Once slow-moving threat, global warmi...

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

There are 62353 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.

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#44476 Mar 18, 2014
Mothra wrote:
<quoted text>
Thanks so much for that irrelevant twaddle. Say howdy to your buddy litesong.
How about it? Give us some solid science that supports your blather What we will get is more blather and cut and paste form WUPWT or some other science deficient blog or fossil fuel shills.
Mothra

Phoenix, AZ

#44477 Mar 18, 2014
Patriot AKA Bozo wrote:
<quoted text>
How about it? Give us some solid science that supports your blather What we will get is more blather and cut and paste form WUPWT or some other science deficient blog or fossil fuel shills.
1350+ Peer-Reviewed Papers Supporting Skeptic Arguments Against ACC/AGW Alarm
http://www.populartechnology.net/2009/10/peer...

Happy reading!

Since: Apr 08

"the green troll"

#44478 Mar 18, 2014
Mothra wrote:
<quoted text>
You missed this part...
"And it’s a strange place now for some news outlets to find themselves in, particularly the Washington Post. This (absurdly detached) blast from the past below reminds us how these outlets may act out with their editorial positions, but these aren’t always harmonious with their lesser-advertised legal postures."
Wapo is now part the the americus brief. So in 2011, they said one thing, but it 2014 they act differently.
Curious, no?
Reading the case document, it looks like it's an attempt to narrow the definition of proprietary so it doesn't cover everything produced by the government in future FOI requests, not another attempt to get Mann's emails.

“Is that all you've got?”

Since: Jun 10

Location hidden

#44479 Mar 18, 2014
SpaceBlues wrote:
We congratulate the IPCC and Al Gore on receiving this year's Peace Prize. We thank you for what you have done for mother earth, and wish you further success in a task that is so vital to us all. Action is needed now. Climate changes are already moving beyond human control.
http://nobelpeaceprize.org/en_GB/laureates/la...
It's ALWAYS been beyond man's control...

http://www.dailygalaxy.com/my_weblog/2014/03/...

...ya loopy arsed tranny.

Now try to prove it was mankind making it warmer for the last 20,000 years.

Since: Jul 11

Location hidden

#44480 Mar 18, 2014
Socialism is for Sissies wrote:
<quoted text>Well, Mr. Brain Trust, I did not say "NO GOVERNMENT". Hence, you lie, as usual. You are sooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooo clueless as to the function of government in a free society that it's pitiful.
Until you answer this quick and simple question your "debating" is done here. Run along and let Uncle Sam wipe your azz for you since you need someone to do everyhting for you because you lack self responsibility.
It's pretty obvious you listen to Rush too much. "Free" as you define it is what ? Freedom of speech, Freedom of assembly, Freedom to travel, Freedom to migrate. That's what most normal people expect in a democratic system of government. What you expect is not deliverable, because your needs are sooooo offbeat to the rest of the population they are ignored. That is why you elect a government, to deal with things YOU as an individual can't deal with. A government is there to look after the majority of the population. It looks after your security, trade , infrastructure, education, health and delivers services you cannot provide. If you want to live in a cave that is your choice, but you still have to pay for the privilege of being able to do it. That is pay taxes on your income for the government to provide all of the above. The fact that you just want to be selective on what the government provides again is irrelevant. If you refuse an education, you can't refuse to pay for that service in your taxes. That's just one example of many but probably the most relevant to you.

Since: Jul 11

Location hidden

#44482 Mar 18, 2014
ritedownthemiddle wrote:
what happened to freedom of choice, freedom of speech, freedom of thought?
are you liberals as opposed to this kind of thing?
speak up hypocrites!!
lol
http://www.bizpacreview.com/2014/03/18/colleg...
if man made climate change is so certain....why are you whackos behaving so hysterical? is it becasue science doesn't back up your beliefs quite so much?
I would have thought that was obvious, the clock is ticking and still nothing of substance has been implemented on a global basis. We have already passed the point where climate is changing, now its trying not to make it worse!. Of cause with you guys the more delay the better, that means you pass it on, like passing on the economic debt but you seem to be more concerned with that when climate is much more important.

“CO2 is Gaseous Love”

Since: Dec 08

Home, sweet home.

#44483 Mar 18, 2014
Maybe our politicians can't mitigate climate change.

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#44484 Mar 18, 2014
Mothra wrote:
<quoted text>
1350+ Peer-Reviewed Papers Supporting Skeptic Arguments Against ACC/AGW Alarm
http://www.populartechnology.net/2009/10/peer...
Happy reading!
From the rebuttals; " it is not claimed that all the papers are physical science papers, only that they are all peer-reviewed."

Of course there are papers that take issue with many facets of global warming science. That is how science works. The ones from reputable scientific journals have been weighed and studied. Those that have found merit have been incorporated into the science. It is up to you to present those that support your rather loose position.

But I do not expect much other than more blather.

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#44485 Mar 18, 2014
Mothra wrote:
<quoted text>
1350+ Peer-Reviewed Papers Supporting Skeptic Arguments Against ACC/AGW Alarm
http://www.populartechnology.net/2009/10/peer...
Happy reading!
BTW, where is the solid science that supports your tenuous tedium.

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#44486 Mar 18, 2014
ritedownthemiddle wrote:
what happened to freedom of choice, freedom of speech, freedom of thought?
are you liberals as opposed to this kind of thing?
speak up hypocrites!!
lol
http://www.bizpacreview.com/2014/03/18/colleg...
if man made climate change is so certain....why are you whackos behaving so hysterical? is it becasue science doesn't back up your beliefs quite so much?
The freedoms stop where they trample on others rights. We are a social order, not a bunch of anarchistic individuals. When those ideas infringe upon the social order, they must be contained. It is not an inherent freedom to shout fire in a packed movie theater. You can think whatever you please.

Here is the quote, "The importance of clearly communicating science to the public should not be underestimated. Accurately understanding our natural environment and sharing that information can be a matter of life or death. When it comes to global warming, much of the public remains in denial about a set of facts that the majority of scientists clearly agree on. With such high stakes, an organised campaign funding misinformation ought to be considered criminally negligent."
Coal is King

Eddyville, KY

#44488 Mar 18, 2014
Looks like at least one Global Warming Hoax money sink is about to get stopped:

http://www.usatoday.com/story/weather/2014/03...

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#44489 Mar 18, 2014
For what it is worth the denier message is falling rather flat. It seems that our local deniers are a pitiful minority.

http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observati...
Mothra

Phoenix, AZ

#44491 Mar 18, 2014
OzRitz wrote:
<quoted text>
I would have thought that was obvious, the clock is ticking and still nothing of substance has been implemented on a global basis.[incoherent ramblings omitted]
What! A crisis?

Goodness... give Al Gore a call! He needs to know this.

If he's not home, call his other mansion. If not there, try is limo. Still no? Try his plane.

Still no luck?

Dunno... smoke signals?

LOL.
Mothra

Phoenix, AZ

#44492 Mar 18, 2014
ritedownthemiddle wrote:
if man made climate change is so certain....why are you whackos behaving so hysterical? is it becasue science doesn't back up your beliefs quite so much?
Maybe they didn't get the memo.... a little "hide" hear, a "trick" there... mix in some homogenization.... and TADA!

It's proven!!!
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

#44493 Mar 18, 2014
Coal is King wrote:
Looks like at least one Global Warming Hoax money sink is about to get stopped:
http://www.usatoday.com/story/weather/2014/03...
No Joke, NO..

From your link: Increasing amounts of CO2 and other gases caused by the burning of the oil, gas and coal that power our world are enhancing the natural "greenhouse effect," causing the planet to warm to levels that climate scientists say can't be linked to natural forces.

Carbon dioxide levels were around 280 "parts per million" (ppm) before the Industrial Revolution, when humans first began releasing large amounts into the atmosphere by burning fossil fuels. They're now near 400 ppm.
..

All of this comes against the backdrop of last week's CO2 rise above 400 ppm at Mauna Loa for the second straight year.(CO2 levels peak in the spring when plants come alive, then decrease when the plants die in the autumn.)

Keeling says that within the next two to three years, the measurement will stay above 400 ppm permanently. "It's just a matter of time before it stays over 400 forever," he said. Consistent levels above 400 ppm haven't been seen in human history and perhaps as long as millions of years.

"We are living in extraordinary times," Keeling said.
Mothra

Phoenix, AZ

#44494 Mar 18, 2014
Patriot AKA Bozo wrote:
<quoted text>
From the rebuttals; " it is not claimed that all the papers are physical science papers, only that they are all peer-reviewed."
Of course there are papers that take issue with many facets of global warming science. That is how science works. The ones from reputable scientific journals have been weighed and studied. Those that have found merit have been incorporated into the science. It is up to you to present those that support your rather loose position.
But I do not expect much other than more blather.
Do please give the whole context:

Under Rebuttals:

Criticism: Paper [Insert Name] is not a physical science paper.
Rebuttal: This is strawman argument as it is not claimed that all the papers are physical science papers, only that they are all peer-reviewed. Just like the WGII and WGIII sections of the IPCC reports, peer-reviewed papers from social scientists and policy analysts are included in the list. These papers appear in the appropriate socio-economic sections (e.g. Socio-Economic) separate from the physical science sections on the list. Regardless, there are over 1000 physical science papers on the list.

Get back to your reading... and this time make sure you look at all the words.
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

#44495 Mar 18, 2014
Mothra wrote:
<quoted text>
Maybe they didn't get the memo.... a little "hide" hear, a "trick" there... mix in some homogenization.... and TADA!
It's proven!!!
Proven what, denier?

Whining suits you!
Mothra

Phoenix, AZ

#44496 Mar 18, 2014
Patriot AKA Bozo wrote:
<quoted text>
BTW, where is the solid science that supports your tenuous tedium.
Ahhh... nothing like the cart before the horse, huh?

It's the warmists that have presented the "theory". As such, they gotta answer to all comers.

Not my rules... just the way it is (or used to be).
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

#44497 Mar 18, 2014
ritedownthemiddle wrote:
<quoted text>exactly who's rights are being trampled on, son?
funny.....you people can never disprove any facts given to you....no matter how much misinformation you all produce.
You, pops, can't handle the truth.. starting with the greenhouse gas effect!

Back to elementary school..
Mothra

Phoenix, AZ

#44498 Mar 18, 2014
Coal is King wrote:
Looks like at least one Global Warming Hoax money sink is about to get stopped:
http://www.usatoday.com/story/weather/2014/03...
Oh my goodness! A crisis within a crisis!

But funding should be no big deal... just snip out a few resort conferences, take commercial airlines, drop some SUV convoys... you know little budget tightening.

Tada! You've got scads of money!

And don't forget your curly-cue light bulbs and to inflate your tires!

btw... anyone know why it takes $1 million a year to keep this running? Seen a cost breakdown anywhere?

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) 3 min Henry 1,460,300
News Scientists say they have proved climate change ... (Dec '08) 39 min Into The Night 7,951
News BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit contesting... (Jan '09) 45 min Dr Guru 231,200
News Israeli troops begin Gaza pullout as Hamas decl... (Jan '09) 49 min TRD 71,241
Are democrats destroyed? 4 hr red dawn 13
The Color of Crime in Chicago. 4 hr red dawn 22
Topix Chitown Regulars (Aug '09) 4 hr Truth Be Told 104,554

Chicago Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Chicago Mortgages