Once slow-moving threat, global warmi...

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

There are 60657 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.

Since: Dec 06

Charlie's

#45944 Apr 16, 2014
Brian_G wrote:
The Earth itself, emits CO2 from every volcano, spring and well. At least our fossil fuel CO2 came from the same atmosphere we're refilling. Burning fossil fuel emits CO2, so does fermenting alcohol, cheese, and raising bread. The carbon was in the air before; we're putting it back where it belongs.
We're putting back in the atmosphere in less than a century fossil fuels that has been trapped in millions years time
Brian_G wrote:
The climate warms or cools or doesn't change measurably; it can't be changed in any manageable way. There's never been an experimental test of man made greenhouse gas on climate temperature.Experiments don't just mean testing to destruction; they start with the smallest input required to create the smallest measurable change. With billions spent annually, to measure climate change; not one peer reviewed journal published an experiment testing climate change mitigation. That's how you can tell its a hoax.
You have been unable to describe how you would experiment on climate, therefore the hoax is your fantasmatic ask for experiment testing climate change mitigation.

“I Luv Carbon Dioxide”

Since: Dec 08

Home, sweet home.

#45945 Apr 16, 2014
DonPanic wrote:
We're putting back in the atmosphere in less than a century fossil fuels that has been trapped in millions years time
For more than a million years, man has been burning anything he could find and putting CO2 back in the atmosphere. Mother nature has adapted to our CO2 emissions, why haven't you?

.
DonPanic wrote:
You have been unable to describe how you would experiment on climate,
I've described the experiment many times, change a variable and measure climate temperature change, then repeat or change until a climate signal is detected from human activity. The thresholds are low, the smallest measurable temperature change would be a nice start. Then publish in a peer reviewed journal. What don't you understand about the scientific method? Only experiments can test the theory of man made catastrophic climate change mitigation.

.
DonPanic wrote:
therefore the hoax is your fantasmatic ask for experiment testing climate change mitigation.
How would you know climate change mitigation is working if there's no objective test? Are you saying climate change mitigation is faith based pseudoscience, and we basically agree?

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#45946 Apr 16, 2014
Lord Hater wrote:
<quoted text>So you pick the definition that best suits your agenda.
Hmm! How about giving your definition of climate. It should be interesting!

Since: Dec 06

Charlie's

#45947 Apr 16, 2014
Brian_G wrote:
I've described the experiment many times, change a variable and measure climate temperature change, then repeat or change until a climate signal is detected from human activity.
That's blablablah, how do you do it IN PRACTICE ?
Brian_G wrote:
What don't you understand about the scientific method?
Scientific method is not only words
Brian_G wrote:
Only experiments can test the theory of man made catastrophic climate change mitigation.
still parroting
.
Brian_G wrote:
How would you know climate change mitigation is working if there's no objective test? Are you saying climate change mitigation is faith based pseudoscience, and we basically agree?
I dont agree with someone not intelligent enough to say which climatic variable is to be changed

“I Luv Carbon Dioxide”

Since: Dec 08

Home, sweet home.

#45948 Apr 16, 2014
I've described the experiment many times, change a variable and measure climate temperature change, then repeat or change until a climate signal is detected from human activity.
DonPanic wrote:
That's blablablah, how do you do it IN PRACTICE ?...I dont agree with someone not intelligent enough to say which climatic variable is to be changed
First, I'd ask for an experiment, unless human activity is too insignificant to climate for measurement. Wait, that's just what I have been doing in thousands of posts...
Professor Emeritus Fellow

Corona Del Mar, CA

#45949 Apr 16, 2014
The following will have the some of the best benefits in the shortest amount of time:

Replace coal fired plants worldwide with:

1. Natural gas from tracking,
2. New nuclear power plants

This will help more than replacing your light bulbs and inflating your car tires.

Write your Congressperson.

Since: Jul 11

Location hidden

#45950 Apr 16, 2014
DDDD-25 wrote:
What is it with you climate change fanatics? In the most arrogant way you possibly can, You put up these posts that berate ANYBODY with a point of view that is not 100% compliant with your own. " Uneducated",
"Moron", etc... Meanwhile you try your best to support the propaganda , " It's the end of the world", "we only have two weeks to do something" etc. Listen pal, you have had WAY too much Kool-Aid.
I'm an old guy, and I remember in 1957 on my 5th birthday my mom would not let me go outside to play because it was 116 degrees. I remember in 1969 it SNOWED in june in So. Cal ! I remember (for all practical purposes) 28 straight days of rain in Berkley. Where were the climate change religious fanatics then? Nobody was going to stick their neck out and say stupid $hit like " It's the end of the world" . That's because nobody wanted to be ridiculed. The point these events were deviations from the AVERAGE norm. 40 hurricanes 1 year, just 8 the next. And so on. You truly need some sedatives. It's beyond ludicrous.
Sane persons are not delusional .
Old ideas formed in the 1950's are not applicable in todays world, if you want to talk about paranioa then just look back at the Mcarthy era that was beyond ludicrous. So like most who post anti warming crap on here can't seem to fatham billions more people sharing the same size planet as we head into the 21st century which poses a whole new threat than the commies are coming. Try and find an educated 20 something who believes in the same ideas that you do, it's not going to happen. With global warming its not about the "weather" on a day to day basis. It's about sowing the seeds for extreme weather and you just want to dismiss this as we had a hurricane last year so get over it. Frequency of extreme weather events are on the increase and that is fact right now. Deny it all you want but it won't change a damn thing. The warming warning is to try and stop making it worse!

Since: Jul 11

Location hidden

#45951 Apr 16, 2014
Just to give you an example of what I mean:

Weather variability can be extremely costly. One estimate finds that the total U.S. economic output varies by up to $485 billion/year owing to weather variability.15 From 1980 to 2010 there were 99 weather disasters in the U.S. in which damages exceeded $1 billion. Altogether those disasters cost $725 billion.16 In 2011, the costs of all weather-disaster damages so far has climbed past $35 billion, according to NOAA estimates. As of August 30th, the U.S. has witnessed 10 weather disasters costing over $1 billion each. This breaks the previous record for the number of such U.S. weather disasters in an entire year.
Blonde coed

Corona Del Mar, CA

#45952 Apr 16, 2014
OzRitz wrote:
Just to give you an example of what I mean:
Weather variability can be extremely costly. One estimate finds that the total U.S. economic output varies by up to $485 billion/year owing to weather variability.15 From 1980 to 2010 there were 99 weather disasters in the U.S. in which damages exceeded $1 billion. Altogether those disasters cost $725 billion.16 In 2011, the costs of all weather-disaster damages so far has climbed past $35 billion, according to NOAA estimates. As of August 30th, the U.S. has witnessed 10 weather disasters costing over $1 billion each. This breaks the previous record for the number of such U.S. weather disasters in an entire year.
All that money stays in the economy and is recirculated around. Those who were insured end up with better homes. Building and repairs after a disaster increase GDP, employment and the velocity of money. They're a good thing! Don't be scared.
litesong

Everett, WA

#45953 Apr 16, 2014
prof sneeritus raunchy fellow wrote:
This will help more than replacing your light bulbs and inflating your car tires.
I take it "prof sneeritus raunchy fellow" don' got no energy eefish-unt light bubs & runs its tie-rrs under-inflated. Billions of gallons of fuel are wasted by underinflated tires. I have stated earlier that hundreds of dollars are saved, just using three LED lights at their most efficient in only 10,000 hours of total burning.

"prof sneeritus raunchy fellow" earns its name, "prof sneeritus raunchy fellow".

Since: Jul 11

Location hidden

#45954 Apr 16, 2014
Blonde coed wrote:
<quoted text>
All that money stays in the economy and is recirculated around. Those who were insured end up with better homes. Building and repairs after a disaster increase GDP, employment and the velocity of money. They're a good thing! Don't be scared.
Oh what a clever lil coed you are, perhaps you share the ideas of the Bush Brain who sends the country to war to stimulate the economy now we can rely on global warming to do the same thing.
litesong

Everett, WA

#45955 Apr 16, 2014
[QUOTE who="blood, couple dead, but that's OK"] Those who were insured end up with better homes. Building and repairs after a disaster increase GDP, employment and the velocity of money. They're a good thing! Don't be scared.[/QUOTE]
"blood, couple dead, but that's OK" earns its name, "blood, couple dead, but that's OK".
"blood, couple dead, but that's OK" offered:
It's actually very nice today through most of the world. Good average temps. Some storms but nothing too bad. Ocean water level isn't too bad. Yesterday as well. Tomorrow looks good!
Don't be scared. I'm not frightened......
/////////
litesong wrote:
Sun, baseball, apple pie & Chevrolet, followed by storms & snow...... Many people have a good time, till the car spins out of control in the snow & kills people. But, don' nev'r mind 'bout the AGW over-warm temperatures in the high Arctic that have been forcing Arctic cold quickly to the south on Canada, the U.S. & Mexico. Not as many dead as during the long hard AGW energy enhanced winter with cold Arctic fronts forced easily out of the North Pole region.
Nuthun' fer "blood, couple dead, but that's OK" to worra 'bout.
litesong

Everett, WA

#45956 Apr 16, 2014
[QUOTE who="lyin' brian"]I've described the experiment many times.....[/QUOTE]

You've experimented with mathematics, with errors of 1 million TIMES, 1000 TIMES, 3000 TIMES, 73 million TIMES, & 2.5+ trillion TIMES. You've experimented with 4 alleged threats & 3 proud threats, with even greater moral errors. Your penchant for errors is why you're obsessed with experiments, to see if you can correct your erroneous life.
DDDD-25

Corona, CA

#45957 Apr 16, 2014
OzRitz wrote:
<quoted text>
Old ideas formed in the 1950's are not applicable in todays world, if you want to talk about paranioa then just look back at the Mcarthy era that was beyond ludicrous. So like most who post anti warming crap on here can't seem to fatham billions more people sharing the same size planet as we head into the 21st century which poses a whole new threat than the commies are coming. Try and find an educated 20 something who believes in the same ideas that you do, it's not going to happen. With global warming its not about the "weather" on a day to day basis. It's about sowing the seeds for extreme weather and you just want to dismiss this as we had a hurricane last year so get over it. Frequency of extreme weather events are on the increase and that is fact right now. Deny it all you want but it won't change a damn thing. The warming warning is to try and stop making it worse!


I'll make you a bet. I plan to be around for about 20years more. So here's the bet/ If, in 20 years ANY of your propaganda has been proven to be True,with absolute scientific proof, including repeatable experiments that support your dogma as being the truth, I will shoot myself. If, on the other hand none of it comes to fruition, Then you must do likewise to yourself. Don't forget that already the exposed emails of your head scientist have proved to the entire world that you have lived and promoted a LIE. YOUR FRAUD HAS BEEN PLACED AT YOUR DOORSTEP. Better denounce your previous association with your fraudulent, lying politico butt lickers before it's too late. As it stands now , when you grow lod and pass on, and the last shovel of dirt falls on your grave, Nobody will ever speak your name again. So there you have it.

“BET DAP”

Since: Feb 09

GOOM BOWN

#45958 Apr 16, 2014
litesong wrote:
<quoted text>
"blood, couple dead, but that's OK" earns its name, "blood, couple dead, but that's OK".
"blood, couple dead, but that's OK" offered:
It's actually very nice today through most of the world. Good average temps. Some storms but nothing too bad. Ocean water level isn't too bad. Yesterday as well. Tomorrow looks good!
Don't be scared. I'm not frightened......
/////////
litesong wrote:
Sun, baseball, apple pie & Chevrolet, followed by storms & snow...... Many people have a good time, till the car spins out of control in the snow & kills people. But, don' nev'r mind 'bout the AGW over-warm temperatures in the high Arctic that have been forcing Arctic cold quickly to the south on Canada, the U.S. & Mexico. Not as many dead as during the long hard AGW energy enhanced winter with cold Arctic fronts forced easily out of the North Pole region.
Nuthun' fer "blood, couple dead, but that's OK" to worra 'bout.
so says the innocent bird merderer.

why don't you go kill something else you can't eat....maybe you'll feel better about yourself "E10" hypocrite.

“BET DAP”

Since: Feb 09

GOOM BOWN

#45959 Apr 16, 2014
liberalism is a disease. i think people catch it by dead birds.

“BET DAP”

Since: Feb 09

GOOM BOWN

#45960 Apr 16, 2014
only a sick individual who claims to be grown and married would stay home all day typing bullshyt and shooting birds with a pellet gun....then stabbing them with a knife.

how sick is that?

what a loser.

“BET DAP”

Since: Feb 09

GOOM BOWN

#45961 Apr 16, 2014
people like that should just make a pb&j and write a novel.....oh, wait!!! people like that haven't a story to tell.
litesong

Everett, WA

#45962 Apr 16, 2014
joey wrote:
All that melted ice will return and politicians will take credit for it.
Ice Age...... Ice Age...... any sleazy slimy toxic topix AGW denier liars call out an Ice Age?

Within months of the low amount of Arctic sea ice in 2012, lowest in 32 years, sleazy slimy toxic topix AGW denier liars reported that the Arctic sea ice had "recovered by 60%, & the Arctic was plunging into an ice age. Later, sleazy slimy toxic topix AGW denier liars reduced the amount of recovered Arctic sea ice to 50%. Later yet, sleazy slimy toxic topix AGW denier liars reduced the amount of recovered Arctic sea ice to 35%. Using proper comparisons AND Arctic sea ice VOLUME, Arctic sea ice VOLUME never was higher than 15% compared to recent years' average. By the end of 2013(remember the year of the returning ice age?), Arctic sea ice VOLUME was only 3% greater than normal recent years.
Presently........
Arctic sea ice VOLUME, as of April 1, 2014 is 1% lower than that of the "2010-to-current" time range. Average Arctic sea ice VOLUME for April 1, for the period 1980-89, was ~30,200 cubic kilometers. Present April 1, 2014 sea ice VOLUME is ~22,700 cubic kilometers,~7500 cubic kilometers less than the 1980-89 period for April 1.

Ice Age......Ice Age.........
Considerations of Arctic sea ice VOLUME show the uncontrolled plummet of sea ice, desired by unscientific toxic topix AGW deniers, who mostly have no or little mathematical or science background.

Since: Oct 13

Location hidden

#45963 Apr 16, 2014
Patriot AKA Bozo wrote:
<quoted text>
Hmm! How about giving your definition of climate. It should be interesting!
Here is a good one.Oxford dictionary. The WEATHER conditions prevailing in an area in general or over a long period:
our cold, wet climate
SYNONYMS
1.1A region with particular prevailing WEATHER conditions:
vacationing in a warm climate

My 5th grader is not allowed to use Wikipedia for school research or reports.(not reliable)

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) 18 min met fan 40,893
Yankee talk back 4, or is it 5 (Aug '08) 47 min NYStateOfMind 330,633
Time to go? (Jun '15) 55 min Into The Night 12,374
Tim Kaine Owned By Banking Interests 1 hr Postgoof 2
Topix Human Sexuality Forum Discontinued 3 hr Charlie Coupland 26
TRUMP to give Adress at Gettysburg ! 4 hr Gettysburg Address 5
GREAT WALL of MEXICO - PLAGIARIZED ! - China ! 4 hr Great Wall of Texas 3

Jackson-Heights Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Jackson-Heights Mortgages