An often overlooked fact is the disastrous environmental impact of Russia's war on Ukraine. So far it has caused more than 180 million tonnes of CO₂ equivalent emissions. The displacement of more than 6 million Ukrainian citizens has added another 3.3 million tonnes.  
Ukraine's long agricultural tradition and its famous fertile Chernozem soil, which feeds people in 100 countries, has also been severely affected by Russian aggression. With the devastation of Ukrainian territory, 30% of which is now covered with deadly mines, the war can be described as ecocide.

The quote is from Greta Thunberg, during a magnificent speech in the House of Parliament, United Kingdom, in April 2019.

The Pew Research Center released a chart (page 9) illustrating the percentage of people who perceive global climate change as a major threat to their country, segmented by political orientation: left, center, and right. This reveals intriguing differences among countries. In nations like South Korea, France, and Italy, climate change is widely regarded as common sense, almost irrespective of political affiliation. Conversely, in the United States, Australia, and Canada, views on this issue are heavily influenced by political orientation. Another noteworthy finding is Israel, which stands out as the only country where neither side of the political spectrum views climate change as a major threat. Additionally, it is unique in that the center demonstrates more concern about climate change than the left and right, whereas in other countries, the perceived threat tends to increase from right to left.

The results can be viewed as part of the broader phenomenon of the politicization of science. The graphic, also available on Wikimedia Commons, has been utilized in several other Wikipedia articles.

The study itself also examined numerous other factors such as gender and age, and compared people’s views on climate change to the spread of false information, cyberattacks, the global economy, and infectious diseases.

Elizabeth Kolbert, author of the 2015 Pulitzer Prize winning “The Sixth Extinction” and “H is for Hope”, writes about the devastating effects of climate change on the Greenland ice sheet. The consequences of its melting will be global, ranging from the obvious rise in sea levels to difficult-to-model effects on the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation (AMOC) (also listen to "The Hole in the Map of the World" from the September–October 2024 issue of Wired at New York Times Audio). The gripping (and long) article tells the story of Eismitte, explains the mechanism of feedback loops and ice cores.

Thomas Flight, who usually analyses films on his wonderful YouTube channel, lives in Asheville, North Carolina, USA, which was hit by Hurricane Helene in late September 2024. In his most recent video, Flight reflects on the depiction of disasters in social media, news and documentaries. While these images may inform and raise awareness, they all fail to do so adequately.

Kimmerer argues that “the most profound act of linguistic imperialism was the replacement of a language of animacy with one of objectification of nature, which renders the beloved land as lifeless object, the forest as board feet of timber.” Her main point of argument is the use of it in the English language for „being[s] of the living earth”. Derived from the Potawatomi “Aakibmaadiziiwin” (a being of the earth), she suggests the pronoun ki. She believes that words matter, and that a more inclusive pronoun could unlock a new (and ancient) way of thinking that puts human exceptionalism aside and brings us closer to the “commonwealth of life.” Kimmerer acknowledges that Russian  – and German too – does ”embrac[e] animacy in its structure” (by not using it pronouns for animals), but still argues for our reflection on language because it “reveals unconscious cultural assumptions and exerts some influence over patterns of thought.”

Utilising 150,000 data points from climate proxies, including fossils and statistical methods such as data assimilation, a team of scientists led by Emily J. Judd has produced the most rigorous reconstruction of Earth‘s past temperatures to date. The timeline illustrates the historical temperature fluctuations and the correlation between rapid changes in temperature and mass extinctions. The previous higher temperatures may be misinterpreted as evidence against the current climate debate; however, they demonstrate that humans evolved in an icehouse climate. The unprecedented change in temperature also raises concerns, as it indicates that the average temperature could reach 17 °C, which has not been seen for 5 million years.

What does more harm: Killing animals (or being vegetarian) or abusing animals (or being vegan)? Along two articles, PJ Vogt and the author of the articles, Annie Lowrey, discuss our irrational relationship with animal rights.

The first story is about the Turkey Trot festival in Yellville, Arkansas, where the annual tradition of dropping about 10 turkeys from a plane has drawn national criticism. But what is more brutal: Dropping birds that cannot fly from a plane, or the 45 million turkeys killed in the US every year (and mostly from the surrounding area).

The second article looks at the systemic issues that lead to animal suffering. Because organic certification rules (in the US) prohibit the use of antibiotics, cow 13039 suffered from “eye cancer” and was not treated properly. This raises the question of whether to prioritise the health of consumers (who want to avoid milk contaminated with antibiotics) or animal welfare.

Bill McKibben, author of the The End of Nature (the book which is regarded as the first book on global warming written for a general audience), uses the newsletter “The Crucial Years” to directly talk about “Working on Winning the Climate Fight”