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

Full story: Newsday 49,190
When Bill Clinton took office in 1993, global warming was a slow-moving environmental problem that was easy to ignore. Full Story
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

#38630 Aug 29, 2013
Mothra wrote:
<quoted text>
A big whoopdy-doo.
The denier goose is cooked, well done.
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

#38631 Aug 29, 2013
Hey deniers, 90 million tons of ghg emissions daily are equivalent to 400,000 Hiroshima's energy. All your whine ignores this!

Your goose is cooked, well done.
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

#38632 Aug 29, 2013
kristy wrote:
<quoted text>
And it's already out of date.
You are DENSE.

P.S. The whole world knows you know no science. Or any expertise to speak of.
kristy

Oviedo, FL

#38633 Aug 29, 2013
Patriot AKA Bozo wrote:
More on oil shale.
http://peakoilmatters.com/2010/01/25/a-brief-...
Not gonna solve our energy problems....
So not trying to find ways to extract the oil will solve our energy problems? Doing away with fossil fuels will solve our energy problems how?
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

#38634 Aug 29, 2013
The planetary problem is the climate change caused by humans' fossil fuel usage.
gcaveman1

Bay Springs, MS

#38635 Aug 29, 2013
kristy wrote:
<quoted text>

You said we don't have enough oil in the ground. Where did you get that information?
A recent report by the U.S. Government Accountability Office estimated that if half of the oil bound up in the rock of the Green River Formation could be recovered it would be "equal to the entire world's proven oil reserves." Both the GAO and private industry estimate the amount of oil recoverable to be 3 trillion barrels. "In the past 100 years — in all of human history -- we have consumed 1 trillion barrels of oil. There are several times that much here," said Roger Day, vice president for operations for American Shale Oil (AMSO).
http://abcnews.go.com/Business/american-oil-f...
Running from Los Angeles to San Francisco, California's Monterey Shale is thought to contain more oil than North Dakota's Bakken and Texas's Eagle Ford -- both scenes of an oil boom that's created thousands of jobs and boosted U.S. oil production to the highest rate in over a decade. In fact, the Monterey is thought to hold over 400 billion barrels of oil, according to IHS Cambridge Energy Research Associates. That's nearly half the conventional oil in all of Saudi Arabia. The United States consumes about 19 million barrels of oil a day. "Four hundred billion barrels, that doesn't escape anyone in this businesses," said Stephen Trammel, energy research director at IHS.
http://money.cnn.com/2013/01/14/news/economy/...
These are just a few sites where huge amounts of oil have been found. There are many more we are sitting on. We could become energy independent and then not have to depend on the Middle East and all their turmoil and instead of energy prices increasing, they would decrease.
By the way, gas prices yesterday here 3.35, today 3.49.
If the oil can be recovered. If a bullfrog had wings, it wouldn't bump its ass all the time.

What would you expect oil guys to say?

Anybody can pull figures out of the air, out of their ass, or out of their camel saddlebags.

Gas is still $3.299 here.
JBH

Richmond, Canada

#38636 Aug 30, 2013
+++++

U.S., U.K. Face Delays on Syria
Full story: Wall Street Journal
Free Syrian Army fighters carry their weapons as they escort a convoy of U.N. vehicles carrying a team of chemical-weapons experts at one of the sites of an alleged attack in Damascus's suburbs of Zamalka on Wednesday.

+++++===

Isn't that a joke of the above report, as Obama said the red line a long time ago, that he would have acted to strike Syria then at that TIME?

Why wait for so long for making up a justification at this time?
WHAT IS THE DELAY THEN that Obama has to wait for so long? Is Obama taking the world, as US versus the world that Obama would try to move on Syria to do whatever?
The fact is US is down-rated by just talking about chemical weapons, while Obama adds on making the downer, poorer image from former Bush as he does not make it any better but worse.

Look for US destruction before it comes and Obama's suffering any time as he started his red line calling.

Look for more disasters of US if Obama would strike Syria, in addition to Obama's further suffering.
JBH

Richmond, Canada

#38637 Aug 30, 2013
Is there any difference by making change from Bush that Obama blamed on the Iraq case?
Obama has not done any good of US image but has made it more troublesome.
OBAMA SO FAR, HAS CAUSED EVERYTHING TO BE SO BAD that US is in a condition worse than that of Bush period, since Obama does no change but the same wrong foreign policies as Bush clone-mold.
People never elected a new man but the same and old worsened Bush.

HIS ANY DOING ON SYRIA WILL BE TOO DESTRUCTIVE TO US AND HIMSELF.
HE CAN'T FIND ONE SOUL WHO IS WITH HIM ON HIS VIEW ABOUT SYRIA.

For on thing, Obama's saying of "mission accomplished" indicates his support of what Bush has done. "Mission accomplished" is the enormous US costs and burden of resources wasted uselessly and wrongly in addition to making US bad image on world stage and so many 5000 military lives lost and over 10,000 wounded-being handicapped coming back, as one out of three US suicides is from Iraq veterans.

Obama has not done one single thing on the economy.

The US people are suffering because Obama has used a lot of Patriot Act, snooping and spying on US people through big brother suppression of them.

Obama stands against those people who elected and supported him by abusing their civil rights and liberty freedom and working against them in everything. Obama is not doing what they say and want, as the example on Syria where great majority of people don't want to mess Syria, to lie to them to betray their wishes, yet people are also dumping Obama.

It is a false economy as there are lots who can't have anything on work, that at least 60 millions of people cannot feed themselves and families. More than 40 millions people live in the third world standard, with plugged-up toilets, run-down houses with barely any electricity, in New Orleans, East LA, Baltimore, Philadelphia, and so on.

Yet, Obama takes their money to go with companies which go other places, so as not to give them employment.
That is why too many are sad and suffering in US as Obama has destructed them too much.

But, there are just too much rubbish trash from US, who never know and wake up to the awareness, at the same time.

OBAMA IS NO WAY POSSIBLE BECAUSE HE IS FACING THE ENORMOUS stumbling blocks of people against him, and BIG, TURBULENT WINDS PROPELLING against HIM.

Further more, UN ALREADY HAS A BAD AND NEGATIVE IMAGE. UN would be demolished If UN lets Obama violate anything. UN has not yet answered the former case of US with Bush doing wrongly on Iraq war. If US would act alone on Syria, the consequences of UN will be extremely gloomy.
What is the point of having UN as If it is doing all wrong and evil things?
What is the point of having US in UN if US is always breaking the rules and coming up with falsified business, like the chemical weapons subject on Syria?
Unless US is not a country on the planet, where it is going to end up as, that Obama is a one-person show alone, to think according to how he thinks as ?
US is being like former Hitler, as the whole Germany went down because of one man Hitler, that the entire US is going down because of one person Obama doing very badly on Syria alone.

Since: Mar 09

Wichita, KS

#38638 Aug 30, 2013
kristy wrote:
<quoted text>
So not trying to find ways to extract the oil will solve our energy problems? Doing away with fossil fuels will solve our energy problems how?
It is not finding ways to extract the oil that is the problem. The problem is to do it economically. Who is advocating doing away with fossil fuels right now? Not I. But we do need to find new ways to get our energy that does not poison the planet. You are so reactionary.

Since: Mar 09

Wichita, KS

#38639 Aug 30, 2013
kristy wrote:
<quoted text>
How many times do I have to say I agree it is warmer? DUHHH. No one is arguing that point. The point, is that AGW science says warming will happen at an alarming rate because of an increase in CO2 and terrible, terrible things will happen. Here are some of the things that have been botched:
Surprise, Antarctic ice not melting, actually increasing.
Himalayan glaciers won’t be gone by 2035, in fact about half of the volume of the Himalayan glaciers is actually growing.
Surprise, 30% less ice melting from glaciers, ice caps, and mountaintops.
Climate models never predicted a standstill for 15 years.
Surprise….mysterious drop in water vapor in the stratosphere.
Surprise the oceans have a bigger effect on temperatures than thought.
No increase in hurricanes, tornadoes, droughts, fires, extreme weather.
Snow was thought to be a thing of the past.
Now we just have roving hot spots and roving rain, which is really just weather, so not sure how any one region can have a change in climate if these hot spots are just randomly moving around.
CO2 at worst case scenario, but temperatures at a standstill.
Climate sensitivity less than thought.
The seas are not rising at an alarming rate.
The Arctic still isn't ice free, even though it was predicted by NASA that the Arctic would be mostly ice free this year, which in fact was the shortest melt season on record for the Arctic.
Most of this is purely gibberish. Who thought snow was a thing of the past? What would you consider to be alarming? That is simply a buzz word used by the deniers along with religion because there is nothing scientifically to support their denial. If any position would be like a religion it would be the denier's because they have no scienct to base their belief upon.

Antarctica gaining ice?
http://www.sciencemag.org/content/338/6111/11...

Of course many glaciers are melting more slowing. Some have melted intirely...

But at least you agree that it is warmer, and staying that way.
gcaveman1

Bay Springs, MS

#38640 Aug 30, 2013
Patriot AKA Bozo wrote:
<quoted text>
Most of this is purely gibberish. Who thought snow was a thing of the past? What would you consider to be alarming? That is simply a buzz word used by the deniers along with religion because there is nothing scientifically to support their denial. If any position would be like a religion it would be the denier's because they have no scienct to base their belief upon.
Antarctica gaining ice?
http://www.sciencemag.org/content/338/6111/11...
Of course many glaciers are melting more slowing. Some have melted intirely...
But at least you agree that it is warmer, and staying that way.
They can wear you out.

krusty throws out a Gish Gallop full of falsehoods, generalizations, and simplistic explanations that would take a few hours to refute with quotes and citations from the real science. And in the end, it would do no good. It would be ignored. Or more falsehoods and distractions would come in her replies, leading to more refutations that ultimately would also do no good.

But she has nothing else to do. In fact, this is probably her work-from-home job. I'm guessing she's a Koch sucker.
Fun Facts

Las Cruces, NM

#38641 Aug 30, 2013
gcaveman1 wrote:
<quoted text>
They can wear you out.
krusty throws out a Gish Gallop full of falsehoods, generalizations, and simplistic explanations that would take a few hours to refute with quotes and citations from the real science. And in the end, it would do no good. It would be ignored. Or more falsehoods and distractions would come in her replies, leading to more refutations that ultimately would also do no good.
But she has nothing else to do. In fact, this is probably her work-from-home job. I'm guessing she's a Koch sucker.
LOL

Does Kristy 'wear you out'? What is it, the fact that she posts information from real science and you don't have what it takes to read the material?

So you denigrate her with simplistic statements that have no value to the science being discussed. Then smear her with your base level of understanding of human kind.

I guess it's not a laughing matter, in reality, it's actually quite sad.
Fun Facts

Las Cruces, NM

#38643 Aug 30, 2013
Patriot AKA Bozo wrote:
<quoted text>
Most of this is purely gibberish. Who thought snow was a thing of the past? What would you consider to be alarming? That is simply a buzz word used by the deniers along with religion because there is nothing scientifically to support their denial. If any position would be like a religion it would be the denier's because they have no scienct to base their belief upon.
Antarctica gaining ice?
http://www.sciencemag.org/content/338/6111/11...
Of course many glaciers are melting more slowing. Some have melted intirely...
But at least you agree that it is warmer, and staying that way.
http://joannenova.com.au/2013/04/antarctica-g...

Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it.
LessHypeMoreFact

Toronto, Canada

#38644 Aug 30, 2013
Fun Facts wrote:
<quoted text>
LOL
Does Kristy 'wear you out'?
There is a phrase that fits her perfectly. "bullshit baffles brains".

IT means that idiots like her can produce more garbage in one minute than a PHd can 'rebut' in an hour. And that is what she does.

BUT the fact is that the PHd CAN rebut every bit of silliness and bullshit she produces.

Same with you..

“Let's X Change!!”

Since: Feb 09

B4 HOPE Is Gone...

#38645 Aug 30, 2013
LessHypeMoreFact wrote:
<quoted text>
There is a phrase that fits her perfectly. "bullshit baffles brains".
IT means that idiots like her can produce more garbage in one minute than a PHd can 'rebut' in an hour. And that is what she does.
BUT the fact is that the PHd CAN rebut every bit of silliness and bullshit she produces.
Same with you..
i take it your not a PhD.
gcaveman1

Bay Springs, MS

#38646 Aug 30, 2013
Fun Facts wrote:
<quoted text>
LOL
Does Kristy 'wear you out'? What is it, the fact that she posts information from real science and you don't have what it takes to read the material?
So you denigrate her with simplistic statements that have no value to the science being discussed. Then smear her with your base level of understanding of human kind.
I guess it's not a laughing matter, in reality, it's actually quite sad.
It's the game of whack-a-mole she plays that wears me out.

We can refute and disprove her posts all day long; like I said, it won't make any difference. It's her job.

There are no fence-sitters coming to this thread. There are no true skeptics. There's only fossil fuel shills, those with such a strong psychological defect that they can't see the truth staring them in the face, and us "global warming alarmists".

But global warming IS alarming.
It's happening.
We are causing it.
It's going to get worse.
But, there is something we can do about it.

Since: Mar 09

Wichita, KS

#38647 Aug 30, 2013
Fun Facts wrote:
<quoted text>
http://joannenova.com.au/2013/04/antarctica-g...
Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it.
Actually, the melting is pretty well balanced with the accumulation. This is to be expected because of increased atmospheric water vapor increases the snowfall.

The temporal and spatial variability of the
SMB (Surface Mass Balance)over the previous 800 yr indicates that SMB changes over most of Antarctica are statistically negligible and do not exhibit an overall clear trend. This result is in accordance with the results presented by Monaghan et al.(2006), which demonstrate statistically insignificant changes in the SMB over the past 50 yr.

So it is not gaining.
kristy

Oviedo, FL

#38648 Aug 30, 2013
LOL...so sorry I'm wearing all of you out. But here is one post for all of you. I notice you say that I can produce more garbage in a minute than a PhD can rebut in an hour. Well here are what the PhD's have to say:

To Bozo in response to your questions, here are my answers:

1. Snow a thing of the past-Dr. David Viner, senior research scientist at CRU (I’m sure he has a PhD) said this in 2000:

However, the warming is so far manifesting itself more in winters which are less cold than in much hotter summers. According to Dr David Viner, a senior research scientist at the climatic research unit (CRU) of the University of East Anglia,within a few years winter snowfall will become "a very rare and exciting event".

http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/snow...

2. What would I consider an alarming sea level rise? Multi-meter by 2100…James Hansen, former NASA GISS scientist (I’m sure he has a PhD) predicts this:

Gravity satellite data, although too brief to be conclusive, are consistent with a doubling
time of 10 years or less, implying the possibility of multi-meter sea level rise this century.

http://www.columbia.edu/~jeh1/mailings/2011/2...

Oh and Dr. Bozo, PhD, could you let these other scientists know (I’m sure they have a PhD) that Antarctica ice is not expanding. They seem confused and they think it’s increasing. Maybe if you email them your graph they will understand how wrong they are. Thanks.

The recent observed positive trends in total Antarctic sea ice extent are at odds with the expectation of melting sea ice in a warming world. More problematic yet, climate models indicate that sea ice should decrease around Antarctica
in response to both increasing greenhouse gases and stratospheric ozone depletion.

http://www.columbia.edu/~lmp/paps/polvani+smi...

In contrast to Arctic sea ice, average Antarctic sea ice area is not retreating but has slowly increased since satellite measurements began in 1979. While most climate models from the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 5 (CMIP5) archive simulate a decrease in Antarctic sea ice area over the recent past, whether these models can be dismissed as being wrong depends on more than just the sign of change compared to observations.

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/jg...

This paper examines the annual cycle and trends in Antarctic sea ice extent (SIE) for 18 models used in phase 5 of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP5) that were run with historical forcing for the 1850s to 2005. Many of the models have an annual SIE cycle that differs markedly from that observed over the last 30 years. The majority of models have too small of an SIE at the minimum in February, while several of the models have less than two-thirds of the observed SIE at the September maximum.

http://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/abs/10.1175/J...

In twentieth-century integrations, Antarctic sea ice area exhibits significant decreasing annual trends in all six ensemble members from 1950 to 2005, in apparent contrast to observations that suggest a modest ice area increase since 1979.

http://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/abs/10.1175/J...

And while you’re at it, could you let the IPCC know that Antarctica ice is not expanding and that you know the reasons why? Thanks.

According to the UNEP in 2007, the IPCC had this to say (this was even before the record breaking increase of the present):

In contrast to the Arctic, there are signs of a slight increase in the extent of annual mean sea ice [in the Antarctic] over the period 1979–2005 (+1.2 per cent per decade) based on the NASA Team retrieval algorithm. The reasons for the very different trends in Arctic and Antarctic sea ice extent over recent decades are not known at present and resolving this important question is a high research priority.

“Let's X Change!!”

Since: Feb 09

B4 HOPE Is Gone...

#38649 Aug 30, 2013
Poetic justice!
Another "facial" served up to the whacked out alarmist hysteria.
http://mobile.bloomberg.com/news/2013-08-30/n...
Heeheehee

“Let's X Change!!”

Since: Feb 09

B4 HOPE Is Gone...

#38650 Aug 30, 2013
gcaveman1 wrote:
<quoted text>

But global warming IS alarming.
It's happening.
We are causing it.
It's going to get worse.
just not in August , huh, punching bag?
Lol

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
BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit contesting... (Jan '09) 3 min Rogue Scholar 05 181,810
Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 5 min John Galt 1,154,054
{keep A word drop A word} (Oct '11) 29 min RACE 4,917
Topix Chitown Regulars (Aug '09) 59 min Ralph 98,853
amy 12-20 1 hr Ralph 4
At least 3 wounded in South Side shootings 1 hr reality is a crutch 1
abby 12-20 1 hr Ralph 4
Chicago Dating
Find my Match
More from around the web

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 ]

NFL Latest News

Updated 11:28 am PST

Bleacher Report11:28AM
Jay Cutler Rumors: Latest Details, Speculation on Bears QB's Future
Bleacher Report11:39 AM
Complete Week 16 Preview for Indianapolis
NBC Sports12:33 PM
1 thing even Rahm can't fix: Da Bears - NBC Sports
NBC Sports 1:01 PM
Cowboys' Murray listed as questionable for Colts - NBC Sports
NBC Sports 8:26 AM
Report: Executives suggest Bears could have to attach a draft pick to move Cutler