Once slow-moving threat, global warmi...

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

There are 63581 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.

litesong

Everett, WA

#44505 Mar 18, 2014
motheaten wrote:
funding should be no big deal... just snip out....
......evidence of coal advocates' rape of the atmosphere, seas, oceans & Earth. re-pubic-lick-uns would fund such...... with snips.
SpaceBlues

United States

#44506 Mar 18, 2014
ritedownthemiddle wrote:
<quoted text>apparently you don't understand the greenhouse effect.
even after i explained it to you.
so....shut up, you mental midget.
BAHAHAHA you can't handle the truth, LIAR.

Go back to my previous posts for hard cramming before you post again..
litesong

Everett, WA

#44507 Mar 18, 2014
[QUOTE who="ratdownthemiddle ","middleofthedownwr onggully"] who's rights are being trampled on......[/QUOTE]

"ratdownthemiddle", "middleofthedownwronggull y" has no eyes to see:
https://www.google.com/search...
SpaceBlues

United States

#44508 Mar 18, 2014
litesong wrote:
<quoted text>
Coal advocates want to cover up evidence of their rape of the atmosphere, seas, & Earth.
Ditto.

Furthermore endanger and harm the living without records..
litesong

Everett, WA

#44509 Mar 18, 2014
[QUOTE who="ratdownthemiddle ", "middleofthedownwronggull y"]since some of you claim to understand the greenhouse effect so well.....what is your plan for water vapor?[/QUOTE]

"ratdownthemiddle", "middleofthedownwronggull y" proves it has no science, chemistry, astronomy, physics, algebra or pre-calc in its poorly earned hi skule DEE-plooomaa.

"ratdownthemiddle", "middleofthedownwronggull y" has been told the following very often.
Quantities of atmospheric phase change, infra-red energy absorbing water vapor AND its primary & secondary feedbacks, are controlled by quantities of atmospheric non-phase change, infra-red energy absorbing GHGs AND their primary & secondary feedbacks. Reduction of quantities of atmospheric phase change, infra-red energy absorbing water vapor & its primary & secondary feedbacks, will occur with reduction of quantities of atmospheric non-phase change, infra-red energy absorbing GHGs & their primary & secondary feedbacks.
SpaceBlues

United States

#44510 Mar 18, 2014
The amount of water vapor in the atmosphere exists in direct relation to the temperature. If you increase the temperature, more water evaporates and becomes vapor, and vice versa. So when something else causes a temperature increase (such as extra CO2 from fossil fuels), more water evaporates. Then, since water vapor is a greenhouse gas, this additional water vapor causes the temperature to go up even further—a positive feedback.

How much does water vapor amplify CO2 warming? Studies show that water vapor feedback roughly doubles the amount of warming caused by CO2. So if there is a 1°C change caused by CO2, the water vapor will cause the temperature to go up another 1°C. When other feedback loops are included, the total warming from a potential 1°C change caused by CO2 is, in reality, as much as 3°C.

The other factor to consider is that water is evaporated from the land and sea and falls as rain or snow all the time. Thus the amount held in the atmosphere as water vapour varies greatly in just hours and days as result of the prevailing weather in any location. So even though water vapour is the greatest greenhouse gas, it is relatively short-lived. On the other hand, CO2 is removed from the air by natural geological-scale processes and these take a long time to work. Consequently CO2 stays in our atmosphere for years and even centuries. A small additional amount has a much more long-term effect.

So skeptics are right in saying that water vapor is the dominant greenhouse gas. What they don't mention is that the water vapor feedback loop actually makes temperature changes caused by CO2 even bigger.
gcaveman1

Bay Springs, MS

#44511 Mar 18, 2014
ritedownthemiddle wrote:
<quoted text>look at a historical chart, son.
Buffoon, looking at a chart tells you what happened, but not how and why.

I know that level of research is beyond you.
SpaceBlues

Hockley, TX

#44521 Mar 18, 2014
Humble pie? Pi?

More cheese? BWAHAHA
litesong

Everett, WA

#44523 Mar 18, 2014
[QUOTE who="ratdownthemiddle ","middleofthedownwr onggully"]i guess the science is nowhere close to settled![/QUOTE]

"ratdownthemiddle", "middleofthedownwronggull y" guesses that the AGW non-science it ingests, is causing its bellyache & unsettling its constitution. But the guesses of "ratdownthemiddle", "middleofthedownwronggull y" will not make up for its lack of science, chemistry, astronomy, physics, algebra & pre-calc in its poorly earned hi skule DEE-plooomaa.

“Is that all you've got?”

Since: Jun 10

Location hidden

#44524 Mar 18, 2014
litesong wrote:
<quoted text>
Coal advocates want to cover up evidence of their rape of the atmosphere, seas, & Earth.
lol
Remember when that wormwad Obama was pushing "clean" coal? Yep, about the same time he gave millions of tax dollars away to Solyndra.
litesong

Everett, WA

#44525 Mar 18, 2014
[QUOTE who="ritedownthemiddle ", "middleofthedownwronggull y"].... accused me of stealing your IP today.
could you ...... set the story straight?[/QUOTE]

Already did. However, it doesn't earn you science, chemistry, astronomy, physics, algebra or pre-calc for your poorly earned hi skule DEE-plooomaa.
Mothra

Phoenix, AZ

#44527 Mar 18, 2014
SpaceBlues wrote:
The amount of water vapor in the atmosphere exists in direct relation to the temperature. If you increase the temperature, more water evaporates and becomes vapor, and vice versa. So when something else causes a temperature increase (such as extra CO2 from fossil fuels), more water evaporates. Then, since water vapor is a greenhouse gas, this additional water vapor causes the temperature to go up even further—a positive feedback.
How much does water vapor amplify CO2 warming? Studies show that water vapor feedback roughly doubles the amount of warming caused by CO2. So if there is a 1°C change caused by CO2, the water vapor will cause the temperature to go up another 1°C. When other feedback loops are included, the total warming from a potential 1°C change caused by CO2 is, in reality, as much as 3°C.
The other factor to consider is that water is evaporated from the land and sea and falls as rain or snow all the time. Thus the amount held in the atmosphere as water vapour varies greatly in just hours and days as result of the prevailing weather in any location. So even though water vapour is the greatest greenhouse gas, it is relatively short-lived. On the other hand, CO2 is removed from the air by natural geological-scale processes and these take a long time to work. Consequently CO2 stays in our atmosphere for years and even centuries. A small additional amount has a much more long-term effect.
So skeptics are right in saying that water vapor is the dominant greenhouse gas. What they don't mention is that the water vapor feedback loop actually makes temperature changes caused by CO2 even bigger.
New paper finds water vapor feedback is strongly negative

The IPCC manufactures climate alarm by assuming CO2 controls water vapor to produce a runaway positive feedback system. Physicist Clive Best has posted his new paper showing that water vapor feedback is instead strongly negative, based on both the Faint Sun Paradox and a comparison of 5600 weather stations in the global CRUTEM4 temperature and humidity database. Peer-reviewed publications by Paltridge and others also find water vapor feedback is strongly negative. Without positive water vapor feedback, the IPCC's case for catastrophic man-made climate change collapses.

http://hockeyschtick.blogspot.com/2012/05/new...
Mothra

Phoenix, AZ

#44528 Mar 18, 2014
ritedownthemiddle wrote:
<quoted text>lol
yet you can't discuss/debate the issues with little ole me.
poor limpdique.
You can always tell when litesong is trolling threads. Icons for Incendiary, Mean and Disagree appear on skeptics posts... and none appear on his.

LOL

btw, which do you prefer for him/her? Kuckoo or cuckoo?
litesong

Everett, WA

#44529 Mar 18, 2014
[QUOTE who="ritedownthemiddle ","middleofthedownwr onggully"] you can't discuss/debate the issues with little ole me.[/QUOTE]

SpaceBlues & I already did, but you can't understand & pretends that we never answered:

[QUOTE who="ratdownthemiddle ", "middleofthedownwronggull y"]since some of you claim to understand the greenhouse effect so well.....what is your plan for water vapor?[/QUOTE]

"ratdownthemiddle", "middleofthedownwronggull y" proves it has no science, chemistry, astronomy, physics, algebra or pre-calc in its poorly earned hi skule DEE-plooomaa.

"ratdownthemiddle", "middleofthedownwronggull y" has been told the following very often.
Quantities of atmospheric phase change, infra-red energy absorbing water vapor AND its primary & secondary feedbacks, are controlled by quantities of atmospheric non-phase change, infra-red energy absorbing GHGs AND their primary & secondary feedbacks. Reduction of quantities of atmospheric phase change, infra-red energy absorbing water vapor & its primary & secondary feedbacks, will occur with reduction of quantities of atmospheric non-phase change, infra-red energy absorbing GHGs & their primary & secondary feedbacks.
//////////
SpaceBlues wrote:
The amount of water vapor in the atmosphere exists in direct relation to the temperature. If you increase the temperature, more water evaporates and becomes vapor, and vice versa. So when something else causes a temperature increase (such as extra CO2 from fossil fuels), more water evaporates. Then, since water vapor is a greenhouse gas, this additional water vapor causes the temperature to go up even further—a positive feedback.

How much does water vapor amplify CO2 warming? Studies show that water vapor feedback roughly doubles the amount of warming caused by CO2. So if there is a 1°C change caused by CO2, the water vapor will cause the temperature to go up another 1°C. When other feedback loops are included, the total warming from a potential 1°C change caused by CO2 is, in reality, as much as 3°C.

The other factor to consider is that water is evaporated from the land and sea and falls as rain or snow all the time. Thus the amount held in the atmosphere as water vapour varies greatly in just hours and days as result of the prevailing weather in any location. So even though water vapour is the greatest greenhouse gas, it is relatively short-lived. On the other hand, CO2 is removed from the air by natural geological-scale processes and these take a long time to work. Consequently CO2 stays in our atmosphere for years and even centuries. A small additional amount has a much more long-term effect.

So skeptics are right in saying that water vapor is the dominant greenhouse gas. What they don't mention is that the water vapor feedback loop actually makes temperature changes caused by CO2 even bigger.
//////////

All "ratdownthemiddle ", "middleofthedownwronggull y" had to say was:

B-b-b-b-b-but, what about the temperature?
//////////
litesong wrote:
"ratdownthemiddle ", "middleofthedownwronggull y" hides behind a 100 year record low TSI, La Nina's, & PDOs, doesn't worry about the increasing AGW energy downwelling to half a billion cubic kilometers of ocean waters & babbles about air temperatures, which is a minimum quantity of total AGW Earth energies.

Mothra

Phoenix, AZ

#44532 Mar 18, 2014
litesong wrote:
Cuckoo, cuckoo.
Mothra

Phoenix, AZ

#44533 Mar 18, 2014
Mothra wrote:
<quoted text>
You can always tell when litesong is trolling threads. Icons for Incendiary, Mean and Disagree appear on skeptics posts... and none appear on his.
LOL
btw, which do you prefer for him/her? Kuckoo or cuckoo?
I'm going with "cuckoo". as well.

btw, litesong used to stalk my posts, but he's got you now. Congrats... and good riddance.

LOL

Since: Jul 11

Location hidden

#44534 Mar 19, 2014
Yet again, another report from scientists for deniers to ignore:

Human-caused climate change is real, and so is the chance that abrupt and irreversible changes could have a devastating impact on the world in a matter of decades, or even years, a new report by an association of American scientists warned Tuesday.

“As scientists, it is not our role to tell people what they should do or must believe about the rising threat of climate change,” the American Association for the Advancement of Scientists (AAAS) wrote in their report.

“But we consider it to be our responsibility as professionals to ensure, to the best of our ability, that people understand what we know: human-caused climate change is happening, we face risks of abrupt, unpredictable and potentially irreversible changes, and responding now will lower the risk and cost of taking action.”

http://america.aljazeera.com/articles/2014/3/...

Since: Apr 08

"the green troll"

#44535 Mar 19, 2014
Mothra wrote:
<quoted text>
New paper finds water vapor feedback is strongly negative
The IPCC manufactures climate alarm by assuming CO2 controls water vapor to produce a runaway positive feedback system. Physicist Clive Best has posted his new paper showing that water vapor feedback is instead strongly negative, based on both the Faint Sun Paradox and a comparison of 5600 weather stations in the global CRUTEM4 temperature and humidity database. Peer-reviewed publications by Paltridge and others also find water vapor feedback is strongly negative. Without positive water vapor feedback, the IPCC's case for catastrophic man-made climate change collapses.
http://hockeyschtick.blogspot.com/2012/05/new...
You have a very loose definition of "paper".

Peer reviewed in a reputable journal?

No, online Word file written by a lecturer at a business college.

Good enough for poptech's list no doubt.

“CO2 is Gaseous Love”

Since: Dec 08

Home, sweet home.

#44536 Mar 19, 2014
SpaceBlues wrote:
The amount of water vapor in the atmosphere exists in direct relation to the temperature.
^^^Is the water vapor in a hot desert is related to the water vapor in a hot jungle because temperature is more significant than climate?
Ozone is a greenhouse gas too. We can't live without greenhouse gases to protect our biosphere. CO2 is essential to our civilization; don't hate.

.
SpaceBlues wrote:
If you increase the temperature, more water evaporates and becomes vapor, and vice versa. So when something else causes a temperature increase (such as extra CO2 from fossil fuels), more water evaporates. Then, since water vapor is a greenhouse gas, this additional water vapor causes the temperature to go up even further—a positive feedback. How much does water vapor amplify CO2 warming? Studies show that water vapor feedback roughly doubles the amount of warming caused by CO2. So if there is a 1°C change caused by CO2, the water vapor will cause the temperature to go up another 1°C. When other feedback loops are included, the total warming from a potential 1°C change caused by CO2 is, in reality, as much as 3°C. The other factor to consider is that water is evaporated from the land and sea and falls as rain or snow all the time. Thus the amount held in the atmosphere as water vapour varies greatly in just hours and days as result of the prevailing weather in any location. So even though water vapour is the greatest greenhouse gas, it is relatively short-lived. On the other hand, CO2 is removed from the air by natural geological-scale processes and these take a long time to work. Consequently CO2 stays in our atmosphere for years and even centuries. A small additional amount has a much more long-term effect. So skeptics are right in saying that water vapor is the dominant greenhouse gas. What they don't mention is that the water vapor feedback loop actually makes temperature changes caused by CO2 even bigger.
^^^Another untested theory; global climate feedback. There's never been a peer reviewed published experiment demonstrating a man made climate feedback event. The science hasn't caught up to the hype.

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#44537 Mar 19, 2014
Mothra wrote:
<quoted text>
"...according to an assessment of 21 surveys ..."
A survey of surveys? Yeah... there's some hard hitting stuff there. This guy's gotta be a warmists... who else could support cherry picking data in such a unique fashion, and then present it as a "fact"?
>>The majority of Americans continue to believe that the effects of global warming are happening or will begin to happen during their lifetimes. At the same time, many fewer, currently 36%, believe global warming will pose a serious threat to their way of life during their lifetimes.
http://www.gallup.com/poll/167879/not-global-...
First... note the distinction... "are happening" or "will happen during their lifetimes"... nothing like a broad brush to cover a big area.
But... is it a big deal?... nope. Check the graph. Never has a majority seen it as a "serious" threat.
d'Oh!


The truth hurts, doesn't it?

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.

Jackson-Heights Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Mets talkback (Dec '07) 16 min Paul Yanks 43,541
yates may tell all even at risk of jail in ligh... 24 min releaseyourtaxes 1
Ap konsi actress ka doodh pena chahte ho (Oct '14) 33 min Salina Prakash ka... 7
Is Rachel Maddow smug or priggish? 49 min Waikiki homeless ... 14
manifort may have transferred mortgages to trum... 1 hr releaseyourtaxes 1
President Trump's first 100 days - Roadmap to D... 1 hr SirLiesAlot 2,970
News Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision (Jan '08) 1 hr Mabinogi 313,678

Jackson-Heights Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Jackson-Heights Mortgages