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

Full story: Newsday

When Bill Clinton took office in 1993, global warming was a slow-moving environmental problem that was easy to ignore.
Comments
34,421 - 34,440 of 46,313 Comments Last updated 4 hrs ago
gcaveman1

Bay Springs, MS

#36506 Jun 16, 2013
BONN, Germany (AP)— From Bangkok to Miami, cities and coastal areas across the globe are already building or planning defenses to protect millions of people and key infrastructure from more powerful storm surges and other effects of global warming.

Some are planning cities that will simply adapt to more water.

But climate-proofing a city or coastline is expensive, as shown by New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg's $20 billion plan to build floodwalls, levees and other defenses against rising seas.

The most vulnerable places are those with the fewest resources to build such defenses, secure their water supplies or move people to higher ground. How to pay for such measures is a burning issue in U.N. climate talks, which just wrapped up a session in the German city of Bonn.

A sampling of cities (and countries)around the world (that are preparing) for the climatic forces that scientists say are being unleashed by global warming:

Rotterdam
Venice
London
New York City
Bangkok
Maldives
Cuba
Bangladesh
Kenya
gcaveman1

Bay Springs, MS

#36507 Jun 16, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>No, I've said without experimental tests we'd never know if mitigation can work, how much it would cost or if it would cause more harm than good.
Please try to keep up. Gcaveman1 might be reacting to a post I've made many times, that if AGW theory is correct then we are already mitigating climate change against catastrophic global cooling, the ice age climate change scenario. Even Gcaveman[the original] understood that was based on an assumption, not reality.
Bullshit again, liar.

This is what you wrote on 3/28/13:
“Using fossil fuel helps free ancient carbon back into the atmosphere where it can do some good. Freeing carbon dioxide into the air helps mitigate climate change against global cooling; the well known ice age climate scenario.“

There's no "if" in that statement. It doesn't sound like you're making an assumption. It sounds like you are stating a fact.

I'm doing more than keeping up. I'm ahead of you.

And I'm not reacting to any posts you've made in the past. I'm reacting to the fact that you're a big fat LIAR.
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

#36508 Jun 16, 2013
we remember you
gcaveman1

Bay Springs, MS

#36509 Jun 16, 2013
Here's a little news:

California Democratic Sen. Barbara Boxer and Sen. Bernie Sanders, a Vermont independent, have introduced a bill that would create a carbon tax, but that doesn’t make H_____ happy.

“As usual the Democrats are going to take some of the money, 40 percent of it,” H_____ said.“Conservatives have to put ta foot down and say you can’t use this as another excuse to make government bigger. Democrats have a problem they can’t keep their hands off our wallets.”

The reason H_____ is so adamant is by his calculation if the government keeps 40 percent most people will end-up paying more for energy than they get back.“It is important that all the money go to the public, so get this push from below,” he said.

What of the general reluctance from anyone — and we mean just about anyone — on the GOP side of the aisle to take up the issue since Arizona Sen. John McCain and South Carolina Sen. Lindsay Graham abandoned their 2008 efforts to fashion bipartisan legislation?

“If they continue to pretend that human-made climate change is a hoax, eventually you get to the point where nature makes it clear it wasn’t a hoax and then the public demands the government do something and that’s the worst nightmare for conservatives,” H_____ said.

<><><>< ><><><> <><><>

Who is this politically-savvy H_____?

It's James Hanson. I'll bet all the conservatives here were in agreement with him up to this point.
Bushwhacker

Seattle, WA

#36510 Jun 16, 2013
ritedownthemiddle wrote:
<quoted text>lol....apparently you're the one out of touch with reality, son, but i won't waste your time explaining why and how.
Copycatting child.... LMAOROTFu!

“I Luv Carbon Dioxide”

Since: Dec 08

Location hidden

#36511 Jun 16, 2013
I wrote: "Using fossil fuel helps free ancient carbon back into the atmosphere where it can do some good. Freeing carbon dioxide into the air helps mitigate climate change against global cooling; the well known ice age climate scenario.“ after I wrote: "if AGW theory is correct then we are already mitigating climate change against catastrophic global cooling, the ice age climate change scenario." In the later post, the assumption is tacit.

Since: Mar 09

Wichita, KS

#36512 Jun 16, 2013
Bushwhacker wrote:
<quoted text>Copycatting child.... LMAOROTFu!
Just words. Never anything of value. That is how a troll exists. There is nowhere to go with someone who has shut out reality. There is nothing right down the middle. It is empty ground.

The job of a scientific skeptic is to give valid evidence that the prevailing thoughts are incorrect. When someone simply says that the prevailing ideas are wrong without giving supported reasons why they think that way, then we see the house of the denier.
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

#36513 Jun 16, 2013
b_gone knows itself as a liar. At this time, it is a token denier leftover from the defunct gang.

:-)

Since: Mar 09

Wichita, KS

#36514 Jun 16, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
I wrote: "Using fossil fuel helps free ancient carbon back into the atmosphere where it can do some good. Freeing carbon dioxide into the air helps mitigate climate change against global cooling; the well known ice age climate scenario.“ after I wrote: "if AGW theory is correct then we are already mitigating climate change against catastrophic global cooling, the ice age climate change scenario." In the later post, the assumption is tacit.
Nice spin but where is the supporting evidence to back up your rant?

“Let's X Change!!”

Since: Feb 09

B4 HOPE Is Gone...

#36515 Jun 16, 2013
Patriot AKA Bozo wrote:
<quoted text>
Just words. Never anything of value. That is how a troll exists. There is nowhere to go with someone who has shut out reality. There is nothing right down the middle. It is empty ground.
The job of a scientific skeptic is to give valid evidence that the prevailing thoughts are incorrect. When someone simply says that the prevailing ideas are wrong without giving supported reasons why they think that way, then we see the house of the denier.
LOL.....i have no problem with 'thoughts' and 'ideas', son.
just don't make demands on others to accept them as facts.
because they aren't.
lol...

“Let's X Change!!”

Since: Feb 09

B4 HOPE Is Gone...

#36516 Jun 16, 2013
Bushwhacker wrote:
<quoted text>Copycatting child.... LMAOROTFu!
funny you'll do anything to change the subject.
kind of tight inside that hole you dug for yourself, huh, son?
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

#36517 Jun 16, 2013
Dont drink the koolaid wrote:
<quoted text>... And that explains the alarming sea level rise... Oh wait er, never mind.
Did you mamage to run away?

Since: Mar 09

Wichita, KS

#36518 Jun 16, 2013
ritedownthemiddle wrote:
<quoted text>LOL.....i have no problem with 'thoughts' and 'ideas', son.
just don't make demands on others to accept them as facts.
because they aren't.
lol...
I see that you do not understand the realm of science. Observations and facts are simply data. It is a fact that the Earth is warming, because data supports that. It is a fact that CO2 is a GHG because science has determined that CO2 does indeed absorb discrete IR radiation. It is a fact that CO2 concentration is increasing in the atmosphere because CO2 is a product of combustion of fossil fuels and is a gas that diffuses into the atmosphere. This increase in CO2 concentration has been measured.

However science does not project facts, it only projects theory. Theory simply represents the best understanding that we have of a phenomenon. It is always open to scrutiny. By definition it must be falsifiable. For example the laws of motion hold for the macro-world but severely fall apart in the micro. That in mind, the theory that CO2 is a driver of global warming is accepted by the climate community at large and is open to scrutiny but has not been falsified. It is the best understanding that climate science has for a cause of global warming and no other climate theory has been able to replace it.

So, to chant the swan song of the denier blogs is completely empty. It is simply a ploy to deceive. What one must question is the motive behind the deceivers.
gcaveman1

Bay Springs, MS

#36519 Jun 16, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
I wrote: "Using fossil fuel helps free ancient carbon back into the atmosphere where it can do some good. Freeing carbon dioxide into the air helps mitigate climate change against global cooling; the well known ice age climate scenario.“ after I wrote: "if AGW theory is correct then we are already mitigating climate change against catastrophic global cooling, the ice age climate change scenario." In the later post, the assumption is tacit.
Squirm and wiggle,little lying worm.

Before doesn't matter. After doesn't matter. In THAT post, you wrote:
“Using fossil fuel helps free ancient carbon back into the atmosphere where it can do some good. Freeing carbon dioxide into the air helps mitigate climate change against global cooling; the well known ice age climate scenario.“

You slipped up and accidentally told the truth. Now you want go back to your old lying habits. No "ifs", "ands" or "buts". Nor assumptions, tacit or otherwise.
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

#36520 Jun 16, 2013
Falsifiability, as defined by the philosopher, Karl Popper, defines the inherent testability of any scientific hypothesis.

Read more: Falsifiability - Karl Popper's Basic Scientific Principle

<Not an easy subject.>
gcaveman1

Bay Springs, MS

#36521 Jun 16, 2013
Dont drink the koolaid wrote:
<quoted text>... And that explains the alarming sea level rise... Oh wait er, never mind.
Ice shelves. Beyond your understanding, right?

Ice shelves don't displace the water they are in. Therefore their effect, after breaking off, is none to negligible. However, they will allow the glaciers that feed them to flow faster.

Give it some time and you'll see the effect. Meanwhile, watch the level of your drink to see if it goes up after the ice melts.

“Let's X Change!!”

Since: Feb 09

B4 HOPE Is Gone...

#36522 Jun 16, 2013
Patriot AKA Bozo wrote:
<quoted text>
I see that you do not understand the realm of science. Observations and facts are simply data. It is a fact that the Earth is warming, because data supports that. It is a fact that CO2 is a GHG because science has determined that CO2 does indeed absorb discrete IR radiation. It is a fact that CO2 concentration is increasing in the atmosphere because CO2 is a product of combustion of fossil fuels and is a gas that diffuses into the atmosphere. This increase in CO2 concentration has been measured.
However science does not project facts, it only projects theory. Theory simply represents the best understanding that we have of a phenomenon. It is always open to scrutiny. By definition it must be falsifiable. For example the laws of motion hold for the macro-world but severely fall apart in the micro. That in mind, the theory that CO2 is a driver of global warming is accepted by the climate community at large and is open to scrutiny but has not been falsified. It is the best understanding that climate science has for a cause of global warming and no other climate theory has been able to replace it.
So, to chant the swan song of the denier blogs is completely empty. It is simply a ploy to deceive. What one must question is the motive behind the deceivers.
Read, learn, and please.....comprehend.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/03/28/a-misin...

“Let's X Change!!”

Since: Feb 09

B4 HOPE Is Gone...

#36523 Jun 16, 2013
Patriot AKA Bozo wrote:
<quoted text>
I see that you do not understand the realm of science.
Apparently I understand science much better than you. But, I already knew that......your beliefs and opinions are guided by political views. Your 'theories' have nothing to do with real science, son.

Since: Jul 11

Location hidden

#36524 Jun 16, 2013
ritedownthemiddle wrote:
<quoted text>Apparently I understand science much better than you. But, I already knew that......your beliefs and opinions are guided by political views. Your 'theories' have nothing to do with real science, son.
You might consult with some of those ppl in Texas right now after receiving 12 mths rainfall in one day. I'm sure they understand the science as well.
Bonny

Capitola, CA

#36525 Jun 16, 2013
Does Obama Boo Boo cause Earth warming or climate change?

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

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

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.

Wethersfield Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 7 min shinningelectr0n 1,100,220
Messianic Jews say they are persecuted in Israel (Jun '08) 1 hr J RULES 68,989
The 25 Most Dangerous Cities in the U.S. Are Mo... (Nov '10) 3 hr Poolicker 18,870
Israeli troops begin Gaza pullout as Hamas decl... (Jan '09) 3 hr TRD 68,369
Santa Ayala: Should she stay or should she go? (Oct '13) 13 hr Sir Samuel 20
Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision (Jan '08) 14 hr Pearl Jam 305,446
Find all students who are in Hartford Thu Mr Black 1
•••
•••
•••

Wethersfield Jobs

•••
Enter and win $5000
•••
•••

Wethersfield People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••

Wethersfield News, Events & Info

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

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]
•••