User Controls
World to hit temperature tipping point 10 years faster than forecast
-
2021-10-15 at 3:04 PM UTC
Originally posted by vindicktive vinny when you're short of oxygen, you breathe harder.
The instinct to breathe harder is caused by an increase in CO2 levels. That's why you can die so easily by being asphyxiated in Helium or Nitrogen gas.when trees experience higher concentration of carbon dioxide, they are going to just grow more leaves.
Very slightly, so for instance CO2 supplementation is used in horticulture. But this won't affect things to any meaningful degree. -
2021-10-15 at 3:06 PM UTCThe only thing we are trying to save here is humans...the planet will not die because of humans...in fact it would FLOURISH without us.
If you adopt the theory that the Earth IS a living being much like coral is..and then you could even expand that further to the "living universe", then it follows anything that tries to hurt it could be dealt with...natural attrition, diseases, new predators etc to get rid of the offending species...aka humans.
All this shit about "save the planet"..the best way to save the planet is for humans to go. -
2021-10-15 at 3:06 PM UTC
Originally posted by Obbe As Marx wrote in the friggen 1850's Capitalism contains inherent contradictions, stemming from its basis in Utility Theory, failing to even examine the fundamental and universal unit of exchange. Dipshits didn't even bother to examine the commodity as an abstract, or considered that it might have properties of its own.
These contradictions, namely the absolute refusal to acknowledge the social nature of production, and the theft of labor value from the workers through "profit", which is implemented through Capitalistic relationships of ownership with the means of production.
This directly creates the flaws and contradictions in the states and societies of the world, through which a state is allowed to not invest in itself.
The very idea that the people themselves would deliberately choose to not invest in themselves is patently ridiculous.
However, being the victims of industrialized theft, and most left so poor that survival becomes the the primary contradiction they struggle against, they naturally balk at taxation (necessary under a Capitalist mode of production to finance any investment), because combined with the theft, it is enough to directly harm their ability to meet their own needs.
Coupled with Capitalist control of the information infrastructure, the newspapers, the magazines, radio stations, television, social media, etc, which has enormous influence on the population, specifically because it alters the material conditions in which they exist, we begin to see very clearly what actually has occurred.
Rather than Keynes' drivel over "states" as abstract entities mysteriously failing to invest in themselves, we find that the Capitalist, no longer content with mere theft of labor, seeks to co-opt the structures of government to create a new engine for profit motive.
They engineer lower taxes for themselves and their business holdings, the deficit of which must necessarily be paid by the proletariat.
They engineer military intervention to forcibly open new markets, whereby they might export Capitalism and recreate the relationships of colonization whereby wealth is extracted from one land and people for the benefit of another.
They defend their economic interests through military force. See the US oil wars, and military defense of the petrodollar.
They refuse to invest in the state, because it is a massive expense that the state, without the money from taxation of the Bourgeoisie and their business, can no longer afford alongside the massive military expenditures and subsidization of business (which when examined is direct theft from the collective workers of a state).
They don't fear Fascism, because fascism will not harm the interests of Capital.
None of that is true. -
2021-10-15 at 3:07 PM UTC
Originally posted by Donald Trump The instinct to breathe harder is caused by an increase in CO2 levels. That's why you can die so easily by being asphyxiated in Helium or Nitrogen gas.
Very slightly, so for instance CO2 supplementation is used in horticulture. But this won't affect things to any meaningful degree.
climate changes dont change in any meaningful degree over any meaningful time. -
2021-10-15 at 3:08 PM UTC
Originally posted by Jiggaboo_Johnson The only thing we are trying to save here is humans…the planet will not die because of humans…in fact it would FLOURISH without us.
If you adopt the theory that the Earth IS a living being much like coral is..and then you could even expand that further to the "living universe", then it follows anything that tries to hurt it could be dealt with…natural attrition, diseases, new predators etc to get rid of the offending species…aka humans.
All this shit about "save the planet"..the best way to save the planet is for humans to go.
All this edgy stuff is just a cope to avoid having to do anything.
It's like your car develops a flat tyre, but you are too lazy to fix it, so you decide to burn it and just walk everywhere instead. -
2021-10-15 at 3:15 PM UTCNow that they can just print endless amounts of money straight off the presses, or just move a decimal place on an electronic account, they don't care about the money anymore; they already have it all, and as much as they'd like to have. It's no longer about money. Now it's all about power. It's all about getting your foot firmly planted on the next guy's face and then twisting. Strictly for the amusement, control and exhilaration factors.
-
2021-10-15 at 3:16 PM UTCA new, comprehensive global survey illustrates the depth of anxiety many young people are feeling about climate change.
The survey was led across 10 countries by researchers from the University of Bath in collaboration with five universities (University of Helsinki, The College of Wooster, NYU Langone Health, University of East Anglia, and Stanford University). It's funded by the campaign and research group Avaaz, and is set to be published in The Lancet medical journal (currently a preprint).
According to the researchers, this is the "largest and most international survey of climate anxiety in young people to date."
A total of 15,543 people began the survey, 10,000 (68%) completed it. There was an even split in terms of gender (51% male, 49% female) and age group (49% aged 16-20; 51% aged 21-25 years). 1,000 young adults were surveyed in ten representative countries each: the UK, Finland, France, USA, Australia, Portugal, Brazil, India, Philippines, and Nigeria.
Their findings include the following aggregate opinions about climate change among young adults (from Figure 1, Table 2 & Table 3 of the literature):
59% were very or extremely worried, 84% at least moderately worried about climate change
>50% felt sad, anxious, angry, powerless, and guilty
>45% said their feelings about climate change negatively affected their daily life and functioning
Along with specific thoughts about climate change:
83% - people have failed to care for the planet
75% - the future is frightening
56% - humanity is doomed
55% - less opportunity than parents
55% - most valued will be destroyed
52% - family security will be threatened
39% - hesitant to have children
And specific thoughts about their government's response to climate change:
65% - failing young people
64% - lying about impact of actions taken
60% - dismissing people's distress
58% - betraying me/future generations
36% - acting in line with climate science
33% - protecting me, planet & future gens
31% - can be trusted
31% - doing enough to avoid catastrophe
30% - taking concerns seriously enough
Conclusions by the researchers:
"A large proportion of children and young people around the world report significant emotional distress and a wide range of painful, complex emotions (sad, afraid, angry, powerless, helpless, guilty, ashamed, despair, hurt, grief, depressed). Similarly, large numbers report experiencing some functional impact, and identify pessimistic beliefs about the future (people have failed to care for the planet; the future is frightening; humanity is doomed; they won’t have access to the same opportunities their parents had; things they value will be destroyed; security is threatened; and they are hesitant to have children). These results reinforce findings of earlier empirical research and expand on these by demonstrating the extensive, global nature of this distress as well as impact on functioning. The findings show that distress appears to be greater when people believe that government response is inadequate. Climate distress is clearly evident both in countries that are already experiencing extensive physical impacts of climate change, and in countries where the direct impacts are still less severe.
Such high levels of distress, functional impact and feelings of betrayal will inevitably impact the mental health of children and young people. Climate anxiety may not constitute a mental illness, but the realities of climate change alongside governmental failures to act are chronic, long term and potentially inescapable stressors; conditions in which mental health problems will worsen. The stress-diathesis model of mental health indicates that those likely to suffer most are those who are most vulnerable. As severe weather events linked with climate change persist, intensify, and accelerate, it follows that in the absence of mitigating factors the mental health impacts will follow the same pattern. We are already seeing increased severe climatic events that act as the precipitating and perpetuating factors of psychological distress; writing this in July 2021, numerous unprecedented weather events have occurred since our data collection (including the ‘heat dome’ and wildfires in the Pacific North-West, catastrophic storms and floods in Germany, Iran, and China, and heat records repeatedly broken in Northern Ireland and North America).
Factors known to protect against mental health problems include psychosocial resources, coping skills, and ‘agency’ to address and mitigate stressors. In the context of climate anxiety this would relate to having one’s feelings and views heard, validated, respected, and acted upon, particularly by those in positions of power and upon whom we are dependent, accompanied by collective pro-environmental actions. However, this survey demonstrates that large numbers of young people globally regard governments as failing to acknowledge or act on the crisis in a coherent, urgent way, or respond to their alarm. This is experienced as betrayal and abandonment, not just of the individual but of young people and future generations generally. The results here reflect and expand upon the findings of an earlier interview study, where young people described their feelings about climate change as: 'Stranded by the Generational Gap: Frustrated by Unequal Power, Betrayed and Angry, Disillusioned with Authority, Drawing Battle Lines.'
...
Legal bodies recognise an intersection between human rights, climate change and climate anxiety. Subjecting young people to climate anxiety and moral injury can be regarded as cruel, inhuman, degrading, or even torturous. This provides further understanding for the current phenomenon of climate criminology where children and young people are voicing their concerns through legal cases as an attempt to have their distress legitimised and validated legally in the face of government inaction.
A complete understanding of climate anxiety in children and young people must encompass these relational, psychosocial, cultural, ethical, legal, and political factors. Current narratives risk individualising ‘the problem’ of climate anxiety, with suggestions that the best response is for the individual to ‘take action’. Our results suggest such action needs to be particularly taken by those in power. To protect the mental health and wellbeing of young people, those in power can act to reduce stress and distress by recognizing, understanding and validating the fears and pain of young people, acknowledging their rights and placing them at the centre of policy making. Before we can offer younger generations a message of hope, we must first acknowledge the obstacles that must be overcome.
...
As one young person said: 'I don’t want to die. But I don’t want to live in a world that doesn’t care about children and animals.'
When our research team first read these results, we were moved by the scale of emotional and psychological effects of climate change upon the children of the world, and the number who reported feeling hopeless and frightened about the future of humanity. Whilst researchers do hope for ‘significant’ results, we wish that these results had not been quite so devastating. The global scale of this study is sufficient to warrant a warning to governments and adults around the world, and demands an urgent need for more in-depth research, greater responsiveness to children and young people’s concerns, and immediate action on climate change."
Press Release #1: https://secure.avaaz.org/page/en/media/pressreleases/1027.html
Press Release #2: https://www.bath.ac.uk/announcements/government-inaction-on-climate-change-linked-to-psychological-distress-in-young-people-new-study/
Original Scientific Literature: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3918955
Watching the collective mental health of young adults deteriorate as a response to hyper-awareness about climate change will have profound consequences to our status quo. -
2021-10-15 at 3:27 PM UTC
-
2021-10-15 at 3:29 PM UTC
-
2021-10-15 at 3:31 PM UTC
-
2021-10-15 at 3:32 PM UTC
Originally posted by Obbe A new, comprehensive global survey illustrates the depth of anxiety many young people are feeling about climate change.
The survey was led across 10 countries by researchers from the University of Bath in collaboration with five universities (University of Helsinki, The College of Wooster, NYU Langone Health, University of East Anglia, and Stanford University). It's funded by the campaign and research group Avaaz, and is set to be published in The Lancet medical journal (currently a preprint).
According to the researchers, this is the "largest and most international survey of climate anxiety in young people to date."
A total of 15,543 people began the survey, 10,000 (68%) completed it. There was an even split in terms of gender (51% male, 49% female) and age group (49% aged 16-20; 51% aged 21-25 years). 1,000 young adults were surveyed in ten representative countries each: the UK, Finland, France, USA, Australia, Portugal, Brazil, India, Philippines, and Nigeria.
Their findings include the following aggregate opinions about climate change among young adults (from Figure 1, Table 2 & Table 3 of the literature):
59% were very or extremely worried, 84% at least moderately worried about climate change
>50% felt sad, anxious, angry, powerless, and guilty
>45% said their feelings about climate change negatively affected their daily life and functioning
Along with specific thoughts about climate change:
83% - people have failed to care for the planet
75% - the future is frightening
56% - humanity is doomed
55% - less opportunity than parents
55% - most valued will be destroyed
52% - family security will be threatened
39% - hesitant to have children
And specific thoughts about their government's response to climate change:
65% - failing young people
64% - lying about impact of actions taken
60% - dismissing people's distress
58% - betraying me/future generations
36% - acting in line with climate science
33% - protecting me, planet & future gens
31% - can be trusted
31% - doing enough to avoid catastrophe
30% - taking concerns seriously enough
Conclusions by the researchers:
"A large proportion of children and young people around the world report significant emotional distress and a wide range of painful, complex emotions (sad, afraid, angry, powerless, helpless, guilty, ashamed, despair, hurt, grief, depressed). Similarly, large numbers report experiencing some functional impact, and identify pessimistic beliefs about the future (people have failed to care for the planet; the future is frightening; humanity is doomed; they won’t have access to the same opportunities their parents had; things they value will be destroyed; security is threatened; and they are hesitant to have children). These results reinforce findings of earlier empirical research and expand on these by demonstrating the extensive, global nature of this distress as well as impact on functioning. The findings show that distress appears to be greater when people believe that government response is inadequate. Climate distress is clearly evident both in countries that are already experiencing extensive physical impacts of climate change, and in countries where the direct impacts are still less severe.
Such high levels of distress, functional impact and feelings of betrayal will inevitably impact the mental health of children and young people. Climate anxiety may not constitute a mental illness, but the realities of climate change alongside governmental failures to act are chronic, long term and potentially inescapable stressors; conditions in which mental health problems will worsen. The stress-diathesis model of mental health indicates that those likely to suffer most are those who are most vulnerable. As severe weather events linked with climate change persist, intensify, and accelerate, it follows that in the absence of mitigating factors the mental health impacts will follow the same pattern. We are already seeing increased severe climatic events that act as the precipitating and perpetuating factors of psychological distress; writing this in July 2021, numerous unprecedented weather events have occurred since our data collection (including the ‘heat dome’ and wildfires in the Pacific North-West, catastrophic storms and floods in Germany, Iran, and China, and heat records repeatedly broken in Northern Ireland and North America).
Factors known to protect against mental health problems include psychosocial resources, coping skills, and ‘agency’ to address and mitigate stressors. In the context of climate anxiety this would relate to having one’s feelings and views heard, validated, respected, and acted upon, particularly by those in positions of power and upon whom we are dependent, accompanied by collective pro-environmental actions. However, this survey demonstrates that large numbers of young people globally regard governments as failing to acknowledge or act on the crisis in a coherent, urgent way, or respond to their alarm. This is experienced as betrayal and abandonment, not just of the individual but of young people and future generations generally. The results here reflect and expand upon the findings of an earlier interview study, where young people described their feelings about climate change as: 'Stranded by the Generational Gap: Frustrated by Unequal Power, Betrayed and Angry, Disillusioned with Authority, Drawing Battle Lines.'
…
Legal bodies recognise an intersection between human rights, climate change and climate anxiety. Subjecting young people to climate anxiety and moral injury can be regarded as cruel, inhuman, degrading, or even torturous. This provides further understanding for the current phenomenon of climate criminology where children and young people are voicing their concerns through legal cases as an attempt to have their distress legitimised and validated legally in the face of government inaction.
A complete understanding of climate anxiety in children and young people must encompass these relational, psychosocial, cultural, ethical, legal, and political factors. Current narratives risk individualising ‘the problem’ of climate anxiety, with suggestions that the best response is for the individual to ‘take action’. Our results suggest such action needs to be particularly taken by those in power. To protect the mental health and wellbeing of young people, those in power can act to reduce stress and distress by recognizing, understanding and validating the fears and pain of young people, acknowledging their rights and placing them at the centre of policy making. Before we can offer younger generations a message of hope, we must first acknowledge the obstacles that must be overcome.
…
As one young person said: 'I don’t want to die. But I don’t want to live in a world that doesn’t care about children and animals.'
When our research team first read these results, we were moved by the scale of emotional and psychological effects of climate change upon the children of the world, and the number who reported feeling hopeless and frightened about the future of humanity. Whilst researchers do hope for ‘significant’ results, we wish that these results had not been quite so devastating. The global scale of this study is sufficient to warrant a warning to governments and adults around the world, and demands an urgent need for more in-depth research, greater responsiveness to children and young people’s concerns, and immediate action on climate change."
Press Release #1: https://secure.avaaz.org/page/en/media/pressreleases/1027.html
Press Release #2: https://www.bath.ac.uk/announcements/government-inaction-on-climate-change-linked-to-psychological-distress-in-young-people-new-study/
Original Scientific Literature: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3918955
Watching the collective mental health of young adults deteriorate as a response to hyper-awareness about climate change will have profound consequences to our status quo.
So your astroturfed wealthy jedi group didn't include any questions about overpopulation, migration, or demographic change in their survey at all? -
2021-10-15 at 3:37 PM UTCThe ultra-rich are holding up to $32 trillion, excluding non-financial assets such as real estate, gold, yachts and racehorses, in offshore accounts.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-offshore-wealth-idUSBRE86L03U20120722
The median income in the US is $32,000. If each step on a staircase represents $100,000 of net worth then HALF of the people in the US are on the base or the very 1st step. Almost 200 million people who can’t even get one step up in this system. The households on the 80th percentile are on the 5th step. That’s about five seconds of walking to get up there. A billionaire is ten thousand steps up the staircase. That’s enough to walk up five Empire State buildings. From these heights, they couldn’t tell the difference between a millionaire and a homeless even if they wanted to. And Jeff Bezos? That’s more than halfway to the space station. That’s more than 24 consecutive Mt. Everest’s stacked on top of each other.
If you had a job that paid you $2,000 an HOUR, and you worked full time (40 hours a week) with no vacations, and you somehow managed to save all of that money and not spend a single cent of it, you would still have to work more than 25,000 years until you had as much money as Jeff Bezos. Of course, we are talking about all his assets but don’t forget that Jeff is selling his shares from time to time. Sold $1B of stock in 2017 and Cashed out $1.8B in 2019. He reinvested the money but nevertheless, he is able to cash it out if he wanted to store it. -
2021-10-15 at 3:39 PM UTC
Originally posted by Donald Trump All this edgy stuff is just a cope to avoid having to do anything.
It's like your car develops a flat tyre, but you are too lazy to fix it, so you decide to burn it and just walk everywhere instead.
You found that edgy? lol. You should probably get out more.
btw when I get a flat I don't fix it, I have AAA...or drive to the tire shop which is on every corner in Houston. -
2021-10-15 at 3:45 PM UTCThe author of this post has returned to nothingness
-
2021-10-15 at 3:48 PM UTCOver one year after The Great Insect Dying series and Insect Apocalpyse media coverage, insects still are in peril:
https://news.mongabay.com/2020/11/one-year-on-insects-still-in-peril-as-world-struggles-with-global-pandemic/amp/
Animal populations declined by 70% in just a few decades:
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/endangered-species-animal-population-decline-world-wildlife-fund-new-report/
Vegetation Biomass 70% lower than it would be (and therefor was) without humans:
Fish population declined up to 50% since 1990:
https://www.geographyrealm.com/study-finds-staggering-decline-in-marine-fishery-biomass/
Fungal Biomass which is critical for forests to thrive faces catastrophe:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6544830/#!po=0.458716
Phytoplankton, the stuff that makes the oxygen we breath, biomass dropped by 40% since 1950:
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/phytoplankton-population/
Microbial biomass declined by 30%:
https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fmicb.2013.00163/full
Bird population declined by 30% since 1970:
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/silent-skies-billions-of-north-american-birds-have-vanished/#:%7E:text=But%20new%20research%20published%20Thursday,of%2029%20percent%20from%201970.
Kevin Anderson went through the IPCC's report that centered around a prediction of 1.5C by 2050, replete with all sorts of fantastical assumptions, such as every single country in the world developing effective NET's in the early 90's, with each subsequent year exponentially increasing the NET's ability to remove carbon from the atmosphere.
That's simply a farcical assumption made by the IPCC. Here's the talk where he walks through every single caveat and assumption, contrasting them to reality:
Even the world's most powerful corporations, the oil barons such as ExxonMobil researched into climate change, and what the effects would be, of not mounting a global effort of biblical proportions to avert it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ExxonMobil_climate_change_controversy
Here's a PDF that consolidates the current trajectory whilst staying within reality. Page 8 has the sobering statistics: https://docs.wixstatic.com/ugd/148cb0_a1406e0143ac4c469196d3003bc1e687.pdf
There is also a satirical video, where a group researched into the effects of climate change and the reality we face, said in a no-holds-barred manner to a TV presenter:
The claims were fact-checked, and they're completely factual: https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2014/11/climate-desk-fact-checks-aaron-sorkins-climate-science-newsroom/
We're facing societal collapse by 2030 due to a 1.5C rise. We're currently at around 1.2C rise in global temperatures, which is affected by the temperatures of the oceans (focus on just land temperatures and it's much higher): https://www.carbonbrief.org/state-of-the-climate-how-the-world-warmed-in-2019
And everything is dying. Insects, for instance, have cratered, with the global biomass of insects having declined by 80%: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/feb/10/plummeting-insect-numbers-threaten-collapse-of-nature
Insect populations are declining by 1-2% a year, which is directly correlated to reductions in biomass: https://www.pnas.org/content/118/2/e2023989118
Abundant evidence demonstrates that the principal stressors—land-use change (especially deforestation), climate change, agriculture, introduced species, nitrification, and pollution—underlying insect declines are those also affecting other organisms. Locally and regionally, insects are challenged by additional stressors, such as insecticides, herbicides, urbanization, and light pollution. In areas of high human activity, where insect declines are most conspicuous, multiple stressors occur simultaneously
There is no longer any meaningful amount of permanent sea ice in the Arctic: https://thebarentsobserver.com/en/2020/08/mosaic-climate-expedition-shares-scary-photos-north-pole
The photos clearly underline how several recent climate studies, predicting ice-free Arctic summers by 2035, is not a theoretical scenario but rather an unavoidable fact
This was predicted several decades ago, by looking at the current trajectory of year-round ice loss: https://www.arcticdeathspiral.org/#
All the green technologies that we've developed are to supplement existing oil and coal energy sources, both of which are also increasing: https://ourworldindata.org/co2-and-other-greenhouse-gas-emissions
Due to the increased temperatures of the oceans, fish are now suffocating to death as there are now vast, growing swathes of ocean where there's not enough oxygen for them to survive: https://www.iucn.org/theme/marine-and-polar/our-work/climate-change-and-oceans/ocean-deoxygenation
The current extinction event we're experiencing is the worst in all of Earth's history, by at least 10x: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holocene_extinction
The current rate of extinction is 10 to 100 times higher than in any of the previous mass extinctions in the history of Earth.
As an example for how much faster the current extinction event is, the previous record holder took 20,000 years to decimate 90% of all of the Earth's species: https://news.mit.edu/2011/mass-extinction-1118
The end-Permian extinction occurred 252.2 million years ago, decimating 90 percent of marine and terrestrial species, from snails and small crustaceans to early forms of liserds and amphibians. “The Great Dying,” as it’s now known, was the most severe mass extinction in Earth’s history, and is probably the closest life has come to being completely extinguished. Possible causes include immense volcanic eruptions, rapid depletion of oxygen in the oceans, and — an unlikely option — an asteroid collision.
While the causes of this global catastrophe are unknown, an MIT-led team of researchers has now established that the end-Permian extinction was extremely rapid, triggering massive die-outs both in the oceans and on land in less than 20,000 years — the blink of an eye in geologic time. The researchers also found that this time period coincides with a massive buildup of atmospheric carbon dioxide, which likely triggered the simultaneous collapse of species in the oceans and on land.
With further calculations, the group found that the average rate at which carbon dioxide entered the atmosphere during the end-Permian extinction was slightly below today’s rate of carbon dioxide release into the atmosphere due to fossil fuel emissions. Over tens of thousands of years, increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide during the Permian period likely triggered severe global warming, accelerating species extinctions.
Contrast that to the decline of wildlife populations in just the past 40 years: https://www.worldwildlife.org/pages/living-planet-report-2018
On average, we’ve seen an astonishing 60% decline in the size of populations of mammals, birds, fish, reptiles, and amphibians in just over 40 years, according to WWF’s Living Planet Report 2018. The top threats to species identified in the report link directly to human activities, including habitat loss and degradation and the excessive use of wildlife such as overfishing and overhunting.
The latest statistics, which go from 1970-2016, shows that four years ago it had risen to a 68% reduction in wildlife population: https://ec.europa.eu/jrc/en/science-update/wwf-living-planet-report-2020-reveals-68-drop-wildlife-populations
The World Wildlife Fund (WWF) Living Planet Report 2020, published today, sounds the alarm for global biodiversity, showing an average 68% decline in animal population sizes tracked over 46 years (1970-2016).
The polar vortex has collapsed: https://www.severe-weather.eu/global-weather/polar-vortex-collapse-winter-weather-europe-united-states-2021-fa/
A Polar Vortex collapse sequence has begun in late December 2020, with a major Sudden Stratospheric Warming event on January 5th, 2021. We will look at the sequence of these events, and how they can change the weather in Europe and the United States in the coming weeks.
Due to the increased water temperatures, it was discovered that arctic rivers are accelerating sea ice loss in a positive (i.e, BAD) feedback loop: https://scitechdaily.com/increased-heat-from-arctic-rivers-is-melting-sea-ice-in-the-arctic-ocean-and-warming-the-atmosphere/
As the arctic's temperature increases, the melting ice releases trapped methane in a positive feedback loop, with the arctic ice containing 1/4 of all of the Earth's methane. Higher temperatures = Ice melts faster = Faster release of methane = Higher temperatures = Ice melts faster: https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2020/08/antarctica-methane-leak-microorganisms/
For the first time in human history, the arctic can be navigated through by ships without ice breakers: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/russian-tanker-cuts-a-previously-impossible-path-through-the-warming-arctic/
The little year-round Arctic sea ice that is left, is now host to algae: https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2021/01/210129110942.htm -
2021-10-15 at 3:49 PM UTC
Originally posted by lockedin i disagree, coordinated propaganda is a minor influence and it's primarily motivated by tribalism just like politicisation of vaccines and masks
Yeah why would the owners of capital care about policy issues like reducing emissions?
Wouldn't they actually care more about the long term survival of their assets?
You just know what these people are thinking when they say "right-wing owners of capital". The villain from Captain Planet.
Hoggish Greedly.
Not shlomo and abdullah and mo wang. -
2021-10-15 at 3:55 PM UTCFrom the late 1970s and through the 1980s, Exxon funded internal and university collaborations, broadly in line with the developing public scientific approach. From the 1980s to mid 2000s, the company was a leader in climate change denial, opposing regulations to curtail global warming. ExxonMobil funded organizations critical of the Kyoto Protocol and sought to undermine public opinion about the scientific consensus that global warming is caused by the burning of fossil fuels.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/ExxonMobil_climate_change_controversy -
2021-10-15 at 3:55 PM UTC
Originally posted by Obbe From the late 1970s and through the 1980s, Exxon funded internal and university collaborations, broadly in line with the developing public scientific approach. From the 1980s to mid 2000s, the company was a leader in climate change denial, opposing regulations to curtail global warming. ExxonMobil funded organizations critical of the Kyoto Protocol and sought to undermine public opinion about the scientific consensus that global warming is caused by the burning of fossil fuels.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/ExxonMobil_climate_change_controversy
Wikipedia lol -
2021-10-15 at 3:59 PM UTC
-
2021-10-15 at 4:01 PM UTC
Originally posted by Obbe From the late 1970s and through the 1980s, Exxon funded internal and university collaborations, broadly in line with the developing public scientific approach. From the 1980s to mid 2000s, the company was a leader in climate change denial, opposing regulations to curtail global warming. ExxonMobil funded organizations critical of the Kyoto Protocol and sought to undermine public opinion about the scientific consensus that global warming is caused by the burning of fossil fuels.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/ExxonMobil_climate_change_controversy
Just lobbying for their business interests, the same way all the woke corporations you people love, like Apple and Netflix, do.
The left has this unhinged and very feminine habit of digging up very small, carefully selected things from the past and bitching on and on about them forever. It's the sort of shit a wife who hates her husband does. And at the same time you can't criticise them at all.
