Oh yeah, you can't do all that, because anyone who publicly suggests global warming is anything less than the absolute truth get death threats.

turdferguson = win.

I wish I was a games student...

I'd make a game where you find the reason for global warming is all the polar bears keep bombing and diving off of tall icebergs. The ironic part is, it is then your duty to go and kill them all with flamethrowers, napalm and rocket launchers.

I would name it "Kill the cunting polar bears with fire cos they're like breaking the sea innit". Winnar?

Global warming issues aside (file that one in the "I'm so not getting into that topic on the interwebs" folder), this sounds like a way to promote XNA more than anything else.

The BBC actually released a flash game about global warming called "Climate Challenge." It was decently entertaining. I wasted a Civ Pro II period playing it, so it's got that going for it.

It means they hardly pay you anything for making 'em! ROFL!

"Are you a bad enough dude to save the ionishpere?!"

The Antarctic ozone hole is an area of the Antarctic stratosphere in which the recent ozone levels have dropped to as low as 33% of their pre-1975 values. The ozone hole occurs during the Antarctic spring, from September to early December, as strong westerly winds start to circulate around the continent and create an atmospheric container. Within this "polar vortex", over 50% of the lower stratospheric ozone is destroyed during the Antarctic spring.[8]

As explained above, the overall cause of ozone depletion is the presence of chlorine-containing source gases (primarily CFCs and related halocarbons). In the presence of UV light, these gases dissociate, releasing chlorine atoms, which then go on to catalyze ozone destruction. The Cl-catalyzed ozone depletion can take place in the gas phase, but it is dramatically enhanced in the presence of polar stratospheric clouds (PSCs).[9]

These polar stratospheric clouds form during winter, in the extreme cold. Polar winters are dark, consisting of 3 months without solar radiation (sunlight). Not only lack of sunlight contributes to a decrease in temperature but also the “polar vortex” traps and chills air. Temperatures hover around or below -80 °C. These low temperatures form cloud particles and are composed of either nitric acid (Type I PSC) or ice (Type II PSC). Both types provide surfaces for chemical reactions that lead to ozone destruction.

The photochemical processes involved are complex but well understood. The key observation is that, ordinarily, most of the chlorine in the stratosphere resides in stable "reservoir" compounds, primarily hydrogen chloride (HCl) and chlorine nitrate (ClONO2). During the Antarctic winter and spring, however, reactions on the surface of the polar stratospheric cloud particles convert these "reservoir" compounds into reactive free radicals (Cl and ClO). The clouds can also remove NO2 from the atmosphere by converting it to nitric acid, which prevents the newly formed ClO from being converted back into ClONO2.

The role of sunlight in ozone depletion is the reason why the Antarctic ozone depletion is greatest during spring. During winter, even though PSCs are at their most abundant, there is no light over the pole to drive the chemical reactions. During the spring, however, the sun comes out, providing energy to drive photochemical reactions, and melt the polar stratospheric clouds, releasing the trapped compounds.

Most of the ozone that is destroyed is in the lower stratosphere, in contrast to the much smaller ozone depletion through homogeneous gas phase reactions, which occurs primarily in the upper stratosphere.


Stripe the problem with you're argument is that any climate scientists not funded by oil companies think global warming is a real problem, and the profit from An Inconvenient Truth was donated to the EPA.

It's funny when people who know nothing about science pretend to understand complex scientific issues.

I was doing some thinking, and I think I know why Microsoft is doing this. Hopefully this dosen't sound like fanboy carp, but I think they are skirting around some comments that a Microsoft executive said about the 360's ability to outpreform the PS3 on folding @ home (or folding @ XBL, I would think). Someone in the know said that if the 360 were to use home, the failure rate on the 360 would approach drastically higher numbers[ for every 360 console that would use it. Even the creator of Folding @ home said that the 360 wouldn't be as fast (or good?) as the PS3. Thye official results even suggest that the processor for the 360 can't compete against the Cell.

@Cloudman

While awesomely technical, your essay describes ozone depletion, not global warming. You need to add the final section that connects the two.

You'll also note that no one here outright denied that the climate was changing. They were decrying the scare tactics used to make us think that my drive to work this morning killed a baby seal in australia or something.

It's funny when people who know stuff about science totally forget to look at all the words around the numbers and actually think about social issues.

I know a great objective for a game about ending global warming, kill Al Gore. BAM! We will never hear a word about it ever again. And I am merely suggesting someone make a fictional game about killing al gore, not that anyone actually go out and hurt him in any way. And if someone can make a mockumentary about kill George Bush, someone better damn well be able to make a game about killing the former vice president.

They prolly have a sercet that the winner has to make a game that says it doesnt really exist.

"The fact of the matter is that humankind hasn't been a part of this planet's ecosystem for long enough for us to know what kind of effect is has on a planet"

I think it's pretty safe to assume tonnes of pollution a day put into the air over centuries won't have a positive effect on the planet.