Federal report: Warming is disrupting America with weird weather, rising pollen, more costs

May 6, 2014 Full story: Cape Breton Post 1,084

Global warming is rapidly turning America into a stormy and dangerous place, with rising seas and disasters costing citizens from flood-stricken Florida to the wildfire-ravaged West, according to a new U.S. federal scientific report.

Read more

Since: Apr 08

"the green troll"

#1045 May 29, 2014
xxxooxxx wrote:
The upward trend of warming began in 1700s(in red) way before the industrial revolution was in full swing. This would suggest that warming was already taking place. In fact the chart seems to show that we were overdue for a warming event, taking into account past patterns of climate change.
http://jonova.s3.amazonaws.com/graphs/lappi/g...
Your chart doesn't include modern warming.

http://hot-topic.co.nz/wp-content/uploads/201...

Look at where the 2009 value is.

I've rubbed your nose in this before, so I can only assume you are brain dead.

From here:

http://www.skepticalscience.com/10000-years-w...

Since: Apr 08

"the green troll"

#1046 May 29, 2014
xxxooxxx wrote:
In fact the chart seems to show that we were overdue for a warming event, taking into account past patterns of climate change.
No, it shows, as do other graphs, that the Earth was slowly cooling and heading into another ice age before AGW arrived with the industrial revolution.

http://www.skepticalscience.com/images/Hockey...

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#1047 May 29, 2014
Fair Game wrote:
<quoted text>
Your chart doesn't include modern warming.
http://hot-topic.co.nz/wp-content/uploads/201...
Look at where the 2009 value is.
I've rubbed your nose in this before, so I can only assume you are brain dead.
From here:
http://www.skepticalscience.com/10000-years-w...
The point was not the time line but the natural variation vs. man made variation in warming. If you had been paying attention...ah but I ask to much.
Holy Silicon Wafer

Philadelphia, PA

#1048 May 29, 2014
Denny CranesPlace wrote:
<quoted text>There is without a doubt climate change. It has been a great deal warmer and a great deal colder and man caused none of that change then or now. Land settlement is a much bigger problem than the ocean levels rising. The amount of water in the world is a constant
No Jethro, the amount of water in the world is not constant. You're so unbelievably scientifically illiterate that you cannot understand that water changes states.(Hint for the tee baggrz and fundie mouthbreathers: Ice can change to water.)

You don't "think" there is climate change. You keep saying the earth has not warmed over the past 17 years [sic].

Previous climate changes took millennia. The current one is shaping up to take a couple of centuries.

And further, since our anti rationalist cohort needs so very much help, the fact that lightning cause fires before mankind existed does not somehow mean that fires today can only be started by lightning.

Denialists may be willfully ignorant, but they are helpless mor onic.

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#1049 May 29, 2014
Fair Game wrote:
<quoted text>
No, it shows, as do other graphs, that the Earth was slowly cooling and heading into another ice age before AGW arrived with the industrial revolution.
http://www.skepticalscience.com/images/Hockey...
So without " man made " Global Warming we would still be in an ice age? is that you premise?
Holy Silicon Wafer

Philadelphia, PA

#1050 May 29, 2014
xxxooxxx wrote:
<quoted text>
Just wanted to get the facts straight. Atheists tend to imply otherwise.
Wrong. The fundie base of the R. Party and the fundie base of the climate change denialist coagulation "know" the buybull says the earth is under 10000 years old.

I merely mock the fact of your fellow armchair climate "thinkers" believe based on the buybull.

You take the issue up with them. You don't have to convince me that the buybull says no such thing or that even if it did that that claim would make any sense.

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#1051 May 29, 2014
Holy Silicon Wafer wrote:
<quoted text>
Wrong. The fundie base of the R. Party and the fundie base of the climate change denialist coagulation "know" the buybull says the earth is under 10000 years old.
I merely mock the fact of your fellow armchair climate "thinkers" believe based on the buybull.
You take the issue up with them. You don't have to convince me that the buybull says no such thing or that even if it did that that claim would make any sense.
Dont really belong to no party, what party do you belong to?
Survey Sez

Owensboro, KY

#1052 May 29, 2014
xxxooxxx wrote:
<quoted text>
Wow! Not only are we causing global warming on earth, but it seems that we have already destroyed Venus! We really must cease and desist before we destroy the rest of the Solar System!
If you deniers are right and the earth is warming because of increased heat from the sun, the 40% increase in carbon dioxide since 1700 is really gonna heat things up.
Survey Sez

Owensboro, KY

#1053 May 29, 2014
Should have said a 40% increase in carbon dioxide since 1800
Holy Silicon Wafer

Philadelphia, PA

#1054 May 29, 2014
xxxooxxx wrote:
<quoted text>
Dont really belong to no party, what party do you belong to?
The point is not what Party won't have you, or that you want to dissemble about your political leanings, the point is that you're in anti scientific bed with buybull literalist mouthbreathers who make up the bulk of the climate denial rank and file.

You go direct your heretical notions about the age of the earth being more than 10000 years to them. Not to me.

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#1055 May 29, 2014
Holy Silicon Wafer wrote:
<quoted text>
The point is not what Party won't have you, or that you want to dissemble about your political leanings, the point is that you're in anti scientific bed with buybull literalist mouthbreathers who make up the bulk of the climate denial rank and file.
You go direct your heretical notions about the age of the earth being more than 10000 years to them. Not to me.
So what is the party's name that you belong too?...surely you not ashamed to mention the name.

Just wondering...
Holy Silicon Wafer

Philadelphia, PA

#1056 May 29, 2014
xxxooxxx wrote:
<quoted text>
So what is the party's name that you belong too?...surely you not ashamed to mention the name.
Just wondering...
No, you're just changing the subject.

Whether you're a white supremacist, Texas secessionist or a fossil fuels industry executive living in Manhattan who has a Wiccan, lesbian daughter your political bedfellows on climate denial are mouthbreather talibangelicals who will condemn you to hell for not believing the buybull says the earth is under 10000 years old.

Obviously the qualified scientists like Mann know the earth is billions of years old. This has nothing to do with my Democratic tendencies, and you know it.

Always "pretending" to be stoopit, aren't you? Of course pretending to be smart would be much harder. You'd have to hire a tutor and a personal coach.

Since: Apr 08

"the green troll"

#1057 May 29, 2014
xxxooxxx wrote:
<quoted text>
The point was not the time line but the natural variation vs. man made variation in warming. If you had been paying attention...ah but I ask to much.
Your graph didn't include man made variation, because it didn't include any of the modern warming.

The ice core data do not include the modern period.

Get it?

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#1058 May 29, 2014
Holy Silicon Wafer wrote:
<quoted text>
No, you're just changing the subject.
Whether you're a white supremacist, Texas secessionist or a fossil fuels industry executive living in Manhattan who has a Wiccan, lesbian daughter your political bedfellows on climate denial are mouthbreather talibangelicals who will condemn you to hell for not believing the buybull says the earth is under 10000 years old.
Obviously the qualified scientists like Mann know the earth is billions of years old. This has nothing to do with my Democratic tendencies, and you know it.
Always "pretending" to be stoopit, aren't you? Of course pretending to be smart would be much harder. You'd have to hire a tutor and a personal coach.
mmm...that's interesting...So you have Democratic tendencies but dont really belong to the Democrat party...ok. I think I understand.

Since: Apr 08

"the green troll"

#1059 May 29, 2014
...the GISP2 “present” follows a common paleoclimate convention and is actually 1950. The first data point in the file is at 95 years BP. This would make 95 years BP 1855 — a full 155 years ago, long before any other global temperature record shows any modern warming.
http://www.skepticalscience.com/10000-years-w...

Suck it, punk.

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#1060 May 29, 2014
Fair Game wrote:
<quoted text>
Your graph didn't include man made variation, because it didn't include any of the modern warming.
The ice core data do not include the modern period.
Get it?
No I didnt. Because I was asking for you to show me the difference between natural and man made warming. If I could tell the difference there would be no point in me asking.
Survey Sez

Owensboro, KY

#1061 May 29, 2014
xxxooxxx wrote:
<quoted text>
mmm...that's interesting...So you have Democratic tendencies but dont really belong to the Democrat party...ok. I think I understand.
http://my.democrats.org/page/content/joindnc

“Let's X Change!!”

Since: Feb 09

B4 HOPE Is Gone...

#1062 May 29, 2014
Holy Silicon Wafer wrote:
<quoted text>
No Jethro, the amount of water in the world is not constant. You're so unbelievably scientifically illiterate that you cannot understand that water changes states.(Hint for the tee baggrz and fundie mouthbreathers: Ice can change to water.)
You don't "think" there is climate change. You keep saying the earth has not warmed over the past 17 years [sic].
Previous climate changes took millennia. The current one is shaping up to take a couple of centuries.
And further, since our anti rationalist cohort needs so very much help, the fact that lightning cause fires before mankind existed does not somehow mean that fires today can only be started by lightning.
Denialists may be willfully ignorant, but they are helpless mor onic.
hey, gomer, water has remained relatively constant throughout time.
water is either in a liquid, solid, or gaseous state.

in other words....ICE IS WATER!

you look rather foolish calling others ignorant.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water
Holy Silicon Wafer

Philadelphia, PA

#1063 May 29, 2014
ritedownthemiddle wrote:
<quoted text>hey, gomer, water has remained relatively constant throughout time.
water is either in a liquid, solid, or gaseous state.
in other words....ICE IS WATER!
Good, we'll let you drink water vapor from now on.

Cletus, apart from your basic misunderstanding that "water" is different from "vapor," the consequence of ice melting is higher seas, because there's more "water."

Water is less dense than ice, just to review.

Your ignorant BS about "always having the same amount of water" never had anything to say about sea level rise. You're willfully confused.
Holy Silicon Wafer

Philadelphia, PA

#1064 May 29, 2014
xxxooxxx wrote:
<quoted text>
mmm...that's interesting...So you have Democratic tendencies but dont really belong to the Democrat party...ok. I think I understand.
That I am Democrat - I might have voted for one or two liberal R. over the years - has nothing whatever to do with the fact that your fellow anti science, anti rational, climate change deniers are mouthbreathing tee baggrz and holy roller fundies who in near majorities think the earth is under 10000 years old. Cos the buybull says so. They are your political peeps.

It also has nothing to do with your inability by comparison to say what your politics are, troll. But that's less important than who in the main is anti rational, anti science, and climate change denying.

Troll better.

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.

Natural Disasters Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Major effort to needed to reverse apathy about ... 10 hr FCM no better 1
News B.C. is not ready for 'the Big One': Report 20 hr Andy 1
News Remembering the Great Alaska Earthquake of 1964 20 hr Andy 1
News Japan 2011 earthquake released tons of greenhou... 20 hr Andy 1
News Earthquake: 3.0 quake strikes near Dana Point Fri not just ozone loss 1
News Diablo is old; remember Fukushima Fri Jennystar 2
News Indiana declares emergency over HIV outbreak Fri Jaimie 16
More from around the web