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
36,841 - 36,860 of 45,773 Comments Last updated 2 hrs ago
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#39194
Sep 15, 2013
 

Judged:

3

3

3

mememine69 wrote:
<quoted text>What you write is that science says a crisis WILL happen when science has NEVER said that. You doomers lie.
LIAR. What are you quoting from me or science?

Your posts inform us of your lunacy.
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#39195
Sep 15, 2013
 

Judged:

4

4

3

Furthermore... Reefs in Florida and the Caribbean were once dominated by these beautiful, branching elkhorn and staghorn corals, but now the species face steep declines due to bleaching from increasing ocean temperatures, pressures from disease, fishing, and pollution, and impacts from ocean acidification.[summitcountyvoi ce]
Mothra

Phoenix, AZ

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#39196
Sep 15, 2013
 

Judged:

4

4

4

OzRitz wrote:
<quoted text>
The problem with that is, your lot dismiss ANY event no matter how big or small as evidence that the effect of warming has already arrived. Floods in Europe, China, Australia etc all based on a huge amount of water (record breaking amounts) dropped in a small amount of time. Then if there is drought in a area where high rainfall is expected that's dismissed as well. So what will it take to admit there is a "enemy at the gates" which at the moment is you.
Such hypocrisy.

During the winter warmists are quick to point out that 'weather' isn't 'climate', so record cold events aren't evidence of cooling.

But during the summer, they are.

btw, I notice you didn't answer my question. Warmists cannot concede any argument.

That just demonstrates how fragile their theory is, and that it's more a 'belief' than "science".
gcaveman1

Louin, MS

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#39197
Sep 15, 2013
 

Judged:

3

3

3

I had a denier try to tell me the Earth was cooling.

I ate his liver with some fava beans and a nice Chianti.

Since: Jul 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#39198
Sep 15, 2013
 

Judged:

3

3

3

An Asian answer to questions that to deniers always ask regardless of previous answers given.
So I call them loop questions, BrianG is the biggest offender and the rest are not far behind.
What is apparent, that countries that don't have a fox news or a Rush Limpburger to deal with view the climate with the only tools they have and that is life experience which is one thing they can't deny.

Three out of four Asians say the weather has become hotter and less predictable in the past decade as a result of climate change, prompting job changes, migration and lifestyle adaptation, a study shows.

In India, one of the world’s biggest producers of wheat, sugar and rice, most respondents said shifting weather patterns have led to water shortages, reduced agricultural productivity and loss of income, according to the study released today by Climate Asia, a project backed by the British Broadcasting Corp.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/mediaaction/where_we_wor...
litesong

Snohomish, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#39199
Sep 15, 2013
 

Judged:

3

3

3

gcaveman1 wrote:
I had a denier try to tell me the Earth was cooling.
I ate his liver with some fava beans and a nice Chianti.
First, how long can toxic topix AGW deniers live without a liver? Forever...... they're toxic.

Second, you sure Hannibal won't come after you for stealing his material?
gcaveman1

Louin, MS

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#39200
Sep 15, 2013
 

Judged:

3

3

3

Mothra wrote:
<quoted text>
Such hypocrisy.
During the winter warmists are quick to point out that 'weather' isn't 'climate', so record cold events aren't evidence of cooling.
But during the summer, they are.
btw, I notice you didn't answer my question. Warmists cannot concede any argument.
That just demonstrates how fragile their theory is, and that it's more a 'belief' than "science".
I'm posting this just to piss you off...

The Boulder, Colo. area is reeling after being inundated by record rainfall, with more than half a year’s worth of rain falling over the past three days. During those three days, 24-hour rainfall totals of between 8 and 10 inches across much of the Boulder area were enough to qualify this storm as a 1 in 1,000 year event, meaning that it has a 0.1 percent chance of occurring in a given year.

Climate Central
litesong

Snohomish, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#39201
Sep 15, 2013
 

Judged:

3

3

3

gcaveman1 wrote:
You're(me me me getting mine in the 69 position) about as far removed from reality as a denierbot can get.
Yes, his name, "me me me getting mine in the 69 position", shows it is removed from reality.
LessHypeMoreFact

Toronto, Canada

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#39202
Sep 15, 2013
 

Judged:

3

3

3

Mothra wrote:
<quoted text>
Such hypocrisy.
Telling on yourself now?
Mothra wrote:
<quoted text>
During the winter warmists are quick to point out that 'weather' isn't 'climate', so record cold events aren't evidence of cooling.
Summer OR Winter. A cold day is NOT evidence of anything except the seasonal changes. And no. Warm and cool days don't say anything about global warming OR cooling. But science does find the global average temperature of the surface and that is warming which is the 'scientific evidence' on that issue.
Mothra wrote:
<quoted text>
But during the summer, they are.
Nonsense. And the issue is the prevalence of climate EXTREMES, not day to day weather as evidence of climate change probably caused by AGW warming.

I realize that you are uneducated and probably confuse the two issues.
Mothra wrote:
<quoted text>
btw, I notice you didn't answer my question. Warmists cannot concede any argument.
The clueless and easily led are the primary 'consumers' of fossil fuel propaganda and junk science. They tend to be your 'arguments' and nobody should 'concede' to crap.
Mothra wrote:
<quoted text>
That just demonstrates how fragile their theory is, and that it's more a 'belief' than "science".
What is more relevant is the total lack of any reference to scientific papers on YOUR part. The refusal to look at science as the 'best current understanding' and seek opinions, politic and silly claims is the heart of your problem.

P.S. if AGW theory is so 'fragile' why are you STILL trying to kill it and how do you rebut the support for it in both climate researchers and scientific academies. Obviously this is just more of your 'big lie' spam.
LessHypeMoreFact

Toronto, Canada

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#39203
Sep 15, 2013
 

Judged:

3

3

3

litesong wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, his name, "me me me getting mine in the 69 position", shows it is removed from reality.
His 'biography' shows how little he knows of science.

MeMeMine69:
Male, Age: 56, London Ontario, UglyVille
About Me:
I’m an award winning playwright, actor, failed comedian, budding screenplay writer, horticulturist, husband to the best lady in the world, father of a lovely daughter, and I’ve worked in the same place for thirty years; Springbank Park.

He calls his home town 'Uglyville' yet has lived there three decades?
Mothra

Phoenix, AZ

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#39204
Sep 15, 2013
 

Judged:

4

4

4

gcaveman1 wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm posting this just to piss you off...
The Boulder, Colo. area is reeling after being inundated by record rainfall, with more than half a year’s worth of rain falling over the past three days. During those three days, 24-hour rainfall totals of between 8 and 10 inches across much of the Boulder area were enough to qualify this storm as a 1 in 1,000 year event, meaning that it has a 0.1 percent chance of occurring in a given year.
Climate Central
Sorry, doesn't piss me off at all.

But I do appreciate you owning up to the hypocrisy of the warmists.

Good for you.

“EnvironMENTAList ”

Since: Feb 07

Near Detroit

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#39205
Sep 15, 2013
 

Judged:

4

4

3

SpaceBlues wrote:
<quoted text>LIAR. What are you quoting from me or science?
Your posts inform us of your lunacy.
Oh, sorry, my bad. I thought you were a climate change believer. Never mind then.
Mothra

Phoenix, AZ

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#39206
Sep 15, 2013
 

Judged:

4

4

3

OzRitz wrote:
An Asian answer to questions that to deniers always ask regardless of previous answers given.
So I call them loop questions, BrianG is the biggest offender and the rest are not far behind.
What is apparent, that countries that don't have a fox news or a Rush Limpburger to deal with view the climate with the only tools they have and that is life experience which is one thing they can't deny.
Three out of four Asians say the weather has become hotter and less predictable in the past decade as a result of climate change, prompting job changes, migration and lifestyle adaptation, a study shows.
In India, one of the world’s biggest producers of wheat, sugar and rice, most respondents said shifting weather patterns have led to water shortages, reduced agricultural productivity and loss of income, according to the study released today by Climate Asia, a project backed by the British Broadcasting Corp.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/mediaaction/where_we_wor...
Thirty-five percent of adults in 111 countries in 2010 say global warming results from human activities, while less than half as many (14%) blame nature. Thirteen percent fault both.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/147242/Worldwide-B...

In developing Asia, only 27% believe in AGW, and for Sub-Sarahan Africa, 22%.

As for the US, 34%.

I hope warmists don't take this as a reason to crank up their propaganda mills.
kristy

Oviedo, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#39207
Sep 15, 2013
 

Judged:

5

5

5

LessHypeMoreFact wrote:
<quoted text>
Anything that is implicit in AGW theory, such as disproving the physics of the greenhouse effect, showing that the forcing is inadequate, showing that CO2 is not accumulating in the atmosphere, etc etc. One flaw is all it takes.
Trouble is that NO peer reviewed serious studies have been able to disprove AGW theory and more and more studies have confirmed it, leading to a situation where it would almost be easier to disprove gravity. Lots of luck on that.. and let us know when you have something REAL, if you ever do.
There are plenty of flaws. No one disputes the greenhouse effect. What is in dispute is that manmade emissions of CO2 have been the main driver of climate for the last 30 years, and due to that, we face catastrophic consequences. There are plenty of peer reviewed papers that are showing natural variability was underestimated and climate sensitivity was overestimated and that model predictions of warming have been overestimated. There is plenty of admission from the IPCC that the oceans, clouds, and sun are poorly understood. Without understanding of these very important climate regulators, there can be no unequivocal statement that CO2 is the primary driver. You can keep on saying that this pause was anticipated, but we know no pause was anticipated at this point in time by just looking back a few years at all the predictions that stated global warming should be ROARING back by now.

But you actually want me to defy the laws of physics and want me to believe that CO2 is taking a break...a pause...and that for now natural variability is in control. But to say that, you are saying that natural variability had little to do with the warming for the last 30 years. If natural variability was underestimated during this pause, it only stands to reason that it was also underestimated during the warming period of the last 30 years. The AGW scientists totally expected at this point in time to be at higher temperatures than now and they are scrambling to explain the “missing heat.” The AGW hypothesis doesn’t live up to the observations or predictions and new peer review papers are showing that.
kristy

Oviedo, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#39208
Sep 15, 2013
 

Judged:

4

4

3

gcaveman1 wrote:
<quoted text>
So far today, I have heard the rains described as "a year's rain in one day", "a 100-year event", " a 1000-year event".
If it is natural variation, I can accept that too. But the odds are that it is a natural event that would have occurred anyway, but because of warming, it is a natural event on steroids.
A concept beyond the grasp of our resident fools.
Not unusual, predicted..Interview with head of Colorado Springs Emergency Management in 2010: He stated Colorado was due for “the big one”…and he was telling citizens to get ready. Not unusual for Colorado.

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

Oviedo, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#39209
Sep 15, 2013
 

Judged:

4

4

2

litesong wrote:
<quoted text>
Altho toxic topix AGW deniers seldom make comments on record shattering AGW enhanced events AT the time of those events, toxic topix AGW deniers love comparing those record shattering AGW enhanced events to "recovery" events, such as 1998-99, 2007-08 & now 2012-13. However, toxic topix AGW deniers seldom get the science & mathematics right, because they don't have science & mathematics degrees.
//////////
Sea ice VOLUME is a better measure of conditions than short climate events:
Arctic VOLUME as of September 1, 2013 is not quite 16% HIGHER(not 60%, like toxic topix AGW deniers report) than that of the "2010-to-current" time range. Average Arctic sea ice VOLUME for September 1, for the period 1980-89, was ~15,000 cubic kilometers. Present September 1, 2013 sea ice VOLUME is almost 3 times less,~5100 cubic kilometers,~10,000 cubic kilometers less than the 1980-89 period for September 1.
Put 10,000 cubic kilometers of 1980's ice minus present day ice on Manhattan....... & you'll have an ice depth of 14 miles. "motheaten" has a whole lot of Arctic sea ice, still to recover.
The warmists are the ones who every year in October trot out the numbers of the Arctic Sea Ice EXTENT, not the volume. So we are only comparing what is trotted out by the warmists to the media every year. If the sea ice volume is a better measurement, then that is the number and graph that should have been publicized every year, but it wasn’t.

Same with temperatures. Every year come January, we get the highly anticipated report of where the year ranked in terms of warmth. Now that it is has been explained that the decade of the 2000s had statistically no warmth, we are being told surface temperature is no longer a good measurement, even though we have been told that it has been for the last 20 years. So now you get all stompy feet mad when surface temperature and ice EXTENT are talked about.
Mothra

Phoenix, AZ

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#39210
Sep 15, 2013
 

Judged:

3

2

2

LessHypeMoreFact wrote:
<quoted text>
P.S. if AGW theory is so 'fragile' why are you STILL trying to kill it and how do you rebut the support for it in both climate researchers and scientific academies. Obviously this is just more of your 'big lie' spam.
Gee who wouldn't support a steady paycheck in a growth industry?

Oh wait... one can only make unfounded allegations of greed, corruption and complicity to the evil oil companies.

Never mind.
Mothra

Phoenix, AZ

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#39211
Sep 15, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

From the UCS:

>>Scientific societies and scientists have released statements and studies showing the growing consensus on climate change science.... Below are links to documents and statements attesting to this consensus.
http://www.ucsusa.org/ssi/climate-change/scie...

Curious... only 4 of the 19 'statements' are from this decade.

Since: Apr 08

"the green troll"

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#39212
Sep 15, 2013
 

Judged:

4

3

3

kristy wrote:
<quoted text>
There are plenty of flaws. No one disputes the greenhouse effect. What is in dispute is that manmade emissions of CO2 have been the main driver of climate for the last 30 years, and due to that, we face catastrophic consequences. There are plenty of peer reviewed papers that are showing natural variability was underestimated and climate sensitivity was overestimated and that model predictions of warming have been overestimated.
Shouldn't be hard to link to a few then, should it?

Since: Apr 08

"the green troll"

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#39213
Sep 15, 2013
 

Judged:

4

4

3

kristy wrote:
But you actually want me to defy the laws of physics and want me to believe that CO2 is taking a break...a pause...and that for now natural variability is in control. But to say that, you are saying that natural variability had little to do with the warming for the last 30 years. If natural variability was underestimated during this pause, it only stands to reason that it was also underestimated during the warming period of the last 30 years.
A non sequitur. If heat is moving into the deep ocean where it wasn't before, which the evidence seems to suggest, then there is no reason to think that warming was overestimated.
The AGW scientists totally expected at this point in time to be at higher temperatures than now and they are scrambling to explain the “missing heat.”
The man who told you about the missing heat says he's found it now:

Abstract
The elusive nature of the post-2004 upper ocean warming has exposed uncertainties in the ocean's role in the Earth's energy budget and transient climate sensitivity. Here we present the time evolution of the global ocean heat content for 1958 through 2009 from a new observation-based reanalysis of the ocean. Volcanic eruptions and El Niño events are identified as sharp cooling events punctuating a long-term ocean warming trend, while heating continues during the recent upper-ocean-warming hiatus, but the heat is absorbed in the deeper ocean. In the last decade, about 30% of the warming has occurred below 700 m, contributing significantly to an acceleration of the warming trend. The warming below 700 m remains even when the Argo observing system is withdrawn although the trends are reduced. Sensitivity experiments illustrate that surface wind variability is largely responsible for the changing ocean heat vertical distribution.
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/gr ...

Why do you believe him when he says there's missing heat but not when he says there is no missing heat any more?
The AGW hypothesis doesn’t live up to the observations or predictions and new peer review papers are showing that.
Here's a peer reviewed paper that says, when you take the random fluctuations of a small part of the Pacific ocean into account, the observations of global temperatures fit the predictions very well.

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/vaop/ncu...

Here's another that shows observations matched model predictions over the previous 16 years, when the model is adjusted to previous climate fluctuations.

http://www.nature.com/ngeo/journal/v6/n4/full...

Two papers that say recent slower warming is due to short term effects and says nothing about the long term threat of AGW.

I've posted links to two peer reviewed papers: let's see you do the same.

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

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

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.

91 Users are viewing the Chicago Forum right now

Search the Chicago Forum:
Title Updated Last By Comments
Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 2 min Grey Ghost 1,079,232
Abby 7-24 13 min Sublime1 9
Amy 7-24 21 min boundary painter 16
{keep A word drop A word} (Oct '11) 23 min boundary painter 4,546
Last word + 2 (Mar '12) 31 min andet1987 461
Ill. House Approves Legalizing Same-Sex Civil U... (Dec '10) 32 min Terry rigsby 48,872
BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit contesting... (Jan '09) 44 min Rogue Scholar 05 174,518
Topix Chitown Regulars (Aug '09) 6 hr edogxxx 97,516
•••
•••
Chicago Dating

more search filters

less search filters

•••

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 ]
•••