More on the insect collapse. Sticky footer warning.
Thereâs no conflict of interest here!!! Look, a squirrel.
I guess thatâs one way to dispose of the ash.
This one deer got one and almost two of us.
That deer didnât look very stumbly to me.
More like this:
Or this:
In short, Bambi might be exaggerated a little.
I wish weâd never had such a âcloseâ relationship with that country. But $$$$$ I guess.
$$$ and 
The continued use of fossil fuel is a large part of our ongoing apocalypse watch, both environmentally and politically/militarily.
Well, I figured SSS = = $$$
Yikes. I canât believe thatâs a .gov domain with that kind of headline. Bureaucrats donât do stuff like that. They must be pissed.
much of part 2 will be familiar.
just 7°F (4°C) of warming âwould constitute the end of civilization as we know it.â [âŚ]
climate impacts that come from just one more degree Celsius of warming â for a total of 3.6°F (2°C) warming â will be catastrophic. [âŚ]
if we warm the planet 2°C that may be enough to trigger feedbacks that push the planet toward the irreversible âHothouse Earth.â That would mean catastrophic warming of 9°F (5°C)
Wasnât it just last month that much of the northern U.S. and southern Canada saw temperatures range almost 100°F in a day or two from around -50°F to 50°F? And when itâs 20°F out, raising the temperature 3-9° certainly doesnât sound catastrophic.
I feel like actually including the temperature deltas when talking about climate change is maybe a bad idea. Given that the numbers are so insignificant when compared to the high/low temperature range within a day, let alone seasonally, itâs counter-intuitive that such a small change would result in such massive and significant catastrophes. That feeds the climate change deniers. There must be a better way to communicate it? Maybe comparing sum global energy rather than energy at one point?