this post was submitted on 04 Aug 2026
102 points (99.0% liked)

Science

7196 readers
72 users here now

General discussions about "science" itself

Be sure to also check out these other Fediverse science communities:

https://lemmy.ml/c/science

https://beehaw.org/c/science

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
top 17 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] atro_city@fedia.io 8 points 18 hours ago

Oh no, how could we not have seen this coming?

[–] Romkslrqusz@lemmy.zip 13 points 23 hours ago (1 children)

Far as I can remember, it was always predicted to be an exponential curve - especially with each year’s fire season growing more intense than the last.

[–] Malyca@lemmy.zip 6 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

Each thing feeds the next. Melting ice warms the ocean which then melts more ice and so on.

[–] Uli@sopuli.xyz 3 points 10 hours ago

Yep, also exposes darker land masses which absorbs more heat. And thaws methane and CO2 which gets released into the atmosphere. And warms the atmosphere itself which can then hold more water vapor which also acts as a greenhouse gas. Not to mention slowing ocean currents and the die-off of diatoms leading to reduced atmospheric oxygen. We've been warned about this stuff for decades. If only anyone with any power actually did something about it.

[–] SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca 9 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

No one ever said global climate change was going to be linear. Nature is rarely linear.

[–] LodeMike@lemmy.today 1 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

Typically average temperatures follow a pattern of jumping up a notch every 10-15 years.

[–] Malyca@lemmy.zip 1 points 18 hours ago

Without humans

[–] BeN9o@lemmy.world 18 points 1 day ago (4 children)

Hmm I wonder if it might have anything to do with all the data centres popping up everywhere??

[–] DougPiranha42@lemmy.world 1 points 16 hours ago

No, it’s unlikely that a cause follows it’s effects in time. Usually we think a cause happens first and then an effect follows.

[–] from_D4rkness@lemmy.world 13 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Scientists were already ringing the alarm, and the corporate overlords answered with more data centers! Surely AGI will figure it out!

[–] shrugs@piefed.social 6 points 1 day ago

wouldn't it be funny if agi will be achieved and the only solution it finds against global warming is shutting down all AI?!

[–] motionofethre@piefed.social 10 points 1 day ago

But AI will fix it though!!!! /s

Honestly, AI is a very cool technology. I work it in and I love it, but it's amazingly disappointing that instead of building models up fold proteins and advance humanity, we built propaganda bots, surveillance and people outsource their intelligence.

And we could have invested heavily into more efficient competing, but instead we just burn the world.

[–] Mihies@programming.dev 4 points 1 day ago (2 children)

I wouldn't say that they have that much effect yet.

[–] acockworkorange@mander.xyz 5 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Yeah, there's localized effects. Like where I live, particulate matter and ozone skyrocketed after they installed a massive gas-powered datacenter in the neighboring town. But globally, it takes forever for these effects to pile up and cause a dent. Which is why they are measured in average increase per decade.

[–] HylicManoeuvre@mander.xyz 1 points 53 minutes ago

Main source of those is combustion engines btw

[–] Rothe@piefed.social 4 points 1 day ago

They have the effect of massively increasing our energy consumption at a time when we desperately need to cut down on it. Just to mention one thing in the slew of disastrous things this AI bubble is causing to our ability to just do the bare minimal to counter our climate disaster.

[–] CuddlyCassowary@lemmy.world 19 points 1 day ago

I detected it too.