Global warming 'undeniable,' scientis...

Global warming 'undeniable,' scientists say

There are 34463 comments on the TwinCities.com story from Jul 29, 2010, titled Global warming 'undeniable,' scientists say. In it, TwinCities.com reports that:

Scientists from around the world are providing even more evidence of global warming, one day after President Barack Obama renewed his call for climate legislation.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at TwinCities.com.

litesong

Lynnwood, WA

#24014 Feb 21, 2013
dang deng wrote:
THE CLIMATE IS GETTING COLDER, NOT WARMER.
chinese communists are getting colder, not the Earth!
chinese communists are getting colder because they have no hearts!

“obamabot livs”

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#24016 Feb 22, 2013
HomoSapiensLaptopicus wrote:
<quoted text>
Scientists: Human activities are warming the earth, & this represents a major danger to civilization in the immediate future.
Deniers: Al Gore is fat!
A major danger? How?

“obamabot livs”

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#24017 Feb 22, 2013
HomoSapiensLaptopicus wrote:
<quoted text>
Scientists: Human activities are warming the earth, & this represents a major danger to civilization in the immediate future.
Deniers: Al Gore is fat!
So you refuse to sell ur IC automobile, why should we listen to anything you say? You don't give a crap, neither does Al Snore. Or Soros. Or Obama. The Obamas are not going to sacrifice one single thing to reduce their carbon footprint.
Bushwhacker

Seattle, WA

#24018 Feb 22, 2013
If you don't know, why are you attempting to post opinions ? Oh, right.

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#24019 Feb 22, 2013
marlowe44 wrote:
<quoted text>
A major danger? How?
Thank you for confirming the joke. Yes, Al Gore is fat.

IF this was a serious question, DUH. How could it threaten civilization? Gee, what do YOU think?

1. It is certain that there will be more intra-continental droughts, we just don't know exactly where, when or how severe. Droughts are increasing now world-wide. There is serious scientific work that suggests we will have droughts world-wide severe enough to cause agricultural collapse by mid-century. This would mean famine, disease & war, with the deaths of billions of humans.

2. Seas are definitely rising, & with higher temps (which are ALREADY occurring, & will worsen in the future) this will worsen & almost certainly accelerate. If New York City is inundated, how much will that "cost"?$10 T?$20 T? more? Some cities, like Houston & Boston, are already trying to figure out how to protect themselves now & in the future.

3. As you (should) know, Sandy was an extratropical cyclone, comparable to the Perfect Storm in 1991 & an unnamed storm in Nov 1950. It was larger & more powerful than both. It was not comparable to the Long Island Hurricane of 1938, so comparisons there are irrelevant. We will have more powerful storms of various types in the future, & of course this is synergistically bad with rising sea levels.

4. Besides droughts, we will have more intense, more prolonged weather events of all kinds. This means more heat waves, cold snaps (YES), floods, storms, etc. Yes, less precipitation away from the coasts overall, but when it comes, it'll be much heavier & more concentrated. These things cost MONEY.

5. The Arctic is warming, causing smaller temperature gradients between middle & high latitudes. These cause a slower, "wavier" jet stream, resulting in Rossby waves (google them if you want). They're the phenomena that cause more severe, more prolonged weather of whatever type we're having at the moment.

6. The Amazon rainforest has been called "the lungs of the world," responsible for generating 15-20% of the O2 on the earth (& removing that percentage of CO2). However, there is drought there, & too much human-caused burning of forest. The rainforest could seriously be transformed in a savannah, with MUCH less capacity to remove CO2 & generate O2.

7. The oceans are already dying, with bleached/dead coral, algal blooms, dead zones, overfished/dead areas like the Grand Banks (once the more productive fishery in the world), etc, etc. If you were a scuba diver you would know this. We are forcing the oceans to absorb too much CO2, making it too acidic, along with warming it excessively.

8. We are in the middle of the ~6th great mass extinction on the earth, this one caused by us. This would have happened with or without AGW/CC, but it is worse because of climate change. It is a tremendous loss of genetic diversity, & this represents not just a moral, but a profound financial, loss.

9. The most dangerous thing of all, by far, is the methane in the Arctic. Methane is 72 times stronger than carbon dioxide as a greenhouse gas for the 1st 20 years it's in the atmosphere.(It's oxidized to CO2 over time, of course.) There is as much carbon in the Arctic, mostly methane, frozen in the permafrost on land & trapped in clathrates underwater on the Siberian continental shelf (largest in the world), as in the rest of the atmophere combined. If a significant fraction is released, it will cause an inexorable positive feedback of warming & release of ALL the methane, resulting in temps ~10-15º C higher & an ice free earth. Sea level will be ~75 meters higher. This means that if it gets to ~5-6º C higher (we don't know exactly how much), it'll go all the way to the top,~10-15º higher.

10. If you think reducing carbon emissions will be expensive, wait till you see the costs of NOT reducing them. If you think the national debt is large, wait till you see the costs of AGW/CC.

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#24020 Feb 22, 2013
marlowe44 wrote:
<quoted text>
So you refuse to sell ur IC automobile, why should we listen to anything you say? You don't give a crap, neither does Al Snore. Or Soros. Or Obama. The Obamas are not going to sacrifice one single thing to reduce their carbon footprint.
Firstly, how EXACTLY do you know whether I drive a car? Remote viewing? This must be an incredible ability of yours.

Secondly, it's 100.00000000000000000000000000 000000000000% IRRELEVANT to the science what Al Gore, George Soros or even Obama do. You could prove all 3 of them are the most hypocritical, manipulative, venal, greedy, evil people in the history of the world, & you know what it would mean to the science?

NOTHING!

Scientific facts are true regardless of who does or doesn't believe them. The outlines of AGW/CC have been proven beyond all reasonable doubt.

Secondly, individual actions WRT their personal carbon footprints will NEVER be enough. Most carbon release is industrial, so we all need to reduce it together.

If you, e.g., took all liberals, which are ~20% of the US population, & had them reduce their personal carbon footprints to zero, total emissions wouldn't go down more than ~5% because so many emissions are industrial & out of individuals' personal control. We need EVERYONE to reduce emissions as part of broad, society-wide policies.

That's just the way it is. So you can say AGW/CC is false as much as you want, & accuse me or anyone else of not giving a cr*p, & it'll mean NOTHING to the science. Scientific facts are true no matter how much you & the oil companies want them to be false.

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#24021 Feb 22, 2013
marlowe44 wrote:
<quoted text>
If Al Snore isn't the high priest, who is? Ur mistaken, the earth has indeed been warming since the last ice age.
I don't accept your language, but the people in AGW/CC theory who matter the most are scientists: James Hansen, Kevin Trenberth, the late Stephen Schneider, Phil Jones, Michael Mann, etc, etc. Al Gore has NOTHING to do with it.
As a matter of fact, Gore was smart enough to get onto the boards of Apple & Google, with stock options, at just the right time. He made a LOT of money. This means that regardless of his views on AGW/CC, YOU should read his new book, The Future.
Lastly, you are WRONG. The earth has NOT been warming since the last glaciation. The peak of our interglacial was ~7500-8000 years ago, & temperaturs have been generally falling ever since - until the recent hockey stick, of course.
http://www.google.com/imgres...
Kyle

Columbia City, IN

#24025 Feb 22, 2013
DENG wrote:
THE CLIMATE IS GETTING COLDER, NOT WARMER.
Nothing loses quite like posting counter-factual BS in all caps sans any support whatsoever.
Kyle

Columbia City, IN

#24026 Feb 22, 2013
marlowe44 wrote:
<quoted text>
So you refuse to sell ur IC automobile, why should we listen to anything you say? You don't give a crap, neither does Al Snore. Or Soros. Or Obama. The Obamas are not going to sacrifice one single thing to reduce their carbon footprint.
Does anyone care to analyze the above for fallacies? HINT: It's nothing but fallacies.

If you had real arguments, you wouldn't have to post such claptrap to support your denial.

“obamabot livs”

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#24027 Feb 22, 2013
HomoSapiensLaptopicus wrote:
<quoted text>
Thank you for confirming the joke. Yes, Al Gore is fat.
IF this was a serious question, DUH. How could it threaten civilization? Gee, what do YOU think?
scientific work that suggests we will have droughts world-wide sevl worsen & almost certainly accelerate. If New York City is inundated, how much will that "cost"?$10 T?$20 T? more? Some cities, like Houston & Boston, are already trying to figure out how to protect themselves now & in the future.
3. As you (should) know, Sandy was an extratropical cyclone, comparable to the Perfect Storm in 1991 & an unnamed storm in Nov 1950. It was larger & more powerful than both. It was not comparable to the Long Island Hurricane of 1938, so comparisons there are irrelevant. We will have more powerful storms of various types in the future, & of course this is synergistically bad with rising sea levels.
4. Besides droughts, we will have more intense, more prolonged weather events of all kinds. This means more heat waves, cold snaps (YES), floods, storms, etc. Yes, less precipitation away from the coasts overall, but when it comes, it'll be much heavier & more concentrated. These things cost MONEY.
5. The Arctic is warming, causing smaller temperature gradients between middle & high latitudes. These cause a slower, "wavier" jet stream, resulting in Rossby waves (google them if you want). They're the phenomena that cause more severe, more prolonged u were a scuba diver you would know this. We are forcing the oceans to absorb too much CO2, making it too acidic, along with warming it excessively.
8. We are in the middle of the ~6th great mass extinction on the earth, this one caused by us. This would have happened with or without AGW/CC, but it is worse because of climate change. It is a tremendous loss of genetic diversity, & this represents not just a moral, but a profound financial, loss.
9. The most dangerous thing of all, by far, is the methane in the Arctic. Methane is 72 times stronger than carbon dioxide as a greenhouse gas for the 1st 20 years it's in the atmosphere.(It's oxidized to CO2 over time, of course.) There is as much carbon in the Arctic, mostly methane, frozen in the permafrost on land & trapped in clathrates underwater on the Siberian continental shelf (largest in the world), as in the rest of the atmophere combined. If a significant fraction is released, it will cause an inexorable positive feedback of warming & release of ALL the methane, resulting in temps ~10-15º C higher & an ice free earth. Sea level will be ~75 meters higher. This means that if it gets to ~5-6º C higher (we don't know exactly how much), it'll go all the way to the top,~10-15º higher.
10. If you think reducing carbon emissions will be expensive, wait till you see the costs of NOT reducing them. If you think the national debt is large, wait till you see the costs of AGW/CC.
OK, when you post crap at the very start it doesn't inspire me to read further. The seas are not rising, simply not true.
Would it be beneficial for the vast tracts of land in Canada and Siberia to be warm enough to grow crops and allow people to live there? Right now they're basically worthless.

“obamabot livs”

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#24028 Feb 22, 2013
HomoSapiensLaptopicus wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't accept your language, but the people in AGW/CC theory who matter the most are scientists: James Hansen, Kevin Trenberth, the late Stephen Schneider, Phil Jones, Michael Mann, etc, etc. Al Gore has NOTHING to do with it.
As a matter of fact, Gore was smart enough to get onto the boards of Apple & Google, with stock options, at just the right time. He made a LOT of money. This means that regardless of his views on AGW/CC, YOU should read his new book, The Future.
Lastly, you are WRONG. The earth has NOT been warming since the last glaciation. The peak of our interglacial was ~7500-8000 years ago, & temperaturs have been generally falling ever since - until the recent hockey stick, of course.
http://www.google.com/imgres...
Which of them has an Oscar?

“obamabot livs”

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#24029 Feb 22, 2013
HomoSapiensLaptopicus wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't accept your language, but the people in AGW/CC theory who matter the most are scientists: James Hansen, Kevin Trenberth, the late Stephen Schneider, Phil Jones, Michael Mann, etc, etc. Al Gore has NOTHING to do with it.
As a matter of fact, Gore was smart enough to get onto the boards of Apple & Google, with stock options, at just the right time. He made a LOT of money. This means that regardless of his views on AGW/CC, YOU should read his new book, The Future.
Lastly, you are WRONG. The earth has NOT been warming since the last glaciation. The peak of our interglacial was ~7500-8000 years ago, & temperaturs have been generally falling ever since - until the recent hockey stick, of course.
http://www.google.com/imgres...
Michael Mann, ya, that's the guy, he got busted sending the Emails with the phony facts, sure , I remember him. Anything he says is worthless.

“obamabot livs”

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#24030 Feb 22, 2013
Kyle wrote:
<quoted text>
Does anyone care to analyze the above for fallacies? HINT: It's nothing but fallacies.
If you had real arguments, you wouldn't have to post such claptrap to support your denial.
Still driving your IC automobile? I thought so, I'll discount anything you say as well.

“obamabot livs”

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#24031 Feb 22, 2013
HomoSapiensLaptopicus wrote:
<quoted text>
Firstly, how EXACTLY do you know whether I drive a car? Remote viewing? This must be an incredible ability of yours.
Secondly, it's 100.00000000000000000000000000 000000000000% IRRELEVANT to the science what Al Gore, George Soros or even Obama do. You could prove all 3 of them are the most hypocritical, manipulative, venal, greedy, evil people in the history of the world, & you know what it would mean to the science?
NOTHING!
Scientific facts are true regardless of who does or doesn't believe them. The outlines of AGW/CC have been proven beyond all reasonable doubt.
Secondly, individual actions WRT their personal carbon footprints will NEVER be enough. Most carbon release is industrial, so we all need to reduce it together.
If you, e.g., took all liberals, which are ~20% of the US population, & had them reduce their personal carbon footprints to zero, total emissions wouldn't go down more than ~5% because so many emissions are industrial & out of individuals' personal control. We need EVERYONE to reduce emissions as part of broad, society-wide policies.
That's just the way it is. So you can say AGW/CC is false as much as you want, & accuse me or anyone else of not giving a cr*p, & it'll mean NOTHING to the science. Scientific facts are true no matter how much you & the oil companies want them to be false.
Fine, I believe, now leave me alone, I'm not changing squat. And neither are you.
When Gore and Obama start acting like they care, so will I.

Since: Nov 11

Westerville, OH

#24032 Feb 22, 2013
Shakalaka wrote:
<quoted text>Woweeee bozo are you STILL crying because we elected the magnificent, the sexy, the intelligent, the honorable, peace prize winning Barack Obama?

Don't be skeered...we won't bankrupt all of America...Just your side of town. But not to worry...you've got that underground bunker to crawl back in. That's good planning sweet cakes!
"peace prize winning"?

The one who attacked Libya for absolutely no reason besides oil?

See? Liberals are hypocrites! They accuse Bush of attacking Iraq for oil when it was Obama the one who attacked Libya for oil!!!

What did your incompetent inexperience communist community organizer did to earn the peace prize?

NOTHING!!!

ABSOLUTELY NOTHING!!!

All he did was a speech like the ones Hitler gave which hypnotized Germany and the Liberals like you!

You are easily manipulated with rhetorical speech. Conservatives know who is a charlatan and who is not!!!

Since: Nov 11

Westerville, OH

#24033 Feb 22, 2013
HomoSapiensLaptopicus wrote:
<quoted text>I must admit, your stooooopidity is good for a lot of laughs, Jose. It's true that SOMEbody is brain dead here, it's just not the liberals.

What a PENETRATING analysis! I am a liberal, therefore I defend Al Gore. What are you, a MOR0N?

Yes, I defend Al Gore's right to eat as many donuts as he wants, & get as fat as he wants! Are you happy now?

Again, I'm NOT going to defend Al Gore's actions. I'm NOT going to defend him for selling his TV network to an oil-money-sponsored news organization, even if that organization is award-winning & does a good job on AGW/CC issues.

Al Gore means NOTHING to the science. You could prove Al Gore was the most selfish, venal, hypocritical, greedy, idiotic person in world history, & it would means NOTHING to the science.

Scientific facts are true no matter how many times fools like you say they're not. The basics of AGW/CC theory are proven facts. Period.

Scientists: the earth is warming, it's due to human activity, & it will cause major disruptions to our civilization in the near future.

Jose: Al Gore is fat!

You really are a piece of work.

Isolated cooling does NOT disprove AGW/CC theory. As a matter of fact, the theory predicts there will be MORE extremes of all kinds of weather: more heat waves, more cold snaps, stronger storms, more floods & more droughts. We are already seeing this NOW. How much worse will it be in 30 or 40 years?

http://www.amazon.com/Global-Weirdness-Relent...

It's already costing us MONEY, a lot of it. It'll be WAY cheaper to reduce CO2 emissions now. Period.
Here is scientific fact:

Libtards predicted that by year 2000, we will all starve to death for lack of sufficient food to feed the overpopulation!

Fact: Libtards were wrong! Very wrong!!!

It is 2013 and we are not starving. Actually they just opened a new buffet restaurant next door, LOL!!!

Yes, 60 years ago it was the overpopulation that would kill us all. Today is global warming!!!

You guys never learn!!!

Once global warming is proven false then what is next? There will be a deadly shortage of metals? Oh, never mind, they already tried that!!!

Since: Nov 11

Westerville, OH

#24034 Feb 22, 2013
HomoSapiensLaptopicus wrote:
<quoted text>I don't disagree with you. I just say it's 100.00000% irrelevant to the science.

But you should know that Al doesn't need the money. Proceeds from his movie were donated to charity. He got onto the boards of Apple & Google, with stock options, at just the right time, in the early 2000s. He made piles of money that way. Besides, he was born into money.

He didn't need the al-Jazeera money either. He just thought it was the right thing to do at this time. His Current TV staff didn't agree, however, nor did a lot of us.

Actually, since he recognized early on that Google & Apple were going to be successful, you should read his book The Future, quite apart from his opinions on AGW/CC.

http://www.amazon.com/Future-Six-Drivers-Glob...
And you will defend him no mater what only because Liberalism is at stake!!!

It is not the climate you care about but liberal big government all you want!

Since: Nov 11

Westerville, OH

#24035 Feb 22, 2013
Predictions Of The ‘Overpopulation’ LIBERALS: Wrong, Wrong, & Wrong Again

Earth Day, Then and Now
The planet’s future has never looked better. Here’s why.

http://www.prisonplanet.com/predictions-of-th...
litesong

Lynnwood, WA

#24036 Feb 22, 2013
[QUOTE who="marred & tinny joke"]Predictions Of The ‘Overpopulation’ LIBERALS: Wrong, Wrong, & Wrong Again[/QUOTE]

Not only did liberals predict over-population, but they sought for great educational programs in many countries, that were headed for population crashes. Such efforts of education were accomplished that many societies were changed in excellent efforts to curb family unsustainable growth rates.

Of course, "marred & tinny joke" only has derision for such great societal changes that have actually saved those societies.
litesong

Lynnwood, WA

#24037 Feb 22, 2013
[QUOTE who="marred & low 44waist"] now leave me alone, I'm not changing squat.[/QUOTE]

Without science & mathematics degrees & without upper class science, chemistry, astronomy, physics, algebra & pre-calc for its poorly earned hi skule DEE-plooomaa, "marred & low 44waist" CAN'T change its squatting position.

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.

Minneapolis Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Amazing 4 blacks IDed on race 2 min Here we go again 4
Team Obama behind IRS Scandal (May '13) 9 hr LIbErals 115
News St. Paul man convicted of stabbing wife 64 time... (Apr '11) 11 hr dGo mdDaen lyHo i... 21
Hillary should pay for Benghazi (Apr '14) 11 hr Normal is OK 51
Drop one word....add one word game (Apr '14) 18 hr Intrepid Surfer 318
Liberals and Conservatives 19 hr UncleSam 4
clinton probe extends to key aides 19 hr UncleSam 31
More from around the web

Personal Finance

Minneapolis Mortgages