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 1,830)

Showing posts 36,581 - 36,600 of45,763
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
kristy

Oviedo, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#38919
Sep 6, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

ritedownthemiddle wrote:
<quoted text>lol
It's not my job, son, to figure out what you can't figure out on your own.
Lol
New Zealand snow storm.

September 4, 2013:

HUNDREDS of skiers are stuck on New Zealand's Mt Hutt after freak weather forced its closure.

A combination of drifting snow and poor visibility has been blamed. While ski area management were aware of an approaching front and poor forecast, the situation deteriorated quickly, Mt Hutt ski area manager James McKenzie said.

There are 316 people trapped on the mountain.

"We made a decision to close the mountain at 11.30 this morning and a number of people made it safely down the road," he said.

"However at midday a combination of new snow blowing around everywhere and wind gusts of up to 45km/h, especially around the Saddles, meant visibility along the upper section of the access road deteriorated to the extent we closed the road completely.

http://www.news.com.au/travel/holiday-ideas/h...
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#38920
Sep 6, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

kristy wrote:
<quoted text>
No it didn't. Why do you think BEST failed peer review from the Journal of Geophysical Research and they refused to publish it? There were problems with the BEST temperatures and UHI that were never corrected. The BEST paper did finally get published, but in the first publication of a new journal.
You are so DENSE.

What happened is exactly how science journals operate. Do I have to teach you how to publish or that it is considered an honor to publish in a new journal?

Alas, you are totally clueless. Watch this to learn a little:

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

Houston, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#38921
Sep 6, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

kristy wrote:
<quoted text>
Actually it was Muller's paper that had errors. Even the warmists panned his paper that got declined to be published in Journal of Geophysical Research.
But could you tell me exactly when Muller was a skeptic. Here is an interview in 2008 where he says this:
"Back in the early ’80s, I resigned from the Sierra Club over the issue of global warming. At that time, they were opposing nuclear power. What I wrote them in my letter of resignation was that, if you oppose nuclear power, the U.S. will become much more heavily dependent on fossil fuels, and that this is a pollutant to the atmosphere that is very likely to lead to global warming."
And this:
"If [Al Gore] reaches more people and convinces the world that global warming is real, even if he does it through exaggeration and distortion — which he does, but he’s very effective at it — then let him fly any plane he wants."
And this:
"The bottom line is that there is a consensus — the [Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change]— and the president needs to know what the IPCC says. Second, they say that most of the warming of the last 50 years is probably due to humans. You need to know that this is from carbon dioxide, and you need to understand which technologies can reduce this and which can’t. Roughly 1 degree Fahrenheit of global warming has taken place; we’re responsible for one quarter of it. If we cut back so we don’t cause any more, global warming will be delayed by three years and keep on going up. And now the developing world is producing most of the carbon dioxide."
http://grist.org/article/lets-get-physical/
Sounds like Muller is a liar.
Sounds like you don't like a scientist or a VP being human..

Why don't you learn from what you are posting? Too DENSE!
Mothra

Phoenix, AZ

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#38922
Sep 6, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

SpaceBlues wrote:
<quoted text>You are so DENSE.
What happened is exactly how science journals operate. Do I have to teach you how to publish or that it is considered an honor to publish in a new journal?
Alas, you are totally clueless. Watch this to learn a little:
http://www.youtube.com/watch...
Why watch?

First, he's introduced as getting his Phd in medicine... not climate.

Then he starts off by saying that he isn't an atmospheric scientist.

So according to your warmist standards, his opinion means squat.

I do love tossing your standards of "science" right back in your face.

LOL

“Let's X Change!!”

Since: Feb 09

B4 HOPE Is Gone...

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#38923
Sep 6, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

kristy wrote:
<quoted text>
New Zealand snow storm.
September 4, 2013:
HUNDREDS of skiers are stuck on New Zealand's Mt Hutt after freak weather forced its closure.
A combination of drifting snow and poor visibility has been blamed. While ski area management were aware of an approaching front and poor forecast, the situation deteriorated quickly, Mt Hutt ski area manager James McKenzie said.
There are 316 people trapped on the mountain.
"We made a decision to close the mountain at 11.30 this morning and a number of people made it safely down the road," he said.
"However at midday a combination of new snow blowing around everywhere and wind gusts of up to 45km/h, especially around the Saddles, meant visibility along the upper section of the access road deteriorated to the extent we closed the road completely.
http://www.news.com.au/travel/holiday-ideas/h...
Mt. Hutt is on the South Island. My friend lives on the north in Auckland. She said its as cold as anytime she remembers. The north island is generally pretty mild year round.
Mothra

Phoenix, AZ

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#38924
Sep 6, 2013
 
SpaceBlues wrote:
<quoted text>Sounds like you don't like a scientist or a VP being human..
Why don't you learn from what you are posting? Too DENSE!
Not much to learn from your posts... other than snark and poor grammar.

LOL

btw, is "dense" your new word-of-the-day? Tired of "whitewasher" (which you never used correctly, btw)

LOL x2
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#38925
Sep 6, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Mothra wrote:
<quoted text>
Why watch?
First, he's introduced as getting his Phd in medicine... not climate.
Then he starts off by saying that he isn't an atmospheric scientist.
So according to your warmist standards, his opinion means squat.
I do love tossing your standards of "science" right back in your face.
LOL
What! You are clueless. Medicine? NOT!

What he's is great:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Alley

What do you mean by "standards" of science? I threw it back in your face!
LessHypeMoreFact

Toronto, Canada

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#38926
Sep 6, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

kristy wrote:
<quoted text>
Actually it was Muller's paper that had errors. Even the warmists panned his paper that got declined to be published in Journal of Geophysical Research.
False.
http://tinyurl.com/lqnvddp

Elizabeth Muller, Richard Muller’s daughter and executive director of the BEST study, reported earlier on the Andrew Revkin’s New York Times blog Dot Earth that the team is working through the review process:

“All of the articles have been submitted to journals, and we have received substantial journal peer reviews. None of the reviews have indicated any mistakes in the papers; they have instead been primarily suggestions for additions, further citations of the literature. One review had no complaints about the content of the paper, but suggested delaying the publication until the long background paper, describing our methods in detail, was actually published.”

Responding to an inquiry from Nature, Elizabeth Muller confirmed that McKitrick reviewed the urban heat island paper and that the paper was technically rejected the first time around.“McKitrick did indeed suggest useful changes to the paper, many of which we made, but our basic results do not depend on these issues,” she wrote.“JGR has a method of technically rejecting a journal while encouraging the authors to revise the paper and re-submit. Apparently they do this to give the authors more time to make changes (otherwise, authors have only about a month to make revisions).” Muller declined to release information about the timing of the peer review process.
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#38927
Sep 6, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Mothra wrote:
<quoted text>
Not much to learn from your posts... other than snark and poor grammar.
LOL
btw, is "dense" your new word-of-the-day? Tired of "whitewasher" (which you never used correctly, btw)
LOL x2
Are you representing the other science denier?

The word "dense" has history with that poster. Your grammar and language errors have been documented. Have you not read them?

Oh you are whitewashing denialism.
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#38928
Sep 6, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

LessHypeMoreFact wrote:
<quoted text>
False.
http://tinyurl.com/lqnvddp
Elizabeth Muller, Richard Muller’s daughter and executive director of the BEST study, reported earlier on the Andrew Revkin’s New York Times blog Dot Earth that the team is working through the review process:
“All of the articles have been submitted to journals, and we have received substantial journal peer reviews. None of the reviews have indicated any mistakes in the papers; they have instead been primarily suggestions for additions, further citations of the literature. One review had no complaints about the content of the paper, but suggested delaying the publication until the long background paper, describing our methods in detail, was actually published.”
Responding to an inquiry from Nature, Elizabeth Muller confirmed that McKitrick reviewed the urban heat island paper and that the paper was technically rejected the first time around.“McKitrick did indeed suggest useful changes to the paper, many of which we made, but our basic results do not depend on these issues,” she wrote.“JGR has a method of technically rejecting a journal while encouraging the authors to revise the paper and re-submit. Apparently they do this to give the authors more time to make changes (otherwise, authors have only about a month to make revisions).” Muller declined to release information about the timing of the peer review process.
Standard fare!
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#38929
Sep 6, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Mothra wrote:
<quoted text>
Why watch?
First, he's introduced as getting his Phd in medicine... not climate.
Then he starts off by saying that he isn't an atmospheric scientist.
So according to your warmist standards, his opinion means squat.
I do love tossing your standards of "science" right back in your face.
LOL
The presentation at AGU is: "The Biggest Control Knob: Carbon Dioxide in Earth's ..."

You are missing so much by not watching it; of course, that assumes a certain comprehension level, which is doubtful with you.
kristy

Oviedo, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#38930
Sep 6, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

SpaceBlues wrote:
<quoted text>You are so DENSE.
What happened is exactly how science journals operate. Do I have to teach you how to publish or that it is considered an honor to publish in a new journal?
Alas, you are totally clueless. Watch this to learn a little:
http://www.youtube.com/watch...
So every major journal refused to publish THE PAPER that would prove global warming, why?
kristy

Oviedo, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#38931
Sep 6, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

LessHypeMoreFact wrote:
<quoted text>
False.
http://tinyurl.com/lqnvddp
Elizabeth Muller, Richard Muller’s daughter and executive director of the BEST study, reported earlier on the Andrew Revkin’s New York Times blog Dot Earth that the team is working through the review process:
“All of the articles have been submitted to journals, and we have received substantial journal peer reviews. None of the reviews have indicated any mistakes in the papers; they have instead been primarily suggestions for additions, further citations of the literature. One review had no complaints about the content of the paper, but suggested delaying the publication until the long background paper, describing our methods in detail, was actually published.”
Responding to an inquiry from Nature, Elizabeth Muller confirmed that McKitrick reviewed the urban heat island paper and that the paper was technically rejected the first time around.“McKitrick did indeed suggest useful changes to the paper, many of which we made, but our basic results do not depend on these issues,” she wrote.“JGR has a method of technically rejecting a journal while encouraging the authors to revise the paper and re-submit. Apparently they do this to give the authors more time to make changes (otherwise, authors have only about a month to make revisions).” Muller declined to release information about the timing of the peer review process.
False, she's lying.

"On March 8 2012 I was asked by JGR to review a revised version of the Wickham et al. paper. I submitted my review at the end of March. The authors had made very few changes and had not addressed any of the methodological problems, so I recommended the paper not be published. I do not know what the journal's decision was, but it is 4 months later and I can find no evidence on the BEST website that this or any other BEST project paper has been accepted for publication.[Update July 30: JGR told me "This paper was REJECTED and the editor recommended that the author resubmit it as a new paper."]

http://www.rossmckitrick.com/temperature-data...
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#38932
Sep 6, 2013
 
kristy wrote:
<quoted text>
So every major journal refused to publish THE PAPER that would prove global warming, why?
Is that a fact? NO.

Still.. we are not going to teach you how or what to publish in a science journal.

However, the standard fare applies!
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#38933
Sep 6, 2013
 
kristy wrote:
<quoted text>
False, she's lying.
"On March 8 2012 I was asked by JGR to review a revised version of the Wickham et al. paper. I submitted my review at the end of March. The authors had made very few changes and had not addressed any of the methodological problems, so I recommended the paper not be published. I do not know what the journal's decision was, but it is 4 months later and I can find no evidence on the BEST website that this or any other BEST project paper has been accepted for publication.[Update July 30: JGR told me "This paper was REJECTED and the editor recommended that the author resubmit it as a new paper."]
http://www.rossmckitrick.com/temperature-data...
Whatever! You <not you per se> win some, you lose some.

Standard fare!
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#38934
Sep 6, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Dear readers,

Isn't it pathetic that any science denier can say anything and expect respose.

Imagine that you are a scientist for a moment. When will you do science if you are busy sueing these liars? Of course, these deniers aim at stopping any science progress, just like the Church, Hitler, etc. have done in the past.
Mothra

Phoenix, AZ

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#38935
Sep 6, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

SpaceBlues wrote:
<quoted text>What! You are clueless. Medicine? NOT!
What he's is great:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Alley
What do you mean by "standards" of science? I threw it back in your face!
My oh my what a short memory you have.

I can't tell you how many times I've see rants from the warmists that only the "science" of climate scientists is worth discussing.

But glad to see you're opening up your narrow perspective.

LOL
Mothra

Phoenix, AZ

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#38936
Sep 6, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

SpaceBlues wrote:
<quoted text>Are you representing the other science denier?
The word "dense" has history with that poster. Your grammar and language errors have been documented. Have you not read them?
Oh you are whitewashing denialism.
Representing a science denier?

Wow... there's a loaded question-- one that presupposes evidence not in fact. Do run along... get some Legos and pretend your useful.
Mothra

Phoenix, AZ

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#38937
Sep 6, 2013
 

Judged:

3

3

3

SpaceBlues wrote:
<quoted text>The presentation at AGU is: "The Biggest Control Knob: Carbon Dioxide in Earth's ..."
You are missing so much by not watching it; of course, that assumes a certain comprehension level, which is doubtful with you.
Is he saying anything different that the warmists on this thread, or just a new twist on the old theme?

Ya' know... if your mommy can't afford Legos, Brix Blox will work too. She can find them cheap in second hand stores.
Mothra

Phoenix, AZ

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#38938
Sep 6, 2013
 

Judged:

3

3

3

SpaceBlues wrote:
Dear readers,
Isn't it pathetic that any science denier can say anything and expect respose.
Imagine that you are a scientist for a moment. When will you do science if you are busy sueing these liars? Of course, these deniers aim at stopping any science progress, just like the Church, Hitler, etc. have done in the past.
My, my... aren't we ratcheting up the rhetoric.

But, alas, nothing new to see here.
If you had any critical thinking skills and were capable of understanding "debate", you'd see there is much 'science' being discussed here. And given it's 'doomsday' nature, religion, and politics too.

But you can't see the forest through the trees, and anyone who disagree with you gets labeled a heretic.

That's not very "scientific" of you, is it?

I've got to ask... what did you ask you mommy to get you when you turn 17?

Run along... adults are talking here.

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

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Showing posts 36,581 - 36,600 of45,763
|
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.

90 Users are viewing the Chicago Forum right now

Search the Chicago Forum:
Topic Updated Last By Comments
Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 3 min ritedownthemiddle 1,078,840
Amy 7-22 9 min Julie 14
Ill. House Approves Legalizing Same-Sex Civil U... (Dec '10) 12 min Terry rigsby 48,850
Israeli troops begin Gaza pullout as Hamas decl... (Jan '09) 59 min danetoo 67,890
BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit contesting... (Jan '09) 1 hr jacques Mont Tremblant 174,493
IL Who do you support for Governor in Illinois in ... (Oct '10) 2 hr nuguyntwn 3,827
The Liberty Brothers Interview: Colonel Kratos,... 2 hr Must be you 7
•••

Beach Hazards Statement for Cook County was issued at July 23 at 4:15PM CDT

•••
•••
•••

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 ]
•••