Once slow-moving threat, global warmi...

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

There are 54341 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.

Since: Mar 09

Wichita, KS

#41190 Nov 9, 2013
Mothra wrote:
<quoted text>
Just quoting from the link you provided.
d'Oh!
Dumb, dumb, The gist of the article was that melting ice can cause the global ocean conveyor belt can be shutdown by less dense water from melting ice caused by global warming. So it slowed down or stopped before, so what does that have to do with global warming? Quit being so dense~!

Since: Mar 09

Wichita, KS

#41191 Nov 9, 2013
dont snow me wrote:
<quoted text>
I've long maintained that if fat Al and the warmers on here would merely halve their intake of burritos the crisis would be over.
The Al Gore hatred all started when Bush stole the election from him and proceeded to fumble the ball. Al Gore aside, the Earth is warming, CO2 is a greenhouse gas. CO2 traps discrete IR radiation in the atmosphere and increases the temperature of the Earth. Burning fossil fuels causes CO2 to increase in the atmosphere. Those are scientific facts. Deal with them. Bashing Al Gore will not change them.

Since: Mar 09

Wichita, KS

#41192 Nov 9, 2013
Patriot AKA Bozo wrote:
<quoted text>
Dumb, dumb, The gist of the article was that melting ice can cause the global ocean conveyor belt can be shutdown by less dense water from melting ice caused by global warming. So it slowed down or stopped before, so what does that have to do with global warming? Quit being so dense~!
!! oops! "global ocean conveyor belt [to] be slowed or shut down"
History

Independence, KS

#41193 Nov 9, 2013
We are currently in an ice age. The temperature now is below the norm, it is normally much warmer than now. All the previous ice ages ended, and there is no evidence to show the current ice age will not end.

Here is a graph (first on left side of page) that was made to deceive people into thinking the recent temperatures were stable and normal. Notice how the years are scaled differently? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geologic_tempera...

Here is a graph (first graph in center of page)that is scaled correctly. http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/Carbonifero...
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

#41194 Nov 9, 2013
History wrote:
We are currently in an ice age. The temperature now is below the norm, it is normally much warmer than now. All the previous ice ages ended, and there is no evidence to show the current ice age will not end.
Here is a graph (first on left side of page) that was made to deceive people into thinking the recent temperatures were stable and normal. Notice how the years are scaled differently? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geologic_tempera...
Here is a graph (first graph in center of page)that is scaled correctly. http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/Carbonifero...
You are not just utterly ignorant but you are merely stupid to think that you know science when you don't..

How dare you! Go do an open heart surgery while you are having this episode..
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

#41195 Nov 9, 2013
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:All_palaeot...

Read Summary and Sources. See File history?

“fairtax.org”

Level 8

Since: Dec 08

gauley bridge wv

#41196 Nov 9, 2013
Carbon Dioxide and Global Warming
Where We Stand on the Issue

C. D. Idso and K. E. Idso
Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change
There is little doubt the air's CO2 concentration has risen significantly since the inception of the Industrial Revolution; and there are few who do not attribute the CO2 increase to the increase in humanity's use of fossil fuels. There is also little doubt the earth has warmed slightly over the same period; but there is no compelling reason to believe that the rise in temperature was caused by the rise in CO2. Furthermore, it is highly unlikely that future increases in the air's CO2 content will produce any global warming; for there are numerous problems with the popular hypothesis that links the two phenomena.
A weak short-term correlation between CO2 and temperature proves nothing about causation. Proponents of the notion that increases in the air's CO2 content lead to global warming point to the past century's weak correlation between atmospheric CO2 concentration and global air temperature as proof of their contention. However, they typically gloss over the fact that correlation does not imply causation, and that a hundred years is not enough time to establish the validity of such a relationship when it comes to earth's temperature history.

The observation that two things have risen together for a period of time says nothing about one trend being the cause of the other. To establish a causal relationship it must be demonstrated that the presumed cause precedes the presumed effect. Furthermore, this relationship should be demonstrable over several cycles of increases and decreases in both parameters. And even when these criteria are met, as in the case of solar/climate relationships, many people are unwilling to acknowledge that variations in the presumed cause truly produced the observed analogous variations in the presumed effect.

In thus considering the seven greatest temperature transitions of the past half-million years - three glacial terminations and four glacial inceptions - we note that increases and decreases in atmospheric CO2 concentration not only did not precede the changes in air temperature, they followed them, and by hundreds to thousands of years! There were also long periods of time when atmospheric CO2 remained unchanged, while air temperature dropped, as well as times when the air's CO2 content dropped, while air temperature remained unchanged or actually rose. Hence, the climate history of the past half-million years provides absolutely no evidence to suggest that the ongoing rise in the air's CO2 concentration will lead to significant global warming.

Strong negative climatic feedbacks prohibit catastrophic warming. Strong negative feedbacks play major roles in earth's climate system. If they did not, no life would exist on the planet, for some perturbation would long ago have sent the world careening into a state of cosmic cold or horrendous heat; and we know from the fossil record that neither of these extremes has ever occurred, even over billions of years, and in spite of a large increase in the luminosity of the sun throughout geologic time.

Consider, in this regard, the water vapor that would be added to the atmosphere by enhanced evaporation in a warmer world. The extra moisture would likely lead to the production of more and higher-water-content clouds, both of which consequences would tend to cool the planet by reflecting more solar radiation back to space.

“fairtax.org”

Level 8

Since: Dec 08

gauley bridge wv

#41197 Nov 9, 2013
A warmer world would also mean a warmer ocean, which would likely lead to an increase in the productivity of marine algae or phytoplankton. This phenomenon, in turn, would enhance the biotic production of certain sulfur-based substances that diffuse into the air, where they are oxidized and converted into particles that function as cloud condensation nuclei. The resulting increase in the number of cloud-forming particles would thus produce more and smaller cloud droplets, which are more reflective of incoming solar radiation; and this phenomenon would also tend to cool the planet.

All of these warming-induced cloud-related cooling effects are very powerful. It has been shown, for example, that the warming predicted to result from a doubling of the air's CO2 content may be totally countered by:(1) a mere 1% increase in the reflectivity of the planet, or (2) a 10% increase in the amount of the world's low-level clouds, or (3) a 15 to 20% reduction in the mean droplet radius of earth's boundary-layer clouds, or (4) a 20 to 25% increase in cloud liquid water content. In addition, it has been demonstrated that the warming-induced production of high-level clouds over the equatorial oceans almost totally nullifies that region's powerful water vapor greenhouse effect, which supplies much of the temperature increase in the CO2-induced global warming scenario.

Most of these important negative feedbacks are not adequately represented in state-of-the-art climate models. What is more, many related (and totally ignored!) phenomena are set in motion when the land surfaces of the globe warm. In response to the increase in temperature between 25°N latitude and the equator, for example, the soil-to-air flux of various sulfur gases rises by a factor of 25, as a consequence of warmth-induced increases in soil microbial activity; and this phenomenon can lead to the production of more cloud condensation nuclei just as biological processes over the sea do. Clearly, therefore, any number of combinations of these several negative feedbacks could easily thwart the impetus for warming provided by future increases in the air's CO2 content.

“fairtax.org”

Level 8

Since: Dec 08

gauley bridge wv

#41198 Nov 9, 2013
Growth-enhancing effects of CO2 create an impetus for cooling. Carbon dioxide is a powerful aerial fertilizer, directly enhancing the growth of almost all terrestrial plants and many aquatic plants as its atmospheric concentration rises. And just as increased algal productivity at sea increases the emission of sulfur gases to the atmosphere, ultimately leading to more and brighter clouds over the world's oceans, so too do CO2-induced increases in terrestrial plant productivity lead to enhanced emissions of various sulfur gases over land, where they likewise ultimately cool the planet. In addition, many non-sulfur-based biogenic materials of the terrestrial environment play major roles as water- and ice-nucleating aerosols; and the airborne presence of these materials should also be enhanced by rising levels of atmospheric CO2. Hence, it is possible that incorporation of this multifaceted CO2-induced cooling effect into the suite of equations that comprise the current generation of global climate models might actually tip the climatic scales in favor of global cooling in the face of continued growth of anthropogenic CO2 emissions.
There is no evidence for warming-induced increases in extreme weather. Proponents of the CO2-induced global warming hypothesis often predict that extreme weather events such as droughts, floods, and hurricanes will become more numerous and/or extreme in a warmer world; however, there is no evidence to support this claim. In fact, many studies have revealed that the numbers and intensities of extreme weather events have remained relatively constant over the last century of modest global warming or have actually declined. Costs of damages from these phenomena, however, have risen dramatically; but this phenomenon has been demonstrated to be the result of evolving societal, demographic and economic factors.
Elevated levels of atmospheric CO2 are a boon to the biosphere. In lieu of global warming, a little of which would in all probability be good for the planet, where do the above considerations leave us? Simply with the biospheric benefits that come from the aerial fertilization effect of atmospheric CO2 enrichment: enhanced plant growth, increased plant water use efficiency, greater food production for both people and animals, plus a host of other biological benefits too numerous to describe in this short statement.
And these benefits are not mere predictions. They are real. Already, in fact, they are evident in long-term tree-ring records, which reveal a history of increasing forest growth rates that have closely paralleled the progression of the Industrial Revolution. They can also be seen in the slow but inexorable spreading of woody plants into areas where only grasses grew before. In fact, the atmosphere itself bears witness to the increasing prowess of the entire biosphere in the yearly expanding amplitude of the its seasonal CO2 cycle. This oscillatory "breath of the biosphere" - its inhalation of CO2, produced by spring and summer terrestrial plant growth, and its exhalation of CO2, produced by fall and winter biomass decomposition - has been documented to be growing greater and greater each year in response to the ever-increasing growth stimulation provided by the ongoing rise in the air's CO2 content.

“fairtax.org”

Level 8

Since: Dec 08

gauley bridge wv

#41199 Nov 9, 2013
Atmospheric CO2 enrichment brings growth and prosperity to man and nature alike. This, then, is what we truly believe will be the result of the ongoing rise in the air's CO2 content: a reinvigorated biosphere characteristic of those prior periods of earth's history when the air's CO2 concentration was much higher than it is today, coupled with a climate not much different from that of the present. Are we right? Only time will tell. But one thing is certain now: there is much more real-world evidence for the encouraging scenario we paint here than for the doom-and-gloom predictions of apocalypse that are preached by those who blindly follow the manifestly less-than-adequate prognostications of imperfect climate models.

Our policy prescription relative to anthropogenic CO2 emissions is thus to leave well enough alone and let nature and humanity take their inextricably intertwined course. All indications are that both will be well served by the ongoing rise in atmospheric CO2.
Hstory

Independence, KS

#41200 Nov 9, 2013
SpaceBlues wrote:
<quoted text>You are not just utterly ignorant but you are merely stupid to think that you know science when you don't..
How dare you! Go do an open heart surgery while you are having this episode..
When you can not find anything to dispute the facts, many people will get angry and turn to name calling. The science says we are in an ice age, and the evidence proves it. If you still don't want to believe it, then stop worring about the ice melting.
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

#41201 Nov 9, 2013
Hstory wrote:
<quoted text>
When you can not find anything to dispute the facts, many people will get angry and turn to name calling. The science says we are in an ice age, and the evidence proves it. If you still don't want to believe it, then stop worring[sic] about the ice melting.
You are a persistent stupid.. it's permanent with you.

Look if you are a kid, still in school, learn about science, graph making in particular. This is a composite plot, a brilliant one. All of Earth's 542 million years are in one place.

No, science does not say we are in ice age. Where does it say that to you?

Since: Mar 09

Wichita, KS

#41202 Nov 9, 2013
flack wrote:
Atmospheric CO2 enrichment brings growth and prosperity to man and nature alike. This, then, is what we truly believe will be the result of the ongoing rise in the air's CO2 content: a reinvigorated biosphere characteristic of those prior periods of earth's history when the air's CO2 concentration was much higher than it is today, coupled with a climate not much different from that of the present. Are we right? Only time will tell. But one thing is certain now: there is much more real-world evidence for the encouraging scenario we paint here than for the doom-and-gloom predictions of apocalypse that are preached by those who blindly follow the manifestly less-than-adequate prognostications of imperfect climate models.
Our policy prescription relative to anthropogenic CO2 emissions is thus to leave well enough alone and let nature and humanity take their inextricably intertwined course. All indications are that both will be well served by the ongoing rise in atmospheric CO2.
Enough flack!
There are some benefits form a slight warming of the Earth. There is a point where the warming will become problematic. Most projections do show a detrimental future if the warming continues unabated. The statement that CO2 is not responsible for increased warming of the Earth is irresponsible and against scientific findings. Idso is not a climate scientist, his training is in geography and agronomy. It looks like his call to fame is his association with the Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change. A anti-global warming bunch funded by the fossil fuel industry. Not impressed.

“EnvironMENTAList ”

Since: Feb 07

Near Detroit

#41203 Nov 9, 2013
Patriot AKA Bozo wrote:
<quoted text>
Enough flack!
There are some benefits form a slight warming of the Earth. There is a point where the warming will become problematic. Most projections do show a detrimental future if the warming continues unabated. The statement that CO2 is not responsible for increased warming of the Earth is irresponsible and against scientific findings. Idso is not a climate scientist, his training is in geography and agronomy. It looks like his call to fame is his association with the Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change. A anti-global warming bunch funded by the fossil fuel industry. Not impressed.
Why should we take your word a crisis will happen when science has NEVER said or agreed it WILL happen or anything beyond; "could be"?
Hstory

Independence, KS

#41205 Nov 9, 2013
SpaceBlues wrote:
<quoted text>You are a persistent stupid.. it's permanent with you.
Look if you are a kid, still in school, learn about science, graph making in particular. This is a composite plot, a brilliant one. All of Earth's 542 million years are in one place.
No, science does not say we are in ice age. Where does it say that to you?
Going to a source you like, it says we are currently in an ice age. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ice_age

Where on your graph does it show that the earth is warmer now than the past? It does not. The earth is currently much cooler now than normal. I supplied a graph to show it.
mike hock

Philadelphia, PA

#41206 Nov 9, 2013
mememine69 wrote:
<quoted text>
Why should we take your word a crisis will happen when science has NEVER said or agreed it WILL happen or anything beyond; "could be"?
I wonder how many agree with me that it is wise to assume the climate will change in some way, because it is not static, and simply do wwhat we can to account for that in whatever practical manor available. Doomsayers and avid deniers both look a little kooky to most people
gcaveman1

Louin, MS

#41207 Nov 9, 2013
Patriot AKA Bozo wrote:
<quoted text>
What a dumb statement! What does that have to do with what I posted?
Yes, it's happened before. What does it matter?

He is too ignorant to know that the UK would go into deep freeze and there would likely be no London or Dublin left.

What does it matter to someone who has no appreciation of history, art, or culture?
Zane

United States

#41208 Nov 9, 2013
MUST SEE VIDEO: WATCH ALL THE WAY TO THE END!



Mia Marie Pope
The Manning Report
Published 11/04/2013
B as in B as as in S

Minneapolis, MN

#41209 Nov 9, 2013
CAGW is but a fantasy in the minds of those who desperately want to believe the planet is at risk from an extra 5 molecules of CO2 in combination with 999,995 molecules of air. The whole idea seems so absurd that I had to reread my own words after typing.

So,who is going to deny that the solution to the suggested climate crisis is:
simply remove 5 molecules of CO2 from every 100000 molecules of air?
Coal is King

Hopkinsville, KY

#41210 Nov 9, 2013
More voices from the coalfields:

From Clay City, KY (commenting on the shutdown of the Louisa Power Plant):

“Obama has none of his renewables ready to replace coal fired power plants, no matter how much they talk about alternative energy non of the renewables can replace the cheap power we just lost from the Louisa Power Plant.

If this EPA and administration shut down of most of the coal fired plants is going to work they should have replaced the coal fired plant with one of the renewables they are pushing.

We have hauled a lot of coal to that ole coal fired plant since the 1980's, hauled untold tons since it was built in the 60's.
Kind of a landmark during the 60's when a lot of had to leave for points up north to find work, because this place was a poverty stricken hell hole. It don't make me feel any worse knowing we got over 30 more years of power from it than we were supposed to. It will hurt the southeastern Kentucky just as much or more now than it would have in the 80's. Same damn stupid government policy that finally shut it down is just as wrong now as it was in the 80's.”

From Elkhorn City, KY:

“the whole non coal economy, transistion and change, what you really mean is, starvation and despair, suicide and wife beatings, drunks and drugs, this is what this type of economy creates.
Children growing up with no fathers, because either he has had to leave here to go elsewhere to work, or he runs off and leaves his family to do the best they can.
This is one more example of the downturn of the Country.
Thanks to the politicians, lol.”

From Clay City, KY:

“Natural Gas is not a renewable energy source, it is a carbon fuel. The Obama campaign to make coal more expensive so the renewables will be on equal footing has no relationship with natural gas.

How does pitting one carbon fuel against another fall into his push for using renewable sources.

We got both but employ more with coal than nat gas. As EPA keeps raising the clean air standard soon Natural Won't meet it either, it is just called the transition fuel. The fuel that burns 50% cleaner that bridges the gap between coal and the renewable energy sources.
The chemicals you lick off the glossy 8X10 of your hero Obama is effecting your brain.”

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) 11 min Grey Ghost 1,264,684
CASEY: Does the State Have the Goods to Convict? (Mar '10) 4 hr HELL ON EARTH 501,555
News CEO may be busy, but his company finds time to ... (Dec '07) 5 hr Michelle 24
keep a word----drop a word (Feb '11) 6 hr Princess Hey 18,072
Alphabet Game (Apr '12) 6 hr Princess Hey 9,399
New Game ***Last Word + 2 (Oct '11) 8 hr Princess Hey 12,199
News Exercise regimens offer little benefit for one ... 13 hr Art 4
More from around the web

Personal Finance

Orlando Mortgages