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

Full story: Newsday 46,626
When Bill Clinton took office in 1993, global warming was a slow-moving environmental problem that was easy to ignore. Full Story
gcaveman1

Ellisville, MS

#35686 May 8, 2013
OzRitz wrote:
<quoted text>
What is the point, are you looking for a quick fix ? Coral reefs are dying all over the world because of increase in acidity and ocean temps. That's a good start. The whole point of fossil fuel burning is to reduce emissions we already know the result of not doing it!
What is the point?

I know where it is, on top of their pointy little heads.

Watch as they RUN FOR THE HILLS!

I have told them

1. If you are in a deep hole and don't want to be, STOP DIGGING!
2. We know what causes AGW (or acidification) and we logically conclude (duh), that doing the opposite will reverse the trend.
3. The only reason you would want an experiment AT THIS POINT would be because you are unconvinced that there is a problem. So you reject most of the rest of the world's scientist's (very strong) theory.
4. Which make's you either a fool or a shill or a slimy steenking filthy vile reprobate rooting(& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AND 4-time alleged & 4-time proud threatener.

I enjoy all denier posts for their illogical thought and immorality as if watching a horror show, but sometimes wish I could walk out of the theater.

“EnvironMENTAList ”

Since: Feb 07

Near Detroit

#35687 May 9, 2013
SpaceBlues wrote:
<quoted text>Do you comprehend the following?
Carbon dioxide emissions have been altering the climate since the Industrial Revolution, some 200 years ago, though it took us a while to figure that out. NASA scientist James Hansen first warned Congress about the dangers of greenhouse gases in 1988.
But an earlier climate warning came five decades previous, way back in 1938. That’s when Guy Stewart Callendar, an engineer specializing in steam and power generation, published a paper that theorized that carbon dioxide emissions from industrial activity could have a greenhouse effect. His prescient paper appeared in the quarterly journal of the Royal Meteorological Society.
That's just you saying it. I want a scientist to say it "WILL" happen like they say asteroid hits are..........eventual. So as long as it's only you remaining believers doing the lying..........climate blame is dead and real planet lovers are happy not mad a crisis was avoided. You just hate yourself and all of humanity.
Retired Farmer

Kuttawa, KY

#35688 May 9, 2013
This is about bees (they are dying off, with potentially catastrophic consequences for agriculture and humanity's food supply), but the pesticide companies reaction to it illustrates the same kind of destructive corporate greed that the coal companies and operators of coal fired power plants display in the Global Warming issue.

http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2013/05/win...
kristy

Oviedo, FL

#35689 May 9, 2013
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
Patriot AKA Bozo wrote:
<quoted text>
It is obvious from past experience that any, any, environmental consideration must commence from government policy. No marketplace mechanism is inherent to limit environmental concerns. Folks will always move in the direction of economic profits-savings. To initiate some kind of mechanism to limit pollution and other environmental concerns there must be some kind of economic stimulus to change the market direction. We have seen this in such things as asbestos, benzene, lead, chlorofluorocarbons, insecticides, tobacco to name a very few. The industry always howls government interference but they will not change their habits until they are given some economic persuasion. For example, lead in gasoline was not voluntarily removed from gasoline. Industry waited until the very last moment. Benzene was not removed from the workplace until the very last moment by industry. Industry heavily lobbied for the repeal of every one of these items. Why would we think that regulation of CO2 to be any different?
<quoted text>
What is funny is that they believe their own lies. Just look at Dr. James Hansen. Why did he retire last month? Did Climategate have anything to do with it?
And then the is Dr. Michael Mann from Penn State who think he can read tree rings. All tree rings tell you is whether of not the growing conditions are ideal. It will not tell you if it is too hot or cold, if it has the right amount of sunlight, moisture, nutrients, etc. But Dr. Mann thinks he knows.
Oh, the lower tropospheric temperatures have gone DOWN a half a degree centigrade in the past dozen years! WHY? Maybe it is because our Sun is taking a big cat nap? Yep, our Sun is at it's lowest power level in a hundred years and NASA-MSFC (not to be confused with NASA-GISS which is actually Columbia University) says they expect it to go down to the level is was 200 years ago during the Little Ice Age.
http://pielkeclimatesci.files.wordpress.com/2...
http://solarscience.msfc.nasa.gov/images/ssn_...
But if you still believe in Global Warming might I suggest you move to Canada while there is still room. As for me, I will stay here in Florida where I will be warmer than you will be.
What they don't seem to understand is that CO2 is different than the other environmental problems such as lead, asbestos, etc. Those fixes were done at the industrial level and the public really didn't notice any change to their lifestyle. What they are asking is for everyone to entirely change their way of life. In Europe they have thought of giving out carbon credits to every person, thus limiting how much you drive, how many vacations you take, what kind of car you drive, how warm or cool you keep your house just to name a few. Over here, they want to tax carbon, but these fixes will only affect the poor. The rich will continue with no change in their lifestyle as they can afford to pay for any price increases. So how are the climate activists and politicians trying to make this change attractive to the poor? Rebates. From an article in an LA daily paper:

"The Citizens Climate Lobby is pushing a proposal for a carbon tax as the best way to incentivize a reduction in the emissions of greenhouse gases. The best part of the carbon tax proposal (besides a cleaner environment)? It comes with an annual rebate for all Americans -- a check in the mail for an estimated $1,500 that accounts for the extra consumers will have to pay as energy companies and utilities pass the cost of the tax along to us."

So bribery is the plan. The only thing this plan does is fill the government coffers and then politicians use this money to buy votes.

kristy

Oviedo, FL

#35690 May 9, 2013
Fair Game wrote:
<quoted text>
The models, the observations, the best scientific evidence we have.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment...
In contrast to clowns tripping over their big feet (that would be you, krusty).
From you article: The [current] variation we are seeing in temperature or rainfall is double the rate of the average. That suggests that we are going to have more droughts, we are going to have more floods, we are going to have more sea surges and we are going to have more storms. Prof Beddington's said:“The evidence that climate change is happening is completely unequivocal.”

Here is what the MET office FOIA said about the drought:

Neither the development nor the severity of the 2010/12 drought was exceptional compared with historical events, and its climatological drivers have several similarities with past droughts.There is therefore, as yet, no evidence that it was due to climate change and not part of the natural variability of the climate.

Here is what the MET office FOIA said about the increase in wet weather:

The jet stream, like our weather, is subject to natural variability – that is the random nature of our weather which means it is different from one week, month or year to the next. We expect it to move around and it has moved to the south of the UK in summertime many times before in the past. It has, however, been particularly persistent in holding that position this year – hence the prolonged unsettled weather. This could be due to natural variability – a bad run of coincidence, if you will – but scientific research is ongoing research to investigate whether other factors at play. If low levels of Arctic sea ice were found to be affecting the track of the jet stream, for example, this could be seen as linked to the warming of our climate – but this is currently an unknown.

So even though behind closed doors they state natural variability is at play and that it is UNKNOWN if the Arctic sea ice level is affecting the jet stream and there is ongoing research to see if other factors are at play, they publically make a statement that the evidence climate change is happening is UNEQUIVOCAL. How can you take weather that has been shown to be from natural variability and unknowns and then state you have a trend showing this is due to AGW?
litesong

Monroe, WA

#35691 May 9, 2013
gcaveman1 wrote:
Solar winning in the Northwest.
http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2013/05/07/1...
The Northwest takes in many climactic types. southern, specially south-eastern Oregon, borders on Nevada, has dramatically less cloud cover than Seattle. Solar there is a no-brainer.

Presently, solar further north in western Washington is not economical.
gcaveman1

Ellisville, MS

#35692 May 9, 2013
mememine69 wrote:
<quoted text>That's just you saying it. I want a scientist to say it "WILL" happen like they say asteroid hits are..........eventual. So as long as it's only you remaining believers doing the lying..........climate blame is dead and real planet lovers are happy not mad a crisis was avoided. You just hate yourself and all of humanity.
Want in one hand and shit in the other and see which one gets full first.

"remaining believers"......LOL...LMA O
SpaceBlues

Pasadena, TX

#35693 May 9, 2013
mememine69 wrote:
<quoted text>That's just you saying it. I want a scientist to say it "WILL" happen like they say asteroid hits are..........eventual. So as long as it's only you remaining believers doing the lying..........climate blame is dead and real planet lovers are happy not mad a crisis was avoided. You just hate yourself and all of humanity.
You are totality out of touch with reality.

Don't come back before getting treated for your condition.

“I Luv Carbon Dioxide”

Since: Dec 08

Location hidden

#35694 May 9, 2013
gcaveman1 wrote:
But brain, you've already said that mitigation works when you said our releasing of CO2 had mitigated the next ice age occurring. Don't you remember? Jeez, are you stupid or what?
No, gcaveman1 misread, just like he forgot the password of his gcaveman login.
litesong

Monroe, WA

#35695 May 9, 2013
me me me getting mine in the 69 position wrote:
That's just you saying it. I want a scientist to say it "WILL" happen ......
To support their denial, toxic topix AGW deniers demand the future to be as positive as the past, & like Pres. Kennedy's "to the moon speech". But the moon landing was piled on the mental skills of scientists, technologists, bodies of dead people, both in rockets & jet planes, people who almost died, & people whose skills were able to keep them from death.

toxic topix AGW deniers know there is no such thing as future surety, but demand it, in order to delay.

Not till the last seconds & the moon words,'Eagle has landed', was surety assured...... & the astronauts still had to get home to Earth.

“Let's X Change!!”

Since: Feb 09

B4 HOPE Is Gone...

#35696 May 9, 2013
litesong wrote:
<quoted text>
The Northwest takes in many climactic types. southern, specially south-eastern Oregon, borders on Nevada, has dramatically less cloud cover than Seattle. Solar there is a no-brainer.
Presently, solar further north in western Washington is not economical.
look at it this way.....maybe washington state will actually bottle a good wine next century.
cheers!

“Let's X Change!!”

Since: Feb 09

B4 HOPE Is Gone...

#35697 May 9, 2013
SpaceBlues wrote:
<quoted text>You are telling that to the angriest poster in this thread.
It will bite you, too. Stick around.
i don't worry about alarmist warnings. i wish obama could actually close gitmo. he might have more willing listeners then about changing the weather.
litesong

Monroe, WA

#35698 May 9, 2013
middleofthedownwronggully wrote:
...maybe washington state will actually bottle a good wine next century.
Washington state already produces a national award winning wine, selling for $200. It is not produced in the 'middleofthedownwronggully', however.

“So long to you, Righties”

Since: Jan 12

keep suckin' and whiffin'!

#35699 May 9, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>No, gcaveman1 misread, just like he forgot the password of his gcaveman login.
Are you lying about both of those, by any chance? Oh, and misreading something and forgetting something are two very different things - just like warming and mitigation, Brainless.

:)

Since: Apr 08

"the green troll"

#35700 May 9, 2013
krusty the clown wrote:
<quoted text>
From you article: The [current] variation we are seeing in temperature or rainfall is double the rate of the average. That suggests that we are going to have more droughts, we are going to have more floods, we are going to have more sea surges and we are going to have more storms. Prof Beddington's said:“The evidence that climate change is happening is completely unequivocal.”
Here is what the MET office FOIA said about the drought:
Neither the development nor the severity of the 2010/12 drought was exceptional compared with historical events, and its climatological drivers have several similarities with past droughts.There is therefore, as yet, no evidence that it was due to climate change and not part of the natural variability of the climate.
Here is what the MET office FOIA said about the increase in wet weather:
The jet stream, like our weather, is subject to natural variability – that is the random nature of our weather which means it is different from one week, month or year to the next. We expect it to move around and it has moved to the south of the UK in summertime many times before in the past. It has, however, been particularly persistent in holding that position this year – hence the prolonged unsettled weather. This could be due to natural variability – a bad run of coincidence, if you will – but scientific research is ongoing research to investigate whether other factors at play. If low levels of Arctic sea ice were found to be affecting the track of the jet stream, for example, this could be seen as linked to the warming of our climate – but this is currently an unknown.
So even though behind closed doors they state natural variability is at play and that it is UNKNOWN if the Arctic sea ice level is affecting the jet stream and there is ongoing research to see if other factors are at play, they publically make a statement that the evidence climate change is happening is UNEQUIVOCAL. How can you take weather that has been shown to be from natural variability and unknowns and then state you have a trend showing this is due to AGW?
krusty the clown can't see the difference between scientists talking about one event and scientists talking about trends.

Watching krusty the clown trip over her own feet is getting a bit dull.

“So long to you, Righties”

Since: Jan 12

keep suckin' and whiffin'!

#35701 May 9, 2013
mememine69 wrote:
<quoted text>That's just you saying it. I want a scientist to say it "WILL" happen like they say asteroid hits are..........eventual. So as long as it's only you remaining believers doing the lying..........climate blame is dead and real planet lovers are happy not mad a crisis was avoided. You just hate yourself and all of humanity.
Science works on its own and in its own way, it doesn't report to doofuses like you or accede to your "demands." You want certainty, but science doesn't peddle certainty. Unlike you, they're aware of the limits of human understanding.

The "believers" here are you non-scientific types who, if you can't "believe," just "deny."

“Let's X Change!!”

Since: Feb 09

B4 HOPE Is Gone...

#35702 May 9, 2013
litesong wrote:
<quoted text>
Washington state already produces a national award winning wine, selling for $200. It is not produced in the 'middleofthedownwronggully', however.
lol...wooooooo! 200 bucks! Wow!:-D. Which vineyard and vintage are you talking about. I'll be happy to tell you it's shortcomings.
SpaceBlues

Pasadena, TX

#35703 May 9, 2013
http://earthengine.google.org/#intro/WyomingC...

Wyoming Coal Mining

Explore a global timelapse of our planet, constructed from Landsat satellite imagery. Watch as mines spread across the surface of Wyoming. Each frame of the timelapse map is constructed from a year of Landsat satellite data, constituting an annual 1.7-terapixel snapshot of the Earth at 30-meter resolution. The Landsat program, managed by the USGS, has been acquiring images of the Earth's surface since 1972. Landsat provides critical scientific information about our changing planet.
litesong

Monroe, WA

#35704 May 9, 2013
middleofthedownwronggully wrote:
I'll be happy to tell you it's shortcomings.
You're not enamored with the 'middleofthedownwronggully' anymore! At age 14, your 'middleofthedownwronggully' has made you a sot.

Since: Jul 11

Location hidden

#35705 May 9, 2013
Retired Farmer wrote:
This is about bees (they are dying off, with potentially catastrophic consequences for agriculture and humanity's food supply), but the pesticide companies reaction to it illustrates the same kind of destructive corporate greed that the coal companies and operators of coal fired power plants display in the Global Warming issue.
http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2013/05/win...
Good point!, we have these litmus tests going on all over the world right now and no one can find definitive answers as to why.

The ONE big thing we could change and DONT is Man's interaction with the environment as a principle cause. It's a sad reflection on what advances have been made since civilisation has began. We change the things that have no impact on Economic infrastructure but as soon as something threatens a dramatic change to that Economic model we fight tooth n nail not to do it regardless of the consequences. It took 40 yrs fighting tobacco lobbying to have smoking banned in public places and advertising. What did they do in response, built a market in undeveloped countries where they have kids as young as 5 smoking in Asia. That's the morality of big business when looking after your welfare without government interference. We did exactly the same thing with manufacturing with business citing too much government control to be profitable so exported a polluting problem off shore. But in reality it was taking advantage of cheap Labor with little to no rules. How is that working out for the planet at the moment.

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) 6 min Patrick 1,109,609
Last word + 2 (Mar '12) 8 min andet1987 617
BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit contesting... (Jan '09) 10 min Jacques from Ottawa 178,012
ISIS Plans to Blow Up an Entire American City a... 12 min Always Smile 83
Scots, Scottish Americans in Chicago brace for ... 14 min James 2
Dear Abby 9-17-14 18 min Mister Tonka 8
Protests Continue After Chicago Police Shoot 3r... 25 min reality is a crutch 1
Amy 9-16 1 hr Mister Tonka 49
Topix Chitown Regulars (Aug '09) 1 hr anonymousdoom 98,215
•••
Chicago Dating

more search filters

less search filters

•••

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 ]
•••