Once slow-moving threat, global warmi...

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

There are 60137 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

Location hidden

#35797 May 12, 2013
Retired Farmer wrote:
<quoted text>
I think you are wrong in this. Climate change may become a dominant issue, but the Republican presidential candidate will not move toward accepting it. He will deny it even more vehemently.
That is because the coalition of economic Libertarians and the Christian Right that now control the Republican nominating process are the most ardent of deniers. Too, they have bundled a group of separate issues, one of which is the conviction that global warming is either a hoax or that it is good, into something that resembles a religious creed. You cannot change or deny one part of the creed without denying or changing all of it. Anybody that tries to change the stand on global warming will be cast as unreliable on the other issues, such as opposition to abortion.
I am betting that the Republican presidential nominee will be Kentucky's Senator Rand Paul. He will lose the general election. However, the Bible Belt states will elect a solid slate of Tea Party type "conservatives" to the House and Senate. There won't be enought of them to actually pass any of their legislative agenda, but there will be enough to produce deadlock. They will get what the minimalist government that they want by paralyzing the governing process.
Things will have to get really, really bad before the grip of the preachers who now call the shots in the Bible Belt either change their tune or lose their influence. I'd guess the time scale at 12 to 15 years before there is any substantial change in the way people in the Bible Belt think and vote. By then we will be well on the way to 500 ppm CO2, an ice-free Arctic, and quite likely past the point of no return to a disastrous rise in sea levels and change in weather patterns.
You may be correct but the existence of the Party demands that it must change to the will of the people or it will cease to exist. I see glimpses of the Republicans moving back to the majority away from the extremism that has been fostered by the "Tea Party" and Rupert Murdoch media. The Party has locked itself into the extremist groups to gain their votes but as the country moves away from this unhealthy coalition, politicians understand that they must break away from their unholy alliances.
SpaceBlues

United States

#35798 May 12, 2013
Patriot AKA Bozo wrote:
<quoted text>
... No one is an island.
Except for Teddy 'are.'

Give him his own medicine.
Teddy R

Reston, VA

#35799 May 12, 2013
Patriot AKA Bozo wrote:
<quoted text>
However a democratic form of government demands that individuals choose to compell those who are not willing to consider their interdependence to conform to the wishes of the demands of the commom good. It has nothing to do with police state. So called individual freedom is a result of interdependent relationships due to social order. No one is an island.
Fallacious presumption again.

As has been clearly pointed out before, the United States is NOT a democracy.

The US is a constitutional REPUBLIC formed by 50 SOVEREIGN States and their SOVEREIGN People, with a central federal government ceded certain STRICTLY LIMITED powers and rights.

My argument is purely with the wrongness of excesses and egregious over-reach and intrusions of this federal government and its organs into private Americans' lives and matters properly those of the States to regulate, and the many instances of foolish and harmful results that these have created.

States can be as foolishly goo-goo nannny-state as they wish, to the extent the People acquiesce. Beyond the point oof intolerable foolishness, they are free to vote with their feet - and leave. Checks and balances; all good.

(Oh - and spare us the twisting of my use of "police power" (the proper legal term for the power any government relies upon to enforce its authority) into the argumentum ad extremis rhetorical shot of "police state." It's fallacious, and unworthy of you. You either have a valid argument without resorting to such sophomoric intellectual dishonesty, or you do not.)
TrollBot

Reston, VA

#35800 May 12, 2013
The Reliably Vacuous SpaceCase wrote:
<quoted text>

(Another typically worthless and inane troll snipped)
Troll. Ignore.

"Flagging trolls until Topix lets you killfile the scum."
SpaceBlues

United States

#35801 May 12, 2013
Teddy 'are' split into no-personality trolls.

Boring!

Since: Jul 11

Location hidden

#35802 May 12, 2013
Dont drink the koolaid wrote:
<quoted text>what seems to be making the "Food Bowl" unreliable is that the farmers are chasing the money by planting corn on land that is better suited for other crops. All because of the CCC alarmism and it's efforts to save the planet by burning food in our cars.
If one would just stop being so darn afraid and think about i, one would see how this Global Warming Alarmism is so misguided.
Sincerely,
koolaid
There is a whole BIGGER picture here than farmers just chasing cash crops after all they have to survive like the rest of us.
First of all globalisation brings direct competition that some developing country in Sth America for instance can deliver a bag of oranges for half the price an American farmer can.
Secondly with Capitalisation being restricted by a slow down in growth rate (ie Births in Western countries) it has to look elsewhere to maintain profits. So it moves off shore and on top of that feeds on itself. Big players buy out smaller players etc etc. So in the end you are left with maybe 4-5 major players in Banking, Media, Groceries, & other life essentials. From this point on Farmers don't get to name their price the buyer does.
The corner store becomes the thing of the past and slowly but surely moves to on line retail and major shopping centres.
We haven't even got to climate yet but each one of those things will contribute to environmental impact. From the farmer in Brazil clearing rain forest to grow those oranges or beef for Mcdonald's to the American farmer having to change crops to compete. As it stands there is currently about 50% food wastage on big supermarket chains that gets tossed. That is the system we built that needs changing and climate is just one of them.
This is the BIG picture stuff that deniers cannot get their head around. That Globalisation in itself has been a large contributor to the acceleration of climate change helped along by the relentless capitalist system that demands constant growth to survive. Kind of like pyramid selling, the only logical way to address this issue is to create a whole new currency and that is with alternative energy sources and environmental practices. Then it becomes kind of like hitting the reset button to start over.
You still have your capitalist system of free enterprise but in a more sustained way that growth comes from reuse and not so much consumption.
Retired Farmer

Crofton, KY

#35803 May 12, 2013
Patriot AKA Bozo wrote:
<quoted text>
You may be correct but the existence of the Party demands that it must change to the will of the people or it will cease to exist. I see glimpses of the Republicans moving back to the majority away from the extremism that has been fostered by the "Tea Party" and Rupert Murdoch media. The Party has locked itself into the extremist groups to gain their votes but as the country moves away from this unhealthy coalition, politicians understand that they must break away from their unholy alliances.
Again you are right and wrong at the same time. If the Republicans stick to the kind of "conservative" (which isn't conservatism at all but a combination of Libertarian economics and a yearning for theocracy) track that they are now on, they will cease to be a national party. However, they will remain overwhelmingly strong in their Bible Belt area. They will become a regional party. They will not have the strength to elect a president, but they will elect enough senators and congressmen to deadlock the political process.

If the Democrats are to win voters in the core Bible Belt region they are going to have to change their stand on some hot button issues: abortion, gay marriage, gun control, and sex education and the teaching of evolution (religious instruction in general) in public schools. As I said before, the new Republicans have bundled those issues, along with dogmatic "free market" economic policy into a take-one-must-take-all package. Democrats made the same mistake by bundling the same set of issues, or at least leaving the perception in the minds of people in the Bible Belt that they are bundled in a this-way-on-one-this-way-on-al l package.

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#35804 May 12, 2013
Retired Farmer wrote:
<quoted text>
Again you are right and wrong at the same time. If the Republicans stick to the kind of "conservative" (which isn't conservatism at all but a combination of Libertarian economics and a yearning for theocracy) track that they are now on, they will cease to be a national party. However, they will remain overwhelmingly strong in their Bible Belt area. They will become a regional party. They will not have the strength to elect a president, but they will elect enough senators and congressmen to deadlock the political process.
If the Democrats are to win voters in the core Bible Belt region they are going to have to change their stand on some hot button issues: abortion, gay marriage, gun control, and sex education and the teaching of evolution (religious instruction in general) in public schools. As I said before, the new Republicans have bundled those issues, along with dogmatic "free market" economic policy into a take-one-must-take-all package. Democrats made the same mistake by bundling the same set of issues, or at least leaving the perception in the minds of people in the Bible Belt that they are bundled in a this-way-on-one-this-way-on-al l package.
You are again correct to a point. However mores change with time. We have seen a general acceptance of divorse even by the so called Bible Belt. Dancing and playing cards were tabu in the past by the majority of Christian organizations in the US but it is generally accepted to frequent casinoes today and divorce carries little or no stigma.

The bundled perception by the Republicans was necessary for them to gain office for some time. They must fabricate that the Democrats are equally bundled on the opposition. However, neither is really that polarized except in political circles. Personally, I would like to see a middle of the road political party emerge from the fray, but understand that with the necessity of gaining support, they are at a great disadvantage because the big lobbiests have things as they wish. The rest of us have a choice of fiddle de or fiddle dum. No outsider has been able to get a toehold.

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#35805 May 12, 2013
Teddy R wrote:
<quoted text>
Fallacious presumption again.
As has been clearly pointed out before, the United States is NOT a democracy.
The US is a constitutional REPUBLIC formed by 50 SOVEREIGN States and their SOVEREIGN People, with a central federal government ceded certain STRICTLY LIMITED powers and rights.
My argument is purely with the wrongness of excesses and egregious over-reach and intrusions of this federal government and its organs into private Americans' lives and matters properly those of the States to regulate, and the many instances of foolish and harmful results that these have created.
States can be as foolishly goo-goo nannny-state as they wish, to the extent the People acquiesce. Beyond the point oof intolerable foolishness, they are free to vote with their feet - and leave. Checks and balances; all good.
(Oh - and spare us the twisting of my use of "police power" (the proper legal term for the power any government relies upon to enforce its authority) into the argumentum ad extremis rhetorical shot of "police state." It's fallacious, and unworthy of you. You either have a valid argument without resorting to such sophomoric intellectual dishonesty, or you do not.)
Oh Teddy, we have been through this several times on Topix. Our government is not a pure democracy but it is still a democratic form of government ala a democratic republic. BTW, the "intrusion" of the Federal Government was determined by the Civil War. Of course we must be vigilant in making sure that the government does not intrude on our civil liberties. That is why we have three independent departments of the Federal Government. The Supreme Court has the final say if they find the government is infringing on our rights. Of course, as in any human endeavour, it is not a perfect union, but it is self correcting if citizens think independently and exercise their voting rights.

BTW, if police power is to utilize "the power any government relies upon to enforce its authority", one must be careful to not sucumb to the false ravings of abject media whose only motive is to gain subscribers no matter what the cost is to the nation. We must not undermine the ability of the government to maintain civil authority. Of course one must subject the law enforcement to the principles of the constitution. That is the job of our justice system. It has done pretty well so far but we must exercise our intellect and power of ballot to maintain.
litesong

Everett, WA

#35806 May 12, 2013
gcaveman1 wrote:
Two truth-sayers against one liar is like the value of two pearls compared to a ton of hogshit.
I disagree & provide a proper correction:

Two truth-sayers against one liar & slimy steenking filthy vile reprobate rooting(& rotting) racist pukey proud pig & 4-time alleged & 4 time proud threatener, is like the value of two pearls compared to a ton of hogshit.

“I Luv Carbon Dioxide”

Since: Dec 08

Home, sweet home.

#35807 May 12, 2013
Fair Game wrote:
Where you differ is SpaceBlues posts in good faith and you are a troll.[URL deleted]
Name calling isn't rational argument; this is where we differ. If you don't like my point of view, cite an experimental test of climate change mitigation and I'll stop posting.

What would it take to change your mind?

“Happy, warm and comfortable”

Since: Oct 10

Mountain retreat, SE Spain

#35808 May 13, 2013
Another thread from 2008.
In the meantime, Glowbull warming has slowed down, but catastrophists haven't noticed.

Since: Apr 08

"the green troll"

#35809 May 13, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>Name calling isn't rational argument; this is where we differ. If you don't like my point of view, cite an experimental test of climate change mitigation and I'll stop posting.
What would it take to change your mind?
Where we differ is I would change my mind if the evidence was against me; you won't change yours however many times you are presented with evidence. In fact the repetition of illogical arguments is the tool of your trade: trolling.

Name calling is perfectly rational when faced with someone who deserves it as richly as you do.

Clutch those pearls, bri, they're all you have.
A troll wants to cause a commotion and get people ranting and raving because they want their presence on a forum or comments thread to be the main focus. They want the spotlight and attention on them.

To do this they will disrupt the flow of conversation, provoke fellow commenters and/or post abusive statements to inflame a response.

Often they will play devils advocate, vigorously defending statements or positions they know to be illogical or untrue in an attempt to get people riled up.
http://www.insidersedge.co.uk/lifestyletips/h...

Since: Apr 08

"the green troll"

#35810 May 13, 2013
Earthling-1 wrote:
Another thread from 2008.
In the meantime, Glowbull warming has slowed down, but catastrophists haven't noticed.
Just like the decline in Arctic sea ice slowed down, and the rate of sea level rise slowed down.

Deniers never tire of being wrong.

Since: Jul 11

Location hidden

#35811 May 13, 2013
The Irony of melting ice caps means Nations fighting over Oil rights underneath only making the problem even worse. When is rational thinking ever going to sink in.
AP:
The melting of three ice-covered areas -- the Arctic, Antarctic and the Himalayas -- already is having fundamental consequences for extreme weather patterns, according to Grimsson, who cited the US superstorm Sandy and China's latest winter, which was the coldest in almost three decades.

“When the ice sheet melts away, you are confronted with a whole series of unexpected and far-reaching scenarios that will generate conflict and strife,” said Hans Joachim Schellnhuber, a climate scientist and director of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research.“The unabated rate at which the globe is warming has far-reaching foreign policy implications.”
Retired Farmer

Crofton, KY

#35812 May 13, 2013
Patriot AKA Bozo wrote:
<quoted text>
You are again correct to a point. However mores change with time. We have seen a general acceptance of divorse even by the so called Bible Belt. Dancing and playing cards were tabu in the past by the majority of Christian organizations in the US but it is generally accepted to frequent casinoes today and divorce carries little or no stigma.
The bundled perception by the Republicans was necessary for them to gain office for some time. They must fabricate that the Democrats are equally bundled on the opposition. However, neither is really that polarized except in political circles. Personally, I would like to see a middle of the road political party emerge from the fray, but understand that with the necessity of gaining support, they are at a great disadvantage because the big lobbiests have things as they wish. The rest of us have a choice of fiddle de or fiddle dum. No outsider has been able to get a toehold.
If you think the Bible Belt has changed that much, just try getting up a local option referendum to repeal Prohibition in a dry county in Kentucky!
TrollBot

Reston, VA

#35813 May 13, 2013
The Reliably Vacuous SpaceCase wrote:

(Another typically worthless and inane troll snipped)
Troll. Ignore.

"Flagging trolls until Topix lets you killfile the scum."
SpaceBlues

United States

#35814 May 13, 2013
SpaceBlues wrote:
Teddy 'are' split into no-personality trolls.
Boring!
I love this post!
Teddy R

Reston, VA

#35815 May 13, 2013
SpaceBlues wrote:
Teddy 'are' split into no-personality trolls.
Boring!
Actually, Teddy R hosts a bot that autonomously flags recidivist bandwidth-wasting topix trolls with nothing constructive to say, providing a canned response on the same level they've posted. Saves much time and trouble - one click and they're dispensed with no tribble at all.

Of course, a much more elegant solution would be for Topix themselves to provide users with select "killfile" functionality so such goobers and spam can simply be filtered out of the feed altogether, upgrading the Topix conversation quality radically, but until they pull their head out and provide this, users will have to provide their own kill-bots to take out the trash, I suppose.

Teddy R

Reston, VA

#35816 May 13, 2013
Patriot AKA Bozo wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh Teddy, we have been through this several times on Topix. Our government is not a pure democracy but it is still a democratic form of government ala a democratic republic. BTW, the "intrusion" of the Federal Government was determined by the Civil War. Of course we must be vigilant in making sure that the government does not intrude on our civil liberties. That is why we have three independent departments of the Federal Government. The Supreme Court has the final say if they find the government is infringing on our rights. Of course, as in any human endeavour, it is not a perfect union, but it is self correcting if citizens think independently and exercise their voting rights.
BTW, if police power is to utilize "the power any government relies upon to enforce its authority", one must be careful to not sucumb to the false ravings of abject media whose only motive is to gain subscribers no matter what the cost is to the nation. We must not undermine the ability of the government to maintain civil authority. Of course one must subject the law enforcement to the principles of the constitution. That is the job of our justice system. It has done pretty well so far but we must exercise our intellect and power of ballot to maintain.
We agree in principle.

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.

Pompano Beach Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 7 min woodtick57 1,395,936
News Boca's Kelsey Cooper Charged With DUI Manslaughter (Oct '14) 12 min S benttott 3
News Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision (Jan '08) 1 hr SassyJM 311,352
News Israeli troops begin Gaza pullout as Hamas decl... (Jan '09) 1 hr TRD 70,730
News Missing 5-year-old Florida girl likely was abdu... (Feb '09) 11 hr zazz 98,087
Review: I Love Kickboxing Tue Tracie 13
Trick Opmin Ucweb Celcom Maxis Malaysia (Apr '12) Jun 24 jyps 9

Pompano Beach Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Pompano Beach Mortgages