@paulnicklen on assignment for @natgeo. Emperor Penguins rocket to the surface. They release millions of micro bubbles from their feathers in order to reduce the amount of friction between their bodies and the water, allowing them to accelerate to much greater speeds to avoid leopard seal predation. Leopard seals hide under the ice edge, waiting to ambush the penguins at this moment when they are most vulnerable. @sea_legacy @natgeocreative @thephotosociety #nature #wildlife #penguins #picoftheday #instagramhub #marineprotectedareas by natgeo
Americans’ divide over global warming getting deeper
Tucked between treatises on algae and prehistoric turquoise beads, the study on page 460 of a long-ago issue of the U.S. journal Science drew little attention.
"I don’t think there were any newspaper articles about it or anything like that," the author recalls.
But the headline on the 1975 report was bold: “Are We on the Brink of a Pronounced Global Warming?” And this article that coined the term may have marked the last time a mention of “global warming” didn’t set off an instant outcry of angry denial.
In the paper, Columbia University geoscientist Wally Broecker calculated how much carbon dioxide would accumulate in the atmosphere in the coming 35 years, and how temperatures consequently would rise. His numbers have proven almost dead-on correct. Meanwhile, other powerful evidence poured in over those decades, showing the “greenhouse effect” is real and is happening. And yet resistance to the idea among many in the U.S. appears to have hardened.
What’s going on?
"The desire to disbelieve deepens as the scale of the threat grows," concludes economist-ethicist Clive Hamilton.
He and others who track what they call “denialism” find that its nature is changing in America, last redoubt of climate naysayers. It has taken on a more partisan, ideological tone. Polls find a widening Republican-Democratic gap on climate. Republican presidential candidate Rick Perry even accuses climate scientists of lying for money. Global warming looms as a debatable question in yet another U.S. election campaign. […]
Sounds about right.
*That’s quite accurate, except that it misses the part about weather tribulations being caused by lesbians.