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

Full story: Newsday 46,980
When Bill Clinton took office in 1993, global warming was a slow-moving environmental problem that was easy to ignore. Full Story

“dening those who deny nature. ”

Since: Jun 07

Norfolk va

#34087 Jan 31, 2013
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....
Did you ever bother to check out who wrote your link. It turns out that he is a science fiction writer who writes macabre stories about the future. Not one you would consider to be knowledgable about climate models. He claimed that the models are accurate without saying which. Funny thing is if he had said which then we could check them out and discover if they are still as accurate. Most of the models (the IPCC's for example) went from accurate to inaccurate within five years. So many claims that models are accurate have since been dropped.

The real issue is politics and always has been. Even your own post with it's remarks about "radical right wing media nutteria" is proof. Funny how people like you talk about radical RW while never mentioning radical LW. In that it tends to point out that where you stand is where some would refer to as the radical LW and to you anything that isn't to the left of the issue is radical RW.

Which only is further proof that it is nothing more than politics and this has little to do with science.

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#34089 Jan 31, 2013
tina anne wrote:
<quoted text>
Did you ever bother to check out who wrote your link. It turns out that he is a science fiction writer who writes macabre stories about the future. Not one you would consider to be knowledgable about climate models. He claimed that the models are accurate without saying which. Funny thing is if he had said which then we could check them out and discover if they are still as accurate. Most of the models (the IPCC's for example) went from accurate to inaccurate within five years. So many claims that models are accurate have since been dropped.
The real issue is politics and always has been. Even your own post with it's remarks about "radical right wing media nutteria" is proof. Funny how people like you talk about radical RW while never mentioning radical LW. In that it tends to point out that where you stand is where some would refer to as the radical LW and to you anything that isn't to the left of the issue is radical RW.
Which only is further proof that it is nothing more than politics and this has little to do with science.
I'm perfectly aware that BPL writes science fiction. He's also a physicist who's been published in peer-reviewed scientific literature on AGW/CC.

He knows the difference between fact & fiction, unlike you deniers. Yes, you reside in the radical right wing media denying nutteria.

The models have been remarkably accurate; the predictions that are INaccurate are the ones made by the handful of scientist who are still trying to deny reality. BPL's site has references to all the papers that prove what he's saying.

You say
"Most of the models (the IPCC's for example) went from accurate to inaccurate within five years. So many claims that models are accurate have since been dropped."

Only a deluded right wing fool would even consider saying such a thing. Since the IPCC made its correction for aerosols in 1995, actual temps have been very close to their mid-range predictions.

The scientists' correct predictions are facts. You should try to familiarize yourself with them instead of reading your right wing fantasies. Go to the original articles if you really want to learn something.

Of course, there are exceptions. Remember when the Arctic Ocean icepack would be gone in September (peak melt) by 2050? Then it was 2040, then 2030. Now it's 2020, & if you look at the raw volume data, it looks like it'll be gone by 2016 or 2017:

https://sites.google.com/site/arctischepingui...

Yes, right wing deniers are ALL about politics, while we are all about science. Your progeny will understand how selfish & WRONG you are.

If you're buried within 75 meters of sea level, maybe they'll move your remains to higher ground. Or not. Maybe they'll just let them wash out to sea.
litesong

Everett, WA

#34091 Jan 31, 2013
Large lying language wrote:
Boring!
'large lying language', is a kkk(ALWAYS SMALL LETTERS) member, & doesn't get excited except for cross burnings, ETC.
PHD

Overton, TX

#34093 Jan 31, 2013
litesong wrote:
<quoted text>
'large lying language', is a kkk(ALWAYS SMALL LETTERS) member, & doesn't get excited except for cross burnings, ETC.
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.
litesong

Everett, WA

#34094 Jan 31, 2013
Large lying language wrote:
oisdkufhjksla\kjikldfm,ksclzk\ am,ieofr12IJQWEMIDSOCLZX;
Misspelling, as usual.
AnonyArch

Brooklyn, NY

#34095 Jan 31, 2013
Likely Voter wrote:
From the article: " The 10 hottest years on record have occurred since Clinton's second inauguration."
The hottest year on record was 1934.
How did Seth get to be "AP Science Writer?"
Do a little bit of research. 1934 was the 4th hottest year in the US. Globally, 1934 is something like 49th hottest. The 10 hottest years on record globally all occurred since 1998.
PHD

Overton, TX

#34096 Jan 31, 2013
litesong wrote:
<quoted text>
Misspelling, as usual.
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.

“dening those who deny nature. ”

Since: Jun 07

Norfolk va

#34100 Jan 31, 2013
Largelanguage wrote:
<quoted text>
Give me proof foolish child!
Go find it for yourself. That way you can learn for yourself.

“dening those who deny nature. ”

Since: Jun 07

Norfolk va

#34101 Jan 31, 2013
HomoSapiensLaptopicus wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm perfectly aware that BPL writes science fiction. He's also a physicist who's been published in peer-reviewed scientific literature on AGW/CC.
He knows the difference between fact & fiction, unlike you deniers. Yes, you reside in the radical right wing media denying nutteria.
The models have been remarkably accurate; the predictions that are INaccurate are the ones made by the handful of scientist who are still trying to deny reality. BPL's site has references to all the papers that prove what he's saying.
You say
"Most of the models (the IPCC's for example) went from accurate to inaccurate within five years. So many claims that models are accurate have since been dropped."
Only a deluded right wing fool would even consider saying such a thing. Since the IPCC made its correction for aerosols in 1995, actual temps have been very close to their mid-range predictions.
The scientists' correct predictions are facts. You should try to familiarize yourself with them instead of reading your right wing fantasies. Go to the original articles if you really want to learn something.
Of course, there are exceptions. Remember when the Arctic Ocean icepack would be gone in September (peak melt) by 2050? Then it was 2040, then 2030. Now it's 2020, & if you look at the raw volume data, it looks like it'll be gone by 2016 or 2017:
https://sites.google.com/site/arctischepingui...
Yes, right wing deniers are ALL about politics, while we are all about science. Your progeny will understand how selfish & WRONG you are.
If you're buried within 75 meters of sea level, maybe they'll move your remains to higher ground. Or not. Maybe they'll just let them wash out to sea.
Published peer reviewed material on AGW. Funny thing is in 2008 they started publishing studies that disproved AGW and now they now have thousands of peer reviewed studies that disproved AGW. Hence the reason why it has disappeared from the media and the reputable sources and are only found on a few of the more loony sites.

As for the models, the fact is that is that in five years the models departed from reality is a well documented fact. As for the handful of scientist. I bet if you were to try and prove that claim you would run into a problem The majority of scientist

As for what my progeny will understand. Using history as a guide they will look at the claims made by those like you and will have a very good laugh. There are century old New York Times articles making similar claims and claiming we needed to act and act quickly. Some even blamed what happened to the Titanic on that.

The lesson that history teaches is that this all about politics and not about science. The fact that you feel the need to toss ouot the RW label for those who disagree with you and your political based opinions is additional proof.

Also, given that the oceans are rising at 3.2mm and 75 meters equates to 75,000 mm will mean that someone buried 75 meters above sea level would have salt water lapping at thier grave in 23,437.5 years. Which by then will have seen the next ice age arrive and may have an expanding ice sheet moving the land where that grave was. Of course if every last bit of ice on the planet was to melt it would still not be able to push sea levels that high. So the real question is where would you come up the water to cause the oceans to rise that high.

Since: Jan 13

Fairfax, VA

#34102 Jan 31, 2013
gcaveman1 wrote:
<quoted text>
What sums can traitor deniers prove are lining the pockets of climatologists? Have they produced any pictures of Mann's mansions or Cook's Cobra GT?
Doubt is their product, bullshit is their language.
Great post.

Of course SUXOBAMA and his aliases are active on this thread.

I think there are more of them than all the people actively posting.
Wonder how long it takes him to sign off and keep revoting dishonestly.
gcaveman1

Laurel, MS

#34103 Jan 31, 2013
tina anne wrote:
<quoted text>
Published peer reviewed material on AGW. Funny thing is in 2008 they started publishing studies that disproved AGW and now they now have thousands of peer reviewed studies that disproved AGW. Hence the reason why it has disappeared from the media and the reputable sources and are only found on a few of the more loony sites.
As for the models, the fact is that is that in five years the models departed from reality is a well documented fact. As for the handful of scientist. I bet if you were to try and prove that claim you would run into a problem The majority of scientist
As for what my progeny will understand. Using history as a guide they will look at the claims made by those like you and will have a very good laugh. There are century old New York Times articles making similar claims and claiming we needed to act and act quickly. Some even blamed what happened to the Titanic on that.
The lesson that history teaches is that this all about politics and not about science. The fact that you feel the need to toss ouot the RW label for those who disagree with you and your political based opinions is additional proof.
Also, given that the oceans are rising at 3.2mm and 75 meters equates to 75,000 mm will mean that someone buried 75 meters above sea level would have salt water lapping at thier grave in 23,437.5 years. Which by then will have seen the next ice age arrive and may have an expanding ice sheet moving the land where that grave was. Of course if every last bit of ice on the planet was to melt it would still not be able to push sea levels that high. So the real question is where would you come up the water to cause the oceans to rise that high.
Funny thing is, you always make the same old claims and always produce the same old amount of evidence..........0.

Zero.

Zilch.

Nada.

actually, after all.
gcaveman1

Laurel, MS

#34104 Jan 31, 2013
Wallop10 wrote:
<quoted text>
Great post.
Of course SUXOBAMA and his aliases are active on this thread.
I think there are more of them than all the people actively posting.
Wonder how long it takes him to sign off and keep revoting dishonestly.
Thanks.

But the minions of the devil are legion....

Since: Jan 13

Fairfax, VA

#34105 Jan 31, 2013
gcaveman1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Thanks.
But the minions of the devil are legion....
Especially... WHEN THEY ARE THE SAME PERSON.

This site must not be very reputable to allow that.

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#34106 Jan 31, 2013
Largelanguage wrote:
<quoted text>
Science fiction!
TINY language:

Prove it. PROVE it's "science fiction."

Try to refute it with scientificd facts & logical arguments instead of your typical name-calling.

I'm waiting with baited breath.
PHD

Overton, TX

#34108 Feb 1, 2013
Wallop10 wrote:
<quoted text>
Great post.
Of course SUXOBAMA and his aliases are active on this thread.
I think there are more of them than all the people actively posting.
Wonder how long it takes him to sign off and keep revoting dishonestly.
Well tell all commander Troll it fits you exactly. Walloped, walloped, walloped all day long. How are those walloped tires working for you?
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

#34110 Feb 1, 2013
Wallop10 wrote:
<quoted text>
Especially... WHEN THEY ARE THE SAME PERSON.
This site must not be very reputable to allow that.
Thanks for bringing this up.

We had been ignoring it before you. There was also a digititap[?] doing the same. I also figured tina acting up because I had observed the instant icon-multiplication related to her posting. Couple of ex-posters engaged in it as well.
PHD

Overton, TX

#34112 Feb 1, 2013
SpaceBlues wrote:
<quoted text>Thanks for bringing this up.
We had been ignoring it before you. There was also a digititap[?] doing the same. I also figured tina acting up because I had observed the instant icon-multiplication related to her posting. Couple of ex-posters engaged in it as well.
So would that be any different from the cut and paste same scientific science fiction you three post everyday? Your issue and your butt buddies have nothing better to do than run your scare tactics to extract more tax dollars from the real tax payers. You don't ignore anything you respond directly and indirectly but you do respond. So, do show all your peer reviewed published work do come back.
PHD

Overton, TX

#34114 Feb 1, 2013
Largelanguage wrote:
<quoted text>
a
sdgfyr
Sorry I don't do well with sign language.
PHD

Overton, TX

#34116 Feb 1, 2013
Largelanguage wrote:
<quoted text>
sdfghjuikoigfd
Well 2r3q6f9b02abc
PHD

Overton, TX

#34119 Feb 1, 2013
OK

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
Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 3 min Eman 1,114,869
Topix Chitown Regulars (Aug '09) 13 min HoneyBear1 98,342
Messianic Jews say they are persecuted in Israel (Jun '08) 13 min JOEL 69,478
Ill. House Approves Legalizing Same-Sex Civil U... (Dec '10) 24 min HOLME 50,018
Amy - 9-29-2014 26 min Mister Tonka 27
Abby 9-30 36 min Kuuipo 7
Abby 9-27 48 min Stina2 16
BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit contesting... (Jan '09) 1 hr LRS 178,579

Chicago Jobs

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 ]