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.

SpaceBlues

United States

#29750 Sep 26, 2013
Denialism is dead.

RIP

Judged:

22

22

20

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!
Kyle

United States

#29752 Sep 26, 2013
richardIII wrote:
<quoted text>
Al "Adolph" Gore ?
The only mistake he made was in thinking that science denial can ever be defeated. Humans are irrational, averse to evidence, prone to conspiracy theories, ideologically motivated, dogmatic thinkers. Science denial will always be with us.

Hell, half the US denies biological science. A smattering of flat Earthers persist. Idiots like you, much like the poor, will always be with us.

Judged:

22

22

20

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!
Kyle

United States

#29753 Sep 26, 2013
ritedownthemiddle wrote:
<quoted text>It always amuses me to see so many on the side of pseudoscience pretend they have the intellectual high road.
It always amuses me when those promoting pseudoscience refer to actual science as pseudoscience. Infantile projection is a hoot. It's hilarious when a young Earth creationist tries to come across all sciency while referring to evolutionary biology, geology, paleontology, cladistics, comparitive genomics, etc. as "religions". What you're doing is no less asinine.

Judged:

22

21

20

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!
Kyle

United States

#29754 Sep 26, 2013
bob wrote:
all a scam
Indeed. The denial industry's promotion of science denial is the most transparent scam ever. It's amazing how many fools can't see it, though.

Judged:

22

22

20

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!

“BET DAP”

Since: Feb 09

GOOM BOWN

#29755 Sep 26, 2013
Kyle wrote:
<quoted text>
It always amuses me when those promoting pseudoscience refer to actual science as pseudoscience. Infantile projection is a hoot. It's hilarious when a young Earth creationist tries to come across all sciency while referring to evolutionary biology, geology, paleontology, cladistics, comparitive genomics, etc. as "religions". What you're doing is no less asinine.
maybe you should try to bring eugenics back in vogue and amalgamate it with your climate change religion, son!
Scepticism is enemy number one to any religion, and must be silenced. You could get sort of a "twofer" for your efforts according to your apparent world view.
Make you a deal....don't pretend to be smarter than me and I'll stop reminding you just how stupid you really are, okay?

Judged:

21

21

20

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!
Kyle

United States

#29756 Sep 26, 2013
ritedownthemiddle wrote:
<quoted text>i do think for myself and on my own. Apparently that's exactly what drives you quacks crazy! Lol
The science isn't settled. The models you all cite are grossly erroneous. Public policy can't be made about something based on "could" and "maybe".
Let the studies continue until more is known. There's no need to make knee jerk reactions...and way too early for public policy on a sloppy theory full of holes.
There it is. The denier argument on a nutshell. Every point is wrong. Every point has been rebutted. Every rebuttal has been rejected. I count five.

1) "We're skeptics. Skepticism is good." There are clear differences between proper skepticism and denial that have been presented many times.

2) "The science should claim certainty before action is warranted." Fails on two counts; both revealed many times. Science never deals in proof or certainty. Demanding it before taking action is illogical in any case. If this semipro liar actually meant to imply that there is significant doubt within the field, he's simply lying. The truth has been revealed many times.

3) "Climate science = only models." Big Lie. Revealed as such many times.

4) "The science is shaky." Actually, the science is very robust. I have personally explained several ways that it is, some of which you assiduously avoid even acknowledging.

5) "Scientists are going off half cocked; it needs more study." It's been studied for decades by many, many scientists, with high tech research tools from the likes of NASA, etc. and by some for well over a century. The latest report by the climate researchers bumped the confidence level for anthropogenic, catastrophic warming from 90 to 95%. This matches the level of certainty that smoking causes lung cancer and exceeds the confidence level universally applied in medicine and public health matters. Also, the science has also shown the effects of delaying action.

All this information has been rejected by the denial industry as well. Congrats on so clearly stating the vacuous nature of denialist.

Judged:

20

20

18

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#29757 Sep 26, 2013
Kyle wrote:
<quoted text>
There it is. The denier argument on a nutshell. Every point is wrong. Every point has been rebutted. Every rebuttal has been rejected. I count five.
1) "We're skeptics. Skepticism is good." There are clear differences between proper skepticism and denial that have been presented many times.
2) "The science should claim certainty before action is warranted." Fails on two counts; both revealed many times. Science never deals in proof or certainty. Demanding it before taking action is illogical in any case. If this semipro liar actually meant to imply that there is significant doubt within the field, he's simply lying. The truth has been revealed many times.
3) "Climate science = only models." Big Lie. Revealed as such many times.
4) "The science is shaky." Actually, the science is very robust. I have personally explained several ways that it is, some of which you assiduously avoid even acknowledging.
5) "Scientists are going off half cocked; it needs more study." It's been studied for decades by many, many scientists, with high tech research tools from the likes of NASA, etc. and by some for well over a century. The latest report by the climate researchers bumped the confidence level for anthropogenic, catastrophic warming from 90 to 95%. This matches the level of certainty that smoking causes lung cancer and exceeds the confidence level universally applied in medicine and public health matters. Also, the science has also shown the effects of delaying action.
All this information has been rejected by the denial industry as well. Congrats on so clearly stating the vacuous nature of denialist.
It is like the game of whack-a-mole. No matter how many times you whack them down, they just pop up again. Here try this, it is a lot more productive than whacking the deniers.
http://www.addictinggames.com/action-games/wh...

Judged:

16

16

14

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!

“BET DAP”

Since: Feb 09

GOOM BOWN

#29759 Sep 26, 2013
Kyle wrote:
<quoted text>
There it is. The denier argument on a nutshell. Every point is wrong. Every point has been rebutted. Every rebuttal has been rejected. I count five.
1) "We're skeptics. Skepticism is good." There are clear differences between proper skepticism and denial that have been presented many times.
2) "The science should claim certainty before action is warranted." Fails on two counts; both revealed many times. Science never deals in proof or certainty. Demanding it before taking action is illogical in any case. If this semipro liar actually meant to imply that there is significant doubt within the field, he's simply lying. The truth has been revealed many times.
3) "Climate science = only models." Big Lie. Revealed as such many times.
4) "The science is shaky." Actually, the science is very robust. I have personally explained several ways that it is, some of which you assiduously avoid even acknowledging.
5) "Scientists are going off half cocked; it needs more study." It's been studied for decades by many, many scientists, with high tech research tools from the likes of NASA, etc. and by some for well over a century. The latest report by the climate researchers bumped the confidence level for anthropogenic, catastrophic warming from 90 to 95%. This matches the level of certainty that smoking causes lung cancer and exceeds the confidence level universally applied in medicine and public health matters. Also, the science has also shown the effects of delaying action.
All this information has been rejected by the denial industry as well. Congrats on so clearly stating the vacuous nature of denialist.
Did you mean to say, "in a nutshell", son?
To your turgid points:
1. Look at me as a climate change agnostic.....but you can label me however you want. You're a faith based idiot....so I really don't care what you call me.
2. Exactly!!! Science doesn't deal in proof! But observations need to match the theory before actions are taken. I could go on all night about this.....but I'll ease you into the process of real science,'kay?
3. Climate science isn't all models. If it were......your 'team' wouldn't be on the field anymore. Get it? LOL
4. The science is shaky.....meaning that the more scientist learn the more they realize how little is understood regarding climate drivers, variabilities, weighting, solar fluxes, infrared radiation actualities, glacial growth and retreats, oceanic measures, natural co2 sources vs man made, total heat sinks.... don't get me started on the m/f's!!
5. No it doesn't. No they haven't. No one denies that climate has and does change. No one denies that man made CO2 contributes to GHG's. No one can quantify or determine how this does, or will, cause any significant change in climate. YOU AZZHOLES INSIST that last weeks tornado or next months hurricane is because of man made co2!! How absurd is that?! If you're making claims like that.....who in the hell is going to believe you? You have no evidence of such....and you lying bastards know it!!
Don't preach to others about science!!! Your crowd is the most unscientific group of snake oil salesman I've come across in my lifetime, brownshirt!

Judged:

16

15

14

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!
SpaceBlues

United States

#29760 Sep 26, 2013
Want to know where people are most likely to die prematurely due to air pollution?

NASA recently recently released a map showing the average number of deaths per year per 1,000 square kilometers (385 square miles) that can be attributed to fine particle matter pollution.

Researchers compared pollution levels over a 150-year span, beginning in 1850 and ending in 2000. The dark brown areas on the map, shown prominently in Asia, India, Europe and parts of Africa, indicate locations with the highest rates of premature deaths due to air pollution.

Blue areas, as seen in the southeast United States and parts of South America, indicate areas that have seen air quality improve and the number of deaths due to air pollution decline.

Why are so many areas getting worse? According to NASA, that can be attributed to increased industrialization and urbanization. As to the areas in blue that have seen air quality improve from 1850 to 2000, researchers suggest that a decrease in biomass burning is the cause.

The research used to create the map comes from University of North Carolina professor Jason West. Published in Environmental Research Letters, the study estimated that roughly 2.1 million deaths per year could be attributed to fine particle matter pollution alone.

What's fine particle matter? The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) defines it as "a complex mixture of extremely small particles and liquid droplets." Particle matter that is 10 micrometers in diameter or smaller is particularly worrisome "because those are the particles that generally pass through the throat and nose and enter the lungs," according to the EPA.

Judged:

12

11

9

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!
LIbEralS

Saint Paul, MN

#29765 Sep 26, 2013
SpaceBlues wrote:
Want to know where people are most likely to die prematurely due to air pollution?
NASA recently recently released a map showing the average number of deaths per year per 1,000 square kilometers (385 square miles) that can be attributed to fine particle matter pollution.
...
I guess we had better hope Mother Nature doesn't set off any more eruptions like Mount St. Helens.

Judged:

14

14

14

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!
SpaceBlues

United States

#29775 Sep 27, 2013
richardIII wrote:
<quoted text>
They're dispersed all over the planet, the oceans absorb them. Ask your self why for 16 years the earth hasn't warmed? Ask yourself why the AGW hysterics continue to drive IC automobiles? ASk yourself how Al"big Oil" Gore justifies his obscene sized mansion?
Kyle

Columbia City, IN

#29776 Sep 27, 2013
ritedownthemiddle wrote:
<quoted text>maybe you should try to bring eugenics back in vogue and amalgamate it with your climate change religion, son!
Scepticism is enemy number one to any religion, and must be silenced. You could get sort of a "twofer" for your efforts according to your apparent world view.
Make you a deal....don't pretend to be smarter than me and I'll stop reminding you just how stupid you really are, okay?
See below. I preemptively disemboweled your claim of being a skeptic. You're a denier. The differences - as i already said - have been discussed at length. You repeat yourself very well, but you never address the rebuttals of your BS.
Kyle

Columbia City, IN

#29777 Sep 27, 2013
ritedownthemiddle wrote:
<quoted text>Did you mean to say, "in a nutshell", son?
To your turgid points:
1. Look at me as a climate change agnostic.....but you can label me however you want. You're a faith based idiot....so I really don't care what you call me.
2. Exactly!!! Science doesn't deal in proof! But observations need to match the theory before actions are taken. I could go on all night about this.....but I'll ease you into the process of real science,'kay?
3. Climate science isn't all models. If it were......your 'team' wouldn't be on the field anymore. Get it? LOL
4. The science is shaky.....meaning that the more scientist learn the more they realize how little is understood regarding climate drivers, variabilities, weighting, solar fluxes, infrared radiation actualities, glacial growth and retreats, oceanic measures, natural co2 sources vs man made, total heat sinks.... don't get me started on the m/f's!!
5. No it doesn't. No they haven't. No one denies that climate has and does change. No one denies that man made CO2 contributes to GHG's. No one can quantify or determine how this does, or will, cause any significant change in climate. YOU AZZHOLES INSIST that last weeks tornado or next months hurricane is because of man made co2!! How absurd is that?! If you're making claims like that.....who in the hell is going to believe you? You have no evidence of such....and you lying bastards know it!!
Don't preach to others about science!!! Your crowd is the most unscientific group of snake oil salesman I've come across in my lifetime, brownshirt!
Yawn. All heard before. All refuted before. I refuse to play whack-a-mole with the defeated. Actually address criticisms - even acknowledge correction - and I'd deem you worthy of a response.

BTW, how desperate are you? Desperate enough to lead off this bit of drivel with a dig at a single instance of incorrect autocorrect by my smartphone.

What a f'n loser!

Judged:

28

28

26

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!
Kyle

Columbia City, IN

#29778 Sep 27, 2013
Toutle wrote:
<quoted text>OMG Kyle you sound like Adolf Hitler and the NAZI party when you talk like that my boy.
All you have to do is put JEWS in were you put DENIAL an you would fit right in with the NAZI'S mentality.
An we all know what happened to Hitler and the Nazi's right.
OMG, what a hilarious stretch.

OMG, you just played the Hitler/Nazi card.

OMG, you just conceded.(see Godwin's Law)

Judged:

26

26

24

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!
Kyle

Columbia City, IN

#29782 Sep 27, 2013
Sunny wrote:
<quoted text>
disemboweled
whack-a-mole
defeated
f'n loser
desperate
Kyle's a Brownshirt NAZI OMG.lmao
Godwin revisited.

When you have science, let us know.

Judged:

24

24

24

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!
Kyle

Columbia City, IN

#29783 Sep 27, 2013
Toutle wrote:
<quoted text>I like that little smiley guy with his tongue out give them to me ya little cry baby lefties.lmao
I'm a conservative. Real conservatism is a reality based philosophy. Climate science denial is not correlated with political ideology in most of the world. The Rep's and TP's will someday know the folly of linking multiple flavors of reality denial with conservatism. Conservatism will wander in the wilderness while liberalism runs rampant.

Even religions have often rejected linkage between their doctrine and reality denial. St. Augustine of Hippo and modern popes come to mind. If an early church figure could see 1600 yrs ago that linking your core principles to nonsense is dangerously counterproductive, why can't a conservative US politician do it today?!

Answer?: Because the lunatics have taken over the asylum.

Judged:

27

26

23

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!

“BET DAP”

Since: Feb 09

GOOM BOWN

#29788 Sep 27, 2013
Kyle wrote:
<quoted text>
Yawn. All heard before. All refuted before. I refuse to play whack-a-mole with the defeated. Actually address criticisms - even acknowledge correction - and I'd deem you worthy of a response.
BTW, how desperate are you? Desperate enough to lead off this bit of drivel with a dig at a single instance of incorrect autocorrect by my smartphone.
What a f'n loser!
so you posted a rant to admit you have no real response? is that what you meant 'in a nutshell', son?

concession accepted!

Judged:

22

21

20

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!

“BET DAP”

Since: Feb 09

GOOM BOWN

#29789 Sep 27, 2013
Kyle wrote:
<quoted text>OMG, what a hilarious stretch.
OMG, you just played the Hitler/Nazi card.
OMG, you just conceded.(see Godwin's Law)
pretender.
you know less about posters here than you do climate change......and that's hard to believe, bermuda divot.

Judged:

21

21

21

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!
LIbEralS

Saint Paul, MN

#29790 Sep 28, 2013
Models of misinformation -- climate reports melt under scrutiny:

A last-ditch effort to refute climate “skeptics”—people unconvinced that we need to spend trillions to reshape our economies to halt or slow “climate change”-- has failed.

Last week, the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) published a study by 13 prestigious atmospheric scientists that supposedly provides “clear evidence for a discernible human influence on the thermal structure of the atmosphere.”

The NAS researchers pointedly echo the famous declaration by the United Nation-sponsored Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, or IPCC, that the “balance of evidence suggests a discernible human influence on global climate.” With this new study, the authors claim to clinch the case. The IPCC, we’re supposed to believe, has been right all along.

With the IPCC now issuing the first segment of its latest mammoth study on the same topic, readers should take the NAS pronouncement with a large grain of salt—and the IPCC report too. This is an attempt to change the subject and ignore the elephant in the room: the crisis in “consensus” climate science arising from the growing mismatch between model-predicted warming and observed warming.

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2013/09/26/don...

Judged:

20

20

20

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!
Kyle

Columbia City, IN

#29806 Sep 28, 2013
GW is the problem wrote:
<quoted text>So, your point is flaws exist in products ???
LMAOROTFU~!
WOW ! Guess you learned a different way to spell or are a complete hypocrite, huh ???
Love teabaggers, their irony is FUNNY !!!
"Mission Accomplished" !!!
The funniest bit was the claim that a blade tip traveled 8 kilometers. If it were made of lead, it would have to be traveling at a ridiculous speed. Considering that they're made of featherweight composites, the necessary initial speed would be sufficient to both shred it and spontaneously combust.

In other words, just another example of how to tell when a denier is lying - they're making a claim.

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
BLM urge rioting over OSU SHOOTING 4 min GrowUp 25
Obama & BLM mourn monstor Fidel Castro 12 hr GrowUp 62
California Dems Block Gang Member Database 16 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