Comments on: Nanotech and climate change http://www.foresight.org/nanodot/?p=3140 examining transformative technology Fri, 03 May 2013 19:22:42 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.4 By: Christine Peterson http://www.foresight.org/nanodot/?p=3140#comment-875743 Christine Peterson Tue, 11 May 2010 22:10:41 +0000 http://www.foresight.org/nanodot/?p=3140#comment-875743 Jesse -- Please go ahead. --Chris Peterson Jesse — Please go ahead.
–Chris Peterson

]]> By: Jesse http://www.foresight.org/nanodot/?p=3140#comment-875546 Jesse Tue, 11 May 2010 08:02:43 +0000 http://www.foresight.org/nanodot/?p=3140#comment-875546 Can I use some of the information from this post to students? I think this may help them to recognize the importance of sustainably managing environment. I will properly cite you. Can I use some of the information from this post to students? I think this may help them to recognize the importance of sustainably managing environment. I will properly cite you.

]]> By: Jay Dugger http://www.foresight.org/nanodot/?p=3140#comment-859520 Jay Dugger Sat, 11 Jul 2009 17:30:43 +0000 http://www.foresight.org/nanodot/?p=3140#comment-859520 Where did the global temperature diagram come from? Where did the global temperature diagram come from?

]]> By: Michael http://www.foresight.org/nanodot/?p=3140#comment-859517 Michael Sat, 11 Jul 2009 03:42:17 +0000 http://www.foresight.org/nanodot/?p=3140#comment-859517 I'm tending to agree with Trent here. Not because of the theory of what you're talking about (of course anything is possible), but because you somehow decided you could ignore that it's the *rate of change* that matters, not the absolute ppm of CO2. 1950 is a good year to go back to because the climate was still similar to the equilibrium it had been in for ten thousand years. Equilibrium is a good thing. Changing it quickly causes mass extinctions. I’m tending to agree with Trent here. Not because of the theory of what you’re talking about (of course anything is possible), but because you somehow decided you could ignore that it’s the *rate of change* that matters, not the absolute ppm of CO2. 1950 is a good year to go back to because the climate was still similar to the equilibrium it had been in for ten thousand years. Equilibrium is a good thing. Changing it quickly causes mass extinctions.

]]> By: Trent Waddington http://www.foresight.org/nanodot/?p=3140#comment-859487 Trent Waddington Sat, 04 Jul 2009 02:19:47 +0000 http://www.foresight.org/nanodot/?p=3140#comment-859487 This has to be the most retarded thing I've ever read on this site. This has to be the most retarded thing I’ve ever read on this site.

]]> By: Dr. Kenneth Noisewater http://www.foresight.org/nanodot/?p=3140#comment-859486 Dr. Kenneth Noisewater Fri, 03 Jul 2009 19:38:27 +0000 http://www.foresight.org/nanodot/?p=3140#comment-859486 Gotta wonder if gigantic dehumidifiers could help withdraw H2O from the atmosphere while providing fresh water to the populace around their installation? We're talking massive dehumidifier complexes powered by even bigger rings of solar, probably hundreds of square miles.. Gotta wonder if gigantic dehumidifiers could help withdraw H2O from the atmosphere while providing fresh water to the populace around their installation?

We’re talking massive dehumidifier complexes powered by even bigger rings of solar, probably hundreds of square miles..

]]>