Look at this scientific paper. Just look at it.
11 Likes
I want to like this, but I have no more likes to give â so, <3
edit: got some likes backâŚ
I read that as âlibrariansâ.
I think I see your point and iceberg calving is difficult to correlate with global warming because calving is a complicated process thatâs not well represented in current, continent-scale models (AFAIK).
But, from what I understand, itâs the growing consistency of the closer timing of the recent releases between events of these massive things (and growing number of smaller ones) that has climate scientists watching them closely - especially once we all consider this:
And things like this:
1 Like
Once again, that looks like a good thing. There is always talk about the lack of fresh water, droughts, etc⌠That graph seems to indicate that we should be up to our armpits in fresh water soon.
1 Like
The glory days of fresh water are upon us.
3 Likes
Thatâs Canadian metric in the parentheses.
That paper. Just look at it.
1 Like
Melt, baby melt!
1 Like
Yeah, it wasnât a comment about global warming, just that this doesnât seem to be a hurricane Sandy scale event in itself. On the other hand, it could be very big for a glacier calving rather than part of an ice shelf splitting off.
1 Like
HMMM NASAâs video says EIGHT Manhattanâs yet BoingBoingâs headline and body sayâs SIX
I prefer the âlaid end to end, how many times theyâd go to the moon and backâ metric. I think this one would be â0.0000555â or so.
Makes it much clearer that wayâwow!
Thatâs because NASA always calculates based on unladen Manhattans.
1 Like
Only if youâre treading water, for far too many coastal people!
6 Manhattans is a cab ride home
2 Likes
Speak for yourself, I bathe more frequently than that. 
Perhaps I can interest you in my new video on how you can invest in some cheap future beach side property now.
I already have: I live in Chicago, close enough to easily bike along the Lake Michigan shoreline but far enough away to remain non-submerged for at least another generation or two.
2 Likes
Cowicide, the best thing about Spam was that it replaced âLibertarians vs. Socialistsâ as the argument that all Usenet discussions eventually devolved into. As a Libertarian, I believed that we were right and yâall were wrong, but that didnât mean I wanted to rehash the same old tired arguments yet again, especially with newbies from both sides who hadnât really thought in any depth about what their positions meant.
âGlobal Warming Is A Hoaxâ isnât a Libertarian position - itâs a Corporatist position that the folks in the energy production and consumption businesses have been trying to sell us, so that Congress doesnât regulate their businesses and interfere with their profits, and if a century from now it means that Manhattan is flooded and billions and billions of dollars of once-valuable real estate and farmland are worthless, theyâll be safely dead anyway. (By the way, the propaganda groups that are selling that position are having a two-for-one special along with âDonât trust scientists about evolutionâ - itâs a useful hook to attract some voting blocks, but the real payload is "Donât trust scientists about Global Warming.)
âGovernment Shouldnât Regulate Businessesâ is one position taken by many Libertarians, but âBusinesses that damage other peopleâs property should have to pay for it, and if you canât afford it, you shouldnât be in that businessâ is another. (Our most popular position on the topic is probably âWhat, me worry?â, but thatâs every political groupâs position on too many topics.)
1 Like
Manhattan is flooded and billions and billions of dollars of once-valuable real estate and farmland are worthless, theyâll be safely dead anyway
Climate change is already negatively affecting our quality of life today. As someone that got to choke on wildfire smoke under a blood-red sky here in Colorado for the last few summers or so, I can assure you the effects are here and now.
On the plus side, I got some âprettyâ photos of one of the several wildfires that were all happening at once in CO. This is a photo I took of the huge smoke clouds moving in. You could feel and smell the death in the air it brings with it:
I then snapped this photo below as the sky turned to night. This is a photo I took of the sun, not the moon. The rest of the sky turned a very dark, sickly blood color. Like dark, dried up blood:
I know some people that lost their homes and the lives of some of their neighbors.
And, Iâve got another news flash. Among a lot of other catastrophic damage, Superstorm Sandy already put parts of New York City underwater for a bit.
This was East 14th Street in Manhattan:
âGlobal Warming Is A Hoaxâ isnât a Libertarian position - itâs a Corporatist position that the folks in the energy production and consumption businesses have been trying to sell us
The libertarians at reason.com have finally after long last admitted that global warming is actually real. But, even after this epic blunder, they expect the rest of the world to take them seriously at this point.
The truth of the matter is without funding from corporatist billionaires, etc. reason.com wouldnât have survived because theyâve lost credibility with educated, reasonable people a long time ago.
Reason.com exists because they help to spread profitable, corporatist half-truths and lies like a form of digital pollution throughout top search engine results throughout places such as Google. Search engine results are the gateways to public opinion.
Kind of like how corporatists will run right wing radio at a loss because the real profits come from indoctrinating a listening public to be sympathetic (or even become zealots) for corporate talking points. Itâs profitable to pollute the airwaves as well.
Now the libertarians at reason.com are on a relatively new kick that is climate change impact denial, God damn them. Theyâre doubling down on their utter lack of credibility among critical thinkers and others that can research their ways out of wet, paper bags and becoming even more hated bastards in the process.
So, yeah⌠the âglobal warming is a hoaxâ thing has gotten stale for a lot of libertarians, but now climate change impact denial is the new, destructive insanity. Is that your thing as well?
Personally, Iâd stop labeling myself a libertarian if I couldnât relate to most other modern libertarians except on a few issues. Otherwise, I would be in a constant state of feeling insulted and feeling misunderstood whenever anyone legitimately disses on them. Itâs not worth the hassle of constantly trying to âcorrectâ most people on what it means for you personally.
I donât think youâre a libertarian in the most modern, common usage of the term and I hope you take that as a compliment. Iâm on the same page with many libertarians on drug decriminalization but often not for the same reasons (no pun intended). But, I canât even imagine labeling myself with the libertarian label in this day and age.
If youâre trying to bring the libertarian name back in good standing, itâs a lost cause. People like those at reason.com, the Koch brothers, âfree marketâ stooges and climate xxx deniers have already ruined the libertarian name, hit it with hurricane force winds, burned it to the ground and flooded the nameâs ashes with salt water.
Libertarians are often associated with similar âthinkersâ such as teabaggers like Michelle Bachman, etc. - If Michelle Bachman and her ilk managed to âownâ a label I related with and it became an accepted label by most people, Iâd abandon the label like a contagious cancer and move onto something else. It just isnât worth it.
Whether you like it or not, libertarians are going to now be forever associated with climate change denial, climate change impact denial and a blind worship of a mythical, unicorn âfree marketâ. Itâs not your fault, but like I said, I wouldnât associate myself with that label either considering the livid resentment thatâs building for those whoâve help corporatists drag our collective feet to do anything about global climate change. As more people are harmed by it, the more the resentment will grow.
1 Like
