Global warming 'undeniable,' scientists say

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. Full Story
Bushwhacker

Seattle, WA

#24578 Mar 20, 2013
What a child.....
Bushwhacker

Seattle, WA

#24579 Mar 21, 2013
Who wrote:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new s/article-2294560/The-great-gr een-1-The-hard-proof-finally-s hows-global-warming-forecasts- costing-billions-WRONG-along.h tml
Do ya think?
National Enquirer equivalent... Pretty sad, you didn't find that obvious.

“I Luv Carbon Dioxide”

Since: Dec 08

Location hidden

#24580 Mar 21, 2013
HomoSapiensLaptopicus wrote:
Yes is does. Climate's main thermostat is carbon dioxide, We know this from studying past climate on the earth, where CO2 level is the most important single factor in determining the earth's temperature. Richard Alley has said this in his YouTube lectures. I THINK this is one where he says it; if not, I'll keep looking & try to post it:[URL deleted]
No, climate doesn't have a thermostat:

A thermostat is a component of a control system which senses the temperature of a system so that the system's temperature is maintained near a desired setpoint. The thermostat does this by switching heating or cooling devices on or off, or regulating the flow of a heat transfer fluid as needed, to maintain the correct temperature. The name is derived from the Greek words thermos "hot" and statos "a standing".
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermostat
Kyle

United States

#24581 Mar 21, 2013
Bushwhacker wrote:
It's important for you to act/feel superior, try slugs... People are WAY BEYOND YOU....
Poor baby.
Someday, you should try intelligence, if you have any..... LMAOROTFU~!
That clear concession is accepted.
Kyle

United States

#24582 Mar 21, 2013
ebtcollector wrote:
<quoted text>
I believe you.
now what?
You're lying because you've lost the argument. You WILL deny again.

What next? Already answered more than once. Hint: It's what you deniers bitch about to deflect from the science.
Kyle

Kendallville, IN

#24583 Mar 21, 2013
ebtcollector wrote:
<quoted text>
I said I believed you.
Now what?
Or you just get off on fighting on forums?
Using issues to seek interaction with others, the only way you know how.
I believe you.
Global warming is real.
Now what?
Is your goal reaching a consensus?
Or just fighting with people?
I believe you.
NOW WHAT?
Are you just lying repeatedly as deniers do? If not, swear that you'll never deny again.

I say your question is desperate stalling. You know damn well what the big, market-based measure should be. Why don't you tell us?
I

“I Want To Be Evil”

Since: Feb 13

I Wanna Be Bad

#24584 Mar 21, 2013
Coldest spring in 40 years in Minnesota, so much for "Global Warming", oh wait, they had to change it to "Climate Change", because it's so obviously BS!!!!!
Bushwhacker

Seattle, WA

#24585 Mar 21, 2013
Overall, winters have warmed about two to four degrees in the past 30 years or so. One good way to measure it is to look at these number of subzero lows that we're seeing at night. There are distinct trends that are emerging in the past 30 to 40 years toward fewer subzero low temperatures in Minnesota and the Twin Cities.

Quick example: this year we've had five days so far, last year we had three. That's a very low number. If you go back to the 1970s - the whole decade - we had 444 subzero days. During the 1980s we had 280, during the 1990s we had 256; down to 198 in the 2000s. That's a 57% drop in those subzero nights. If you look at that overall the trend lines show we could be down to around 10 on average per winter. We used to average about 30 back in the '70s and we could be maybe closer to zero by 2040. By 2040, in the Twin Cities we could be very close to few or any subzero nights if our current climate trends continue.
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

#24586 Mar 21, 2013
Who wrote:
..
Do ya think?
But do you enough to watch this?

litesong

Everett, WA

#24587 Mar 21, 2013
Miss Piggy Chops wrote:
Coldest spring in 40 years in Minnesota, so much for "Global Warming", oh wait, they had to change it to "Climate Change", because it's so obviously BS!!!!!
Frank Luntz, advisor to re-pubic-lick-uns, said to use 'climate change' to make re-pubic-lick-uns more electable. However, re-pubic-lick-un numbers continue to decrease percentage-wise.

As for your cold weather, AGW enhanced warm fronts push hard into the Arctic, causing some of the Arctic increased temperatures. Simultaneously, Arctic cold fronts are moved out of the Arctic to the south, giving you cold toes. I'm glad.

You've read my accounts before. You just continue to deny the truth.

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#24588 Mar 21, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>No, climate doesn't have a thermostat:
A thermostat is a component of a control system which senses the temperature of a system so that the system's temperature is maintained near a desired setpoint. The thermostat does this by switching heating or cooling devices on or off, or regulating the flow of a heat transfer fluid as needed, to maintain the correct temperature. The name is derived from the Greek words thermos "hot" and statos "a standing".
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermostat
Yes, climate DOES have a thermostat, & it's carbon dioxide. But don't take my word for it. I finally found the correct Richard Alley video:

http://www.agu.org/meetings/fm09/lectures/lec...

CO2 does exactly what you say a thermostat should do. If you have an open mind, watch Alley's vid. He's a bit goofy & nerdy, but entertaining & informative.

Currently, humans are emitting CO2 into the atmosphere ~20,000 times faster than natural processes emit it. We are already seeing anthropogenic climate, & will see ever more of it in the future.

Scientific facts are true no matter how many times you try to say they're not.
LessHypeMoreFact

Toronto, Canada

#24589 Mar 21, 2013
HomoSapiensLaptopicus wrote:
<quoted text>
Scientific facts are true no matter how many times you try to say they're not.
It would be more correct to say that CO2 (and other GHGs) are the PRIMARY thermostat. Other factors can produce a smaller shift that may confuse some people trying to isolate the cause and effect.

The issue of the thermostat is one of insolation (incoming heat from the sun) which is fairly but not entirely constant, balanced against the necessary surface temperature to drive the SAME amount of thermal IR radiation to space. The barriers to this IR are GHGs which retard IR photons. On the incoming side, we have SMALL changes in the solar output, along with some effect from high altitude sulfate aerosols which can reflect some solar influx.

All else is 'shifting heat around' which is the CLIMATE response, not AGW. Of course, the primary problem of AGW is the climate response so we cannot lose sight of the fact that AGW will tamper with the climate in many ways, from floods and drought to record cold and warm spells. In fact, the primary effect of AGW will be to make it easier for record events to occur.
Kyle

Kendallville, IN

#24590 Mar 21, 2013
Miss Piggy Chops wrote:
Coldest spring in 40 years in Minnesota, so much for "Global Warming", oh wait, they had to change it to "Climate Change", because it's so obviously BS!!!!!
Retarded denier argument #1 yet again! Denier BS never dies because deniers are immune to refutation and impressed with childishly fallacious arguments.
Kyle

Kendallville, IN

#24592 Mar 21, 2013
Bushwhacker wrote:
Overall, winters have warmed about two to four degrees in the past 30 years or so. One good way to measure it is to look at these number of subzero lows that we're seeing at night. There are distinct trends that are emerging in the past 30 to 40 years toward fewer subzero low temperatures in Minnesota and the Twin Cities.
Quick example: this year we've had five days so far, last year we had three. That's a very low number. If you go back to the 1970s - the whole decade - we had 444 subzero days. During the 1980s we had 280, during the 1990s we had 256; down to 198 in the 2000s. That's a 57% drop in those subzero nights. If you look at that overall the trend lines show we could be down to around 10 on average per winter. We used to average about 30 back in the '70s and we could be maybe closer to zero by 2040. By 2040, in the Twin Cities we could be very close to few or any subzero nights if our current climate trends continue.
I believe that it's Ellesmere Island that has warmed 10.7 degF in mid-winter. Such data are harder to deny than fractions. Too bad scientists don't have a megaphone to disperse such facts as efficiently as the denial movement disperses misinformation.

Sorry about that previous response. You didn't quote the comment to which you were responding and, you must admit, your comment reads just like some of the denier stuff.

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#24593 Mar 21, 2013
LessHypeMoreFact wrote:
<quoted text>
It would be more correct to say that CO2 (and other GHGs) are the PRIMARY thermostat. Other factors can produce a smaller shift that may confuse some people trying to isolate the cause and effect.
The issue of the thermostat is one of insolation (incoming heat from the sun) which is fairly but not entirely constant, balanced against the necessary surface temperature to drive the SAME amount of thermal IR radiation to space. The barriers to this IR are GHGs which retard IR photons. On the incoming side, we have SMALL changes in the solar output, along with some effect from high altitude sulfate aerosols which can reflect some solar influx.
All else is 'shifting heat around' which is the CLIMATE response, not AGW. Of course, the primary problem of AGW is the climate response so we cannot lose sight of the fact that AGW will tamper with the climate in many ways, from floods and drought to record cold and warm spells. In fact, the primary effect of AGW will be to make it easier for record events to occur.
Yes, of course. I was oversimplifying a bit because some here don't appear able to appreciate nuance or complexity. There are many factors that affect temperature besides CO2; it's just the main one.

Just the mechanism of radiative forcing appears beyond the grasp of some here. It's not the same as conduction, but some here can't understand that.("The cooler atmosphere CAN'T warm the earth! It violate the 2LOT!" Crazy.)

(2LOT = 2nd Law of Thermodynamics)
Jarrod D

Kennesaw, GA

#24594 Mar 21, 2013
None of you know what youre talking about. its not "global warming"
anyone considered the bible?
God said in the world's end time you will see signs in the weather.
"For nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom, and in various places there will be famines and earthquakes" Matthew 24:7
"And ye shall hear of wars and rumours of wars: see that ye be not troubled: for all these things must come to pass, but the end is not yet."
The book of Matthew 24 is very good at explaing whats going on and soon to come, signs right in front of our eys. notice how crazy the weather is and recently? how can that be global warming? maybe that could be what's fulfilling these prophecies, even how the government is spraying the sky so much. wake up and see
Bushwhacker

Seattle, WA

#24595 Mar 21, 2013
Nobody...."its" ??? Yeah, the contraction challenged doofus has the "answer"???
PHD

Overton, TX

#24596 Mar 22, 2013
Bushwhacker wrote:
Nobody...."its" ??? Yeah, the contraction challenged doofus has the "answer"???
The commander clap trapper calling the kettle.You bush wacked your---self again.
Bushwhacker

Seattle, WA

#24597 Mar 22, 2013
Nobody...."its" ??? Yeah, the contraction challenged doofus has the "answer"???
Who

Wyoming, MI

#24598 Mar 22, 2013
Bushwhacker wrote:
<quoted text>National Enquirer equivalent... Pretty sad, you didn't find that obvious.
Does it really matter?
Even if all the "climate change scientists" in the world told you idiots straight to your face GW is a hoax, the gloom and doomer imbeciles, like yourself, would still argue GW exists, liberal idiots like you would just find somebody else to say what you want to hear.

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
Mall of America Protest 2 hr cantmakeitup 15
Minneapolis schools superintendent FIRED 8 hr Ron 9
Walker Wins Unions Lose (May '12) 23 hr LIbEralS 29
Veteran Freed From MSP VA Dental Dept Phone Abu... Fri American_Sons 13
Review: State Wide Protective Agency (Jul '11) Fri Martin Scott treptow 84
8 dead in aussie stabbing Fri Space ace 1
MNsure losing money already (Jan '14) Fri LIbEralS 17
Minneapolis Dating
Find my Match
More from around the web

Minneapolis People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Minneapolis News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Minneapolis

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]

NFL Latest News

Updated 2:50 pm PST

Bleacher Report 2:50PM
Complete Week 15 Preview for Green Bay
Bleacher Report 8:19 PM
Ranking Packers' Best Wins over Buccaneers
Bleacher Report 9:16 PM
What Are Experts Saying About Vikings vs. Dolphins
Yahoo! Sports12:30 PM
Greg Cosell's Look Ahead: Aaron Rodgers' off day
Yahoo! Sports 5:26 PM
Lions claim playoff berth with Eagles' loss