The leap in temperatures over the past 13 months has exceeded the global heating forecasts – is this just a blip or a systemic shift?

Temperatures above 50C used to be a rarity confined to two or three global hotspots, but the World Meteorological Organization noted that at least 10 countries have reported this level of searing heat in the past year: the US, Mexico, Morocco, Algeria, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Iran, Pakistan, India and China.

In Iran, the heat index – a measure that also includes humidity – has come perilously close to 60C, far above the level considered safe for humans.

Heatwaves are now commonplace elsewhere, killing the most vulnerable, worsening inequality and threatening the wellbeing of future generations. Unicef calculates a quarter of the world’s children are already exposed to frequent heatwaves, and this will rise to almost 100% by mid-century.

  • @mojo_raisinEnglish
    3•26 days ago

    So either we get to some near global agreement on how to get out of this situation, or we just keep doing far too little since… what’s the point of trying to improve things if it just means you get annihilated by those that don’t, and things will remain the same despite your best efforts…

    I feel like the way out is global and cultural in nature, and I think it’s in progress now, in fact we’re doing it now, talking about this on Lemmy. This wasn’t practical, wasn’t being done outside of “elite circles” before a decade or so ago. This global conversation is going to take some time and have bumps, but it’s happening, this is novel on this planet.

    What I hope comes of this, and seems to be happening, perhaps slower than I’d like, is a paradigm shift in the way we think about ourselves, others, our communities, our situation, and our goals. We need a new “mythology” that allows us to live on this planet sustainably, and it only needs to be true enough and could even be done transparently and with purpose.

    I feel like our species is in a existential battle and almost nobody (at least on the left-ish) is talking strategy. As if any valid strategy (e.g. “capitalism”, “communism”, “competition”, “religion”, “growth” “zero sum” etc) has been identified by the 1960s and we’re all just battling amongst 20th century ideas for domination.

    I’m thinkiing stuff like this (sorry for the poor organization of my thoughts, to lazy to cleanup)

    Define some axioms/statements that are mostly true and fairly agreeable, not based in faith, not limited by materialism.

    • Most people would be happy to just live and thrive and don’t feel a need to dominate others or hoard resources
    • There is a tiny number of people who do feel a need to dominate and/or hoard
    • We are all vulnerable to propaganda
    • Nobody is inherently better or more deserving than anyone else
    • Nobody is entitled to the time or labor of anyone (except a child being entitled to their parents)
    • Nobody actually knows the meaning of life or the nature of reality (not even materialists).
    • Our own conscious experience is all we can be certain of, nobody knows any absolute truths
    • The most logical assumption is that others’ experience is similar to my own
    • I don’t want to suffer or be coerced, I don’t feel others are entitled to cause me to suffer or coerce my behavior
    • It’s ok to defend myself against those trying to harm or coerce my behavior, dominate or hoard at my or my community’s expense
    • If I cause another to suffer or coerce their behavior I should expect a response

    –> The goal of these axioms is not to get everyone to agree to them, it’s to blaze a new path that can evolve into the way, to plant a seed that can inspire moving in new directions.

    A set of explicit stated axioms allows taking the next steps and figure out how to evolve into a sustainable culture. Clear eyed strategy and goals are why the Heritage Foundation is making progress and the left is not.

    Strategy like this could allow a better understanding of who and what the actual threats are and identify appropriate responses to them.

    –> The “global agreement” will not be a formal inter-governmental thing, it will be loosely coupled set of cultural evolutions spurred by global conversations happening now.

    • @[email protected]English
      2•26 days ago

      I feel like the way out is global and cultural in nature,

      I agree that it starts with a sense of a global community. Instead of people considering themselves a citizen of their homecountry, they need to switch to the mindset of being a citizen of Earth.

      We now have the technology to get past the language barrier, so it is more possible to get people together, talking about our future as a species more than anytime in our history.

      One thing that could help is some sort of globally available social media, or forum that automatically translate to the language of the reader. Imagine if a Chinese person could post something in Chinese, but English speakers could read and respond in English, and vice versa.