So tell me: is this the one scientific paper about the effects of climate change that somehow found the rise in global temperature as we continue to release co2 and methane into the air doesn’t increase the drought conditions, extreme heat, more powerful and deadly storms, loss of crops? Because you being so smart having read this study, it must be something new, right? Not exactly what scientists have been saying for decades? This one study on this subject must be completely groundbreaking and not relaying the information that has been found in all the other studies, correct? I mean, obviously it is, because it’s found that extreme weather events, sea level rise, and a dying planet bringing acidified oceans and untenable land and drought (and the concurrent famine) aren’t the results of our actions…right?
Jeezus. You’re really trying to argue semantics instead of defending your position? You know “AR6” stands for “sixth assessment report,” right? They accumulated a bunch of papers, and made…a report on the findings.
But since you’re clearly so much smarter than everyone and read so much more than us, why don’t you enlighten us all on these brand new findings that you know everything about? Did they or did they not find that human emissions are causing increasingly dangerous conditions? So please, pass your infinite wisdom to us peons. Grace us with your genius! Because you seem to be implying that they didn’t—more than that, you’re straight up claiming that they didn’t. Are you sure you read it?
The science shows the current predicament and the fact that any "good things" are based on the idea of massive reforms (or even revolutions) occurring. This makes it very easily to estimate how bad the situation is based on what's not happening.
As the climate chaos gets worse, it's reasonable to expect more bad news, not less.
Your drawing a false equivalency. Just because there is an over-reporting of negative stories does not mean that all negative stories are false.
While climate change news is A popular target for doom scroll fodder, I think in this case it is accurate, and I think it is important to understand the situation well, even if it's not good news.
Yeah, but how you gonna win internet points if you're not overly cynical to the point of hyperbole? /s
I appreciate you pointing out the obvious negative bent of most current news media. It's why I don't bother with them anymore; they don't care about an accurately weighted story, they want clicks and subscriptions.
21 Comments
Diplomjodler3@lemmy.world · 61 pts · 1y
The solution is of course to persecute trans people.
IphtashuFitz@lemmy.world · 24 pts · 1y
Don’t forget about deporting entire families if just one of them is here illegally.
Diplomjodler3@lemmy.world · 10 pts · 1y
Demographic Collapse? Never heard of him!
azolus@slrpnk.net · 2 pts · 1y
you misspelled "the burgeoisie"
troed@fedia.io · 56 pts · 1y
TheFriar@lemm.ee · 17 pts · 1y
“When the world is actively murdering us, maybe we’ll finally see some positive change for a few select oppressed groups.”
troed@fedia.io · -4 pts · 1y
TheFriar@lemm.ee · 10 pts · 1y
You just kinda linked to the IPCC website. Care to expand on what you’re hoping I get from that
troed@fedia.io · -4 pts · 1y
TheFriar@lemm.ee · 5 pts · 1y
lol okay
So tell me: is this the one scientific paper about the effects of climate change that somehow found the rise in global temperature as we continue to release co2 and methane into the air doesn’t increase the drought conditions, extreme heat, more powerful and deadly storms, loss of crops? Because you being so smart having read this study, it must be something new, right? Not exactly what scientists have been saying for decades? This one study on this subject must be completely groundbreaking and not relaying the information that has been found in all the other studies, correct? I mean, obviously it is, because it’s found that extreme weather events, sea level rise, and a dying planet bringing acidified oceans and untenable land and drought (and the concurrent famine) aren’t the results of our actions…right?
troed@fedia.io · -1 pts · 1y
TheFriar@lemm.ee · 2 pts · 1y
Jeezus. You’re really trying to argue semantics instead of defending your position? You know “AR6” stands for “sixth assessment report,” right? They accumulated a bunch of papers, and made…a report on the findings.
But since you’re clearly so much smarter than everyone and read so much more than us, why don’t you enlighten us all on these brand new findings that you know everything about? Did they or did they not find that human emissions are causing increasingly dangerous conditions? So please, pass your infinite wisdom to us peons. Grace us with your genius! Because you seem to be implying that they didn’t—more than that, you’re straight up claiming that they didn’t. Are you sure you read it?
RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world · 7 pts · 1y
That rapid change can be caused by or result in massive upheaval and damage.
Just like it mentions WW2. It’d be great if that didn’t have to happen, though.
whostosay@lemmy.world · 28 pts · 1y
Honestly, let's wrap this shit up. I am exhausted.
SARGE@startrek.website · 5 pts · 1y
Sir_Kevin@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 15 pts · 1y
Beginning??
Kaliax@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 1y
Yeah, they must be new here.
Sylvartas@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 1y
Always has been
zante@slrpnk.net · -5 pts · 1y
veganpizza69@lemmy.world · 16 pts · 1y
The science shows the current predicament and the fact that any "good things" are based on the idea of massive reforms (or even revolutions) occurring. This makes it very easily to estimate how bad the situation is based on what's not happening.
As the climate chaos gets worse, it's reasonable to expect more bad news, not less.
zante@slrpnk.net · -5 pts · 1y
veganpizza69@lemmy.world · 12 pts · 1y
I wish you were correct, but the popular press is usually loaded with optimism, especially techno-optimism.
zante@slrpnk.net · 4 pts · 1y
franklin@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 1y
Your drawing a false equivalency. Just because there is an over-reporting of negative stories does not mean that all negative stories are false.
While climate change news is A popular target for doom scroll fodder, I think in this case it is accurate, and I think it is important to understand the situation well, even if it's not good news.
zante@slrpnk.net · 0 pts · 1y
Telorand@reddthat.com · 2 pts · 1y
Yeah, but how you gonna win internet points if you're not overly cynical to the point of hyperbole? /s
I appreciate you pointing out the obvious negative bent of most current news media. It's why I don't bother with them anymore; they don't care about an accurately weighted story, they want clicks and subscriptions.
franklin@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 1y
This It implies that they're only reporting it because it is bad news. Which has a whole other host of implications and make sure you're aware of it.
Perhaps I read too much into it, but I don't believe that's the case.
Warl0k3@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 1y