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

Full story: Newsday 48,595
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

#43289 Feb 8, 2014
OzRitz wrote:
<quoted text>
Like everything else the deniers love to quote on here, if you dig deep enough, web sites, blogs & so called scientific research all come back to the same source. Fossil Money!
It sure as hell won't be any environmental group, it is always some self serving lobby for the fossil industry. Just the same as tobacco did trying to disclaim the health risks with smoking. Then try to whine about legitimate climate research as a funding scam. Who is pushing who's barrow here. I find it no coincidence that big money manipulates the least informed to be their voice while any academic they might rope in just happens to be also on the payroll. No clash of ethics there! none at all
Tell ya what meathed, next time you cite any source please include financial documents of all parties involved so we can all see where that money came from.

And put another record.... yours in broken.

Since: Apr 08

"the green troll"

#43291 Feb 8, 2014
Mothra wrote:
<quoted text>
<sigh>
The first tactic of the debunking guide... dismiss the argument based on who is making it.
Yeah, people with their back pockets stuffed with wads of cash from an industry don't relay scientific findings harmful to that industry.

The second tactic is of course to look at exactly how they distort, misrepresent and lie....
gcaveman1

Laurel, MS

#43292 Feb 8, 2014
denier wrote:
<quoted text>2ft of snow in part of the Sierras is not minimal but it's not enough it needs to get to the southern portions of the state
No, not enough.

That translates into 5-8" of rain, depending on the moisture content.

Since: Apr 08

"the green troll"

#43293 Feb 8, 2014
Truth Facts wrote:
computer models.
Let's debunk some charges these "warmist groups" make:
-- The rate and magnitude of recent warming is unprecedented. This is absolutely false. Peer reviewed studies, including the journal Climate Dynamics, recently concluded that average global temperatures stopped warming 15 years ago. Looking farther back, there have been many periods of rapid warming before man's measurable release of CO2.
There are many problems with this.

1) There are hundreds of scientific papers published on global warming every year that support global warming. Finding one that seems to reject it does not mean that one paper is right.

http://thinkprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2...

2) The paper quoted says nothing about the rate or magnitude of warming, or about past warming and its relation to global warming.

3) The title of the paper quoted is:

Role for Eurasian Arctic shelf sea ice in a secularly varying hemispheric climate signal during the 20th century.

It's proposing a 60 year cycle that doesn't say anything about warming in the long term due to global warming. To suggest it says global warming has stopped is a lie.

4) The paper is very speculative and anything it does say is a long way from being accepted by the scientific community, let alone overturning global warming.(Didn't stop the denier blogs from doing their own stadium wave with it though.)

5) There is good scientific evidence that the rate and magnitude of global warming is unprecedented.
Current global warming appears anomalous in relation to the climate of the last 20000 years

ABSTRACT: To distinguish between natural and anthropogenic forcing, the supposedly ongoing global warming needs to be put in a longer, geological perspective. When the last ca. 20000 yr of climate development is reviewed, including the climatically dramatic period when the Last Ice Age ended,
http://www.int-res.com/abstracts/cr/v48/n1/p5...
A Reconstruction of Regional and Global Temperature for the Past 11,300 Years

Surface temperature reconstructions of the past 1500 years suggest that recent warming is unprecedented in that time.
http://www.sciencemag.org/content/339/6124/11...

6) Past episodes of warming were caused by known factors that do not explain the modern warming.

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

Since: Jul 11

Location hidden

#43294 Feb 8, 2014
Mothra wrote:
<quoted text>
<sigh>
The first tactic of the debunking guide... dismiss the argument based on who is making it.
demsogblog?
DeSmogBlog is a smear site founded by a scientifically unqualified public relations man, James Hoggan and funded by a convicted money launderer, John Lefebvre. The irony here is their favorite tactic is to attempt to smear those they disagree with as funded by “dirty money”. Since it’s creation in 2006 the site has done nothing but post poorly researched propaganda with a clear intent to smear respected scientists, policy analysts or groups who dares oppose an alarmist position on global warming. Their articles frequently reference unreliable sources such as Wikipedia and Sourcewatch since they are unable to find any fact based criticisms of those they criticize in respected news sources.
http://sppiblog.org/news/the-truth-about-desm...
Now, let me guess... you'll find another site to "debunk" SPPI.
Never mind those inconvenient facts presented, and please give up the crappola "peer review" standard. It's a pathetic argument..
Is this the same as Charles Manson believing in GW so therefore its bad. Here is the truth
about Lefebvre the so called hard core criminal indicating a clash of interests and what possible financial gain he would get out of pushing the GW message. Should I add your name to the liable list as well ? This is what happens when a single piece of BS gets posted around too many times to the ignorant who never bother to fact check. People like yourself who embellishes it just a lil bit more to make it sound more convincing.

"Richard Littlemore has posted an annotated transcript of his debate with Monckton, with corrections to Monckton’s numerous false statements.

Andrew Bolt thinks the best argument that Monckton had in the debate with Littlemore was his defamation of one of the funders of Desmogblog, so he repeats it, falsely accusing John Lefebvre of being “a convicted Internet fraudster”, when in fact Lefebvre has not been charged with fraud, let alone convicted of it. I don’t know much about the law, but doesn’t that make Bolt liable as well as Mockton if Lefebvre decides to sue?"

http://scienceblogs.com/deltoid/2008/08/23/mo...

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#43295 Feb 8, 2014
OzRitz wrote:
<quoted text>
Is this the same as Charles Manson believing in GW so therefore its bad. Here is the truth
about Lefebvre the so called hard core criminal indicating a clash of interests and what possible financial gain he would get out of pushing the GW message. Should I add your name to the liable list as well ? This is what happens when a single piece of BS gets posted around too many times to the ignorant who never bother to fact check. People like yourself who embellishes it just a lil bit more to make it sound more convincing.
"Richard Littlemore has posted an annotated transcript of his debate with Monckton, with corrections to Monckton’s numerous false statements.
Andrew Bolt thinks the best argument that Monckton had in the debate with Littlemore was his defamation of one of the funders of Desmogblog, so he repeats it, falsely accusing John Lefebvre of being “a convicted Internet fraudster”, when in fact Lefebvre has not been charged with fraud, let alone convicted of it. I don’t know much about the law, but doesn’t that make Bolt liable as well as Mockton if Lefebvre decides to sue?"
http://scienceblogs.com/deltoid/2008/08/23/mo...
Are you saying mankind's actions of consumerism in a fossil fuel economy, of self interest and a false economy of fiat money of servitude and debt , The means in which we extract these fossil fuel energy's , has no effect on the global environment and the biosphere of this planet?

Since: Jul 11

Location hidden

#43296 Feb 8, 2014
oneear69 wrote:
<quoted text> Are you saying mankind's actions of consumerism in a fossil fuel economy, of self interest and a false economy of fiat money of servitude and debt , The means in which we extract these fossil fuel energy's , has no effect on the global environment and the biosphere of this planet?
Read again, before any friendly fire. I was making the point about those who HAVE a self interest against those who choose to believe science and are prepared to pay whatever it takes. That is the REAL difference between deniers and warmers. If you look deep enough in deniers so called science it is always comes back to fossil fuel interests. Mothballs was trying to make the same comparison because an individual who funded a website was using a tax haven in the Isle of Mann. There was no clash of interest at all, it was a online gambling site.
If tax havens discredited someone from having a voice then how come Romney stood for President he is the king of tax havens!

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#43297 Feb 8, 2014
OzRitz wrote:
<quoted text>
Is this the same as Charles Manson believing in GW so therefore its bad. Here is the truth
about Lefebvre the so called hard core criminal indicating a clash of interests and what possible financial gain he would get out of pushing the GW message. Should I add your name to the liable list as well ? This is what happens when a single piece of BS gets posted around too many times to the ignorant who never bother to fact check. People like yourself who embellishes it just a lil bit more to make it sound more convincing.
"Richard Littlemore has posted an annotated transcript of his debate with Monckton, with corrections to Monckton’s numerous false statements.
Andrew Bolt thinks the best argument that Monckton had in the debate with Littlemore was his defamation of one of the funders of Desmogblog, so he repeats it, falsely accusing John Lefebvre of being “a convicted Internet fraudster”, when in fact Lefebvre has not been charged with fraud, let alone convicted of it. I don’t know much about the law, but doesn’t that make Bolt liable as well as Mockton if Lefebvre decides to sue?"
http://scienceblogs.com/deltoid/2008/08/23/mo...
Charles Manson is a perfect example, of how much our social environments have an effect on us. His is one of institutionalization. A direct result of how we treat our poor.

Since: Apr 08

"the green troll"

#43298 Feb 8, 2014
Truth Facts wrote:
-- The number and intensity of major hurricanes and tornadoes is rising. The 2013 Atlantic hurricane season was the first Atlantic hurricane season since 1994 to end with no known major hurricanes. Data published by Florida State University indicates global cyclonic intensity has been trending down for 20 years.
ropical cyclone accumulated cyclone energy (ACE)
has exhibited strikingly large global interannual variability
during the past 40
&#8208;
years. In the pentad since 2006,
Northern Hemisphere and global tropical cyclone ACE has
decreased dramatically to the lowest levels since the late
1970s. Additionally, the global frequency of tropical
cyclones has reached a historical low. Here evidence is
presented demonstrating that considerable variability in
tropical cyclone ACE is associated with the evolution of the
character of observed large
&#8208;
scale climate mechanisms
including the El Nińo Southern Oscillation and Pacific
Decadal Oscillation.

http://scholar.google.co.uk/scholar_url...

In other words, low hurricane activity is due to natural variability and says nothing about global warming.

Since: Apr 08

"the green troll"

#43299 Feb 8, 2014
Truth Facts wrote:
-- Droughts and floods are more frequent and intense. Again false. According to 106 peer reviewed global drought and 47 global flood studies, this is not true.
Lol.

Tell that to the people of England, experiencing rain and floods unprecedented in hundreds of years of records!

It's not hard to find studies attributing flooding to global warming:
Here we show that human-induced increases in greenhouse gases have contributed to the observed intensification of heavy precipitation events found over approximately two-thirds of data-covered parts of Northern Hemisphere land areas.
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v470/n73...
The precise magnitude of the anthropogenic contribution remains uncertain, but in nine out of ten cases our model results indicate that twentieth-century anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions increased the risk of floods occurring in England and Wales in autumn 2000 by more than 20%, and in two out of three cases by more than 90%.
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v470/n73...

"According to 106 peer reviewed global drought and 47 global flood studies, this is not true."

An impressive claim, which has been cut'n pasted around countless denier blogs, but nowhere is it actually referenced.

As a sceptic, I'd want to know, where does it come from?

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#43300 Feb 8, 2014
OzRitz wrote:
<quoted text>
Read again, before any friendly fire. I was making the point about those who HAVE a self interest against those who choose to believe science and are prepared to pay whatever it takes. That is the REAL difference between deniers and warmers. If you look deep enough in deniers so called science it is always comes back to fossil fuel interests. Mothballs was trying to make the same comparison because an individual who funded a website was using a tax haven in the Isle of Mann. There was no clash of interest at all, it was a online gambling site.
If tax havens discredited someone from having a voice then how come Romney stood for President he is the king of tax havens!
i just don't see the point in arguing over ,the piety indifference's of the obvious problem like GW, when clearly mankind does and is having an effect on it.Regardless of ones political , religious, or monetary stature. The problems of our shared biosphere and social environments is of the same importance to us all. I think we spend to much time pointing a finger of blame, and not really dealing with the problems, using the best of mankind's knowledge and ability as a whole. Without self interest, it would be possible to put the worlds greatest scientists in a think tank, and get to the actual data.And have it presented to the citizenry, and then by mutual agreement , decide on a coarse of action. A kind of Direct Democracy, where the citizenry is educated and votes in the interest of the whole rather than self interest.

“I Luv Carbon Dioxide”

Since: Dec 08

Location hidden

#43301 Feb 8, 2014
Droughts and floods have always happened; don't panic.

Do you really trust politicians to mitigate climate change?

Since: Oct 13

Location hidden

#43302 Feb 8, 2014
Lets look at the accomplishment's of environmentalist and their impact on the world.
1. The plastic shopping bags.
2. Bio fuel's.
3. Lumber industry shut down in U.S.
4. Fracking
5. Coal power plant shutdowns.
All of these actions have and will continue to wreak havoc on the environment and the poor of the world.

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#43303 Feb 8, 2014
One thing they never taught us in school about WW2 , is the financing interests, and who benefited from the misery of the common people.We point to the leaders and put all the blame on them. Nazi Germany did not happen because of one man, but because a scared and uninformed citizenry followed blindly. Education and shared knowledge is what brought about the Civil Rights movement in the early 60s. The USA was #1 in public education, The news media where a public service, government built great infrastructure, the rich paid their share of taxes, therefore creating a better float of public money, for public institutions, And we the people participated and understood that we the people are government, We don't need leaders and unqualified self interest representatives managing government.
truth facts

Sardinia, OH

#43304 Feb 8, 2014
oneear69 wrote:
<quoted text> i just don't see the point in arguing over ,the piety indifference's of the obvious problem like GW, when clearly mankind does and is having an effect on it.Regardless of ones political , religious, or monetary stature. The problems of our shared biosphere and social environments is of the same importance to us all. I think we spend to much time pointing a finger of blame, and not really dealing with the problems, using the best of mankind's knowledge and ability as a whole. Without self interest, it would be possible to put the worlds greatest scientists in a think tank, and get to the actual data.And have it presented to the citizenry, and then by mutual agreement , decide on a coarse of action. A kind of Direct Democracy, where the citizenry is educated and votes in the interest of the whole rather than self interest.
Well said the problem is these politicians refuse to take their agendas to the citizenry.Let the people decide.That is not what's happening in our society today. When the citizens do get to vote and pass legislation an activist judge comes behind the citizens and rules against the people.Then you have a pres. ruling by executive fiat.Case in point,obozoscam should have been voted on by the people but it was not.It was rammed down the throats of the American people and sold to the American people on a pack of lies.Same with GW.

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#43306 Feb 8, 2014
Lord Hater wrote:
Lets look at the accomplishment's of environmentalist and their impact on the world.
1. The plastic shopping bags.
2. Bio fuel's.
3. Lumber industry shut down in U.S.
4. Fracking
5. Coal power plant shutdowns.
All of these actions have and will continue to wreak havoc on the environment and the poor of the world.
plastic is a fossil fuel by-product, the heavy crude of the tar sands, that can be replaced with hemp.
Bio fuels agreed are not practical to meet demand.
We have been clear cutting forests for almost 500yrs now, besides Vancouver Island, there are no more old growth forests left in North America. We have been cutting forest down faster than they can grow. Plus we are now clear cutting the rain forests of south America
Fracking is another means of fossil fuel extraction, I do not see the correlation with the environmentalists.
Actually strip mining for coal in the Appalachian Mountains still goes on, As well the USA is the #1 supplier of coal to China that is stripped mined in the midwest, one of the largest strip mining projects in the world, next to the Canadian Tar Sands...

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#43307 Feb 8, 2014
truth facts wrote:
<quoted text>Well said the problem is these politicians refuse to take their agendas to the citizenry.Let the people decide.That is not what's happening in our society today. When the citizens do get to vote and pass legislation an activist judge comes behind the citizens and rules against the people.Then you have a pres. ruling by executive fiat.Case in point,obozoscam should have been voted on by the people but it was not.It was rammed down the throats of the American people and sold to the American people on a pack of lies.Same with GW.
Agreed, but by the means of democracy. We the people in solidarity ,do have a choice to choose the ones who represent , we the people. We the people as a whole have to throw away, our outdated affiliated political parties,that have merged behind the scenes. Start looking for other alternatives, and demand explanation and understanding of ones political agendas.Ask those who which to lead, who they are going to have in charge of the different management rolls of government, before they come to power.
Get rid of the Federal reserve, bring back the greenback, a government tool of trade and barter based on actual supply and demand of commodity and labour, with no interest on the debt.
ban special interest groups and lobbyists from government, and change the law that gives corporations as much rights as a citizen.
And participate in government, and stop the bread and circus of self interest. The power of we the people is in our voting power, a general consensus decided by we the people, in the interest of the whole.
take care my friends, and thanks for all the fish

Since: Apr 08

"the green troll"

#43308 Feb 8, 2014
Truth Facts wrote:
-- Forest fires and acreage destroyed have intensified. The National Interagency Fire Center statistics of total wild land fires and acres destroyed from 1960-2012 concludes that there is no evidence to support this claim.
The graph says otherwise:

http://tamino.files.wordpress.com/2013/01/acr...

http://tamino.wordpress.com/2013/01/26/where-...

Since: Oct 13

Location hidden

#43309 Feb 8, 2014
oneear69 wrote:
<quoted text> plastic is a fossil fuel by-product, the heavy crude of the tar sands, that can be replaced with hemp.
Bio fuels agreed are not practical to meet demand.
We have been clear cutting forests for almost 500yrs now, besides Vancouver Island, there are no more old growth forests left in North America. We have been cutting forest down faster than they can grow. Plus we are now clear cutting the rain forests of south America
Fracking is another means of fossil fuel extraction, I do not see the correlation with the environmentalists.
Actually strip mining for coal in the Appalachian Mountains still goes on, As well the USA is the #1 supplier of coal to China that is stripped mined in the midwest, one of the largest strip mining projects in the world, next to the Canadian Tar Sands...
We have in the U.S. We have been cutting timber and repeatedly replanting it for hundreds of years. Environmentalist shuttling down tiber harvesting here were it was managed. Shifted to county's Thad did not manage their timber.Coal power plants shutting down coal production down. That energy supply is being replaced with CNG fracking. Which effect's on the environment may be just as bad if not worse than coal.

Since: Apr 08

"the green troll"

#43310 Feb 8, 2014
Truth Facts wrote:
-- The rate of sea level rise is increasing. Global statistics refute this claim. Sea level is continuing its rate of rising seven inches per century, unrelated to human contributions to global warming. There are some local areas where sea level is either rising or falling but no global increasing rate of sea level rise.
This is something we know must be happening- more ice is melting, the ocean is warming, but it's not something that can be seen over the period of a couple of decades of satellite data, although it looks like the rate may have accelerated.(Light blue line).

http://www.realclimate.org/images//IPCC_AR5_1...

The rate of increase won't really be obvious till mid-century.

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) 7 min John Galt 1,144,308
BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit contesting... (Jan '09) 57 min WelbyMD 180,965
Song Titles Only (group/artist in parenthesis m... (Mar '10) 1 hr _Zoey_ 7,856
Israeli troops begin Gaza pullout as Hamas decl... (Jan '09) 1 hr Mandela 68,801
4 injured in separate Thanksgiving Day shootings 1 hr reality is a crutch 1
EverGreen Belgrade 2 hr servonazis 19
Messianic Jews say they are persecuted in Israel (Jun '08) 7 hr JOEL 70,627
Chicago Dating
Find my Match

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 ]

NFL Latest News

Updated 6:07 pm PST

Yahoo! Sports 6:07PM
Lions, Eagles serve up Thanksgiving Day routs
Bleacher Report12:15 AM
Marc Trestman-Jay Cutler Partnership Is Still Failing the Chicago Bears
NBC Sports12:30 AM
Lions begin crucial homestand with win over Bears - NBC Sports
NFL 5:57 AM
Marc Trestman on loss to Lions: 'I'm looking inside'
NBC Sports 7:26 AM
Griffin's departure from starting lineup could be temporary