Once slow-moving threat, global warmi...

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

There are 53490 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.

“I Luv Carbon Dioxide”

Since: Dec 08

Home, sweet home.

#34825 Mar 29, 2013
gcaveman1 wrote:
There were thousands of experiments before the first bomb, showing the effects of nuclear chain reaction. How many cities were blown up?
None, but several scientists were injured during experimental tests, "tickling the dragon's tail".
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louis_Slotin

.
gcaveman1 wrote:
Then they experimentally tested the bomb before they used it in the war. They had a good idea of the power, since stayed out of the blast radius while watching the test. How many cities were blown up before they finally did the REAL experiment?
None, they experimented in the New Mexico desert before they used the bomb to end the war.

.
gcaveman1 wrote:
Everything was theory until that first explosion in the desert.
There were a series of experiments showing how nuclear chain reactions work, how much energy is generated and testing the approach to critical mass. There were thousands of experiments that helped to build the bomb.

.
gcaveman1 wrote:
Global warming is just as valid a theory but you won't believe it even when the ice all melts in your ex-Nazi neighborhood.
There are no experiments that show even the smallest measurable climate change from a man made greenhouse gas emission too or capture from the atmosphere.

Ice melts and water freezes; don't panic.
PHD

Overton, TX

#34826 Mar 30, 2013
gcaveman1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Look this up........'!
All have and discovered your still an empty chair.Look this up Dumb ASSumption of your----self and discover your----self.

“fairtax.org”

Since: Dec 08

gauley bridge wv

#34827 Mar 30, 2013
flack wrote:
New solar structure cools buildings in full sunlight, replacing air conditioners
Have any idea how much electricity you would not have to use it you didn't need air conditioners running 24/7/365? Don't worry all your little heads about climate change. Science will lead the way without all this carbon tax nonsense and that other truck you all are trying to use to control the people. Just think it was only around ten years from the first man in space to man on the moon. More power in your tricorder (come on can we really still call it a phone?) than to run the space shuttle.

Humans have a very stubborn belief in the fact that the world is static. That tomorrow will be exactly like today. Science has already defied tomorrow and is working on next week. We are about to enter the most amazing time period of planet Terra. The technological advances will transform our lives in ways some here can't even imagine yet. Hold on to your hats it's going to be a great ride!!!
PHD

Overton, TX

#34828 Mar 30, 2013
Yes science will be a great ride. Now convince the scientific science fiction posters above.

“fairtax.org”

Since: Dec 08

gauley bridge wv

#34829 Mar 30, 2013
PHD wrote:
Yes science will be a great ride. Now convince the scientific science fiction posters above.
It won't happen. They have drunk the Kool-ade. The biggest thing is they missed the window of opportunity on their carbon tax scam. The people woke up before they were ready. The American people for the most part know a pig in a poke when they see one.

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#34830 Mar 30, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>I'm not promoting changing the atmosphere...
You know Brian, you can lie like this a hundred thousand times, over & over again here, but that won't change the FACT: you are advocating emitting carbon into the atmosphere without restraint. This has already adversely changed the atmosphere, & will continue to change it in ever-more dangerous ways.

You are advocating a dramatic, almost incalculably expensive change in the climate of the earth. It will cause ever-worsening droughts that will cause agricultural problems & finally collapse in multiple areas. Famine, starvation, disease & war will be unavoidable.

Worsening storms will cause increasing damage & flooding in other areas. Hundreds of trillions of dollars of infrastructure will be inundated.

It's true that the precise location, severity & timing of these things remain in dispute, but they WILL happen eventually if we don't change. People like you will have to die or get out of the way. Otherwise we won't be able to save human civilization.

I'm sorry that your bosses & your ideology won't let you see obvious facts that are right in front of your face. Scientific facts are true no matter how much you wish they were not.
litesong

Lynnwood, WA

#34831 Mar 30, 2013
'brian_g stumble butt dumpster diver' wrote:
I'm not promoting changing the atmosphere...
//////////
"HomoSapiensLaptopicus " wrote:
You know Brian, you can lie like this a hundred thousand times, over & over again.....
/////////
litesong wrote:
'brian_g stumble butt dumpster diver' doesn't know it is lying. Having made errors of 1 million TIMES, 1000 TIMES, 3000 TIMES & 73 million TIMES, the math of 'brian_g stumble butt dumpster diver' sends it down the wrong track....... over & over again.......
Reddy Kilowatt

Mclean, VA

#34833 Mar 30, 2013
How not to fix AGW:

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/claim-ger...

By caving in cowardly fashion to the know-nothing Marching Moron Greens and taking the nuclear solution off the table, Merkel has consigned Germany to waste hundreds of billions of national wealth accomplishing fcuk-all in terms of actually saving the planet from AGW.

“I Luv Carbon Dioxide”

Since: Dec 08

Home, sweet home.

#34834 Mar 30, 2013
HomoSapiensLaptopicus wrote:
You know Brian, you can lie like this a hundred thousand times, over & over again here, but that won't change the FACT: you are advocating emitting carbon into the atmosphere without restraint.
True, and I advocate taking carbon out of the atmosphere without restraint too. Sequester as much CO2 as you please, load mansions with valuable manuscripts and antique furniture if you like, that's nobody's business how much carbon dioxide you sequester or emit. FACT: I am advocating taking carbon out of the air without restraint. What you grow on your land is your business, not mine.

I've got no atmospheric CO2 level goals; this is where we differ. I also don't fear atmospheric levels closer to 500ppm or less than 1,000ppm, but I don't want them to fall below 300ppm if I can help it.

.
HomoSapiensLaptopicus wrote:
This has already adversely changed the atmosphere, & will continue to change it in ever-more dangerous ways.
We don't know that, there's never been a peer reviewed experimental test on climate change mitigation or showing adding or removing CO2 from the air changes atmospheric CO2 levels even the smallest measurable part per trillion or the smallest measurable global temperature change.

.
HomoSapiensLaptopicus wrote:
You are advocating a dramatic, almost incalculably expensive change in the climate of the earth.
No, I'm advocating adapting to climate change and since we can't do anything about climate change, we shouldn't bother mitigating it. I have no climate goals, plans or schemes; HSL is the one with a climate mitigation strategy; not me.

.
HomoSapiensLaptopicus wrote:
It will cause ever-worsening droughts that will cause agricultural problems & finally collapse in multiple areas. Famine, starvation, disease & war will be unavoidable. Worsening storms will cause increasing damage & flooding in other areas. Hundreds of trillions of dollars of infrastructure will be inundated.
^^^This is proof of the irrationality, there have always been "agricultural problems...[f]amine, starvation, disease & war[]. They have always been unavoidable and if you think a new carbon tax would stop it, please think again.

Please join us in the real world where storms always cause damage and flooding always happen somewhere. Don't create fake impressive propaganda claims about the dangers of climate; we know cold and heat, precipitation and drought can hurt or help, they always have.

.
HomoSapiensLaptopicus wrote:
It's true that the precise location, severity & timing of these things remain in dispute, but they WILL happen eventually if we don't change.
The reason "these things remain in dispute" is the complete lack of any published experimental test of climate change mitigation or of man made global warming by the emission of a known greenhouse gas or the extraction of a greenhouse gas from the air, that shows either a change in the quantity of that gas as part of the atmosphere or a change in climate.

.
HomoSapiensLaptopicus wrote:
People like you will have to die or get out of the way. Otherwise we won't be able to save human civilization.
If "[p]eople like you will have to die or get out of the way", then human civilization's not worth saving. I'd never advocate such inhumane treatment or bully people out of the way to protect climate. This is where we differ.

.
HomoSapiensLaptopicus wrote:
I'm sorry that your bosses & your ideology won't let you see obvious facts that are right in front of your face.
The facts are, no citation for an experimental test of climate change mitigation. Until that changes; get a grip.

.
HomoSapiensLaptopicus wrote:
Scientific facts are true no matter how much you wish they were not.
True, in science experiments are used to verify and refine theory, not consensus.

“EnvironMENTAList ”

Since: Feb 07

Near Detroit

#34835 Mar 30, 2013
Science says comet hits are real but can't say a climate crisis is as real as a comet hit. Science has never said this comet hit of an emergency labeled now as “Climate Change Crisis” WILL be an actual crisis.
Not one IPCC warning report says it is inevitable or "WILL" happen only might happen and could happen and....... So why won't science end the debate by being crystal clear in stating that it WILL happen, or not? Wouldn't you want to know the truth because the only thing worse than a climate crisis is a comet, you know the "real imminent and eventual ones? Lets put an end to this costly debate get a yes or a know before we condemn our own children the greenhouse gas ovens. None of us want this misery to be true. Help my planet is on fire maybe?

“EnvironMENTAList ”

Since: Feb 07

Near Detroit

#34836 Mar 30, 2013
I fixed my spelling;
Science says comet hits are real but can't say a climate crisis is as real as a comet hit. Science has never said this comet hit of an emergency labeled now as “Climate Change Crisis” WILL be an actual crisis, only might be.
Not one IPCC warning report says it is inevitable or "WILL" happen, only might happen and could happen and....... So why won't science end the debate by being crystal clear in stating that it WILL happen, or not? Wouldn't you want to know the truth because the only thing worse than a climate crisis is a comet hit, you know the "real imminent and eventual ones? Lets put an end to this costly debate and get a yes or a no from the experts before we condemn our own children the greenhouse gas ovens. None of us want this misery to be true. Help my planet is on fire maybe?

Since: Aug 07

SFV

#34838 Mar 30, 2013
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/30/opinion/the...

If you can read, read this. I know it's the NYTimes a notoriously left/right wing rag. All lies because it's not funded by Chevron.
PHD

Overton, TX

#34839 Mar 31, 2013
flack wrote:
<quoted text> It won't happen. They have drunk the Kool-ade. The biggest thing is they missed the window of opportunity on their carbon tax scam. The people woke up before they were ready. The American people for the most part know a pig in a poke when they see one.
All but the scientific science fiction useless babble scare tactic sheeplebots.

“EnvironMENTAList ”

Since: Feb 07

Near Detroit

#34840 Mar 31, 2013
Deny this you evil fear mongers of climate blame:

The millions of people in the global scientific community need to step up to the plate and end this costly debate. This we can all agree on denier, believer or former believer.
Science could end the debate by stating in one strong voice that a climate crisis is inevitable not just “possible” and “likely” and “maybe” a climate crisis.“Maybe” is good enough to condemn your own kids to the greenhouse gas ovens of an exaggerated crisis?
Climate change crisis is a comet hit of an emergency but while the world of science is willing to say a comet hit is real, they are not willing to day a climate crisis from Human CO2 is as real as a comet hit. Help my house could be on fire maybe? The ultimate crisis needs the ultimate in proof and certainty, not 27 more years of “maybe” a climate crisis for our children.
Not one single IPCC warning says it will happen only might happen. Not one, only could be and might be……
gcaveman1

Bay Springs, MS

#34841 Mar 31, 2013
mememine69 wrote:
Science says comet hits are real but can't say a climate crisis is as real as a comet hit. Science has never said this comet hit of an emergency labeled now as “Climate Change Crisis” WILL be an actual crisis.
Not one IPCC warning report says it is inevitable or "WILL" happen only might happen and could happen and....... So why won't science end the debate by being crystal clear in stating that it WILL happen, or not? Wouldn't you want to know the truth because the only thing worse than a climate crisis is a comet, you know the "real imminent and eventual ones? Lets put an end to this costly debate get a yes or a know before we condemn our own children the greenhouse gas ovens. None of us want this misery to be true. Help my planet is on fire maybe?
Your argument is so lame.

Let me ask; are each of you operatives assigned a particular theme by Central Control to hammer away on constantly?

Yours used to be and still is this "death by CO2 for our children". That was always lame. Lately you've added this positivity of a comet strike juxtaposed against the "possibly's" of scientific research. As if anyone but a crazy Baptist preacher would dare to make a prediction with 100% accuracy. You and the Baptist preacher are both lame. No one KNOWS the future. They are all guesses; some educated, some like yours. Maybe Central decided the CO2 killing children argument was lame too and decided to move you away from that to something (supposedly) stronger.

Brain_Gone's meme is climate mitigation. Doesn't matter whether it's lame, or wrong, or stupid; it's apparently what he was assigned by Central Control and that's his theme.

Gord SUX Obama's is his 2nd Law befuddlement. Teener's is that it happens all the time. A few other's, whose pay obviously matches their intellect, is that "it isn't happening", "it's the sun", or some other foolishness. Central is trying to cover all the bases but has trouble finding people smart enough to sustain a debate.

You want to know our theme? not ordered by any central command?

It's that yall don't know Jack.

Since: Mar 09

Wichita, KS

#34842 Mar 31, 2013
gcaveman1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Your argument is so lame.
Let me ask; are each of you operatives assigned a particular theme by Central Control to hammer away on constantly?
Yours used to be and still is this "death by CO2 for our children". That was always lame. Lately you've added this positivity of a comet strike juxtaposed against the "possibly's" of scientific research. As if anyone but a crazy Baptist preacher would dare to make a prediction with 100% accuracy. You and the Baptist preacher are both lame. No one KNOWS the future. They are all guesses; some educated, some like yours. Maybe Central decided the CO2 killing children argument was lame too and decided to move you away from that to something (supposedly) stronger.
Brain_Gone's meme is climate mitigation. Doesn't matter whether it's lame, or wrong, or stupid; it's apparently what he was assigned by Central Control and that's his theme.
Gord SUX Obama's is his 2nd Law befuddlement. Teener's is that it happens all the time. A few other's, whose pay obviously matches their intellect, is that "it isn't happening", "it's the sun", or some other foolishness. Central is trying to cover all the bases but has trouble finding people smart enough to sustain a debate.
You want to know our theme? not ordered by any central command?
It's that yall don't know Jack.
They are simply disruptors. It is counter productive to try to discuss ideas with any of them. They have no desire of finding truths. I am sure each of them knows that their arguments are more than lame, that they are simply wrong.

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#34843 Apr 1, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>True, and I advocate taking carbon out of the atmosphere without restraint too... I also don't fear atmospheric levels closer to 500ppm or less than 1,000ppm, but I don't want them to fall below 300ppm if I can help it.

<quoted text>We don't know that, there's never been a peer reviewed experimental test on climate change mitigation or showing adding or removing CO2 from the air changes atmospheric CO2 levels even the smallest measurable part per trillion or the smallest measurable global temperature change.

<quoted text>The reason "these things remain in dispute" is the complete lack of any published experimental test of climate change mitigation or of man made global warming by the emission of a known greenhouse gas or the extraction of a greenhouse gas from the air, that shows either a change in the quantity of that gas as part of the atmosphere or a change in climate.

<quoted text>If "[p]eople like you will have to die or get out of the way", then human civilization's not worth saving. I'd never advocate such inhumane treatment or bully people out of the way to protect climate. This is where we differ.

<quoted text>True, in science experiments are used to verify and refine theory, not consensus.
You can repeat your arrant equine excrement as much as you want; it'll still stink.

You're a fool & a MOR0N if you don't fear CO levels of 1000 PPM. That would cause a MUCH warmer, ice-free earth, with temps 20 or 30º C warmer. Humans would not be happy. Sea level would be ~75 meters higher. Billons would die because droughts would kill agriculture.

Our sun is ~3% stronger than it was in the Carboniferous; believe it or not, that matters - a LOT. But you just maintain your "what - me worry?" attitude.

Since you people refuse to prove that your actions won't kill billions of people, & our best evidence suggests they almost certainly will, why don't we do the experiment? Just like others have said, let's get atmospheric CO2 down to 350 PPM. GREAT idea!!

That way you could maintain an ethical stance. Maybe future generations won't consider you responsible the worst mass murder in history.

Oh, believe me, you WILL die or get out of the way of climate change mitigation & CO2 reduction. That's not a threat, it's a guarantee.

It's unbelievable how much your progeny will despise you. I guess it's comforting for you to be in this profound denial. It lets you spew this incessant stream of equine excrement from your brain cavity to the outside world.

“I Luv Carbon Dioxide”

Since: Dec 08

Home, sweet home.

#34844 Apr 1, 2013
HomoSapiensLaptopicus wrote:
... why don't we do the experiment? Just like others have said, let's get atmospheric CO2 down to 350 PPM. GREAT idea!!....
Why not? You want to take CO2 out of the air, go for it. Farmers and foresters use atmospheric CO2 to create goods, nobody's stopping you. You don't need my help.

That would be a first, an experiment that shows a man made action changing the composition of the Earth's atmosphere; I'd like to see that. There have been no peer reviewed experiments on climate change mitigation, man made emissions changing the atmosphere or man made emissions causing global climate change. We need experimental tests to tell if it would work and how much it would cost.
Reddy Kilowatt

Houston, TX

#34845 Apr 1, 2013
HomoSapiensLaptopicus wrote:
<quoted text>
You can repeat your arrant equine excrement as much as you want; it'll still stink.
You're a fool & a MOR0N if you don't fear CO levels of 1000 PPM. That would cause a MUCH warmer, ice-free earth, with temps 20 or 30º C warmer. Humans would not be happy. Sea level would be ~75 meters higher. Billons would die because droughts would kill agriculture.
Our sun is ~3% stronger than it was in the Carboniferous; believe it or not, that matters - a LOT. But you just maintain your "what - me worry?" attitude.
Since you people refuse to prove that your actions won't kill billions of people, & our best evidence suggests they almost certainly will, why don't we do the experiment? Just like others have said, let's get atmospheric CO2 down to 350 PPM. GREAT idea!!
That way you could maintain an ethical stance. Maybe future generations won't consider you responsible the worst mass murder in history.
Oh, believe me, you WILL die or get out of the way of climate change mitigation & CO2 reduction. That's not a threat, it's a guarantee.
It's unbelievable how much your progeny will despise you. I guess it's comforting for you to be in this profound denial. It lets you spew this incessant stream of equine excrement from your brain cavity to the outside world.
A pretty self-righteous lecture from someone who is standing in the way by their own inaction and hand-wringing of replacing all US carbon-fueled base load electric power generation with modern nuclear - the ONLY available strategy that bends the carbon curve down meaningfully in the immediate short-term.

litesong

Lynnwood, WA

#34846 Apr 1, 2013
rundown kilowatt wrote:
....... pretty self-righteous lecture
"rundown kilowatt" is jealous, since it has no righteousness(& no right science & mathematics) of its own.

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) 3 min Nostrilis Waxman 1,234,171
News BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit contesting... (Jan '09) 15 min positronium 190,178
{keep A word drop A word} (Oct '11) 38 min Doug77 6,007
Topix Chitown Regulars (Aug '09) 2 hr those who can- teach 99,570
Abby 5-28 2 hr RACE 13
amy 5-28 4 hr Kuuipo 12
any cute emo girls wana talk? 9 hr kay 2
More from around the web

Chicago People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]