Slashdot Mirror
Global Dimming
wiredog writes "The Guardian reports on research which shows that the amount of sunlight reaching the Earth's surface has decreased by 10% in 30 years. This has implications for global warming models and, especially, agricultural output."
I would say this is directly linked to our obesity problems
badum DUM
This is not a sig
my landlord told me not to touch that dial on the wall, but i couldn't resist
i'll set it back to the way i found it
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
I always felt that the world was a brighter place when I was a kid, now I have proof!
So the pollution that pumps out of power stations is making it too dark to switch to solar power. How convenient.
research which shows that the amount of sunlight reaching the Earth's surface has decreased by 10%
Maybe we already have that considering that the study has a margin of error of 10%
Didn't you people see Animatrix? We HAD to do this to prevent the robot takeover, but it will only cause them to come after us for batteries.
So, if I get this right, global dimming and global warming are compatible, possibly complementary phenomena. This would mean that the world is getting warmer & darker.
Now, I'm not a scientist, but this sort of implies to me that things will get more humid as well. So, we're setting up for living in a big ole' sauna. So, let's look at the ups and downs:
Good: We'll all have great skin for starts.
Bad: Lots of very fat men walking around in flip-flops with small towels around their waists.
Good: Girls will wear less clothing to cope with the heat & humidity--we'll have a population of nice-skinned chicks dressed like the love-slaves from planet Triton. Misquoting Mary Carey: "Global warming? Never heard of it, but I guess we'll all have to wear less". Woo!
Bad: Killer hangovers, massive ring around the collar.
Cole's Law: Thinly sliced cabbage
If we make it easier for the stupid people to survive, then of course Global Dimming will occur.
Play Well
3. I haven't done the calculations (has anybody?) but it also occurs to me that if Earth's atmosphere were soaking up all of that energy, there'd be some SERIOUS global warming occuring.
IANAAP*, IAAIC**. But why would energy being soaked up by the atmosphere lead to a warmer planet than being soaked up by the ground which then heats the atmosphere? If anything it would just change the temperature gradient, not the mean temperature, making the surface temperature colder, no?
* I am not an atmospheric physicist
**I am an ignorant clod
/. readers and global domination.. I don't think so!
:)
geek1: 'we need a totalitarian state run by elite technocrats to rule the world'
geek2: 'totalitarian states blow goatse, your monopolistic society just prevents personal freedom and restricts innovation. a community-wide socialist state for the benefit of all is what's needed'
geek1: 'you commie, just like the inhabitants of Thabeza3 in trek:NG episode 7, your society will crumble under the weight of indecision and everyone making their own principalities'
Meanwhile.. the rest of the world will continue as normal
The Venusians apparently made the same assumption about their climate, unfortunately.
What? Sure, we can mine for Hydrogen. We will mine the public treasuries for subsidies to make lots and lots of Hydrogen. Within 30 years, the rurals will be slaving away to afford the land taxes to pay for the urbanites having H-powered cars so they can zippidy doo dah down their brightly lit streets (which will have to be brightly lit, due to less sunlight, you dig?).
[You have a stable society when some nut guns down a schoolyard and the law doesn't change.]
Eldery farmers are just kooks. Everyone know that. (They even believe in owning firearms .. I mean, that's just crazy!) They don't have degrees, and all they do is mess around in the dirt (which can just get some wetbacks to do anyway). What the hell do they know? After all, it's not like the Human animal can watch something change for decades and come to a conclusion on the basis of that. Nope, not at all.
It's better overall to have scientists shaking their heads, saying things like "if it's this significant, then it would have been reported before". After all, it's not possible to have something reported the first time. Nope, not at all. These scientist guys really know their stuff.
[You have a stable society when some nut guns down a schoolyard and the law doesn't change.]