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.

(Gizmodo)   Old MacDonald had a farm, E-I-E-I-O. And on this farm he had some methane-producing animals contributing a lot more to global warming than we initially estimated, E-I-E-I-OMG   ( gizmodo.com) divider line
    More: Scary  
•       •       •

4269 clicks; posted to Main » on 29 Sep 2017 at 5:20 PM (11 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



140 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2017-09-29 04:32:27 PM  
I smell a conspiracy.
Always remember that when you pass through a fart you are inhaling aerosol shiat.
 
2017-09-29 04:48:31 PM  
It certainly isn't helping. But our human populations are out of control and need to eat.

This should be worrying, too. Probably isn't for most people, but methane is bad for you, mkay? And a lot of it has been trapped in the Frozen Tundra of Lambeau Field Siberia.

img.fark.netView Full Size


And as the tundra thaws, due to climate change, these bubbles are forming. And collapsing.

img.fark.netView Full Size

Yeesh.
 
2017-09-29 04:55:02 PM  
Yet somehow the models have the right numbers.
 
2017-09-29 05:01:11 PM  
So republicans were right... it's not humans causing global warming, it's animals. Chessmate, libtardos.
 
2017-09-29 05:23:43 PM  
I'm more worried about flying cows...

vignette.wikia.nocookie.netView Full Size
 
2017-09-29 05:23:44 PM  
You can have my delicious steak when you pry it from my cold, dead fingers.
 
2017-09-29 05:24:34 PM  
img.fark.netView Full Size

/oblig
 
2017-09-29 05:24:35 PM  
"WHATEVAH, AS LONG AS I GET MY MEGATALLBOY BURGER, DEEP-FRIED AND SERVED WITH A GALLON OF DONKEY SAUCE! 'MURICA!"
 
2017-09-29 05:25:08 PM  
Farts are serious business.
 
2017-09-29 05:25:36 PM  
We can get rid of this problem by killing and eating them.
 
2017-09-29 05:27:39 PM  
I have a bridge for sale, etc. etc.
These people have inhaled way too much barium from the chemtrails.
 
2017-09-29 05:30:33 PM  
Imagine how much dinosaurs farted.   Explains earlier warming.  I knew it wasn't man made.
 
2017-09-29 05:31:22 PM  
Farts.
Can't live with 'em.
Can't live without 'em.
 
2017-09-29 05:31:30 PM  

WelldeadLink: Yet somehow the models have the right numbers.


it means the models are wrong and it's worth than we thought
 
2017-09-29 05:31:58 PM  
Factory farms are patriotic! Those cows stand all day and never kneel. They don't have room.
 
2017-09-29 05:32:47 PM  

WelldeadLink: Yet somehow the models have the right numbers.


worse*

Of course - why hasn't anyone invented a way to capture this methane?  There has to, at least, be enough produced to power a generator.
 
2017-09-29 05:33:55 PM  
I wonder how the cow population in the USA compares to the former bison population. I'm guessing that they are much the same.

Yet another case of hyper-alarmist rants, journalistic fear mongering. But of course, I didn't click the link. I'll come back and correct myself if I am wrong about this.
 
2017-09-29 05:34:59 PM  
That's it.  I'm gonna start eating the biatches
 
2017-09-29 05:37:21 PM  
I was driving through Greeley, CO yesterday, and can vouch for cow emissions.
 
2017-09-29 05:38:05 PM  
Subby...

media.tenor.comView Full Size


In addition to livestock contributing to the release of methane, let's not forget that fake climate change resulting in the melting of glaciers, permafrost* and icecaps is also releasing ancient methane (and God knows what else) into the atmosphere.

*there's some scary ancient viruses that are seeing the light of day with the melting of the permafrost, some hat haven't been seen in thousands of years.
 
2017-09-29 05:40:10 PM  
I'd the earth's environment that sparse pockets of cows are able to turn the tide of global climate change, we're in a lot bigger trouble than we realize.

We might as well use up all the oil and trash the place because fighting the climate is futile.
 
2017-09-29 05:40:24 PM  
img.fark.netView Full Size
...
 
2017-09-29 05:40:27 PM  
Wait, isn't SpaceX going to be using methane and liquid oxygen as rocket fuel? Just insert a collection pipe into the source of the methane and...to the moon, Alice!

img.fark.netView Full Size
 
2017-09-29 05:40:31 PM  
This is clearly a hoax because cows are a myth propagated by Big Farma.
 
2017-09-29 05:41:54 PM  

bigdanc: WelldeadLink: Yet somehow the models have the right numbers.

it means the models are wrong and it's worth than we thought


You have a lithsp. Lol
 
2017-09-29 05:42:20 PM  
We've known for a while that a meat based diet contributes to greenhouse gasses more than transportation or industry.  And it's dumb that we keep ignoring the real problems.  Go meatless 3 days a week before your next spittle flying rant about someone else who should be solving the problem for you.
 
2017-09-29 05:42:41 PM  

lordjupiter: This is clearly a hoax because cows are a myth propagated by Big Farma.


Boooooooo

I wish I had thought of that.
 
2017-09-29 05:44:14 PM  

docpeteyJ: Subby...

[media.tenor.com image 490x280]

In addition to livestock contributing to the release of methane, let's not forget that fake climate change resulting in the melting of glaciers, permafrost* and icecaps is also releasing ancient methane (and God knows what else) into the atmosphere.

*there's some scary ancient viruses that are seeing the light of day with the melting of the permafrost, some hat haven't been seen in thousands of years.


They have hats?
 
2017-09-29 05:45:03 PM  
EAT MOR VEAL
 
2017-09-29 05:47:03 PM  
Trey L.  <I can't remember your fark handle> remember when we debated this in high school back in 1992/3 when it was obscure?
 
2017-09-29 05:48:07 PM  
MOO! [HD]
Youtube wrw1VMRNFUg
 
2017-09-29 05:48:33 PM  
There's a farm called Misery, but of that we'll have none,
Because we know of one, that's always lots of fun (Ha ha!).
And this one's name is Jollity; believe me, folks, it's great,
For everything sings out to us as we go through the gate.
 
2017-09-29 05:49:11 PM  
The world would be a better place there were no animals
 
2017-09-29 05:49:23 PM  
Bacon cheeseburger or the planet.
You decide.....
 
2017-09-29 05:50:23 PM  
Large mammals any way
 
2017-09-29 05:51:13 PM  
Even if we got the numbers correct it'd still be pretty gross.
 
2017-09-29 05:51:48 PM  

bigdanc: WelldeadLink: Yet somehow the models have the right numbers.

it means the models are wrong and it's worth MORE than we thought


fixed for accuracy
 
2017-09-29 05:52:07 PM  

WTFDYW: docpeteyJ: Subby...

[media.tenor.com image 490x280]

In addition to livestock contributing to the release of methane, let's not forget that fake climate change resulting in the melting of glaciers, permafrost* and icecaps is also releasing ancient methane (and God knows what else) into the atmosphere.

*there's some scary ancient viruses that are seeing the light of day with the melting of the permafrost, some hat haven't been seen in thousands of years.

They have hats?


Knitted ones. It's part of the Trump Plan to Preserve the Permafrost, and he's recruited lots of old pink MAGA-hate wearing biddies in the midwest to do it, too.
 
2017-09-29 05:54:02 PM  
Damnit. I am the Typo King today.

MAGA-hat wearing biddies, FFS.

/What is this magic Preview Button you speak of???
 
2017-09-29 05:54:40 PM  
If most Americans went meatless once or twice a week and ate more beans* and vegetables, our impact on GW would likely decrease.

/* even accounting for the increase in farting caused by eating more beans and lentils
 
2017-09-29 05:55:27 PM  

Sum Guye: EAT MOR VEAL


img.fark.netView Full Size
 
2017-09-29 05:55:50 PM  
Cow's farts matter!
 
2017-09-29 05:56:14 PM  

ThrobblefootSpectre: We've known for a while that a meat based diet contributes to greenhouse gasses more than transportation or industry.  And it's dumb that we keep ignoring the real problems.

Go meatless 3 7 days a week before your next spittle flying rant about someone else who should be solving the problem for you.
 
2017-09-29 05:56:39 PM  

bigdanc: WelldeadLink: Yet somehow the models have the right numbers.

it means the models are wrong and it's worth than we thought

 
img.fark.netView Full Size


She's not wrong.
 
2017-09-29 05:58:11 PM  

AverageAmericanGuy: I'd the earth's environment that sparse pockets of cows are able to turn the tide of global climate change, we're in a lot bigger trouble than we realize.


I swear you're a secret environmentalist liberal the way you goad people into posting factual information to disprove your lies.
 
2017-09-29 06:00:09 PM  

docpeteyJ: Damnit. I am the Typo King today.

MAGA-hat wearing biddies, FFS.

/What is this magic Preview Button you speak of???


I disagree... "MAGA-hate wearing" read just fine... I didn't even blink at it.
 
2017-09-29 06:00:10 PM  
So hang bells from their necks and pilot lights from their asses.  Problem solved.
 
2017-09-29 06:01:50 PM  
So in order to reduce bovine emissions we need to reduce the number of bovines. Therefore, everyone needs to eat burgers and steaks, like right now.
 
2017-09-29 06:02:09 PM  
This is a red herring.

Methane from livestock has zero impact on climate change. Methane in the atmosphere only last a few years before breaking down into CO2. Carbon moving back and forth between atmospheric CO2 -> carbohydrates in plants -> methane -> atmospheric CO2 has no impact.

Digging up more entombed carbon and adding it to the cycle DOES have an impact.
 
2017-09-29 06:02:41 PM  

germ78: If most Americans went meatless once or twice a week and ate more beans* and vegetables, our impact on GW would likely decrease.

/* even accounting for the increase in farting caused by eating more beans and lentils


I would sooner murder every soul in some faraway country that I will never go to than give up eating red meat. I love beans, but they are not steak.

Also, our climate models were grossly inaccurate, but they're good now so you should believe them.
 
2017-09-29 06:03:52 PM  
If I have to ask them to hold the steak when I order filet mignon to save the planet all I'll have to eat is bacon.

Chessteak, libmustards!
 
2017-09-29 06:09:35 PM  
Gee, it's almost like there is more than one cause of climate change, and they are all interrelated in a very complex and synergistic way that will require a very complex and careful plan to fix it.

Who would have thought it was not as easy as just ignoring it?
 
2017-09-29 06:09:58 PM  
I guess that will have to kill off more elephants in order to balance things out.
 
2017-09-29 06:12:30 PM  
Dearest headline submitter person,

+1 LOL aside...
(can't believe I'm the first)
img.fark.netView Full Size
 
2017-09-29 06:16:05 PM  
I hate myself a little bit every day for not being a vegetarian because I know for a fact that it's one of the single greatest things I could do to reduce my impact on the environment.  I'm still going to eat salmon or chicken for dinner

/cull the herd (of humans)
 
2017-09-29 06:16:22 PM  

Richard Saunders: Dearest headline submitter person,

+1 LOL aside...
(can't believe I'm the first)
[img.fark.net image 320x240]


Probably because that's so old, that it's from just after the Tracy Ulman show, but before the animation was done by a Korean company. Like, 1991 at the latest.
 
2017-09-29 06:17:34 PM  

gregscott: I wonder how the cow population in the USA compares to the former bison population. I'm guessing that they are much the same.

Yet another case of hyper-alarmist rants, journalistic fear mongering. But of course, I didn't click the link. I'll come back and correct myself if I am wrong about this.


Not by a long shot. Peak bison = 20-30 million. There's 92 million or so cattle just in the US currently, with an estimated 1.4 billion worldwide.

Add the fact that the cattle are fed high-test grain grown by intensive agriculture, and...
 
2017-09-29 06:17:58 PM  
That's what happened to Mars. They farted themselves to extinction.
 
2017-09-29 06:18:11 PM  

gregscott: I wonder how the cow population in the USA compares to the former bison population. I'm guessing that they are much the same.

Yet another case of hyper-alarmist rants, journalistic fear mongering. But of course, I didn't click the link. I'll come back and correct myself if I am wrong about this.


First, there were an estimated 20 million bison, compared to about 40 million cows today.

Second, it wouldn't matter if the cow population was equal, as the diets may be different enough to make such equivocation meaningless.

Third, it STILL doesn't matter even if bison produced more methane than cattle, as we are discussing the cumulative effects in global warming and how we can change them today.

X+y+z+q=T, where T is higher than we want it, is not a formula that gives a crap whether the X or the y is the newcomer to the party.

"I'm getting fat, I should consume fewer calories"
"Well, don't stop drinking soda. You've always drank that and you weren't fat before" said nobody ever.

Livestock are worth looking into for a host of reasons, as they are particularly easy to adjust in terms of human behavior relative to telling people not to have kids, not to drive to work, not to use AC, etc. There are also multiple methods of addressing methane from livestock without dramatically reducing production. Diet, potential capturing systems, who knows?

Hell, identifying a thing as a contributor is useful whether or not we even change it as a variable, because we still want to fully complete the overall picture.
 
2017-09-29 06:27:55 PM  
THE USUAL SUSPECTS Old McDonald
Youtube OMvbKBTyV64
 
2017-09-29 06:30:20 PM  
Peer reviewed article in Nature by the team that does the carbon budgets for the IPCC assessment reports concluded that models overestimate anthropogenic forcing/feedbacks and they adjusted the carbon budget accordingly. Basically they say with more realistic numbers for the anthropogenic component of the models they calculate that the conventional wisdom that we will add 2 degrees C to the temperature should be adjusted down to 1.5 degrees C.
http://www.nature.com/ngeo/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/ngeo3031.html

Of course the alarmist went into a tizzy immediately questioning the science... Deniers are they? The irony was delicious.

And of course Fark wouldn't greenlight a link to real science or articles about it. Hell, their filter won't even let the link above work. LOL
 
2017-09-29 06:31:30 PM  

madgonad: This is a red herring.

Methane from livestock has zero impact on climate change. Methane in the atmosphere only last a few years before breaking down into CO2. Carbon moving back and forth between atmospheric CO2 -> carbohydrates in plants -> methane -> atmospheric CO2 has no impact.

Digging up more entombed carbon and adding it to the cycle DOES have an impact.


Except CO2 in the atmosphere has a dwell time of decades to centuries. We're pumping it out several orders of magnitude faster than it can be taken back up, so it builds up.

Sure, over the course of centuries it's neutral, but we're overloading the cycle.
 
2017-09-29 06:35:34 PM  

stirfrybry: http://www.nature.com/ngeo/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/ngeo3031.html


I don't think that article says what you're trying to claim.

" Assuming emissions peak and decline to below current levels by 2030, and continue thereafter on a much steeper decline, which would be historically unprecedented but consistent with a standard ambitious mitigation scenario (RCP2.6), results in a likely range of peak warming of 1.2-2.0°C above the mid-nineteenth century. If CO2 emissions are continuously adjusted over time to limit 2100 warming to 1.5°C, with ambitious non-CO2 mitigation, net future cumulative CO2 emissions are unlikely to prove less than 250GtC and unlikely greater than 540GtC. Hence, limiting warming to 1.5°C is not yet a geophysical impossibility, but is likely to require delivery on strengthened pledges for 2030 followed by challengingly deep and rapid mitigation. "
 
2017-09-29 06:41:14 PM  

NutWrench: Farts are serious business.


Pre-diarrhea FTW! Or loss.
 
2017-09-29 06:41:34 PM  
Everybody farts.
 
2017-09-29 06:42:37 PM  
You should never be surprised when things are much worse than the press release.
 
2017-09-29 06:43:39 PM  

farkstorm: ThrobblefootSpectre: We've known for a while that a meat based diet contributes to greenhouse gasses more than transportation or industry.  And it's dumb that we keep ignoring the real problems.Go meatless 3 7 days a week before your next spittle flying rant about someone else who should be solving the problem for you.


No.
 
2017-09-29 06:44:10 PM  
DAVE MATTHEWS SAYS FARTS ARE DESTROYING ENVIRONMENT
Youtube OZ8c96NoI_g


Old news
 
2017-09-29 06:47:43 PM  
The 40ish million cows currently in the US, more or less replace the 30 to 60 million bison that were hunted to near extinction.
 
2017-09-29 06:55:46 PM  
With a

i.pinimg.comView Full Size


And a


sillycowadventures.files.wordpress.comView Full Size


There
 
2017-09-29 06:57:48 PM  
https://www.google.com/amp/amp.timeinc.net/fortune/2016/01/27/fair-oa​k​s-dairy-farm-manure-fuel/%3Fsource=dam

Fair Oaks Farms in Indiana converts the methane from the animal waste to CNG to fuel their tanker trucks. They have 42 power units that run an average of 500 mi. per day each. That's a lot of cow farts.
 
2017-09-29 07:01:16 PM  
But  but - organic farming's supposed to be good for the environment! Where will we get the fertilizer without octupling the livestock population???
 
2017-09-29 07:01:38 PM  

Ker_Thwap: The 40ish million cows currently in the US, more or less replace the 30 to 60 million bison that were hunted to near extinction.


Bison population at peak = 20-30 million.

Current US cattle population per the USDA = 92 million. (PDF)

Worldwide cattle population = 1.4 billion.

Bison were a mere fart in a whirlwind compared to current cattle production. They also lived off of prairie grass and weren't fed intensively-grown corn and soy.
 
2017-09-29 07:01:59 PM  
In a shocking turnaround, eating meat will be viewed as having been more repugnant than slavery or ten Holocausts
 
2017-09-29 07:04:30 PM  

Dumski: I smell a conspiracy.
Always remember that when you pass through a fart you are inhaling aerosol shiat.


Not with HEPA underwear.
 
2017-09-29 07:06:27 PM  

SwiftFox: But  but - organic farming's supposed to be good for the environment! Where will we get the fertilizer without octupling the livestock population???


Actually, a lot of dairy farms are setting up methane digesters to make natural gas to heat their barns. It's a win-win, they don't have to truck in natural gas to heat the barns in the winter, and the resulting sludge makes great fertilizer.

I saw a number of setups like that in India and Nepal as well.
 
2017-09-29 07:09:55 PM  

bigdanc: Of course - why hasn't anyone invented a way to capture this methane?  There has to, at least, be enough produced to power a generator.


But to collect the methane to power one generator, you have to send up a huge balloon fleet of nuclear-powered gas separators.
 
2017-09-29 07:12:20 PM  

maxheck: SwiftFox: But  but - organic farming's supposed to be good for the environment! Where will we get the fertilizer without octupling the livestock population???

Actually, a lot of dairy farms are setting up methane digesters to make natural gas to heat their barns. It's a win-win, they don't have to truck in natural gas to heat the barns in the winter, and the resulting sludge makes great fertilizer.

I saw a number of setups like that in India and Nepal as well.


Interesting - though it doesn't cure the organic fertilizer shortage if the world is to be fed.  OTOH, I suppose the methane from cow manure could be used for making more synthetic fertilizer, too.
 
2017-09-29 07:12:43 PM  
Old MacDonald headline?  Good thing I had this open in another tab:

[Youtube video bFiUyfbyjbA unavailable]
 
2017-09-29 07:14:18 PM  
img.fark.netView Full Size
 
2017-09-29 07:16:19 PM  

stirfrybry: Peer reviewed article in Nature by the team that does the carbon budgets for the IPCC assessment reports concluded that models overestimate anthropogenic forcing/feedbacks and they adjusted the carbon budget accordingly. Basically they say with more realistic numbers for the anthropogenic component of the models they calculate that the conventional wisdom that we will add 2 degrees C to the temperature should be adjusted down to 1.5 degrees C.
http://www.nature.com/ngeo/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/ngeo3031.html

Of course the alarmist went into a tizzy immediately questioning the science... Deniers are they? The irony was delicious.

And of course Fark wouldn't greenlight a link to real science or articles about it. Hell, their filter won't even let the link above work. LOL


http://www.fark.com/comments/9738177/Were-not-doooooomed-by-climate-c​h​ange-were-only-doooomed-Soooory-about-that-We-gooood#new
 
2017-09-29 07:21:36 PM  
Yeah, but does are powered by vegetables.

Chessmate, vegans!
 
2017-09-29 07:24:44 PM  

SwiftFox: maxheck: SwiftFox: But  but - organic farming's supposed to be good for the environment! Where will we get the fertilizer without octupling the livestock population???

Actually, a lot of dairy farms are setting up methane digesters to make natural gas to heat their barns. It's a win-win, they don't have to truck in natural gas to heat the barns in the winter, and the resulting sludge makes great fertilizer.

I saw a number of setups like that in India and Nepal as well.

Interesting - though it doesn't cure the organic fertilizer shortage if the world is to be fed.  OTOH, I suppose the methane from cow manure could be used for making more synthetic fertilizer, too.


No, it's not 100%, but it's certainly better than just making mountains of poop and letting it compost the way we usually do. That produces just as much natural gas, but it all ends up vented to the atmosphere to be wasted, and the poop just runs off into streams and rivers. There's a lot less waste with digesters.

The local water and sewer company actually sells bags of "ComPro," which is a fertilizer made from digested human poop.

The technology is dead simple too... I've seen one design that was just a 55 gallon drum for the digester, some tubing, and a tractor inner tube to store the gas. It was enough to run a small cookstove and some lamps.
 
2017-09-29 07:49:23 PM  

WelldeadLink: bigdanc: Of course - why hasn't anyone invented a way to capture this methane?  There has to, at least, be enough produced to power a generator.

But to collect the methane to power one generator, you have to send up a huge balloon fleet of nuclear-powered gas separators.


Interestingly, the Navy is getting 1.9Mw for one of their bases from waste methane from a local landfill.
They're also using the waste heat for steam.
 
2017-09-29 07:51:05 PM  

maxheck: Ker_Thwap: The 40ish million cows currently in the US, more or less replace the 30 to 60 million bison that were hunted to near extinction.

Bison population at peak = 20-30 million.

Current US cattle population per the USDA = 92 million. (PDF)

Worldwide cattle population = 1.4 billion.

Bison were a mere fart in a whirlwind compared to current cattle production. They also lived off of prairie grass and weren't fed intensively-grown corn and soy.


I said ish.  I just googled how many cows, I wasn't preparing for a thesis.  I'm also fairly sure that most cattle are fed mostly on pasturage, crop residues and fallows.  I limited my statement to the US, so we could compare apples to apples.    The numbers are worth considering, even if it's one factor among many.
 
2017-09-29 08:08:19 PM  
Still no word on sports game farts
 
2017-09-29 08:11:12 PM  

kbronsito: So republicans were right... it's not humans causing global warming, it's animals. Chessmate, libtardos.


Yeah, 99% of the scientific community is wrong. I guess that means the earth is flat too.
 
2017-09-29 08:14:56 PM  

gregscott: I wonder how the cow population in the USA compares to the former bison population. I'm guessing that they are much the same.

Yet another case of hyper-alarmist rants, journalistic fear mongering. But of course, I didn't click the link. I'll come back and correct myself if I am wrong about this.


Part of the issue is diet. The big cattle operations feed the cows a fark ton of corn which if I remember correctly makes them fart more.
 
2017-09-29 08:21:14 PM  
With a toot toot here and toot toot there
 
2017-09-29 08:21:40 PM  
Talk to this guy, he knows how to deal with this shiat.
img.fark.netView Full Size
 
2017-09-29 08:21:50 PM  

Ker_Thwap: maxheck: Ker_Thwap: The 40ish million cows currently in the US, more or less replace the 30 to 60 million bison that were hunted to near extinction.

Bison population at peak = 20-30 million.

Current US cattle population per the USDA = 92 million. (PDF)

Worldwide cattle population = 1.4 billion.

Bison were a mere fart in a whirlwind compared to current cattle production. They also lived off of prairie grass and weren't fed intensively-grown corn and soy.

I said ish.  I just googled how many cows, I wasn't preparing for a thesis.  I'm also fairly sure that most cattle are fed mostly on pasturage, crop residues and fallows.  I limited my statement to the US, so we could compare apples to apples.    The numbers are worth considering, even if it's one factor among many.


Yes.

And you were still wrong.

Also, there were a maximum total of 30 million bison. There were not 30 million bison at one time. There are at least that many cows, steers, bulls, and calves in the US at any given time. Also, you are wrong about cows being fed on pasturage. Beef cattle are kept on pasture for no more than 12-18 months; after that, they go to finishing feed lots for another 9-12 months to be fed on corn. Dairy cattle, of course, are kept in lots and almost exclusively fed hay and corn.

This is, of course, only the gas emitted by the farting cattle. The methane given off by piles of manure has to be factored in, and anyone who thinks that is negligible ought to go out to Coalinga, CA, and stand downwind of the huge feedlot out on the 5. You'll want to take an SCBA and some supplemental 02.
 
2017-09-29 08:37:55 PM  

germ78: If most Americans went meatless once or twice a week and ate more beans* and vegetables, our impact on GW would likely decrease.

/* even accounting for the increase in farting caused by eating more beans and lentils


Ok. I'll bite.

I hate beans (except for garbanzo - which is just kind of "meh ok"). I love beef.

Should folks who hate beans and love beef just kill themselves? I'm not sure what the alternative is here for us.

/i prefer chicken over beef when given the choice
 
2017-09-29 08:44:03 PM  

casual disregard: Should folks who hate beans and love beef just kill themselves?


img.fark.netView Full Size
 
2017-09-29 08:45:08 PM  

casual disregard: i prefer chicken over beef


Wheee!

i.pinimg.comView Full Size
 
2017-09-29 08:45:40 PM  
Screw that. Global climate change is happening. There are lots and lots of contributing factors. There is no way all the countries around the world are all going to band together and agree to implement anything other than the most trivial of changes in an attempt to mitigate it. May as well accept it.

So we should eat our steak and enjoy it, the Titanic is already sinking.

Of course you can go without meat however many days a week you like if it makes you feel better, just don't expect me to.
 
2017-09-29 08:51:50 PM  

Ker_Thwap: maxheck: Ker_Thwap: The 40ish million cows currently in the US, more or less replace the 30 to 60 million bison that were hunted to near extinction.

Bison population at peak = 20-30 million.

Current US cattle population per the USDA = 92 million. (PDF)

Worldwide cattle population = 1.4 billion.

Bison were a mere fart in a whirlwind compared to current cattle production. They also lived off of prairie grass and weren't fed intensively-grown corn and soy.

I said ish.  I just googled how many cows, I wasn't preparing for a thesis.  I'm also fairly sure that most cattle are fed mostly on pasturage, crop residues and fallows.  I limited my statement to the US, so we could compare apples to apples.    The numbers are worth considering, even if it's one factor among many.


Wasn't trying to jump on you, just wanted to clarify, people have been quoting stuff all over so I thought I would look this up.
 
2017-09-29 08:57:39 PM  

Nidiot: Screw that. Global climate change is happening. There are lots and lots of contributing factors. There is no way all the countries around the world are all going to band together and agree to implement anything other than the most trivial of changes in an attempt to mitigate it. May as well accept it.

So we should eat our steak and enjoy it, the Titanic is already sinking.

Of course you can go without meat however many days a week you like if it makes you feel better, just don't expect me to.


... and instead even attempting the bailing of water we are drilling more holes in the hull here in the United States.
 
2017-09-29 09:16:59 PM  

Dragonflew: casual disregard: i prefer chicken over beef

Wheee!

[i.pinimg.com image 500x333]


Well done.

Prepare my steak....well done!!!

img.fark.netView Full Size


/the finger to palm thing is a myth btw
//the only way to determine cookedness is with a meat thermometer (which will always tell you how overdone it is) or by cutting
///i'd rather cook my own than trust a "professional"!
 
2017-09-29 09:26:34 PM  

AquaTatanka: .. and instead even attempting the bailing of water we are drilling more holes in the hull here in the United States.


A great deal more needs to be done.  But lies on either side don't help.  U.S. emissions heave been decreasing for years as we transition away from coal, and are now at a 25 year low.  In fact some sources report we are leading in emissions reduction.  Yes, Trump is an eco-idiot, and wants to increase coal use.  But he hasn't done anything successful other than talk about it.  And anyway that doesn't mean the whole United States is actively making things worse.  We aren't.  We are improving.  (And yes, I know that makes some people very angry.)

Note:  All of this progress was in the energy (power) industry, and making some headway in the agricultural sector would help a lot too.
 
2017-09-29 09:29:12 PM  

Gyrfalcon: Also, there were a maximum total of 30 million bison. There were not 30 million bison at one time.


Ah, wat?  You think there were only 30 million bison over history?  I suspect there are some fudge factors in this, but I suspect that each spring when calves were born the population jumped a bunch, then on the average dropped back considerably to about the same number until the next calving season.

Scientific research?  Googling first gets "Methane emissions from bison-An historic herd estimate for the North American Great Plains",

Abstract
Enteric methane (CH4) emissions were estimated from 30 M bison (Bison bison) across the North American Great Plains before contact with European settlers. We compiled the first historic emissions inventory using an Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Tier 2 method. The emissions were governed by the energy requirements for grazing, growth and reproduction. A sex/age distribution accounted for the net effect of births, development and deaths. The CH4 yield was based on calorimeter measurements. The average bison's weight, feed (dry matter, DM) intake and emissions were 411 kg, 3.4 t DM head−1 year−1 and 72 kg CH4 head−1 year−1, respectively. The historic herd's emissions were 2.2 Tg CH4 year−1. On 1 January 2008, 36.5 M cattle were located in 10 American states occupying the historic bison range. Cattle emissions were 2.5 Tg CH4 year−1, estimated using an IPCC Tier 1 method, adjusted by comparison with a mechanistic model and food gathering energy required by 77% of the cattle fed by grazing.

I note that the rest of the USA contains considerably more cattle than those 10 states, just thought some non imagined numbers might help someone.
 
2017-09-29 09:32:03 PM  

maxheck: stirfrybry: http://www.nature.com/ngeo/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/ngeo3031.html

I don't think that article says what you're trying to claim.

" Assuming emissions peak and decline to below current levels by 2030, and continue thereafter on a much steeper decline, which would be historically unprecedented but consistent with a standard ambitious mitigation scenario (RCP2.6), results in a likely range of peak warming of 1.2-2.0°C above the mid-nineteenth century. If CO2 emissions are continuously adjusted over time to limit 2100 warming to 1.5°C, with ambitious non-CO2 mitigation, net future cumulative CO2 emissions are unlikely to prove less than 250GtC and unlikely greater than 540GtC. Hence, limiting warming to 1.5°C is not yet a geophysical impossibility, but is likely to require delivery on strengthened pledges for 2030 followed by challengingly deep and rapid mitigation. "


Millar was quoted that the models were "running hot". Why are you guys so averse to correcting models? Wouldn't you rather have accurate science? Admit that you wouldn't than.
https://judithcurry.com/2017/09/26/are-climate-models-overstating-war​m​ing/
 
2017-09-29 09:39:55 PM  
 IPCC AR5 WG1 chapter 9, this is also discussed in chapter 11:
"This provides evidence that some CMIP5 models have a higher transient response to GHGs and a larger response to other anthropogenic forcings (dominated by the effects of aerosols) than the real world (medium confidence).' The ASK results and the initialised predictions both suggest that those CMIP5 models that warm most rapidly over the period (1986-2005) to (2016-2035) may be inconsistent with the observations."
 
2017-09-29 09:59:51 PM  
Gyrfalcon:

Yes.

And you were still wrong.

Also, there were a maximum total of 30 million bison. There were not 30 million bison at one time.


LOL!  A simple Google search says you lack reading comprehension at best.  Google rocks.
 
2017-09-29 10:02:14 PM  

69gnarkill69: Gyrfalcon:

Yes.

And you were still wrong.

Also, there were a maximum total of 30 million bison. There were not 30 million bison at one time.

LOL!  A simple Google search says you lack reading comprehension at best.  Google rocks.


And yet it doesn't matter, per my earlier post. If we plugged all volcanoes and the did something stupid that matched them (not that volcanoes are a big contributor mind you, that's right wing nonsense) we would still want to stop doing that something stupid.
 
2017-09-29 10:06:45 PM  

69gnarkill69: Gyrfalcon:

Yes.

And you were still wrong.

Also, there were a maximum total of 30 million bison. There were not 30 million bison at one time.

LOL!  A simple Google search says you lack reading comprehension at best.  Google rocks.



Exhibit A - https://www.fws.gov/bisonrange/timeline.htm
Exhibit B - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_bison
Exhibit C - http://www.pbs.org/wnet/need-to-know/five-things/the-great-american​-bi​son/8950/
Exhibit D - https://www.joslyn.org/Post/sections/375/Files/Buffalo%20Timeline.p​df
It goes on and on and on.
 
2017-09-29 10:11:41 PM  

Smackledorfer: 69gnarkill69: Gyrfalcon:

Yes.

And you were still wrong.

Also, there were a maximum total of 30 million bison. There were not 30 million bison at one time.

LOL!  A simple Google search says you lack reading comprehension at best.  Google rocks.

And yet it doesn't matter, per my earlier post. If we plugged all volcanoes and the did something stupid that matched them (not that volcanoes are a big contributor mind you, that's right wing nonsense) we would still want to stop doing that something stupid.


My point wasn't with your post but since you made it that way, my concern is the big hot ball of gas in the sky.  There is your climate change driver. But I'm not here to argue, I just couldn't let Gyrfalcon get away with a comment that is blatantly wrong.  I leave you to your previously interrupted discussion.  Peace out.
 
2017-09-29 10:22:21 PM  

69gnarkill69: Smackledorfer: 69gnarkill69: Gyrfalcon:

Yes.

And you were still wrong.

Also, there were a maximum total of 30 million bison. There were not 30 million bison at one time.

LOL!  A simple Google search says you lack reading comprehension at best.  Google rocks.

And yet it doesn't matter, per my earlier post. If we plugged all volcanoes and the did something stupid that matched them (not that volcanoes are a big contributor mind you, that's right wing nonsense) we would still want to stop doing that something stupid.

My point wasn't with your post but since you made it that way, my concern is the big hot ball of gas in the sky.  There is your climate change driver. But I'm not here to argue, I just couldn't let Gyrfalcon get away with a comment that is blatantly wrong.  I leave you to your previously interrupted discussion.  Peace out.


Oh, you're a moron who thinks the sun is the primary accelerant of climate change.

Well, farkied as such. Goodbye.
 
2017-09-29 10:30:14 PM  
Look, the details don't matter.  What matters is that climate scientists were not 100% accurate about something, therefore all science and scientific knowledge no more valid than whatever some guy working for "Raping the Earth For Jesus Inc." tells me.
 
2017-09-29 10:32:36 PM  

69gnarkill69: 69gnarkill69: Gyrfalcon:

Yes.

And you were still wrong.

Also, there were a maximum total of 30 million bison. There were not 30 million bison at one time.

LOL!  A simple Google search says you lack reading comprehension at best.  Google rocks.


Exhibit A - https://www.fws.gov/bisonrange/timeline.htm
Exhibit B - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_bison
Exhibiatchttp://www.pbs.org/wnet/need-to-know/five-things/the-great-am​erican-bison/8950/
Exhibit D - https://www.joslyn.org/Post/sections/375/Files/Buffalo%20Timeline.pd​f
It goes on and on and on.


Wikipedia says there are now about 530,000 bison. That's 1% of 50 million. Does it seem reasonable that there used to be only 100 times more bison than there are now?
 
2017-09-29 10:50:51 PM  

Horizon: Part of the issue is diet. The big cattle operations feed the cows a fark ton of corn which if I remember correctly makes them fart more.


Beef cattle are sent to the feedlot when they're less than a year old to 2 years old. They spend 3-4 months being "finished", often with grain in their feed. It is unlikely that they're on an all-corn diet before then, unless corn happens to be exceptionally cheap at the time. Have you not heard that alcohol production has increased the price of corn?
 
2017-09-29 11:06:03 PM  
First, they came for the plastic six pack rings and I did not speak because I drank from bottles. Then they came for the gasoline and I did not speak because I did not have an SUV. Then they came for the coal and I did not speak because I was not a miner. Then they came for my medium-rare T-bone and there was no one left to speak for me.
 
2017-09-29 11:16:42 PM  

WelldeadLink: Wikipedia says there are now about 530,000 bison. That's 1% of 50 million. Does it seem reasonable that there used to be only 100 times more bison than there are now?


i don't know the specific numbers but do seem to remember reading about wild population fluctuations when it came to bison... maybe in the book 1491... the indians burned forests to expand the bison range, which means the population was large enough to warrant creating more grasslands but still kept in check by being the main source of protein for various tribes. But European observations of bison may have occurred after their diseases had already decimated native americans. There was likely a bison explosion caused by not being hunted by as many humans. But eventually the native american population would had stabilized against disease and they got horses, which started decreasing the bison population again and then whitey got into the bison hunting biz and that's when they collapsed to near extinction.
 
2017-09-30 12:04:31 AM  

kbronsito: WelldeadLink: Wikipedia says there are now about 530,000 bison. That's 1% of 50 million. Does it seem reasonable that there used to be only 100 times more bison than there are now?

i don't know the specific numbers but do seem to remember reading about wild population fluctuations when it came to bison... maybe in the book 1491... the indians burned forests to expand the bison range, which means the population was large enough to warrant creating more grasslands but still kept in check by being the main source of protein for various tribes. But European observations of bison may have occurred after their diseases had already decimated native americans. There was likely a bison explosion caused by not being hunted by as many humans. But eventually the native american population would had stabilized against disease and they got horses, which started decreasing the bison population again and then whitey got into the bison hunting biz and that's when they collapsed to near extinction.


Also keep in mind that apparently much of the bison population went south for the winter, then migrated north in the spring before returning south. So although there will have been scattered groups remaining south, the great herds we hear of were probably mostly part of one migrating group and not always spread out over all of the Great Plains.
 
2017-09-30 12:24:23 AM  
One thing that never gets mentioned when climate change is discussed- parking lots & roadways.

They store massive amounts of solar energy during the day, and then release it at night.  That's a huge departure from the same acreage of pasture lands thermal profile, and over time and considering the millions of square miles of pavement, that has to have a huge effect, maybe the biggest effect of all.

But they haven't figured out how to make a profitable game like "carbon credits" for it yet, so there's that.
 
2017-09-30 01:25:16 AM  

WelldeadLink: Horizon: Part of the issue is diet. The big cattle operations feed the cows a fark ton of corn which if I remember correctly makes them fart more.

Beef cattle are sent to the feedlot when they're less than a year old to 2 years old. They spend 3-4 months being "finished", often with grain in their feed. It is unlikely that they're on an all-corn diet before then, unless corn happens to be exceptionally cheap at the time. Have you not heard that alcohol production has increased the price of corn?


Not all are. Some are raised entirely on grass, like mine.
 
2017-09-30 06:41:26 AM  
casual disregard:
//the only way to determine cookedness is with a meat thermometer (which will always tell you how overdone it is) or by cutting

Meat Thermometer is what I call my kitchen utensil that I use to ensure properly cooked food.

/i bet you thought I was going to say penis
 
2017-09-30 07:01:48 AM  

Mister Peejay: casual disregard:
//the only way to determine cookedness is with a meat thermometer (which will always tell you how overdone it is) or by cutting

Meat Thermometer is what I call my kitchen utensil that I use to ensure properly cooked food.

/i bet you thought I was going to say penis


Your comment just made me imagine what third degree burns of the penis might look/feel like. It almost made me die.
 
2017-09-30 08:14:24 AM  
i.dailymail.co.ukView Full Size


solution: capture the methane!
 
2017-09-30 11:04:57 AM  
cows & cows & cows
Youtube FavUpD_IjVY
 
2017-09-30 11:23:05 AM  

WTFDYW: docpeteyJ: Subby...

[media.tenor.com image 490x280]

In addition to livestock contributing to the release of methane, let's not forget that fake climate change resulting in the melting of glaciers, permafrost* and icecaps is also releasing ancient methane (and God knows what else) into the atmosphere.

*there's some scary ancient viruses that are seeing the light of day with the melting of the permafrost, some hat haven't been seen in thousands of years.

They have hats?


But since the ice caps are growing now, they're swallowing up all that methane now, right? Along with the cow farts?

Not to worry, I've invented a device that captures carbon dioxide in the air and fixes it in usable, biodegradable form. I call it "plants."
 
2017-09-30 11:26:05 AM  

lordjupiter: This is clearly a hoax because cows are a myth propagated by Big Farma.


This deserves more funnys.
 
2017-09-30 11:42:18 AM  

Deez Piles: WTFDYW: docpeteyJ: Subby...

[media.tenor.com image 490x280]

In addition to livestock contributing to the release of methane, let's not forget that fake climate change resulting in the melting of glaciers, permafrost* and icecaps is also releasing ancient methane (and God knows what else) into the atmosphere.

*there's some scary ancient viruses that are seeing the light of day with the melting of the permafrost, some hat haven't been seen in thousands of years.

They have hats?

But since the ice caps are growing now, they're swallowing up all that methane now, right? Along with the cow farts?

Not to worry, I've invented a device that captures carbon dioxide in the air and fixes it in usable, biodegradable form. I call it "plants."


LOLWUT?

The A,B and C Larsen Ice Shelves have been there for over 100,000 years have all FALLEN THE fark OFF the polar ice cap. That ain't normal by any stretch of the imagination. Hell, the C shelf is the size of goddamned Delaware, FFS (I don't have time to explain the impact of how the meltwater from it affects ocean temperature and salinity. Look it up).

And in case you missed it, there's a whole lotta ancient viruses*  and god knows what else being exposed by the melting of the goddamned permafrost, which has also been around a very long time. That scares the shiat out of me, because that's how you get a goddamned Zombie Apocalypse...or at the very least, a naive viral pandemic.

*and GODDAMNIT the plural of virus isn't viri (or virii), which is Latin for "men" (vir is the root of our word "virile"). The plural of virus (which, BTW, is the plural form anyway) is VIRUSES. Anyone who uses viri as the plural of virus is a pretentious douchebag guilty of Latin Abuse.
 
2017-09-30 12:21:03 PM  

docpeteyJ: Deez Piles: WTFDYW: docpeteyJ: Subby...

[media.tenor.com image 490x280]

In addition to livestock contributing to the release of methane, let's not forget that fake climate change resulting in the melting of glaciers, permafrost* and icecaps is also releasing ancient methane (and God knows what else) into the atmosphere.

*there's some scary ancient viruses that are seeing the light of day with the melting of the permafrost, some hat haven't been seen in thousands of years.

They have hats?

But since the ice caps are growing now, they're swallowing up all that methane now, right? Along with the cow farts?

Not to worry, I've invented a device that captures carbon dioxide in the air and fixes it in usable, biodegradable form. I call it "plants."

LOLWUT?

The A,B and C Larsen Ice Shelves have been there for over 100,000 years have all FALLEN THE fark OFF the polar ice cap. That ain't normal by any stretch of the imagination. Hell, the C shelf is the size of goddamned Delaware, FFS (I don't have time to explain the impact of how the meltwater from it affects ocean temperature and salinity. Look it up).

And in case you missed it, there's a whole lotta ancient viruses*  and god knows what else being exposed by the melting of the goddamned permafrost, which has also been around a very long time. That scares the shiat out of me, because that's how you get a goddamned Zombie Apocalypse...or at the very least, a naive viral pandemic.

*and GODDAMNIT the plural of virus isn't viri (or virii), which is Latin for "men" (vir is the root of our word "virile"). The plural of virus (which, BTW, is the plural form anyway) is VIRUSES. Anyone who uses viri as the plural of virus is a pretentious douchebag guilty of Latin Abuse.


Not unusual at all. Ice shelves collapse all the time. They also grow back. Cracks form in one place and ice grows somewhere else.

The world has been growing warmer since the Little Ice Age and should get cooler again in a few years, as a new sunspot minimum is set to begin around 2030. There should be plenty of ice-shelf regrowth then.

In Antarctica specifically, there's been no warming in the past 30 years, and more recently the winter ice pack has reached record-setting levels (trapping in ice one boatload of climate-botherers, aboard the USS No Sense of Irony). The Larsen B glacial area is close to six active volcanoes, a far more likely explanation for this localized breakup than magical pixie dust.

Don't take my word for it -- ask the climate alarmists themselves. Even the IPCC is admitting (though it suppressed the information until after the climate conference) that the models are "running too hot" -- i.e. flat wrong.

At another time I may explain the purpose of this hoax but I think the above is enough truthification for now.

Finally, I take your point about the plural of virus. I've always wondered why the plurals of hippopotamus and rhinoceros aren't hippopotamoi and rhinocerontes.
 
2017-09-30 12:33:02 PM  

Kit Fister: [i.dailymail.co.uk image 634x416]

solution: capture the methane!


img.fark.netView Full Size
 
2017-09-30 12:46:26 PM  

Deez Piles: docpeteyJ: Deez Piles: WTFDYW: docpeteyJ: Subby...

[media.tenor.com image 490x280]

In addition to livestock contributing to the release of methane, let's not forget that fake climate change resulting in the melting of glaciers, permafrost* and icecaps is also releasing ancient methane (and God knows what else) into the atmosphere.

*there's some scary ancient viruses that are seeing the light of day with the melting of the permafrost, some hat haven't been seen in thousands of years.

They have hats?

But since the ice caps are growing now, they're swallowing up all that methane now, right? Along with the cow farts?

Not to worry, I've invented a device that captures carbon dioxide in the air and fixes it in usable, biodegradable form. I call it "plants."

LOLWUT?

The A,B and C Larsen Ice Shelves have been there for over 100,000 years have all FALLEN THE fark OFF the polar ice cap. That ain't normal by any stretch of the imagination. Hell, the C shelf is the size of goddamned Delaware, FFS (I don't have time to explain the impact of how the meltwater from it affects ocean temperature and salinity. Look it up).

And in case you missed it, there's a whole lotta ancient viruses*  and god knows what else being exposed by the melting of the goddamned permafrost, which has also been around a very long time. That scares the shiat out of me, because that's how you get a goddamned Zombie Apocalypse...or at the very least, a naive viral pandemic.

*and GODDAMNIT the plural of virus isn't viri (or virii), which is Latin for "men" (vir is the root of our word "virile"). The plural of virus (which, BTW, is the plural form anyway) is VIRUSES. Anyone who uses viri as the plural of virus is a pretentious douchebag guilty of Latin Abuse.

Not unusual at all. Ice shelves collapse all the time. They also grow back. Cracks form in one place and ice grows somewhere else.

The world has been growing warmer since the Little Ice Age and should get cooler again in a few years, as a new s ...


You're quite right.... except for the whole being factually wrong part. But hey, it sounds truthy if you repeat it enough.
 
2017-09-30 01:02:40 PM  

maxheck: You're quite right.... except for the whole being factually wrong part. But hey, it sounds truthy if you repeat it enough.


THIS.  I guess all those satellite photos taken over the last few decades showing that the northern ice caps have been steadily shrinking are just a hoax, like the moon landing.
 
2017-09-30 01:14:42 PM  
7 week account, guys.
 
2017-09-30 02:56:21 PM  

maxheck: You're quite right.... except for the whole being factually wrong part. But hey, it sounds truthy if you repeat it enough.


the whole thing about the planet eventually growing cooler again because of sun spots is factually wrong and stupid. But if climate change results in farking up crops or extreme natural disasters leading to civil unrest and wars that result in millions of deaths, there'd be less humans to burn fossil fuels and forests may take over some of the abandoned towns, cities, and abandoned farmland. New forests should capture carbon and the problem should correct itself, right? We just need to make sure that we maximize casualties in any upcoming conflicts. Sooooo chessmate, libtardos?
 
2017-09-30 03:33:19 PM  

kbronsito: Sooooo chessmate, libtardos?


Not sure if this is snark against liberals or you saying "this is what republicans actually think!", but...

assets.pewresearch.orgView Full Size


Unlike the party-line straddling idiocy of anti-vaxxers, this idiocy is almost all republican.
 
2017-09-30 03:53:01 PM  

WelldeadLink: bigdanc: Of course - why hasn't anyone invented a way to capture this methane?  There has to, at least, be enough produced to power a generator.

But to collect the methane to power one generator, you have to send up a huge balloon fleet of nuclear-powered gas separators.


Oh, I mean as the cows are farting, you'd just have to put a diaper of sorts on them, maybe?  Maybe it's not a great idea, but balloons tethered to cows asses could do it, the solid waste falls through some sort of check valve and you can see how full the balloon is to know if it's worth your time to collect it.  Maybe the manure could be collected as it falls too, if that's a big source of methane, if it's not a source of methane you could collect it anyways and sell it as fertilizer.  I mean, cows are strong so they could tow some type of contraption around.  It would be even easier with dairy or factory meat cows because they don't really move.
 
2017-09-30 03:54:10 PM  

WTFDYW: bigdanc: WelldeadLink: Yet somehow the models have the right numbers.

it means the models are wrong and it's worth than we thought

You have a lithsp. Lol


hahaha
 
2017-09-30 05:12:59 PM  
You know, I really don't give a shiat whether or not you believe that humans are responsible for climate change. I really don't care whether or not you think it's a natural phenomenon.

Putting that aside, you can't dispute that the earth right now is warmer than it was 20 or 50 years ago. You can't dispute that there are significant health problems relating to smog and the amount of pollutants there are in the air and environment. You can't dispute that we're seeing major changes to our environment including the extinction of species.

Whether or not you believe this is entirely a man-made issue or not, none of those facts alone are in dispute (Among the population that are reasonably intelligent. Those of you so dumb that you can't even believe reports that have nothing to do with climate change directly because whatever reason, I really can't help you).

We need better sources of energy that create less pollution. We need better resources that don't destroy our forests and our land. We need lifestyles that don't amount to rivers full of chemicals and garbage.

So who the fark gives a crap whether humans caused climate change or not? Why are you fighting against actively pushing for a system where we live better in a cleaner world? Do you *enjoy* living in a world where there's garbage everywhere, the water's nigh undrinkable, and there's no wildlife left to look at?
 
2017-09-30 06:27:15 PM  

Kit Fister: You know, I really don't give a shiat whether or not you believe that humans are responsible for climate change. I really don't care whether or not you think it's a natural phenomenon.

Putting that aside, you can't dispute that the earth right now is warmer than it was 20 or 50 years ago. You can't dispute that there are significant health problems relating to smog and the amount of pollutants there are in the air and environment. You can't dispute that we're seeing major changes to our environment including the extinction of species.

Whether or not you believe this is entirely a man-made issue or not, none of those facts alone are in dispute (Among the population that are reasonably intelligent. Those of you so dumb that you can't even believe reports that have nothing to do with climate change directly because whatever reason, I really can't help you).

We need better sources of energy that create less pollution. We need better resources that don't destroy our forests and our land. We need lifestyles that don't amount to rivers full of chemicals and garbage.

So who the fark gives a crap whether humans caused climate change or not? Why are you fighting against actively pushing for a system where we live better in a cleaner world? Do you *enjoy* living in a world where there's garbage everywhere, the water's nigh undrinkable, and there's no wildlife left to look at?


It's got electrolytes
 
2017-09-30 09:43:29 PM  

docpeteyJ: The A,B and C Larsen Ice Shelves have been there for over 100,000 years have all FALLEN THE fark OFF the polar ice cap. That ain't normal by any stretch of the imagination.


How do you know that?
 
2017-09-30 09:59:39 PM  

WelldeadLink: docpeteyJ: The A,B and C Larsen Ice Shelves have been there for over 100,000 years have all FALLEN THE fark OFF the polar ice cap. That ain't normal by any stretch of the imagination.

How do you know that?


Because I actually follow the scientific study regarding the collapse of the Larsen Ice Shelves.

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/2016/04/160412-ice-sheet-collapse-​a​ntarctica-sea-level-rise/
 
2017-09-30 11:44:21 PM  

Smackledorfer: 7 week account, guys.


Another!?
 
2017-10-01 12:23:32 AM  

docpeteyJ: WelldeadLink: docpeteyJ: The A,B and C Larsen Ice Shelves have been there for over 100,000 years have all FALLEN THE fark OFF the polar ice cap. That ain't normal by any stretch of the imagination.

How do you know that?

Because I actually follow the scientific study regarding the collapse of the Larsen Ice Shelves.

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/2016/04/160412-ice-sheet-collapse-a​ntarctica-sea-level-rise/


That doesn't say that this isn't normal.
 
2017-10-01 12:44:07 AM  

WelldeadLink: docpeteyJ: WelldeadLink: docpeteyJ: The A,B and C Larsen Ice Shelves have been there for over 100,000 years have all FALLEN THE fark OFF the polar ice cap. That ain't normal by any stretch of the imagination.

How do you know that?

Because I actually follow the scientific study regarding the collapse of the Larsen Ice Shelves.

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/2016/04/160412-ice-sheet-collapse-a​ntarctica-sea-level-rise/

That doesn't say that this isn't normal.


Common sense says that it isn't normal, since those ice shelves have been there for at least 100,000 years without change (except that until recently, they've been slowly growing over the centuries. It's only very recently that warmer temperatures have caused the shelves to collapse.

Not only that, but the melting of the northern permafrost isn't normal, either. These are unusual occurrences, regardless of the cause. Climate change IS happening. The sad part is we are all so caught up in arguing about WHY it is happening while doing nothing to prepare for the impact it will have on our civilization. Denying climate change is just an exercise in burying your head in the sand.
 
2017-10-01 02:01:57 AM  
Your link mentions a melting 120,000 years ago -- but of a different ice area and that the model results don't match other numbers.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Larsen_Ice_Shelf
Wikipedia says one of the Larsen areas is 4,000 years old, and another at least 10,000. So, how normal is it for them to break off sometimes?
Also, those areas are on the leeward side of the Antarctic Peninsula ridge so are prone to adiabatic heating.
 
2017-10-01 02:30:23 AM  

WelldeadLink: Your link mentions a melting 120,000 years ago -- but of a different ice area and that the model results don't match other numbers.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Larsen_Ice_Shelf
Wikipedia says one of the Larsen areas is 4,000 years old, and another at least 10,000. So, how normal is it for them to break off sometimes?
Also, those areas are on the leeward side of the Antarctic Peninsula ridge so are prone to adiabatic heating.


At the risk of repeating myself, the Larsen C shelf was dated by South Korean scientists at around 100K years old; the excitement is that is has exposed a similarly old part of the sea floor, which they are hurrying to study while they can.

Again, you are missing my point: regardless of WHAT is causing climate change, it does exist, and it's highly irresponsible that people are more concerned with arguing over the cause rather than preparing for the changes on our society that are inevitable.
 
Displayed 140 of 140 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking

On Twitter





Top Commented
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.
  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