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 1,765)

Showing posts 35,281 - 35,300 of42,945
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#37573
Aug 1, 2013
 

Judged:

4

3

2

OzRitz wrote:
<quoted text>
Let's not mince words here, Foreign aid is only a drop in the ocean compared to the capitalism "globalisation machine". With a highly connected world and better logistics any Corporate empire can take advantage of third world Labor & resources to improve their bottom line. But don't think for a minute that climate concerns factor into their business model, for most it doesn't even appear on the list. So those same global forces undermine any work done trying to combat pollution and addressing clean energy concerns. One is working against the other, but in a conservative mind, it's always the handouts that are the problem not the profit makers. This is one of those complex problems of the modern world that conservatives just ignore thinking of the quick fixes of yesterday as a cure!
Did you fall off the wagon again?

Since: Jul 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#37574
Aug 1, 2013
 
SpaceBlues wrote:
<quoted text>Did you fall off the wagon again?
Nope, you either mis-read the post or I'd love you to explain to me where I am wrong in my observation of foreign aid for environment friendly projects competing with forces working against it.
Meaning there is not much gained building a huge solar array panel in some foreign entity while they are digging a huge coal mine 10 miles up the road.
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#37575
Aug 1, 2013
 

Judged:

4

3

2

OzRitz wrote:
<quoted text>
Nope, you either mis-read the post or I'd love you to explain to me where I am wrong in my observation of foreign aid for environment friendly projects competing with forces working against it.
Meaning there is not much gained building a huge solar array panel in some foreign entity while they are digging a huge coal mine 10 miles up the road.
Thanks for your civil reply to a post I did not post.

Alas it was posted maliciously .. by somebody else whom I don't even know.

This is the second time today.

Since: Apr 08

"the green troll"

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#37576
Aug 1, 2013
 
Fair Game wrote:
<quoted text>
Out come the big clown feet again.
kristy wrote:
<quoted text>
Now how am I supposed to know what you mean. But stop conflating weather with climate.
Told ya!

Since: Apr 08

"the green troll"

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#37577
Aug 1, 2013
 
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...
Add this to the list:

One can't have a scientific debate with someone who confuses scientific statements about daytime temperatures with statements about average daily temperature.

And what's happening in the Arctic is a climate shift, not just weather.
chisholm

Columbus, OH

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#37578
Aug 2, 2013
 

Judged:

1

kristy wrote:
<quoted text>
By 1974, many scientists were predicting global cooling. The IFIAS met in Bonn Germany in 1974 and put out this statement: "The facts of present climate change are such that the most optimistic experts would assign near certainty to major crop failures within a decade......edit....So along comes global warming and again, we have to do something to fix it, NOW, and it is the same plan as for the scare of global cooling, funnel money from developed countries to developing countries to avoid the calamities of climate change.
Continued next post.
Basically, a big pile of right wing paranoia and hooey. "States rights" and nationalism are outdated ways of thinking, and you're simply going to see more international control on everything in our world - or we're going to make ourselves extinct. Climate is just one issue where this is going to become important.

I'm not a big fan of the carbon tax thing, myself, though...to me it just shifts things around and continues to enable polluters rather than moving to new technologies and obsoleting the old ones.

Your comments about climate are mostly discredited nonsense, no one but Deniers buys that 'scientists were all behind global cooling in the '70s' crap any more. And even if some did believe that was the case, we know they were simply wrong - the globe isn't cooling, it's warming. Period. There's no real debate there at all.

Finally, the World Bank and IMF don't move our precious money into those nasty, undeserving thirld-world countries...they PREY on those countries. Huge loans, crippling repayment conditions, imposed sanctions and austerity programs which hurt average citizens...those aren't the actions of radicals shovelling our cash into Africa but bloodsucking capitalist leeches making a buck off of Africa, like Europeans and Americans have done for centuries.

Get a clue, lady. You don't have one now.
chisholm

Columbus, OH

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#37579
Aug 2, 2013
 
kristy wrote:
<quoted text>
Now how am I supposed to know what you mean. But stop conflating weather with climate.
clap...clap...clap

Excellently played, very disingenuous...:)
B as in B S as in S

Minneapolis, MN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#37582
Aug 2, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

SpaceBlues wrote:
<quoted text>LOL.
Another nonscience post. Not debate-worthy.
Kettle Pot Black LOL
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#37583
Aug 2, 2013
 

Judged:

4

3

2

B as in B S as in S wrote:
<quoted text>
Kettle Pot Black LOL
LOL but you are all wet.
B as in B S as in S

Minneapolis, MN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#37584
Aug 2, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Fair Game wrote:
<quoted text>
<quoted text>
Told ya!
Skillfully argued my good man!
Perhaps the most compelling defense of the AGW belief system to date :-)
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#37585
Aug 2, 2013
 

Judged:

4

3

2

chisholm wrote:
<quoted text>
clap...clap...clap
Excellently played,...:
knock knock ... that poster is furthest from this adverb.

Since: Jul 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#37586
Aug 2, 2013
 
Perhaps a look into the USA of the future.

http://www.dvice.com/2013-8-2/how-hot-will-un...
JBH

Delta, Canada

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#37587
Aug 3, 2013
 
++++++++

19 hrs ago | Posted by: roboblogger
Russia a G8 'outlier' for granting asylum to Snowden: Baird
Full story: CTV
Canada has added its voice to those criticizing Russia for granting asylum to U.S. National Security Agency leaker Edward Snowden

++++++===

This current Conservative government does not speak for the consensus of people of Canada about Snowden case. A Great majority of Canadian people support Snowden, just like those in USA and people all around the world.

This is a free country and people can think whatever and however they think in a democracy.

This present government has not reflected nor represented the sentiments and positions of most Canadians in the democracy, like former one.

http://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/canada-joins-n... ?

Since: Jul 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#37588
Aug 3, 2013
 
JBH wrote:
++++++++
19 hrs ago | Posted by: roboblogger
Russia a G8 'outlier' for granting asylum to Snowden: Baird
Full story: CTV
Canada has added its voice to those criticizing Russia for granting asylum to U.S. National Security Agency leaker Edward Snowden
++++++===
This current Conservative government does not speak for the consensus of people of Canada about Snowden case. A Great majority of Canadian people support Snowden, just like those in USA and people all around the world.
This is a free country and people can think whatever and however they think in a democracy.
This present government has not reflected nor represented the sentiments and positions of most Canadians in the democracy, like former one.
http://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/canada-joins-n... ?
The catch-22 of powerful countries is there has to be some point where the media can be controlled. China has it down to a fine art form. But in democracies these days it tends to be owned by less competitors & driven by the likes of Murdoch & co. Then the news you get may be filtered by a political bent or exchanging favours for those in high office. The integrity of journalism gets compromised, as was highlighted dramatically in Britain. So sites like Wikileaks need to be around otherwise we would never know what goes on. However whistle blowers should only get protection if they are exposing crime or illegal activity otherwise it's their own actions that are criminal. Things like the BP oil spill, Chernobyl, the nuke meltdown in Japan go through damage control first before the public gets to know the real story. The US learnt it's lesson from Vietnam where journalists were filing stories on the nightly news that was fuelling the anti war lobby. So when Iraq came along everything was staged managed with tight control on what reporters could or could not do. Aljazeera gave the other side of the story with those so called smart bombs only taking out the bad guys you never saw. This infuriated the likes of Rumsfield & co & seriously thought about targeting their headquarters in the middle east, so it highlights the power of the media if not controlled.
kristy

Oviedo, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#37589
Aug 3, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Fair Game wrote:
<quoted text>
Add this to the list:
One can't have a scientific debate with someone who confuses scientific statements about daytime temperatures with statements about average daily temperature.
And what's happening in the Arctic is a climate shift, not just weather.
litesong said this:“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.”

The most widely used definition of the Arctic, the area north of the Arctic Circle, where, on the June solstice, the sun does not set is used in astronomical and some geographical contexts. However, in a context of climate, the two most widely used definitions in this context are the area north of the northern tree line, and the area in which the average temperature of the warmest month is less than 10 °C (50 °F), which are nearly coincident over most land areas (NSIDC).
This definition of the Arctic can be further divided into four different regions:
• The Arctic Basin includes the Arctic Ocean within the average minimum extent of sea ice.
• The Canadian Arctic Archipelago includes the large and small islands, except Greenland, on the Canadian side of the Arctic, and the waters between them.
• The entire island of Greenland, although its ice sheet and ice-free coastal regions have different climatic conditions.
• The Arctic waters that are not covered by sea ice in late summer, including Hudson Bay, Baffin Bay, Ungava Bay, the Davis, Denmark, Hudson and Bering Straits, and the Labrador, Norwegian,(ice-free all year), Greenland, Baltic, Barents (southern part ice-free all year), Kara, Laptev, Chukchi, Okhotsk, sometimes Beaufort and Bering Seas.

The subarctic is a region in the Northern Hemisphere immediately south of the true Arctic and covering much of Alaska, Canada, Iceland, the north of Scandinavia, Siberia, northern Mongolia, much of Scotland and even parts of northern England. Generally, subarctic regions fall between 50°N and 70°N latitude, depending on local climates.

Litesong in no way specified that he/she was speaking of subarctic temperatures and I showed that the Arctic in no way has had 80 degree temperatures as shown by the graph I posted. In order for there to have been 80 F temperatures in the Arctic, you know that the mean would have to be much greater than 35 F.
kristy

Oviedo, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#37590
Aug 3, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

1

chisholm wrote:
<quoted text>
Basically, a big pile of right wing paranoia and hooey. "States rights" and nationalism are outdated ways of thinking, and you're simply going to see more international control on everything in our world - or we're going to make ourselves extinct.
Your comments about climate are mostly discredited nonsense, no one but Deniers buys that 'scientists were all behind global cooling in the '70s' crap any more. And even if some did believe that was the case, we know they were simply wrong - the globe isn't cooling, it's warming. Period. There's no real debate there at all.
I wasn't arguing whether global cooling or global warming was happening, my example is what politicians and world leaders do in the name of a crisis either real or perceived. At the same time the global cooling "crisis" was picking up steam, so too was the population bomb. Governments and banks and corporations take a crisis and use it; in this case, the starvation of the masses.

So in your utopia of international control, who controls the money system and the economies of all the nations around the globe? Who decides how each country should spend their money? Well wake up, because we are already in your utopia and you don't even realize it. All you see are those nasty corporations, but you don't see how those nasty corporations get the ability to do what they do. If you want to know who is destroying the environment and creating corporate welfare, look no further than the IMF and the World Bank. IMF policies promote corporate welfare.

• The IMF is imposing a fundamentally flawed development model:

Unlike the path historically followed by the industrialized countries, the IMF forces countries from the Global South to prioritize export production over the development of diversified domestic economies. Nearly 80 percent of all malnourished children in the developing world live in countries where farmers have been forced to shift from food production for local consumption to the production of export crops destined for wealthy countries. The IMF also requires countries to eliminate assistance to domestic industries while providing benefits for multinational corporations -- such as forcibly lowering labor costs. Small businesses and farmers can't compete. Sweatshop workers in free trade zones set up by the IMF and World Bank earn starvation wages, live in deplorable conditions, and are unable to provide for their families. The cycle of poverty is perpetuated, not eliminated, as governments' debt to the IMF grows.

I suggest you read this, because this is your international control in action: Top 10 reasons to oppose the IMF

http://www.globalexchange.org/resources/wbimf...

You stated this:“Basically, a big pile of right wing paranoia and hooey. "States rights" and nationalism are outdated ways of thinking, and you're simply going to see more international control on everything in our world - or we're going to make ourselves extinct.”

Let me ask you this. Where do we the people have the most control? That would be our local and state governments. As our Federal government takes more and more control away from local and state, they are taking more control away from you and me. Retired Farmer recently complained about a canned response from his US senator. RF stated that senator was just telling the people what he thought they wanted to hear. That’s exactly what the UN/IMF/World Bank do. They tell us they are here to keep peace, stop poverty and starvation, but in reality they are doing the opposite. You tell me we have to have more international control, but who does this international entity answer to? Do they run for election? Do we get a say as to who makes the decisions? Or are they just appointed with no accountability?
kristy

Oviedo, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#37591
Aug 3, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

OzRitz wrote:
<quoted text>
The catch-22 of powerful countries is there has to be some point where the media can be controlled. China has it down to a fine art form. But in democracies these days it tends to be owned by less competitors & driven by the likes of Murdoch & co. Then the news you get may be filtered by a political bent or exchanging favours for those in high office. The integrity of journalism gets compromised, as was highlighted dramatically in Britain. So sites like Wikileaks need to be around otherwise we would never know what goes on. However whistle blowers should only get protection if they are exposing crime or illegal activity otherwise it's their own actions that are criminal. Things like the BP oil spill, Chernobyl, the nuke meltdown in Japan go through damage control first before the public gets to know the real story. The US learnt it's lesson from Vietnam where journalists were filing stories on the nightly news that was fuelling the anti war lobby. So when Iraq came along everything was staged managed with tight control on what reporters could or could not do. Aljazeera gave the other side of the story with those so called smart bombs only taking out the bad guys you never saw. This infuriated the likes of Rumsfield & co & seriously thought about targeting their headquarters in the middle east, so it highlights the power of the media if not controlled.
Just wondering your thoughts on MSNBC. Watch this video and then explain to me where the outrage on MSNBC is now.

http://www.youtube.com/watch...

Since: Jul 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#37592
Aug 3, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

kristy wrote:
<quoted text>
Just wondering your thoughts on MSNBC. Watch this video and then explain to me where the outrage on MSNBC is now.
http://www.youtube.com/watch...
PBS did a long doco on this in 2007. Fact is I have no problem with anyone monitoring net traffic for clues on terror activity. But it does have the potential for "Hoover" like files on high profile people that could be used for other purposes such as blackmail to obtain funding etc. So someone like Snowden exposing this was NOT new, it was known for a long time. All American allies have this type of surveillance as the new battle grounds have no borders either these days. At it's worse is the Mcarthy era when the communists replaced the terrorists but too many innocent ppl got caught in that web of paranoia. Which is why I favour those wikileaks type organisations. There needs to be balance. Because there are plenty of examples how Murdoch uses his power in numerous countries to influence political outcomes in elections when his bottom line is under threat. He played a major role in England throwing Brown out of office. He can also switch sides for precisely that reason as well. Right now he is doing exactly that in Australia because the current government is rolling out high speed cable broadband country wide which is a threat to his sat cable network profits. As a result every newspaper & media outlet has anti government articles 365 days a year while he controls up to 75% of media. All things corporate don't always add up to what is good and wholesome. Yet tea party type conservatives keep ranting on about minimalist governments but that reality ends up government by corporate whom no one elects.

http://www.filmsforaction.org/watch/spying_on...
kristy

Oviedo, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#37593
Aug 4, 2013
 

Judged:

3

3

3

OzRitz wrote:
<quoted text>
PBS did a long doco on this in 2007. Fact is I have no problem with anyone monitoring net traffic for clues on terror activity. But it does have the potential for "Hoover" like files on high profile people that could be used for other purposes such as blackmail to obtain funding etc. So someone like Snowden exposing this was NOT new, it was known for a long time. All American allies have this type of surveillance as the new battle grounds have no borders either these days. At it's worse is the Mcarthy era when the communists replaced the terrorists but too many innocent ppl got caught in that web of paranoia. Which is why I favour those wikileaks type organisations. There needs to be balance. Because there are plenty of examples how Murdoch uses his power in numerous countries to influence political outcomes in elections when his bottom line is under threat. He played a major role in England throwing Brown out of office. He can also switch sides for precisely that reason as well. Right now he is doing exactly that in Australia because the current government is rolling out high speed cable broadband country wide which is a threat to his sat cable network profits. As a result every newspaper & media outlet has anti government articles 365 days a year while he controls up to 75% of media. All things corporate don't always add up to what is good and wholesome. Yet tea party type conservatives keep ranting on about minimalist governments but that reality ends up government by corporate whom no one elects.
http://www.filmsforaction.org/watch/spying_on...
My point about Olbermann and MSNBC wasn't about whether FISA is right or wrong, it's about how it is portrayed in the media. When MSNBC reported on it during the Bush years, it was fascist. Do you hear anyone on MSNBC calling Obama a fascist? He continued the monitoring and even expanded it. Whether or not you think it is okay is not the issue. It's how it was reported. You claim Al Jazeera is non-biased, but yet you don't show how Dave Marash quit in 2008 due to Al Jazeera's anti-American slant or the reporters who quit in 2012 due to bias in the Syria coverage or the reporters who quit in 2013 due to Al Jazeera's bias towards the Muslim Brotherhood. You also don't show how the majority of the American Media slants stories to change policy all the time, prime example is the total monopolizing of all news to show that a Hispanic male shooting a black male is somehow white rage and laws much be changed. But then not reporting things like McDonald versus Chicago in which a black man was denied a permit for a gun to protect himself in his crime-ridden neighborhood. You bring up Murdoch but yet don't bring up that until very recently GE owned NBC and the CEO of NBC was an adviser to Obama and that GE did very well in profits while not paying any taxes in 2010. How is that you preach objectivity, but don't even do it yourself.

Since: Mar 09

Wichita, KS

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#37594
Aug 4, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

kristy wrote:
<quoted text>
My point about Olbermann and MSNBC wasn't about whether FISA is right or wrong, it's about how it is portrayed in the media. When MSNBC reported on it during the Bush years, it was fascist. Do you hear anyone on MSNBC calling Obama a fascist? He continued the monitoring and even expanded it. Whether or not you think it is okay is not the issue. It's how it was reported. You claim Al Jazeera is non-biased, but yet you don't show how Dave Marash quit in 2008 due to Al Jazeera's anti-American slant or the reporters who quit in 2012 due to bias in the Syria coverage or the reporters who quit in 2013 due to Al Jazeera's bias towards the Muslim Brotherhood. You also don't show how the majority of the American Media slants stories to change policy all the time, prime example is the total monopolizing of all news to show that a Hispanic male shooting a black male is somehow white rage and laws much be changed. But then not reporting things like McDonald versus Chicago in which a black man was denied a permit for a gun to protect himself in his crime-ridden neighborhood. You bring up Murdoch but yet don't bring up that until very recently GE owned NBC and the CEO of NBC was an adviser to Obama and that GE did very well in profits while not paying any taxes in 2010. How is that you preach objectivity, but don't even do it yourself.
Yep, the corporations and banks do control a good amount of the media. That is one of the most frightening things about our democratic form of government. If we do not get the unbiased facts, how are we going to make good decisions? The Murdoch bunch is undoubtedly more biased than most, however we do need more independent news sources. The National Enquirer sensationalist news and the poisoning by the extreme left and right wing media is undoubtedly harming our country.

The internet is a good possibility but the news sources are controlled by the organized sources like API etc. Mostly the internet simply rehashes junk from these sources. Of all the boogie men that FOX News presents, they fail to mention how the major corporations and banks are controlling the media.

NPR and PBS have both gone into this deeply. I am more apt to follow them than other sources. Of course the biased conservatives claim that they are liberal. I suppose by their definition, they are. But they are much less biased than the cons are.

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

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Showing posts 35,281 - 35,300 of42,945
|
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.

94 Users are viewing the Chicago Forum right now

Search the Chicago Forum:
Topic Updated Last By Comments
Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 6 min flack 1,032,772
Topix Chitown Regulars (Aug '09) 9 min Toj 96,033
{keep A word drop A word} (Oct '11) 14 min boundary painter 4,024
Messianic Jews say they are persecuted in Israel (Jun '08) 14 min STEFANO COLONNA 65,004
Song Titles Only (group/artist in parenthesis m... (Mar '10) 18 min boundary painter 7,546
Abby 4-17 18 min ScarletandOlive 21
Amy 4-17 23 min boundary painter 15
BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit contesting... (Jan '09) 1 hr Jacques from Ottawa 167,425
•••
•••
•••

Chicago Jobs

•••
•••
•••

Chicago People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]
•••