It's official: Antarctic glacial basin is a goner

[preslove]

How? Those will take decades, if not centuries to properly develop and deploy on a global scale. The IPCC's worst fears regarding CO2 would have already come true by then.

Anyone that wants to stop CO2 immediately is not going to be using future technology to do it.

We can't stop global warming, but we can mitigate it, you fucking moron.

 

[Mai72]

It's only going to get worse. Have you seen China's highway?

 

[phucheneh]

+1

Vice on Greenland Ice Sheet Collapse Must Watch!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fpEPyhqjRGg

God I love Vice. Shane Smith could have my pudgy, bearded man-babies.

 

[Jaskalas]

Taxes can have an effect if they make dirtier methods (of power generation, of construction, of whatever) less profitable. Disincentivizing the worst activities won't undo damage, but it will prevent the worst damage.

I'm having trouble following the cause and effect.

Let's say we become... efficient. What is a healthy best case scenario, shall we assume that we cut our emissions in half? By the time this has occurred our population could have easily doubled. Far as I see the best case scenario, the net result is no change in the rate of increase.

And that's just from the United States. The world over is begging to develop and become first world CO2 emitters like the rest of us. We've been enjoying wealth and prosperity for over a century, its their turn. Even if we wish to abandon our standard of living they don't want to keep theirs.

CO2 is rising today, and I bet it'll be rising a hundred years from now. I know of no moderate plan which prevents this.

 

[Jaskalas]

These findings are new, which means they weren't in the latest UN report. That's the thing about climate change, new evidence of how fucked we are comes up all the time.

Right... but let's assume the IPCC is 100% accurate. Even if the planet stopped emitting CO2 today, it would take decades to stop warming from what is already in the air. The heat to melt that ice shelf is already in the system. Far as you should be concerned , that thing is already gone.

Why not?

Regarding taxes, I replied to another poster.

Are you really too stupid to understand that a mass extinction would kill us off? It's the worst case scenario, but it's certainly possible.

If this continues, unabated, we aren't going to be around for more than a few hundred years. Maybe even less.

65-125 million years ago we endured 1,000 - 2,000 ppm. Why must we become extinct if this happens again?

Oh, and your side is the one that thinks this is all a hoax to somehow make al gore rich. That's a conspiracy theory.

If counted, I'd be well within the established 97% consensus, as I believe man-made CO2 warms the atmosphere. The standing question is how much? The IPCC only estimates Climate Sensitivity.

My chief concerns here are:

1. The heat is already there to eliminate that ice.
2. No moderate action will alter the 21st century outlook.
3. There's no immediate solution that is friendly to humans.
4. We have decades of R&D ahead of us.

 

[Ruptga]

Ok, but you're pulling numbers out of the air. You have no idea what kind of emissions reductions are possible or how consumption will rise.

Fixing environmental problems, in the US and in Africa, will require large amounts of capital investment. But that's just it, it's an investment. What our future looks like depends in large part on whether we are willing to invest in it or whether we are only willing to exploit our present.

 

[sdifox]

Good news for Canada eh?

Not really. All major population centres in Canada would be underwater.

 

[Ruptga]

Not really. All major population centres in Canada would be underwater.

Don't be ridiculous, the ice is melting at the south pole, everyone knows Canada is way up north.

 

[Sonikku]

Humans have no tangible impact on their surroundings in any way and even if they do, by the time it catches up with us it'll be the next generations problem.

 

[MongGrel]

How? Those will take decades, if not centuries to properly develop and deploy on a global scale. The IPCC's worst fears regarding CO2 would have already come true by then.

Anyone that wants to stop CO2 immediately is not going to be using future technology to do it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Ignition_Facility

 

[88keys]

What can 300,000,000 people do about climate change that 2.2 billion people are not doing?


Human beings are too shortsighted greedy and ignorant to reverse the damage. We don't think about the future and we barely remember yesterday, hence we are doomed to repeat past mistakes in perpetuity and drive off cliffs despite the warning signs posted 10 miles back.
The only thing seperating us from the animals is that we can sow the seeds of our own destruction.

The only viable solution at this point is adaptation.

 

[MongGrel]

Humans have no tangible impact on their surroundings in any way and even if they do, by the time it catches up with us it'll be the next generations problem.

Every post I see from you becomes more ignorant.

IMHO.

 

[Imp]

the earth is resilient.

it survived before we got here and will survive after we are gone.

I agree... Just how many people will die while it rights itself will be the "fun" part.

Waterworld!

Not really. All major population centres in Canada would be underwater.

Those geniuses thinking it'd be a good idea to build near water... Drink your own piss and get a horse you pussies!

 

[DrPizza]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Ignition_Facility

It's a shame how little money we're investing into fusion. It would be bad for the oil/gas/coal interests, but a huge benefit to humanity.

 

[Miramonti]

People keep writing about global warming....newspapers pick up stories and print them...printing for the masses generates mucho heat....mucho heat melts grande glaciers....creates self-fulfilling prophetic chaos-omundo.

 

[Orignal Earl]

Every post I see from you gets more ignorant.

IMHO.

Sonikku is actually one of the more fun posters
It took me awhile to get what his deal is, when it clicks you will enjoy him

Did anyone catch that last episode of Vice, where the dude is talking to the guys quading in the mud that used to be a water reservoir
You guys ever hear of global warming?
No.. no..no..I heard of it but someone proved it wrong
I think it's the government doing it
I think it's God

 

[JulesMaximus]

Humans have no tangible impact on their surroundings in any way and even if they do, by the time it catches up with us it'll be the next generations problem.

Why do today what you can put off until tomorrow?

 

[jhansman]

Earth->good. Man->evil.

 

[Jaskalas]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Ignition_Facility

Hopefully this century's greatest achievement.

 

[BladeVenom]

If you look at the 10,000 year time span or longer, global temperatures are fairly low right now.

 

[Miramonti]

Communities can do nothing to prepare, and get flooded in the next 50-100 years....or do everything possible to prepare, and then become the region's refugee camp for their neighbors who did nothing, when waters rise.

Doing nothing sounds cheaper, keeps the transients out.

 

[schmuckley]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TzEEgtOFFlM
Sustainable development.
Meanwhile..There's more ice in the arctic than ever.

 

[SparkyJJO]

We can't stop global warming, but we can mitigate it, you fucking moron.

Yeah, throwing heavy insults at people is a great way to strengthen your position and make someone agree with you.



BTW, giving more money to the politicians to spend on hookers and blow isn't gong to fix a darn thing.

 

[tortillasoup]

The biggest issue conservatives have with this is the potential of severely reducing the quality of life for people and the fact that people are already heavily taxed, that to put another tax on top of everything would severely damper things...

I think a question I have for the liberals is, if they think climate change is so important, would they be willing to give up the social safety net and welfare spending in order to fight climate change? So all the taxes that go toward welfare goes towards fighting climate change.


This is where the democrat party would quickly fall apart with nobody agreeing to anything.

Keep tax rates the same AND OR replace the taxes we have with carbon taxes instead.

 

[Ruptga]

The biggest issue conservatives have with this is the potential of severely reducing the quality of life for people and the fact that people are already heavily taxed, that to put another tax on top of everything would severely damper things...

I think a question I have for the liberals is, if they think climate change is so important, would they be willing to give up the social safety net and welfare spending in order to fight climate change? So all the taxes that go toward welfare goes towards fighting climate change.


This is where the democrat party would quickly fall apart with nobody agreeing to anything.

Keep tax rates the same AND OR replace the taxes we have with carbon taxes instead.

Conservatives don't care about quality of life, otherwise they'd be the ones talking about how the top 1%'s income grew by 275% while the bottom 60%'s grew by 40%(sourcehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_inequality_in_the_United_States#cite_note-cbo-17).

I'm not saying you don't have a point, effective environmental initiatives are normally not cheap at all, but let's be realistic about everyone's motivations. Conservatives oppose such things for two reasons: 1. They are fat cats and their finances would be directly affected. 2. They oppose such things on principle, because they really believe in trickle down economics and unregulated capitalism. One point of view is self-serving, the other is unthinking dogma, and neither is persuasive for the unconverted.

And how about this false dichotomy? You can finance world police activities and intervention/occupation forces, or you can ensure your grandchildren inherit a world that will sustain them, which is it?