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 1,191)

Showing posts 23,801 - 23,820 of29,882
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
Bushwhacker

Kent, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#25106
Apr 13, 2013
 

Judged:

5

5

5

Being dumb has benefits, right Brain Gone ??

Chronic exposure to airborne pollutants from gasoline and vehicle emissions contributes to severe asthma attacks and other lung-related health problems, as well as heart disease, stroke, diabetes, cancer and premature births. Itís also harmful to anyone who simply enjoys being outside.

Guess, it's fortunate blather here is your hobby.

“CAPS LOCK CAUSE CLIMATE CHANGE”

Since: Dec 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#25107
Apr 13, 2013
 

Judged:

5

5

5

CO2 isn't a pollutant in the atmosphere, not harmful or toxic but essential for life.

Water vapor is a greenhouse gas too.

Since: Dec 06

One of Paris nicest district

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#25109
Apr 14, 2013
 

Judged:

3

2

2

Livin Woodbury wrote:
2009 was another year of global cooling, which saw numerous low temperature and high snowfall smashed.
The Dutch canals for the first time in 12 years, record cold came to Al Gore's home town and ironically a blizzard dumped snow on the Copenhagen convention where world leaders met to try and stop global warming.
High snowfall records means that there have been high level of evaporation somewhere else
Kyle

Cromwell, IN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#25110
Apr 14, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>I'm not advocating climate change mitigation; I've got no theory to test. I just noted, I've got the same experiments to support the belief man's greenhouse gases do good that you have to test the claim they are harmful.
We should wait for the science to catch up to the hype.
You lie. You have squat but for handwaving nonsense. You're advocating for continuing the experiment fro a 41% increase to 100% and beyond. Your theory is that doing so is just peachy. Any references to CO2 being good because of anything other than it's GHG action are red herrings that are obvious to the RETARDED. But then, the retarded are the deniers' remaining audience.

Hey, Lyin' Brian, you IGNORED (the #1 denier skill) that your reference to CO2 as a critical GHG logically supports the scientific position and renders yours RETARDED.
Kyle

Cromwell, IN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#25111
Apr 14, 2013
 

Judged:

3

3

2

Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>Mammals evolved when CO2 levels were much higher than today. We are living in a CO2 famine atmosphere.
Mother nature has adapted to our CO2 emissions; she likes it when we use fossil fuel.
The mammals did so over MILLIONS of years, whereas the warming from returning C to the atmosphere 100,000 times faster than it came out means the warming is happening over mere decades. Tell me, RETARDED ONE, how fast do you think evolution can happen? Remember that the primary events in the evolutionary record are EXTINCTIONS. I forgot. You can't really believe in evolution because it's mostly an historical science. They don't satisfy your 5th grade conception of science.

And don't forget - "I n case you missed it, Lyin' Brian has just copped to the fact of CO2 being a critical GHG for regulating Earth's climate. Therefore, he has copped to the fact that increasing it 41%(now) or 100%(in decades) will regulate climate at a drastically different state."
Kyle

Cromwell, IN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#25112
Apr 14, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>Then watch where you put your lips; CO2 at atmospheric levels is perfectly safe, it doesn't burn lungs. Don't you drink carbonated beverages, beer or sparkling wine?
Lyin' Brian deliberately appears RETARDED enough to confuse a reference to the "burning" of the GHE with oxidation, prooving yet again that science deniers are too wedded to dogmatic beliefs - or fat paychecks - to be capable of rational discourse.

And don't forget - "I n case you missed it, Lyin' Brian has just copped to the fact of CO2 being a critical GHG for regulating Earth's climate. Therefore, he has copped to the fact that increasing it 41%(now) or 100%(in decades) will regulate climate at a drastically different state."
Kyle

Cromwell, IN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#25113
Apr 14, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>Fossil fuel goes into the furnace, engine cylinder or turbine, CO2 goes into the air. CO2 doesn't burn, it's used in fire extinguishers.
Twice in a row - " Lyin' Brian deliberately appears RETARDED enough to confuse a reference to the "burning" of the GHE with oxidation, prooving yet again that science deniers are too wedded to dogmatic beliefs - or fat paychecks - to be capable of rational discourse."

And don't forget - "In case you missed it, Lyin' Brian has just copped to the fact of CO2 being a critical GHG for regulating Earth's climate. Therefore, he has copped to the fact that increasing it 41%(now) or 100%(in decades) will regulate climate at a drastically different state."
Kyle

Cromwell, IN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#25114
Apr 14, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Brian_G wrote:
Chronic exposure to CO2 at levels much higher than the atmosphere is benign. Instead of distracting people about CO2 emissions, let's worry about real pollutants. We can't live without CO2 so we'd best learn to live with it.
Unable to make anything remotely resembling a rational argument, Lyin' Brian has again been willing to appear RETARDED by confusing the levels of CO2 required to adversely affect blood chemistry with the amount required to make large climate changes via the GHE.

And don't forget that he's already conceded on the actual subject at hand - "In case you missed it, Lyin' Brian has just copped to the fact of CO2 being a critical GHG for regulating Earth's climate. Therefore, he has copped to the fact that increasing it 41%(now) or 100%(in decades) will regulate climate at a drastically different state."
Kyle

Cromwell, IN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#25115
Apr 14, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Brian_G wrote:
CO2 isn't a pollutant in the atmosphere, not harmful or toxic but essential for life.
Water vapor is a greenhouse gas too.
Twice MORE - also in succession - " Lyin' Brian deliberately appears RETARDED enough to confuse a reference to the "burning" of the GHE with oxidation, prooving yet again that science deniers are too wedded to dogmatic beliefs - or fat paychecks - to be capable of rational discourse.

And don't forget - "In case you missed it, Lyin' Brian has just copped to the fact of CO2 being a critical GHG for regulating Earth's climate. Therefore, he has copped to the fact that increasing it 41%(now) or 100%(in decades) will regulate climate at a drastically different state."

And also, lest anyone following is as RETARDED as Lyin' Brian, recall that he's being utterly intellectually dishonest by continuing here at all. Why? Because he has repeatedly conceded that each of his lies are lies, every one of his arguments fallacious, and the correctness of the scientific findings
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#25116
Apr 14, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

Psst .. CO2 is aka the Earth's thermostat.

“CAPS LOCK CAUSE CLIMATE CHANGE”

Since: Dec 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#25119
Apr 14, 2013
 

Judged:

3

3

2

We have different goals, I say learn about your climate, live with it or move someplace better, quit whining about mitigating climate unless you can prove it would help.

This is where we differ. I like demonstrations, tests, trials or experiments, alarmists take their science on faith in consensus.

“CAPS LOCK CAUSE CLIMATE CHANGE”

Since: Dec 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#25120
Apr 14, 2013
 

Judged:

4

3

3

Remember when they tried to mitigate evolution and brought us eugenics? Why would you fall for the same lies again?
Bushwhacker

Kent, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#25121
Apr 14, 2013
 

Judged:

5

5

5

Being dumb has benefits, right Brain Gone ??
Chronic exposure to airborne pollutants from gasoline and vehicle emissions contributes to severe asthma attacks and other lung-related health problems, as well as heart disease, stroke, diabetes, cancer and premature births. Itís also harmful to anyone who simply enjoys being outside.
Guess, it's fortunate blather here is your hobby.
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#25122
Apr 14, 2013
 

Judged:

7

6

4

Bushwhacker wrote:
Being dumb has benefits, right Brain Gone ??

Chronic exposure to airborne pollutants from gasoline and vehicle emissions contributes to severe asthma attacks and other lung-related health problems, as well as heart disease, stroke, diabetes, cancer and premature births. Itís also harmful to anyone who simply enjoys being outside.

Guess, it's fortunate blather here is your hobby.
Well, this is b_gone's:

There is no climate thermostat; climate is chaotic. We can't dial it back without the danger of disaster tipping the balance. We won't jeopardize climate without experiments showing the data

There's no dial we can turn, else it would have been tried and tuned. Our CO2 emissions are perfect, they fit without a hitch. Other noxious combustion byproducts might be problems but not carbon dioxide.

Don't panic.

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

P.S. b_gone is at large.
Kyle

Cromwell, IN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#25123
Apr 14, 2013
 

Judged:

6

6

6

Brian_G wrote:
We have different goals, I say learn about your climate, live with it or move someplace better, quit whining about mitigating climate unless you can prove it would help.
This is where we differ. I like demonstrations, tests, trials or experiments, alarmists take their science on faith in consensus.
YOU "proved" it would help when you admitted that CO2 is a major climate driver. Do I need to post your own words back to you? You know, the ones that claim that CO2 - mere trace gas that it is (snicker)- is critical because of the warming effect that it produces? Hmmm?

As I've pointed out before - and you DISHONESTLY ignored - if it's critical to keep us warm, increasing it by 41%- and soon 100%- will keep us too warm - critically.

And as we've also pointed out to you - but you either ignore or give atrociously illogical responses - the proof, which YOU ADMIT, that CO2 is warming us is also proof that mitigation of CO2 would mitigate warming, UNLESS YOU'RE POSITING AN EXCEPTION TO THE LAWS OF CAUSE AND EFFECT.

I've also made that last point before, but you;re paid to well by Exxon to respond with any intellectual honesty whatsoever.
Kyle

Cromwell, IN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#25124
Apr 14, 2013
 

Judged:

6

5

5

Brian_G wrote:
Remember when they tried to mitigate evolution and brought us eugenics? Why would you fall for the same lies again?
Obviously, Lyin' Brian is having trouble with the definition of "mitigate", as well as pulling the creatard trick of equating the misnomer social Darwinism with the facts of biological evolution.

He's also quite possibly tossing a bone to the creatards because they represent the climate denier base.

GTFA, Lyin' Brian; you conceded at least 100 times and you're embarrassing yourself and your employer's cause.
LIbEralS

Saint Paul, MN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#25125
Apr 16, 2013
 

Judged:

5

5

5

Climate scientists struggle to explain warming slowdown:
Often focused on century-long trends, most climate models failed to predict that the temperature rise would slow, starting around 2000...

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/04/16/us-...

“CAPS LOCK CAUSE CLIMATE CHANGE”

Since: Dec 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#25126
Apr 16, 2013
 

Judged:

4

4

4

Kyle wrote:
YOU "proved" it would help when you admitted that CO2 is a major climate driver.
I wrote, CO2 is a climate driver, I don't know if it's significant or which way it drives climate, but CO2 is a climate force. Some O3 is a greenhouse gas too; don't panic. There are many climate drivers; I never wrote "CO2 is a major climate driver." That was Kyle, not me. I admitted CO2 is a greenhouse gas, like all the others.

Water vapor is a greenhouse gas and a significant climate driver. Water moves heat from the equator where the sunlight falls straight down to the poles where sunlight falls by. Lattitude drives climate, along with oceans, mountain ranges and continental plains are major climate drivers, CO2 not so much.

.
Kyle wrote:
Do I need to post your own words back to you?
Please show me where I qualified a climate force as "major", please.

.
Kyle wrote:
You know, the ones that claim that CO2 - mere trace gas that it is (snicker)- is critical because of the warming effect that it produces? Hmmm?
Along with all the other greenhouse gases, sure. If AGW theory is true then we are already mitigating climate against the known catastrophe of global cooling; the Ice age scenario. Nobody has seen a man made global climate change catastrophe, and I'm scouting front row tickets. This should be awesome!

.
Kyle wrote:
As I've pointed out before - and you DISHONESTLY ignored - if it's critical to keep us warm, increasing it by 41%- and soon 100%- will keep us too warm - critically.
And as we've also pointed out to you - but you either ignore or give atrociously illogical responses - the proof, which YOU ADMIT, that CO2 is warming us is also proof that mitigation of CO2 would mitigate warming,
.
Kyle wrote:
UNLESS YOU'RE POSITING AN EXCEPTION TO THE LAWS OF CAUSE AND EFFECT.
We'd never know how cause and effect applies to global climate unless we see experimental tests. Please post the most compelling experiment you've found for climate change mitigation. So far, I'm not sold.

.
Kyle wrote:
I've also made that last point before, but you;re paid to well by Exxon to respond with any intellectual honesty whatsoever.
I don't even own Exxon stock or endorse them, I like BP, PTR, CLMT, HFC, OKE and BTE, I'm long on all of them.

Those companies I endorse, Kyle seems impressed with Exxon. XOM traded between $77.13 and $93.67 this year. Maybe he likes the price?

“CAPS LOCK CAUSE CLIMATE CHANGE”

Since: Dec 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#25127
Apr 16, 2013
 

Judged:

4

4

4

Kyle wrote:
Obviously, Lyin' Brian is having trouble with the definition of "mitigate", as well as pulling the creatard trick of equating the misnomer social Darwinism with the facts of biological evolution.
I'm calling eugenics, evolutionary mitigation. Then comparing that to climate change mitigation. I'm especially concerned about carbon taxes and regulations.

Deregulation mitigates economic stagnation. So does cutting taxes. Too bad, we can't afford to cut taxes.

.
Kyle wrote:
He's also quite possibly tossing a bone to the creatards because they represent the climate denier base.
Creationism has more in common with man made global climate change catastrophe, then Kyle wants to admit. They both believe in an end of world event and make policy decisions based on that belief. Fascinating!

.
Kyle wrote:
GTFA, Lyin' Brian; you conceded at least 100 times and you're embarrassing yourself and your employer's cause.
Every customer, vendor, truck driver, investor and employee profits from fossil fuel, it brings billions in taxes to our governments. The tax share is massive, it dominates the markets. We should deregulate and lower taxes on most markets to encourage economic growth.
litesong

Everett, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#25128
Apr 16, 2013
 

Judged:

4

3

3

liberals reign wrote:
Climate scientists struggle to explain warming slowdown:
toxic topix AGW deniers cling to the lower level of the Solar TSI, as if the solar irradiation will never rise again. But science shows the sun will continue warming in millennia ahead. But while conservative re-pubic-lick-uns in Minnesota cling to every Arctic cold front that AGW drives down from the NP, as their mantra, they fail to understand their snowfall is a gift from the warming Arctic energy, that more vigorously drives Arctic weather to the south.

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

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Showing posts 23,801 - 23,820 of29,882
|
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.

26 Users are viewing the Minneapolis Forum right now

Search the Minneapolis Forum:
Topic Updated Last By Comments
Judge Finds Minnesota Energy Law Unconstitutional 2 min LIbEralS 1
Minneapolis Public Schools aims for new level o... 11 min Capt Crunch 3
Koch Brothers Net Worth Tops $100 Billion as TV... 17 min Capt Crunch 7
Walker Wins Unions Lose (May '12) 39 min Mike from Sheboygan 6
Affordable Care Act (Oct '13) 5 hr LIbEralS 350
For a good, cheaper cigar, head to Wisconsin; M... 15 hr Brown fingers and teeth 60
The 1% Should Pay Their Fair Share in Taxes 17 hr redeemer 12
•••
•••
•••
Minneapolis Dating

more search filters

less search filters

•••

Minneapolis Jobs

•••
•••
•••

Minneapolis People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]
•••