Once slow-moving threat, global warming speeds up, leaving litt...

There are 53517 comments on the Newsday story from Dec 14, 2008, titled Once slow-moving threat, global warming speeds up, leaving litt.... In it, Newsday reports that:

When Bill Clinton took office in 1993, global warming was a slow-moving environmental problem that was easy to ignore.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Newsday.

Teddy R

Houston, TX

#32569 Oct 3, 2012
Fair Game wrote:
<quoted text>
Then why cite a model from an obscure corner of computer science?
I didn't - you did.
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

#32570 Oct 3, 2012
Teddy R wrote:
<quoted text>
I respectfully disagree, team-mate.
Experimental variables are not known to be "independent" until experimental results show they are. Until the experiment is performed, any "independence" of variables can only be a presumed independence, and thus any experimental design that depends upon such a presumed independence of experimental variables pre-supposes the result, and is flawed.
It is therefore sufficient for good experimental design that control can be exercised over a single variable - it is redundant and unnecessary to insert "independence" as a qualifier.
<quoted text>
Again I must respectfully reject your editorial comment.
Reproducible and repeatable results do not mean identical results - in fact since all experiments involve some degree of experimental error, any repeat experiment that produced "the same" results - i.e., perfectly identical results with zero experimental error - would be highly suspect.
So "same" would not be correct - "similar" is not incorrect, though there may be better adjectives. But I don't have sufficient appetite for pedantry to go in search of one for Topix.
<quoted text>
Awfully sweet of you to clean up my word, whatever it was, team-mate. In fact I'm in search of a secretary atm - are you interested in the job?
I quite agree on my last sentence, and i have withdrawn it in a previous post.
Toodles.
Toodles, already.

I stand by my first cut. Now you're nit-picky qualitatively, which means unncessarily, ceteris paribus..

Read up on "similar" .. a more sensitive term than 'same' because a required error analysis takes care of all that in a real situation.

Sorry that you're not a careful reader for yourself. Thanks for the job offer but just try harder. As to "atm," what is it?

“I Luv Carbon Dioxide”

Since: Dec 08

Home, sweet home.

#32571 Oct 3, 2012
SpaceBlues wrote:
Why why good grief! No, not all experiments are repeatable.
You think not? Can you cite a non-repeatable experiment?

.
SpaceBlues wrote:
No, good experiments don't mean you can be certain of getting results within an error range.
Isn't that what repeatable means? If you do an experiment and get different result every time, that means you aren't controlling independent variables, you don't have a good experiment. Can you cite a good experiment where you can't be certain of getting results with the accustomed error range?

.
SpaceBlues wrote:
No, there's always uncertainty with or without experiments.
Yes, but good experiments reduce uncertainty.

.
SpaceBlues wrote:
Conclusion: it shows that you don't understand science. Btw, there's no pseudoscience but there are people like you who don't know science.
PSEUDOSCIENCE : a system of theories, assumptions, and methods erroneously regarded as scientific
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/pse...

“I Luv Carbon Dioxide”

Since: Dec 08

Home, sweet home.

#32572 Oct 3, 2012
Northie wrote:
...Science depends on observations and evidence, not necessarily on experiments. One cannot perform experiments on black holes, for example, but that doesn't prevent researchers from drawing conclusions about them based on observed evidence.[URL deleted]
You notice, there is no policy to mitigate black holes so experiments aren't essential in otiose science. If you had a theory on how to mitigate black holes, an experiment would be the only way to test it.

.
Northie wrote:
In the case of our responsibility for cooking the climate, the evidence comes from experiments, from the fossil record, from computer models, and from observed physical phenomena...such as the minor facts that global temperatures are breaking all records decade after decade, and most of the Arctic's sea ice is now friggin' GONE.
I like to call it,'defrosting the climate', it's more descriptive than 'cooking the climate'. The issue is climate change mitigation, the 'act' you expect from Obama. Before anyone acts, let's see some experimental data.

Since: Apr 08

"the green troll"

#32573 Oct 3, 2012
Teddy R wrote:
<quoted text>
I didn't - you did.
Hmmm..., that's right- yours was an unsourced quote.

I had to look up where it came from.
Teddy R

Houston, TX

#32574 Oct 3, 2012
SpaceBlues wrote:
<quoted text>Toodles, already.
I stand by my first cut. Now you're nit-picky qualitatively, which means unncessarily, ceteris paribus..
Read up on "similar" .. a more sensitive term than 'same' because a required error analysis takes care of all that in a real situation.
Sorry that you're not a careful reader for yourself. Thanks for the job offer but just try harder. As to "atm," what is it?
atm = "at the moment"
Northie

Spokane, WA

#32575 Oct 3, 2012
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text><quoted text>I like to call it,'defrosting the climate', it's more descriptive than 'cooking the climate'.
So is that what they did with witches and heretics during the Reformation; the authorities "defrosted" them?

“EnvironMENTAList ”

Since: Feb 07

Near Detroit

#32576 Oct 3, 2012
SpaceBlues wrote:
<quoted text>Learn science. You, lazy one.
You sound like a bible thumper. Need something to believe in and trust and worship? Doomsday is your worship and no different from a cave man doing the same thing.
PHD

Houston, TX

#32577 Oct 3, 2012
Earthling-1 wrote:
<quoted text>Spambrat couldn't find anything wrong with it either, he fires blank cartridges wildly for effect.
Much like you firing useless babble for effect. How is your visit with the care giver going?
litesong

Lynnwood, WA

#32578 Oct 3, 2012
Latest about Arctic sea ice melt 'and recovery':

+Barely ABOVE 4 million km2, Arctic sea ice extent is still BELOW any recorded level in any previous year for ~6 weeks, presently at 4,166,563 km2 (October 2, 2012), fractionally gaining ~25,000 km2(a bit more than West Virginia area) of sea ice the previous day, despite the sun, unseen, from the North Pole for 10+ days, & temperatures above the 80th parallel, a bit above -13 degC, fractionally above normal. Much warmth built up in Arctic waters these past months is resisting its conversion back to sea ice, especially southern Arctic waters which have seen much more solar energy absorbed than northern Arctic clear waters.

Only along the Greenland east coast is sea ice extending greatly south. All other regions, including the Northwest Passage, Northeast Passage & Arctic waters, south of the Arctic Ice Pack, resist conversion back to Arctic sea ice.

IN ADDITION, for months, any downwellings in the Arctic waters that have been ice-free, have been conducting much captured solar energy radiating on those clear waters, to the depths of the continental shelves & Arctic Ocean.

This same Arctic Ocean warmth is & will continue to keep Arctic sea ice thinner through the coming winter & even spring. As of October 2, Arctic sea ice VOLUME is ~23% lower than any satellite recorded year AND indications of submarine-detected Arctic sea ice VOLUME.

Yes, the Arctic sea ice Volume is disappearing, day to day, & year to year, quicker than the Arctic sea ice extent, even in the time of Arctic sea ice increase.

“Happy, warm and comfortable”

Since: Oct 10

Mountain hideaway, SE Spain

#32579 Oct 4, 2012
Spambrat wrote:
Now you're nit-picky qualitatively, which means unncessarily[sic], ceteris paribus..
All other things being equal and constant, you're a spambrat.
PHD

Houston, TX

#32580 Oct 4, 2012
Earthling-1 wrote:
<quoted text>All other things being equal and constant, you're a spambrat.
Well if all other things were equal and constant you're care giver should have found a cure for you a dirtling.
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

#32581 Oct 4, 2012
Teddy R wrote:
<quoted text>
atm = "at the moment"
Nice.

Thanks.

Since: Mar 09

Wichita, KS

#32582 Oct 4, 2012
Teddy R wrote:
<quoted text>
Sorry. I still see only different language - making no material difference. Nor do I see anything "expressed incorrectly" in what I posted.
Perhaps this will expand and help to understand that that there are methods other than laboratory experiments.
http://www.experiment-resources.com/research-...

“Facts”

Since: May 08

Guadalajara, Mexico

#32583 Oct 4, 2012
Earthling-1 wrote:
<quoted text>All other things being equal and constant, you're a spambrat.
Tina and you are the queens of that

Still waiting for you to back up your claims..........LOL
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

#32584 Oct 4, 2012
Earthling-1 wrote:
<quoted text>All other things being equal and constant,.
Is "warrat .. beging .. catsasstrophe" spanglish for 'rats are begging for war with cats?'
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

#32585 Oct 4, 2012
Patriot AKA Bozo wrote:
<quoted text>
Perhaps this will expand and help to understand that that there are methods other than laboratory experiments.
http://www.experiment-resources.com/research-...
Nice. Hope we will cover more.

Btw, at the bottom, there's "Science Experiment" to click on. Would you believe Mitt's site shows up in the list?
Teddy R

Houston, TX

#32586 Oct 4, 2012
SpaceBlues wrote:
<quoted text>Nice.
Thanks.
np
Teddy R

Houston, TX

#32587 Oct 4, 2012
Patriot AKA Bozo wrote:
<quoted text>
Perhaps this will expand and help to understand that that there are methods other than laboratory experiments.
http://www.experiment-resources.com/research-...
Yes, correct.
Northie

Spokane, WA

#32588 Oct 4, 2012
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>You notice, there is no policy to mitigate black holes so experiments aren't essential in otiose science. If you had a theory on how to mitigate black holes, an experiment would be the only way to test it.
So the scientific method can depend upon observations of natural phenomena unless one tries to "mitigate" them, in which case one must ignore observed evidence?

It's all so very clear now.

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.

Chicago Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 5 min shinningelectr0n 1,232,792
News BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit contesting... (Jan '09) 8 min Dale 189,874
Topix Chitown Regulars (Aug '09) 25 min Michael Satterfield 99,542
News Ill. House Approves Legalizing Same-Sex Civil U... (Dec '10) 1 hr James 51,766
News More Than 40 People Shot In Chicago Over Holida... 4 hr reality is a crutch 1
abby 5-25-15 4 hr mrs gladys kravitz 3
amy 5-25-15 4 hr Kuuipo 4
More from around the web

Chicago People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]