What is Digg?71 Comments
- eak125, on 01/12/2008, -3/+40and the older arctic ice keeps yelling at the younger ice to keep off it's grass....
- rationalist, on 01/12/2008, -1/+17Congratulations, you have just invented the straw herring.
- MaTT2011, on 01/12/2008, -5/+19I refuse to make any kind of changes in order to increase the chances of the survivability of the human race in the future cause i will be dead and all those who are alive can deal with the mess i've made themselves, young yet to be born punks. Plus; Jesus made dinosaurs so they could turn into oil for the specific purpose of using my over the top SUV with Bush/Cheney re-election sticker on it.
/standard apathetic a-hole response - inactive, on 01/12/2008, -6/+19In other news, the sky is blue.
- scabbers, on 01/12/2008, -3/+10I'm glad I'm not that young anymore. You're all doomed.
- CrankyHippo, on 01/12/2008, -0/+7Thanks for ***** things up for us old timer
- TrevorBradley, on 01/12/2008, -4/+11And the sand is very dark (with one's head stuck in it)
- Ramble, on 01/12/2008, -0/+6Not if we also build more nuclear power plants.
- inactive, on 01/12/2008, -8/+13Which genius scientist was the first to decide they would take a snap shot of the earth as soon as we got the right tools to do it and if ANNYTHING changed it not only was negative but that it also meant the world would soon end? This planet has gone from being a huge lake of molten lava to a gigantic ice cube. I think I'd be a little more worried if nothing changed at all while we were here. Ice will always be melting here and forming there, species that can't adapt will always die off while the others live on. Welcome to life on Earth.
- TrevorBradley, on 01/12/2008, -3/+7It's not climate change, it's intelligent warming!
(really, that's how many of the more extreme folks are behaving...) - TrevorBradley, on 01/13/2008, -0/+4Even with perfect efficiency, our exponential growth curves (population, economy, use of non-renewable resources) was going to bite us in the ass one way or another.
- inactive, on 01/13/2008, -0/+3http://www.hse.k12.in.us/staff/cvanalstine/images/ ...
- ru1dt, on 01/13/2008, -0/+3"You can eat it, but it tastes like *****."
- visability, on 01/12/2008, -1/+4No one is saying the world is going to end
- earthwormzim, on 01/13/2008, -3/+6The world suffers from Global Climate Change? Haha! That's like saying, the world suffers from Global Sun Rises.
- rarson, on 01/13/2008, -0/+3Use of "renewable" resources is already ***** us over. In much of Africa, over half the population doesn't have access to drinkable water. Rice in some parts of China grows with a red tint due to the toxic ***** that is in the water that they have no other choice but to use to water their rice. Supplying water for people to drink is an immediate problem, but some people (oddly enough, people like Al Gore who don't have to worry about their drinking water) think climate change, something that occurs naturally that we have no control over (whether we contribute to it or not), is a more important issue. Even if we devoted 100% of the world's resources to climate change, we wouldn't see the effect in our lifetime, and we'd all die from all the other problems that the world has that we're currently ignoring.
- Ramble, on 01/12/2008, -2/+5We only percieve the sky as blue.
- ZenMojo, on 01/12/2008, -1/+4Too bad those desalinization plants use fuel. The irony is, at some point the deniers will come up with expensive, elaborate, post-catastrophe ideas while everyone else is busy offering cheap, effective preemptive solutions.
- ZenMojo, on 01/12/2008, -1/+4I would have said he's been drinking too much Red Dog.
- salinemist, on 01/13/2008, -2/+4Which is why I think that it's idiocy to believe that the Earth maintains a steady temperature for thousands of years regardless of human input.
- l2OI3, on 01/13/2008, -1/+3Sometimes I feel like we're so inefficient a species that doom is our destiny. I wouldn't be surprised if in 200 years humans are living as they once did in prehistorical times.
- Aensland, on 01/12/2008, -0/+2No problem.
- OneHine, on 01/13/2008, -0/+2Which would explain why p0s3r vomited it up at us once. But why does he continue doing it in virtually every science story on Digg?
- nick111, on 01/13/2008, -1/+3You're a creationist right?
- Richandler, on 01/12/2008, -1/+3All that ice is currently falling on top of Green Bay right now.
- l2OI3, on 01/13/2008, -0/+1The sky is a lie.
- Ramble, on 01/12/2008, -2/+3That's ok, we don't mind if you die off, one generation of imbeciles is enough let alone three.
- TygerTyger, on 01/12/2008, -2/+3Older Arctic Sea ice giving way to younger, thinner ice...
...how like Hollywood!
What's next? Icebergs changing their name to sound less Jewish? - inactive, on 01/12/2008, -1/+2The color blue, although unnamed, existed before humans.
- lazyrussian, on 01/13/2008, -1/+2*its*
- thebellmaster1x, on 01/13/2008, -0/+1"Water shortage" means "freshwater shortage." 'Cause, you know, if you drink saltwater, you DIE.
And desalinization plants are generally inefficient; as well, they would use energy that could be better devoted to other things. - bboyjkang, on 01/13/2008, -0/+1scabbers
"I'm glad I'm not that young anymore. You're all doomed."
Stem cell research + Human Epigenome project = live to up 200-300 yrs old
= you're ***** with the rest of us
= we all die before we're supposed to die - earthwormzim, on 01/12/2008, -0/+1Tru tru.
- kibbled, on 01/13/2008, -0/+1In Australia they are using wind to power desalination plants.
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?story ... - fixedcoma, on 01/13/2008, -0/+1alot of that ice has now evaporated and is now giving the desert lands some water and snow!
- sanman, on 01/13/2008, -0/+1I think the older ice is just jealous, and secretly has the hots for the younger thinner ice
- nospinhere, on 01/13/2008, -1/+2Thanks for this breaking news story. Something scientists have known for 20 years.
- eak125, on 01/13/2008, -0/+1Thank you lazyrussian god knows the internet would be doomed without you to correct ***it's*** grammar. Though as you can see we just don't learn because we don't care.
- inactive, on 01/14/2008, -0/+1If the world is ending, which I hope it does soon- why are people still trying to make money. Money isn't even real!
- MaTT2011, on 01/13/2008, -1/+2But all those issues, to some level or another, impact each other in profound ways. If the earths climate changes even slightly we could see less and less types and amounts of food as well as drinkable water resources. Everything is intertwined and if we can reduce our effects on the current warming trend we can better utilize and preserve the resources we currently have and will have in the future.
I understand the concern about spending a ton of money and not getting a, what we think, return on our large investment; but the alternative is that we spend/do nothing/very little and as a result the consequences would be much greater and at that point we would have to spend even MORE money than what we might have had to spend to avoid the problem, or as much of it as we can, to begin with. The cost of doing nothing is far greater than the cost of doing even everything currently in our power.
Thats not to say that we should spend as much possible as soon as possible; it has be an integration of resources, technology and effort on the individual level over a long period of time, human time that is, to see results. Its not a simple do nothing -or- everything situation and even if we start out small we send the message that we are making an effort now and that in the future we will continue to do so. It is all about adapting, like you said, but its about adapting in a manner that lets us enact change where and when we can as much as we can. If we assume the problem is just a natural warming trend we also have to examine what part we are playing in that trend; if we are making it worse we need to be able to reduce that effect as much as possible in order to give us every advantage at our disposal.
Its a complicated issue, to be sure, but the price of doing nothing is much larger than the price of doing what we can when we can. - londubh, on 01/13/2008, -1/+2And with global warming there's going to be a lot less of it.
- ryan83189, on 01/13/2008, -0/+1Solar desalination.
- a1programmer, on 01/13/2008, -0/+1hmmmm. Is there anything else "a new" indicates ?
- rarson, on 01/13/2008, -1/+1It's difficult to give a ***** about global warming when so many people around the world don't even have access to drinking water.
- inactive, on 01/13/2008, -2/+2You're not very smart, right? I'm pretty sure creationist have the earths date pegged somewhere in the few thousand year old mark. You were clever enough to pick up on the Utah in my screen name, just not quite quick enough to actually read what I wrote.
- hitokiri808, on 01/13/2008, -1/+1Didn't it just snow in Baghdad?
- rarson, on 01/13/2008, -1/+1Are you completely unaware of the growing problem of a lack of access to clean drinking water around the world? Just because there is water doesn't mean that it is safe to drink. Or were you responding to londubh? I can't tell from your response.
- earthwormzim, on 01/13/2008, -1/+1Hahahahahahaha! Seriously...be careful dude! I almost fell of my chair when you said that. You could hurt people like that! So, where, pray tell, will the water go? Outer space?
- TrevorBradley, on 01/12/2008, -2/+2"while we were here"
If the "we" in your statement referred to the sum existence of ***** Sapiens, I'd wholeheartedly agree. I'll even agree that rate and extent of change over the past 100 years isn't without precedent... for example, changes this dramatic and this fast (though in the other direction) occur before the rapid onset of an Ice Age. - rarson, on 01/13/2008, -1/+1A warming environment with increased CO2 increased the growth of vegetation. So, while I'm not a climate scientist, I can only hypothesize that a warmer environment would be beneficial to feeding mankind.
I'm not saying that we need to heat the Earth up to solve hunger problems, but simply that spending money on trying to change the climate isn't going to benefit mankind as much as it would if we spent that money on solving issues like providing people with drinkable water and food.
In other words, I think we sort of agree. We can't rush to spend on the climate, but it's an important issue. Regardless, even if we devote all our resources, we still will not have a very large impact, so while maybe we can stave the problem off for a short while, we still need to figure out how to weather this issue, and certainly the Earth will warm or cool whether we want it to or not. We can't change the natural cycles. I think it's more important to come up with a plan to survive global warming than coming up with a plan to reduce it, because we have no idea what the future will bring. We might *plan* on a certain amount of warming, while solar activity could increase it far beyond what we planned for. Maybe I'm wrong, I'm not a scientist, but I'm trying to look at the issue from a pragmatic standpoint. -
Show 51 - 70 of 70 discussions
Check out the new & improved 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is 