Once slow-moving threat, global warmi...

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

There are 59540 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.

B as in B S as in S

Minneapolis, MN

#41257 Nov 12, 2013
LessHypeMoreFact wrote:
<quoted text>
But it isn't just about one typhoon or the death toll. It is about the long term changes to climate that make such disasters on a grand scale more prevalent. Being able to 'disconnect' the cause and effect, is one thing that is helping the denialists and preventing responsible action.
One typhoon... ONE!
OK. Let's accept this one typhoon for the entire season as proof of CAGW.
Let's also accept that an average number of typhoons is evidence that CC has had no effect on that season's severe storms.

Summary: CAGW is linked to a typhoon season in which a single severe storm made landfall.
Conclusion: one storm a season must be bad for life on Earth because NOTHING good comes of AGW.
B as in B S as in S

Minneapolis, MN

#41258 Nov 12, 2013
JAG wrote:
U.N. Global Summit being held in Warsaw saw Australia stand against any additional taxes set aside for global initiatives. The Australian delegation gave this statement:
"No longer support Socialism masquerading as Environmentalism"
Perhaps America will join this sensible opinion
and take a step further and not accept our tax money to support Socialism masquerading as Healthcare.
Huh... Australia: The new leader of 'The Free World'.
I guess AGW is bad for The United States.
gcaveman1

Bay Springs, MS

#41259 Nov 12, 2013
B as in B S as in S wrote:
<quoted text>
One typhoon... ONE!
OK. Let's accept this one typhoon for the entire season as proof of CAGW.
Let's also accept that an average number of typhoons is evidence that CC has had no effect on that season's severe storms.
Summary: CAGW is linked to a typhoon season in which a single severe storm made landfall.
Conclusion: one storm a season must be bad for life on Earth because NOTHING good comes of AGW.
Does your foot taste so good that you want to keep it in your mouth all the time?

There have been 13 named typhoons in the north and central Pacific this year, with 5 of them unofficially classified as "super" typhoons. That does not count the many tropical storms.

Idiot!
gcaveman1

Bay Springs, MS

#41260 Nov 12, 2013
B as in B S as in S wrote:
<quoted text>
Huh... Australia: The new leader of 'The Free World'.
I guess AGW is bad for The United States.
It's notable that the greatest numbers of deniers and the strongest denial infrastructures are based in the mainly English-speaking countries of the United States, Canada, the United Kingdom, and Australia. These countries are also heavy producers and consumers of fossil fuels.

The numbers of deniers in all other countries is much smaller in proportion.
heavytune

Seattle, WA

#41261 Nov 12, 2013
gcaveman1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Does your foot taste so good that you want to keep it in your mouth all the time?
There have been 13 named typhoons in the north and central Pacific this year, with 5 of them unofficially classified as "super" typhoons. That does not count the many tropical storms.
Idiot!
wow 'cave', so these storms are quite common, going back hundreds, if not thousands or millions of years. most have had even higher death tolls. who would have thought they were a new thing? your family reunions must be special events. dating, marriage who knows.

“BET DAP”

Since: Feb 09

GOOM BOWN

#41262 Nov 12, 2013
Fair Game wrote:
<quoted text>
Fact: sea level rise makes storms more damaging.
Fact: warmer ocean temperatures give storms more energy and make them more damaging.
Fact: a warmer atmosphere carries more moisture, which results in more precipitation, making storms worse.
Not LOL.
LOL
Are you a chronic sensationalist?
LOL
Here's a fact: the IPCC has proven that they're incapable of any scientific predictive skill.
LOL
Btw.... What's the difference in damage of a 14' storm surge today that may be 14' 7" a century from now? How many of the additional inches from the future storm surge directly caused from man made co2 emissions?
LOL

“BET DAP”

Since: Feb 09

GOOM BOWN

#41263 Nov 12, 2013
SpaceBlues wrote:
<quoted text>Follow news?
The Philippine delegate at U.N. climate talks began a fast on Monday in protest at a lack of action on global warming that he blamed for fuelling a super typhoon that has killed an estimated 10,000 people in his country.
LOL
You get your scientific factoids from a foreign UN delegate.....who is panhandling for sympathy and financial aid.
LOL
Interesting.
gcaveman1

Bay Springs, MS

#41264 Nov 12, 2013
heavytune wrote:
<quoted text>wow 'cave', so these storms are quite common, going back hundreds, if not thousands or millions of years. most have had even higher death tolls. who would have thought they were a new thing? your family reunions must be special events. dating, marriage who knows.
Wow, "acidpunk", I'll bet tropical cyclones even killed dinosaurs 100 million years ago.

But our concern is on what kills PEOPLE today. And in the future.

You think my family reunions have anything to do with the science? That just shows how little you know about science OR families.

Since: Jul 11

Location hidden

#41265 Nov 12, 2013
JAG wrote:
U.N. Global Summit being held in Warsaw saw Australia stand against any additional taxes set aside for global initiatives. The Australian delegation gave this statement:
"No longer support Socialism masquerading as Environmentalism"
Perhaps America will join this sensible opinion
and take a step further and not accept our tax money to support Socialism masquerading as Healthcare.
The guy who got elected as new leader in Australia is a complete di.khead, a Rhodes scholar masquerading like a tea bagger in disguise. He was only elected because the ruling government self destructed with in fighting changing leaders every 5 mins. It was not his policies that won it for him and his plan to repeal the carbon trading emissions/ tax call it what you will is never going to pass as legislation. The opposition parties will group together and block it. It will be a stand off much like in the US but with the power to force another election. See what happens, but as it stands he is not representing the view of the majority. His other major policy band wagon of stopping the refugee boats coming from Indonesia came undone in the first week. The Indonesian's gave him the finger & refused to take the boats he instructed the navy to turn back. He has no clue! Even most business support the carbon pricing, its only the mining companies that don't. They have all priced carbon into their business models, knowing that it is inevitable and even they are against his policy. To change it all back again is a exercise in futility.
heavytune

Seattle, WA

#41266 Nov 12, 2013
ritedownthemiddle wrote:
<quoted text>LOL
You get your scientific factoids from a foreign UN delegate.....who is panhandling for sympathy and financial aid.
LOL
Interesting.
oh my 'middle', it is much more than that. the science is real, we make it up as we go. why panhandle when we can demand. forget about all the other weather events, this one was special. you caused it, you and your friend brian. all of the other storms were natural, but this one was caused by you, and that asshat brian. seems every time the wind blows, well no, that's never happened before, but the rain, no wait a minute, the sun shine, no, not that, the tides. yea, you and brian are causing the tides. the science is clear now.

“BET DAP”

Since: Feb 09

GOOM BOWN

#41267 Nov 12, 2013
heavytune wrote:
<quoted text>oh my 'middle', it is much more than that. the science is real, we make it up as we go. why panhandle when we can demand. forget about all the other weather events, this one was special. you caused it, you and your friend brian. all of the other storms were natural, but this one was caused by you, and that asshat brian. seems every time the wind blows, well no, that's never happened before, but the rain, no wait a minute, the sun shine, no, not that, the tides. yea, you and brian are causing the tides. the science is clear now.
hilarious and sad at the same time!!
B as in B S as in S

Minneapolis, MN

#41268 Nov 12, 2013
gcaveman1 wrote:
<quoted text>

There have been 13 named typhoons in the north and central Pacific this year,

Idiot!
LOL... First a pervert, always a pervert, and now a STRAWMAN. One would do well if one could read.

I repeat:
"Summary: CAGW is linked to a typhoon season in which a single severe storm made landfall."

Since: Jul 11

Location hidden

#41269 Nov 12, 2013
A new study by Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory scientists shows that observed changes in global (ocean and land) precipitation are directly affected by human activities and cannot be explained by natural variability alone. The research appears in the Nov. 11 online edition of the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

Emissions of heat-trapping and ozone-depleting gases affect the distribution of precipitation through two mechanisms. Increasing temperatures are expected to make wet regions wetter and dry regions drier (thermodynamic changes); and changes in atmospheric circulation patterns will push storm tracks and subtropical dry zones toward the poles.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/11/...

LA Times: Not exactly predicting a bright future

Climate change will disrupt not only the natural world but also society, posing risks to the world's economy and the food and water supply and contributing to violent conflict, an international panel of scientists says.

http://www.latimes.com/local/la-me-climate-ch...

Since: Jul 11

Location hidden

#41270 Nov 12, 2013
ritedownthemiddle wrote:
<quoted text>hilarious and sad at the same time!!
Ya never know, those tin foil hats you and Brian wear to block anything getting in just might be influencing the moon's gravitational pull. So it's feasible you guys could be affecting the tides!
Green Force

Corona Del Mar, CA

#41271 Nov 12, 2013
To combat global warming we must reduce the density of high density cities like New York, Washington and Los Angeles.

There's too much concrete, steel, metal and glass. Very little green.(the potted plant in the lobby doesn't count)

We need low density cities with sensible development and lots of open space.

People need to live close to nature and in more balanced biomes.
SpaceBlues

Humble, TX

#41272 Nov 12, 2013
ritedownthemiddle wrote:
<quoted text>LOL
You get your scientific factoids from a foreign UN delegate.....who is panhandling for sympathy and financial aid.
LOL
Interesting.
LOL.

Are you a serial sensationalist?

LOL.
Truth Facts

Chillicothe, OH

#41273 Nov 12, 2013
Green Force wrote:
To combat global warming we must reduce the density of high density cities like New York, Washington and Los Angeles.
There's too much concrete, steel, metal and glass. Very little green.(the potted plant in the lobby doesn't count)
We need low density cities with sensible development and lots of open space.
People need to live close to nature and in more balanced biomes.
did you just say that in one breath?That's amazing

“no one told me”

Since: Dec 07

Denver

#41274 Nov 12, 2013
OzRitz wrote:
<quoted text>
Ya never know, those tin foil hats you and Brian wear to block anything getting in just might be influencing the moon's gravitational pull. So it's feasible you guys could be affecting the tides!
evening, traitorous coward.

“no one told me”

Since: Dec 07

Denver

#41275 Nov 12, 2013
Green Force wrote:
To combat global warming we must reduce the density of high density cities like New York, Washington and Los Angeles.
There's too much concrete, steel, metal and glass. Very little green.(the potted plant in the lobby doesn't count)
We need low density cities with sensible development and lots of open space.
People need to live close to nature and in more balanced biomes.
I suggest you move to Pahrump, Nv. and get back to nature, get moving.
Al Gore

Fullerton, CA

#41276 Nov 13, 2013
Green Force wrote:
To combat global warming we must reduce the density of high density cities like New York, Washington and Los Angeles.
There's too much concrete, steel, metal and glass. Very little green.(the potted plant in the lobby doesn't count)
We need low density cities with sensible development and lots of open space.
People need to live close to nature and in more balanced biomes.
So true. My plan encourages green homes in small green cities (10,000 to 40,000 population) throughout the US.

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
Oprah to cast comedian and actor Larry Bourne I... 26 min DtownCrazi 2
News Israeli troops begin Gaza pullout as Hamas decl... (Jan '09) 46 min Budmo hey Budmo heey 70,610
News Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 58 min Yeah 1,383,857
News BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit contesting... (Jan '09) 1 hr Rogue Scholar 05 214,601
Observations 4 hr A Noted Observer 36
last post wins! (Apr '13) 4 hr Retired SOF 1,001
Four letter word game (Dec '11) 6 hr GEORGIA 1,525
More from around the web

Personal Finance

Chicago Mortgages