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

Full story: Newsday 46,605
When Bill Clinton took office in 1993, global warming was a slow-moving environmental problem that was easy to ignore. Full Story

“Let's X Change!!”

Since: Feb 09

B4 HOPE Is Gone...

#38650 Aug 30, 2013
gcaveman1 wrote:
<quoted text>

But global warming IS alarming.
It's happening.
We are causing it.
It's going to get worse.
just not in August , huh, punching bag?
Lol
Mothra

Phoenix, AZ

#38651 Aug 30, 2013
ritedownthemiddle wrote:
<quoted text>i take it your not a PhD.
Not so sure myself... if PhD is for "Piled higher and Deeper".
Mothra

Phoenix, AZ

#38652 Aug 30, 2013
ritedownthemiddle wrote:
Poetic justice!
Another "facial" served up to the whacked out alarmist hysteria.
http://mobile.bloomberg.com/news/2013-08-30/n...
Heeheehee
All that 'proves' is that there's no "consensus" on hurricane predictions.

LOL
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

#38653 Aug 30, 2013
Written as an objection to being included in an anthology of British poetry, as he claimed his identity was Irish, in 1982.

"Be advised my passport's green.

No glass of ours was ever raised

to toast the Queen."

Seamus Heaney
kristy

Oviedo, FL

#38654 Aug 30, 2013
Fun Facts wrote:
<quoted text>
LOL
Does Kristy 'wear you out'? What is it, the fact that she posts information from real science and you don't have what it takes to read the material?
So you denigrate her with simplistic statements that have no value to the science being discussed. Then smear her with your base level of understanding of human kind.
I guess it's not a laughing matter, in reality, it's actually quite sad.
You know what's funny. All these climate scientists with PhD's have made such outrageous predictions in the past, it is now coming back to haunt them, so now they just end up arguing against their past predictions. Example, Dr. Viner publicly proclaims snow will be a thing of the past, then when it snows they pretend they never said it and blame it on the skeptics and then start a circular argument with themselves stating how they knew all along they knew snow would increase. They do it with all their predictions.

Look what they just recently said about Antarctic Sea Ice:

Antarctic sea ice extent in mid-August reached a record or near-record level high at 18.7 million square kilometers, according to the National Snow and Ice Data Center External Non-U.S. government site.

The positive growth of total sea ice extent around Antarctica, which averages 18 million square kilometers at the height of winter, is part of a long-term trend and is consistent with how scientists believe climate change affects the southernmost continent.

http://antarcticsun.usap.gov/science/contenth...

Back in 2007, the IPCC said this:

In contrast to the Arctic, there are signs of a slight increase in the extent of annual mean sea ice [in the Antarctic] over the period 1979–2005 (+1.2 per cent per decade) based on the NASA Team retrieval algorithm. The IPCC concluded that this overall increase was not significant and that there are NO CONSISTENT TRENDS trends during the period of satellite observations.

What a bunch of BS.
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

#38655 Aug 30, 2013
gcaveman1 wrote:
<quoted text>
It's the game of whack-a-mole she plays that wears me out.
We can refute and disprove her posts all day long; like I said, it won't make any difference. It's her job.
There are no fence-sitters coming to this thread. There are no true skeptics. There's only fossil fuel shills, those with such a strong psychological defect that they can't see the truth staring them in the face, and us "global warming alarmists".
But global warming IS alarming.
It's happening.
We are causing it.
It's going to get worse.
But, there is something we can do about it.
You notice that the deniers ignore the daily ninety million tons of manmade ghg emissisions, equivalent to 400,000 hiroshima's energy.
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

#38656 Aug 30, 2013
Mothra wrote:
<quoted text>
All that 'proves' is that there's no "consensus" on hurricane predictions.
LOL
DUH. That means they differ in their techniques or methods.
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

#38657 Aug 30, 2013
SpaceBlues wrote:
Written as an objection to being included in an anthology of British poetry, as he claimed his identity was Irish, in 1982.
"Be advised my passport's green.
No glass of ours was ever raised
to toast the Queen."
Seamus Heaney
HUH. They have programmed choice icons for any post from me.

Is there an editor in the building?

P.S. Isn't the EU passport cover cranberry color?

Since: Mar 09

Wichita, KS

#38658 Aug 30, 2013
kristy wrote:
<quoted text>
You know what's funny. All these climate scientists with PhD's have made such outrageous predictions in the past, it is now coming back to haunt them, so now they just end up arguing against their past predictions. Example, Dr. Viner publicly proclaims snow will be a thing of the past, then when it snows they pretend they never said it and blame it on the skeptics and then start a circular argument with themselves stating how they knew all along they knew snow would increase. They do it with all their predictions.
Look what they just recently said about Antarctic Sea Ice:
Antarctic sea ice extent in mid-August reached a record or near-record level high at 18.7 million square kilometers, according to the National Snow and Ice Data Center External Non-U.S. government site.
The positive growth of total sea ice extent around Antarctica, which averages 18 million square kilometers at the height of winter, is part of a long-term trend and is consistent with how scientists believe climate change affects the southernmost continent.
http://antarcticsun.usap.gov/science/contenth...
Back in 2007, the IPCC said this:
In contrast to the Arctic, there are signs of a slight increase in the extent of annual mean sea ice [in the Antarctic] over the period 1979–2005 (+1.2 per cent per decade) based on the NASA Team retrieval algorithm. The IPCC concluded that this overall increase was not significant and that there are NO CONSISTENT TRENDS trends during the period of satellite observations.
What a bunch of BS.
Of course uneducated people know more than educated folks do....LOL you are so smart....
dont drink the koolaid

Minneapolis, MN

#38659 Aug 30, 2013
"Once slow moving threat, global warming SPEEDS UP...."

The above premise is false and those who are/have defended it are/were wrong.
The oddest thing though... these same people now deny the experts' conclusion that warming has NOT been speeding up. Their belief in the face of this reality maintains their "faith" that accelerating warming was happening then and is continuing to this day.

Without my participation in these AGW threads I suspect I may not have noticed the nature of this faith-based belief system.

May your faith give you peace of mind.
-koolaid
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

#38660 Aug 30, 2013
dont drink the koolaid wrote:
"Once slow moving threat, global warming SPEEDS UP...."
The above premise is false and those who are/have defended it are/were wrong.
The oddest thing though... these same people now deny the experts' conclusion that warming has NOT been speeding up. Their belief in the face of this reality maintains their "faith" that accelerating warming was happening then and is continuing to this day.
Without my participation in these AGW threads I suspect I may not have noticed the nature of this faith-based belief system.
May your faith give you peace of mind.
-koolaid
You are drinking again. How's your health? Get a checkup.

Hope you have insurance.
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

#38661 Aug 30, 2013
AlgoreTheTinFoilHatter wrote:
Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW) is a theory (hypothesis). It is an
unproven theory. What you do with theories is put them to the test with
scientific observations. Let's see what data points we now have:
1) Average annual temperatures have not surpassed 1998 (NOAA)
(University of Alabama)
2) Average annual temperatures are now trending downward since 1998
(NOAA)(University of Alabama)
3) Ocean temperatures have not risen since 2000 when the 3000 Argo buoys
were launched. The buoys even show a slight decrease in ocean temperatures
4) The Arctic ice froze to February levels by December 07, there are 1mm
more sq km than before (previous was 13mm sq km)
5) The Arctic ice is 20cm thicker than "normal" (whatever that is)
6) All polar bear pods are stable or growing (NOAA/PBS)
7) Mount Kilimanjaro is not melting because of global warming, rather
"sublimation"
8) The Antarctic is not "melting", it is growing in most places, the
sloughing off at the edges is normal as the ice mass grows
9) The majority of the Antarctic is 8 degrees below "normal" (again,
whatever that is)
10) The coveted .7 degree rise in temperatures over the last 100 years
has been wiped out with last years below "normal" temperatures (NOAA
coolest winter since 2001)
11) Al Gores film was just deemed "propaganda" in a court of law in the
UK as many points could not be substantiated by scientists
12) It was also just reveled that some of the footage in Als film was
CGI. The ice shelf collapse was from the movie The Day After Tomorrow (ABC)
13) One of the scientists that originally thought that CO2 preceded the
warming has now found with new data that the CO2 rise follows the
warming (Dr David Evans)
14) August 2008 was the first time since 1913 there were no sun spots.
15) The Medieval Warm Period was warmer than the 20th century (no SUVs)
16) Many scientists are now predicting 30 years of cooling.
17) The greenhouse effect is real, our small contribution to it cannot
even be measured
18) Several publications, including those that are warmist have recently
written that the natural cycles of the earth may mask AGW. Give me a break.
Why don't you make corrections to your post?[I'm assuming you might have learned a little in the past five years.]
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

#38662 Aug 30, 2013
dont drink the koolaid wrote:
"Once slow moving threat, global warming SPEEDS UP...."
The above premise is false and those who are/have defended it are/were wrong.
The oddest thing though... these same people now deny the experts' conclusion that warming has NOT been speeding up. Their belief in the face of this reality maintains their "faith" that accelerating warming was happening then and is continuing to this day.
Without my participation in these AGW threads I suspect I may not have noticed the nature of this faith-based belief system.
May your faith give you peace of mind.
-koolaid
Read this carefully, it should help you:

[T]he first decade of the 21st century was the hottest based on records kept since the 1880s -- and it included record heat waves in Russia and the US as well as a precipitous meltdown of Arctic sea ice and surging sea level rise. Atmospheric concentrations of CO2 touched 400 parts per million on Mauna Loa in May, a first in the time line of human existence. A cooler Pacific stuck in a La Niña rut may have restrained global warming for the past decade or so, Xie notes, but it is unlikely to last. "This effect of natural variability will be averaged out over a period of 100 years," he says, "and cannot argue away the threat of persistent anthropogenic warming that is occurring now."[scientific american]
No Warming

Waverly, OH

#38663 Aug 30, 2013
dont drink the koolaid wrote:
"Once slow moving threat, global warming SPEEDS UP...."
The above premise is false and those who are/have defended it are/were wrong.
The oddest thing though... these same people now deny the experts' conclusion that warming has NOT been speeding up. Their belief in the face of this reality maintains their "faith" that accelerating warming was happening then and is continuing to this day.
Without my participation in these AGW threads I suspect I may not have noticed the nature of this faith-based belief system.
May your faith give you peace of mind.
-koolaid
The warming gods will impose punitive action on heretics like you. Be prepared to hand over your savings AND your first born son for that comment.
dont drink the koolaid

Minneapolis, MN

#38664 Aug 30, 2013
SpaceBlues wrote:
<quoted text>You are drinking again. How's your health? Get a checkup.
Hope you have insurance.
Is that it?
First sentence: non sequitur
Second sentence: Fine thank you for asking, Mr. Blues.
Third and forth sentence: humor?
Fifth sentence: convincing counterpoint which supports the idea that there is such a thing as CAGW!!!
dont drink the koolaid

Minneapolis, MN

#38665 Aug 30, 2013
SpaceBlues wrote:
<quoted text>Read this carefully, it should help you:
[T]he first decade of the 21st century was the hottest based on records kept since the 1880s -- and it included record heat waves in Russia and the US as well as a precipitous meltdown of Arctic sea ice and surging sea level rise. Atmospheric concentrations of CO2 touched 400 parts per million on Mauna Loa in May, a first in the time line of human existence. A cooler Pacific stuck in a La Niña rut may have restrained global warming for the past decade or so, Xie notes, but it is unlikely to last. "This effect of natural variability will be averaged out over a period of 100 years," he says, "and cannot argue away the threat of persistent anthropogenic warming that is occurring now."[scientific american]
Oh my.
Thank you so much!
Yes, your "Cut 'n Paste"' is EXTREMELY helpful.
gcaveman1

Bay Springs, MS

#38666 Aug 30, 2013
kristy wrote:
<quoted text>
You know what's funny.
What a bunch of BS.
You know what's funny? YOU!
What a bunch of BS, the stuff you spout, trying to distract from the reality.

The Earth IS warming.

WE are the reason.

It's going to get worse.

There are things we can do about it.
No Warming

Waverly, OH

#38667 Aug 30, 2013
dont drink the koolaid wrote:
<quoted text>
Is that it?
First sentence: non sequitur
Second sentence: Fine thank you for asking, Mr. Blues.
Third and forth sentence: humor?
Fifth sentence: convincing counterpoint which supports the idea that there is such a thing as CAGW!!!
Strike two ... questioning the enthusiasm of an alarmist. You'll burn in hell before the nights over at this rate.
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

#38668 Aug 30, 2013
dont drink the koolaid wrote:
<quoted text>
Is that it?
First sentence: non sequitur
Second sentence: Fine thank you for asking, Mr. Blues.
Third and forth sentence: humor?
Fifth sentence: convincing counterpoint which supports the idea that there is such a thing as CAGW!!!
Fifth sentence? There is no fifth sentence. You here confirm that you are drinking.

I wonder how you are because you cannot even count. You referred to five sentences of mine when there are only four.

Since: Apr 08

"the green troll"

#38669 Aug 30, 2013
kristy wrote:
LOL...so sorry I'm wearing all of you out.
Tiresome is not a virtue.

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.

Wethersfield Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 17 min Incognito4Ever 1,109,407
Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision (Jan '08) 1 hr Pearl Jam 305,560
The 25 Most Dangerous Cities in the U.S. Are Mo... (Nov '10) 2 hr WARRIOR 19,207
CT Who do you support for Governor in Connecticut ... (Oct '10) 3 hr Tippy Faulker 792
Messianic Jews say they are persecuted in Israel (Jun '08) 5 hr Eric 69,368
Israeli troops begin Gaza pullout as Hamas decl... (Jan '09) 16 hr TRD 68,469
Wright Upsets Klett For Mayor; Republicans Win ... (Nov '07) 21 hr football coach 85
•••
•••
•••

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 ]
•••