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.
93 Comments
- naldwell, on 10/09/2008, -1/+7Did you read the article? Warm, humid conditions facilitate the spread of these diseases. Overpopulation of humans means more humans will be infected, but warm humid conditions means more wildlife and more humans get infected.
- cdigioia, on 10/09/2008, -1/+7...also doesn't have anything to do with global warming.
- Metyu, on 10/09/2008, -6/+11Buried for being sensationalist nonsense.
- wunksta, on 10/09/2008, -0/+4interesting, and what is you take on the development of ice ages?
milankovitch cycles alone are not sufficient to explain them, but combined with ghg and solar variation provide a much more stable explanation i believe. given this, you must conclude that the creation of ghg will inevitably lead to something.
yes, there are things we dont understand and its a still a developing field, but we shouldnt dismiss any attempt to explain what happens based on the evidence available because "its too difficult to understand!". that my friend, is ridiculous. - ratexla, on 10/09/2008, -1/+5"How to talk to a climate sceptic" http://gristmill.grist.org/skeptics
"Responses to common contrarian arguments" http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2004 ...
Go take on this challenge, you deniers make it sound easy: http://greenfyre.wordpress.com/2008/10/06/climate- ... - wunksta, on 10/09/2008, -1/+4well, logically you can conclude that the amount of NATURAL C02 production would not change that much in the last hundred years unless it was from some change in volcanic activity or such. its not like theres all of a sudden a lot more exhalation or something going on
anyway, exhalation etc is generally around 119.6 billon metric tons, (with a variable of 1.6 production) 90.6 billon comes from the ocean and we produce about 7.2, so overall around 219 billon tons, so about 3 percent i think. HOWEVER, and its a big "however". theres already a natural cycle of C02 production and use. plants take in about 120.2 billon tons (the reverse variable being 2.6) and the oceans can take 92.2. so this actually negates the overall production leaving still a little bit that can be absorbed, around 4 billon tons. now this leaves 3.2 billon that we are producing that is accumulating. now thats if you go off these figures i found, other ones have higher ones that still balance out for the natural process but have us producing upwards to 20 billion tons extra
http://www.eia.doe.gov/bookshelf/brochures/greenho ...
http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/emissions/co2_hum ...
http://hvo.wr.usgs.gov/volcanowatch/2007/07_02_15. ...
http://www.skepticalscience.com/human-co2-smaller- ...
either way, you have to agree that we are putting out extra C02, the question then is how much does it take before theres a noticible difference
now, this doesnt even go over methane or NO2 emissions i believe, just CO2, and we are producing a lot more of those then we are CO2. - sockpuppets, on 10/09/2008, -2/+5The only prescription for these is more cowbell.
- greenfyre, on 10/09/2008, -0/+3"The question is how much and how we should respond: this is where the science becomes prediction based upon beliefs."
What? Only the science can answer the first part, and science informs the second (ie the dialogues about "hows" must be informed, rational discussion, not the idiotic arm flapping that currently prevails). And if it is science then it is still based on science.
"and therefore their opinion does not count"
Not as "informed opinion" it doesn't. For that you have to be informed, regardless of your credential
"as evidenced by his calls to sabotage non-CCS coal plants. "
Scientists are still citizens and have a right to participate in politics ... or are you saying MLK jr should have shut up because he wasn't an economist?
"Ignore the politics. "
Is followed by a long, irrelevant conspiracy rant. Irrelevant because if the science is correct none of that crap matters, and if the science is wrong, it also doesn't matter.
"my viewpoint should be reduced to such nonsense."
You said it, I didn't!
Freeman Dyson debunked http://www.realclimate.org/wiki/index.php?title=Fr ... - partrow, on 10/09/2008, -2/+5"Global warming" ? Do you mean climate change?
- wunksta, on 10/09/2008, -0/+2it doesnt require force nor do i think its necessary
in reality, i think the markets would tend toward more sustainable efficient energy as well as environmentally friendly products and services with consumer awareness. the main thing is that these changes are BETTER for society in more ways than one
i dont look at it so much as preventing climate change but more just doing something to create a sustainable society while maintaining a relative social level. reducing emissions is a byproduct of that change, not the goal i would suggest. - goodinohio, on 10/10/2008, -0/+2govsucks, NAILED IT!!
- scamper22, on 10/09/2008, -0/+1you're getting dugg down, but climate change is a better name.
We really don't know how the earth is going to react to the increase in CO2. Maybe it will cool in the short term climate. Maybe the warming will only occur in the really long term. We don't know.
That's why I prefer the term climate change. - Hyst3ria, on 10/09/2008, -0/+2Exactly what I thought when I read it.
- pedo, on 10/09/2008, -6/+8waits for "global warming is a hoax" conspiracy theorists to discover this link and hijack every thread
- Metyu, on 10/09/2008, -0/+2WHO BURIED ME FOR KNOWING THE ANSWER!!! LOL!!!
- govsucks, on 10/09/2008, -0/+2uhhh, running a company that employees people. The fact is that we should weight the cost of these things before we FORCE people to comply wunksta. Driving 10mph would save a lot of lives but we don't do that because its stupid...and so is killing the option of DDT for third world nations. As you noted we've seen India using it with success. Why, because they told the environazis to go ***** themselves. Africa should do the same thing if they know what's good for them. Bunch of pampered collectivists sitting here in the U.S. and other nations living well and benefiting from our use of DDT all the while telling others they shouldn't or can't use the same thing. ***** doesn't begin to describe them. These collectivists run around in the US with two cars and a 1500 sqft home then have the nerve to tell some poor african village to prop up a solar panel to run their refridgerators....PRICKS!
- wunksta, on 10/09/2008, -2/+4are you talking about this?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milankovitch_cycles
it doesnt happen that fast, additionally these factors (since they are relatively predictable) can be factored in with anthropogenic changes in the environment
http://astrobiology.ucla.edu/OTHER/SSO/SolarSysInt ...
http://dx.doi.org/10.1126%2Fscience.207.4434.943
anyway, solar variation counts for around 25% of the current temperature change - govsucks, on 10/09/2008, -0/+2"We don't know."
But lets force billions of humans to give up their incomes in an effort to stop what we are unsure of.
Jeez, pathetic, - pe5t1lence, on 10/09/2008, -0/+2I would have thought Malaria would be a given.
- mbtria, on 10/09/2008, -1/+3Scare mongering. Pure and simple.
Babesiosis is not even a tropical disease, it is found on the eastern end of Long Island, NY, Fire Island and possibly some islands off the coast of Massachusetts. It is more widespread in Eurpope. Like Lyme disease, a frequent co-infector, Babesiosis is spread by the bite of the deer tick.
TB is not a tropical disease, but rather one of poverty and a lack of public health resources. During the 1800's, 1 in 6 Americans had TB.
Red tides may be a problem as water temperature can certainly play a role in their genesis, but there are other severely limiting factors in the formation of red and brown tides, as well as other biotic blooms.
The rest of the list is nothing but propaganda meant to frighten with new, exotic or frightening names. Yes, some of them are very serious public health concerns, but they are either not subject to ambient temperatures, or more dependent on a lack of sanitation or other health measures. - andergriff, on 10/09/2008, -0/+2Add this one: mental instability and delusional behavior
- greenfyre, on 10/09/2008, -1/+3Except for it being the complete opposite of the facts http://debunking.pbwiki.com/Humans+Causing+Climate ... great point.
- Tyrghast, on 10/09/2008, -0/+2Alcoholism isn't a disease either.
and no I'm not being sarcastic. - Metyu, on 10/09/2008, -0/+2The rest points towards a wider fact, which is that the climate changes continually.
I assume the author is rightly sceptical of the hysteria surrounding the climate change debate. I for one care more about the 10,000 children that die every month TODAY from easily treatable and preventable disease than any increases that may or may not happen in 100 years, depending which computer model you happen to be looking at.
The world is currently looking at models set up to prove man-made global warming. Hence, I also agree with "steaming pile of BS...". - greenfyre, on 10/09/2008, -1/+3Try actual science instead of abstract references to it "Solar Myth Debunked" http://debunking.pbwiki.com/Sunspots-and-Solar-Myt ...
- Metyu, on 10/09/2008, -0/+2Really?
Human = ~27 billion, global = 420 + 27 bn?? Pls reference if I'm wrong. - jasonliman, on 10/09/2008, -3/+4Because last winter was -2 degree colder than last year, I ate more turkey.
And because last summer was 2 degree hotter, I ate more ice cream.
It's got to be Global Warming!! IT'S A DISEASE!!
/s - inactive, on 10/09/2008, -0/+1No, I didn't. It is pointless.
- norrin, on 10/09/2008, -2/+3We have the technology to virtually wipe out numbers 9 through 12. Millions of people have been dying from these diseases for many years before there was ever any talk of "Global Warming". All because some dumb-ass, in his infinite wisdom, thought it was a good idea to ban DDT.
- lornali, on 10/10/2008, -1/+2There is so much evidence of global warming, but the cynics refuse to see the writing on the wall
- deacont23, on 10/09/2008, -0/+1A very nasty virus
Read 'The Hot Zone' by Richard Preston. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Hot_Zone
Its a good book and shows you how close we were to having an outbreak in the US. - divinediva, on 10/09/2008, -0/+1There is significant evidence that outbreaks of both diseases are related to unusual variations in rainfall/dry season patterns
- jasonliman, on 10/09/2008, -2/+3Well, SARS and H5N1 was basically came from Hong Kong, and I was born in Hong Kong, bet you don't know how was the grocery's market condition in HK.
Hong Kong is one of the city in the world has the most density in population, probably more dense than New York. We Chinese loves live stock, specially we want freshly kill chicken. In order to supply a tremendous amount of population, ranchers usually store chicken in a small cage. let's say the cage is 2' by 3', and 10 chicken per cage. They put cages on top of each other, and as much as 10 cages per pile. Just imagine the condition in these chicken storage places with over 20 or even 30 piles per store. Oh rite, think about the chicken will be ***** on top of each other.
Since you talk about humid, Hong Kong has always been humid, weather? Several typhoons a year, rain a lot and summery time can be as high as 40'C.
Also, since lands is very expensive in HK, grocery's market is built at the ground floor of a high rise apartment building and yes, live chicken store right underneath where we live.
Over population means the disease can spread out very fast like in a Zombie movie and its hard to control, and HK basically doesn't have enough space for live stock, wild life animal and people living area, so not simple your general statement of "more people will be infected."
Living too close to a bad condition grocery's market is pretty much asking for getting a disease.
At last, the title of the article is "The Deadly Dozen: 12 Diseases Global Warming Incubates," it is obviously over using the term of global warming. - wunksta, on 10/09/2008, -0/+1ill agree that scientists should focus on their respective fields and such, but because the issue has become politicized and possibly exaggerated in some respects doesnt mean that it should be thrown out with the bath water, so to speak.
lets find out what the evidence tell us and then we can figure out ourselves what we should or should not do about it. - wunksta, on 10/09/2008, -1/+2im actually going into civil engineering to volunteer and help with the development of villages and cities, providing fresh water wells, schools etc
what are you doing again? - Arrhenius, on 10/10/2008, -1/+2The DDT myth is another hoax by the same crowd that can never be bothered to get their facts straight. That hoax is basically 100% backwards from the truth. Widespread use of DDT for agriculture has led to the development of resistance to DDT in mosquitoes. Household use of DDT for malaria vector control is _not_ banned, it is however, less effective thanks to pesticide manufacturers pushing the use of DDT for non-health related reasons.
http://scienceblogs.com/deltoid/ddt/
http://timlambert.org/category/science/ddt/
http://www.gnxp.com/blog/2006/04/ddt-myths.php
http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/ridley/tutorial ... - govsucks, on 10/09/2008, -2/+3To be fair, thousands of people have died because some do-gooders thought something MIGHT happen. Enough already!
- wunksta, on 10/09/2008, -0/+1interesting stuff
however what this indicates, i think, is that massive changes are going on which havent been happening in the past. how often does this happen?
if this is caused by solar variation, then really we expect it to return combined with the anthropogenic changes we are making, excerbating the overall effect.
if this cooling trend continues though, what are the predominat causes and what will be the effects?
be this what it may, its still an anomaly and only time will tell what happens next
http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction= ... - wunksta, on 10/09/2008, -2/+3@It's the cycle we are experiencing right now. Duh!
thats not a scientific answer. what i was asking is what are the causes of this change? can you identify the causes? i mean, seriously. why should anyone take your opinion seriously if you cant even offer a valid answer as to whats causing this natural change? you would just be repeating whatevers told to you without actually understanding it yourself, what makes that different then people just "saying" climate change was man made without knowing? - johnsna2, on 10/09/2008, -0/+1The problem is the markets won't move towards sustainable efficient energy, at least not as efficiently as they would without government stepping in, they are likely going to turn into you're average products where people are just trying to make a quick buck without actually producing a quality product. These aren't things that should be produced based on supply/demand economics, they are necessary and should be mandated because it is NECESSARY for our society to be using less energy, and getting it from renewable sources. And as for consumer awareness, I don't think most can grasp the whole climate change picture, and society is going to follow the usual route where people buy things that they want and not what they need. To put it in a not nice way, for this situation the majority of people don't know better so its going to take something like government to step in and make a difference.
- wunksta, on 10/09/2008, -2/+3well, go ahead and debunk it
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/05/08051 ...
im sure there you could receive a lot of funding from those that want it to be "alarmism" - ratexla, on 10/09/2008, -1/+2Have you seen this great anti-denier blog? :) http://greenfyre.wordpress.com
- wunksta, on 10/09/2008, -0/+1well i agree, we could implement controls such as taxes on current energy and subsidize alternatives
but given the nature of the market, people are more willing to get cheaper sustainable energy than pay outrageous amounts for the current energy
plus, adding sustainable energy into the mix will help to lower prices overall - inactive, on 10/09/2008, -0/+1Is there any disease that doesn't originate in Africa? Damn its rough over there.
- nehigh, on 10/09/2008, -1/+2"Myths which are believed in tend to become true."- George Orwell:
You "believe"? What part of a scientific argument does "believe" come into play? - Tyrghast, on 10/09/2008, -0/+1In-laws...
- Frostek, on 10/09/2008, -0/+1Nothing much - same as before.
- wunksta, on 10/09/2008, -2/+3and what natural cycle is that again? could you point it out for me?
here, ill start. you tell me whats wrong with this
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/05/08051 ... - Metyu, on 10/10/2008, -0/+0@"Not as "informed opinion" it doesn't. "
What? Are you saying some of the best phycisists geologists geographers on the planet are not informed?
@"Is followed by a long, irrelevant conspiracy rant."
"irrelevent"... well argued. Thanks for that. Glad to see you're engaging with reasons to be sceptical. Have YOU studied empire, greenfyre? I mean, you seem to claim that informed opinion is important, so is it your informed opinion that this is irrelevant or are you simply dismissing the argument because it makes you uncomfortable?
@ Dyson debunked. From one of the links you sent, "I agree with Dyson that the focus on meteorology is misplaced in the mitigation arguments. Climate science is crucial on the adaptation side, but all the focus on it on the mitigation side is a red herring and a vicious one."
How about the bleaching of corals being caused by sun lotion not increased acidity? Tis has been blamed on CO2 for ever, until someone comes along and says actually, maybe something else is causing it. Just one example of where the science is not complete - and yet (excuse the emphasis) CLIMATE POLICY IS ALREADY DETERMINED. Reduce CO2, and make sure developing countries can only use technologies made in the West to develop. Now, where have I heard this before? Oh yeah, when I was reading about how empires were built! -
Show 51 - 97 of 97 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is