Digg Townhall now online!
Check out the latest Digg Townhall, where Kevin and Jay answered the top questions from the Digg Community!
Will Shiny Plants Save Us From Global Warming?
environmentalgraffiti.com — Interesting geoengineering solution proposed the by University of California-Irvine.
socialpyramid- 418 diggs
- digg it
- inghamb87, on 01/09/2008, -3/+18maybe not, but if cows stopped farting...
- magiclava, on 01/09/2008, -4/+1You mean burping...
- duckyinc, on 01/09/2008, -1/+2both
- thinkart, on 01/09/2008, -4/+1i guess your comment went over most people's heads...
note: only 7 diggs at time of this comment - duckyinc, on 01/09/2008, -1/+2...then we are going to run out of meat
- JettaMan, on 01/09/2008, -5/+3Seeing as the earth stopped warming the past decade, and seeing how warming is good for life, I have no idea why people are pretending that if the earth gets warmer it will be bad. We had 1 foot sea level rise last century and we will have 1.5 next century. It's no biggie. By then we will have run out of petroleum.
- blqysmg, on 01/09/2008, -3/+6If the Earth stopped warming in the past decade, why would we have a 1.5 foot sea level rise in the next 100 years? Not that I disagree that it has stopped. The fact that the trend has turned downward in the last few years is an undeniable fact. I also agree that a bit of a warming trend is a Good Thing. More CO2 makes the plants grow better, which in turn give off more Oxygen. More heat means more humidity in the air, which likely means more rain, which means more plant life, which equals more food. Life is Good!
For those who say, "we're all going to die," I have a different opinion. Maybe just half of you are going to die, which is a Good Thing. There are too many people on the planet already.- Logicexe, on 01/09/2008, -1/+3Are both of you stupid? Have you read any of the recent reports or studies? Almost everything you said is not only wrong but opposite to reality.
The warming trend is accelerating, not turning back or stopping.
Yes, the warming trend will change climates causing some northern areas to get more rain and thus more vegetation, but will also cause many equatorial areas to experience severe droughts.
The rate the sea level is rising is beyond the high estimates published in past IPCC reports. It appears that those evil liberal fear mongers were actually being conservative with their estimations. Color me surprised.
Natural carbon sinks like the oceans and forests are actually becoming less capable of sequestering CO2.
More humidity does not mean more rain. If anything it means the air can hold more water vapor before which would delay the rain since rain only happens when 100% relative humidity is reached. But of course, that could mean that when it does rain it will lower the temperature causing all that pent up water vapor to condense and fall at once in a large storm, which isn't as good for vegetation as consistent light rain.
I'm wondering whether or not blgysmg would mind being part of the half that dies out.
Seriously, neither of your sound like you've read any of the literature about climate science. All you're doing is spouting typical talking points that border on anti-climate science propaganda. You might as well be stating that evolution doesn't exist because we cam from monkeys and there are still monkeys.- JettaMan, on 01/09/2008, -0/+1Well that's all *****. In the past, warm temperatures means more evaporation which means less droughts. Sorry but thats the way it is even if government paid scientists try to convince you they can predict the future.
- Logicexe, on 01/09/2008, -1/+3Are both of you stupid? Have you read any of the recent reports or studies? Almost everything you said is not only wrong but opposite to reality.
- blqysmg, on 01/09/2008, -3/+6If the Earth stopped warming in the past decade, why would we have a 1.5 foot sea level rise in the next 100 years? Not that I disagree that it has stopped. The fact that the trend has turned downward in the last few years is an undeniable fact. I also agree that a bit of a warming trend is a Good Thing. More CO2 makes the plants grow better, which in turn give off more Oxygen. More heat means more humidity in the air, which likely means more rain, which means more plant life, which equals more food. Life is Good!
- 4pple5auce, on 01/09/2008, -0/+0You know, most diggers claim to dislike the mainstream media... unless it's perpetuating the human global warming agenda or how great Apple's new product is. Honestly, this neo-environmentalist movement is going to cause more harm to the environment than SUV's and incandescent light bulbs. You realize that all those florescent 'eco-friendly' light bulbs we're being told to use contain mercury, right? What happens when people start throwing away all of those light bulbs in their trash cans, they get hauled off to a landfill where mercury will runoff into a leachate pool, leak out into the soil, and then the ground water?. How about all those tube TVs containing lead that are going to be heading to the landfills in the coming years? Or maybe we should talk about all the ecological damage being done by the recent boom in organic farms; sure they don't use pesticides, but how do they keep their crops from being eaten? Look it up. Here's another for you... how about all the water wasted because we clean it and send to our homes just so we can dirty it up, clean it again, and then send it right back to the river because the idea of reusing treated waste water is too unbearable (treated waste water is just as clean as, if not cleaner than(minus some nitrates and nitrites), the water that was initially taken in for treatment) . There really are ACTUAL environmental problems that are going to cause real damage to our rivers, oceans, soil, and air... this carbon obsession has pushed them to the back-burner. Although climate data shows some correlation between co2 and temperature, it still hasn't been determined which is the chicken and which is the egg... if either. Theres some compelling data to support the sun argument and it CAN'T be written off or ignored exclusively because there is about as much controversy surrounding the data correlation of the sun as there is for the carbon correlation (and is it really so crazy to think that the giant ***** star right next to us might have cycles that influence our planet's climate?). It's just surprising to see so many people defending man-made global warming like it's a religion, especially on Digg where I have been thoroughly impressed with the sharpness of it's users. This isn't about the environment, it's about the creation of a international organization (either within the UN or as a stand-alone) to which all nations are held accountable for their carbon output (even if it's NOT conclusive that we're even causing warming). It's about: new ways of expanding government, finding another reason to tax you, finding another way to get money from large, industrial, and productive nations, and, really, if nothing more, it's about internationalism. Just another way for the assholes at PNAC.org and the NWO to further their agenda of one world government. Now, you're all a part of their army while big business continues to dump stuff a whole lot worse than carbon into the rivers, oceans, air, and soil.
- magus_melchior, on 01/10/2008, -0/+2Dude, paragraphs. The key above right shift is there for a reason.
- kravex, on 01/10/2008, -0/+1SUV TV ACTUAL CAN'T NOT PNAC NWO
That's all I could see..
- magiclava, on 01/09/2008, -4/+1You mean burping...
- ubernoggin, on 01/09/2008, -7/+2An idea so bizarre it just might work
- rtknox00, on 01/09/2008, -3/+24i say that congress passes a bill endorsing shiny things. It'll be huge with the ADD lobby.
- blqysmg, on 01/09/2008, -0/+2They would pass a resolution, not a bill. If they want to spend money on shiny things, that would require a bill.
- silverchrysalis, on 01/09/2008, -1/+3Just trying to imagine what, exactly, the ADD lobby would be like is utterly hilarious. They'd have to hang around Capitol Hill with notes pinned to their suit jackets.
- blqysmg, on 01/09/2008, -0/+4Senator, I propose we use shiny plants to... hey, is that the new iPhone? I always wanted one. Does it get TV shows? 'Cause I missed my favorite show last week. I'm sorry, what were we talking about, again?
- lademic, on 01/10/2008, -0/+0Is global warming even the most pressing global issue? oh wait... http://www.jisto.com/?j=7gj9b
- vault, on 01/09/2008, -21/+10global warming = eco-marxist propaganda
- rtknox00, on 01/09/2008, -6/+9marxist? Not nazi? I'm mildly impressed by your restraint in not grouping those of us who believe in global warming with Hitler. Thanks!
- right75, on 01/09/2008, -3/+3rtknox00: I don't believe Hitler was anywhere near as "concerned" about the environment as Lenin, Brezhnev and (Soviet) company. But then again, the Soviets weren't truly worried about the environment, they were worried about American dominance and how they could stop it. Brezhnev said the Soviet Union would gather natural resources in such a way as to become a NR powerhouse; and look what they're doing now with oil and gas supplies -- they have Europe in a noose with their control of gas to Europe.
Additionally, Earth Day is celebrated on Lenin's birthday, and this is hardly by coincidence. Read more for yourself on the matter here:
http://www.capmag.com/article.asp?ID=3646
Or, for more, go here: http://www.google.com/search?q=%22Earth+Day%22+Len ...
This who notion of "saving the earth" is nothing more than controlling American dominance. Of course, now we have enviro-nazis doing the dirty work of the commies in our own government. - vault, on 01/09/2008, -0/+2No I wouldn't group you eco-marxists in with Hitler and Godwin myself...more of a Lenin/Stalin thing.
- right75, on 01/09/2008, -3/+3rtknox00: I don't believe Hitler was anywhere near as "concerned" about the environment as Lenin, Brezhnev and (Soviet) company. But then again, the Soviets weren't truly worried about the environment, they were worried about American dominance and how they could stop it. Brezhnev said the Soviet Union would gather natural resources in such a way as to become a NR powerhouse; and look what they're doing now with oil and gas supplies -- they have Europe in a noose with their control of gas to Europe.
- skyscape, on 01/09/2008, -6/+1what difference does it make? Hitler was a puppet of Marxism.
"If you tell a lie long enough, people began taking it as a gospel of truth" - Renuvian, on 01/09/2008, -0/+3Eco-Marxist?
"Weeds of the world unite!" - Logicexe, on 01/09/2008, -2/+31. Spread environmental propaganda
2. Get people to conserve energy by introducing products that use less energy and are more environmentally friendly, use tax system to encourage the movement to cleaner alternatives.
3.???
4. GLOBAL NAZI-COMMUNIST DOMINATION!!!!
- rtknox00, on 01/09/2008, -6/+9marxist? Not nazi? I'm mildly impressed by your restraint in not grouping those of us who believe in global warming with Hitler. Thanks!
- Born4Surf, on 01/09/2008, -6/+3Anything is worth a go hey
- thcobbs, on 01/09/2008, -0/+3No, no its not. Just doing anything on a whim to try and alter the GLOBAL climate is INSANE.
- blqysmg, on 01/09/2008, -0/+1Insane, maybe, but funny! Let's do it!
- thcobbs, on 01/09/2008, -0/+3No, no its not. Just doing anything on a whim to try and alter the GLOBAL climate is INSANE.
- xdvx, on 01/09/2008, -5/+3Yes why not. Trees grows to slow anyway
- halobender, on 01/09/2008, -0/+5too
- blqysmg, on 01/09/2008, -2/+1You corrected "to" but failed to correct "slow?" The correction should have been "too slowly."
- pcking, on 01/09/2008, -0/+4Yes, and you also failed to make the proper correction.
"Trees GROW too slowly..."- blqysmg, on 01/09/2008, -0/+3Wow, I did miss that. I was too quick to criticize. Of course, I was just doing it for fun, but I truly should have done a better job. Thanks!
- pcking, on 01/09/2008, -0/+4Yes, and you also failed to make the proper correction.
- blqysmg, on 01/09/2008, -2/+1You corrected "to" but failed to correct "slow?" The correction should have been "too slowly."
- halobender, on 01/09/2008, -0/+5too
- nokia123, on 01/09/2008, -6/+1Why not just build a gigantic mirror in a field and let that act as the "shiny material" to reflect everything back.
- teh_techie, on 01/09/2008, -0/+1because that wouldn't be very cheap...
- ScienceDoc, on 01/09/2008, -7/+6The answer is no. They need to address the cause. Not put bandages on the symptoms. Buried.
- blqysmg, on 01/09/2008, -1/+3The absorbsion of solar light, and subsequent heating of the atmosphere is the cause. Bright shiny objects don't heat up as much as dark dull objects, therefore they reflect instead of absorb more of the solar energy. The sum total of energy absorbed on the way through the atmosphere is miniscule compared to the heat released by convection by dark surface materials. Less heat, less global warming. Still, it's a useless effort. It would be much better to put huge mylar ballons in the upper atmosphere to reflect light away before the CO2 had a chance to absorb it.
- LeeSoong, on 01/09/2008, -8/+5No, because infared light bounces off the upper atmosphere back down to the land.
Shiny plants would just bounce energy around the closed system created by higher levels of CO2.
And for all the people who think global warming is a lie,
please go take a week long vacation on the surface of Venus.- Ramble, on 01/09/2008, -0/+2it's not a closed system, it's just a slightly harder one to get out of.
- skiddles, on 01/09/2008, -0/+2The point of the "shiny" would be to reflect the visible light rays back out of the atmosphere (this is not trapped by CO2) as opposed to the infared that the underlying ground gives off (which is SOMEWHAT trapped by CO2).
Maybe you should read more about the topic before criticizing people who have an informed opinion. - br0ck, on 01/09/2008, -0/+4Visible and UV light are mostly not absorbed by the atmosphere, but are absorbed by many surfaces on the ground. As the ground is heated it radiates infrared radiation upward which then heats the air. This re-radiation is the main heating effect that keeps the air warm. If the ground is shiny due to snow or other reasons, the UV and visible light will mostly reflect back into space and not be re-radiated and absorbed and the air will not be warmed.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenhouse_effect - RadicalEdward, on 01/09/2008, -2/+2What the heck does venus have to do with global warming anyway? Thats like saying "we're running out of oxygen because too many people are breathing, if you don't believe me go live on mars. Now agree with me, otherwise the terrorists win!"
- Logicexe, on 01/09/2008, -0/+3Venus is hotter than Mercury because it has a very strong greenhouse effect. Of course, it's not a very good comparison considering all the other differences between the Earth and Venus, but both of us do have a greenhouse effect that essentially does the same thing.
- ryan83189, on 01/09/2008, -0/+1But some studies show Venus is heating up too.
- atmenterprises, on 01/09/2008, -0/+1But where are the Venusians that are causing that global warming?
- Screwy1138, on 01/10/2008, -0/+1I knew it was only a matter of time before humans were blamed for Venus' global warming as well.
- skewl, on 01/09/2008, -3/+6Planting trees seems like a great way to combat global warming.
- tsunamisteve, on 01/09/2008, -0/+1Actually it's not. If biotechnology gives us "black-leaf" plants that are a hybrid of solar cells and plants/trees, then we're talking. As it is, tree efficiency isn't that great.
I encourage you to listen to the NJIT Technology Forum podcasts in iTunesU. Particuluarly Freeman Dyson's "Life After Darwin: The Open Software of Gene Transfer". It will blow your mind! - moletimer, on 01/09/2008, -1/+1As the temperature of the Earth increases, trees are becoming less efficiant at absorbing CO2. So, maybe not, but it could be one factor in preventing furthur global warming.
- tsunamisteve, on 01/09/2008, -0/+1Actually it's not. If biotechnology gives us "black-leaf" plants that are a hybrid of solar cells and plants/trees, then we're talking. As it is, tree efficiency isn't that great.
- airiox, on 01/09/2008, -4/+5Great idea. Lets mess with our environment/planet even more...
- Camote, on 01/09/2008, -1/+22I clicked on the title because I thought it said "Shiny PANTS" at first...
- byronne, on 01/09/2008, -1/+8So did I. How disappointing. We should wear shiny pants regardless.
- acyork, on 01/09/2008, -1/+0I did as well...I was thinking "didn't we go through the shiny pants fad already?...like in the 80's?"
- marx2k, on 01/09/2008, -1/+1Apparently you haven't been to Long Island lately
- rtknox00, on 01/09/2008, -1/+4disco stu will save the environment
- TheUngod, on 01/09/2008, -1/+1MC Hammer DOES still serve a purpose!
- darthjure, on 01/10/2008, -0/+1me too... :)
- Mockylock, on 01/09/2008, -1/+4No.
- skyscape, on 01/09/2008, -10/+3Do people seriously believe global warming?
Can anyonne answer me if the profs at universities still brainwashing children about global warming?- UberNick, on 01/09/2008, -2/+6Just pray hard enough and you'll find the answer. Whatever you do, stay away from science!
- vandy125, on 01/09/2008, -0/+3Come on now, why the pot shot at religion here? I completely disagree with him. It is completely obvious what is happening if you just look around a bit.
- UberNick, on 01/09/2008, -0/+2He's equating science and reason to brainwashing and beliefs. I've never heard a non-uber-religious person take this perspective. Which is funny, because, being brainwashed believers, they think all people must established their opinions the same way-- not by open, independently verifiable evidence and debate, but rather through indoctrination and blind faith.
- vandy125, on 01/09/2008, -0/+3Come on now, why the pot shot at religion here? I completely disagree with him. It is completely obvious what is happening if you just look around a bit.
- thcobbs, on 01/09/2008, -0/+1Is the earth warming up? Sure...
Are we causing it by our pollution? Not so sure....- LeeSoong, on 01/10/2008, -0/+1Is the atmosphere's free Oxygen O2 level dropping ?
You Bet.
- LeeSoong, on 01/10/2008, -0/+1Is the atmosphere's free Oxygen O2 level dropping ?
- Logicexe, on 01/09/2008, -0/+2Yeah, hopefully they'll stop it with the evolution and the astronomy too!
- UberNick, on 01/09/2008, -2/+6Just pray hard enough and you'll find the answer. Whatever you do, stay away from science!
- simism, on 01/09/2008, -4/+3save the world, eat more tofu
- marx2k, on 01/09/2008, -0/+2Keep your phytoestrogens out of my body kthx
- ftx437, on 01/09/2008, -0/+0Screw the environment SAVE THE PENNIES!
- Kakcoo, on 01/09/2008, -0/+3Aren't plants supposed to absorb light for photosynthesis?
/greenhouse noob- kmusser, on 01/09/2008, -0/+2They absorb certain wavelengths. Some are reflected, some are absorbed.
/did too much undergrad research on plants (at uci coincidentally) - gotterdammerung, on 01/09/2008, -0/+4Plants with shiny leaves can still absorb enough light to carry out photosynthesis. Usually, these plants originate in areas where there is ample sunshine, but not a whole lot of rainfall - the shininess is like waxy coating on their leaves that helps them not get too hot from absorbing sunlight, and at the same time lessens the amount of water they lose.
- kmusser, on 01/09/2008, -0/+2They absorb certain wavelengths. Some are reflected, some are absorbed.
- hasahugedig, on 01/09/2008, -1/+1At first I read it as "shiny pants" and thought of disco.
- lhbaker, on 01/09/2008, -0/+4The earth just needs some bling to reflect the heat.
- DrSnodgrass, on 01/09/2008, -0/+1if you have a layer of CO2 in the atmosphere growing more then it wont matter. Look at Venus as an example. Granted it is closer to the sun, but the clouds do blanket its atmosphere. It is good to plant trees, but how fast will they consume the CO2 thats being emitted? Im not against planting trees, just think we should also mainly try to reduce emissions.
- cephelo, on 01/11/2008, -0/+0No one solution is the total solution. Controlling our impact on the environment will require hundreds of different solutions all combined. If shiny plants can work to reduce temperature gains by 0.5%, it could still be worth it. Bean cultivation isn't going anywhere.. if we can make its impact less on the earth, what's not to like about it?
- duchossois, on 01/09/2008, -3/+3Shiny PLANTS! Now I get it. I thought you said, "Will shiny PANTS save us from global warming?"
- solid12345, on 01/09/2008, -2/+1And these are the geniuses who say we are idiots for not believing their hogwash.
- sponeil, on 01/09/2008, -0/+1We just need to put a ring of big floating mirrors in the ocean circling the equator. Or maybe we can bio-engineer floating mirror plants. Hey, it may even cut down on the number of hurricanes we have (until a hurricane comes by and tears up all the mirrors ;-).
- RadicalEdward, on 01/09/2008, -0/+3For all the people arguing back and forth about whether or not global warming is real or not, your both right. Most (if not all) scientist agree that "global warming" is a natural process that the earth has been through tons of times before. The only thing they're saying (atleast the proponents) is that humans are contributing to it in a manner which is advancing it(global warming) quicker than in the normal cycle.
- SEMaven, on 01/09/2008, -1/+0Yes, but the contribution is so minuscule...who cares
- MarsSentinel, on 01/09/2008, -2/+2there is not "real" argument about warming. the only debate is between the people who know about it and the Faux Noise obfuscators and their sheep.
- ryan83189, on 01/09/2008, -0/+1You are not allowed to be in the middle. Either my car is going to kill everyone on earth, or it's a conspiracy for politicians to give away our sovereignty to the NWO.
- SEMaven, on 01/09/2008, -1/+0Yes, but the contribution is so minuscule...who cares
- halobender, on 01/09/2008, -1/+1Nope it wont. Sorry to say but when we try to engineer the planet we f*ck it up. It took nature a long time to get any type of balance.
- FuzzyDustBall, on 01/09/2008, -1/+0Where is this balance ? Last time I checked nature let this little creature called man run around out of control. Who is this nature any way? a set of random events coupled with survival of the luckiest? I think I will take my chances with a well thought out plan then let "nature" do its thing. Oh and please list failed attempts at engineering the planet.
- designer, on 01/09/2008, -4/+3No, man made global warming is not real.
- FuzzyDustBall, on 01/09/2008, -3/+1Ok, lets say its not. Do you think non-man made global warming its a good thing, that we should just let it happen?
- bullcutter, on 01/09/2008, -1/+4yes! the earth would become more habitable as less people would die from cold snaps. our population of sustainability would no doubt increase as lands too cold for farming now warmed up.
- skiddles, on 01/09/2008, -1/+2OK lets say getting warmer is a "not good" thing. If it is occuring naturally, then you have to address the natural cause of the problem. Ultimately, man's CO2 output is relatively small, and the impact of CO2 is relatively small on the atmosphere. Therefore cutting back CO2 output will fix nothing and cost a whole lot.
I look at it this way. Why waste a whole lot of money controlling a trace element (CO2) if we need to launch massive mirrors to reflect the sunlight from space?
Others here might say, if it is natural then it must be good.
- FuzzyDustBall, on 01/09/2008, -3/+1Ok, lets say its not. Do you think non-man made global warming its a good thing, that we should just let it happen?
- MaceSoul, on 01/09/2008, -2/+1Global warming aside. Every single time man has farked with the environment to try to fix something, they've made things even worse.
- FuzzyDustBall, on 01/09/2008, -0/+3Please list attempts to fark with the environment that have gone wrong.
- bullcutter, on 01/09/2008, -0/+2you're missing the point, we have to get the whole world to change you guys, before its too late. who wants to help me write a song about it?
- Veni_Vidi_Vici, on 01/09/2008, -0/+1How will artificial volcanoes help us? The article doesn't specify how. it's my understanding that volcanoes spew crap into the air. I'm no volcanologist, but I can't imagine that can be a good thing. You would think most of the gases being released would be greenhouse gases.
- skiddles, on 01/09/2008, -0/+3From memory, volcanoes can do several things that may impact the CO2 caused AGW equation. Volcanoes emit serious quantities of CO2 which would not be good. Volcanoes also emit serious quantities of aerosols and particulates which have a cooling effect on the atmosphere. When Mt Pinatubu (sp?) errupted in the 90's it sent temps dramatically lower for about a year and a half from memory.
My guess is that proponents of artificial volcanoes are trying to figure out a way to spew aerosols and particulates into the air without the CO2.
Sounds great until you have a real volcano erupt right after an artificial volcano and we are all plunged into semi arctic conditions.
I could be wrong. Just trying to put the pieces together for you as I see them. - blqysmg, on 01/09/2008, -0/+1Aerosols
- bullcutter, on 01/09/2008, -0/+1its mostly water vapor, which is a greenhouse gas
- skiddles, on 01/09/2008, -0/+3From memory, volcanoes can do several things that may impact the CO2 caused AGW equation. Volcanoes emit serious quantities of CO2 which would not be good. Volcanoes also emit serious quantities of aerosols and particulates which have a cooling effect on the atmosphere. When Mt Pinatubu (sp?) errupted in the 90's it sent temps dramatically lower for about a year and a half from memory.
- VAXcat, on 01/09/2008, -0/+4 Anyone else read this as shiny pants?
- festering1, on 01/09/2008, -0/+1You probably need grasses... ;->
- festering1, on 01/09/2008, -0/+1You probably need grasses... ;->
- MarsSentinel, on 01/09/2008, -1/+2switchgrass captures and sequesters in itself and in the ground a LOT of CO2. It also makes a good amounht of ethanol when processed as a fuel. switchgrass is teh isht and we should shoot the corn-magnates and their subsidies in the head to get onboard with this r-e-a-l eco-plant.
- FuzzyDustBall, on 01/09/2008, -0/+0This remind anyone else of the mirror plants from ring world?
- Abeyance, on 01/09/2008, -0/+1let's smile more often ! White teeth we'll show will increase the reflective surface of the Earth ....=) be in a good mood
- bullcutter, on 01/09/2008, -0/+2gee whizz i feel cooler already. wait a second...
"“Slowing or reversal of regional warming trends may be achieved by manipulation of land surface albedo.."
so what does this article have to do with GLOBAL warming?? NOTHING! But, putting it in your Digg headline will help you seem cool and hip, so why not?
Do you realize how many billions/trillions of these plants would have to be planted in order to have any sort of impact on GLOBAL heat trends??
The truth is so boring, huh? - DerangedPenguin, on 01/09/2008, -0/+2only if the sun goes out....
- tedc, on 01/09/2008, -2/+2I am skeptical about any scheme to fix the climate by engineering the albedo of the planet. Global warming is not just a rise in the mean temperature. I wish it were that simple. Greenhouse gases are insulative, and work in their own special way to warm things up.
For example, you would expect to see the night time lows rising faster than the daytime highs with greenhouse gases. If you were to tweak the albedo, the days would have to get cooler to compensate for the warmer nights, but it's not the same thing.
Improving the insulation of your home may not have a pronounced effect on its average temperature, since the thermostat tends to keep things in line. It may, however, make the drafty rooms feel more comfortable. On a global scale, the problem is that those drafts are the winds which drive the weather. Mess with those and you've altered the climate. So you could have your space mirrors switching on and off like a thermostat, but it won't stop climate change. - solid12345, on 01/09/2008, -1/+3And let's pretend earth was cooling down, would these same lamebrain scientists propose we try to heat the earth back up by pumping more C02 into the atmosphere?
What is their definition of a "stable" and "right" temperature? Earth has never had one agreeable mean temperature. - moletimer, on 01/09/2008, -0/+2This is stupid. How about facing the real issues? Such as oil, corporate pollution, war, intensive farming, deforestation etc. If they dealt with the true issues of global warming, then we'd start to get somewhere.
- lonelycanuck, on 01/09/2008, -0/+2is it sad that i thought the title read
WILL SHINY PANTS SAVE US FROM GLOBAL WARMING?
ugh. and i was so excited. - hammerattack, on 01/09/2008, -0/+3This... is retarded. In a way that even retards are offended by.
- festering1, on 01/09/2008, -1/+0By....? Do you speak for all retards?......
- caponumen, on 01/09/2008, -0/+3LOL, this should be the official definition of "greentard thinking"; or is it just insane?
- britoca, on 01/10/2008, -0/+1oh joy, yet another monoculture idea
- RawOysters, on 01/10/2008, -0/+1Nice crystally trichromes on cannabis buds reflect a lot of light. I say plant them everywhere.
- rmorranis2, on 01/10/2008, -0/+0We're not masters of a thermostat though (not God) see solutions [1]: http://dwarfurl.com/ef10b
Check out the new & improved 
© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is