kater posted:

Every time this gets quoted it looks worse I swear there wasn't black the last time I saw it. Why the fucj does a temperature chart have black goddamn

Raine posted:

why engage with someone who presents a gulag-level take when you can just tell them to gently caress off

patience and word salads are pointless wastes of time

kater posted:

Why the fucj does a temperature chart have black goddamn

quote:

Plastics, part of modern life, are useful but can pose a significant challenge to the environment and may also constitute a health concern. Indeed, exposure to plastic-associated chemicals, such as base chemical bisphenol A and phthalate plasticizers, can increase the risk of human cardiovascular disease. What underlying mechanisms cause this, however, remain elusive.

A team led by Changcheng Zhou, a biomedical scientist at the University of California, Riverside, now raises the hopes of solving the mystery. In a mouse study, the researchers found a phthalate — a chemical used to make plastics more durable — led to increased plasma cholesterol levels

“We found dicyclohexyl phthalate, or DCHP, strongly binds to a receptor called pregnane X receptor, or PXR,” said Zhou, who is a professor in the UCR School of Medicine. “DCHP ‘turns on’ PXR in the gut, inducing the expression of key proteins required for cholesterol absorption and transport. Our experiments show that DCHP elicits high cholesterol by targeting intestinal PXR signaling.”.

kater posted:

Why the fucj does a temperature chart have black goddamn

splifyphus posted:

sure am thanks for asking. and how's your mass extinction event going today?

yeah dawg, gently caress learning from history or defining our concepts.

we should respect people who know their interests and act on their convictions, because we should be people who know our interests and act on our convictions.

the social contract/ideology we were all inculcated into is indeed totally obsolete. the semantic apocalypse in full swing - get you some.

exxon falsifies the info to keep the party going. carlin tells you the info doesn't even loving matter in the first place, because we don't matter, because 'the universe' doesn't care about us, cuz 'the planet' will be fine. which is worse?

trick question - both are worse. they're both figures of the same ideological formation. the view from nowhere is an anthropomorphic projection, a structural illusion built into bourgeois idealism. carlin was just a ventriloquist for exxon. cynical about everything except the conditions for the emergence of his own cynicism, unaware of his own structural function. a pathetic sop to boomer self-hatred and nihilism.

Raine posted:

gently caress off

petit choux posted:

Do you look at your AV before you hit the post button and check if Billy would approve?

Raine posted:

thanks for reminding me to check the status of season 3

also i feel like the scene my av is from makes that post seem friendly by comparison

splifyphus posted:

everyone in this thread is an agent of extinction.

Thorn Wishes Talon posted:

we should all be nice to each other

imho

Pryor on Fire posted:

we were already at +1.4c in some places like alaska, and that's before current brutal heat wave so that number is probably higher now

30 years is today buddy

quote:

https://i.imgur.com/1mBdDFs.mp4
Extreme climate change has arrived in America

New Jersey may seem an unlikely place to measure climate change, but it is one of the fastest-warming states in the nation. Its average temperature has climbed by close to 2 degrees Celsius since 1895 — double the average for the Lower 48 states.

A Washington Post analysis of more than a century of National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration temperature data across the Lower 48 states and 3,107 counties has found that major areas are nearing or have already crossed the 2-degree Celsius mark.

— Today, more than 1 in 10 Americans — 34 million people — are living in rapidly heating regions, including New York City and Los Angeles. Seventy-one counties have already hit the 2-degree Celsius mark.

— Alaska is the fastest-warming state in the country, but Rhode Island is the first state in the Lower 48 whose average temperature rise has eclipsed 2 degrees Celsius. Other parts of the Northeast — New Jersey, Connecticut, Maine and Massachusetts — trail close behind.

— While many people associate global warming with summer’s melting glaciers, forest fires and disastrous flooding, it is higher winter temperatures that have made New Jersey and nearby Rhode Island the fastest warming of the Lower 48 states.

The average New Jersey temperature from December through February now exceeds 0 degrees Celsius, the temperature at which water freezes. That threshold, reached over the past three decades, has meant lakes don't freeze as often, snow melts more quickly, and insects and pests don't die as they once did in the harsher cold.

The freezing point “is the most critical threshold among all temperatures,” said David A. Robinson, New Jersey state climatologist and professor at Rutgers University’s department of geography.

The uneven rise in temperatures across the United States matches what is happening around the world.

In the past century, the Earth has warmed 1 degree Celsius. But that’s just an average. Some parts of the globe — including the mountains of Romania and the steppes of Mongolia — have registered increases twice as large. It has taken decades or in some cases a century. But for huge swaths of the planet, climate change is a present-tense reality, not one looming ominously in the distant future.

To find the world’s 2C hot spots, its fastest-warming places, The Post analyzed temperature databases, including those kept by NASA and NOAA; peer-reviewed scientific studies; and reports by local climatologists. The global data sets draw upon thousands of land-based weather stations and other measurements, such as ocean buoys armed with sensors and ship logs dating as far back as 1850.

In any one geographic location, 2 degrees Celsius may not represent global cataclysmic change, but it can threaten ecosystems, change landscapes and upend livelihoods and cultures.

In Lake Hopatcong, thinning ice let loose waves of aquatic weeds that ordinarily die in the cold. This year, a new blow: Following one of the warmest springs of the past century, harmful bacteria known as blue-green algae bloomed in the lake just as the tourist season was taking off in June.

Cold on a Cob posted:

i've been super nice and chill with people in my personal and professional life since i crossed over into acceptance. everyone has noticed and wants to know my secret.

lol. lmao.

Real hurthling! posted:

david attenbourogh once ate an entire turtle species to extinction when he was stuck on an Indonesian island to film exotic birds

https://grist.org/climate/climate-change-forest-loss posted:

Wildfires are erasing Western forests. Climate change is making it permanent.

The evidence is clear: Forests are shifting to scrublands across large swaths of the Western U.S.

Nathanael Johnson Sr. Staff Writer



The trees were not coming back. In the years following the 2000 Walker Ranch Fire, Tom Veblen, a forest ecologist at the nearby University of Colorado, Boulder, saw that grass and shrubs were regrowing in the charred foothills, but he had to search to find the rare baby version of the tall ponderosa pines that had dominated the area before the fire.

“I kept watching and I was barely seeing any seedlings at all,” Veblen said.

One of his graduate students at the time, Monica Rother, who now leads her own lab at the University of North Carolina at Wilmington, took a closer look, formally sectioning off research plots and returning year after year to count little trees. More than a decade after the Walker Ranch Fire most of her plots had zero tree seedlings.

Now that the winter has cooled the 2021 fire season, scientists are looking at the big burn scars across the West with the grim understanding that, in some places, the pine and Douglas fir forests will not return.

The driving force here is that the rising global temperature is wiping out seedlings. In many spots around the U.S. West, summer temperatures are already high enough to cook young trees before they can develop thick protective bark. Others have become so dry that seedlings shrivel before their roots can grow deep enough to reach groundwater. Both circumstances can thwart forest regeneration. Mature trees can survive in these areas long after they stop reproducing. But when fires wipe out these forests and seedings can’t get a foothold, they are replaced with grasses and dense brush.

Climate change has already shifted biomes. Intense fires simply clear away the last vestiges of the old regime.

When Veblen told the Forest Service about his early observations, around 2003, officials shrugged off the concern. Back then, during President George W. Bush’s administration, the idea that climate change was already producing changes was still somewhat taboo. It would probably just take a few years for trees to get reestablished, the government foresters said.

But over the years, the evidence piled up. And new research has cemented the scientific consensus that climate change is making it much harder for forests of Western mountains to return after fires.


Burned stems are all that remain of a forest. Nearly 20 years after the 2002 Ponil Complex Fire, there’s little sign of the pines that once filled this part of northern New Mexico. In their place, scruby Gambel oaks and mountain mahogany have sprouted. Photo taken in 2016 by Kyle Rodeman

Kimberley Davis is a plant ecologist at the University of Montana and the lead author of an influential study on how climate change is altering forest regeneration after fire, published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. In her research, she found site after site where new climatic conditions no longer supported the growth of young pines. Adult trees can survive in conditions that kill their seedlings, but they have no future: Like the humans in the science-fiction movie “Children of Men” they’ve outlived their ability to reproduce. With no seedlings, when a fire eventually passes through that is strong enough to wipe out mature trees, it means the woods are gone for good.

When trees fail to regenerate after a fire, new plants take their place. To generalize, in the northern Rocky Mountains, it’s a mix of grasses and shrubs of the genus ceanothus — like snowbrush. In parts of the Southwest, juniper and oak savannas replace pine forests. In New Mexico, thorny locusts often dominate. In northern California, its dense hip to head-high thickets of manzanita and ceanothus. The general trend: fewer forests, more shrublands.

Examples of this ecological shift abound. Twenty years have passed since the Valley Complex Fire burned down the mature forests in Bitterroot National Forest in Montana, and yet there are no signs of young trees returning to the big swaths of landscape. Sixteen years after the Peppin Fire in Lincoln National Forest in New Mexico, it appears the pines are gone for good in many places, replaced by scrubby Gambrel oaks that can survive in the hotter conditions. After the 2007 Moonlight Fire in Plumas National Forest, dense stands of chaparral whitethorn and greenleaf manzanita grew back, rather than trees.

“It’s already happening, it’s not just something we are modeling in the future,” Davis said. “We are definitely at a point where we are all noticing significant impacts of climate change in terms of lack of forest regeneration across the West.”


Seedlings in the area burned in the 2005 Mason Fire in the Sangre de Cristo Mountains near Pueblo, Colorado. This is what forest regrowth looks like in areas where the climate has not made conditions too hot or dry for conifers. Photo taken in 2016 by Kyle Rodeman.

One study, published last year, found that if forested areas in the Rocky Mountains burned, just half would recover well. It’s generally the south facing slopes and the fringes, where woods meet the plains, that can no longer nurture young pine and fir trees, because those are the parts of forests with the highest temperatures, said Kyle Rodeman, the lead author of that paper, and a scientist studying forest recovery at Northern Arizona University. Southern slopes get more sun in the northern hemisphere, which makes them hotter and drier. And the low-elevation edges of forests mark the line where conditions become inhospitable for trees — with smaller plants in the hotter lowlands, and trees appearing at higher, cooler elevations. It only makes sense that these spots have been the first places forced over the tipping point, into conditions unsuitable for forests, as climate change has turned up the heat. As the years pass, those unsuitable conditions for forest creep uphill.


Burnt snags stand upright amid chest-high brush.The forest on New Mexico’s El Capitan mountain, between the Pecos and Rio Grande rivers, in the 2004 Peppin Fire, has become a brushy biome, dominated by thorny locusts and Gambel oak.

We’ve long known that it takes water and cool weather to support mountain pine forests. “In a way you would say, ‘Duh, what did you expect? Under warmer drier conditions you are going to get fewer forests,” Veblen said. But it took time to document, and back up the logic with data. At this point, he said, “there’s really no resistance to that idea anymore.”

Today, land managers are scrambling to slow the transformation in many places, by planting trees and killing shrubs. For instance, the Forest Service has proposed a plan to wipe out brush with herbicides in Plumas National Forest. There, climatic conditions would still allow young trees to survive, if they were not crowded out by fast growing shrubs, experts say. When fires enter forests every few years, they tend to burn gently, creeping along the ground and clearing out plants that compete with young trees, without killing the mature ones. But in a landscape dominated by brush, fires burn hot, wiping out the remaining trees and favoring the scrubby species that can quickly grow back. It looks like that’s exactly what happened when the 2021 Dixie Fire swept through the brushy areas created by the 2007 Moonlight Fire. By clearing the brush, the Forest Service hopes to give trees a chance to tip the ecosystem back into a self-sustaining forest.

These efforts to control habitats can succeed in areas teetering on the edge — where temperatures are still low enough to allow a few young pine trees to take root. But they don’t control the most important variable determining the fate of these forests: “The earlier we start dealing with the root problem, climate change, the better chance we have,” Veblen said. “If you want to keep these forests, keep fossil fuels in the ground.”

Cold on a Cob posted:

i've been super nice and chill with people in my personal and professional life since i crossed over into acceptance. everyone has noticed and wants to know my secret.

lol. lmao.

splifyphus posted:

trick question - both are worse. they're both figures of the same ideological formation. the view from nowhere is an anthropomorphic projection, a structural illusion built into bourgeois idealism. carlin was just a ventriloquist for exxon. cynical about everything except the conditions for the emergence of his own cynicism, unaware of his own structural function. a pathetic sop to boomer self-hatred and nihilism.

Cloks posted:

same

it's chaos, be kind

goochtit posted:

https://twitter.com/pkedrosky/status/1466232825569431554

Xaris posted:

lol if we live long enough to see +1.5c in like 30 years. what a show that's gunna be

blatman posted:

the most impressive part of this post isn't that someone invented a way to post in the future from the 90s, it's that you're somehow able to post with a copy of netscape navigator and a 56k modem

Hubbert posted:

ok the alarm bells are going off in my head now

Hubbert posted:

ok the alarm bells are going off in my head now

Alobar posted:

honestly, to me, it seems like a partisan non-issue

the earth has plenty of water, it's not like we're gonna run out of it at any point

Hubbert posted:

ok the alarm bells are going off in my head now

petit choux posted:

SCTV did a great takedown of George one time, a Woody Allen movie styled after "play it again sam" but with George Carlin instead of Bogey. Highly recommend.

Trabisnikof posted:

if carlin was alive it would rock to see how he would have ruined his legacy

Milo and POTUS posted:

Oh my god I'm watching this and it's spot on lmao.

He would have gotten more into acting

Rime posted:

It is probably time to admit that exponential feedback effects are fully spun up and mass-migration waves such as we have never seen are now years, not decades, and certainly not "a" decade, away. poo poo is hosed.

BC's snowpack is down about 45% over the last 15 years. We got some snow up there late October/ early November, and I recall talk about the local ski hills opening at the start of December, the first time in half a decade. Now that we can see them again they're almost bare, because it was Twenty loving Degrees across much of the province yesterday after a week of torrential rain.

I am firmly of the belief that we'll see major migrations and societal collapse in 5 years tops, hell by 2025 tops. There is no way we skid out to 2030 with anything intact.

Hubbert posted:

ok the alarm bells are going off in my head now

goochtit posted:

https://twitter.com/pkedrosky/status/1466232825569431554

https://twitter.com/pkedrosky/status/1466510236416503813

quote:

This summer, Newsom asked California residents and businesses to reduce urban water use by 15% from last year’s levels. But they are falling far short, cutting by only 3.9% in September.

[...]

This summer, the district asked Santa Clara County residents to cut water use 15% from 2019 levels to preserve supplies. So far, they have reduced by only 7%.

splifyphus posted:

Tabletops posted:

do you have a cabin somewhere or are you just gonna roll in the poo poo

gently caress COREY PERRY posted:

i mean that's contemporary technology for forums dot something awful dot com