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.

(Guardian)   Good news everyone, the Northwest Passage will be completely clear by the summer of 2016   (guardian.co.uk) divider line 92
    More: Spiffy, Northwest Passage  
•       •       •

2926 clicks; posted to Geek » on 18 Sep 2012 at 5:47 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



92 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-09-17 11:59:19 PM  
And a few decades ahead of schedule! Good work, internal combustion engine!
 
2012-09-18 12:07:54 AM  
You know, just once I'd like to take the Northwest Passage and you know, maybe find the hand of Franklin reaching for the Beaufort Sea. That'd rock.
 
2012-09-18 12:19:49 AM  
Obligatory Stan Rogers reference, like no one predicted that.

Link
 
2012-09-18 12:21:31 AM  

dameron: You know, just once I'd like to take the Northwest Passage and you know, maybe find the hand of Franklin reaching for the Beaufort Sea. That'd rock.


Whoa. I was too focused on finding the vid and missed your post - my hat is off to you, sir.
 
2012-09-18 12:25:21 AM  
I'm all for geoengineering at this point. This is getting crazy.
 
2012-09-18 12:31:02 AM  
By "leading expert" they mean "someone who lives off of grant money". You might want to check out the actual unaltered data on arctic sea ice before booking any boat trips....
 
2012-09-18 12:43:48 AM  
So we'll be able to get to more oil right? Win Win.
/Not serious :/
 
2012-09-18 01:04:12 AM  
Laugh now, start drilling. Cry later? Thermohaline circulation interruption.
 
2012-09-18 02:11:42 AM  

LordZorch: By "leading expert" they mean "someone who lives off of grant money". You might want to check out the actual unaltered data on arctic sea ice before booking any boat trips....


You mean like raw numbers from weather stations, satellites, and buoys? Screw that. They'd have to pay me for that kind of work. Maybe even with grant money.
 
2012-09-18 02:31:33 AM  
People don't understand the full implications of this. It helps to ponder this with an actual globe.
 
2012-09-18 04:29:29 AM  

LordZorch: By "leading expert" they mean "someone who lives off of grant money". You might want to check out the actual unaltered data on arctic sea ice before booking any boat trips....


Grant money! The battle cry of the GW deniers.

/grant money
 
2012-09-18 05:56:10 AM  
I don't know...more studies should be done. We should also really find out if oil is exhaustible or not before trying to move off it. They should lay out a 20 year plan to conduct these studies and hopefully congress and oil companies can feign some kind concern in that time too. Then in 20 years if it's deemed man has an impact on the environment we can plan to slowly move off oil and attempt to reduce carbon emissions by 25% over the following 10-15 years.
 
2012-09-18 05:56:37 AM  
Harper better get off his Conservative ass and gets some ships up there. We don't want your international traffic in our territorial waters.

/at least, not for free.
 
2012-09-18 06:01:08 AM  
Or maybe it'll be covered by fifteen feet of ice standing on the sea-bed
 
2012-09-18 06:15:05 AM  
Attempting to drastically modify a system we can't even approximately model yet is suicide. Stratospheric aerosols? Jesus Christ, people.
 
2012-09-18 06:22:35 AM  
Global warming is always strongest in election years.
 
2012-09-18 06:56:05 AM  

MayoSlather: I don't know...more studies should be done. We should also really find out if oil is exhaustible or not before trying to move off it. They should lay out a 20 year plan to conduct these studies and hopefully congress and oil companies can feign some kind concern in that time too. Then in 20 years if it's deemed man has an impact on the environment we can plan to slowly move off oil and attempt to reduce carbon emissions by 25% over the following 10-15 years.


Why do it over 10-15 years when we can just elect Romney and have him do it retroactively?
 
2012-09-18 07:36:09 AM  

Mugato: LordZorch: By "leading expert" they mean "someone who lives off of grant money". You might want to check out the actual unaltered data on arctic sea ice before booking any boat trips....

Grant money! The battle cry of the GW deniers.

/grant money


Lee money!
 
2012-09-18 08:11:34 AM  

yeomanfarmer: Thermohaline circulation interruption.


I was thinking this as well....
 
2012-09-18 08:16:57 AM  

dittybopper: Lee money!


Lee Mo-NAY, Lee Mo-NAY.
 
2012-09-18 08:25:58 AM  
I say we draw a line in the sand.
Rent a boat in 2016 and put congress on it. If they can't sail the northwest passage then global warming is a lie and Sarah Palin is retroactively president.
Then we sink the boat and move on with our lives.
 
2012-09-18 08:26:02 AM  
So apparently August 2012 was the 330th consecutive month of above average global temperatures, if the average is taken over the 20th century.

Link to article

The odds against this sort of thing happening randomly, if there has been no actual change in global climate, are 2^329 to 1. That first number is a 1 followed by 99 zeroes. It is an absolutely stunning statistic, one which cannot be denied by any rational person. Global warming is not made up, no matter how much snow you got last winter. This doesn't rule out the possibility that it's a natural process, which is where the deniers are moving to now, but denying global warming at this point indicates insanity.
 
2012-09-18 08:26:54 AM  

dragonchild: dittybopper: Lee money!

Lee Mo-NAY, Lee Mo-NAY.


Burnside Bucks?

Buford Bread?

De Russy Dough?
 
2012-09-18 08:28:57 AM  
They can cut back on CO2 by reducing the carbonization in canned drinks. 12 ounces fizzes over a 20 ounce glass no matter how slowly I pour it.

That's right, I'm complaining about too much head.
 
2012-09-18 08:48:08 AM  
This is bad new for.... Panama!
www.vh1.com
 
2012-09-18 08:59:13 AM  
Climate change deniers 2010
"scientists are being to alarmist saying the arctic will be ice free in 50 years"

Climate change deniers 2012
"see I told you the models were unreliable you said we had 50 years"
 
2012-09-18 09:13:28 AM  

Mugato: Grant money! The battle cry of the GW deniers.


Actually, despite the fact that he's a stammering moron and an obligate liar, he happens to be more or less right this time, even if it's for entirely the wrong reasons.

It's highly doubtful the passage will be completely clear by 2016, the passage will only be clear briefly at first, and it wouldn't take much of a change to freeze it back up again for a few years. The biggest reason it's so thin this year is because the thawing started so early. It wouldn't take much of a shift in weather patterns to put a halt to that next year.

Safe money adds two or three decades to the estimate.
 
2012-09-18 09:17:20 AM  

gilgamesh23: Global warming is not made up, no matter how much snow you got last winter


How about depending on, you know, actual worldwide surface temperature averages for the last 15 years, as reported by the climate scientists themselves?

www.woodfortrees.org

Just sayin'.

/hate to have to go all, you know, actual data, on you there
 
2012-09-18 09:25:40 AM  

SevenizGud: gilgamesh23: Global warming is not made up, no matter how much snow you got last winter

How about depending on, you know, actual worldwide surface temperature averages for the last 15 years, as reported by the climate scientists themselves?

[www.woodfortrees.org image 640x480]

Just sayin'.

/hate to have to go all, you know, actual data, on you there


How about you start reporting on how the same data set shows temperatures have been going up for the last 14 years and the last 16 years (and every other starting point except 15 years). And how your 15 years number is a statistical anomaly created by starting your graph at an outlier.

You are a blatant liar who constantly, unsuccessfully attempts to manipulate statistics to propagate your lie. Being so blatantly dishonest does not help your cause ... I am surprised that the other deniers don't shout you down for making them look bad.
 
2012-09-18 09:31:48 AM  

gilgamesh23: So apparently August 2012 was the 330th consecutive month of above average global temperatures, if the average is taken over the 20th century.

Link to article

The odds against this sort of thing happening randomly, if there has been no actual change in global climate, are 2^329 to 1. That first number is a 1 followed by 99 zeroes. It is an absolutely stunning statistic, one which cannot be denied by any rational person. Global warming is not made up, no matter how much snow you got last winter. This doesn't rule out the possibility that it's a natural process, which is where the deniers are moving to now, but denying global warming at this point indicates insanity.


You should really look at the error bars on global temperatures from the early 1900s. It will show how silly the article is.
 
2012-09-18 09:32:59 AM  

SevenizGud: How about depending on, you know, actual worldwide surface temperature averages for the last 15 years, as reported by the climate scientists themselves?


Why 15 years? What's so special about 1997?

More to the point, why the effort? Global warming isn't the end of the world. It's a serious problem, the end of the world as we know it, but no, don't feel fine. The reason for the alarm is that if this goes runaway, life is gonna suck. Not even the scientists know where we go from here, but the anti-intellectuals sure as hell don't, and we happen to NOT have a back-up planet.

The reason to look at this rationally is because global warming denialism is trading tomorrow's standard of living for today's. Unless you plan to die in the next few years, you're not protecting anything by digging in.
 
2012-09-18 09:44:27 AM  

Dokushin: Attempting to drastically modify a system we can't even approximately model yet is suicide. Stratospheric aerosols? Jesus Christ, people.


We may not have been attempting it as such, but we've already been doing this in a number of ways for the past century. Even the background stratospheric aerosol burden has increased in recent years, most likely, though inadvertantly, due to human industrial activity.
 
2012-09-18 09:55:42 AM  

dittybopper: Mugato: LordZorch: By "leading expert" they mean "someone who lives off of grant money". You might want to check out the actual unaltered data on arctic sea ice before booking any boat trips....

Grant money! The battle cry of the GW deniers.

/grant money

Lee money!


I Shermaned my money and now I have nothing!
 
2012-09-18 10:00:06 AM  
The solution is easy, large scale Volcanic Eruptions cool the planet, so we need to engineer super Volcanoes to erupt every 3 or 4 years.
 
2012-09-18 10:04:43 AM  

Vegan Meat Popsicle: Mugato: Grant money! The battle cry of the GW deniers.

Actually, despite the fact that he's a stammering moron and an obligate liar, he happens to be more or less right this time, even if it's for entirely the wrong reasons.

It's highly doubtful the passage will be completely clear by 2016, the passage will only be clear briefly at first, and it wouldn't take much of a change to freeze it back up again for a few years. The biggest reason it's so thin this year is because the thawing started so early. It wouldn't take much of a shift in weather patterns to put a halt to that next year.

Safe money adds two or three decades to the estimate.


Yeah, it's just that it gets annoying when every time a scientists' findings or conclusions don't agree with the political leanings of someone with no qualifications at all on the subject, they invariably scream, "Grant money" when that's clearly not how science works.
 
2012-09-18 10:06:18 AM  

SevenizGud: last 15 years


Liar
 
2012-09-18 10:10:09 AM  

dragonchild: Why 15 years? What's so special about 1997?


1998 was extremely hot so for a few more years you can finesse a dishonest "trend" out of the data by starting there.

If you start at the highest outlying point, there's nowhere to go but down until that point is surpassed by a new, even higher, outlier. At which point you just restart your "trend" from that new point.

It's called statistical manipulation. Or, in more common parlance, being a shiat-eating liar.
 
2012-09-18 10:14:21 AM  

SevenizGud: gilgamesh23: Global warming is not made up, no matter how much snow you got last winter

How about depending on, you know, actual worldwide surface temperature averages for the last 15 years, as reported by the climate scientists themselves?

[www.woodfortrees.org image 640x480]

Just sayin'.

/hate to have to go all, you know, actual data, on you there


Your continued use of that abridged graph, rather than a more complete graph that does show a warming trend, is dishonest. You are a liar, and claims issued by you are not credible.
 
2012-09-18 10:19:26 AM  

dittybopper: Mugato: LordZorch: By "leading expert" they mean "someone who lives off of grant money". You might want to check out the actual unaltered data on arctic sea ice before booking any boat trips....

Grant money! The battle cry of the GW deniers.

/grant money

Lee money!


movieactors.com

RIP Lee Grant
 
2012-09-18 10:35:32 AM  

MayoSlather: I don't know...more studies should be done. We should also really find out if oil is exhaustible or not before trying to move off it. They should lay out a 20 year plan to conduct these studies and hopefully congress and oil companies can feign some kind concern in that time too. Then in 20 years if it's deemed man has an impact on the environment we can plan to slowly move off oil and attempt to reduce carbon emissions by 25% over the following 10-15 years.


Wait... I think I've seen this movie.
 
2012-09-18 10:36:03 AM  

dameron: You know, just once I'd like to take the Northwest Passage and you know, maybe find the hand of Franklin reaching for the Beaufort Sea. That'd rock.


You tardy explorer!
 
2012-09-18 10:42:13 AM  

SevenizGud: derp


My chart is much more accurate.

i16.photobucket.com

/ q&d
 
2012-09-18 10:49:43 AM  
Bullshiat, it'll be completely free of ice next summer.

Even the alarmists always use the conservative estimates, and conservatives are always WRONG.

Seriously, just stop predicting shiat morons.
 
2012-09-18 10:55:53 AM  

Dimensio: SevenizGud: gilgamesh23: Global warming is not made up, no matter how much snow you got last winter

How about depending on, you know, actual worldwide surface temperature averages for the last 15 years, as reported by the climate scientists themselves?

[www.woodfortrees.org image 640x480]

Just sayin'.

/hate to have to go all, you know, actual data, on you there

Your continued use of that abridged graph, rather than a more complete graph that does show a warming trend, is dishonest. You are a liar, and claims issued by you are not credible.


Thanks for the graphs! They will come in handy.
 
2012-09-18 10:59:21 AM  

way south: I say we draw a line in the sand.
Rent a boat in 2016 and put congress on it. If they can't sail the northwest passage then global warming is a lie and Sarah Palin is retroactively president.
Then we sink the boat and move on with our lives.


The northwest passage is already open. Comedian Billy Connolly sailed it several years ago and made a TV program out of it. No big deal.

But I do like the idea with Congress and that boat.
 
2012-09-18 11:04:31 AM  

dragonchild: SevenizGud: How about depending on, you know, actual worldwide surface temperature averages for the last 15 years, as reported by the climate scientists themselves?

Why 15 years? What's so special about 1997?

More to the point, why the effort? Global warming isn't the end of the world. It's a serious problem, the end of the world as we know it, but no, don't feel fine. The reason for the alarm is that if this goes runaway, life is gonna suck. Not even the scientists know where we go from here, but the anti-intellectuals sure as hell don't, and we happen to NOT have a back-up planet.

The reason to look at this rationally is because global warming denialism is trading tomorrow's standard of living for today's. Unless you plan to die in the next few years, you're not protecting anything by digging in.


There has been an overall increase in temperature of less than one degree since 1850. That is what you are getting all shiatless about. Do you always run around scared out of your wits over something so minor?

Most people would consider this a very stable temperature but you and your ilk want to get us all worked up over it. Maybe you should stop being such a little cry baby and go find a real problem to worry about.
 
2012-09-18 11:11:02 AM  

GranoblasticMan: SevenizGud: derp

My chart is much more accurate.

[i16.photobucket.com image 328x480]

/ q&d


And uses more recent data!
 
2012-09-18 11:11:06 AM  

chuckufarlie: There has been an overall increase in temperature of less than one degree since 1850.


One degree in temperature =/= one degree in climate.

If you need an analogy you can relate to, a 5% raise in individual income is no big deal. 5% increase in GDP is very robust growth.
 
2012-09-18 11:25:33 AM  
www.topgearbox.com
 
2012-09-18 11:33:35 AM  
In 2007 they said it would be gone by 2012
 
Displayed 50 of 92 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report