Global warming 'undeniable,' scientis...

Global warming 'undeniable,' scientists say

There are 37131 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.

Bushwhacker

Seattle, WA

#28739 Aug 6, 2013
Same guy who said I can't invest, right rat ???

Really sad, you're such a twit. LMAOROFU~!

Like I'll continue to say, we take turns.

Nobody likes the company of a child who doesn't know how to share or take turns.

I told you how many shares, now you tell me your +20% stock pick, this month or admit you're a mouthy moron...

Now GO ahead, coward.... prove you HAVE WORTH.

Since: Aug 13

Hilo, HI

#28740 Aug 6, 2013
Sunny wrote:
<quoted text>Nope not going to explain you'll have to do some connect-the-dots.
What a moronic statement.

You are not going to explain it because you can't.

You hubris is nauseating.

“BET DAP”

Since: Feb 09

GOOM BOWN

#28741 Aug 6, 2013
People who think a tax will alter the climate of a 4.56 billion year old climate are either too stupid or too vain.

“BET DAP”

Since: Feb 09

GOOM BOWN

#28742 Aug 6, 2013
You rely on government because you can't survive on a changing planet!!!!! I get it now!!! Keep it all the same so you can survive.

Sorry people it doesn't work that way. A tax doesn't save everything!!!! Even though most of you were indoctrinated to think that way.

Since: Aug 13

Hilo, HI

#28745 Aug 6, 2013
ritedownthemiddle wrote:
<quoted text>i omitted part of your message in order to save bandwidth....it was a waste the first time.
If peer reviewed references are the "gospel" for your crowd......why do results and findings need to be doctored? Is it because that helps fit into your religious STORY?
Apparently you never get tired of negative votes.

Please provide a reference that proves that any findings have been doctored.

As far as "Climategate" is concerned:

Eight committees investigated the allegations and published reports, finding no evidence of fraud or scientific misconduct.[15] However, the reports called on the scientists to avoid any such allegations in the future by taking steps to regain public confidence in their work, for example by opening up access to their supporting data, processing methods and software, and by promptly honouring freedom of information requests.[16] The scientific consensus that global warming is occurring as a result of human activity remained unchanged throughout the investigations.[17]

15.^ a b The eight major investigations covered by secondary sources include: House of Commons Science and Technology Committee (UK); Independent Climate Change Review (UK); International Science Assessment Panel (UK); Pennsylvania State University first panel and second panel (US); United States Environmental Protection Agency (US); Department of Commerce (US); National Science Foundation (US)
16.^ a b Venkatraman, Archana (September/October 2010). "Data Without the Doubts". Information World Review (Bizmedia Ltd.): 18–19.
17.^ a b Biello, David (Feb., 2010). "Negating 'Climategate'". Scientific American.(302):2. 16. ISSN 00368733. "In fact, nothing in the stolen material undermines the scientific consensus that climate change is happening and that humans are to blame"; See also: Lubchenco, Jane (2 December 2009) House Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming (House Select Committee). "The Administration's View on the State of Climate Science". House Hearing, 111 Congress. U.S. Government Printing Office. "...the e-mails really do nothing to undermine the very strong scientific consensus and the independent scientific analyses of thousands of scientists around the world that tell us that the Earth is warming and that the warming is largely a result of human activities." As quoted in the report published by Office of Inspector General.

“BET DAP”

Since: Feb 09

GOOM BOWN

#28746 Aug 6, 2013
Bushwhacker wrote:
Same guy who said I can't invest, right rat ???H.
i stand behind that statement!! You can't!!!!
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

#28749 Aug 6, 2013
ritedownthemiddle wrote:
<quoted text>maybe you only have pseudoscience on your side thus preventing you from making a conclusive case for your religious zelitotry[sic].
What are you talking about? Maybe you could get focused and specific in your reply.

Maybe, alas.
blackiethecat

Seattle, WA

#28752 Aug 6, 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.
If you are serious you should not be allowed out in public without supervision due to severe judgment impairment.

Judged:

17

17

16

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!
Bushwhacker

Seattle, WA

#28753 Aug 6, 2013
Poor deniers,

You either need better IQs or scripts....

Judged:

14

14

13

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!

“BET DAP”

Since: Feb 09

GOOM BOWN

#28754 Aug 7, 2013
Bushwhacker wrote:
You either need better IQs or scripts....
lol....this is like Oedipus Rex calling someone a m-f-er

“BET DAP”

Since: Feb 09

GOOM BOWN

#28756 Aug 7, 2013
The Integral wrote:
<quoted text>
Apparently you never get tired of negative votes.
what are you talking about ???

The 97% you people bring up isn't nearly 97%!! I've provided quotes from the very scientists who were surveyed. It's already on the thread, son. They all say their responses were misrepresented.
gcaveman1

Bay Springs, MS

#28758 Aug 7, 2013
Sunny wrote:
<quoted text>You one of them wizzy kids I keep hearing about.
Because I can't make heads or tails out of any of that chit.
Why am I not surprised?

“Come Home America!”

Since: Nov 11

Claymont, Delaware 19809

#28759 Aug 7, 2013
Sunny wrote:
<quoted text>Well get of the computer an go do something about Global Warming if you are so worried about it.
Matter fact you can start by turning you're power off,throw your car keys in the garbage and I can go on,on,on if you need more suggestion on human activities you can stop doing,well you get the point.
You can stop farting in the bushes too ,but you won't.

“Come Home America!”

Since: Nov 11

Claymont, Delaware 19809

#28760 Aug 7, 2013
"The front pages of the newspapers and the headlines on the news programs make me very sad this morning.

The tragedy of the train explosion at Lac Mégantic continues (What was in the rail cars anyway? Who's going to pay? etc.)

Quebec mayors are upset about the nuclear waste transiting the province from the nuclear facility at Chalk River (too unsafe to go by ship, why are we sending it overland to Georgia?)

And plans are announced for a new pipeline to St. John, New Brunswick to transport petroleum from the West.

The problem behind all this bad news is our need for more and more energy. More gas to get from one place to another, more electricity to run everything, more houses, more roads, more traffic, more everything." http://marysoderstrom.blogspot.com/2013/08/pi...

“BET DAP”

Since: Feb 09

GOOM BOWN

#28764 Aug 7, 2013
frontporchreactionary wrote:
"The front pages of the newspapers and the headlines on the news programs make me very sad this morning.
The tragedy of the train explosion at Lac Mégantic continues (What was in the rail cars anyway? Who's going to pay? etc.)
Quebec mayors are upset about the nuclear waste transiting the province from the nuclear facility at Chalk River (too unsafe to go by ship, why are we sending it overland to Georgia?)
And plans are announced for a new pipeline to St. John, New Brunswick to transport petroleum from the West.
The problem behind all this bad news is our need for more and more energy. More gas to get from one place to another, more electricity to run everything, more houses, more roads, more traffic, more everything." http://marysoderstrom.blogspot.com/2013/08/pi...
look into becoming a Mormon. Now there's a religion you could live with!
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

#28765 Aug 7, 2013
Sunny wrote:
<quoted text>I know what he's talking about space.
...
And where's your answer?

LOL.
Bushwhacker

Seattle, WA

#28771 Aug 7, 2013
It's low brow, of course you do...twas intended for such as you.

“Come Home America!”

Since: Nov 11

Claymont, Delaware 19809

#28778 Aug 7, 2013
Sunny wrote:
<quoted text>Tongue hanging out.
more ya more ya more ya more jobs more jobs more jobs, more house,more roads,more everything sounds good to mean.
Republicans are cutting funding for all those things. You've switched to the Dems!
LessHypeMoreFact

Etobicoke, Canada

#28780 Aug 7, 2013
Sunny wrote:
<quoted text>Little Tidbit.
Check it out Ice Cores from Medieval Warm Period to Little Ice Age.
For what purpose?? Ice cores show global average temperature, not regional climate extremes such as LIA. Apples and oranges don't mix except in fruit salad (and your brain which bears a striking resemblance).

“CO2 is Gaseous Love”

Since: Dec 08

Home, sweet home.

#28781 Aug 7, 2013
Kyle wrote:
A Republican Case for Climate Action
By WILLIAM D. RUCKELSHAUS, LEE M. THOMAS, WILLIAM K. REILLY and CHRISTINE TODD WHITMAN
Published: August 1, 2013, New York Times
EACH of us took turns over the past 43 years running the Environmental Protection Agency. We served Republican presidents, but we have a message that transcends political affiliation: the United States must move now on substantive steps to curb climate change, at home and internationally.
There is no longer any credible scientific debate about the basic facts: our world continues to warm, with the last decade the hottest in modern records, and the deep ocean warming faster than the earth’s atmosphere. Sea level is rising. Arctic Sea ice is melting years faster than projected.
The costs of inaction are undeniable. The lines of scientific evidence grow only stronger and more numerous. And the window of time remaining to act is growing smaller: delay could mean that warming becomes “locked in.”
A market-based approach, like a carbon tax, would be the best path to reducing greenhouse-gas emissions, but that is unachievable in the current political gridlock in Washington. Dealing with this political reality, President Obama’s June climate action plan lays out achievable actions that would deliver real progress. He will use his executive powers to require reductions in the amount of carbon dioxide emitted by the nation’s power plants and spur increased investment in clean energy technology, which is inarguably the path we must follow to ensure a strong economy along with a livable climate.
They aren't conservatives and their plan won't do anything about climate:
How Not to Convince Republicans to Address Climate Change
Jonathan H. Adler • August 3, 2013 10:24 am

It’s fair to say that only one political party today considers climate change to be a problem worth addressing. As readers know, I wish it were otherwise and believe there is a conservative case for addressing climate change. I welcome others to this cause. This NYT op-ed,“A Republican Case for Climate Action,” is not the sort of thing that will help. The article is by four former EPA Administrators who served in Republican Administrations: William Ruckelshaus, Lee Thomas, William Reilly, and Christine Todd Whitman. Neither the message nor the messengers are likely to have much influence with a Republican audience. It’s a case study of how not to try and influence people with differing political priorities.

Let’s start with the authors. Yes, all four served Republican Presidents, but none are known as Republican leaders or are particularly influential in Republican circles. Indeed, it’s not clear they should all even be identified as Republicans. Whitman may still give money to liberal Republicans, but her co-authors are regular contributors to Democratic campaigns. Reilly, for instance, may have given a primary contribution to Mitt Romney in 2011, but according to OpenSecrets.org the remainder of his recent political contributions have all gone to Democrats, including Elizabeth Warren (who, one should recall, was running against one of the more liberal GOP Senators). Thomas and Ruckelshaus appear to give to both sides. However one wishes to characterize these four, it would not be as “respected GOP leaders” and they are not likely to carry much weight in politically active GOP circles....
http://www.volokh.com/2013/08/03/how-not-to-c...

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
Trump Bans Trans Military 3 min Davycrockett 39
John mccain stabs GOP in back 2 hr Davycrockett 5
I love waking up to a Trump presidency 2 hr Davycrockett 38
Teach our kids to hate them 3 hr cowboy chris 19
News Mohamed Noor is Proof That "Blue Lives" are a F... 3 hr cowboy chris 3
Liberals are trying to destroy america 16 hr Cat Man 78
Bye bye Betsy...Bye bye Betsy 17 hr Davycrockett 18

Minneapolis Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Minneapolis Mortgages