This like the flouride study frustrates me. Butting heads with idiots is so annoying. It is not a question of is it happening its a question of how best to deal with it. It also drives me nuts that I feel like the intractible folks fighting it when they come around jump to geo engineering.
this post was submitted on 15 Apr 2026
142 points (98.6% liked)
Climate
8561 readers
380 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
Just face the extinction and embrace it like a real man
A chain - including the logical type - is only as strong as its weakest link. e.g. if I compost a fantastic massage in ym bread (sic x4), but autocorrect mangles it all to hell, then what message did I end up conveying (regardless of what I may have intended)?
As a global society, it is starting to look like we failed. We did not consider the fundamentals as being important, so we were vulnerable to take-over, both from without and even more from within. Those who obstinately refuse to learn from history are doomed forever to repeat it.
The world will go on though, with or without any particular nation, or even species (i.e. us).
Holy age of stupid when a piece like this is needed
Unfortunately, they're applying their intelligence to propaganda opposing scientific knowledge. It isn't quite the same. While scientists look for truth, deniers strategically go above and beyond to hide and muddy that truth.
i cant wait for an llm to tell us how to fix it!
Beep boop just unplug me
I'm an engineer. I've built a system to try and start fixing this, but no one likes the numbers... https://youtube.com/@narcimalgae
40 gallons a person minimum. Water holds 8 times the gasous CO2 as the atmosphere it is exposed to. (Oxygen is 1:1) Algae pulls the CO2 out of the water and converts it to solid biomass. Oxygen is offgassed. This is grade school photosynthesis. 1 lb dry algae is 4lbs gasous CO2 sequestered. Don't be a dunce and convert it right back to biofuel or you've wasted a lot of time and energy.
Yes yes, but what is the profit margin here?
I'll check your videos out later, I'm just on break.
I'm sure your videos cover it, but what would you suggest to do with the biomass?
I want to try converting my stock to algenic acid. Really any process that doesn't result in burning it and putting the carbon back in the atmosphere. I personally don't grow in a clean enough environment for food-algae, and recommend anyone wanting to grow algae for food to grow regional vegetables instead.
That's really interesting; I'll do some reading about that when I'm home. Thanks for the reply!
I'm grateful we tried
@silence7
This illustration intrigued me, and after doing a bit of research, I came across this article by its author, who explains that his prediction was correct, but for the wrong reasons. I find such honesty wonderful.
However, his 1975 prediction should no longer be used to show that scientists had correctly predicted global warming. The author himself points out that he was just lucky.
Scientists are cool and all, but I really hate substack.
@silence7
#degrowth and a radical reduction of #greenhouse gases is the only way.
To shreds you say...