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
35,741 - 35,760 of 46,282 Comments Last updated 22 min ago

Since: Jul 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#38089
Aug 17, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Asitshouldbe wrote:
We're actually in a cooling trend for last 8 yrs.
Why do we have recorded in history that it was hotter before the industrial age ?
Lib liars want to bring our way of life down, period, while the rest of the world pollutes at will.
Weather is nothing but cyclical.
When you throw out the lib card, you give yourself away.

You might want to check out this link on how Fox news is one of the driving forces for the denial movement. Climate is NOT a lib issue, it's a global issue that should have bi-partisan support.

Extract:

"The question now is how long the Republican Party's global warming denial and obstruction of climate solutions can last in the face of these growing numbers of Americans (including Republicans) demanding climate solutions. Climate misinformation from Fox News and other conservative media outlets may be stemming the tide against climate denial, but the tide is rising, both literally and figuratively."

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/climat...

Since: Mar 09

Wichita, KS

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#38090
Aug 17, 2013
 
kristy wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh so now in order to disprove AGW, you have to show an EXACT cause whereas to prove AGW it can just be plausible, even if all models fail to live up to obsevations. So far the skeptics who have said we are warming and that CO2 does contribute, but more like 15% are more accurate than the models. These scientists have said the warming would not be as catastrophic as the claims from the IPCC. So their argument is more plausible than the AGW hypothesis.
That is the way science works. The theory has been established that CO2 introduced into the atmosphere by burning fossil fuels is causing the planet to warm. The only way to derail the theory is to prove that something else is causing the current unexpected warming, not CO2. So far all you have said is that it is not warming as much as the models say it should for the short term.
kristy

Oviedo, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#38091
Aug 17, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Mothra wrote:
<quoted text>
With the thousands of predictions made, ONE seems to be accurate thereby validating all the failed ones?
Reminds me of Hype posting a single article about a researcher who itemized his expenses from a grant, as "proof" that all the others do the same.
Extrapolate much?
This was wasn't eve accurate. If it was accurate, why did the Met Office throw it out? The prediction was for 2004-2014. At the time they made the prediction they already knew we were in a pause, so they just predicted a few more years of the pause and then temperatures would come roaring back with 3/5 years after 2009 being warmer then 1998. They then threw out this prediction and revised it in 2011 to this: During the period 2012-2016 global average temperatures will rise between 0.36 C and 0.72 C above the long term (1971-2000) average with values most likely to be about 0.54 C higher than average. They then threw out that prediction and revised it again in 2012 to now say that global temperatures up to 2017 will most likely be 0.43 deg C above the 1971 -2000 average, with an error of +/- 0.15 deg C.

There is no way a 10-year prediction is accurate if it has already been revised 2 times.

Here is an overlay with the 2011 prediction with the updated 2012 prediction.

http://bobtisdale.files.wordpress.com/2013/01...
kristy

Oviedo, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#38092
Aug 17, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

gcaveman1 wrote:
Belief.
Gee, caveman won:
The Earth is warming.
We are causing it.
We can do something about it.
<><><>< ><><><> <><><>< ><><>
Krusty believes in an international conspiracy involving thousands of scientists, generals, bankers, politicians, and world leaders, past and present, who plan to take over control of the world.
Something like:
The Illuminati trace their origins back thousands of years to their conception as a result of the genetic inbreeding between a reptilian extraterrestrial race and humanity. Their modern origin, however, traces back to the 1760s and a man named Adam Weishaupt, who defected from the Catholic church and organized the Illuminati, financed by the International Bankers. Since then, according to the Illuminati, their top goal has been to achieve a “one world government” and to subjugate all religions and governments in the process. The Illuminati thus attribute all wars since the French Revolution as having been fomented by them in their pursuit of their goals.
Weishaupt wrote out a master plan in the 1770s outlining the Illuminati’s goals, finishing on May 1, 1776. According to the Illuminati, this great day is still commemorated by Communist nations in the form of May Day. At the time Weishaupt’s ideology was first introduced, Britain and France were the two greatest world powers, and so the Illuminati claimed credit for having kindled the Revolutionary War in order to weaken the British Empire and the French Revolution to destroy the French Empire..........Under new leadership by an American general named Albert Pike, the Illuminati worked out a blueprint for three world wars throughout the 20th century that would lead to a one world government by the end of the 20th century. According to the Illuminati, the First World War was fought to destroy Czarism in Russia (the Illuminati had held a grudge against the Czarist regime since Russia had thwarted its plans for a one world government after the Napoleonic Wars) and to establish Russia as a stronghold of Communism.
Likewise, the Illuminati claim that the Second World War pitted the Fascists against the “political Zionists” so as to build up International Communism until it equaled in strength that of the United Christendom. According to Illuminati plans, the Third World War, which is to be fought between the political Zionists and the leaders of the Moslem world, will drain the international community to the extent that they will have no choice but to form a one world government.
<><><>< ><><><> <><><>< >
Belief.
You said you were going to blow me out of the water and show me how wrong I am. Instead you post some jibberish. In order to blow me out of the water, you have to at least show where my information is wrong about the funding of the Adaptation Fund, wealth distribution, World Bank, IMF, poverty in Africa, governments funding climate change science.

But I know you are busy worrying about all the scientists who are deniers and the complex web of denialism. You know all of them are paid by big oil to deny. There is no other reason for them to deny. They hate science. They still think the Earth is flat.
kristy

Oviedo, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#38093
Aug 17, 2013
 

Judged:

2

1

1

No Warming wrote:
Sarcasm sucks, but when the subject goes from climate to asteroids and witch burning what next.
Funny!! Here is what an exchange would have been like back in the day:

Village Alarmist: The village has a witch, we must burn her at the stake for the safety of the village.

Village skeptic: Why do you think this person is a witch?

Village alarmist: She was in the town square and fell to the ground and started writhing and screaming. Then the next day, the town hall was burned to the ground.

Village skeptic: Why do you think she was responsible?

Village alarmist: What else could it be? Prove it’s something else. We must burn her tonight.

Village skeptic: But wait, Why don’t we wait and see if there are other explanations for the fire.

(The alarmist then gathers the entire village and tells them horrible catastrophic things will happen unless they burn the witch).

Village alarmist: We have no time to wait. This is an absolute. No debate. This is settled. We will burn her tonight for the safety of the village and for our future children.

kristy

Oviedo, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#38094
Aug 17, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

OzRitz wrote:
I'm sure half these deniers would be more happy with a large asteroid heading towards Earth to finish us all off rather than a unseen enemy like man made warming. That way they could argue about its trajectory while they wait and die defiant.
All through history its been the same with the flat earth ppl, the plaque was caused by witches so they were burnt at the stake. Science always had to play a backward step until evidence rolls over them like a steam roller. One wonders what the steam roller will be with warming, one hurricane too many or the cost of living.
What is one hurricane too many, just so I know.
kristy

Oviedo, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#38095
Aug 17, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

OzRitz wrote:
<quoted text>
You may not like the comparison, but when ignorance is viewed by historians in years to come. I'm sorry but you guys will be right up there with the witch burners. Science is real, its not a religion nor is it a myth.
You all are just too funny.
kristy

Oviedo, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#38096
Aug 17, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

No Warming wrote:
This is ignorance :
"Britain’s Met Office projects 2014 temperature likely to be 0.3 degrees Celsius warmer than 2004.“Here is the climate forecast for the next decade [2007-2014]; although global warming will be held in check for a few years, it will come roaring back to send the mercury rising before 2014. This is the prediction of the first computer model of the global climate designed to make forecasts over a timescale of around a decade, developed by scientists at the Met Office. The new model developed at the Met's Hadley Centre in Exeter, and described in the journal Science, predicts that warming will slow during the next few years but then speed up again, and that at least half of the years after 2009 will be warmer than 1998, the warmest year on record.
Over the 10-year period [2007-2014] as a whole, climate continues to warm and 2014 is likely to be 0.3 deg C [0.3 degrees Celsius] warmer than 2004. The overall trend in warming is driven by greenhouse gas emissions but this warming effect will be broadly cancelled out over the next few years by the changing patterns of the ocean temperatures.”(Roger Highfield, Science Editor,“Global warming forecast predicts rise in 2014,” The Daily Telegraph, London, England, United Kingdom, August 9, 2007 reporting findings in Doug M. Smith, Stephen Cusack, Andrew W. Colman, Chris K. Folland, Glen R. Harris, and James M. Murphy,“Improved Surface Temperature Prediction for the Coming Decade from a Global Climate Model,” Science, August 10, 2007 317: 796-799 DOI: 10.1126/science.1139540)"
That seems to me like a hit right in the middle of the goddamed bullseye! The only data missing is the year we haven't experienced yet (2014). I guess we'll have to wait and see. But it appears that it was not only predicted, but explained as well.
And here is the record since 2004.
Year
HadCRUT4
NOAA NCDC
NASA GISS
WMO Average
2012 0.44±0.10 0.45 0.44 0.45
2011 0.40±0.09 0.41 0.44 0.42
2010 0.54±0.09 0.53 0.56 0.54
2009 0.49±0.09 0.47 0.5 0.48
2008 0.38±0.09 0.38 0.37 0.38
2007 0.48±0.09 0.46 0.52 0.49
2006 0.49±0.09 0.47 0.48 0.48
2005 0.53±0.09 0.52 0.55 0.54
2004 0.44±0.09 0.45 0.41 0.43
Where is .3C warming.
In order for any part of the prediction to come true, 2014 would have to end up at 0.74.

Since: Mar 09

Wichita, KS

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#38097
Aug 17, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

kristy wrote:
<quoted text>
You said you were going to blow me out of the water and show me how wrong I am. Instead you post some jibberish. In order to blow me out of the water, you have to at least show where my information is wrong about the funding of the Adaptation Fund, wealth distribution, World Bank, IMF, poverty in Africa, governments funding climate change science.
But I know you are busy worrying about all the scientists who are deniers and the complex web of denialism. You know all of them are paid by big oil to deny. There is no other reason for them to deny. They hate science. They still think the Earth is flat.
Even if this were so it does nothing to discredit climate science. If your conspiracy is true, it is obvious that the conspiratists would use anything that would further their cause. Even global warming. That does nothing to show that the premise of global warming is wrong. It simply says that your conspiratists will use it to further their cause.....

Since: Mar 09

Wichita, KS

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#38098
Aug 17, 2013
 
kristy wrote:
<quoted text>
Funny!! Here is what an exchange would have been like back in the day:
Village Alarmist: The village has a witch, we must burn her at the stake for the safety of the village.
Village skeptic: Why do you think this person is a witch?
Village alarmist: She was in the town square and fell to the ground and started writhing and screaming. Then the next day, the town hall was burned to the ground.
Village skeptic: Why do you think she was responsible?
Village alarmist: What else could it be? Prove it’s something else. We must burn her tonight.
Village skeptic: But wait, Why don’t we wait and see if there are other explanations for the fire.
(The alarmist then gathers the entire village and tells them horrible catastrophic things will happen unless they burn the witch).
Village alarmist: We have no time to wait. This is an absolute. No debate. This is settled. We will burn her tonight for the safety of the village and for our future children.
LOL, you are writhing and screaming.
kristy

Oviedo, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#38099
Aug 17, 2013
 

Judged:

2

1

1

OzRitz wrote:
<quoted text>
When you throw out the lib card, you give yourself away.
You might want to check out this link on how Fox news is one of the driving forces for the denial movement. Climate is NOT a lib issue, it's a global issue that should have bi-partisan support.
Extract:
"The question now is how long the Republican Party's global warming denial and obstruction of climate solutions can last in the face of these growing numbers of Americans (including Republicans) demanding climate solutions. Climate misinformation from Fox News and other conservative media outlets may be stemming the tide against climate denial, but the tide is rising, both literally and figuratively."
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/climat...
Just wondering do you give yourself away only if you throw out the lib card? Is it giving yourself away when you throw out the Rush/Beck/Fox/right-wing/chris tian/denial complex card?
kristy

Oviedo, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#38100
Aug 17, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

1

OzRitz wrote:
You might read this article from the guardian. It explains the way you guys distort data.
http://www.theguardian.com/science/2013/jul/2...
All I got from this article was how much they don't know and what they need to learn, but that somehow that doesn't change anything and that they again prove they really have no clue by giving another bad prediction.

From the article:

Recent slowdown in the upward march of global temperatures is likely to be the result of the slow warming of the deep oceans, British scientists said on Monday.

(But then they said this:)

Sutton said more research was needed on the effects of warming on the deep oceans, as observations of deep ocean temperatures have only been carried out in detail over the past decade and more are needed.

(Then the article said this:)
The Met Office warned early in the summer that the UK could be in for a decade of "washout" summers, like those of the past six years, because of the effect of climate change on global weather systems, partly as a result of changes in wind patterns caused by the melting Arctic.

But no sooner had the meteorologists made their prediction than the weather bucked this trend, with a shift in the Atlantic's jet stream air circulation system giving rise to high-pressure weather fronts and a long period of settled sunny weather.
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#38101
Aug 17, 2013
 
Some clowns whine again because they don't understand how science progresses. It's their own fault.

hehehehee
Mothra

Phoenix, AZ

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#38102
Aug 17, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Patriot AKA Bozo wrote:
<quoted text>
That is the way science works. The theory has been established that CO2 introduced into the atmosphere by burning fossil fuels is causing the planet to warm. The only way to derail the theory is to prove that something else is causing the current unexpected warming, not CO2. So far all you have said is that it is not warming as much as the models say it should for the short term.
Gee... what if the planet isn't warming?

What if the 300ppm tipping point is passed? Oh... I mean 350. No, wait now it's 400, or maybe 450.

So hard to keep track of those moving goalposts.
gcaveman1

Bay Springs, MS

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#38103
Aug 17, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

No Warming wrote:
This is ignorance :

And here is the record since 2004.
Year
HadCRUT4
NOAA NCDC
NASA GISS
WMO Average
2012 0.44±0.10 0.45 0.44 0.45
2011 0.40±0.09 0.41 0.44 0.42
2010 0.54±0.09 0.53 0.56 0.54
2009 0.49±0.09 0.47 0.5 0.48
2008 0.38±0.09 0.38 0.37 0.38
2007 0.48±0.09 0.46 0.52 0.49
2006 0.49±0.09 0.47 0.48 0.48
2005 0.53±0.09 0.52 0.55 0.54
2004 0.44±0.09 0.45 0.41 0.43
Where is .3C warming.
Are your figures correct? Are these C or F?

You do realize that 0.44 is more than 0.3? And that the average of the first column is 0.465?
gcaveman1

Bay Springs, MS

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#38104
Aug 17, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

kristy wrote:
<quoted text>
You said you were going to blow me out of the water and show me how wrong I am. Instead you post some jibberish. In order to blow me out of the water, you have to at least show where my information is wrong about the funding of the Adaptation Fund, wealth distribution, World Bank, IMF, poverty in Africa, governments funding climate change science.
But I know you are busy worrying about all the scientists who are deniers and the complex web of denialism. You know all of them are paid by big oil to deny. There is no other reason for them to deny. They hate science. They still think the Earth is flat.
You've already blown yourself out of the water.

Anyone who goes for the Illuminati conspiracy is easily recognizable as gullible and incapable of critical thinking. Debating a nutcase on anything is futile.

Like communism, you can make it look real good on paper, but leaving out free will and human nature makes all the connections collapse.
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#38105
Aug 17, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Mothra wrote:
<quoted text>
Gee... what if the planet isn't warming?
What if the 300ppm tipping point is passed? Oh... I mean 350. No, wait now it's 400, or maybe 450.
So hard to keep track of those moving goalposts.
You shout into the wind. Are you qualified to whine about climate science?

NO. About the last election? Perhaps.

“Let's X Change!!”

Since: Feb 09

B4 HOPE Is Gone...

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#38106
Aug 17, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

SpaceBlues wrote:
Some clowns whine again because they don't understand how science progresses. It's their own fault.
hehehehee
in that case, son, stop whining and try to figure it out. It's not good science or good manners to whine about unproven hypotheses.....and claim they're settled science.
Mothra

Phoenix, AZ

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#38107
Aug 17, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

SpaceBlues wrote:
<quoted text>You shout into the wind. Are you qualified to whine about climate science?
NO. About the last election? Perhaps.
blah, blah, blah....

So if it's not piss-ant word games, you're onto inane blather.

How long did you spend in 3rd grade?

“I Luv Carbon Dioxide”

Since: Dec 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#38108
Aug 17, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

kristy wrote:
Your iphone uses more energy than a refrigerator:
The average iPhone uses more energy than a midsize refrigerator, says a new paper by Mark Mills, CEO of Digital Power Group, a tech investment advisory. A midsize refrigerator that qualifies for the Environmental Protection Agency's Energy Star rating uses about 322 kW-h a year, while your iPhone uses about 361 kW-h if you stack up wireless connections, data usage, and battery charging.
http://theweek.com/article/index/248273/your-... #
Communicating information takes energy, they would control our energy use. If you value free speech, look for an experimental test of climate change mitigation or man made global climate change before you let the government tell you how, when or where you can use energy and fuel.

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

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

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) 3 min Stu Rumsfeld 1,099,382
Ill. House Approves Legalizing Same-Sex Civil U... (Dec '10) 6 min observation 49,425
One kilometre high and counting (Jul '07) 23 min TW_sugar_daddio 31
BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit contesting... (Jan '09) 45 min Jacques from Ottawa 177,277
Israeli troops begin Gaza pullout as Hamas decl... (Jan '09) 1 hr TRD 68,341
Topix Chitown Regulars (Aug '09) 1 hr Sublime1 97,900
Abby 8/24/14 1 hr RACE 13
•••
•••

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 ]
•••