Global warming 'undeniable,' scientis...

Global warming 'undeniable,' scientists say

There are 34489 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.

Since: Apr 08

"the green troll"

#24835 Mar 29, 2013
Amused Slew wrote:
<quoted text>
Maybe, maybe not
Just stating my perspective
Relativism?

Feck off.
Amused Slew

Minneapolis, MN

#24836 Mar 29, 2013
Fair Game wrote:
<quoted text>
Relativism?
Feck off.
:( ok

Since: Apr 08

"the green troll"

#24837 Mar 29, 2013
Amused Slew wrote:
<quoted text>
:( ok
Bye.
Amused Slew

Minneapolis, MN

#24838 Mar 29, 2013
Fair Game wrote:
<quoted text>
Bye.
See you!
for what's its worth I enjoyed our conversation.:)
litesong

Everett, WA

#24839 Mar 29, 2013
phdtoo wrote:
if you view temps at the north and south poles they are both very cold.
No. The NP is very cold, but the SP is very very very cold.
litesong

Everett, WA

#24840 Mar 29, 2013
In addition, Vostok, Antarctica averages almost another 10degC colder than the South Pole. So it is very, very, very, very cold!

“I Luv Carbon Dioxide”

Since: Dec 08

Home, sweet home.

#24841 Mar 29, 2013
Fair Game wrote:
I agree: we need to reverse it to make it an experiment: reduce CO2 and see if we get the opposite effect. Just adding more CO2 and seeing more warming and less radiation escaping to space proves nothing.
Right, our CO2 use isn't an experiment now because it's not controlled or in the words of Fair Game, we need to reverse it to make it an experiment. The experiment has never been done. No experimental emissions or absorption of CO2 and the atmosphere has ever been shown to create even the smallest measurable global climate change.

I'm glad we agree on this.

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#24842 Mar 29, 2013
Kyle wrote:
<quoted text>
BINGO! This point has been made so well and so many times, yet Brian is non-responsive and will forever be.
Refusal to acknowledge refutations IS a defacto concession. Brian HAS conceded. He's either too intellectually dishonest to do so explicitly (hypothesis #1), too irrational to process hos defeat (hypothesis #2), too well compensated to do so or go away (hypothesis #3), or some combo.
What percentage breakdown would you estimate applies?
My best estimate would be that #3 is most important,#1 next,#2 least. I don't think he's irrational, he's just a paid liar. JMO.

After all,

"It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it!"
--Upton Sinclair

Since: Apr 08

"the green troll"

#24843 Mar 29, 2013
Amused Slew wrote:
<quoted text>
See you!
for what's its worth I enjoyed our conversation.:)
I didn't.

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#24844 Mar 29, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>My entire argument is, there have been no trials, tests, experiments, demonstrations or real world atmospheric models of climate change mitigation so we don't know if it will harm more than help or how much it would cost.
Yes. There have been no trials, tests, experiment, demonstrations or real world atmospheric models of climate change done by emitters that prove the changes in the atmosphere they're forcing on the rest of us are safe.

See? I fixed it for you. You're welcome, BTW.
Amused Slew

Minneapolis, MN

#24845 Mar 29, 2013
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/features...

20 year hiatus in rising temperatures has climate scientist puzzled
Amused Slew

Minneapolis, MN

#24846 Mar 29, 2013
Amused Slew wrote:
http://www.theaustralian.com.a u/news/features/twenty-year-hi atus-in-rising-temperatures-ha s-climate-scientists-puzzled/s tory-e6frg6z6-1226609140980
20 year hiatus in rising temperatures has climate scientist puzzled
http://www.economist.com/news/leaders/2157449...
Bushwhacker

Seattle, WA

#24847 Mar 29, 2013
Amused Slew wrote:
http://www.theaustralian.com.a u/news/features/twenty-year-hi atus-in-rising-temperatures-ha s-climate-scientists-puzzled/s tory-e6frg6z6-1226609140980
20 year hiatus in rising temperatures has climate scientist puzzled
"But it does not mean global warming is a delusion."

The fact is temperatures between 2000 and 2010 are still almost 1C above their level in the first decade of the 20th century.

"The mismatch might mean that for some unexplained reason there has been a temporary lag between more carbon dioxide and higher temperatures in 2000-2010.

"Or it might mean that the 1990s, when temperatures were rising fast, was the anomalous period."

The magazine explores a range of possible explanations including higher emissions of sulphur dioxide, the little understood impact of clouds and the circulation of heat into the deep ocean.

But it also points to an increasing body of research that suggests it may be that climate is responding to higher concentrations of atmospheric carbon dioxide in ways that had not been properly understood before.

"This possibility, if true, could have profound significance both for climate science and for environmental and social policy," the article says.

There are now a number of studies that predict future temperature rises as a result of man-made carbon dioxide emissions at well below the IPCC best estimate of about 3C over the century.

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#24848 Mar 29, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>I haven't seen a citation for a peer reviewed experiment on climate change mitigation, have you?
.
<quoted text>I'm not advocating changing the atmosphere, I advocate the freedom to add or remove as much CO2 as you like. There's already plenty of CO2 in the atmosphere, I won't change that.
It's HSL who advocates changing and controlling atmosphere CO2, not I.
.
<quoted text>No, its on scientist to provide compelling experimental evidence; else science fails.
.
<quoted text>I don't call my opponents names because I prefer rationality to childish insults.
I haven't seen any scientific citations showing that the way the emitters want to keep changing the atmosphere is safe, no. Actually, we already know for a FACT that it's expensive & dangerous.

Oh, you LIE. You most assuredly DO want to change the atmosphere. You're already changing it now, as Keeling & others have proven.

On other threads, you've already claimed it would be harmless for CO2 to go to 2000 or 2500 PPM. That would be certain death for many billions of people, & an almost incalculable loss, in the quadrillions of today's dollars (counting the deaths).

NO, I advocate keeping the atmosphere where it is, or better yet, getting CO2 down to <350 PPM. YOU want to change it, for nothing other than your own selfish reasons.

NO, it's incombent upon YOU to PROVE raising CO2 is harmless, because YOU & your ilk are the ones who want to change it. You can deny this a hundred thousand times if you want, but it won't change the FACT that I'm right about this & you're wrong.

When you show you're not worthy of names, people will stop calling you those names. As it is now, your repetitive posts, saying the same thing over & over, despite being refuted multiple times by multiple people, move the needle on the troll-o-meter far into the red zone.

Sorry. You've earned it.
Bushwhacker

Seattle, WA

#24849 Mar 29, 2013
Fake slew, said he'd be trolling these boards a lot more... Funny, how the morons admit their agenda, then whine when they're called out for it.
Amused Slew

Minneapolis, MN

#24850 Mar 29, 2013
Bushwhacker wrote:
Fake slew, said he'd be trolling these boards a lot more... Funny, how the morons admit their agenda, then whine when they're called out for it.
I would hate to live in your world.
I genuinely pity you.

You have issues.
serious issues.
Amused Slew

Minneapolis, MN

#24851 Mar 29, 2013
Bushwhacker wrote:
Fake slew, said he'd be trolling these boards a lot more... Funny, how the morons admit their agenda, then whine when they're called out for it.
When do you NOT call someone out with insults?
Funny how you always seem to disappear when I'm actively on.

Then come back later to throw insults.

I genuinely pity you :(

You have serious issues with your life.

I suspect you will be like this for a long long time.
Quite a sad individual.

Find a genuinely rewarding hobby.
Your life is quite depressing.

And its like watching an alcoholic at a bar everytime I read your writing.

You need an intervention.
PHD2

Minneapolis, MN

#24852 Mar 29, 2013
Amused Slew wrote:
<quoted text>
When do you NOT call someone out with insults?
Funny how you always seem to disappear when I'm actively on.
Then come back later to throw insults.
I genuinely pity you :(
You have serious issues with your life.
I suspect you will be like this for a long long time.
Quite a sad individual.
Find a genuinely rewarding hobby.
Your life is quite depressing.
And its like watching an alcoholic at a bar everytime I read your writing.
You need an intervention.
Amen!

Adam Lanza didn't get the needed attention. Another basement dweller, will Slewer be the NEXT MASS MURDERER?
PHD

Overton, TX

#24853 Mar 30, 2013
Kyle wrote:
<quoted text>
You are truly insane. You quote science that unequivocally supports GW and just dismiss it with nothing more than an unjustified characterization. I think there might be one other possibility. If you're not batshite bonkers, you could be a rational acceptor of science attempting to discredit denial to the absolute maximum extent possible.
In which case, you're succeeding in spades. Keep up the good work.
The simple English language confuses you. That would explain why you successfully engineered the bankruptcy of the Auto Ind. Just to help you along the quote "was pointing out scientific science fiction".Yes another reason why you successfully engineered the Auto Ind. into bankruptcy you don't know the difference between real science and scientific science fiction.
PHD

Overton, TX

#24854 Mar 30, 2013
Fair Game wrote:
<quoted text>
You are obviously determined to go to the grave a know-nothing.
Don't worry- you'll make it.
Your the one confused and not knowing.

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.

Global Warming Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News In climate bid, Obama stares down melting Alask... 2 min woodtick57 162
News On Arctic voyage, Obama banks on power of his c... 51 min Synque 8
News Once slow-moving threat, global warming speeds ... (Dec '08) 2 hr Into The Night 54,624
Global Cooling 3 hr Into The Night 201
What role do you think humans play in global wa... (Sep '14) 4 hr Into The Night 6,975
COP21 Paris 2015 (Feb '15) 6 hr Earthling-1 12
The Science of GHG 6 hr Earthling-1 133
More from around the web