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

Full story: Newsday 46,656
When Bill Clinton took office in 1993, global warming was a slow-moving environmental problem that was easy to ignore. Full Story
Mothra

Phoenix, AZ

#39778 Sep 26, 2013
Patriot AKA Bozo wrote:
<quoted text>
Whining that someone else is not doing their part is not an argument, it is simply a rationalization. The problem exists. What is important is structuring our energy system so we can mimimize the effects. It is not a problem that individauls can solve, it must be a sociatial effort. Of course you understand that but are not astute enough to admit it.
The problem exists? Really? Then why the free pass? C'mon... you're saying it's the science, they're saying it's the science. You might be doing something about it, but they sure as hell are not.

Rationalization my ass.

Hypocrisy is a better word.

Do your part, sit in the dark.

btw, who is whining? I'm asking.

Warmists just love to take digs at people when they're forced into an indefensible corner.

So predictable.
kristy

Oviedo, FL

#39779 Sep 26, 2013
Mothra wrote:
<quoted text>
And let's not forget that the warmists allow a free-pass of the 'science' to their "leaders" for pumping massive amounts CO2 into the atmosphere cuz the bought their indulgences
Nothing like the logic of the Inquisition era is there?
The era of the Inquisition, Al Gore's goal...

Former vice president Al Gore on Monday called for making climate change "denial" a taboo in society.

http://thehill.com/blogs/e2-wire/e2-wire/3239...

Since: Apr 08

"the green troll"

#39780 Sep 26, 2013
kristy wrote:
<quoted text>
My point exactly, they are small, not alarming and what one would expect to see in a world coming out of the LIA.
Total bollocks of course. The Greenland ice melt has accelerated in the period of satellite observation- nothing to do with "coming out of the LIA".

The numbers add up to a considerable amount of sea level rise, at the end of the century, which of course to solipsists like you is meaningless.

Since: Apr 08

"the green troll"

#39781 Sep 26, 2013
kristy wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm not predicting this is a start of a recovery, I said IF the arctic ice made a recovery to 20th century levels, you all would still claim the heat was hiding and that AGW was responsible and would come roaring back.
No, IF the arctic ice made a recovery to 20th century levels, I'd say that AGW didn’t exist and we could all relax.

Since: Apr 08

"the green troll"

#39782 Sep 26, 2013
kristy wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh, so it's ok to beat up on Judith Curry, Roger Pielke, John Christy, Roy Spencer, Richard Lindzen, Sallie Baliunas, Willie Soon, Henrik Svensmark to name a few just because they don't agree with catastrophic AGW?
No, because they don't follow the evidence, misrepresent the science, have their back pockets stuffed full of fossil fuel cash, are religious nuts, or are vain sour faced attention seeking prunes.

Since: Apr 08

"the green troll"

#39783 Sep 26, 2013
krusty the klown wrote:
<quoted text>
So true in that they use fear to try to make believers. Just an example:
NASA puts out a report that Greenland and Antarctica’s combined rate of melting has increased over the last 20 years and they are losing more than three times as much ice per year. Sounds scary right? But if you actually look at the numbers, the fear mongering is baseless. The rise is now 0.04 inches per year; 0.013 inches for Antarctica (statistically zero) and 0.026 inches for Greenland (statistically zero). Not to mention that the capability to even measure such small increments is not reliable. Everyone gets worked up over the word “accelerating” without digging into the numbers.
Put it another way, it's 300 billion tons of ice lost every year.

Nobody measures sea level rise to determine how much ice has melted of course- it's done by gravity measuring satellites.

0.04 inches per year is more than three and a half inches by the end of the century- that's assuming the rate of increase is not still increasing.

And that's just on top of sea level rise due to thermal expansion.

Your post illustrates the mental contortions deniers like you go through to
reduce the numbers to "statistically zero" in your minds.

Since: Mar 09

Wichita, KS

#39784 Sep 26, 2013
kristy wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh, so it's ok to beat up on Judith Curry, Roger Pielke, John Christy, Roy Spencer, Richard Lindzen, Sallie Baliunas, Willie Soon, Henrik Svensmark to name a few just because they don't agree with catastrophic AGW? Funny how you trash these people with blogs. Funny how you all take papers such as Trenberth's missing heat paper and treat it as if it were gospel when there is no agreement that the "missing heat" is the deep oceans or if there is even any missing heat. Funny how most of the time you all post opinion pieces instead of data as the reason people are in "denial."
Bottom line, the models did not predict a standstill at this point in time, the oceans and temperatures are not rising at an alarming rate. What we are seeing is what one would expect in a warming world coming out of the LIA. The only thing showing alarming rates of warming are the models which do not live up to the observations. That is fact.
I think Fair Game summarized it quite well. Some of these folks have been exposed several times. My question is, Why do you persist in saying these folks are right and that the establishment is wrong????

Since: Mar 09

Wichita, KS

#39785 Sep 26, 2013
Mothra wrote:
<quoted text>
The problem exists? Really? Then why the free pass? C'mon... you're saying it's the science, they're saying it's the science. You might be doing something about it, but they sure as hell are not.
Rationalization my ass.
Hypocrisy is a better word.
Do your part, sit in the dark.
btw, who is whining? I'm asking.
Warmists just love to take digs at people when they're forced into an indefensible corner.
So predictable.
Still you rationalize. The old cop-out of saying that "no one" else is doing it, momma, why should I. It makes little difference if AL Gore lives in a cave or a mansion. What is important is that we study the effects of our activities and attempt to prevent future problems. Quit your whinnnnnnning. My part is to support the science and attempt to influence the political necessities needed to alleviate future problems where possible. My carbon footprint is smaller that average. Yes it could be smaller but I need to exist in the world as we have made it. We need new energy systems or find a method of reducing the effects of CO2 and other human activities. Yes, it is a political consideration. Big energy corporations by nature must resist any change that infringes upon their profits. To do so, they must discredit the science of global warming by any means.

Since: Jul 11

Location hidden

#39786 Sep 26, 2013
kristy wrote:
<quoted text>
And OzRitz really loves China and admires their ability to control their people...He can overlook the corruption and human right violations because, you know, China is a country we should strive to emulate.
Rubbish, it was a comparison on their ability to get things done. Unlike this republican lead congress who would prefer to send the country bankrupt rather than pass a bill. If that is an prime example of democracy at work to the rest of those dictatorial regimes around the world, then they don't have much to worry about.

If you want to talk about being a hypocrite bringing Al Gore's name up all the time as if you expect him to be camped on a iceberg with a polar bear to have credibility. What about all those right wing evangelists who ask for donations to feed the poor, providing the poor are offshore 1000's of miles away. Do they live in a mud hut because I haven't seen too many Mother Theresa's amongst that lot except lots of limo's and mansions.

We will see what the report says today, and your lot can rant on about .5 of a degree air temp and ignore the ocean temps rise completely. Just as it always has been.
Mothra

Phoenix, AZ

#39787 Sep 26, 2013
Patriot AKA Bozo wrote:
<quoted text>
Still you rationalize. The old cop-out of saying that "no one" else is doing it, momma, why should I. It makes little difference if AL Gore lives in a cave or a mansion. What is important is that we study the effects of our activities and attempt to prevent future problems. Quit your whinnnnnnning. My part is to support the science and attempt to influence the political necessities needed to alleviate future problems where possible. My carbon footprint is smaller that average. Yes it could be smaller but I need to exist in the world as we have made it. We need new energy systems or find a method of reducing the effects of CO2 and other human activities. Yes, it is a political consideration. Big energy corporations by nature must resist any change that infringes upon their profits. To do so, they must discredit the science of global warming by any means.
Still you dodge.

Why give ol' Al and the President a pass?
litesong

Monroe, WA

#39788 Sep 26, 2013
rustykrusty wrote:
...... loves China and admires their ability to control their people...He can overlook the corruption and human right violations because, you know, China is a country we should strive to emulate.
Old re-pubic-lick-uns overlooked communist chinese murdering, torturing, & starving to death 100 million of their own BROTHERS, SISTERS, CHILDREN & BABIES, to make money on one-sided communist chinese trade. Glad you brought up this point, altho I've repeated it hundreds of times on topix forum threads.
litesong

Monroe, WA

#39789 Sep 26, 2013
rustykrusty wrote:
IF the arctic sea ice made a recovery to 20th century levels........
.....enough btus would be released to freeze in excess of ~ 10,000 extra cubic kilometers of water than existed as of September 1, 2013. That'll cool lots of margaritas........but not enough for toxic topix AGW deniers
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

#39790 Sep 26, 2013
NASA MAP [from yahoonews]

Want to know where people are most likely to die prematurely due to air pollution?

NASA recently recently released a map showing the average number of deaths per year per 1,000 square kilometers (385 square miles) that can be attributed to fine particle matter pollution.

Researchers compared pollution levels over a 150-year span, beginning in 1850 and ending in 2000. The dark brown areas on the map, shown prominently in Asia, India, Europe and parts of Africa, indicate locations with the highest rates of premature deaths due to air pollution.

Blue areas, as seen in the southeast United States and parts of South America, indicate areas that have seen air quality improve and the number of deaths due to air pollution decline.

Why are so many areas getting worse? According to NASA, that can be attributed to increased industrialization and urbanization. As to the areas in blue that have seen air quality improve from 1850 to 2000, researchers suggest that a decrease in biomass burning is the cause.

The research used to create the map comes from University of North Carolina professor Jason West. Published in Environmental Research Letters, the study estimated that roughly 2.1 million deaths per year could be attributed to fine particle matter pollution alone.

What's fine particle matter? The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) defines it as "a complex mixture of extremely small particles and liquid droplets." Particle matter that is 10 micrometers in diameter or smaller is particularly worrisome "because those are the particles that generally pass through the throat and nose and enter the lungs," according to the EPA.

“Let's X Change!!”

Since: Feb 09

B4 HOPE Is Gone...

#39791 Sep 26, 2013
litesong wrote:
<quoted text>
Old re-pubic-lick-uns overlooked communist chinese murdering, torturing, & starving to death 100 million of their own BROTHERS, SISTERS, CHILDREN & BABIES, to make money on one-sided communist chinese trade. Glad you brought up this point, altho I've repeated it hundreds of times on topix forum threads.
hey, mullet, i assume that only republicans put the bad co2 into the atmosphere, huh?

you're so blindly partisan (which doesn't help your cause on a scientific thread) that you think republicans are to be blamed for china relations? were you tied up in a basement as a kid with your only communication coming from your pro-union democrat parents feeding you cat food at night?
psssst...you repeat a lot of things on topix! that might be the reason people don't often pay much attention to your crazy azz.

btw, what are you going to major in when you get out of the basement?

“Let's X Change!!”

Since: Feb 09

B4 HOPE Is Gone...

#39792 Sep 26, 2013
litesong wrote:
<quoted text>
.....enough btus would be released to freeze in excess of ~ 10,000 extra cubic kilometers of water than existed as of September 1, 2013. That'll cool lots of margaritas........but not enough for toxic topix AGW deniers
you always talk about others not having math, science, pre calc, yada yada yada....

can you put arctic ice growth into margarita terms, mullet???

you dumb azz......people like you are the reason climate alarmists are mocked and laughed at by sane people.

“Let's X Change!!”

Since: Feb 09

B4 HOPE Is Gone...

#39793 Sep 26, 2013
SpaceBlues wrote:
NASA MAP [from yahoonews]
Want to know where people are most likely to die prematurely due to air pollution?
NASA recently recently released a map showing the average number of deaths per year per 1,000 square kilometers (385 square miles) that can be attributed to fine particle matter pollution.
Researchers compared pollution levels over a 150-year span, beginning in 1850 and ending in 2000. The dark brown areas on the map, shown prominently in Asia, India, Europe and parts of Africa, indicate locations with the highest rates of premature deaths due to air pollution.
Blue areas, as seen in the southeast United States and parts of South America, indicate areas that have seen air quality improve and the number of deaths due to air pollution decline.
Why are so many areas getting worse? According to NASA, that can be attributed to increased industrialization and urbanization. As to the areas in blue that have seen air quality improve from 1850 to 2000, researchers suggest that a decrease in biomass burning is the cause.
The research used to create the map comes from University of North Carolina professor Jason West. Published in Environmental Research Letters, the study estimated that roughly 2.1 million deaths per year could be attributed to fine particle matter pollution alone.
What's fine particle matter? The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) defines it as "a complex mixture of extremely small particles and liquid droplets." Particle matter that is 10 micrometers in diameter or smaller is particularly worrisome "because those are the particles that generally pass through the throat and nose and enter the lungs," according to the EPA.
Al Gore is killing people. His carbon foot print is wiping out hundreds by the day, right?

“Let's X Change!!”

Since: Feb 09

B4 HOPE Is Gone...

#39794 Sep 26, 2013
you people are so stupid....
litesong

Monroe, WA

#39795 Sep 26, 2013
middleofthedownwronggully wrote:
....... were(sic) you tied up in a basement as a kid with....... your pro-union democrat parents.....
Ah..... another kid with its re-pubic-lick-un parents, who think trade with & sending all the jobs to communist china was AOK.
gcaveman1

Bay Springs, MS

#39796 Sep 26, 2013
kristy wrote:
<quoted text>
So true in that they use fear to try to make believers. Science has no place in a belief that man is causing the destruction of Earth (Gaia).
Babblings of an idiot.

Tiresome. Worn completely out.

The fifth assessment will toast your ass.
litesong

Monroe, WA

#39797 Sep 26, 2013
middleofthedownwronggully wrote:
.....can you put arctic ice growth into margarita terms
....people like you are the reason climate alarmists are mocked and laughed at by sane people.
You need sea ice in margarita terms? Summer is over...... its time for jiggers of tequila & bites of lime.....

Glad you don't understand, "in excess of ~10,000 cubic kilometers". It matches your lack of science, chemistry, astronomy, physics, algebra & pre-calc for your poorly earned hi skule DEE-plooomaa.

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, our next President (Nov '08) 1 min Yeah 1,110,284
Antarctic Ice Sheet Largest by Far in 25 Years 8 min ThisWhatAlGorpMeant 4
Ill. House Approves Legalizing Same-Sex Civil U... (Dec '10) 9 min Jonah1 49,836
BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit contesting... (Jan '09) 10 min Learn to Read 178,046
FLOOD of illegal alien kids explained. 11 min YaGottaWatchAndReply 2
Messianic Jews say they are persecuted in Israel (Jun '08) 12 min Eric 69,380
Ray "CHOCOLATE NEW ORLEANS" NEGRA goes to prison. 14 min Is Rec tum Ashcan... 6
Amy 9-16 42 min ralph 58
Amy 9-18 51 min Stina2 21
Topix Chitown Regulars (Aug '09) 1 hr billyh 98,228
•••
Chicago Dating

more search filters

less search filters

•••

Chicago Jobs

•••
•••
•••

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 ]
•••