digg

Join DiggAbout

Digg Townhall now online!
Check out the latest Digg Townhall, where Kevin and Jay answered the top questions from the Digg Community!

See the original image at nwf.org —

8 Animals to Be Dramatically Impacted by Global Warming

nwf.org — The National Wildlife Federation considers global warming to be "the most dangerous threat to the future of wildlife." Here are just some of the species being dramatically impacted by global warming.

show profanity settings
expand all
  • EpicSelekta, on 04/18/2008, -28/+21Pretty much any species that lives in a narrow habitat range and doesn't breed like crazy will be majorly impacted. Animals that live in jungles or tundra are screwed.

    Can we just sign the Kyoto Protocol already?
    • Doofy, on 04/18/2008, -9/+36Kyoto, even if signed by the entire world, won't change the temperature of the planet a single degree.
      • TJ11240, on 04/18/2008, -7/+9No temperature change - isn't that what we want?
        • forgottenhope, on 04/18/2008, -14/+2smarty, putting taxes on carbon wont do it either. 9/11 was an inside job.
          • WATYF, on 04/18/2008, -1/+9wow... that's some left turn you took there.
      • MrSidnet, on 04/18/2008, -7/+6Might even increase climate change, due to all paper and ink used by all the world to sign the protocol.
        • Lythium, on 04/18/2008, -4/+7Not to mention all the hot air released by the endless debates -.-
      • DiggyWiggy, on 04/18/2008, -2/+3Maybe if everyone in the world kept their freezer open for just one day, we could change the temperature of the planet a single degree.
        • Tanath, on 04/18/2008, -0/+1I don't know whether to thumb you up for the humour value, or to thumb you down because some people would fail to recognize it and think it's a good idea.
    • jbenson2, on 04/18/2008, -5/+13"any species that lives in a narrow habitat range and doesn't breed like crazy will be majorly impacted"

      Say goodbye to the "typical white person".
      • Duositex, on 04/18/2008, -6/+4What? White people live from Antarctica to Alaska. Buried for being racist and idiotic.
      • SteveHamn, on 04/18/2008, -1/+1Well see, humans have developed brains (well white people anyway =P ), and can adapt to their enviroment.
        • anthortic, on 04/19/2008, -0/+0im white and i cant adapt to monday mornings
    • ElAssoWipo, on 04/18/2008, -5/+9Kyoto serves no purpose.

      There actually is not one single effort that I've heard about that would actually change anything.

      The only possible way to stop this is to change our entire production methods, change our sources energy and remove all fossil fuels, and pay for an actual garbage separation service that will recycle all usable materials. Replace all transportation by public means of transportation, such as trains, and issue permits for businesses that actually need vehicles.

      But even then, we need to drop the over-consumption culture and, the big one, control the human population. And we also have to reforest large areas.

      Carbon credits and taxes will only involve more paperwork. It's all *****. It's like when they talk about winning the drug war with prisons and guns.

      What we need is a culture change. It'll either happen by necessity, with the depletion of natural ressources, or by choice. But it will happen, eventually.
      • Gazoo2001, on 04/18/2008, -3/+2I largely agree with you, with a couple of comments...
        The Kyoto Protocol might not have really been effective, but if we had signed on to it (like just about everybody else did), it would have sent a message that we were at least willing to entertain being serious about the problem. As it is, by NOT signing it we send the message that we don't give a flying f&%^ about climate change, which is largely true as far as this administration is concerned.
        As to carbon credits/taxes--well, I don't know how effective they would be, but I think in a way they're conceptually different than building more prisons or increasing the number/presence of police to "win the war on drugs"; although carbon credits and taxes are still "working within the system," as it were, they are an attempt to assign an economic cost to a formerly "free" externality. I think this can lead to a new awareness and be part of the culture change you mention, ultimately.
        • ElAssoWipo, on 04/18/2008, -2/+5Messages? You mean invest into pretending you care about doing something while doing nothing at all? Like that China/Tibet resolution?

          Just with the money spent on flying around dignitaries and organizing meetings, and writting the document, having it translated, sent, approved, corrected and signed, they could've bought about half the rain forest to make it a private protected area.
        • Alpione, on 04/18/2008, -0/+3Exactly. "Sending a message" that causes major damage to the economy and having to divert tons of money into frivolous non-solutions is the height of idiocy. We were 100% correct to reject Kyoto.
      • TrevorBradley, on 04/18/2008, -0/+2I sadly have to agree. The equation of ":fixed resources - growth^time" doesn't go away. One form of ***** or another was going to hit the fan at some point.
      • WATYF, on 04/18/2008, -1/+2wow... I was right there with you up until you started suggesting solutions. Yes, there is a problem, no Kyoto is not the answer, but taking away freedom and making people utterly dependent on the gov't is a horrible, horrible solution.

        Science has always been about progress. Going forward. But I've noticed a strange trend in more recent years. People who claim to adhere to science are constantly calling for regress. Going backwards. But the solution is not to say, "All this happiness and prosperity is bad... let's take it away from people.. oh yeah... and dictate how many kids they can have". The solution is to find a NEW way to harness energy for our needs. Science should be stepping up (like it always has) to INVENT a solution, not just call for the stripping away of rights and benefits as a de facto solution.
        • ElAssoWipo, on 04/18/2008, -1/+1"happiness and prosperity" Your happiness and prosperity depends on the misery and poverty of people half way accross the globe. You have ten apples. Everybody needs an apple. There are 20 people. The strongest will eat.

          Progress means to evolve, not to build mountains of plastic crap while masturbating to plastic breasts.
          • WATYF, on 04/18/2008, -1/+1No... our current, outdated, inefficient energy production methods depend on the misery and poverty of people half way across the globe. So the solution is not to spread the misery EVERYWHERE so that everybody's life sucks... it's to INVENT better energy production methods that don't produce the same harmful side-effects.
          • ElAssoWipo, on 04/18/2008, -1/+1There will never be anything more efficient than nuclear energy. Unless we find a new form of matter.

            It's all there, there's no need for innovation, it's all there. Electric trains can reach speeds of over 500km/h. The first electric car was built in 1835.

            There's nothing to invent. The only thing lacking is management.
          • WATYF, on 04/18/2008, -1/+2Yes, and oddly enough we're not using nuclear energy nearly as much as we're using fossil fuels and coal. Hhmmm... wonder why that is. Couldn't possibly have anything to do with the gov't (by way of anti-nuclear lobbyists) making it pretty much impossible to build nuclear power plants. So the solution to that problem is........ giving the gov't *more* power? (to take away our cars and tell us how many kids we can have)

            Let science have the freedom to invent and implement. Even if it is to implement (and perfect) a technology that we are already aware of. Although, I'd also like to see advances in the recent discoveries that suggest we might be able to generate electricity from almost any form of matter (thereby eliminating our landfill problems).
          • ElAssoWipo, on 04/18/2008, -1/+1The government having power has nothing to do with it. The government being corrupted and ran by ignorants is why the US doesn't build nuclear anymore.

            The rest makes no sense. Scientists don't implement anything, they discover, they invent, they study, they implement nothing.

            And as for over-population: it will become a necessity. That's just a given. Uncontrolled growth in a limited space with limited ressources can only lead to two things: responsible management or war.

          • WATYF, on 04/18/2008, -1/+1Gov't power has everything to do with it. If you think that the gov't has just recently been "corrupted and ran by ignorants" then you haven't been paying attention much or for very long.

            And by "implement" I, of course, don't mean scientists building the infrastucture or anything like that... but simply that they will provide the discoveries (and subsequent knowledge) necessary to do so. Hell, I'm not even talking about a narrow definition of science... a better word would probably be "technology", which involves science, inventors, investors, entrepenuers, etc.
  • Doofy, on 04/18/2008, -13/+39This is how it works. Cute poster animals are "Dramatically Impacted", while cockroaches, rats, and mosquitos... well... who cares.
    • ttavenner, on 04/18/2008, -1/+18I can't attest to mosquitoes, but cockroaches and rats are highly adaptable so that would be a major reason why they don't get much press, other than their bad reputation. Rats are able to survive in a vary wide range of climates and are the king of scavengers. Insects in general are the most diverse and quickly evolved family of animals and most insects thrive in warmer climates.
    • diggface5000, on 04/18/2008, -5/+10Do you want the public to get outraged and spring into action or don't you? Who cares that we're selective about what animals we highlight as endangered? If steps are taken in the right direction, the other animals will benefit. A "Save The Mosquito" campaign just wouldn't work.
      • HarryBauzonia, on 04/18/2008, -5/+5The end justifies the means.
        It's ok to lie because it's for your own good.
        etc. etc.
        • 11oops, on 04/18/2008, -2/+5What lies? When it comes to cockroaches, rats, and mosquitoes and their adaptability to global climate change, the only liar is Doofy.
        • elasticsoul, on 04/19/2008, -2/+1Where's the lie? You can say X is affected without saying Y will also be affected and be completely truthful. It's not even a lie by omission, so don't go there.
    • 11oops, on 04/18/2008, -0/+8Mosquitoes have already shown signs of adaptation to global warming -- not to mention that they thrive in warm, wet areas which global warming is predicted to produce more of.

      http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2001/11/11 ...
      http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2001-07/uof ...
  • scamerica, on 04/18/2008, -47/+41Al Gore says any scientist who disagrees with him on Global Warming is a kook, or a crook.

    Guess he never met these guys:

    Dr. Edward Wegman--former chairman of the Committee on Applied and Theoretical Statistics of the National Academy of Sciences--demolishes the famous "hockey stick" graph that launched the global warming panic.
    Dr. David Bromwich--president of the International Commission on Polar Meteorology--says "it's hard to see a global warming signal from the mainland of Antarctica right now."
    Prof. Paul Reiter--Chief of Insects and Infectious Diseases at the famed Pasteur Institute--says "no major scientist with any long record in this field" accepts Al Gore's claim that global warming spreads mosquito-borne diseases.
    Prof. Hendrik Tennekes--director of research, Royal Netherlands Meteorological Institute--states "there exists no sound theoretical framework for climate predictability studies" used for global warming forecasts.
    Dr. Christopher Landsea--past chairman of the American Meteorological Society's Committee on Tropical Meteorology and Tropical Cyclones--says "there are no known scientific studies that show a conclusive physical link between global warming and observed hurricane frequency and intensity."
    Dr. Antonino Zichichi--one of the world's foremost physicists, former president of the European Physical Society, who discovered nuclear antimatter--calls global warming models "incoherent and invalid."
    Dr. Zbigniew Jaworowski--world-renowned expert on the ancient ice cores used in climate research--says the U.N. "based its global-warming hypothesis on arbitrary assumptions and these assumptions, it is now clear, are false."
    Prof. Tom V. Segalstad--head of the Geological Museum, University of Oslo--says "most leading geologists" know the U.N.'s views "of Earth processes are implausible."
    Dr. Syun-Ichi Akasofu--founding director of the International Arctic Research Center, twice named one of the "1,000 Most Cited Scientists," says much "Arctic warming during the last half of the last century is due to natural change."
    Dr. Claude Allegre--member, U.S. National Academy of Sciences and French Academy of Science, he was among the first to sound the alarm on the dangers of global warming. His view now: "The cause of this climate change is unknown."
    Dr. Richard Lindzen--Professor of Meteorology at M.I.T., member, the National Research Council Board on Atmospheric Sciences and Climate, says global warming alarmists "are trumpeting catastrophes that couldn't happen even if the models were right."
    Dr. Habibullo Abdussamatov--head of the space research laboratory of the Russian Academy of Science's Pulkovo Observatory and of the International Space Station's Astrometria project says "the common view that man's industrial activity is a deciding factor in global warming has emerged from a misinterpretation of cause and effect relations."
    Dr. Richard Tol--Principal researcher at the Institute for Environmental Studies at Vrije Universiteit, and Adjunct Professor at the Center for Integrated Study of the Human Dimensions of Global Change, at Carnegie Mellon University, calls the most influential global warming report of all time "preposterous . . . alarmist and incompetent."
    Dr. Sami Solanki--director and scientific member at the Max Planck Institute for Solar System Research in Germany, who argues that changes in the Sun's state, not human activity, may be the principal cause of global warming: "The sun has been at its strongest over the past 60 years and may now be affecting global temperatures."
    Prof. Freeman Dyson--one of the world's most eminent physicists says the models used to justify global warming alarmism are "full of fudge factors" and "do not begin to describe the real world."
    Dr. Eigils Friis-Christensen--director of the Danish National Space Centre, vice-president of the International Association of Geomagnetism and Aeronomy, who argues that changes in the Sun's behavior could account for most of the warming attributed by the UN to man-made CO2.
    And many more, all in Lawrence Solomon's devastating new book, The Deniers
    • ElAssoWipo, on 04/18/2008, -20/+25You forgot to make an argument.
      • MrSidnet, on 04/18/2008, -14/+5and you forgot to add anything worthwhile to Digg comments. (much like this comment)
      • Klaatu14, on 04/18/2008, -11/+5Really? You were unable to glean the point of that post?
      • ElAssoWipo, on 04/18/2008, -7/+4Here, read, it'll make you smarter:

        http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/appeal-to ...
        http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/appeal-to ...
        • Lythium, on 04/18/2008, -3/+5Quoting Al Gore is indeed an appeal to authority, since he is a politician and thus unqualified to make scientific claims. Quoting scientists who deal with climate-related issues is perfectly legit, since they are _actually_ authorities on the subject..... Not sure which of the claims you consider to be an appeal to authority fallacy - just tossing it out there.
          • ElAssoWipo, on 04/18/2008, -0/+3"since he is a politician and thus unqualified to make scientific claims"

            That's an appeal to authority.

            The point is that being an authority on a subject doesn't make you right. Only your arguments can make you right.

            And this is what Al Gore said:
            "Confronted by Stahl with the fact some prominent people, including the nation’s vice president, are not convinced that global warming is man-made, Gore responds: “You’re talking about Dick Cheney. I think that those people are in such a tiny, tiny minority now with their point of view, they’re almost like the ones who still believe that the moon landing was staged in a movie lot in Arizona and those who believe the world is flat,” says Gore. “That demeans them a little bit, but it’s not that far off,” he tells Stahl."

        • TrevorBradley, on 04/18/2008, -2/+7Agreed. Al Gore is not an authoritative source, much like Wikipedia isn't an authoritative source. I'll take the planet's climatologists as the authoritative group to tackle the question. All other groups are also welcome to submit data/theories for rigorous peer review. Everyone else is just armchair quarterbacking.
    • TrevorBradley, on 04/18/2008, -7/+18Y'know, I saw this post (identical) in reply to one of my previous posts. And a couple of weeks ago I decided to check at least one of them out. At least to give the other side some consideration. It's a long list, so I hope you'll forgive me for only checking out the first person on your list.

      Wegman's work on climatology hasn't been peer reviewed by anyone other than people he's personally selected. And I don't quite get how a statistician can dump on a scientific theory. Of *course* statistics doesn't show causailty! Statistics can show correlation and can at best show that a theory is false because two things aren't correlated. You start with the best data you have on hand with a demonstrable statistical correlation, build a theory, and rigorously test that theory to verify the causality you postulated. The statistics never prove anything, but form the foundation for proceeding with your hypothesis.

      And no, I don't have a PhD in Statistics, but I have taken 4th year university statistics and majored in Mathematics, thank you.

      I know I've not taken the time to review everyone on your list, but I'd like to think I tried (more than many would do). And I'll try again if someone can make a persuasive argument. But I"m not seeing it.

      • elasticsoul, on 04/19/2008, -0/+1Thank you, Mr. Bradley. As a former sceptic who took the time to review some of the anti-global warming claims, I ran into the same thing you did: those saying climate change was not real generally hadn't published anything in a peer-reviewed journal, and everything I checked had been thoroughly debunked. Much of it was rather obviously false.
    • Lythium, on 04/18/2008, -4/+8Bah, none of those losers invented the Internet; what the heck do THEY know? ;)
    • anstice85, on 04/18/2008, -1/+4MANY of those are regarding specific points or are open to interpretation.
    • Tanath, on 04/18/2008, -0/+3Congratulations, you can copy & paste from Amazon. I can copy and paste too, but what's the point? You've likely already made up your mind.
    • MarkTaiwan, on 04/18/2008, -0/+3Hey guys, check out the guy's profile,

      Name: Scamerica
      User icon: 911 was an inside job
      Comments: Only comments on how global warming is a scam.

      I consider this guy either a spammer or a troll.
    • ZeroFive1, on 04/19/2008, -0/+2Sure, I will believe someone who thinks 9/11 was an inside job.

      Seriously...
  • SoapboxDave, on 04/18/2008, -25/+15Folks its real, get over it.

    Handful of scientist...handful. Once anyone takes a stand on any issue there will be some who disagree.

    4 out of 5 Dentists agree...The 5th guy just wanted to stand out.
    • ElAssoWipo, on 04/18/2008, -3/+19Appeal to popularity is not an argument. 4 out of 5 logic professors agree.
      • ftx437, on 04/18/2008, -3/+7It's not if it's real or not,
        it about is it man made or natural.
        • ElAssoWipo, on 04/18/2008, -5/+7Actually at this stage, it's veryfiable evidence vs made up data.

          Problem is both sides are guilty of both. Until they come up with an actual measure of the human impact, it's all guesses, on each side.
    • MrSidnet, on 04/18/2008, -1/+11The AMOUNT of people believing in something has never made anything true.
      ...that's what all my friends say at least...
  • saffsam, on 04/18/2008, -11/+9we all talk about it but what do we do to stop it!!
    • TJ11240, on 04/18/2008, -4/+6Talk to your power company about buying renewable electricity. Have an energy audit of your home, and fix the insulation problems. Only buy energy star products when available. Eat local/organic. Minimize flying in airplanes/roadtrips. Let your representatives know that you want change.
      • HarryBauzonia, on 04/18/2008, -3/+5Brush your teeth three times a day.
        Wash your hands after going to the bathroom.
        Don't swim right after eating.
        If you keep making faces your face will freeze that way.
        • luchid, on 04/18/2008, -2/+1Your avatar honors your assbackwards attempts at trolling.
      • wertach, on 04/18/2008, -2/+3Or send the carbon credits (money) to me I will use the money to stop all of my fossil fuel usage!
        • ReduX33, on 04/18/2008, -1/+4OR send your carbon credits (money) to me so I can buy a new fleet of suburbans, and maybe if I get enough, I can buy a big huge jet like Al Gore and act like I'm a smug, non-environmental polluting moron that's just in it for the money.
      • chalkboy, on 04/18/2008, -2/+3Eating ORGANIC will do nothing to help Global Warming.
        Organic food is the biggest scam right after global warming.
    • DiggyWiggy, on 04/18/2008, -4/+3We've all stopped using toilet paper and are now using our left hands. Didn't you hear?
    • starmanfalls, on 04/18/2008, -3/+0ya cant stop something that exists only in the minds of morons. Or those trying to get more of your money.
    • blast_flame, on 04/19/2008, -0/+1Politicians won't help, although they will probably take all the credit in the end. Reducing consumption won't work, unless feel like going back to the stone age and getting the entire earth's population to agree. Technology will be the solution. I can't tell you what technology exactly, maybe nano-solar or maybe geo-engineering but it will be technology.
  • FeartheKnighted, on 04/18/2008, -18/+17Big deal, species have been dying out because of climate changes since the beginning of time. Who are we to play God?
    • pcpimpster, on 04/18/2008, -6/+7god...? what does he have to do with any of it?
      you must be a conservative who believes god will take care of us and we can all go about our business destroying the planet as we see fit.
      /thats *****



    • MrSidnet, on 04/18/2008, -2/+6The importance of maintaining biodiversity is of great importance. I just wrote a test on this, lets see if I can get them all. SUEDE...
      S - Scientific Value - for indexing animals/plants, getting a database on all of life
      U - Utilitarian - we get many of our medicines and technological ideas from nature. protection of species ensures us diversity and gives us a playground on which to search for new medicines
      E - Esthetics - humans love to look at things and appreciate life
      D - I can't remember the D...It might be Diversity though.
      E - Ethical - who are we to demolish the habitats of organisms then turn the other way when they start dying off? All life has a right to be here, us no more then them.
      • HueytheFreeman, on 04/18/2008, -0/+24/5, you got a B- ! You need to work harder, young man.
      • blast_flame, on 04/19/2008, -0/+1S and U seem like decent reasons. If D is taking about the biosphere supporting us then it is also decent, Both of the Es on the other hand just appeal to over emotional, illogical fanaticism.
    • mOdQuArK, on 04/18/2008, -2/+3If the ecosystems that prop up our food supplies die out, you will probably want to rethink your priorities. Of course, by then, it will be a little too late to do anything about it. If that happens, I hope you remember who to blame for not trying to do anything when we had a chance.
    • Gazoo2001, on 04/18/2008, -1/+6So, polluting the environment and changing the climate through our voracious appetite for resources is not playing God, it's just fine and normal; and if some species die out because of that, your answer to that is "how dare we have the hubris to try and save them or change our ways?"
      We're already playing God. How convenient that you choose to not want to play God anymore, now, when it will involve a cost to you.
    • Jaablaze, on 04/18/2008, -1/+1Read your Bible..
    • Jaablaze, on 04/18/2008, -0/+3Ouch, getting dugg down. I was talking to FeartheKnighted...
    • ZeroFive1, on 04/19/2008, -1/+3Being responsible is playing God nowadays? Harsh, man.
    • elasticsoul, on 04/19/2008, -1/+2But we are playing god/God if we are the ones responsible for the species dying off, aren't we?
    • Shriyansi, on 04/21/2008, -0/+1People like you are the reason these issues don't get the attention they deserve. I'm sorry if this sounds personal, but it is. My children may not get to live long if WE don't act now. And yes, that is a priority that God wouldn't mind us 'playing God' for. However, I do beleive your viewpoint does not stem from your views about God... I think its just pure self indulgent, self involved, lazy, ignorance fuelled denial.
  • snakejohns, on 04/18/2008, -4/+32Whew, luckily nothing I really like to eat...
    • KingGorilla, on 04/18/2008, -0/+1You've never tried penguin have you?
  • mytibt, on 04/18/2008, -0/+2Do they make OFF for carabou? Poor guys.
    • Nougat, on 04/18/2008, -0/+4I wish they did. I can't figure out how to keep those pesky caribou from biting me all the time.
  • jbenson2, on 04/18/2008, -9/+16The real reason for Global Warming:
    http://tinyurl.com/5xete2
    • tfox2k1, on 04/18/2008, -6/+1That is the best evidence for the cause of global warming I have ever seen.
  • zacheh, on 04/18/2008, -10/+20It's depressing to see so many ignorant comments.
    • canUdi9it, on 04/18/2008, -2/+4Most people argue about climate change out of ignorance. We're supposed to trust the 'consensus' and ignore the legitimate critics of human-caused climate change. We're not supposed to think for ourselves, just follow the herd, like good sheep. The fact that CO2 doesn't drive climate change is evidenced by the lack of temperature increases since 2000 despite a rise in CO2.
      • vikingcoder, on 04/18/2008, -1/+2Thinking for yourself, requires actually thinking. Agreeing with whatever op-ed, public policy organization publication, or radio show host supports your preconceived notions isn't "thinking for yourself".

        http://skepticalscience.com/co2-lags-temperature.h ...
        The behaviour of CO2 in the past is well understood by climatologists and confirms the amplifying effect of CO2 in the atmosphere.

        http://skepticalscience.com/Global-warming-stopped ...
        The current "plateau" of global temperature is not only not unusual but is expected. Global warming hasn't reversed. Rather, this is a brief respite before solar activity begins rising in Solar Cycle 24. When this happens, in the words of Tung and Camp 2007, solar forcing will double the amount of global warming expected from greenhouse warming alone.
    • ReduX33, on 04/18/2008, -3/+3It's depressing to see so many ignorant people like you. Jump on the Global Warming bus and make yourself feel better by thinking you're actually making a change.
    • KingGorilla, on 04/18/2008, -1/+2Then you shouldn't watch cable news. You just might commit suicide
  • orangefly, on 04/18/2008, -1/+2at least one species will survive when they fly south....
  • forgottenhope, on 04/18/2008, -12/+14i didnt see a picture of my wallet.

    did you all know that our sun will explode in 3-5 billion years killing us all. What the ***** is al gore going to do about that?
    • JimSwarthow, on 04/18/2008, -6/+4the Goracle will save us from our sun too!
      • piper999, on 04/18/2008, -2/+2Apparently anyone who believes the sun has anything to do with the temperature on Earth is the type of person who believes the Earth is flat. At least according to Al.
        • Gazoo2001, on 04/18/2008, -1/+2Wow...you're saying that you believe that all the scientists involved in the IPCC report, and plenty of others, somehow neglected to take the Sun's effect into account? That's mighty ignorant of you.
        • elasticsoul, on 04/19/2008, -0/+1The scientists had heard that the sun had an effect on the earth's temperature. Unfortunately, they figured out that it was considerably less than the current warming.
    • Gazoo2001, on 04/18/2008, -5/+3He's probably not doing anything about the Sun exploding in 3+ bilion years because 1. nothing could be done about it given our present level of technology, and 2. it's extremely far away in time. Those two points don't apply to global warming, of course, as you no doubt know.
      • JimSwarthow, on 04/18/2008, -1/+4and people say envirowhackjobs don't have a sense of humor
        • worldchanger, on 04/18/2008, -1/+2ZING!
        • Gazoo2001, on 04/18/2008, -1/+1I guess I don't have a sense of humor in that I didn't think you were funny. Wait, let me amend that...your comment wasn't funny. Your own belief that you are extremely clever is pretty f'ing funny. I am laughing at you about that.
          How's that for a sense of humor?
    • piper999, on 04/18/2008, -0/+2There was a story on the front page of digg today saying it's only going to be 1 billion years till the sun wipes out life on earth.
    • Shriyansi, on 04/21/2008, -0/+1That's a lovely attitude! We're all 'probably' going to be wiped out by something a billion years from now (unless we develop the technology we need to survive)... so why bother? Let's put our heads in the sand and give up and get wiped out in a hundred years or so. Bravo!!
      O selfish, stupid one! I hope you do not procreate, because if you do, my future generations would love to look up yours and continue this discussion then.
  • Hartley1942, on 04/18/2008, -7/+1Care?
  • Daltos, on 04/18/2008, -6/+5This is a shame. I love penguin burgers.
  • greeniemeani, on 04/18/2008, -1/+3I originally read the url as nsfw.org.
  • tfox2k1, on 04/18/2008, -15/+5Want to end global warming? Stop whining about it so much. All that hot air being expelled has to be raising the global temp by a few degrees.
    • anstice85, on 04/18/2008, -5/+4I have a feeling you don't know the impact that global warming will actually have some years down the line..
  • RespectableGuy, on 04/18/2008, -8/+2Let them die, i could care less about animals.
  • bjsiders, on 04/18/2008, -7/+1Ym
    Global climate change!
    HTH!

    NO!! YM
    Global climate crisis!
    HTH!
  • ChiefShaman, on 04/18/2008, -8/+7Listening to some of these comments makes me wish man was on the list too - at least Christians who believe that the Earth was made for man to do with as he pleases.
    • chalkboy, on 04/18/2008, -0/+5That is a very tolerant of you. Wish for every one that has an opposing opinion to you to die.
      • ChiefShaman, on 04/20/2008, -1/+1Not everyone, just would like to see the world free of Organized Religion.
  • designer, on 04/18/2008, -12/+58 Animals to Be Dramatically Impacted by Global Warming...if Global Warming was real.
  • thallium205, on 04/18/2008, -16/+1029 Ways To INCREASE Global Warming
    The hysteria surrounding global warming is a crock. The idea that human beings are destroying the planet with BBQs and hair spray is stupid and silly. All clear thinking, rational human beings should refuse to accept this nonsense. Use the following chart as your 'how-to' guide and learn to enjoy more of the wonderful resources our Earth has to offer.
    I encourage readers to stop feeling guilty if they choose NOT to recycle. It's time to burn those fossil fuels. Get out and drive your SUV...And by all means, leave the farting cows alone!
    1. Remove your energy-saver bulbs and go back to normal lights.
    Your home should emit a soft, warm, comforting glow. Dull gray office lights have no business in a home. Normal lights look so much better than those tacky fluorescents.

    2. Rinse your driveway and walkways with water instead of using a blower.
    A good wash removes stuck on dirt, grass and dead bugs that a blower simply can't touch. Plus, by hosing down your driveway instead of blowing you can avoid kicking up all of that allergy causing dust and debris.
    3. Fart more during the day.
    The average person produces about a half liter of fart gas per day. If you increase that amount to ¾ of liter you will probably feel less bloated and be a little friendlier to people around you. Fart gas may contain methane which is a greenhouse gas.

    4. Set your air conditioner thermostat to whatever temperature you want.
    Some spring nights you may want to enjoy the cool spring air by sleeping with a window open and leaving the heater on. Haven't you ever driven at night in a convertible with the top down and the heat on? It's a great feeling.

    5. Use a BBQ smoker at least once a month.
    There is no better tasting food on this planet than smoked meat. Smoked ribs, smoked ham and even smoked salmon. It's simply delicious! Some people think clouds of billowing smoke rising out of your backyard will increase global warming.

    6. Chop down trees.
    If you prefer open views and sunshine, a big ugly tree obstructing your landscape can be nuisance. The truth is, some trees are better off turned into firewood. Trees are a100% renewable resource. if we need more, we can plant more.

    7. Grab extra packets of ketchup when you visit a fast food joint.
    By taking lots of extra packs you can be sure you'll have enough sauce to cover each and every fry. And when you toss the extra stuff you don't need into the garbage you can deliver more waste to the landfills and cause more packets to be made.

    8. Allow the water to run while you brush your teeth.
    The sound of water running early in the morning can have a calming effect as you prepare for school or work.

    9. Stay away from organic foods.
    Foods grown without pesticides are more prone to parasites and disease. Large factories requiring lots of energy are needed to produce chemical pesticides. More factories could also mean more jobs for people who need them.

    10. Be sure to set your dishwasher to 'heat dry' rather than 'air dry'.
    Get ALL of your dishes dry faster. The heat setting can also reduce the number of spots appearing on the glasses.

    11. Drive an SUV. A nice big sport utility vehicle allows you to haul more of your stuff in greater comfort.
    Why not live life in luxury? Stretch out and relax. You should not have to contort your body and legs around a tiny steering wheel and fit into someone else's idea of acceptable transportation.

    12. Always turn your water heater up to the maximum temperature setting.
    This way you can use a little less of the hot water in your hot/cold mix to make your shower warm. This also allows you to take longer showers, wash more clothes and enjoy a bath where a tub of water actually reaches the top before it gets too cold.

    13. Hold the lever down a little longer when you flush the toilet.
    Since so many of us are now using these tiny, little, girley-man, 1.6gpf ultra-low flow toilets, holding the lever a bit longer to completely empty the tank will increase the chance everything will actually get down. When you empty the toilet reservoir tank, you force the sewage treatment facility to take more crap and water and spend more energy working to process the stuff before it's dumped in the ocean.

    14. Never use mass transit.
    What if, on your way home from work, you want to stop and get a pizza? What if you want to take the scenic route as you drive to the office? What if you simply decide at the last minute to ditch work and go to the beach? Public buses and trains deprive you of your ability to do what you want when you want to.



    15. Use hot water to wash your clothes.
    The best way to clean white clothes is with hot water and a little bleach. Cold water simply doesn't do the job. This is also the method to use if you need to disinfect sheets and towels after having those nasty relatives over for a visit. In most cases, using hot water requires the burning of fossil fuel. Some people think the more we burn fossil fuels, the more we will increase global warming.

    16. Wash smaller loads in your wash machine.
    Washing your clothes more frequently means you'll have more fashion choices each morning. Plus, by running smaller loads, you can be sure that your clothes are getting as clean as possible.

    17. Remove the flow restrictors from your low-flow shower heads.
    Simply open them up with a screwdriver, punch out the plastic restrictor and once again enjoy the nice, strong shower you deserve.

    18. Avoid buying a new car solely for its fuel economy.
    Cars that get the best gas mileage are almost always the ugliest cars on the road. The truth is, while you may be saving 3 or 4 dollars on a tank of gas, you almost always look like an idiot driving a Kia.

    19. Stop recycling your bottles and aluminum cans.
    The time it takes to separate your recyclables is not worth the hassle. How much do you really make on the deal? A dollar a bag? - or some other ridiculously insignificant amount. Plus, have you ever thought about all of the money your city makes off of recyclables? Don't you think it's a little unfair that we have to pay the city to haul away items that they will in turn sell for a profit? Start dumping your recyclables in the trash where they belong.

    20. Always accept a free sample.
    Especially at the grocery store, a tiny, little half cooked sausage or a cheesy cracker may be just what you need to quell those rising hunger pains as you shop. The energy required to slaughter the animal for sausage and fry it up nice and good is the same energy that some people think will increase global warming.

    21. Always drive a little over the speed limit.
    In some states you can get away with driving as much as 15mph over the posted speed limit. Driving a little faster will help you arrive at your destination quicker, giving you more time to do other things.

    22. Never reuse old faxes.
    Have you ever seen people use both sides of the paper in their fax machines? Don't they realize the other side bleeds through making both sides difficult to read...Never mind trying to figure out which side is the most current. Faxes should be treated like toilet paper. You use one side and throw it out.

    23. Trade in your gas BBQ for a charcoal grill.
    The quick start convenience of a gas grill is great but, you can't beat the taste of food cooked on an old fashioned charcoal grill. Also, refilling or swapping out your used propane tanks is so much more of a hassle than dumping a bag of coals.

    24. Leave your outdoor lights on through the night.
    One of the best forms of home security is a well lit perimeter. Criminals are attracted to dark spaces and avoid targets that have bright lights. While you may be able to keep the burglars away, some people think the extra lights will increase global warming.

    25. Ask for more junk mail.
    Use a fake name to get on as many mailing lists as possible. There's a small chance you may actually see something you like. As the ads arrive simply toss the unwanted stuff into the garbage. The more ads you receive the more trees have to be cut down to produce more paper. This too may help add jobs to the economy.

    26. Don't buy recycled copier paper.
    It's usually more expensive and it always has that weird grayish hue that never looks quite right. When you avoid recycled paper, you increase the number of trees being turned into pulp and this is a good thing.

    27. Double or even triple bag your groceries at the supermarket.
    Use as many bags as you need to ensure your items don't burst through the bottom. The goal is to deliver your goods from the market to your pantry in as near perfect condition as possible. What global warming freak is going to pay for your broken Kahlua bottles if the one-bag theory doesn't hold up?

    28. Do not use re-refined oil in your car.
    Other than it costing more, there is something just not right about putting someone else's old lube in your hot new ride. When you avoid re-refined oil, you encourage the oil companies to explore, drill and produce more energy.



    29. Print online articles and stop reading from your computer screen.
    This list of '29 things' was written by those mean old conservative Republicans at MetroSpy.com (http://www.metrospy.com/). We want you to know, this list should be printed and read from a sheet of paper. After you've read the list, throw that paper in the trash. If you want to read it again, simply print it again! DO NOT READ THIS LIST FROM YOUR COMPUTER SCREEN!!

    By following the advice on our list you can learn to enjoy all of the wonderful resources this nice big planet has to offer. On the other hand, if you decide to pursue the hippie-lifestyle and avoid the Earth's natural resources that's okay! Others of us are perfectly happy consuming whatever you decide not to use.

    Burn more, digg more, eat more! - Enjoy!
    http://www.shopmetrospy.com/cgi-bin/cNc/showPage.p ...
    • TrevorBradley, on 04/18/2008, -6/+2Agree with the sentiment, buried because the comment is just way too fraking long...

      (If this gets dugg up, feel free to check out the parent. Reverse digging!)
    • chalkboy, on 04/18/2008, -0/+1Just one thing
      Organic does not equal food with out pesticides. Read what certified organic means.
  • Dynamis, on 04/18/2008, -2/+13Can we stick to scientifically proven facts and overall pros and cons of the situation instead of strictly targeting the emotional response of the masses to get what we want?
    • TrevorBradley, on 04/18/2008, -1/+2I don't care what side of the debate you're on, the people who dugg the parent down need to be sent to Antarctica without internet access.
    • Shriyansi, on 04/21/2008, -0/+1Unfortunately, people respond to emotional appeal far more than facts... that's why politics still exists... isn't it? Unless something is lobbied for, made a big hue and cry of... no action. We all know the facts already. Today, a 5 year old can tell you that global warming is a threat. And that many species are dying every year.
      Now, its about leveraging this knowlege using emotional appeal to propel people into action. The fact based approach has fallen short. This is propaganda. But for once, its for a reason we can all agree upon.
  • xL0Sx, on 04/18/2008, -4/+4Don't you think it's a bit arrogant to think that we, humanity, can save anything?

    I mean really, humanity causing change (whether by global warming or otherwise) is about as natural a process as an insect infestation killing off a crop of corn. Yes, we'll lose polar bears and penguins something will eventually take their place, just as something will eventually take peoples place. The world is going to keep on spinning long after anyone reading this is dead. It's not to say it's not worth looking at and trying to fix, but it's going to happen regardless.

    You can't micromanage the planet.
    • TrevorBradley, on 04/18/2008, -1/+3By the same logic, we should get get police and fire departments to pack up and go home, as everything will take care of itself. And for small populations, that would actually work. Large scale police and fire departments are economically unfeasible for tiny settlements.

      To say that humans are incapable of transitioning over to non-carbon based power sources? We did a fine job transitioning to them, and society was better for it. I think we can do it again.
      • bjf182, on 04/18/2008, -0/+1Police and fire address issues we can actually control. Provide an accurate weather forecast more than five days out and then I might just believe that we can control an entire planet.
        • TrevorBradley, on 04/18/2008, -1/+2Say it with me: CLIMATE IS NOT WEATHER. They're completely different sciences with different predictive powers.
        • TrevorBradley, on 04/18/2008, -1/+2(doh! stupid digg. Comment continues)

          We can never predict weather beyond 17 days because of quantum physics. But we know there will be seasons, that El Nino and La Nina persist, and we know the scientific properties of carbon dioxide.
    • gryphon50, on 04/18/2008, -0/+1so your belief is, it's ok if man dies out, so there is no point in doing anything. I just wanted to sum up your opinion.
    • ZeroFive1, on 04/19/2008, -0/+1We could ***** bomb the surface of this planet right now right this second, with nukes. We would probably wipe out at least 80% of all species. If we can kill everything, why can't we save one goddamn species?
    • Shriyansi, on 04/21/2008, -0/+1Good point, but ill founded. Insects kill off crops through 'natural processes', which by design, are almost always small scale, and dont produce nasty side effects (think Hiroshima). The ecological footprint of man is MASSIVE. We have done things on a SCALE that nature cannot recover from on her own. Its that simple. Today, if we all went back to living off berries and fruit, wearing animal skin for clothes... we'd still kill everything off! Because we are the DOMINANT species. There are so many of us! Because we invented unnatural means of killing like guns - giving me (a 130 pound woman) an advantage over a grizzly bear. We've created the industrial revolution. Which means that if we gave up agriculture, nature cannot feed us as we've decimated the forests.
      We have tipped the scales so far in our favor, that we have upset the balance. We broke it. Its our job, our responsibility to fix it. We have to macromanage the planet. And if it takes micromanagement, we have to do that too... or accept the inevitable fate of mankind, on behalf of our children.
  • po43292, on 04/18/2008, -0/+1http://www.scarysquirrel.org/special/movies/dpd/
  • Aonghais, on 04/18/2008, -13/+10Global warming was last year's junk science fad- aren't we over it yet?
  • linksus, on 04/18/2008, -5/+2Surely the ancient ice ferrits of outer coldsville will be impacted?
  • kidmaninwar, on 04/18/2008, -3/+39. Human
  • rascilon, on 04/18/2008, -4/+2It's a cynical point of view, yes, but the global warming crisis will probably be solved by global thermal nuclear war.
  • Pfkninenines, on 04/18/2008, -2/+2They forgot to mention "Humans"
  • TrevorBradley, on 04/18/2008, -2/+1On a side note, it's amusing (sad?) how the original article (likely unread) is completely forgotten and the two competing sides go at it like a rugby scrum.

    For all we know the article could be filled with pictures of naked breasts and we'd never know... ;)
    • DkSeraph, on 04/18/2008, -1/+1That might be because the original article was predicated on a scientific theory that a majority of the scientific community either decries completely or has recanted to claim the exact opposite. I won't bore anyone with already well-established facts that completely destroys any supposition of so-called global warming (if anything, we're seeing global cooling), but one of the most salient facts is that in the last 100 years, the world has increased it's temperature by a whopping 1.4%. Wow. I'm sweating already. And if I never lived in the Nevada desert, I might be dismayed when I experienced my first 110 degree day.. until I realized that my lack of accurate historical reference did not allow me to see that temperatures fluctuate and that 110 is cooler this year than 10 years before or 20 years hence.

      We don't have enough scientific reference to truly understand climatology or meteorology in a historical reference. As such, articles like this are alarmist and misleading for no good reason. Might as well post an article that Mormonism causes malaria or that eating nothing but sardines makes you into a Nazi; they'd be no more factual, no more provable and just as sensationalist.

      So yes, let's forget about the propogandistic article and debate the real issues.
      • Darntwitch, on 04/18/2008, -0/+2Eh go ahead, bore me with your sources.
  • DeFex, on 04/18/2008, -0/+1Its ok the mexicans have cut down the middle of those "protected" monarch trees anyways (which you can see by satellite photos) http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23574635/ so unless they find a different place to go they are toast anyways even if the climate stays exactly the same.
  • nullvector, on 04/18/2008, -5/+6Didn't I just read something in the newspaper about the Earth actually COOLING down over the last 10 years since '98?

    Our study on "global change" is like analyzing the stock market for 10 minutes to define it's activity over a decade. You can't take a sample size of data for a very small period of time, and determine that it is "proof" of anything.

    All we can do is be mindful of our environment and try our best not to make it worse, with pollution, waste, etc.

    • TrevorBradley, on 04/18/2008, -3/+2Actually the data to date is based on data over hundreds of thousands of years. Debunking a theory based on the last 10 years of data is your "10 minute analysis". Don't fall into your own fallacy.

      Global Land Temperature warmest on record in March 2008
      http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/04/08041 ...

      See? I can hand pick data too! :) Let's let the climatologists take all the data and make an assessment.
      • worldchanger, on 04/18/2008, -0/+2right. because climatologists have time machines that let them go back to 300,000 BC with a thermometer.
      • starmanfalls, on 04/18/2008, -1/+1Global warming maybe. man made HELL NO. Just getting ready to hit us with the carbon tax. What a bunch a crap!!! The entire solar system is on a cycle of warming. So tax it make some money and count the idiots that fall for this *****.
    • Math, on 04/19/2008, -0/+1Another myth. 1997 was an abnoramally hot year. A mean of the temperatures is more useful in showing whether the temperature is trended upwards:
      http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/graphs/Fig.A2.lr ...
  • 919kwjc, on 04/18/2008, -4/+2Your mom goes to college
  • designerutah, on 04/18/2008, -5/+2Do we NEED this critters anyway? Sure, they're cute and have big eyes. So what? We've got anime to compensate. Hot chicks with HUGE eyes... much cuter than these things. And more useful too. Really, are they edible (animals, not girls)? Do they fill a necessary niche? Something we just CAN'T do without? If not, lose 'em. Millions of other species have preceeded them into extinction. Why not these? And yes, I'm aware that mankind is just as likely to become one of the extinct someday... so what?
  • MinibossMike, on 04/18/2008, -1/+6The Earth’s climate is changing, has always been changing and always will be changing. There is no debate about this. However, there is a very real debate in the scientific community about whether or not humans are contributing to climate changes. It should be concerning to everyone that this debate is not talked about in the media and instead the people are told they all need to pay carbon taxes now.

    Don’t listen to what the cable news channels tell you about it, don’t listen to the politicians, don’t even listen to me. Go research it for yourself. Start here: http://www.google.com
    • TrevorBradley, on 04/18/2008, -1/+2I agree with your sentiment, but dispute there's a "very real debate in the scientific community". No.. You can hand pick scientists who have no expertise in climatology or maybe find a handful of climatologists who continue to debate the severity of the issue. But the debate you speak of is a manufactured talking point.
  • dhaugen, on 04/18/2008, -7/+9global warming is *****
    accept it
    • NOFXY, on 04/18/2008, -2/+3global climate change is not *****
      accept it.
      ha! proved you wrong.
      • dhaugen, on 04/25/2008, -0/+1no ***** thats nature, but this ***** about our activity being the cause is false, humans have only been polluting for about 150 years, compare that to the 4.5 billion years that the earth has been here and you'll realize that we're basically nothing
    • vikingcoder, on 04/18/2008, -1/+1Who needs science? An pseudonymous commenter on digg told me to "accept it", and that was good enough for me.
      • dhaugen, on 04/25/2008, -0/+1do some ***** research and stop listening to that dumbass gore
    • Shriyansi, on 04/21/2008, -1/+1You are ignorant.
      Accept it!
      HA!!
      • dhaugen, on 04/25/2008, -0/+1really because i would like to know why scientists are saying we're approaching a little ice age dumbass
  • spilk, on 04/18/2008, -3/+3This article claims that the arctic fox is a "marvel of environmental adaptation". So, the temperature increasing a degree or two is going to wipe out this "marvel" of adaptation? This should be a sign that perhaps natural selection needs to run its course instead of humans selfishly preserving the animals they think are cute.
  • zelig, on 04/18/2008, -2/+8No global warming since 1998.
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7329799. ...
    • Darntwitch, on 04/18/2008, -0/+1Read the article maybe?
      "But this year's temperatures would still be way above the average - and we would soon exceed the record year of 1998 because of global warming induced by greenhouse gases. The WMO points out that the decade from 1998 to 2007 was the warmest on record."
  • wertach, on 04/18/2008, -1/+6If you really want to decrease your carbon footprint.... send money to me. I will buy solar panels for my home and the money won't be spent on a bunch of studies that have already been done. If you send me more money, I will buy a motorcycle for my work commute. And if you send me enough money I will stay home, grow my own food, using organic techniques. I will be happy and you will make a big difference!
  • evodude, on 04/18/2008, -1/+2How about that? They're almost all cute. Even the fish is kind of cute.
    • evodude, on 04/18/2008, -0/+1Basically, I just hate the underlying assumption that all it takes to convince me of the evils of something are pictures of cute animals that are going to be harmed as a result. I in no way doubt the dangers of global warming, but don't insult our collective intelligence by implying that things are only bad if cute little animals get hurt.
      • pakruse, on 04/18/2008, -0/+0While I agree with the sentiment, I don't know how anyone could call Caribou cute. 'Cute' is not usually what comes to mind when describing trout, either.

        For the other 6 animals, I completely agree. I think we need to be doing more to lessen our impact to the environment overall (and global warming isn't even at the top of my list of issues that need to be addressed), but to phrase an argument with "but think of the penguins!" is patronizing and insulting.
        • rwblackbird, on 04/18/2008, -0/+0I work as a caribou campaigner, believe it or not! And it is hard to get people to care about the poor critters. Maybe if they were on ice floes, being hit with clubs...

          But the alternative is to try to get people excited about carbon biomass in peat bogs. Even harder.
  • walbold, on 04/18/2008, -1/+1just because something's a list doesnt mean it should be on dugg
    these are only 8 of the thousands of animals effected
  • paulc87, on 04/18/2008, -5/+4Shut up about global warming
    • ReduX33, on 04/18/2008, -0/+2Amen.
    • vikingcoder, on 04/18/2008, -1/+0If you don't know want to know about science, uncheck the section in your account settings.
  • nofear8103, on 04/18/2008, -1/+2 Just wondering what the correct average temperature of the planet should be, ya know since we have 150 years worth of data on a planet that is 4+ billion years old. I am also wondering how does one physically take the temperature of the planet. I know it has to be more complicated then just setting up weather stations in arbitrary locations and recording the the high and low for the day. Does the planet have a giant ***** that we stick the thermometer in?
    Finally just wondering if these climate experts would mind working for the TV stations as my current weather man cant seem to get the temperature or the weather right for tomorrow. I figure since these people know what 40 years from now is going to be, getting the next three days right should be a breeze.
    • NOFXY, on 04/18/2008, -2/+2You're an uneducated moron who assumes you're correct simply because you haven't taken a little time to look up the facts. GTFO and read a little before you comment on something you obviously know nothing about.
    • Gazoo2001, on 04/18/2008, -0/+4"Does the planet have a giant ***** that we stick the thermometer in?"
      Well, I think it's an uncontroversial statement to say that the planet has a large number of giant assholes.
    • worldchanger, on 04/18/2008, -0/+1that was beautiful. BAHAHAHA!!
  • starfocus03, on 04/18/2008, -0/+5I swear global warming posts get the craziest comments ever.
    • GhostyBoy, on 04/18/2008, -0/+3It's because there is such total trash on either side of the argument. A bunch of ***** hippies on one side and a bunch of corporate scum on the other, with fake ***** science coming from every direction and political leaders like Al ***** Gore running their mouths. It doesn't help that the media and the government have pedaled so much ***** that no one believes anything anyone says anymore.
      • ssn697, on 04/18/2008, -1/+2I believe we have some climate change happening, but I don't have the foggiest ***** why, and neither do any of the scientists on either side.
        • GhostyBoy, on 04/18/2008, -0/+2The thing that gets me is that people are having this ridiculous debate when there is simple logical things that we can easily see and do to improve the environment.

          For instance, how much garbage is every family producing? My family creates 1-2 bags of garbage, and including the garbage we create outside of our own home we probably produce at least 100 bags of garbage a year. Multiply that by the population of North America and that's a lot of natural resources that we turn into unusable garbage.

          Why have an argument about something that may or may not have anything to do with us when their are simple, tangible problems that every producer and consumer can help to solve?
    • Gazoo2001, on 04/18/2008, -0/+2Yes, global warming gets plenty of crazy comments. Go take a look at evolution vs. creationism articles, too, for some big-league crazy.
  • sajidf, on 04/18/2008, -1/+1Thank you for sharing. In solidarity
  • Th3Zodiac, on 04/18/2008, -2/+1Shenanigans, I froze my fkn ass off this winter with record levels of snow!!!
  • fard0wn, on 04/18/2008, -0/+2Even if global warming isn't happening(I think it is), it still serves as a good vehicle to get people interested in preserving/caring for the environment. The planet simply cannot sustain the current human lifestyle trends. Change has to happen. Whether it's a smooth transition or an abrupt drop on the head, it's going to happen.
  • Heysal, on 04/18/2008, -1/+1More political scientist *****. Warming is not happening right now -we just had a record cold season -globally. Yes if it gets warm again we will lose some wildlife - but if we decrease C02 during warming, which is not a pollutant and protects plants in warming we will have real trouble.
    Leave it alone and plants will migrate up in altitude and animals will follow - and come back down in cold.
    Polar bears are not in danger - they have 19 tribes and only 2 are not doing well. The others are proliferating and doing great.
    Wolves? -- Yep, they are in real trouble since Bush just signed legislation to allow them to be killed again. Humans are killing them from helicopter searches for them.
    Wanna save the planet? Burn the BUSH - and take Cheney and Rice with him.
  • Ponder416, on 04/18/2008, -1/+1This would be interesting if there was a such thing as Global Warming
    • MaxRipple, on 04/18/2008, -1/+1Where did you came up with this highly intellectual opinion about Global Warming by watching MTV on your Hummer !

      • worldchanger, on 04/18/2008, -0/+1probably from this newfangled thing called "science." ever heard of it?
  • dannilee, on 04/18/2008, -1/+1It's sad to see so many stupid comments on one page, especially when it's about something so important. Why cant you people grow up?
    • ReduX33, on 04/18/2008, -1/+2Why can't you realize "Global Warming" is a political game that is going to cost us trillions of dollars with no positive outcome?
    • starmanfalls, on 04/18/2008, -1/+0You seem to be the stupid one here. it is a out and out lie and this run for the carbon money will fail.
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 57 of 57 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.