Global warming 'undeniable,' scientis...

Global warming 'undeniable,' scientists say

There are 35607 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

#24864 Mar 30, 2013
Amused Slew wrote:
When do you(Bushwhacker) NOT call someone out with insults?
Insults!? Bushwhacker describes toxic topix AGW deniers in accurate detail...... no insults, at all.

You're just lucky you aren't a......... slimy steenking filthy vile reprobate rooting(& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AND alleged & proud threatener........ at least, so far. However, a large minority(majority?) of toxic topix AGW deniers are slimy steenking filthy vile reprobate rooting(& rotting) racist pukey proud pigs.

You should leave the group before their ways rub off on you.
Kyle

Rensselaer, IN

#24865 Mar 30, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>I asked for an experiment on man made greenhouse gas in the atmosphere, or are you proposing we mitigate natural greenhouse gas too. We need that greenhouse gas to keep our planet habitable.
What do you think was the dependent variable in the experiment?
Why on Earth would you deny the identical nature of molecules? Why would you create some outrageous straw man about eliminating GHG's? Why do you cling to your infantile definition of valid science as only comprising single-factor experiments after it's been destroyed?

Rhetorical X 3. Because you've lost the argument. Because you are too dishonest to admit that you've lost.

Because you're a denier.
Kyle

Rensselaer, IN

#24866 Mar 30, 2013
I'll never pay even one shekel for the inundation of New York, I don't live there and I never forced anyone to live there.
If your factory pollutes a river that supplies a city, causing cancers that kill people, would you refuse to pay one shekel, either to the victims or to treat the effluent, because you don't live in that city and didn't force them to, either?

Frickin' moron.
SpaceBlues

United States

#24867 Mar 30, 2013
Dont drink the koolaid wrote:
CO2 is good.
CO2 is food.
CO2 is dangerously low.
1200ppm is the goal for a healthy planet.
http://nujournal.net/core.pdf
Did you read your reference?

"Consequences of global warming are far more serious than previously imagined."
SpaceBlues

United States

#24868 Mar 30, 2013
Kyle wrote:
<quoted text>To b_gone:

If your factory pollutes a river that supplies a city, causing cancers that kill people, would you refuse to pay one shekel, either to the victims or to treat the effluent, because you don't live in that city and didn't force them to, either?
Frickin' moron.
b_gone lives in Germany, where his position is not attainable.

He lies for the USA ignorance.
Dont drink the koolaid

Eden Prairie, MN

#24869 Mar 30, 2013
SpaceBlues wrote:
<quoted text>Did you read your reference?
"Consequences of global warming are far more serious than previously imagined."
Yes, it is a PDF of a scientific paper that suggests the planet may explode as a result of Global Warming.
There is a consensus that Anthropogenic CO2 is responsible for this warming which means that if the Earth does explode it will be the result of Man's use of fossil fuels.... So yes, that does suggest the "Consequences of global warming are far more serious than previously imagined".

That said: If Man made CO2 is not a "Darth Vader Death Star" (capable of destroying a planet) then the higher levels of CO2 may not be as bad as science suggests.
.
Bushwhacker

Seattle, WA

#24870 Mar 30, 2013
Poor Schmahl SPAMMER.... Can you even list all the monikers you've used today ???

Since: Apr 08

"the green troll"

#24871 Mar 30, 2013
Dont drink the koolaid wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, it is a PDF of a scientific paper that suggests the planet may explode as a result of Global Warming.
There is a consensus that Anthropogenic CO2 is responsible for this warming which means that if the Earth does explode it will be the result of Man's use of fossil fuels.... So yes, that does suggest the "Consequences of global warming are far more serious than previously imagined".
That said: If Man made CO2 is not a "Darth Vader Death Star" (capable of destroying a planet) then the higher levels of CO2 may not be as bad as science suggests.
.
It's a joke, you clueless twit.
Dont drink the koolaid

Eden Prairie, MN

#24872 Mar 30, 2013
Fair Game wrote:
<quoted text>
It's a joke, you clueless twit.
DrTomJ.Chalko1 ,MSc,PhD co-authored the paper
1 Head of Geophysics Division, Scientific E Research P/L, Mt Best, Australia http://sci-e-research.com
What part of the Doctor's paper is a joke and what is the basis of this conclusion?

Since: Apr 08

"the green troll"

#24874 Mar 30, 2013
Dont drink the koolaid wrote:
<quoted text>
DrTomJ.Chalko1 ,MSc,PhD co-authored the paper
1 Head of Geophysics Division, Scientific E Research P/L, Mt Best, Australia http://sci-e-research.com
What part of the Doctor's paper is a joke and what is the basis of this conclusion?
The journal doesn't exist- it's just a web site- and it only publishes articles by this Chalko character- no proof he has a Phd- all of them arrant and obvious nonsense.

The articles are probably published as a joke to see how many people take them seriously.

Or perhaps the guy really is the wildest crank on the inetenet. Poe's law applies.

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Poe%27s_Law

“CO2 is Gaseous Love”

Since: Dec 08

Home, sweet home.

#24875 Mar 30, 2013
HomoSapiensLaptopicus wrote:
Yes. There have been no trials, tests, experiment, demonstrations or real world atmospheric models of climate change done by emitters that prove the changes in the atmosphere they're forcing on the rest of us are safe. See? I fixed it for you. You're welcome, BTW.
That's true, I don't stay awake nights worrying because I'm emitting CO2. If you want to take CO2 from the air, to feed your garden or crops; that's fine with me.

I don't have any atmospheric CO2 goals; I advocate freedom, not climate change mitigation by restricting fossil fuel emissions.

“CO2 is Gaseous Love”

Since: Dec 08

Home, sweet home.

#24876 Mar 30, 2013
Kyle wrote:
WTF difference does it make, you simpering twit?! One more time for the hard of thinking: HUMAN CO2 OUTPUT IS 100X THE NATURAL RATE.
This is untrue, natural carbon dioxide emission far outweigh's man's use of fossil fuel. Look at the yearly cycle in Keeling's atmospheric carbon dioxide graphs; it looks like Earth is breathing as she orbits the sun.

We can't know what the rates of emission are, because nobody measures whether you store or use the gas, oil and coal you buy. We can't measure Earth's geological CO2 emissions because more than three quarters of the Earth is under the oceans.

We can't know because we don't have the data; nobody has ever published an experiment where they release or collect carbon dioxide from the air and measured even the smallest change in atmospheric CO2 level or in global temperature.

.
Kyle wrote:
Who gives a flying eff that a denier moron like yourself thinks they need to act seperately to disentangle their effects.
I think its a good idea to see experimental data before we buy into climate change mitigation. That's common sense; don't buy a pig in a poke.

.
Kyle wrote:
If I thump your skull with a 101 oz. hammer, would you demand proof that the damage was done by 1 oz?
If Kyle were to hit my head with a hammer, I'd demand he be prosecuted. It doesn't matter which ounce hurt most; don't hit people with things. He should have learned that before he started school.

On the other hand, there's an upside to people like Kyle not doing the experimental work on climate change mitigation. Maybe we're all better off when they just post on Topix to whine about climate change, and leave the science alone.

.
Kyle wrote:
Respond to my rebuttals, denier scum.
^^^See what I mean? Irrationality is a trait common to global warming alarmists and climate change mitigators.
Bushwhacker

Seattle, WA

#24877 Mar 30, 2013
You "advocate" BS and shortsightedness and demand better from ANYONE else... Pretty sad, you "think" you have self "respect".
Libertarian Boy

Salem, MO

#24878 Mar 30, 2013
Honest Liberal wrote:
These scientists are heros of person kind. They care about our planet and have no ulterior motive. We need to pass the Fairness Doctrine so Fox News and others bought by Big Oil will no longer brainwash the sheep.
Scientists told our ancestors the Earth was flat,and the moon made of cheese.
Bushwhacker

Seattle, WA

#24879 Mar 30, 2013
Pretty sad, you're nothing but a childish, moniker changer... attempting poor logic to smarter folks(everyone).

“CO2 is Gaseous Love”

Since: Dec 08

Home, sweet home.

#24880 Mar 30, 2013
Kyle wrote:
Please support your imbecilic interpretation that for science to be valid it must disentangle the identical molecules representing 1% of the total from the other 99%.
Perhaps an analogy will kick-start your remaining neuron:
A biology experiment is undertaken to determine the salinity tolerance of a bacteria. The bacteria flourished with a low level of salt in the aqueous solution. The salt was from a mine near Cleveland and processed to be pure NaCl.
Then, the salinity is increased by a factor of 100, using salt from a mine near Kansas City, similarly refined. The bacteria die. The researchers conclude that its salinity tolerance is <100 times the original level.
Your insane assertion is that the experiment is bad science because the original salt was still present so the effect couldn't be reliably linked to the addded salt.
Defend your insanity or concede.
In the experiment posted above, anthropogenic salt was added to a solution containing bacteria. The amount of salt in solution was the independent variable and life or death of the bacteria acted as the dependent variable. Science moves forward by experimental tests, not untested or untestable theories no matter the consensus.

The experiment I want to see published is where a measurable amount of greenhouse gas is added to or taken from the atmosphere, to measure a change in global temperature or atmospheric CO2 levels. That experiment hasn't been done, even though its exactly the sort of experiment Kyle describes in his biology experiment. You'll notice, he didn't wait 42 years for salinity to change naturally over time, the experimenters added a measurable quantity of salt to a solution of known volume, the independent variable was controlled and the experiment is reproducible.

This is the same way the FDA and other organizations test the effectiveness of medications and medical treatments. If experiments are a good enough standard for your own health, why aren't they a good standard in climate change mitigation? Either you're concerned about the health of the Earth and need to see experimental data first or you're falling for a hoax.

“CO2 is Gaseous Love”

Since: Dec 08

Home, sweet home.

#24881 Mar 30, 2013
Kyle wrote:
If your factory pollutes a river that supplies a city, causing cancers that kill people, would you refuse to pay one shekel, either to the victims or to treat the effluent, because you don't live in that city and didn't force them to, either?
Frickin' moron.
We're talking about man made CO2 in the atmosphere, that's not pollution, carcinogenic and it never kills people at atmospheric levels. You might make a case that CO2 is an effluent but the EPA was specifically bound by their charter against treating CO2 as a pollutant.

At atmospheric levels, CO2 feeds plants so we can live and warms the air so our planet doesn't freeze and stops the nights from getting even colder. Don't hate carbon dioxide; learn to love it.
SpaceBlues

United States

#24883 Mar 30, 2013
The German guy does not admit fossil fuels and their combustion products are toxic, radioactive, and carcinogenic.

He lies nonstop while butchering science terms and concepts.
Dont drink the koolaid

Eden Prairie, MN

#24884 Mar 30, 2013
Any scientific test or experiment of The AGW Theory may complete the requirements of the scientific method thus stripping the last vestiges of denial from the ignorant heritics. Hence, all true believers should be advised to promote any efforts to test AGW.
Dont drink the koolaid

Eden Prairie, MN

#24885 Mar 30, 2013
Correction: heretics

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
Obama & BLM mourn monstor Fidel Castro 3 min Drumpf 67
BLM urge rioting over OSU SHOOTING 2 hr Drumpf 32
California Dems Block Gang Member Database 22 hr TAAM 1
Drop one word....add one word game (Apr '14) Dec 4 texas pete 628
Get Over It! Dec 3 Evil Roy Slade 10
Child sex ring>Pizzagate>Clinton's>Obama's>FBI ... Dec 1 Georgia 1
News Cops To Drunk Drivers: We'll Make You Listen To... Nov 30 Ferrerman 20

Minneapolis Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Minneapolis Mortgages