What is Digg?Sponsored by Best Buy
Best Buy Employees Turn Carolers For A Day view!
www.youtube.com/bestbuy - Go behind the scenes to see real employees croon their way to star in Best Buy’s holiday campaign.
94 Comments
- TrevorBradley, on 08/28/2008, -1/+12Because I've not seen it in the comments above...
The concern about melting arctic ice isn't directly about rising sea levels (melting ice is *mostly* sea level neutral in salt water). It is an indicator of rising temperatures in the arctic (they're skyrocketing). The big concern is that an Arctic melt removes that reflective white sheet of ice and allows the north to absorb even more heat.
(Not that anyone is listening anymore...) - brstilson, on 08/28/2008, -1/+8Apparently the person who thinks that Earth is the same temperature everywhere in the summer also thinks that climatologists and scientists are all crazy.
- notwizt, on 08/28/2008, -2/+8"Water expands when frozen" well yeah, that point would apply if all the ice was already in water. Which it's not. So it doesn't really matter if it's in solid or liquid form because a lot of water is still going to be introduced to the oceans.
- inactive, on 08/28/2008, -5/+11Where the ***** is Captain Planet when you need him?
- ElectroStep, on 08/28/2008, -1/+6Maybe one of the kids lost their rings?
- grumpyrain, on 08/28/2008, -1/+6Furthermore, ice is white, which nicely reflects a hell of a lot of solar energy back out to space. When that ice goes, it is replaced by very deep sea water, which absorbs most of that solar energy previously reflected by the ice. In other words - a double whammy. The more ice that melts, the more solar energy the ocean will absorb, which in turn causes more ice to melt.
- inactive, on 08/28/2008, -18/+23"Environmental groups said the ice melt was another alarm bell warning of global warming."
And the fact that, at the same time, the Antarctica ice shelf has increased in size means...global cooling?
"The effects faced by people in the Arctic eventually will reach the rest of the nation and the world, he warned."
Dude, talk about global warming hysteria. Nah! This is junk science at its worst. - polumrak, on 08/28/2008, -1/+6Today is the day they leave their houses and if they will see their shadow, fossil fuels will burn another 100 years.
- monoa, on 08/28/2008, -2/+7Given the way the retards occasionally swamp climate threads, I'd say that there's some neocon mailing list that they all subscribe to which points them at certain articles. They show up, paste the usual dumb, discredited arguments and then leave.
- Alexcarrier, on 08/28/2008, -1/+6"YOUR CRAZY!"
You actually take yourself seriously? Surely these petty scientists forgot it was summer when releasing their data!! Of course you can't expect rational thinking from the same people who reject evolution. - monoa, on 08/28/2008, -2/+6And 'your' illiterate.
So, do we pay attention to the illiterate, SHOUTING hippocopter on Digg comments or do we believe what every national science academy of every industrialized country on the planet is telling us - that anthropogenic climate change is fact.
Not a difficult decision for the rational amongst us.... - borez, on 08/28/2008, -11/+15And the Antarctic Ice sheet is growing... but the press and the activists seem to be sweeping this little 'Inconvenient truth' nicely under the carpet:
http://www.nasa.gov/vision/earth/environment/sea_i ...
http://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/lynn-davidson/200 ... - Animental, on 08/28/2008, -0/+4WATER!
- NeoNevermore, on 08/28/2008, -0/+4WIND
- richlw, on 08/28/2008, -0/+4BY YOUR POWERS COMBINED I AM CAPTAIN PLANET!
AND WE MUST DESTROY MANBEARPIG HUZZAH!
/thinks Al Gore thinks he's actually Captain Planet - polumrak, on 08/28/2008, -0/+4Wow, it's all about rebuttal.
If you win in an argument, facts mean nothing!
Call me "monkey", that'll make droughts and hurricanes go away. - Alexcarrier, on 08/28/2008, -1/+5@TPorter72
No it's not surely in the water. I guess you forgot the 700,000 sq mi. of ice that sits on the elevated Greenland, ready to flow right back into the ocean. Same with the Canadian Arctic archipelago. Also, all that ice contains tons of carbon dioxide, once it melts it will contribute even more to screwing up the climate. - brstilson, on 08/28/2008, -10/+13Wow what's with all the conservatards on Digg this morning?
- kingp, on 08/28/2008, -0/+3FIRE
- webkami, on 08/28/2008, -0/+3You are doing it wrong, I will start off.
EARTH - Isidore, on 08/28/2008, -3/+5@JimmySpaza
the planetary scientists at NASA disagree with you. http://climate.jpl.nasa.gov/evidence/
See the ice maps.
Who is more likely to be doing 'junk science' you or NASA? - Alexcarrier, on 08/28/2008, -0/+2Study finds Arctic seabed afire with lava-spewing volcanoes : http://www.canada.com/topics/news/story.html?id=81 ...
Quote : "The scientists say the heat released by the explosions is not contributing to the melting of the Arctic ice"
You got served. - Navicerts, on 08/28/2008, -0/+2Rising water is the LEAST of the concerns, possibly the VERY least. Global temperature changes that cause severe weather is greater and I think fresh drinking water will be the #1 issue (but who knows?). Don''t be so obtuse.
- Navicerts, on 08/28/2008, -0/+2What does he have in mind? Enlighten me please?
- Isidore, on 08/28/2008, -2/+4NASA website on evidence that humans are now changing this planet's climate http://climate.jpl.nasa.gov/evidence/
But maybe NASA are part of the AGW conspiracy - maybe they faked the moon landings and spherical earth too ... - polumrak, on 08/28/2008, -0/+2You are 100% correct.
You didn't say why that's a bad thing, thought, and why stopping The Great Atlantic Conveyer would be a very, very, very bad idea indeed. - wrathchilde, on 08/28/2008, -1/+3True enough, except that the mixing time of the ocean is roughly 1000 years. A large rapid addition of fresh water will have regional effects on circulation patterns until the light, fresher water is advected away. Rates are important when considering fluxes of any perturbation including melt water, CO2 or oxygen consumption.
- monoa, on 08/28/2008, -0/+2No, it is about rising sea level. Enormous volumes of ice sit on Greenland - ~3 million km3. If that melts, it ends up in the sea. A complete melt would raise sea level by 7.2m: http://www.grida.no/climate/ipcc_tar/wg1/412.htm#t ...
A 7.2m sea level rise? New York, Florida, London, Netherlands, Bangladesh - goodbye. The USA couldn't cope with a few thousand flood victims from New Orleans - what's going to happen with a few hundred million across the planet?
The removal of the albedo effect (reflection of sunlight by the ice sheets) is one of the feedback mechanisms that will accelerate climate change. On top of that there will be release of vast quantities of methane as the permafrost in Siberia, and elsewhere, thaws. Methane is 20 times more effective at trapping heat than CO2. At some point in this feedback process, climate change will no longer respond to cutting CO2 emissions and the scientific term for that is "we are *****". - DracoFlameus, on 08/28/2008, -1/+3Oh please, I "love" this general underestimation of scientists... serious ones, that is.
Nobody ever denied that there were ups and downs, all (serious) scientists will agree on that point.
But the fact is: We have a never seen before impact on the world, as more and more people gather together, build cities and especially industry, clearing woodland, drilling for oil just to burn it (simplified) and release it into the air.
And now you are trying to tell, that _all_ those things we are doing on a global scale (welcome China and India btw.) have no impact whatsoever.
How should we know that? Do we have historcial data? Because the historical data until the industrial revolution does no longer apply to our current situation. - MrRealSurf, on 08/28/2008, -3/+5Here is the current list of (volunteer?) shills for the fossil fuels industry who have commented on this item: JimmySpaza, earryan, hippocopter, 9bpm9, angrynorwegian, borez, draterrojam, stealthc, gjlloyd
- dualboy24, on 08/29/2008, -0/+1Digg is full of idiots. It was not always like this, but has gotten worse the past year especially.
- inactive, on 08/28/2008, -3/+4Ha ha what a wacked up logic.
When North Pole has completely melted, we won't take the properties of ice into account any more, because the ice has melted to water. That is when the 30,000,000 cubic km of new fresh water tops up the oceans. It's roughly 7,925,161,570,000,000,000 US gallons of water or 30,000,000,000,000,000,000 liters. - monoa, on 08/28/2008, -0/+1So now that you're proved wrong you hide behind a conspiracy theory for which you offer no evidence. A massive, coordinated global conspiracy between scientists, journalists and politicians would involve millions of people around the globe . There must be *some* evidence? Right? Right?
Of course, if there's not, we'll need to fall back on Occam's Razor. In this case the simplest solution is that you're a delusional tool who cannot accept scientific reality because it conflicts with your whacko political ideology.
How does that sound? - 9bpm9, on 08/28/2008, -14/+15I think it's funny that between the 2005 minimum and now, the size of the ice actually increased.
The global warming scar is simple capitalist politics. All of these scientists are being payed by groups to say global warming is going to destroy this world in the next century because it's good for their agenda. - lastobelus, on 08/28/2008, -0/+1He's talking about an analysis of satellite pictures by pixel counting done by Steven Goddard.
Of course, Steven Goddard in discussions with other scientists later decided his initial conclusion was erroneous (see discussion at http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2008 ...
Will the denialists ever acknowledge this though? No, of course not. Instead they will use the initial blog post, regardless of how erroneous it is demonstrated to be, even if it's original author acknowledges that its conclusion was erroneous and apologizes for it.
They don't care about truth or evidence. They only care about what latest sound bite they can scrounge to justify not having to give a ***** about the impact of their lifestyle on others. - monoa, on 08/28/2008, -4/+5Antarctic ice sheet is growing:
http://gristmill.grist.org/story/2006/11/4/211834/ ...
NewsBusters: "...the leader in documenting, exposing and neutralizing liberal media bias."
In other words, a right wing attack group that will deny any reality that conflicts with neocon political ideology. Yeah, we're going to get our science from them.... - inactive, on 08/28/2008, -0/+1Three responses that don't address the issue.
How many volcanoes are there in the Bering sea and the Arctic circle?
How many are active?
When you can answer that then you can tell me that the ice melting in the Arctic is due to humans.
Until then you have done nothing to prove you even know what you are writing about.
You people wrote that the ice streams in Antarctica were driven by global warming caused by man until it was discovered that volcanic activity was melting the ice from underneath.
Now you want to claim that volcanoes are irrelevant because you don't know whether or not they are there and how much effect they have.
So, if you ever get to the point where you can tell me how many volcanoes there are in the Arctic I am interested.
If all you have is insults and articles which do NOT answer those questions I will continue to digg down your comments due to your ignorance and irrelevance. - borez, on 08/28/2008, -0/+1And you're a sucker for the BS you're being fed by capitalists cashing in, the media, and the scientists trying to secure grants.
Denialist...no, realist...yes. - Navicerts, on 08/29/2008, -0/+1But he is going to lower taxes over all and not immediately stop the war in Iraq which is costing us billions? How is this feasible?
- Alexcarrier, on 08/28/2008, -0/+1Study finds Arctic seabed afire with lava-spewing volcanoes : http://www.canada.com/topics/news/story.html?id=81 ...
Quote : "The scientists say the heat released by the explosions is not contributing to the melting of the Arctic ice"
Its actually quite funny that you spam the same comment on every story about global warming or the ice caps, believing you are holding the key that "defeats" the evil environmentalists. Yet all you say is pure rambling. - Zergvasion, on 08/28/2008, -2/+3Confirmed: Beijing reversed global warming.
You heard it here first. - inactive, on 09/02/2008, -0/+1It takes a special kind of person to equate smoking with slavery.
I despise slavery and environmentalism for the same reason: they take away people's freedom. I don't want to own slaves. I want _everyone_ to be smokers. I want _everyone_ to be conspicuous consumers. I want _everyone_ to drive gas-guzzling supercars down the highway.
There is no such thing as society, and thus there is no such thing as having an obligation to it. And your obsession with personality differences being caused by genetics is quite close to the Nazi belief system, especially when it's combined with the notion of obligations to the fiction that is "society". - Thadster, on 08/28/2008, -1/+2I thought Obama had stopped the sea from rising...
- bruce86, on 08/28/2008, -0/+1Actually, if we look at the mass extinction of the Permian period. The best theory they have is that CO2 from a super volcano called Flood basalts over Russia, cause a chain reaction catastrophic 3 stage extinction.
You know we still haven't figured out what causes certain types of cancer. By your logic we are arrogant to try to treat cancer based on the latest theories. Well, you can tell everyone who is dying of leukemia, or pancreatic cancer, to ***** off and quit trying to fighting for their lives in those clinical trials because those doctors are too arrogant and could be wrong. - brstilson, on 08/28/2008, -0/+1Of course, all that ice that's over land at the South Pole isn't much a concern...
- inactive, on 08/28/2008, -0/+1Wow, you're a *****.
See, I can make baseless personal attacks too.
I wholeheartedly support big business and our way of life. I want to destroy environmentalists who want to destroy our way of life. - brstilson, on 08/28/2008, -1/+2Silly me, I thought my basic science classes in primary school taught me that the Arctic is cold, below freezing, even in the summer, and that the seasons were determined by not the distance from the sun, but the angle of the earth's tilt in relation to it's orbit. Good thing nfury8ing is here to set me straight!
- DracoFlameus, on 08/28/2008, -0/+1there are always some who are listening :)
- Foor, on 08/28/2008, -0/+1ughh HEART!! .. the lamest of them all
- monoa, on 08/28/2008, -1/+2Don't get your science from non-scientists.
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php?p=74
http://climateprogress.org/2006/08/08/the-deniers- ...
You're confusing your ignorance of the subject with what other people know. There is incontrovertible scientific evidence for anthropogenic climate change - you just need to educate yourself:
http://royalsociety.org/page.asp?id=1279 -
Show 51 - 95 of 95 discussions
Catch all of your favorite Digg shows in one place, including Digg Dialogg, Diggnation, The Digg Reel and More!
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is