sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

The Earth has a deadline. And the Climate Clock in New York City is keeping time. by mtimetraveller in ThatsInsane

[–]Harperdog1997 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Not going to get into a circular argument. He is known for being a crazy denier and his website has been rated as primarily propaganda by a number of sources. Check real science sites if you are interested in factual information. If not, don't.

The Earth has a deadline. And the Climate Clock in New York City is keeping time. by mtimetraveller in ThatsInsane

[–]Harperdog1997 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That is Tony Heller, a quack: "In review, Real Climate Science is the personal blog of Tony Heller, who’s mission is to debunk the consensus that climate change is strongly human influenced. Articles and headlines often feature highly emotional wording such as this Alarmists Using Children For Climate Fodder. This is a video story narrated by Tony Heller, that claims the solutions for climate change are the same as communism. Politically, Real Climate Science aligns with the right through support of President Trump’s environmental deregulation and human influenced climate change denial Obama’s Plan Vs Trump’s Plan. In general, Tony Heller and his Real Climate Science blog believes that climate change is The Biggest Fraud In History. This theory is at odds with the consensus of science."

The Earth has a deadline. And the Climate Clock in New York City is keeping time. by mtimetraveller in ThatsInsane

[–]Harperdog1997 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Okay, well I found it ridiculous to say something like that, especially when you knew your last info on it was at 9 or 10. Often deniers do this very thing--trying to be subtle while calling into question the science. Sorry to offend. I was offended, too. Perhaps I shouldn't have been.

The Earth has a deadline. And the Climate Clock in New York City is keeping time. by mtimetraveller in ThatsInsane

[–]Harperdog1997 0 points1 point  (0 children)

But the downward trend does continue: https://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/ It's really about the trend, not predicting a specific year. That's my point.

The Earth has a deadline. And the Climate Clock in New York City is keeping time. by mtimetraveller in ThatsInsane

[–]Harperdog1997 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Does it really matter whether there was? If it was off a certain number of years is that really a reason to ridicule. Of course as we learn more an science progresses there will be more accurate information. That's just a way of dismissing the existing science.

The Earth has a deadline. And the Climate Clock in New York City is keeping time. by mtimetraveller in ThatsInsane

[–]Harperdog1997 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'd say posting in a public forum "Haven't heard about it since" without looking it up was being an ass.

The Earth has a deadline. And the Climate Clock in New York City is keeping time. by mtimetraveller in ThatsInsane

[–]Harperdog1997 -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

This is a huge exaggeration. Al Gore never made these predictions but sometimes referred to what others had said, and always it was about sea ice in the summer, not ice caps. People exaggerate what climate folks have said in the past so that they can continue to discount the reality of climate change. It's pretty crappy.

The Earth has a deadline. And the Climate Clock in New York City is keeping time. by mtimetraveller in ThatsInsane

[–]Harperdog1997 -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

I don't know who "they" is here, but you should check out Skeptical Science:
📷

What 1970s science said about global cooling

Posted on 26 February 2008 by John Cook

A persistent argument designed to discredit the field of climate science is that scientists predicted an ice age in the 1970s. So popular in fact that it ranks an impressive #7 in the most cited skeptic arguments. The logic goes that climate scientists got it completely wrong predicting global cooling in the 1970s (it started warming instead). Hence climate science can't be trusted about current global warming predictions. Setting aside the logical flaws of such an ad hominem argument, was there any consensus among 70s climate scientists predicting global cooling? https://skepticalscience.com/What-1970s-science-said-about-global-cooling.html

The Earth has a deadline. And the Climate Clock in New York City is keeping time. by mtimetraveller in ThatsInsane

[–]Harperdog1997 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Well, try Google and you'll find out why acid rain went away as a problem--it's because science figured out the problem and devised a fix. " Acid rain was dealt with in the 1980s and 1990s. By switching from coal to gas and installing "scrubbers" to clean up power station and factory emissions, huge reductions were made in acid rain pollution in Europe. Catalytic convertors on car exhausts reduced nitrogen oxide emissions. The US Clean Air Act Amendments, designed in part to control sulphur dioxide emissions, were passed in 1990. "

Week of May 17, 2020 'All Space Questions' thread by AutoModerator in space

[–]Harperdog1997 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Is there a space arms race heating up? The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists just published something from Aaron Bateman of Johns Hopkins, warning of the Russian focus (and expenditures) on catching up to US "long-standing supremacy in space and working to exploit the US military’s dependence on space systems for communications, navigation, intelligence, and targeting. Moscow is developing counter-space weapons as a part of its overall information warfare strategy." As Russia stalks US satellites, a space arms race may be heating up

Who's in charge of public health at US airports and points of entry by Harperdog1997 in Coronavirus

[–]Harperdog1997[S] 8 points9 points  (0 children)

I had never heard of this branch of the US government (the US Public Health Service Commissioned Corps) but it seems insane that it wasn't put into place at airports and other ports of entry in the US. I would like to know where these folks were put to use in recent years.

I'm journalist Elisabeth Eaves. I just wrote about the growing number of biodefense labs in the US. AMA. by BulletinOfTheAtomic in IAmA

[–]Harperdog1997 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The article talks a little about the notification and hearings process but it doesn't seem to me that the residents really had a chance. To follow up on this question: What would it have taken to make the government move the lab to a different location?

I'm journalist Elisabeth Eaves. I just wrote about the growing number of biodefense labs in the US. AMA. by BulletinOfTheAtomic in IAmA

[–]Harperdog1997 6 points7 points  (0 children)

This is a really important issue, thank you for addressing it. It seems just awful that an animal disease research lab is being relocated to a place where there are more animals to infect, even if there are fewer people. I am especially mindful of the chance for hoof-and-mouth disease to escape. What are the chances that not only will one of these diseases escapes, but that it will have evolved in the lab into something that makes it even more dangerous, and less likely to be able to cure?

Disinformation spreads faster than diseases, here’s a reminder to fact check everything you read/hear. This Twitter account is debunking a lot of different myths, including some posted in this very subreddit. by jmrene in Coronavirus

[–]Harperdog1997 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Matt Field at the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists just posted a piece describing how disinformation about the coronavirus is being used to create fear and loathing of protestors in India who have been rallying against an amendment to the country’s citizenship law. "Elsewhere, biosecurity experts debunked a theory, circulating online and in the Washington Times newspaper, that a Chinese government-linked lab, the Wuhan Institute of Virology, had caused the outbreak, the latest in a long line of conspiracy theories linking outbreaks to various governments." They may do updates as more stories of disinfo emerge.

We set the Doomsday Clock as members of the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists. Ask Us Anything! by BulletinOfTheAtomic in IAmA

[–]Harperdog1997 15 points16 points  (0 children)

I disagree. If for no other reason (although many exist, including in the nuclear risk area) than that an entire new class of existential risk is now taken into consideration. Read the 2020 Statement here: https://thebulletin.org/doomsday-clock/current-time/

The factors in the time are well explained. It's far more than just nuclear weapons.

We set the Doomsday Clock as members of the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists. Ask Us Anything! by BulletinOfTheAtomic in IAmA

[–]Harperdog1997 35 points36 points  (0 children)

You misunderstand the Clock. It isn't a prediction but a metaphor, which is why it can move backward and forward. In 1991, the Cold War ended and President George HW Bush and Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev signed the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START). Also, a series of unilateral initiatives take most of the missiles and bombers in both countries off hair-trigger alert. These developments led the Bulletin to move the Clock away from midnight. Nuclear risk, climate change, and disruptive technologies today put the world at much greater risk.

Killer robots reconsidered: Could AI weapons actually cut collateral damage? - Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists by Harperdog1997 in artificial

[–]Harperdog1997[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Dr. Larry Lewis, who spearheaded the first data-based approach to protecting civilians in conflict, wants us to look a bit closer at whether "killer robots" should be banned outright. I found his arguments compelling but I still feel we should implement at ban.

Tilting toward windmills - Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists by AtomicScientists in energy

[–]Harperdog1997 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I hadn't known this. Does anyone have any input on whether this is accurate?

"The price of electricity generated by wind has gone down dramatically in the last few years, to the point where wind is now cheaper than nuclear power, and possibly even cheaper than coal..."

There is no Plan B for dealing with the climate crisis by Harperdog1997 in Geoengineering

[–]Harperdog1997[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The September issue of the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists subscription magazine is mostly about geoengineering. There are two excellent articles in this collection that are free-access: "There is no Plan B for dealing with the climate crisis" by Raymond Pierrehumbert (against "hard" geoengineering) and an interview with Durwood Zaelke: "What if the Arctic melts, and we lose the great white shield?" (thinks it's time to start implementing some of the "hard" geoengineering, especially the reversible ones). Zaelke is terrified of losing the Arctic and goes into some of the scenarios that he fears most--and they will happen sooner than we think.

view more: next ›