Global warming 'undeniable,' scientists say

Full story: TwinCities.com

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.

Comments (Page 1,170)

Showing posts 23,381 - 23,400 of31,790
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
Bushwhacker

Kent, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#24662
Mar 25, 2013
 

Judged:

2

1

1

Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>We're also not doing an experiment to restrict Rock music, to see if that would effect global climate temperature. Experiments are pre-planned and controlled, that's why our fossil fuel use can't be called an experiment.
"An experiment is a orderly procedure carried out with the goal of verifying, falsifying, or establishing the validity of a hypothesis. Experiments provide insight into cause-and-effect by demonstrating what outcome occurs when a particular factor is manipulated. Experiments vary greatly in their goal and scale, but always rely on repeatable procedure and logical analysis of the results."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Experiment
Most global warming alarmists don't understand what experiments are and how they are used in science to verify theories; that's why they shouldn't decide science policy.
.
<quoted text>Taxes harm the people by depriving them of wealth; that's why they should only be used to fund vital government interests. A "revenue-neutral" tax doesn't fund anything, it just redistributes wealth. The poster quoted above seems to want socialism and climate is the excuse.
.
<quoted text>Storms, floods, drought and other extreme weather events have happened throughout the past. Global warming alarmists don't understand history or science.
.
<quoted text>If you think I'm a paid shill, you're delusional. Nobody would pay me to write this simple common sense criticism.
If you're using ridiculous comparisons, that's on YOU, son.....

“I Luv Carbon Dioxide”

Since: Dec 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#24663
Mar 25, 2013
 

Judged:

4

4

4

HomoSapiensLaptopicus wrote:
Actually, I don't want to be a part of YOUR climate change experiment. You're recommending we add carbon to the atmosphere without restraint.
HSL is in luck, I'm not a scientists conducting a climate experiment. There's never been an experiment on adding CO2 to the atmosphere and measuring its effect; that's the problem with climate change mitigation.

.
HomoSapiensLaptopicus wrote:
The fact that we're already seeing changes predicted by theory is verification that the theory is correct.
Coincidence isn't causality. Without an experimental test, we'll never be able to distinguish the difference between natural CO2 emissions and human emissions.

.
HomoSapiensLaptopicus wrote:
I don't want to be a part of the experiment you're forcing on me. After all, humans are releasing CO2 ~20,000 times faster than natural processes release it. We are completely overwhelming natural processes. Hopefully that doesn't mean the ice sheets will break up 20,000 times faster.
HSL doesn't know what an experiment is; that explains his fear. I recommend learning how the scientific method works then applying that knowledge to public policy.
Bushwhacker

Kent, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#24664
Mar 25, 2013
 

Judged:

3

3

3

Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>HSL is in luck, I'm not a scientists conducting a climate experiment. There's never been an experiment on adding CO2 to the atmosphere and measuring its effect; that's the problem with climate change mitigation.
.
<quoted text>Coincidence isn't causality. Without an experimental test, we'll never be able to distinguish the difference between natural CO2 emissions and human emissions.
.
<quoted text>HSL doesn't know what an experiment is; that explains his fear. I recommend learning how the scientific method works then applying that knowledge to public policy.
There's never been a man intentionally dropped from space to see if he survives, oddly it's a simply stupid as your "point".
Bushwhacker

Kent, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#24665
Mar 25, 2013
 

Judged:

4

3

3

There's never been a man intentionally dropped from space to see if he survives, oddly it's as simply stupid as your "point".
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#24666
Mar 25, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>HSL is in luck, I'm not a scientists conducting a climate experiment. There's never been an experiment on adding CO2 to the atmosphere and measuring its effect; that's the problem with climate change mitigation.
Because you are not of science, you don't understand the climate science and you post to the world such nonsense.
You repeat what's not true as you have for many years.
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>Coincidence isn't causality. Without an experimental test, we'll never be able to distinguish the difference between natural CO2 emissions and human emissions.
The reality is not what you post to the world. You are not aware of the science.
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>HSL doesn't know what an experiment is; that explains his fear.
Actually, you are describing your own fault. You misrepresent the reality of AGW.
Your brain must have shrunk to a tiny one after repeating lies for years and years.

“I Luv Carbon Dioxide”

Since: Dec 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#24667
Mar 25, 2013
 

Judged:

3

2

2

SpaceBlues wrote:
Because you are not of science, you don't understand the climate science and you post to the world such nonsense. You repeat what's not true as you have for many years. The reality is not what you post to the world. You are not aware of the science. Actually, you are describing your own fault. You misrepresent the reality of AGW. Your brain must have shrunk to a tiny one after repeating lies for years and years.
Why do you have a problem with noting the lack of experimental tests for climate change mitigation? I'm no scientist but I can see there are no experimental tests that show climate change mitigation is possible or that it won't do more harm than good.

I'm able to make my arguments without discussing other poster's brain size. My arguments are based on the issue, not ad hominem fallacies.

You go ahead and believe whatever you like, make your case a convincingly as possible. I'll do the same and let others decide who to believe.

“I Luv Carbon Dioxide”

Since: Dec 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#24668
Mar 25, 2013
 

Judged:

3

3

3

Bushwhacker wrote:
There's never been a man intentionally dropped from space to see if he survives, oddly it's as simply stupid as your "point".
I don't see what that has to do with climate change mitigation. Is Bushwhacker proposing 'gravity mitigation'?

I've always believed gravity is one of the most dangerous forces in the universe. 20,000 Americans die from falls and slips each year.
http://hspsupplyinc.com/stats.htm

We adapt to gravity, learn to look where we're going and how to lift heavy loads with our legs instead of with our backs. We'll learn to adapt to climate change too. There is no antigravity magic or climate change mitigation.
Bushwhacker

Kent, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#24669
Mar 25, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

There's never been a man intentionally dropped from space to see if he survives, oddly it's as simply stupid as your "point".
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#24670
Mar 25, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>Why do you have a problem with noting the lack of experimental tests for climate change mitigation? I'm no scientist but I can see there are no experimental tests that show climate change mitigation is possible or that it won't do more harm than good.
I'm able to make my arguments without discussing other poster's brain size. My arguments are based on the issue, not ad hominem fallacies.
You go ahead and believe whatever you like, make your case a convincingly as possible. I'll do the same and let others decide who to believe.
LOL. There's an insurmountable gap between scientists and you.

You don't agree with scientists because their work does not encourage you to burn uncontrolled and limitless quantities of fossil fuel. The future of humanity is threatened by your position of uncontrolled and limitless use of fossil fuel.

You misrepresent people like me by using the word "believe." My science understanding is not something you could ever enjoy.

Who to listen to for science? The scientists. Definitely, not to you or what you believe.
PHD2

Minneapolis, MN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#24671
Mar 25, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

"Faith" posted this on March 20th 2012:

"Global warming is the greatest thing ever! It's like 80 here in Michigan and it's still winter! Longer growing seasons, lower energy bills....It's a win-win."

So what does the 2013 COLD SPRING mean, global cooling?

Climate changes every year, Al Gore is worth more tha Mitt ROmney, thanks to fools.
PHD2

Minneapolis, MN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#24674
Mar 25, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

"Faith" posted this on March 20th 2012:

"Global warming is the greatest thing ever! It's like 80 here in Michigan and it's still winter! Longer growing seasons, lower energy bills....It's a win-win."

So what does the 2013 COLD SPRING mean, global cooling?

Climate changes every year, Al Gore is worth more tha Mitt ROmney, thanks t
Who

Wyoming, MI

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#24675
Mar 25, 2013
 

Judged:

2

1

1

PHD2 wrote:
"Faith" posted this on March 20th 2012:
"Global warming is the greatest thing ever! It's like 80 here in Michigan and it's still winter! Longer growing seasons, lower energy bills....It's a win-win."
So what does the 2013 COLD SPRING mean, global cooling?
Climate changes every year, Al Gore is worth more tha Mitt ROmney, thanks to fools.
If GW has been getting worse since, as the econuts put it, "since the beginning of recorded history", how does that explain why it still snows at all?

Why is this year COOLER than last year? Why was 2011 cooler than 2012? Did GW take a year off?

Why are the average temperatures in the upper northern hemisphere globally not on par with the tropical zones if GW has been getting worse for hundreds of years?

How can the severity of GW be based on the amount of money they want to spend to "fix it"?

How can these so-called scientists "predict" what the weather will be 5 years from now, when meteorologists can barely predict the weather a few days from now? Are we to believe we should just throw billions at something they think MIGHT happen? Wouldn't it be cheaper to just ask a two-bit psychic?

I gaurantee though that if we start throwing billions at GW "science", the so-called scientist will make sure GW never ends. It'll be too lucrative of an enterprise. Look at what they already blame GW for.

GW is COMPLETE BULLSHIT. Period.

It's what liberals do best - create a crisis so they can sell you the solution.
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#24677
Mar 25, 2013
 
Scientists use mathematical models.. all models are first tested in a process called Hindcasting. The models used to predict future global warming can accurately map past climate changes. If they get the past right, there is no reason to think their predictions would be wrong. Testing models against the existing instrumental record suggested CO2 must cause global warming, because the models could not simulate what had already happened unless the extra CO2 was added to the model. All other known forcings are adequate in explaining temperature variations prior to the rise in temperature over the last thirty years, while none of them are capable of explaining the rise in the past thirty years. CO2 does explain that rise, and explains it completely without any need for additional, as yet unknown forcings.

http://www.skepticalscience.com/climate-model...
PHD2

Minneapolis, MN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#24679
Mar 25, 2013
 
Hey man it's COOLING!!!!
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#24680
Mar 25, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

PHD2 wrote:
"Faith" posted this on March 20th 2012:
"Global warming is the greatest thing ever! It's like 80 here in Michigan and it's still winter! Longer growing seasons, lower energy bills....It's a win-win."
So what does the 2013 COLD SPRING mean, global cooling?
Climate changes every year, Al Gore is worth more tha Mitt ROmney, thanks t
ROmney who??

Your post needs a rewrite. Thanks.

P.S. Gore's money is not yours. Are you jealous?
PHD2

Minneapolis, MN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#24682
Mar 25, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

52% of the USA is covered in SNOW!!

ALL TIME RECORDS are being set for COLD!!

In 2012 record warmth was said to be proof of global warming.

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#24686
Mar 25, 2013
 
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>We're also not doing an experiment to restrict Rock music, to see if that would effect global climate temperature. Experiments are pre-planned and controlled, that's why our fossil fuel use can't be called an experiment.
"An experiment is a orderly procedure carried out with the goal of verifying, falsifying, or establishing the validity of a hypothesis. Experiments provide insight into cause-and-effect by demonstrating what outcome occurs when a particular factor is manipulated. Experiments vary greatly in their goal and scale, but always rely on repeatable procedure and logical analysis of the results."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Experiment
Most global warming alarmists don't understand what experiments are and how they are used in science to verify theories; that's why they shouldn't decide science policy.
.
<quoted text>Taxes harm the people by depriving them of wealth; that's why they should only be used to fund vital government interests. A "revenue-neutral" tax doesn't fund anything, it just redistributes wealth. The poster quoted above seems to want socialism and climate is the excuse.
.
<quoted text>Storms, floods, drought and other extreme weather events have happened throughout the past. Global warming alarmists don't understand history or science.
.
<quoted text>If you think I'm a paid shill, you're delusional. Nobody would pay me to write this simple common sense criticism.
Ideally, experiments are done carefully, with conscious thought toward learning as much as possible. The poisoning of our atmosphere may be an inadvertent experiment, but it's an experiment nonetheless. And people of your ilk are forcing me to accept worsening poisoning every day.

I understand perfectly well how to run experiments, & have done plenty of them myself in the lab. Actually, climatologists are the most important scientists who SHOULD have say over policy. If nothing is done about AGW/CC, there won't BE any other sciences.

You're having trouble with the whole revenue-neutral thing, eh? A revenue neutral tax "deprives the people" of ZERO wealth, removes ZERO money from the people & adds ZERO to the cost of government.

You no doubt suffer from the psychotic, delusional hallucination that it is "free" to emit carbon into the atmosphere. It most assuredly is NOT free. It will cost our progeny staggering, almost incalculable amounts of money, probably in the quadrillions of dollars counting the loss of life. A stiff carbon tax is the only way to get the true costs of burning fossil fuels into their prices.

BTW, our government has been redistributing wealth for decades. What, you've never heard of the estate tax? The progressive income tax? Without ongoing (partial) redistribution, capitalism will collapse – always. Redistribution keeps it vital, keeps new entrepreneurs entering the system, keeps growth alive.

Extreme weather events are becoming much more common with warming. PERIOD. AGW/CC will mean more frequent extreme precipitation events. What we've already seen is a 16% increase in "heavy rain events," a 25% increase in "very heavy rain events" and a 36% increase in "extreme" precipitation events (or deluges). I'm sorry the facts contradict your convenient political beliefs.

On second thought, you're right – there's no WAY you're smart enough to be a paid shill. That'd be Fun Facts.

Since: Apr 08

"the green troll"

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#24687
Mar 25, 2013
 
HomoSapiensLaptopicus wrote:
On second thought, you're right – there's no WAY you're smart enough to be a paid shill. That'd be Fun Facts.
fun farts would love to be paid to post , but isn't. Brian won't deny being paid.

http://www.topix.com/forum/news/global-warmin...

Being smart is actually not in the job description- see this advert:
Writers Needed to post right-wing Comments to social me and news outlets

We are a social media company, working for a political organization hired to help balance the left-wing bias of the major media outlets by supplying a team of writers who will post to newspaper conments. media foruns, etc.

You writing must be strong right-wing and use supplied talking points without boggng down in too much detail. You are creating an online persona with a consistent tone. Ideally you can find or make up facts and statistics to stir controversy. Where suited humour sarcasm and personal insults are welcome.

You are a news junky, who is able to log on to news forums, facebook pages several times a day. You are able to write comments tailored to new topics while always repeating key talking points.

Compensation. TBD hourly rate and volume of online activity. Bonuses for controverstial postings that heat up a topic or forum thread.

How to apply. We are more interested in your writing than Your resume. To apply submit a 100 word post... Show us that you can write from a right wing character voice, score points, stir outrage and use humour.

Sorry, only candidates who submit the best test posts will be contacted for an interview.
...talking points... make up facts and statistics to stir controversy... sarcasm and personal insults.

brian_g almost exactly, just substitute trolling for sarcasm.

Since: Apr 08

"the green troll"

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#24688
Mar 25, 2013
 
OK, scrub "almost": brian_g exactly: "score points, stir outrage". I.e., troll.

“I Luv Carbon Dioxide”

Since: Dec 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#24689
Mar 26, 2013
 
SpaceBlues wrote:
LOL. There's an insurmountable gap between scientists and you. You don't agree with scientists because their work does not encourage you to burn uncontrolled and limitless quantities of fossil fuel. The future of humanity is threatened by your position of uncontrolled and limitless use of fossil fuel. You misrepresent people like me by using the word "believe." My science understanding is not something you could ever enjoy. Who to listen to for science? The scientists. Definitely, not to you or what you believe.
There's no difference between my views and Doctor Richard Lindzen's or Professor Bjørn Lomborg's views of climate change mitigation. Many scientists oppose climate change mitigation.

http://www.oism.org/pproject/

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

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Showing posts 23,381 - 23,400 of31,790
|
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.

24 Users are viewing the Minneapolis Forum right now

Search the Minneapolis Forum:
Topic Updated Last By Comments
Lebron james back in cleveland 10 min Space ace 1
Can't manage the gov & NOT honest or trustworthy (Nov '13) 34 min cantmakeitup 187
Woman's head stepped on by Rand Paul supporters (Oct '10) 41 min BCB 26,170
Read your Quran 45 min Gen DeShawn Pedro Patton 8
The Impeachment Delusion 1 hr cantmakeitup 6
Man, 24, Charged In Connection With N. Mpls. Sh... 1 hr Bellweather 11
Obama demands 3.7 billion dollars for border cr... 1 hr Bellweather 37
•••
•••
•••
•••

Minneapolis Jobs

•••
Enter and win $5000
•••
•••

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 ]
•••