Slashdot Mirror
NASA: Increasing Carbon Emissions Risk Megadroughts
An anonymous reader writes: Droughts in the western U.S. have been bad recently, but not as bad as they could be. Researchers from NASA, Cornell, and Columbia are now warning that if we don't slow the rate at which we produce greenhouse gases, then we're dramatically increasing our odds of a drought that lasts upwards of three decades. "The scientists were interested in megadroughts that took place between 1100 and 1300 in North America. These medieval-period droughts, on a year-to-year basis, were no worse than droughts seen in the recent past. But they lasted, in some cases, 30 to 50 years. When these past megadroughts are compared side-by-side with computer model projections of the 21st century, both the moderate and business-as-usual emissions scenarios are drier, and the risk of droughts lasting 30 years or longer increases significantly."
Ahh no.
http://www.co2science.org/arti...
But yes keep telling yourself that the warm periods weren't global and miraculously just materialized where people could record it.
Ahh no. [posts link to site funded by ALEC, Exxon Mobil, and Richard Mellon Scaife] But yes keep telling yourself that the warm periods weren't global and miraculously just materialized where people could record it.
Ahh no., I didn't just tell myself.
Actually 1100 years ago CO2 was pretty much at a high point for the last 1 million years at 280 ppm. During the cycle of glaciations/interglacials that have occurred on an ~100,000 year period for the last 800,000 years the peak CO2 level was 300 ppm or below and during the height of the glaciations it dropped into the 190 ppm range. At 400 ppm now it's higher than it's been in 4 or 5 million years if not longer, before anything resembling modern humans evolved.
While we're at it, let's fix the economic models that predicted hyperinflation as a result of the Fed's money creation. Instead, we have a strong dollar. Creating more money makes it stronger. What economic model ever predicted that?
I don't know if you're serious, but the standard model predicted it. Here is the equation: mv = pq Where m is the total amount of money, v is is the velocity of money (how quickly money gets transferred from person to person), and pq is the total price of everything. Essentially what has happened as the fed prints more money and m increases, the velocity has gone down because banks have been keeping the extra money in their vaults instead of loaning it out. The equation balanced out, just as expected.
Speaking of hyper-inflation, anyone who predicted that was wrong. The fed can theoretically slip up and create inflation, but to get hyper-inflation you have to continue printing more and more money. The fed wasn't about to do that, and Bernanke had several methods for countering large inflation if it became a problem (those methods hadn't been tested necessarily, I am just pointing out that it clearly wasn't his intention to spur hyper-inflation).
Also, the dollar is strong relative to the Euro and Yen. Relative to itself, we've had inflation.
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
you're confused because this is a rare case of a reverse poe's law
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P...
rather than fundamentalism though, what is being misunderstood is the sarcasm
the troll is speaking sarcastically. his position is "like NASA knows shit, and we should all bow down before mighty NASA, what a joke"
but since the position he is speaking sarcastically about is extreme (that NASA doesn't have anything useful to say), he sounds genuinely earnest about not heeding NASA's warnings. he sounds earnest, by accident
so i guess a follow up observation to poe's law would be "a sarcastic troll is unintentionally useful and perceptive"
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
How about we fix the climate models before using them to predict things?
How about these guys take into account the rising temperatures in oceanic heat reservoirs instead of restricting their analysis to lagging indicators like air temperature?
Because historical deep oceanic temperature records do not exist. There is no evidence of rising oceanic temperatures.
I watched the video. Pathetic. So there is no record of long droughts in the US. But it is going to get worse! I suggest you ask the Anasazi why they left their lands. Oh geez. A 300 year drought without any SUVs and with less population?
+5 insightful? What is insightful about this?
The linked Wikipedia article mentions the supposed "300 year drought" in a single sentence that ends with... wait for it... "citation needed". Nice.
If you actually bother to read TFA, you will see that the entire point is that droughts in the near future are likely to be similar to those that occured around the time the Anasazi were abandoning their villages. The researchers never claim that "there is no record of long droughts in the US". Their conclusion is that there were long droughts in the past, and we are likely to soon see them again.