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.

(Independent)   Crafty libs fake disappearance of populated island, fueling global-warming scare   (news.independent.co.uk.) divider line 733
    More: Scary  
•       •       •

24617 clicks; posted to Main » on 27 Dec 2006 at 11:31 AM (8 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



733 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | » | Last | Show all
 
2006-12-27 12:44:37 PM  
CommonSenseSurrenders: But mine might have started out smaller.


Perhaps genetics had something to do with it...not the frying pan to the head. Or perhaps the frying pan to the head caused damage to the brain making you think your member is huge? See, don't just jump on the fad...wait for the best snake-oil. I have some in here that makes you big and her a "happyest woman alife". I think the email is from Vietnam, so you know its good.
 
2006-12-27 12:45:54 PM  
Uncle Karl:

I fail to see how Gore's use of a private jet (does he use a private jet? I don't know anything about it) has any relevance to anthropogenic global warming.

If he flew by commercial air, would you admit that we're causing increased carbon emissions?
 
2006-12-27 12:45:57 PM  
What has the future ever done for ME?
 
2006-12-27 12:46:02 PM  
gr8fultom: My god I hope your kidding...you realize what a foot a decade rise in the ocean would do...you do right...tell me you;'re not that stupid.

Yes - it would completely submerge everything
 
2006-12-27 12:46:18 PM  
amindtat

thank you i was about to type out something about global warming existing and gettin all up in the argument but that pic made me laugh too much.

thanks for brightening my day.
 
2006-12-27 12:46:29 PM  
thedarksyde
Reference?

Just google ["Hockey Stick" global warming]. First article is:

http://www.technologyreview.com/Energy/13830/

Search article for "fundamental mathematical flaw."

/Sorry, I was off on the fixed data part. Maybe there is more than one problem with it.
 
2006-12-27 12:46:50 PM  
March_Hare


spacechicken170am: They're not the ones that don't know the difference between a theory and a fact.

"Theory" and "fact" are not mutually exclusive words.


I didn't say they were. I am saying that people spout off like global warming is a fact when it is just a theory. Granted some theories have more facts to back them up like say gravity whereas some theories are not based on much fact like global warming or FSM....Ramen.
 
2006-12-27 12:46:51 PM  
YoungSwedishBlonde: The ocean is coming at us at a blistering pace of a foot a decade! LOOK OUT!!!!

You can't help but look at a post like that and wonder how humanity got to the top of the food chain.
 
2006-12-27 12:46:55 PM  
dallashockey69: in the grand scheme of things this world has NEVER seen an industrial revolution that artificially introduced greeenhouse gases and co2 and waste to our environment.

How exactly do you know that? We don't know much of anything in that sort of detail past, oh,I'd say, 2.500, 3.000 years or so. We can't even agree on why the Giza plateau was built, or how it was built. Now you are gonna tell me that in 2-3 million years of human existence, we are the only civilization that achieved an industrialized society? We wouldn't necessarily see the leftovers of said society. Think about it. If we were wiped out by disease, what would be left to show our civilization existed in 1000 years? 5000? 10,000? Not a lot. The only building materials that would still be standing in 10,000 would be stone.
 
2006-12-27 12:47:20 PM  
Alien invasion: How the possum became public enemy No 1

Gotta trust a source with articals like this one.
 
2006-12-27 12:47:31 PM  
"anyone here not getting at least 40mpg is part of the problem"

So better fuel economy will save us all.

20 mpg for 20 miles per day
vs
40 mpg for 100 miles per day

One of them is contributing more CO2 and should probably move closer to work.
 
2006-12-27 12:47:32 PM  
The problem with relying on memory ... fixed memories!
 
2006-12-27 12:47:42 PM  
I_C_Weener: Perhaps genetics had something to do with it...not the frying pan to the head. Or perhaps the frying pan to the head caused damage to the brain making you think your member is huge? See, don't just jump on the fad...wait for the best snake-oil. I have some in here that makes you big and her a "happyest woman alife". I think the email is from Vietnam, so you know its good.

But see - I have a chart that tracks the average penile length over the past 40 years, and there has been a dramatic rise in length that coincided with when I began to smash my face with the cast-iron skillet. What more proof do you need? How can you deny the facts that are right there in front of your face???
 
2006-12-27 12:48:06 PM  
LouDobbsAwaaaay
Congratulations. You have proven, without a doubt, that humans are not partially responsible for observed global warming.
800 years ago.


So you all are just going to ignore it? 800 years ago we had a similar uptick in the Earths' temperature. So why can't we have one now?
 
2006-12-27 12:48:15 PM  
dallashockey69,

i am an asshole

Yes, you are. Being an asshole is great, sometimes. Not always. Basically every post I've seen you "write" has been negative to the utmost. There's probably a lot of people out there, like me, who don't respond well to the labels you attach people in your faux-intellectual tantrums. (You don't even deserve the label tirade, which I equate to being more than just an OMG ur an idiot! crap you seem to favour.)

People respond much better if you show them that they're wrong. It's why I think Phelps and his ilk shouldn't have their right to speech restricted for the most part because someone should show them that kindness is much better than hatred and compliments are better than insults. He won't but maybe his grandspawns might wake up one day and realise, hey, gay people aren't all that evil or people in the military don't deserve to die or that September 11 was really an atrocious act.

Please excuse the digression. My point being: if you want someone to change, tell them nicely why they need to change. Enlighten them. Calling them idiots and lambasting their beliefs only make them more recalcitrant, and, in effect, you've worsened your cause because you refuse to reach out to those whom you desire to change. The worst thing that could possibly happen to you is you question your beliefs, which is always a good thing.

Anyways, I'm through with you. I wish you embodied the values of Texas friendliness more instead of the hate that apparently fills your soul.
 
2006-12-27 12:48:43 PM  
I actually have a coworker who denies anthropogenic global warming. I said to him:

Me: Do you believe that humans have caused an increase in atmospheric carbon?
Him: Yes.
Me: So...
Him: I don't believe in the greenhouse effect.
Me: Er, what?
Him: I don't believe that atmospheric carbon raises the temperature of the planet. It's simple physics. It's not possible.
Me: Um, what?
Him: Yeah. I mean, think about it. If there's carbon in the atmosphere blocking radiation, it'll make the earth cooler, because it'll block incoming radiation, as well.
Me: Um, but, ah, well...you do, ah, realize that's not how it works...um, right?
Him: Exactly! No such thing as global warming!
Me: Um... I have to, um, get back to work now.

(For the kids: carbon dioxide blocks long-wave radiations, like the earth's black body radiation, but not the visible light that most of the incoming energy is. Thus it blocks more radiated energy than solar energy.)
 
2006-12-27 12:48:48 PM  
You can't help but look at a post like that and wonder how humanity got to the top of the food chain.

I bet you it wasn't by worring about global warming [sic].

/just having fun
 
2006-12-27 12:48:49 PM  
Mosey
I am more realistic than millions die in 30 years. I say millions are displaced in 30 years by rising sea levels.

But I also understand that this can be ammeliorated by a 15% reduction in greenhouse gas emmissions over the same period of time (a 5% reduction ever decade). And such a reduction is viable both technologically and economically (increase average gas milage of cars by 10MPG would take care of 5%, carbon dioxide sequestration could account for up to 50% if it is used on a large scale, 5% if powerplants start being built to allow for it). It is a good bet because if we do nothing then there will be disaster. if we do a couple of things here and there we will progressively get a handle on the problem.
 
2006-12-27 12:48:53 PM  
img245.imageshack.us
 
2006-12-27 12:49:06 PM  
The obvious solution: Get rid of some water!
 
2006-12-27 12:49:10 PM  
CommonSenseSurrenders: Yes - it would completely submerge everything

GAH stupid tag thing..

let's try it again:

gr8fultom: My god I hope your kidding...you realize what a foot a decade rise in the ocean would do...you do right...tell me you;'re not that stupid.

Yes - in the next 10 years, it would completely submerge everything that is currently 1 foot or less above the current sea level!
 
2006-12-27 12:49:11 PM  
KrispyKringle
I already admit it. Did you read my damn post? I believe global warming is being cause in part by human activty, and since that is the only part we can control we should be doing something about it.

Mr.Gore's lifestyle has relevance as he is campaigning to get people to do something about a problem, and he is doing the absolute opposite. It is the old "do what I say not what I do" issue.
 
2006-12-27 12:49:19 PM  
Taulin


How come people who don't believe in global warming never present facts that it is false?


If you want people to spend billions of dollars to curtail pollution then you are the one who needs to prove global warming is caused by man made pollution.
 
2006-12-27 12:50:00 PM  
GoodyearPimp:

Actually, fuel efficiency isn't a direct corollary to emissions. See, e.g., catalytic converters.
 
2006-12-27 12:50:03 PM  
Bugs_Bunny_Practiced_Psychological_Warfare
YoungSwedishBlonde: The ocean is coming at us at a blistering pace of a foot a decade! LOOK OUT!!!!

You can't help but look at a post like that and wonder how humanity got to the top of the food chain.


Perhaps it was our sense of humor.
 
2006-12-27 12:50:13 PM  
CommonSenseSurrenders: Yes - it would completely submerge everything


Only Noah would survive...and fish.
 
2006-12-27 12:50:48 PM  
Ohy, when will people get it right? The ball isn't heating up, it's cooling down. If you put down the Starbucks and quit watching Fox News for 10 minutes you might just discover that we're actually coming out of a global warming trend, pretty much the end of the lull that followed the Ice Age near the dawn of man.

Sorry, fundies, but yes, mankind has been around for a little better than 10,000 years.

What is a drought? A lack of Water. But the Law of Conservation of Matter says that matter can neither be created nor destroyed. So, where does the water go?

Yeah. Glaciers.

Honestly: How many people involved in the Global Warming movement actually go out and watch a glacier? Most are PR pros and politicians with an agenda. They pick and choose what data supports their cause, and dismiss the rest entirely.

Saline needs a lower temperature in order to freeze, so you don't really hear about oceans receeding. No, it's the fresh water, which freezes at 0c, that seems to be AWOL.

It isn't a big ice age we're moving into, so there's no need to EVERYBODY PANIC. These things are cyclical in a sense: A big one followed by some little ones, with warming trends in between. When the stable temperatures are done, the transition period to the new stable temp begins. Now, you'd think that'd bring about some oddball weather, wouldn't you?

/no study
//stop touching yourself, kent
 
2006-12-27 12:50:59 PM  
dyz2913-

trust me there are plenty of libs out there who contribute to waste but there are many of us who do our part to help save try to slow down global warming. my part?

i bought a more fuel efficient car. my girlfriend and i carpool to work. i walk or ride my bike to the store when i need just a few items. i drive the shortest distance to places and drive at the speed limit instead of rushing around using more gas. i recycle. i dont flush every single piece of paper down the toilet. i turn off lights when i leave a room. i dont wash a couple of dishes, i do a sink full. i turn my thermostats a couple degrees cooler in the winter and warmer in the summer. i dont buy newspapers. i can go forever. wish more people would do some of the same stuff.
 
2006-12-27 12:51:00 PM  
Uncle Karl:

I guess. I mean, yeah, I'm all in favor of Gore taking public transportation and flying commercial. Why the fark not?

But it's not really relevant to the debate. Global warming existed long before Gore decided to make it his pet issue, and whether or not you like him, it's still a problem.
 
2006-12-27 12:51:05 PM  
One other thing I don't understand - the idea that somehow developing and implementing new technologies for power and transportation will somehow "wreck the economy"?

Depends on the tech and implementation. Suddenly everybody wants to legislate hydrogen fuel cells for cars, but the efficiency sucks, hydrogen is hard to corral so we'll be leaking it like a sieve, and you have to convert (just in the US) 243,000,000 passenger vehicles, 200,000 gas stations, distribution system for same, manufacturing system for same. Hydrogen better work like a damn charm and be affordable to boot if we want to force that kind of fundamental economic change on the country. The free market still wants nasty gasoline, and until gas becomes unaffordable (which, granted, may be soon) the only way to make this change is to force it, and we're going to have to have an enormously strong argument for people to spend a brazillian dollars doing that. If hydrogen gets rammed ahead but turns out to be a bust economically, while gasoline is still affordable to competitor nations, oops, you just pissed away a century of economic domination, enjoy being a much greener version of Mexico.
 
2006-12-27 12:51:24 PM  
If you take an Ice cube, and fill a glass all the way to the top. Wait for the icecube to melt, the water level will not raise in the glass of water, because mass takes up the same amount of space, or somthing. Would'ent that be like, the same affect here ?
 
2006-12-27 12:51:40 PM  
I thought I read that cow farts are contributing more to global warming than anything else.

Oh wait...didn't we have an ice age so many thousands of years ago. What caused that? And before the ice age came what made everything nice and warm then?

We as humnas like to think we know everything. I'm guessing we don't.

But not to worry I saw in an earlier headline that the forecast is calling for something like -30,000 below zero in California this weekend.
 
2006-12-27 12:52:01 PM  
if you want someone to change, tell them nicely

Ha ha! You must be joking. Show me a person who's core beliefs have changed by chatting on the intertubes and I'll show you a ... a ... hmmm, this started out so good.
 
2006-12-27 12:52:07 PM  
Lohachara Island was an islet on the Sundarban river delta in the Sundarban National Park, located near the Indian state of West Bengal. The islet is one of a dozen "vanishing islands" in India's part of the delta. Although other islands have disappeared due to various man-made construction projects, Lohachara was the first inhabited island to disappear due to naturally-occurring ocean and river forces. There are multiple causes of the disappearances of islands in the delta, including sea-level rise, coastal erosion, cyclones, and coastal flooding. The loss of land has created thousands of refugees in the area.

/that limey news article is full of crap!
 
2006-12-27 12:52:08 PM  
Sea level rising because of melting ice??

I think someone failed at the concept of "displacement"
 
2006-12-27 12:53:24 PM  
TemperedEdge:

The Law of Conservation of Matter? Um...

It doesn't say any such thing, that the same amount of water in the universe now will always be there (which is what you imply).

For instance, run an electric current through water. What do you get? Hydrogen and Oxygen. Less water.

Presto, change-o, you're a whacko on the Internet who doesn't know what he's talking about!
 
2006-12-27 12:53:46 PM  
gonzo731-

who asked you for a lesson on manners? and what kind of loser actually would go through all my posts? are you that lonely? and who ever said texas is friendly? ever been to dallas to experience beverly hills east?
 
2006-12-27 12:53:57 PM  
CommonSenseSurrenders: But see - I have a chart that tracks the average penile length over the past 40 years, and there has been a dramatic rise in length that coincided with when I began to smash my face with the cast-iron skillet. What more proof do you need? How can you deny the facts that are right there in front of your face???


Well, since the dramatic up-tick in your Hockey Stick occurred only inthe last 2 years, I'd say you wasted 18 years of your face. Also, after hitting your face for 20 years with a frying pan, haven't you smashed up your nose, despite your face?
 
2006-12-27 12:54:04 PM  
scale down america. we are out of control with waste and abundance.

Hard to argue with that. I'm not one for forcing Americans to live one way or another. I do however wish we as a people didn't feel the need to use as much of everything.

/pro-environment, liberal conservative (huh?)
//please don't read that as Republican or neo-con
 
2006-12-27 12:54:14 PM  
People who deny that there will be mass deaths in 30 years are just ignorant and ignoring science.

/OH SORRY. I thought this was 1968 and the thread was about the Population Bomb

//my bad.
 
2006-12-27 12:54:42 PM  
Ihatemidgets

Take that same class fill with water, put one ice cube ABOVE the water line, and let them melt, see what happens, uh oh, the water went up. Greenland and any ice shelves that sit on land (Antartica) are not in the water. They are on land.
 
2006-12-27 12:55:01 PM  
Hang On Voltaire
LouDobbsAwaaaay
Congratulations. You have proven, without a doubt, that humans are not partially responsible for observed global warming.
800 years ago.

So you all are just going to ignore it? 800 years ago we had a similar uptick in the Earths' temperature. So why can't we have one now?


Who's ignoring it? Global climate models do a fairly good job of simulating the Medieval Warm Epoch with natural processes. No such simulation can be performed to match present-day global warming. You are using a previous case of natural warming to explain away a present case of warming which behaves extremely differently. That's the sort of thing that happens when you "research" your case using USA Today instead of a peer-reviewed scientific publication.
 
2006-12-27 12:55:08 PM  
Oracle of Bandwidth: What I hate, and has happened several times, is the very liberal kids at school admonish me for being a polluter and most of them drive SUVs or minivans alone, while I carpool in my tiny car.

Understandable. I'm somewhat liberal (ok, very liberal) and I hardly believe it's all saints on my side. There are some real jerks on both sides of this issue (and on both sides of pretty much every issue for that matter).

From the evidence I've seen, and this is just a judgment I'm making with no major scientific background and therefore should be taken with an appropriately sized grain of salt, I feel that humans are probably a cause. I don't think we're the cause. We might not even be a major cause, but I have to think at this point we're doing something, even if it turns out to be minuscule. I think the question needs to stop being "are we the problem?" and needs to start being "how do we fix the problem?"

Mosey: All the best intentions, sufferings we partake in and changes we make could still be a terribly insignificant effect if the earth "wants" to do something (and has for some time).

Yeah, could happen. We could also completely solve the problem for all you or I know. I can't say for sure which outcome is more likely and no one else can either. Your argument seems to be that because we could go to a lot of trouble and it might not work anyway, we shouldn't even bother trying. Quite frankly, that strikes me as a ludicrous way to look at things.

We (and I use the term "we" here as the entire human race, not just a nationality or some other subsection) have faced many problems in our history. We have overcome many of them. We continue to look for solutions to many more. I see no reason why we can't do the same here. And by God, even if we fail, at least we died trying rather than sitting around hoping for the best and ignoring the problem.
 
2006-12-27 12:55:53 PM  
Captain Obvious
Sea level rising because of melting ice??
I think someone failed at the concept of "displacement"


Its the Antarctic and Greenland ice sheet melt that is causing the greatest portion of sea level increase.
 
2006-12-27 12:56:07 PM  
Don't laugh. This may actually really be fake news. News agencies no longer check facts.
 
2006-12-27 12:56:12 PM  
Captain Obvious: I think someone failed at the concept of "displacement"


Ice on Antarctica and Greenland is not subject to displacement arguments.
 
2006-12-27 12:56:29 PM  
Fifty years ago people were screaming that a new ice age was coming and we would all freeze to death. It's cyclical people.

Do you really think that over the hundreds of millions of years the earth has been around that it will hold a constant temp?
 
2006-12-27 12:57:06 PM  
YoggiSothoth
1970's: Global cooling is going to kill us all.
1980's: Global warming is going to kill us all.
1990's: New hotness -- Global warming AND global cooling is going to kill us all.
2000+: Nah, were back to just global warming again.

So, when's the new mantra that we're all going to freeze to death coming back around?


scientific conclusions change based on new data. it never ends. you can find the same sort of thing in medicine and every other scientific field.

It would be nice if we could figure everything out quickly and easily to accommodate the short attention spans of the average human. But we can't.
 
2006-12-27 12:57:54 PM  
stappawho: Fifty years ago people were screaming that a new ice age was coming and we would all freeze to death. It's cyclical people.

Do you really think that over the hundreds of millions of years the earth has been around that it will hold a constant temp?


I keep hearing this argument. It makes about as much sense as the arguments creationists try to use to disprove evolution.

I'm starting to think there's a correlation.
 
2006-12-27 12:58:00 PM  
KrispyKringle
I even like him, Heck I voted for him once upon a time. I just think that sort of behavior undermines what he is trying to do.
 
Displayed 50 of 733 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | » | Last | 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