Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Scientists Warn of Rising Oceans As Antarctic Ice Melts

samzenpus posted about 3 months ago | from the it's-getting-hot-in-here dept.

Earth 784

mdsolar (1045926) writes "The collapse of large parts of the ice sheet in West Antarctica appears to have begun and is almost certainly unstoppable, with global warming accelerating the pace of the disintegration, two groups of scientists reported Monday. The finding, which had been feared by some scientists for decades, means that a rise in global sea level of at least 10 feet may now be inevitable. The rise may continue to be relatively slow for at least the next century or so, the scientists said, but sometime after that it will probably speed up so sharply as to become a crisis."

cancel ×

784 comments

In a century... (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46982339)

it can be somebody else's problem!

(I stole the baby boomers generation playbook)

Re:In a century... (0, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46982685)

it can be somebody else's problem!

(I stole the baby boomers generation playbook)

Not so much the baby boomers as much as the neo-cons playbook. They are very different.

Re:In a century... (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46982905)

Yeah, because the Democrats haven't been passing the buck on things like the national debt.
 
While global climate is a much more dire situation the fact of the matter is that the neo-tards don't have the kind of control over it as the Dumbocrats do over the national debt. Both have effectively looked the other way on things that will impact the nation in future generations with little more than shrugs and excuses.
 
Get your head out of the sand and stop being a partisan pawn.

Re:In a century... (1, Insightful)

ganjadude (952775) | about 3 months ago | (#46982933)

in a century we have no idea what might happen. Its possible that the ice may reform there or somewhere else negating the rise. Also the ice has come and gone many many times before. Where I live in NY was at one point under a mile of ice. Climate change is real, we adapted in centuries past, we will adapt in centuries future

Re:In a century... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46982955)

Reminds of the global cooling and energy crisis of the 70's, 80's. Snap!, oh wait, that never happened either!

Well, since it's inevtiable (4, Funny)

NotDrWho (3543773) | about 3 months ago | (#46982353)

Fuck all this Prius hippie shit. I'm buying a Hummer.

Re:Well, since it's inevtiable (5, Funny)

MozeeToby (1163751) | about 3 months ago | (#46982419)

All the cool kids these days are buying amphibious demilitarized "ducks".

Re:Well, since it's inevtiable (2)

bzipitidoo (647217) | about 3 months ago | (#46982517)

So they're getting ready for rising sea levels?

Re:Well, since it's inevtiable (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46982571)

That Hummer better be "amphibious" for all the water that's coming.

Re:Well, since it's inevtiable (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46982713)

Protip: If you're pissing in your girlfriend's/boyfriend's mouth, you're doing it wrong.

Re:Well, since it's inevtiable (1)

WindBourne (631190) | about 3 months ago | (#46982725)

Why? 10'? That is nothing for MOST nations. The real issue is not the ocean rise, but the massive change in climate the will be coming.

Re:Well, since it's inevtiable (1)

HideyoshiJP (1392619) | about 3 months ago | (#46982773)

Well, there's also the issue of the numerous global financial centers along various coasts.

Re:Well, since it's inevtiable (5, Funny)

CanHasDIY (1672858) | about 3 months ago | (#46982819)

Well, there's also the issue of the numerous global financial centers along various coasts.

Yea, not seeing the problem...

Re:Well, since it's inevtiable (4, Funny)

bunratty (545641) | about 3 months ago | (#46982425)

Fuckin A, dude! My stupid doctor was telling me to exercise and eat right, and I'm all, well, dying is inevitable, so fuck it!

Translation... (4, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46982509)

99.9%+ of the people alive today will not live to see the crisis, or even live long enough to know whether or not the crisis will actually occur.

Re:Translation... (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46982749)

Kind of convenient, since none of the people predicting all this chaos will be around to answer for it if their predictions come out completely wrong.

It's a con artists dream:

"Hey the world is going to end 100 years from now. Give me lots of money and I'll help your descendents deal with it."

[cut to said descendents 100 years later] "That lying sonofabitch..."

Re:Translation... (2)

Ralph Wiggam (22354) | about 3 months ago | (#46982881)

We're already seeing large scale changes. The crisis *is* actually occurring.

Re:Well, since it's inevtiable (1)

WindBourne (631190) | about 3 months ago | (#46982709)

Assuming you meant the 4 wheel drive one, I have always thought it was a big mistake to quit making those. Instead, they were IDEAL for GM to turn those into serial hybrids. I suspect that they could have gotten an easy 40-50 MPG with that, and had a vehicle that had the largest torque of any passenger vehicle.

Re:Well, since it's inevtiable (0)

Mister Liberty (769145) | about 3 months ago | (#46982793)

There's plastic surgery for small pricks like yours.
Girls probably will see it for what it's worth though, so yes,
maybe the hummer is best for you.

Re:Well, since it's inevtiable (0)

NotDrWho (3543773) | about 3 months ago | (#46982861)

Is there surgery to fix pricks like you?

Get a horse! (1)

Thud457 (234763) | about 3 months ago | (#46982953)

Why on Earth would anyone want a 3-cylinder "truck"??!!!

SCIENCE IS A RELIGION! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46982367)

I am tired of you science priests deciding that my favorite corporations and CEOs shouldn't have obscene profits because of your SCIENCE RELIGION.

The world in on the back of a turtle and the sun goes around the earth. And you assholes that say the earth is millions of years old are just GAY BUTTFUCKING FREAKS!

Re:SCIENCE IS A RELIGION! (1)

Mister Liberty (769145) | about 3 months ago | (#46982843)

"Unbelievers" -- the movie, the real thing --> TPB.
NOW.

Chicken Little (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46982369)

Here we go again

Re:Chicken Little (4, Insightful)

MickyTheIdiot (1032226) | about 3 months ago | (#46982397)

Chicken Little because it isn't going to happen in your lifetime?

I don't get it. This is happening.

Re:Chicken Little (2, Insightful)

MightyMartian (840721) | about 3 months ago | (#46982461)

Just remember, short term comfort ALWAYS trumps long term viability. We live in a world dominated by the next few fiscal quarters. It's a breeding ground for sociopaths and the mentally deficient dupes who follow them.

Eat, drink and be merry for tomorrow we shall day is literally the motto for so many people.

Re:Chicken Little (1)

Intrepid imaginaut (1970940) | about 3 months ago | (#46982753)

If short term comfort was all that mattered to people nobody would ever take out mortgages, so, er, yeah.

This article says is that even if we and all of our works vanished tomorrow, it still wouldn't make a difference. Despite which most if not all developed nations have goals to reach in terms of renewable energy generation, and many of them are reaching or exeeding their goals. In a hundred years I'd be surprised if fossil fuels are in use at all to be honest.

The world is changing. I for one am rather glad of past changes as I'd have some difficulty typing under several kilometers of ice. The problem which will arise due to sea level changes are more due to a global assumption that the state of affairs which exists today is somehow "normal" or "in balance". It's not and it never has been, there is no natural balance, and the sooner we adjust our societies to work with rather than try to withstand enormous generational adjustments, the better.

One thing it's not however is the end of the world, far from it.

Re:Chicken Little (1)

SpankiMonki (3493987) | about 3 months ago | (#46982771)

Eat, drink and be merry for tomorrow we shall day is literally the motto for so many people.

So....carpe diem cras?

Re:Chicken Little (4, Insightful)

Shakrai (717556) | about 3 months ago | (#46982513)

So what do you want to do about it? We live in the real world, most of us in elective democracies where any politician that purposes a reduction in the standard of living will quickly find himself out of a job. Green energy doesn't scale and nuclear is a bad word, so where do you propose we get the gigajoules needed to both run Western civilization and bring the third world out of poverty?

The climate change crowd never has a good answer for this question. Thankfully we're an adaptable species, arguably the most adaptable ever to live on the blue marble. I think we'll manage just fine.

Re:Chicken Little (0)

BasilBrush (643681) | about 3 months ago | (#46982581)

Green energy doesn't scale

In what way does green energy not scale?

Re:Chicken Little (1)

Mister Liberty (769145) | about 3 months ago | (#46982911)

You can't carry it around in a jerrycan, basically.

Re:Chicken Little (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46982967)

That's presumptuous. Maybe Jerry enjoys having it in his can. Further, did Bruce enjoy putting it there?

Re:Chicken Little (3, Informative)

Shakrai (717556) | about 3 months ago | (#46982929)

Do some reading about base load power [wikipedia.org] , then contemplate the fact that the United States consumed 3,866,000,000,000 kilowatt hours (that's 13,917,600,000,000,000,000 joules, if you were wondering) of electricity in 2012. Since nuclear fission is politically explosive, explain how you propose to generate a sizable fraction of that energy (never mind all of it) without relying on carbon based sources. Limit yourself to technologies that are actually here, not distant fantasies like nuclear fusion.

After you do that, you can further depress yourself with the realization that I'm only talking about electricity. The actual energy budget of the United States is far higher when you account for the transportation sector and other non-electrical needs. And we're only talking about the United States here, one country out of ~190, with 4.5% of the global population. The rest of the World aspires to our standard of living, and they're not going to abandon that goal because of a distant and hard to quantify threat.

Re:Chicken Little (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46982647)

... so where do you propose we get the gigajoules needed to both run Western civilization and bring the third world out of poverty?

Nuclear and solar, duh. Throw some geothermal and tidal power in there too and we're good.

Re: Chicken Little (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46982539)

Jam tomorrow...

Re:Chicken Little (1, Funny)

NotDrWho (3543773) | about 3 months ago | (#46982835)

This is happening.

No, it's not. It's always GOING to happen *at some point*.

The same way that nuclear fusion is always GOING to be happening at some point.

The same way that the world is always GOING to be ending soon in every cult.

The same way that Jesus is always GOING to be coming someday.

The same way they by the time these predictions come due, everyone is GOING to have long forgotten them and moved on to the next environmental-disaster-thats-going-to-kill-us-all-this-time.

Chicken....Little.

BFD (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46982389)

I'll be dead.

Re: BFD (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46982569)

Is that you, Mr. Keynes?

But the Antarctic is gaining ice! (5, Informative)

bunratty (545641) | about 3 months ago | (#46982403)

Just kidding... the Antarctic ice has been melting for decades [skepticalscience.com] . More precisely, the mass of the old, thick land ice is decreasing due to rising temperatures, but the surface area of the short-lived, thin sea ice has been increasing, partly due to decreased salinity in the Southern Ocean because the land ice is melting. Overall, the Antarctic has been losing ice at an accelerating rate [ossfoundation.us] as temperatures have continued to increase.

Re:But the Antarctic is gaining ice! (2)

bluefoxlucid (723572) | about 3 months ago | (#46982555)

So global temperature is stable because the heat is going into ice melt?

I can't solve these problems without a dyson sphere; and only a society with a dyson sphere can sustain the economic weight of building a dyson sphere.

Re:But the Antarctic is gaining ice! (1)

bunratty (545641) | about 3 months ago | (#46982615)

If the temperature were stable, I would expect the amount of ice to decrease as it reaches a new equilibrium. But we've seen the temperature rise [skepticalscience.com] and the ice melt at an accelerating rate. Most of the increased heat is going into the oceans.

Re:But the Antarctic is gaining ice! (2)

bunratty (545641) | about 3 months ago | (#46982637)

I mean, if the temperature were stable, I would expect the rate of melting of ice to decrease.

Irrelevant, RTFA. Ice melt not from AGW. (0, Troll)

SuperKendall (25149) | about 3 months ago | (#46982879)

Not sure why you are bringing up those tired global warming talking points since (as the article notes) the melting has nothing to do with global warming, but from warmer currents about which we can do nothing.

Should solve water shortage issues... (0)

unixisc (2429386) | about 3 months ago | (#46982407)

We keep reading about how ground water tables & other water shortages are coming. Well, this one should make plenty of more water available and since the oceans would presumably be less saline as a result of all that extra water, desalination should be easier. It would solve water problems in higher regions - the ones that don't go the way of Maldives, presumably.

Re:Should solve water shortage issues... (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46982479)

Well, let's find out if that's actually true. Here's a math problem: The salinity of the ocean is 3.5%, and the ocean has an average depth of 3700 meters. If enough fresh water is added to the ocean to increase its depth by 3 meters, what is the new salinity of the ocean?

(Answer: 3.5%, i.e. not significantly different from before.)

pfft (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46982583)

Pfft. Math. Science. That stuff is for weaklings.

In other words... (4, Funny)

PortHaven (242123) | about 3 months ago | (#46982501)

California should build MASSIVE quantities of desalanization plants along the coast. So that we can keep the oceans properly salined. While extract massive amounts of water to turn the entire southwest into a lush green sub-tropic region, and keep sea levels in check. Start now!!!

Re:In other words... (5, Informative)

RichMan (8097) | about 3 months ago | (#46982801)

Nobody should build anything along the coast. At least any coast that is not at least 100m above sea level.

Push the button for the interactive map -
http://ngm.nationalgeographic.... [nationalgeographic.com]

Re:Should solve water shortage issues... (1)

ChadL (880878) | about 3 months ago | (#46982559)

Reading the wiki on both desalinization via boiling and reverse osmosis indicates the vast majority of the energy in both methods (ether boiling the water under a vacuum or pumping at a high pressure) seem to be independent of how much salt it has to remove; so reducing the salt content by a few percent won't reduce the energy consumption (but will flood most existing plants and require more energy to have them rebuilt).

Re:Should solve water shortage issues... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46982765)

Well, the average depth of the ocean is about 14,000 feet (http://oceanservice.noaa.gov/facts/oceandepth.html)
So another 10 feet would dilute the salinity of the oceans by a good.... .07%
I don't think that makes an impact that's of any significance to desalination efforts.

Speed it up? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46982441)

Anything I can do to speed it up? 100 years is too long to wait, I want beachfront now.

A crisis? (2)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46982443)

I'm a bit puzzled. If it will truly become a crisis, does it not suggest that the ice was frozen for all time and has never in history been running water?

Wouldn't that mean that eons ago, we had a crisis to solve and managed to create the worlds biggest ice-box in the process... who cares if it made some dino-ice cubes?

The world is constantly changing, for better or worse, and people always seem genuinely surprised when it changes.

Everybody PANIC! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46982455)

You only have a century or more (maybe) to be prepared!

On the plus side think about a whole new industry that will form around managing changing shorelines / levees / seawalls / dikes / etc

Start investing in IJkdijk!

Meteor Impact! (2)

us7892 (655683) | about 3 months ago | (#46982463)

Nothing a good meteor impact can't fix. Apparently, we get buzzed all the time by large rocks (reference to some other article recently here.)

When it hits, we'll have of few months of darkness to fix the problem.

Re:Meteor Impact! (2)

JWW (79176) | about 3 months ago | (#46982849)

This line of reasoning always makes me fee a bit uneasy. What if we do all the hard work of fixing the climate, only to get hit by an asteroid and have it all go to shit anyway?

I mean really, it'd be global scale Murphy's law to fix the climate and then get hit.

But in all seriousness, it does bother me to see near Earth asteroid detection projects loose funding, IMHO they are as important as climate change projects.

Awwww not this shit again! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46982475)

Awwww not this shit again!

Looking forward to future spin (4, Funny)

Frequency Domain (601421) | about 3 months ago | (#46982481)

NYC, the new Venice!

An article that suggests a counter-effect.... (-1, Flamebait)

phillk6751 (654352) | about 3 months ago | (#46982541)

http://www.science20.com/news_... [science20.com] Apparently the loss of ice in the Antarctic is raising the continent as well. If this is true, how much will the levels really rise as the ice melts? Scientists, I believe are a bit too quick to assume melting ice caps are going to flood several parts of the earth, and likely being pushed to by the global warming crowd to push their BS agendas.

Re:An article that suggests a counter-effect.... (5, Informative)

mrvan (973822) | about 3 months ago | (#46982825)

You're probably trolling, but here goes:

Any continent will rise if the mass on top is reduced, because the mantle acts as a liquid on geological time scales (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-glacial_rebound)

However, it's not the loss of mass or height of the antartcic that is causing sea levels to rise, but the movement of water from "long term storage" on top of the antarctic continent into the ocean. What the container does after the contents have been released is immaterial.

(for the arctic ice it is different because it is all floating, so melting it won't do anything to sea levels (it will to salinity and hence ocean currents) - and greenland has a lot of land ice, of course)

Re:An article that suggests a counter-effect.... (1)

phillk6751 (654352) | about 3 months ago | (#46982935)

Not trolling....My logic is that if the continent rises, then the volume of water it displaces would in-effect decrease, thereby countering the effect of the water rise. The real idea i was putting forth was that they could measure the volume displacement countered to see what the offset really is. 15mm/yr rise doesn't sound significant, but if you consider the area affected, 15mm could make a huge difference in offsetting the purported rise in sea level.

Hurray (-1, Flamebait)

Stumbles (602007) | about 3 months ago | (#46982543)

more fear mongering from pseudo-scientists, climate models that have never been right and other prophecies that have not been even close to reality.

Re:Hurray (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46982727)

Propagandists are busy modding down comments like these.

Re:Hurray (1)

Mister Liberty (769145) | about 3 months ago | (#46982855)

Indeed. They have all been too moderate.
Glad to assist.

Re:Hurray (2)

Ralph Wiggam (22354) | about 3 months ago | (#46982947)

Actually, the models have been too conservative. Things are significantly worse than predicted.

But you're clearly not a "facts oriented" kind of person.

water shortage and rising sea levels (1, Interesting)

Wycliffe (116160) | about 3 months ago | (#46982545)

Two things associated with global warming are a water shortage and rising sea levels.
Seems like if we really wanted to we could use one to help the other.
For instance pumping sea water to death valley and filling it full of water would
create a ton more waterfront property. We have oil pipelines much longer than this.
You could do the same thing by digging a big hole in the sahara desert or any other
desert relatively close to the ocean. Heck, we could even solve the other potential
problem of human overpopulation by creating more farmable land in the process.
There are plenty of solutions to this problem. If this ever really becomes a problem
you would think places like florida, etc.. could easily get together and finance
a "water sequestering" plan that could possibly even make the world a better place.

Re:water shortage and rising sea levels (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46982679)

"There are plenty of solutions to this problem." Sure, the problem is none of them are short term economically viable investment opportunities, and businesses with the scale to get this done aren't interested in anything else.

RTFA, not global warming (1)

SuperKendall (25149) | about 3 months ago | (#46982857)

Ice is melting from warm currents in the sea, not global warming. They only said warmer winds from global warming MAY hasten the melting a little.

Global warming itself was only going to raise sea levels about a foot over 100 years... hardly something to get worked up over.

Seriously? (5, Informative)

sirwired (27582) | about 3 months ago | (#46982891)

It's not "waterfront property" that anybody is worried about. It's the fact that a very large number of the world's current cities happen to be located near the water for historical reasons (major trading hubs built around ports for oceangoing ships.) The utter annihilation of those cities is a huge economic problem.

And flooding Death Valley with seawater doesn't create a single acre of arable land. You can't farm jack $hit out of soil contaminated with salt. The shores of the Persian gulf (nor, for that matter the shores of southern CA) don't support much in the way of farms, despite the large body of water next door.

So when this doesn't happen (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46982561)

what should we do with all the fools? Remember in the 70s we were entering an ice age.

I actually remember the 70's (2)

publiclurker (952615) | about 3 months ago | (#46982649)

Only one report claimed an ice age, and they didn't have anything to back them up. I know you are desperate to avoid accepting responsibility for your actions and the need to clean things up, but insulting everyone else's intelligence with your usual BS is not going to accomplish anything.

Re:I actually remember the 70's (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46982873)

There was not ONE report. I laugh at you...even wikipedia pops up 3 names. Go buy your floating house now! And for the 20 year old mod that modded this troll, screw you. You weren't alive to know. Al Gore is running out of time to cash in on his carbon credit scheme.

Re:I actually remember the 70's (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46982877)

I remember the 70s, and I remember the 'OMG! Ice Age!' scam being so widespread that even Hollywood was making fun of the idea.

Stop trying to pretend it never happened. You just make the 'OMG! Global Warming!' scam look even sillier.

Re:I actually remember the 70's (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46982931)

Only one report claimed we were entering an ice age and wasn't a very good one at that, but the media widely reported it. It even propagated through primary school teachers. They were simply wrong, and the act was lamented by the scientific community, but that doesn't matter all that much. And now we have 40 year olds who swear that "the scientists" are completely flip-flopping. Because of what they saw on TV once as a child.

This is why scientific journalism is important and why we can't let them screw up the representation of these issues. This is what makes Fox News so detestable. We have to do better.

Re:So when this doesn't happen (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46982677)

Propagandists are out to bury this comment

rising water? (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46982599)

rubbish.

The West Antarctic Ice Sheet (WAIS) is the segment of the continental ice sheet that covers West (or Lesser) Antarctica, the portion of Antarctica on the side of the Transantarctic Mountains which lies in the Western Hemisphere. The WAIS is classified as a marine-based ice sheet, meaning that its bed lies well below sea level and its edges flow into floating ice shelves.

Marine based ice sheets do not affect sea level.

Re:rising water? (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46982783)

No, you're very confused here. It's correct that the rock beneath the West Antarctic ice sheet is below sea level, but the ice sheet is not floating and sea level will certainly rise if the thing melts.

Think of it this way. If you have an ice cube floating in your drink, it is 90% under water and 10% above water. If such an ice cube melts, the level of your drink doesn't change.

Now imagine that instead of a free-floating, 90%-submerged ice cube, you have an ice cube that is suspended by a string so that it is 50% above water and 50% below water. This ice cube "wants" to settle lower in your drink so that it is 90% below water, and if it is allowed to do so, the level of your drink will rise. So if the ice cube is allowed to melt, the level of the drink will also rise, to exactly the same level it would reach if you cut the string.

The WAIS is like a 50% submerged ice cube that wants to be 90% submerged.

Re:rising water? (1)

MobyDisk (75490) | about 3 months ago | (#46982853)

Marine based ice sheets do not affect sea level.

Whhoooah there. Let's not jump to conclusions here...

Okay, close enough for all practical purposes. :-)

Re:rising water? (2)

gewalker (57809) | about 3 months ago | (#46982889)

While buoyancy works exactly as you state (and I am pretty sure climate scientists understand this too). I do recall from past reading is that scientists are concerned that breakup of the marine sheets leads to accelerated melting of the land sheets.

With intact marine sheets, the land sheets do not flow easily into the ocean (not enough force to displace the marine ice). But if the marine ice is gone, the land ice can flow more freely into the water. In the large, Ice is quite plastic and will flow downhill due to gravity at significant rate.

Launch Solar Shade! (1)

poity (465672) | about 3 months ago | (#46982633)

unless Svensgaard vetoes it...

Monthly /. quota for propaganda exceeded (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46982635)

Every few days we get another one of these stories.

Re:Monthly /. quota for propaganda exceeded (1)

Mister Liberty (769145) | about 3 months ago | (#46982885)

Watch the Insurance Agencies. They'll tell fools like you what
to believe in no time.

Dogs and cats! Living together! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46982653)

It'll be mass hysteria!

Finally we don't have to care about global climate (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46982657)

I love it. It is happening it is unavoidable. Stop whining about it. Strap on and ride it out. Even worst maps show where I am I will be fine so heck lets stop complaining and let it ride.

to hell with your kids, I want my Canyonero! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46982747)

because jeebus is gonna rapture me up, and all you sinners are gonna burn.

you could have saved yourselves by going full-on nucklear, but the hippies done screwed everybody on that one!

Well, that settles it (1)

Chris Mattern (191822) | about 3 months ago | (#46982681)

Re:Well, that settles it (1)

slashmydots (2189826) | about 3 months ago | (#46982717)

Yeah, buy up property in the middle of a drought area that's only going to get worse. Good idea.

I have an idea (0)

slashmydots (2189826) | about 3 months ago | (#46982695)

Let's take everyone who thinks climate change isn't real and tie them to a rock 6 inches above the waterline on the ocean shore. Then we can let them go when they admit it's real.

Re:I have an idea (1)

fredrated (639554) | about 3 months ago | (#46982769)

I have a better idea: eat them instead!

Re:I have an idea (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46982803)

After we take all the gays and ship them to an island and see how many generations they last

Re:I have an idea (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46982847)

This is what passes for enlightenment.

"They don't believe us, just because the last 200 models failed to predict anything accurately. Let's torture the heretics!"

I know you want to kill off at least half the population of this planet, but be aware that if you try, it'll be your blood feeding the trees. There are a lot of people who don't want to get violent, but if you genocidal assholes start something, we will finish it.

Re:I have an idea (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46982923)

Which just goes to show that the fanatics are losing the battle. Since you can't convince anyone who disagrees with you, now you just plan to murder them, as Commies always do, sooner or later.

When are you opening the Climate Change Re-Education Camps, Comrade?

Re:I have an idea (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46982937)

Climate change is very real. The earth gets closer and further from the sun as it oribits (seasons). The suns temperature fluctuates (solar cycles). If you think what car you drive changes that to any significant degree your entitled to that opinion. We some how managed to get in to and out of several ice ages sans gas guzzling soccer mom suburbans.

OMGOMGOMG! (1)

doggo (34827) | about 3 months ago | (#46982739)

"The rise may continue to be relatively slow for at least the next century or so..."

Oh. Okay. I'll be dead by then, and I didn't have any kids.

You young'uns're screwed! Heeheehee!

This is a POLITICAL issue, NOT a scientific one. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46982827)

This is all used to push a United Nations backed agenda to de-industrialize the U.S. and Europe, and way too many people have chugged the Kool-Aid.
Climate change is cyclical, folks.

Denver (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46982829)

Everybody crowd into Denver!

Meanwhile, in reality world... (-1)

hsthompson69 (1674722) | about 3 months ago | (#46982837)

...http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/05/12/antarctic-sea-ice-at-record-levels/

"Antarctic sea ice has expanded to record levels for April, increasing by more than 110,000sq km a day last month to nine million square kilometers."

Funny how facts get in the way of a good scare story.

Re:Meanwhile, in reality world... (5, Informative)

bunratty (545641) | about 3 months ago | (#46982893)

That's the surface area of ice, not the amount of ice, which is measured by volume or mass. If you look at the mass of ice in the Antarctic, you can see it's been melting for decades at an accelerating rate [ossfoundation.us] . Funny how the real facts get in the way of a good misinformation campaign.

Re:Meanwhile, in reality world... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46982897)

Funny how a good scare story get headlines whereas facts don't get a look in...

Unstoppable? (1)

Alomex (148003) | about 3 months ago | (#46982899)

West Antarctica appears to have begun and is almost certainly unstoppable,

The "unstoppable" part is gratuitous and meant to create a sense of urgency. The melting is supposed to take place over hundreds of years, so if by some miracle of science we could reduce C02 production by 50% in 30 years, likely the melting process would stop. If only we had a clean source(s) of energy growing exponentially that could replace fossil fuels. I don't know something powered by either nuclear fusion on Earth or fission high above in outer space where it is safe to store a massive fission reactor from which we could collect energy in the form of radiation.

New beach front property (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46982915)

The thing I love about the warming trend on earth is that all these rich folks who sunk billions upon billions of dollars to acquire all the beach front property they now have will have nothing when the water rises. Come on sea rise. It can't happen fast enough.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...