|
Yeah. I'm glad all that can't happen in our sane and well run society
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2017 04:24
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 07:20 |
|
|
Invest in lead right now to raise funds.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2017 04:28
|
|
|
Mustached Demon posted:Invest in lead right now to raise funds. I'm selling short on clean air and water futures 
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2017 04:52
|
|
|
Haha, worse yet, what if everyone kept driving cars and burning coal and gas for energy!
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2017 05:30
|
|
|
VectorSigma posted:Haha, worse yet, what if everyone kept driving cars and burning coal and gas for energy! Good luck with that...
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2017 05:51
|
|
|
Minge Binge posted:who's gonna take the courageous step and start a company that helps victims of climate disaster. let's start pitching this to investor. lots of money to be made. lots of lives to be saved. You'd probably want to focus on the production of goods and services that help people in the event of calamity: bottled water, non-perishable food, durable blankets/clothing (wool is best; still warm even if it's wet), waterproof matches, road flares, etc. Really focus on that doomsday prepper dollar. Pick a couple of items you think you can make affordably, or maybe something along the lines of a pre-packed "bug-out bag," and diversify as your profit margin allows. If you source locally/domestically and employ Americans, you could even do some good along the way.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2017 08:03
|
|
|
Just in case you were wondering how things are doing lately... Arctic sea ice extent has recovered to the point where it dropped out of lowest-ever. Briefly; a storm had spread it out quite a bit. It reclaimed lowest-ever for awhile, but now is approaching not-quite-lowest-ever. Area is still low. Worse is volume, which is averaging about a little over a meter thick. To give you an idea about how hosed up that is, just look at the title of this article: The new mid-winter Arctic shipping: tanker makes it through Bering Strait to pick up oil in Yamal Antarctic sea ice extent, while less concerning, is still remarkably low; it's not yet the usual time to reach minimum extent and it's already in the top 10 for lowest extent. Meanwhile, several ice shelves are cracking: Larson C Brunt Amery & Shackleton (these appear to change more regularly, see Shackleton circa 2003) 
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2017 03:26
|
|
|
A loving tanker was able to traverse the Bering strait to pick up oil in loving February. Wow
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2017 10:55
|
|
|
so the arctic ice is hosed, yep. will this have any effect on the antarctic ice?
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2017 13:06
|
|
|
No, they are very different and not closely related. It just happens that this year they are both at record lows.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2017 13:34
|
|
|
Strictly, if ice is lost from Greenland, the sea level in Antarctica will rise, ice shelves will break off more quickly and continental ice loss will accelerate, but the specific type of ice that we are discussing every week in the Arctic is sea ice, which does not directly infulence sea level.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2017 13:57
|
|
|
But it does influence the rate at which Earth absorbs heat from the sun.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2017 19:39
|
|
|
Arglebargle III posted:But it does influence the rate at which Earth absorbs heat from the sun. And a warmer ocean will expand, which will increase pressure on land ice.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2017 19:50
|
|
|
Can't believe waterworld was in fact a prophecy come true.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2017 21:45
|
|
|
I'm ready to start drinking my own piss. Embrace death.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2017 23:23
|
|
|
Ready to start? Way ahead of you friend.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2017 04:18
|
|
|
The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration got caught falsifying data ahead of COP 21 in order to push for more radical global austerity measures. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-4192182/World-leaders-duped-manipulated-global-warming-data.html
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2017 03:36
|
|
|
smoke sumthin bitch posted:The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration got caught falsifying data ahead of COP 21 in order to push for more radical global austerity measures. quote:The Daily Mail is a British daily middle-market[2][3] tabloid newspaper owned by the Daily Mail and General Trust[4] and published in London.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2017 03:43
|
|
|
https://arstechnica.co.uk/science/2017/02/article-names-whistleblower-who-told-congress-that-noaa-manipulated-data/ quote:Bates expected the same approach from his surface temperature counterparts, but Peterson explained that their work with weather station data was not nearly so high-stakes—problems could easily be fixed on the fly. The engineering-style process NOAA was using for endlessly double-checking the software for all dataset updates could drag on for quite a long time—years, in fact—and Bates opposed any attempt to speed this up. Peterson and other scientists were naturally anxious to incorporate changes they knew were scientifically important. More lies to push the murderous anti-science agenda. Cool. Fangz fucked around with this message at 03:52 on Feb 7, 2017 |
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2017 03:49
|
|
|
Some responses to David Rose's piece from people involved. http://rabett.blogspot.ca/2017/02/the-speed-of-entropy.html http://icarus-maynooth.blogspot.ca/2017/02/on-mail-on-sunday-article-on-karl-et-al.html?m=1 http://variable-variability.blogspot.ca/2017/02/david-roses-alternative-reality-noaa-Karl.html http://greatwhitecon.info/2017/02/climategate-2-falls-at-the-first-hurdle/
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2017 04:15
|
|
|
thank you, smoke sumthin bitch, for alerting us to the evils of Rep. Smith (R-Texas)
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2017 09:56
|
|
|
So long Larsen C, you had a nice run.. https://www.nytimes.com/interactive...WT.nav=top-news
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2017 16:03
|
|
|
It's going to be hard to explain to people that a long essay on software version control and organizational politics that they will never read is not the smoking gun that the Daily Mail has made it out to be.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2017 21:29
|
|
|
The daily mail's graph in the article sort of undermines their point, but nobody can probably read graphs anyways.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2017 21:44
|
|
|
woops wrong thread
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2017 06:17
|
|
|
smoke sumthin bitch posted:The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration got caught falsifying data ahead of COP 21 in order to push for more radical global austerity measures. So, how far into this did you look? Nucleic Acids fucked around with this message at 04:15 on Feb 9, 2017 |
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2017 04:06
|
|
|
Sort of good news: http://blogs.agu.org/geospace/2017/02/08/gas-hydrate-breakdown-unlikely-cause-massive-greenhouse-gas-release/ A new study seems to indicate that the methane clathrates "gun" won't fire after all. It still isn't good, but it's not as apocalyptic as was feared. Maybe.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2017 11:04
|
|
|
Wanderer posted:Sort of good news: This literature review just says there is little evidence there's large scale release right now.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2017 11:38
|
|
|
Wanderer posted:Sort of good news: Well, I think the main author of that study, Carolyn Ruppel, has been somewhat vocal against the methane clathrate gun hypothesis for some time now, and to be totally fair the methane clathrate gun idea is one of the least certain predictions about future global warming catastrophes. Of course, there's firstly the question of the totality of her critique, as she is mostly focused on undersea methane release and not so much the whole of Siberia rotting thing. Secondly there's a question of how accurate we can trust this study to be, after all since the future is unpredictable, which outcome do we want to take a chance on? Do we want to risk methane clathrates not being a thing when we describe future scenarios? How about future worst-case scenarios? All in all it would be super if the methane bomb isn't a thing that's likely to happen. It buys us some very valuable time, time we can use to actually slow this poo poo down and maybe be looking at a few-degrees warmer future as opposed to a double-digits warmer future. Which may be difference of a few billion lives. But at this point and with the climate denialist pieces of poo poo at the top of the US political system and the state of the world and international cooperation, I'd much rather we assume the absolute worst and work towards prevention with that in mind rather than providing any excuses for postponing meaningful reform another decade or two. Because the rest of our global problem is for damned sure not going away.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2017 11:41
|
|
|
We know that the Earth has going through rapid climate shifts in the past, without human interference. Check out Dansgaarg Oeschger events if you are interested. Basically, there are natural mechanisms which can rapidly accelerate a temperature increase. Whether methane calthrates is one of them or its something else, it feels rather moot. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2017 13:01
|
|
|
Wanderer posted:Sort of good news: is this scary article (http://www.nationofchange.org/2017/02/10/rapidly-warming-arctic-loose-methane-climate-bomb-mean-extinction-nine-years/) this methane gun thing? SO much scary, bring back ELF and other eco-terrorist groups please.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2017 21:46
|
|
|
I have serious doubts the ELF could operate in the modern era. All it takes is one dumb gently caress bringing a cellphone along while you bomb a coal terminal / pulp mill / oil refinery and suddenly you're all going to prison. The logistics are too difficult in our era of Orwellian surveillance. Besides, the real troubles are in developing nations. Good luck gathering a group of expendibles to go pull off a mass-murder of illegal loggers in Brazil! At this point it's too late anyways and if them clathrates gonna blow, no amount of eco-terrorism is going to stop things. Just eat your soma and pretend nothing is wrong, citizen. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2017 23:23
|
|
|
Doorknob Slobber posted:is this scary article (http://www.nationofchange.org/2017/02/10/rapidly-warming-arctic-loose-methane-climate-bomb-mean-extinction-nine-years/) this methane gun thing? SO much scary, bring back ELF and other eco-terrorist groups please. Methane Clathrates were strictly crazy territory back when I was in school. They were just thought to be too stable to pose a serious risk for the methane gun to be an actual thing in our lifetimes. However, from what I understand it basically all comes down to how long does it take for a seasonally ice free Arctic to become a permantly ice free Arctic. Some people think centuries, some think less than a decade. If it's more on the scale of decade warm Atlantic water could flood the Artic in sufficient volume to trigger climate apocalypse. Even a seasonally ice free Arctic represents an extreme and real threat to sea shelf methane clathrates, and that isn't exactly apocalypse but sets in motion feedback loops that fundamentally change human organizational structure. And it is batshit loving insane that this is a real possibility.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2017 00:20
|
|
|
Welp, you can put the final nail in the coffin of the nuclear renaissance now.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2017 08:12
|
|
|
Can someone point me in the direction of a good "clathrates apocalypse for dummies" article so I have a better idea of what's going on?
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2017 14:56
|
|
|
double nine posted:Can someone point me in the direction of a good "clathrates apocalypse for dummies" article so I have a better idea of what's going on? Well, wikipedia is an okay start. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clathrate_gun_hypothesis This is a good one that's often cited: http://pm22100.net/docs/pdf/enercoop/energie/gaz/130316_Methane_Hydrates_and_Contemporary_Climate_Change.pdf And skepticalscience is interesting, if possibly alarmist? I don't know, but I do use their references from time to time. https://skepticalscience.com/Wakening_the_Kraken.html The tl;dr on it as far as I can tell is that with a reasonable amount of warming over the next few centuries, it might not happen. It most likely will not happen in our lifetimes. A big however is that we really don't know enough to reasonably conclude that this won't happen, and won't happen soon. We know that the Arctic deposits are the biggest danger and the most likely to cause problems, but there are good indications that there are natural processes that will slow down or mitigate the impact. On land, we have a lot less methane deposits so they play a lesser role. So, not knowing how runaway warming effects will impact this picture, it's a cool "possibly, we should probably do something to prevent this". Nice piece of fish fucked around with this message at 15:30 on Feb 13, 2017 |
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2017 15:28
|
|
|
double nine posted:Can someone point me in the direction of a good "clathrates apocalypse for dummies" article so I have a better idea of what's going on? The wiki article is actually pretty good. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clathrate_gun_hypothesis
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2017 15:35
|
|
|
ComradeCosmobot posted:Welp, you can put the final nail in the coffin of the nuclear renaissance now. My favorite quote from the article quote:Stone & Webster had built the Massachusetts Institute of Technology’s campus and many of the country’s nuclear plants from the 1950s to the 1970s, but it was a shell of its old self when Bernhard bought it. Still, the name gave Shaw new credibility in the nuclear field, which it capitalized on to win all of Westinghouse’s contracts. “They weren’t necessarily qualified, but they had the heart and the go-get-them to take it on,’’ says Jeffrey Kellerman, a retired construction project controller who worked for Shaw at its nuclear sites. Herm, I can see no way that this will later be a problem.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2017 16:25
|
|
|
Have people checked out https://www.skepticalscience.com/docs/Debunking_Handbook.pdf Thoughts?
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2017 03:27
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 07:20 |
|
|
Only seen it now, wish I had known about it sooner. Seems to make sense to me.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2017 04:01
|
|