Slashdot Mirror
Mathematical Formula Predicts Global Mass Extinction Event in 2100 (vice.com)
Kate Lunau, writing for Motherboard: A new paper in Science Advances finds that a mass extinction period mirroring ones from our planet's ancient past could be triggered when humanity adds a certain amount of carbon to the oceans, which are home to the majority of all plants and animals on our planet. The paper pegs that amount at 310 gigatons. According to lead author Daniel Rothman of MIT, based on projections from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, we're on course to hit that number by 2100. After that, we enter "unknown territory." [...] Previous mass extinctions have happened over the course of thousands or millions of years, but the period of change we're in right now has lasted centuries at best, making it hard to compare them. Although plenty of experts say Earth is already experiencing a sixth mass extinction, that remains "a scientific question," Rothman, who is professor of geophysics in the MIT Department of Earth, Atmospheric and Planetary Sciences, told me. Once our planet hits the threshold he identified in this paper, he explained, it will kickstart changes that will "amplify" everything that came before. These same changes, to reiterate, have been associated with all previous mass extinctions on Earth.
I cannot believe how freaked out everyone is about carbon, when it is a basic and abundant element of the planet... the amount in the atmosphere is minuscule to begin with, never mind whatever we are adding in being a tiny fraction of what it is already.
The entire ecosystem of the Earth is built to process carbon, to consume carbon, to use carbon to sustain life. It is so sad to see rational people get lost in a death cult that makes absolutely no sense to anyone with a shred of scientific understanding of the climate, or indeed basic material science...
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Is to go back to living in a cave like a hunter-gatherer while the Al Gore and the rest of the elites can reign over us on high like the Greek Gods from their Mount Olympus.
I am not saying we shouldn't be as clean and impactless as we can to take care of our home, we shouldn't need any kind of model to do the right thing on a global stewardship level, but this model is essentially useless for any kind of prediction.
Aside from a number what ifs that this model simply can't predict, this all depends the current social/economic/political environment remaining virtually the same (not to mention natural ones like tectonic, space phenomena, diseases, etc).
All it takes is one event (or a cascade event) to change virtually everything and render the model moot....
I really wish Hubbard hadn't used 'Scientology', because it'd be an apt descriptor for blind worship of anything that sounds remotely "sciency".
So, according to this sort of "science", we've hit peak oil, everyone has skin cancer, the poles have melted a decade ago, we have flying cars, and have colonized the moon.
C'mon, giant carbon meteor 2100.
I see you didn't go to any of the cars shows in China, the UK, or Germany.
Check Bloomberg search for 2018 electric cars - watch the video yourself. Go to the broadcasts on BBC CBC or even the live Chinese websites.
Your time is over. No I won't type your search for you.
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
I'm not into joining any cult thanks.
However it should be pointed out you are by far the dumber of the two cult groups.
I mean, any large modern religion - you cannot prove nor disprove whatever they believe in. 72 virgins after you die killing infidels? Why not. Heaven/Hell reward/punishment system? Sure, could be. So it's kind of nonsensical to argue about it, and people believe what they will.
But you, you AGW cultist acolytes - you are dumb as a forest of clear-cut stumps. You believe in something (end result of whatever == disaster) that keeps being disproved, then they change what the disaster is supposed to be in response, then you insist on believing THAT until it too is eventually disproved. Note I'm not saying the planet is not warming, or that CO2 has not increased- THOSE things are true things. But atop the true things you have build a cult of lies and punishment and hate, fearing a disaster that will never come. The ironic thing is, you are already living *a* disaster - your very being is being consumed by others for their pleasure and benefit.
I mean, if you were trying to put together a group of the most gullible and easily led people on the planet, I do not believe you could do a better job than your AGW priests have managed to this date. It is truly inspiring to see how many sheep they have created out of rational beings; my hats are off to them.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Indeed!
For those of us who are getting "long in the tooth" we recall very clearly the "Nuclear Winter" debacle, followed by the "Limits to World Growth" debacle, followed by the "Hockey Stick" debacle, followed by the "Climate Change" debacle.
Each had one thing in common: the claim that the only way to avoid catastrophe was to adopt Marxism (they used the euphemism "Socialism") and transfer wealth to Marxist countries (dialectical materialism). The last three are notable because of their use of computers to create an air of "science" about their claim. After all, if a computer says it true it has to be true.
In fact, the Russians invented the kind of hysteria being promoted today. It's called Lysenkoism: the use of faked science to push political agendas.
Running with Linux for over 20 years!
The hockey stick has been soundly debunked and the reality shows no such thing occurring.
Sadly, some of AGW's greatest supporters appear to understand climate science the least.
Yes, the planet is warming. Yes, humans have had an impact. Yes, it is a problem.
No, the hockey stick is absurd and incorrect. The newer models show no such thing, as a general rule. There are, of course, lots of models and lots of ways to tweak them. However, the hockey stick is pretty soundly debunked.
"So long and thanks for all the fish."