If you have a problem with the current ppm, or the science they use to come to tat number, then state it and we can talk. idiotic statements that make it sound like you can't think about things in a complex way are beneath you.
", snow packs and back on a glacier" it does not do that if it is too warm. There will be no ice packs. we will have snow for awhile, but it won't stay through the year.
Just from that alone. also, it has doubles it's spead since last observed.
A loss of all the ice in the six glaciers would add about 1.2m to global sea level.
This is still a small fraction of the total sea-level potential of Antarctica, which holds something like 26.5 million cubic km ice (or 58m of sea-level rise equivalent).
A) yes. You have angry people, conservative the balk at actual rehabilitation, so you need to distract them. Also, just being in prison is pretty harsh punishment, even with TV.
B) That is not what a prison is for. At least not if you want one that's good for society., It's for rehabilitation. They idea of punishment for the sake of punishment is an idea of small minded people who have learned nothing form history.
Yes, the topic should be a corrupt guard system and how privatization of prisons has lead to them becomes warehouse, increases recidivism, and how the prison guard union have pushed to make more things punishable by prison, and 3 strikes laws.
The code clearly states that distributions by unauthorized person is a crime. charging is irrelevant.
If I where to print my own copy of Game of thrones, and then give the copies I printed away, I would be in violation However, the people buying the books would not have violated any current laws.
Nothing long term. People who say there are advantages seem to thing the CO2 output will stop at that point. 1000 PPM and people become drowsy. How is that going tom effect civilization? when no one can think straight?
That's not even getting into the impacts on feeding people and more arid land.
acceptable levels: 600 ppm - This is inside a building. FYI. complaints of stiffness and odors: 600 - 1000 ppm ASHRAE and OSHA standards: 1000 ppm general drowsiness: 1000 - 2500 ppm adverse health effects expected: 2500 - 5000 ppm maximum allowed concentration within a 8 hour working period: 5000 ppm
Climate change and global warming are TWO DIFFERENT THINGS. No names have been changed.
Global warming is the increase in global temperature. Increase in trapped energy, really. Climate change is the impact of the increasing temperature. http://www.skepticalscience.co...
Yes, droughts happen. SO what? How are the changing? frequent? HInt: Worse and more often.
No one is saying the firs are a result of global warming, specifically. Just that there are more of them, the last longer, and the happen sooner. Did you know that last year fire season didn't end?
Yes, some(one) where caused by arson. so what? How hot did they get, how did the spread, home long did it take to extinguish?
How is this an over-broad statements like this from "scientists" . It's forma n actual scientist, btw. I'm not sure why you think you need quotes. Is it an implied ad hom at the article, Or to show your a dumb ass. haha, I kid, it's both.
"The fires in California and here in Arizona are a clear example of what happens as the Earth warms, particularly as the West warms, and the warming caused by humans is making fire season longer and longer with each decade,"
which has nothing to do wit the topic. They ahve been using these policies for decades, and it's been getting worse within the context of those guidelines.
NO. you re looking at one aspect and applying too much to it.
The question is: What has the Mexican side of the border seen? are the smaller fires hotter? have that change the number of smaller fires? is it working?
I honestly thing I am the only one on/. that knows why the fire management system was changed.
Of course it's denial, the science is in, AGW is real. CO2 is increasing beyond what can be captured, and it's trapping more energy in the lower atmosphere.
"The real question is are the changes such that we need to try and implement measures to stop them?" well, since once we get past abut 1000 PPM, the world won't be habitable by humans in any meaningful way, I would say yes. And no, that's not alarmist, that's reality.
AGW is a fact. It's been know that CO2 traps energy for well over 100 years.
AGW and CA fire management as separate issues. With the new fire management system we have seen impacts from global warming on top of impacts for fire management change.
You're understanding of the history of fire management in CA is lacking, but that's a different topic.
Just so you know, they still do pre-fire management.
You are just one of many people who can't conceive that it might be some of both, aren't you? That special kind of idiot who thinks everything is on or the other and never a mix. A product of for profit news.
Slashdot Mirror
It's the dose that makes the poison. - Paracelsus
If you have a problem with the current ppm, or the science they use to come to tat number, then state it and we can talk. idiotic statements that make it sound like you can't think about things in a complex way are beneath you.
http://water.epa.gov/drink/con...
", snow packs and back on a glacier"
it does not do that if it is too warm. There will be no ice packs. we will have snow for awhile, but it won't stay through the year.
Funny how idiots never mention that.
Melting of all ice would about 60+ meter increase in ocean depth.
It as AGW and we d know for sure.
Why do you think it will stop when the glaciers have melted? It's going to keep going up if we keep allowing deniers to have a say in policy.
Just from that alone. also, it has doubles it's spead since last observed.
A loss of all the ice in the six glaciers would add about 1.2m to global sea level.
This is still a small fraction of the total sea-level potential of Antarctica, which holds something like 26.5 million cubic km ice (or 58m of sea-level rise equivalent).
No it doesn't. That money gets spend and circulates. It doesn't go 'poof'.
dammit. MC squared, duh,
E = MC2
By definition, 50% of the population are not morons.
It's like saying 50% of the population are geniuses.
A) yes. You have angry people, conservative the balk at actual rehabilitation, so you need to distract them.
Also, just being in prison is pretty harsh punishment, even with TV.
B) That is not what a prison is for. At least not if you want one that's good for society., It's for rehabilitation. They idea of punishment for the sake of punishment is an idea of small minded people who have learned nothing form history.
Yes, the topic should be a corrupt guard system and how privatization of prisons has lead to them becomes warehouse, increases recidivism, and how the prison guard union have pushed to make more things punishable by prison, and 3 strikes laws.
The code clearly states that distributions by unauthorized person is a crime. charging is irrelevant.
If I where to print my own copy of Game of thrones, and then give the copies I printed away, I would be in violation
However, the people buying the books would not have violated any current laws.
""climate change will make hurricanes worse and worse!", they said in a year with bad hurricanes"
and they have.
""climate change will make flooding worse and worse!", they said in a year with bad floods"
and they have.
""climate change will make snowstorms worse and worse", they said in a year with bad snow storms"
and they have.
""climate change will make wildfires worse and worse!", they said in a year with bad wildfires"
and they have.
Maybe you should learn to be able to think about complex things and stop reading Black and White fairy tales?
You remember a few wild fires that are a little worse then the ones we are having more frequently.
You know what else they had in the 70's? fire seasons that ended. Last years fire season never ended.
1940s - 3 wildfires.
1950s -6 wildfires
1960s - 6 wildfires
1970s - 8 wildfire
1980s - 9 wildfires.
1990s - 13 wildfires
2000s - 19 wildfires
2010 - 13 wildfires and we are only half way through the year. 2013 'fire season' did not end.
well.. don't look at one area. Look at the globe and whats happening. There are places that refuse to allow plans for a rising sea level.
Nothing long term. People who say there are advantages seem to thing the CO2 output will stop at that point. 1000 PPM and people become drowsy. How is that going tom effect civilization? when no one can think straight?
That's not even getting into the impacts on feeding people and more arid land.
acceptable levels: 600 ppm - This is inside a building. FYI.
complaints of stiffness and odors: 600 - 1000 ppm
ASHRAE and OSHA standards: 1000 ppm
general drowsiness: 1000 - 2500 ppm
adverse health effects expected: 2500 - 5000 ppm
maximum allowed concentration within a 8 hour working period: 5000 ppm
Thanks for telling us you don't know what a model is or how they work.
Climate change and global warming are TWO DIFFERENT THINGS. No names have been changed.
Global warming is the increase in global temperature. Increase in trapped energy, really.
Climate change is the impact of the increasing temperature.
http://www.skepticalscience.co...
Yes, droughts happen. SO what? How are the changing? frequent? HInt: Worse and more often.
No one is saying the firs are a result of global warming, specifically. Just that there are more of them, the last longer, and the happen sooner. Did you know that last year fire season didn't end?
Yes, some(one) where caused by arson. so what? How hot did they get, how did the spread, home long did it take to extinguish?
How is this an over-broad statements like this from "scientists" . It's forma n actual scientist, btw. I'm not sure why you think you need quotes.
Is it an implied ad hom at the article, Or to show your a dumb ass. haha, I kid, it's both.
"The fires in California and here in Arizona are a clear example of what happens as the Earth warms, particularly as the West warms, and the warming caused by humans is making fire season longer and longer with each decade,"
So tired of you idiots.
which has nothing to do wit the topic.
They ahve been using these policies for decades, and it's been getting worse within the context of those guidelines.
Look how wrong you are:
http://www.wunderground.com/hu...
NO. you re looking at one aspect and applying too much to it.
The question is: What has the Mexican side of the border seen? are the smaller fires hotter? have that change the number of smaller fires? is it working?
I honestly thing I am the only one on /. that knows why the fire management system was changed.
Of course it's denial, the science is in, AGW is real. CO2 is increasing beyond what can be captured, and it's trapping more energy in the lower atmosphere.
"The real question is are the changes such that we need to try and implement measures to stop them?"
well, since once we get past abut 1000 PPM, the world won't be habitable by humans in any meaningful way, I would say yes.
And no, that's not alarmist, that's reality.
AGW is a fact. It's been know that CO2 traps energy for well over 100 years.
AGW and CA fire management as separate issues. With the new fire management system we have seen impacts from global warming on top of impacts for fire management change.
You're understanding of the history of fire management in CA is lacking, but that's a different topic.
Just so you know, they still do pre-fire management.
Yes, actually. But hey, your a fuck twad so I shouldn't expect basic level thinking.
It's my fault for having hopes that people will actually think.
You are just one of many people who can't conceive that it might be some of both, aren't you? That special kind of idiot who thinks everything is on or the other and never a mix.
A product of for profit news.
It happens every year, and it's energy output is going up.
I have no clue why you think an annual event doesn't happen in known cycles.
Maybe you're stupid?