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 (Page 1,609)

Showing posts 32,161 - 32,180 of43,185
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:

“dening those who deny nature. ”

Since: Jun 07

Norfolk va

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#34021
Jan 29, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

SpaceBlues wrote:
<quoted text>Agree.
This is a recurrring theme with tina. It's part of her antiscience stance because she has no science or mathematics.
She's promoting a parallel system where antiscience fights science.
So you claim. Then again I could claim with far more evidence that you are promoting a system that promotes an agenda over science and that history has shown that this is a reoccuring event.

I could also point out how often what you have held up as science has latter been proven to be anything but. For example the IPCC AR4 report. Recall any of the major oops in there like about glaciers in the highest part of the earth.
Largelanguage

Wrexham, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#34022
Jan 29, 2013
 

Judged:

3

3

3

tina anne wrote:
<quoted text>
So you claim. Then again I could claim with far more evidence that you are promoting a system that promotes an agenda over science and that history has shown that this is a reoccuring event.
I could also point out how often what you have held up as science has latter been proven to be anything but. For example the IPCC AR4 report. Recall any of the major oops in there like about glaciers in the highest part of the earth.
SpiralBlurrs is foolish.
Northie

Spokane, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#34023
Jan 29, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

tina anne wrote:
<quoted text>
And you based that it is more accurate on something other than what you want to be true. The simple truth about Wikipedia is it has limited authorship because of it's history. The same lonely, aganda driven white men like Connonelly have turned what was suppose to be a shining source of knowledge into a sludgepool of fiction in certain areas. While it has shown that it can be a starting point it has a long way to go before it can ever be considered creditable on this particular subject.
What you are seeing is your desire for what is posted there to be right. To back what you really want to believe instead of what is true. You claim that it is more accurate than the "average denier or tabloid site deniers post" and yet I doubt you could point to any alarmist site and refer to them with the same line. That is because your bias is such that anything that disagrees with what you want to be true is deemed wrong and that which agrees is deemed right.
Once again, we see Tina's tried-and-true method for discussing climate science: cover ears, close eyes and shout, "la, la, la! I can't hear you! La, la, la, la!".
PHD

Bertram, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#34024
Jan 29, 2013
 
Largelanguage wrote:
<quoted text>
The GOP? Why?
Just follow the money.
Largelanguage

Wrexham, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#34025
Jan 29, 2013
 
PHD wrote:
<quoted text>Just follow the money.
But they are supporting equal taxes aren't they?
PHD

Bertram, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#34026
Jan 29, 2013
 
Largelanguage wrote:
<quoted text>
But they are supporting equal taxes aren't they?
Yes from my pocket to theirs.
litesong

Lynnwood, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#34027
Jan 29, 2013
 

Judged:

3

3

3

Large lying language wrote:
We must stop the democrats from destroying america.
The kkk(ALWAYS SMALL LETTERS), who "Large lying language" belongs to, knows that blacks vote 90% for the democratic party. Of course, "Large lying language" hates President Obama.
Largelanguage

Wrexham, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#34028
Jan 29, 2013
 

Judged:

4

4

4

PHD wrote:
<quoted text>Yes from my pocket to theirs.
They aren't stealing the money of america, Obama is.

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#34029
Jan 29, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

tina anne wrote:
<quoted text>
And you based that it is more accurate on something other than what you want to be true. The simple truth about Wikipedia is it has limited authorship because of it's history. The same lonely, aganda driven white men like Connonelly have turned what was suppose to be a shining source of knowledge into a sludgepool of fiction in certain areas. While it has shown that it can be a starting point it has a long way to go before it can ever be considered creditable on this particular subject.
What you are seeing is your desire for what is posted there to be right. To back what you really want to believe instead of what is true. You claim that it is more accurate than the "average denier or tabloid site deniers post" and yet I doubt you could point to any alarmist site and refer to them with the same line. That is because your bias is such that anything that disagrees with what you want to be true is deemed wrong and that which agrees is deemed right.
The fiction is what deniers say. If you want to know what's true, look at the real science. Papers predicting warming between 1991 & 2012 outnumber those that predict cooling by APPROX ~600 to 1. Yet somehow YOU are smarter than thousands of climatologists who make the study of climate their life's work.

OK. Whatever.

The denier sites, people & organizations include Watts, c3, Breitbart, Chri$topher Monckton, Spencer, Christy, the Heartland Institute & the Telegraph (UK). There are many, many others.

Remember, 8 of the 12 largest companies in the world by revenue are oil companies, 2 are auto manufacturers, 1 is a utility & the other is WalMart. They ALL have profound economic interests in AGW/CC denial, or at least delay in mitigation.

Careful laws could make the car makers, utility & WalMart more neutral, but the oil industry is still the richest in the world, by far. There are HUGE amounts of money & power behind AGW/CC denial.
Largelanguage

Wrexham, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#34030
Jan 29, 2013
 

Judged:

3

3

3

HomoSapiensLaptopicus wrote:
<quoted text>
The fiction is what deniers say. If you want to know what's true, look at the real science. Papers predicting warming between 1991 & 2012 outnumber those that predict cooling by APPROX ~600 to 1. Yet somehow YOU are smarter than thousands of climatologists who make the study of climate their life's work.
OK. Whatever.
The denier sites, people & organizations include Watts, c3, Breitbart, Chri$topher Monckton, Spencer, Christy, the Heartland Institute & the Telegraph (UK). There are many, many others.
Remember, 8 of the 12 largest companies in the world by revenue are oil companies, 2 are auto manufacturers, 1 is a utility & the other is WalMart. They ALL have profound economic interests in AGW/CC denial, or at least delay in mitigation.
Careful laws could make the car makers, utility & WalMart more neutral, but the oil industry is still the richest in the world, by far. There are HUGE amounts of money & power behind AGW/CC denial.
Gullible.
litesong

Lynnwood, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#34031
Jan 29, 2013
 

Judged:

4

3

2

Large lying language wrote:
Lets wallop wallop!
"Large lying language" must've had a slow night of cross burning & needs more excitement. "Large lying language" is a slimy steenking filthy vile reprobate rooting(& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AND alleged & proud threatener.

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#34032
Jan 29, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

tina anne wrote:
<quoted text>
So you claim. Then again I could claim with far more evidence that you are promoting a system that promotes an agenda over science and that history has shown that this is a reoccuring event.
I could also point out how often what you have held up as science has latter been proven to be anything but. For example the IPCC AR4 report. Recall any of the major oops in there like about glaciers in the highest part of the earth.
Science "proven wrong"? That's what YOU WISH, not what's happened. If you believe this, then you're blinded by the radical right wing media nutteria.

Yes, there was an "oops" about Himalayan glaciers in ONE SMALL PART of the IPCC report, while other, more important, parts of the report did NOT make the Himalayan mistake. Climatologists are human. They occasionally make mistakes.

Those things don't invalidate the theory, which has proven to be incredibly powerful in making predictions. Depending on how you count them, the theory has made between 17 & 20 predictions. That's pretty darn good IYAM.

http://bartonpaullevenson.com/ModelsReliable....
PHD

Bertram, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#34033
Jan 29, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Largelanguage wrote:
<quoted text>
They aren't stealing the money of america, Obama is.
They all steal the money of America.
Largelanguage

Wrexham, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#34034
Jan 29, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

HomoSapiensLaptopicus wrote:
<quoted text>
Science "proven wrong"? That's what YOU WISH, not what's happened. If you believe this, then you're blinded by the radical right wing media nutteria.
Yes, there was an "oops" about Himalayan glaciers in ONE SMALL PART of the IPCC report, while other, more important, parts of the report did NOT make the Himalayan mistake. Climatologists are human. They occasionally make mistakes.
Those things don't invalidate the theory, which has proven to be incredibly powerful in making predictions. Depending on how you count them, the theory has made between 17 & 20 predictions. That's pretty darn good IYAM.
http://bartonpaullevenson.com/ModelsReliable....
So the scientists don't make mistakes?

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#34035
Jan 29, 2013
 
Erratum:

AGW/CC has made between 17 & 20 CORRECT predictions. Check the link.
Largelanguage

Wrexham, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#34036
Jan 29, 2013
 

Judged:

3

3

2

HomoSapiensLaptopicus wrote:
Erratum:
AGW/CC has made between 17 & 20 CORRECT predictions. Check the link.
Science fiction nonsense.
PHD

Bertram, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#34037
Jan 29, 2013
 

Judged:

3

3

3

Well is it 17 or 20 correct predictions. Hold on its a prediction not fact.
Largelanguage

Wrexham, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#34038
Jan 29, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

1

Different confused and confusing predictions.
litesong

Lynnwood, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#34039
Jan 29, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

phud fetid feces face fiend wrote:
They all steal the money of America.
But re-pubic-lick-uns dumbly give it to the chinese communists(ALWAYS SMALL LETTERS).

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#34040
Jan 29, 2013
 

Judged:

3

1

1

Largelanguage wrote:
<quoted text>
Science fiction nonsense.
Prove it.

Go thru every one of those correct predictions & find the flaw in the science.

Or maybe you'll just take it on faith, which would just be proof of your profound anti-scientific bias. If the facts fail to agree with your preconceived notions, then, like Hegel might say, it's too bad for the facts.

Whatever.

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

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Showing posts 32,161 - 32,180 of43,185
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
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.

72 Users are viewing the Chicago Forum right now

Search the Chicago Forum:
Topic Updated Last By Comments
Topix Chitown Regulars (Aug '09) 4 min Sublime1 96,396
Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 5 min ritedownthemiddle 1,037,669
Messianic Jews say they are persecuted in Israel (Jun '08) 41 min JOEL COOL DUDE 65,597
BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit contesting... (Jan '09) 47 min LRS 167,751
IL Who do you support for Secretary of State in Il... (Oct '10) 1 hr Chicagobunny 510
IL Who do you support for Governor in Illinois in ... (Oct '10) 1 hr Chicagobunny 3,794
IL Who do you support for Treasurer in Illinois in... (Oct '10) 1 hr Chicagobunny 113
Amy 4-24 1 hr Kuuipo 34
•••
•••
Chicago Dating

more search filters

less search filters

•••

Chicago Jobs

•••
•••
•••

Chicago People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]
•••