What is Digg?282 Comments
- dalittle, on 04/28/2008, -8/+82First thing is not to call it a war. All the other things have been called wars that are not really wars have been utter failures. See "War on Drugs", "War on Terrorism", etc.
- cr125er, on 04/28/2008, -2/+60Does it involve some sort of a ribbon on my car?
- fr0mundacheese, on 04/28/2008, -5/+34we need to stop consuming things.... let us start with Time Magazine
- inactive, on 04/28/2008, -3/+30Another "war" is it?
- Vektuz, on 04/28/2008, -3/+25We should definitely send troops to Global Warming and occupy it. Or at least bomb Global Warming.
- DraggingTheLake, on 04/28/2008, -14/+33Ignore the environment, it'll go away.
- inactive, on 04/28/2008, -12/+30charge for the sky?
yeah lets tax EVERYTHING, make everything outrageously expensive, almost impossible to live.
That will fix the environment and economy.
WTF are they smoking? - ManoWar, on 04/28/2008, -10/+28When did Time magazines turn into a tabloid?
- canuck102, on 04/28/2008, -1/+19Can somebody explain to me why this is a "war"?
Who are the Americans fighting? - StealthMonkey, on 04/28/2008, -5/+20We need more government regulation! We need the government telling me what I can and cannot buy and use in my own home!
- feoren, on 04/28/2008, -1/+16Yes, the idea that everything we don't like is something we should war against is practically the American ideal. Ann Coulter say something retarded again? Declare "war on the right". A gay kid get beat up? Declare "war on intolerance". As opposed to "compromise with the right", "compromise with drugs", "compromise with the Earth". The prevailing and misguided viewpoint is that compromise = failure.
- atact88, on 04/28/2008, -22/+36Global warming is a lot like the internet. It was invented by Al Gore.
- vanscott, on 04/28/2008, -10/+23Is anyone else suspicious at how fast global warming stories are flooded with responses claiming that global warming is a hoax? This thread has only been popular for 11 minutes and we already have ~10 responses claiming global warming is a hoax. Later on in the thread you'll notice the opposite, people claiming otherwise. For some reason the naysayers are always first in, and in most cases nobody bothered to read the article.
- yaddayaddayoda, on 04/28/2008, -1/+14I think he meant "funded".
Step 1: Create a problem that is unwinnable
Step 2: Create a war against that problem
Step 3: Get funded
Step 4: Profit!
Step 5: Repeat as often as you can - espek, on 04/28/2008, -2/+15I hear we're winning the War on Drugs too!
USA! USA! - Zera, on 04/28/2008, -7/+18This was a terrible article. A technology that even "An Inconvenient Truth" concluded is the most viable solution to global warming WASN'T EVEN MENTIONED!!!!!!!!! Every technique mentioned in the article is a tiny tiny tiny fraction of what could be accomplished with Nuclear Power as far as reduction of Greenhouse gas emissions. All greenhouse gas emissions reduced by EVERY Hybrid vehicle in the world combined for a YEAR is the amount our COAL power plants give off EVERY SIX DAMN MINUTES. WAKE THE ***** UP. Coal is bad, and Nuclear is safe. Nuclear Bombs are to Nuclear power what Machine Guns are to WATER GUNS.
Zero Americans have been killed by Nuclear Power, Yet 30-50 Americans are KILLED EVERY YEAR in Coal mining accidents. Where is the outrage for that? WTF
"There may be nothing like free enterprise to unleash innovation, but there's nothing like government to put a whip hand to the process."
***** THAT. We are only still on oil because our government subsidies it so heavily. Government puts the whip in the hand of a incompetent bureaucrats who are power hungry. They aren't scientists, they aren't educated in things other than politics.
This is BY FAR the WORST article I've ever seen from TIME. WHAT THE HELL IS GOING ON?!?!?!?! We have all the research, all of this is common knowledge and easily proven. HOW CAN WE STILL BE MISSING THE FOREST FOR THE TREES???????
Is it no wonder a more nebulous debacle like Iraq we can't even keep track of our finances, much less the battle itself. - Leomarth, on 04/28/2008, -3/+13Can we stop having these faux wars please?
- ManoWar, on 04/28/2008, -2/+12don't forget to pass the Kool Aid.
- LucerinRed, on 04/28/2008, -0/+9I dunno, but I've been told we'll be treated as liberators
- theneb29, on 04/28/2008, -0/+9why does everything with america has to be a "war", war on drugs, war on terrorism war on rising costs.....*sigh*
- serif69, on 04/28/2008, -16/+24According to recent global temperatures, we've already won! Go USA!
- CaptainRant, on 04/28/2008, -57/+65Ugh. Global Warming is such a friggin scam. Buried as watermelon spam.
- steelhooves90, on 04/28/2008, -5/+13Is that a title of a book you're writing, or did you just forget what a proper noun is?
- NonLeftistDiggr, on 04/28/2008, -1/+8I started reading it at age 18 in 1998, and came to realize shortly there after it was basically a pretty low quality news mag, so at least a decade ago.
- tracywood, on 04/28/2008, -2/+9Excuse me??? Oil is gone up in price because the DOLLAR has gone DOWN.
An OZ of gold bought about 7-8 barrels of oil in 2001 before we invaded Iraq. Guess how many barrels of oil an OZ of gold buys today?? Oh, about 7-8. Well fancy that!! Oil has not gone up in VALUE, only PRICE. - inactive, on 04/28/2008, -4/+11Intelligence.
- Nougat, on 04/28/2008, -4/+11That is for an exceedingly influential person. Whether the influence is good or bad is not part of the equation.
- breadfred, on 04/28/2008, -3/+10Improve the world, begin with yourself
- dimplemonkey, on 04/28/2008, -11/+17Slaughter the farting cows, of course.
- Zera, on 04/28/2008, -0/+6Yep it does, its not quite a ribbon though, it's a label that says "Hybrid", little more expensive than a ribbon, but with the same effect on the world, for people looking to feel better about their consumption.
All Hybrids in the world combined, reduce an amount of greenhouse gas equivalent to what US Based Coal power plants produce in SIX minutes. The added expense of those millions of hybrid cars could have gone to pay for giant windmills that would do thousands of times more pollution reduction than hybrids will ever do. - christor, on 04/28/2008, -1/+7Two truthy falsehoods in a single assertion (though over two sentences). Nice going!
- mparker7410, on 04/28/2008, -2/+8Why is everything a "War Against..."?
- Zera, on 04/28/2008, -0/+6"make energy star appliances mandatory"
Sorry to say, but "Energy Star" products are not necessarily any good. The term has been bastardized, because products only have to be better than similarly powered devices...... THUS, an ELECTRIC Clothes Dryer can be rated positively with an Energy Star rating, JUST for having an efficient motor, DESPITE USING LITERALLY 15 TIMES MORE ELECTRICITY TO CREATE THE HEAT, and not taking into account that a GAS Clothes dryer is 15 TIMES more efficient, which thus makes an energy star rating total BS.
Here's another huge piece of ***** that will make you sick to your stomach.... "Auto Defrost" refrigerators use 6 times more power than "Manual Defrost" Yet, Auto Defrost are only ranked VERSUS other Auto Defrost freezers, and so don't even realize they're buying a total energy hog piece of *****. Refrigeration of Food accounts for 9% of all US Power Consumption, and 7.3% of that consumption could be eliminated by just getting rid of Auto Defrost fridge and freezers. - NonLeftistDiggr, on 04/28/2008, -2/+7Right, enegy star appliances and incandescent bulbs will solve it. slavetolust, more like a slavetoepa
- pgouy, on 04/28/2008, -1/+6Aside all the CAPS LOCK moments, you made some valid points
- PabloMac, on 04/28/2008, -2/+7"finded?"
- init100, on 04/28/2008, -0/+5Who cares about what the "proper" temperature is? Our cities are where they are, and moving them due to rising sea levels would be prohibitively expensive. The dinosaurs had no fixed settlements, so they didn't have this problem.
- christor, on 04/28/2008, -0/+5Also, the big issue here is rate of temperature change more than temperature value. We are a pretty adaptable species, and we probably could survive, maybe even well, in a hotter climate. But we, and the rest of the earth's biota, are not prepared to survive well a rapid temperature change.
- inactive, on 04/28/2008, -3/+7Are you referring to this? http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/17/business/worldbu ...
Or to this? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Effects_of_global_war ... - agentVivid, on 04/28/2008, -4/+8do you turn your computer off at night?
- ocbeta, on 04/28/2008, -2/+6FTFA "Americans don't like to lose wars—which makes sense, since we have so little practice with it." WTF? We have been in over 20 "Wars" or battles, conflicts, et. al.
- bicyclethief, on 04/28/2008, -4/+8America needs to start waterboarding carbon dioxide (or suspected carbon dioxide anyways).
- nezroy, on 04/28/2008, -1/+5I'm declaring the start of the War on Fantasy.
- christor, on 04/28/2008, -4/+8Enviro-fascists? Do you know how ridiculous you sound? People who disagree with you about the appropriate response to and level of risk from human-induced warming of the atmosphere are "fascists"?
- christor, on 04/29/2008, -0/+4You can't blame this traffic death on my client's being drunk while driving. People have been dying in traffic accidents throughout the history of the automobile.
- Scheissen, on 04/28/2008, -9/+13Buried. I'm not reading four pages of TIME magazine. Do not start taxing "carbon footprints."
- inactive, on 04/29/2008, -1/+5So the climatologists who have been predicting increasingly severe and extended droughts just got lucky?
- slvrbullet87, on 04/28/2008, -2/+6Then why dont you show me where the tubes are
- vikingcoder, on 04/28/2008, -1/+5Volcanoes emit 150 - 200 million tons CO2 / year globally; that includes both subaerial and submarine volcanoes. Humanity's 28 billion tons of CO2 emissions in 2005 exceed all the volcanic emissions during the entire 20th century.
The only other GHG that volcanoes emit is water vapor which shortly condenses back out of the atmosphere since the long-term atmospheric water vapor concentration is a function of temperature.
Humanity's CO2 emissions are ~4% of the oceanic & terrestrial outgassing. The catch is that anthropogenic fossil fuel combustion based CO2 emissions are not complemented by anthropogenic CO2 absorption. The oceans are a net CO2 sink that are currently absorbing 7 billion tons more than they outgas each year. The terrestrial biomes are also net sinks that are currently absorbing 5 billion tons more than they outgas each year.
http://www.eia.doe.gov/iea/carbon.html
( table H.1co2 => http://www.eia.doe.gov/pub/international/iealf/tab ... )
http://volcano.und.edu/vwdocs/Gases/man.html
http://volcanoes.usgs.gov/Hazards/What/VolGas/volg ...
http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Library/CarbonCyc ... -
Show 51 - 100 of 276 discussions
Digg is coming to a city (and computer) near you! Check out all the details on our 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is