Marty: The future, it's where you're going? Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
0
Options
ShadowfireVermont, in the middle of nowhereRegistered Userregular
Marty: The future, it's where you're going? Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
0
Options
That_GuyI don't wanna be that guyRegistered Userregular
Once the hydrogen economy takes over via fusion, you guys will be fine. You just have to hold out another 10-20 years. You guys have another 10 years of water, right? RIGHT?
on an unrelated note, does anyone happen to know how long a stillsuit filter lasts? The manufacturer warranty says 2 years, but what if you really wanted to stretch it
Marty: The future, it's where you're going? Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
0
Options
gavindelThe reason all your softwareis brokenRegistered Userregular
on an unrelated note, does anyone happen to know how long a stillsuit filter lasts? The manufacturer warranty says 2 years, but what if you really wanted to stretch it
You really shouldn't sietch those things past their breaking point.
Also, Texas was just in a giant drought with wild fires everywhere! Clearly all this water is merely a return to baseline, proving the climate change wrong all along.
MayabirdPecking at the keyboardRegistered Userregular
You know how I talked about the guy in India with the super-successful water harvesting and conservation program? They're doing it in Ethiopia too.
He tosses a handful of dust into the wind. "Ten years ago, that was our land." Then he points at a shimmering blue flash in the reeds. "Now look: we've got malachite kingfishers living in the desert."
Once the hydrogen economy takes over via fusion, you guys will be fine. You just have to hold out another 10-20 years. You guys have another 10 years of water, right? RIGHT?
Fusion: 10 years away for the last 60 years.
Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
No, we need that for pretending like we still have time to surf
Marty: The future, it's where you're going? Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
When I was in Australia, the tour had Shark Steaks on the menu for dinner. So I had one, it was pretty good. Still, it was pretty disturbing to be eating shark. I am in the belief that if you kill an animal, you damn well better use all of it. Even if you have 1% unusable stuff, throw it in with the hot dog meat, because I know what goes into there.
However, the people who practice "fining", we should cut off their arms and legs and throw them in the ocean
+1
Options
MayabirdPecking at the keyboardRegistered Userregular
There's been a pre-monsoon heat wave in India and Pakistan. The death toll in India has been over 2000 and in Pakistan over 800 so far.
0
Options
MayabirdPecking at the keyboardRegistered Userregular
Speaking of check dams and water retention, you know who else builds dams using local materials? Beavers. Not only do they create ponds and wetlands which are excellent habitat for a whole ecosystem-worth of species, plus increase water infiltration to groundwater by building dams, but they help sequester carbon on a landscape-scale level.
“Obama said last year that 2014 is the hottest year ever. But it’s not true. It’s not the hottest,” Mr. Giaever said, arguing that the mean global temperature has not risen in nearly 19 years.
He cited data showing from 1898 to 1998, the global temperature increased by about 0.8 degrees Fahrenheit, arguing, “I think the temperature has been amazingly stable.”
Hrm. Is that actually true?
0
Options
jungleroomxIt's never too many graves, it's always not enough shovelsRegistered Userregular
“Obama said last year that 2014 is the hottest year ever. But it’s not true. It’s not the hottest,” Mr. Giaever said, arguing that the mean global temperature has not risen in nearly 19 years.
He cited data showing from 1898 to 1998, the global temperature increased by about 0.8 degrees Fahrenheit, arguing, “I think the temperature has been amazingly stable.”
Hrm. Is that actually true?
At a minimum it's .08, but it can be as high as 1.2 because we didn't have accurate measurements in the 1900's. He also leaves off the last 17 years, which were hotter than the ones previous to it.
“Obama said last year that 2014 is the hottest year ever. But it’s not true. It’s not the hottest,” Mr. Giaever said, arguing that the mean global temperature has not risen in nearly 19 years.
He cited data showing from 1898 to 1998, the global temperature increased by about 0.8 degrees Fahrenheit, arguing, “I think the temperature has been amazingly stable.”
Hrm. Is that actually true?
If he arbitrarily stops counting at 1998, he is 100% hiding something.
I guess it is agism but it seems a lot of experts that are on the denier side of things are really old. Supreme court judges (in Canada at least) retire at 75 for a reason. My grandfather worked in education all his life but at 90 I wouldn't ask him for advice on how to run school administrations. With the scientific and computer modeling advances in the past years I have some doubt that a 86 years old physicist (even if he won a Nobel prize..more than fourty years ago) is really someone we should look to for an educated advice on current climate science considering his field was also nowhere near anything related to climate.
+1
Options
That_GuyI don't wanna be that guyRegistered Userregular
“Obama said last year that 2014 is the hottest year ever. But it’s not true. It’s not the hottest,” Mr. Giaever said, arguing that the mean global temperature has not risen in nearly 19 years.
He cited data showing from 1898 to 1998, the global temperature increased by about 0.8 degrees Fahrenheit, arguing, “I think the temperature has been amazingly stable.”
Hrm. Is that actually true?
If he arbitrarily stops counting at 1998, he is 100% hiding something.
That's an example of using random start and end points to find a result you want. 1998 was a very warm year, so by resetting your start point to that year, you can claim that the average temperature hasn't gone up by much. It's a bunch of BS, listen to the smart people
What the fuck is a physicist doing acting like an authority on Climate Change?
I can think of another Nobel winner who went kind of crazy outside of his field, but I'm not sure linking him back would make the right point: Luc Montagnier
What the fuck is a physicist doing acting like an authority on Climate Change?
He's 86, old people say whatever the hell they are thinking and don't care about the consequences.
0
Options
MayabirdPecking at the keyboardRegistered Userregular
Alaska and western Canada are on fire.
Current map of Alaskan fires:
There are over 300.
The normally wet forests have dried out and with warmer temperatures (since areas closer to the poles have been warming much faster than the rest of the world) thunderstorms are developing. Many of the native people in these regions had never seen lightning there until a few years ago, and the lightning is setting off fires.
These are the current Canadian wildfires.
That big grey streak on the satellite image is the smoke from them.
This was the sky in Vancouver a few days ago from the smoke.
This graph can barely contain it's laughter at Alaska burning to the ground. It is the rudest graph.
+2
Options
Nbspshe laughs, like Godher mind's like a diamondRegistered Userregular
edited July 2015
I feel Planet-scale Climate Engineering is the only thing that can save us.
Trying to change human behavior is simply not going to work. At any given moment there's a huge amount of people who know they will be dying soon and leaving this world behind so they don't care, and then the people who are going to be most affected are too young to do anything about it.
Someone has to start playing God and re-terraform the Earth to what it used to be. Or else we just have to accept this new world and look at this as a way to stabilize the ever growing population of this planet, which we cannot sustain anyway.
Nbsp on
0
Options
MayabirdPecking at the keyboardRegistered Userregular
Or a few lucky-for-certain-definitions-of-lucky people could survive on tropical Greenland and Antarctica.
0
Options
Nbspshe laughs, like Godher mind's like a diamondRegistered Userregular
Tropical Antarctica seems kind of cool, kind of like living on another planet, fresh new lands. The hole in the ozone will also probably be closed by then. Day and night cycles are kind of weird though.
0
Options
HacksawJ. Duggan Esq.Wrestler at LawRegistered Userregular
We're headed for a Neuromancer-esque cyberpunk future. Gear up and get ready.
+1
Options
Nbspshe laughs, like Godher mind's like a diamondRegistered Userregular
So that's why cyberpunk games and movies always seem to be set at night instead of the blistering day
0
Options
Captain Marcusnow arrives the hour of actionRegistered Userregular
I can think of another Nobel winner who went kind of crazy outside of his field, but I'm not sure linking him back would make the right point: Luc Montagnier
IIRC either Watson or Crick also went batshit insane
Wow, that looks really bad. Any natural disaster you can see from orbit is bad news.
Also that red and blue dotted map is from Canada not Alaska.
How are those forests set to recover from wildfires if they never have them? I know in most western US forests that they can recover pretty quickly but mostly because the ecology evolved to compensate for fires happening regularly.
Tropical/temperate Greenland might be an interesting idea, imagine the competently new ocean ecosystems forming in the middle. I imagine that a concerted effort could make those areas lush in a few decades.
He's a shy overambitious dog-catcher on the wrong side of the law. She's an orphaned psychic mercenary with the power to bend men's minds. They fight crime!
I don't think so. You'd still have the incredibly long nights- I doubt most tropical stuff is going to do well when winter is 1-2 hours of light.
You could have jungles that die off during the long nights then grow back.
Speaking of futuristic tech, why have we not heard more about solar thermal plants? Most of them seem less expensive then nuclear power. The ones with heat reservoirs are able to function at night to reduce one of the big downsides to solar power.
Void Slayer on
He's a shy overambitious dog-catcher on the wrong side of the law. She's an orphaned psychic mercenary with the power to bend men's minds. They fight crime!
Posts
Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
any water
please
Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
Once the hydrogen economy takes over via fusion, you guys will be fine. You just have to hold out another 10-20 years. You guys have another 10 years of water, right? RIGHT?
on an unrelated note, does anyone happen to know how long a stillsuit filter lasts? The manufacturer warranty says 2 years, but what if you really wanted to stretch it
Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
You really shouldn't sietch those things past their breaking point.
Also, Texas was just in a giant drought with wild fires everywhere! Clearly all this water is merely a return to baseline, proving the climate change wrong all along.
Again, we need to be doing more of this.
Fusion: 10 years away for the last 60 years.
Silly California, the Pacific is right there!
No, we need that for pretending like we still have time to surf
Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
However, the people who practice "fining", we should cut off their arms and legs and throw them in the ocean
One guy says it isn't real, let's ignore the 99 who say it is!
PSN/Steam/NNID: SyphonBlue | BNet: SyphonBlue#1126
Hrm. Is that actually true?
At a minimum it's .08, but it can be as high as 1.2 because we didn't have accurate measurements in the 1900's. He also leaves off the last 17 years, which were hotter than the ones previous to it.
If he arbitrarily stops counting at 1998, he is 100% hiding something.
PSN/Steam/NNID: SyphonBlue | BNet: SyphonBlue#1126
What the fuck is a physicist doing acting like an authority on Climate Change?
That's an example of using random start and end points to find a result you want. 1998 was a very warm year, so by resetting your start point to that year, you can claim that the average temperature hasn't gone up by much. It's a bunch of BS, listen to the smart people
I have 549 Rock Band Drum and 305 Pro Drum FC's
REFS REFS REFS REFS REFS REFS REFS REFS
I can think of another Nobel winner who went kind of crazy outside of his field, but I'm not sure linking him back would make the right point: Luc Montagnier
He's 86, old people say whatever the hell they are thinking and don't care about the consequences.
Current map of Alaskan fires:
There are over 300.
The normally wet forests have dried out and with warmer temperatures (since areas closer to the poles have been warming much faster than the rest of the world) thunderstorms are developing. Many of the native people in these regions had never seen lightning there until a few years ago, and the lightning is setting off fires.
These are the current Canadian wildfires.
That big grey streak on the satellite image is the smoke from them.
This was the sky in Vancouver a few days ago from the smoke.
What?!
Alaska is beautiful
I'm playing the long game.
This graph can barely contain it's laughter at Alaska burning to the ground. It is the rudest graph.
Trying to change human behavior is simply not going to work. At any given moment there's a huge amount of people who know they will be dying soon and leaving this world behind so they don't care, and then the people who are going to be most affected are too young to do anything about it.
Someone has to start playing God and re-terraform the Earth to what it used to be. Or else we just have to accept this new world and look at this as a way to stabilize the ever growing population of this planet, which we cannot sustain anyway.
IIRC either Watson or Crick also went batshit insane
Also that red and blue dotted map is from Canada not Alaska.
How are those forests set to recover from wildfires if they never have them? I know in most western US forests that they can recover pretty quickly but mostly because the ecology evolved to compensate for fires happening regularly.
Tropical/temperate Greenland might be an interesting idea, imagine the competently new ocean ecosystems forming in the middle. I imagine that a concerted effort could make those areas lush in a few decades.
You could have jungles that die off during the long nights then grow back.
Speaking of futuristic tech, why have we not heard more about solar thermal plants? Most of them seem less expensive then nuclear power. The ones with heat reservoirs are able to function at night to reduce one of the big downsides to solar power.