Once slow-moving threat, global warmi...

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

There are 63591 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.

SpaceBlues

Humble, TX

#45019 Mar 25, 2014
Air pollution linked to seven million deaths globally[bbc]

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#45020 Mar 25, 2014
truth facts wrote:
<quoted text>Another indoctrinated "BOZO" speaks.Your dancing like the good puppet you are.
Do you ever have an idea of your own?
denier

Zion, IL

#45024 Mar 25, 2014
SpaceBlues wrote:
<quoted text>Gosh.. who's paying for the oil cleanup in Galveston right now?
Many businesses and the wild life are impacted by the oil spill. Do you know that this spill alone cost more than annual climate research in Texas?
The oil company should pay for the cleanup!

“BET DAP”

Since: Feb 09

GOOM BOWN

#45025 Mar 25, 2014
SpaceBlues wrote:
<quoted text>Once again, you say anything to pollute minds.
This topic is about speeding global warming effects that you don't comprehend. Do some study:
http://www.ydr.com/nation-world/ci_25414015/c...
don't buy into the hoax.
don't fall for the madness.
theories have not been tested.
Truth Facts

Chillicothe, OH

#45029 Mar 25, 2014
Patriot AKA Bozo wrote:
<quoted text>
Do you ever have an idea of your own?
Yeah here's an idea for ya.The circus is hiring for new clowns and I recommended you.Your #1 on their list.

“BET DAP”

Since: Feb 09

GOOM BOWN

#45030 Mar 25, 2014
charles in charge wrote:
<quoted text>
ALL theories have been "tested" or they wouldn't be theories, imbecile.
really?
where is that one on co2 mitigation, genius?
everyone else on the planet must of missed that one!!

lol
Truth Facts

Chillicothe, OH

#45031 Mar 25, 2014
charles in charge wrote:
<quoted text>
YOU appear to be speaking of yourself.
In charge of what? Ignorance.Yout just another troll.

“BET DAP”

Since: Feb 09

GOOM BOWN

#45032 Mar 25, 2014
charles in charge wrote:
<quoted text>
Um, no, he's fighting the trend. Bush's two failed terms were more indicative of GOP hatred of education.
i only hate dumbed down education brought to you by teachers unions....you seem like a product from it.
litesong

Everett, WA

#45034 Mar 25, 2014
[QUOTE who="ratdownthemiddle ","middleofthedownwr onggully"]...all predetermined!!![/QUOTE]

"ratdownthemiddle", "middleofthedownwronggull y" was predetermined & determined NOT to have science, chemistry, astronomy, physics, algebra, or pre-calc in its poorly earned hi skule DEE-plooomaa.

“BET DAP”

Since: Feb 09

GOOM BOWN

#45035 Mar 25, 2014
apparently charles is another alarmist dumbchyt.
litesong

Everett, WA

#45036 Mar 25, 2014
litesong wrote:
Finally, a sweet sweet day of spring..... But unlike some slimy steenking toxic topix AGW deniers, who would pollute with 5 gallons of fuel used, I used a tidy 1.62 gallons.
//////////
"little willy & braggin" bragged:
Boy it's to(sic) bad you didn't live in oso(sic),,sad to say it would or been the only good thing to come out of a tragedy!
/////////
litesong wrote:
"little willy & braggin" misspells & thinks the horrific Oso death mountain must be used to advance the cause of "little willy & braggin".

“BET DAP”

Since: Feb 09

GOOM BOWN

#45037 Mar 25, 2014
litesong wrote:
litesong wrote:
Finally, a sweet sweet day of spring..... But unlike some slimy steenking toxic topix AGW deniers, who would pollute with 5 gallons of fuel used, I used a tidy 1.62 gallons.
//////////
"little willy & braggin" bragged:
Boy it's to(sic) bad you didn't live in oso(sic),,sad to say it would or been the only good thing to come out of a tragedy!
/////////
litesong wrote:
"little willy & braggin" misspells & thinks the horrific Oso death mountain must be used to advance the cause of "little willy & braggin".
and you people pretend to be educated...

“BET DAP”

Since: Feb 09

GOOM BOWN

#45038 Mar 25, 2014
litesong wrote:
<quoted text>
"ratdownthemiddle", "middleofthedownwronggull y" was predetermined & determined NOT to have science, chemistry, astronomy, physics, algebra, or pre-calc in its poorly earned hi skule DEE-plooomaa.
but i aced all my economics courses......you must've dropped econ 101!!!

poor ignorant mullet....being retarded is not an excuse for your idiotic posts.
litesong

Everett, WA

#45040 Mar 26, 2014
[QUOTE who="ratdownthemiddle ","middleofthedownwr onggully"] aced all my economics courses......[/QUOTE]

That's why you can't figure, if the supply of 100% gasoline rises by 10 to 15 times from its low 5% availability, the price DIFFERENCE between 100% gasoline & 10% ethanol blend, will decrease from its high of $1+.

Since: Jan 14

Location hidden

#45041 Mar 26, 2014
litesong wrote:
<quoted text>
That's why you can't figure, if the supply of 100% gasoline rises by 10 to 15 times from its low 5% availability, the price DIFFERENCE between 100% gasoline & 10% ethanol blend, will decrease from its high of $1+.
love ethanol, it makes us burn more gasoline, and use corn, thereby denying food crops. Win for money hungry people like me. Win win.

“BET DAP”

Since: Feb 09

GOOM BOWN

#45042 Mar 26, 2014
litesong wrote:
<quoted text>
That's why you can't figure, if the supply of 100% gasoline rises by 10 to 15 times from its low 5% availability, the price DIFFERENCE between 100% gasoline & 10% ethanol blend, will decrease from its high of $1+.
actually it won't. you still don't understand what i've tried to explain, son. the more 100%(cbob) sold will only increase the rvo's of obligated parties. hence d-6 rin's will increase in value (the reason 100% gasoline is higher already) since they will have to buy them on the open market instead of being credited the rin for splashing ethanol into their volume percentages.

BLAME THE EPA.....
litesong

Everett, WA

#45043 Mar 26, 2014
litesong wrote:
That's why you can't figure, if the supply of 100% gasoline rises by 10 to 15 times from its low 5% availability, the price DIFFERENCE between 100% gasoline & 10% ethanol blend, will decrease from its high of $1+.
//////////
"desperate warmist" wrote:
love ethanol, it makes us burn more gasoline, and use corn, thereby denying food crops. Win for money hungry people like me. Win win.
/////////
litesong wrote:
Ethanol, used to dilute our nation's gasoline stocks by only 10%, lowers mpg by 8% to 5%, in low compression ratio(9:1 to 12:1) gasoline engines. To stuff worthless ethanol in gasoline engines, also saps land that should be used for food for 500 million people. Support the Feinstein/Coburn bi-partisan bill to eliminate dilution of our nation's gasoline stocks with ethanol.

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#45044 Mar 26, 2014
Truth Facts wrote:
<quoted text>Yeah here's an idea for ya.The circus is hiring for new clowns and I recommended you.Your #1 on their list.
I'll have to admit that is one of your better thoughts, comparatively. You certainly don't have any idea of how science works.
Mothra

Tempe, AZ

#45045 Mar 26, 2014
Mann’s Screw Up #7.1 – Semantics

Most people hate discussing semantics. Unfortunately, it’s necessary when people try to abuse semantics to win an argument. Michael Mann’s defense of his “trick” is one of those cases.

As you’ll recall, Michael Mann’s “trick” was to append the instrumental record to his temperature reconstruction, smooth the resulting series then truncate it so it appeared to only be a reconstructed series. That’s unquestionably dishonest.

Naturally, Mann doesn’t admit such. Instead, he attempts to abuse semantics to cover it up. On page 210 of his book, he attempts to say his trick had nothing to do with hiding things:

" The full quotation from Jone’s e-mail was (emphasis added),“I’ve just completed Mike’s Nature trick of adding in the real temps to each series for the last 20 years (i.e. from 1981 onwards) and from 1961 for Keith’s to hide the decline.” Only by omitting the twenty-three words in between “trick” and “hide the decline” were change deniers able to fabricate the claim of a supposed “trick to hide the decline.” No such phrases was used in the e-mail nor in any of the stolen e-mails for that matter. Indeed,“Make’s Nature trick” and “hide the decline” had nothing to do with each other."

He says the two phrases “had nothing to do with each other,” and people can only pretend otherwise by omitting words. Let’s consider this. Here is the original quote:

"I’ve just completed Mike’s Nature trick of adding in the real temps to each series for the last 20 years (i.e. from 1981 onwards) and from 1961 for Keith’s to hide the decline."

The words people omit are prepositional phrases. All they do is clarify what the trick was. This can be seen by paring down the sentence. First, we remove the phrases listing the periods which had data added. That gives us:

"I’ve just completed Mike’s Nature trick of adding in the real temps to each series… to hide the decline."

This gives us the phrase “Mike’s Nature trick”; a description of what it is,“add in the real temps to each series”; and a purpose,“to hide the decline.” We can remove the description and get:

"I’ve just completed Mike’s Nature trick… to hide the decline."

In other words, anyone with basic reading skills can see Mann is just making things up when he says the two phrases had nothing to do with each other.

http://hiizuru.wordpress.com/2014/03/25/manns...

The lack of "basic reading skills" will prevent Bozo, Oz, Spaceballs and certainly litesong from understanding this.
Jackinthebox

Philadelphia, PA

#45046 Mar 26, 2014
Ethanol farm it on land that could be used for food
Process the corn which could be used as feed
Waste gas to farm, process and ship it
And make major investments it developing it

Or invest invest in cleaner burning gas

Like people won't make war over corn fields

Seems legit

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) 2 min Teaman 1,510,290
Give liberals a stroke! Fight for coal powered... 55 min Trump is the man 1
News Sessions: DOJ will crack down on federal grants... 58 min Trump is the man 1
News Scientists say they have proved climate change ... (Dec '08) 1 hr Patriot AKA Bozo 8,080
Topix Chitown Regulars (Aug '09) 1 hr CrunchyBacon 105,074
News BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit contesting... (Jan '09) 2 hr NotSoDivineMsM 239,644
Southern Ill will vote to expell Chicago From S... (Sep '15) 2 hr Peoria 5

Chicago Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Chicago Mortgages