Global Warming Is Speeding Up and the World Is Feeling the Effects 134
An anonymous reader shares a report: Summer started barely a week ago, and already the United States has been smothered in a record-breaking "heat dome." Alaska saw its first-ever heat advisory this month. And all of this comes on the heels of 2024, the hottest calendar year in recorded history. The world is getting hotter, faster. A report published last week found that human-caused global warming is now increasing by 0.27 degrees Celsius per decade. That rate was recorded at 0.2 degrees in the 1970s, and has been growing since.
"Each additional fractional degree of warming brings about a relatively larger increase in atmospheric extremes, like extreme downpours and severe droughts and wildfires," said Daniel Swain, a climate scientist at the University of California. While this aligns with scientific predictions of how climate change can intensify such events, the increase in severity may feel sudden to people who experience them.
"Back when we had lesser levels of warming, that relationship was a little bit less dramatic," Dr. Swain said. "There is growing evidence that the most extreme extremes probably will increase faster and to a greater extent than we used to think was the case," he added. Take rainfall, for example. Generally, extreme rainfall is intensifying at a rate of 7 percent with each degree Celsius of atmospheric warming. But recent studies indicate that so-called record-shattering events are increasing at double that rate, Dr. Swain said.
"Each additional fractional degree of warming brings about a relatively larger increase in atmospheric extremes, like extreme downpours and severe droughts and wildfires," said Daniel Swain, a climate scientist at the University of California. While this aligns with scientific predictions of how climate change can intensify such events, the increase in severity may feel sudden to people who experience them.
"Back when we had lesser levels of warming, that relationship was a little bit less dramatic," Dr. Swain said. "There is growing evidence that the most extreme extremes probably will increase faster and to a greater extent than we used to think was the case," he added. Take rainfall, for example. Generally, extreme rainfall is intensifying at a rate of 7 percent with each degree Celsius of atmospheric warming. But recent studies indicate that so-called record-shattering events are increasing at double that rate, Dr. Swain said.
Time For– (Score:2)
Shorter centuries.
Re: (Score:1)
Mod parent E for Effort if not F for Funny Fail?
Currently reading two books with "the end" in the title. And yesterday's news mentioned that the June weather was surprisingly higher than ever before recorded. In mitigating circumstances, the local temperature records only go back about 150 years. During that news there were several flash announcements about little tornadoes. I remember one for a district just north of here, so that must have been a specific sighting, but later there was a warning for the en
Re:Time For– (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:3)
No, it is for people whose concept of knowing things isn't limited to pretending.
You're decades too late to have rational doubts about the existence of global warming; that's true even if you're an idiot who knows nothing.
If you don't know anything... stfu about everything.
Re: Time For– (Score:5, Interesting)
"People using normal comes-and-goes of the weather to frighten others into toeing their line are despicable."
People ignoring science, including what it says about localized weather events including some occasional cooking, are dumb as shit. And when they claim other people are using scare tactics because they lack the mental fortitude to handle bad news and they want them to stop so they can feel secure amidst chaos, it's pathetic.
Re: Time For– (Score:5, Insightful)
I am from Florida and this year is far far hotter than Florida 10 years ago. Your small data set is dishonest.
Re: (Score:2)
At this point trying to have a rational discussion with any Trumplican is stupid. Dare I say irrational?
But Florida Man trying to defend the YOB is proof of concept. The concept of stupid people vote, too.
From a larger perspective, I don't feel like the fools are responsible. They are suckers who are being manipulated and victimized by applied psychologists.
In general psychology is a crock of garbage, but the applied psychologists have a huge bag of tricks to sell to con artists and rich scumbags who want m
Re: Time For– (Score:2)
One question I have for you is: Do you take to Trumpians without arguing? Do you listen to thier their concerns? For both the far right and far left there is usually some kernel of something.
I believe Trump won not because of people liking him, but the Democrats ostrisizing a large enough chunk of the eletorate they became "homeless in their own country."
Elections are games of addition. The democrats are just as bad as scarying away voters in this age.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Time For– (Score:4, Insightful)
The Dems lost because of 40 years of not actually standing for anything they'd die on the hill for. Dems haven't shut down the gov't to get the minimum wage increased. It's worth less today than it was in the 1960s. Dem's haven't shut down the gov't for much of anything.
People see that and when a charlatan says he will do things FOR you, people start to listen. If people don't have concrete and recent examples of what YOU do for them...they tend to go where the promises are.
I kid you not, today the Dem Senate leader Schumer crowed about changing the friggin NAME of the big Trump bill. Not any of the actions in it, but the NAME. Like, if that's what's important to you....you ain't gonna win elections.
Re: Time For– (Score:2)
That is it in short. Also looking at the states they run, their current playbook is broken. It isn't like TX can build housing anymore either but from the 90s until a few years back it did pretty well. California can't build anything and hasn't been able to for years. But, the disease of letting absolutely any niche group (or individual!) stop any action whatsoever has spread from the left to maga leadership. Along with centralized one size fits all federal government and deficit spending. Maybe the left w
I live above the arctic circle (Score:4, Interesting)
and summer is ultra-messed-up too here. We've had 2 days at 64 degrees this year, but otherwise it barely goes above 50. It's really rare here to have such a long, sustained bout of cold weather around midsummer.
I live (Score:1)
That's normal where I live. Yesterday I was complaining how cold it was in Capitola by the beach (lat 36 deg N). It was below 64 F / 18 C in the middle of the afternoon on the last day of June. The shops in that town must make a fortune selling hoodies and blankets to unprepared tourists.
I sure am glad we are sharing our anecdotes and getting some productive discussion going.
Re: (Score:3)
The thing to understand is we're talking about sixth tenths of a degree warming since 1990, when averaged over *the entire globe* for the *entire year*. If the change were actually distributed that way -- evenly everywhere over the whole year -- nobody would notice any change whatsoever; there would be no natural system disruption. The temperature rise would be nearly impossible to detect against the natural background variation.
That's the thinking of people who point out that the weather outside their door
Talking about the weather (Score:2)
The thing to understand ...
There's nothing to understand. Just two fellows comparing their local climate. It's essentially meaningless.
That's the thinking of people who point out that the weather outside their doors is unusually cool despite global warming.
There's no way to know that's what the poster meant without asking him yourself.
When you consider six tenths of a degree increase across the roughly 10^18 kg of the troposphere, that is as vast, almost unthinkable amount of energy increase.
Yes, the Earth receives a lot of solar radiation. It's almost like we don't need to drill for oil and gas quite so much if we could just put some turbines and panel up. But that makes the wrong people rich, so that's bad from someone's point of view. Changing the political power in controlling energy in a few central place
Well, I have the democracy I deserve (Score:3)
The Bill passed today. More debt, fewer services, tax breaks for the wrong people.
I bet you dollars to donuts that the American people will just accept it and simply grumble when they have to shell out more for everything, and be annoyed that grandma is not getting medical care in her retirement home anymore. Even things that directly affect people seems to have no effect on their politics or voting behavior.
Re:Well, I have the democracy I deserve (Score:4, Insightful)
Kinda sad that there will be a lot of people gloating about "the big victory" when they are actually its victims.
But it is what it is.
Re: (Score:2)
It makes certain sense that people don't want to admit they were taken advantage of. Nobody wants to be a loser or a rube. The denial will remain strong through Trump's term and it's unlikely anything will be done.
Re: (Score:2)
Yep. Essentially sunk-cost fallacy. And it makes things worse. It is hard to feel comassion for people that aggressively are doing it to themselves.
Re: (Score:2)
That heavily revised version of the initial bill still has to pass through Congress. Maybe it will fail there.
Re: (Score:2)
It has to pass through the House of Representatives. Congress is made up of the House of Representatives and the Senate. It started in the House of Representatives, went to the Senate, got updated/changed, now it has to go back to the House of Representatives to agree on the Senate's version.
At this point, it's very likely to pass unless enough Republicans side with the Democrats. It's possible. It barely got out of the Senate with a tie-breaker from the VP, JD Vance. We shall just have to see.
Re: (Score:1)
So no "Trumpistan" is not the largest polluter anymore. The US is polluting less every year and China continues to pollute more and more. Here's a graph that will not in any way dispel your obvious anti-American bias. [statista.com]
Re: (Score:1)
You say that like its supposed to mean something. It means the opposite of what you think it means when CHINA HAS **FOUR** TIMES THE POPULATION OF THE USA.
Re: (Score:2)
While that's definitely true, the physical globe doesn't care what country the CO2 is coming from. China is also continuing to make progress on breaking more people into the "middle class" and as people make more money, they tend to generate more co2/pollution in general.
For instance, if the China and USA could just vanish overnight along with their CO2 footprint, the world is still pretty screwed. India is also rapidly catching up, since they can't control their population either.
Re:Well, we're lucky (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:1)
And China has 4x's the population of the U.S., so, per capita, the U.S. has double the amount of CO2;
You are correct that China is overpopulated at 4x the people in a land area less than 3% larger than the US. That makes their per capita CO2 numbers look better, but doesn't change the fact that their number is going up while the US is going down.
Their one child policy was a disaster and there's no ethical way to reduce their population by 75% but the climate doesn't care that they are breeding their way into outpolluting the US. The CO2 production needs to come down and the fact that some countries have mu
Re: (Score:2)
the climate problem is due to the accumulated emissions, more than half of which are from the ole USA and that will not change anytime soon. I will not mention the part where a lot of "Gina's" output is due to shit consumed in the trumpistan, but it is there.
emissions rate [Re:Well, we're lucky] (Score:5, Insightful)
Depends on what you're measuring. An individual person in the United States emits more carbon dioxide than an individual person in China, on the average. The sum total of yearly emissions from China is greater than the sum total of yearly emissions from the United States. Of the total carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, the amount that had been emitted by the United States is more than the amount emitted from China (i.e., the cumulative emissions).
All of these are accurate. The actual answer is, all of the above. If Chinese emissions were dropped to zero, that would not be enough to halt global warming. If US emissions were dropped to zero, that would not be enough to stop global warming, either. It is a worldwide problem.
This is why it is such a wicked hard problem. No one nation can stop it on their own.
Re: (Score:2)
Sure one country can stop it! If we'd just nuke everybody we don't like, we'd have a nuclear winter instead.
Re: (Score:2)
That is an over simplification. I am not American, but European, and the same reasoning, but at a smaller scale could be applied to Europe. *BUT* you forget a couple of important aspects:
* The emissions in the West has lead to important technological progress, from antibiotics to transistors. China, and the rest of the world, have much less to show for their emissions.
* West didn't have any options to burning fossil fuels for a long time. There were no nuclear power or solar cells.
* West didn't know about c
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, the Democrats read the entire 900+ page bill on the Senate floor as a stall tactic. So this bill was actually read, in full.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
I wouldn't call gasoline tax a sin tax.
As far as actual sin taxes go, the people most addicted to cigarettes are also the poorest, with the least amount of support to quit smoking, and they will bear the brunt of this tax. It's easy to say "just quit" but much harder to do in practice. So increasing the sin tax is devastating to these people who are already coming at life with a disadvantage.
Whereas taxing electric vehicles is an arguably progressive tax. Just not sure how to best implement such a tax. C
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Installing a GPS on every vehicle will probably result in a civil war, if it is even Constitutional.
Why is GPS necessary? Every vehicle has an odometer, why is that not enough to measure wear on the roads? Sure, there's greater accuracy in using GPS, but why do we need such precision?
Even if there was an argument to make GPS tracking constitutional that's a lot of added expense for so little extra useful information for taxes than can be had with an odometer. That is an indication this isn't about collecting taxes, they want more.
Wear on the roads is a matter of vehicle mass and miles driven. The vehi
Re: (Score:1)
This will actually not close the gap, people will simply quit buying cigarettes.
Let me finish that for you.
This will actually not close the gap, people will simply quit buying cigarettes... in that state.
It's not that difficult to cross a state line to buy cigarettes, or to buy a lot of things, unless someone truly lives in the middle of a large state.
Re: (Score:2)
Or another option, such as we have in Ohio, is to increase registration fees on hybrid and electric vehicles to compensate for the reduced fuel tax they generate.
Re: (Score:3)
If governments wanted to be "fair" about who should be paying for road damage, they would use an equation that took the weight of your vehicle into consideration, since weight is the number one factor in road damage. The big tractor-trailers (semi truck) by far do the vast majority of the damage. They should be the ones paying to maintain the roads (they'd pass it along in cost to the consumer though) but instead, since we love big business so much, we allow them to use a gas tax on all of us to subsidize t
Re: (Score:2)
Take advantage of the law by owning a bus conversion. Our bus weighs ten tons empty.
Alas, California is requiring us to smog the fucking things now, we have to do the same tests as commercial trucks, not just as often. Our rig passes easily, but it costs money and requires a trip halfway across a large county. In fact, since we hardly ever go anywhere, it significantly increases our emissions...
Re: (Score:2)
The big tractor-trailers (semi truck) by far do the vast majority of the damage.
From the perspective of road damage (which feeds into cost of road repair), passenger cars are a rounding error compared to fully-loaded tractor-trailers [ 40-ton 5-axle semi truck versus a 2-ton sedan gives a factor of 10,000 to 1 ], to the point that they could be ignored if your purpose was to charge for wear-and-tear on the roads.
Splitting the semi-truck loads in half (still using 5-axle trucks) cuts the road damage by 2/3, but you now have twice as many trucks on the road and are probably burning somew
Re: (Score:2)
> Installing a GPS on every vehicle will probably result in a civil war, if it is even Constitutional.
In Europe, cars have to go for a technical control every 2 years to be allowed to be on the road. Just have the technician enter the mileage into a govt system at that point, and have a fixed tax rate per mile*. Who pays? doesn't matter, the tax is on the vehicle, whoever registers as the "vehicle tax payer".
*a fixed rate per mile is probably the wrong way to do it, it would probably penalize people who
Re: (Score:2)
Talk about collectively digging your own grave. Such a smart move...
Re: (Score:2)
I don't care what grave are the trumpistani digging for themselves, they can off each other with their 2nd amendment guns and their ammo boxes that they "protect" their "democracy" with.
The problem is they've dug everyone else's grave as well.
Re: (Score:2)
How can anything be a surprised when the Democrats read the entire bill out loud on the senate floor to slow the process down? Since the entire thing was read, there should be zero surprised at all.
Re: (Score:2)
Does a rubber stamp have ears to listen with?
Re: (Score:1)
Why, zdorovo, tavarisch trololo, I was wondering why I haven't seen you around recently.
Turns out I have to go to -1 to see you.
Where are you checking in from, Lakhta? How's the weather in Leningrad today?
Not real [Re:Well, we're lucky] (Score:5, Interesting)
Yes, this is what "kneejerk" looks like. Maybe you shouldn't have been pushing stuff like puberty blockers without parental consent (or knowledge),
Puberty blockers without parental consent or knowledge doesn't happen. It is a made-up outrage intended to create outrage.
All stages of treatment for gender dysphoria in children and adolescents require consent from all parties with parental responsibility.
(In any case, this is irrelevant to the topic of climate change. It is yet another example of whataboutism, a form of argumentation endemic on /.)
Re: (Score:2)
But nobody who says that is arguing in good faith. The important thing is to derail the conversation from anything that touches on immediate economic interests.
And make no mistake climate change is all about the economy and jobs. That's why it had to be turned into a culture war.
The Republican party and the right wing are just a shambling mass of moral panics and Petty grievances.
Re: Not real [Re:Well, we're lucky] (Score:2)
I read just yesterday they jave many permanent effects and are not reversible at all depending on the age started. But that in some cases that is the lesser issue.
But you succinctly stated the playbook. Spot something unrelated to the issue you feel your party is in the minority opinion on, but that the opposition, will defend emotionally and make that the issue. It helps if you are in the majority opinion on that issue. It is mostly a weakness in the democrats. They have The Groups and they maintain solida
Re:Well, we're lucky (Score:5, Insightful)
Which of course never happened.
But it's perfectly fine for a parent to let their child die of a preventable disease because "vaccines bad", right?
Re:Well, we're lucky (Score:5, Interesting)
1) this highlights how poorly budget bills are written and why having giant omnibus bills is insane which has been standard practice in Congress across both parties for decades so they can bury all sorts of pork and stupid shit. They = both parties. There is nothing maga or Trump specific about this practice.
The conservative faction of Congress has been shouting that there needs to be separate bills, not one giant bill, for the last decade.
Apparently that got trumped in the current congress.
Re: (Score:2)
The conservative faction of Congress has been shouting that there needs to be separate bills, not one giant bill, for the last decade.
It is quite normal, and typical, for a political party to call for changes while in opposition and then completely forgetting about them when they are elected. It is not specific to any party, or country. It is SOP here in Canada (both federally and provincially) too, where only whichever parties are not in power complain about omnibus bills, never the governing party.
Re: (Score:2)
Just wait for the backlash when the Democrats retake the WH. Since we are normalizing the behaviors of the president, I imagine the next president will take it further because, why not?
Re:If it moves, tax it. (Re:Well, we're lucky) (Score:5, Insightful)
strangely, the subsidies for fossil fuels continue and you're not upset about them.
Re: (Score:1)
strangely, the subsidies for fossil fuels continue and you're not upset about them.
What makes you believe I'm not upset about fossil fuel subsidies?
Then is the matter of "creative accounting" that people use to make the fossil fuel subsidies look larger than they are. Considering the taxes on transportation fuels I have my doubts that the government is seeing a net loss in money to fossil fuels, there's certainly a net gain there.
If the government isn't making money on some sector of the econmomy then I expect politicians might not be terribly interested in promoting that sector when the
Re: (Score:2)
What makes you believe I'm not upset about fossil fuel subsidies?
Your strong concern about taxing wind and solar properly :)
Re: (Score:1)
What part of "I'm not defending this tax" did you not understand?
I'm seeing a lot of mind reading going on. I point out that the wind power industry is doing well and therefore should not be subsidized like it is a new industry in need of a "jump start", I then get a half dozen replies asking why I am not upset about subsidies for fossil fuels and nuclear power. But I am upset about those subsidies too, I expected people to understand that I'm opposed to any subsidies for established industries.
Stop tryin
Re: (Score:2)
What part of "I'm not defending this tax" did you not understand?
The lack of credibility part of this statement, mostly. But also the fervor that you're "not defending it" with :)
Subsidies are bad. Clear enough?
Ignorant enough, for sure. Subsidies are, actually, the most efficient and the least distorting way to perform industrial policy. They are visible, easy to track, easy to account for and easy to remove. Taxes and tax breaks are the opposite.
If it moves then the government will tax it. Is that clear enough?
You seem to live in a world of illusions. Taxing has not happened to a lot of things that move. But you probably like those things better than wind and solar
Re: (Score:1)
But you probably like those things better than wind and solar
Have I stated any opposition to onshore wind power? I like onshore wind power. I expect to see more of it in the future. Much of the reductions in CO2 emissions from electricity production, and reduced electricity fees, is because of onshore wind power.
If you want to talk about credibility then it would help your credibility if you can improve your reading comprehension.
Re: (Score:3)
>> the dumpster fire of the solar power industry
Utter bullshit as usual. Utility-scale solar is the cheapest form of electricity generation. And it should be heavily subsidized in order to displace dirty energy ASAP.
Re: DOOOOOOM (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
We're all gonna die!!!!!
Yes, but we already knew that. Has been true for as long as the human race has existed.
America is shutting down weather satellites (Score:5, Interesting)
If you live in a place with severe weather events like floods or hurricanes or tornadoes then you can expect to get little or no notice in the coming years.
We all make trade-offs. Last November we made a pretty big one. Just now 5 trillion in tax cuts for billionaires just got rammed through the Senate. If you live in a rural community your hospital will be closing to pay for that. Some suburban hospitals will be closing too.
I don't think we talk about those trade-offs enough. We spend too much time talking about how much damage gets done to the poor but nobody gives a flying rat's ass about the poor.
So instead we should talk about how fucked everybody on this forum is now. We're going to take over a trillion dollars out of the US economy and hand it over to a handful of billionaires. They cannot possibly spend enough of it to keep the economy going. And the massive unfunded tax cuts are going to trash the bond market and with it the entire US economy.
The worst of it is scheduled for right after the midterm elections. And if you're over the age of 12 you should be able to figure out why.
You're going to get a lot of propaganda in your eyeballs over the next several months. And you need to figure out what to do about the economy first and foremost. But I don't think we can give up our moral panics. They're just too much fun.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
If you live in a rural community your hospital will be closing to pay for that. Some suburban hospitals will be closing too.
No, they will not be closing to pay for that.
That is not, and isn't how it has ever worked.
They'll be closing because the folks in power are philosophically opposed to publicly funded healthcare. It's that simple.
There was no trade-off involved. We have a single-party Government currently, and they're doing what they do every time they're in power.
And the massive unfunded tax cuts are going to trash the bond market and with it the entire US economy.
lol, what?
Chicken Little, you never fail to make me smile.
The Tea Party is back, but now with more compassion and decidedly more blue color!
If there were a
Re: (Score:2)
Just wait until he gets to name Powell's replacement next year. I am sure it'll do wonders for the dollar and the bond market.
Re: (Score:2)
In the end though, it'll all be just fine.
He may cause a 2008 Level Event, though.
Re: (Score:2)
Remember Trump isn't actually in charge the heritage foundation and Peter theil, with a bit of Elon Musk mixed in just to make things more chaotic and cruel.
Trump is a senile old man who could barely make it through the first 20 minutes of a town hall meeting set up to lob him softballs.
Re: (Score:2)
For something like that Trump might not be allowed to pick anybody but powell.
Fuck- you're the liberal version of QAnon.
Christ I'm sick of how people (Score:2, Interesting)
Most rural hospitals rely on Medicaid payouts as a consistent and reliable revenue stream to stay open. Without those payouts they aren't profitable and they go under in the hospital closes. Many suburban hospitals also fall into this.
I'm not Chicken Little you idiot. This is what the CBO is saying you can look at the fuck up. If you live in a rural community or a suburban community that's further out congratulations you just voted to
Re: (Score:1, Troll)
Who don't know how anything works tell me that's not how it works.
That's pretty rich coming from the person clearly struggling with the language we're communicating in.
Most rural hospitals rely on Medicaid payouts as a consistent and reliable revenue stream to stay open. Without those payouts they aren't profitable and they go under in the hospital closes. Many suburban hospitals also fall into this.
Nobody contested this. What was contested was your reasoning for the withdrawal of public funding. Do try to stay on point.
I'm not Chicken Little you idiot.
Oh, you absofuckinglutely are, lol.
This is what the CBO is saying you can look at the fuck up. If you live in a rural community or a suburban community that's further out congratulations you just voted to shut down your own fucking hospital. Good luck not having a stroke or a heart attack.
Shit, this conversation is moving too fast for you to keep up with, isn't it?
I called you Chicken Little because of your bond market claim. You're trying to answer that with a rehash of your above claim that was never contested- that's classic.
Have o
Re: (Score:1)
The downside is you've got our religious lunatics whipped up into a frenzy and we are about to hand them the launch codes.
You're going to find out real soon whether or not you're a nukes work. Honestly I don't know if ours do either but it doesn't matter because we have more than enough conventional bombs to turn the whole of Russia into a parking lot
And thanks to all that Russian propaganda we hav
Re: (Score:2)
Must be nice to be over there in Russia and not have to worry about the American economy collapsing.
You're an idiot. I'm in Seattle, and US GDP has currently collapsed by -1.6%, which is to say it fucking increased, you fucking imbecile.
The downside is you've got our religious lunatics whipped up into a frenzy and we are about to hand them the launch codes.
You think.... Russians.... have got the evangelicals whipped up into a tizzy? Christ, you're so fucking un-self-aware, I think you might be an LLM.
You're going to find out real soon whether or not you're a nukes work. Honestly I don't know if ours do either but it doesn't matter because we have more than enough conventional bombs to turn the whole of Russia into a parking lot
Step 1 when accusing someone of being a Russian, is to not fuck up the English language in a way they'll be able to point out.
You see, I are not a nukes.
As for whether or not US nukes work? Of course they do. What kind of fuck
Re: (Score:2)
You are talking to idiots that think that tariffs are paid by the exporter, not the importer.
Re: (Score:2)
Why are you lying?
I think no such thing. Do you think I'm a fucking Trumptard?
You stupid fuckers and your purity tests. You're why we lose elections. You're ever bit as bad as a motherfucker with a red hat.
Re: (Score:1)
Do you think I'm a fucking Trumptard?
I have no idea whether you are a MAGA, but the quality of your mental processes seems at least often pretty similar. Remember thet Trump is a symptom of a larger problem and not everybody part of that problem likes Trump. Some even see that electing a rapist, convicted felon and serial banktuptee as president may be a bad idea.
Re: (Score:2)
There's basically two kinds of right-wing slashdotter.
The first are the I got mine fuck you crowd. These are genuine idiots who think that they can put psychopathic lunatics in charge of everything and get away with it. A handful of them are in their mid 60s or even seventies and they will drop dead before the damage they're causing hits them. The rest are going to be homeless and living out of a broken down car by the river. Paying rent for that b
Re: (Score:2)
2) "And then there are the moral panics." Chicken Little, I don't know if you get to talk about other peoples' panic.
.
3) I never heard an N-bomb in my home, thankfully.
4) I'm in my early 40s, not 60s.
5) I'm squarely in the "i've got mine category", but I also want "you to get yours".
6) None of this, even though we align in our voting, makes you any less fucking stupid than you are.
We may both be l
Re: (Score:2)
The problem isn't borrowing money even as tax cuts. The problem is we borrowed $20 trillion dollars and handed it to the top 1%.
That fundamentally breaks our economy and the bond market knows it. They're going to start selling their bonds and that's going to tank the value of the dollar.
As is typical of people who don't know the first fucking thing about the US economy you don't understand that we are artificially boosting the value of the d
Re: (Score:2)
Oh and as for the bond market you are a blooming moron.
Just a realist who's been around for a long time, can look at graphs and gauge the current level of dysfunction.
The problem isn't borrowing money even as tax cuts. The problem is we borrowed $20 trillion dollars and handed it to the top 1%.
That fundamentally breaks our economy and the bond market knows it. They're going to start selling their bonds and that's going to tank the value of the dollar.
As with every claim you make, all it takes to prove you wrong is a little bit of time, Chicken Little.
I have it on good authority from you that our bond market should have already collapsed. Yet, strangely, it still hasn't even hit a historical (contemporarily speaking) level of fuckery, much less a truly historical level.
Bock bock, the sky is falling, the sky is falling!
You're such a fucking
Re:America is shutting down weather satellites (Score:5, Informative)
It's worse than that: the proposed budget for NOAA dismantles a significant number of climate-related activities. Here's some of the text:
In coordination with the requested terminations for Weather Laboratories and Cooperative Institutes (see OAR-10) and Ocean Laboratories and Cooperative Institutes (see OAR-19), NOAA will close the Atlantic Oceanographic & Meteorological Laboratory (AOML) in Miami, FL; the Air Resources Laboratory (ARL) in College Park, MD, Idaho Falls, ID, and Oak Ridge, TN, as well as a nation-wide network of soil moisture sensors; the Chemical Sciences Laboratory (CSL) in Boulder, CO; the Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory (GFDL) in Princeton, NJ; the Global Monitoring Laboratory (GML) in Boulder, CO, Utqiavik, AK, Mauna Loa, HI, Hilo, HI, Big Island, HI, American Samoa, and the South Pole; the Pacific Marine Environmental Laboratory (PMEL) in Seattle, WA; and the Physical Sciences Laboratory (PSL) in Boulder, CO.
With this termination, NOAA will no longer support the National Integrated Heat Health Information System, the Climate Smart Communities Initiative, or Climate Adaptation Partnerships. NOAA will assess how to continue support for high priority activities currently supported within Regional Climate Data and Information.
With this termination, NOAA will no longer support climate research grants.
See https://www.noaa.gov/sites/def... [noaa.gov] for details.
So nobody who voted Trump (Score:2)
I don't talk to climate change with those idiots. They only understand one thing and that's themselves. If it doesn't directly and immediately hurt them they are not going to be worried about it in the slightest.
I don't think of any of it matters anymore but these morons are going to get wiped off the
Re: (Score:2)
Speak for yourself. I live in San Diego. I have at least 4 hospitals I could go to, possibly more. Of course, I'll be living in a tent at the rate housing is going but at least I can wander into a hospital for free (since I'll be living in a tent, and won't have anything to take from me).
I'm sure glad we're handling all these issues in California. ie. housing, homelessness, raising gas taxes to encourage ev, highest energy cost in the country. I could go on but fuck why bother.
Re: (Score:2)
That that could be used to sue over the effects, or challenge refused insurance pay-outs on an "act of god" basis, that sort of thing.
Who do we trust on solutions and stats? (Score:1, Interesting)
If we are to solve this we need people we can trust to give us good statistics and numbers on our options, and from there to establish our best options for solutions. I'll give some links to Wikipedia for data, and this practice usually triggers people into screaming how Wikipedia cannot be trusted. Well, don't trust Wikipedia then, follow the links to the original sources or go seek out better sources with your favored search engine.
If asked on who to trust I might start with the IPCC as I have doubts th
Re: (Score:1)
We do know nukes are by far the most expensive option.
There are four arguments against investment in nuclear power: Olkiluoto 3, Flamanville 3, Hinkley Point C, and Vogtle. These are the four major latest-generation plants completed or near completion in Finland, the United States, the United Kingdom and France respectively.
Cost overruns at these recent plants average over 300%, with more increases to come. The cost of Vogtle, for example, soared from US$14 billion to $34 billion (A$22-53 billion), Flamanvi
,27C/decade doesn't seem like much... (Score:5, Insightful)
The first is that it's not evenly distributed: some parts of the planet will get hotter faster than that - others may even cool down. Some will get dryer; some will get wetter. Keep in mind, this is a globally-calculated average. As we've already seen, short-term, mid-term, and long-term temperature increases in some regions may be much more than just a quarter of a degree. Some of those are well on the path to becoming essentially uninhabitable, and that in turn will generate social, political, and economic crises.
The second is that even this fractional degree of warming significantly shifts the window of possibility for extreme events: bigger hurricanes, worse droughts, etc. Events that were extremely unlikely 20, 30, 40 years ago are now only somewhat unlikely. Even the best weather models -- which are stunningly accurate when it comes to things like predicting hurricane landfall locations -- may need to be adjusted to account for conditions that have never happened before. Until that adjustment happens, those models may not be as reliable as they have been, and that affects public safety.
The third is we don't know where the tipping point is. Despite enormous amounts of research, we have - at best - plausible estimates. And if you've read any of this research then you know that we do not want to find the tipping point by going over it. And every incremental increase in the rate of warming slightly increases the probability that we'll do that.
most of it is in the Arctic (Score:2)
One of the reasons most people don't see much effect is because they aren't polar bears. Global average annual temperature is not really a very useful metric other than in the Doom Goblin sense of "Oh noes it's getting warmer we'll all cook". The trend in rural temperatures for the USA is rather gentle compared with the publicised numbers which include urban heat island effect and badly sited thermometers. Even then averaging across a year and across the entire country rather masks people's actual experienc
Re: (Score:2)
> One of the reasons most people don't see much effect is because they aren't polar bears
It's because people are locked in cities, no way to observe the actual world.
I've been gardening for the past few years. What I did with my grandparents as a kid 30 years ago doesn't work anymore.
Michael E. Mann disagrees (Score:3)
He considers this an artifact of setting too short a time window and he stresses that current trends are still very much in line with the forecasts of climate modeling.
To quote:
https://bsky.app/profile/micha... [bsky.app]
Alaska (Score:3)
“It’s not that the heat in the interior that prompted Fairbanks to issue this is record heat or anything like that.” said Rich Thoman, a climate specialist at the Alaska Center for Climate Assessment and Policy. Thoman also clarified that the term swap doesn’t have anything to do with climate change. (https://apnews.com/article/alaska-first-ever-heat-advisory-df913edec183efd7b1b800fab33ff1ad)
FR, PT, and ES believe it this week (Score:2)
Who cares... (Score:2)
What's important is we make AI.
To be realistic (Score:1)
The only way to so stop global warming is the so stop the insensitive to try to get ahead. On the macro level countries competing with AI and crypto currency using huge amounts of power.
In the micro scale you have ribbid consumerism and a throw away culture. Maybe you need those PFAS clothes to get ahead at work because they don't wrinkle or stain. You have people thinking electric vehicles are good for the environment when though they are likely just less terrible.
Unless something changes, I think a large
Re: fake news (Score:3)
Denialism is really boring trolling. You are a penis bird's clown shoes.
Re: (Score:1, Insightful)
What a useless article, typical msmash no-effort space filler.
We get it. AGW bad.
Nothing is accomplished by cluttering a tech site with redundant low-information threads where the audience in no way benefit from yet another piece of space filler.
Nicely put. Global warming isn't news any more. I'd like more news on what is being done about it, and what could be done with new technology. By that I don't mean more "news" on nuclear fusion since that is perpetually only 10 years away. How about news on things being built? I'd like to hear what is being built to mitigate against global warming. Any kind of big machines or megaprojects that produce energy, hold back rising seas, produce carbon neutral fuels, or do more with less energy, would be so