Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(New Scientist)   Greenland ice cap melting at three times the usual pace. Where's your global warming now?   (newscientist.com ) divider line
    More: Interesting  
•       •       •

550 clicks; posted to Geek » on 11 Aug 2006 at 8:49 AM (10 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



73 Comments     (+0 »)
 


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2006-08-11 07:26:47 AM  
Nice headline, submitter. Well done. :D
 
2006-08-11 07:30:24 AM  
god is nuking earth from orbit. w0000h000
 
2006-08-11 07:38:39 AM  
Blink of an eye.

That's how long we've been measuring the earth's climate. You really can't make the claim man is altering the global climate.

That being said...it's better to be on the safe side...SINCE WE DON'T KNOW. I support taking care of the environment, and I agree we need to find alternative fuel methods NOW. But don't tell me our limited amounts of measurements are conclusive...because they are most certainly not.
 
2006-08-11 07:41:47 AM  
Bonkthat_Again: You really can't make the claim man is altering the global climate.

Actually, one can claim whatever they want. Proving that claim to be true is another matter.

I tend to be we are the cause behind this whole mess.
 
2006-08-11 07:42:04 AM  
Bonkthat_Again,

We've been measuring terror attacks for a shorter period of time than we have the weather. Does that mean Al Qaeda doesn't exist and the war in Iraq is a lie?
 
2006-08-11 07:44:12 AM  
I'm looking forward to living on a spacious yacht when the time comes.

Bonkthat_Again: it's better to be on the safe side
Agreed.

I will do my part and load the animals on my yacht two-by-two.
 
2006-08-11 07:45:54 AM  
Bonkthat_Again

no, they arent 100% conclusive, but then nothing is. How long did we fight over whether or not cigarette smoke caused cancer, or whether HIV was the virus that caused AIDS? There can never be absolute certainty, but the earth IS warming, and we are probably contributing to the effect....the science is there.

It would seem to be arrogant to sugegst otherwise (of course the catch22 is that it could be arrogant to assume that we are as well).

By all means question everything you hear, but dont let the politics get to you, most serious scientific literature is pretty much in agreement on this subject.
 
2006-08-11 07:46:15 AM  
nickyhopkins

Yikes, can those really be compared? The earth has been around for billions of years longer than Al Queda.
 
2006-08-11 07:47:24 AM  
Damn -Al Qaeda-
 
2006-08-11 07:47:44 AM  
I_am_jesus,

most serious scientific literature is pretty much in agreement on this subject...

Most "scientific literature" supports evolution, and we all know what a crock of BS that is.

/being facetious
//happily came from monkeys
 
2006-08-11 07:47:59 AM  
nickyhopkins: We've been measuring terror attacks for a shorter period of time than we have the weather.

I believe that's the worst analogy I've ever seen.
Congrats.


As I said...I believe in erring on the side caution.
 
2006-08-11 07:53:56 AM  
I submitted this 2 years ago with a funnier headline.
 
2006-08-11 07:56:18 AM  
Im preparing for a got damned ice age.
 
2006-08-11 08:03:18 AM  
RobertBruce

I WANT THIS MOTHERfarkING ICE AGE OFF THIS MOTHERfarkING PLANE!
 
2006-08-11 08:16:58 AM  
would it be so horrible if we starting taking precautions that would benefit us regardless? is clean air and water too "filthy commie hippie" for anti-green crowd?
 
2006-08-11 08:21:28 AM  
doublesecretprobation: would it be so horrible if we starting taking precautions that would benefit us regardless?

I totally agree.
 
2006-08-11 08:33:58 AM  
Bonkthat_Again: I believe that's the worst analogy I've ever seen.
Congrats.


That's like saying Hitler was a vegetarian, so radishes are evil.

/I can come up with bad analogies like a pig in a ten foot crawlspace
//;-)

I_am_jesus: MOTHERfarkING

Tip of the day: Flow like water. Flow with the MOTHERFARKING filter, don't try to swim upstream like a pig in a ten foot crawlspace...
 
2006-08-11 08:36:20 AM  
(er, what I meant by my last comment was that typing "fark" instead of the word that gets filtered into "fark" will prevent limp case syndrome...

/hur hur hur limp case instead of small case... see how I'm comparing the filter's force of small case to the hypothetical case of a male who fails to achieve an erection at some time that it would generally be expected, which is interpreted as a bad thing?
//I think the above is "brute force humour" or something... :D
 
2006-08-11 08:46:51 AM  
daychilde: or something...

uh huh
 
2006-08-11 08:59:16 AM  
I'm gonna be known as the swimming lessons magnate...
 
2006-08-11 09:00:48 AM  
JFC not this shiat again
 
2006-08-11 09:03:46 AM  
doublesecretprobation :

would it be so horrible if we starting taking precautions that would benefit us regardless?

Depends. If we spent $9 trillion to lower global temps 1°C, wouldn't that money be better spent doing something that has more of an impact, like all but eliminating global hunger? (I figure that kind of money could do that) We can't let our hearts get in the way of our brains when determining how money is most efficiently spent to ease suffering.
 
2006-08-11 09:12:00 AM  
Are we responsable for ruining the earths climate? Sure... why not

Are we "destroying" the planet? Nope

The earth was here long before we were and will be long after we are gone. Nature has a way of correcting things that are causing an inbalance and if we happen to be that thing, then we are only screwing ourselfs. The earth will correct itself overtime
 
2006-08-11 09:17:42 AM  
gundamtsubasa: If we spent $9 trillion to lower global temps 1°C

$9 trillion dollars? even if you just pulled a crazy number out of your ass, you've got to realize that regardless, the money would be spent and put into the economy. it's like like the shuttle program, it's not money wasted, it's money in the economy.

wouldn't $300 billion a month be better spent eliminating poverty in the USA rather than liberating the living fark out of iraq? we're talking about something that may very well cause cataclysmic change here. changes which may very well muliply global hunger manyfold.
 
2006-08-11 09:18:00 AM  
Whether or not global warming is real(I believe it is), someone explain to me the advantage of not doing anything about it. By acting on it, the least we do is improve the air quality for everyone, and by not acting on it we run the risk of killing off the planet,us included(if we don't blow each other up first). At least the roaches will survive.
 
2006-08-11 09:22:57 AM  
Throw a little Jesus on the ice cap and it will all go away. Huh? What did I say?
 
2006-08-11 09:28:07 AM  
argue and flame all you want about the subject but please grant me one request. Both sides stop claiming 1. Science has "proved" their side. THE FIRST thing you learn about science in school is that it cannot prove or disprove anything. 2. Stop this "the scientific community agrees on" BS. the scientific community never agrees on anything and the only reason you would think that is bc your only looking at half the farking scientists.
 
2006-08-11 09:29:35 AM  
According to Sean Hannity this planet was given to us by god to rape and plunder as we see fit and there is no possible way to damage it.

Ice Ages, Mass Extictions and stuff like that are tricks to test our faith.
 
2006-08-11 09:35:09 AM  
That's right Dead Sexy Albino.
And when you're drowning, just remember, to fishes it'll seem you're just joining the club. Two sides to every coin...
 
2006-08-11 09:41:38 AM  
As you duly noted, I pulled the number out of my ass. And yes, "Liberating Iraq" is pretty much a money & blood sink. All I'm answering is your question, "would it be so horrible...." and I think that yes, there are some situations where it might not be the best idea in the world.

All I'm saying is that we reach a point of diminishing returns on pretty much everything, even the environment. Too many people assume we should completely "fix" the environment, damn the costs. What if global leaders decided to take a hard line on global warming and vowed to reduce temps 5°C over the next 25 years? What if they reduced it 4°C in 20 years, but that last 1°C would cost 10x what it cost to lower temps the first 4 degrees, would it be worth it to sink that kind of money into something for that last 1 degree?
 
2006-08-11 09:46:05 AM  
doublesecretprobation:

would it be so horrible if we starting taking precautions that would benefit us regardless? is clean air and water too "filthy commie hippie" for anti-green crowd?

I don't see the problem either. I see lots of money to be made by American entrepreneurs in energy conserving and/or green technology. Yes, there will be some costs to update old equipment, but I'd think that the cost-benefit would work out, not to mention those kinds of costs usually are passed on to you and me...
 
2006-08-11 09:46:38 AM  
Look at da envirolment - global warming is so bad, dey say in 100 years time, all de rainforests will be gone and all de ice caps will have melted. Actually, 100 years time, we ain't gonna be around den, so don't need to worry about dat one.

/i love da ali g
 
2006-08-11 09:47:31 AM  
 
2006-08-11 09:55:49 AM  
Dancin_In_Anson: But don't let things like that get in the way of your panic.

OMG REALLY? there's contrary evidence? no way!?!?!? thanks so much for pointing that out!

no one is saying that contrary evidence doesn't exist, but no one knows anything for sure. there's lots of evidence on both sides to make compelling arguments. the problem is that one side is proposing precautionary measures and the other would rather throw caution to the wind and just keep polluting.
 
2006-08-11 09:56:16 AM  
I wish it would hurry up and melt. That sea level rise would put me just a tad closer to the beach.
 
2006-08-11 10:00:28 AM  
Dead Sexy Albino

top this "the scientific community agrees on" BS

yes, there are always fringe scientists out there with alternate motives...however i challenge you to find me a peer reviewed journal article that states that we are not at least some part responsible for global warming.

http://gateway.ovid.com/autologin.cgi

im waiting.
 
2006-08-11 10:11:02 AM  
doublesecretprobation: the problem is that one side is proposing precautionary measures and the other would rather throw caution to the wind and just keep polluting.


Really? Can you point out one organization that is actually "pro pollution"?
 
2006-08-11 10:15:14 AM  
UltraFark: JFC not this shiat again

Geeee....is this really inconveniencing you? Well, we oughta put a stop to that right now. Poor Mr(s). UltraFark doesn't want to be bothered by things that may very well affect his/her life on this planet to some extent or another.

Go to WalMart, buy your twelve pack, and plop down in front of the tube and vegetate....please.
 
2006-08-11 10:16:05 AM  
Dancin in Anson;
the Competitive Enterprise Institute sez Co2 makes happier plants, higher yields...
 
2006-08-11 10:17:41 AM  
Can you point out one organization that is actually "pro pollution"?

Every single one that doesn't meet EPA standards.
 
2006-08-11 10:17:49 AM  
DIA's article:

co2science.org
POC : Craig Idso
Hey, Idso, partisan much? How to salve:
Make a website and give it a reputable sounding name.
Tada!
 
2006-08-11 10:21:50 AM  
Dancin_In_Anson: Really? Can you point out one organization that is actually "pro pollution"?

i'm not saying people are "pro-pollution" as much as i'm saying they are stuck in their polluting ways, reluctant to change because it would cost money or require behavior changes. that being said, if you're complacent you're essentially consenting to the status quo. therefore you'd rather keep polluting than do anything to curb it.
 
2006-08-11 10:26:40 AM  
stebain: Craig Idso

a little googling for mr idso reveals a wealth of interesting information. thanks for pointing that out. one of his pro-global warming films was entirely funded by the "western fuels association".
 
2006-08-11 10:51:14 AM  
Dancin_In_Anson: Really? Can you point out one organization that is actually "pro pollution"?

"don't give a crap" doesn't make you specifically pro pollution, but not bathing doesn't make you pro-being smelly either.
 
2006-08-11 11:00:08 AM  
http://www.exxonsecrets.org/html/orgfactsheet.php?id=24

Oh look, look who funds www.co2science.org

shill
 
2006-08-11 11:06:01 AM  
lovemyself Jake: Oh look, look who funds www.co2science.org

shill


Does that make the data false?

This is a "yes" or "no" question.
 
2006-08-11 11:34:13 AM  
Dancin_In_Anson:

Would you listen to health advice from the tobacco industry?

I'm not saying that the data is or isn't right, I'm saying I wouldn't trust who is interpreting it.
 
2006-08-11 11:51:03 AM  
Dancin_In_Anson: Does that make the data false?

not necessarily. questionable for sure.

This is a "yes" or "no" question.

no it's not.
 
2006-08-11 11:51:03 AM  
Who was the person on here who said:

"If I'm wrong we end up with unnecesarily clean air, if you're wrong we all die"


I think that about sums it up for me.
 
2006-08-11 12:01:57 PM  
From TFA:

The Greenland Ice Sheet shrank at a rate of about 239 cubic kilometres per year from April 2002 to November 2005...

The Greenland Ice Sheet holds about 2.85 million cubic kilometres of ice...


If I'm doing my math right, percentage-wise, that's about .008386%

EVERYBODY PANIC!

Also note how far apart those numbers are in the article. About eight paragraphs apart.

/oh, and why was it called greenland in the first place, i wonder?
 
Displayed 50 of 73 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report