Global Warming Irreversible, NOAA Scientist Finds 1061
Tibor the Hun writes "NPR reports that Susan Solomon, one of the world's top climate scientists, finds in her new study that global warming is now irreversible. The study, published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, concludes that even if we could immediately cease our impact on pollution and greenhouse gasses emissions, global climate change would continue for more than a thousand years. The reason is the saturation of oceans with carbon dioxide. Her study looked at the consequences of long-term effect in terms of sea-level rise and drought."
First post (Score:4, Funny)
We all gona die, but at least I got my first post...
I know what to blame... (Score:3, Funny)
Re:well... (Score:2, Funny)
Let's just hope... (Score:3, Funny)
No, much more likely we'd be gone, and in a few tens of millions of years
Let's just hope that whoever will be putting our bones in a museum will get a little sophisticated and won't think that digital watches are a pretty neat idea.
Re:Don't forget! (Score:3, Funny)
Re:OOOK (Score:5, Funny)
Absolutely! I hear you brother. I've totally lost confidence in *them*. Let's face it. Every time *they* have predicted the end of the world, *they* have been wrong. EVERY SINGLE TIME!
I mean, if once -- only one time -- *they* got it right, I'd be willing to listen. But let's face it. *They* must be absolutely insane, because in my long life (and my father's and his father's before him) I have *never* EVEN ONCE died a horrible death from a world wide disaster of our own making.
And like you say, technology *always* saves us (a fact that *they* are always too eager to sweep under the rug). Every time technology has saved us from imminent disaster, every single time mind you, it has been *technology* that has saved us. *They* would have us think that there are limits to what technology can do for us. But who are *they* anyway to say such nonsense. Let's just look at history.
I'm just so tired of all this crap. I say, let's forget these stupid scare mongers and get back to something *important* like getting terrorists out of our beautiful country!
]
Re:How long do we have, really? (Score:3, Funny)
"The simplest, most elegant solution I can think of to global warming is to build giant orbital sunshades to reduce the total solar irradiance to the earth's surface."
Why not skip that and just set off a couple of dozen nukes? A mild nuclear winter could offset the global warming trend quite nicely.
Re:OOOK (Score:3, Funny)
That guy from Rome, the one who wears those funny hats.
Re:Nothing New (Score:5, Funny)
A horrible misrepresentation of a text like that'll garner you a C- at best by anyone who has actually read the book
You new here? We don't even have the patience to read an article, let alone a book. As for that C- we're use to getting them after spending too much time on /.
Re:""If you can invent an easy process..." (Score:5, Funny)
No good. We need those for paper towels and houses.
Re:Nothing New (Score:1, Funny)
Some 50,000 people die each day from starvation. Countless more live in a chronically malnourished state.
Why are they still reproducing if they can't feed themselves?
Re:Nothing New (Score:3, Funny)
And who mentioned George W?
He was the leader of the first world for 8 years. So, it "must" be his fault. After all, it couldn't be the fault of Omar al-Bashir or Robert Mugabe...
Re:Nothing New (Score:3, Funny)
The solution is obviously to build the reactors in the media's backyards. Can we figure out a way to get the lawyers in there too?
Re:Nothing New (Score:3, Funny)
Leader of the first world? Only in his fucking delusions. Did you see how this "leader" was treated at the G12 summit once they knew his ass was gone? Plus I don't think a whole bunch of "first world" countries condemning your decisions really gives much credence to him being leader of any damn thing outside of his own mind.
Good (Score:1, Funny)
The extinction of mankind is a small price to pay for the complete annihilation of nerdom.
Re:Nothing New (Score:2, Funny)
Now that idiot Bush is out of office we're the opposition, and the opposition is always edgier than the government.
Re:Nothing New (Score:3, Funny)
A C- for being completely wrong? And some still wonder why liberal arts degrees garner little respect...
Re:Nothing New (Score:3, Funny)
No, they didn't. Actually, the "Paleocons" did. There are big differences between Paleocons and Neocons.
Re:Nothing New (Score:3, Funny)
And in every instance, that distribution problem is caused by governments.
Re:Nothing New (Score:3, Funny)
"The situation seemed dire. In 1894, the Times of London estimated that by 1950 every street in the city would be buried nine feet deep in horse manure. One New York prognosticator of the 1890s concluded that by 1930 the horse droppings would rise to Manhattan's third-story windows. A public health and sanitation crisis of almost unimaginable dimensions loomed."
Seen Washington DC lately?
By pretty much all measures, it's been roof-deep in horseshit since at LEAST the 1950's.
The final solution (Score:4, Funny)
It seems all our problems would be solved if we were fewer...
Re:First post (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Nothing New (Score:1, Funny)
And just how did they get out of this horseshit disaster?
By recognizing the problem and finding a solution. Street cars, subways and eventually motor vehicles.
you know NOTHING about history. the CAR was NOT invented to fix the 3 stories deep horse crap dilemma.
Holy crap people like you piss me off, you can not randomly reach back in time and connect two unconnected items and declare they were entwined.
"Look! God Hates Jews! He allowed Hitler to be Born!"
That makes as much sense as your connections.
The car was invented to make people RICH and for no other reason. Ford stole the idea and designs for building a car and invented mass production to make himself disgustingly rich. That was his plan all along, there never was any kind of heroic, "save new york from horse shit" plan at all. In fact ford was pretty much very evil, Unions came about because of how downright mean and evil that man was.
next you will be telling me that time is like a sting balled up in a hand and a man can jump back in time to any points where they cross and you got stuck in time hoping your last jump will be the jump home...
Re:Nothing New (Score:3, Funny)
The inconceivability of this is epic. Anthropogenic influence cannot cause irreversible climate change, nor will we ever be rid of the scourge of Passenger Pigeon. Don't overestimate our ability to make things happen.
Re:How long do we have, really? (Score:2, Funny)
Mice (Score:2, Funny)
Don't worry, it's just the mice overclocking the Earth a little bit so they get the ultimate question five minutes eralier. It's all perfectly under control, just ask any mouse about it.
Re:First post (Score:5, Funny)
Yes, it's possible the planet will survive us -- in fact, it's more than likely that "the planet", the dirty ball of rock hurtling through space, will still be here.
I move that if the human race is going to die off, the last survivors use nukes to crack the planet in half.
If we can't have the planet, no one can.
Does the motion have a second?
Re:Nothing New (Score:4, Funny)
This is /. you dont need to worry too much about people making babies..
Re:Some facts from a farm guy (Score:3, Funny)
Uh oh, someone is actually daring to say that ethanol and its subsidizing is a bad idea :)
You mean to say that when Zimbabwe took over the farms of only the white farmers and the country went from a food exporter to famine, it was the gov'ts fault?! LIAR! It was global warming! It was Bush's fault! It was the UN not having the support of the US! It was those damned fat American's fault!
Re:First post (Score:4, Funny)
if it will be cloudy on March 5th, 2010
It will be, I guarantee it. You didn't specify where.
Re:First post (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Nothing New (Score:3, Funny)
I believe (and hope) that these recommendations were written in the first realization that mercury was dangerous and applied to the large fluorescent tube lights, and were then just copied over without thought to "how to deal with a compact fluorescent".
This, however, isn't based on positive knowledge. It's mainly based on hope. But it's also based on a knowledge of how bureaucracies operate.