Once slow-moving threat, global warmi...

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

There are 58811 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.

“Amor patriae.”

Since: Feb 08

Eastern Oregon

#47936 Jun 17, 2014
SpaceBlues wrote:
<quoted text>1. You will never pass your 5th grade. When you remove trees, where do the resident animals go? What happens to rains, etc?
2. When you destroy a habitat, you bring on extinction(s). This happens to people, too.
There are more trees in America now, than when the Pilgrims landed.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/10/23/new-...

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#47937 Jun 17, 2014
FAKE WARMING CRISIS wrote:
Itís time to take an hysterical and panicky look at fake global warming. Fake global warming is one of the most serious fake problems not actually facing our nation today. According to smarmy billionaire Al Gore, we must take useless and expensive actions immediately or the polar ice caps will be completely melted by two thousand and thirteen... which will be catastrophic when last year arrives.
And the polar bears ó oh, the polar bears! Studies reveal that over the last twenty years, as computer models of the climate have progressively damaged computer models of their habitat, the polar bear population has steadily increased. But thatís only in real life! In the computer models, the poor creatures are dropping like flies.
Letís examine the distorted facts. Between the years 1950 and 2000, the earthís temperature increased approximately nine tenths of a degree Centigrade. Over the exact same period, the price of butter in Morris County New Jersey rose from 77 cents a pound to nearly four dollars. According to climate change logic, this means that if we give government the power to lower the price of butter in Morris County, the temperature should once again sink back to the levels of the 1950ís. And werenít the 50Ďs a fine old time! Who wouldnít want those temperatures back again?
I realize there are some superstitious troglodytes who donít believe in science. They insist we have to go on powering our country with oil and gas instead of using sustainable energy from the holy Vitraya Ramunong tree from that great, great movie Avatar. Weíve explained to them that 97 percent of scientists believe in global warming, but it means nothing to them, even though the number 97 percent has been scientifically selected as the most panic-inducing random number available.
But fake global warming is not just a fake problem for a computer generated future. Even as we speak, itís creating a pervasive and irritating whining noise that sounds almost exactly like the President of the United States. This must be stopped.
Iím Andrew Klavan with the Revolting Truth.
http://www.truthrevolt.org/videos/andrew-klav...
Who is Andrew Klavan and what are his credentials
Except

Largo, FL

#47938 Jun 17, 2014
SpaceBlues wrote:
<quoted text>1. You will never pass your 5th grade. When you remove trees, where do the resident animals go? What happens to rains, etc?
2. When you destroy a habitat, you bring on extinction(s). This happens to people, too.
Well meaning environmentalist have destroyed more habitats than any other group.
litesong

Everett, WA

#47939 Jun 17, 2014
"rebec caw" caws:
We need to cut down the redwoods so we can measure them to see how tall they grow. Just back off fool.

Since sleazy slimy steenking toxic topix AGW denier liars don't take science, chemistry, astronomy, physics, algebra or pre-calc in their poorly (or non-) earned hi skule DEE-plooomaas, they don't know that trigonometry will measure redwoods without cutting them down.

Her lack of mathematical reasoning leads her to anti-science conclusions, just like all the other sleazy slimy steenking toxic topix AGW denier liars.
litesong

Everett, WA

#47940 Jun 17, 2014
litesong wrote:
Might be more trees today, but very few of the original big bio-mass virgin trees. The logging industry tried their propagandistic "super trees" growth patterns, but the building trades found that fast growing super trees made for sub-standard wood strengths. & now, with some eastern regions on the 5th & 6th(?) secondary growths, the soils are not supplying proper nutrients for strong wood products.
Your wife & you are a prime example of the logging industry & the Forestry service working together to disassemble Gifford Pinchot's powerful implementation of proper nearly sustainable forest practices. Again, you think that reforestations is all that the logging industry must do.
Of course, Gifford Pinchot (& even now, the present Forestry service, & you) ain't addressing nutrient loss in soils.

After six generations of cuttings soils are poor. Like farm soils, much greater care is needed to maintain forest soils, to truly be sustainable. You know this, but you deflect the conversation.
Now, don't think Pinchot is on the logging industry's side, tho his am was sustainability. Pinchot fought against industry (& industry's influence in gov't) his entire life. Tho he convinced much of the logging industry to stop their wanton forest slaughter, many of his practices laid down in the 19th century, have been intruded on by present loggers, despite the logging industry's propaganda PEE-R sustainability strategy to make them look good in the public eye.
//////////
"ratdownthemiddledownwron ggully" gushed:
if you're gonna just make up shyt ....... and tell lies......
//////////
litesong wrote:
"ratdownthemiddledownwron ggully" has nothing to oppose the truth of Gifford Pinchot & present scientific forestry, even after logging & business had 100+ years to oppose & implement policies to continue their desecration of American landscapes.
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

#47941 Jun 17, 2014
mdbuilder wrote:
<quoted text>
There are more trees in America now, than when the Pilgrims landed.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/10/23/new-...
No, not at all true.

But thanks for confirming what I posted before.

P.S. Obviously, you don't know what you publish, LOL.

Since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution (taken as the year 1750), the burning of fossil fuels and extensive clearing of native forests has contributed to a 40% increase in the atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide, from 280 to 392.6 parts per million (ppm) in 2012.[5][6] and has now reached 400 ppm in the northern hemisphere. This increase has occurred despite the uptake of a large portion of the emissions by various natural "sinks" involved in the carbon cycle.[7][8] Anthropogenic carbon dioxide (CO
2) emissions (i.e., emissions produced by human activities) come from combustion of carbon-based fuels, principally wood, coal, oil, and natural gas.[9] Under ongoing greenhouse gas emissions, available Earth System Models project that the Earth's surface temperature could exceed historical analogs as early as 2047 affecting most ecosystems on Earth and the livelihoods of over 3 billion people worldwide.[10] Greenhouse gases also trigger[clarification needed] ocean bio-geochemical changes with broad ramifications in marine systems.[11
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

#47942 Jun 17, 2014
Except wrote:
<quoted text> Well meaning environmentalist have destroyed more habitats than any other group.
HOW is that?

The truth: Since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution (taken as the year 1750), the burning of fossil fuels and extensive clearing of native forests has contributed to a 40% increase in the atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide, from 280 to 392.6 parts per million (ppm) in 2012.[5][6] and has now reached 400 ppm in the northern hemisphere. This increase has occurred despite the uptake of a large portion of the emissions by various natural "sinks" involved in the carbon cycle.[7][8] Anthropogenic carbon dioxide (CO
2) emissions (i.e., emissions produced by human activities) come from combustion of carbon-based fuels, principally wood, coal, oil, and natural gas.[9] Under ongoing greenhouse gas emissions, available Earth System Models project that the Earth's surface temperature could exceed historical analogs as early as 2047 affecting most ecosystems on Earth and the livelihoods of over 3 billion people worldwide.[10] Greenhouse gases also trigger[clarification needed] ocean bio-geochemical changes with broad ramifications in marine systems.[11
litesong

Everett, WA

#47943 Jun 17, 2014
except wrote:
Well meaning environmentalist(sic) have destroyed more habitats than any other group.
Correction:
Environmentalists have ended more habitat destroying logging & business plans than any other group.

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#47944 Jun 17, 2014
Except wrote:
<quoted text> Well meaning environmentalist have destroyed more habitats than any other group.
That is just a dumb statement. Sounds like old Rush!
Except

Hollywood, FL

#47945 Jun 17, 2014
litesong wrote:
<quoted text>
Correction:
Environmentalists have ended more habitat destroying logging & business plans than any other group.
Environmentalist are responsible for the destruction of the rain forest. The plastic water bottle and the single most destructive thing THE PLASTIC shopping bag.

“I Luv Carbon Dioxide”

Since: Dec 08

Home, sweet home.

#47946 Jun 17, 2014
SpaceBlues wrote:
HOW is that? The truth: Since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution (taken as the year 1750), the burning of fossil fuels and extensive clearing of native forests has contributed to a 40% increase in the atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide, from 280 to 392.6 parts per million (ppm) in 2012.
We don't know how much atmospheric change is caused by burning fossil fuels or extensive clearing of native forests, there's never been an experimental test to measure change in atmospheric carbon dioxide after a man made emission or clear-cut event. Our emissions and habitat use seems too small to experimentally measure the effect on the atmosphere. We also don't know what effect our CO2 has on climate because that's never been experimentally tested either. We don't know how much carbon sequestration helps or if restricting CO2 emissions is less expensive than the consequences, there's no experimental data.

.
SpaceBlues wrote:
and has now reached 400 ppm in the northern hemisphere. This increase has occurred despite the uptake of a large portion of the emissions by various natural "sinks" involved in the carbon cycle.[7][8] Anthropogenic carbon dioxide (CO
2) emissions (i.e., emissions produced by human activities) come from combustion of carbon-based fuels, principally wood, coal, oil, and natural gas.[9] Under ongoing greenhouse gas emissions, available Earth System Models project that the Earth's surface temperature could exceed historical analogs as early as 2047 affecting most ecosystems on Earth and the livelihoods of over 3 billion people worldwide.[10] Greenhouse gases also trigger[clarification needed] ocean bio-geochemical changes with broad ramifications in marine systems.[11
Don't think of our carbon emissions as a tiny fraction of the atmosphere, think of man made greenhouse emissions like an enormous growing erection slowly entering Mother Nature's loose and sky big vagina, just for laughs. What's not to love about global warming?
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

#47947 Jun 17, 2014
These deniers are desperately arrogant.

skepticalscience.com
Except

Hollywood, FL

#47948 Jun 17, 2014
The next great environmental disaster courtesy of the greenies will be the throngs of the poor and starving because of high energy costs and restricted crops. Poor people pollute more don't recycle. Thanks greenies.
Los Angeles

Los Angeles, CA

#47949 Jun 17, 2014
mdbuilder wrote:
<quoted text>
There are more trees in America now, than when the Pilgrims landed.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/10/23/new-...
It depends on the location.

There are more trees now in Southern California than when the Pilgrims landed. Guaranteed.
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

#47950 Jun 17, 2014
Watch this.. Meltwater Pulse 2B

http://skepticalscience.com/new-video-meltwat...
Los Angeles

Los Angeles, CA

#47951 Jun 17, 2014
Instead of working on global warming and climate changing, President Obama tonight will go to a LGBT Gala:

Who asks who to dance at an LGBT Gala?

4:35 PM
The President arrives New York, NY
John F. Kennedy International Airport
Open Press
5:25 PM
The President attends a Senate Majority PAC roundtable event
Intercontinental Hotel - New York
Closed Press
8:05 PM
The President delivers remarks at the DNC LGBT Gala
Gotham Hall - New York
Expanded Pool Press
9:00 PM
The President attends a DNC roundtable
Private Residence - New York
Closed Press

“Sharia, NOT!”

Since: Jul 10

Chesapeake, VA

#47952 Jun 17, 2014
mdbuilder wrote:
<quoted text>
There are more trees in America now, than when the Pilgrims landed.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/10/23/new-...
Exactly!!!!!
Let's not forget that plants love and NEED CO2. Kill the CO2, kill the planet!
Except

Hollywood, FL

#47953 Jun 17, 2014
Los Angeles wrote:
Instead of working on global warming and climate changing, President Obama tonight will go to a LGBT Gala:
Who asks who to dance at an LGBT Gala?
4:35 PM
The President arrives New York, NY
John F. Kennedy International Airport
Open Press
5:25 PM
The President attends a Senate Majority PAC roundtable event
Intercontinental Hotel - New York
Closed Press
8:05 PM
The President delivers remarks at the DNC LGBT Gala
Gotham Hall - New York
Expanded Pool Press
9:00 PM
The President attends a DNC roundtable
Private Residence - New York
Closed Press
Laser focus on jobs.

“Sharia, NOT!”

Since: Jul 10

Chesapeake, VA

#47954 Jun 17, 2014
SpaceBlues wrote:
These deniers are desperately arrogant.
skepticalscience.com
These Climate Clowns are terribly ignorant.

“I Luv Carbon Dioxide”

Since: Dec 08

Home, sweet home.

#47955 Jun 17, 2014
SpaceBlues wrote:
These deniers are desperately arrogant.
Our President's using the word "denier" for climate change mitigation skeptics too, it's getting deep here.

.
SpaceBlues wrote:
Watch this.. Meltwater Pulse 2B [URL delelted]
Woo woo meltwater post science. Don't panic S.B., meltwater freezes in winter have saved our Earth from meltwater pulse over every one of the past 2,443,234,117 years. Climate is chaotic and complex, man evolved to adapt to climate change all over the world, not to mitigate climate change.

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 Israeli troops begin Gaza pullout as Hamas decl... (Jan '09) 4 min Ize Found 70,458
sex help! 1 hr Shycat9 1
News BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit contesting... (Jan '09) 1 hr Dr Guru 213,066
The USA has the SUPER RICHEST..................... 1 hr SNIP fallopian tubes 51
Caught masturbating 1 hr Shycat9 3
Abby May 1, 2016 2 hr boundary painter 2
News 2 Dead, 3 Wounded In West Englewood Shooting 3 hr bozo 1
More from around the web

Personal Finance

Chicago Mortgages