Once slow-moving threat, global warmi...

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

There are 61082 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.

gcaveman1

Bay Springs, MS

#36166 May 31, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
CO2 isn't pollution, it's invisible, odorless at atmospheric levels and beneficial to plants. Don't just hug a tree, exhale on it too.
Yes, beneficial to ALL plants.

How do you like the part where CO2 is beneficial to kudzu, poison ivy, and weeds?
LessHypeMoreFact

Etobicoke, Canada

#36167 May 31, 2013
gcaveman1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, beneficial to ALL plants.
How do you like the part where CO2 is beneficial to kudzu, poison ivy, and weeds?
I disagree that it is 'beneficial' to most plants from the standpoint of OUR interests. Yes, it makes for more 'woody material' i.e cellulose and larger plants. That may be of interest to the paper makers and termites.

But it ALSO has two other effects. One is to reduce transport of minerals from the soil (and therefore lower mineral and vitamin content of food plants) due to lower transpiration rates (the stomata close up). And more of the plant is indigestible fiber, rather than food (seeds, fruits, etc). From the standpoint of AGRICULTURE, it is a loser.

Then there is the effect to warm the planet. This tends to make for more drought and lower yields of food crops due to heat stress and higher metabolism during nighttime when the sun is not producing food.

Overall, the total is probably negative on all levels. Even the 'boost' in woody fiber tends to last only a few years until some other factor becomes the 'limit'.

One thing on this article is that the reduced stomata opening may make plants hardier to desert or drought conditions.

“EnvironMENTAList ”

Since: Feb 07

Near Detroit

#36168 Jun 1, 2013
Science DOES NOT say and in 28 years has never said climate change IS or WILL be a crisis only could be and they won't say their "possible" crisis is as inevitable as they love to say comet hits are. But unstoppable warming IS a comet hit!
Science ONLY agrees:
"Climate change is real and is happening and "could" cause, might cause, possibly cause......unstoppable warming. Not one IPCC warning isn't swimming in "maybes" and "could bes". Help my house could be on fire maybe?
You can't have a little unstoppable warming crisis outside of Harry Potter movies.
Climate Blame = Reefer Madness
gcaveman1

Bay Springs, MS

#36169 Jun 1, 2013
LessHypeMoreFact wrote:
<quoted text>
I disagree that it is 'beneficial' to most plants from the standpoint of OUR interests. Yes, it makes for more 'woody material' i.e cellulose and larger plants. That may be of interest to the paper makers and termites.
But it ALSO has two other effects. One is to reduce transport of minerals from the soil (and therefore lower mineral and vitamin content of food plants) due to lower transpiration rates (the stomata close up). And more of the plant is indigestible fiber, rather than food (seeds, fruits, etc). From the standpoint of AGRICULTURE, it is a loser.
Then there is the effect to warm the planet. This tends to make for more drought and lower yields of food crops due to heat stress and higher metabolism during nighttime when the sun is not producing food.
Overall, the total is probably negative on all levels. Even the 'boost' in woody fiber tends to last only a few years until some other factor becomes the 'limit'.
One thing on this article is that the reduced stomata opening may make plants hardier to desert or drought conditions.
Yes, I know all that. But more complicated arguments and questions than what I gave are wasted on short-attention-span, anti-science, paid agents of fossil interests.

Their reply to your detailed answer? CO2 is good for plants!
SpaceBlues

United States

#36170 Jun 1, 2013
One thing on this article is that ..??
gcaveman1

Bay Springs, MS

#36171 Jun 1, 2013
mememine69 wrote:
Science DOES NOT say and in 28 years has never said climate change IS or WILL be a crisis only could be and they won't say their "possible" crisis is as inevitable as they love to say comet hits are. But unstoppable warming IS a comet hit!
Science ONLY agrees:
"Climate change is real and is happening and "could" cause, might cause, possibly cause......unstoppable warming. Not one IPCC warning isn't swimming in "maybes" and "could bes". Help my house could be on fire maybe?
You can't have a little unstoppable warming crisis outside of Harry Potter movies.
Climate Blame = Reefer Madness
Coulda...woulda....shoulda.

Let me tell you a sure thing. You're stupid.
Retired Farmer

Paducah, KY

#36172 Jun 1, 2013
gcaveman1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Coulda...woulda....shoulda.
Let me tell you a sure thing. You're stupid.
You know, caveman, I don't think it really matters whether or not we do anything to mitigate human induced global warming - or if we even can if we try. Nature will not allow humans to render the planet unfit for life, or even go so far as rendering it unfit for human life. No. Nature will kill 95 percent of us first. Even if we make a big enough natural catastrophe to do that, there will still be over 15 million Americans - about the same as the Native American population in 1492.
gcaveman1

Bay Springs, MS

#36173 Jun 1, 2013
Retired Farmer wrote:
<quoted text>
You know, caveman, I don't think it really matters whether or not we do anything to mitigate human induced global warming - or if we even can if we try. Nature will not allow humans to render the planet unfit for life, or even go so far as rendering it unfit for human life. No. Nature will kill 95 percent of us first. Even if we make a big enough natural catastrophe to do that, there will still be over 15 million Americans - about the same as the Native American population in 1492.
Yes, it seems impossible to kill everything. Even the asteroid that wiped out the dinosaurs didn't wipe out all the dinosaurs; the survivors are today called birds. With all the extinctions and global disasters that have happened, Nature never had to start over from scratch; there was always something left alive.

What matters is the suffering and pain along the way. Doesn't matter to an ephemeral and symbolic Mother-God like Nature; pain and suffering are two of her most common attributes. But as humanists or theists, we feel an obligation to try to reduce pain and suffering. So even if the Earth has its human infection in remission for a while, it will be nasty and brutish for the humans.

The Earth probably won't die until the Sun is in its death throes.
litesong

Camano Island, WA

#36174 Jun 1, 2013
middleofthedownwronggully wrote:
.....co2 is not a pollutant.....plants love it!
We should give plants a rest...... & raise temperatures more often, past 104degF, so the plants can take a nap.......... some people call it wilting

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2009/11/27/8079... #

http://www.preen.com/articles/wilting-plants

“BET DAP”

Since: Feb 09

GOOM BOWN

#36175 Jun 1, 2013
tha Professor wrote:
Asshat Deniers need to test their theories about the beneficial nature of C02 by walking into a room full of it.
It shouldn't be a problem...after all, PLANTS love it!
LOL
stupid argument. try spending your day at the bottom of the swimming pool.
according to your logic......water must be a pollutant, too.

“BET DAP”

Since: Feb 09

GOOM BOWN

#36176 Jun 1, 2013
litesong wrote:
<quoted text>
We should give plants a rest...... & raise temperatures more often, past 104degF, so the plants can take a nap.......... some people call it wilting
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2009/11/27/8079... #
http://www.preen.com/articles/wilting-plants
don't be a "wallflower", liteyear! say what you mean with just a little bit of intellect added.

“BET DAP”

Since: Feb 09

GOOM BOWN

#36177 Jun 1, 2013
tha Professor wrote:
<quoted text>
ROTFLMAO!!
You demand answers about the complex causes and effects of warming, then post some fatuous comment about C02 being fine because "plants love it?"
Jesus...you really are too stupid to live.
no more stupid than your crowd jumping to conclusions about "the complex causes and effects of warming".
but you're not smart enough to realize that, are you, sport?
litesong

Camano Island, WA

#36178 Jun 1, 2013
middleofthedownwronggully wrote:
......say what you mean with just a little bit of intellect added.
Glad
"middleofthedownwronggull y" doesn't understand science. Nothing
"middleofthedownwronggull y" says against Earth science, can change Earth science.
"middleofthedownwronggull y" is down the wrong gully.

“BET DAP”

Since: Feb 09

GOOM BOWN

#36179 Jun 1, 2013
litesong wrote:
<quoted text>
Glad
"middleofthedownwronggull y" doesn't understand science. Nothing
"middleofthedownwronggull y" says against Earth science, can change Earth science.
"middleofthedownwronggull y" is down the wrong gully.
okay, sport, your science concludes that climate change, among other things, will lead to increased transactional sex. who am i to rain on your parade? breathe easy....i'm sure the extra $20 you earn per night will be a windfall for ya.:-)
gcaveman1

Bay Springs, MS

#36180 Jun 1, 2013
mememine69 wrote:
Science DOES NOT say and in 28 years has never said climate change IS or WILL be a crisis only could be and they won't say their "possible" crisis is as inevitable as they love to say comet hits are. But unstoppable warming IS a comet hit!
Science ONLY agrees:
"Climate change is real and is happening and "could" cause, might cause, possibly cause......unstoppable warming. Not one IPCC warning isn't swimming in "maybes" and "could bes". Help my house could be on fire maybe?
You can't have a little unstoppable warming crisis outside of Harry Potter movies.
Climate Blame = Reefer Madness
Let's say your doctor tells you that you have colon cancer. He tells you it WILL kill you.

He says there are a couple of other things that might kill you; chemicals and radiation. But they "could" save your life. It could be possible that they might save your life.

Will you tell the doctor that his solution is not certain enough for you to try it and accuse him of trying to scare your kids?
Dont drink the koolaid

Eden Prairie, MN

#36181 Jun 1, 2013
gcaveman1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, it seems impossible to kill everything. Even the asteroid that wiped out the dinosaurs didn't wipe out all the dinosaurs; the survivors are today called birds. With all the extinctions and global disasters that have happened, Nature never had to start over from scratch; there was always something left alive.
What matters is the suffering and pain along the way. Doesn't matter to an ephemeral and symbolic Mother-God like Nature; pain and suffering are two of her most common attributes. But as humanists or theists, we feel an obligation to try to reduce pain and suffering...
The Earth probably won't die until the Sun is in its death throes.
"But as humanists or theists, we feel an obligation to try to reduce pain and suffering..."
Yes, and the theist best suited for emulation is Tomás de Torquemada. After all, who would know more about 'pain and suffering"?
"Tennessee - America at Its Best"

Since: Jul 11

Location hidden

#36182 Jun 1, 2013
mememine69 wrote:
Science DOES NOT say and in 28 years has never said climate change IS or WILL be a crisis only could be and they won't say their "possible" crisis is as inevitable as they love to say comet hits are. But unstoppable warming IS a comet hit!
Science ONLY agrees:
"Climate change is real and is happening and "could" cause, might cause, possibly cause......unstoppable warming. Not one IPCC warning isn't swimming in "maybes" and "could bes". Help my house could be on fire maybe?
You can't have a little unstoppable warming crisis outside of Harry Potter movies.
Climate Blame = Reefer Madness
If you licked a lead pipe everyday its "PROBABLE" you would get lead poisoning and brain activity would be on a par with what it is now.
Also if you have a gazillion people unlocking trapped carbon that took a gazillion years to form in only the space of a couple of hundred years and at the same time take away half the means to adsorb it again. I'd say its "PROBABLE" that would upset the balance of nature.
It's also "PROBABLE" the weather warnings those poor folks in Oklahoma get will result in tornadoes if conditions are met or you can stand outside and go about your business because it was only a "Probable"

“BET DAP”

Since: Feb 09

GOOM BOWN

#36183 Jun 1, 2013
gcaveman1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Let's say your doctor tells you that you have colon cancer. He tells you it WILL kill you.
He says there are a couple of other things that might kill you; chemicals and radiation. But they "could" save your life. It could be possible that they might save your life.
Will you tell the doctor that his solution is not certain enough for you to try it and accuse him of trying to scare your kids?
lol...try your theories out on lab rats first. last time i checked c02 mitigation hasn't shown to prove anything. you, and your crowd, are proclaiming co2 is the root cause of'cancer'...and eradicating it will make everything okay. problem is....many other things cause climate change....and you pretend that your procedure is the cure?

i want a second opinion and more tests....besides yours.

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#36184 Jun 1, 2013
ritedownthemiddle wrote:
<quoted text>lol...try your theories out on lab rats first. last time i checked c02 mitigation hasn't shown to prove anything. you, and your crowd, are proclaiming co2 is the root cause of'cancer'...and eradicating it will make everything okay. problem is....many other things cause climate change....and you pretend that your procedure is the cure?
i want a second opinion and more tests....besides yours.
Many things cause cancer. Eradicating tobacco will not eradicate all cancer. But it is a probable cause of cancer. So your logic is that since other things besides tobacco cause cancer, there is no need to stop using tobacco. Your problem is that you don't listen to your doctor.
gcaveman1

Bay Springs, MS

#36185 Jun 1, 2013
ritedownthemiddle wrote:
<quoted text>lol...try your theories out on lab rats first. last time i checked c02 mitigation hasn't shown to prove anything. you, and your crowd, are proclaiming co2 is the root cause of'cancer'...and eradicating it will make everything okay. problem is....many other things cause climate change....and you pretend that your procedure is the cure?
i want a second opinion and more tests....besides yours.
Do you have a second opinion? If not greenhouse gases, what is causing the temperature rise over the past 100+ years?

Hmmm?

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) 1 min USAsince1680 1,420,254
News BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit contesting... (Jan '09) 6 min District 1 222,776
Four letter word game (Dec '11) 1 hr Raydot 1,948
Word (Dec '08) 3 hr PEllen 6,698
{keep A word drop A word} (Oct '11) 3 hr PEllen 9,394
Double Word Game (Dec '11) 3 hr PEllen 3,048
abby8-29-16 4 hr Doctor Phil da Fraud 6

Chicago Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Chicago Mortgages