Global warming 'undeniable,' scientis...

Global warming 'undeniable,' scientists say

There are 35524 comments on the TwinCities.com story from Jul 29, 2010, titled Global warming 'undeniable,' scientists say. In it, TwinCities.com reports that:

Scientists from around the world are providing even more evidence of global warming, one day after President Barack Obama renewed his call for climate legislation.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at TwinCities.com.

LessHypeMoreFact

Orleans, Canada

#31228 Jan 23, 2014
independent common sense wrote:
<quoted text>
Wrong! Ben Santor himself admitted to making deletions from the report and the report AFTER the deletions has been used as a "valid source" for proof of climate change ever since. It's kind of hard to come across as very educated or even believable on a subject when you actual argue that something didn't happen when the person that did it admits to it!
What is hard is trying to find some substance to your lies.

http://www.pnas.org/content/110/1/3

"Santer and 40 other scientists responded to the Wall Street Journal that all IPCC procedural rules were followed, and that IPCC procedures required changes to the draft in response to comments from governments, individual scientists, and non-governmental organizations. They stated that the pre- and post-Madrid versions of Chapter 8 were equally cautious in their statements; that roughly 20% of Chapter 8 is devoted to the discussion of uncertainties in estimates of natural climate variability and the expected signal due to human activities; and that both versions of the chapter reached the same conclusion: "Taken together, these results point towards a human influence on climate."
independent common sense wrote:
<quoted text>
I guess his admission didn't fit in your little green bubble of reality. Facts sometimes don't fit in for those that choose to be blissfully ignorant. You are right on the fact that there are thousands that agree on climate change, but just like Santor you are leaving out that little fact that there are also thousands that can't agree or just don't agree with it based on their evidence and lack of any evidence to prove otherwise. There are many scientist that actually believe we are on the verge of heading towards another mini ice age. At the very least surely you can see the way global warming looks like an asinine argument when we have actually set records for the coldest temps in decades and in some areas coldest ever. I am sure I won't be the only one NOT thinking about global warming as I layer clothes and bundle up to go outside in our below zero temps this evening. Investigating only what agrees with your opinion is not really looking for the truth.
This is all YOUR paranoid delusion and you are hardly an authority. Those IN authority have chastised Fred Seitz for his false opinion piece attacking the legitimacy of the IPCC.

http://www.ucar.edu/communications/quarterly/...

Judged:

16

15

14

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!
VN Vet

Richmond, VA

#31229 Jan 23, 2014
There is NOTHING normal to GW, history shows how many times it has happened in the past. But according to you and the faux science, the SUVs of a thousand years ago caused all those warmings. Damn you are stupid. Please quit breathing out the CO2 from your mouth.
litesong

Everett, WA

#31230 Jan 23, 2014
LessHypeMoreFact wrote:
Not really applicable though. The increase in sea ice AREA was to be sychronous with a decrease in sea ice thickness (stronger outward flowing winds but warmer waters). But these forecasts are irrelevant to the problem. The ice breakers would have had no problem in NORMAL pack ice. This was 15 meter thick ice from the collision of an ice tongue and an ice island. No current ice breaker could break through continuous segments of 15 meter ice.
So the story has nothing to do with sea ice or AGW but everything to do with glacier ice flow increases. Also normal to AGW.
Your assumption that the AGW Antarctic sea ice prediction references only Antarctic sea ice area is wrong, & the sea ice increasing mechanism, you mention, is not the only AGW changes in effect. The AGW prediction for increasing Antarctic sea ice area, also includes increases in Volume AND thickness.
LessHypeMoreFact

Orleans, Canada

#31232 Jan 24, 2014
litesong wrote:
<quoted text>
Your assumption that the AGW Antarctic sea ice prediction references only Antarctic sea ice area is wrong, & the sea ice increasing mechanism, you mention, is not the only AGW changes in effect.
There is also snow deposition triggering freezing, lower salinity from landbound ice melt and stratification of the oceans. Sure. I wanted to make a simple point.
litesong wrote:
<quoted text>
The AGW prediction for increasing Antarctic sea ice area, also includes increases in Volume AND thickness.
Actually not, which is why it is ok that sea ice thickness has become thinner.
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/20...
"We utilize satellite laser altimetry data from NASA's Ice, Cloud, and land Elevation Satellite (ICESat) combined with passive microwave measurements to analyze basin-wide changes in Antarctic sea ice thickness and volume over a 5 year period from 2003–2008. Sea ice thickness exhibits a small negative trend"
litesong

Everett, WA

#31233 Jan 24, 2014
LessHypeMoreFact wrote:
<quoted text>
There is also snow deposition triggering freezing, lower salinity from landbound ice melt and stratification of the oceans. Sure. I wanted to make a simple point.
<quoted text>
Actually not, which is why it is ok that sea ice thickness has become thinner.
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/20...
"We utilize satellite laser altimetry data from NASA's Ice, Cloud, and land Elevation Satellite (ICESat) combined with passive microwave measurements to analyze basin-wide changes in Antarctic sea ice thickness and volume over a 5 year period from 2003–2008. Sea ice thickness exhibits a small negative trend"
Finally, you mention the mechanism highlighted 12 years ago, that the prediction stated would help lead to increasing Antarctic sea ice area, Volume & thickness. But now you say the prediction is invalidated, altho the prediction's mechanism, increasing Antarctic sea ice area, AND increasing sea ice Volume are true, but the thickness, after 12 years is a bit less, because you take out your micrometer.

You would feel differently, if you had been the one to continually highlight this truly outstanding AGW prediction, against the touched toxic topix AGW deniers, who try to use Antarctic sea ice increases as a sign against AGW. But you didn't.
independent common sense

Coffeyville, KS

#31234 Jan 24, 2014
The only proof we need to show what a scam this global warming crap is would be ...... HISTORY!

It has all happened before and it will continue on the cycle just like it always has. The only difference is now we have people that have figured out that you can control people and get filthy rich in the process off a green movement. Greed and desire for power are just like global warming.....it's all happened before and it's no different now.
LessHypeMoreFact

Orleans, Canada

#31235 Jan 24, 2014
litesong wrote:
<quoted text>
Finally, you mention the mechanism highlighted 12 years ago, that the prediction stated would help lead to increasing Antarctic sea ice area, Volume & thickness. But now you say the prediction is invalidated, altho the prediction's mechanism, increasing Antarctic sea ice area, AND increasing sea ice Volume are true, but the thickness, after 12 years is a bit less, because you take out your micrometer.
The main reason for the increase (as I remember it) was increased katabatic winds (outward sweeping winds from the inland height of the ice sheet) which was primarily a feature of the ozone hole cooling of stratospheric air over the pole. Science is non-partisan and open minded. I agree with the prediction. I do not agree with your trumpeting this as a 'success' of AGW prediction, though it is pretty good for ANY forecasting. The main thing is that it is supposed to be a small and temporary increase in winter sea ice extent, ending in a decade or two. And winter sea ice growth is of little concern anyway.
litesong wrote:
<quoted text>
You would feel differently, if you had been the one to continually highlight this truly outstanding AGW prediction, against the touched toxic topix AGW deniers, who try to use Antarctic sea ice increases as a sign against AGW. But you didn't.
I agree that the toxic denialists will take ANY disagreement as signs that AGW theory is 'on the ropes' but trying to bolster the theory by biasing the facts is not the way to communicate.

The ice that trapped the boat was due to glacier tongue vs ice island. The thickness that would stop this class of ice breaker is NOT winter formed sea ice which is at most two meters thick and easily traversed.

THAT is the point that should be highlighted. That this event is due to ice sheet decline, a feature of AGW, not sea ice freezing. I find your post to be a distraction from the proper discussion.

Judged:

20

20

20

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!

“I Luv Carbon Dioxide”

Since: Dec 08

Home, sweet home.

#31236 Jan 24, 2014
http://www.examiner.com/article/u-n-climate-c...

U.N. climate chief: Communism best method of dealing with global warming

January 15, 2014
For years, conservatives have said that radical environmentalism is little more than a front for a move to Communist tyranny. That assertion seems to have been proven with comments made by Christiana Figueres, climate chief for the United Nations, who said Communism is the best model for fighting global warming, the Daily Caller reported Wednesday.

According to Figueres, China, the world's top emitter of carbon dioxide, is “doing it right,” even though it has major pollution problems of its own.

The reason, she explained, is that democracy is no good at handling something like global warming, with different parties arguing over policy. In fact, she said, political differences like those in the U.S. Congress, are "very detrimental" to solving the issue....

Judged:

22

22

21

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!
Science Bob

Hamden, CT

#31238 Jan 24, 2014
Global warming is a myth. It has been admitted as such. It's a devise of the human hating left.

Judged:

23

23

23

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!
Science Bob

Hamden, CT

#31239 Jan 24, 2014
[QUOTE
For years, conservatives have said that radical environmentalism is little more than a front for a move to Communist tyranny. That assertion seems to have been proven with comments made by Christiana Figueres, climate chief for the United Nations, who said Communism is the best model for fighting global warming, the Daily Caller reported Wednesday.
According to Figueres, China, the world's top emitter of carbon dioxide, is “doing it right,” even though it has major pollution problems of its own.
The reason, she explained, is that democracy is no good at handling something like global warming, with different parties arguing over policy. In fact, she said, political differences like those in the U.S. Congress, are "very detrimental" to solving the issue....[/QUOTE]

You morons need to live under comunism for a while.

Judged:

24

24

24

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!
Those Crazy Aliens

Winnipeg, Canada

#31245 Jan 24, 2014
This is it! The REAL Stan Romanek Alien Video



New Extraordinary 2013 Alien UFO Documentary - Stan Romanek

http://www.youtube.com/watch...

The Stan Romanek Story: Messages - UFO and Alien Contact

http://www.youtube.com/watch...

Any prominent scientists on this thread?

If so, contact Stan Romanek, analyze his evidence and documentation!

Judged:

18

18

18

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!
LessHypeMoreFact

Orleans, Canada

#31246 Jan 24, 2014
Livin Woodbury wrote:
2009 was another year of global cooling, which saw numerous low temperature and high snowfall records smashed.
Unseasonably warm weather continues; Alyeska closed to skiers today

http://www.adn.com/2014/01/20/3282860/more-un...

And Alaska has no snow for skiers! In mid winter!!!

You have to look at the global picture, not look for 'cold snaps' in mid-winter.

And the global picture is a continuation of the warming trend.

http://blog.chron.com/climateabyss/2012/04/ab...

You have a LOT to learn before you will make a meaningful comment here.

Judged:

14

14

14

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!
gcaveman1

Bay Springs, MS

#31247 Jan 24, 2014
It's always the same. Mostly intelligent, thoughtful posts from AGW acceptors, always attempting the truth.

Stupid, shallow, petty, untruthful barbs from the deniers.

Why don't you guys fight facts with facts? Because you don't have any, maybe?

Judged:

18

18

18

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!
SpaceBlues

United States

#31248 Jan 24, 2014
Gee.. Mr Caveman, you know you're right!

:-)

Judged:

18

18

17

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!

“BET DAP”

Since: Feb 09

GOOM BOWN

#31251 Jan 25, 2014
gcaveman1 wrote:
It's always the same. Mostly intelligent, thoughtful posts from AGW acceptors, always attempting the truth.
Stupid, shallow, petty, untruthful barbs from the deniers.
Why don't you guys fight facts with facts? Because you don't have any, maybe?
stop being so stupid, petty, and shallow.

btw......you're lying. again!

Judged:

14

14

14

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!
B as in B S as in S

Minneapolis, MN

#31253 Jan 25, 2014
LessHypeMoreFact wrote:
<quoted text>
Unseasonably warm weather continues; Alyeska closed to skiers today
http://www.adn.com/2014/01/20/3282860/more-un...
And Alaska has no snow for skiers! In mid winter!!!
You have to look at the global picture, not look for 'cold snaps' in mid-winter.
And the global picture is a continuation of the warming trend.
http://blog.chron.com/climateabyss/2012/04/ab...
You have a LOT to learn before you will make a meaningful comment here.
God... you are like a pit bull. Record Regional COOLING across parts of the northern Hemisphere is not evidence of CC (" not look at cold snaps")? BUT pointing to some warm parts of Alaska is somehow Looking At The Global Picture. You are strong evidence that Cognitive Dissonance is a prerequisite for the global warming faithful.

Judged:

14

14

14

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!
Anti Christ

Minneapolis, MN

#31254 Jan 25, 2014
gcaveman1 wrote:
It's always the same. Mostly intelligent, thoughtful posts from AGW acceptors, always attempting the truth.
untruthful barbs from the deniers.
Why don't you guys fight facts with facts? Because you don't have any, maybe?
So besides making you a SICK PERVERTED HILLBILLY do your posts also make you "Stupid, shallow, petty, denier"?:
gcaveman1 wrote:
"I hope I have answered your dumbass questions."

"If I'm misreading the chart..." HA!

Try "misreading the CHARTS", try misreading the graphs.

And you suggest that we are misreading the graphs. Typical substitution of blame, a sign of a serious personality disorder, if not serious mental illness.

Did you enjoy all this as much as I did?

You're fucked."
...
http://www.topix.com/forum/news/global-warmin...

"I think you're a little sore since I screwed you."

"Didn't like it much, huh?"
...

"You never had any credibility and now you've even lost that."
...
http://www.topix.com/forum/nyc/T1046AOH0DHHII...

"...so good that you want to keep it in your mouth all the time?"
...
http://www.topix.com/forum/news/global-warmin...

Judged:

14

14

14

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!

Since: Apr 08

"the green troll"

#31256 Jan 25, 2014
B as in B S as in S wrote:
<quoted text>
God... you are like a pit bull. Record Regional COOLING across parts of the northern Hemisphere is not evidence of CC (" not look at cold snaps")? BUT pointing to some warm parts of Alaska is somehow Looking At The Global Picture. You are strong evidence that Cognitive Dissonance is a prerequisite for the global warming faithful.
You don't seem to understand what cognitive dissonance is, clutz.

Judged:

13

13

13

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!
Delon Royster

Universal City, CA

#31257 Jan 25, 2014
Even if we stopped all human carbon emissions today, the effects of global warming would still take a many centuries or more to play out. If we stopped all carbon emissions today it would cause a famine killing billions. Anyone who has visited many third world countries with rapid population growth know there is no chance they will do anything other than lip service to slow this down. They are unable to implement even basic sanitation. They are very good at blaming others and denial.

There are attempts to regulate this away. While it will increase there political power it will operationally do nothing to address or prepare.

One of the confusions about global warming, is it gets mixed with various forms of political correctness. Like pouring tons of extra money into Detroit public schools yet half are functionally illiterate. Explanations offered for this blame others and denial of the consequences of lifestyle choices. So people think all this is BS and lump global warming in with this.

For instance in the past in the American Southwest many things (dams & aqueducts) have greatly slowed the negative effects of drought. More needs to be done. Fighting unnecessary wars and expanding support for the baby-momma lifestyle does nothing to prepare. There are possible water projects like an aqueduct to the Columbia river. More intrinsically safe nuke plants (Thorium reactors for instance) must be developed and built. More efficient desalinization will need to be developed. There are many other things too. History has always favored those who adapt to change and think outside its current politically correct box. Politicians typically hang on the coattails of real change. History forgets those who blame and deny.
gcaveman1

Bay Springs, MS

#31258 Jan 25, 2014
Brian_G wrote:
http://www.examiner.com/articl e/u-n-climate-chief-communism- best-method-of-dealing-with-gl obal-warming
U.N. climate chief: Communism best method of dealing with global warming
January 15, 2014
For years, conservatives have said that radical environmentalism is little more than a front for a move to Communist tyranny. That assertion seems to have been proven with comments made by Christiana Figueres, climate chief for the United Nations, who said Communism is the best model for fighting global warming, the Daily Caller reported Wednesday.
According to Figueres, China, the world's top emitter of carbon dioxide, is “doing it right,” even though it has major pollution problems of its own.
The reason, she explained, is that democracy is no good at handling something like global warming, with different parties arguing over policy. In fact, she said, political differences like those in the U.S. Congress, are "very detrimental" to solving the issue....
Yes, Thomas Friedman, in his 2009 book, "Hot, Flat, and Crowded", fantasized about how quickly we could solve the problem if the US were to become "China for a day".

Ain't gonna happen.

Democracy and freedom will always do better than communism in the long run, but it takes cooperation and bipartisanship, working together, like this country is supposed to do. That's why I say you, and you Republicunt cohorts in Congress, are traitors to our country and to the world.

History will judge yall as mass murderers, who held up action for a few dollars more.

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.

2012 Presidential Election Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Election 'Fox News Sunday' to Host Kentucky Senate Debate (Oct '10) 3 min Abe 228,585
News BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit contesting... (Jan '09) 30 min District 1 216,727
News For Obama, setbacks from a divided Supreme Court 4 hr Rev Cash Dollar 1
News Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 6 hr USAsince1680 1,395,134
News IAAF issues guidelines on Russian track athletes 11 hr PUTINs JUNKIES 3
News Adios, Three Amigos: Obama heads to last summit... 12 hr He Named Me Black... 6
News Poll: Should Hillary Clinton choose Cory Booker... 21 hr Go Blue Forever 4
More from around the web