Krik

An now all together:
🎼 If you're happy and you know it... 🎶

And they could lose a lot - their job first, which also means their house and their health insurance. Not to mention plenty of laws criminalizing most protest already, where you are bound to be caught on camera or via other digital surveillance, and a single arrest on your permanent record means no future employment, and missed payments on your credit history means no future economic prospects.

It's astounding you aren't already rioting! People in my country would tar and feder the guy who's responsible for that or anyone who doesn't want to change that.

"If he's that worried about it and wets himself like a little child, then he is unworthy and will never lead France," Bannon said.

You know, it's not a productive thing to insult the guys you want to get on your side. Rookie mistake.

but the reality is that the country is massive and you need an incredible organizing effort to offer any real, organized resistance.

That's no problem.
The protests that brought down East Germany weren't that much organized at first. People went to the street every monday and that was it. Internet and instant messenger didn't exist back then. Most didn't even had a telephone at home and TV was censored by the state.
Children were pretty successful too. The whole worldwide protest grew from a single child.

The USA is big, yes, but the population live in the cities not in between them.

Now you know what to do:
Pick a day and go protest every week on that day in your city. Politics eventually will feel the pressure.

I repeat: Live thrived under much harsher conditions in the past. It will not suddenly die out. I find your pessimism unfounded. I'm sure humankind will exist for at least another millennium.

Ocean acidification will not kill all algae. They existed for much longer than most other forms of live. They survived the +14 °C 300 million years ago, guess how acid the oceans were back then. Also about 300 million years ago oxygen levels in the atmosphere peaked at about 35 % indicating a very strong production by plants. The algae species from back then are still alive today!

Watch Sabine Hossenfelder's videos about climate models on YouTube: https://youtu.be/4S9sDyooxf4

+3 °C just means that the average temperature on Earth increased by that on average. There are places where the increase is higher and there are places where the temperature dropped. And then there are other places where the weather will be more violent than it was in the past.
The melting of permafrost in Russia that keeps methane trapped will probably be a problem in the future but that's still several decades or even a century away. The release of methane will not kill us. But it might kill a lot of species.

It's not the temperature that's the problem, it's the rate of change. Flora and fauna can't adapt that fast. 10 000 years would be enough time to adapt to +3 °C but it'll happen within only a 150 years time span.

Humans on the other hand will just install an air con and be done with 'adapting'. Some coastal areas will be flooded and some hot places on Earth will be too hot for humans but everywhere else will stay 'ok'.

Live on Earth will survive. There were times when temperature and atmosphere conditions were way more extreme and even toxic for humans. But the dinosaurs thrived in that conditions!

Nope. That's a common misconception about climate change. Humankind will not die out anytime soon. But a lot of places on this world will become inhospitable and the people that are currently living there will migrate.

Guess where they'll want to migrate to when they have to?

There will be a price to pay for past decisions

Yeah, that price is that no sane economy will invest in Russia as long as they are scum. They have proven that they don't care about contracts, sovereignty, territorial borders and human dignity.

I would like to see the recipe of that mayo cake(?) in the center.

Ich bin aktuell eher in einem Leserausch:

• Foundryside von Robert Bennett Jackson habe ich jetzt nach 2/3 vom Buch unterbrochen, weil es mich irgendwie nicht mehr reizt. Vielleicht beende ich das noch in den nächsten Wochen.
  Ich bin der Meinung, dass das Buch allerdings eine super Grundlage für eine TV-Serie darstellt. Es ist ne Menge Action drin, es gibt keine überlangen Mono- oder Dialoge, viel Abwechslung ist da, Drama und eine übersichtliche Anzahl von relevanten Charakteren. Ich würde mir das anschauen.
• Stattdessen verschlinge ich die Arcane Ascension-Bücher von Andrew Rowe. Da habe ich das erste Buch (Sufficiently Advanced Magic) durch und bin bei der Hälfte vom zweiten Buch (On the Shoulder of Titans). Der Autor legt besonderen Fokus auf die Systematik der Magie; ich bin einfach ein Fan von so was.
  Ich habe auch gerade herausgefunden, dass das ein eigenes Genre darstellt. Coole Sache, ich werde mal weiter drin stöbern.

Ich habe auch den Film Moonfall gesehen. Sehr bildgewaltig, weil von Roland Emmerich, aber es war doch eher seicht, abgedreht und voller 0815-Tropes. Schade. Für Popcorn-Kino ist der Film gut geeignet; wer aber etwas mehr Anspruch haben will, verdreht die Augen.

Song says it appears that the world’s oceans are losing their ability to dissipate heat from the surface into the deep ocean.

But isn't it obvious that there's a limit how much heat the oceans can store? Actually it can only get rid of it by emitting it into the atmosphere/space.
Additionally the hotter the water gets the more energy it emits which should slow down the net energy absorption.
As those two effects are opposites of each other there should be an equilibrium temperature where they cancel each other out. Currently it seems the oceans are a bit away from that equilibrium. It should swing the other way in a few decades or so. The oceans are big that's why it takes time for change to manifest.

For me it sounds like the journalist didn't really understood, what Song researched or tried to make a click bait article.

Number?