What is Digg?Sponsored by Best Buy
Meet Keith: Best Buy Employee and Possible Singing Sensation. view!
www.youtube.com/bestbuy - One employee proves he has the chops and the passion to star in Best Buy’s holiday campaign.
99 Comments
- RonPauls, on 07/09/2009, -20/+36next generation could face 'living hell'.... if governments keep overspending and over-regulating.
- ousthouse, on 07/09/2009, -4/+18Am I the only one who thinks it's funny that the PRINCE OF WALES is chastising the rest of us for living lives of comfort?
- stack3r, on 07/09/2009, -1/+13next generations will be in living hell due to current generation focusing on economic growth and greed, and nothing else.
- Lionhart, on 07/09/2009, -5/+15There's an unbelievable amount of newly registered users commenting on this post. I smell an invasion from a conservative board.
also lol@ "typicaldiggeral". Seriously, if you think everyone in Digg is a liberal why do you even bother posting here? Do you think you're going to convert people or something?? - Smegzor, on 07/09/2009, -5/+14Unless the sea of grey goo gets them first.
- Kapitaine, on 07/09/2009, -1/+9To those who think that because it's cold one day global warming therefore cannot exist...please, go outside and dig your own hole.
Global warming is NOT about weather. Weather is rather a result / effect of global warming. Global warming is not about idle pockets of temperature in small places on a sunny day, it's about the overall global temperature and rays not being able to escape properly due to a build up of CO2 which absorbs and therefore reflects back to the earth heat. This causes overall global temperature increase.
Just look at Venus for an example of this. It's a cloudy planet built up of CO2 - a runaway global greenhouse show for us all to enjoy! - GreenAlien, on 07/09/2009, -5/+10People still believe global warming is a hoax? I thought that fad had already passed.
- GreenAlien, on 07/09/2009, -3/+8That's what the companies raping the planet would like you to think. That way nothing curbs their profits.
- alamedaman, on 07/09/2009, -2/+7we're facing hell cause we have to pay for all the ***** of the current generation
- dregin, on 07/09/2009, -1/+6Charles can't actually become king...
- GreenAlien, on 07/09/2009, -3/+7I don't follow this logic. There are other serious issues to deal with so let's not deal with this serious issue until it's too late?
- wrathchilde, on 07/10/2009, -1/+5Haahahahahaha!
You can look at actual data and say the last three years are a trend. - N01SE, on 07/10/2009, -0/+3Seriously these comments suck, why are people even making all these comments about government, the article was about climate change and I'm halfway down before anyone says anything about that.
- N01SE, on 07/10/2009, -0/+3People should not digg you down because that is actually an issue. Mass cultivation and consumption of the Earth's resources do not occur for fun, they occur to sustain an exponentially increasing population. No solution for stability with the planet will work unless population growth itself is stabilized. It's simple arithmetic, do the math.
- gvlax50, on 07/09/2009, -6/+9Population control FTW
- NodOfficer, on 07/09/2009, -0/+2Scientists vs. Rich People?
- wrathchilde, on 07/09/2009, -4/+6Excellent point!
Let's take a look at that trend:
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/graphs/
Whew, thank goodness for those last 3 years. - inactive, on 07/09/2009, -0/+2Or the firebreathing snorlaxes.
- autoboy, on 07/09/2009, -10/+12Never waste a crisis
- wrathchilde, on 07/09/2009, -2/+4um, what global globe?
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/graphs/ - LongShlong, on 07/10/2009, -0/+2You mean Pangaea? Right... But that's even a little too far back... Think a couple of hundred years ago, you unread fool. Besides... what's your point?
- GreenAlien, on 07/09/2009, -5/+7Let me guess. Republican?
- ralph123, on 07/09/2009, -5/+7The ice age is coming, the sun's zooming in
Meltdown expected, the wheat is growing thin
Engines stop running, but I have no fear
Cause London is drowning and I, live by the river - ladyattis, on 07/10/2009, -1/+3Bingo.
- GreenAlien, on 07/10/2009, -0/+2For example. For many years the car manufacturers got aggressive in blocking development of electric cars. Some documentaries about it on YT. Not a great deal I can do about that as a consumer until they start mass producing them to make them affordable. These are all executive decisions and lobbyists funded by oil companies.
With computers/monitors, given the choice between one with a green/energy certificate and one without, I'll chose the one with. Without being a full blown activist there's not a great deal I can do about that either.
You might want to look up the definition of "hypocrite" in the dictionary. Or at least take the piss in a way that makes sense. - N01SE, on 07/10/2009, -0/+2in a van down by the river?
- damnshoes, on 07/09/2009, -2/+3OM NOM NOM NOM
- Lionhart, on 07/11/2009, -0/+1I think your reading comprehension needs some work. I said an unbelievably amount of newly registered users.
- inactive, on 07/10/2009, -0/+1No matter, I suspect he's more inflentual already.
- Ozzsanity, on 07/10/2009, -1/+2I find it amusing that these old folks are just now understanding what they have done to the earth for their entire lives. Now they want to act like it matters. You spent 60+ ***** on the earth and now you want change.
- JohnGalt750, on 07/10/2009, -2/+3Remember it's "climate change" now. That way they can take credit for anything.
More heat = climate change
Less heat = climate change
More storms = climate change
Less storms = climate change - ihavefrowned, on 07/10/2009, -0/+1You are an idiot buddy. That's not at all what he said. I know because I can read it. You can't twist people's words around like that when the discussion is not verbal. It just doesn't work.
- JohnGalt750, on 07/10/2009, -1/+2And I wonder what Chuck's carbon footprint is?
- inactive, on 07/09/2009, -11/+12Global warming is gonna be a good thing time to eliminate some waste preferably paul zombies - rush dildo heads - o'really misfits - all a bunch of pussies - i'll be choking on the ashes of my enemies
- Lionhart, on 07/11/2009, -0/+1There's nothing illogical about it. A large amounts of the posts were from new users. This indicates they registered on digg just to make these comments. Mostly likely an organized movement. ***** happens all the time on digg.
- LongShlong, on 07/09/2009, -4/+5The planet used to be a lot warmer than it is today...
Perhaps you'll just have to settle for chocking on ***** for the time being, as per usual? - Nairebis, on 07/10/2009, -2/+3It also entirely possible -- though they won't tell you this -- that life will be, on the whole, *better* when the Earth is slightly warmer than in the past. *gasp*
Why is it always assumed that any change is automatically bad?
Ask your self this question. Suppose the Earth was cooling. You know that we would have the same hysterical stories about life as we know it ending. So, the current temperature is perfectly optimal? No, of course it isn't.
Will some areas be worse off? Yes. Will some areas be better off? YES. And it may be that the good outweighs the bad. - SamSks, on 07/10/2009, -0/+1Dammit! That works!
- gwatzn, on 07/10/2009, -0/+1It is kind of funny, but it doesn't change the fact that he's right. You don't need to be a genius to worry when the vast majority of climate scientists think we're heading towards a cliff. Fast. If you have children or care about anyone under 20 years old, you should get informed and get political quickly.
- DomineInSitu, on 07/10/2009, -1/+2http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/science/pastcc.ht ...
- wrathchilde, on 07/10/2009, -0/+1biqysmg, that is all well and good. I never offered any interpretation, just pointed out that 3 years does not a trend make, so provided a link to some data. Certainly there are more data, how much would you like to see?
And the term sinusoid is generally applied to cycles, not trends. You want to point out that variables go up and down, great.
Today's weather is just weather. A generally accepted shift in weather over 30 years is how we begin to discuss climate. If you think it should be over time-scales where orbital parameters apply, great, but it is simply semantics.
Cheers. - dandandantheman, on 07/09/2009, -5/+6By the time some type of resource-based catastrophe starts impacting human beings, scientists in white lab coats will have gained super jesus powers and the ability to make a living being immortal with stem cell technology, gene therapy, and other fun DNA tricks. The uber rich will pay for this technology and will become immortal gods, or the scientists will invent invisibility cloaks that cloak their entire labs and their labs will walk away on tiny robot legs undetected to the north pole where they will invent fire-breathing dragons. They will revive the Dinosaurs to go hunt and kill any remaining humans. The uber rich will try to nuke the scientists, who will have already included anti-nuke screen technology into their cloaks. The scientists will fly to another planet and destroy Earth with a new type of ray gun. OR they will let the sun destroy the earth in a giant solar flare. I dunno, something like that.
- N01SE, on 07/10/2009, -3/+3@GreenAlien
then you should've read the comment again. There are lots of other things we need to fix as well as global warming, assume there would be prioritizing, changes in government will need to occur along the way. - inactive, on 07/10/2009, -3/+3And what exactly makes this inbred buffoon an expert on climate change?
- EricSchC1, on 07/10/2009, -1/+1"Shut your mouth or talk about something you're actually educated about."
Take your own ***** advice...oh, I'm sorry...I didn't see the "Dr." ahead of your username...ass. - blqysmg, on 07/10/2009, -1/+1When you look at the actual data, from something more than the last 30 years, you will see that there IS a trend. It started at the end of the Little Ice Age, and shows an increase of just less than 0.5 degrees Celsius per century. There is ALSO a sinusoidal trend with a period of about 30 years where the temperature travels around half a degree above and below this other trend line.
The temperature rose from around 1915 to around 1945, then fell from around 1945 to about 1975. It rose again from the mid 1970s to the mid 2000s, and has now started to fall again. This year, in fact just last month, we crossed the "average" temperature, and are now sitting at approximately the zero mark, or just at the average temperature of the three decades between 1960 and 1990, which is considered the norm for the globe. The IPCC predictions show that we should be over a full degree above that by this year.
The hottest year so far has been, what? 1998? Followed by 1934? The average of the temperatures between 1998 and 2008 are the highest ever recorded, but it is actually only about 1% different than the peak temperature of the 1930s. They make a big deal out of the temperature rise and fall, but the truth is that if the average temperature is 60 degrees, then the rise and fall of half a degree back and forth doesn't amount to a hill of beans.
In the historical record, the CO2 levels have been as much as 20 times what they are now. We still have had ice ages. We've had steep changes in temperature before, they did not persist. This one has not persisted. Even if the temperature does keep rising on average, it will not rise on an exponential scale. If it is cyclic, as many scientists claim, then it will have to rise AND FALL. The climate model prediction is already very wrong. A model that the authors claim can accurately predict out to over a hundred years is already off by 17% in the first 10 years of it's prediction life does not seem to be very accurate.
Yes the model was able to take the last 30 years and predict with some accuracy the next five. After that, however, it began to deviate rather sharply with reality. Perhaps if they had used more than the last 30 years to base the model on? After all, they tell us that you cannot look out the window and see climate changes. Today's weather is just weather. It takes a longer view to see Climate Change. They decided that 30 to 50 years was the right length of time to look. I think they should have used 30 to 50 thousand. Or 300 to 500 thousand.
If they had started their calculations based on the average temperature of 300 to 500 thousand years ago, and seen what the deviation is between that and today, then plotted the line between the two, and divided by 500,000, they would have found themselves looking at a flat line. That would not have sold very many movie tickets, however, or gotten $50 Billion in grant money to study the Crisis. - inactive, on 07/10/2009, -1/+1heh.. sounded like I was talking about the present Administration...
On the Climate Change note... Anyone catch the Waxman bill? 1300 pages of nanny state, blasted through congress, even though they blatantly were not allowed the time to read it? How does this stuff happen in a government that expects people to be accountable to it? Easy. Every major news network providing hours upon hours of informative MJ coverage day after day = nobody's talking about the insane atrocities happening in congress.
The timing is mind-boggling. - JohnGalt750, on 07/10/2009, -2/+2A developer is someone that wants to build a house in a forest, an environmentalist is someone who already owns a house in the forest.
- stuffradio, on 07/10/2009, -1/+1Great logic: "I smell an invasion from a conservative board." *rolls eyes*
-
Show 51 - 100 of 102 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