Once slow-moving threat, global warmi...

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

There are 54005 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.

SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

#40517 Oct 9, 2013
I'm lucky he's not my grandfather.
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

#40518 Oct 9, 2013
Cut n Paste wrote:
<quoted text>
Now the experts say that is NOT correct:
"Current Issue > vol. 108 no. 29 > Robert K. Kaufmann, 11790–11793
Reconciling anthropogenic climate change with observed temperature 1998–2008
Robert K. Kaufmanna,1, Heikki Kauppib, Michael L. Mann, and James H. Stockc
Author Affiliations
Edited by Robert E. Dickinson, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX, and approved June 2, 2011 (received for review February 16, 2011)
Abstract
Given the widely noted increase in the warming effects of rising greenhouse gas concentrations, it has been unclear why global surface temperatures did not rise between 1998 and 2008."
Now is not 2011 but 2013.

One paper at a time, a denier digs for its own ignorance. Alas...

Since: Mar 09

Wichita, KS

#40519 Oct 9, 2013
Mothra wrote:
<quoted text>
If you've got 'science' put it out there.
If not, don't.
I'm not playing your 'appeal to authority fallacy' game.
It is apparent that you have no science background so I suppose for you ignorance is bliss.

LOL, appealing to authority is a game? That makes Fox and friends equal.....

Since: Mar 09

Wichita, KS

#40520 Oct 9, 2013
Cut n Paste wrote:
<quoted text>
Now the experts say that is NOT correct:
"Current Issue > vol. 108 no. 29 > Robert K. Kaufmann, 11790–11793
Reconciling anthropogenic climate change with observed temperature 1998–2008
Robert K. Kaufmanna,1, Heikki Kauppib, Michael L. Mann, and James H. Stockc
Author Affiliations
Edited by Robert E. Dickinson, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX, and approved June 2, 2011 (received for review February 16, 2011)
Abstract
Given the widely noted increase in the warming effects of rising greenhouse gas concentrations, it has been unclear why global surface temperatures did not rise between 1998 and 2008."
Perhaps it is a result of changes in the ocean.

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v501/n74...

"Our results show that the current hiatus[slowdown in atmospheric warming] is part of natural climate variability, tied specifically to a La-Niña-like decadal cooling."

Since: Apr 08

"the green troll"

#40521 Oct 9, 2013
Cut n Paste wrote:
<quoted text>
Now the experts say that is NOT correct:
No, it's not any more,'cos the the 1934 record was broken in the US in 2012.
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

#40523 Oct 9, 2013
AND..

By the year 2047 the mean air temperature around the planet will shift completely out of the range seen in recent history. From that point on, even a cold year will be warmer than any warm year from 1860 to 2005 if nations continue to emit carbon dioxide the way they do now. And the new extreme temperatures—the new normal—will first occur not in the Arctic but in the tropics, where people, plants and wildlife are least equipped to adapt. That disquieting analysis comes from a massive new study led by Camilo Mora at the University of Hawaii at M noa, published today in Nature.

The report begins with the recognition that the annual mean global air temperature fluctuates from year to year, even though it has been climbing overall since the industrial revolution began. If the world does nothing new, then the temperature by 2047 will exceed even the highest annual temperature from 1860 to 2005. If the world aggressively cuts back on emissions, then the date at which the temperature fully departs from modern history will be delayed until 2069. Mora and his colleagues crunched data from 39 different climate models that feed two future scenarios: business as usual (leading to the 2049 date) and aggressive mitigation (the 2069 date). The same two scenarios are cornerstones of the new climate assessment released two weeks ago by the International Panel on Climate Change.[scientificamerican]

Since: Jul 11

Location hidden

#40524 Oct 9, 2013
gcaveman1 wrote:
<quoted text>
It's like a bonus for the Stupid Party!
Not only do they damage the US economy so they can blame that on Obama in the future, and pointlessly fight a law that is in effect and has been found to be Constitutional, but they get to disrupt climate research and cause the loss of a year's worth of data.
They must be proud!
So proud in fact, Fox decides it's the Obama shutdown, not those hero tea baggers they don't want to own the denial of a soldiers memorial visit. That has to be Obama's fault and the reason the world went broke was "Health care" not the Bush lead GFC. I mean it was so obvious, any tea bagger could see it, health care sent the world broke. But when you look around every corner of the globe 5yrs on and you know what ? NO ONE has dropped it. Why ??? Because they believe health care it is a BASIC HUMAN RIGHT!

So to all those Billions of people out there around the globe living deluded lives who just can't see what those tea baggers see. I think Cruz & co along with Bonehead should be nominated for the next Nobel prize for Economics and Medicine. They may just as well given the world another economic hit in the nuts while still being on their knees and stopped any chance of doing anything constructive about global warming. History will remember them well, I'm sure.
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

#40526 Oct 9, 2013
Evidence from recent years suggests that some tropical species, which are used to only limited climate variation, will be more sensitive to rapid changes in climate than species in areas that experience a wide array of conditions[2].

But it is not clear which species will be hardest hit, says Sean McMahon, a forest ecologist at the Smithsonian Environmental Research Center in Edgewater, Maryland.“This paper very clearly shifts the discussion from ‘if’ the climate will have an impact to ‘when’ it will have an impact — and serves as a call for scientists to use regional climate projections to predict specific impacts on biodiversity,” he says.

Williams agrees.“This study will help identify the emergence of novel climates — but to determine species’ ability to survive climate change, it will be important to look deeper back in time to determine species' responses to past ice ages,” abrupt warming and other extreme climate shifts, he says.
Retired Farmer

Marion, KY

#40528 Oct 9, 2013
OzRitz wrote:
<quoted text>
So proud in fact, Fox decides it's the Obama shutdown, not those hero tea baggers they don't want to own the denial of a soldiers memorial visit. That has to be Obama's fault and the reason the world went broke was "Health care" not the Bush lead GFC. I mean it was so obvious, any tea bagger could see it, health care sent the world broke. But when you look around every corner of the globe 5yrs on and you know what ? NO ONE has dropped it. Why ??? Because they believe health care it is a BASIC HUMAN RIGHT!
So to all those Billions of people out there around the globe living deluded lives who just can't see what those tea baggers see. I think Cruz & co along with Bonehead should be nominated for the next Nobel prize for Economics and Medicine. They may just as well given the world another economic hit in the nuts while still being on their knees and stopped any chance of doing anything constructive about global warming. History will remember them well, I'm sure.
Yep. History will remember then. A friend of mine, somebody that's a whole lot smarter than I am who went to college and got a PhD, told me at our high school class reunion a few months ago, "The 20th Century was called 'The American Century', but the way we're going the 21st will probably be called 'The Century of Decline' or 'The Century of Crisis'."

He said the Tea Party (which he defined broadly to include a whole constellation of 'right wing' ideas)will be called 'The Regressives'.
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

#40529 Oct 9, 2013
More importantly, Outlook for earth:

http://www.nature.com/news/specials/ipcc2013/...

Since: Mar 09

Wichita, KS

#40530 Oct 9, 2013
Retired Farmer wrote:
<quoted text>
Yep. History will remember then. A friend of mine, somebody that's a whole lot smarter than I am who went to college and got a PhD, told me at our high school class reunion a few months ago, "The 20th Century was called 'The American Century', but the way we're going the 21st will probably be called 'The Century of Decline' or 'The Century of Crisis'."
He said the Tea Party (which he defined broadly to include a whole constellation of 'right wing' ideas)will be called 'The Regressives'.
I suppose that is fitting. They call the rest of us progressives.....

Since: Jul 11

Location hidden

#40531 Oct 9, 2013
Patriot AKA Bozo wrote:
<quoted text>
I suppose that is fitting. They call the rest of us progressives.....
If you catch the overseas news services like BBC etc. Tea Party are being called America's Taliban they are not sympathetic at all.
Retired Farmer

Marion, KY

#40532 Oct 9, 2013
Patriot AKA Bozo wrote:
<quoted text>
I suppose that is fitting. They call the rest of us progressives.....
Yep. They, who call themselves "Republicans" use the word "Progressive" as an insult, but who was the best known turn of the 20th century Progressive? Answer: Theodore Roosevelt!

I have actually run some T.R. quotes by some Tea Party types without telling them that it was his words and they instantly labeled it "socialist" or "communist" or "Marxist".

More on the Big Warmup that I posted stuff about earlier. This one is USA specific and has a nice map.
Retired Farmer

Marion, KY

#40533 Oct 9, 2013
gcaveman1

Bay Springs, MS

#40534 Oct 9, 2013
SpaceBlues wrote:
More importantly, Outlook for earth:
http://www.nature.com/news/specials/ipcc2013/...
I think the structure of civilization will fall apart long before the worst of warming arrives...like maybe in just a very few years.
Retired Farmer

Marion, KY

#40535 Oct 9, 2013
gcaveman1 wrote:
<quoted text>
I think the structure of civilization will fall apart long before the worst of warming arrives...like maybe in just a very few years.
I'm afraid you are right, caveman. Human civilization is ultimately based on africulture, no matter how technologically advanced we become. The environment has to be good enough for the earth to be able to produce the food. If it can't, then a lot of people starve and civilization collapses.
It happened to the Anasazi, probably to the Mississippians, and to some civilizations in Central Asia about the same time. In those days, with far far fewer people, the survivors just fanned out and became hunters, herders, and scattered subsistence farmers. Now there are far too many people to do that. When the climate deteriorates to the point that crops fail on a global scale, billions of people will starve.
Mothra

Phoenix, AZ

#40536 Oct 9, 2013
Hate to breakup the 'amen' chorus here, but how about some science?

Met Office backtracks on Global Warming

The UK Met Office has revised one of its forecasts for how much the world may warm in the next few years. It says that the average temperature is likely to rise by 0.43 C by 2017 – as opposed to an earlier forecast that suggested a warming of 0.54C. The explanation is that a new kind of computer model using different parameters has been used.– David Shukman, BBC Science Editor

Have things finally begun to crack with the CAGW narrative? Lets look at the recent data and compare it to Met office forecasts from just 4 months ago.
Fig 1:Comparison of HADCM2 Model results from 2000 against decadel averaged global temperatures.

What is really going on here is that their sophisticated climate models are being continuously tuned so as to “backcast” and agree with past temperature data. There has been no warming for ~15 years. As a result the parameters are now showing little AGW at all for the next 10 years.

A scientist should ask the following question. If predictions of GCM models from just 2 years ago have now been invalidated by the data, how can we now have any faith in new predictions made with the same models but with various fudge factors added ?

http://clivebest.com/blog/...
Mothra

Phoenix, AZ

#40537 Oct 9, 2013
2012 Didn’t Crack The Top Ten For Record Maximums

NOAA has inflated the 2012 record maximum number by adding new stations which didn’t exist during the hot years of the 1930s. That is a completely illegitimate approach, suitable only for government workers.

An apples to apples comparison uses only the same stations. When that is done, 2012 doesn’t even crack the ten hottest years.

http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2013/01/09...
Mothra

Phoenix, AZ

#40538 Oct 9, 2013
The Big Lie Becomes Official At NOAA

I’ve been warning for months that NOAA was going to claim that 2012 was the hottest year ever, regardless of the actual temperatures. They did it today.

"The year 2012 was the warmest on record for the contiguous United States, beating the previous record by a full degree in temperature, a government climate agency said on Tuesday. Scientists at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration said the average temperature in 2012 in the contiguous United States was 55.3 degrees Fahrenheit (12.94 degrees Celsius), 3.2 degrees above the average recorded during the 20th century and 1.0 degree above 1998, until now the hottest on record."

2012 was hottest year on record in U.S., climate agency says | Reuters

I will do a more complete analysis later, but for now I want you to focus on the bold sentence above, which claims that 1998 used to be the hottest year in the US.

In an article which NASA published in 1999, Hansen showed that 1998 was only the fifth warmest year, after 1934, 1921, 1931 and 1953. In fact, 1998 was 0.6C cooler than 1934.

Over the past decade, NASA and NOAA have continuously altered the temperature record to cool the past and warm the present. Their claims are straight out of Orwell’s 1984, and have nothing to do with science.

http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2013/01/08...
Mothra

Phoenix, AZ

#40539 Oct 9, 2013
Marble Bar heatwave, 1923-24

The world record for the longest sequence of days above 100°Fahrenheit (or 37.8° on the Celsius scale) is held by Marble Bar in the inland Pilbara district of Western Australia. The temperature, measured under standard exposure conditions, reached or exceeded the century mark every day from 31 October 1923 to 7 April 1924, a total of 160 days.

http://www.bom.gov.au/lam/climate/levelthree/...

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
News Israeli troops begin Gaza pullout as Hamas decl... (Jan '09) 5 min TRD 70,152
Topix Chitown Regulars (Aug '09) 9 min Go Blue Forever 99,934
News Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 10 min Mr Lib 1,252,691
abby7-7-15 23 min Julie 6
Fun Song Combos (Sep '12) 29 min boundary painter 445
News BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit contesting... (Jan '09) 32 min Chicagoan by Birth 192,543
Word (Dec '08) 46 min boundary painter 5,331
More from around the web

Chicago People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Personal Finance

Chicago Mortgages