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 (Page 375)

Showing posts 7,481 - 7,500 of7,946
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
PHD

Bertram, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#7802
Feb 7, 2013
 

Judged:

2

1

1

tina anne wrote:
<quoted text>
Actually, given the words I tend to use I could not have less than a pre K level of education. In fact, the best pre K schools are only teaching simple words. Many schools do not teach words like education until about the third grade if not later.
Glad to see you finally made it out of K level your spelling has improved.

“See how you are?”

Since: Jul 12

Earth

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#7803
Feb 7, 2013
 

Judged:

2

1

1

tina anne wrote:
<quoted text>
And you left out some very important factors in your calculations. You forgot the very oceans which you are claiming that would rise. The fact that you referred to test tube tells that you had not really considered all the facts. In this case you test tube needs to be replaced with a pie pan. There is a reason why so many dropped this for thermal expansion. In fact if you were to run the numbers on evaporation that the oceans are loosing a similar mass of water as the Greenland Ice sheet every day.
Also, some of the experts are expecting that the Greenland Ice Sheet will stop melting and start growing in a decade.
For purposes of this forum it is a hypothetical exercise, as you well know. What your "some experts" (which might be an interesting and revealing investigation in itself, I'm sure) propose will happen in 10 years or a hundred has no effect on the static numbers.
Whether it is a pie pan, a test tube or a Slurpee cup - the point is that you intimated that the depth of a partially filled container has a bearing on the height of liquid that is added. That is erroneous. If you are talking about oceanic volume and thermal expansion, then fine - we might also calculate what additional rise could occur from oceanic warming, how those temperature changes will affect currents, how those currents affect weather, how weather affects climatology - and so on... Regardless, those factors were not your assertion. You were simply and clearly overwhelmed with the depth of the basins and overlaid that as an agent when in the limited scope of THIS specific strain of the topic it is actually a non sequitur. Bear in mind as well that the ice melt is FRESH water and because of density and temperature difference it will tend to mix above the thermocline.

“See how you are?”

Since: Jul 12

Earth

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#7804
Feb 7, 2013
 

Judged:

2

1

1

tina anne wrote:
<quoted text>
Computer science. I write computer models for a living along with other minor tasks.
Aha - an insight at last. We'll have to rewrite an axiom for you.
"Data in, Garbage out."
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#7805
Feb 7, 2013
 

Judged:

2

1

1

She's a low-paid programmer who seeks to supplement her income with anti science posting.

Oh the pity.
PHD

Bertram, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#7806
Feb 8, 2013
 

Judged:

4

2

2

SpaceBlues wrote:
She's a low-paid programmer who seeks to supplement her income with anti science posting.
Oh the pity.
Aha - an insight at last. We'll have to rewrite an axiom for you.
"No Data in, and Garbage out." A more fitting statement wouldn't you agree ?

Since: Jan 13

Fairfax, VA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#7807
Feb 8, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

tina anne wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh please bring up the consensus argument. I have tons a prepared information to bury that in. But just to keep it simple the word consensus is not a scientific but a political and often has been used to support concepts that were later discovered to be wrong. At one point the consensus of all the learned men on earth was that the earth was flat and that it was the center of the universe.
The entire consensus took a major hit when climate scientist started publishing studies that disproved AGW.
Except this hasn't happened. You always point to extreme right wing misinformation sites, where more often than not, the "author" isn't even a climatologist, but someone playing games with statistics.
tina anne wrote:
<quoted text>
It also took hits when it was discovered that the IPCC had published opinions as fact in the AR4 and Climate Gate and the CRU added another hit.
#1 The IPCC is a compilation summary of scientific reviews.

People from over 130 countries contributed to the IPCC Fourth Assessment Report over the previous 6 years. These people included more than 2500 scientific expert reviewers, more than 800 contributing authors, and more than 450 lead authors.[54]

Of these, the Working Group 1 report (including the summary for policy makers) included contributions by 600 authors from 40 countries, over 620 expert reviewers, a large number of government reviewers, and representatives from 113 governments.[55]>>

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intergovernmenta...

All the information was supposed to be checked against peer reviewed scientific studies, and they missed a couple -- representing less than .1% of the data -- which had NO impact on the scientific consensus of global warming

#2 As for climate gate, the only "scam" is that this was proven to be where the right wing took personal emails out of context. All formal inquiries came to this conclusion.

So once again, Tina Anne parrots pure right wing crap.
tina anne wrote:
<quoted text>

Of course at one time the consensus was that man was going to cause an ice age. The truth is that the consensus was nothing more than an attempt by a few to try and end the discussion before they lost it. That your consensus is only backed by a smalled and shrinking handful of climate scientist.
Liar! You ignored where I showed there was one paper in the 1970s which clearly was speculating on the impact of aerosols vs. CO2. The author reversed himself four years later saying more research, even then showed CO2 was the stronger force.

Need those citations again, major liar?

Since: Jan 13

Fairfax, VA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#7808
Feb 8, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

SpaceBlues wrote:
She's a low-paid programmer who seeks to supplement her income with anti science posting.
Oh the pity.
I must say she didn't deny it when you accused her of this one.

I normally wouldn't think they'd want to PAY someone... well this clueless.

Since: Jan 13

Fairfax, VA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#7809
Feb 8, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

tina anne wrote:
<quoted text>
And you left out some very important factors in your calculations. You forgot the very oceans which you are claiming that would rise.
They have risen. Missed the posts by a Steve guy how he questions why the data is SHOWING them rising.

You are such a bad liar.
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#7810
Feb 8, 2013
 

Judged:

2

1

1

Wallop10 wrote:
<quoted text>
I must say she didn't deny it when you accused her of this one.
I normally wouldn't think they'd want to PAY someone... well this clueless.
Well, you read what fakefacts posted to the possibility of getting paid. Money must be flowing because every denier is on the $ quest here.

How weird is that! As to tina, she feels flattered that she might be paid.

tina was adamant for a while that "Solar Won't Work Because US Isn't Sunny" enough. It turns out the source is Fox.

http://politix.topix.com/homepage/4513-fox-ne...
The Sun is Hot in Florida

Miami, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#7811
Feb 8, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

The Sun is Hot in Florida
Small Town America UGX

Absecon, NJ

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#7812
Feb 8, 2013
 

Judged:

3

2

2

Old Hippie wrote:
Climate change is real and is caused by greedy America's addiction to oil.
China uses and burns more oil than the USA. You are showing your age, old hippie. You should stop reading old playmate magizines and be brought up to date.
Small Town America UGX

Absecon, NJ

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#7813
Feb 8, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

The Sun is Hot in Florida wrote:
The Sun is Hot in Florida
The Devils Dandruff called snow, is cold in South Jersey. Big time super blizzard just starting in the Northeast now. Could be the worst in USA recorded history.
litesong

Everett, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#7814
Feb 8, 2013
 

Judged:

2

1

1

small ugly town wrote:
Big time super blizzard just starting in the Northeast now. Could be the worst in USA recorded history.
AGW enhanced warm fronts have vigorously pushed into the North Pole region, raising temperatures. Simultaneously, the warm fronts have vigorously pushed Arctic fronts, which have been in cold darkness for almost 5 months, south onto Canada & the U.S. A Tropic rain front moving from the Gulf of Mexico has met the Arctic front over the U.S. & now dumping lots of snow.

Yeah, all AGW caused, in both warmth at the North Pole & lots of snow in the U.S.
Small Town America UGX

Absecon, NJ

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#7815
Feb 8, 2013
 

Judged:

3

2

2

litesong wrote:
<quoted text>
AGW enhanced warm fronts have vigorously pushed into the North Pole region, raising temperatures. Simultaneously, the warm fronts have vigorously pushed Arctic fronts, which have been in cold darkness for almost 5 months, south onto Canada & the U.S. A Tropic rain front moving from the Gulf of Mexico has met the Arctic front over the U.S. & now dumping lots of snow.
Yeah, all AGW caused, in both warmth at the North Pole & lots of snow in the U.S.
Your ISP of Everett, Washington is quite a familiar one around here. Why the aggressive crap.? I could care less about what caued this current storm, only I posted it as it is a current event.
PHD

Bertram, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#7816
Feb 9, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

litesong wrote:
<quoted text>
AGW enhanced warm fronts have vigorously pushed into the North Pole region, raising temperatures. Simultaneously, the warm fronts have vigorously pushed Arctic fronts, which have been in cold darkness for almost 5 months, south onto Canada & the U.S. A Tropic rain front moving from the Gulf of Mexico has met the Arctic front over the U.S. & now dumping lots of snow.
Yeah, all AGW caused, in both warmth at the North Pole & lots of snow in the U.S.
In addition, you think topix does not know what you publish. Attacks on me will not delete or erase what you are and what you do. You should stop making an ASSumption of your---self before you know the facts. Do contact topix to satisfy your accusations of the reprint BS your posting of what I said. You are a dumbASSumption of your---self again.
Brit Expat

Montpellier, France

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#7817
Feb 9, 2013
 
PHD

Bertram, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#7818
Feb 9, 2013
 

Judged:

2

1

1

Brit Expat wrote:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =7W33HRc1A6c
Hats off to G.C. they really want to control your tax dollar.

Since: Jan 13

Fairfax, VA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#7819
Feb 9, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Small Town America UGX wrote:
<quoted text>
The Devils Dandruff called snow, is cold in South Jersey. Big time super blizzard just starting in the Northeast now. Could be the worst in USA recorded history.
Guess you never heard the old saying, "Too cold to snow".

EE: I see you are using the PC term of climate change instead of global warming why?

TS: It was climatologists who recommended switching the term to climate change decades ago: Because it was known warming in the atmosphere could hold more water vapor which could form into stronger cloud masses that create powerful rain AND snow weather systems in local regions.

Scientists also know the decline of the ice in the Arctic, has changed the pattern of the Westerlies so that Arctic air reaches further south, in causing cold weather events.

So again, you **proudly** display your gross ignorance between climate and local weather.
PHD

Bertram, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#7820
Feb 10, 2013
 

Judged:

1

Wallop10 wrote:
<quoted text>
Guess you never heard the old saying, "Too cold to snow".
EE: I see you are using the PC term of climate change instead of global warming why?
TS: It was climatologists who recommended switching the term to climate change decades ago: Because it was known warming in the atmosphere could hold more water vapor which could form into stronger cloud masses that create powerful rain AND snow weather systems in local regions.
Scientists also know the decline of the ice in the Arctic, has changed the pattern of the Westerlies so that Arctic air reaches further south, in causing cold weather events.
So again, you **proudly** display your gross ignorance between climate and local weather.
Another bold statement from the commander of gross ignorance wallop10 AKA walloped again and again. the wallop10 AKA walloped again and again is easily confused between climate and weather.

“See how you are?”

Since: Jul 12

Earth

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#7821
Feb 10, 2013
 

Judged:

2

1

1

PHD wrote:
<quoted text>Another bold statement from the commander of gross ignorance wallop10 AKA walloped again and again. the wallop10 AKA walloped again and again is easily confused between climate and weather.
Just curious, PHD. Would you define "weather" and "climate" and how that differs from Wallop10's contentions?

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

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Showing posts 7,481 - 7,500 of7,946
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" 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 Dating

more search filters

less search filters

•••

Chicago Jobs

•••
•••
•••

Chicago People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]
•••