Global warming 'undeniable,' scientis...

Global warming 'undeniable,' scientists say

There are 37507 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.

“you know i know”

Since: Oct 07

denver

#36011 Sep 12, 2014
LessHypeMoreFact wrote:
<quoted text>
Technically it would be mostly weather (primary causation from proximate conditions),local climate (you don't get snow in the Sahara no matter what), and AGW driven climate change (weakening of the jet stream causing more arctic air to flow south to meet with northward flowing gulf humidity).
Now, that you k now, are you going to try to post something rational?
BTW, thanks for admitting yur a hysteric.
litesong

Everett, WA

#36012 Sep 12, 2014
litesong wrote:
It is good that "lippy ass" reports effects of AGW, which is causing increased times & greater amounts of Arctic cold to move to the south.
Meanwhile other areas warm, such as Fairbanks, Alaska at 20degC(68degF).
//////////
"harm on us" huffed:
Ice is good for ice skating and cold drinks, nothing else.
/////////
litesong wrote:
Tho you dislike cold, it is good that you understand that excess AGW energy is produced in the Arctic AND is thrust into the Arctic. That excess AGW energy more readily moves Arctic cold fronts to the south.

“Happy, warm and comfortable”

Since: Oct 10

Mountain retreat, SE Spain

#36013 Sep 12, 2014
LessFactAllHype wrote:
Yes. Warmer AIR temperatures in SUMMER melted surface ice in the periphery causing hydraulic fracturing to break up the Larsen B ice shelf. That is one fact.
There is also the issue of warmer water undercutting the West Antarctic Ice Sheet, leading to greater flows and negative mass balance.
Then there are the stronger katabatic winds and more frequent snow (from higher precipitation) in the shore regions that are also less salty (easier to freeze) leading to a lower volume of winter sea ice but a greater area (about 1% or so depending whether later corrections (two thirds may be spurious) are correct.)
And all that due to an alleged 0.5C of AGW.
Believe that, you'll believe anything.

“Happy, warm and comfortable”

Since: Oct 10

Mountain retreat, SE Spain

#36014 Sep 12, 2014
LessFactAllHype wrote:
If the long term weather odds changes, it would be 'climate change'.
Have a care, Mr Undoubtably Spelt Fourty:
LessFactMoreHype wrote:
And no. Climate and weather are not 'linked' any more than the subject of gambling and a throw of the dice. Different concept levels entirely.
http://www.topix.com/forum/news/global-warmin...

My response:
http://www.eea.europa.eu/themes/climate/faq/w...
1. Climate = average weather.
2. Climate change and weather are intertwined.
3. Changes in weather identify climate change.
4. Weather and climate are closely related.
LessHypeMoreFact

Toronto, Canada

#36015 Sep 12, 2014
Earthling-1 wrote:
<quoted text>And all that due to an alleged 0.5C of AGW.
Believe that, you'll believe anything.
Global warming is closer to 1C right now and likely to hit 3C before it is halted. That is a MASSIVE amount of thermal energy which chances the climate processes over vast areas. The ice ages were only a change of about 3C to 6C. Other events of no more than 5C warming have led to 95% extinction rates. Trivializing it is just your childish reaction, not a relevant argument.
LessHypeMoreFact

Toronto, Canada

#36016 Sep 12, 2014
Earthling-1 wrote:
Your response is noted. It is not very good. More of a 'science for dummies' version that approximates or tries to get the concept in a manner that would be understood by a grade three student.
Earthling-1 wrote:
<quoted text>
1. Climate = average weather.
Wrong. If the local temperature averages 15C but ranges from -15C to +30C, that is one climate. If the local temperature averages 15C but ranges from 10C to 20C, that is a DIFFERENT climate. Understand yet? Climate is metadata ABOUT weather (probabilities).. In the second case, the chance of a -15C day is NOT the same as in the first case.
Earthling-1 wrote:
<quoted text>
2. Climate change and weather are intertwined.
Since local climate is about the odds of particular weather events or regimes, this is defensible.
Earthling-1 wrote:
<quoted text>
3. Changes in weather identify climate change.
Changes in the ODDS of particular weather show that the climate has changed, yes. Changes in any particular days weather do not. Identifying climate change is partly finding correlations and mechanisms, and partly statistics.
Earthling-1 wrote:
<quoted text>
4. Weather and climate are closely related.
Related, yes. As in 2.

With that said, you are probably still as ignorant as you were going in..
Obskeptic

Livonia, MI

#36017 Sep 12, 2014
LessHypeMoreFact wrote:
<quoted text>
Your response is noted. It is not very good. More of a 'science for dummies' version that approximates or tries to get the concept in a manner that would be understood by a grade three student.
<quoted text>
Wrong. If the local temperature averages 15C but ranges from -15C to +30C, that is one climate. If the local temperature averages 15C but ranges from 10C to 20C, that is a DIFFERENT climate. Understand yet? Climate is metadata ABOUT weather (probabilities).. In the second case, the chance of a -15C day is NOT the same as in the first case.
<quoted text>
Since local climate is about the odds of particular weather events or regimes, this is defensible.
<quoted text>
Changes in the ODDS of particular weather show that the climate has changed, yes. Changes in any particular days weather do not. Identifying climate change is partly finding correlations and mechanisms, and partly statistics.
<quoted text>
Related, yes. As in 2.
With that said, you are probably still as ignorant as you were going in..
So it snowed yesterday in Denver and its only September. It also snowed in South Dakota. Earliest snowfall recorded there since 1888. According to the ultra smart like yourself, this is a result of man made global warming, not repeating weather cycles. Of course, in 1888 we were busy burning tons of coal and stripping our forests clean, and it appears based on predictions, that we are in store for another brutal winter on top of the cold and wet summer, but ignore all of that. We are in the middle of a man made climate CRISIS declared by the "sky is falling" lunatics like yourself, even though all of the weather events we are witness too today happened before.
SpaceBlues

Humble, TX

#36018 Sep 12, 2014
At the rate we're going, we'll shatter our goal by a hefty 2 C by the end of the century (reaching a total of 4 degrees Celsius increase) with potentially disastrous effects.

In fact, the report shows we might exceed a 2 C increase as early as 2034.

http://tinyurl.com/l7euamz
LIbEralS

Saint Paul, MN

#36020 Sep 12, 2014
Rare September snow causes damage to trees and power outages in some areas of Wyoming.

While the heaviest snow fell in the Big Horn Mountains, the town of Buffalo received as much as 10 inches.

The 3 to 5 inches that fell in Cody is the earliest recorded snowfall there since 1915, when records started being kept. The previous earliest recorded snowfall in Cody was Sept. 12, 1970.

http://trib.com/news/local/casper/up-to-inche...

“Happy, warm and comfortable”

Since: Oct 10

Mountain retreat, SE Spain

#36021 Sep 13, 2014
NoFactJustHype wrote:
Global warming is closer to 1C right now
Closer than what?
It hasn't risen in the 6 or more years we've been posting here.
You can wish for it as much as you like, the point is, it isn't close to 1C yet.
Read this and weep, Mr Undoubtably Spelt Fourty:
-
HOW MUCH HAS THE GLOBAL TEMPERATURE RISEN IN THE LAST 100 YEARS?
Averaged over all land and ocean surfaces, temperatures warmed roughly 1.53F (0.85C) from 1880 to 2012, according to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (see page 3 of the IPCC's Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis, Summary for Policymakers.
https://www2.ucar.edu/climate/faq/how-much-ha...
-
And that's the IPCC's exaggerated guesstimate.
NoFactAllHype wrote:
and likely to hit 3C before it is halted.
IF it ever "hit 3C" it won't be halted by mankind.
NoFactAllHype wrote:
That is a MASSIVE amount of thermal energy which chances[sic] the climate processes over vast areas. The ice ages were only a change of about 3C to 6C. Other events of no more than 5C warming have led to 95% extinction rates. Trivializing it is just your childish reaction, not a relevant argument.
I'm "trivializing it" because it isn't going to happen, except in your wet dreams.

“Happy, warm and comfortable”

Since: Oct 10

Mountain retreat, SE Spain

#36022 Sep 13, 2014
NoFactAllHype wrote:
Your response is noted. It is not very good. More of a 'science for dummies' version that approximates or tries to get the concept in a manner that would be understood by a grade three student.
You get what you deserve.
-
If you don't like it, I suggest you advise the authors of the article as to their failings.
European Environment Agency (EEA)
Kongens Nytorv 6
1050 Copenhagen K
Denmark
Phone:+45 3336 7100
gcaveman1

Bay Springs, MS

#36023 Sep 13, 2014
Earthling-1 wrote:
<quoted text>Have a care, Mr Undoubtably Spelt Fourty:<quoted text>
http://www.topix.com/forum/news/global-warmin...
My response:
http://www.eea.europa.eu/themes/climate/faq/w...
1. Climate = average weather.
2. Climate change and weather are intertwined.
3. Changes in weather identify climate change.
4. Weather and climate are closely related.
Do you read links you post? This isn't the first time you've posted something that gives OUR side of the CC argument.
<><><>< ><><><> <>

A common confusion between weather and climate arises when scientists are asked how they can predict climate 50 years from now when they cannot predict the weather a few weeks from now. The chaotic nature of weather makes it unpredictable beyond a few days. Projecting changes in climate (i.e., long-term average weather) due to changes in atmospheric composition or other factors is a very different and much more manageable issue. As an analogy, while it is impossible to predict the age at which any particular man will die, we can say with high confidence that the average age of death for men in industrialised countries is about 75.

Another common confusion of these issues is thinking that a cold winter or a cooling spot on the globe is evidence against global warming. There are always extremes of hot and cold, although their frequency and intensity change as climate changes. But when weather is averaged over space and time, the fact that the globe is warming emerges clearly from the data.

“Happy, warm and comfortable”

Since: Oct 10

Mountain retreat, SE Spain

#36024 Sep 13, 2014
caveman wrote:
Do you read links you post?
That's not the point I was making.
LessFact had this to say about the link:
Your response is noted. It is not very good. More of a 'science for dummies' version that approximates or tries to get the concept in a manner that would be understood by a grade three student.
I guess you missed that.
LessHypeMoreFact

Toronto, Canada

#36026 Sep 13, 2014
Earthling-1 wrote:
<quoted text>Closer than what?
Closer to exact would be 0.9C (relative to 1880, the accepted starting point). Really, if we accept the data on the deep oceans, the total thermal change would be at least 1C in 2010.

http://pubs.giss.nasa.gov/docs/2010/2010_Hans...

Certainly 0.6C is total nonsense.
Fed up with stupid

Minneapolis, MN

#36027 Sep 13, 2014
litesong wrote:
<quoted text>
"sleepy sleazy slimy steenking filthy vile reprobate rooting(& rotting) racist pukey proud pig dirtling" never got & never deserved a hi skule DEE-ploooma.
Uhhhh yep dats fur shur dahhh.

“Happy, warm and comfortable”

Since: Oct 10

Mountain retreat, SE Spain

#36028 Sep 14, 2014
NoFactAllHype wrote:
Closer to exact would be 0.9C (relative to 1880, the accepted starting point). Really, if we accept the data on the deep oceans, the total thermal change would be at least 1C in 2010.
Certainly 0.6C is total nonsense.
Not when talking about AGW, Mr Undoubtably Spelt Fourty.
The anthropogenic contribution to Glowbull warming is probably a lot less than 0.6C, but no one knows the actual figure, not even you.
The only figures available are guesstimates.
Here's one of them:
Three-Quarters of Climate Change Is Man-Made
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/thr...
weams

Lancaster, OH

#36029 Sep 14, 2014
Are we still talking about this fraud? There are only two types of people who advocate for this charade and only one of them actually believes in it.

Both types are dangerous to society as a whole and THAT is undeniable.

I should know, I created the internet.
Captain Yesterday

“Trump is the Enemy”

Since: Oct 10

Impeach Trump

#36030 Sep 14, 2014
"Rare September snow causes damage to trees and power outages in some areas of Wyoming."

A Denier's approach to rational, scientific argument. All that's missing is a link to Breitbart or Daily Caller or some other nutball non-scientific source.:)
litesong

Everett, WA

#36031 Sep 14, 2014
obskeptic wrote:
So it snowed yesterday in Denver and its only September. It also snowed in South Dakota.
It snows in Denver in June, any year & Native tribes have had poor weather before & after the transplanted euros stuck them in concentration camps (reservations). With the sun 3 arcdegrees above the horizon at the North Pole, temperatures over millions of Arctic square kilometers is -6degC. At Alert, Nunavut, Canada, it is -8degC(18degF), & is sending lots of Arctic cold to the U.S. on the Polar Express.

“you know i know”

Since: Oct 07

denver

#36032 Sep 14, 2014
SpaceBlues wrote:
At the rate we're going, we'll shatter our goal by a hefty 2 C by the end of the century (reaching a total of 4 degrees Celsius increase) with potentially disastrous effects.
In fact, the report shows we might exceed a 2 C increase as early as 2034.
http://tinyurl.com/l7euamz
I blame you.

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
News Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 3 min Canuk 1,658,511
News BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit contesting... (Jan '09) 2 hr loose cannon 243,095
News Trump's repeated claim that he won a 'landslide... (Nov '16) 22 hr TnClm 8,789
News Tea party plans to abandon some of their GOP stars (Aug '13) Wed ardith 153
News Palin: Democrats spreading misinformation and lies (Sep '08) Dec 12 Palmermomma 11
News In Political Ads, Christian Left Mounts Sermoni... (Jul '09) Dec 12 Faith In GAWD 2
News Ron Paul on the Verge of Going Third Party? (Jan '08) Dec 9 was auch immer 29,315
More from around the web