Once slow-moving threat, global warmi...

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

There are 64843 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.

truth facts

Delaware, OH

#42753 Jan 19, 2014
SpaceBlues wrote:
<quoted text>Shish.. you feel worse now?
What part of my post you find not to be the truth or facts? Come on.. get angry again..
heheheh
Angry?I laugh my ass off at you wacko birds.Thought it was the funniest sh$$ when the GW "so called-scientist" got iced in on the research ship.You nut jobs should try to sale your wares at your local flea market or Disneyland.
SpaceBlues

United States

#42754 Jan 19, 2014
truth facts wrote:
<quoted text>Angry?#I laugh my ass off at you wacko birds.#Thought it was the funniest sh$$ when the GW "so called-scientist" got iced in on the research ship.#You nut jobs should try to sale[sic] your wares at your local flea market or Disneyland.
Yes, you are angry, duh!

Where did you reply to my post?

Get in touch with your head: why are you angry? Because you can't write in English.

LOL

Since: Apr 08

"the green troll"

#42755 Jan 19, 2014
AlgoreTheTinFoilHatter wrote:
Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW) is a theory (hypothesis). It is an
unproven theory. What you do with theories is put them to the test with
scientific observations. Let's see what data points we now have:

3) Ocean temperatures have not risen since 2000 when the 3000 Argo buoys
were launched. The buoys even show a slight decrease in ocean temperatures
Another denier talking point from 5 years ago that has fallen by the wayside.

It might have been true in 2008 (from 0-700m), but it ain't now.

http://www.nodc.noaa.gov/OC5/3M_HEAT_CONTENT/...

0-2000m shows an acceleration in warming.

http://www.nodc.noaa.gov/OC5/3M_HEAT_CONTENT/...

Yes folks, deniers are liars, and time proves it.
SpaceBlues

United States

#42756 Jan 19, 2014
Massachusetts wrote:
So true, so true.
<quoted text>
Which one of those listed in your post is true?
----------
1) Average annual temperatures have not surpassed 1998 (NOAA)
(University of Alabama)
2) Average annual temperatures are now trending downward since 1998
(NOAA)(University of Alabama)
3) Ocean temperatures have not risen since 2000 when the 3000 Argo buoys
were launched. The buoys even show a slight decrease in ocean temperatures
4) The Arctic ice froze to February levels by December 07, there are 1mm
more sq km than before (previous was 13mm sq km)
5) The Arctic ice is 20cm thicker than "normal" (whatever that is)
6) All polar bear pods are stable or growing (NOAA/PBS)
7) Mount Kilimanjaro is not melting because of global warming, rather
"sublimation"
8) The Antarctic is not "melting", it is growing in most places, the
sloughing off at the edges is normal as the ice mass grows
9) The majority of the Antarctic is 8 degrees below "normal" (again,
whatever that is)
10) The coveted .7 degree rise in temperatures over the last 100 years
has been wiped out with last years below "normal" temperatures (NOAA
coolest winter since 2001)
11) Al Gores film was just deemed "propaganda" in a court of law in the
UK as many points could not be substantiated by scientists
12) It was also just reveled that some of the footage in Als film was
CGI. The ice shelf collapse was from the movie The Day After Tomorrow (ABC)
13) One of the scientists that originally thought that CO2 preceded the
warming has now found with new data that the CO2 rise follows the
warming (Dr David Evans)
14) August 2008 was the first time since 1913 there were no sun spots.
15) The Medieval Warm Period was warmer than the 20th century (no SUVs)
16) Many scientists are now predicting 30 years of cooling.
17) The greenhouse effect is real, our small contribution to it cannot
even be measured
18) Several publications, including those that are warmist have recently
written that the natural cycles of the earth may mask AGW. Give me a break.

P.S. No break for you!

Since: Jul 11

Location hidden

#42757 Jan 19, 2014
truth facts wrote:
<quoted text>Angry?I laugh my ass off at you wacko birds.Thought it was the funniest sh$$ when the GW "so called-scientist" got iced in on the research ship.You nut jobs should try to sale your wares at your local flea market or Disneyland.
You know what is even funnier or is it sad, a lil of both i think. The fact that you would not have known about the iced ship if Fox news hadn't told you and they would know about it having heard it on the grapevine not from their own research.
But of course as with every story they do, put on their own embellishment of BS saying it was a ship full of climate scientists studying global warming and that was just not true. The sole purpose of the trip was to retrace the steps made by the first Antarctic explorer Mawson in 1912. Yes some climate scientists were hitching a ride but almost half the passengers were eco tourists including politicians. But it would be fair to say there would have been very few deniers on board but the other half that were on board paid for the trip with their OWN money not a government grant as you idiots want to keep pointing out as motivation for research. Yes climate was a big part of the study because it was comparing what was there a 100 yrs ago with now.
litesong

Everett, WA

#42758 Jan 19, 2014
lying farts wrote:
.... funniest sh$$ when the GW "so called-scientist" got iced in on the research ship.
AGW science predicted in 2002, re-confirmed in 2005 & is proved true now, that Antarctic sea ice would increase. Touched toxic topix AGW deniers like to crow(as if it wasn't an AGW prediction) that Antarctic sea ice is increasing & prove their lack of science background.
truth facts

Delaware, OH

#42759 Jan 19, 2014
Oh you cry baby GW nut jobs don't fret your messiah will save the day and sign another executive order saving the day.Forcing everyone into bullsh$$ just like Obozoscam.Oh I know you'll say it was voted on(by 1 party) ruled constitutional by scotus(LOL) so it's here to stay.He's not going to get his way with his GW agenda so he'll just sign that eo order.HOORAY,HOORAY your messiah will save the day.
gcaveman1

Bay Springs, MS

#42760 Jan 19, 2014
The worst El Nino weather events, which are linked to devastating natural disasters and reduced Australian rainfall, will double with dangerous climate change, research has found.

In a study published on Monday in the journal Nature Climate Change, an international team of researchers, including Australian scientists, for the first time predict ''extreme'' El Nino events will occur once every 10 years - instead of every 20 years as in the previous century - as the planet continues to warm due to human activity.

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/environment/climate-cha...
truth facts

Delaware, OH

#42761 Jan 19, 2014
Gallop polling shows that Americans are not concerned about the junk science.GW/climate change didn't even rate in the top 8.LOL
LessHypeMoreFact

Orleans, Canada

#42762 Jan 19, 2014
truth facts wrote:
Gallop polling shows that Americans are not concerned about the junk science.GW/climate change didn't even rate in the top 8.LOL
http://www.gallup.com/poll/161714/republican-...
Republican Skepticism Toward Global Warming Eases

Of course, polls do not create science fact. Those are still strong whether the polls are for or against. And what is at the top of the agenda shifts with each new political crisis. It is probably NSA spying at the moment. Of no real concern.
SpaceBlues

United States

#42764 Jan 19, 2014
Lord Hater wrote:
Global warming. Climate change.
Which is it. Started off a Global warming but when all the horrible weather events did not happen. The powers that be decided we need a new phrase so we can play both sides of the issue. Kinda like Obama and the Democrats ditching (Obama care ) when it went bad. Started calling it ACA.
What's your point? Whine a lot when you dont want to learn, huh hater?

http://www.skepticalscience.com/climate-chang...

So to sum up, although the terms are used interchangeably because they are causally related,'global warming' and 'climate change' refer to different physical phenomena. The term 'climate change' has been used frequently in the scientific literature for many decades, and the usage of both terms has increased over the past 40 years. Moreover, since the planet continues to warm, there is no reason to change the terminology. Perhaps the only individual to advocate the change was Frank Luntz, a Republican political strategist and global warming skeptic, who used focus group results to determine that the term 'climate change' is less frightening to the general public than 'global warming'. There is simply no factual basis whatsoever to the myth "they changed the name from global warming to climate change".
SpaceBlues

United States

#42765 Jan 19, 2014
The argument "they changed the name" suggests that the term 'global warming' was previously the norm, and the widespread use of the term 'climate change' is now. However, this is simply untrue. For example, a seminal climate science work is Gilbert Plass' 1956 study 'The Carbon Dioxide Theory of Climatic Change'(which coincidentally estimated the climate sensitivity to a doubling of atmospheric carbon dioxide at 3.6C, not far off from today's widely accepted most likely value of 3C). Barrett and Gast published a letter in Science in 1971 entitled simply 'Climate Change'. The journal 'Climatic Change' was created in 1977 (and is still published today). The IPCC was formed in 1988, and of course the 'CC' is 'climate change', not 'global warming'. There are many, many other examples of the use of the term 'climate change' many decades ago. There is nothing new whatsoever about the usage of the term.

In fact, according to Google Books, the usage of both terms in books published in the United States has increased at similar rates over the past 40 years.

http://www.skepticalscience.com/climate-chang...
gcaveman1

Bay Springs, MS

#42767 Jan 19, 2014
Lord Hater wrote:
Global warming. Climate change.
Which is it. Started off a Global warming but when all the horrible weather events did not happen. The powers that be decided we need a new phrase so we can play both sides of the issue. Kinda like Obama and the Democrats ditching (Obama care ) when it went bad. Started calling it ACA.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHA!

Another one!
gcaveman1

Bay Springs, MS

#42768 Jan 19, 2014
Lord Hater wrote:
Global warming. Climate change.
Which is it. Started off a Global warming but when all the horrible weather events did not happen. The powers that be decided we need a new phrase so we can play both sides of the issue. Kinda like Obama and the Democrats ditching (Obama care ) when it went bad. Started calling it ACA.
Someone will call me a pervert, saying I am picking on a mental cripple like you, but....

I don't care.

Climate change and global warming are 2 (two), difFerENt things; global warming causes climate change.

"Which is it. " Is that an interrogatory? Then you should put a ? at the end of it.

You, uh, haven't noticed any horrible weather events, huh?

Frank Luntz.

It was the ACA before it became Obamacare.

Any questions?
gcaveman1

Bay Springs, MS

#42769 Jan 19, 2014
Lord Hater wrote:
Global warming. Climate change.
Which is it. Started off a Global warming but when all the horrible weather events did not happen. The powers that be decided we need a new phrase so we can play both sides of the issue. Kinda like Obama and the Democrats ditching (Obama care ) when it went bad. Started calling it ACA.
"Started off a Global warming but when all the horrible weather events did not happen."

This is an incomplete sentence. It lacking a prepositional verbal object phrase or something, makes no sense, and shows lack of foresight and knowledge of grammar rules, and is just plain sloppy. Only professional writers can do that kind of stuff, and you aint qualified.

The whole post is stupid. That's just my professional assessment, you understand.

Since: Jul 11

Location hidden

#42770 Jan 19, 2014
truth facts wrote:
Gallop polling shows that Americans are not concerned about the junk science.GW/climate change didn't even rate in the top 8.LOL
Which poll was that, the one conducted on Rush Limpdick's listeners or the one down at your local coal miners drinking hole.
truth facts

Delaware, OH

#42772 Jan 20, 2014
OzRitz wrote:
<quoted text>
Which poll was that, the one conducted on Rush Limpdick's listeners or the one down at your local coal miners drinking hole.
hey nutjob Didn't know Rush conducted gallop polling.
truth facts

Delaware, OH

#42773 Jan 20, 2014
LessHypeMoreFact wrote:
<quoted text>
http://www.gallup.com/poll/161714/republican-...
Republican Skepticism Toward Global Warming Eases
Of course, polls do not create science fact. Those are still strong whether the polls are for or against. And what is at the top of the agenda shifts with each new political crisis. It is probably NSA spying at the moment. Of no real concern.
Your missing the point.people are not concerned with your junk science.The only people concerned with it is scammers(Mother earth Gore) and kooks.Have a nice day.
gcaveman1

Bay Springs, MS

#42774 Jan 20, 2014
truth facts wrote:
<quoted text>hey nutjob Didn't know Rush conducted gallop polling.
I'm assuming you mean the Gallup poll? It's OK, I'm used to dealing with ignorant deniers who can't spell or capitalize proper names.

You have a more recent poll than 4/13? Because that one says you're a liar.

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#42775 Jan 20, 2014
truth facts wrote:
<quoted text>Your missing the point.people are not concerned with your junk science.The only people concerned with it is scammers(Mother earth Gore) and kooks.Have a nice day.
The truth is that to folks like you, all science is junk. You need to study what science is and how it works then perhaps you could have an opinion. Otherwise, you are just showing your ignorance.

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 Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 1 hr Oxbridge Troll 1,782,545
Four letter word game (Dec '11) 2 hr MPMMB 2,667
Last word + 2 (Mar '12) 2 hr MPMMB 1,148
Change one letter in the word (Apr '12) 2 hr MPMMB 138
Booby DeNiro guarantees Donald's 2020 election ... 4 hr Guest 18
last post wins! (Apr '13) 4 hr The real Rudy 2,872
Double Word Game (Dec '11) 4 hr The real Rudy 3,922

Chicago Jobs

Personal Finance

Chicago Mortgages