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

There are 20 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.

“EnvironMENTAList ”

Since: Feb 07

Near Detroit

#35524 May 4, 2013
gcaveman1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Because we could wise up, fool.
Tell us what else in life is inevitable, besides death and asteroid strikes.
Death and asteroid hits don't drive home the point enough of what "inevitable" is?
You fear mongers don't love the planet, you hate humanity and your miserable lives and just want to drag the rest of us down with you. Have fun while we laugh and spread love for the planet, not silly fear.
SpaceBlues

Pasadena, TX

#35525 May 4, 2013
Why are the deniers like mememe certifiable nuts?
SpaceBlues

Pasadena, TX

#35526 May 4, 2013
“In response to carbon dioxide-induced warming, the global water cycle undergoes a gigantic competition for moisture resulting in a global pattern of increased heavy rain, decreased moderate rain, and prolonged droughts in certain regions,” said William Lau of NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Md.

Areas projected to see the most significant increase in heavy rainfall are in the tropical zones around the equator, particularly in the Pacific Ocean and Asian monsoon regions.

Some regions outside the tropics may have no rainfall at all.

“EnvironMENTAList ”

Since: Feb 07

Near Detroit

#35527 May 4, 2013
SpaceBlues wrote:
Why are the deniers like mememe certifiable nuts?
Would you be willing to be subjected to criminal charges of uttering CO2 death threats to our children when climate change crisis is proven in court to be the exaggeration that it is?
What else do you do for fun besides fear mongering kids; torture frogs, pull fire alarms, rubber neck car accidents, tell on your sister....?
SpaceBlues

Pasadena, TX

#35528 May 4, 2013
mememine69 wrote:
<quoted text>.. uttering CO2 death threats to our children when climate change crisis is proven in court to be the exaggeration that it is?
What else do you do for fun besides fear mongering kids; torture frogs, pull fire alarms, rubber neck car accidents, tell on your sister....?
What! I've never done those things but you have in these threads. I'm NOT you!

I was correct you are a certifiable nut.

“I Luv Carbon Dioxide”

Level 10

Since: Dec 08

Home, sweet home.

#35529 May 4, 2013
tha Professor wrote:
Brainless_G would prefer we use GM foods and manipulation of food distribution to starve the poor...
I support the use of GM food to prevent starvation and vitamin deficiencies, such as golden rice. The greens are the ones banning GM foods at the price of starving children.

.
tha Professor wrote:
use fossil fuels with massive tax subsidies and profits...
Fossil fuels create massive tax revenue, far more than any 'subsidy'. Why don't you cite a fossil fuel tax subsidy that doesn't apply to any other producer?

.
tha Professor wrote:
and pretend that "mitigation" is the problem rather than recognition of climate change and acceptance of the need for green energy and conservation.
The problem is the lack of any experiment that shows climate change mitigation is possible.

.
tha Professor wrote:
That's because Brainless_G is, well...brainless.:)
I make my arguments without irrational insults; this is where we differ.
gcaveman1

Bay Springs, MS

#35530 May 4, 2013
Two of the denier's darlings are a little more reasonable than the majority of deniers.

http://blogs.nicholas.duke.edu/thegreengrok/h...

It's possible that even some Republicans are finding it to be politically expedient to embrace reason instead of dogma.
litesong

Everett, WA

#35531 May 4, 2013
me me me getting mine in the 69 position wrote:
You fear mongers don't love the planet, you hate humanity.....
That's why conservative, business & re-pubic-lick-un PEE-R propaganda opposed the life saving benefits of clean air technology in the 70's, 80's, 90's & even today. re-pubic-lick-uns stink (some... even quite a few are steenking)!
gcaveman1

Bay Springs, MS

#35532 May 4, 2013
Dont drink the koolaid wrote:
<quoted text> OK...? What "Truth" is used to back up Scientific opinion?
Didn't yo momma tell you?

Look it up, dear.
litesong

Everett, WA

#35533 May 4, 2013
me me me getting mine in the 69 position wrote:
..... when climate change crisis is proven in court........
toxic topix AGW deniers can't prove that their cube heads fit in a square root.
litesong

Everett, WA

#35534 May 4, 2013
gcaveman1 wrote:
It's possible that even some Republicans are finding it to be politically expedient to embrace reason instead of dogma.
But all re-pubic-lick-uns can only lick pubics.
gcaveman1

Bay Springs, MS

#35535 May 4, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
Wise up? Use corn ethanol to starve the poor. Use solar and wind with massive tax subsidies and borrowing. Use credit to mitigate climate change because it's unaffordable as well as impossible.
Massive tax subsidies for fossil fuels dwarf any for green energy, at least in the US.

Green tech is nice and very helpful, but there's also conservation and higher efficiency, which "greens" have been promoting for decades and deniers have denigrated for just as long.
gcaveman1

Bay Springs, MS

#35536 May 4, 2013
mememine69 wrote:
<quoted text>Death and asteroid hits don't drive home the point enough of what "inevitable" is?
You fear mongers don't love the planet, you hate humanity and your miserable lives and just want to drag the rest of us down with you. Have fun while we laugh and spread love for the planet, not silly fear.
No, fool, I asked that you give us some other things that are immutable, unchangeable, inevitable.

The two points I concede are, as yet, beyond our control. But, in the scope of human endeavor, any future result can be altered by action now, be it good or bad.
gcaveman1

Bay Springs, MS

#35537 May 4, 2013
mememine69 wrote:
<quoted text>Would you be willing to be subjected to criminal charges of uttering CO2 death threats to our children when climate change crisis is proven in court to be the exaggeration that it is?
What else do you do for fun besides fear mongering kids; torture frogs, pull fire alarms, rubber neck car accidents, tell on your sister....?
Why don't you bring those charges against whomever in a court of law now if you think you have a case?

Otherwise, why don't you shut the fuggup?
litesong

Everett, WA

#35538 May 4, 2013
SpaceBlues wrote:
Why are the deniers like mememe certifiable nuts?
mememine69 is really 'me me me getting mine in the 69 position' & it contracted the same thing as Karen in 'Out of Africa', spreading it to all the toxic topix AGW deniers.

“I Luv Carbon Dioxide”

Level 10

Since: Dec 08

Home, sweet home.

#35539 May 4, 2013
gcaveman1 wrote:
Massive tax subsidies for fossil fuels dwarf any for green energy, at least in the US.
Fossil fuel users pay far more in taxes than any supposed subsidy. Why don't you cite one of your imagined fossil fuel tax subsidies? Do you think all the money earned by producing fossil fuels belongs to the government?

.
gcaveman1 wrote:
Green tech is nice and very helpful, but there's also conservation and higher efficiency, which "greens" have been promoting for decades and deniers have denigrated for just as long.
Green energy doesn't work, that's why the government has to pay people to use it.
litesong

Everett, WA

#35540 May 4, 2013
gcaveman1 wrote:
Why don't you bring those charges against whomever in a court of law now if you think you have a case?
'me me me getting mine in the 69 position' is too busy getting its in the 69 position.
Retired Farmer

Kuttawa, KY

#35541 May 4, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>Fossil fuel users pay far more in taxes than any supposed subsidy. Why don't you cite one of your imagined fossil fuel tax subsidies? Do you think all the money earned by producing fossil fuels belongs to the government?
.
<quoted text>Green energy doesn't work, that's why the government has to pay people to use it.
I suppose that if you had been around in the 1860s you would have said, "Railroads don't work, that's why the government has to subsidize building them."

“I Luv Carbon Dioxide”

Level 10

Since: Dec 08

Home, sweet home.

#35542 May 4, 2013
Retired Farmer wrote:
I suppose that if you had been around in the 1860s you would have said, "Railroads don't work, that's why the government has to subsidize building them."
Railroads have been experimentally tested, climate change mitigation hasn't. See the difference?
SpaceBlues

Pasadena, TX

#35543 May 4, 2013
b_gone has no proof for its lies .. that span five years and 40,880 posts.

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) 19 min John Galt 1,223,644
Double Fun Word Game (Mar '11) 3 hr Princess Hey 12,473
keep a word----drop a word (Feb '11) 3 hr Princess Hey 17,725
CASEY: Does the State Have the Goods to Convict? (Mar '10) 7 hr RealBenjam in 496,684
Inspiration Lane - Don't Quit (May '09) 10 hr Murph 71,744
Let's Chat (Jan '12) 11 hr Wiley_Kyote 18,118
News Missing 5-year-old Florida girl likely was abdu... (Feb '09) 23 hr zazz 97,184
More from around the web

Orlando People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]