|
Best to post something positive along with that or Trabisnikof will call you a climate change denier.
|
#
¿
Nov 19, 2015 03:34
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 20:08 |
|
|
brakeless posted:Gave a little talk today at my school on geoengineering. School as in where you attend or where you attended? If geoengineering is part of your career, I'd be interested in reading about what you do.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 23, 2015 14:34
|
|
|
Arkane posted:Food scarcity is a completely idiotic bogeyman. I like how your graph stops at the year that phosphate shortage is predicted to become a thing.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 1, 2015 07:28
|
|
|
DolphinCop posted:although the hyperfertilizer is apparently more effective for grasses than it is for stalks, meaning america's nonsensically excessive corn production won't be as incentivised to get with the program, which is a bummer Not that I'm doubting your uncle, but as I understand it, the major grain crops (corn, wheat, etc) actually are grasses.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 8, 2015 00:22
|
|
|
Kurt_Cobain posted:This new yorker article mentioned something I hadn't heard before, raised streets "Building up" is a pretty traditional response to flooding. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raising_of_Chicago https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seattle_Underground
|
|
#
¿
Dec 15, 2015 20:37
|
|
|
New study claiming that a lot more people than previously thought currently experience severe water scarcity. About half a billion year-round, with another 3.5 billion at least one month of the year. The study: http://advances.sciencemag.org/content/2/2/e1500323.full Washington Post article on the study that spoke to one of the researchers: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2016/02/12/the-world-has-even-bigger-water-problems-than-we-thought/ Rime posted:Edit: It's 4am and climate change is not the climbing thread. Climbate Change: Are We Headed for an Insurmountable Cliff?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 13, 2016 16:20
|
|
|
Uranium Phoenix posted:I don't think we should conflate hopelessness with denialism. You can criticize someone who feels hopeless for inaction, but I think many of the people who are feeling hopeless still do things, they just realize how inadequate their individual actions are. It's Trabisnikof. Anyone who doesn't agree with him is in some stage of climate change denial.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 8, 2016 09:10
|
|
|
Isaac0105 posted:"A given?" Please. Right now even human survival over the next century isn't a given, let alone an unprecedented shift in energy production which (according to you) is a given because of a pilot project and an underdeveloped technology. All I am calling for is realism. If you seriously think the human race may not last another 100 years, you and realism aren't in the same boat.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 18, 2016 14:00
|
|
|
Isaac0105 posted:Human extinction is definitely possible. It's been possible for a while actually, it's just that the odds have seemingly been very low. So for instance, we never ended up having a terminal thermonuclear war between the Soviet Union and the United States - but the reason that failed to happen was not because it couldn't happen, but because we just got lucky. There were plenty of close calls - read up about these two incidents, as one example. Now of course there were ifs - maybe that nuclear torpedo would not have triggered a nuclear war if it had been launched. Or maybe the war would not have wiped out humanity - there are simulations saying it would have, but these were criticized. Now you're just being dishonest. We're talking about the possibility of the consequences of climate change leading to human extinction, not nuclear warfare. If you'd like to seriously discuss the possibility of nuclear warfare, find or create a thread for it. "Possible" does not also equal "realistic". It's possible that flipping a (fair) coin a hundred times in a row will result in a hundred instances of heads, but it's not realistic to assume that scenario has a reasonable chance of occurring. So, find us some reliable evidence that the consequences of climate change have a reasonable chance of bringing about human extinction within 100 years. Best of luck with that, because there isn't any.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 19, 2016 03:50
|
|
|
The problem is, climate doesn't really work like that. A climate suitable for producing one catalyzing megadisaster (or perfect storm of disasters) is suitable for producing multiple megadisasters.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 23, 2016 02:59
|
|
|
Back to the libertarian threads with you, jrod. The Cato Institute isn't a reliable source.
|
|
#
¿
May 16, 2016 08:12
|
|
|
Triglav posted:Is there anything wrong with climate change? Anti-human perspectives aren't really relevant. You're also ignoring that we don't really know where the "tipping point" is for when warming trends become self-sustaining (for example, when permafrost melts) and Earth is locked in to becoming a second Venus without intervention via geoengineering.
|
|
#
¿
May 24, 2016 18:08
|
|
|
Rime posted:Give up on keeping up with the Jone's, espouse YOLO in all things and don't give a gently caress about what might happen. Do you think your crippling depression and near-homelessness might have anything to do with the perpetual attitude of hopelessness you espouse in this thread? (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
¿
Jun 26, 2016 01:08
|
|
|
LLSix posted:While I'm asking about the percent agreement on AGW and it's likely impact, where does that 3% contrarian come from? I've always just kind of assumed that coal and oil company money is buying them that much but more and more that'd be a huge number of flatly fraudulent papers. Having research funded by the fossil fuels industry is a thing, but there's also just a small collection of wingnuts with PhDs on most every topic within a given discipline. For example, there are a handful of geologists who actually believe that oil isn't formed from organic material.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 5, 2016 08:10
|
|
|
TildeATH posted:Anthropogenic, you idiot. Maybe the furries/otherkin/etc have just gotten even weirder.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 6, 2016 03:46
|
|
|
Femur posted:For people who think we give a poo poo about what we say. I guess that's damning to people who expect PACs to be single-issue organizations (and for that issue to be climate change).
|
|
#
¿
Sep 7, 2016 19:32
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:Most everything we can do now won't go far enough, but that's because the scale of our problem and the realities of systemic inertia, but that inertia is the exact reason we must act and act now in all the ways we political and socially can even if those ways aren't perfect or "enough". Unless it's an initiative to try and get people to stop breeding quite so much.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 5, 2016 23:06
|
|
|
smoke sumthin bitch posted:carbon taxes are regressive and disproportionately burden the poor So you're totally on board with a carbon tax as long as low-income taxpayers are subsidized to make up the difference, then?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 11, 2016 21:00
|
|
|
TildeATH posted:That's the comically wrong jet stream guy, right? Yeah, I think he's off the mark. The NSIDC graphs for arctic and antarctic sea ice don't match his at all.   e: Went and looked at the twitter post that had the graph. He even includes the same two NSIDC images. I have no idea how he's combining them to get that. e2: What the gently caress. Look at the totals. Eight million arctic and fifteen million antarctic makes twenty-three million right now. This dude's own graph only ever reached twenty-three million in the 1980s. Hello Sailor fucked around with this message at 07:47 on Nov 14, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Nov 14, 2016 07:35
|
|
|
There was an A/T thread some years back started by a goon who had a home aquaponic setup going. He kept his fish fed by growing duckweed and said that it took about 2 pounds of duckweed to raise 1 pound of tilapia from fry to adult. Since the fish crap went on to become fertilizer used to rapidly grow crops that adapted well to his method (tomatoes did very well, as I recall), that's hardly a terrible return on investment in lieu of just eating the duckweed directly. e: Might be misremembering on the fish a bit. I think he just raised tropical fish as pets and got the 2:1 duckweed:fish ratio from other aquaponics enthusiasts. Hello Sailor fucked around with this message at 21:00 on Nov 26, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Nov 26, 2016 20:58
|
|
|
Stallion Cabana posted:just convince Donald you can somehow gold plate Solar panels and get him to invest in them. "Trump Solar settled out-of-court today to resolve plaintiffs' claims that their solar panels, which were advertised as "the greatest solar panels money can buy", in fact only returned an average of .5% of their cost in electricity savings before breaking down, often in less than six months."
|
|
#
¿
Dec 1, 2016 20:12
|
|
|
Notorious R.I.M. posted:Dumping a species in 2100-level pH water ignores the 80 years that happens in between. But I do agree that the rate of acidification is terrifying. The faster pH drops, the fewer generations anything will have to adapt. Also, which is more likely, that ocean systems will have a linear pH increase with increasing levels of carbonic acid or that ocean systems are buffered? Because if it's the latter, as soon as we hit the tipping point, the rate speeds up exponentially.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 11, 2016 20:24
|
|
|
Get angry, stay angry.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 18, 2016 22:39
|
|
|
Fangz posted:Interesting stuff. What about paper/cardboard? Or replacing plastics with paper/cardboard? If you're recycling the material, plastic is generally better than paper. It takes less energy to make a plastic product than an equivalent paper one.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 19, 2016 23:19
|
|
|
A Buttery Pastry posted:And yes, I know, the last map I posted probably wasn't the best way to make people take my posts seriously, but I hope you can all look past that. The map was just icing on the cake.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 8, 2017 18:38
|
|
|
No other marine ecosystem has managed to withstand unmanaged fishing. What do you think?
|
|
#
¿
Jan 17, 2017 17:24
|
|
|
ChairMaster posted:Not all nihilists are suicidal, some people do stuff just because they feel like it. I just don't like the idea of people wasting so much time and effort towards a greater good that cannot materalise when they could be putting that time and effort into making their own lives better instead. Well then, gently caress off. Go try to convince climate change deniers to give up.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 18, 2017 16:19
|
|
|
The Ender posted:...So, we're pretty much down to trying to somehow solve climate change through individual action now then, right? Since the state has catastrophically failed and is obviously not going to be able to respond in time even if somehow Democrats manage to stop being comical losers long enough to hold power again? In the US, there's always the court system. I'm taking Environmental Law & Reg this semester and current events are an inevitable part of the discussion. A large part of the Trump administration's problems are going to stem from them not really having any idea how their branch of government works or the checks placed upon them.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 28, 2017 18:19
|
|
|
That's a pretty good post/custom title combo.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 11, 2017 23:15
|
|
|
Has anyone sent this to Trump? It's from the Russian Academy of Science, so he might believe it.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 24, 2017 04:36
|
|
|
RobotDogPolice posted:I'm going to community college right now with the intention of transferring to a university. I've been gravitating toward biology and it's evident to me how much of a problem climate change will be. What majors should I pursue if I want to help? I live in Seattle now, are there good places to intern? I went back to school for a bachelors in environmental engineering and have about a year left to go. Engineering degrees usually pay well and you definitely don't need a doctorate (masters is debatable). I did as much as I could at CC before transferring to a university, which knocked out about half of my degree requirements at about a fourth of the price. My plan is to spend a couple years working for a state regulatory agency, which should give me a good foot in the door pretty much anywhere else. If no nearby universities specifically offer an env eng program, you can do civil or chemical and use your engineering electives to give you an environmental focus.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 3, 2017 23:09
|
|
|
According to the study, they think it's likely that increased erosion in the river the glacier is now discharging to will eventually connect it back to the Slims. e: Just rechecked after reading the study yesterday and erosion is expected to connect the river to the lake the Slims drained into, not the Slims itself. Hello Sailor fucked around with this message at 04:56 on Apr 19, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Apr 19, 2017 04:17
|
|
|
I'm taking a particularly Carlinesque pleasure from these bits: quote:“Nobody thinks it’s coming as fast as it is,” said Dan Kipnis, the chairman of Miami Beach’s Marine and Waterfront Protection Authority, who has been trying to find a buyer for his home in Miami Beach for almost a year, and has already lowered his asking price twice. It's starting.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 20, 2017 23:18
|
|
|
I'm all for this. Clearly Smith intends this to be a two-way street and wants to include scientists on business and economic advisory boards.
|
|
#
¿
May 8, 2017 16:31
|
|
|
Libluini posted:You know, I first wanted to write down this long text explaining why this issue could potentially cause huge military disasters, but I realized that would come with the danger of an American general reading this on SA. So instead I just say: Yes, yes you're 100% right. It would be no issue whatsoever. Please do elaborate on how our continual satellite coverage of the earth could fail to notice the disappearance of a beach over a couple of decades.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 3, 2017 16:37
|
|
|
Those GT of CO2-equivalent reductions are just estimates for implementation only in the US, right?
|
|
#
¿
Jun 9, 2017 00:09
|
|
|
BattleMoose posted:Thirdly, and repeating ad nuasem, unsubstantiated claims get rejected. Equally ad nauseum, the substantiation of the claims are in the book, you enormous fuckwit.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 10, 2017 12:24
|
|
|
Deltasquid posted:His parting shot to me was "There's no problem the free market can't fix. And the government is never a solution. Remember that." so I think he was a lost cause no matter what. "Markets require government in order to exist, fuckwit. Love, Econ 101"
|
|
#
¿
Jun 26, 2017 00:14
|
|
|
Burt Buckle posted:Really cool picture. Desalination processes are energy-intensive, which is where a chunk of the expense comes in. So, if the energy source isn't nuclear or renewable, then it also increases atmospheric carbon. There was some promising research in greatly reducing the energy usage by filtering saltwater through a carbon nanotube mesh, but I haven't heard anything recent about it.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 28, 2017 06:24
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 20:08 |
|
|
a fuckwit with 20/20 hindsight posted:And which of those outcomes was obviously going to occur when Borlaug set his monster loose. We're not even touching on the environmental catastrophe from the intensive farming itself, mind, but just the human suffering which was inevitable to occur under existing socioeconomic systems. He knew his work would cause a population explosion, he knew it would require farming techniques which would sterilize the soil after a few decades of intensive use. He couldn't possibly have not foreseen this. "Some of the environmental lobbyists of the Western nations are the salt of the earth, but many of them are elitists. They've never experienced the physical sensation of hunger. They do their lobbying from comfortable office suites in Washington or Brussels. If they lived just one month amid the misery of the developing world, as I have for fifty years, they'd be crying out for tractors and fertilizer and irrigation canals and be outraged that fashionable elitists back home were trying to deny them these things." - Norman Borlaug Hello Sailor fucked around with this message at 19:12 on Jul 4, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Jul 4, 2017 19:10
|
|
