Slashdot Mirror
Worrying Rise in Global CO2 Forecast for 2019 (theguardian.com)
The level of climate-warming carbon dioxide (CO2) in the atmosphere is forecast to rise by a near-record amount in 2019, according to the Met Office. From a report: The increase is being fuelled by the continued burning of fossil fuels and the destruction of forests, and will be particularly high in 2019 due to an expected return towards El Nino-like conditions. This natural climate variation causes warm and dry conditions in the tropics, meaning the plant growth that removes CO2 from the air is restricted. Levels of the greenhouse gas have not been as high as today for 3-5m years, when the global temperature was 2-3C warmer and the sea level was 10-20 metres (32 to 64 feet) higher. Climate action must be increased fivefold to limit warming to the 1.5C rise above pre-industrial levels that scientists advise, according to the UN. But the past four years have been the hottest on record and global emissions are rising again after a brief pause.
This is extremely unlikely. The Paris accord was signed in 2016 and is against any rise of Co2 emissions.
Could you provide citation for our President being a traitor? Not taking the piss, just trying to understand where you're coming from.
Of course butter. Realy butter, from freshly squeezed cows and salt. Lots of it. In a styrofoam container that keeps the stuff warm and doesn't burn my fingers on the damn hot butter.
Screw the world. I'm old. I don't have kids. And I'm tired of trying to teach people. I tried to inform, I was laughed at, mocked and eventually threatened. What for? It's not like I need this planet more than maybe 30 more years, if that. I'm fairly sure that it's gonna last that long. After that, why should I give a fuck anymore?
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
I find it funny you only mention Fox news as if the outlets you like are paragons of truth and fact. Meanwhile, we have had wonderfully bad examples of how bad the news and "journalists" are as they do everything to push narrative over fact.
This isn't a defense of Fox news.
Yeah, and just like back then, no humans need to survive on the planet.
It will be paradise.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
I hope I only live long enough to be still around to see it.
I for one hope I die in my sleep or in the middle of a massive orgasm before that day happens, because by the time the wealthy-and-in-charge actually sit up and take notice, things are likely to be well and rightly fucked in a way we've yet to imagine.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Go stick your head in a plastic bag, and tie it tight.
Enjoy the CO2.
"Nerds" like all sorts of things other than "tech". I'm a biology nerd, and I find "tech" about as interesting as watching paint dry. This is news for me, thanks.
I don't respond to AC's.
Who writes this shit? I'm tired of it.
People who want to avoid a devastating future where million die due to an eternal famine while millions more flood into nations further from the equator. I think everyone is going to be tired of that very quickly. Vote for people who will do something to avoid this future and you won't have to read about it anymore.
Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
How is this tech news again?
I understand its an important issue, but tech related it is not.
Slashdot is "news for nerds and things that matter". Climate change matters.
Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
They never believed it - neither the ones that claim to nor the ones that claim not to.
If those who claimed to believe it really did believe it, they'd be working to abort pro-natalist policies, which raise the world population (creating more users of fossil-fuel energy) and other policies that move people to places with higher standards of living (where each uses far more energy and fossil-fuels).
Instead they're encouraging the migration of masses of low-income voters from Mexico, and prefer to let part of the government be shut down for months to allowing a wall be built to slow them. And the biggest "educator"/propagandist for the global warming claim is a billionaire from an oil-rich family who made more on his own by starting a "carbon credit exchange", taking a percentage of the added costs to global businesses imposed by the new anti-carbon laws he helped pass.
Those who claim not to believe it say it's a massive power grab that hurts their constituents, donors, and own pocketbooks.
Meanwhile, among the general public, since scientific research has become attached to moral claims, power politics, and enormous economic gains and lossess, real believers and real skeptics will not believe any further research supporting the other's view. The skeptics have seen enough fudged data, peer-review capture, and selective funding of doom-finders by the powers-that-be with more power to be gained, that they don't believe any research or analysis suggesting ever-increasing doom scenarios. The believers reject any research or analysis suggesting the problem may not be as big as claimed, or exist at all, or even be headed in the opposite direction.
The issue has become a shibboleth - a group identifier and virtue signal. Nobody will be convinced by more science, because with the claims that it's "settled" they can't separate real science from fake science well enough to trust it to change their current ideas.
So we won't find out whether it's right until it happens.
A pity, really. If there IS an eco-catastrophe on its way, we'll just have to live through it and patch it after the fact (or die trying), when we MIGHT have done something useful in advance. (On the other hand, if there isn't one coming, maybe we won't impoverish and enslave ourselves making useless motions to solve a non-problem.)
Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
I want to do die peacefully in my sleep, like my grandfather did. Not screaming in terror like his passengers.
We couldn't have scripted it better. Here is your question answered by a Nobel laureate in physics.
https://youtu.be/SXxHfb66ZgM?t=1428
Oh, not to worry, climate-change deniers, religious types, greedy bastards, and whoever else effectively doesn't give a fuck about what happens to the Earth, it's got it's own failsafe plan to save itself: the die-back of the Human species. You people keep going the way all of you are going, and at some point there won't be enough resources to sustain everyone, and there will be a massive die-back of our species, along with the fall of our civilization -- likely hastened by the wars that you'll fight over what usable land and resources are left. So, eventually, the Earth will survive and recover -- but we'll either not be here to see it, or there'll be only a fraction of us left. I won't be here to see that happen, none of us will, but I almost wish I would be just to see the look on the religious zealots' faces when they realize that Zombie Jesus ain't coming to 'take them home' and that they have to live with the mess they've made of things...
...or, you can all stop being idiots about this and stop fucking everything up, starting now. Your choice.
And end all fossil fuel depreciation, exemptions, exclusions, and subsidies.
Everywhere.
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
It's lazy to say that the world and humanity will not end (literally no one is suggesting the world will end, and the worst predictions do not predict humanity will end). It's also lazy to say that reasonable analysis is labelled as far right. The quote you posted can't be debated.
Taken to their logical conclusion, increasing population, increasing CO2 output, increasing pollution, and environmental change suggest that sometime soon things are going to reach a tipping point in the broadest sense, financial, socioeconomic, environmental. This is reasonable analysis that also can not be debated and should not be labelled left or right. Saying "I believe a future technology we have no hint of now is going to emerge soon enough to be able to have enough of an impact on this problem to materially affect the current trajectory" is the ultimate laziness. Renewables/nextgen nuclear seem at best to be able to take a bite out of current output not take a bite out of atmospheric CO2. And keep in mind we need that tech now, not in 50 years. Citation welcome, but please don't cite something lame.
But for me it really comes down to the hard fact that we are borrowing against the future for our present. The morality of what we're doing is incontrovertibly bad. I would not want to be my own grandchild, I would be freakin pissed at how selfish and lazy my grandparent had been. Granted humanity has always done this, but our ability to consume and pollute has grown exponentially.
How do I edit my sig.