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
36,001 - 36,020 of 45,822 Comments Last updated Yesterday
kristy

Oviedo, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#38313
Aug 22, 2013
 

Judged:

3

3

3

Fair Game wrote:
<quoted text>
Here's what I posted:
"In a future grand minimum, the Sun might perhaps again cool the planet by up to 1C.
"Greenhouse gases, on the other hand, are expected to raise global temperatures by 1.5-4.5C by 2100.
"So even if the predictions are correct, the effect of global warming will outstrip the Sun's ability to cool even in the coldest scenario.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment...
The sun may cool the planet a bit, but temperatures won't decrease.
What you fail to understand or what you want to leave out is that the AGW hypothesis in no way ever predicted a 30-year pause or decrease in temperatures. In fact the 2007 IPCC report stated this for 2011-2030:

Climate models show warming averaged for 2011-2030 compared to 1980-1999 is between +0.64 and +0.69 with a range of only 0.05.

So obviously if we do cool, it is the sun that is outstripping CO2's ability to warm. That was NEVER expected. So how can you carry on with such a failed prediction and pretend like cooling never happened and doesn't change the science of AGW? If we do get a 30-year cooling period, it makes all previous predictions meaningless.
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#38314
Aug 22, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Speaking of Professor Curry... Her own writing leads one to think that she can not follow the whole universe of climate science due to her own deficiencies or blind spots.

PhD, Geophysical Sciences, University of Chicago (1982).
• B.S., Geography, Northern Illinois University (1974).

Gosh, her first degree is in geography. She gets busy with politics because it works for her.
NobodyYouKnow

Toronto, Canada

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#38315
Aug 22, 2013
 

Judged:

2

1

1

kristy wrote:
<quoted text>
Institutional loyalties
I don't take Judith Curry as an authoritative voice in either science, sociology or ethics. She has her own agenda.

And I have yet to meet a scientist that has any loyalty to any institution. They tend to brag about the papers they wrote DEMOLISHING the 'established science' if they CAN. It is like 'one upmanship' or to become the new 'authority' on the subject. But they need to have FACTS or the rest of the scientific community will rip them apart.
gcaveman1

Louin, MS

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#38317
Aug 22, 2013
 

Judged:

1

Fair Game wrote:
<quoted text>
LOL.
Well, "thinking reader", why do you think proxies from one half of the planet would give a valid global figure?
Geezuz.

Draw him a picture....
gcaveman1

Louin, MS

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#38318
Aug 22, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

ritedownthemiddle wrote:
<quoted text>you said you had no interest in the EPA's stance on renewable fuel standards. You were only interested in the "stationary". How else should I take your position, son?
I really still have no interest, but that little petition came along and I just couldn't resist. If I had known it was going to piss you off this much, I would have found a dozen more to sign. You're really pushing me to get involved, aren't you?

You guys are all the same; it's either black or white, no middle ground or compromise. When will you see the rainbow?
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#38319
Aug 22, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Mothra wrote:
<quoted text>
Are you still knocking heads with these global warming proselytizers?
Their faith is "science".
Oxymorons...
LOL
Go back to sleep.

Since: Apr 08

"the green troll"

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#38320
Aug 22, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

kristy wrote:
<quoted text>
What you fail to understand or what you want to leave out is that the AGW hypothesis in no way ever predicted a 30-year pause or decrease in temperatures. In fact the 2007 IPCC report stated this for 2011-2030:
Climate models show warming averaged for 2011-2030 compared to 1980-1999 is between +0.64 and +0.69 with a range of only 0.05.
So obviously if we do cool, it is the sun that is outstripping CO2's ability to warm. That was NEVER expected. So how can you carry on with such a failed prediction and pretend like cooling never happened and doesn't change the science of AGW? If we do get a 30-year cooling period, it makes all previous predictions meaningless.
There is no "30-year pause or decrease in temperatures", only a decade of slower rise in surface temperatures, something that was *always* expected from time to time by the IPCC.
Fair Game wrote:
<quoted text>
You're wrong of course.
(You're the clown, after all, not me.)
The first IPCC report made it quite clear that we didn't know enough about ocean circulation to make an absolute prediction of year-by-year temperatures:
<quoted text>
<quoted text>
The uncertainties that we can't predict have not altered the main prediction: decade upon decade warming.
The previous decade was warmer than the one before that.
kristy wrote:
Did they tell that to the policy makers? Did they tell that to the media? Did they tell that to the public?
Fair Game wrote:
<quoted text>
They put it in the report in black and white.
It's called "writing".
Do you expect them to come and explain it to every clown on the planet?
You have to *read* it.
Apparently even having your noses rubbed in what the IPCC actually said won't stop liars like you repeating the same lie.
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#38321
Aug 22, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Greenhouse gas emissions could offset a natural cooling trend or amplify a heating trend.“It could even mean the plausible worst-case scenario is worse than anything we’ve imagined,” Curry says.“Carbon dioxide, all other things being equal, will contribute to a warmer planet.”

Her PhD thesis at the University of Chicago was on the impact of sea ice and clouds on the radiation balance of the Arctic. She continued that research for a decade while serving as a faculty member at the University of Wisconsin, Purdue and eventually Penn State.

How much did she mitigate of Arctic uncertainties?

“Let's X Change!!”

Since: Feb 09

B4 HOPE Is Gone...

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#38322
Aug 22, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

1

gcaveman1 wrote:
<quoted text>
You guys are all the same; it's either black or white, no middle ground or compromise. When will you see the rainbow?
says the cave dweller who demands that man made climate change is settled science! LOL
Btw...it is more likely that earth will be hit by a two mile wide asteroid in the next 15 minutes than you ever agitating me. And you can quote me on that, son.

Since: Jul 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#38323
Aug 22, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Every post in here by the deniers is an argument about terms of degrees in temp or someone's off beat idea on why we should discount the result of years of research. Electing to wait on even more years of research. In other-words delay what can't be delayed.

Not one of them even think about what the worse case scenario would be if they are wrong. So the life style that they are desperately clinging to right now would be so drastically changed that they will regret not putting panels on the roof or buying the smaller car or other energy saving measures. Only it will all be too late.

The real sceptics are the scientists not the trolls

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/climat...
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#38324
Aug 22, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

1

OzRitz wrote:
Every post in here by the deniers is an argument about terms of degrees in temp or someone's off beat idea on why we should discount the result of years of research. Electing to wait on even more years of research. In other-words delay what can't be delayed.
Not one of them even think about what the worse case scenario would be if they are wrong. So the life style that they are desperately clinging to right now would be so drastically changed that they will regret not putting panels on the roof or buying the smaller car or other energy saving measures. Only it will all be too late.
The real sceptics are the scientists not the trolls
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/climat...
Very good. Thanks for the link.

I posted above some about Professor Curry because there's a flare up again with her. I feel like talking to her in person.
gcaveman1

Louin, MS

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#38325
Aug 22, 2013
 
Prof. Curry was on NPR a while ago. They explored her past, including that she was the main researcher who predicted that hurricanes would become more numerous and more intense.

NPR noted, as I did, that her most common answer was "I don't know." In the world of science, that can be a good thing or a bad thing.

Judith Curry drives a Prius, and is an admitted "light switch nazi".

“Let's X Change!!”

Since: Feb 09

B4 HOPE Is Gone...

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#38326
Aug 22, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

gcaveman1 wrote:
Prof. Curry was on NPR a while ago. They explored her past, including that she was the main researcher who predicted that hurricanes would become more numerous and more intense.
NPR noted, as I did, that her most common answer was "I don't know." In the world of science, that can be a good thing or a bad thing.
Judith Curry drives a Prius, and is an admitted "light switch nazi".
so....are you saying she's an honest variety of your team, son?

“Let's X Change!!”

Since: Feb 09

B4 HOPE Is Gone...

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#38327
Aug 22, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

OzRitz wrote:
Every post in here by the deniers is an argument about terms of degrees in temp or someone's off beat idea on why we should discount the result of years of research. Electing to wait on even more years of research. In other-words delay what can't be delayed.
Not one of them even think about what the worse case scenario would be if they are wrong. So the life style that they are desperately clinging to right now would be so drastically changed that they will regret not putting panels on the roof or buying the smaller car or other energy saving measures. Only it will all be too late.
The real sceptics are the scientists not the trolls
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/climat...
LOL!!!!!
terms of degrees? your 'team' seems to predict them with horrible results.
years of results have been revised...revised....revised, and are still innacurate.
WHY CAN'T IT BE DELAYED???? NONE OF THE SHYT YOU PREDICT IS COMING TRUE!!!! I had more faith in the Maya calendar!!! LOL!!!
You, son, are clinging to a faith in your opinions.....nothing could be further from reality from where I stand.
buy your bike...buy your volt....live in a solar home. your opinions and beliefs are all your own. why do you demand everyone else buy into your unfounded faith??

it's all political pseudoscience. if you don't get the joke.....don't blame us who know better.

peace.

“Let's X Change!!”

Since: Feb 09

B4 HOPE Is Gone...

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#38328
Aug 22, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

gcaveman1 wrote:
Prof. Curry was on NPR a while ago. They explored her past, including that she was the main researcher who predicted that hurricanes would become more numerous and more intense.
NPR noted, as I did, that her most common answer was "I don't know." In the world of science, that can be a good thing or a bad thing.
too bad 'your scientists' didn't have the intellectual honesty she does.....unless they have bacon to go with the egg on their face on a near daily basis.

“Let's X Change!!”

Since: Feb 09

B4 HOPE Is Gone...

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#38329
Aug 22, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Fair Game wrote:
<quoted text>
There is no "30-year pause or decrease in temperatures", only a decade of slower rise in surface temperatures, something that was *always* expected from time to time by the IPCC.
what's the difference in a pause or a slower rise....if it ain't rising?'hayseeds' want to know. speak to caveman's people on this!!

LOL
gcaveman1

Louin, MS

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#38330
Aug 22, 2013
 
ritedownthemiddle wrote:
<quoted text>so....are you saying she's an honest variety of your team, son?
Don't call me "son", boy, I'm probably old enough to be your grandpa, and I could be.
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#38331
Aug 22, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

SpaceBlues wrote:
Greenhouse gas emissions could offset a natural cooling trend or amplify a heating trend.“It could even mean the plausible worst-case scenario is worse than anything we’ve imagined,” Curry says.“Carbon dioxide, all other things being equal, will contribute to a warmer planet.”
Her PhD thesis at the University of Chicago was on the impact of sea ice and clouds on the radiation balance of the Arctic. She continued that research for a decade while serving as a faculty member at the University of Wisconsin, Purdue and eventually Penn State.
How much did she mitigate of Arctic uncertainties?
Not much.

You could see here how she fluffs her one-dimensional model testing:

http://curry.eas.gatech.edu/currydoc/Curry_JA...
Fun Facts

Las Cruces, NM

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#38332
Aug 22, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

1

kristy wrote:
<quoted text>
This seems to exactly fit what we have seen in the past and what we are seeing now, as compared to the AGW hypothesis where they are always trying to explain why temperatures aren't rising as expected. It seems the do protest too much when it comes to the sun. They all came out of the woodwork on this one to protest. They get especially nasty. I think they realize that the sun has a larger effect on the climate than they want to admit.
Yes, it fits. And yes they all come out of the woodwork to protest. They believe, and nothing is harder to counter than belief. You can't do it with facts.
Fun Facts

Las Cruces, NM

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#38333
Aug 22, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

1

B as in B S as in S wrote:
You DO realize "you are talking about the nonsensical ravings of a lunatic mind!"
-Frederick in Mel Brooks' "Young Frankenstein"
Fun Facts, what 97% of 'real scientists' want you to believe is that every driver you mentioned (PDO, AMO, La Niña, etc) are secondary to 50 molecules of Man made CO2.
Now really, is that really so hard to believe?
Let me think about it. lol

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.

Other Recent Wethersfield Discussions

Search the Wethersfield Forum:
Title Updated Last By Comments
Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 5 min John Galt 1,082,040
Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision (Jan '08) 40 min headlines 305,142
The 25 Most Dangerous Cities in the U.S. Are Mo... (Nov '10) 53 min Fitus T Bluster 18,579
Israeli troops begin Gaza pullout as Hamas decl... (Jan '09) 1 hr Zioni 68,043
Messianic Jews say they are persecuted in Israel (Jun '08) 14 hr JOEL COOL DUDE 68,391
More Advice On Acura TL Transmission Failures A... (Apr '09) 21 hr boogie 273
Nassau County Court and Family Court judges (Nov '08) Sun Nassaus Most Wanted 64
•••

Severe Thunderstorm Watch for Hartford County was issued at July 28 at 2:10PM EDT

•••
•••
•••
•••

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 ]
•••