Welcome • User Guide
ToS • Privacy • Canary
Donate • Bugs • License

©2025 Poal.co

1.3K

(post is archived)

[–] • 21 pts

I know where it's going... Drawing water from your own well will be illegal and you will be forced to consoom 'safe and healthy' government approved (and poisoned) water.

[–] • 2 pts

One of the board members in my town wants to tax people who have their own wells.

[–] • 1 pt

What was their purported reasoning?

[–] • 1 pt

Just 1 guy so far and he didn't like that people weren't paying the same tax that those who used town water had to pay.

[–] • 8 pts

Everything is a lie.

[–] • 4 pts

This. The end game here is "no more wells"

We all know why.

[–] • 6 pts

Trusting the NY Times for scientific rigor is a worse idea than trusting a kike with your wallet.

[–] • 3 pts

I agree, just been following this story b/c I wonder how this is going to turn into something the govt says they need money to fix.

[–] • 3 pts

...I wonder how this is going to turn into something the govt says they need money to fix.

Excellent point! Create the crisis, provide the solution!

[–] • 6 pts

Bullshit

[–] • 3 pts

If anyone's interested, here's the napkin math:

[assuming a round earth, SI units used because it makes conversions easier]

Earth weights 6E24 kg with a radius of 6.4E6 m, with an angular frequency of 2π/(246060) = 7.3E-5 rad/s

giving it an approximate angular momentum of (2/5)MR²ω = 7.2E33 kg·m²/s

The actual value would be somewhat smaller than this, since this assumes a uniform density sphere, while the earth has most of its mass closer to its core, but a slightly wider-than-spherical shape. To swing the axis of rotation 180° would require double this input of angular momentum. The change described in the paper is ~0.08 meters per year, while the part of that change attributed to groundwater movement is only ~0.04 meters per year. In angular terms, that's 6.2E-9 rad/year (2E-16 rad/s) attributed to groundwater.

How much angular momentum would that shift require? At that rate, the earths rotation would take π/6.2E-9 = 500 million years to completely flip earth's rotational axis, so that's an annual change of 2·7.2E33/5E8 = 2.9E25 kg·m² (9E17 kg·m²/s²)

Assuming all the water pumped by humans is pumped from the equator in the optimal direction to shift the axis of rotation, what flow-rate of water would this correspond to? 9E17/6.4E6² = 22000 kg/s, or about 22 tons of water per second (about 6x the flow rate over Niagara falls). Considering total human freshwater use is close to 120000 tons per second, 22 tons per second doesn't seem unreasonable as the net effect of all human water pumping.

Main take-away is that if all this math is correct, and nothing changes for the next hundred million years, humans will have fucked up the rotation of the Earth.

[–] • 1 pt

Same math applied to human(Anthropogenic) carbon emissions does not account for more than 7% of the 10% variable in the total global carbon cycle. We are not a significant contributor to any global change.

[–] • 0 pt

The rate of increase of atmospheric CO2 concentrations is too steep, and too closely timed to the industrial revolution to be a coincidence of nature...no?

[–] • 2 pts

I couldn't help but notice that no numbers were given. I bet we are talking milliseconds and hundredths of a degree and thus just barely above the noise floor.

My hunch is backed up by “it’s impressive they were able to tease that out of the data," Dr. Rodell said.

And "and that the observations they have of the polar motion are precise enough to see that effect."

This sounds like a split quote to make the second part have less impact on the fact that the data points are indeed so close to noise.

Now, I'm making assumptions on all of this because I don't have the dataset nor the study results but, we all know what type of fuckery that the falling sky climate fucknuggets are willing to do to make shit fit their agenda.

[–] • 1 pt

How about that study that said the massive 3 gorges project in China would ALTER the AXIS of the fucking earth. How about we talk about that.

[–] • 1 pt

“I’m not surprised that it would have an effect” on Earth’s spin, said Matthew Rodell, an earth scientist at NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center. But “it’s impressive they were able to tease that out of the data,”

“Tease that out of the data”, indeed.

Other forces might also be pulling Earth’s axis in its new direction but aren’t yet fully understood, said Clark R. Wilson, a geophysicist at the University of Texas at Austin and another author of the study. “It’s possible, for example, there’s something in Earth’s fluid core that’s going on, that’s contributing as well,” he said.

How about Nemesis? It’s the elephant in the room.

[–] • 1 pt

And fatties. They probably have a slight effect on spin.

[–] • 0 pt

There is no way they could prove or disprove such a theory. No possible way.

In any case, this is just more “science bullshit” that will be used to further restrict freedoms and/or used as an excuse for more taxes.

[–] • 0 pt

This is an obvious cover story for the real deal

Imagine what billions taking a piss at least twice a day has done already... That's right, yet another stuff they don't want you to know... https://youtu.be/HBWM9BVRy9A?t=140

[–] • 0 pt

This smells of kike bullshittery.....

Load more (2 replies)