Climate Change thread: tl; dr - We are so screwed

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > Climate Change thread: tl; dr - We are so screwed

duck monster: Dec 15, 2004

doomy doom doom doom

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencet...-Southwest.html

quote:

A small 'hot spot' in the U.S. Southwest is responsible for producing the largest concentration of the greenhouse gas methane seen over the United States - and is the subject of a major new investigation to find out why.
The hot spot, near the Four Corners intersection of Arizona, Colorado, New Mexico and Utah, covers only about 2,500 square miles (6,500 square kilometers), or half the size of Connecticut.
A recent Nasa map shows is produces more than triple the standard ground-based estimate - and researchers say they don't know why..

Researchers from several institutions are now in the Four Corners region of the U.S. Southwest with a suite of airborne and ground-based instruments, aiming to uncover reasons for a mysterious methane 'hot spot' detected from space.
'With all the ground-based and airborne resources that the different groups are bringing to the region, we have the unique chance to unequivocally solve the Four Corners mystery,' said Christian Frankenberg, a scientist at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Pasadena, California, who is heading NASA's part of the effort.
Other investigators are from the Cooperative Institute for Research in Environmental Sciences (CIRES) in Boulder, Colorado; the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA); and the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
Last fall, researchers including Frankenberg reported that a small region around the Four Corners intersection of Arizona, Colorado, New Mexico and Utah had the highest concentration of methane over background levels of any part of the United States.
An instrument on a European Space Agency satellite measuring greenhouse gases showed a persistent atmospheric hot spot in the area between 2003 and 2009.
The amount of methane observed by the satellite was much higher than previously estimated.

The satellite observations were not detailed enough to reveal the actual sources of the methane in the Four Corners.
Likely candidates include venting from oil and gas activities, which are primarily coalbed methane exploration and extraction in this region; active coal mines; and natural gas seeps.
Researchers from CIRES, NOAA's Earth Systems Research Laboratory and Michigan are conducting a field campaign called TOPDOWN (Twin Otter Projects Defining Oil Well and Natural gas emissions) 2015, bringing airborne and ground-based instruments to investigate possible sources of the methane hot spot.

The JPL team will join the effort on April 17 and fly two complementary remote sensing instruments on two Twin Otter research aircraft.
The Next-Generation Airborne Visible/Infrared Imaging Spectrometer (AVIRISng), which observes spectra of reflected sunlight, flies at a higher altitude and will be used to map methane at fine resolution over the entire region.
Using this information and ground measurements from the other research teams, the Hyperspectral Thermal Emission Spectrometer (HyTES) will fly over suspected methane sources, making additional, highly sensitive measurements of methane.
Depending on its flight altitude, the NASA aircraft can image methane features with a spatial resolution better than three feet (one meter) square. In other words, it can create a mosaic showing how methane levels vary every few feet, enabling the identification of individual sources.

With the combined resources, the investigators hope to quantify the region's overall methane emissions and pinpoint contributions from different sources. They will track changes over the course of the month-long effort and study how meteorology transports emissions through the region.
'If we can verify the methane detected by the satellite and identify its sources, decision-makers will have critical information for any actions they are considering,' said CIRES scientist Gabrielle P�tron, one of the mission's investigators. Part of President Obama's recent Climate Action Plan calls for reductions in methane emissions.
The research team also includes scientists from the Institute of Arctic and Alpine Research at the University of Colorado, Boulder; the U.S. Bureau of Land Management; and the state of New Mexico.

In each of the seven years studied from 2003-2009, the area released about 0.59 million metric tons of methane into the atmosphere.
This is almost 3.5 times the estimate for the same area in the European Union's widely used Emissions Database for Global Atmospheric Research.
In the study published online today in the journal Geophysical Research Letters, researchers used observations made by the European Space Agency's Scanning Imaging Absorption Spectrometer for Atmospheric Chartography (SCIAMACHY) instrument, which measured greenhouse gases from 2002 to 2012.
The atmospheric hot spot persisted throughout the study period.
A ground station in the Total Carbon Column Observing Network, operated by the Department of Energy's Los Alamos National Laboratory, provided independent validation of the measurement.
To calculate the emissions rate that would be required to produce the observed concentration of methane in the air, the authors performed high-resolution regional simulations using a chemical transport model, which simulates how weather moves and changes airborne chemical compounds.
Research scientist Christian Frankenberg of NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) in Pasadena, California, first noticed the Four Corners signal years ago in SCIAMACHY data.
'We didn't focus on it because we weren't sure if it was a true signal or an instrument error,' Frankenberg said.
The study's lead author, Eric Kort of the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, noted the study period predates the widespread use of hydraulic fracturing, known as fracking, near the hot spot.
This indicates the methane emissions should not be attributed to fracking but instead to leaks in natural gas production and processing equipment in New Mexico's San Juan Basin, which is the most active coalbed methane production area in the country.
Natural gas is 95-98 percent methane.
Methane is colorless and odorless, making leaks hard to detect without scientific instruments.
'The results are indicative that emissions from established fossil fuel harvesting techniques are greater than inventoried,' Kort said.
'There's been so much attention on high-volume hydraulic fracturing, but we need to consider the industry as a whole.'

Coalbed methane is gas that lines pores and cracks within coal.
In underground coal mines, it is a deadly hazard that causes fatal explosions almost every year as it seeps out of the rock. After the U.S. energy crisis of the 1970s, techniques were invented to extract the methane from the coal and use it for fuel. By 2012, coalbed methane supplied about 8 percent of all natural gas in the United States.
Frankenberg noted that the study demonstrates the unique role space-based measurements can play in monitoring greenhouse gases.
'Satellite data cannot be as accurate as ground-based estimates, but from space, there are no hiding places,' Frankenberg said.
In March 2014 the Obama Administration announced a strategy to reduce methane emissions under its Climate Action Plan.
The strategy includes improving the measurement and monitoring of methane emissions and assessing current methane emissions data.

Well maybe not doomy doom. But still slightly doomish. Methane bad.

duck monster fucked around with this message at 03:42 on Apr 10, 2015

# ? Apr 10, 2015 03:38

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? Jun 3, 2024 19:10

achillesforever6: Apr 23, 2012; psst you wanna do a communism?

Evil_Greven posted:

We're just so very hosed:

Aauuugh the same poo poo is happening with science, too.

God if only I could become dictator of this country, I would throw the Koch brothers and their cronies in a room that pumps methane in it then use their wealth to fund climate change research/solutions.

# ? Apr 10, 2015 05:17

Evil_Greven: Feb 20, 2007; Whadda I got to,
whadda I got to do
to wake ya up?

To shake ya up,
to break the structure up!?

Sadly, the most powerful nation on Earth is also the most unable to address such things due to its political structure.

Placid Marmot posted:

Pertinent graph.

http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/imageo/2015/04/09/new-record-low-for-arctic-sea-ice/#.VSbFwZOZNpM

Maybe this will be the year that becomes the first with basically no loving ice in the Arctic... that trend sure ain't looking good.

Gore cited some research predicting it in 2015 or 2016 (depending on speech) in his speeches, but that was literally the worst-case scenario.

# ? Apr 10, 2015 05:36

CommieGIR: Aug 22, 2006; The blue glow is a feature, not a bug; Pillbug

Its hard to believe the country that gave us NASA is so incompetent.

No, wait, its easy to believe.

# ? Apr 10, 2015 05:41

rivetz: Sep 22, 2000; Soiled Meat

Batham posted:

Yeah, I was thinking, weren't most of Antarctica's (glacier) issues related to volcano's getting really active? Not that it makes the situation any better.

Not really. Several of the Antarctic volcano research stories have been immediately grabbed by enthusiastic/desperate press spinning it as evidence that AGW isn't the problem, but no: https://news.vice.com/article/no-volcanoes-are-not-the-primary-cause-for-the-melting-ice-caps* . A more succinct distancing was posted on Cryolist; I can't find the original link, but here's the text:

quote:

Dear Cryolist,
The last couple of days have been interesting. What seemed like an innocuous chat with a San Antonio AM radio station about the findings of our new paper on geothermal flux under Thwaites Glacier (doi:10.1073/pnas.1405184111) rapidly turned into a confusing internet news story on how we had disproven anthropogenic global warming (this news story has now been taken down at our request). This is obviously not the case. For the record:

-Our study has no bearing on whether or not anthropogenic global warning is occurring.
-The amount of basal melting we find, although elevated compared to typical values estimated for Antarctica, is minor compared with both ice flux over the grounding line, snow fall in the catchment, and near the grounding line, the implied geothermal melting is small compared to the ice lost observed through various methods.
-We believe the main effect of this elevated heat flow is on the distribution and evolution of basal traction in the catchment. There may be a role for time varying interior boundary conditions to influence ice dynamics, complementing the now well established links to ice shelf thinning and ocean dynamics.

By and large, the media response to the paper has been accurate, but there obviously have been some outliers.

Cheers,
Duncan Young, Don Blankenship, Enrica Quartini and Dustin Schroeder

* I know we were poo-pooing Vice earlier as a source of hard science, but this link is relevant for direct quotes from the lead researcher.

# ? Apr 10, 2015 11:43

Batham: Jun 19, 2010; _{Cluster bombing from B-52s is very, very accurate. The bombs are guaranteed to always hit the ground.}

Thank you for the info!

# ? Apr 10, 2015 12:00

computer parts: Nov 18, 2010; PLEASE CLAP

CommieGIR posted:

Its hard to believe the country that gave us NASA is so incompetent.

No, wait, its easy to believe.

Because NASA is also incompetent?

# ? Apr 10, 2015 12:51

Slow News Day: Jul 4, 2007

Wisconsin cutting environmental damage, limiting talk of climate change

quote:

Since taking office in 2010, Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker has reshaped the state�s Department of Natural Resources (DNR). He appointed a former state senator and critic of the agency to be its secretary and hired an outside �deer czar� in response to hunters� complaints about the state�s management of the deer herd. Gov. Walker also re-wrote state mining regulations to clear the way for an ill-fated iron mine proposal that was finally abandoned last month. Several days ago, the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel reported that the mining company�s lobbyist and spokesman had been considered for appointment as the DNR�s deputy secretary�until officials realized there was a federal law specifically preventing that kind of thing. (He was, instead, hired for a job in another agency.)

Now, the DNR has come under the budget knife. Among other changes and position cuts, the agency�s science bureau faces a 30 percent reduction in staff. Now, Wisconsin Watch reports that the DNR is considering eliminating the science bureau altogether, shuffling remaining staff into other divisions.

The bureau performs the local, applied ecological research and monitoring that informs state regulations. Timothy Van Deelen, a University of Wisconsin ecologist, told Wisconsin Watch he was concerned about losing that work. �Long-term data sets are so incredibly rare,� he said. �And now a lot of that monitoring, such as with the deer herd, is up in the air.�

The Wisconsin government is also in the news for taking a page from the Florida playbook: the Board of Commissioners of Public Lands, which oversees logging on some state land among several other financial duties, voted on April 7 to ban its nine employees from working on or speaking about climate change. The move was led by State Treasurer Matt Adamczyk, a colorful character who ran on a platform of abolishing the office of State Treasurer�an office that had atrophied over the years.

Adamcyzk has gone after the board�s executive secretary, Tia Nelson, who had also served as co-chair of the previous governor�s global warming task force in 2007 and 2008. Adamczyk apparently wanted Nelson fired for having worked on that task force, saying it was outside the board�s mission, and for testifying on climate change to a US House subcommittee in 2009 while in Washington DC on board business. Previously, Adamczyk successfully had references to climate change removed from the board�s website.

Tia Nelson, by the way, is the daughter of former Wisconsin Gov. Gaylord Nelson�the man who established Earth Day. Prior to working for the Board of Commissioners of Public Lands, she led a climate change program for the Nature Conservancy. Just don�t ask her about it while she�s on the clock.

# ? Apr 10, 2015 14:48

rivetz: Sep 22, 2000; Soiled Meat

enraged_camel posted:

Wisconsin cutting environmental damage, limiting talk of climate change

Let's hope this leads to more hilarious "I'm sorry, what's the name of the thing you're talking about, again?" exchanges on the floors of various state senate chambers etc. :xd:

# ? Apr 10, 2015 18:14

CommieGIR: Aug 22, 2006; The blue glow is a feature, not a bug; Pillbug

computer parts posted:

Because NASA is also incompetent?

No, more NASA was just founded as another 'Fight the communists/Take the high ground' attempt, despite their awesome contributions to science and aeronautics.

# ? Apr 10, 2015 18:16

eNeMeE: Nov 26, 2012

enraged_camel posted:

Wisconsin cutting environmental damage, limiting talk of climate change

"Sorry sir, whether or not forests are cut down is related to that thing we can't work on, so I'm going to have to refuse"
"I'm sorry sire*, spending money to make things happen is related to that thing we can't work on, so I'm going to have to refuse"

*unintentional typo, but funnier. Obviously not going to happen that way, but I'd laugh (especially at the wrongful dismissal suits, since they could get expert testimony that they are correct).

# ? Apr 10, 2015 20:58

SMILLENNIALSMILLEN: Jun 26, 2009

enraged_camel posted:

Wisconsin cutting environmental damage, limiting talk of climate change

Seeing danger on the horizon, Wisconsin dons a blindfold.

# ? Apr 11, 2015 04:23

Job Truniht: Nov 7, 2012; MY POSTS ARE REAL RETARDED, SIR

CommieGIR posted:

Its hard to believe the country that gave us NASA is so incompetent.

No, wait, its easy to believe.

OTOH the Pentagon literally believes water wars are a thing that's going to happen so they spent the last few years gearing up for it by trying to reduce its dependency on fossil fuels- because last time the OPEC embargo happened it quickly turned into a national security risk for fueling tanks/jets on the tarmac and boats in the dock.

# ? Apr 11, 2015 07:08

duck monster: Dec 15, 2004

The pentagon has always had strategic reserves. They even had a loving massive old store of Helium dating back to the days when some believed aerial warfare would primarily involve blimps, that they sold off recently, much to the annoyance of some resource economists who note that helium is rare as hens teeth on earth for some reason.

# ? Apr 11, 2015 17:10

Pervis: Jan 12, 2001; YOSPOS

duck monster posted:

The pentagon has always had strategic reserves. They even had a loving massive old store of Helium dating back to the days when some believed aerial warfare would primarily involve blimps, that they sold off recently, much to the annoyance of some resource economists who note that helium is rare as hens teeth on earth for some reason.

Helium in the atmosphere is light enough to be blown away by solar winds and escape back in to space, or something. The helium that we captured came from oil wells, as a by-product of radioactive decay that was trapped underground. I think the price of helium is or will rise to the point where it'll be captured as part of the extraction process of oil/natural gas, but it sucks for industrial users of helium/whoever who relied upon the strategic helium reserves effect on prices for the last century or whatever. It reminds me of the Accuweather situation to a certain degree - it's government policy to make business opportunities (for the well-connected), possible at the expense of other business and almost certainly of the general public.

That being said, I wonder what the Pentagon plans look like for supplying a multi-year global war. They almost certainly have to take in to account some ability to spin up production (at great cost) in the US through fracking/etc, as well as making sure the Canada/Mexico supplies are secure as hell (and Nigeria?), but even then I would guess they would need massive cuts in domestic use in order to prosecute any protracted war of that magnitude. Mass Transit as well as other forms of alternative energy are probably high on their list of things to make that better, but they'd run in to opposition from the party of fossils and fossil fuels.

# ? Apr 11, 2015 18:18

Prolonged Panorama: Dec 21, 2007; Holy hookrat Sally smoking crack in the alley!

Fun fact - helium is so called because it was discovered in the sun. 14 years later it was detected on Earth. My university physics department had a good amount of helium for chilling stuff down to near absolute zero. About a third of the total lab space on my floor, as far as I could tell, was piping/machinery for circulating and recycling what helium we had. Very little was allowed to escape.

I remember a grad student telling me the dangers of a big leak in our liquid helium system - first of all the helium would flash to gas and expand rapidly, like an explosion. Deadly enough already. Further, the gaseous helium would be high enough pressure to displace the regular air on the floor (and we were in the basement) - we'd suffocate for lack of oxygen if we didn't get out quickly enough.

Prolonged Panorama fucked around with this message at 20:31 on Apr 11, 2015

# ? Apr 11, 2015 20:26

ANIME AKBAR: Jan 25, 2007; afu~

Pervis posted:

Helium in the atmosphere is light enough to be blown away by solar winds and escape back in to space, or something. The helium that we captured came from oil wells, as a by-product of radioactive decay that was trapped underground. I think the price of helium is or will rise to the point where it'll be captured as part of the extraction process of oil/natural gas, but it sucks for industrial users of helium/whoever who relied upon the strategic helium reserves effect on prices for the last century or whatever. It reminds me of the Accuweather situation to a certain degree - it's government policy to make business opportunities (for the well-connected), possible at the expense of other business and almost certainly of the general public.

Most helium harvesting is done as a byproduct of natural gas harvesting. It's apparently not too difficult to extract helium, but for some reason the gas companies simply choose not to do so, and the helium is just allowed to escape into the atmosphere. For a while I thought this was just a stupid ploy to inflate the price of helium for mad profits, but a couple years back we actually had to shut down some research systems because our helium suppliers simply refused to renew a contract with us, citing a lack of supply. They wouldn't sell us helium, at any price whatsoever. Meanwhile tons of the stuff boils away into space every day, it's crazy.

# ? Apr 11, 2015 21:02

Placid Marmot: Apr 28, 2013

Prolonged Priapism posted:

I remember a grad student telling me the dangers of a big leak in our liquid helium system - first of all the helium would flash to gas and expand rapidly, like an explosion. Deadly enough already. Further, the gaseous helium would be high enough pressure to displace the regular air on the floor (and we were in the basement) - we'd suffocate for lack of oxygen if we didn't get out quickly enough.

Eh, it's not that dangerous -
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1R7KsfosV-o

wiki posted:

According to helium conservationists like Nobel laureate physicist Robert Coleman Richardson, the free market price of helium has contributed to "wasteful" usage (e.g. for helium balloons). Prices in the 2000s have been lowered by U.S. Congress' decision to sell off the country's large helium stockpile by 2015.[92] According to Richardson, the current price needs to be multiplied by 20 to eliminate the excessive wasting of helium.

Don't worry, just keep the prices as they are and supply and demand will fix the problem when the supply drops to zero. It's working with oil, silver, gold, copper, lead, rare earths... well, most metals except iron and aluminum... phosphorus, water...

# ? Apr 11, 2015 21:48

Prolonged Panorama: Dec 21, 2007; Holy hookrat Sally smoking crack in the alley!

I dunno, that explosion looked like it was outside. So yeah, not much danger of running out of breathable air.

Wikipedia backs me up, though:

Wikipedia article on superconducing magnets" posted:

If a large magnet undergoes a quench, the inert vapor formed by the evaporating cryogenic fluid can present a significant asphyxiation hazard to operators by displacing breathable air.

# ? Apr 11, 2015 22:22

Placid Marmot: Apr 28, 2013

Prolonged Priapism posted:

I dunno, that explosion looked like it was outside. So yeah, not much danger of running out of breathable air.

Wikipedia backs me up, though:

No doubt - the advice for a helium leak is to hit the floor, since the helium rises - it was the physical explosion that seems pretty benign.

# ? Apr 12, 2015 00:06

CommieGIR: Aug 22, 2006; The blue glow is a feature, not a bug; Pillbug

Job Truniht posted:

OTOH the Pentagon literally believes water wars are a thing that's going to happen so they spent the last few years gearing up for it by trying to reduce its dependency on fossil fuels- because last time the OPEC embargo happened it quickly turned into a national security risk for fueling tanks/jets on the tarmac and boats in the dock.

The DoD is so weird, it presents a conservative idealism, but they don't shun the scientists as openly, and tend to listen to evidence much more readily, sure its just because of the potential for national security risks, but that is a significant improvement over say our current Environmental Senate Chair.

# ? Apr 12, 2015 03:00

computer parts: Nov 18, 2010; PLEASE CLAP

CommieGIR posted:

The DoD is so weird, it presents a conservative idealism, but they don't shun the scientists as openly, and tend to listen to evidence much more readily, sure its just because of the potential for national security risks, but that is a significant improvement over say our current Environmental Senate Chair.

They're the people who actually make the trains run on time, or would like to at least.

# ? Apr 12, 2015 05:08

got any sevens: Feb 9, 2013; by Cyrano4747

^ Raising the question of if we'd be better off with a junta instead of democratic partisan gridlock.

# ? Apr 12, 2015 05:18

lollontee: Nov 4, 2014; Can't post for 10 years!

i think i would make a great emperor of america

# ? Apr 12, 2015 07:43

Kafka Esq.: Jan 1, 2005; "If you ever even think about calling me anything but 'The Crab' I will go so fucking crab on your ass you won't even see what crab'd your crab" -The Crab(TM)

Friendly Tumour posted:

i think i would make a great emperor of america

The best dictators come from the nation next door.

# ? Apr 12, 2015 16:27

Salt Fish: Sep 11, 2003; Cybernetic Crumb

effectual posted:

^ Raising the question of if we'd be better off with a junta instead of democratic partisan gridlock.

They would probably recognize the severity of climate change, prepare for a water war, but then encourage it as an excuse to finally justify the f-22 and similar projects. We'd be better off putting some actual scientists in charge of something instead of scientists by proxy of a giant military-industrial organization.

# ? Apr 12, 2015 17:20

Die Sexmonster!: Nov 30, 2005

Salt Fish posted:

We'd be better off putting some actual scientists in charge of something

There's a party I'd get behind, before even technocrats.

Tyson/Nye 2016! Or Nye/Tyson, they can pick.

# ? Apr 14, 2015 02:05

Trabisnikof: Dec 24, 2005

Pyroxene Stigma posted:

There's a party I'd get behind, before even technocrats.

Tyson/Nye 2016! Or Nye/Tyson, they can pick.

So you think TV personalities make good politicians?

# ? Apr 14, 2015 03:12

Berk Berkly: Apr 9, 2009; by zen death robot

Trabisnikof posted:

So you think TV personalities make good politicians?

You think politicians make good politicians?

# ? Apr 14, 2015 05:30

Zombie #246: Apr 26, 2003; Murr rgghhh ahhrghhh fffff

Mike Tyson wouldn't be a good choice.

# ? Apr 14, 2015 05:46

duck monster: Dec 15, 2004

Zombie #246 posted:

Mike Tyson wouldn't be a good choice.

Bite the ear off any motherfucker who blocks his judical nominations.

Yeah I probably would actually vote for that, just for the comedy.

# ? Apr 14, 2015 09:42

WorldsStongestNerd: Apr 28, 2010; by Fluffdaddy

Trabisnikof posted:

So you think TV personalities make good politicians?

It depends on what the rest of thier background is. In Tysons case he was part of the scientific community before he became a tv personality. If a person is only a personality that is bad. If being a personality is only a small part of thier experience and skill set then that can be good as being a successful politician does require image management and the ability to talk and engage with people.

So the answer to your sarcastic poo poo post is that a tv personality can be a good politician if they also have other things going on. Otherwise no. Reagan for example was a disaster for America, but he was just an actor and nothing else substantial.

# ? Apr 14, 2015 15:46

CommieGIR: Aug 22, 2006; The blue glow is a feature, not a bug; Pillbug

duck monster posted:

Bite the ear off any motherfucker who blocks his judical nominations.

Yeah I probably would actually vote for that, just for the comedy.

Idiocracy come to life.

Trabisnikof posted:

So you think TV personalities make good politicians?

Bill Nye and Tyson at least have the educational background and scientific experience. I mean, granted, Carter was a nuclear engineer, and look out that turned out.

# ? Apr 14, 2015 15:54

Evil_Greven: Feb 20, 2007; Whadda I got to,
whadda I got to do
to wake ya up?

To shake ya up,
to break the structure up!?

Happy times ahead:

quote:

There is a considerable likelihood of warming reaching 4�C above pre-industrial levels within this century... Crop yields are expected to decline by 30 percent with 1.5-2�C warming and up to 60 percent with 3-4�C warming
...
In a 4�C world, mean summer temperatures are expected to be up to 8�C warmer in parts of Algeria, Saudi Arabia and Iraq
...
"I guess it should be between three and four degrees hotter. We used to think that we were headed for +8�C, but that will never happen. We are not even on track for +6�C because economies will be collapsing long before we get there. We know that after +2�C, dangerous things start happening, and we start passing crucial tipping points, like the West Antarctica ice sheet collapse, which has reportedly already begun."

Time to party like it's 1998! After all, in the near future, that would be a cool year.

# ? Apr 14, 2015 18:33

ToxicSlurpee: Nov 5, 2003; -=SEND HELP=-; Pillbug

WorldsStrongestNerd posted:

It depends on what the rest of thier background is. In Tysons case he was part of the scientific community before he became a tv personality. If a person is only a personality that is bad. If being a personality is only a small part of thier experience and skill set then that can be good as being a successful politician does require image management and the ability to talk and engage with people.

So the answer to your sarcastic poo poo post is that a tv personality can be a good politician if they also have other things going on. Otherwise no. Reagan for example was a disaster for America, but he was just an actor and nothing else substantial.

The only people that actually make good politicians are the ones that don't want the job. It's kind of a Catch 22; dudes like Nye and Tyson seem to want to just kind of hang around and science. In their cases it seems like they got handed fame then went "well I guess I can use this to promote science or something?" which is part of why they're such fantastic, respectable personalities. They are very science first and are more interested in that then fame and fortune. They just want to understand the universe better and help others do the same. That's why they'd make better politicians than what we have now.

Granted you could probably run the nation better by just putting all the possible decisions on a dart board and picking whichever one a blindfolded drunk hit.

# ? Apr 14, 2015 19:57

SSJ_naruto_2003: Oct 12, 2012

Evil_Greven posted:

Happy times ahead:

Time to party like it's 1998! After all, in the near future, that would be a cool year.

How can we be warming the earth by over 2 celcius when the liberal scientists are conspiracy lying SCAM al gore bought a mansion on the CA coast which he CLAIMED WOULD BE UNDERWATER and the ICE CAPS ARE MIGRATING ITS OK

and man i just can't do that

It's physically painful.

# ? Apr 14, 2015 21:06

CommieGIR: Aug 22, 2006; The blue glow is a feature, not a bug; Pillbug

GreyPowerVan posted:

How can we be warming the earth by over 2 celcius when the liberal scientists are conspiracy lying SCAM al gore bought a mansion on the CA coast which he CLAIMED WOULD BE UNDERWATER and the ICE CAPS ARE MIGRATING ITS OK

and man i just can't do that

It's physically painful.

To be fair, being Ted Cruz or David Inhofe looks physically painful.

# ? Apr 14, 2015 21:08

SSJ_naruto_2003: Oct 12, 2012

Is there like a "proving climate change for newbies" post to show people who don't have any information on it at all? There are a few people I think could be swayed but of course if it requires looking up information and reading it, no deal. It's easier to listen to their congressman say on the floor that there is no climate change than to doubt them and dig a little.

# ? Apr 14, 2015 21:15

CommieGIR: Aug 22, 2006; The blue glow is a feature, not a bug; Pillbug

GreyPowerVan posted:

Is there like a "proving climate change for newbies" post to show people who don't have any information on it at all? There are a few people I think could be swayed but of course if it requires looking up information and reading it, no deal. It's easier to listen to their congressman say on the floor that there is no climate change than to doubt them and dig a little.

This might help as a starting point to counter denialism:

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Global_warming_denialism

# ? Apr 14, 2015 21:28

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? Jun 3, 2024 19:10

SSJ_naruto_2003: Oct 12, 2012

CommieGIR posted:

This might help as a starting point to counter denialism:

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Global_warming_denialism

The person who is claiming it's all a scam actually just linked me to support for his point of view. It's a wikipedia article that claims global warming is real.

So I guess it's just another person who doesn't actually read or care about it.

Thanks for the link, and if anyone else has information I'm still interested.

# ? Apr 14, 2015 21:39

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > Climate Change thread: tl; dr - We are so screwed

«‹›260 »