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 (Page 2,117)

Showing posts 42,321 - 42,340 of45,761
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
gcaveman1

Keller, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#45296
Mar 31, 2014
 

Judged:

3

3

2

Mothra wrote:
<quoted text>
Hmm... you didn't use any of those nasty fossil fuels for your trip, did you?
If so, what did you do to offset the additional CO2 your trip created?
An indirect tithe?
d'Oh!
Of course not. We took the mules.

Since: Apr 08

"the green troll"

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#45297
Mar 31, 2014
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Mothra wrote:
<quoted text>
Your argument seems to be that it's impossible for 800 scientists to be wrong. Would that be every issue of just global warming?
Did you notice the headline.. "may prove"?
So... those same 800 scientists can't even agree that events "will" happen... just that they "may"? That's the definitive proof?
Wow... warm fuzzies for everybody!
Somebody has obviously not read the report...

Many species will be unable to track suitable climates under mid- and high-range rates of climate change during the 21st century.

Some species will adapt to new climates. Those that cannot adapt sufficiently fast will decrease in abundance or go extinct in part or all of their ranges.

Due to sea-level rise projected throughout the 21st century and beyond, coastal systems and low-lying areas will increasingly experience adverse impacts such as submergence, coastal flooding, and coastal erosion.

Due to projected climate change by the mid 21st century and beyond, global marine-species redistribution and marine-biodiversity reduction in sensitive regions will challenge the sustained provision of fisheries productivity and other ecosystem services.

To be continued...

Since: Apr 08

"the green troll"

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#45298
Mar 31, 2014
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Mothra wrote:
<quoted text>
Speaking of more food...
The new IPCC report claims reducing CO2 emissions will help to provide food security for the future, but the opposite is true. Hundreds of scientific papers prove increased CO2 fertilization markedly increases photosynthetic rates and biomass production of all the world's major crops, in addition to increasing resistance to drought. And there is also the significant body of work that reveals that as the atmosphere's CO2 concentration rises, the various temperatures at which different plants photosynthesize most proficiently rise right along with it.
IPCC decarbonization policies will decrease agricultural production, and lead to more malnourishment and poverty due to higher energy and food prices.
http://hockeyschtick.blogspot.com/2014/03/the...
CO2 fertilisation only works where you have enough water and temperatures aren't too high.

The real effect of global warming on agricultural production is here:

http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media/images/7387300...
Mothra

Phoenix, AZ

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#45300
Apr 1, 2014
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Fair Game wrote:
<quoted text>
CO2 fertilisation only works where you have enough water and temperatures aren't too high.
The real effect of global warming on agricultural production is here:
http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media/images/7387300...
<sigh>

It's been said that a picture is worth a thousand words.

And then there are those from warmist computer models.

You need to stop taking posting tips from Spaceballs.... a random graphic with no documentation?

Yeah... that's a serious argument.

btw... the Shell Foundation is listed as one of their donors. So does that mean all their science should be dismissed?

d'Oh!

“I Luv Carbon Dioxide”

Since: Dec 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#45301
Apr 1, 2014
 

Judged:

2

2

2

http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media/images/7387300...

Change is good. What's not to love about global warming?

Since: Apr 08

"the green troll"

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#45302
Apr 1, 2014
 

Judged:

2

2

1

Mothra wrote:
<quoted text>
<sigh>
It's been said that a picture is worth a thousand words.
And then there are those from warmist computer models.
You need to stop taking posting tips from Spaceballs.... a random graphic with no documentation?
Yeah... that's a serious argument.
btw... the Shell Foundation is listed as one of their donors. So does that mean all their science should be dismissed?
d'Oh!
It's from the latest IPCC report, where else?

Since: Apr 08

"the green troll"

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#45303
Apr 1, 2014
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Mothra wrote:
<quoted text>
Speaking of more food...
The new IPCC report claims reducing CO2 emissions will help to provide food security for the future, but the opposite is true. Hundreds of scientific papers prove increased CO2 fertilization markedly increases photosynthetic rates and biomass production of all the world's major crops, in addition to increasing resistance to drought. And there is also the significant body of work that reveals that as the atmosphere's CO2 concentration rises, the various temperatures at which different plants photosynthesize most proficiently rise right along with it.
IPCC decarbonization policies will decrease agricultural production, and lead to more malnourishment and poverty due to higher energy and food prices.
http://hockeyschtick.blogspot.com/2014/03/the...
OK, the fact that this is written by people with their back pockets full of cash from the fossil fuel industry makes me doubt this assessment of the science, let's have a look at the science they cite.

*Yes, the temperature at which optimum photosynthesis rises, but it then falls dramatically.

http://ib.berkeley.edu/courses/ib151/IB151Lec...

*You can't look at photosynthesis in isolation: higher temperatures mean more water lost from the soil and root stress.

*Study cited is for a species of tree: you can't draw conclusions for arable crops from that.

*Study cited is *leaf* temperature in full sunlight: you can't draw conclusions about the effect of air temperature from that.

*Study cited is for a northern temperate zone plant: plants in hotter habitats will be nearer the optimum temperature already.

http://www.plantphysiol.org/content/75/4/1022...

*predicted global warming is not the same as land surface air temperature warming, which is higher than the global average.

So yes, there is a lot of scientific literature on CO2 fertilisation, but no, this fossil fuel funded study is not an accurate summary of it.

Northern latitudes will see increased agricultural production by mid century, but southern latitudes will see dramatically reduced production.

http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media/images/7387300...
Professor

Chatsworth, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#45304
Apr 1, 2014
 

Judged:

3

3

3

CO2, despite being a minor element of the Earth’s atmosphere, is essential for all life on Earth because it is the food that nourishes all vegetation. The Earth has passed through many periods of high levels of CO2 and many cycles of warming and cooling that are part of the life of the planet.
“Science works by creating theories based on assumptions,” Dr. Ball notes,“then other scientists—performing their skeptical role—test them. The structure and mandate of the IPCC was in direct contradiction of this scientific method. They set out to prove the theory rather than disprove it.”
“The atmosphere,” Dr. Ball notes,“is three-dimensional and dynamic, so building a computer model that even approximates reality requires far more data than exists and much greater understanding of an extremely turbulent and complex system.” No computer model put forth by the IPCC in support of global warming has been accurate, nor ever could be.
Most of the reports were created by a small group of men working within the Climate Research Unit (CRU) of the University of East Anglia and all were members of the IPCC. The result was “a totally false picture supposedly based on science.”

Since: Mar 09

Wichita, KS

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#45305
Apr 1, 2014
 

Judged:

2

2

1

Professor wrote:
CO2, despite being a minor element of the Earth’s atmosphere, is essential for all life on Earth because it is the food that nourishes all vegetation. The Earth has passed through many periods of high levels of CO2 and many cycles of warming and cooling that are part of the life of the planet.
“Science works by creating theories based on assumptions,” Dr. Ball notes,“then other scientists—performing their skeptical role—test them. The structure and mandate of the IPCC was in direct contradiction of this scientific method. They set out to prove the theory rather than disprove it.”
“The atmosphere,” Dr. Ball notes,“is three-dimensional and dynamic, so building a computer model that even approximates reality requires far more data than exists and much greater understanding of an extremely turbulent and complex system.” No computer model put forth by the IPCC in support of global warming has been accurate, nor ever could be.
Most of the reports were created by a small group of men working within the Climate Research Unit (CRU) of the University of East Anglia and all were members of the IPCC. The result was “a totally false picture supposedly based on science.”
What else can one expect from a retired geography professor tied to the oil industry?

“I Luv Carbon Dioxide”

Since: Dec 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#45306
Apr 1, 2014
 

Judged:

3

2

2

No species has ever been driven extinct by man made climate change and no species has evolved the ability to mitigate climate change either.

That's why climate change mitigation is a hoax and man made catastrophic climate change is pseudoscience.
litesong

Everett, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#45307
Apr 1, 2014
 

Judged:

2

2

1

[QUOTE who="lyin' brian"]No species has ever been driven extinct by man made climate change [/QUOTE]

"lyin' brian" has made errors of 1 million TIMES, 1000 TIMES, 3000 TIMES, 73 million TIMES, & 2.5 trillion TIMES. "lyin' brian" has no science, chemistry, astronomy, physics, algebra or pre-calc in its poorly earned, but proudly held hi skule DEE-ploooma.
litesong

Everett, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#45308
Apr 1, 2014
 

Judged:

2

2

2

false farts wrote:
The IPCC's Latest Report Deliberately Excludes And Misrepresents Important Climate Science:
Just Joseph Bast filling webs with its most inaccurate, anti-science pro-oil, energy & re-pubic-lick-un toxicity. "false farts" quotes a paper shuffler to counter science.

"false farts" earns its name, "false farts".
Mothra

Phoenix, AZ

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#45309
Apr 1, 2014
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Fair Game wrote:
<quoted text>
OK, the fact that this is written by people with their back pockets full of cash from the fossil fuel industry makes me doubt this assessment of the science, let's have a look at the science they cite.
Thanks... just wanted to get a warmist to admit that funding from fossil fuel companies doesn't discount science.

d'Oh!
Mothra

Phoenix, AZ

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#45310
Apr 1, 2014
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Patriot AKA Bozo wrote:
<quoted text>
What else can one expect from a retired geography professor tied to the oil industry?
As usual we expect no rational argument from you... and you deliver.

btw, your warmist bud above just vindicated oil industry funding.

d'Oh!
Mothra

Phoenix, AZ

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#45311
Apr 1, 2014
 

Judged:

2

2

2

litesong wrote:
It's Tuesday... did you take your meds?
litesong

Everett, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#45312
Apr 1, 2014
 

Judged:

2

gcaveman1 wrote:
We took the mules.
How did you like the Grand Canyon. I hiked in myself.
Truth Facts

Chillicothe, OH

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#45313
Apr 1, 2014
 

Judged:

1

1

1

litesong wrote:
<quoted text>
Just Joseph Bast filling webs with its most inaccurate, anti-science pro-oil, energy & re-pubic-lick-un toxicity. "false farts" quotes a paper shuffler to counter science.
"false farts" earns its name, "false farts".
Just shows your immaturity ass hat.

Since: Apr 08

"the green troll"

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#45314
Apr 1, 2014
 
Mothra wrote:
<quoted text>
Thanks... just wanted to get a warmist to admit that funding from fossil fuel companies doesn't discount science.
d'Oh!
No one will notice you dodged any discussion of the science, will they?

Or made any attempt to defend the obvious flaws.

Keep you virginity as far as actually talking about the science. Wise move. If you tried to talk about the science, you'd just demonstrate you utter inability to spot good from bad.

Keeping your virginity, you keep you excuse: there were some science that said global warming wasn't a threat.

Acknowledge that somebody pointed out to you that that science is junk and you can't use the excuse.

So walk away quietly.

With a trolling remark you think will be a distraction.

Since: Apr 08

"the green troll"

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#45315
Apr 1, 2014
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Mothra wrote:
<quoted text>
As usual we expect no rational argument from you... and you deliver.
Don't think I've ever seen a rational argument from you- just the stupid conspiracy theory, lots of vacuous trolling and some cut'n pasting.

Since: Apr 08

"the green troll"

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#45316
Apr 1, 2014
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Brian_G wrote:
No species has ever been driven extinct by man made climate change.
• EXTINCT: Golden toad (Bufo periglenes). Along with the Monteverde harlequin frog (Atelopus varius), also of Central America, the golden toad is among the very small number of species whose recent extinction has been attributed with medium confidence to climate change, according to Scholes and Pörtner. Last seen in 1989, the golden frog lived in mountaintop cloud forests that have disappeared due to drought and other climatic changes. Other confounding factors are involved, such as the deadly chytrid fungus, which has killed off many amphibians worldwide.(See: "Photos: Ten Most Wanted 'Extinct' Amphibians.")

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2014/...

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

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Showing posts 42,321 - 42,340 of45,761
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
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:
Topic Updated Last By Comments
Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 3 min ritedownthemiddle 1,078,308
Messianic Jews say they are persecuted in Israel (Jun '08) 12 min Eric 68,352
Israeli troops begin Gaza pullout as Hamas decl... (Jan '09) 50 min voice of peace 67,846
Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision (Jan '08) 1 hr Yeah but 305,065
The 25 Most Dangerous Cities in the U.S. Are Mo... (Nov '10) 9 hr just wondering 18,537
Police: Suspect Tried To Strangle Woman (Mar '08) Mon LMAO 164
Electric heat Cromwell hills Mon Tommy T 1
•••
•••
•••
Wethersfield Dating

more search filters

less search filters

•••

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 ]
•••