The evidence the author uses to back her claim is that her bluesky engagement rised in November, while her threads engagement dropped.

This was a platform wide trend as threads rapidly lost users and bluesky rapidly gained. I doubt this is because her account reports on climate. But likely because in the same timeframe bsky gained 10+ million new users vs threads 1 million. (And threads actually declined in active users).

I’m as sceptical of Zuck as anyone, and think his algorithm surely does fucked up shit, but the bar for evidence really hasn’t been reached here.

Then make it :)

Ah the “drop in the ocean” fallacy. “We’re only a small part of the problem so we shouldn’t have to stop being part of the problem”. I see people on lemmy use this all the time when they want to justify doing things that are environmentally reckless.

I remember getting this concept from this (now ancient) reddit post

I think that’s partly due to the fall of the soviet union, which caused a noticeable drop in carbon emissions.

The dent is atleast it’s stopped following an exponential growth curve

Perhaps we should start actually trying

Isn’t this just brute force? Liek trying random directions until one works?

That’s how the majority of non-english speaking democracies work.

Some argue that voting for partys that represent ideologies over specific personalities leads to healthier democracy.

lmao. two comments in a row that are off mark.

I hardly think Stein in Pro-Hamas. But Stein is also a Russian tool made to weaken US democracy by getting Trump elected.