Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 14th Dec 2016 19:51 UTC
In the News

The higher temperatures are in part due to especially warm air coming from the south during this year's winter, the report says. And that's where things get scary. Shrinking sea ice and glaciers used to be a thing of the summer, but now that trend is carrying over into the winter months, says Jeremy Mathis, director of NOAA's Arctic Research Program. "The pace of change that's happening in the Arctic ... is truly unprecedented," he says.

Rapidly shrinking arctic sea ice... In winter.

Order by: Score:
Comment by philcostin
by philcostin on Wed 14th Dec 2016 22:26 UTC
philcostin
Member since:
2010-11-03

Instead of pushing for technocratic world globalist control and the imposition of breathing taxes, we'd just like to hear about operating systems, please.

Reply Score: 0

RE: Comment by philcostin
by Megol on Wed 14th Dec 2016 22:35 UTC in reply to "Comment by philcostin"
Megol Member since:
2011-04-11

Instead of pushing for technocratic world globalist control and the imposition of breathing taxes, we'd just like to hear about operating systems, please.


Nobody have pushed for that. Idiot trolls should at least make some effort...

Reply Score: 3

v RE[2]: Comment by philcostin
by dylansmrjones on Wed 14th Dec 2016 23:02 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by philcostin"
RE[3]: Comment by philcostin
by tylerdurden on Wed 14th Dec 2016 23:13 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by philcostin"
tylerdurden Member since:
2009-03-17

Name calling. Now there's a "scientific" counter-argument...

Edited 2016-12-14 23:14 UTC

Reply Score: 3

RE[4]: Comment by philcostin
by dylansmrjones on Wed 14th Dec 2016 23:18 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by philcostin"
dylansmrjones Member since:
2005-10-02

Nope. No name calling. Just drawing comparisons between different branches of Collectivism.

Reply Score: 0

RE[5]: Comment by philcostin
by tylerdurden on Thu 15th Dec 2016 04:14 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Comment by philcostin"
tylerdurden Member since:
2009-03-17

LOL. You're adorable.

Reply Score: 2

RE[6]: Comment by philcostin
by dylansmrjones on Thu 15th Dec 2016 10:17 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Comment by philcostin"
dylansmrjones Member since:
2005-10-02

You surely meant "deplorable"? :-)

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Comment by philcostin
by Thom_Holwerda on Wed 14th Dec 2016 23:16 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by philcostin"
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

Always good to know that some random dude with zero qualifications knows better than thousands of properly accredited scientists publishing thousands of properly accredited and peer reviewed scientific articles in thousands of properly accredited and peer reviewed journals working at hundreds of properly accredited institutions.

Your choice of words makes it very clear you do not accept the scientific method and the ideals of the Enlightenment. That's fine.

and highly emotional


There's nothing emotional about accepting the scientific method and the ideals of the Enlightenment. Just look at the wording of your right-wing extremist rant - who's the emotional one here?

Edited 2016-12-14 23:16 UTC

Reply Score: 5

RE[4]: Comment by philcostin
by dylansmrjones on Wed 14th Dec 2016 23:23 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by philcostin"
dylansmrjones Member since:
2005-10-02

Pot, meet Kettle. (See your previous article.)

First, I am not rightwing. I am part of the alternative non-marxist leftwing.
Second, unlike you I support the scientific method, but I do not support Leuchter-style cherry picking of data (e.g. reversed scientific method).

I have no beef with actual climate scientists, but their data do not support your alarmist agenda, nor do they support sensationalist journalism.

Climate scientists and leftwing alarmists are not the same group.

Edited 2016-12-14 23:24 UTC

Reply Score: 1

RE[5]: Comment by philcostin
by Thom_Holwerda on Wed 14th Dec 2016 23:26 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Comment by philcostin"
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

Second, unlike you I support the scientific method, but I do not support Leuchter-style cherry picking of data (e.g. reversed scientific method).


What are your qualifications? What accreditation do you possess that allows you to so confidently dismiss virtually the entire body of peer-reviewed knowledge on climate change, and basically act like a modern-day reverse (i.e., wrong) Galileo?

Because if you're just talking out of your ass, I got news for you: you clearly do not accept the scientific method and the ideals of the Enlightenment.

Reply Score: 2

RE[6]: Comment by philcostin
by dylansmrjones on Wed 14th Dec 2016 23:49 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Comment by philcostin"
dylansmrjones Member since:
2005-10-02

I am not dismissing any body of peer-reviewed knowledge on climate change. On the contrary. I am rejecting climate alarmists hijacking and abusing scientific findings for the sake of their own draconian agenda.

I am neither denying global warming, sea level increases, melting ice or climate changes. But the future is not as bleak as climate alarmists are making it out to be. We have more time than you think. For that reason I reject alarmists. Calm down and adapt instead of running in circles and screaming.

The rightwing solution of do nothing, hear nothing, see nothing and know nothing will obviously not help.

I don't know if this clarified my position, or merely left you more confused.

Reply Score: 3

RE[7]: Comment by philcostin
by Thom_Holwerda on Thu 15th Dec 2016 00:04 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Comment by philcostin"
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

I am neither denying global warming, sea level increases, melting ice or climate changes. But the future is not as bleak as climate alarmists are making it out to be. We have more time than you think.


Tell that to the Pacific islands that are disappearing today. Tell that to the people on the Atlantic coast of the southern US, where land is disappearing today. Tell that to the people of Florida, who are seeing the effects of climate change today. Tell that to the people of California, who are seeing the effects of climate change today. Tell that to the Dutch people and our second-to-none water engineers, who have been working on and paying ungodly amounts of money for strengthening our water defences against the rising sea levels today. Tell that to the thousands of peer-reviewed scientists who implore us that UNLESS we do something NOW, the consequences to especially poorer parts of the world will be quite, quite bad.

There is nothing "alarmist", "fascist", "Marxist" (what even?), or "holocaust denial" (all your words) about heeding the warnings of proper peer-reviewed science.

Edited 2016-12-15 00:05 UTC

Reply Score: 3

v RE[7]: Comment by philcostin
by icicle on Thu 15th Dec 2016 02:27 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Comment by philcostin"
RE[7]: Comment by philcostin
by kwan_e on Thu 15th Dec 2016 04:17 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Comment by philcostin"
kwan_e Member since:
2007-02-18

We have more time than you think. For that reason I reject alarmists.


You mean you and your first world climate controlled cheap drinking water environment miles from the coast (or meters above sea level) has more time than you think.

As long as you're comfortable, everything is fine.

Why, look how well Syria is doing after all those farmers moved into the city after a long drought.

Reply Score: 3

RE[7]: Comment by philcostin
by mgsio on Thu 15th Dec 2016 14:50 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Comment by philcostin"
mgsio Member since:
2016-12-15

And what is their draconian agenda?

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: Comment by philcostin
by aldo on Thu 15th Dec 2016 18:40 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by philcostin"
aldo Member since:
2010-02-17

Scientific data is being cherrypicked and misrepresented by Social Fascists in very much the same style as by Holocaust deniers or 911-"truthers".


Ah, right. It's the people with the actual science who're in denial. OK.

The marxist alarmists are yelling louder and louder while every revision to data models are extending the deadline:
The world will end in 2000.
New data available: The world will END IN 2050.
New data available: The world WILL END IN 2150.
New data available: The WORLD WILL END IN 2300!
.......eventually, it will. In another 4 billion years.


No climate scientist has ever claimed that the world is going to end in 2000, 2050, 2150 or 2300.

The arguments pushed by Thom and his ilk are entirely non-scientific and highly emotional.


Ummm...

No, but Thom is pushing for a neo-marxist semi-religious tyranny akin to the anti-science Sovietunion.


Yeah, it's Thom with the highly emotional arguments. You're the epitome of rational, level-headed scientific debate...

The average temperature increase is perfectly within the normal


Is it fuck. We've managed to reverse a six-millennia long temperature decline in less than a century and a half and the rate of change is more than many of the planet's species will be able to bear. Also: sea level rise, ocean acidification, increased incidence of extreme weather events, droughts leading to wars etc.

I suggest that you apply the same level of scepticism to whatever bullshit sources inform you about climate that you do to the actual science.

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Comment by philcostin
by Megol on Fri 16th Dec 2016 01:27 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by philcostin"
Megol Member since:
2011-04-11

No, but Thom is pushing for a neo-marxist semi-religious tyranny akin to the anti-science Sovietunion. Scientific data is being cherrypicked and misrepresented by Social Fascists in very much the same style as by Holocaust deniers or 911-"truthers".


So you have absolutely no clue what a Marxist is. Hint: just as Fascist it have a meaning and isn't just a dirty label for everything you don't like.

The Soviet union was absolutely scientific, the list of discoveries that Soviet scientists produced is much longer than is still being told today. The reason were secrecy and the fact that most discoveries were published in (for the western world) obscure Russian language media.

I think you are trying to refer to the well known unscientific idea of socialism among plants (I don't want to name the jerk responsible)? Then write that down as, again, the Soviet union were a scientific state more than many others.

BTW Marxist Fascist is an oxymoron as the ideas aren't compatible.


The marxist alarmists are yelling louder and louder while every revision to data models are extending the deadline:
The world will end in 2000.
New data available: The world will END IN 2050.
New data available: The world WILL END IN 2150.
New data available: The WORLD WILL END IN 2300!
.......eventually, it will. In another 4 billion years.


The Marxist alarmists may do that, I don't read Marxist literature/sites so I don't know. If you read that the world will end in x years you are dealing with a crap site/paper and should stop reading it. You should stop reading the unscientific right-wing crap too, it is starting to corrupt your thinking abilities.


The arguments pushed by Thom and his ilk are entirely non-scientific and highly emotional. The average temperature increase is perfectly within the normal, though a tad low historically speaking. We still have 415 years to go before we should be worried.


No the temperatures aren't within normal as you would know if you were informed. It is obvious that you aren't and don't want to be.

Reply Score: 3

RE: Comment by philcostin
by chithanh on Thu 15th Dec 2016 11:15 UTC in reply to "Comment by philcostin"
chithanh Member since:
2006-06-18

I think Thom can be forgiven for reporting on man-made climate change, as he is from the Netherlands which will be very much affected by rising sea levels in the future.

Plus in the previous article it was pointed out why climate scientists are afraid of the anti-science attitude of the Trump administration, so it is not exactly a first.

Protip: If your movement involves postulating that a vast conspiracy of scientists exists, then it is probably anti-science.

Sadly, anti-science movements such as creationism, anti-vaccination, climate change denialism and fat acceptance have gained a strong following in the US, and both liberals and conservatives participate.

Edited 2016-12-15 11:22 UTC

Reply Score: 3

RE: Comment by philcostin
by The123king on Thu 15th Dec 2016 17:49 UTC in reply to "Comment by philcostin"
The123king Member since:
2009-05-28

You want to know why?

OS and OS-related stories

AmigaOS4 SDK Browser v2.0.0.100 - 1 comment
Making an MSX font - 0 comments
Why Apple is removing 'time remaining' battery life estimates - 18 comments (despite being controversial)
Google renames Brillo to Android Things - 6 comments
Some Copland documentation - 14 comments (Copland, that mythical Apple OS? 14 comments??)
Indus OS: India's multi-lingual operating system - 3 comments
Funky Fantasy IV: a machine-translated video game experiment - 4 comments
Google adds true multi-language support to Android's keyboard - 8 comments
Unix in your browser tab - 10 comments
Samsung will render US Note 7 devices inoperable with update - 16 comments (the nuking of an entire line of devices? even if they were crap? privacy issues much?)
How to get a C64 on WiFi and start BBSing again - 6 comments
Windows 10 is coming to ARM again, with win32 emulation - 47 comments
Apple engineer tried to buy BeOS from Palm for the iPhone - 19 comments

Non OS-related stories:

Finding North America's lost medieval city - 12 comments (wtf is this article doing here anyway?)
The Arctic's warming trends are 'truly unprecedented' - 26 comments
Scientists are frantically copying US climate data - 67 comments (probably due to this thread (make that 68 comments))
The inside story behind Pebble's demise - 21 comments
Taking the 3.5mm jack off phones is stupid when Samsung does it too - 113 comments(!!!)
Google never had to worry about financial discipline - until now - 15 comments

It seems to me that the majority of OSnews, is in fact, OS(-related) news. However, some of the most commented on stories happen to be the non-OS-related news. If you look at the comment numbers, it seems that non-os news is actually the most popular news on OSnews.

Edited 2016-12-15 17:49 UTC

Reply Score: 2

Thom is playing with emotions.
by dylansmrjones on Wed 14th Dec 2016 23:15 UTC
dylansmrjones
Member since:
2005-10-02

There is absolutely nothing surprising about ice melting at the north pole during winter. It is expected due to the influence of the gulf stream. It can be worrying for other reasons, but being winter is not one of them.

Reply Score: 2

Gone fishing Member since:
2006-02-22

There is absolutely nothing surprising about ice melting at the north pole during winter. It is expected due to the influence of the gulf stream. It can be worrying for other reasons, but being winter is not one of them.


Possibly, nevertheless a consensus of the experts in this field are suggesting there is a problem and suggesting that only neo-marxist, involved in semi-religious tyranny supported by Soviet science express any concern. Presumably theses cherry picking Social Fascists using the same techniques as Holocaust deniers or 911-"truthers" are doing it for their own nefarious reasons.

What are these nefarious reasons? Is it part of a neo Socialist, Marxist conspiracy to impose a totalitarian world bureaucracy; that this conspiracy involves evil scientists working on behalf of the elite, who are part of the illuminati to destroy liberty etc etc etc.

Surely you can see how toxic this conspiracy skepticism is.

I’m beginning to feel that there is a real danger in those who reject reason and empiricism, and the ideas of the enlightenment. That these dangers come from the right and the left who choose their preferred narrative over reality; who both argue that the truth is unknowable on the right due to a conspiracy of the evil and on the left due to toxic identity politics.

We seriously need to get a grip and try and see through this narrative bull shit, we cannot possible fix the problems of the world if we don’t allow ourselves to see the world. Part of the process of seeing is believing those who have expertise and not pretending they are either part of elitist conspiracy or guardians of the “Grand Narrative”

Reply Score: 3

RE: Thom is playing with emotions.
by Gargyle on Thu 15th Dec 2016 09:05 UTC in reply to "Thom is playing with emotions."
Gargyle Member since:
2015-03-27

What *is* surprising is how it now deviates from the norm that has been set in the previous years. What might have caused that? What does this say about the future? Sure, it's a waste of time to panic, but being overly optimistic in a grave situation (which is what you are doing) has never helped anyone.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Thom is playing with emotions.
by aldo on Thu 15th Dec 2016 18:25 UTC in reply to "Thom is playing with emotions."
aldo Member since:
2010-02-17

What exactly are you trying to say here? That you expect arctic sea ice to decline during the winter..? When do you expect this ice to form? Or do you deny that there is such a thing as arctic sea ice - is that part of the Conspiracy?

Reply Score: 2

Perfect time to invest in property
by The123king on Thu 15th Dec 2016 17:22 UTC
The123king
Member since:
2009-05-28

All those houses at 70 meters above (current) sea level will be valuable beachfront properties in a few (hundred) years!

Edited 2016-12-15 17:23 UTC

Reply Score: 3

Still the wrong website...
by looncraz on Thu 15th Dec 2016 17:29 UTC
looncraz
Member since:
2005-07-24

This article has no business on this website. This is not climate website, this is OSnews - Operating System news.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Still the wrong website...
by Thom_Holwerda on Thu 15th Dec 2016 17:44 UTC in reply to "Still the wrong website..."
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

Your website, your content. Our website, our content. You cannot dictate what we put here. This is a simple concept ;) .

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Still the wrong website...
by looncraz on Fri 16th Dec 2016 07:38 UTC in reply to "RE: Still the wrong website..."
looncraz Member since:
2005-07-24

Your website, your content. Our website, our content. You cannot dictate what we put here. This is a simple concept ;) .


"OSNews is Exploring the Future of Computing."

You have been called out before for posting articles not related to computing or for posting too much of your own opinion on articles.

This isn't a blog. Once upon a time, in fact, this website posted news related to operating systems. I remember those days well.

Reply Score: 1

Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

From the FAQ:

"OSNews is not just about operating systems. We report on other technology news, on development issues and articles, hardware, and if it is a slow news day, we might kick in some sci-fi movie news or other stuff we might find interesting. Our motto is "Exploring the Future of Computing," and we do just that... and more. While we try to focus on all major news about operating systems, ultimately, we report on a range of technologies and anything else we think our readers might find interesting."

This is not your website.

Reply Score: 2

looncraz Member since:
2005-07-24

Climate isn't technology.

Reply Score: 1

Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

or other stuff we might find interesting


and anything else we think our readers might find interesting


Please read more carefully.

In addition to only us deciding what we post here and this being perfectly aligned with our mission statement, nobody is forcing you to read everything we post.

Reply Score: 1

looncraz Member since:
2005-07-24

Well, if you're going to be that way about it... f--k off.


EDIT:
Which, if I'm not being clear, means: delete my f--king account.

I've been coming to this website for most of my adult life... and you're polluting it with nonsense.

Edited 2016-12-17 01:37 UTC

Reply Score: 2