What is Digg?Related by Keyword 
How are these related stories? Tell us!
- leerayIG88, on 11/14/2008, -7/+6The towels are a little scratchy..
- adml_shake, on 11/15/2008, -16/+2Did anyone else thing that said "Marine dead zombies set to expand rapidly".
- smackydoodle, on 11/15/2008, -1/+10no
- MrSquirrel, on 11/15/2008, -6/+25Ah well. Bunches of non-scientists will vociferously deny it, just like everything else they prefer not to believe, and doom our children to a science fiction nightmare of a future through inaction.
- alais, on 11/15/2008, -5/+3Hey, I know a way you could cut down on carbon dioxide levels right now...
- Gr8Kid, on 11/15/2008, -1/+9hmmm..would that mean no fish??
- shadeOfGrey, on 11/15/2008, -5/+13Title made me think this was a story about Iraq.
- maus56, on 11/15/2008, -5/+6Scary. When I first saw that headline I thought it was something out of Iraq. Geez...
- partrow, on 11/15/2008, -10/+6It is understandable that we do not have any Marines in these areas, because there is no conflict or need to defend these areas. There are also many other "Marine dead zones" around the world. We have to deploy our Marines to areas where we need them.
Also, Iraq is a non-expanding "Marine dead zone". The number of Marines who have died there has dropped steadily for some time now, thankfully.- anonymous1986, on 11/15/2008, -2/+5Stupidity has no boundaries..., along with blindly commenting without reading an article
- khoa1708, on 11/15/2008, -10/+0Johnny Smith had the perfect life. Until he was in coma for six years. When he awoke, he found his fiance married to another man. His son doesn't know who he is. Everything's changed. Including Johnny. One touch, he can see things. Things that have happened. Things that will happen. You should see what he sees.
- PEMDAS, on 11/15/2008, -0/+4Is that the plot synopsis of Dead Zone? I've never watched it, but you better be talking about that.
- CIAVT, on 11/15/2008, -12/+1I figured with Obama being elected and all, most of our Marines would soon be coming home safe.....
- FLUX, on 11/15/2008, -12/+6Study shows liberals likely to become noecons in the future.
I hold the above statement just about at true as this half ass pseudo science article based entirely on what ifs and maybes- rustintable, on 11/15/2008, -0/+4Your comment should be in politics not the science section.
- Trent1492, on 11/15/2008, -0/+3"Study shows liberals likely to become noecons in the future.
I hold the above statement just about at true as this half ass pseudo science article based entirely on what ifs and maybes."
Did not bother to read it did you? - FLUX, on 11/16/2008, -0/+1yes i read it and it based on supposed global warming co2 rise and it is pure pseudo science scare the hell outa the masses *****
- Intercon, on 11/15/2008, -4/+17Make all the jokes you want, folks. If the world's oceans pass a critical point of being able to sustain life, the whole planet goes. That's why they refer to it as a WEB OF LIFE. Because all the ecosystems on this planet are intimately and intricately connected. And no more fish doesn't just mean no more Mrs. Paul's fish stix. It means no more life on this planet. Digg me down for being an alarmist, but it's the truth.
The solution: nothing less than a complete shift from industrial fertilizers in agriculture back to organic farming. While it won't completely remove the problem as mining and industrial waste, and certain fishing techniques need to be curbed as well, but it's the single most blatant part of the problem and (nicely enough) the easiest, quickest, and likely the strongest method to pursue towards insuring the safety of those ecosystems. And believe it or not, but crop yields and nutritional content of food would actually rise significantly.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/africa/org ...
http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/10587.php
Welcome to the future. Now let's get to work. - Jareth86, on 11/15/2008, -1/+15Whether you believe in "global warming" or not, it is scientific fact that CO2 levels are rising. Listening to you people deny this is almost as painful as watching a creationist rally, yet you imagine yourselves to be much more "intelligent" than these people. Denying scientific fact is denying scientific fact. Sorry.
- whok, on 11/15/2008, -11/+2although CO2 are certainly rising at a rate that we've never seen, the earth has cycles, just because the planet is warming doesnt mean we caused all of it. im sorry but al gore's global warming is a money sceme
- archiesteel, on 11/15/2008, -2/+10While the earth has cycles, the last time CO2 levels rose at this rate there was a massive extinction in which 90% of animal species perished.
Global Warming isn't Al Gore's, and there's more money to be made in denying it. Your argument is BS, and more dangerous to our safety than if you were cheerleading for Al Qaida. Go jump off a ***** cliff. - Jareth86, on 11/15/2008, -1/+10The CO2 our machines and factories have been releasing is not just vanishing. It goes into the atmosphere. That thereby increases the CO2 levels. Do you not see the disconnect with your reasoning? Using fossil evidence, we are able to monitor what the levels used to be, and this goes way beyond any previous levels recorded.
...Or did god put those there to test your faith?
- archiesteel, on 11/15/2008, -2/+10While the earth has cycles, the last time CO2 levels rose at this rate there was a massive extinction in which 90% of animal species perished.
- whok, on 11/15/2008, -11/+2although CO2 are certainly rising at a rate that we've never seen, the earth has cycles, just because the planet is warming doesnt mean we caused all of it. im sorry but al gore's global warming is a money sceme
- XGIUSMC, on 11/15/2008, -1/+8I have heard arguments on both sides of the CO2 issue. Even if we do not know for sure what is happening, it makes sense to minimize the damage we cause to the planet while we are figuring it out.
- archiesteel, on 11/15/2008, -3/+5Just by curiosity, what argument from the denier side have you found convincing? Because *every* one of them has been disproved by scientists, who make a lot less money fighting for this cause than deniers do in kickbacks from Big Oil.
- XGIUSMC, on 11/17/2008, -0/+0Years ago I had read someone who claimed Mount St. Helens spewed more CO2 than automobiles and heavy Industry.
However, I had also heard from old salts of the previous generation that there were wierd areas in the oceans covered with garbage and seemingly devoid of life. As it was described to me, merchant sailors would often catch fish to supplement their diet. But they couldn't catch fish in these particular areas. And this was decades ago.
- XGIUSMC, on 11/17/2008, -0/+0Years ago I had read someone who claimed Mount St. Helens spewed more CO2 than automobiles and heavy Industry.
- archiesteel, on 11/15/2008, -3/+5Just by curiosity, what argument from the denier side have you found convincing? Because *every* one of them has been disproved by scientists, who make a lot less money fighting for this cause than deniers do in kickbacks from Big Oil.
- else7en, on 11/15/2008, -13/+2learn to skeptic *****
- PabloMac, on 11/15/2008, -11/+4We Marines are always looking to expand our kill zone.
- Anonchrist, on 11/15/2008, -10/+1If they wait to long to do something there will not be a free market solution. If the oceans are at the point of dieng off then I could see the *real* possibibility of a communist revolution across the globe. Can you imagine being pissed that other people are breathig while knowing that there is not enough food to eat? Would you really let people have as many children as they wanted or own big cars? That is really a scary thought and it makes me wonder why the "capitialistic* forces are not trying to battle this problem if it is indeed real. Either the facts don't seem to point in this articles direction or corporations would benifit from communism.
- DeFex, on 11/15/2008, -1/+7corporations dont care about anyone who cant buy their stuff. if they die, tough *****.
and they cant think beyond the quarterly earnings report.
"who cares about 5 years from now i would have taken my golden handshake and be off to scam someone else" - Anonchrist, on 11/16/2008, -0/+1I see exactly what you mean. I was only pointing out the obvious hole in the grand *we the capitalist are fighting communism by denying global warming* rhetoric. If global warming is really as bad as it has been predicted to be, then we can expect horrible things to happen by leaving it ignored.
- DeFex, on 11/15/2008, -1/+7corporations dont care about anyone who cant buy their stuff. if they die, tough *****.
- socialfly, on 11/15/2008, -1/+1http://news.cnet.com/Troubled-waters-for-ocean-dea ...
Earlier link on the same subject. The problem seems to be increasing. - 111408, on 11/15/2008, -12/+2
- anonymous1986, on 11/15/2008, -2/+8Please read the below link from the newscientist:
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn11462-climat ...
From one of the articles:
The fact is that there is an overwhelming consensus in the scientific community about global warming and its causes. There are some exceptions, but the number of sceptics is getting smaller rather than growing".
It's a shame that you don't read, here's an explanation for the global cooling theory predicted in the 70's
Climate myths: They predicted global cooling in the 1970s
"Indeed they did. At least, a handful of scientific papers discussed the possibility of a new ice age at some point in the future, leading to some pretty sensational media coverage (see Histories: The ice age that never was).
One of the sources of this idea may have been a 1971 paper by Stephen Schneider, then a climate researcher at NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center in Maryland, US. Schneider's paper suggested that the cooling effect of dirty air could outweigh the warming effect of carbon dioxide, potentially leading to an ice age if aerosol pollution quadrupled.
This scenario was seen as plausible by many other scientists, as at the time the planet had been cooling (see Global temperatures fell between 1940 and 1980). Furthermore, it had also become clear that the interglacial period we are in was lasting an unusually long time (see Record ice core gives fair forecast).
However, Schneider soon realised he had overestimated the cooling effect of aerosol pollution and underestimated the effect of CO2, meaning warming was more likely than cooling in the long run. In his review of a 1977 book called The Weather Conspiracy: The Coming of the New Ice Age, Schneider stated: "We just don't know...at this stage whether we are in for warming or cooling - or when." A 1975 report (pdf format) by the US National Academy of Sciences merely called for more research."
Update: A survey of the scientific literature has found that between 1965 and 1979, 44 scientific papers predicted warming, 20 were neutral and just 7 predicted cooling. So while predictions of cooling got more media attention, the majority of scientists were predicting warming even then.
Here's a link to the story about the Bush administration fudging the findings of scientists:
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn11417
The Bush administration has again been charged with interfering with federal climate science, in order to underplay the significance of global warming.
Educate yourself please- Dralha, on 11/15/2008, -0/+7That's a lot of good information, but all of it will be entirely ignored by rightards like "111408." They are so hopelessly immersed in their delusional fantasylands of reality denial, and are so well-fed by imbecile cretins like limbaugh and o'reilly, that they no longer have the cognitive capacity to comprehend or deal with the real world.
- PEMDAS, on 11/15/2008, -3/+1How do you make them arrows.
- MrSquirrel, on 11/16/2008, -0/+2Like this: ►
- doubledmateo, on 11/15/2008, -2/+1Actually if you turned the graph upside down (as long as it isn't transparent and being flipped to the other side at the same time) then the graph would look roughly the same. Just sayin'.
- anonymous1986, on 11/15/2008, -2/+8Please read the below link from the newscientist:
- DeFex, on 11/15/2008, -1/+5Keep breeding like rats and see if you can guess what happens when there are too many rats for the environment.
how a bout wave powered aerator buoys, as long as they are not designed bu a US powerpoint committee they would be quite cheap. - Mc_Carter, on 11/15/2008, -2/+1Has anyone read Sahara. Almost the same deal.
- PEMDAS, on 11/15/2008, -4/+1***** bitches all I want is to know how to make the bullet points he used in his comment.
- doubledmateo, on 11/15/2008, -2/+2Okay, I've seen countless arguments about global warming and how we're all doomed, yada, yada, but where is a viable solution. You can tell me till you're blue in the face that we're all going to cook to death, starve to death, run out of water, and drown, while getting thrown around by tornados and experiencing wildfires, but what the hell am I supposed to do about it. I do my best to reduce my waste of energy and drive as little as possible, but it doesn't make a damn bit of difference. Doom and gloom scenarios that don't offer any ways of getting out are a total waste and only serve to get people panicky and increase the hits for whatever alarmist magazine or site is posting them.
Almost forgot, they also work wonders for the eletist jerks that want bash on anyone that doesn't live the same life they do, and has some deep seated hatred for it's own species. It's an intellectual pissing contest.- rustintable, on 11/15/2008, -1/+1Research is done to understand what is going on. That is all. All the social ***** you are talking about is not relevant to the truth of the problem.
And you are the one freaking out and then you go blaming other for freaking you out. It sounds like you are doing good stuff. Great. We are all working on solutions. Thanks all we can do.
Many people are working hard on solutions to environmental problems and they are producing great technology that may be able to solve these problems. If you can't handle reading the negative stuff then read about the new tech coming out to make yourself feel better.
Why do I have to baby you people. Grow a brain *****... - Inspiron08, on 11/16/2008, -1/+0I just thought I would make a few points here, no one has proven any of this is caused by man. I have spoken with physicists and chemists about global warming and they say there is no for sure answer. Also on digg alone the same thing happened an article a while back showed that MIT proved that global warming wasn't caused by man, on the next page was a man who intensive "study" showed that the world must spend at least 10 trillion dollars on combating global warming otherwise the world will no longer sustain life.
- rustintable, on 11/15/2008, -1/+1Research is done to understand what is going on. That is all. All the social ***** you are talking about is not relevant to the truth of the problem.
- runnerr0, on 11/15/2008, -1/+1Soylent green is ...
- mos6507, on 11/16/2008, -0/+1...on its way to the store shelves.
- PEMDAS, on 11/16/2008, -0/+1How do I make ***** bullet points? Jesus ***** digg me down again christ. Bullet points dammit. Bullet points.
- caponumen, on 11/16/2008, -0/+1CO2 levels where much higher in prehistoric times.
Interestingly this period was host to an explosion of life on earth.
This article is nonsense in that dead zones are mainly a result of poor land use practices........
The Digg Toolbar for Firefox lets you Digg, submit content, and keep track of Digg even when you're not on the Digg site. Download the official 
© Digg Inc. 2009 — Content posted by Digg users is