Stuart Carlson by Stuart Carlson

Stuart Carlson

Comments (9) (Please sign in to comment)

  1. dtroutma

    dtroutma GoComics PRO Member said, almost 4 years ago

    We need a mix of all energy sources, yes, fossil fuels, wind, solar, and even nuclear (we already HAVE a few centuries worth of nuclear fuel, we don’t need more mining). But the REAL issue is CONSERVATION of energy, and stop WASTING so much!

  2. Night-Gaunt49

    Night-Gaunt49 GoComics PRO Member said, almost 4 years ago

    No we need a mix just no carbon based fuels. But we will be using them as the climate gets worse even into the 2050’s.


    Nuclear power is too dangerous, needs lots of water. No good place to store the nuclear waste. Costs too much money. Should be last on our list.

  3. benbrilling

    benbrilling GoComics PRO Member said, almost 4 years ago

    Guess which industries are giving huge contributions to BOTH campaigns -and the debate commission.

  4. Bruce4671

    Bruce4671 said, almost 4 years ago

    Well, there is still those that think this:

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2217286/Global-warming-stopped-16-years-ago-reveals-Met-Office-report-quietly-released—chart-prove-it.html

    But wonder of wonders Trout said something I can agree with.

  5. Lynne B

    Lynne B GoComics PRO Member said, almost 4 years ago

    @Bruce4671

    The Daily Fail (trust me, I know this paper, they are awful for getting any science right) did a great deal to mangle the science on this one. Here is the Met’s reply:

    http://metofficenews.wordpress.com/2012/10/14/met-office-in-the-media-14-october-2012/

  6. Bruce4671

    Bruce4671 said, almost 4 years ago

    @Lynne B

    OK thanks for the reference.

    A point::

    “Over the last 140 years global surface temperatures have risen by about 0.8ºC. However, within this record there have been several periods lasting a decade or more during which temperatures have risen very slowly or cooled. The current period of reduced warming is not unprecedented and 15 year long periods are not unusual.”

    So it seems to be cyclic with an upward trend.

  7. dtroutma

    dtroutma GoComics PRO Member said, almost 4 years ago

    In the past 6,000 years, there were three 500 years periods of greater than "historical " drought in my area. Drought isn’t direct to temperature, but the fact that humans have changed climate is disputed only by those who can ignore multiple factors, not just “temperature observations”. Biological systems are much more indicative of changes, linked to human activities, and they’re overwhelmingly stating we’re in a huge “oops” time.

  8. braindead08

    braindead08 GoComics PRO Member said, almost 4 years ago

    Let’s keep pumping those greenhouse gasses into the air.

  9. Lynne B

    Lynne B GoComics PRO Member said, almost 4 years ago

    @Bruce4671

    “Cyclical with an upward trend” isn’t a bad summary, actually. It’s complicated, though, by the fact that there isn’t just one cycle, there are numerous cycles interacting with each other — for example, the VERY long Milankovitch cycles, the 11-year solar cycles, and the year-to-year or decade-to-decade ENSO and Atlantic & Pacific oscillations, among these.


    It’s an incredibly non-linear system. That’s why there is so much “noise” in the annual climate, and only in periods of 15 years or more can an actual trend in the system even be detected.

  10. Refresh Comments.