Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Environment & Energy

Nederland

(9,979 posts)

7. Interesting

Reply to GliderGuider (Reply #1)

Wed May 16, 2012, 10:13 AM

May 2012

This graph comes from a 2012 article in Smithsonian Magazine. One has to wonder why they choose to end the observed trends at the year 2000 when an additional 10 years of data is easily available. Why leave off 25% of the data?

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

11 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Earth's environment getting worse, not better, says WWF ahead of Rio+20 [View all] xchrom May 2012 OP

This is not news, but this too is reality. GliderGuider May 2012 #1

Interesting Nederland May 2012 #7

Why do you ask? GliderGuider May 2012 #8

I prefer as much data as possible Nederland May 2012 #9

Have you seen Graham Turner's paper? GliderGuider May 2012 #11

k stuntcat May 2012 #2

"An opportunity for the world to get serious about . . . sustainable" hatrack May 2012 #3

The problem is that true sustainability GliderGuider May 2012 #5

Reminds me of one of my favorite quotes (can't attribute, since I've forgotten but . .. ) hatrack May 2012 #10

You know how the economy gets worse if the 1% hoards all the money? The2ndWheel May 2012 #4

+1000 GliderGuider May 2012 #6