3 ms·

ETA until "Climate change is a myth and CO2 isn't increasing." is uttered? Can we call this Wingod's Carson's law?[0] 0. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rach

ETA until "Climate change is a myth and CO2 isn't increasing." is uttered? Can we call this ~~Wingod's~~ Carson's law?[0] 0. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rachel_Carson https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rachel_Carson

oezi 1y ago
I don't think anybody seriously thinks Climate Change is a myth. There are just too many people who are too selfish to care.
- stratocumulus0 1y ago
  Every time there is a longer period of cold weather in the warm season I see populists on social media ironically asking where is this climate change supposed to be. People have a short context window. It doesn't help that our efforts to combat climate change consist in large part of petty consumer regulations that are annoying to individuals while not achieving much.
  - RiverCrochet 1y ago
    Social media is so easy to fill with unaccountable non-genuine activity (bots, shills, trolls, influencers, guerilla marketers, reputation managers, bored attention seekers) that I no longer consider most social media a valid heuristic for what "everyone thinks." I made this decision after looking at the profiles of those who tended to post like that, most of the time they seem fake. What is the valid heuristic is that what you see on it all the time is clearly what someone wants you think. Someone in real life that cites rando social media too much is probably on their phone too much or themselves in a non-genuine activity group.
- sjsdaiuasgdia 1y ago
  It's difficult to reliably sort the "it's a myth" believers from the opportunists, the selfish, and the lazy. The US has a president that has routinely supported the "it's a myth" viewpoint [0], which increases the visibility and credibility of climate change contrarians regardless of their motivations. [0] https://www.factcheck.org/2024/09/trump-clings-to-inaccurate-climate-change-talking-points/ https://www.factcheck.org/2024/09/trump-clings-to-inaccurate...
  - add-sub-mul-div 1y ago
    The most fascinating thing about him is that from day to day and topic to topic he can switch between looking (convincingly) like he's either selling the grift or buying it.
  - burnt-resistor 1y ago
    Don't forget nonzero % of actual bots and sock puppet meatcloud boiler room operations trying to manipulate sentiment / manufacture consent by flooding the zone with trolling, contrariness, and low-effort "opposition".
- Cthulhu_ 1y ago
  There's plenty, but they don't know the difference between weather and climate.
deadbabe 1y ago
I haven’t heard much about Climate Change in recent months, and to be honest it’s kind of comforting to forget it exists. If we can’t do anything about it, then might as well not think about it. It’s so much less stressful and doesn’t put me in a bad mood the way doomer articles do. The outcome won’t change either way. If someone isn’t proposing a solution, I don’t want to hear the problems.
- callmeal 1y ago
  >If we can’t do anything about it, then might as well not think about it. The thing is, we can do something about it, but unfortunately we've been lobbied into believing that profits trump "doing something about it".
  - larrled 1y ago
    One thing we can do is to understand denial is a normal human defense mechanism. Better to avoid triggering denial by not making people afraid of the future. And when denial exists in a person already, best to avoid arguing with or labeling that person and getting them more deeply invested in their denial. Yet, too often we’ve: overwhelmed people with fear, argued with them when they tended towards normal defense mechanisms to cope with that fear, and then labeled people so their initial reaction of denial becomes a permanent part of their identity. Amazingly that isn’t saving the planet too quickly.
    - quesera 1y ago
      That's fair, but it turns out that indulging the denial does not lead to positive results either. So where does that leave us?
- pixxel 1y ago
  [dead]
sneak 1y ago
I’m not a denier, nor do I dispute climate change, but it seems taken for granted that extreme weather events as of late are caused directly by climate change. It seems probable; likely even. But how do we know? Is it a guess? The very fact that New York hit this temperature in 1888 (pre industrial revolution) suggests that we can’t take it on faith, as we have at least one data point that suggests heat spikes like this have happened in recent planet history without extra atmospheric CO2.
- Cthulhu_ 1y ago
  There's a correlation, but it's better to look at long term weather trends and averages, like this page does https://www.climate.gov/news-features/understanding-climate/climate-change-global-temperature https://www.climate.gov/news-features/understanding-climate/... (read it while it's not censored yet). It shows a clear increase in average temperatures, at least for the time period we have fairly accurate figures (so after 1880). for anything before 1880 and pre-history there's other sources like deep ice cores, geological strata, tree rings, etc. Not accurate, but good enough for an educated guess.
- femiagbabiaka 1y ago
  The effects of human-driven climate change are not about the existence of extreme weather events, but about their frequency. https://science.nasa.gov/earth/climate-change/extreme-makeover-human-activities-are-making-some-extreme-events-more-frequent-or-intense/ https://science.nasa.gov/earth/climate-change/extreme-makeov...
  - ajsnigrutin 1y ago
    This is still a very short-term chart, compared to eg.: https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Global-mean-temperatures-over-the-last-500-000-years-11_fig3_356606430 https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Global-mean-temperatures... Not saying or denying anything, but on a universe-al scale, 200 years is nothing, since some changes take longer.
    - jakelazaroff 1y ago

ETA until "Climate change is a myth and CO2 isn't increasing." is uttered? Can we call this ~~Wingod's~~ Carson's law?[0] 0. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rach

oezi 1y ago

I don't think anybody seriously thinks Climate Change is a myth. There are just too many people who are too selfish to care.

stratocumulus0 1y ago
Every time there is a longer period of cold weather in the warm season I see populists on social media ironically asking where is this climate change supposed to be. People have a short context window. It doesn't help that our efforts to combat climate change consist in large part of petty consumer regulations that are annoying to individuals while not achieving much.
- RiverCrochet 1y ago
  Social media is so easy to fill with unaccountable non-genuine activity (bots, shills, trolls, influencers, guerilla marketers, reputation managers, bored attention seekers) that I no longer consider most social media a valid heuristic for what "everyone thinks." I made this decision after looking at the profiles of those who tended to post like that, most of the time they seem fake. What is the valid heuristic is that what you see on it all the time is clearly what someone wants you think. Someone in real life that cites rando social media too much is probably on their phone too much or themselves in a non-genuine activity group.
sjsdaiuasgdia 1y ago
It's difficult to reliably sort the "it's a myth" believers from the opportunists, the selfish, and the lazy. The US has a president that has routinely supported the "it's a myth" viewpoint [0], which increases the visibility and credibility of climate change contrarians regardless of their motivations. [0] https://www.factcheck.org/2024/09/trump-clings-to-inaccurate-climate-change-talking-points/ https://www.factcheck.org/2024/09/trump-clings-to-inaccurate...
- add-sub-mul-div 1y ago
  The most fascinating thing about him is that from day to day and topic to topic he can switch between looking (convincingly) like he's either selling the grift or buying it.
- burnt-resistor 1y ago
  Don't forget nonzero % of actual bots and sock puppet meatcloud boiler room operations trying to manipulate sentiment / manufacture consent by flooding the zone with trolling, contrariness, and low-effort "opposition".
Cthulhu_ 1y ago
There's plenty, but they don't know the difference between weather and climate.

deadbabe 1y ago

I haven’t heard much about Climate Change in recent months, and to be honest it’s kind of comforting to forget it exists. If we can’t do anything about it, then might as well not think about it. It’s so much less stressful and doesn’t put me in a bad mood the way doomer articles do. The outcome won’t change either way. If someone isn’t proposing a solution, I don’t want to hear the problems.

callmeal 1y ago
>If we can’t do anything about it, then might as well not think about it. The thing is, we can do something about it, but unfortunately we've been lobbied into believing that profits trump "doing something about it".
- larrled 1y ago
  One thing we can do is to understand denial is a normal human defense mechanism. Better to avoid triggering denial by not making people afraid of the future. And when denial exists in a person already, best to avoid arguing with or labeling that person and getting them more deeply invested in their denial. Yet, too often we’ve: overwhelmed people with fear, argued with them when they tended towards normal defense mechanisms to cope with that fear, and then labeled people so their initial reaction of denial becomes a permanent part of their identity. Amazingly that isn’t saving the planet too quickly.
  - quesera 1y ago
    That's fair, but it turns out that indulging the denial does not lead to positive results either. So where does that leave us?
pixxel 1y ago
[dead]

sneak 1y ago

I’m not a denier, nor do I dispute climate change, but it seems taken for granted that extreme weather events as of late are caused directly by climate change. It seems probable; likely even. But how do we know? Is it a guess? The very fact that New York hit this temperature in 1888 (pre industrial revolution) suggests that we can’t take it on faith, as we have at least one data point that suggests heat spikes like this have happened in recent planet history without extra atmospheric CO2.

Cthulhu_ 1y ago
There's a correlation, but it's better to look at long term weather trends and averages, like this page does https://www.climate.gov/news-features/understanding-climate/climate-change-global-temperature https://www.climate.gov/news-features/understanding-climate/... (read it while it's not censored yet). It shows a clear increase in average temperatures, at least for the time period we have fairly accurate figures (so after 1880). for anything before 1880 and pre-history there's other sources like deep ice cores, geological strata, tree rings, etc. Not accurate, but good enough for an educated guess.
femiagbabiaka 1y ago
The effects of human-driven climate change are not about the existence of extreme weather events, but about their frequency. https://science.nasa.gov/earth/climate-change/extreme-makeover-human-activities-are-making-some-extreme-events-more-frequent-or-intense/ https://science.nasa.gov/earth/climate-change/extreme-makeov...
- ajsnigrutin 1y ago
  This is still a very short-term chart, compared to eg.: https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Global-mean-temperatures-over-the-last-500-000-years-11_fig3_356606430 https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Global-mean-temperatures... Not saying or denying anything, but on a universe-al scale, 200 years is nothing, since some changes take longer.
  - jakelazaroff 1y ago