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.

(The New American)   Do you want to save the planet? Fire up the SUV this holiday weekend and go for a pleasure ride; burn some more coal in your barbecue grill; crank up the house's AC; and, generally, aspire to a Paul Bunyan-size carbon footprint. Suck it, Al Gore   (thenewamerican.com) divider line 92
    More: Cool, Paul Bunyan, sport utility vehicles, coal, Al Gore, carbon dioxide, Langley Research Center, carbon footprints, holiday weekend  
•       •       •

3580 clicks; posted to Geek » on 07 Jul 2013 at 8:07 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-07-07 04:47:06 PM  
In less than a billion years, its levels will be too low for photosynthesising plants to survive, say scientists. When that happens, life as we know it on Earth will cease to exist.

Yes, because we all know that plants will not be able to adapt over a timespan of a billion years. But they will have no problem adapting to the higher CO2 that we've spewed out over the last 100 years.
 
2013-07-07 06:23:59 PM  
New American? Really? Really really?

Under "Friends and Affiliates" section they have a John Birch Society link first and foremost among an assemblage of other sucky sites.

Another AGW denier site with RW wingnut links, just what the world needs.

*makes rude gesture towards whoever greened this abortion of a link*

Before It's News is running this story from the angle that this guy is predicting all life on earth will probably go extinct in 2.8 billion years except for a few microbial species in pockets of trapped water but not these NA assholes.

http://beforeitsnews.com/beyond-science/2013/07/doomsday-for-earth-p re dicted-by-astrobiologist-2442584.html
 
2013-07-07 06:24:10 PM  
So, by this guys reasoning, we need more CO2 so plants can produce more oxygen for us to breathe...

Which will then kill us due to the toxic levels of oxygen...

makes sense.
 
2013-07-07 06:51:00 PM  
This all sounds plausible.

The Earth has always been CO2 deficient until humans came along with their cars and their farting cows to bring it up to the proper levels.  Now we're threatening to take all that we've added in order to balance things out.

New American:  Fark logic!
 
2013-07-07 07:06:55 PM  
Yes, a time scale of billion years--about twice the time scale that chordates even evolved--and folks want to talk about the effect that firing up your SUV will have on that? Barely a blip. A brief flash in the pan, which on a scale of billion years will barely even show unless we manage to get our sh*t together.

I wonder if they can get apples with the cherry picker that they're using, or do you think it's just that purpose? I mean, I could use some really nice pears and peaches too...
 
2013-07-07 07:20:07 PM  
Yeah, I'd like to see you grill food over coal, Subby. Mind if I pull up a chair and watch you bite into whatever you just cooked?
 
2013-07-07 07:58:22 PM  
I have it on good authority that we're all getting taken out by a meteor on August 16, 2021, so this is all nonsense anyway.  The few who will survive for a year or two will have underground shelters, but eventually the food supply is going to dry up.
 
2013-07-07 08:13:45 PM  
was the "asinine" tag unavailable?
 
2013-07-07 08:20:09 PM  
Anti-global warming people just want the Earth to be too cold for bikinis.  Burkas for everybody! Weee!
 
2013-07-07 08:24:21 PM  
This guy is totally right.  If we don't manage to to convert every last bit of carbon on Earth into CO2 in the next generation or two, then we're definitely going to run out of stuff for plants to eat.
 
2013-07-07 08:38:05 PM  
"...a Paul Bunyan-size carbon footprint...."

You mean an Al Gore sized footprint.
 
2013-07-07 08:51:27 PM  
We are the most coddled and privileged group of human beings in the history of the species. Even poor people live better than kings of yore.
 
2013-07-07 08:55:14 PM  

HotIgneous Intruder: We are the most coddled and privileged group of human beings in the history of the species. Even poor people live better than kings of yore.


So why do so many hate life?
 
2013-07-07 08:57:00 PM  
Dafuq did I just read? I'm as perturbed as any other educated person about all the political chicken littling going on the past few years, but whoever wrote that article is a moron. There is no chance of us running out of CO2 or collapsing into a global ice age.
 
2013-07-07 08:59:15 PM  
"After ages during which the earth produced harmless trilobites and butterflies, evolution progressed to the point at which it generated Neros, Genghis Khans, and Hitlers. This, however, is a passing nightmare; in time the earth will become again incapable of supporting life, and peace will return." - Bertrand Russell

And, your blog sucks.
 
2013-07-07 09:04:32 PM  

baka-san: So, by this guys reasoning, we need more CO2 so plants can produce more oxygen for us to breathe...

Which will then kill us due to the toxic levels of oxygen...

makes sense.


Yeah about that....
"The prevailing theory, proposed around a century ago, is that the Earth's atmosphere used to have much more oxygen-more than 30 per cent in the Permian, compared to just 20 today. This vital gas sets an upper limit on how big animals can be. The seething quantities of past eras allowed flying insects to fuel faster metabolisms and larger bodies. "
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/notrocketscience/2012/06/04/giant- in sects-disappeared-thanks-to-falling-oxygen-levels-and-agile-birds/#.Ud oOu23USDU


The reason dinosaurs got so damn big is because reptiles never stop growing, and a combination of higher atmospheric pressure and a LOT higher oxygen content provided their lungs with enough O2 to be able to oxygenate a much larger body mass than can be maintained at current levels.  It'd be a lot like you and me moving from a lifetime at sea level to the top of Everest.
 
2013-07-07 09:07:12 PM  
DNRTFA.
I wonder what Al Gore did for the Fourth Weekend. Work his compost pile? Feed The Homeless from his Organic, Zero Carbon Footprint Garden?

 On his private jet laughing all the way to a bank sponsored BBQ is more likely. You got buffaloed kids.
The answer is in a grey area between Doom and It's OK.

Secretary of State John "I don't pay taxes" Kerry was seen on Nantucket. With a Secret Service detail and Coast Guard Station Brant Point "Security Detail".

Fark (D) how does it work?
 
2013-07-07 09:12:45 PM  
So basically, the world would be better off without humans.  Thanks for the newsflash.
 
2013-07-07 09:17:09 PM  
Time to cut and paste links to charts.  Those prove everything and will solve the debate once and for all like they always do.
 
2013-07-07 09:25:30 PM  
Headline: Too Little Carbon Dioxide Will Destroy Earth

No, it won't. Neither will too much. Either might make things inhospitable for current life on Earth, but Earth could give a fark. Some life will survive -- it always does -- and after enough time life will flourish again, only different from what exists now, and the Universe won't even notice.
 
2013-07-07 09:26:15 PM  
While it's probably hard to forecast weather for 1,000,002,013 A.D., many experts have pointed out that CO2 needs to hire a PR team, misunderstood and maligned as it is by global-warming proponents. For instance, Mike Adams of Natural News 2 is so bad for the planet, why do greenhouses pay to produce it?" He then offers the answer:
CO2 is a plant NUTRIENT.


If chocolate is bad for me, then how come my cat can't ride a bicycle?
 
2013-07-07 09:33:12 PM  
That website is some kind of a put-on, right?
 
2013-07-07 09:33:13 PM  

Kuoxasar: While it's probably hard to forecast weather for 1,000,002,013 A.D., many experts have pointed out that CO2 needs to hire a PR team, misunderstood and maligned as it is by global-warming proponents. For instance, Mike Adams of Natural News 2 is so bad for the planet, why do greenhouses pay to produce it?" He then offers the answer:
CO2 is a plant NUTRIENT.

If chocolate is bad for me, then how come my cat can't ride a bicycle?


Betep has the answer.
 
2013-07-07 09:33:45 PM  
These days I find myself completely ignoring websites who have red, white and blue logos. They never have anything to say thats worth reading.
 
2013-07-07 09:36:01 PM  

Kuoxasar: While it's probably hard to forecast weather for 1,000,002,013 A.D., many experts have pointed out that CO2 needs to hire a PR team, misunderstood and maligned as it is by global-warming proponents. For instance, Mike Adams of Natural News 2 is so bad for the planet, why do greenhouses pay to produce it?" He then offers the answer:
CO2 is a plant NUTRIENT.

If chocolate is bad for me, then how come my cat can't ride a bicycle?


Open a jar of peanut butter. Do you see any cats riding bicycles in it?
No matter how many jars of peanut butter you open, you are never going to open one and see a cat riding around inside on a bicyle.
Which proves my point.
 
2013-07-07 09:37:33 PM  
i.qkme.me
 
2013-07-07 09:48:30 PM  

Kuoxasar: While it's probably hard to forecast weather for 1,000,002,013 A.D., many experts have pointed out that CO2 needs to hire a PR team, misunderstood and maligned as it is by global-warming proponents. For instance, Mike Adams of Natural News 2 is so bad for the planet, why do greenhouses pay to produce it?" He then offers the answer:
CO2 is a plant NUTRIENT.

If chocolate is bad for me, then how come my cat can't ride a bicycle?




And he's citing Natural News! Next up, citing Infowars to support an opinion!
 
2013-07-07 09:59:06 PM  

quatchi: New American? Really? Really really?

Under "Friends and Affiliates" section they have a John Birch Society link first and foremost among an assemblage of other sucky sites.


The New American is the John Birch Society's official magazine.

// I was a member a long time ago.
// Yes, I am ashamed of that.
// The dErp ... it is curable.  Somehow I escaped it.
 
2013-07-07 10:36:35 PM  

HotIgneous Intruder: We are the most coddled and privileged group of human beings in the history of the species. Even poor people live better than kings of yore.


Is that first world poor people, or third world poor people?
 
2013-07-07 10:37:44 PM  
So wait, if hotter temperatures means water is absorbing more CO2, than how would that eliminate photosynthetic plants in the ocean, since they would actually have access to more CO2 absorbed from the atmosphere?
 
2013-07-07 10:38:33 PM  

Betep: [non-sequitur-garrrbl]


Steve (excuse me, Evets) has a brother?
 
2013-07-07 10:42:47 PM  

IntertubeUser: The New American is the John Birch Society's official magazine.

// I was a member a long time ago.
// Yes, I am ashamed of that.
// The derp ... it is curable.  Somehow I escaped it.


I'm glad you got out with your mind intact.  Many don't.

BS content aside for a sec I think the site could do with more crying eagles and sparkles gifs.

That way if I ever click on one of their links again I can have some lulz while wading through the dreck.
 
2013-07-07 10:48:26 PM  

IntertubeUser: The New American is the John Birch Society's official magazine.


My bad. I had it confused with American Thinker.
 
2013-07-07 10:51:26 PM  
Subby you ignorant slut. Get on a search engine and read up on Al Gore's monstrosity of a house and the plane he primarily uses for flight. That man has balls the size of church bells.
 
2013-07-07 11:32:32 PM  
That article is the stupidest thing I've read in at least a few weeks. I especially enjoyed how the author described the scientific consensus on climate change as a pop culture belief. I guess now the libertarian shut-ins can reject it just like Lady Gaga and personal hygiene.
 
2013-07-07 11:42:52 PM  

jfarkinB: Betep: [non-sequitur-garrrbl]

Steve (excuse me, Evets) has a brother?


I'm sorry. You think Al Gorbal is actually smart! Sorry. He's ripping you off.

The (D) people don't really care about you too much. You're just a vote.And a sucker.
 
2013-07-07 11:59:18 PM  

Betep: jfarkinB: Betep: [non-sequitur-garrrbl]

Steve (excuse me, Evets) has a brother?

I'm sorry. You think Al Gorbal is actually smart! Sorry. He's ripping you off.

The (D) people don't really care about you too much. You're just a vote.And a sucker.


Wow, there are no words available that express just how much stupidity you expressed in so few words.  Nice troll.
 
2013-07-08 12:17:07 AM  

Betep: jfarkinB: Betep: [non-sequitur-garrrbl]

Steve (excuse me, Evets) has a brother?

I'm sorry. You think Al Gorbal is actually smart! Sorry. He's ripping you off.

The (D) people don't really care about you too much. You're just a vote.And a sucker.


So Al Gore who donates all the profits to the book and the movie is in it for the money but the Oil Companies who are the most profitable companies on the planet, and the people who write denier books who keep all the profits and get paid by oil companies to write the books are the ones to be trusted and don't care about money just if they can help us?
 
2013-07-08 12:24:48 AM  
FTRA:
So if the critics of Anthropogenic Global Warming theory are correct, the only man-made aspect of the matter is the data itself.

A recent NASA report throws the space agency into conflict with its climatologists after new NASA measurements prove that carbon dioxide acts as a coolant in Earth's atmosphere.

So the data is both "man-made" as in made up AND also proves supports your point?

Wow you hold two contradictory points but if it attacks the thing you don't believe in it's ok to contradict yourself.

Obviously they are not trying to make a logical attack, they are just trying to throw as much FUD and hope some sticks.
 
2013-07-08 12:42:19 AM  

Zafler: Betep: jfarkinB: Betep: [non-sequitur-garrrbl]

Steve (excuse me, Evets) has a brother?

I'm sorry. You think Al Gorbal is actually smart! Sorry. He's ripping you off.

The (D) people don't really care about you too much. You're just a vote.And a sucker.

Wow, there are no words available that express just how much stupidity you expressed in so few words.  Nice troll.


Instead of just being able to ignore or favorite a person, I would love it if I could automatically replace their comment with a gif or small inline video (not autoplaying, of course) of my choosing. Betep might get this one.

Can we make this happen?
 
2013-07-08 12:43:29 AM  

Jarhead_h: baka-san: So, by this guys reasoning, we need more CO2 so plants can produce more oxygen for us to breathe...

Which will then kill us due to the toxic levels of oxygen...

makes sense.

Yeah about that....
"The prevailing theory, proposed around a century ago, is that the Earth's atmosphere used to have much more oxygen-more than 30 per cent in the Permian, compared to just 20 today. This vital gas sets an upper limit on how big animals can be. The seething quantities of past eras allowed flying insects to fuel faster metabolisms and larger bodies. "
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/notrocketscience/2012/06/04/giant- in sects-disappeared-thanks-to-falling-oxygen-levels-and-agile-birds/#.Ud oOu23USDU


The reason dinosaurs got so damn big is because reptiles never stop growing, and a combination of higher atmospheric pressure and a LOT higher oxygen content provided their lungs with enough O2 to be able to oxygenate a much larger body mass than can be maintained at current levels.  It'd be a lot like you and me moving from a lifetime at sea level to the top of Everest.


We did have more oxygen in the Carboniferous (an era which had the griffonflies with the 2-foot wingspans), but actually the reason we had big dinos is much the same reason we had big mammals (before a mix of catastrophes, one among them being that early Homo sapiens found them damn tasty AND was getting pretty good with the "making sharp rocks and sticks go fast to kill big game)--lots of evolutionary pressure; basically the "game dinosaurs" and the predatory ones were in rather a bit of an arms race.

Dinosaurs forked from the rest of the Archosauria during the Triassic, and particularly at the P-T boundary (shortly after the Great Dying--the largest mass extinction event that killed something like 95% of all species on earth; ironically, it was THAT mass extinction that killed off a lot of the therapsids (which include not only mammals but a lot of mammal-cousins and mammal-uncle clades) and allowed archosaurs to become dominant) the oxygen levels were actually considerably LOWER than nowadays--something like 12 percent oxygen at the time that dinosaurs were coming to be, compared to the modern 20-21 percent (cite here), and only got to a peak once around 200mya of oxygenation levels similar to nowaday.  It's actually been the subject of recent speculation that dinosaurs (not just birds and other theropods, but the big sauropods too) might have actually developed air-sac systems and respiratory systems that are actually quite a bit more efficient than mammalian/therapsid respiration specifically to deal with the low oxygen levels in the Triassic.

Oxygen levels were still low through much of the Jurassic compared to nowaday, had fluctuation during the Cretaceous and even early Tertiary periods, and it seems to have finally stabilised in the Tertiary period to the modern 20-21% oxygen.

(Also, as an aside: We're really about as much "reptiles" as dinosaurs--including the modern dinosaurian bat-analogues we call "birds"--are (the forking of squamates--mammals and therapsids and Dimetrodon, oh my!--and sauropsids, the "scaly and feathery" clade--occurred some time after leathery eggs started being a thing, and the fossil record is still muddy but there really isn't a hell of a lot of difference between "ur-squamates" and "ur-sauropsids", they both look like lizardy things :D).  "Reptile", as cladistics has discovered, has become a bit of a wastebasket taxon either analgous to "Amniotes" (including us, the lizards, and the archosaurs) or analgous to "Sauropsids" (basically all the scaly critters + archosaurs including dinosaurs).  We're learning that "reptiles" are a really surprisingly diverse group cladistically, including a lot of groups that aren't traditionally thought of as reptiles (birds, which are now classified as a subclade of theropod dinosaurs; the closest related sister group to the birds are actually dromaeosaurs, which are turning out to be very birdy-looking and birdy-acting themselves) and may ultimately exclude some things we DO think of reptiles (there is actually a bit of a lively debate over whether testudines--turtles and tortoises and their relatives--should be classified as Reptilia or actually fit in a separate clade).  What most people think of when they think of "reptile" are lepidiosaurs--lizards and snakes and their immediate kin.)
 
2013-07-08 12:46:13 AM  

KrispyKritter: Subby you ignorant slut. Get on a search engine and read up on Al Gore's monstrosity of a house and the plane he primarily uses for flight. That man has balls the size of church bells.


The former vice president of the USA has a house 4 times bigger than the national average?

The hell you say!

Read up on it, ya say?

Gore has made his home an example of clean green tech specfically buying power from, green energy sources, installed solar panels, rainwater collection system, all LED lights.

This "ZOMG!11! ALGORE's carbon footprint is HUUUGE!1!" schtick was stupid when it was first spewed forth in 2007 and it hasn't aged well at all.
 
2013-07-08 01:11:46 AM  

Major-General: "...a Paul Bunyan-size carbon footprint...."

You mean an Al Gore sized footprint.


Hey, one has to get to all these environmental conferences  somehow, and sailing ships are so slow!  I went to an interesting conference on sustainable (carbon-neutral) transport earlier this year... flew 15,500 miles round-trip and emitted 2 tons of carbon.  [Ironic]

(Coming up on 70,000 miles of flying for environmental conferences this year.)
 
2013-07-08 01:11:48 AM  

Great Porn Dragon: Jarhead_h: baka-san: So, by this guys reasoning, we need more CO2 so plants can produce more oxygen for us to breathe...

Which will then kill us due to the toxic levels of oxygen...

makes sense.

Yeah about that....
"The prevailing theory, proposed around a century ago, is that the Earth's atmosphere used to have much more oxygen-more than 30 per cent in the Permian, compared to just 20 today. This vital gas sets an upper limit on how big animals can be. The seething quantities of past eras allowed flying insects to fuel faster metabolisms and larger bodies. "
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/notrocketscience/2012/06/04/giant- in sects-disappeared-thanks-to-falling-oxygen-levels-and-agile-birds/#.Ud oOu23USDU


The reason dinosaurs got so damn big is because reptiles never stop growing, and a combination of higher atmospheric pressure and a LOT higher oxygen content provided their lungs with enough O2 to be able to oxygenate a much larger body mass than can be maintained at current levels.  It'd be a lot like you and me moving from a lifetime at sea level to the top of Everest.

We did have more oxygen in the Carboniferous (an era which had the griffonflies with the 2-foot wingspans), but actually the reason we had big dinos is much the same reason we had big mammals (before a mix of catastrophes, one among them being that early Homo sapiens found them damn tasty AND was getting pretty good with the "making sharp rocks and sticks go fast to kill big game)--lots of evolutionary pressure; basically the "game dinosaurs" and the predatory ones were in rather a bit of an arms race.

Dinosaurs forked from the rest of the Archosauria during the Triassic, and particularly at the P-T boundary (shortly after the Great Dying--the largest mass extinction event that killed something like 95% of all species on earth; ironically, it was THAT mass extinction that killed off a lot of the therapsids (which include not only mammals but a lot of mammal-cousins and mammal-uncle clade ...


That was so much science I think my mustache grew a size class from the sheer awesome of it all.
 
2013-07-08 01:27:44 AM  

Dinki:

In less than a billion years, its levels will be too low for photosynthesising plants to survive, say scientists. When that happens, life as we know it on Earth will cease to exist.

Yes, because we all know that plants will not be able to adapt over a timespan of a billion years. But they will have no problem adapting to the higher CO2 that we've spewed out over the last 100 years.

So, if you're locked in a room with no ventilation, and are slowly using up the carbon dioxide, gasping, the fact that humans developed over a billion years of evolution means that if someone opens a door, and oxygen rushes in, you will be in danger from the increased oxygen, and will have to EVOLVE again to deal with it?


Wow.  That's some impressive stupid you have going there.

 
2013-07-08 01:34:39 AM  

GeneralJim: Dinki: In less than a billion years, its levels will be too low for photosynthesising plants to survive, say scientists. When that happens, life as we know it on Earth will cease to exist.

Yes, because we all know that plants will not be able to adapt over a timespan of a billion years. But they will have no problem adapting to the higher CO2 that we've spewed out over the last 100 years.
So, if you're locked in a room with no ventilation, and are slowly using up the carbon dioxide, gasping, the fact that humans developed over a billion years of evolution means that if someone opens a door, and oxygen rushes in, you will be in danger from the increased oxygen, and will have to EVOLVE again to deal with it?
Wow.  That's some impressive stupid you have going there.



DRINK
 
2013-07-08 01:35:39 AM  
Cool!  I found a new idiot blog to avoid, AND I learned there's a climate change denier version of Bevets, both in the same thread!  Bonus!
 
2013-07-08 01:36:53 AM  

GeneralJim: Dinki: In less than a billion years, its levels will be too low for photosynthesising plants to survive, say scientists. When that happens, life as we know it on Earth will cease to exist.

Yes, because we all know that plants will not be able to adapt over a timespan of a billion years. But they will have no problem adapting to the higher CO2 that we've spewed out over the last 100 years.
So, if you're locked in a room with no ventilation, and are slowly using up the carbon dioxide, gasping, the fact that humans developed over a billion years of evolution means that if someone opens a door, and oxygen rushes in, you will be in danger from the increased oxygen, and will have to EVOLVE again to deal with it?
Wow.  That's some impressive stupid you have going there.


media0.giphy.com
 
2013-07-08 02:03:20 AM  

GeneralJim: So, if you're locked in a room with no ventilation, and are slowly using up the carbon dioxide, gasping, the fact that humans developed over a billion years of evolution means that if someone opens a door, and oxygen rushes in, you will be in danger from the increased oxygen, and will have to EVOLVE again to deal with it?
Wow.  That's some impressive stupid you have going there.


Not sure if parody slyly comparing the intelligence and general moral status of the crazy right-wingers to the kind of non-nuclear bacteria required to have sufficient generations for noticeable evolution to occur in the time it takes them to run down a room full of O2, or just someone that's genuinely that stupid.

Poe's law strikes again, I guess.

//Third possibility: poster is secretly Conrad Nomikos, thinks a billion years is a reasonable time-scale to think in terms of a single lifetime and not generations.
 
2013-07-08 02:04:07 AM  

quatchi: New American? Really? Really really?


that
 
Displayed 50 of 92 comments

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

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
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