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

Full story: Newsday

When Bill Clinton took office in 1993, global warming was a slow-moving environmental problem that was easy to ignore.
Comments
31,541 - 31,560 of 45,799 Comments Last updated 2 hrs ago
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#33362
Jan 3, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Teddy R wrote:
Did you notice nobody commented on your reference?

Thanks for publishing it. Any particular point to notice?
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#33363
Jan 3, 2013
 

Judged:

1

Teddy R wrote:
<quoted text>
How pleasant to discover there are a few out there who have somehow managed to retain some ability to detect & appreciate humor. Restores one's hope and faith in the species, to a degree.
Happy New Year to you too.
Thanks, true always.
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#33364
Jan 3, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

litesong wrote:
SpaceBlues wrote:
NO. You failed again.
//////////
'phudd feces face' wrote:
Ok you do have a point.
//////////
litesong wrote:
Yeah,'phudd feces face' fails, further!
Yeah,...

“dening those who deny nature. ”

Since: Jun 07

Norfolk va

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#33365
Jan 3, 2013
 

Judged:

3

3

2

SpaceBlues wrote:
<quoted text>Dumb LIAR.
Am I? Or are you the one who is lying?

Since: Apr 08

"the green troll"

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#33366
Jan 3, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

1

Teddy R wrote:
Oh noes!

Another denier too dumb to understand science!

“dening those who deny nature. ”

Since: Jun 07

Norfolk va

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#33367
Jan 3, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

1

Fair Game wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh noes!
Another denier too dumb to understand science!
Or someone who knows enough to know what cannot be true. That climate change is natural and has little to do with man.

The one who is in denial is Fair Game.

Since: Apr 08

"the green troll"

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#33368
Jan 3, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

1

tina anne wrote:
<quoted text>
Or someone who knows enough to know what cannot be true.
teddy at least seems to have a couple of brain cells floating around, although he doesn't seem to have used them for a couple of decades.

You on the other hand are an unmitigated moron.
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#33369
Jan 3, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

tina anne wrote:
<quoted text>
Am I? Or are you the one who is lying?
Yes, you are. No, I'm NOT.
PHD

Bertram, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#33370
Jan 3, 2013
 

Judged:

4

3

3

SpaceBlues wrote:
<quoted text>Yes, you are. No, I'm NOT.
Said the two year old mental midget. We see that the tina gave you another spanking.
Teddy R

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#33371
Jan 3, 2013
 

Judged:

3

3

3

SpaceBlues wrote:
<quoted text>Did you notice nobody commented on your reference?
Thanks for publishing it. Any particular point to notice?
I hadn't really noticed, but thanks for noting. Pretty much as one would expect, really - for all the posing and cock-measuring contests being indulged in on this thread over the "SCIENCE!!!," the complete lack of intelligent response to a post linking some actual climate science literature just goes to the prove how little the participants here actually care about the real science or rational, objective exchange. No - most of the folks here are more concerned with hurling partisan political, ideogical, theological talking points at each other (while piously pretending it's all about the SCIENCE!! of course ...)

(Case in point - I see the one response my post did attract was our friend Fair Game's reactionary alpha-Nerd bark of "DENIER!!" That's all it takes to be damned as a "denier!!" in FG's reactionary mind, it seems - just post a link to a piece of scientific literature without any comment. How ... DENIALIST of me. Mea maxima culpa. I shall now go write out the Arrhenius equation 1000 times in penance.)

Points to notice? A couple mildly interesting ones - nothing earth-shaking.

I found the number of proof-reading errors a bit off-putting, e.g. this howler -(T data from 25 stations from 1949-1998 show) "... a mean annual temperature increase for all stations in the range of 1.0 - 2.2 deg C." That works out to a total average T increase of between 49.0 and 107.8 deg C over the period. Yikes!

This was compensated for by the authors' actually having the courage and scientific integrity, in describing the period of cooling evidenced over the 1st decade of this century, to actually say, "At this time it cannot be decided whether this is a climatic shift during the first decade of the 21st century or if it represents decadal-interdecadal variability." How refreshing.

No real surprises - the recent cooling trend is correlated with, and largely attributable to, a negative shift in PDO number over the same period, less so with sunspot number. The over-arching global warming trend is still visible in Temps at the northern-most station, Barrow, North of the Brooks Range and isolated from the avection/circulation mechanisms the authors posit is driving the recent regional cooling trend over the rest of Alaska.

For all the politically-motivated hoo-hah over long-term global climate trends, the paper reminded me that it is regional and short-term variations and variability in climate that have the most immediate and direct effects on people, habitats, plants, and animals.

Since: Apr 08

"the green troll"

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#33372
Jan 3, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Teddy R wrote:
...the complete lack of intelligent response to a post linking some actual climate science literature just goes to the prove how little the participants here actually care about the real science or rational, objective exchange.
Unfortunately you haven't demonstrated any understanding of the literature you post.

You seem to think it is in some way inconvenient to the theory of AGW, when in fact it isn't.

All you demonstrate is your total ignorance of the science involved. What rational exchange can one have with a fool?

Since: Apr 08

"the green troll"

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#33373
Jan 3, 2013
 

Judged:

3

3

2

PHD wrote:
...tina gave you another spanking.
A spnaking by tina seems to be a common theme in your posts. A phudd phantasy.

Since: Apr 08

"the green troll"

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#33374
Jan 3, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Teddy R wrote:
This was compensated for by the authors' actually having the courage and scientific integrity, in describing the period of cooling evidenced over the 1st decade of this century*, to actually say, "At this time it cannot be decided whether this is a climatic shift during the first decade of the 21st century or if it represents decadal-interdecadal variability." How refreshing.
* A cooling trend in Alaska, you fucktard.

Alaska != the world.
gcaveman1

Louin, MS

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#33375
Jan 3, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

tina anne wrote:
<quoted text>
Am I? Or are you the one who is lying?
If it's any consolation, Teener, I don't think you're lying.

I think you're too stupid to know how to lie.
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#33376
Jan 3, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

I think you're too stupid
to know how to lie.
You write posts on Topix
that painfully die.
But you insist regularly
to cash the big lie.
Teddy R

Mclean, VA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#33377
Jan 3, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Fair Game wrote:
<quoted text>
Unfortunately you haven't demonstrated any understanding of the literature you post.
Unfortunately you haven't demonstrated any qualifications to render such a judgement.
Fair Game wrote:
<quoted text>You seem to think it is in some way inconvenient to the theory of AGW.
A bizarre notion. Please cite your supporting evidence.

My contending theory is that you are simply indulging in paranoic delusions and projection to assuage your internal feelings of inferiority and Need to be Right.
Fair Game wrote:
<quoted text>All you demonstrate is your total ignorance of the science involved. What rational exchange can one have with a fool?
TOTAL ignorance? Dear me. Rather sweeping and un-scientific of you, don't you think?

Cite your evidence of my "ignorance" on which specific points of scientific understanding this time, please.

"What rational exchange can one have with a fool?" Oh - about the same rational exchange one can have with an arrogant self-important prick, I should think ...

Teddy R

Mclean, VA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#33378
Jan 3, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Fair Game wrote:
<quoted text>
* A cooling trend in Alaska, you fucktard.
Alaska != the world.
"You fucktard?" Really? Do you kiss you Mom with that mouth?

Shame on you, Sir.

Now - if there was some intelligent point in your post, it's marvellously obscure.

Care to spin again?
paddyomalley

Austin, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#33379
Jan 3, 2013
 

Judged:

3

2

2

SpaceBlues wrote:
All deniers are dumb liars.
Typical leftist. No facts, just name callers.
paddyomalley

Austin, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#33380
Jan 3, 2013
 

Judged:

3

2

2

SpaceBlues wrote:
<quoted text>OK. Have you heard of the greenhouse gas effect as a fact?
There you go.
Are you saying 630 billion years ago, the greenhouse effect began melting the ice of whatever ice age was ending? Very good. Now tell me what part man had in causing that greenhouse effect? How many fords and chevys were on the road? How many miles of highways were on earth at that time? In other words, what part in melting the glaciers 2.5 billion years ago during the end of the first Ice Age did man play and every Ice Age since? You don't have to account for the dozens of thaws and refreezes, just the Ice Age and the major thaw. I suggest man had nothing to do with any of it and for anyone to think what ever man does now is going to stop or start a thaw and freeze is goofy.

Since: Apr 08

"the green troll"

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#33381
Jan 4, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Teddy R wrote:
<quoted text>
Unfortunately you haven't demonstrated any qualifications to render such a judgement.
Anyone with the slightest understanding of climate science, or prepared to do a little work to acquire such an understanding, could spot why you have misunderstood the paper if you think it casts doubt on AGW.

But not, you have no such understanding, and are too intellectually lazy and arrogant to acquire it.

Apparently you proved how smart you are in some other field years ago, so your conclusions about AGW based what you believe the evidence for it is must be correct.

A delusion held by many other arrogant old fools on the web.

The climate is a complex system. It does not warm uniformly. Some parts warm more, some parts warm less, some parts can even get colder for decadal period.

To point to the paper you did and laugh as you did show an utter ignorance of the science.

And it shows you in your ignorance to be a utter fool, old man.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" 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.

25 Users are viewing the Chicago Forum right now

Search the Chicago Forum:
Title Updated Last By Comments
Topix Chitown Regulars (Aug '09) 3 min edogxxx 97,541
Abby 7-26 6 min edogxxx 1
Amy 7-26 8 min edogxxx 1
Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 30 min GUESS we 1,080,447
BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit contesting... (Jan '09) 1 hr wojar 174,671
Israeli troops begin Gaza pullout as Hamas decl... (Jan '09) 2 hr Uzi 67,977
Ill. House Approves Legalizing Same-Sex Civil U... (Dec '10) 5 hr Natual should be respect 48,918
•••
•••
•••
•••

Chicago Jobs

•••
Enter and win $5000
•••
•••

Chicago People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••

Chicago News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Chicago
•••

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]
•••