Global warming 'undeniable,' scientis...

Global warming 'undeniable,' scientists say

There are 37790 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.

“CO2 is Gaseous Love”

Since: Dec 08

Home, sweet home.

#25644 May 13, 2013
frontporchreactionary wrote:
<quoted text>So, you want picture-proof of 'man made greenhouse gas changing climate' Here's also why we're losing ground on climate change mitigation.[URLs deleted] Even a child can understand the last photo.
No, I don't want picture-proof, I want any experiment showing man made climate change or climate change mitigation, published in a peer reviewed journal. If you can cite one, I'll stop posting.

Since: Apr 08

"the green troll"

#25645 May 14, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>No, I don't want picture-proof, I want any experiment showing man made climate change or climate change mitigation, published in a peer reviewed journal. If you can cite one, I'll stop posting.
According to radiative physics and decades of laboratory measurements, increased CO2 in the atmosphere is expected to absorb more infrared radiation as it escapes back out to space. In 1970, NASA launched the IRIS satellite measuring infrared spectra. In 1996, the Japanese Space Agency launched the IMG satellite which recorded similar observations. Both sets of data were compared to discern any changes in outgoing radiation over the 26 year period (Harries 2001). What they found was a drop in outgoing radiation at the wavelength bands that greenhouse gases such as CO2 and methane (CH4) absorb energy. The change in outgoing radiation was consistent with theoretical expectations. Thus the paper found "direct experimental evidence for a significant increase in the Earth's greenhouse effect". This result has been confirmed by subsequent papers using data from later satellites (Griggs 2004, Chen 2007).

http://www.skepticalscience.com/empirical-evi...
Dont drink the koolaid

Eden Prairie, MN

#25647 May 14, 2013
frontporchreactionary wrote:
<quoted text>So, you want picture-proof of 'man made greenhouse gas changing climate' Here's also why we're losing ground on climate change mitigation. http://www.pmel.noaa.gov/co2/files/pmel-oa-im... http://www.oceanchampions.org/images/slides/a... http://www.globalwarmingsparks.com/wp-content... Even a child can understand the last photo.
Further "picture-proof of 'man made greenhouse gas changing climate' " That does it. How does one debate this evidence offered as "proof" of AGW? This also appears to confirm the assertion that AGW Advocates debate on a different level than Global Warming Heretics.

Thank you, frontporch, for your contributions to this debate.

Sincerely,
koolaid
Dont drink the koolaid

Eden Prairie, MN

#25648 May 14, 2013
Kyle wrote:
<quoted text>

For your information, I'm not an alarmist; I'm merely NOT a science denier. Also, I use profanity as punctuation that clarifies...
Yes Kyle,once again, you are absolutely correct. Without profanity, the meaning of your thoughts lack clarity.
Clarity is one of the corner stones of science so logically your profanity becomes your corner stone of The Scientific Debate of AGW. Your contributions will clearly aid the intellectually honest side of this debate.

Thank you sir.

-koolaid
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

#25649 May 14, 2013
Lol. koolaid assumes incorrectly that it debates science in Topix.

“Come Home America!”

Since: Nov 11

Claymont, Delaware 19809

#25650 May 14, 2013
I was glad to see that Caryl Johnson has reissued her provocative and thought-provoking first novel, "After the Crash:An Essay-Novel of the Post-HydroCarbon Age" You can read a brief excerpt from her novel here or buy the book to read it in full. Well-worth the price! Check this out: http://www.lulu.com/shop/caryl-johnston/after...
Neither of my Teeth

Seattle, WA

#25651 May 14, 2013
Dont drink the koolaid wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes Kyle,once again, you are absolutely correct. Without profanity, the meaning of your thoughts lack clarity.
Clarity is one of the corner stones of science so logically your profanity becomes your corner stone of The Scientific Debate of AGW. Your contributions will clearly aid the intellectually honest side of this debate.
Thank you sir.
-koolaid
787 is flying, you're STILL LYING ??? Oh right
"Christian" Scientist ???

“Come Home America!”

Since: Nov 11

Claymont, Delaware 19809

#25652 May 14, 2013
Rio+20 Conference Priority Areas and Proposals
'Organizers identified seven priority areas: jobs, energy, cities, food, water, oceans, and disaster readiness (described,
with fact sheets, at http://www.uncsd2012.org/rio20/index.php... ). Check this out: http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/row/R42573.pdf
Bushwhacker

Seattle, WA

#25653 May 14, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>I have nothing to test, I'm not advocating a climate mitigation policy.
You're asking someone else to prove something to you, but already admitted you won't understand it and want it set up to suit you on a earth scale, before you're willing to blather another point ??? Yeah, you're a moron, who already posted observable changes work as proof.
Sorry pal, you're playing a fool.
litesong

Everett, WA

#25654 May 14, 2013
[QUOTE who="lyin' brian"]I have nothing to test.......[/QUOTE]

You already tested your slimy steenking filthy vile reprobate rooting(& rotting) racist pukey proud pigisms & 4 alleged & 4 proud threats. After driving some AGW advocates away from posting on toxic topix any longer, you found your tests were successful.
litesong

Everett, WA

#25655 May 14, 2013
dfl 2 b a waste wrote:
Fossil fuel is fossil fuel no matter how it's burned the exhaust is the same.
"dfl 2 b a waste" (did find learning 2 b a waste) proves its learning to be a waste. Yes, its name is true.

By the contention of "dfl 2 b a waste", we should eliminate all catalytic converters, electro-static precipatators & burn like the communist chinese do.

"dfl 2 b a waste" (did find learning 2 b a waste) proves its learning to be a waste. Yes, its name is true.

Judged:

15

14

14

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!
Bushwhacker

Seattle, WA

#25656 May 14, 2013
Same "child" that said the 787 would NEVER FLY....

Seeing big bird in Everett, I'll bet....

http://www.google.com/imgres...

Judged:

15

14

13

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

#25657 May 14, 2013
America's Share of the Climate Crisis: A State-By-State Carbon Footprint

http://www.greenpeace.org/usa/en/media-center...

This study aims to shed light on the United States’ responsibility for taking the lead to solve global warming as a result of its outsized role in causing the problem in the first place. Using data from the Carbon Analysis Indicators Tool maintained by the World Resources Institute, the analysis examines state-by-state carbon dioxide emissions from fossil fuel combustion from 1960-2005 and compares those emissions to 184 other countries of the world.
litesong

Everett, WA

#25660 May 14, 2013
SpaceBlues wrote:
America's Share of the Climate Crisis: A State-By-State Carbon Footprint
http://www.greenpeace.org/usa/en/media-center...
A small but delineating detail of america's love with waste is comparing Oregon (423tons CO2 per person) & Washington state(480tons CO2 per person). In the 70's Washington state & Seattle where at the top of the list for 2/3rds of a billion dollars of federal funds to begin a mass transportation system. Back in the 70's a billion meant a lot of money. Seattle was jammed between the Puget Sound & large Lake Washington & needed a future mass transportation system. When Seattle's popular vote was taken for the 'FREE' funds, Seattle TURNED IT DOWN. People didn't want to give up their cars.

The money then defaulted to Portland, Oregon, which has the nice light rail transportation MAX system.

Anyhow, some of the difference between Washington state & Oregon emissions are in the mass transportation systems functioning or not functioning in both major cities.

Another small but telling detail in U.S. emissions:
The state with the lowest per capita emissions, Vermont, emitted 420 tCO2 per person, more than
the per capita emissions of 167 individual nations (Figure 8).

Judged:

11

10

9

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!
Kyle

United States

#25661 May 14, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>I claim, looking at the experimental record is based on science instead of faith. This is where we differ.
I claim, looking at the observational record, that it has been shown statistically impossible for well over a decade for the observed warming to be caused by any other forcing function other than CO2.

And I have virtually all active climate researchers agreeing with me.

I claim, using junior high level physics concepts of heat transfer, that the pattern of warming (and cooling) seasonally, diurnal, by altitude, and by latitude can only he caused by GHG's.

And I have virtually all active climate researchers agreeing with me on that, too.

All you have is one braindead talking point that's been destroyed a dozen different ways hundreds of times.

So, Lyin' Brian, are you still demanding a test of reduced CO2 while refusing to allow CO2 to be reduced? Are you still dismissing the science as a preposterous hoax while ignoring the open funding of the deniers by fossil fuel interests? Is your cranium still lodged deep in your rectum?
Kyle

United States

#25662 May 14, 2013
Dont drink the koolaid wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes Kyle,once again, you are absolutely correct. Without profanity, the meaning of your thoughts lack clarity.
Clarity is one of the corner stones of science so logically your profanity becomes your corner stone of The Scientific Debate of AGW. Your contributions will clearly aid the intellectually honest side of this debate.
Thank you sir.
-koolaid
Science content - zero.

I've posted science, dipsquat. Deal with that or stfu.
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

#25663 May 14, 2013
litesong wrote:
<quoted text>
A small but delineating detail of america's love with waste is comparing Oregon (423tons CO2 per person) & Washington state(480tons CO2 per person). In the 70's Washington state & Seattle where at the top of the list for 2/3rds of a billion dollars of federal funds to begin a mass transportation system. Back in the 70's a billion meant a lot of money. Seattle was jammed between the Puget Sound & large Lake Washington & needed a future mass transportation system. When Seattle's popular vote was taken for the 'FREE' funds, Seattle TURNED IT DOWN. People didn't want to give up their cars.
The money then defaulted to Portland, Oregon, which has the nice light rail transportation MAX system.
Anyhow, some of the difference between Washington state & Oregon emissions are in the mass transportation systems functioning or not functioning in both major cities.
Another small but telling detail in U.S. emissions:
The state with the lowest per capita emissions, Vermont, emitted 420 tCO2 per person, more than
the per capita emissions of 167 individual nations (Figure 8).
Have you seen this about the end of driving boom?

http://bikeportland.org/2013/05/14/report-end...
gcaveman1

Bay Springs, MS

#25664 May 14, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>No, I don't want picture-proof, I want any experiment showing man made climate change or climate change mitigation, published in a peer reviewed journal. If you can cite one, I'll stop posting.
You already said we were mitgating the next ice age, so you know CO2 works.

You can substitute observations for experiments sometimes, especially when you subject is so large.

Sure is taking you a long time to catch on. Is this all confusing to you? Is there something I can do to help?

“Come Home America!”

Since: Nov 11

Claymont, Delaware 19809

#25665 May 14, 2013
At the party your neighbor says to you: "Climate change ?? I don't believe it means anything. The globe's climate has changed before, and it'll change back !”
WHAT DO YOU SAY IN RESPONSE ??

Joe Romm (Climate Progress) writes:
"Progressives should know the disinformers’ most commonly used arguments — and how to answer them crisply. Those arguments have been repeated so many times by the fossil-fuel-funded disinformation campaign that almost everyone has heard them — and that means you’ll have to deal with them in almost any setting, from a public talk to a dinner party.

You should also know as much of the science behind those rebuttals as possible, and a great place to start is SkepticalScience.com .

BUT most of the time your best response is to give the pithiest response possible, and then refer people to a specific website that has a more detailed scientific explanation with links to the original science. That’s because usually those you are talking to are rarely in a position to adjudicate scientific arguments. Indeed, they would probably tune out. Also, unless you know the science cold, you are as likely as not to make a misstatement.

Physicist John Cook has done us a great service by posting good one-line responses and then updating them as the science evolves and as people offer better ways of phrasing. Below I have reposted the top 99 with links to the science. You can find even more here. Everybody should know the first 20 or so."

Learn your 20+ responses to climate change denial here:
http://bit.ly/12QcjNC

Image credit: Horsey/L.A. Times (via Climate Progress)
__________
"Truth is beautiful, without doubt; but so are lies."
-- Ralph Waldo Emerson
litesong

Everett, WA

#25666 May 14, 2013
litesong wrote:
A small but delineating detail of america's love with waste is comparing Oregon (423tons CO2 per person) & Washington state(480tons CO2 per person). In the 70's Washington state & Seattle where at the top of the list for 2/3rds of a billion dollars of federal funds to begin a mass transportation system. Back in the 70's a billion meant a lot of money. Seattle was jammed between the Puget Sound & large Lake Washington & needed a future mass transportation system. When Seattle's popular vote was taken for the 'FREE' funds, Seattle TURNED IT DOWN. People didn't want to give up their cars.
The money then defaulted to Portland, Oregon, which has the nice light rail transportation MAX system.
Anyhow, some of the difference between Washington state & Oregon emissions are in the mass transportation systems functioning or not functioning in both major cities.
Another small but telling detail in U.S. emissions:
The state with the lowest per capita emissions, Vermont, emitted 420 tCO2 per person, more than
the per capita emissions of 167 individual nations (Figure 8).
//////////
SpaceBlues wrote:
Have you seen this about the end of driving boom?
http://bikeportland.org/2013/05/14/report-end ...
//////////
litesong wrote:
Didn't need to. I was part of an auto forum in 2007-8 & knew about the continuing rise of U.S. highway miles......... & the exact collapse of that rise. The economy was straining at the end of 2007, & citizens were bluffing their way through the economy, as the housing market collapsed. However, the total unbluffable collapse occurred at the end of Winter. Throughout the truck market, a full 1/5th of truck sales disappeared, as citizens & small businesses had no reason & no means to purchase work trucks & certainly not trucks for pleasure. Trucks bigger than Ford Rangers, such as F-150's, 250's, 350's & Chevy Silverados, collapsed by 40%. In the past, a strong move to economy cars showed where people put their money. In this case, people had no money, & even the economy car market fell. All economy car brands fell, except for Hyundai, which had fine cars & a 100,000 mile warranty to tell people that their cars were good.

As the new car market collapsed, the depth of depression also showed, in a total 5% decrease in U.S. travel miles. Many millions of people either could eat or repair their old, but ailing vehicles..... but not both. Many people tried to make an inadequate mass & bus transportation system work for them. But people were spending 3 hours & 2 or 3 bus transfers trying to get to work & the same going home. An example of mass transportation failure, was my area. Getting from one area to another, by car took 15 minutes. By bus, the trip took 3 hours, including a 16 mile bus drive almost directly away from where you were trying to get to. A bicycle could have made the trip in about an hour, walking in about 3 hours, hitch-hiking....... 20 minutes, AFTER getting in the vehicle or dead in 3 seconds.

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
Threads Gone I'm Gone 6 hr figgypops 5
Liberals crying over trump comments again Wed God 38
Megyn Kelly's mysterious Olympics benching by N... Jan 16 Me Too 7
Libs behind Hawaii fake alert Jan 15 FBI Dirty - Trump... 11
Obama tries to suck up to Prince Harry Jan 15 Seattle Slew 70
Somalians at jimmy johns Jan 15 figgypops 5
Hey Hawaii, Duck and Cover, There's a Nuke on t... Jan 15 FBI Dirty - Trump... 12

Minneapolis Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Minneapolis Mortgages