What is Digg?147 Comments
- skiner24, on 11/08/2008, -2/+25We need more trees
- wonderchemist, on 11/07/2008, -2/+25One man's disaster is another man's gold mine, so invest in boat manufactures today! When Miami becomes a city of floating boat houses, you'll be rich!
- MAGZine, on 11/08/2008, -2/+18wow! one button hides it all!
- inactive, on 11/08/2008, -4/+19That conspiracy would make so much more sense if the government wasn't constantly trying to suppress global warming.
So my question - how did they get the thousands and thousands of scientists who support global warming to play along? How'd they fake the data? Why hasn't anyone managed to demonstrate that the research is bogus and made-up? - frieddonuts, on 11/08/2008, -11/+25I really thought that Digg was a place for science-minded people, but the amount of climate change deniers on this site shows me I was wrong.
- inactive, on 11/08/2008, -0/+13The beauty of a conspiracy theory is that it doesn't have to be proven. Any evidence against the conspiracy theory is simply part of the conspiracy.
- dartmanx, on 11/07/2008, -3/+14Cue Kenny Loggin's theme frame Top Gun...
- neoform, on 11/08/2008, -5/+15Revvin' up your engine
Listen to her howlin' roar
Metal under tension
Beggin' you to touch and go
Highway to the Danger Zone
Ride into the Danger Zone
Headin' into twilight
Spreadin' out her wings tonight
She got you jumpin' off the track
And shovin' into overdrive
Highway to the Danger Zone
I'll take you
Right into the Danger Zone
You'll never say hello to you
Until you get it on the red line overload
You'll never know what you can do
Until you get it up as high as you can go
Out along the edges
Always where I burn to be
The further on the edge
The hotter the intensity
Highway to the Danger Zone
Gonna take you
Right into the Danger Zone
Highway to the Danger Zone - AirRaven, on 11/08/2008, -7/+16You're talking out of your ass.
It's the "danger zone" according to the climate models that happen to be the *only ***** way we have of estimating what the situation really is*.
Learn some ***** Science. - Clbull, on 11/08/2008, -3/+12YOU MUST CONSTRUCT ADDITIONAL PYLONS
YOU MUST CONSTRUCT ADDITIONAL PYLONS
YOU MUST CONSTRUCT ADDITIONAL PYLONS
YOU MUST CONSTRUCT ADDITIONAL PYLONS
YOU MUST CONSTRUCT ADDITIONAL PYLONS
YOU MUST CONSTRUCT ADDITIONAL PYLONS
YOU MUST CONSTRUCT ADDITIONAL PYLONS
YOU MUST CONSTRUCT ADDITIONAL PYLONS - Dralha, on 11/08/2008, -2/+11There still are a lot of science-minded people on digg. But big oil and king coal have thousands of loyal devotees who immediately take action upon encountering any global warming article and then proceed to disseminate their global warming denialism gospel of lies, distortions, and obfuscations. The denialists are everywhere. But like their brethren-in-ignorance, the young Earth creationists, they're only a vocal minority of imbeciles.
- doiveo, on 11/07/2008, -9/+17Nope, still doesn't mean you are right. How about a few more times and louder?
- dafragsta, on 11/08/2008, -0/+8I'm sorry, but if the motive is still cheap renewable energy outside of climate concerns, I still don't see how pushing greener energy and cleaner air can in any way shape or form be a bad thing for longevity. Space is the prioirty for the next 100 generations, you can bet. With the advances in other areas of technology hitting full steam, I don't see how new energy efficiency and creation movements couldn't also help that goal.
- monoa, on 11/08/2008, -3/+11Every national science academy of every major industrialised country on the planet confirms recent climate change is due to human activity.
Provide evidence that they are all lying in a massive global conspiracy or that they are all wrong.
If you can do neither, you're just a delusional moron. - DrReaper, on 11/08/2008, -3/+10It just too bad. The government made industrial hemp illegal then went around and cut down the forests for 70+ years. When will people wake up and get it?
- inactive, on 11/08/2008, -3/+10I'll leave you in a sealed room, pump in some CO2 gas, and then you can let me know how you feel about it, 'k?
- alittleroy101, on 11/08/2008, -3/+10It's not just climate change deniers. There are people on here that think pure capitalism will solve all of America's problems, and that federal government should be dissolved so that each state should rule how it wishes. In other words, people that have not left their parent's basement.
- inactive, on 11/08/2008, -3/+10That maybe true... but
YOUR COMMENT IS SPAM
YOUR COMMENT IS SPAM
YOUR COMMENT IS SPAM
YOUR COMMENT IS SPAM ... well I think people get the idea. - lynchjo, on 11/07/2008, -9/+15Thanks for the very informative post! Very sobering news CO2 levels in earth's atmosphere are actually much higher than we thought.
- Hrodrik, on 11/08/2008, -8/+14Do you actually believe the ***** you post?
- inactive, on 11/08/2008, -4/+10And what happened after the Medieval Warm Period? Oh, that's right, the ***** Little Ice Age! Yes, climate change is nothing we should be at all concerned about - it's changed throughout human history, and - oh, right, people died every time it did.
- monoa, on 11/08/2008, -2/+8Water is a life-giving liquid. Now go pour a couple of pints in your lungs and tell us how that works out.
- logic6, on 11/08/2008, -2/+8Abstract:
Paleoclimate data show that climate sensitivity is ~3°C for doubled CO2, including only fast feedback processes. Equilibrium sensitivity, including slower surface albedo feedbacks, is ~6°C for doubled CO2 for the range of climate states between glacial conditions and ice-free Antarctica. Decreasing CO2 was the main cause of a cooling trend that began 50 million years ago, the planet being nearly ice-free until CO2 fell to 450 ± 100 ppm; barring prompt policy changes, that critical level will be passed, in the opposite direction, within decades. If humanity wishes to preserve a planet similar to that on which civilization developed and to which life on Earth is adapted, paleoclimate evidence and ongoing climate change suggest that CO2 will need to be reduced from its current 385 ppm to at most 350 ppm, but likely less than that. The largest uncertainty in the target arises from possible changes of non-CO2 forcings. An initial 350 ppm CO2 target may be achievable by phasing out coal use except where CO2 is captured and adopting agricultural and forestry practices that sequester carbon. If the present overshoot of this target CO2 is not brief, there is a possibility of seeding irreversible catastrophic effects. - Dralha, on 11/08/2008, -0/+6Big oil and king coal's global warming denial industry costs millions of dollars, but that's a small drop in the bucket compared to the billions in corporate profit they gain by raping and destroying the planet.
- Culero, on 11/08/2008, -2/+8yea, if you're a plant
- inactive, on 11/08/2008, -7/+12Global warming is science, it has nothing to do with the economy, *****!
- TheMoniker, on 11/09/2008, -0/+5The ice caps are not expanding at record levels. You are also missing the difference between climate and weather. Climate is the statistical average of weather, including extremes, whereas weather is the meteorological state of a specific place, at a specific time. Take last winter for instance, while there were extreme lows in North America and China, there were extreme highs in Russia and the UK: Scotland had summer weather in the middle of February. Of course, these aren't what determine if climate change is happening, it's the average of the temperature globally, which has been increasing.
Nor are we presently having "the coldest winter" in a hundred years, globally: the arctic is already seeing record highs.
http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNew ... - gjokkel, on 11/08/2008, -4/+9Maybe. But if not (and there is a SLIGHT chance for that) then we are going to be screwed big time.
In other words: inaction is not an option even if the whole thing is just a "confidence trick". - RedHeadedFreak, on 11/08/2008, -3/+8Because Peekman, CO2 is not a poisonous gas. Oceans emit it, volcanoes emit it, dying plants emit it and living plants thrive off of it.
- archiesteel, on 11/08/2008, -0/+5But the Rainforest are being razed at increasing rates.
World forest coverage is down overall, and that compounds the already alarming effect of increased CO2 release in the atmosphere. - archiesteel, on 11/08/2008, -2/+7singularityv: please provide peer-reviewed evidence to support your position - and please, don't bring up anything that has already been disproved several times, such as Milankovitch cycles, the false notion that all planets in the solar system are heating up, etc.
Note: anything by denier-for-hire Fred Singer automatically dismisses your entire argument.
Seriously, deniers are quick to claim that scientists are wrong about anthropogenic climate change, but whenever you ask them for hard scientific evidence to support their claims, they *always* come up empty-handed. Me, I choose to believe in science rather than my own fear-induced-bias (because that's what it is: deniers are mainly motivated by their own paralyzing - but not always acknowledged - fear that global warming is real and unstoppable; in other words, they act exactly like the proverbial ostrich putting its head under the sand, thinking that what they don't see won't hurt them). - inactive, on 11/08/2008, -10/+15@frieddonut Science-minded? Try having these global warming clowns answer why this year has been the most inactive hurricane season for quite some time. Why early snow fall records are being broken in Europe and North America. They can't because C02/man made global warming is bogus science, old news, false and totally wrong. Ground zero isn't underwater. Sea levels aren't rising beyond their limits, the north pole ice melts, the south pole is colder and is growing. Historical evidence from ice core & tree ring samples show it's been much hotter. Maps of the 16th century Mexico show the Yucatan as an Island which coincides with the Medieval warming period where vikings were growing crops on Green Land.
I've seen stupid diggers saying retarded ***** like, "we should get rid of all the Co2". Why? Do we want to kill plant life that makes oxygen?
The fact that Digg still allows this ***** to make front page is a witness to the collective idiocy that still abounds on this subject... - Beautyon, on 11/08/2008, -2/+7You need to explain why. No one seems to know about the Carbon Cycle and Photosynthesis.
- TheMoniker, on 11/09/2008, -0/+4Is NASA a good enough source to start with?
http://www.nasa.gov/vision/earth/environment/earth ...
Also, you might want to check here:
http://ipcc-wg1.ucar.edu/wg1/Report/AR4WG1_Print_S ...
If you want to dig a little deeper, there is really so much evidence that it would take you weeks to read through it, it's a little like asking for "evidence of evolution" it's hard not to point to the whole field of biology.
We can see warming in the upper troposphere:
http://www.nature.com/ngeo/journal/v1/n6/abs/ngeo2 ...
We can see the warming in the ocean:
http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/cru/data/temperature/
We can see the warming over land:
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/
Meanwhile, ExxonMobil has funnelled nearly $16 million between 1998 and 2005 to a network of 43 advocacy organizations that seek to confuse the public on global warming science:
http://www.ucsusa.org/global_warming/science/exxon ... - archiesteel, on 11/08/2008, -2/+6"I've seen stupid diggers saying retarded ***** like, "we should get rid of all the Co2".
Link please....oh, right, you're just making this up. How silly of me, I forgot that's what you deniers do.
PS it was colder this year because of the periodical phenomenon known as La Nina. Climate scientists already knew about this and, guess what, their computer models already take this into account. Now stop spouting moronic nonsense and go actually learn some science. - archiesteel, on 11/08/2008, -2/+6Actually, there has been a consensus, and for quite some time now. Deniers are incapable of providing actual scientific data to support their position, and the few "scientists" deniers have been shown to be on the payroll of Big Oil.
You're looking in the wrong place for "religion" - it's the deniers who put personal beliefs above scientific data. - archiesteel, on 11/08/2008, -0/+4You're totally, right, it's not just increased CO2 output, but also rampant deforestation. The surprising thing would be if this had no effect, not the other way around.
- archiesteel, on 11/08/2008, -1/+5barf1: in order to "ridicule" them, you'd have to make an intelligent argument supported by evidence. Since you're clearly incapable of doing this, it is us that laugh at you instead.
- Peekman, on 11/08/2008, -0/+4I am really undecided on the topic of whether CO2 emissions actually causes climate change...... I have read both points of view and they both have good arguments...
But the way I look at it is..... CO2 is emitted by all those things mentioned above and living plants break it down again..... thus completing some sort of cycle???
So, if we create our own C02 and remove plants are we not putting an imbalance into this cycle??? The result of this imbalance seems debatable but never the less there is a human caused imbalance that should be addressed for the sake of future generations... - rustintable, on 11/08/2008, -1/+5Well the dirty hippies you speak of never did any harm to anyone and they have a beautiful culture and they are making a resurgence now.
But the selfish mindless greedy capitalists are the ones who are going the way of the dodo.
Only brainwashed morons would choose war over love. - inactive, on 11/08/2008, -4/+8Nature has this little thing called Natural Selection and Evolution. Adapt to the change or die... There's no UN tax or legislative bill that can cure climate change when the sun burns hotter or cooler... No carbon credit scam will stop the earth from getting hotter if that is how the cards fall. It will lean your pockets if you let gov and hucksters dupe you into it with films and fantasy...
- solidcube, on 11/09/2008, -0/+4I'm calling ***** on your intellect.
Explain to me why Alaska has lost permafrost for the first time in memory. Explain why Mount Fuji is now without snow in the summer for the first time ever. Explain why the glaciers are shrinking at unprecedented rates: first time they've ever melted since the initial glaciation period.
You have done no research on the subject, you don't have the critical thinking ability necessary to do the very simple thought experiments that would lead you to the unavoidable conclusion, and you aren't educated to the point where you can make meaningful statements on the subject. - Jenga, on 11/08/2008, -0/+4I agree with most of what you've said, but Milankovitch forcing is more a separate issue than it is 'wrong'. It is still a likely candidate for phase locking of interglacials, it just isn't too relevant to anthropogenic global warming because the timescales in question are on the order of 100,000 years. More succinctly, Milankovitch forcing does not explain recent warming, nor will it explain the warming we expect in the next fifty years.
- archiesteel, on 11/08/2008, -1/+4There is more money to be made by denying AGW. So following your own logic, AGW must be true.
- solidcube, on 11/09/2008, -0/+3I have studied the subject extensively and I do not believe it is a scam. In addition, it is overwhelmingly the dominant position among climate PHDs.
Are you a PHD? No? Then you are not qualified to argue the subject. - Trent1492, on 11/09/2008, -0/+3Hello Mr. Patriot,
If you want to look at the report itself got to this link:
http://www.bentham.org/open/toascj/openaccess2.htm
Please note that the article has been published in an appropriate peer reviewed journal has 99 different citations. You should also give due attention to the fact that the authors of the paper are geophysicists. - DrReaper, on 11/08/2008, -0/+3Hello trees eat CO2 and so does hemp! If you make industrial hemp a jailing offense and still need paper you cut down over half of the worlds tress your going to have too much CO2. They are quick to blame cars but turn a blind eye to cutting down the worlds old groth forests at $80.00 a ton. This started in 1937 and has not stopped. We should make industral hemp legal now and save what is left of the trees.
- Jakerzon, on 11/08/2008, -0/+3It's not just trees that create oxygen. The world's oceans breathe in Carbon Dioxide and exhale Oxygen. The ocean accounts for something like70% of our Oxygen(I think, I can't remember exactly, but it's very high).
- TheMoniker, on 11/08/2008, -0/+3The ice caps are not expanding at record levels. You are also missing the difference between climate and weather. Climate is the statistical average of weather, including extremes, whereas weather is the meteorological state of a specific place, at a specific time. Take last winter for instance, while there were extreme lows in North America and China, there were extreme highs in Russia and the UK: Scotland had summer weather in the middle of February. Of course, these aren't what determine if climate change is happening, it's the average of the temperature globally, which has been increasing.
Nor are we presently having "the coldest winter" in a hundred years, globally: the arctic is already seeing record highs.
http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNew ... - TheotherotherMe, on 11/09/2008, -1/+4They amount of denier posts is high, but the fact that they all get dugg down tells me they are just a vocal minority.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 148 discussions
The Digg Toolbar for Firefox lets you Digg, submit content, and keep track of Digg even when you're not on the Digg site. Download the official 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is