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 1,685)

Showing posts 33,681 - 33,700 of45,545
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
Dont drink the koolaid

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#35683
May 8, 2013
 
tha Professor wrote:
<quoted text>
what would it take to get you to change your trolling or at least troll a new subject?:)
Yes, a mitigation experiment... Do you know of one?

Since: Jul 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#35684
May 8, 2013
 
Dont drink the koolaid wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, a mitigation experiment... Do you know of one?
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!
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#35685
May 8, 2013
 
Dont drink the koolaid wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, a mitigation experiment... Do you know of one?
Listen. I know many. What are you gong to do with one?
gcaveman1

Louin, MS

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#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

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#35687
May 9, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

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

Cadiz, KY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#35688
May 9, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

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

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#35689
May 9, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

1

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

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#35690
May 9, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

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

Everett, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#35691
May 9, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

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

Louin, MS

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#35692
May 9, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

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

Houston, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#35693
May 9, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

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

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#35694
May 9, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

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

Everett, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#35695
May 9, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

1

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...

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#35696
May 9, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

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...

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#35697
May 9, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

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

Everett, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#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'!

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#35699
May 9, 2013
 

Judged:

2

1

1

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"

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#35700
May 9, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

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'!

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#35701
May 9, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

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...

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#35702
May 9, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

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.

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

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Showing posts 33,681 - 33,700 of45,545
|
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.

60 Users are viewing the Chicago Forum right now

Search the Chicago Forum:
Topic Updated Last By Comments
Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 7 min Olive Oil 1,072,779
BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit contesting... (Jan '09) 15 min wojar 173,735
Last word + 2 (Mar '12) 37 min Hatti_Hollerand 402
1st to contact have a gift 52 min posttopics 1
Four Dead in Bridgeview Head-On Collision 1 hr Amena 70
Israel Will Avenge The Holocaust: Nuke Germany ... 1 hr Maimie Eisenhowers Couche 1
Bloomberg Calls Colorado a “Rural and Roadless”... 1 hr Maimie Eisenhowers Couche 3
•••

Tornado Watch for Cook County was issued at July 12 at 9:50PM CDT

•••
•••
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 ]
•••