What is Digg?Sponsored by Dragon Age: Origins
Can't get enough Dragon Age: Origins? Check out new footage. view!
DragonAge.BioWare.com - EA presents BioWare's new dark fantasy epic Dragon Age: Origins. '9/10' from Game Informer.
192 Comments
- ghast, on 04/09/2008, -14/+68Look at all the arm chair climate experts crawl out of the woodwork. Of course all the people who actually study these things for a living must be wrong. Obviously their opinions aren't worth any more than somebody who crawled the Internet for a few hours.
I mean even if there wasn't a consensus on global warming among experts, say there was a 50% chance it was happening, would you live in a house that had 50% chance of collapsing?
This is typical American mentality and complete lack of foresight: "I'm not willing to make any changes in my excessive life style now, and damn the consequences". This shouldn't be surprising however, we are a talking about a country of people who elected Bush... TWICE! Clearly it is a nation that lost touch with reality a long time ago. - Futile, on 04/09/2008, -8/+48I don't know why people don't trust in billionaire oil company executives. I mean, it's not like the billionaires would lie to you. What possible reason would these oil company people have for lying about this? They sure don't have any motives for denying global warming.
It's the scientists that are liars, obviously. All the scientists are being alarmist attention whores and they are lying to get funding for their "research". Come on, we all know people want to be scientists so they can be popular and famous and rich. - WoollyMittens, on 04/09/2008, -6/+461. Denial --- (You are here)
2. Anger
3. Despair
4. Depression
5. Acceptance - craighoxton, on 04/09/2008, -13/+43The only branch of government telling it like it is. Go NASA!
- bsmang, on 04/09/2008, -4/+19Hey billlyboobs, I like your name and everything, but, are you saying essentially that you know a lot more about science and climate than NASA's top climate scientist? Or are you saying that Hansen is working for the devil? Or perhaps you think that he just hates Bush and is making stuff up to try to make him look bad? Or something else? I'm curious. I mean, maybe you're right and this Hansen guy is wrong, but I don't want to let that decision be affected by my personal feelings about you having the word 'boobs' in your digg handle.
- whoreable, on 04/09/2008, -7/+22It is obvious burning oil isn't a good idea. Otherwise we wouldn't have asthma inhalers ...we would just suck on the car's tailpipe to make ourselves feel better.
- Futile, on 04/09/2008, -2/+15To people who think human causes and pollution won't change the global environment:
Would you piss in a swimming pool? It's just a little pee in a big pool, right? It won't make the pool any warmer...
If we keep peeing in our own pool, pretty soon we'll all be swimming in piss. - Aokitsune, on 04/09/2008, -3/+16But the Rapture and Armageddon is going to happen any day now! Why should we care about the sustainability of life on Earth? Use everything we can get our hands on of for profit- it's God's will for us! There aren't going to be any consequences, all that matters is that we're rich and prosperous. /s
Personally, I think this line of thinking is a pretty outstanding example of the "nation that lost touch with reality a long time ago." Dugg up ghast. - inactive, on 04/09/2008, -2/+13How come every single one of the hundreds of peer reviewed papers on this subject disagrees with you? Don't you realize that, if you're correct, bigoil will pay you $$$ to get your research published?
- inactive, on 04/09/2008, -4/+14Global warming deniers have low standards. They accept as scientific truth anything they can dig up in an op-ed, a blog, or a youtube video because NONE of the professional scientific literature supports their arguments. Just like I can find any number of dubious sources willing to attest to the power of the latest miracle weight loss cream, the health benefits of drinking colloidal minerals, or the banana as proof of intelligent design, I can find a youtube video of someone spouting some nonsense about how CO2 isn't a greenhouse gas, or volcanoes emit more CO2 than humans, or solar flares correlate to the recent rise in global temps.
But among professional scientists, there is no disagreement: http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/306/570 ...
Out of nearly 1000 peer reviewed scientific papers on the topic, not a single one refutes the consensus position that the earth is warming and that human activity is the cause. Right wingers can hem and haw all day long about how the jury is still out, but anyone with a modicum of knowledge about the scientific method and means by which scientists arrive at robust conclusions knows better. - rilus, on 04/09/2008, -0/+10Scientists know that the great majority of CO2 emissions are not man-made. However, we also know that there's plenty of evidence that little bit of man-made CO2 is enough to affect the atmosphere.
So, even if we're not the cause, we're most definitely, at least, accelerating the process by releasing more than the natural CO2 sinks can process. - MrWhite7, on 04/09/2008, -1/+10I love how this has been turned ionto just another divisive political issue, like gun control and abortion. It used to be"let's pollute less." No one can argue with that. Now it's "is climate change caused by man? Is it even occurring?" As usual you fools get so caught up in the damned rhetoric you miss the point.
- migitalwarfare, on 04/09/2008, -4/+12and to think we could have avoided all of this if they just had you sitting in on their climate meetings!
- WoollyMittens, on 04/09/2008, -0/+8whoreable is a "no child left behind"-victim
- Twinked, on 04/09/2008, -0/+8Dugg for the graphic used.
- relic180, on 04/09/2008, -4/+121. Denial
2. Anger
3. Despair
4. Depression
5. Acceptance
6. Profiteering -- (Should be here) - inactive, on 04/09/2008, -1/+9You're a classic example of the kind of ***** I describe in my earlier posts in this thread, ftx437. I don't give a ***** what the IPCC has to say on this topic and neither does any climate scientist. I'm talking about the world of published, peer reviewed, scientific literature, not some UN roundtable.
Dumbass right wingers love to treat this as a debate between the IPCC/Al Gore and the rest of the world, but those people are secondary figures and they are not relevant to people who understand and appreciate the scientific method.
Go find a single piece of peer reviewed scientific literature that refutes the consensus view. I haven't read the IPCC report, I haven't seen Al Gore's movie, and I don't care about what either one has to say on the topic. Bring the science or kill self. TYIA. - inactive, on 04/09/2008, -3/+10Right wingers think something can only be scientifically valid if it's simple enough to be understood by a kindergartener. If you tell them that climate change might cause some parts of the globe to become cooler over time, they'll say you're just talking crazy talk because "it's called global warming, so that means everything has to get hot."
This attitude is a large part of the reason why these nicompoops are impervious to the published findings of actual climate scientists. Go watch the youtube video where Kirk Cameron explains how the existence of bananas refutes evolution and you'll understand why it's so easy to brainwash these simps into thinking that everything is fine and that climatologists are part of some big super-secret conspiracy to get "funding" for their work.
I'm starting to think we need a reverse-Khmer Rouge to come along and eliminate as undesirable anyone who doesn't understand the fundamental tenets of the scientific method. Aristotelian logic isn't some historical anachronism - it establishes the best means by which fallible human minds are able to determine the truth of any matter. It's not perfect, but it's the best we've got. - relic180, on 04/09/2008, -1/+7The ocean is not the largest CO2 emitter (isn't that what you meant by sink? I was a little thrown off by it actually..). It's decaying plant and animal matter that puts, far and away, the largest amount of CO2 into the air.
- relic180, on 04/09/2008, -0/+6Just like rilus said, it's not that we're creating all the Co2, it's that we're knocking the natural balance out of whack and the planet cannot compensate for our "extra", indefinitely.
- MrWhite7, on 04/09/2008, -1/+6I love how this has been turned into a simple divisive political issue, just like gun control and abortion. It used to be "let's pollute less." That was a target no one could argue with. It's been manipulated into "is climate change man-made." As usual you fools get so wrapped up in the rhetoric you miss the whole point...
- nick111, on 04/09/2008, -3/+8Specifically with regards gobal warming:
1) it's not happening
2) ok, it is happening, but it's not our fault
3) ok, it is our fault but we can't do anything about it
4) NUKE POWER !!!
Each stage accompanied by lieing, smearing, worming-around and widespread quoting of of other liars etc.
Meanwhile, the rest of the world is getting on with it. - bsmang, on 04/09/2008, -1/+6So big oil/money and big politics are at odds with each other? That's weird because here in the US lately it seems a lot more like big money/oil and big politics have been pretty much the same guys.
- relic180, on 04/09/2008, -1/+6So, you copy/paste ONE guy and suddenly glaciers across the globe aren't melting anymore. Bravo.
- Futile, on 04/09/2008, -0/+4PSSHHH global warming isn't real! It was really cold here last night and my car's windows got all frosted and there was ICE on the road. ICE! How can you say the climate is warming up when there is ICE on the ROAD?? Fools!
- xceptionaly, on 04/09/2008, -1/+5No, they don't have any rockets to launch, because the government would rather blow all of their money on wars that lead to nowhere than spend more than a sixth of a percent of the budget to pursue scientific progress.
- inactive, on 04/09/2008, -5/+9It hasn't gone down: http://www.giss.nasa.gov/research/news/20080116/
- inactive, on 04/09/2008, -4/+8Learn some science, dude. Car engines put out CO2 AND CO. If car engines burned all the fuel completely and efficiently, then there would be no CO, only CO2 and water vapor. But, since they do not burn fuel completely, SOME of the exhaust is CO.
- vikingcoder, on 04/09/2008, -0/+4That is true. CO2 is a secondary factor to the historical primary warming mechanism, Milankovitch Cycles - i.e. total solar irradiance. However, the sun has shown a slight cooling trend over the last 3 decades. Not only is the sun not contributing to global warming, it has had a slight, long term cooling effect.
The historical secondary factor is thus the current primary mechanism.
http://skepticalscience.com/Determining-the-long-t ... - Dukaso, on 04/09/2008, -1/+5There has been an upward trend. Two gained, one lost. The Earth warms up more than it cools per cycle. It's a net gain.
- vikingcoder, on 04/09/2008, -1/+5The 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.
Since the start of the industrial revolution, humanity has put out 1.2 trillion tons of CO2, half of that since the early 1980s. The atmospheric CO2 concentration has increased 35% solely due to our emissions. That increase can be directly linked to humanity through parallel decline of the 14C/12C ratio of atmospheric CO2. That is because fossil fuels do not contain 14C precisely because they are fossil - much older than 10 half-lives of 14C.
It has been known for over 50 years that an increased atmospheric CO2 concentration will make for a stronger greenhouse effect regardless of saturation in the lower atmosphere.
The behaviour of CO2 in the past is well understood by climatologists and confirms the amplifying effect of CO2 in the atmosphere. CO2 warming explains how the relatively weak forcing from Milankovitch cycles can bring the planet out of an ice age. It begins with the high southern latitudes (eg - Antarctica) warming and releasing CO2 from the oceans. The CO2 mixes through the atmosphere, amplifying and spreading the warming to northern latitudes.
http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Library/CarbonCyc ...
http://www.eia.doe.gov/pub/international/iealf/tab ...
http://cdiac.ornl.gov/trends/emis/tre_glob.htm
http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/ccgg/trends/
http://www.physicstoday.org/vol-58/iss-5/p16a.html
http://www.aip.org/history/climate/Radmath.htm
http://skepticalscience.com/co2-lags-temperature.h ... - Jaablaze, on 04/09/2008, -1/+5I think thats what we are trying to avoid...
- relic180, on 04/09/2008, -0/+3Copy/pasting other peoples' comments is fun.
- inactive, on 04/09/2008, -2/+5And economists can't tell you what the DJIA will close at today. Does that mean that Milton Friedman was wrong and that communism is okey-dokey?
- Dukaso, on 04/09/2008, -1/+4Well it couldn't have anything to do with how we're all living on the same planet.
- cJw314, on 04/09/2008, -0/+3THEN? I'd wager we're well beyond 'boned'.
- VBDon, on 04/09/2008, -1/+4Global Warming is sooooo yesterday. G.E. has already been exposed as the main culprit. They want $Billions to "research" global warming and spent millions getting everyone to buy into the "Global Warming Nightmare". It's all junk science. Even the moans and groans about the poor Polar Bears. Between 1000 and 1300 AD there was no Artic Ice Mass to speak of and Polar Bears and other wildlife thrived. Today Polar Bears live everywhere in west and central Canada and even in Wisconsin and Michigan; no artic ice there.
Let's face it, if the world is getting warmer, that's good news, not bad news. - inactive, on 04/09/2008, -2/+5This guy recites his professional "credentials" here: http://glowarmers.blogspot.com/2007/08/interview-w ...
Among his qualifications:
" I maintain a regular Email correspondence with the world experts. I regularly survey the relevant websites. I visit the local university library to keep up to date. I have huge personal library of relevant books, brochures and reprints."
So basically since 1987 he's done nothing by email people and read blogs. Note, by the way, that the guy doesn't claim to have published ONE SINGLE scientific article on the topic of global warming.
Given all this, I'm not sure why the IPCC was bound to accept him as an authority on anything. But he says things that right wingers like to hear, so in their minds he's leading the crusade against scientific cabal that is conspiring to brainwash the planet. - mickman17, on 04/09/2008, -3/+6I totally agree with you. Its not like Big Oil is making Billions in Record profits. Its the GW scammers that are the one banking billions and billions on the ignorance on people who want to be responsible and ensure their impact to the world is minimal.
If you cant see the sarcasm here I suggest you pull that Hummer out of your ass - inactive, on 04/09/2008, -1/+4"First, the number of scientists that agree with global warming theories is roughly half,"
Among climate scientists, the number is roughly 99.999%. - relic180, on 04/09/2008, -1/+4Melting ice maintains the temperature. When the ice runs out the temperature will start to rise.
Average temperature for last 1000 YEARS? Where exactly did you find those numbers? - sensical, on 04/09/2008, -0/+3There goes NASA funding.
- inactive, on 04/10/2008, -0/+3What the ***** are you talking about?
"The eight warmest years in the GISS record have all occurred since 1998, and the 14 warmest years in the record have all occurred since 1990."
...
""As we predicted last year, 2007 was warmer than 2006, continuing the strong warming trend of the past 30 years that has been confidently attributed to the effect of increasing human-made greenhouse gases," said James Hansen, director of NASA GISS."
I don't see any reference to any "five year averages" there. You say the earth isn't warming, NASA says you're wrong. End of story. - relic180, on 04/09/2008, -0/+2That would be a dope wallpaper.
- inactive, on 04/09/2008, -1/+3" we are talking ppb PARTS PER BILLION here folks."
OMG that's so meaningful!!! Because everyone knows a theory isn't scientifically valid if it implies that changes in levels of substances that vary in minute ratios to each other can have large scale impacts! - Doofy, on 04/10/2008, -0/+2Has anyone else noticed that...
NASA (National Aeronautics and Space Administration) believes in Man-made global warming and puts out (opinion) press releases constantly. (a pet project of the director maybe?)
Meanwhile, NOAA (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration)... not so much. They tend to report on whatever the actual temp readings are without all the spin.
Things that make you go hmmmm. - inactive, on 04/10/2008, -0/+2Wrong again, as usual.
http://cdiac.ornl.gov/trends/temp/jonescru/jones.h ...
"The land portion of the database from which the Jones et al. time series are computed consists of surface air temperature (SAT) data (land-surface meteorological data and fixed-position weather ship data) from over 3000 station records that have been corrected for non-climatic errors, such as station shifts and/or instrument changes (Jones 1994)...The marine data used are compiled at the Hadley Centre of the United Kingdom Meteorological Office and consist of sea surface temperatures (SSTs) that incorporate in situ measurements from ships and buoys...Both these sources also extensively discuss the issue of consistency and homogeneity of the measurements through time and the steps that have been taken to ensure all non-climatic inhomogeneities have been removed."
"The only year in the last ten not among the warmest ten is 1996 (replaced in the warm list by 1990). The ten warmest years, in descending order, are 1998, 2005, 2003 and 2002 (tie), 2004, 2001, 1997, 1995, 1999, and 1990. "
Absolutely devastating. - realchemist, on 04/09/2008, -2/+4*****, these are political problems. There is no shortage of oil and there is no glabal warming.
- realveronica, on 04/09/2008, -1/+3i think its egotist human centric to cover our asses by saying "oh if we're not the SOLE cause, then why do anything about it."
- protodon, on 04/09/2008, -2/+4Most people's answer to global warming seems to be "it was gonna happen anyway". Way to give up. Perhaps one day when I become a serial killer because ignorant people have driven me mad my iine of defense will just be "well, they were going to die anyway"
-
Show 51 - 100 of 193 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is