Once slow-moving threat, global warmi...

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

There are 59437 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.

litesong

Everett, WA

#43744 Feb 21, 2014
[QUOTE who="ratdownthemiddle ", "middleofthedownwronggull y"]are you mentally retarded?
just saying.[/QUOTE]

We know "ratdownthemiddle", "middleofthedownwronggull y" can only say something non-scientific, because "ratdownthemiddle", "middleofthedownwronggull y" never had science, chemistry, astronomy, physics, algebra & pre-calc in its poorly(or non-) earned hi skule DEE-ploomaa.
litesong

Everett, WA

#43745 Feb 21, 2014
false farts wrote:
Do you have any new material.....
Yes, I do. We know "false farts" has no new science, chemistry, astronomy, physics, algebra or pre-calc in its poorly (or non-) earned hi skule DEE-plooomaa.
litesong

Everett, WA

#43746 Feb 21, 2014
jefferson wrote:
Koo koo, Koo koo
"jefferson" thinks it is koo koo to have science, chemistry, astronomy, physics, algebra or pre-calc in its poorly (or non-) earned hi skule DEE-plooomaa. That is why it is a touched touchy toxic topix AGW denier.
guest

Sherwood, AR

#43747 Feb 21, 2014
Gas cannot retain heat thats what I was taught in school. CO2 is a gas correct.

“Sharia, NOT!”

Since: Jul 10

Suffolk, VA

#43749 Feb 21, 2014
Fair Game wrote:
<quoted text>
"The two fundamental facts are that carbon-dioxide levels in the atmosphere have increased due to the burning of fossil fuels, and carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is a greenhouse gas, trapping heat before it can escape into space."
Yes, that is what the consensus says.
Do you believe those facts?
I believe this :"We might forgive these modelers if their forecasts had not been so consistently and spectacularly wrong. From the beginning of climate modeling in the 1980s, these forecasts have, on average, always overstated the degree to which the Earth is warming compared with what we see in the real climate."

The article clearly reflects that as scientists they must step back and take a look based upon facts and not speculative models that hurt their cause. Something a lot of us have said for years. Note that the models get redefined as more facts become know.

Science must demand FACTS AND NOT GRANTS based upon the sky is falling emotions.

“Sharia, NOT!”

Since: Jul 10

Suffolk, VA

#43750 Feb 21, 2014
Fair Game wrote:
As to whether Christy's 1994 paper says anything about the last two decades, the answer is no.
Removing 20 years of ocean heating does not give you an accurate figure for how much the world has warmed: his own satellite data give a much higher figure.
Which is why he is talking to the Wall St Journal and not the scientific community.
http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2011/03/10/2...
He's not talking to the scientific community because he got a Nobel prize based upon what is now questionable data and he perhaps would rather save face among his peers?
litesong

Everett, WA

#43751 Feb 21, 2014
[QUOTE who="ratdownthemiddle ", "middleofthedownwronggull y]i conducted a scientific study[/QUOTE]

"ratdownthemiddle", "middleofthedownwronggull y" never had science, chemistry, astronomy, physics, algebra & pre-calc in its poorly(or non-) earned hi skule DEE-ploomaa, so it doesn't know how to conduct a scientific study.
litesong

Everett, WA

#43752 Feb 21, 2014
social disease wrote:
We might forgive.....
"social disease can't forgive its lack of science, chemistry, astronomy, physics, algebra & pre-calc in its poorly(or non-) earned hi skule DEE-ploomaa.
Truth Facts

Chillicothe, OH

#43754 Feb 21, 2014
litesong wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, I do. We know "false farts" has no new science, chemistry, astronomy, physics, algebra or pre-calc in its poorly (or non-) earned hi skule DEE-plooomaa.
blah,blah,blah,dirty little troll
litesong

Everett, WA

#43757 Feb 21, 2014
[QUOTE who="ratdownthemiddle ", "middleofthedownwronggull y"].......retards are so.......[/QUOTE]

We know "ratdownthemiddle", "middleofthedownwronggull y" can only say something non-scientific, because "ratdownthemiddle", "middleofthedownwronggull y" never had science, chemistry, astronomy, physics, algebra & pre-calc in its poorly(or non-) earned hi skule DEE-ploomaa. We also know that "ratdownthemiddle", "middleofthedownwronggull y" is disrespectful of those less fortunate them itself. "ratdownthemiddle", "middleofthedownwronggull y" could also be a slimy steenking filthy vile reprobate rooting(& rotting) racist pukey proud pig.
Mothra

Tempe, AZ

#43759 Feb 21, 2014
Socialism is for Sissies wrote:
<quoted text>I believe this :"We might forgive these modelers if their forecasts had not been so consistently and spectacularly wrong. From the beginning of climate modeling in the 1980s, these forecasts have, on average, always overstated the degree to which the Earth is warming compared with what we see in the real climate."
The article clearly reflects that as scientists they must step back and take a look based upon facts and not speculative models that hurt their cause. Something a lot of us have said for years. Note that the models get redefined as more facts become know.
Science must demand FACTS AND NOT GRANTS based upon the sky is falling emotions.
When every single model overestimates warming how can anyone argue there isn't a bias towards a preconceived "scientific" consensus?
Mothra

Tempe, AZ

#43760 Feb 21, 2014
THAT white guy wrote:
<quoted text> I thought you Liberals only cared about instilling high self esteem and celebrating diversity.
Only 'approved' diversity is celebrated.

Liberals are such phonies.
litesong

Everett, WA

#43761 Feb 21, 2014
motheaten wrote:
only 'approved' diversity is celebrated.
....... as opposed to unapproved slimy steenking filthy vile reprobate rooting(& rottitng) racist pukey proud pig white guys.....
litesong

Everett, WA

#43764 Feb 21, 2014
[QUOTE who="ratdownthemiddle ", "middleofthedownwronggull y"]the reason so many of them vote twice.......[/QUOTE]

After re-pubic-lick-uns corralled racists to vote against candidate & Pres. Obama, re-pubic-lick-uns surmised that Pres. Obama won both times, because the re-pubic-lick-un racists forgot to vote twice. Every good re-pubic-lick-un knows that. The decreasing percentage re-pubic-lick-uns are keeping their power now, only by really creative gerrymandering.

Since: Apr 08

"the green troll"

#43765 Feb 21, 2014
Socialism is for Sissies wrote:
<quoted text>I believe this :"We might forgive these modelers if their forecasts had not been so consistently and spectacularly wrong. From the beginning of climate modeling in the 1980s, these forecasts have, on average, always overstated the degree to which the Earth is warming compared with what we see in the real climate."
The article clearly reflects that as scientists they must step back and take a look based upon facts and not speculative models that hurt their cause. Something a lot of us have said for years. Note that the models get redefined as more facts become know.
Science must demand FACTS AND NOT GRANTS based upon the sky is falling emotions.
The only thing worse than the models are the "sceptics" predictions.

http://www.skepticalscience.com/graphics/Pred...

As to why the models are off, science now has a pretty good idea.
"We show that a pronounced strengthening in Pacific trade winds over the past two decades is sufficient to account for the cooling of the tropical Pacific and a substantial slowdown in surface warming," said the study, led by scientists from the University of New South Wales in Australia.

"The net effect of these anomalous winds is a cooling in the 2012 global average surface air temperature of 0.1-0.2 degrees Celsius, which can account for much of the hiatus in surface warming since 2001."

The study's authors, including scientists from other research centres and universities in the United States, Hawaii and Australia, used weather forecasting and satellite data and climate models to make their conclusions.

"This hiatus could persist for much of the present decade if the trade winds trends continue, however, rapid warming is expected to resume once the anomalous wind trends abate," the study said.

"If the anomalously strong trade winds begin to abate in the next few years, the model suggests the present hiatus will be short-lived, with rapid warming set to resume soon after the wind trends reverse," it added.
http://www.trust.org/item/20140209174016-vo0m...

You have a few more years to peddle this crap. Knock yourself out.
Mothra

Tempe, AZ

#43766 Feb 21, 2014
ritedownthemiddle wrote:
<quoted text>HONESTLY!!! Have you ever seen a model that underestimated actual data?
Proof is in the pudding!!! These people are really reaching now. Talk about 'intellectual' dishonesty.
Computer models can be made to do whatever you design them to do. Don't like the results?

Tweak it.

Ta-da!

Since: Jul 11

Location hidden

#43767 Feb 21, 2014
Mothra wrote:
<quoted text>
When every single model overestimates warming how can anyone argue there isn't a bias towards a preconceived "scientific" consensus?
Did you ever wonder about those living close to the Chernobyl Plant yet survived following the nuke meltdown. That's exactly the way you deniers treat the science of climate change. You pick out the survivors and declare it isn't happening. Completely ignoring the 1000's dead.
I mean they have computer models mapping the universe now, maybe they might miss a couple of planets and in the end does it really matter ? According to your lot it does, and that's why you keep coming up with these BS arguments like Al Gore says the Ice will keep melting for the next 20 yrs but if it stops at 18 he is wrong! That's pretty damn lame trying to tell us we can ignore the past as if it never happened.
Traffic

Chicago, IL

#43768 Feb 21, 2014
Global Warming? LMAO....what a joke.

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#43769 Feb 21, 2014
ritedownthemiddle wrote:
<quoted text>really?? where's yours?
weather and climate is ever changing... you quacks like to exploit misfortunes.
debate that, sasquatch!!
lol
Hey, its your choice to be as ignorant as you want, no one is forcing you to believe anything.
University

Corona Del Mar, CA

#43770 Feb 21, 2014
oneear69 wrote:
<quoted text> Hey, its your choice to be as ignorant as you want, no one is forcing you to believe anything.
And which politician are you whole heartedly supporting in your efforts to combat climate change? It's time to name names.

Hmmmmm?

Well?

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 BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit contesting... (Jan '09) 50 min Dr Guru 214,265
Word (Dec '08) 1 hr Raydot 6,132
News Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 2 hr USAsince1680 1,382,088
{keep A word drop A word} (Oct '11) 3 hr GEORGIA 8,362
Double Word Game (Dec '11) 3 hr GEORGIA 2,396
last post wins! (Dec '10) 4 hr They cannot kill ... 2,024
last post wins! (Apr '13) 5 hr They cannot kill ... 974
More from around the web

Personal Finance

Chicago Mortgages