Ben See

1

20

Captain Climate Action@CaptainAdvance1·7h

@ClimateBen Those temperature projections are about what is expected based on current pledges if we don't backslide. There are many calls to do so. I agree it is dire. You don't offer many solutions, Ben. What do you make of research that offering agency creates more support than fear?

English

0

18

Ben See@ClimateBen·21h

COLLASPE: a conservative projection assuming action soon to cut emissions would slow the rate of warming (this would still be unsurvivable for 30-50% of species 🤯 - ask IPCC scientists P. Forster, E. Hawkins, Z. Hausfather, etc). 1.41°C 2025 2.15°C 2050 2.75°C 2075 2.96°C 2100

RAPID MASS EXTINCTION: I assume the rate of warming won't go back down to below 0.1°C per decade for at least ~50 years (unless there is fatal abrupt cooling)? That implies broadly unsurvivable 3°C and rising within ~1 to 7 decades*. * regionally from the 2030s, globally 2040s

English

7

53

102

4.8K

Ben See@ClimateBen·5h

48-90% of species face extinction * extinction rates: fastest ever * 48% of species: declining populations * conditions to become increasingly extreme given inertia in the: - economy (industrial capitalist/growth; agriculture, energy) - climate system (2.9-5.2°C v. likely)

ZXX

377

Ben See@ClimateBen·1d

18. '... reptiles were most affected with.. 51%.. likely to experience extreme heat events by the end of the century Extreme heat: land vertebrates in peril ‘disastrous consequences for wildlife’ if human-caused emissions push global temperatures up 4.4C'theguardian.com/environment/20…

English

2

5

975

Ben See@ClimateBen·2d

Remember: 1. primates 2. trees 3. freshwater fish 4. large mammals 5. crocodiles 6. turtles & tortoises 7. high seas sharks 8. island species 9. frogs, toads, newts, & salamanders 10. flowering plants For all of these, a staggering 50-75% of species already risk extinction.

English

7

280

836

12.5K

Ben See@ClimateBen·5h

icymi: >90-95% of species at risk of extinction at 4.5-9°C..?

ZXX

400

Ben See@ClimateBen·12 Tem

a high-precision age model for the end-Permian mass extinction, which was the most severe loss of marine and terrestrial biota in the last 542 My, that allows exploration of the sequence of events at millennial to decamillenial timescales 252 Mya (2014) pnas.org/doi/abs/10.107…

English

2

15

961

Ben See@ClimateBen·12 Tem

48-90% of species face extinction * extinction rates: fastest ever * 48% of species: declining populations * conditions to become increasingly extreme given inertia in the: - economy (industrial capitalist/growth; agriculture, energy) - climate system (2.9-5.2°C v. likely)

English

6

94

174

23K

Ben See@ClimateBen·5h

icymi: >90-95% of species at risk of extinction at 4.5-9°C..?

ZXX

2

410

Ben See@ClimateBen·5h

48-90% of species face extinction * extinction rates: fastest ever * 48% of species: declining populations * conditions to become increasingly extreme given inertia in the: - economy (industrial capitalist/growth; agriculture, energy) - climate system (2.9-5.2°C v. likely)

ZXX

2

0

4

619

Ben See@ClimateBen·8h

AMAZING: 48-90% of species now at extreme risk of extinction within decades (not millennia) and.. nobody seems to know

English

12

78

238

5.7K

Ben See@ClimateBen·5h

mass media journalists: "the good news is that..."

scientists: if global warming stops accelerating and slows down to >0.1°C/decade in the next 50 years, a slim chance of survival in horrific conditions next century may be on the cards

English

12

24

1.1K

Ben See@ClimateBen·5h

@zmooc @rupephoto True, capitalism with 8 billion industrial vegans wouldn't be sustainable, but first and foremost it's the economic system which creates catastrophic outcomes. 8 billion non-industrial vegans in a culture/economy where nature was the most important thing wouldn't do such damage.

English

1

240

Ben See@ClimateBen·5h

@zmooc @rupephoto Industrial animal agriculture is catastrophic. That's why some relatively very rich people like me end up going vegan. But plenty of humans in the past managed to eat meat without totally wrecking the biosphere.

English

0

4

299

Ben See@ClimateBen·1d

"They don't eat meat, humans do." Let's take a look at the scientific consensus: the first underlying cause of biodiversity destruction is 'disconnection from and domination of nature and people' through 'colonialism, slavery, modernity, capitalism, and growth-driven economies'.

zmooc@zmooc

@ClimateBen Meat is a major driver of climate change and there is no realistic low carbon footprint meat. That also means that blaming capitalism or companies or governments or whatever is rather disingenuous. They don't eat meat, humans do. And they have to stop (or at least reduce). 2/

English

2

20

2K

Ben See@ClimateBen·5h

Global temperatures are VERY likely to keep hitting new record levels well beyond this century.. nevermind the next 4 years! Why are the UN, WMO, & MET OFFICE misleading the public?

ZXX

1

394

Ben See@ClimateBen·6h

'a temperature increase of 5.2 °C above the pre-industrial level at present rates of increase would likely result in mass extinction comparable to that of the major Phanerozoic events, even without other, non-climatic anthropogenic impacts.' nature.com/articles/s4146…

English

2

429

Ben See@ClimateBen·6h

icymi: >90-95% of species at risk of extinction at 4.5-9°C..?

AMAZING: 48-90% of species now at extreme risk of extinction within decades (not millennia) and.. nobody seems to know

English

11

12

2.2K

Ben See@ClimateBen·5h

Global temperatures are VERY likely to keep hitting new record levels well beyond this century.. nevermind the next 4 years! Why are the UN, WMO, & MET OFFICE misleading the public?

ZXX

2

515

Ben See@ClimateBen·1d

RAPID MASS EXTINCTION: I assume the rate of warming won't go back down to below 0.1°C per decade for at least ~50 years (unless there is fatal abrupt cooling)? That implies broadly unsurvivable 3°C and rising within ~1 to 7 decades*. * regionally from the 2030s, globally 2040s

English

24

96

247

9.1K

Ben See@ClimateBen·8h

COLLASPE: a conservative projection assuming action soon to cut emissions would slow the rate of warming (this would still be unsurvivable for 30-50% of species 🤯 - ask IPCC scientists P. Forster, E. Hawkins, Z. Hausfather, etc). 1.41°C 2025 2.15°C 2050 2.75°C 2075 2.96°C 2100

ZXX

0

1

767

Ben See@ClimateBen·17h

remember: even conservative global warming projections imply this will very likely occur within decades not centuries

48-90% of species face extinction * extinction rates: fastest ever * 48% of species: declining populations * conditions to become increasingly extreme given inertia in the: - economy (industrial capitalist/growth; agriculture, energy) - climate system (2.9-5.2°C v. likely)

English

8

95

210

5K

Ben See@ClimateBen·8h

@danmiller999 Haha I assume SRM (Solar Radiation Management?) will be attempted at some point and that it will create new difficulties. 😬

English

42

Dan Miller@danmiller999·10h

@ClimateBen Ben, I assume you support Sunlight Reflection Methods (SRM) to keep temps from reaching these catastrophic levels?

English

0

1

59

Ben See retweetledi

Alex is fine@Lacertko·22h

War crimes. But who cares?

Drop Site@DropSiteNews

🚨Breaking: U.S. Strike Hits Desalination and Power Facilities Near Jask, Cutting Water to Villages Iranian officials said U.S. forces struck power infrastructure and desalination plants at the port of Bonji village near Jask at 4:44 a.m., cutting off water supplies to several surrounding villages. Hormozgan’s deputy governor for political and security affairs said several missiles hit the facilities. Authorities said further details would be released after an initial assessment. Source: Khabar Fouri

Moravany, Česká republika 🇨🇿 English