Your video, Foggy Brittany warming up in the morning sun, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

What’s he mean “young people”? I’m 50, I’ve felt that way since 1990 because I pay attention. We are addicts, addicts use until they die, they don’t quit because their health suffers.

At 3 degrees some developing countries won’t be able to feed their population!?! WTF?! That was the case before any climate changes, dummy. It’s bad now. It will be apocalyptic relatively soon…like decades, not centuries.

WILL cause trillions in damage!?….guess again, already happened. It WILL cause tens of trillions in damage per year, eventually outpacing global gdp.

What scientists are he counting when he says “most agree” we won’t see this kind of future? Certainly not climate scientists, they agree it’s happening, and none see it even slowing, much less getting better. From what I saw, they just went on strike because they’re sick of being ignored.

Leveled off, eh? Look at your own graph to see that China’s coal consumption went up by 5000 twh equivalents since 2010, and is insanely massive…it went up by more than the US used at its highest levels (in his timeline). But he calls that “leveled off”. Who is this guy? He’s insane or lying through his teeth.

Solar and wind have been better than coal economically for decades, but we haven’t switched over, have we?

Where does he get his statistics, because every time I see real numbers we’ve only slowed our increased emissions by 4%, we have not actually reduced them….like saying Obama reduced the military budget because he didn’t increase it as much as previous administrations. It’s asinine.

India isn’t building trillions in solar, they’re building fossil fuel power plants and hydro electric, also disastrous for the environment….and useless after their glaciers fail.

The CO2 in the atmosphere will be there for 300-1000 years, carbon capture is a ridiculous pipe dream that completely ignores the scope of the problem. Methalhydrate is already destabilized, and it’s 25 times as potent as CO2. The total global amount of methane carbon bound up in these hydrate deposits is in the order of 1000 to 5000 gigatonnes – i.e. about 100 to 500 times more carbon than is released annually into the atmosphere by the burning of fossil fuels (coal, oil and gas). It’s melting now faster every day, and will surpass human carbon emissions.

None of his “requirements” are happening. What we need is less people….like 90% less.

Progress is being made, minor progress in small amounts on tiny scales…so are increases in emissions but on massive scales and unfathomable amounts….emissions that needed to be at zero decades ago to save civilization as we know it. Climate refugees exist today in huge numbers, think how difficult 1 million Syrians were for Europe to absorb, now multiply by 2000 or more when all equatorial nations become uninhabitable. Where will we grow food with refugees covering every bit of land? Get real.

He admits that stopping warming below 1.5 degrees is impossible, and 3 degrees before 2021 likely (many say by 2050). Did he forget that 1.5 degrees warming is where we lose control and feedback loops make our emissions moot?

Do you even science, dude?

He gave me zero hope, because I know most of his pie in the sky “hope” is utterly ridiculous and runs contrary to reality and human nature. I wanted some good news, I got pablum.
Booo Kurzgesagt. Try being honest and not ignoring the facts, please. BOOOOO!

Might be a tiny bit of good news on the warming front, but what about the sulfuric "pollution" effect of the areas the ashes reache? Vegetation, waterways, etc. I'm not just thinking about the effects on human, but on the living environment of animals.

A 2012 United Nations report summarized 65 different estimated maximum sustainable population size and the most common estimate was 8 billion. Advocates of reduced population often put forward much lower numbers. Paul R. Ehrlich stated in 2018 that the optimum population is between 1.5 and 2 billion

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sustainable_population

Since we are at or near 8 billion and are far from sustainable, haven’t been for over 50 years, I think the 1.5 number is far more realistic, maybe even high. I think the 8 billion estimates assume international cooperation, constant advances in farming tech with constantly increasing yields (that aren’t happening), and don’t account for climate change disrupting supply chains and production at various levels….so wishful thinking.

War sucks for population control. It’s messy, expensive, destructive of both infrastructure and ecology, and just crap at killing meaningful numbers. We need to reduce by billions, the worst war killed a few million and destroyed much of Europe. A war that kills 1000 times more people….yikes. Forget global warming, hello planetary disintegration.

The only acceptable method IMO is quit having children, then you don’t kill anyone to achieve sustainability. For some idiotic reason, average people find the idea of not having excess children horrific and totally out of the question, but the idea of starving their children to death seems to garner a “shit happens”.

Agreed, we need something like an airborne infectious prion where there could be no vaccine, no sterilization, no escape…..only that would wipe out everyone so maybe not that.

I think the worst part of these summits is their stated goals.
Paris intended to keep warming to 1.5 degrees by 2050 (no real plan beyond then)…but you might recall, 1.5 degrees of warming is considered the tipping point where feedback loops and natural processes outpace human inputs, meaning even if we hit zero emissions by 2050, and if everyone kept to their Paris agreement promises, and if other nations don’t continue to ramp up emissions, and if unforeseen feedback loops aren’t stronger or faster acting than predicted, we still lose control completely by 2050. That’s the best plan we have, runaway climate shifts in <30 years AT BEST….and no one seems to be living up to even that planned disaster of a plan. Emissions aren’t being cut, they’re increasing. Feedback loops are ramping up 40 years earlier than predicted. All the while, people are complaining that gas is over $3 (I haven’t seen it under $4 in decades where I live) and insisting we adopt some heavily polluting power generation instead of investing in green energy solutions. People assume, it seems, that some last minute fix will solve climate change, ignoring the fact that emissions from today are reactive in the atmosphere for between 25 and 150 years, so we needed to be at net zero 25 years ago to even start effecting the atmosphere today…and some emissions from the industrial revolution are still effecting us now. Net zero by 2050 (a pipe dream, and the best plan so far) is planning to fail completely…like turning off the blast furnace in your house when the thermometer hits 450.5 inside and thinking you can stop it from burning down.
If Covid taught us anything, it’s that there is 0% chance humans will be able to cooperate enough to tackle climate change. People were asked to simply wear a mask and distance a bit to save their lives, and enough refused to do it that the methods that worked beautifully elsewhere failed miserably to control a virus. If we can’t pull off such a simple, blatantly obvious plan against a virus, what chance is there of cooperation across the board to sacrifice enormous amounts of money and completely revamp our wasteful way of life in uncountable ways to stop something seen as a future problem by many? IMO, there so little chance of pulling it off that it’s statistically correct to say there’s absolutely no chance at all.

Ant,

It would require a fairly intensive refactor to get it to work. The hardest part would be figuring out how to shoehorn GOTO into a modern BASIC interpreter since that command was taken out back and shot in the head -- and for good reason -- but with the memory and processor restrictions of computers at the time, GOTO was necessary because GOSUB required 4 bytes of stored information and a bit more processing power. There's also a number of functions that are exclusive to TRS-DOS BASIC and the Model III in particular.

At one point, I thought about moving the code from BASIC to Z-80 Assembler, but by then the first PC Jr. clones were out (I had a TRS Model 1000 and it was GREAT!) and it no longer made sense to continue doing anything on the Model III.

The worst loss is the database data, which was all the room and pathing descriptions, as well as part of the warm storage for the games. That's the part that breaks my heart to have lost.

That said, the sound over an acoustic coupler of an analog modem making a 300 bps connection is still makes me smile.

My guess is that the value of a few calories would depend on whether the dinosaurs were warm- or cold-blooded. A cold-blooded lizard or snake can last a lot longer on a small meal than a warm-blooded human.

The debate on whether or not actual dinosaurs were cold-blooded is still open, as far as I know. My favourite point in the argument is that all dinosaurs alive today (i.e. birds) are warm-blooded but perhaps it was exactly that adaptation that let them survive through the mas extinction.

Looking at the predatory dinosaurs in the film, there's no hint of feathers (so they're unlikely to be actual t-rexes), which to me points towards the idea that they're cold-blooded and so a small morsel would sustain them a while.

As for three of them getting involved, to me they're also being opportunistic at the chance of getting Kong. He seemed comfortable enough handling one, but it was definitely not a given. He acted very wary of two of them, so a third joining should really swing things in the dinosaurs' favour. However, it looks like Kong was holding back, and really let things fly when the odds were against him.

This is propaganda from an oil company. Carbon capture technology is bullshit to distract you from thinking it is okay to continue drilling oil at a rate that will cause catastrophic harm from global warming. Solar, wind, nuclear, and battery powered electric vehicles are how we get off of our addiction to oil.

Right after Jackass came out, a couple of friends-of-a-friend decided to stage their own version of the movie -- with a hornet's nest. They found the thing hanging from a tree at the edge of a field and it was not remotely on the small size. Also, this was in late August and the queen had already flown away, leaving the drones to slowly starve to death. Thus, the enormous number of stripey-stripey sting-stings were already good 'n' pissed-off.

They were about to get moreso.

So chowderhead A and chowderhead B have a brilliant plan: they're going to shoot this enormous ball full of astoundingly-irate murderous insects with a shotgun while they're filming it. If you're hearing banjos playing and luke-warm cheap beers being cracked open, you're about in the right frame of mind.

Places, everybody!

The stage is set: on one end, at what's decided to be "minimum safe distance", are our erstwhile David Attenborough/Jonny Knoxville knock-offs. At a decidedly NOT minimum safe distance away is the arthropod version of the T'sar Bomba. All we're missing now is a Mossberg, enough idiocy to think this can end any way but badly, and a camera. With far too much alacrity for what's about to happen, all three are provided.

Aaaaaand, ACTION!

* BOOOM! *

At first, surprisingly, nothing happens. This period of stasis lasts roughly a picosecond. Then, unsurprisingly, things start to happen and they happen far more quickly than the Chuckle Brothers planned on. This plays out in three acts:

Act 1: "Hey, uh, why is the nest still there?"
Act 2: "Uh-oh..."
Act 3: "FUCK FUCK FUCK FUCK FUCK FUCK FUCK!!!"

Hubris takes many forms, and schadenfreude takes twice as many, but both combined were statistically zero compared to the number of hornets involved in this fiasco. Had the two Mensa escapees who irked said hornets thought this thing through -- stop laughing -- perhaps they would have arrived at the conclusion that 1. a shotgun slug is not the preferred load-out when dealing with a ball made out of wasp puke and 2. being the only two things visible within a 20 mile radius of the ball made out of wasp puke pretty much negates the mystery of who the hornets are going to sting the ever-loving fuck out of.

With their plans in ruins and the nest not, our heroes decide to quit the field. This is the first smart thing they've done since looking at that big ball of wasps and deciding it was redolent with untapped hilarity. The hornets are having none of this white flag nonsense, however, and they decide to quit screwing around and really inflict some pain. It's a quarter mile back to the car and the hornets are going to make them pay for every inch of it.

The final score:
Hornet losses: meh, they were all going to die in a few weeks anyway.
The chucklenuts: 23 stings, a dropped shotgun, and three minutes of footage that they took in the pre-YouTube era and thus is lost to time.

Moral:
Hornets are not toys.

may be a dupe of https://videosift.com/video/The-Newsrooms-Take-On-Global-Warming-Fact-Checked

*doublepromote someone else finally telling the truth, even if it is just a fictional tv character. I’ve been saying the same thing since around 2000. If we went all in, halted all co2 emissions and all methane emissions 20 years ago, and invested in methods to catch and sequester what we already emitted, we might have avoided the tipping point where we are no longer in control….but instead we increased emissions every year, flooring it towards that cliff and hitting the nitrous button.
*quality if inconvenient truths

That tipping point was reached well over a decade ago when methane started to melt out of permafrost and the deep ocean where it has been frozen for eons. It’s capable of causing warming >80 times as much as co2 short term, >25 times as much long term, and is boiling out at rapidly increasing rates. Pre 2006 it’s estimated around .5 million tons per year…2006 it was measured at 3.8 million tons…by 2013 that was up to 17 million tons with the trend increasing. More recent estimates are hard to find, but it’s agreed that as temperatures climb not only are hydrates melting much more rapidly, bacteria are also accelerating decomposition in the thawed permafrost, and they emit methane. The Arctic is warming up to 5 times faster than the average global temperature. It’s likely over 50 million tons per year by now if not much higher.

Shakhova et al. (2008) estimate that not less than 1,400 gigatonnes (Gt=1 billion tons) of carbon is presently locked up as methane and methane hydrates under the Arctic submarine permafrost, and 5–10% of that area is subject to puncturing by open taliks. They conclude that "release of up to 50 Gt of predicted amount of hydrate storage [is] highly possible for abrupt release at any time". That would increase the methane content of the planet's atmosphere by a factor of twelve in one shot….game over.

Bear in mind, 1 cubic meter of hydrate contains >160 cubic meters of methane gas at atmospheric pressure.

The amount of increase from bacterial emissions in rotting permafrost is debatable, but even the lowest estimates are insurmountable.

This is only one of dozens of KNOWN feedback loops already in action, and there are definitely unknown feedback systems we can’t predict.

This does not mean there’s nothing to be done, we can still mitigate the damage somewhat, maybe slow the rate of change enough that some animals and plants more advanced than bacteria survive long term. It does mean a massive >99% culling of humanity, a total shift in civilization from a money based civilization to one focused on survival, and likely an unavoidable mass extinction rivaling any previous extinctions.

global warming is real
at this point anyone who denies it is flat out moron

Global warming is real; and it's coming--liberal or conservative, North, South--increasing oscillations in weather, increasingly violent oscillations--are gonna be a thing.

Before this weekend the all time high in Portland was 107. This weekend they hit 108. Today they hit 115!!!
Seattle broke their all time high today too...was 103, today was 105.

Good thing global warming is fake news.

Derp.
I've seen dozens of reports of increases in the 1000-1500% range, and millions just dropped with nothing....but even your lowball +30% per year is still impossible to absorb and insane increases.

Water damage not hurricane related include flooding from sea level rise and more powerful storms outside hurricane season.

You ijit....more and stronger hurricanes ARE a component of global warming, as are flood events not from hurricanes, stronger storms, and higher flood tides.

Dummy.... Of the top 5 years with the most hurricanes on record since 1851, 4 were since 2005. Absolutely there are more hurricanes on average since 2000. You need to learn how to read a graph, and to not cherry pick data by discarding any you don't like or stopping the tally before major changes started. More dishonest Bob.

If it's from the dollar dropping (no where near 50%, the dollar index went from 110 -90 since 2000, CPI from $1722-$2634) why didn't they explode under Bush when it dropped as low as 72, and why didn't they drop when Obama brought that back to 102?

Answer: because you're totally full of it, as usual.
The company's themselves say it's from higher payouts due to more, stronger storms causing more damage....Many abandoning the market for other states....not because the dollar is weak. That's nonsense.