Once slow-moving threat, global warmi...

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

There are 61486 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.

Largelanguage

Halkyn, UK

#33769 Jan 23, 2013
Power stations are usually coal or nuclear. Switch to nuclear. Easy option. Is it too expensive, fellow republicans?
PHD

Cibolo, TX

#33770 Jan 23, 2013
gcaveman1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Tell us about this money.
Do you have pictures of Michael Mann's villa in the south of Italy?
Do you have a picture of Trenberth gettin into his Maserati?
Any real proof at all that these guys are getting rich off their "scam"?
I didn't think so.
Well than you didn't follow the money.Do you know what riches they have?I didn't think so.
Largelanguage

Halkyn, UK

#33771 Jan 23, 2013
PHD wrote:
<quoted text>Well than you didn't follow the money.Do you know what riches they have?I didn't think so.
Obama is taking away our money!
PHD

Cibolo, TX

#33772 Jan 23, 2013
Largelanguage wrote:
<quoted text>
Obama is taking away our money!
They all take away our money. They just change hats.
litesong

Lynnwood, WA

#33773 Jan 23, 2013
Largelanguage wrote:
Obama is taking away our money!
romneyhood, romnesia, & romney who(?) would have crowned himself king & had you bow down to him.
PHD

Cibolo, TX

#33774 Jan 23, 2013
There all the same they just change their hats.
Largelanguage

Halkyn, UK

#33775 Jan 23, 2013
litesong wrote:
<quoted text>
romneyhood, romnesia, & romney who(?) would have crowned himself king & had you bow down to him.
Liberal Propaganda of World War 3.
PHD

Cibolo, TX

#33777 Jan 23, 2013
Useless babble from the "pinheadlitesout"

“Denying those who deny nature”

Since: Jun 07

Norfolk va

#33778 Jan 23, 2013
Fair Game wrote:
It is if your using skepticalscience. I could find just as many links in junkscience.com to refute it and they are just as valid as skepticalsceince's.

Also the first actually supports what I have been telling you.

“Denying those who deny nature”

Since: Jun 07

Norfolk va

#33779 Jan 23, 2013
Patriot AKA Bozo wrote:
<quoted text>
Hmmm, So you don't believe that burning mega tons of fossil fuels does not add CO2 to the atmosphere. Poor thing.
You mean CO2 that was in the atmosphere back during the Cambrian. When the planet was lush with life.

“Denying those who deny nature”

Since: Jun 07

Norfolk va

#33780 Jan 23, 2013
HomoSapiensLaptopicus wrote:
<quoted text>
You are incorrect. The optimum of the current interglacial was approximately 5000 to 9000 years ago. We have been on a COOLING trend since then, as others have also shown you.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interglacial
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holocene
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Holocene_Te...
If humans hadn't started pouring carbon dioxide into the atmosphere in the 1800s, the Little Ice Age might still be with us today. We may have arrested the slow slide into another ice age, but we've overshot & have emitted WAY too much carbon into the atmosphere.
BTW, it's "...would HAVE happened..." or "...would'VE happened..." - not "...would OF..."
If you want people to believe you are right then you need better than the junk William Connonelly wrote for wikipedia.

So if all you have is wikipeidia then you in reality have no proof at all. Most teachers will not even accept wikipeida and the site even has an entry saying that you should not trust them either.
Largelanguage

Halkyn, UK

#33781 Jan 23, 2013


The yellow cat(named ratchet) in the video is very cute and ought to be supported morally, and politically. I am here to spread awareness of ratchet!
PHD

Cibolo, TX

#33782 Jan 23, 2013
Careful they will insist the yellow cat is actually orange with their sciencetific science fiction.
Largelanguage

Halkyn, UK

#33783 Jan 23, 2013
PHD wrote:
Careful they will insist the yellow cat is actually orange with their sciencetific science fiction.
Colour blind are those libs?
PHD

Cibolo, TX

#33784 Jan 23, 2013
Largelanguage wrote:
<quoted text>
Colour blind are those libs?
Oh how true that is.
Largelanguage

Halkyn, UK

#33785 Jan 23, 2013
True enough!

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#33786 Jan 23, 2013
tina anne wrote:
<quoted text>
You mean CO2 that was in the atmosphere back during the Cambrian. When the planet was lush with life.
Yep, all that CO2 that was broken down by microorganisms to release oxygen that supports life as we know it today.
PHD

Cibolo, TX

#33788 Jan 23, 2013
Ahh, yes as we know it today. Tomorrow there will be more scientific science fiction that will show the errors in their ways.

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#33789 Jan 23, 2013
PHD wrote:
Ahh, yes as we know it today. Tomorrow there will be more scientific science fiction that will show the errors in their ways.
Sir, you do not know science fiction, just science friction.

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#33790 Jan 23, 2013
tina anne wrote:
<quoted text>
If you want people to believe you are right then you need better than the junk William Connonelly [SIC] wrote for wikipedia.
So if all you have is wikipeidia [SIC] then you in reality have no proof at all. Most teachers will not even accept wikipeida [SIC] and the site even has an entry saying that you should not trust them either.
Then you're posting in the wrong place. If you don't like what ANYone says on Wiki, then you should try to develop a TINY bit of courage, sign on there & tell them EXACTLY how they're wrong. If you have facts & logic on your side, in the small-D democratic environment of Wiki, you'll prevail. Period.

I reference Wiki because it's usually pretty accessible, plus they have lots of live links to reputable sources. Are they perfect? Of course not. But they're a LOT more accurate than the average site out there. The fact that so many people can input their own knowledge tends to push the site toward the truth.

So you're talking to the wrong guy in the wrong place. Either post on Wiki & tell them exactly HOW they're wrong - or SU.

You might also show a BIT more respect by learning how to spell proper names. It's "Wikipedia" & "William Connolley."

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 BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit contesting... (Jan '09) 2 min District 1 225,378
News 15-year-old Chicago boya s burned body found in... 8 min Well Well 4
News Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 9 min Incognito4Ever 1,432,791
{keep A word drop A word} (Oct '11) 27 min _Zoey_ 9,541
News Murderous Chicago 1 hr wow 7
Steve Wilkos : talk show host ? or simple mi... (Feb '08) 1 hr wow 433
last post wins! (Apr '13) 1 hr Retired SOF 1,706
Topix Chitown Regulars (Aug '09) 9 hr CrunchyBacon 103,629

Chicago Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Chicago Mortgages