Beta
×

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!

Unexplained Leap In CO2 Levels

Hemos posted more than 9 years ago | from the when-not-if? dept.

Science 1215

Cally writes "The Guardian is reporting that atmospheric CO2 concentrations have leapt by 4.5 ppm in the last two years. This raises the ugly possibility that the capacity of a large carbon sink (possibly the oceans) has been exceeded, and the worst-case scenario is that a tipping point has been reached and a runaway warming scenario is in progress. Quote from Dr. Piers Foster of Reading University: 'If this is a rate change, of course it will be very significant. It will be of enormous concern, because it will imply that all our global warming predictions for the next hundred years or so will have to be redone.'"

cancel ×

1215 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

More on sinks (5, Informative)

erick99 (743982) | more than 9 years ago | (#10491967)

Carbon Sinks [umn.edu] are an important component of this discussion. From the article referenced in the first sentence:

Buildup of atmospheric C02 is moderated by "sinks" on the earth's surface that use some C02 and store much of the carbon in living organisms, organic matter and carbonate minerals, says soil scientist H.H. Cheng. These carbon sinks include the oceans that cover more than 70 percent of the earth surface, forests and other vegetation covering the land, and organic matter in the soil.

Interestingly, this article talks about soil as a possible source of CO2 buildup in the atmosphere, making the El Nino effect not always a good indicator of how much a rise or fall in atmospheric CO2 should be. Finally, here is article that that argues that rises in atmospheric CO2 are not a cause for alarm: PortlandTribune.com | Rise in CO2 levels is no cause for alarm [portlandtribune.com]

Re:More on sinks (5, Insightful)

DreadPiratePizz (803402) | more than 9 years ago | (#10492003)

PortlandTribune.com | Rise in CO2 levels is no cause for alarm

This isn't true. I heard an article on NPR the other day that discussed Global Warming's treatment in the media. The man being interviewed thought that the media did the issue a great disservice by trying to be fair and covering both sides of the issue. The fact is, there IS NO OTHER SIDE. The scientific evidence that humans are affecting the climate with CO2 is as clear as day, and scientists who say otherwise are hired by special interest groups or oil companies. That article is true when it says that the effects we will have on climate aren't fully known, but the connection is there in a strong way. All of the research I have read suggests the link. We NEED to be concerned.

Re:More on sinks (4, Insightful)

jd (1658) | more than 9 years ago | (#10492084)

Agreed, 100%. The "other side" tends to be those causing the pollution. However, that's just how they are, right now, when their ultra-expensive coastal home is above water. If CO2 levels are spiralling rapidly, it's unlikely to remain that way.


On a side-note, British scientists have observed that, although they've largely eliminated acid rain causing pollution from power stations, etc, the problem of acid rain is actually getting worse in places. This has now been shown to be a product of marine fuels and an increase in shipping.


Consider, then, the impact this increase will be having on countries that have not put in the time, effort and money to reduce pollution...

Re:More on sinks (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10492137)

Excellent. Demonize the opposition, that's a clever strategy. Then you can dismiss them out-of-hand, without ever having to prove your own POV.

Re:More on sinks (2, Insightful)

0123456 (636235) | more than 9 years ago | (#10492091)

"The scientific evidence that humans are affecting the climate with CO2 is as clear as day,"

Nonsense, of course. We know that humans have slightly increased CO2 levels in the atmosphere, but hard evidence linking that to temperature rises is minimal.

"scientists who say otherwise are hired by special interest groups or oil companies"

You are parodying the lefties here and not being serious, I presume? That is, making fun of the fact that most scientists who claim that 'global warming' is a threat are being paid by governments to do 'global warming' research and would be out of a job if they didn't keep claiming that it's a big threat?

'Global Warming' is a multi-billion dollar a year industry around the world: if you wouldn't believe McDonalds if they said that their meals are good for you, why would you believe the global warming industry?

Re:More on sinks (5, Insightful)

Oddly_Drac (625066) | more than 9 years ago | (#10492185)

"Nonsense, of course. We know that humans have slightly increased CO2 levels in the atmosphere, but hard evidence linking that to temperature rises is minimal."

The main problem is that if the tipping point has been reached, then the first time you might get your 'hard evidence' is the entire population of Florida migrating north.

Still, it's fun to see people backpedalling from the 'global warming isn't caused by humans argument'. That was always fun.

"'Global Warming' is a multi-billion dollar a year industry around the world:"

Really? How? Where did you get that figure? Your ass?

On McDonalds (-1, Offtopic)

Gr8Apes (679165) | more than 9 years ago | (#10492191)

Just watched "SuperSize me".

I'd say calling McDonalds toxic might be more appropriate. Yick.

(Disclaimer: I never cared much for McDonalds. I did like Burger King, but I'm sure their current fare isn't any better)

Re:More on sinks (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10492108)

Wow dude, need a napkin? You're dripping foam everywhere.

Get a grip - your hysterics are only hurting your side of the argument. And yes, there are at least two sides, no matter how much you stamp your feet and chant 'watermelon watermelon watermelon'.

Re:More on sinks (1, Interesting)

bgarcia (33222) | more than 9 years ago | (#10492115)

The scientific evidence that humans are affecting the climate with CO2 is as clear as day
Yes, because having 3 simultaneously-active volcanoes sputtering out CO2 couldn't possibly have anything to do with a rise in CO2 levels. It must be those pesky humans!

Everybody, stop exhaling immediately!

Re:More on sinks (1)

YE (23647) | more than 9 years ago | (#10492121)

The fact is, there IS NO OTHER SIDE....

... hired by special interest groups or oil companies

All of the research I have read...

Ahem... you're not convincing anyone who isn't already subscribed to your theory, you realize that?

I'm starting to think Goldwin's law [regarding Nazis in Internet discussions] should be ammended to include oil companies.

Re:More on sinks (3, Insightful)

julesh (229690) | more than 9 years ago | (#10492140)

The fact is, there IS NO OTHER SIDE. The scientific evidence that humans are affecting the climate with CO2 is as clear as day, and scientists who say otherwise are hired by special interest groups or oil companies.

As a layman with a little scientific background, I think I can see both sides here. There are two sides, whatever you may say. There is the side saying that our CO2 emissions are going to bring about serious climate change that could be disastrous to us, and there is the side that says the other side is overreacting. The latter frequently point to evidence in this planet's fossil record that suggests that CO2 levels vary dramatically whether we're here or not, and that the amount of CO2 we produce is a drop in the ocean compared to what is produced and consumed every year by the rest of the planet. The argument is convincing, and I haven't heard a good counterargument.

Re:More on sinks (3, Interesting)

RodgerDodger (575834) | more than 9 years ago | (#10492160)

There is no question that human activity has resulted in increased carbon dioxide levels.

Of course, we don't emit as much CO2 now as was done in the mid-12th century (aka "the Little Ice Age"); over a period of about 50 years, it got so cold that about 75% of the Black Forest was cut down, reducing it to smaller than its current size. All of that went up in smoke.

And we don't emit as much in a year as a good size active volcano can do in a week. But we do emit enough to cause CO2 levels to rise.

Of course, the link to changes in _climate_ from increased CO2 levels isn't really clear. Global warming is the common concern, but the opposite has just as much evidence, and there's even a lot to show that any effect either way will simply cause a negative feedback loop to stop it. Nobody really knows, because climate studies are a real bitch to figure out.

Of the two, an iceage is probably more likely than warming, anyway; we're overdue for one, and the sun appears to be going into another contraction cycle (which means less heat coming in). And frankly, the Earth spends most of its time as a snowball; the nice weather we get these days is purely an aberation that will correct itself over time.

Re:More on sinks (1)

someme2 (670523) | more than 9 years ago | (#10492203)

The fact is, there IS NO OTHER SIDE. [...] and scientists who say otherwise are hired by
special interest groups or oil companies.
(italics added by me)

Mhmmm, aahhhhh, I don't even know where to begin... It's so hard to resist writing something really sarcastic... okay, but I won't.
I think you should point at the "scientific process" and at refereed papers. If your claim is right then there should be minimal amounts of refereed papers claiming the contra-point (when compared to the papers claiming your point).
But certainly "oil companies" and "special interest groups" don't really qualify as "NO OTHER SIDE". Especially not in all caps.

Also don't get me started with puns going into the direction "siggraph and how they secretly dominate the world's oil industry".

Re:More on sinks (1)

amightywind (691887) | more than 9 years ago | (#10492208)

The fact is, there IS NO OTHER SIDE. The scientific evidence that humans are affecting the climate with CO2 is as clear as day, and scientists who say otherwise are hired by special interest groups or oil companies.

Six billion people in the world seeking a better life will have their affect on climate. What about increasing levels of more efficient greenhouse gases methane and water vapor?

The timing this report before an election is suspect. Proponents of the Kyoto Treaty are trying to spread their cause through inuendo, fear ,and coersion. It has no merit. Fortunately the reaty was rejected by a bipartisan vote of 95-0 in the U.S. Senate and is unlikely to be put to the vote again.

Re:More on sinks (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10492012)

As Wesley opened his mouth in agony Kor slid the gigantic head of
his Klingon cock into his soft boy-mouth. Wes's scream became a gurgle as
he began nursing the head in compliance with Kor's bellowing order to
please his warrior dick with his pussyboy mouth.
As Kor slid another two thick inches into Wesley's stretched mouth,
Taul the Vulcan pushed the Ferengi away from Wesley's ass. " Your round
ass was made to be fucked, Ensign," he said, " now fulfill your destiny
and become my whore." Taul rubbed his dripping cock across Wes's virgin
hole so that the green pre-cum would act as lubricant then without warning
rammed all 9 inches DEEP into acting Ensign Crusher's delicious ass.
Wes's eyes bulged and he began to gag in
pain, but Kor's response was to shove another three inches of Klingon meat into his yeilding mouth,
which was now so stretched that Wesley's saliva was being forced out of
the corners of his mouth. Wes looked up at Kor, pleading with his big, doelike brown eyes. Kor showed no mercy and
gave a grunt as he rammed the last 5 inches down Wesley's throat.
Kor grabbed a handful of Wes's hair and
began to move ion a swaying motion, fucking Wesley's face and throat, as
Taul now began to ass fuck
Wes in earnest. Bak Dar was jacking his slender but long Feringi cock at
the sight of Ensign Crusher's dual rape. The
sight of the Federation Flagship's mascot being made into a fucktoy
rapidly bringing Bak to climax.
Kor quickened his pace and began slamming
his cock down Wesley's throat, forcing it further down by yanking Wes's head forward by the
fistful of hair he clasped. With a chilling roar he came, spewing 2 pints
of greyish cum into Wesley's raw throat. As Wes's face contoted at the
bitter taste, Bak Dar replaced the Klingon in front of Wesley's face, and
forcing Wes's mouth open shoved his thin 8 inch orange dick down Wes's
well lubricated throat. After a few deep thrusts into the slut's mouth, Bak withdrew his cock.
"Let whoever dares see the face of the
Enterprize's chosen mascot covered in my seed" Bak stated with satisfaction as his cock spewed thick
gobs of yellow Feringi cum allover Wesley's twisted face.
" Stick your pink human tonge out and
lick the cum off your face, human dog" Taul gruffly ordered from behind as he rammed all 9 inched of
his throbbing green Vulcan cock DEEP into Wesley's barbarically stretched
ass. Only when Kor gripped his neck and began to squeeze did the young,
brutalized Ensign respond and stick out his tongue, lashing it around his
face, sopping up the yellow chunks of Ferengi sperm.
" Now swallow, or I'll castrate you" ordered Taul. Wesley
complied, his spirit completely broken and tasted the acidic flavor of Bak Dar's wad.
Taul was giving Wes's ass a galactic fuck, pulling out all 9
inches then ramming the entire lengh back in.. With a shout of "Pan Far is achieved!!" Taul filled Wesley's ass with 7 years worth of green
cum.Wesley's abdomen swelled noticably as LITERALLY a gallon of green
Vulcan sperm pumped into his ruined ass and into his intestines.
Just as Kor stepped behing Wes to begin
where Taul had just left off, Wes's body began to shimmer and.......

Re:More on sinks (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10492097)

Firefox sucks

Yes (Scôre: 2, Insightful) (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10492163)

FireFox sucks

Re:More on sinks (1)

kiatoa (66945) | more than 9 years ago | (#10492018)

Yeah, and do a back of the napkin calculation of how much carbon is tied up in the masses of humanity. Couple pounds carbon per human times 6 billion of us. So, go make babies to do your part to counter global warming :)

Just kidding. BTW I have no idea how much carbon there is in the average adult human.

Re:More on sinks (4, Informative)

moonbender (547943) | more than 9 years ago | (#10492059)

Finally, here is article that that argues that rises in atmospheric CO2 are not a cause for alarm: PortlandTribune.com | Rise in CO2 levels is no cause for alarm

For what it's worth: The article - it's really just a brief op-ed piece - is fairly old (Fri, Jun 20, 2003), does not deal with the "leap" dealt with in the original article, and is written by the "environmental policy director at Cascade Policy Institute, a free-market think tank in Portland".

Re:More on sinks (1)

GuyFawkes (729054) | more than 9 years ago | (#10492095)


Yeah, it is a well known fact that the wooly mammoths driving around in dodge vipers were largely responsible for the end of the last ice age too.

Re:More on sinks (2, Interesting)

Cat_Byte (621676) | more than 9 years ago | (#10492106)

I believe Scientific American had an article about all of the CO2 that was trapped underwater. With all of the hurricane activity lately I wouldn't be surprised if it wasn't just stirring it up a bit. This is just speculation though.

The cause is obvious... (5, Funny)

aborchers (471342) | more than 9 years ago | (#10491976)

We're in the run up to an election in the US. It's all the candidates hot air...

Re:The cause is obvious... (1)

aNonMooseCowherd (169745) | more than 9 years ago | (#10492005)

I tried to patent patent barratry as a business model, but there was too much prior art.

How about parrotry? You could license it to journalists, who largely parrot what other journalists say.

Re:The cause is obvious... (1)

aborchers (471342) | more than 9 years ago | (#10492096)

That would have the same prior art problem, then, no? :-)

Re:The cause is obvious... (5, Funny)

kabocox (199019) | more than 9 years ago | (#10492192)

We're in the run up to an election in the US. It's all the candidates hot air...

Does that mean if we join that Kyoto thingy, we'd have to have our elections once a decade to meet emissions requirements?

Quick (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10491979)

Everyone stop breathing to save the planet

What about.. (5, Insightful)

59Bassman (749855) | more than 9 years ago | (#10491986)

It will be of enormous concern, because it will imply that all our global warming predictions for the next hundred years or so will have to be redone.
Or just maybe it implies that the model of global warming is flawed? Perhaps the ecosystem is a bit more complex than any of us realize, and perhaps this is a natural phenomenon?

Re:What about.. (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10491991)

perhaps

Re:What about.. (5, Insightful)

moonbender (547943) | more than 9 years ago | (#10492016)

It's most certainly flawed, and I'm sure the people working on those models are very aware of that. Perhaps it's a natural phenomenon, perhaps not, probably it's a combination, but what do I know. You get a better idea as to what is the case by working with and improving on the existing models. And at any point in time, the respective existing model is all you've got to base a sound argument on.

Re:gyrandgimbolle (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10492028)

Oh pee oh poo drats Co2s got wayso high for me and you and hope ya choke and think I'll gag cause where's the steaks and charcoal rags ...

Re:What about.. (1)

Ga_101 (755815) | more than 9 years ago | (#10492035)

Or perhaps this is worse than we first tought...

Re:What about.. (1)

metlin (258108) | more than 9 years ago | (#10492044)

How very bright and cheerful a thought on a Monday morning :-p

Re:What about.. (1)

wongn (777209) | more than 9 years ago | (#10492061)

and perhaps this is a natural phenomenon?
Quite possibly. Its hardly as if humans are a necessary presence for a change in climate. If there was an intelligent life form during the ice age, would they have said that it was due to their existance and fumes etc. that the polar caps were recedeing and the atmosphere was warming? Continual changes in the environment are completely natural, there is not the slightest shred of evidence that human's are the cause. Mind you, that wasn't implyed. Perhaps the Amazon has released a portion of its huge CO2 reserves? That's been in the news for years...

Re:What about.. (3, Insightful)

StrawberryFrog (67065) | more than 9 years ago | (#10492073)

Or just maybe it implies that the model of global warming is flawed?

Of course it implies that the model of global warming is flawed. And it indicates that things are probably worse than the doomsayers thought.

Perhaps the ecosystem is a bit more complex than any of us realize,

Some of us realise that it's very complex indeed.

and perhaps this is a natural phenomenon?

That's not what the evidence indicates. So there's no absolute prof yet, but hey, maybe that gun isn't loaded. Why not point it at your head, pull the trigger and see. But please, don't you take that risk with my future.

Re:What about.. (4, Insightful)

Ardanwen (746930) | more than 9 years ago | (#10492118)

Well, chances are that the model is flawed. I'm a theoretical biologist, so modelling biological processes is what I do (HIV evolution for me at the moment), and as the co2 level is in part a biological problem, I can spew some incoherent thoughts about it, claiming it's the opinion of an expert. ;)

Just because there's no way for us to give a good estimate of the impact of our actions on the earth, doesn't mean that we need to consider those actions more carefully then we are now. We're only just emerging from a few centuries in which we just exploited everything, assuming that we wouldn't run out of resources.

If we slipped past a threshold and we're in a runaway heating, then life as you know it ends soon. It might be because of human actions, or it might not be, but that's not important. We don't want the earth to end up as either Mars or Venus, and we'll have to take what actions seem neccesary (and that doesn't include saving the economy :P).

Too bad it isn't my turn to rule the earth.

I never get how.. (2)

ivano (584883) | more than 9 years ago | (#10492187)

...people can say things like this.

Of course the scientists know the assumptions that their models are based on. They understand those assumptions more than anyone. Models are not just used so scientists can say "hey aren't we smart" they're also used to test the theories they're based on and if the data doesn't match the model then back to the drawing board they go. The fact that models are simplified is down to both theoretical non-understanding and computational and mathematical power (not only are they hard to model some of those equations are just plain hard to solve precisely).

When you deal in a limited world you work with what you have.

Ciao

Re:What about.. (0)

zeugma-amp (139862) | more than 9 years ago | (#10492201)

Or just maybe it implies that the model of global warming is flawed? Perhaps the ecosystem is a bit more complex than any of us realize, and perhaps this is a natural phenomenon?

Ya. I think it is funny that a bunch of folks who can't give me a local weather forcast for more than 3 days into the future that is in any way accurate can tell me about weather predictions for the next 100 years.

The earth is a much more complex model than we can yet simulate with computers. In order to make it feasable to run simulations, you have to simplify your assumptions right out of reality.

it's getting hot in here... (0)

cwebb1977 (650175) | more than 9 years ago | (#10491990)

so take off all your clothes! Woohoo, girls in bikinis everywhere!

Re:it's getting hot in here... (1, Funny)

geeveees (690232) | more than 9 years ago | (#10492065)

so take off all your clothes! Woohoo, girls in bikinis everywhere!

For the love of Linus! NERDS in speedos everywhere! The goggles! They do nothing!!

Quick fix... (-1, Redundant)

UnAmericanPunk (310528) | more than 9 years ago | (#10491992)

Ok everyone... here's the quick fix for rising CO2 levels. Everyone, all at once... just stop breathing! That should work.

Re:Quick fix... (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10492019)

You go first.

Re:Quick fix... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10492168)

I tried that about 5 times but farted each time.

Sorry, but I let out more CO2 and Methane than I kept in by holding my breath.

Maybe a buttplug would help?

Watch the media (-1, Troll)

beacher (82033) | more than 9 years ago | (#10491995)

FTA - Analysts stress that it is too early to draw any long-term conclusions.
Just watch the media - I'm sure they will convieniently ignore this and push some "Netcraft confirms that the world is dying" type of thread. This will probably seep into the current election media campaigns as well because this is Bush's fault (co2 increases for the past 2 years straight due to all the hot air coming out of DC)

Last Gasp... (-1, Redundant)

DrMindWarp (663427) | more than 9 years ago | (#10491998)

I for one, welcome our new CO2 adapted, heat-loving overlords.

The Day after Tomorrow (2, Interesting)

freedom_india (780002) | more than 9 years ago | (#10491999)

why do i get an uneasy feeling that the movie The Day After Tomorrow is coming alive...?

Re:The Day after Tomorrow (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10492008)

Because you're a stupid faggot?

Re:The Day after Tomorrow (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10492152)

you're the stupid faggot

Re:The Day after Tomorrow (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10492042)

As Wesley opened his mouth in agony Kor slid the gigantic head of
his Klingon cock into his soft boy-mouth. Wes's scream became a gurgle as
he began nursing the head in compliance with Kor's bellowing order to
please his warrior dick with his pussyboy mouth.
As Kor slid another two thick inches into Wesley's stretched mouth,
Taul the Vulcan pushed the Ferengi away from Wesley's ass. " Your round
ass was made to be fucked, Ensign," he said, " now fulfill your destiny
and become my whore." Taul rubbed his dripping cock across Wes's virgin
hole so that the green pre-cum would act as lubricant then without warning
rammed all 9 inches DEEP into acting Ensign Crusher's delicious ass.
Wes's eyes bulged and he began to gag in pain, but Kor's response
was to shove another three inches of Klingon meat into his yeilding mouth,
which was now so stretched that Wesley's saliva was being forced out of
the corners of his mouth. Wes looked up at Kor, pleading with his big,
doelike brown eyes. Kor showed no mercy and gave a grunt as he rammed the
last 5 inches down Wesley's throat.
Kor grabbed a handful of Wes's hair and began to move ion a swaying
motion, fucking Wesley's face and throat, as Taul now began to ass fuck
Wes in earnest. Bak Dar was jacking his slender but long Feringi cock at
the sight of Ensign Crusher's dual rape. The sight of the Federation
Flagship's mascot being made into a fucktoy rapidly bringing Bak to
climax.
Kor quickened his pace and began slamming his cock down Wesley's
throat, forcing it further down by yanking Wes's head forward by the
fistful of hair he clasped. With a chilling roar he came, spewing 2 pints
of greyish cum into Wesley's raw throat. As Wes's face contoted at the
bitter taste, Bak Dar replaced the Klingon in front of Wesley's face, and
forcing Wes's mouth open shoved his thin 8 inch orange dick down Wes's
well lubricated throat. After a few deep thrusts into the slut's mouth,
Bak withdrew his cock.
"Let whoever dares see the face of the Enterprize's chosen mascot
covered in my seed" Bak stated with satisfaction as his cock spewed thick
gobs of yellow Feringi cum allover Wesley's twisted face.
" Stick your pink human tonge out and lick the cum off your face,
human dog" Taul gruffly ordered from behind as he rammed all 9 inched of
his throbbing green Vulcan cock DEEP into Wesley's barbarically stretched
ass. Only when Kor gripped his neck and began to squeeze did the young,
brutalized Ensign respond and stick out his tongue, lashing it around his
face, sopping up the yellow chunks of Ferengi sperm.
" Now swallow, or I'll castrate you" ordered Taul. Wesley
complied, his spirit completely broken and tasted the acidic flavor of Bak
Dar's wad.
Taul was giving Wes's ass a galactic fuck, pulling out all 9
inches then ramming the entire lengh back in.. With a shout of "Pan Far
is achieved!!" Taul filled Wesley's ass with 7 years worth of green
cum.Wesley's abdomen swelled noticably as LITERALLY a gallon of green
Vulcan sperm pumped into his ruined ass and into his intestines.
Just as Kor stepped behing Wes to begin where Taul had just left
off, Wes's body began to shimmer and.......

Re:The Day after Tomorrow (1)

Chexum (1498) | more than 9 years ago | (#10492177)

No, the normal procedure is to come up with "scientific" research *before* the release of a movie.

last two years... (3, Interesting)

Daniel Ellard (799842) | more than 9 years ago | (#10492000)

Any chance this has something to do with burning oil wells? (I guess if so then there would have been another spike about ten years ago...)

More Likely... (1)

CiXeL (56313) | more than 9 years ago | (#10492207)

Look at China's booming economy and their insatiable demand for oil driving rates up to insane levels and devouring all supply.

Either that or the ice hydrates in the ocean floor are beginning to thaw in which case we're all fucked.

*shits on self in fear*

Someone look that part up in Revelation where the oceans boil?

Wow, not blaming fossil fuels. (1)

goneutt (694223) | more than 9 years ago | (#10492013)

I think this is the first level headed article on the subject I've come across in a while. By looking at the globe in a widespread fashion they've seen logical causes to CO2 rise.

The article does wrap up with "Based on those two years alone I would say it was too soon to say that a new trend has been established, but it warrants close scrutiny."

I've come to belive in a closed carbon cycle, but the easy "pump and use" nature of fossil fuels make biofuels a hard prospect.

*sigh* (3, Insightful)

GR1NCH (671035) | more than 9 years ago | (#10492014)

Every time there is some big post about a comet hitting earth in the next 20 years, or global warming, or any other earth ending disaster it stays in the news for about 1 day. Just long enough for every other scientist in the world to say the guy that came up with it is a crank and the whole thing doesn't matter. I give this one maybe 2 days.

Re:*sigh* (2, Funny)

BarryNorton (778694) | more than 9 years ago | (#10492060)

If only we would just hurry up and die then it would stop...

Re:*sigh* (3, Insightful)

YouHaveSnail (202852) | more than 9 years ago | (#10492119)

Then it should tell you something that global warming has been in the news for twenty years or more, and that it's a theory that's been widely accepted by scientists.

The only people you hear saying that it doesn't matter these days are politicians with links to the oil and gas industries.

This particular article may be out of the headlines in a few days, but the issue will be with us for the rest of our lives.

Stop Reading (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10492023)

David J Hofmann of the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration centre, which also studies CO2, was more cautious.

"I don't think an increase of 2 ppm for two years in a row is highly significant - there are climatic perturbations that can make this occur," he said. "But the absence of a known climatic event does make these years unusual.

"Based on those two years alone I would say it was too soon to say that a new trend has been established, but it warrants close scrutiny."

--

Nothing to see here, run along.

Earth wants to get rid of us (2, Funny)

Harmfulfreeradical (800606) | more than 9 years ago | (#10492024)

I think this 'runaway' global warming effect isn't run away at all. If 30,000 died in last summer's heatwave, why can't we assume that earth is just getting rid of 'excess' baggage? I think earth has a few tricks up its sleeve, and everytime we push her to her limits, she'll fart back and wipe a few of us off until we reach the correct mass again.

Re:Earth wants to get rid of us (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10492069)

In virtually all chemical reactions that take place naturally on Earth, mass is conserved.

Moron.

Re:Earth wants to get rid of us (1)

Harmfulfreeradical (800606) | more than 9 years ago | (#10492083)

True, true. Mass will be transferred to something else then. Bigot :)

Re:Earth wants to get rid of us (1)

Ardanwen (746930) | more than 9 years ago | (#10492167)

I think earth has a few tricks up its sleeve
Ponies have tricks. The earth just functions.

Besides, the only (main) way for the earth to lose mass is to radiate more energy than it receives from the sun :)

Her ? (1)

DrSkwid (118965) | more than 9 years ago | (#10492189)

How do you determine the gender of planets ?

It is an "it" not a her.

Plus your analysis is idiotic.

Muhahah! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10492029)

The END IS NIGH HUMANS!! Repent!!! Ctulhu cometh!

Re:Muhahah! (0)

julesh (229690) | more than 9 years ago | (#10492199)

I think if Cthulhu were to come, it wouldn't bother with heating us all up a little first.

Cue standard issue global warming denier (3, Insightful)

Viol8 (599362) | more than 9 years ago | (#10492038)

Someone will be along soon to tell us that this is all part of a natural progression and we have nothing to worry about and to all go back to driving 5.0 SUVs as we can't hope to understand the climate and so figures are irrelevant and its not are fault etc etc etc. I wonder how many of these people STILL have their heads in the sand after this?

Cue standard issue global warming lamenter (1)

Harmfulfreeradical (800606) | more than 9 years ago | (#10492050)

Most of the people here look like they drive 5.0 SUVs, but I doubt they do. Not accepting treehugger mentality does not mean we work for oil companies.

Re:Cue standard issue global warming lamenter (1)

Asha2004 (460204) | more than 9 years ago | (#10492141)

True but there is a difference between not being a treehugger and being complete naive. The article calls for close monitoring the next couple of years before drawing ANY conclusions. Thats probably what we should do.

Re:Cue standard issue global warming lamenter (1)

Harmfulfreeradical (800606) | more than 9 years ago | (#10492179)

I never suggested we do otherwise. That's why I made it clear most people on here don't infact drive 5.0 SUVs. I do my part, and I expect most people do to. But being overly cautious and paranoid doesn't help anyone either.

Re:Cue standard issue global warming denier (4, Insightful)

erick99 (743982) | more than 9 years ago | (#10492076)

You have to take these alarmist predictions with a grain of salt. Remember in the 1978 when we were told that we had less than 10 years worth of oil still in the ground? Since then we have learned quite the opposite. I am not saying we shouldn't address the issues of so-called "greenhouse gases," but we don't have to go at it in a panic-stricken manner. We should do what we can to maintain a clean and stable atmosphere.

Re:Cue standard issue global warming denier (5, Insightful)

Asha2004 (460204) | more than 9 years ago | (#10492194)

True we shouldnt panic, and we should always carefully look at the evidence. But the issue has been on and off the political agenda for the last 20 years and we are still all producing more co2 each year. So we can assume that since 78 nobody believes or acts upon warnings with any seriousness anymore, "because in 78 it turned out to be nonsense....".
"We should do what we can to maintain a clean and stable atmosphere." I agree, but must also note that we are not doing that at the moment.

Re:Cue standard issue global warming denier (1)

dan dan the dna man (461768) | more than 9 years ago | (#10492148)

I have to say I wanted to insert a "denial" here, as I think it's quite well known that C02 levels DO fluctuate with time - a fact I knew, but not the paramaters of the fluctuation.

Having spent a few minutes looking for some evidence of this I came across this page [esr.org] which clearly shows the CO2 increases over time from ice core data - something I'd not seen before. Modern CO2 concentrations are way above anything seen before even with the natural fluctuations.

Quite what this implies for the environment however, I do believe is currently anyones "educated guess"...

Re:Cue standard issue global warming denier (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10492172)

You are a moron.

Your lion wants some more tofu.

How do you dare !? (2, Funny)

thrill12 (711899) | more than 9 years ago | (#10492184)

Leave our cars alone ! Even though they suck in air, burn it with millions years old Dinosaur-meat, then plunge out recycled Dinosaur-meat in the form of CO(2), that doesn't mean they are the problem.

I think we can only test your far fetched hypothesis by producing new 10-20 liter cars, and decrease the petrol cost by 75% at least. If, after say 25 years, we are imitating the faith of the creatures we now burn, I would say we need to discuss the consequences.

In the mean time, keep burning that oil folks !

Convergence (3, Funny)

DrWho520 (655973) | more than 9 years ago | (#10492053)

Thirteen hurricanes by the first week of October, and a very active Typhoon season in the Pacific.

Mt. St. Helens rumbling.

Earthquakes in California.

And now, a build up of CO2 in the atmosphere!

So when are the Tsunamis and land slides do? When will the Mississippi start to flood? The Yellowstone caldera even reaching its theoretical 640 thousand (million ?) year cycling point! Game over, man! GAME OVER!

Re:Convergence (1)

gspr (602968) | more than 9 years ago | (#10492173)

Most of those things seem to be hitting the US only, so the rest of us should be fine. See ya ;-)

Re:Convergence (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10492178)

I say we take off and nuke the whole planet from orbit........It's the only way to be sure!

Re:Convergence (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10492193)

An the great agent of the incipient Rapture, the Antichrist himself, George W. Bush is on the verge of reelection. He will rain terror and destruction upon the Earth with bunker busting Nukes that punch holes straight to Hell.

Remember: the Antichrist is one who is at first perceived to be an agent of God, not Satan. Tell me, what about Bush, Cheney, or the Republican party is even remotely consistent with the teachings of Christ?

I better go make a donation to Robert Tilton, get my prayer cloth, and cower in the basement...

Better put out those peat bogs (3, Interesting)

cluge (114877) | more than 9 years ago | (#10492066)


Peat Bogs outburn Western Europe New Scientist 18 Oct 1997


PEAT bogs in Indonesia that have been set alight by the country's raging forest fires could release more carbon dioxide into the atmosphere over the next six months than all the power stations and car engines of Western Europe emit in a year. The finding backs up claims that the fires could have a significant impact on global warming.


Sometimes there is very little that we can do to stop the production of CO2 into our atmosphere. Natural causes, like breathing put tonnes of CO2 into the air. Why haven't we begun a program using iron oxide spread on the ocean to trap and remove CO2? It's viability was proved years ago?. Why are environmentalist opposed to a scientific solution?

Re:Better put out those peat bogs (4, Insightful)

mr_null (16516) | more than 9 years ago | (#10492181)

I really think the only thing that recent experiments in HNLC ocean waters has proved is that Fe2+ is the limiting nutrient in phytoplankton production.

There really doesn't seem to be a solid link between increased production and Carbon sequestering. It's definatly worth further study, but as for proven?

Do you have well regarded source you could list that states some hard numbers for Carbon sequestering rates? I wouldn't mind seeing it, as I certainly havn't read every article out there on the subject.

More Evidence (4, Insightful)

squoozer (730327) | more than 9 years ago | (#10492080)

How much more evidence do we need before we start to do something about this problem? The problem, IMHO, is that even if we are at the point of seeing the start of run away global warming there is little incentive for our governments to do anything about it as it won't affect the current generation significantly.

If any of the governments of the world were thinking ahead though they would start investing very heavily in alternative power generation technology. In global terms it's not all that long before we run out of fossil fuels or damage the climate to the point where fossil fuels cost more than they are worth. The country that owns the technology to generate clean power will be in a very strong position. Imagine if your country didn't have to rely on the middle east for transport - suddenly your country becomes very powerful.

At the end of the day though while the American sheeple continue to vote idiots into power nothing is going to be done about the problem.

Re:More Evidence (1, Flamebait)

0123456 (636235) | more than 9 years ago | (#10492124)

"If any of the governments of the world were thinking ahead though they would start investing very heavily in alternative power generation technology."

The Chinese are apparently investing heavily in building cheap, safe nuclear reactors. Hopefully they'll sell them to us, since the whacko lefties won't let us build our own to eliminate their 'global warming' bogeyman.

runaway warming trend? (1, Informative)

Cat_Byte (621676) | more than 9 years ago | (#10492085)

tipping point has been reached and a runaway warming scenario is in progress

I don't know about everywhere else, but this is the mildest summer we have ever had in my entire life in TX. I think it broke 100 degrees 3 times all summer. Personally I'm predicting a harsh winter if it follows the same trend.

Re:runaway warming trend? (5, Informative)

herrison (635331) | more than 9 years ago | (#10492144)

General global warming need not mean that all places get warmer. Here in northern Europe, global warming could lead to a disruption of the north Atlantic drift/Gulf stream - which could lead to a much colder local environment.

Re:runaway warming trend? (1)

mcharlet (601009) | more than 9 years ago | (#10492209)

It's not about individual summers being nice/stormy, or winters being mild/harsh: it might take years to be able to decipher the impact of climate change on an area. There's widespread theory that this bout of climate change will produce more variable weather, which means that taking any single summer or winter as supportin or contrary evidence isn't very valuable. (Note that the increased variability theory doesn't have enough data yet to be clearly demonstrated, at least according to http://www.ec.gc.ca/TKEI/cc_weather/cc_weather_e.c fm [ec.gc.ca] this.)

Work to be "redone" (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10492098)

"it will imply that all our global warming predictions for the next hundred years or so will have to be redone."

This guy is more worried about redoing his work than the dangers of global warming itself.

So would now be a good time to... (0)

advocate_one (662832) | more than 9 years ago | (#10492109)

invest in companies that produce Umbrellas, Raincoats and Wellington Boots (galoshes for you USAnians)???

The sky is falling (3, Informative)

Kohath (38547) | more than 9 years ago | (#10492110)

Everyone run for the hills.

Here's a graph of temperature vs. Carbon-dioxide levels [junkscience.com] . See a relationship? Neither do I.

It's from this article [junkscience.com] .

Re:The sky is falling (2, Interesting)

PrionPryon (733902) | more than 9 years ago | (#10492204)

Of course, then you see graphs like this [grida.no] and you wonder, do people pick data sets that conform to their bias?

Solution! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10492111)

I know, let's keep pumping out CO2 as fast as we possibly can until it is an absolute proven fact that we're destroying the planet. Only then should we consider doing something about it (if it is not too late).

In the meantime, everyone continue to rubbish and shout down those damn tree huggers. I mean it is absolutely ludicrous to ask questions first and shoot later.

Who's with me?

It's me. I did it. (1, Funny)

TheLoneCabbage (323135) | more than 9 years ago | (#10492112)

I admit it, it's all my fault.
I've got 200 SUV's & 500 farting cows in the back yard, cranking out the C02.

And it's none too soon, winter is comming and it's gonna get way too cold. Anyone want to donate some microwave boritos to help speed up the process?

Re:It's me. I did it. (1)

freedom_india (780002) | more than 9 years ago | (#10492190)

Sorry. Farting cows release Methane and not CO2 as you have mentioned.

global warming Back gorund (2, Informative)

Mstrgeek (820200) | more than 9 years ago | (#10492120)

I have taken some time to do some Google searches to provide some background information on the topic hope you find the links useful

EPA : EPA Global Warming Site

http://yosemite.epa.gov/oar/globalwarming.nsf/cont ent/index.html

global warming group http://www.globalwarming.org/

Cause & effect's of global warming http://www.nrdc.org/globalWarming/default.asp

Talking about Global Warming is unpatriotic! (4, Interesting)

NoSuchGuy (308510) | more than 9 years ago | (#10492128)

Remember that talking about Global Warming is very unpatriotic in the US!

Just ask a "sponsored" (read: lobbied) politican.
Then ask a "censored" (read: cut off from money because of non compliant research) scientist.

Of all the songs... (1)

zecg (521666) | more than 9 years ago | (#10492130)

...that might have played at the moment I read this, Foobar2000 and his randomness generator chose this [tigerlillies.com] .

"And every dream, hope and desire
Is just a flicker in the fire
And that fire it will consume
The crack of doom
Is coming soon"

This is just a publicity stunt. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10492146)

YA ominous global warming article appears today.
"The Day After Tomorrow" comes out on DVD tomorrow.

Coincidence? I think not!

To use less hydrocarbon (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10492147)

Humanity will have to undergo "demand destruction".

In math terms:

Barrels of oil TIMES Number of Humans = CO2 production.

Now....how many humans wish to reduce the number of the barrels of oil they use? How many "leaders" will see it eaiser to reduce the number of humans?

Re:To use less hydrocarbon (3, Funny)

R.Caley (126968) | more than 9 years ago | (#10492210)

How many "leaders" will see it eaiser to reduce the number of humans?

The people it is easiest to eliminate are the ones whose elimination will have least impact on carbon use.

Mind you, some kind of flying robot which picks up any four wheel drive vehicle in use in an urban area and drops it and it's driver into a deep ocean trench is a possibility for significant change few people will object to...

Probably... (-1, Troll)

haxor.dk (463614) | more than 9 years ago | (#10492153)

...those EEEVIL RIGHTWINGERS!!! BWAHAHAHA!

Seriously, isn't it time people realised that environmental studies is still a discipline in its infancy, and political action taken on the basis of a young science is irresponsible ?

CWRU's Cockroach Project... (-1, Offtopic)

Saltine Cracker (116414) | more than 9 years ago | (#10492156)

Check out Case Western Reserve University's Biorobotics Research [case.edu] .

They have an very interesting program that starts in the biology lab where they're recording the nerve impulse patterns of live cockroaches as the run. This data is then studied by the robotics team in order to develop locomotion routines for the robots.

Additionally, there is research coming out of this project which enables victims of paralysis to have implants which help them regain some mobility of other wise unusable limbs.

Sorry to bring facts into this.... (2, Informative)

Ancient_Hacker (751168) | more than 9 years ago | (#10492164)

All the coal and oil on the planet (about 3 teratons) is only about 8% of the carbon dissolved in the oceans. Which seems to imply two things: (1) We need to stir up the oceans a bit to get some of that CO2-poor deep water to the surface. (2) If we got desperate we could mine the waters for carbon.

Maybe God is Making Planet Ready For Apocalypse (-1, Troll)

polished look 2 (662705) | more than 9 years ago | (#10492195)

It seems to me that the last day is approaching and God may be increasing the CO2 levels in preparation of the end-times scenerio.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

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>