search results matching tag: 1000 years

» channel: nordic

go advanced with your query
Search took 0.003 seconds

    Videos (15)     Sift Talk (0)     Blogs (0)     Comments (99)   

Hurricane Ian Southwest Florida compilation

“Don’t Look Up” in Real Life

newtboy says...

19 of the 20 hottest years ever recorded have occurred in the last 21 years.
8 of the hottest 8 years ever recorded were the last 8 years.

Black is not white. Up is not down. Hot is not cold….no matter how many times you say it, Bob. Being too dumb to even understand the science or its implications have you just denying it….like if you don’t understand it must not be true. 🤦‍♂️
It is well known that the right’s MO is to just lie about what their opponent claims, then debunk their own lie, ignoring the actual claims. It’s the best you can do, and the right’s constituents are so intellectually absent, incurious, and not just willing but wanting to be spoon fed propaganda that you buy it without ever investigating a thing. I know this to be true, because everyone who actually looks at the data (and doesn’t just misrepresent it completely) comes to the same conclusion (unless they’re selling something).

2030 did not come from Greta. It came from multiple climate reports, except for those who said we had less time.
It’s a purposeful intent to mislead the public to say the reports say ultimate disaster happens in 2030, they don’t, and the right knows they don’t say that and knows that’s not what climate activists say either…it says at current rates (when the report was written) by 2030 1.5C rise would be locked in, unavoidable. CO2 can last 300-1000 years actively in the atmosphere. Stopping adding CO2 and methane when we are at the line of 1.5C rise is planning for disaster with no backup and no margin for error when the stakes are literally survival of the species and civilization. In fact, rates have increased since the data was collected, so 2030 is too late….2000 may have been too late to stop runaway climate change, but we can still minimize or slow the impacts.

1.5C is when we lose control and feedback loops (likely) take over our ability to have any control. It’s too bad so many idiots are too dumb to comprehend that yet still have the resources to effect the outcome. “Mea culpa” isn’t going to restore the planet when they finally admit the undeniable, neither is their heads on pikes nor their children being used as food, but that’s where we’re going. Too bad we aren’t there yet, it would save a hell of a lot of problems if we just eradicated the irresponsible money worshiping morons in favor of people who put a livable planet above record quarterly profits.

bobknight33 said:

Climate change denial

We WILL Fix Climate Change!

newtboy says...

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!

A Puppy Named Narwhal

Second Ellicott City 'Thousand Year Storm' in 2 years

eric3579 says...

(edit)

I think title and description may be wrong

"The 2016 Ellicott City cloudburst was deemed* a “thousand-year rain event” in terms of the probability of recurrence. That an event of this magnitude unfolded in the same spot, two years later, is what it is"
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/capital-weather-gang/wp/2018/05/28/the-second-1000-year-rainstorm-in-two-years-engulfed-ellicott-city-heres-how-it
-happened/?utm_term=.c1948c1b867b

*Which came from this https://www.weather.gov/lwx/EllicottCityFlood2016

Please correct me if i'm wrong on this.

Ricky Gervais And Colbert Go Head-To-Head On Religion

Payback says...

I like the "destroy all books, science and theist, which will come back in 1000 years the exact same way?" argument. Even the Theist Colbert thinks that's a good one.

newtboy said:

I don't believe in one more god than you don't believe in.
Why is that a difficult concept for some?
*quality points, Gervais

Deciphering the Dark Secrets of Codex Seraphinianus

JustSaying says...

And imagine we'd go 1000 years in the future and people would've built a religion on that shit.
If Jesus knew how much fun he could've had with future generations, we'd be doing much more interesting things than just marvel at magic underwear and secret handshakes.

ravioli said:

All this speculation that went on about the book, and we could just ask the guy about it, finally!

Climatologist Emotional Over Arctic Methane Hydrate Release

newtboy says...

The simplest counter arguments to your dismissal are, 1) it's not a single degree, it's a number of degrees in a short time, releasing massive amounts of methane at once instead of over a few millennia. 2) it's exactly what happened 250 million years ago when climate change happened rapidly enough to release massive methane deposits in a short time frame, causing massively more climate change and a mass extinction event. Since then, there has not been the same kind of rapid mass increase in ocean temperature since the methane deposits were replaced.

It's about the speed of the temperature change, not just the amount of temperature change. Methane is short lived in the atmosphere, so if a change happened over 1000 years, the same total amount of methane might be released as a 100 year change, but only 10% of it will be in the atmosphere at a time. Consider, we've raised the temperature fast enough that the permafrost is melting at the same time as ice at the bottom of the ocean. That's a fairly unique situation that releases two enormous deposits of methane at the same time.

Our understanding does not need to be "complete" to be scientifically valid, or right. We may not know everything we need to know about the climate, but what we do KNOW is how methane reacts in the atmosphere, and how methane hydrates melt at certain temperatures/pressures, and we are near those levels in the deep oceans and permafrost areas today....so close that there are massive methane pockets bubbling out of the northern oceans and recently frozen ground worldwide.

bcglorf said:

The simplest counter argument to your catastrophic prediction is the stability of the paleo-temperature record. If there has been a methane 'time-bomb' just sitting there waiting to be set off anytime the temperature got an extra degree warmer then temperatures wouldn't be stable as they have been over the last millenia. The gradual shifts from ice-age to global rain forests wouldn't have been gradual at all, and likely wouldn't have been reversible either.

The more likely answer is our understanding of climate functions and things like just how much methane is likely to escape in a certain time frame is incomplete.

Samantha Bee on Orlando - Again? Again.

dannym3141 says...

It seems really strange from an outside perspective. It isn't all that long ago - at least in my memory - when certain types of American were almost celebrating that they were willing to torture and maim people if they 'got their answers'. Even if some of those people were innocent, it was an acceptable price to pay.

When Ed Snowden came out and told us that our governments were spying on us, trawling through our data and tracking our entire history online and in reality through surveillance cameras. The majority of America was against Snowden (in all the polls I've seen) - in any other day he would have been given the Nobel peace prize and celebrated as an all-time hero that stood up to impossible odds just to give the human race full disclosure on their 'freedom'. That's the stuff of legend, the stuff that people should be talking about in 1000 years time like we talk about Genghis Khan or something. Instead he was treated like a traitor and forced to live in exile in Russia because it was the only country that wouldn't hand him over to the torturing, controlling, law-breaking bastards he'd just made to look very stupid..... Gee, I wonder why he didn't want to face "criminal proceedings"? Nothing to hide, nothing to fear - except if you cross the wrong people?

Not too long ago freedom WAS an acceptable sacrifice for security.

When a lunatic got hold of an automatic rifle, killed 50 people and injured another 50, the prevailing argument seems to be "Hey, hey, let's not over react here, we can't sacrifice our freedom because of one terrorist act."

The only difference in this situation is that it isn't about "other people's" freedom and "my security" any more. It is about "my" freedom and "other people's" security.

You probably weren't one of those people, but I think it's fair to preface my comment with that contradiction.

I accept you have a decent point in this case; people shouldn't lose their freedom because the FBI made a mistake. But that's not the question being asked, let's talk about the general case rather than this specific one. The question is does legislation exist that will make mass shootings less common in the US? And I think the answer is yes, but I also think that culture is the biggest factor, not just access to guns.

As an example of what I mean - what if there were legislation that limited his ability to get hold of the weapon, registered that he had expressed an interest with the FBI who could then investigate based on his history? And maybe some other legislation could make it harder in general for him to just go and borrow one of his friends', or steal one from a local lax firing range, or whatever other illegal means exist to get hold of one.... perhaps because there were less in circulation, or those that were in circulation were more stringently secured?

At the end of the day it might not stop him getting hold of one, but it might make it harder and he might have second thoughts or make a mistake and be caught if it were harder. Hell, at least then the families of the dead would be able to say that a CRIME was committed when this fucking lunatic who had been under investigation was allowed to get access to a weapon that could so easily kill or maim a hundred people.

Mordhaus said:

That is not the point. Government works a certain way and rarely is it in the favor of individual liberties. We knee jerked after 9/11 and created the Patriot Act, you know, the set of rules that gave us torture, drone strikes/raids into sovereign nations without their permission, and the NSA checking everything.

If you ban people from one of their constitutional rights because they end up on a government watchlist, then you have set a precedent for further banning. Then next we can torture people in lieu of the 5th amendment because they are on a watchlist (oh wait, we sorta already did that to a couple of us citizens in Guantanamo). The FBI fucked up and removed this guy from surveillance, even though he had ample terrorist cred. That shouldn't have happened, but should we lose our freedom because of their screw up?

Where Did Russia Come From?

the enslavement of humanity

coolhund says...

Yeah its getting too long and youre putting words into my mouth and I cant stand people that cant even do a simple Google search on their own. It means they are not objective at all.

Anyway, you made a huge post, but most is just completely beside what I actually said and thus worthless, because I dont see a point going on with someone who obviously knows very well I am right, but then just put on his blindfold and pulls stuff out of his ass to save his ego...
For example I never said its exacly like slave labor in the past. But it is a good analogy and what you said are no good point in any way. I also didnt say they had a much better life 500-1000 years ago. I only said they had more free time, didnt work as hard and were happy considering those times.
Whatever... Keep downplaying problems for the whole worlds because someone proved you wrong.

the enslavement of humanity

coolhund says...

Where is the option for the cotton planter to change careers to something they find interesting and challenging?

Does it matter? If you have a job that you studied for in college and suddenly notice it doesnt fit you, you have to work a lot to correct that for no pay, you actually have to pay for it. Also if youre 40+ and want to start a new career human resource managers will rather take someone who didnt have the issues like you and has the years experience in actual work at the same job. So you will always be at a huge disadvantage if you decide to change professions.
All these "super successful" people you see on TV that proudly talk about how they did all that so well, "just because they worked soooooo hard" (everyone either does that, or claims it), are exceptions to the rule!



Where are the benefits of infrastructure?

Uhm, those infrastructures are mostly used to get to your job or do your job anyway. What good are they if you work where you live, like those slaves?



How about healthcare?

AFAIK slaves got good healthcare, since they were property and the owner would lose money if they "broke" and couldnt be fixed.
Also I wouldnt call American healthcare good. People have to pay for it. And often have to take huge debts on themselves and their family to survive or be still able to work.



How about individual's rights?

Individual's rights? Yeah, maybe against other "slaves", but not against the state or rich people. They will always have a huge advantage compared to you. And actually they do what they want all over the world. Just look at those cesspools Syria, Libya, Ukraine, Iraq, Afghanistan, etc. Millions killed for what? Are you safer now than before 9/11? No. The whole world is actually MUCH MUCH unsafer now. All thanks to your masters that care so much about the "individual's rights".
They even have the audacity to threaten NATO countries with invasion if they ever dared to bring one of them before an international tribunal.



How about protection from hostility?

Hostility from whom? Terrorists? Are you kidding me? Terrorists who are only created due to inhumane politics aswell? Criminals? Do you know that crime is actually not something we are born with, but we actually learn to do, because of our surroundings? If a lot of people feel treated unfair and cant do anything about it, crime rate will skyrocket. It has been that way for thousands of years. Look at other countries that treat their people much more humane and actually even pay then enough to live a good life even if they dont work, or have never worked! They shudder when seeing American crime rates. You can compare yourself more to Brazil than to Europe.



How about ever improving quality of life?

Most people are extremely stressed in their life, due to their job, not having enough time because of their job, being frustrated because other people have more then them, while working less (or not at all), having health issues due to their work and they know they cant change the job because they wont get another one, they simply hate their job, but also know they cant get a better one, etc, etc, etc.
There was a study a few years ago where they found out that people 500-1000 years ago were actually very happy. They didnt have to work nearly as much as we do nowadays! It wasnt rare that they only worked 6 months a year, and even if they worked they had MUCH longer breaks every day and didnt work as long. And they lived a good life for those times. Of course nowhere near as good as the monarchs, but it wasnt nearly as bad as its commonly claimed.

One thing has changed though: If youre smart and/or lucky (as in having a rich family) you can open your own company, do what you love. But even that gets harder and harder because the competition gets higher in numbers and in quality.

Barbar said:

It's definitely not spot on. It makes some points, but it misses them elsewhere.

Where is the option for the cotton planter to change careers to something they find interesting and challenging?

Where are the benefits of infrastructure?

How about healthcare?

How about individual's rights?

How about protection from hostility?

How about ever improving quality of life?

I'm all for complaining about the clown show that is the current state of US (amongst other countries) politics. But don't pretend that you are afforded no benefits by the state.

This has the intellectual honesty of a Bill O'reilly segment.

The Titanic's Metal Mysteries

Sniper007 says...

...aaand I'm fairly certain "scientists understood that temperatures affect material performance." That is not something that is new knowledge gained by humanity in the last 100 (or 1000) years.

Better metal alloys? Certainly.

Remembering Some Of the Most Notorious Videosift Shills (History Talk Post)

chingalera says...

Fair enough ma'am, and as to my sincerity I consider such assertions to be somewhat subjective in light of association and nearness to your heart......and if my memory serves me incorrectly as to his mission, passion, or prominence I do with all heart and sincerity apologize once again.

Hearsay is in fact, what prompted my accusatory tone, I seem to recall someone having told me he was in fact, working for the Obama campaign in some form or another which in my personal playbook would include pejoratively your man in the ranks of similar eager apologists for the lame-duck's fan-club. I was never a fan of the damaged President, his works have proven his mettle thus far to have been a dire shame to America rather than some savior or healing saint.

You may believe me mint, that I harbor no ill-will whatsoever to your man, or to his sincerity and passion for the healing of this country. I simply consider fans of anyone whose knowledge of the facts consists of promulgated sound-bites and half-truths at face value, self-deceit of the highest order. I do respect his mind and heart, his passion and dedication to ultimate truth and peace.

As to my sanity well, what IS sanity would be my question and who if anyone is qualified to make such a bold assumption as to another person's mind? I maintain that nobody holds the keys to that mysterious kingdom and would offer, that my own dysfunction lies in my inability to use language very well, to express my emotions and angst, my joy and contentment, that all may understand and relate to. We all have our problems and mine are several and constant-Expression of heart comes at a great price for me. I am an angry person, a thoughtful person, a sincerely confused and connected person, and all humans share this with every other, with no exceptions.

If I may be called a shill as well, my fanaticism rests in the camp of understanding who and what I am relative to the rest of the human race.

We're all works-in-progress until we stop sucking air and pumping blood, my hope is to remain incarnate for another 1000 years, at which point I may become an adolescent just passing the age of reason (7 years old in human dog years)!

I hope you come back strong and NetRunner too, in 2014. I welcome what everyone has to share. Sorry I was such a dick in the past-

I won't promise that you will not see it again, keeping oneself in check is a 24/7, 365 chore.

Peace and understanding to all members of this site, and above all, love.

19-year-old hopes to revolutionize nuclear power

chingalera says...

Well I'm humbled enough to admit that I know as much about nuclear energy production as a primary schoolboy. Extant history of large-scale operations leaves a foul taste for everyone, or should. How many European countries ditched the idea of ever using nuclear energy? How many phaseouts planned?

Out with the old if it's not a potential ELE (extinction level enterprise).

LD just made the scariest prediction considered all morning and begs the question, "Does the planet really need China playing around with tinker-toy nuke power plants considering their track-record for building ginormous engineering disasters?" They may have a 1000-year-plan for empire but their characteristic program of increase as their world economic status grows seems a, 'many trials, many errors' approach.

That their success in economic influence has been accomplished through producing sub-standard plastic bullshit consumer products, sub-standard textiles, etc. with indigenous slave-labor to sell the bullshit to robotic consumers like U.S., Mexico, (insert non-Asian nations here) while cornering the market on raw materials for their machine should be of preeminent concern beyond that of how humans will get the power they need to continue turning the planet into something ugly.

Look at what they accomplished in space just the other day with their launching of that satellite-grabber. Here's another new level of paranoia I can agree with;
"In March 2013, a new law that "prohibits anyone from China setting foot in a NASA building" was passed."(wiki)

China in space
What a frightening concept.

LiquidDrift said:

It's a shame that fukushima has tainted the idea of safe, clean nuclear power. There are some really cool, safe modern designs out there that create orders of magnitude less waste, can't melt down and of course produce no carbon emissions. But they are just not politically viable in most western countries. This is probably another area that China will dominate in the future.



Send this Article to a Friend



Separate multiple emails with a comma (,); limit 5 recipients






Your email has been sent successfully!

Manage this Video in Your Playlists

Beggar's Canyon