Scientists say they have proved climate change is real, now mus...

Full story: Hartford Courant

Scientists studying the changing nature of the Earth's climate say they have completed one crucial task - proving beyond a doubt that global warming is real.
Comments
7,021 - 7,040 of 7,946 Comments Last updated Aug 14, 2013

Since: Apr 08

"the green troll"

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#7327
Dec 13, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

954Classifieds wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't know if we will truly ever know the real answer on this subject.People say that we had this type of warming hundreds of years ago and that its just a cycle.My answer to that is we didn't have cars and factories back then!!!
People?

The science says this warming is unprecedented for a thousand years or more, and that the known causes of past temperature change do not explain this warming.
naw

Newport, TN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#7328
Dec 13, 2012
 

Judged:

1

naw
PHD

Overton, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#7329
Dec 13, 2012
 

Judged:

1

The more things change the more they remain the same. Scientist corrects an issue than discover more issues that show their corrected issue is incorrect. Ask Einstein.
litesong

Lynnwood, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#7330
Dec 13, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

phdudd wrote:
Scientist corrects an issue than discover more issues that show their corrected issue is incorrect.
Should have stayed with the flat-Earth concept.......'here be dragons' beyond.......
PHD

Overton, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#7331
Dec 13, 2012
 

Judged:

2

2

2

litesong wrote:
<quoted text>
Should have stayed with the flat-Earth concept.......'here be dragons' beyond.......
The only thing that is flat, why the top of your head.
litesong

Lynnwood, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#7332
Dec 13, 2012
 

Judged:

2

2

1

litesong wrote:
Should have stayed with the flat-Earth concept.......'here be dragons' beyond.......
//////////
pududd wrote:
The only thing that is flat, why the top of your head.
//////////
litesong wrote:
pududd follows me around like a puppy dog & copies my ideas, tho he makes them worse in the process. But his copied ideas are better than his original thoughts.
PHD

Overton, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#7333
Dec 14, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

litesout wrote:
litesong wrote:
Should have stayed with the flat-Earth concept.......'here be dragons' beyond.......
//////////
pududd wrote:
The only thing that is flat, why the top of your head.
//////////
litesout wrote:
pududd follows me around like a puppy dog & copies my ideas, tho he makes them worse in the process. But his copied ideas are better than his original thoughts.
So if I copy your ideas and make them worse your ideas must have by your own words useless. Now that you cleared that up it could be the first step in your recovery. Oh still the only flat thing here is the top of your head.

“See how you are?”

Since: Jul 12

Earth

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#7334
Dec 14, 2012
 
PHD wrote:
<quoted text>Sorry you’re a little behind but my solar panels do an excellent job charging my batteries. Wind the jury is still out but the new tech should make a big change in efficiency.Heck my solar panel works well with a full moon.
Behind? okaaay...
There are over 60 million passenger cars in the US alone. Maybe 1/10th of 1% of those are electric (not counting golf carts, mobility scooters, etc.). At .001 kw generated per square foot and between 1.8 - 2.7 kw and 6-10 hr to charge, how many panels would it take to maintain a mere 60,000 electric vehicles? If the goal is to replace the internal combustion engine altogether, that doesn't count for trucks, buses, landscape, farm and construction equipment, etc. etc. where toting batteries is (at the very least) impractical.
litesong

Lynnwood, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#7336
Dec 14, 2012
 
ChromiuMan wrote:
.......toting batteries is .... impractical.
Electric motors are wonderful, in-city pollution freedom(almost no pollution, no where, with hydro, wind or solar power), providing power in small packages, highest torque at lowest rpms, three TIMES the efficiency of 100 plus years of internal combustion engine development, simple, & providing utter quietness & smoothness, compared to ICE.

Work the battery technology & the miracles will follow.



“See how you are?”

Since: Jul 12

Earth

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#7337
Dec 14, 2012
 
litesong wrote:
<quoted text>
Electric motors are wonderful, in-city pollution freedom(almost no pollution, no where, with hydro, wind or solar power), providing power in small packages, highest torque at lowest rpms, three TIMES the efficiency of 100 plus years of internal combustion engine development, simple, & providing utter quietness & smoothness, compared to ICE.
Work the battery technology & the miracles will follow.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =369h-SEBXd8XX
Wonderful? Hmm. Okay.
It always comes down to the right tool for the right job. For personal transportation the electric motor is fine. For harvesting a few thousand acres of wheat - not so much.
There are many circumstances where toting batteries is impractical. The car in the video is carrying well over 600 lbs of lead acid batteries to feed its 300 HP motor, and the cost for these was probably around $9,000. A truck battery can easily weigh 6 times as much as the ones used in the White Zombie, and most trucks carry 2 just for the starter. To provide the amp hours to RUN a school bus, dump truck or semi would be off the charts.
PHD

Overton, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#7338
Dec 14, 2012
 
ChromiuMan wrote:
<quoted text>
Behind? okaaay...
There are over 60 million passenger cars in the US alone. Maybe 1/10th of 1% of those are electric (not counting golf carts, mobility scooters, etc.). At .001 kw generated per square foot and between 1.8 - 2.7 kw and 6-10 hr to charge, how many panels would it take to maintain a mere 60,000 electric vehicles? If the goal is to replace the internal combustion engine altogether, that doesn't count for trucks, buses, landscape, farm and construction equipment, etc. etc. where toting batteries is (at the very least) impractical.
Inductive charging.Space Solar Power. Not practical but soon will be.

“See how you are?”

Since: Jul 12

Earth

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#7339
Dec 14, 2012
 
PHD wrote:
<quoted text>Inductive charging.Space Solar Power. Not practical but soon will be.
Please don't go there. You'll look as silly as Tina Less Than a Box of Rocks.
PHD

Overton, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#7340
Dec 14, 2012
 

Judged:

1

ChromiuMan wrote:
<quoted text>
Please don't go there. You'll look as silly as Tina Less Than a Box of Rocks.
You look even sillier keeping yourself limited.

“See how you are?”

Since: Jul 12

Earth

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#7341
Dec 14, 2012
 

Judged:

1

PHD wrote:
<quoted text>You look even sillier keeping yourself limited.
I said please, didn't I?
Get back with me after you've rewound a few motors. Inductive charging for high amperage applications? Inverse square law is just one of a half dozen factors against that gimmick - and that's all it is for 99% of applications, a gimmick. If your device is close enough for inductive charging you are better off just to plug it in. Space based power generation for terrestrial consumption? Not feasible for another dozen reasons.
PHD

Overton, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#7342
Dec 14, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

ChromiuMan wrote:
<quoted text>
I said please, didn't I?
Get back with me after you've rewound a few motors. Inductive charging for high amperage applications? Inverse square law is just one of a half dozen factors against that gimmick - and that's all it is for 99% of applications, a gimmick. If your device is close enough for inductive charging you are better off just to plug it in. Space based power generation for terrestrial consumption? Not feasible for another dozen reasons.
I said this is a Free America didn't I? You can limit your thinking if you choose. Henry Ford was called a gimmick with his assembly line and he was able to industrialize the world. Ya that rewind thing you talk about was covered in basic electricity class. Not feasible is because you choose to limit yourself.

“See how you are?”

Since: Jul 12

Earth

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#7343
Dec 14, 2012
 
PHD wrote:
<quoted text>I said this is a Free America didn't I? You can limit your thinking if you choose. Henry Ford was called a gimmick with his assembly line and he was able to industrialize the world. Ya that rewind thing you talk about was covered in basic electricity class. Not feasible is because you choose to limit yourself.
rewind was covered in electricity class... okay. I guess we're done here. You have a nice day, now.
PHD

Overton, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#7344
Dec 14, 2012
 
ChromiuMan wrote:
<quoted text>
rewind was covered in electricity class... okay. I guess we're done here. You have a nice day, now.
It was basic electricity class.Only if you choose to be done. You have a greater day.
PHD

Overton, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#7345
Dec 14, 2012
 
ChromiuMan wrote:
<quoted text>
rewind was covered in electricity class... okay. I guess we're done here. You have a nice day, now.
www.ehow.com/how_8777580_do-yo urself-winding-electric-motor. html
Maybe this will help.

“dening those who deny nature. ”

Since: Jun 07

Norfolk va

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#7346
Dec 14, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

ChromiuMan wrote:
<quoted text>
Not only am I capable of learning, I'm also capable of comprehending and extrapolating. Try it.
Greenland is not the only north polar land area.
The southern ARCTIC pole is completely land bound.
Water vapor is a major part of the greenhouse mechanism.
Water that falls on land is not forever bound to stay on land - and pay attentions to this: Even if it falls as snow and becomes glacial ice, it can and probably will eventually melt and flow into an ocean.
I am assuming that you are talking about Antartica and the funny thing is that based on the measurements and other evidence that it is getting thicker. Numerous man made items have been abandoned for one reason or another and quickly buried. Equipment like cranes for example.

So how can you extrapolate that Antartica is shrinking when there is plenty of proof that the sheet is thickening? That if anything the mass of the Antartic ice sheet is if anything growing.

http://www.fogonazos.es/2007/04/recovery-of-a...

http://www.iceagenow.com/Construction_Crane_B...
PHD

Overton, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#7347
Dec 15, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

tina anne wrote:
<quoted text>
I am assuming that you are talking about Antartica and the funny thing is that based on the measurements and other evidence that it is getting thicker. Numerous man made items have been abandoned for one reason or another and quickly buried. Equipment like cranes for example.
So how can you extrapolate that Antartica is shrinking when there is plenty of proof that the sheet is thickening? That if anything the mass of the Antartic ice sheet is if anything growing.
http://www.fogonazos.es/2007/04/recovery-of-a...
http://www.iceagenow.com/Construction_Crane_B...
It's Antarctica!!! Yes you do make an ASSumption of your---self again.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

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 Jobs

•••
Enter and win $5000
•••

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 ]
•••