Slashdot Mirror
Sea Levels May Rise More Rapidly Due To Greenland Ice Melt
An anonymous reader quotes a report from The Guardian: Rising sea levels could become overwhelming sooner than previously believed, according to the authors of the most comprehensive study yet of the accelerating ice melt in Greenland. Run-off from this vast northern ice sheet -- currently the biggest single source of meltwater adding to the volume of the world's oceans -- is 50% higher than pre-industrial levels and increasing exponentially as a result of manmade global warming, says the paper, published in Nature on Wednesday. Almost all of the increase has occurred in the past two decades -- a jolt upwards after several centuries of relative stability. This suggests the ice sheet becomes more sensitive as temperatures go up.
The researchers used ice core data from three locations to build the first multi-century record of temperature, surface melt and run-off in Greenland. Going back 339 years, they found the first sign of meltwater increase began along with the industrial revolution in the mid-1800s. The trend remained within the natural variation until the 1990s, since when it has spiked far outside of the usual nine- to 13-year cycles.
The researchers used ice core data from three locations to build the first multi-century record of temperature, surface melt and run-off in Greenland. Going back 339 years, they found the first sign of meltwater increase began along with the industrial revolution in the mid-1800s. The trend remained within the natural variation until the 1990s, since when it has spiked far outside of the usual nine- to 13-year cycles.
Washington D.C. is very near sea-level, isn't it?
"Encyclopedia" is to "Wikipedia" what "Library" is to "Some people at a bus stop"
Anything about mankind ruining the environment has to be fake news, right?
What I'd like is to -- someday -- see all these deniers, excuse seekers, carbon lobbyists, oil burners before a court, accused of crimes against humanity.
And then, the likes of Trump, the Kochs, most of the political class, Bannon, all that ugly bunch doing services in those places in the world where damage is highest (I'm not for jails, mind you).
Once upon I time, I thought it was a legitimate concern. But they've Chicken Littled it way beyond anything I have patience for at this point. Every week or two, we get another 'report' speeding up the timeline to armageddon by 25-50% or adding another foot or two to predicted sea level rise. I can only take so much before I have no choice but to write this whole thing off as fear mongering. To what end, I don't know, but it's clearly obvious at this point that it is - nothing is this dire. Nothing.
Look, I don't want to hand our offspring a big shitburger after we're gone. I don't want them to hate us and look back on us with disgust. But there's no way things are as bad as they say. I would have given money, changed my lifestyle, my purchasing habits, whatever was required - and I did, for a time. But after years of constant escalation of rhetoric, I am done. I'm not going to waste any more of my time or effort on this. Things will be fine, we'll adapt, some people will have to move, some species will die out. But life will go on. At this point we've turned it into a bigger issue than climate change ever was. Adios.
With that much fresh water entering the north Atlantic, it could well shift the North Atlantic current and that could more drastically affect the climate of Europe and create some dramatic cooling there. That might, in the long run, be worse for Europe than the rising sea levels.
A whole extra inch over the next 500 years!
As the weight of millions of tonnes of ice cap is released there should also be an increase in seismic activity. The potential for earth quakes in areas that were fairly stable is there. Hopefully sudden radical upthrust does not occur the way it did on the west coast of North America after last ice age. The native populations of the West Coast all have flood stories related to an upthrust event that occurred very suddenly. We cannot know for certain what will occur as the ice caps are lost but we can make good guesses at what could occur. Either way displacing a huge portion of the earths ice at an accelerated rate due to our redistribution of carbon from where it is sequestered into the earths atmosphere is not something we may be able to deal with other than with a sudden decrease in our populations and the resultant decrease in our use of carbon based fuels.
Sea levels will rise, right after the next ice age, that was predicted in the 1970s. These climate predictions must be chronological, right?
Attack Greenland! Send the best the Queen has! Up with this we will not put!
I'm personally going to buy a boat just so I can sail it over Mar-a-Lago once this happens.
#MAGA
Fucking hell, slashdot, must every other article be about global warming or trump or full communism now???
FUCK OFF
Um, sorry. As a person of a younger generation that will need to deal with the accumulation from this shit storm, NO. So sorry that you need to be bothered with news stories about the mess that you have helped create. Yup, it was far easier when we pretended we could talk about effects to far off future generations. It was incredibly wrong AND some of these "far off future generations" are now old enough to be able to understand that we are getting screwed over.
Dooms day is coming! Repent sinners!
Seriously? With all of the billions of dollars that have been poured into climate "research," that research never took into account what might happen to Greenland ice sheets if the temperature increased.. until now?
Years ago. Many years ago. There has long been hypothesis regarding a possible disruption of the Gulf stream by Greenland icemelt.
If the gulf stream is substantially weakened or changes course, weather in the British Isles might be affected, and become much colder. If you were to look at a map, the British Isles are similar in latitude to Montana in the US. Yet Palm trees grow in Ireland.
This is because the Gulf Stream moderates the weather in the British Isles. The Gulf stream goes away, or changes course, the British Isles could see weather more in keeping with it's high latitude. This does not negate Global warming, just changes the weather in various areas.
The lack of attention to detail is just another of many indicators that modern climate "research" is completely insincere and disinterested in actually finding the truth. It's all about foisting an agenda.
Foolish child. You are the one who has not been paying attention. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Stop it Greenland!
May rise? Let me know when we ACTUALLY see some sea rise. Then we can talk about 75% taxers and regulations that basically make everyone a slave to the government, you know like in Europe.
And there we go again, since more than 20 years, they are telling us the sea levels are rising, and we are to blame. And bij 2013 half Europe would be under water, than they had to correct it, it became 2030, now it's like 2050. And in the last 20 years, the sea levels haven't risen any centimeter, and the Netherlands still has the same beaches as 30 years ago...
Banks are still loaning you money to pay off for 30 years, even thou half Europe would be under water by then...
But hey you are allowed to believe any horror fairy tales you desire to...
Tell the truth, at least occasionally.
I've been told the Himalayan glaciers will be gone by 2032, it was a misprint from an alarmist advertisement with no scientific backing, but was reprinted EVERYWHERE about 10 years ago.
It will never snow in DC again, then DC is crippled by snow that year.
It will never snow in UK again, then the UK is crippled by snow.
Its the warmest year in the US by FAR, until you include Alaska that year then it was one of the coldest ever.
Sea temps are going up faster than expected, first person who double checks it finds they lied (Just 2 weeks ago)
Polar bears going extinct, Canada is now having issues with Polar Bear overpopulation in areas.
It just never stops with the EASILY provable lies they tell. You can go ahead and say those are journalists, but none of you AWGers are calling out the lies and it made you lose credibility. You knew they were lies, and called people names for pointing it out, because the lies supported your agenda, not realizing it wrecked credibility. You've lost most people because of that.
As a person of a somewhat older generation I have seen the earth a lot longer than you. And I can tell you, nothing has changed much. Nothing out of the ordinary anyway. Ice has always melded. Storms were always there. Bush fires happened long before you were born. Earthquakes happened long before you were born. Hot and cold winters have been there since forever.
Climate doesn't give a damn about us humans, it changes as it pleases. No taxes or windmills are going to change a damn bit about that. Climate doesn't care if 97% of scientists tell us it's a disaster, as science isn't democratic. It's facts. And the facts are that nothing has changed much.
To Terminate, or not to Terminate, that's the question - SCSIROB
"The earth changes"
*People changes the earth*, corrected it for you.
Ok, so you think there's no difference between a delta of x and a double diffetential of e^x.
Your maths teacher should be fired if you're that grotesquely incompetent when it comes to rates of change.
But you're not that stupid. Nobody is. So stop acting as if you were.
It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
Everyone is not an expert in modeling--it does not mean that it is "modeling." We cannot exactly just experiment on a second planet Earth. We cannot predict human behavior. The basics of climate change is well understood--more green house gasses lead to increased temperatures, melting ice sheets, expanding water, sea level rise, etc. There is so much research because climate change will pretty much impact everything.
What the summary appears to say is that observations of melting from the ice sheet appears to be non-linear (and the rate of melting appears to be increasing with temperature change). E.g., it is implying that more melting occurs going from 0.5 to 0.6 deg C temperature rise than from 0 to 0.1 deg temperature rise.
Having worked in risk analysis modeling, I have a suspicion that many climate scientists may be too conservative. It is difficult to model the "no one gives a flip, will start flying more, drive even bigger cars, perpetually get bigger houses, try to eat even ore meat, cut down the Amazon rain forest, have drones flying all over the place, etc" without being called out for fear mongering. But this is essentially what humans are doing. (And yes, I know this does not describe the whole planet, but we still share the same atmosphere.)
"As a young person", you're more part of the problem then us older folk - in the US anyway. If you would actually get out and vote, get people in office who would do something, then we could change it. Sitting back, blaming previous generations is rather pointless when you refuse to exercise your rights and the tools within the system itself, is really the root cause in the US, namely elected owned assholes.
I have also been on the Earth a long time. Making measurements.
Ice is there, yes. A few hundred miles less ice on the glaciers. I assume that you can tell the difference between an ice cube and an ice sheet. Or is it all filed under ice?
Bloody hell.
Storms have always been there. In different places, with different moisure content.
Maybe the Khmer Empire thought the same as you, just before they died horribly. They'd moved the atmospheric rivers by several hundred miles. Sure, there was rain. Just not near them, because they were idiots.
Don't copy them.
The temperature has risen to levels that are higher than what they should be given prevailing conditions. But that's not as important as the gradient. The gradient has never occurred in historic times, or indeed any time since the last asteroid strike.
But you ignore that and assume all gradients are equal, all numbers are equal.
They are not.
The Khmer discovered this too late. This time, you're plsying not with millions of lives but billions. Ignorance isn't going to save even one of them. There is no plea bargain with physics.
It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
And the facts are that nothing has changed much.
Your facts are out of date.
"Encyclopedia" is to "Wikipedia" what "Library" is to "Some people at a bus stop"
If it stops the north atlantic conveyor, it could cause a mini-ice age instead, that would refreeze the arctic. Of course, northern Europe, Russia, nor anybody close to the equator might not be happy.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
So, I hear millions of people are going to die... Uhh... How? Are they just going to wade into water and drown themselves? Are they going to walk into deserts with no water? Are they going to sit in the sun, day after day, with no food or water? People that believe claims like this are complete idiots. And many do. Actually, we should be lucky, considering much of the Northern half of the USA is usually covered in thick sheets of ice. It's only because we're in a cycle as described by Milankovitch where, yes, the world is warming. But this is only temporary. As our irregular orbit around the sun continues, we'll eventually peak, and then quickly descend into another ice age. So really, enjoy the warming it while it lasts.
As another person from an older generation, I can only assume you have a faulty memory. I have seen a tremendous amount of change. You seem to just be whitewashing it away.
temperatures have been both warmer and cooler and within historical times.
Northern Europe being forced to stop a thousand years (from Roman times until the middle 13th century) of cultivating grapes should be enough for anyone. Any vineyards in Scotland today?
They know the arguing in the comments will drive clicks. That's all this site has left. Scroll down the past few pages of articles, they're lucky to get 100 comments on any of them. It wasn't long ago that even the most mundane tech story here generated 1000+ comments. They killed it with marxist politics a couple years ago.
For this reason, God sends them a powerful delusion(operation of wandering)(planet) so that they will believe the lie.
Working of Error
Hmm... Like it or not, the older generation has been around longer and has had far more impact on the current trajectory that we are on. Yes, the younger generation should vote more. And yes, all generations should appreciate what they were given more and try to improve the future. Part of this is understanding the trajectory we are on (instead of belly-aching) about the news story posted to /.
Actually, I'm GDI, and was registered Libertarian for over 25 years. O did not increase the deficit by much except with his tax cuts. ACA was fully paid for, unlike gop's Medicare part D. And his temp spending up front was to keep us out of depression. Trump's spending and tax cuts are pure disaster.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
Just asking...
5 out of 6 people enjoy Russian Roulette & 6 out of 7 Dwarfs are not Happy
And yet you offer no proof of this omission and no proof of substantial deviation. The models have been highly accurate sibce the 1990s and far more accurate than the skrptics since the 1890s.
And yet that part doesn't bother you.
The fact that the science has been fundamentally sound for 114 years doesn't enter your equation.
What concerns you is a vague, meaningless statemwnt about something that probably never happened.
Honestly, that's pathetic.
It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
Under President Obama, the national debt grew the most dollar-wise. He added $8.588 trillion. This 74 percent increase was the fifth-largest.
5 out of 6 people enjoy Russian Roulette & 6 out of 7 Dwarfs are not Happy
If all of Greenland's glaciers melted, sea level would rise ~ 6 meters (about 19.7 feet)
https://www2.usgs.gov/climate_landuse/glaciers/glaciers_sea_level.asp
Beginning about 15,000 years ago, continental glaciers retreated and sea level began to rise. Sea level reached its current height about 8,000 years ago and has fluctuated ever since.
https://www.usgs.gov/faqs/how-does-present-glacier-extent-and-sea-level-compare-extent-glaciers-and-global-sea-level
Global sea level has fluctuated widely in the recent geologic past. It stood 4-6 meters above the present during the last interglacial period, 125,000 years ago, but was 120 m lower at the peak of the last ice age, around 20,000 years ago.
https://www.giss.nasa.gov/research/briefs/gornitz_09/
Because of all of this, there were many books written in the 1960's predicting a new ice age (Global Cooling).
We need to keep the earth clean, yes. But the hype is stupid. As someone else stated, percentage changes mean nothing.
Not people, It's just some melt that lives in Greenland apparently.
It's just happening much faster now than ever before.
Remember that time that the climate scientists accurately predicted sea level rise? Me neither.
lmao you're a fucking retard.
Stop thinking with your "heart" you fucking degenerate hick. Stop fucking up the world for the rest of us. Have a little fucking common decency and stop letting your feefees dictate what's fact and what isn't.
If you're really that fucking old you should have learned what facts and statistics are, by now, and you should have learned that when you don't have a fucking clue about a subject and all you have to go on are your own vague recollections, you shouldn't open your fucking mouth about it.
Read some actual data you fucking retarded piece of shit, not just the shit you want to believe. Alex Jones isn't a fucking source, alright? Get a fucking grip on reality. Let go of your pride and your confirmation bias. For one in your fucking worthless life do the right thing.
Denialists would often ask, "what if these imperfect estimates are too high?" and scientifically-minded people would counter with "what if these imperfect estimates are too low?" In the last few years it's been obvious that they were mostly too low (as in conservative) across the board. Oddly enough the constant unfounded accusations of bias toward climate science has created a real bias toward conservative estimates, as scientists all fear overestimating and becoming the deniosphere's celebrated Chicken Little.
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
Still wrong. It's "Peoples changes the earth". One people couldn't do it all by themselves. It has to be multiple peoples, plural. Fuck a duck. Go too scool and Learn some well grammers.
Whenever it's fucking cold and snowing outside, the number of "climate change" articles has to increase to remind me that global warming really is happening, trust us.
No, actually most of it was built by the generation before them. If not earlier. Infrastructure construction, and even maintenance, has been largely neglected for the better part of a century.
--- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
You have live long enough to see the last ice sheet retreat?
What about the fact climate change is largely due to human activity?
Ignore other facts may be good enough for you but not for future generations.
If ACA was paid for then why was it failing and everyone's premiums went way way up when they were promised by your sweetheart O was to go way way down?
It couldn't be "full communism" because almost nobody knows what that means now. We live in the Golden Age of Bullshit, where words are used for how they make you feel, not what they mean.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
Unlike you who can only say Heil Twitler?
Shrub's administration crashed the world economy by choosing not to pay attention to what was going on in the housing and banking markets. But you're like Honey Badger, you don't care.
You should be thanking Obama for saving the economy; if not for him, you'd probably be living under a freeway overpass. But sure, whine about spending what needed to be spent to reboot the economy after W's malfeasance.
And, BTW, please do tell us who controlled the House for six, and the Senate for two of Obama's eight years. Congress spends, not the President. Dumbass.
Ever wonder why? Have you forgotten the housing market collapse and the subsequent stock market crash? All thanks to banks making risky loans and buying toxic assets guaranteed by the gubmint. Shrub's gubmint. That wasn't paying one bit of attention to what was going on.
Maybe you could educate yourself. Just a little bit. It doesn't hurt much.
The whole notion of sea level rise assumes that the Earth's crust is static and unchanging. Definitely not the case.
Only in the loosest definition of the word are you being screwed over. You enjoy the same comfortable life that was enabled by the behavior of the generations you're scolding. Your carbon footprint is just as big, and it's your choice. You can stop driving a car, stop flying, stop buying clothes before old clothes are worn out, stop consuming out of season foods, stop using air conditioning, stop buying new phones to replace working phones, stop eating so much meat. You don't need a big house, you don't need concrete buildings, you don't need a big TV. Wanna have kids? You selfish bastard! The kind of life that will let more than 8 billion people live on this planet without overtaxing its resources is ascetic. It's easy to point at people who can't change what they, mostly unknowingly, did to the environment. YOU can still choose. So far, your generation hasn't shown any signs of being willing and able to make the sacrifices necessary, so STFU, you holier-than-thou brat.
New flash - the entire history of the modern human species has occurred in a single ice age - the current Quaternary Ice Age started about 2.6 million years ago, about a half-million years before homo erectus evolved.
You may be thinking of the latest glacial period within that ice age, and yes, we were possibly coming out of that before our carbon-based economy gathered anything like its current momentum. However, we've accelerated the process considerably by adding major new forcing factors in the form of deforestation, desertification, and significantly boosting the heat retention of the atmosphere - and that's changing things considerably faster than normal, and there is a very real risk that on our current course we'll cause the ice age to end, and the Earth to transition to it's opposing quasi-stable hothouse state.
And while the Earth is always changing, it's the speed of that transition which can be a problem - most trees and other plants can't migrate very quickly, and if the climate lines move faster than they can, they likely go extinct, and take much of their associated ecosystems with them. And we're already in the midst of one of the larger extinction events the planet has seen thanks to pollution, over-hunting and ecosystem destruction. A second, independent extinction event on a similar scale may well reduce biodiversity to the point of ecosystem collapse. It's happened several times before, and it can take the planet many thousands of years to recover. Bad news for anyone who wants to eat regularly in the interim.
Perhaps even worse, at least for us, is that it's looking like such transitions don't happen smoothly. As the thermal engines driving weather destabilize, weather patterns become less predictable from year to year, and the rate of crop failure increases considerably as a result. And when people get hungry, wars break out.
--- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
Average comments on a story has stayed pretty consistent at about 120 posts per interesting story, ~20-30 for less interesting stories. To get 1000 comments a new chapter in the IBM/SCO lawsuit needed to happen or something. This has been true from ~2000 all the way through present era.
moox. for a new generation.
Has anyone here read the article, or is it just "oooh...glaciology...no one can tell me anything about glaciology that I don't already know."
It all tribal politics all the time here on Slashdot?
More liberal bias from Slashdot.Org. I just looked outside and it is snowing, I guess its global cooling again, huh you chinks.
Since mankind looks to the skies watching lightening and fearing thunder humans have feared the end of the world is nigh. Through the ages this has not changed, yet people keep believing this nonsense. If it isn't the world freezing from nuclear winter, from starvation in the 1800's, and nuclear destruction blowing the world up people will be fearful of what they cannot control, and what they do not fully understand.
People. Get a life. You are a fool if you live your life listening to these fools. Read history and you will become enlightened. You will understand that this is just human nature to fear the end of the world. Henny Penny, Chicken Little have nothing over you these days. Busybodies with nothing else to do.
Whatever your age, your ideology of ignorance is the fucking disaster
The question is, how much ice should those models assume will melt in response to a given degree of global warming?
When you read a popular press account that says "Sea level may rise 2m by 2100", what the scientific papers actually say is more like "sea level may rise between 1m and 3m under the RCP8.5 scenario." Nearly all of that uncertainty is driven by uncertainty in how rapidly Greenland and Antarctic ice will respond to rising temperatures. So you have to go have a look to see what's already been happening.
Scientists tend to avoid talking much about worst case scenarios, because as far as we know the worst case scenarios are, as far as we know, unlikely to happen. The worst case sea level rise is catastrophic to the global economy, and if you actually thought it was going to happen you'd move to high ground and be stockpiling food and weapons.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
I just can't wait for all the people like you to be dead. Please hurry up.
Does this same report indicate when Greenland will be underwater due to the ice sheet that had formed on top of it thawing out? My prediction: it will never be underwater in our lifetime, or the lifetime of anyone born in the next million years. The reality is that H2O has 3 states, it leaving one state does not mean it is only going to change into one of the other two.
To anti-Trump pro libtard climate crazy bullshitness.
Jesus tapdancing Christ, ...
I'd still like to know what the "H" stands for.
Research shows that 67% of those who use the term "research shows", are just making shit up.
It should be noted that we are not "killing the planet". The planet has gone through 'tougher' things than us puny human ants.
What we are killing is ourselves by eliminating the relatively comfortable conditions that we have lived in the the past few thousands of years.
Further, our civilization was bootstrapped to the cheap and easy sources of energy of fossil fuels. There was a one-time supply of them never to be available again (at least not for a few million years).
It is prudent to keep some around in case there's a global Dark Age collapse (e.g., new plague) and we have to re-bootstrap things. Better to use renewables where possible and keep the non-replaceable stuff around for possible future use.
Wow, let's look back one century to the grand year of 1918.
Top of the line car was a Studebaker Special Six, with a whopping 29.4 HP engine. Yep, that looks and performs like every car we drive today (actually I kind of like the design, wouldn't mind owning one myself).
Miles of paved road. I can't find any data back to 1918, but starting in 1960 the USA had about 1.2 million miles of roads, 2016 puts that about 2.7 million miles now.
Bridges, I can't find exact numbers per year, but I do see that at least 15 new bridges are built every year.
So yeah, I guess no Infrastructure construction or maintenance has happened since 1918! Seriously you must be deluding yourself! Bridges alone are built to last 50 years, which means that since 1918 if we didn't build any new ones or maintain any of them we should have no bridges 100 years later. I find that hard to believe as I crossed one just getting to work.
Word of advice, things change all the time. There are things you notice, like a new shopping mall, or new track of housing that goes up in less than a year. Then there are other things you don't notice, like the height of all the trees in your neighborhood that eventually grow so tall they snap power lines, the number of planes flying overhead, rivers cutting a grand canyon out of solid rock over millions of year. Just because things aren't changing rapidly around you doesn't mean it isn't happening. Old infrastructure is changing all the time, it just tends to look old because people want to keep it that way (take aluminum house wiring with new copper runs, gas lamps replaced by street lights, old cars with modern engines, retrofitted building with steel frames, historic roads with new reinforced beddings). Take a common item you probably see every day, the light bulb. Ten years ago the common type was probably an incandescent, 5 years ago most likely a CFL, now you will probably see LED bulbs. To the casual eye they all look the same.
As a young person", you're more part of the problem then us older folk - in the US anyway
Please do enlighten us with the actual facts behind what you espouse, such as the numbers of "young" people eligible to vote and the number who actually voted in the past four elections against the numbers of, say Boomers eligible to vote verses the numbers of Boomers who actually voted in the past four elections.
Otherwise eat shit.
Enjoy being poor Chinesr slaves under water Amerikuks!!
What "full communism" means is a society without any government at all -- or classes or money for that matter. If you look at "communist states", they actually have all of these things: social classes, currency, and some degree of private ownership.
In fact, in a certain sense "communist state" is a contradiction in terms. Communist regimes knew this, and justified their existence as a vanguard revolution that would bring about communism in the long term. This really wasn't any better, since communist ideology see communism as a natural and historically inevitable outcome of capitalism.
If you look at how "communist states" actually arose, they didn't arise out of a popular adoption of communist ideology. That comes later. Indigenous communist revolutions never happened in functioning democracies; they came in societies dominated by wealthy oligarchs, dictators or warlords. I see a lot of parallels with the anti-elitism of Trumpists. They're not ideologues; they're just fed up with the elite and want the swamp drained.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
You should really read up on Operation Mockingbird and MK Ultra so you can find out how you've been mind controlled.
check out the fake science data IPCC hockey stick graph while you're at it - then as the IPCC, pretend you have any scientific validity anymore lolololol
Nope, Obama's discretionary spending was under 1/5 of W Bush. You're just a dishonest faggot who doesn't understand debt in linear time goes up either way, and can't admit who actually spent the money on what.
Go figure, you live in faggot Tulsa.
https://www.npr.org/2016/05/16...
http://www.pewresearch.org/fac...
Eat Shit yourself fucktard. The level of how much you "like" something, has zero impact on its validity.
You know that Florida is mostly low-lying and already suffering as a result of sea-level rise? Well, it now looks like you can look forward to hoards of Floridian climate refugees seeking shelter across the USA sooner than you expected. You know Florida? Where the bat-shit crazy people tend to be? They'll soon be among you. May you live in "interesting" times.
Debate is a form of harassment. Do not question my truth.
I have friends and relatives who are global warming deniers - 50+ age range. They are highly intelligent people and actually have advanced degrees (in scientific fields no less; one is a Chemistry teacher with a Masters in chemistry - which really sets me off because she has influence over younger minds.. but that's a different rant. ). This disheartens me greatly. Unsurprisingly, they are Trump supporter republicans.
It's like religion (and they are also religious), "don't interfere in my beliefs with facts", mentality. I don't know how to get around this. I have kids (and grand kids). I really worry about what the planet will be like in 30 years when my youngest son in his 50's.
I believe the problem, and why it's so hard to overcome, is that to fix things, the entire energy eco system needs a redo from top to bottom. That means the really rich oligarchy on top will lose billions - and there in lies the road block. They have the resources, they own the politicians, they own the media.
man, I'm open to suggestions....
Sorry junior - I'm here, I'm in charge, and I get to hire and fire jizwads like you.
But you are talking to people who bargain with "God". You are dealing with the Abrahmic Apocaplypse Cults. They want humanity to end. All those evil non-believing scientists will go to hell, and they will get to go to heaven and meet Jesus or fuck forty virgins or whatever it is that tickles their feeble minds.
The debt grew, but, he was handed a 1T deficit, and brought it down. Had the deficit level remained where W/GOP left it, things would have been far far worse.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
Fucking hell, slashdot, must every other article be about global warming or trump or full communism now???
FUCK OFF
Um, sorry. As a person of a younger generation that will need to deal with the accumulation from this shit storm, NO. So sorry that you need to be bothered with news stories about the mess that you have helped create. Yup, it was far easier when we pretended we could talk about effects to far off future generations. It was incredibly wrong AND some of these "far off future generations" are now old enough to be able to understand that we are getting screwed over.
the solution is not with government or regulation. the Riots in France highlight this fact. to go US centric for a moment a Regulatory solution that works well in New York City is only going to be a nightmare in a place like Burtrum, Minnesota https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.... Do you want to be the one who instates a gas tax that makes it difficult for them to make a living by making the fuel for their farm implements more expensive? or make it more expensive to go to the market 30 miles away to buy food? do you want to run these people off their farms. if any regulation happens it needs to be on the city and county level. Tailord to the needs of that community. it also has to happen in the home. don't use the car to go a mile away, combine your trips, regular preventive maintenance on your car to check the Pollution control systems. turn the darn light off when you leave the room. Want the world cleaned up start at home. Take ownership of what you as a individual cause. its your job to clean up after yourself not the government's and not mine i already cleaned up my act as much as possible. I ride the bus with smelly hobos. are you willing to?
For the redt of you, Comrade? I look forward to tougher times ahead. Cabdy ass dickwads will be weeded out of genepool.
Here's a good way to think about climate change:
Earth has a greenhouse effect and carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas. If carbon dioxide increases, then, all things being equal, there will be a greater greenhouse effect.
Now, climate science is notoriously complex and the atmosphere interacts with the biosphere, so the "all things being equal" part is self-evidently nonsense. So maybe there will be some feedback loop or whatever and carbon dioxide can increase without affecting climate. But the burden of proof is on the person advancing that hypothesis, because the default assumption is that warming will occur.
Start with that, and rational discussion can take place.
...Perhaps even worse, at least for us, is that it's looking like such transitions don't happen smoothly. As the thermal engines driving weather destabilize, weather patterns become less predictable from year to year, and the rate of crop failure increases considerably as a result. And when people get hungry, wars break out.
Sounds like a testable hypothesis. In the last century global temp has risen around 1C after having remained comparatively stable prior to that. One could take global crop yields, and compare the annual trends against the change in global temperature.
The trouble is, that your hypothesis of increased crop failure, and presumably decreased global yields(else if yields don't drop who cares), presupposes that all other things remain equal...
Of course, global crop production has been trending persistently upwards as temperatures have also trended up. Numerous advances in crop technologies and techniques being a portion, and additionally regions impacted by climate change where conditions become too warm/cold/dry/wet for one crop are rotated for others. Farmers don't stubbornly plant the same crop for decades when conditions change, even if that would make projecting trends easier...
Goddammit! You've opened my eyes! I didn't realize until now that I'm poor because I bought an iPhone this year. I just haven't been yanking on those bootstraps hard enough like you did. I am soooo enlightened now...
"Global warming deniers" and "highly intelligent people" are mutually exclusive categories.
Oh wait, maybe there's a tiny intersection in the venn diagram, where they overlap with the "selfish machiavellian lying assholes" category. They say they deny it, but only to further their selfish ends of not having to make any lifestyle or policy changes. If they are intelligent, they know their denial stance is just posturing for effect.
Where are we going and why are we in a handbasket?
Jesus tapdancing Christ, ...
I'd still like to know what the "H" stands for.
H is for Harvey
"You want to know how to help your kids? Leave them the fuck alone." -George Carlin
Please cite for us exactly what sea level rise has done in Florida in the last 100 years. Exactly how many people have had to move from where to where? Exactly what mitigation has had to take place? And why has there been exactly NO mitigation from sea level rise where I have been visiting the exact same spot in my state for the last 56 years? Not one person has had to do jack shit because of sea level rise here. You think you know what is happening, but reality is a bitch baby.
What problem was he trying to correct? Rich weren't getting rich enough fast enough?
Deficit not rising fast enough?
Are you tired of winning yet?
Lord Slashdot, may we please have an "Ignorant" moderation choice?
Not much else to see. Tesla fanboi too I guess.
What "full communism" means is a society without any government at all -- or classes or money for that matter. If you look at "communist states", they actually have all of these things: social classes, currency, and some degree of private ownership.
Really? In the real world this is called "anarchy" I suppose if you think that's full communism, then you're ready for the revolution yesterday.
In fact, in a certain sense "communist state" is a contradiction in terms. Communist regimes knew this, and justified their existence as a vanguard revolution that would bring about communism in the long term. This really wasn't any better, since communist ideology see communism as a natural and historically inevitable outcome of capitalism.
So, the USSR didn't collapse because of communism, mass debt and so on. And Venezuela didn't collapse because of communist policies, and seizing businesses.
That comes later. Indigenous communist revolutions never happened in functioning democracies; they came in societies dominated by wealthy oligarchs, dictators or warlords. I see a lot of parallels with the anti-elitism of Trumpists. They're not ideologues; they're just fed up with the elite and want the swamp drained.
Strange, let's look at Europe and the "rise" of communist ideologies back in the late 1800's and early 1900's. Well look at that, it wasn't wealthy oligarchs, dictators, or warlords. Nope it was the 'enlightened intelligentsia' and wavering economic collapse of various industries. Well let's look at China...damn..what a failure. Cuba? Nope. Vietnam? Nope. You seem to be confusing populism with communism, those are actually polar opposite ideologies in play. Communism wants to replace government with it's own system, and enforce the rule on people. Populism wants the existing system in play to continue, but the bullshit and garbage that's causing harm to society/business/work/etc to stop.
Om, nomnomnom...
Interesting... liberals that call places and people anti LBGTQ names.
5 out of 6 people enjoy Russian Roulette & 6 out of 7 Dwarfs are not Happy
8 years and > 8 Trillion...might want to check your math..
5 out of 6 people enjoy Russian Roulette & 6 out of 7 Dwarfs are not Happy
With 100 and 500 year storms happening every year or two now, I would argue that it is changing.