What is Digg?Sponsored by Best Buy
Best Buy casts another employee in holiday campaign. view!
youtube.com/bestbuy0 - Jarice Brodie has done some cool things in his life. Next: Best Buy’s holiday campaign.
139 Comments
- designer, on 10/10/2007, -42/+57We can't stop global warming because were not causing global warming.
- shibz, on 10/10/2007, -10/+24will they work on volcanoes too?
- noahhoward, on 10/10/2007, -0/+12I don't think the cows will appreciate your advances with a ceramic pipe.
- norman619, on 10/10/2007, -4/+15You sir, are a rock. NASA's own data says the cause(driving force) of global warming is not terrestrial you boob.
- JlmAWP, on 10/10/2007, -5/+15I think he meant that stopping human "changes" to the environment won't do anything if humans aren't causing global warming.
Even if global warming WAS changeable, yet completely natural, would we really want to change it? Think on that for a bit. - Victorioso, on 10/10/2007, -2/+12Carbon dioxide is important to regulate, but methane is even more important. Where does most of the methane come from ? Cows ! Now when you see those "Eat more chikin" signs" you can think of global warming. But ...er chickens make it too...
- michael1406, on 10/10/2007, -3/+13There's no double-caps in Newcastle.
The ceramic tubes seem interesting, but they can't stop global warming. It's a natural process that at most we contribute to, but don't cause outright. - norman619, on 10/10/2007, -3/+12Can PC stupidity stop global warming?
- haentz, on 10/10/2007, -9/+18Ceramic tubes? New internet connections?
- halavais, on 10/10/2007, -3/+11Bravo! Always healthy to hear from those who are unwilling to accept the scientific consensus.
Now, if you'll excuse me, I have to go walk my chupacabra. - init100, on 10/10/2007, -0/+7"Keep in mind that all the carbon in the air gathered by man throughout his existence only equals to 1/10,000 of that in the atmosphere."
I guess that you are talking about the human contribution to atmospheric carbon dioxide levels. Yes, it equals about 1/10,000 of all the gases in the atmosphere, but it equals about 26% of the carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, an increase of 36% compared to pre-industrial levels. Suddenly, the human CO2 contribution does not seem so small, does it? - MBHoy, on 10/10/2007, -4/+11"Can Ceramic Tubes Stop Global Warming?"
No. ***** off. - init100, on 10/10/2007, -2/+8Why would they need to? Volcanoes contribute a minuscule amount of carbon dioxide to the atmosphere each year compared to human activities. Volcanoes contribute around 150-250 million tons of CO2, while humanity contributes some 30 billion tons of new CO2 each year.
- axiomflash, on 10/10/2007, -2/+8Great news! Now we don't need to change our ways!
- mashw, on 10/10/2007, -0/+6To the doubters:
You're allowed and encouraged to be skeptical but I'm afraid it's time to just accept facts. You aren't rising above the populace by completely denying global warming.
Michael Shermer, the founder of the Skeptic Society even accepts it now, and yes this does stand for something. He is an authority and a beacon of pragmatic skepticism, it's time to hand in the doubting jackets and start helping the cause, this can be a uniting and positive thing for mankind. - inactive, on 10/10/2007, -2/+8Send the tubs to the Sun. Maybe it can help since the Sun is warming the entire solar system.
- zanzzz, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5Somehow all the assurances that man is not causing global warming by the legion of deniers just doesn't work for me. You have no education in the field of earth sciences or climatology. You read a few websites that made you feel better about possible human impact on climate. Now you post your "facts" about the climate. It's like the creationists throwing around a few "facts" about evolution to discredit it.
Why is it so hard to accept that as man alters the make up of the atmosphere and the reflectivity of the earth's surface it can impact climate?
Let's look at the real facts as understood by the vast majority of the scientific community.
Slight global warming has been observed in the last few years
Global warming cannot easily be accounted for from just "natural", i.e. non man made causes.
Human activity has had a measurable affect on the composition of the atmosphere and other inputs that affect the climate.
Climate processes are exceedingly complex and our understanding of them is rudimentary at best.
There are a number of differing possiblities as to the impact of human activity on climate in the long run.
Global warming is by far the most likely outcome but not a certainty. - alexanEmpire, on 10/10/2007, -3/+8Will Senator Ted Stevens over see the construction of this series of tubes?
- jmkiii, on 10/10/2007, -2/+7We need less people!
That solves everything! - Ramble, on 10/10/2007, -2/+7That's not explaining it. All you did was type that it's proven we're not causing it.
I'd like to see your sources please. - noahhoward, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4Yeah... no I don't think so. I was born an omnivore, my body requires the nutrients and protiens from an omnivorous diet, I will remain an omnivore.
- sully213, on 10/10/2007, -3/+7You see, it's not just a big truck that you can put global warming on and move it around. It's a series of tubes to filter oxygen out of the air. I was sent some greenhouse gases to me last week and they didn't get to me until yesterday because the tubes were clogged with pure CO2 and steam.
- norman619, on 10/10/2007, -1/+5No just cow flatulence.
- inactive, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4See! bush had it right all along. he is just trying to reduce the population of the world, to save the environment!
- inactive, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4We just replaced bison and other indigents animals with cows. No more methane that was produced before.
- norman619, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3No it's still funny. It's ok for you to laugh now.
- Godlike, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3Go to hell with your vegan crap. Humans are omnivores, plain and simple, end of story.
- Mockylock, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3More beachfront property and farmland, right before everything freezes down to florida.
- NSResponder, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3You first, sunshine. Stick that gun in your mouth, and take one for the team.
-jcr - elementop, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3I don't WANT to stop global warming -- it's cold where I live!!!
- Wootery, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3"Even if global warming WAS changeable, yet completely natural, would we really want to change it? Think on that for a bit."
The answer is yes.
Assuming said global warming is a Bad Thing, I don't care if it's natural. There's not much to think on. - knugen, on 10/10/2007, -2/+4Obviously, global warming is good up to a certain point.
- inactive, on 10/10/2007, -2/+4Chicken farts are much smaller. And rather pleasant smelling...
- mashw, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Irrelevant and unintelligent responses aside..
The problem is the doubters seek out websites and media that refute global warming, self-affirming their view. Those who acknowledge it don't actually want it to be real but nonetheless accept the facts when presented to them. It seems to me there is a problem with the doubters in that their bias precedes the facts. - FreakyD, on 10/10/2007, -2/+4I heard that cardboard tubes are much more comfortable for the active woman!!
- krasherspk, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Difference between then and now. There are 6 billion people on the planet now only about 5 million during that.
- felyduw, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3Why people criticize and make fun of other people who try to reduce our CO2 emissions? Climate change arguments aside, why do you people want to keep the CO2 emission levels the way they are now ? It makes absolutely no sense to me.
- Godlike, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Pretty much everyone is an idiot. It might not always be the same people, and it is not always the same people each time, but pretty much you can find something idiotic about at least one thing that any active digger has posted.
www.duggornot.com - nick111, on 10/10/2007, -4/+6Well there we go again
Nasa thinks it's a problem
The Pentagon thinks it's a problem
The vast biomass of climate scientists on this planet think it's a problem
Hell, even the pope thinks it's a problem
Miscellaneous ***** on the internet are still to weak to face their responsabilities are saying "no, no, no".
You people are worse than ***** creationists. - mutatron, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3Oh really?
http://www.giss.nasa.gov/research/features/altscenario/
> Non-CO2 greenhouse gases are probably the main cause of observed global warming, with CH4 causing the largest net climate forcing. - ubuntuedgy, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3While I agree that we cannot stop or have we caused global warming, we have a responsibility to leave as small a footprint on the planet as possible. If these tubes will help keep bad emissions from being spit into the air, great. I know there was a huge study done saying that man is causing it, but I don't buy it. There was also a huge study done showing that the sun revolves around the earth at one time. Climatology is not en exact science, but it is getting better.
Anyways, we do have a responsibility to reduce the poisons that we kick into our atmosphere. If these tubes help that, then hopefully those in charge will buy into it so we can reduce what damage we are doing. - noahhoward, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1There is a lot to think on, screwing with a natural cycle could kill us all.
- MagicCake, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1"Ha ha! You fool! You have no vagina but I still expect you to know these things! Why don't you? This makes me laugh!"
- VitriolAndAngst, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1The NASA probe data started around the late 1970's.
We should be cooler right now -- but we aren't.
Ozone depleting aerosols can also help heat us up, because the UV's that normally get stopped now reach the ground instead of warming the ozone layer. Just points out that this stuff is really complicated -- and we've been recklessly changing our environment.
Now we get the GW deniers starting to say there is nothing we can do, or that it isn't human made, or whatever it takes to do nothing. Brilliant! People who admittedly don't know what is going on, urging caution about trying to limit human impacts. I'm really going to love the reassurance this gives me when something else we didn't understand bites us. For instance -- nobody predicted that the defrosting of the Siberian permafrost would release more Methane or that the ice on the Antarctic didn't need to melt to raise sea levels (it just needs to slide off). We also didn't know that the hole in the ozone layer we created in the late 1970s was going to make the South Pole melt quicker than the rest of the planet.
How they heck can these people reassure anyone, by saying "do nothing"? Ignoring this issue will NOT leave us in a better place. - krasherspk, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Wrong, well we dont really need to change but someday we will. Its crazy to think that non-stop economic growth is possible, resources are finite. At some point necessary resources will reach an end and then suddenly we will need to change. But hey if people were you know, intelligent and had foresight, we would attempt to conserve and create an ecologically steady-state society. Destroying our world so that the production increases does not make sense to me, I dont know how anyone could fathom it either, unless the only thing that mattered to you was money and I'm pretty sure most people in power only care about money.
- salinemist, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Yeah, maybe we can teach people some basic science and end this *****.
- inactive, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1LOL!!! You're an idiot!!
- rockrapdude, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1No, but dumptrucks can.
- noahhoward, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Apparently the Ice Age comment and common knowledge are not clear enough for you?
Lets look at it in more detail then.
Was there an ice age? Yes. If you don't accept this, sorry can't help you.
When did it end? According to science 10000 years ago.
What happened when the ice age ended? Earth got warmer.
Did humans cause it? 10000 years ago? No.
So. The earth got warmer without us... warmer across the entire globe... hmm.... what is a good name for that? Global Warming? - deadsQuerl, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Exactly. This is great and all, but if they're not economical they won't implement them. As it is right now, coal-powered plants CAN reduce pollution by installing scrubbers, but they cost tens/hundreds of millions of dollars and are about as large as the plants they're built for. Not very useful.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 139 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is