Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Saturday March 25 2017, @02:43PM   Printer-friendly
from the ignore-at-your-own-peril dept.

Siberian Times states that thousands of bulging methane gas bubbles have been located in Siberia. These are thought to explode to form the giant craters found in the area. Scientist say it's thawing permafrost releasing methane caused by elevated temperatures. Article contains amazing pictures.

Similar observations have been made around the Arctic regions. This is a cause for concern as methane is a potent greenhouse gas creating a positive feedback loop; there is potential for a chain reaction.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Saturday March 25 2017, @07:25PM (6 children)

    by Grishnakh (2831) on Saturday March 25 2017, @07:25PM (#484170)

    I think we should do better than that: we should get a few million climate deniers to sign statements that they don't believe humans can change the climate, and that if they're wrong we get to torture them and all their descendants to death slowly on public TV, then we should set up a program to build lots of nuclear plants powering systems to produce as much methane as possible, and pump it into the atmosphere. Then let's see what these assholes have to say after a decade or two.

    Obviously we're not going to stop the inevitable, so we might as well go out with a bang, and also punish some of those responsible.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 2) by Scruffy Beard 2 on Sunday March 26 2017, @07:51AM (2 children)

    by Scruffy Beard 2 (6030) on Sunday March 26 2017, @07:51AM (#484300)

    uhm, if you are using nuclear reactors to but as much methane as possible in the atmosphere, why not just use it to scrub CO2 instead?

    • (Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Monday March 27 2017, @03:36AM (1 child)

      by Grishnakh (2831) on Monday March 27 2017, @03:36AM (#484513)

      Because the climate deniers don't believe that's necessary.

      • (Score: 1) by khallow on Monday March 27 2017, @06:45PM

        by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Monday March 27 2017, @06:45PM (#484771) Journal

        Because the climate deniers don't believe that's necessary.

        Would you happen to be one of these alleged "climate deniers"? Because you don't seem to be taking this seriously.

  • (Score: 1) by khallow on Sunday March 26 2017, @11:39AM (2 children)

    by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Sunday March 26 2017, @11:39AM (#484334) Journal

    I think we should do better than that: we should get a few million climate deniers to sign statements that they don't believe humans can change the climate, and that if they're wrong we get to torture them and all their descendants to death slowly on public TV, then we should set up a program to build lots of nuclear plants powering systems to produce as much methane as possible, and pump it into the atmosphere. Then let's see what these assholes have to say after a decade or two.

    Couldn't you try rational argument and evidence? Funny who engages in these murder fantasies when they face disagreement. If the rate of production of these methane bubbles is unusually high and unusually threatening to our climate, you should eventually be able to come up with evidence to back that assertion.

    • (Score: 2) by darkfeline on Monday March 27 2017, @03:52AM (1 child)

      by darkfeline (1030) on Monday March 27 2017, @03:52AM (#484515) Homepage

      >Couldn't you try rational argument and evidence?

      Have you met a climate denier before?

      --
      Join the SDF Public Access UNIX System today!
      • (Score: 1) by khallow on Monday March 27 2017, @09:43AM

        by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Monday March 27 2017, @09:43AM (#484562) Journal
        I have and your implied argument is ridiculous. First, the label "climate denier" is used promiscuously to libel anyone skeptical of any part of the climate change narrative. Second, it is folly as a result to insinuate as you do that "climate deniers" are irrational and hence, can't be reached by rational argument.

        Sure, the catastrophic climate change people could be right. But I wouldn't bet money on anyone who can't string together a rational argument and then blames their failure to communicate on imaginary intellectual flaws of people who would go along with an argument that isn't pure shit!