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 1,763)

Showing posts 35,241 - 35,260 of45,437
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
kristy

Oviedo, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#37527
Jul 30, 2013
 

Judged:

3

3

3

Fair Game wrote:
<quoted text>
No, I looked for adjusted temperatures and found the graph.
Where's yours?
*you* made the claim,*you* back it up.
I'm not going to do your work for you.
You found the graph of a blogger playing around with ENSO-adjusted temperatures and solar and volcanic adjusted temperatures. Would any scientific institution use any of those graphs as proof of anything? It really doesn't matter anyway according to NOAA, because NOAA claimed in the 2008 State of the Climate Report that all this discussion was moot anyway because global temperatures would begin to rise again after 2008.

http://www.moyhu.blogspot.com/2013/06/adjusti...

Since: Apr 08

"the green troll"

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#37528
Jul 30, 2013
 

Judged:

3

3

2

kristy wrote:
<quoted text>
You found the graph of a blogger playing around with ENSO-adjusted temperatures and solar and volcanic adjusted temperatures. Would any scientific institution use any of those graphs as proof of anything? It really doesn't matter anyway according to NOAA, because NOAA claimed in the 2008 State of the Climate Report that all this discussion was moot anyway because global temperatures would begin to rise again after 2008.
http://www.moyhu.blogspot.com/2013/06/adjusti...
You are trying to have your cake and eat it.

If there are no figures for ENSO-adjusted temperatures up to the present, then you can't claim that there is a 15 year flat period in the ENSO-adjusted temperatures.

Of course Nick Stokes is a competent scientist and has dome the analysis and his results show a significant trend over the period in the ENSO-adjusted temperatures.

If you don't want to accept his results, you'll have to wait for NOAA to update their results.

Or accept the more recent research that BS posted that says 15 years periods in the adjusted temperatures are predicted by the models.

Either way you don't have a scientific leg to stand on.
litesong

Stanwood, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#37529
Jul 30, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

ol kinky coal wrote:
Land has zero value until it is made productive. It does not even have potential value until it is made accessible to the markets. The railroads made the worthless land of the American West accessible.
Excellent example of euro & transplanted euro thinking.....land that supported 100 million Native Tribal members was worth nothing...... until less than worthless, & diseased(both in body & mind) euros & transplanted euros killed off the Native Tribes & changed & polluted the land........ oh, then it gets value.

Yeah, only the values of euros & transplanted euros mean anything...... suppression at its best!
kristy

Oviedo, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#37530
Jul 30, 2013
 

Judged:

3

3

3

Fair Game wrote:
<quoted text>
You are trying to have your cake and eat it.
If there are no figures for ENSO-adjusted temperatures up to the present, then you can't claim that there is a 15 year flat period in the ENSO-adjusted temperatures.
Of course Nick Stokes is a competent scientist and has dome the analysis and his results show a significant trend over the period in the ENSO-adjusted temperatures.
If you don't want to accept his results, you'll have to wait for NOAA to update their results.
Or accept the more recent research that BS posted that says 15 years periods in the adjusted temperatures are predicted by the models.
Either way you don't have a scientific leg to stand on.
You can't have your cake and eat it either. You stated with no proof that ENSO-adjusted temperatures are strongly trending positive by showing a blogger's graph of a work in progress and refused to link the graph to this "competent" scientist. It is obvious the "competent" scientist is in no way posting these graphs declaring any kind of definitive conclusion. Just read the comments section, as there is lots of discussion going on about the methodology.

So I believe we are a standstill until NOAA decides to release an updated version of the ENSO-adjusted temperatures. In the meantime, scientists are trying to explain the pause.
chisholm

Columbus, OH

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#37531
Jul 30, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

kristy wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, that phrase does seem more like contentiousness rather than debate doesn't it? NOAA said this in their 2008 State of the Climate Report after discussing the pause in warming:
"Given the likelihood that internal variability contributed to the slowing of global temperature rise in the last decade, we expect that warming will resume in the next few years, consistent with predictions from near-term climate forecasts."
So if you have a problem with the statement I posted, take it up with NOAA, please. More debate would be nice rather than contentiousness.
I was speaking of you, of course, so trying to pass it off onto NASA is a bit disingenuous. You could at least take responsibility for repeating NASA's comment.

As to NASA, their phraseology could've been better, but I have to assume they meant that their graph would go back to following the general upward trend after a short-term dip or two of the kind any climate graph would be expected to take. Every single year's temperature isn't what's important, obviously, only the general trend over a longer period of years.

NASA made it sound, unfortunately, like warming had stopped and was starting again. That only encourages Deniers to take their comments the wrong way, unfortunately.
Coal is King

Hopkinsville, KY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#37532
Jul 30, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

chisholm wrote:
<quoted text>
You mean "valuable" only in the capitalist sense, I assume. Land with trees, vegetation, natural beauty, and native peoples on it obviously isn't "worthless."
Settlement of the West has ruined large parts of it, thank goodness that leaders like Teddy Roosevelt put aside large tracts to be free from capitalist "development" that would've destroyed it.
Land has real value only if it contributes something to the material needs of civilization: food, fuel, building materials, etc. Unutilized land inhabited by savages contributes nothing to the material needs of civilization. Therefore it is worthless.

“I Luv Carbon Dioxide”

Since: Dec 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#37533
Jul 30, 2013
 

Judged:

4

3

3

SpaceBlues wrote:
Why?
We've been emitting CO2 that way for a million years; mother nature has adapted by now. Don't panic, water vapor is a greenhouse gas; we wouldn't survive without that anymore than we can survive without carbon dioxide.

Since: Mar 09

Glenwood Springs, CO

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#37534
Jul 30, 2013
 

Judged:

2

1

1

Coal is King wrote:
<quoted text>
Land has real value only if it contributes something to the material needs of civilization: food, fuel, building materials, etc. Unutilized land inhabited by savages contributes nothing to the material needs of civilization. Therefore it is worthless.
That land had potential to provide material needs for the white man. It already was valuable to the Native Americans. Of course it was not worthless. BTW the way the USA paid France a nice sun of money for the Louisiana Purchase. Not worthless.

Since: Apr 08

"the green troll"

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#37535
Jul 30, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

kristy wrote:
<quoted text>
You can't have your cake and eat it either. You stated with no proof that ENSO-adjusted temperatures are strongly trending positive by showing a blogger's graph of a work in progress and refused to link the graph to this "competent" scientist. It is obvious the "competent" scientist is in no way posting these graphs declaring any kind of definitive conclusion. Just read the comments section, as there is lots of discussion going on about the methodology.
So I believe we are a standstill until NOAA decides to release an updated version of the ENSO-adjusted temperatures. In the meantime, scientists are trying to explain the pause.
You chose to believe what you want to believe is true even in the face of evidence that it isn't.

There is always discussion about the methodology, but nothing that questions the result: there is a positive trend for the last 15 years.

I don't believe for a minute that you will accept NOAA updated figures either: you will simply move on to a new excuse like deniers always do.

Yes, scientists are trying to explain the "pause", but that does not mean they doubt global warming is real or that it will continue.

http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/media/pdf/q/0/Pap...
chisholm

Columbus, OH

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#37537
Jul 30, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

1

Coal is King wrote:
<quoted text>
Land has real value only if it contributes something to the material needs of civilization: food, fuel, building materials, etc. Unutilized land inhabited by savages contributes nothing to the material needs of civilization. Therefore it is worthless.
So ignorant, backward, and regressive a statement I have to assume you are trolling with it, so I'll leave it at that. Collect angry, outraged responses somewhere else.
chisholm

Columbus, OH

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#37538
Jul 30, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>We've been emitting CO2 that way for a million years; mother nature has adapted by now. Don't panic, water vapor is a greenhouse gas; we wouldn't survive without that anymore than we can survive without carbon dioxide.
Perhaps he meant to suggest that including human exhalations in the C02 count was a fatuous idea? Perhaps even deliberately fatuous, in fact?

You do seem to post a lot of irrelevant comments as if they were answers to real questions, I must say.
Bargeman

Hopkinsville, KY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#37539
Jul 30, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Reading all the scientific gobbleygook on here is like listening to a bunch of idiot savants babbling minelessly to each other.
Bargeman

Hopkinsville, KY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#37540
Jul 30, 2013
 
chisholm wrote:
<quoted text>
So ignorant, backward, and regressive a statement I have to assume you are trolling with it, so I'll leave it at that. Collect angry, outraged responses somewhere else.
Actually that statement pretty much sums up how people thought about it in the 19th century. It's almost like the Coal King is a Rip Van Winkle that went to sleep in about 1890 and just woke up.
Cordwainer Trout

Elizabethtown, KY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#37541
Jul 30, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

It's the middle of summer and there were new record low temperatures across the mid-West, frost in Minnesota... not a word from the Climatologist in Chief.
LessHypeMoreFact

Toronto, Canada

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#37542
Jul 30, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Cordwainer Trout wrote:
It's the middle of summer and there were new record low temperatures across the mid-West, frost in Minnesota... not a word from the Climatologist in Chief.
What is your point?? You are experiencing cold weather. Cold weather will occur pretty much every year at some point. The issue HERE is global warming (a small but critical change in the AVERAGE GLOBAL temperature which can cause disruption in the 'usual climate norms'(climate change). Some places will be warmer, colder, wetter and drier. And which extremes will occur within the 'norms' even then.

The way to determine if your climate is changing is to have a 'baseline' of weather that says what conditions will occur say ones in a century, then see if their occurence is more or less frequent than that. There is a large and growing database of data that shows that climates ARE changing around the world. For example, the number of 'extreme heat' records is now much much more prevalent than the historical 'cold weather' extreme records.

By this we know that the CLIMATE is likely changing, even if day to day weather may hit 'too hot' and 'too cold' for some.
kristy

Oviedo, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#37545
Jul 31, 2013
 

Judged:

3

3

2

chisholm wrote:
<quoted text>
I was speaking of you, of course, so trying to pass it off onto NASA is a bit disingenuous. You could at least take responsibility for repeating NASA's comment.
As to NASA, their phraseology could've been better, but I have to assume they meant that their graph would go back to following the general upward trend after a short-term dip or two of the kind any climate graph would be expected to take. Every single year's temperature isn't what's important, obviously, only the general trend over a longer period of years.
NASA made it sound, unfortunately, like warming had stopped and was starting again. That only encourages Deniers to take their comments the wrong way, unfortunately.
My, my, my, aren't you being contentious. Using words like disingenuous and denier hardly leads to debate. Didn't you just post that I was guilty of not wanting a debate, just an argument? Funny how posting the words of NOAA (not NASA as you posted) makes me the one that is contentious and NOAA is disingenuous. It is obvious you are not looking for a debate, so I find your hypocrisy very amusing.
litesong

Stanwood, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#37546
Jul 31, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Cordwainer Trout wrote:
It's the middle of summer and there were new record low temperatures across the mid-West, frost in Minnesota...
The heat went to the Arctic, where temperatures have been mid-twenties defC(80degF)...... oh, yeah, & pushed Arctic cold to the south. Yeah....... winter or summer, heat is pushing Arctic cold to the south.

Since: Apr 08

"the green troll"

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#37547
Jul 31, 2013
 

Judged:

3

3

2

kristy wrote:
<quoted text>
My, my, my, aren't you being contentious. Using words like disingenuous and denier hardly leads to debate.
One can't have a debate on science with someone who doesn't understand science.

One can't have a scientific debate with someone who confuses scientific statements about one hemisphere of the Earth with statements about the globe as a whole; someone who confuses scientific statements about attribution of events with statements about attribution of a series of events; someone who confuses scientific statements about adjusted temperatures with statements about unadjusted temperatures...
kristy

Oviedo, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#37548
Jul 31, 2013
 

Judged:

3

3

2

litesong wrote:
<quoted text>
The heat went to the Arctic, where temperatures have been mid-twenties defC(80degF)...... oh, yeah, & pushed Arctic cold to the south. Yeah....... winter or summer, heat is pushing Arctic cold to the south.
OMG....did you really just post that? The temperatures in the Arctic have been 80 degrees F? I don't know where you get your information, but you need to find better sources or at least check your sources. The temperatures in the Arctic haven't gone above 35 degrees F and as of today, the Arctic is at freezing 32 F, way earlier than usual. For it to have been 80 F, that would be 300 Kelvin and the graph for the Arctic temperatures only goes to 280.

http://ocean.dmi.dk/arctic/meant80n.uk.php
kristy

Oviedo, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#37549
Jul 31, 2013
 

Judged:

4

3

2

Fair Game wrote:
<quoted text>
One can't have a debate on science with someone who doesn't understand science.
One can't have a scientific debate with someone who confuses scientific statements about one hemisphere of the Earth with statements about the globe as a whole; someone who confuses scientific statements about attribution of events with statements about attribution of a series of events; someone who confuses scientific statements about adjusted temperatures with statements about unadjusted temperatures...
I think you better give that speech to litesong.

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

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Showing posts 35,241 - 35,260 of45,437
|
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.

89 Users are viewing the Chicago Forum right now

Search the Chicago Forum:
Topic Updated Last By Comments
Topix Chitown Regulars (Aug '09) 3 min NWmoon 97,423
Ill. House Approves Legalizing Same-Sex Civil U... (Dec '10) 4 min Cali Girl 2014 48,675
Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 4 min John Galt 1,071,364
Four Dead in Bridgeview Head-On Collision 10 min In Your Face 69
Chicago Democrats a Protected Species on the Na... 10 min bensley reality 2
Amy 7-10 12 min Cass 5
Abby 7-10 26 min Cass 8
BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit contesting... (Jan '09) 47 min Jacques from Ottawa 173,533
•••
•••
•••

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 ]
•••