Global warming 'undeniable,' scientis...

Global warming 'undeniable,' scientists say

There are 35579 comments on the TwinCities.com story from Jul 29, 2010, titled Global warming 'undeniable,' scientists say. In it, TwinCities.com reports that:

Scientists from around the world are providing even more evidence of global warming, one day after President Barack Obama renewed his call for climate legislation.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at TwinCities.com.

someone

Minneapolis, MN

#23711 Feb 6, 2013
truman wrote:
<quoted text>
'Agenda 21' Good Lord do any of you paranoid Rovian Toads ever listen to yourselves?
Don't ad hominem attacks get old? You wont win many arguments.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agenda_21#sect...

Least not with me.

Try again.
someone

Minneapolis, MN

#23712 Feb 6, 2013
http://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/index.ph...

Read the first paragraph. Here let met paste it for you.

Agenda 21 is a comprehensive plan of action to be taken globally, nationally and locally by organizations of the United Nations System, Governments, and Major Groups in every area in which human impacts on the environment.

In every area in which human impacts on the environment.

Feel free to download the whole thing and read it, its available as a pdf.

Newsflash
Socialism is new word for corporate facism.
true socialism is dead.

People like you will never own let alone control your means of production.
someone

Minneapolis, MN

#23713 Feb 6, 2013
Do you hold allegiance to the United States and its constitution?

Or to a foreign government?

I suggest people like you who would prefer to be loyal to a foreign government just leave the rest of alone. Better yet move to a so called socialist nation...
If there is any true socialist countries.

TRUE SOCIALISM IS DEAD.
TRUE CAPITALISM IS DEAD.

WE HAVE STATE CORPORATISM NOW.
CORPORATE FACISM.

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#23714 Feb 6, 2013
someone wrote:
http://sustainabledevelopment. un.org/index.php?page=view &nr=23&type=400&me nu=35
Read the first paragraph. Here let met paste it for you.
Agenda 21 is a comprehensive plan of action to be taken globally, nationally and locally by organizations of the United Nations System, Governments, and Major Groups in every area in which human impacts on the environment.
In every area in which human impacts on the environment.
Feel free to download the whole thing and read it, its available as a pdf.
Newsflash
Socialism is new word for corporate facism.
true socialism is dead.
People like you will never own let alone control your means of production.
Someone clueless,
You conspiracists would be quite amusing if you weren't so wacky & dangerous.

So Agenda 21 is an indication of world fascist socialist government, imposed by the UN, eh? Why don't we check Wiki?

"Agenda 21 is a non-binding, voluntarily implemented action plan of the United Nations with regard to sustainable development..."

It says "NON-BINDING, VOLUNTARILY IMPLEMENTED" in the FIRST SENTENCE!!! What is WRONG with you people? How can sensible people think of you as anything but psychotically detached from reality?

Source:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agenda_21

Wiki links to this, where it's ~half way down:
http://www.icleiusa.org/about-iclei/faqs/faq-...

Among other things, it says this:
"Agenda 21 is not a treaty or legally binding document and does not infringe upon the sovereignty of any nation, state, or local government."

OK? Your paranoid fantasies have NO BASIS IN REALITY.
Amused Slew

Kent, WA

#23715 Feb 6, 2013
When you straighten the wacko out, he starts playing games, like you're a gay couple... Kid has PROBLEMS !!!
Kyle

Ligonier, IN

#23716 Feb 6, 2013
PHD wrote:
<quoted text>There you go all scientific science fiction again. See the wallop10 gets walloped again and again. You do an excellent job proving your---self wrong. They all show you by stating in my opinion, prediction could be, should be and forecast. You’re just not getting it.
WTF? Was there an argument in there somewhere? Methinks it merely word salad to avoid dealing with the facts as stated by wallop10 - Every relevant scientific organization is on one side of the argument - the one WITH THE SCIENCE. Meanwhile, ideologues, fossil-fuel industry paid flacks, retired weathermen pretending to be climate scientists, etc. are on the other.
Kyle

Ligonier, IN

#23717 Feb 6, 2013
someone wrote:
<quoted text>
Don't ad hominem attacks get old? You wont win many arguments.
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agenda_21#sect...
Least not with me.
Try again.
Personally, I never tire of seeing conspiracy theorist wingnuts ridiculed.

Since: Jan 13

Fairfax, VA

#23718 Feb 6, 2013
someone wrote:
Agenda 21.
"sustainable development"
End of private property.
Limit education. Increase indoctrination.
More educated people achieve higher incomes... thus consuming more.
We need to limit the number of educated people to reduce consumption.
Agenda 21.
Global warming will be the tool to bring about a new world order.
With global central control.
where every single aspect of our lives will be governed and dictated by the illuminated, the enlightened.
Conservative poster: The topic was the UN's Agenda 21 ( http://www.un.org/esa/dsd/agenda21 ). It's real, and it's dangerous. It's the first proposal for global governance and global taxation.
TS: Since your link was just an announcement of a meeting (is that all you needed ? a blank slate?), I went to the table of contents.

Tried to find the most "dangerous" section. What could be more dangerous than their chapter on financial resources??? So I click here to get more of those terrible details...

<<Financial Resources & Mechanisms

----------

BASIS FOR ACTION

33.3. Economic growth, social development and poverty eradication are the first and overriding priorities in developing countries and are themselves essential to meeting national and global sustainability objectives. In the light of the global benefits to be realized by the implementation of Agenda 21 as a whole, the provision to developing countries of effective means, inter alia, financial resources and technology, without which it will be difficult for them to fully implement their commitments, will serve the common interests of developed and developing countries and of humankind in general, including future generations.

33.4. The cost of inaction could outweigh the financial costs of implementing Agenda 21. Inaction will narrow the choices of future generations.

33.5. For dealing with environmental issues, special efforts will be required. Global and local environmental issues are interrelated. The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change and the Convention on Biological Diversity address two of the most important global issues.

33.6. Economic conditions, both domestic and international, that encourage free trade and access to markets will help make economic growth and environmental protection mutually supportive for all countries, particularly for developing countries and countries undergoing the process of transition to a market economy (see chapter 2 for a fuller discussion of these issues).>>

http://www.un.org/esa/dsd/agenda21/res_agenda...

Free markets? Why this is unacceptable?

Horrors, they appear to be concerned about the degradation of the environment around the world.

Surely they know they should hate future generations, and take all we can with us now?
This cannot be tolerated, no?

==========

I tried to narrow it down using google if it was Alex Jones or Glenn Beck that was hyping the Agenda 21 lies.

Hey, found it for BOTH of them.

www.youtube.com/watch...

www.youtube.com/watch...

amazing stupidity if anyone believes this crap! Ashamed yet?

Since: Jan 13

Fairfax, VA

#23719 Feb 6, 2013
One can always tell where SUXObama has been around... with his multiple logins...

Looks like he is not going on 9 Times in one block now.
Amused Slew

Kent, WA

#23720 Feb 6, 2013
someone wrote:
<quoted text>
Don't ad hominem attacks get old? You wont win many arguments.
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agenda_21#sect...
Least not with me.
Try again.
He "won't" or he won't, because where I come from, the dummy loses.... As for proving you wrong, some folks don't care what the crazy folks "think".
litesong

Everett, WA

#23721 Feb 6, 2013
someone else wrote:
Do you hold allegiance to the United States and its constitution?
'OH, oh, say can you SEEEEEEEE, by the dawn's early light!' & 'americaaaaaaaaa americaaaaaaa'
Amused Slew

Minneapolis, MN

#23722 Feb 6, 2013
Amused Slew wrote:
<quoted text>He "won't" or he won't, because where I come from, the dummy loses.... As for proving you wrong, some folks don't care what the crazy folks "think".
My gay hubby, Slewsie, is the Spell Check Queen of Topix. All you losers out there better watch out.

“Denying those who deny nature”

Since: Jun 07

Norfolk va

#23723 Feb 7, 2013
HomoSapiensLaptopicus wrote:
<quoted text>
Silly. We can study paleontologically going back billions of years. There's just more uncertainty when we use proxies of past climate. That doesn't mean we know nothing.
Silly again. CO2 is both an effect (especially initially with the Milankovitch cycles) AND a cause (later, & MUCH larger) of warming. The increased insolation with Milankovitch changes causes only slight warming; there must be positive feedbacks, including rising CO2, decreasing albedo as ice melts &, as warming continues, methane release. These feedbacks cause the vast majority of the warming we see during an interglacial.
Yes, CO2 levels were very high in the Cambrian, & probably had been so since they helped to break the last snowball earth event. However, the sun was ~4% dimmer then - BIG difference. Those things balanced out, making temps moderate.
AGW/CC has NEVER been "disproven," since more & more information over time has only verified the basic truth of the theory. It has made ~17-20 correct predictions, depending on how you count them.
Models are ALWAYS being adjusted to reflect new data, & this process has increased their accuracy over time.
Next time try linking actual science instead of the denier claptrap you always post.
Of course you can't link the NASA site you promised Wallop10 that "disproved" AGW/CC because it doesn't exist. All legitimate science organizations (with a few exceptions, like petroleum geologists, who are neutral) support the consensus on AGW/CC. More than 99.8% of scientific papers over the past 20 years support the consensus, less than 0.2% disbelieve it.
You'd get less consensus if you said "it's Tuesday" for goodness' sake. It's FAR beyond reasonable doubt that AGW/CC is correct.
First, the bad news. They started publishing studies in peer reviewed journals back in 2008 that disproved AGW and since then there has been numerous studies published that disproved AGW. To the point that only a few left overs like yourself are the only ones left who still are hanging in there. It went the way of the consensus and that was into the trash heap. That is the thing about a theory, all it takes is one person discovering one major error and it isn't a theory anymore.

And yes, we can study paleontologically going back billions of years, problem is that isn't the same as someone recording the high and low on a sheet of paper after reading it off a measuring device. And your claim that the sun was 4% weaker balancing it out is also a blow for the whole concept that CO2 is the cause. The sun changes in cycles and if CO2 is the cause then the sun being 4% weaker would not matter. It would matter if sun was a major source of climate change. Then it would mean that CO2 plays less of a part. Yet the real truth is that the earth during the Cambrian was a lush place full of life. We have the fossils to prove that. In fact much of the guesses about the climate have to do with those fossils.

“Denying those who deny nature”

Since: Jun 07

Norfolk va

#23724 Feb 7, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>I'll bet everyone of those institutions receives public funding.
Not true, a few like the AAAS are lobbying groups who funnel funding back into election funds.

Although I have to wonder how much climate research the Nigirian, Sudan, Tanzania, Uganda, and Zambia Academy of Science do. Of course they all happen to have received grants from the US for scientific research. Not to mention they all have a history of government graft.
Amused Slew

Kent, WA

#23725 Feb 7, 2013
We didn't live in the Cambrian period... Too bad, that's beyond you.

“Denying those who deny nature”

Since: Jun 07

Norfolk va

#23726 Feb 7, 2013
Yet life thrived during the Cambrian with the higher CO2 levels. Which is the part you want to ignore.

Man could thrive in that type of enviroment.

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#23727 Feb 7, 2013
tina anne wrote:
Yet life thrived during the Cambrian with the higher CO2 levels. Which is the part you want to ignore.
Man could thrive in that type of enviroment.
The minimal level of photosynthetic activity before and during Cambrian raised oxygen levels in Earth's atmosphere to approximately 10% of that found in the modern atmosphere.

http://www.bookrags.com/research/cambrian-per...

Do you think that you could survive in that atmosphere?
PHD

Cibolo, TX

#23729 Feb 7, 2013
litesong wrote:
<quoted text>
'OH, oh, say can you SEEEEEEEE, by the dawn's early light!' & 'americaaaaaaaaa americaaaaaaa'
And you think topix doesn’t know what you publish? Attacks on me won't delete or erase what you are and what you do. You should stop making an ASSumption of your---self before you know the facts. Do contact topix to satisfy your accusations of the reprint BS your posting of what I said. You are a dumbASSumption of your---self again.
CRASSUS

Neenah, WI

#23730 Feb 7, 2013
litesong wrote:
<quoted text>
The first time Pres. Obama won election, the racists & threateners showed up at toxic topix AGW forums in force. Took a bit longer this time, but the racists & threateners are winding up now.
'cras ass' is a slimy steenking filthy vile reprobate rooting(& rotting) racist pukey proud pig, who is too scared to use the 'N' word. We have the slimy steenking filthy vile reprobate rooting(& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AND alleged & proud threatener toxic topix AGW denier brian_g stumble butt dumpster diver' ganghood, where all the worst slimy steenking filthy vile reprobate rooting(& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AND alleged & proud threatener toxic topix AGW deniers hang out.
Its crowded, but you'll fit right in like a jig saw puzzle piece.
In order to help a Jigger out, I give free lessons on how to speak proper English. You Jiggers would do much better if you knew how to talk.

Since: Nov 11

Westerville, OH

#23731 Feb 7, 2013
SpaceBlues wrote:
<quoted text>You don't see that you are anticapitalist. Are you commie pinko?
I am PRO Capitalism!

Liberals hate the freedom that Capitalism provides.

Because Liberals believe that if someone in a corner of the world is happy, then someone else HAS TO be sad!

If someone is eating, then someone else is starving!

So the "starving" happens because and only because someone else is eating. Not because their government is socio-communist as the Liberals are, therefore depriving them of food and making them all equally miserably.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Kabol, Afghanistan Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News American at home in Afghanistan, with some help... Sep 15 nativewalk 2
News U.S. commander: Progress in fighting the Taliba... Sep 12 Sam 2
News Turexit: Should Turkey leave NATO? Jul '16 progressive 1
News Commander: US support of Afghans could be game-... Jul '16 Le Jimbo 2
News Ron Haviv Jun '16 Kosovo is Serbia 1
News Afghan Taliban select new leader May '16 grover 1
News Taliban leader 'is dead': Obama May '16 tomin cali 10
More from around the web