid who grew up during a more acute phase of the climate crisis to imagine that we all knew about thisfor decades and did nothing, but that's what happened.
Nowadays, we're not only doing nothing, but speeding up the process.
60s*
See my comment here. While some scientists were studying anthropogenic climate change in the 1960s, the consensus wasn't as clear as it was later and the average person was more concerned with more immediately obvious pollutants than CO2.
Thats no surprise. Gore was doing his powerpoint presentations that became the movie and inconvenient truth after the hanging chads. Thats about when the average joe became aware of it.
the hippies stood for environmentalism in the late 60s, which everybody was aware of
yeah though I can say even in the 80's and 90's it was more around pollution and poisoning of the air, water, earth. I was fairly into it and did not remember any talk around global warming really.
the national park movement gained traction in the late 1800s
Not the same thing . Environmentalism is different from an awareness of climate change, and prior to the late 1980s and 90s the average person's main concern with industrial emissions were toxic vapors and particulates, not CO2, since these have much more immediately apparent impacts on health and safety.
A few centuries is because people are really bad at considering growth in use. So they take current usage as constant.
this post was submitted on 15 Aug 2025
531 points (99.4% liked)
Climate - truthful information about climate, related activism and politics.
7157 readers
574 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:
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.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS