"ALMOST at an all time high" seems more fitting than "drastically reduced" when referring to a 20% reduction.

Your initial argument is that the USA "drastically" reduced emissions without harming the poorest part of the population, and my point is that it is simply not true. The USA produces the same emissions that it did 50 years ago, does it seem enough to you? The USA hasn't suffered from climate change policies because it has not put in place any meaningful climate policy.

Bracket is still better for rhe WC. This is honestly shittier with extra steps

And that’s only part of the problem. We need water taxes especially where lands are drier.

I don't know how we didn't drop out of the top 12 in 2010 considering we missed the world cup that year.

Ah! If I were you I would stick with your original thinking as I’m reasonably confident there was a coding issue or the set-up of the simulation wasn’t quite what it should be. If I have time I might try and knock something together myself, but that’s a big if as I’ve got a mental couple of weeks.

[removed]

As a member of the whistlers gang I was deeply impressed by vuvuzela.

I was part of the peace deal

How can you not show the rest of North America? Knowing how much Canada (Quebec notably) produces in Hydro and sells it to the U.S.

Conservatives post this like once a week here lmfao. SF is by far my favorite city to visit in America.

It was 30 years ago in visual basic. So I don’t have access to it.

Yeah.. the processes involved in lithium battery manufacturing.. not great.

What if all countries went full France and invested heavily into nuclear?

The data set in question is the one that is historically chronologically complete, in the sense that there are daily records from one location that can be compiled together. Before the 1880s no one was keeping regular temperature data so everything before that has to be inferred with other scientific techniques like ice core samples.

So, the answer to your first question is realistically and statistically, no. It is not a large enough data set to draw conclusions from, since this a sample from one place for 140ish years and climate happens all over the globe from the present all the way back to you know the foundation of the planet. Trouble is, this graph can be drawn from location points all over the world with similar windows of time. This is just the longest one with this type of granularity, so it gets used all the time.

I don't know how the average/mean temperature for a day is calculated, if 24 points were measured every hour and averaged out for a day or what. I'm sure you could find out this info with some google fu.

I'd recommend the XKCD comic on earth temperature. It gives you a long enough time line to understand the enormity of the change we're experiencing right now.

Thanks for taking the time to clarify your question. Have an up vote :P

[deleted]

Except Croatia and Morocco, two of the most prominent

[deleted]

Let's not count the year leading up to and including COVID. Totally skews the data.

[removed]

Posted a link to the source article as per the rules of the sub.

The link is to an archived version so people without an Economist subscription can read it.

Direct link to the image:

https://www.economist.com/sites/default/files/images/print-edition/20180602_USM966.png

[removed]

Looks like 2018 Finals part 2

Yeah I was being snarky, the math suggests that COVID stopped games at the 300 mark. It's effect would be limited to the final spike.

Even if we somehow cut emissions across the board Today, the train is moving. We'll continue to see negative climate effects worsen for the next few decades, before they get better. That, of course, is if we had everything fixed today.

Almost every single process in the modern US requires some form of hydrocarbon pulled out of the ground to function. Are you willing to go back to the days when you need to ride into town on a horse? Is your entire city willing to do that? No Amazon, no internet, no Reddit, no A/C, no Walmart, no skyscrapers, you don't even get to insulate your house, tap water is out too, and on and on and on. You don't even get to use solar panels or modern wind turbines. At best you get some old fashioned wooden windmills and small hydroelectric dams.

99% of your clothes are out because it takes power and infrastructure made out of or requiring the use of those hydrocarbons to make your cotton and wool clothes. Ceramic dishes are out because they need the power to light their kilns on the scale to give you a set. Lightbulbs are made from plastic and metal heated using burning hydrocarbons. That computer or phone you're on absolutely requires hydrocarbons to make. Toss your new iPhone 15 in the garbage if you want cLiMaTe ChAnGe to be addressed.

In order to get the desired outcome you seek, EvErYoNe will need to go back to the early 1800s US society. That's also likely to take Feminism, LGBT, and Civil Rights along with it. And you have no idea if other states or countries will agree or not. China can just say No and what are you going to do? Line up muskets to fight tanks and nuclear weapons?

People aren't going to agree to cut back on anything and at best will pass the blame to a scapegoat. The standards of living drop will be catastrophic. No one will agree to going back to what amounts to be the stone age just to save the planet. Sad, but true. But the planet will survive. Did you know that when the Siberian Traps were formed, Earth became Venus for a few million years. Did most life perish? Yes. Did the Earth survive? Also yes.

If you really want to live a life where everything is green and no pollution is there, go on a one-way trip to Mars and homestead it.

I’m with you. I think if your friend’s code showed otherwise then there’s a flaw in the code and it’s not doing quite what it should be. Would they be willing to share it?