Once slow-moving threat, global warmi...

Once slow-moving threat, global warming speeds up, leaving litt...

There are 60675 comments on the Newsday story from Dec 14, 2008, titled Once slow-moving threat, global warming speeds up, leaving litt.... In it, Newsday reports that:

When Bill Clinton took office in 1993, global warming was a slow-moving environmental problem that was easy to ignore.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Newsday.

litesong

Everett, WA

#34704 Mar 25, 2013
brian_g stumble butt dumpster diver wrote:
This argument is just cyberbullying and insults.
More accurately:
"brian_g stumble butt dumpster diver" gives out slimy steenking filthy vile reprobate rooting(& rotting) racist pukey proud pigisms AND 4 alleged & 3 proud threats.

“EnvironMENTAList ”

Since: Feb 07

Near Detroit

#34705 Mar 25, 2013
HomoSapiensLaptopicus wrote:
<quoted text>
Of course, you're dead WRONG again. More than 30 years ago, Hansen et al made a remarkbly accurate set of predictions about what would happen to temperatures & other aspects of climate. If you dare, read it:
http://pubs.giss.nasa.gov/docs/1981/1981_Hans...
Actual temperatures turned out to be a BIT higher than they predicted, but it was close enough. They also predicted other things that have subsequently happened: shifting climatic zones, drought in central North America & Asia, unstable ice sheets & the opening of the Northwest Passage.
Why don't you find ONE denier who was so accurate in predicting things so far into the future? One, just one.
Show me one single IPCC warning report not full of "maybes". Science has never said any crisis was certain, imminent, eventual,inevitable or "WILL" happen. Science says comet hits are a real eventual crisis and has NEVER said the same for climate change crisis. Prove me wrong!27 years of maybe means won't be. Deny that Doomer.
commoncents

East Hartford, CT

#34707 Mar 25, 2013
One very hot or cold year regionally or globally= no big deal. The main concern is trends over decades. In 1934 the ice caps were ok. the glacier melt provinding water to billions of people annually= ok. now the arctic is disappearing....the glacers are retreating at an alarmingly rapid geological rate a threat to the store of clean water for billions of people. 1934 is not even the tip of any well thought argument against the rapidly worsening warming trend.
commoncents

East Hartford, CT

#34708 Mar 25, 2013
Yes i saw and read the report thank you. It was very detailed. First page= admits C02 is responsible for global warming trends. first page= admits human activity is causing c02 release into the atmospere, read read read read read etc. then read the last page.........closer.

“I Luv Carbon Dioxide”

Level 10

Since: Dec 08

Home, sweet home.

#34709 Mar 25, 2013
Fair Game wrote:
So deliberately releasing CO2 would be an experiment? Only problem is, your experimental method wouldn't work. How can we produce enough CO2 to make a measurable change? By burning coal or oil, of course. So burning coal or oil deliberately would be an experiment. Burning it in power stations would not? A schoolboy would see that that is idiotic. The fact that you repeat the idiocy makes it obvious that you are simply a troll.
"An experiment is a orderly procedure carried out with the goal of verifying, falsifying, or establishing the validity of a hypothesis. Experiments provide insight into cause-and-effect by demonstrating what outcome occurs when a particular factor is manipulated. Experiments vary greatly in their goal and scale, but always rely on repeatable procedure and logical analysis of the results."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Experiment

If Fair Game finds that explanation 'idiotic', it reflects on his understanding of science.
SpaceBlues

United States

#34710 Mar 25, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>Evolution isn't an experiment. They believe in catastrophic man made global warming because they don't understand science.
You are clueless.

Because you don't understand science, you post such nonsense.
SpaceBlues

United States

#34711 Mar 25, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>"An experiment is a orderly procedure carried out with the goal of verifying, falsifying, or establishing the validity of a hypothesis. Experiments provide insight into cause-and-effect by demonstrating what outcome occurs when a particular factor is manipulated. Experiments vary greatly in their goal and scale, but always rely on repeatable procedure and logical analysis of the results."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Experiment
If Fair Game finds that explanation 'idiotic', it reflects on his understanding of science.
You actually believe you are a scientist when you are not one iota.

<Too late for you to face reality like the other deniers who dropped out before a concession>
SpaceBlues

United States

#34712 Mar 25, 2013
Fair Game wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh you poor little thing?
Are you being bullied?
It's pretty obvious you are pitching your arguments to the less well educated, who won't know one end of a scientific argument from another, but hate being condescended to, and hate seeing another less well educated person being condescended to.
So you make stupid arguments knowing the less well educated won't spot how stupid they are, or won't care, and clutch your pearls and appeal for sympathy.
Just an appeal for the less smart to shoot themselves in the foot rather than listen to smart people you and they resent so much.
My sentiments as well. Great post!
SpaceBlues

United States

#34713 Mar 25, 2013
mememine69 wrote:
<quoted text>to another poster:
Show me one single IPCC warning report not full of "maybes". Science has never said any crisis was certain, imminent, eventual,inevitable or "WILL" happen. Science says comet hits are a real eventual crisis and has NEVER said the same for climate change crisis. Prove me wrong!27 years of maybe means won't be. Deny that Doomer.
Look. You are boring and bored.

How about reading this for new vistas?

http://www.aip.org/history/climate/index.htm
Ready

Rougemont, NC

#34714 Mar 25, 2013
How about a world war that kills off 2 thirds of the world population. Maybe we need to go a little more letÂ’s take it down to 1 eighth of where it is now.

“I Luv Carbon Dioxide”

Level 10

Since: Dec 08

Home, sweet home.

#34715 Mar 25, 2013
SpaceBlues wrote:
You are clueless. Because you don't understand science, you post such nonsense.
I don't post 'evolution is an experiment', gcaveman1 does. Experiments are done by intent, with as much control as possible, they aren't done by nature.

If you disagree, then why don't you post a definition of experiment?

“I Luv Carbon Dioxide”

Level 10

Since: Dec 08

Home, sweet home.

#34716 Mar 25, 2013
SpaceBlues wrote:
You actually believe you are a scientist when you are not one iota.
^^^This is untrue, I've posted I'm not a scientist and I'll repeat that again. I don't design experiments for my living, I just happen to know the difference between an experiment and nature or man's fossil fuel use.

.
SpaceBlues wrote:
<Too late for you to face reality like the other deniers who dropped out before a concession>
^^^I'll be happy to debate your definition of experiment, why don't you post one?

“I Luv Carbon Dioxide”

Level 10

Since: Dec 08

Home, sweet home.

#34717 Mar 25, 2013
Fair Game wrote:
Oh you poor little thing? Are you being bullied?
I won't be bullied and I'll call Patriot AKA Bozo on bullying opponents to "Shut up." This is a forum for argument, bullying and insults have no place.

.
Fair Game wrote:
It's pretty obvious you are pitching your arguments to the less well educated, who won't know one end of a scientific argument from another, but hate being condescended to, and hate seeing another less well educated person being condescended to.
I pitch my arguments to everyone, even Fair Game. Please post the most compelling experiment for climate change mitigation that you've found. I haven't found any.

.
Fair Game wrote:
So you make stupid arguments knowing the less well educated won't spot how stupid they are, or won't care, and clutch your pearls and appeal for sympathy.
I respect other posters, I never call them 'stupid'; this is where we differ. I'd rather treat someone respectfully and respond to their arguments than discuss motives or trade insults.

.
Fair Game wrote:
Just an appeal for the less smart to shoot themselves in the foot rather than listen to smart people you and they resent so much.
Not everyone with a college degree is smart and not everyone who doesn't graduate high school is stupid. This issue is controversial; I'm just telling my side.

I don't believe in climate change mitigation because there are no experiments, tests, trials or demonstration that show it's possible or won't cause more harm than good. If you find a compelling experiment, please post. I'll wait.
SpaceBlues

United States

#34718 Mar 25, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>I don't post 'evolution is an experiment', gcaveman1 does. Experiments are done by intent, with as much control as possible, they aren't done by nature.
If you disagree, then why don't you post a definition of experiment?
Listen, I'm not here to educate you about science experiments.

As someone who can design/conduct science experiments, my purpose here is the thread/forum subject, not you.

I see clearly that you are here to confuse the uneducated/uninitiated just as Fair Game has described correctly your presence here. I feel sorry for you that you have done this for years and years.

“I Luv Carbon Dioxide”

Level 10

Since: Dec 08

Home, sweet home.

#34719 Mar 25, 2013
SpaceBlues wrote:
Listen, I'm not here to educate you about science experiments. As someone who can design/conduct science experiments, my purpose here is the thread/forum subject, not you.
If you don't want to provide education, you aren't a scientist. I'm glad that's clear.

.
SpaceBlues wrote:
I see clearly that you are here to confuse the uneducated/uninitiated just as Fair Game has described correctly your presence here.
I don't see the confusion, I've noted there are no experimental tests for climate change mitigation and the only people who disagree seem to think nature, our fossil fuel use and evolution are experiments. I'll be glad to clear up any confusion; experiments are orderly, intended and controlled.

.
SpaceBlues wrote:
I feel sorry for you that you have done this for years and years.
I don't feel sorry for SpaceBlues; this is where we differ. He's entitled to his position and I encourage him to post his most compelling arguments. I'm prepared to post and defend my arguments.

Seems fair to me.
SpaceBlues

United States

#34720 Mar 25, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>^^^This is untrue, I've posted I'm not a scientist and I'll repeat that again. I don't design experiments for my living, I just happen to know the difference between an experiment and nature or man's fossil fuel use.
LOL. Your first and second sentence are in conflict with each other. You are lying.

You are into uncontrolled and limitless use of fossil fuel. Yet you choose to disagree with the scientists about their science when you are not a scientist and don't understand science.

You are not fooling the science crowd.
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>^^^I'll be happy to debate your definition of experiment, why don't you post one?
LOL. It's not a pleasure to read you butcher science.

I've no intention to teach you science. However, I expect you to respect the scientists and their work.
gcaveman1

Bay Springs, MS

#34721 Mar 25, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>"An experiment is a orderly procedure carried out with the goal of verifying, falsifying, or establishing the validity of a hypothesis. Experiments provide insight into cause-and-effect by demonstrating what outcome occurs when a particular factor is manipulated. Experiments vary greatly in their goal and scale, but always rely on repeatable procedure and logical analysis of the results."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Experiment
If Fair Game finds that explanation 'idiotic', it reflects on his understanding of science.
Just a reminder: You're fellow deniers say citing Wiki is verboten.

So only man can perform experiments?

These experiments must be in a lab?

Where is the word deliberate? I don't see it, yet you said that was a requirement.
gcaveman1

Bay Springs, MS

#34722 Mar 25, 2013
Hung by your own petard, it seems. Or maybe you didn't read all of the Wiki entry:

"The term "experiment" usually implies a controlled experiment, but sometimes controlled experiments are prohibitively difficult or impossible. In this case researchers resort to natural experiments or quasi-experiments. Natural experiments rely solely on observations of the variables of the system under study, rather than manipulation of just one or a few variables as occurs in controlled experiments. "

"Much research in several important science disciplines, including economics, political science, geology, paleontology, ecology, meteorology, and astronomy, relies on quasi-experiments. For example, in astronomy it is clearly impossible, when testing the hypothesis "suns are collapsed clouds of hydrogen", to start out with a giant cloud of hydrogen, and then perform the experiment of waiting a few billion years for it to form a sun. However, by observing various clouds of hydrogen in various states of collapse, and other implications of the hypothesis (for example, the presence of various spectral emissions from the light of stars), we can collect data we require to support the hypothesis."

<>><><> <><><>< ><><><> <><
Your experiment argument just collapsed....kinda like a supernova, only faster.

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#34723 Mar 25, 2013
mememine69 wrote:
<quoted text>
Show me one single IPCC warning report not full of "maybes". Science has never said any crisis was certain, imminent, eventual,inevitable or "WILL" happen. Science says comet hits are a real eventual crisis and has NEVER said the same for climate change crisis. Prove me wrong!27 years of maybe means won't be. Deny that Doomer.
IPCC reports are always written in bureaucratese. They're being extra cautious. So what? The point is that the climate scientists were very accurate (actually, real temps have been a bit higher than they predicted) more that 30 years ago.

Given that (paraphrasing Yogi) predictions are difficult, especially when you're talking about the future, it's actually remarkable how accurate Hansen et al were in 1981. They were so accurate then that only the ignorant, the psychotic or the profoundly politically biased would fail to listen to Hansen today.



I guess you'd prefer to delay action until the wolves are at the door. The problem is that there's a great deal of momentum & delay in the system. You'll have NO chance of stopping the wolves, nor will any of your neighbors, or the next town over, or the next, if you wait till they're at your door.

It'll be WAY easier & cheaper to start to limit CO2 emissions today. We know we have to do it, or civilization will be completely destroyed.
Level 1

Since: Apr 08

"the green troll"

#34724 Mar 25, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>"An experiment is a orderly procedure carried out with the goal of verifying, falsifying, or establishing the validity of a hypothesis. Experiments provide insight into cause-and-effect by demonstrating what outcome occurs when a particular factor is manipulated. Experiments vary greatly in their goal and scale, but always rely on repeatable procedure and logical analysis of the results."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Experiment
If Fair Game finds that explanation 'idiotic', it reflects on his understanding of science.
Let me see: did I say experiments were idiotic, or that your idea of an experiment was idiotic?

Add misrepresentation to pearl clutching and fauxtrage as the tools of the troll.

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php...

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.

Orlando Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 43 min VetnorsGate 1,406,601
New Game ***Last Word + 2 (Oct '11) 7 hr Princess Hey 12,698
News 50 dead in Florida nightclub shooting, worst in... 8 hr Major Nadal Hassan 1,585
News Almost one year since gay marriage ruling, LGBT... 9 hr Frankie Rizzo 220
News Bono, Beyonce, Wonder, Springsteen, Usher lined... (Jan '09) 9 hr MAXine Waters 6
News FDA Signals Relaxing Gay Blood Donation Policy 10 hr DebraE 8
News Missing 5-year-old Florida girl likely was abdu... (Feb '09) 12 hr zazz 98,135

Orlando Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Orlando Mortgages