Once slow-moving threat, global warmi...

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

There are 59545 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.

kristy

New Smyrna Beach, FL

#38095 Aug 17, 2013
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

New Smyrna Beach, FL

#38096 Aug 17, 2013
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

Location hidden

#38097 Aug 17, 2013
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

Location hidden

#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

New Smyrna Beach, FL

#38099 Aug 17, 2013
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

New Smyrna Beach, FL

#38100 Aug 17, 2013
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

United States

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

hehehehee
Mothra

United States

#38102 Aug 17, 2013
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

#38103 Aug 17, 2013
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

#38104 Aug 17, 2013
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

United States

#38105 Aug 17, 2013
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.

“BET DAP”

Since: Feb 09

GOOM BOWN

#38106 Aug 17, 2013
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

United States

#38107 Aug 17, 2013
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

Home, sweet home.

#38108 Aug 17, 2013
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.
SpaceBlues

United States

#38109 Aug 17, 2013
gcaveman1 wrote:
<quoted text>
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?
Let's see if wormingly replies..

A can of worms, really.

Good one.
SpaceBlues

United States

#38110 Aug 17, 2013
ritedownthemiddle wrote:
<quoted text>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.
The days of whine and cheese are over, mickey! Learn that the science is settled according to the scientific method and is not in your realm.

Get used to it, mickey.

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#38111 Aug 17, 2013
Mothra wrote:
<quoted text>
Gee... what if the planet isn't warming?
...
Gee...That would be nice! Back to reality....
kristy

New Smyrna Beach, FL

#38112 Aug 17, 2013
gcaveman1 wrote:
<quoted text>
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?
Seriously? I really can't believe you posted this. The prediction was:

1. At least 3 of the years after 2009 would be warmer than 1998 in which 1998 was about 0.66 above the 20th century average. That means those numbers should have been at least 0.67 or greater.
2. 2014 would be 0.3 higher than 2004 in which 2014 would be about 0.74.

Geez no wonder you thought this prediction was right. So you really don't even know what it is you are posting.
kristy

New Smyrna Beach, FL

#38113 Aug 17, 2013
SpaceBlues wrote:
<quoted text>Let's see if wormingly replies..
A can of worms, really.
Good one.
Really?

“BET DAP”

Since: Feb 09

GOOM BOWN

#38114 Aug 17, 2013
SpaceBlues wrote:
<quoted text>The days of whine and cheese are over, mickey! Learn that the science is settled according to the scientific method and is not in your realm.
Get used to it, mickey.
says the pseudoscience hobbyist. lol

get the facts.....get smart....stop looking so foolish, son.

mitigating co2 will help....what.....how so? i haven't seen a scientific method that addresses that.

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
{keep A word drop A word} (Oct '11) 3 min GEORGIA 8,465
News BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit contesting... (Jan '09) 5 min Dr Guru 214,640
News Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 14 min flack 1,384,089
Instagram fitness journey FOLLOW 56 min Tylerwkline 1
Quit trashing Obama's accomplishments. He's don... 2 hr Go Blue Forever 11
Four letter word game (Dec '11) 3 hr GEORGIA 1,527
Double Word Game (Dec '11) 3 hr GEORGIA 2,448
More from around the web

Personal Finance

Chicago Mortgages