Shit up. My ideas are great and of benefit to all.
Mr Christmassyfur wrote:
I'm always hugely amused by the way the government bigs up the UK "space economy",
Every time I pass the sign on the M1 to the 'National Space Centre' with the little emblem of a rocket, I quietly dream about what might have been.
Kern wrote:
Mr Christmassyfur wrote:
I'm always hugely amused by the way the government bigs up the UK "space economy",
Every time I pass the sign on the M1 to the 'National Space Centre' with the little emblem of a rocket, I quietly dream about what might have been.
So do I; Blue Streak, Black Knight, Black Arrow...
But shit, we couldn't even keep Standard Fireworks going, let alone an actual space industry.
We've got loads of banks though.
Skylon engine passed another significant test the other day. No doubt they'll be forced to go abroad for funding. Still, I can't wait to see the first proper spaceship take off from china in ten years time.
Kern wrote:
Mr Christmassyfur wrote:
I'm always hugely amused by the way the government bigs up the UK "space economy",
Every time I pass the sign on the M1 to the 'National Space Centre' with the little emblem of a rocket, I quietly dream about what might have been.
Hell, yeah, me, too.
I laughed out loud yesterday when I saw the actual flight path of El Reg's failed LOHAN test flight.
Still, it counts as a space programme. Ish.
Still, it counts as a space programme. Ish.
Kern wrote:
I laughed out loud yesterday when I saw the actual flight path of El Reg's failed LOHAN test flight.
Still, it counts as a space programme. Ish.
Still, it counts as a space programme. Ish.
Did it crash because she was pissed?
kalmar wrote:
MaliA wrote:
Doctor Glyndwr wrote:
MaliA wrote:
3) Colonize mars.
For its imaginary oil reserves?
Details, mere details. If we set out to colonize mars as a national priority the benefits are:
Science and engineering sectors get a boost of resources.
Spaceships.
This will draw talent to the UK.
More spaceships.
This will improve the UK economy.
Awesome spaceships.
Deprived areas become developed as more emphasis is put on education to be part of this project.
Moral behaviour becomes the norm.
Spaceships.
The booming economy promotes internal and external investments in regions.
Foreign governments tender for contracts.
More spaceships.
Spin off tech reduces carbon dependency.
Basically, we can solve many social and economic problems by moving now to colonize mars. And then the uk will have mars. And spaceships.
It's a shame no one ever consults me on this.
No one ever consults the Stainless Steel Rat.
You might mock..
http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2 ... pasta.html
The end of pasta...?
The end of pasta...?
Quote:
“Wheat is a cool-season crop. High temperatures are negative for its growth and quality, no doubt about it,” says Frank Manthey, a professor at North Dakota State University who advises the North Dakota Wheat Commission. Already, a mere 1 degree Fahrenheit of global temperature rise over the past 50 years has caused a 5.5 percent decline in wheat production, according to David Lobell, a professor at Stanford University’s Center on Food Security and the Environment.
By 2050, scientists project, the world’s leading wheat belts—the U.S. and Canadian Midwest, northern China, India, Russia, and Australia—on average will experience, every other year, a hotter summer than the hottest summer now on record. Wheat production in that period could decline between 23 and 27 percent, reports the International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI), unless swift action is taken to limit temperature rise and develop crop varieties that can tolerate a hotter world.
By 2050, scientists project, the world’s leading wheat belts—the U.S. and Canadian Midwest, northern China, India, Russia, and Australia—on average will experience, every other year, a hotter summer than the hottest summer now on record. Wheat production in that period could decline between 23 and 27 percent, reports the International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI), unless swift action is taken to limit temperature rise and develop crop varieties that can tolerate a hotter world.
It's OK. By 2050, we'll have fallen into the sea, due to fracking.
If the world ends next Friday it might be for the best.
Did anyone else see this?
Did anyone else see this?
My god, global warming sunk the Titanic!
Morte wrote:
If the world ends next Friday it might be for the best.
Did anyone else see this?
Did anyone else see this?
Yeah.
Report leaked onlinesays it is
Quote:
"There is consistent evidence from observations of a net energy uptake of the earth system due to an imbalance in the energy budget. It is virtually certain that this is caused by human activities, primarily by the increase in CO2 concentrations. There is very high confidence that natural forcing contributes only a small fraction to this imbalance."
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/scien ... 30408.html
This isn't theoretical; millions of tons of methane are already being released each summer from under what was, until recently, permafrost in the Arctic.
Quote:
The sudden release from the melting Arctic of vast quantities of methane – a greenhouse gas at least 20 times more potent than carbon dioxide –is an “economic time-bomb” that could explode at a cost of $60 trillion (£40tr) to the global economy, a study has concluded.
A scientific assessment of the costs associated with the release of Arctic methane into the atmosphere has found that the financial consequences to the world would almost equal the entire global economic output of one year.
Scientists and economists said that the release of methane trapped for thousands of years beneath the frozen permafrost of the Arctic is one of the most dangerous “feedback” consequences of the rapid warming of the region, which has seen sea ice diminish by more than a third since the 1970s.
A scientific assessment of the costs associated with the release of Arctic methane into the atmosphere has found that the financial consequences to the world would almost equal the entire global economic output of one year.
Scientists and economists said that the release of methane trapped for thousands of years beneath the frozen permafrost of the Arctic is one of the most dangerous “feedback” consequences of the rapid warming of the region, which has seen sea ice diminish by more than a third since the 1970s.
This isn't theoretical; millions of tons of methane are already being released each summer from under what was, until recently, permafrost in the Arctic.
Quote:
Estimates of how much methane could be released from the Arctic were based on joint Russian-American expeditions to the East Siberian Sea where scientists have measured vast plumes of methane bubbling to the sea surface from underground deposits stored beneath the permafrost of the seabed, which extends under the sea because the continental shelf here is relatively shallow.
Russian scientists have calculated that there may be as much as 50 billion tonnes of methane locked away beneath the permafrost of the East Siberian Sea. Methane is about 23 times more potent than carbon dioxide over a 100 year period and its sudden release could change the global climate significantly faster than current predictions, the scientists say.
For instance, a massive pulse of methane could bring forward by between 15 and 35 years the date when global average temperature exceed the “safe” limit of 2C above pre-industrial levels. This limit would be reached by 2035 if nothing is done to curb greenhouse gases or 2040 if emissions are lowered, the study found.
Russian scientists have calculated that there may be as much as 50 billion tonnes of methane locked away beneath the permafrost of the East Siberian Sea. Methane is about 23 times more potent than carbon dioxide over a 100 year period and its sudden release could change the global climate significantly faster than current predictions, the scientists say.
For instance, a massive pulse of methane could bring forward by between 15 and 35 years the date when global average temperature exceed the “safe” limit of 2C above pre-industrial levels. This limit would be reached by 2035 if nothing is done to curb greenhouse gases or 2040 if emissions are lowered, the study found.
So yeah, we had 80mm of rain in an hour in Nottingham on Tuesday.
That's about a month's worth. IN ONE HOUR.
We're doomed.
That's about a month's worth. IN ONE HOUR.
We're doomed.
We should bottle the methane, and then burn it.
It's ok, all the methane will leak out through the hole in theozone layer. Right?
On a related note, scientists are getting closer to working out what's killing the bees and its worse than they thought.
In case you hadn't seen this, this is what a supermarket produce section looks like with and without bees:
With no bees to pollinate flowers, huge amounts of the fruits and vegetables we rely on can no longer grow.
In case you hadn't seen this, this is what a supermarket produce section looks like with and without bees:
With no bees to pollinate flowers, huge amounts of the fruits and vegetables we rely on can no longer grow.
Quote:
This resulted in the removal of 237 out of 453 products – 52 percent of the department's normal product mix. What's missing? There's a definitive lack of apples, avocados, bok choy, broccoli, broccoli rabe, cantaloupe, carrots, cauliflower, celery, cucumbers, eggplant, green onions, honeydew, kale, leeks, lemons, limes, mangos, mustard greens, onions, summer squash and zucchini — all foods that rely on bees.
"Pollinators are a critical link in our food system. More than 85 percent of earth's plant species – many of which compose some of the most nutritional parts of our diet – require pollinators to exist. Yet we continue to see alarming declines in bee numbers," said Eric Mader, assistant pollinator conservation director at the Xerces Society. "Our organization works with farmers nationwide to help them create wildflower habitat and adopt less pesticide-intensive practices. These simple strategies can tip the balance back in favor of bees."
"Pollinators are a critical link in our food system. More than 85 percent of earth's plant species – many of which compose some of the most nutritional parts of our diet – require pollinators to exist. Yet we continue to see alarming declines in bee numbers," said Eric Mader, assistant pollinator conservation director at the Xerces Society. "Our organization works with farmers nationwide to help them create wildflower habitat and adopt less pesticide-intensive practices. These simple strategies can tip the balance back in favor of bees."
From the same site, would also kill off the Tour de France!
SilentElk wrote:
From the same site, would also kill off the Tour de France!
Which is slightly loaded with bullshit. I like the bit where they say they could theoretically move it from June (it is in July) to September, but the cycling calendar is too crowded to do so.
Yes, over a 87 year horizon, there is no capacity to consider moving the single most prestigious event, consistently, for the history of a cycling as a sport, as there is no way that they would consider changing the date of another event of secondary importance.
Also, apparently, they can't run the tour if the temperature on the streets of Paris is not favourable to spectators. The average temperature would vary to higher ranges, but the graphs aren't giving certainty that it would be hotter than a Qatar summer for those 3 hours of the year.
But they say on the website!
To quote the greatest philosopher of our time. "life will find a way"
How come every single thing reported on climate change always will have catastrophic consequences in the next 20 years or so?
At least the methane will solve the oil crisis...
How come every single thing reported on climate change always will have catastrophic consequences in the next 20 years or so?
At least the methane will solve the oil crisis...
HA! I've just moved on top of a hill! HAHAH! COWER PUNY HUMANS!
I'm pretty sure that the last thing anyone is going to be giving a toss about is a bicycle race.
markg wrote:
I'm pretty sure that the last thing anyone is going to be giving a toss about is a bicycle race.
La Grande Boucle is more important than many things.
There wsa a really interestring program about CCD on the TV recently. I think it was a Horizon one. The sheer scale of the problem is miond boggling, also, how many bees are used in California alone.
Genuine question:
Why can't we do what bees do? What part of the process do they provide that cannot be replicated by science?
Why can't we do what bees do? What part of the process do they provide that cannot be replicated by science?
Curiosity wrote:
Genuine question:
Why can't we do what bees do? What part of the process do they provide that cannot be replicated by science?
Why can't we do what bees do? What part of the process do they provide that cannot be replicated by science?
humans pollinating things on an agribusiness scale would be a bit of a task.
By hand, sure - but can't we just spray pollen around? Not sure it's a job Curio would want to do, mind.
The gains in crops would be lost in Claritin production
Cras wrote:
By hand, sure - but can't we just spray pollen around? Not sure it's a job Curio would want to do, mind.
How would you harvest the pollen? The ebst way to do it, having given it about 3 seconds of thought, would proabbly to make a tree shkaing device and then use a big fan to blow the pollen aorund. Although this might not be that efficient.
Can we not GM up a massive fucking pollen plant, harvest on an industrial scale, then basically use crop dusters to pollinate everything?
Obviously saving bees is better (if they promise not to sting me).
Obviously saving bees is better (if they promise not to sting me).
Curiosity wrote:
Can we not GM up a massive fucking pollen plant, harvest on an industrial scale, then basically use crop dusters to pollinate everything?
Obviously saving bees is better (if they promise not to sting me).
Obviously saving bees is better (if they promise not to sting me).
You'd be expsoed to the same risks as huge monocultures, so would stilll need broad spectrum pesticides and whatnot.
markg wrote:
I'm pretty sure that the last thing anyone is going to be giving a toss about is a bicycle race.
I'm more worried about chocolate, coffee, pasta, and more.Cras wrote:
By hand, sure - but can't we just spray pollen around? Not sure it's a job Curio would want to do, mind.
Your mum sprays her pollen around by hand. Doctor Glyndwr wrote:
markg wrote:
I'm pretty sure that the last thing anyone is going to be giving a toss about is a bicycle race.
I'm more worried about chocolate, coffee, pasta, and more.Cras wrote:
By hand, sure - but can't we just spray pollen around? Not sure it's a job Curio would want to do, mind.
Your mum sprays her pollen around by hand.And that is another job I don't want to be involved in.
MaliA wrote:
Curiosity wrote:
Can we not GM up a massive fucking pollen plant, harvest on an industrial scale, then basically use crop dusters to pollinate everything?
Obviously saving bees is better (if they promise not to sting me).
Obviously saving bees is better (if they promise not to sting me).
You'd be expsoed to the same risks as huge monocultures, so would stilll need broad spectrum pesticides and whatnot.
Why can't we GM up a massive fucking pollen plant with preprogrammed genetic variation in its pollen production?
Cras wrote:
MaliA wrote:
Curiosity wrote:
Can we not GM up a massive fucking pollen plant, harvest on an industrial scale, then basically use crop dusters to pollinate everything?
Obviously saving bees is better (if they promise not to sting me).
Obviously saving bees is better (if they promise not to sting me).
You'd be expsoed to the same risks as huge monocultures, so would stilll need broad spectrum pesticides and whatnot.
Why can't we GM up a massive fucking pollen plant with preprogrammed genetic variation in its pollen production?
Because, science.
EDIT: The path of least resistance to do this would be to replace the host's DNA polymerase with a non error checking one. That'll increase your error rate when duplicating by quite a bit thus variety increases. You'll get lots of things that do nothing, though. However, many plants carry multiple copies of their genome so this might cause problems further down the line. it won't be at all efficient.
Then can we not create mechanical bees?
I think nano-robo-bees may be the only workable solution, to be honest.
But then, I think that is the solution to most things. YMMV.
But then, I think that is the solution to most things. YMMV.
Though mechanical bees can bring about the end of the world. See 'Angelmaker' by Nick Harkaway for details.
MaliA wrote:
Doctor Glyndwr wrote:
MaliA wrote:
3) Colonize mars.
For its imaginary oil reserves?
Details, mere details. If we set out to colonize mars as a national priority the benefits are:
Science and engineering sectors get a boost of resources.
Spaceships.
This will draw talent to the UK.
More spaceships.
This will improve the UK economy.
Awesome spaceships.
Deprived areas become developed as more emphasis is put on education to be part of this project.
Moral behaviour becomes the norm.
Spaceships.
The booming economy promotes internal and external investments in regions.
Foreign governments tender for contracts.
More spaceships.
Spin off tech reduces carbon dependency.
Basically, we can solve many social and economic problems by moving now to colonize mars. And then the uk will have mars. And spaceships.
It's a shame no one ever consults me on this.
Hi 5 India!
http://m.motherjones.com/environment/20 ... t-collapse
Could be fifteen feet of rise is now inevitable.
Quote:
Two new scientific papers, in the journals Science and Geophysical Research Letters, report that major glaciers that are part of the West Antarctic Ice Sheet appear to have become irrevocably destabilized.
Could be fifteen feet of rise is now inevitable.
Doctor Glyndwr wrote:
http://m.motherjones.com/environment/2014/05/west-antarctic-ice-sheet-collapse
Could be fifteen feet of rise is now inevitable.
Quote:
Two new scientific papers, in the journals Science and Geophysical Research Letters, report that major glaciers that are part of the West Antarctic Ice Sheet appear to have become irrevocably destabilized.
Could be fifteen feet of rise is now inevitable.
Ah yes, but a recent study sponsored by Shell and Exxon reported that it was like that when they got there, and we shouldn't worry at all. Now look at the shiny thing over there!
Who cares! It won't happen until I'm long dead!
Brilliant clip about climate change doing the rounds from John Olivers new HBO show. Would link but at work.
Doctor Glyndwr wrote:
http://m.motherjones.com/environment/2014/05/west-antarctic-ice-sheet-collapse
Could be fifteen feet of rise is now inevitable.
Quote:
Two new scientific papers, in the journals Science and Geophysical Research Letters, report that major glaciers that are part of the West Antarctic Ice Sheet appear to have become irrevocably destabilized.
Could be fifteen feet of rise is now inevitable.
Of course if 15 feet is inevitable, then the argument now follows we should do nothing to aim to prevent it, and reinvest all of that expenditure into protection rather than prevention.
The message could be provided in a better format than received in the past week or so - dig deeper and the 15ft is over a millenium, not by half two next Wednesday.
Here's the John Oliver clip.
Basically everything he does makes me laugh a lot.
Basically everything he does makes me laugh a lot.
Someone at work said that with my dark hair, rants, new glasses and slight brummie twang when excited, that I reminded them of John Oliver yesterday.
I did a baby wee at this news, but then realised that they missed out 'funny'
I did a baby wee at this news, but then realised that they missed out 'funny'
