created by: CitizenTopix | Oct 12, 2010

California

4,462 votes

CA Proposition 23 - Global Warming

Click on an option to vote

  • Yes
  • No
  • Other (explain below)
Comments
7,801 - 7,820 of 7,848 Comments Last updated Sunday
Steven G

Covina, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#8546
Wednesday Jul 2
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Stooges in city hall have:

Don't be like a brain-less Douglas Tessitor and quote a hack called Steven Godard.

It appears the GOP-pigs have been eating to many truffles and they are unleashing another political gas-attack on this web site, to protect undeserving political stooges in Glendora city hall.

Since: Nov 12

Sacramento, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#8549
Wednesday Jul 2
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Nancy Polockski wrote:
Will someone love me, Obama Boo Boo is not HOT enough for me.
that's why the great obama brought over all the kids to keep you company.

Since: Nov 12

Sacramento, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#8552
Wednesday Jul 2
 
nancy raygun wrote:
I love Mexican kids also, the meat is nice and tender.
and not much fat.
skeets give more

Covina, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#8553
Wednesday Jul 2
 
And the skeets just keep on giving around here.
MDWATKINS

Downey, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#8556
Friday Jul 11
 
Chuck wrote:
We need to vote YES on Prop.23 as we will lose up to one milion jobs in the near future and energy prices (gasoline, electricity, natural gas etc.) will skyrocket. Massive State regulations will kill many industies in our State. 35 years ago we had "Global Cooling" and that was an obvious hoax; "Global Warming" advocates are using the same scare tactics that were used by the "Global Cooling" kooks. We don't need any more governmnet intrusion into our lives than we hae already.
Science requires you to read, turn off the T.V. and start tonight:
http://www.skepticalscience.com/
MDWATKINS

Downey, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#8557
Friday Jul 11
 
"The greenhouse effect works like this: Energy arrives from the sun in the form of visible light and ultraviolet radiation. The Earth then emits some of this energy as infrared radiation. Greenhouse gases in the atmosphere 'capture' some of this heat, then re-emit it in all directions - including back to the Earth's surface.
Through this process, CO2 and other greenhouse gases keep the Earth’s surface 33°Celsius (59.4°F) warmer than it would be without them. We have added 42% more CO2, and temperatures have gone up. There should be some evidence that links CO2 to the temperature rise.
So far, the average global temperature has gone up by about 0.8 degrees C (1.4°F):
"According to an ongoing temperature analysis conducted by scientists at NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS)…the average global temperature on Earth has increased by about 0.8°Celsius (1.4°Fahrenheit) since 1880. Two-thirds of the warming has occurred since 1975, at a rate of roughly 0.15-0.20°C per decade."
The temperatures are going up, just like the theory predicted. But where’s the connection with CO2, or other greenhouse gases like methane, ozone or nitrous oxide?
The connection can be found in the spectrum of greenhouse radiation. Using high-resolution FTIR spectroscopy, we can measure the exact wavelengths of long-wave (infrared) radiation reaching the ground.
Figure 1: Spectrum of the greenhouse radiation measured at the surface. Greenhouse effect from water vapour is filtered out, showing the contributions of other greenhouse gases (Evans 2006).
Sure enough, we can see that CO2 is adding considerable warming, along with ozone (O3) and methane (CH4). This is called surface radiative forcing, and the measurements are part of the empirical evidence that CO2 is causing the warming.

How long has CO2 been contributing to increased warming? According to NASA,“Two-thirds of the warming has occurred since 1975”. Is there a reliable way to identify CO2’s influence on temperatures over that period?
There is: we can measure the wavelengths of long-wave radiation leaving the Earth (upward radiation). Satellites have recorded the Earth's outbound radiation. We can examine the spectrum of upward long-wave radiation in 1970 and 1997 to see if there are changes.
Figure 2: Change in spectrum from 1970 to 1996 due to trace gases.'Brightness temperature' indicates equivalent blackbody temperature (Harries 2001).
This time, we see that during the period when temperatures increased the most, emissions of upward radiation have decreased through radiative trapping at exactly the same wavenumbers as they increased for downward radiation. The same greenhouse gases are identified: CO2, methane, ozone etc.
The Empirical Evidence
As temperatures started to rise, scientists became more and more interested in the cause. Many theories were proposed. All save one have fallen by the wayside, discarded for lack of evidence. One theory alone has stood the test of time, strengthened by experiments.
We know CO2 absorbs and re-emits longwave radiation (Tyndall). The theory of greenhouse gases predicts that if we increase the proportion of greenhouse gases, more warming will occur (Arrhenius).
Scientists have measured the influence of CO2 on both incoming solar energy and outgoing long-wave radiation. Less longwave radiation is escaping to space at the specific wavelengths of greenhouse gases. Increased longwave radiation is measured at the surface of the Earth at the same wavelengths.
These data provide empirical evidence for the predicted effect of CO2."
http://www.theconsensusproject.com/empirical-...

“I Luv Carbon Dioxide”

Since: Dec 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#8558
Friday Jul 11
 
Arrhenius found that a geometric increase of carbon dioxide would cause an arithmetic increase of air temperature. The greenhouse effect is self limiting and our climate system has significant negative feedbacks for stabilization.

Besides, nobody has tested Arrhenius's theory in the atmosphere or obtained data from an experimental climate change mitigation test.

“I Luv Carbon Dioxide”

Since: Dec 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#8559
Friday Jul 11
 

Judged:

1

1

MDWATKINS wrote:
"The greenhouse effect works like this: Energy arrives from the sun in the form of visible light and ultraviolet radiation. The Earth then emits some of this energy as infrared radiation. Greenhouse gases in the atmosphere 'capture' some of this heat, then re-emit it in all directions - including back to the Earth's surface.
Through this process, CO2 and other greenhouse gases keep the Earth’s surface 33°Celsius (59.4°F) warmer than it would be without them. We have added 42% more CO2, and temperatures have gone up. There should be some evidence that links CO2 to the temperature rise.
So far, the average global temperature has gone up by about 0.8 degrees C (1.4°F):
"According to an ongoing temperature analysis conducted by scientists at NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS)…the average global temperature on Earth has increased by about 0.8°Celsius (1.4°Fahrenheit) since 1880. Two-thirds of the warming has occurred since 1975, at a rate of roughly 0.15-0.20°C per decade."
The temperatures are going up, just like the theory predicted. But where’s the connection with CO2, or other greenhouse gases like methane, ozone or nitrous oxide?
The connection can be found in the spectrum of greenhouse radiation. Using high-resolution FTIR spectroscopy, we can measure the exact wavelengths of long-wave (infrared) radiation reaching the ground.
Figure 1: Spectrum of the greenhouse radiation measured at the surface. Greenhouse effect from water vapour is filtered out, showing the contributions of other greenhouse gases (Evans 2006).
Sure enough, we can see that CO2 is adding considerable warming, along with ozone (O3) and methane (CH4). This is called surface radiative forcing, and the measurements are part of the empirical evidence that CO2 is causing the warming.
How long has CO2 been contributing to increased warming? According to NASA,“Two-thirds of the warming has occurred since 1975”. Is there a reliable way to identify CO2’s influence on temperatures over that period?
There is: we can measure the wavelengths of long-wave radiation leaving the Earth (upward radiation). Satellites have recorded the Earth's outbound radiation. We can examine the spectrum of upward long-wave radiation in 1970 and 1997 to see if there are changes.
Figure 2: Change in spectrum from 1970 to 1996 due to trace gases.'Brightness temperature' indicates equivalent blackbody temperature (Harries 2001).
This time, we see that during the period when temperatures increased the most, emissions of upward radiation have decreased through radiative trapping at exactly the same wavenumbers as they increased for downward radiation. The same greenhouse gases are identified: CO2, methane, ozone etc.
The Empirical Evidence
As temperatures started to rise, scientists became more and more interested in the cause. Many theories were proposed. All save one have fallen by the wayside, discarded for lack of evidence. One theory alone has stood the test of time, strengthened by experiments.
We know CO2 absorbs and re-emits longwave radiation (Tyndall). The theory of greenhouse gases predicts that if we increase the proportion of greenhouse gases, more warming will occur (Arrhenius).
Scientists have measured the influence of CO2 on both incoming solar energy and outgoing long-wave radiation. Less longwave radiation is escaping to space at the specific wavelengths of greenhouse gases. Increased longwave radiation is measured at the surface of the Earth at the same wavelengths.
These data provide empirical evidence for the predicted effect of CO2."
[URL deleted]
CO2 is so much more than keeping our planet warm, carbon is the backbone of life. Without CO2, we wouldn't exist, don't be a hater.

Thermodynamics means it all balances out, more CO2 more longwave radiation and less more shortwave radiation, win/win for all. We are the carbon balance. Emit while you live because you can't after you die and decay.
Skeet give more

Covina, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#8560
Friday Jul 11
 
And the skeeter's just keep on giving around here.
Peter

Gardena, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#8562
Friday Jul 11
 
I prefer See's but not their truffles. The global temperature rise is in direct proportion of the number of rich liberals making movies that require gasoline explosions and other pyrotechnical effects to entertain and make billions. The diesel exhaust alone from the hundreds of semi-trucks used to supply movie sets and U-2 concerts is killing the oceans and rivers where the soot ends up. I love listening to your fat butt boy Al Gore deliver his message of fear. Strange, him and nasty's administration never had an energy policy while wasting 8 years in the White House.

Since: Nov 12

Sacramento, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#8563
Saturday Jul 12
 
“ANY SCIENTIFIC THEORY THAT EXPLAINS EVERYTHING, EXPLAINS NOTHING” C Krauthamm Brisbane hits coldest temperature in 103 years http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/brisbane...
74 pecent

Covina, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#8564
Saturday Jul 12
 

Judged:

2

2

1

74 % of GOP/Republican's Affordable Care Act health insurance coverage.
74 pecent

Covina, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#8565
Saturday Jul 12
 

Judged:

2

2

1

74% of GOP/Republican's love there Affordable Care Act health insurance coverage.

Since: Nov 12

Sacramento, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#8566
Saturday Jul 12
 

Judged:

2

1

1

74 pecent wrote:
74 % of GOP/Republican's Affordable Care Act health insurance coverage.
How does that make you feel since you are the 0.0002%?
sloading

Covina, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#8567
Saturday Jul 12
 
Slow a s sloading web page
paddyomalley

Austin, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#8568
Sunday Jul 13
 

Judged:

1

Global Warming is still a theory, although many people have decided theory can be made into fact if they drop the theory part. The reason GW or Climate Change is still a theory is because of some pesky facts that keep popping up and the GW/CC community can’t answer and does not attempt to. The only people really qualified to make comments, assumptions, and conclusions are true Climatologists. I don't care what some scientist who has spent his life teaching chemistry, acarology, aerolithology, Egyptology, or any other of the 500, or so, sciences thinks they contribute to the discussion. Climatologists who by the nature of their science do continual research, tracking, and study of the climate therefore their opinions are worth listening too.
So tell Mr. Egyptian Scientist what the rings of a 2500 year old Redwood tell us about drought in California? Tell me Al Gore, non-scientist and master of absolutely nothing, is the climate controlled by man caused carbon emissions, or by volcanos and wild fires across the world. Now Al, explain four-major freezes and the HUNDREDS of thaws and refreezes that accompanied them, 98% 0f them before man, his fires, or his ford trucks. Just explain it.
One of you, the misled tell me exactly what do ice sample show us from the artic tell us?
Last Winter a Russian ship was stuck in the ice of Antartica that had previously been reported as melting away and a Chinese icebreaker that went to get it, was trapped in that melting ice. Ha.
I lived in California from Los Angeles to Huntington Beach to Newport Beach, to San Francisco, to Clayton in the East Bay, to the San Joaquin Valley for my first 50-years. It was one drought to floods to the next drought during that time. Oh you cry, this is the worst ever drought. So what? What was the worst drought before this one? You’re repeating the weather pattern of the 1950’s.
I now live in Texas and two years ago this summer we set a record for number of 100 PLUS days, far too many in the 106 to 115 degree range. This YEAR, we have yet to hit 100 and 97 has been the warmest. Core drilling ice and earth has shown weather to rage about in the patterns time and again. We in Central Texas are reliving a weather pattern of the 1950’s.
The climate and weather patterns are the result of deep sea and mid sea currents and wind in both hemispheres, not by how many nights we barbeque in the back yard, or how many miles you drive. Yes, I’m sure it affects something, but it is not warming the planet
If you want to lose jobs, pay $6 and $7 a gallon for gasoline, eventually be unable to live or work where you want to keep swallowing the lies fed you. There is an agenda here and it is part of Agenda 21, which you should read through, or browse through before you make any decisions.
Half of who reads this have IQs below 100 and are easily influenced, won’t even bother to find out what Agenda 21 is, let alone what it says and only about half of the above 100 group will bother to dig it up, because you think you know it all. Believe me, this climate has been here before
all doned in

Covina, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#8569
Sunday Jul 13
 
The adults are all done with this topic.
paddyomalley

Austin, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#8570
Sunday Jul 13
 
74 pecent wrote:
74% of GOP/Republican's love there Affordable Care Act health insurance coverage.
That is a lie, junior. Oh wait, did you get that on Mother F-ing Jones? Of course.
PMS will get yeah

Covina, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#8571
Sunday Jul 13
 

Judged:

1

It's all done, moving on.
JEG

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#8572
Sunday Jul 20
 
Global warming is for suckers

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" 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.

•••
•••
•••
•••

Riverbank Jobs

•••
Enter and win $5000
•••
•••

Riverbank People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••

Riverbank News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Riverbank
•••

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]
•••