This paper is way out of my wheelhouse but the Wired headline actually seems alright. It’s just completely uncritical of the paper though.

I can’t speak for the Wired article or its healine, but it’s based on this paper by some of Anthropic’s researchers: transformer-circuits.pub/2026/emotion.... All the authors I googled have PhDs and are very highly cited. The paper is not currently peer reviewed though.

I don’t like this headline at all but there are absolutely genuine researchers at Anthropic. These are not peer reviewed claims though and that’s what’s important.

A message I like to convey is that there’s no such thing as too little action or too late because every tenth or hundredth of a degree cooler is better. Every bit of action may mean another species lives, another community has water, another ski area remains open lol. It all matters.

Any “we’re doomed” framing is wrong in my opinion but I lack the space and time to fully elaborate. At any rate, I think if we are eventually doomed, it’ll be because of a proliferation of that belief. Imagine if everyone who cares, but thinks we’re hopeless, became motivated and pressed for action.

Think it’s a matter of Booker gunning for centrism? Often I see Dems criticize their party and follow by co-opting conservative vernacular like “radical left.” At the same time they speak gently of the GOP and never mention its extremism, even though it is extreme all the way through.

Now do subsubdivisions

I’m convinced nation states would act if there was widespread and consistent public support, despite short term heterogeneous costs. At COP/Paris, large, wealthy states have expressed willingness to take on more burden for the sake of others too. I believe there is precedence for such actions too.

Good points. My main interest is in convincing the ones hearing fossil fuel propaganda who think we’re helpless. If they heard enough voices to the contrary, then perhaps public support for climate action would increase and that would motivate geopolitical coordination.

I don’t mean to suggest it is easy or simple. I mean to suggest it is doable with limited sacrifice given sufficient coordination and investment. Neither is novel/unaffordable and similar examples are in living memory. I mean to refute the propagandized view that our cultures/species is incapable.

The list grows substantially when you include subsidized efforts (including the fossil fuel industrial complex we have now) and economically driven development. Renewables already justify themselves economically and would be a no brainer if they saw the same subsidies the fossil fuel industry does.

Others said the ozone hole, acid rain, and Y2k, which are among my examples too. Others include:
- smoking in the US
- WWII
- vaccination campaigns and other public health efforts
- various infrastructure development

We also have loads of oil and gas money to subsidize it. It would make me sleep easier knowing oil and gas money went to something to help us be independent from it and avoid a climate disaster.

We have the tools and the means to solve climate change.

The world (and the US) has coordinated to solve similarly expensive/challenging tasks in the near past.

This is absolutely incredible: the average temperature over the past six months (October-March) will end up at 52.5°F in #Albuquerque.

That's 4°F above the previous record warmest.

🤯 Even after accounting for climate change, the odds of it being THAT warm are 1-in-123,000!! 🤯

Man, that’s pathetic

I wonder if people are just exhausted by the endless list of things to protest. I know there were some small ones in my city. I agree though, I was at those ‘03 protests when I was 10.

Exxon’s 1982 report is pretty easy to read and very easy to find online if you search for it “1982 Exxon internal report”. It’s titled A Primer on CO2 and Climate Change

Not too far off mine

Photo of a lightning strike. "Scott's Bluff" by Isaac Schluesche was a finalist in the AMS 2024 Photo Contest

New AMS Statement: Dismantling NSF’s National Center for Atmospheric Research would weaken U.S. leadership in weather, water, and climate science, putting public safety at risk.

For more than 60 years, NSF NCAR has improved forecasts and early warnings that save lives. More: https://bit.ly/4q6eChn

Thanks, that’s believable. Obviously I don’t live in NY or a place dense enough to really understand these changes.

For sure. It’s worth knowing the impact though and it’s interesting anyway. They may see their own increased congestion, which is likely worthwhile but is still worth understanding. It’s a potential cost of these changes right?

How were travel times for non-car travelers affected?

www.usatoday.com/story/news/p...

This post is sociopathic and deranged behavior

I’d have liked some discussion on their privacy and security because that’s what keeps me from entertaining anything other than Apple’s.

There’s a culture of despair on the left. Not for no reason of course, but a shame.

Dr. Jane Goodall filmed an interview with Netflix in March 2025 that she understood would only be released after her death.

There is "no room for indifference or resignation."

Pope Leo nails the climate message.