Losing Earth: The Decade We Almost Stopped Climate ChangesteemCreated with Sketch.

in #nature6 years ago

Breathtaking New York Times Article about science, politics and global warming

This is by far the best story about the scientific discovery of global warming and the subsequent politic action (or non-action) that I am aware of - its actually a bit Michael Lewis style.

The Editor's note of Jake Silverstein says it all:

This narrative by Nathaniel Rich is a work of history, addressing the 10-year period from 1979 to 1989: the decisive decade when humankind first came to a broad understanding of the causes and dangers of climate change. Complementing the text is a series of aerial photographs and videos, all shot over the past year by George Steinmetz. With support from the Pulitzer Center, this two-part article is based on 18 months of reporting and well over a hundred interviews. It tracks the efforts of a small group of American scientists, activists and politicians to raise the alarm and stave off catastrophe. It will come as a revelation to many readers — an agonizing revelation — to understand how thoroughly they grasped the problem and how close they came to solving it. Jake Silverstein

Please find below the link to the narrative from Nathaniel Rich published in the New York Times.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/08/01/magazine/climate-change-losing-earth.html

Definitively worth a read!

Sort:  

@mattynra I dearly love the way you make a clown of yourself... Keeling, the very author of the by you cited study (actually the son of the creator of the famous co2 keeling curve) is actually one of those climate change scientist believers that you call a retard... actually all of his and his father's scientific career is devoted to this...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ralph_Keeling

here you can find the original paper that your link cited...
I hope you understand it, if not please ask someone who does, to explain it to you..
https://www.pnas.org/content/114/39/10361
.. and another example why you should always look at the original paper and not at some simplistic and often false citation...

to sum it up for you: his study concludes that land based plants do actually digest more co2 due to the higher co2 level in the air, but its by far too little to have any meaningful impact to stop global man made warming...

Ralph Keeling
Ralph Franklin Keeling (born 1959) is a professor at Scripps Institution of Oceanography. He is the Principal Investigator for the Atmospheric Oxygen Research Group at Scripps and is the director of the Scripps CO2 Program, the measurement program behind the Keeling curve, which was started by his father Charles David Keeling in 1958. Ralph Keeling has developed precise instruments and techniques for the measurement of atmospheric oxygen and anthropogenic CO2 in the ocean, and for the analysis of land and ocean carbon sinks.

People who believe in climate change are retards. Currently there is 400 parts per million of carbon in the atmosphere, plants grow optimally at at 1000-1500 parts per million of carbon. I just debunked climate change in a single sentence. Google it!
Posted using Partiko iOS

you better have a look here about your idea...
https://skepticalscience.com/

You obviously know nothing about this topic otherwise you'd directly dispute me, then posting a link to a propaganda site. Sorry dude nice try, I upvoted you for the lack of effort anyway.

Posted using Partiko iOS

What is obvious is, that you do not know me and therefore you do not know what I know... But what I know is that you would not have brought up this .. lets say .. not very well thought through idea.. if you would know about the issue.. so I post a link where your "idea" is disputed on scientific basis very thoroughly... If you do not want to take the time to check this out...

and by the way to denounce someone as retard should disqualify for any attention...

The anger you’re feeling for not being able to make a rational factual argument is really the realization that you’re an idiot.

Posted using Partiko iOS

Still not a dispute of the facts I presented, obvious you are clueless about the science. Repeating mainstream media platitudes is not an argument. I'm doubling down on you being a retard.

Posted using Partiko iOS

your actions speak for themselves.. bye bye

Exactly, my action of debunking climate change in a single sentence speaks for itself. Your inaction to even challenge me speaks to the reality that you’re just not that intelligent. Just a bit of advice, if you are going to cover this topic on steemit, it might help to actually know something about it.

And I would advise you to google about stuff before you spam it into steem.. even for you it would have been easy to find this source: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/ask-the-experts-does-rising-co2-benefit-plants1/

where is your source?