you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[+] -7 points 2 years ago (16 children)

As a climate activist, my data comes largely from the NOAA/EPA as well as independent think-tanks.

The poster you're responding to is correct.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 16 child comments
  • [+] 0 points 2 years ago (9 children)
  • [+] -7 points 2 years ago (8 children)

    Pretty sure as a literal climate lobbyist, I know more about this than you

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [+] 6 points 2 years ago (5 children)
  • [+] -7 points 2 years ago (4 children)

    I did not say I am in a think tank. I said we use some think tank knowledge (generally for highly localized policy advocation), while relying on world standards for climate studies

    If you have an issue with the world's chosen standards, perhaps write to the UN or your country's UN ambassador.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [+] 5 points 2 years ago (3 children)
  • [+] -7 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    I'm not the one trying to start arguments about climate science

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [+] -1 points 2 years ago (5 children)
  • [–] -1 points 2 years ago (4 children)

    You don't know what astroturfing is

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [+] -1 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (3 children)
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago* (2 children)

    I'm not downplaying consequences, but being accurate about timelines.

    Most serious impacts of climate change that is already in-process won't be felt til 2100+. We'll hit 1.5C by 2030 and 2C by 2050, but that's nowhere near catastrophic - that comes if we continue to not do things because the changes are slow.

    Not understanding the timeline is what feeds into climate denialism. It's like their #1 talking point

    Next time you're confused just ask for clarity.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments