4 ms·

Thanks for the good newss, didn’t know about that. News tend to be biased towards the bad and the good is left it. Bookmarking that site

dbtqgoat 8y ago
I wouldn’t bookmark this site. The writers of this article did not do their due diligence in their research or in their presentation of this article. Check our the other comments here, which do a good job of explaining the nuances of the “greening”.
- emiliobumachar 8y ago
  Skepticism is always good, but so is a modicum of good news bias, especially if announced, to counter the predominance of bad news bias. If the world was in fact getting less green, and this was presented as bad news, would you hold the reporters to the same high standard of including all relevant silver linings?
rcMgD2BwE72F 8y ago
It's greener because the vegetation is capturing some of our massive CO2 emissions, but the planet (or the biosphere, more precisely) is increasingly suffering from the Anthropocene: the ocean is slowly being killed, the soil is getting ravaged, insects are disappearing, birds too, the biodiversity is collapsing, etc. A greener Earth is not a good sign. It's a swan song :'(
- ThomPete 8y ago
  So when it has hotter previously in history it wasn't a good sign either? Not sure I understand why it's bad this time around and wasn't bad last time around?
  - sethammons 8y ago
    Rate of change is the super scary part.
    - ThomPete 8y ago
      The rate of change of emission is not the same as rate of change of temperature so not sure what it is you are worried about exactly. Keep in mind the models aren't actual predictions they are models which give us a range from no problem at all to really scary. But none of them are actual scientific predictions and there is plenty of argument for why it's not going to be a big issue and certainly not something we can't deal with.

4 ms·

Thanks for the good newss, didn’t know about that. News tend to be biased towards the bad and the good is left it. Bookmarking that site

by cjohansson 8y ago

dbtqgoat 8y ago
I wouldn’t bookmark this site. The writers of this article did not do their due diligence in their research or in their presentation of this article. Check our the other comments here, which do a good job of explaining the nuances of the “greening”.
- emiliobumachar 8y ago
  Skepticism is always good, but so is a modicum of good news bias, especially if announced, to counter the predominance of bad news bias. If the world was in fact getting less green, and this was presented as bad news, would you hold the reporters to the same high standard of including all relevant silver linings?
rcMgD2BwE72F 8y ago
It's greener because the vegetation is capturing some of our massive CO2 emissions, but the planet (or the biosphere, more precisely) is increasingly suffering from the Anthropocene: the ocean is slowly being killed, the soil is getting ravaged, insects are disappearing, birds too, the biodiversity is collapsing, etc. A greener Earth is not a good sign. It's a swan song :'(
- ThomPete 8y ago
  So when it has hotter previously in history it wasn't a good sign either? Not sure I understand why it's bad this time around and wasn't bad last time around?
  - sethammons 8y ago
    Rate of change is the super scary part.
    - ThomPete 8y ago
      The rate of change of emission is not the same as rate of change of temperature so not sure what it is you are worried about exactly. Keep in mind the models aren't actual predictions they are models which give us a range from no problem at all to really scary. But none of them are actual scientific predictions and there is plenty of argument for why it's not going to be a big issue and certainly not something we can't deal with.