Federal report: Warming is disrupting...

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

There are 1084 comments on the Cape Breton Post story from May 6, 2014, titled Federal report: Warming is disrupting America with weird weather, rising pollen, more costs. In it, Cape Breton Post reports that:

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.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Cape Breton Post.

“If it ain't broke don't fix it”

Level 9

Since: Jul 09

Arcadia, LA.

#146 May 7, 2014
Lawrence Wolf wrote:
<quoted text>Dragoon, I'm going to ask you a couple of serious questions. No insults or putdowns. Could you explain your reasoning for denying the existence of man-made global warming? Surely, you are aware that virtually every qualified climatologist says it is real. Do you honestly believe that all these scientists are in on some sort of conspiracy? What kind of evidence could make you a believer?
Seriously:

1) There is credible evidence to suggest that IPCC data regarding "climate change" is not only wrong, but is intentionally misleading.
2) Even without that evidence, climatologists who argue for global warming shot themselves in the foot long ago by claiming that global warming will result in more frequent hurricanes and more powerful hurricanes will hit the U.S. The exact opposite has happened.
3) The fact that the "97%" of scientists pushing their "theory" can't decide on whether we are experience global warming or climate change is enough to cast doubt on their studies...

I could go on.

As far as what kind of evicence could make me a believer? Show me some "climate change". Thus far, despite all of the hype and misleading stories (such as the one leading to this thread), I have yet to see any "weird" or "unusual" weather . Everything that the IPCC and media is pushing as "weird" or "unusual" is anything but weird or unusual. It is nothing I haven't seen many times throughout my life.

“If it ain't broke don't fix it”

Level 9

Since: Jul 09

Arcadia, LA.

#147 May 7, 2014
litesong wrote:
litesong wrote:
As for 2013 Arctic sea ice, sleazy slimy toxic topix AGW denier liars squawked that sea ice increased by 50%.... even 60%. Later, sleazy slimy toxic topix AGW denier liars reduced that amount to 30%. None of their numbers were correct. Even at the worst of sleazy slimy toxic topix AGW denier liars' assertions that an ice age was started(an AGW deniar lie of 10 years), proper comparisons, showed only a 15% increase. By the end of 2013, the Arctic sea ice was only 1% greater. Presently, Arctic sea ice VOLUME is 1% less than normal for this decade.
/////////
"ratdownthemiddledownwron ggully" knows all this. But, "ratdownthemiddledownwron ggully" is a sleazy slimy steenking toxic topix AGW denier liar continues to stonewall.
"ratdownthemiddledownwron ggully" earns its name, "ratdownthemiddledownwron ggully".
/////////
"drag its goony face" fluffed:
You religious nuts sure do get.....
/////////
litesong wrote:
Glad "drag its goony face" doesn't believe:
As for 2013 Arctic sea ice, sleazy slimy toxic topix AGW denier liars squawked that sea ice increased by 50%.... even 60%. Later, sleazy slimy toxic topix AGW denier liars reduced that amount to 30%. None of their numbers were correct. Even at the worst of sleazy slimy toxic topix AGW denier liars' assertions that an ice age was started(an AGW deniar lie of 10 years), proper comparisons, showed only a 15% increase. By the end of 2013, the Arctic sea ice was only 1% greater. Presently, Arctic sea ice VOLUME is 1% less than normal for this decade.
/////////
"ratdownthemiddledownwron ggully" knows all this. But, "ratdownthemiddledownwron ggully" is a sleazy slimy steenking toxic topix AGW denier liar, who continues to stonewall.
"ratdownthemiddledownwron ggully" earns its name, "ratdownthemiddledownwron ggully".
I ain't its teacher, & from whom it failed to learn, the first go around. "drag its goony face" can't be smarter than its lack of science, chemistry, astronomy, physics & pre-calc in a poorly (or non-) earned hi skule DEE-ploomaa, would truly indicate.
You really are one angry little girl.
Mechanic

Marthaville, LA

#148 May 7, 2014
Or maybe if the government open leases to allow a lot more drilling on federal lands to produce "clean burning" and "inexpensive" natural gas,
uh, well no,,,
the current administration won't allow that.

“If it ain't broke don't fix it”

Level 9

Since: Jul 09

Arcadia, LA.

#149 May 7, 2014
Lawrence Wolf wrote:
<quoted text>Well, at least you realize there's more than one of me.
There was more than one fanatic follower of Charles Manson as well.
Christsharia Law

Philadelphia, PA

#150 May 7, 2014
ritedownthemiddle wrote:
<quoted text>oh, so you're admitting that effects haven't been identified yet?
No cretin, I was correcting your basic misunderstanding/troll.

There are effects now.

That does not mean, as you posted, that there are not going to be future effects also.

Every qualified scientist accepts the basic mechanism. There are supplied ranges of possible, future effects. Everyone knows this. Everyone with half a brain knows what a trend is, what kinds of things might mitigate or worsen that trend, and roughly what sorts of results we would see from each scenario.

Again, this is how knowledge and science work - people are interested in predictive ideas.
Mechanic

Marthaville, LA

#151 May 7, 2014
Well I could stop driving and start walking to work,
uh,, well no, that's 25 miles.
There's no one I can to car pool with.
Maybe Al Gore could fly me back and forth to work in his jet,
Hey, we could "Jet Pool",!!! How cool would that be??
Christsharia Law

Philadelphia, PA

#152 May 7, 2014
Commander Bunny wrote:
"Man" is just a tiny little flea on this dirtclod.
Yet, to take just two examples, the amount of deforestation and paved roads are very significant on a planetary basis.

Your idea that humans cannot affect the planet is the lowest form of idi ocy yet expressed here. The sheer irrationality and stu pidity of it is breathtaking.
Christsharia Law

Philadelphia, PA

#153 May 7, 2014
More study wrote:
<quoted text>
WOW!!!!!!
You really are a piece of shit. Aren't you? You demean those that deny climate change and those that acknowledge it. At least you're an equal opportunity piece of shit. Good luck convincing anyone that climate change is real and that man has a part in causing it with that attitude.
Hey cretin, you ignored the content in favor of whining.

The effects are human caused, unlike the changes from the Ice Ages.

I explained why. Can you remember? Can your hom skool teechur help you?

The current changes are taking place at a pace far, far faster than any previous, naturally occurring changes. That means human activity is driving them. The changes aren't like previous changes.

These changes are not seen on planets in our solar system. That means it's human activity.

Still too complex for rubes?
Mechanic

Marthaville, LA

#154 May 7, 2014
Christsharia Law wrote:
<quoted text>
Yet, to take just two examples, the amount of deforestation and paved roads are very significant on a planetary basis.
Your idea that humans cannot affect the planet is the lowest form of idi ocy yet expressed here. The sheer irrationality and stu pidity of it is breathtaking.
I understand you are concerned.
Just a simple question.
What solution do you offer as an alternative to the forest product it took to make the box your computer came packaged in or the paved road it took to deliver it?
Christsharia Law

Philadelphia, PA

#155 May 7, 2014
Mechanic wrote:
<quoted text>
I understand you are concerned.
Just a simple question.
What solution do you offer as an alternative to the forest product it took to make the box your computer came packaged in or the paved road it took to deliver it?
We were discussing the ignorant and anti rational and anti scientific denial of human caused climate change we see from know nothing tee baggrz and fundies.

Whether or how to deal with the problem of carbon emissions is a different matter.

Or did you just admit that the only reason you deny human mediated climate change is because the remedies look difficult under our current system? Is that why you tried to switch your argument?

BTW, educated people, the ones who know the earth is more than 10000 years old, the ones who understand the quite simple mechanism around co2, have been having discussions about how to address the problem. It's you anti rational deniers who block all _those_ discussions by lyingly maintaining there is no problem at all.

So the answer to your non question question is that first we have to deal with all the filth who are in purposeful denial, claiming the "science isn't clear." It is clear. They just don't like the implications of the science being perfectly clear. As your non question question so aptly, if inadvertently, shows.
Mechanic

Marthaville, LA

#156 May 7, 2014
This is some beautiful spring with the lovely sound of crickets chirping.
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

#157 May 7, 2014
Mechanic wrote:
<quoted text>
I understand you are concerned.
Just a simple question.
What solution do you offer as an alternative to the forest product it took to make the box your computer came packaged in or the paved road it took to deliver it?
Start thinking like that.for solutions.

This forum is known for publishing solutions. However, it is not your private tutor.
Survey Sez

Owensboro, KY

#158 May 7, 2014
The plan is to gradually transition to clean energy over the next 50 to 100 years.

“BET DAP”

Level 4

Since: Feb 09

GOOM BOWN

#159 May 7, 2014
Survey Sez wrote:
Science Channel
People produce a great deal of carbon dioxide (CO2) from many different sources, and most of this CO2 ends up in the atmosphere. As of 2002, for example, there were 531 million cars worldwide [source: World Watch]. Each of those cars, on average, produces 20 pounds of carbon dioxide for every gallon of gas it consumes [source: United States Dept. of Energy]. A great deal of our electricity is generated by coal-fired power plants as well, and they are are some of the worst polluters.
When you factor in other sources of CO2, such as cow manure and cleared forests,the U.S. Department of Energy estimates that humans are responsible each year for emitting nearly 6 billion metric tons of carbon dioxide.
cow farts produce methane.
human emissions equal to about the same (a fart) in the superdome.

“BET DAP”

Level 4

Since: Feb 09

GOOM BOWN

#160 May 7, 2014
litesong wrote:
<quoted text>
As a group, sleazy slimy steenking toxic topix AGW denier liars have less science, chemistry, astronomy, physics, algebra & pre-calc in their poorly (or non-) earned hi skule DEE-plooomaas, even including U-knee-ver-city grad-U-ated "ratdownthemiddledownwron ggully".
"ratdownthemiddledownwron ggully" earns its name, "ratdownthemiddledownwron ggully".
where is your proof to that claim?

oh....you just have a bad habit of making shyt up, right, bird killer?

“BET DAP”

Level 4

Since: Feb 09

GOOM BOWN

#161 May 7, 2014
litesong wrote:
litesong wrote:
As for 2013 Arctic sea ice, sleazy slimy toxic topix AGW denier liars squawked that sea ice increased by 50%.... even 60%. Later, sleazy slimy toxic topix AGW denier liars reduced that amount to 30%. None of their numbers were correct. Even at the worst of sleazy slimy toxic topix AGW denier liars' assertions that an ice age was started(an AGW deniar lie of 10 years), proper comparisons, showed only a 15% increase. By the end of 2013, the Arctic sea ice was only 1% greater. Presently, Arctic sea ice VOLUME is 1% less than normal for this decade.
/////////
"ratdownthemiddledownwron ggully" knows all this. But, "ratdownthemiddledownwron ggully" is a sleazy slimy steenking toxic topix AGW denier liar continues to stonewall.
"ratdownthemiddledownwron ggully" earns its name, "ratdownthemiddledownwron ggully".
/////////
"drag its goony face" fluffed:
You religious nuts sure do get.....
/////////
litesong wrote:
Glad "drag its goony face" doesn't believe:
As for 2013 Arctic sea ice, sleazy slimy toxic topix AGW denier liars squawked that sea ice increased by 50%.... even 60%. Later, sleazy slimy toxic topix AGW denier liars reduced that amount to 30%. None of their numbers were correct. Even at the worst of sleazy slimy toxic topix AGW denier liars' assertions that an ice age was started(an AGW deniar lie of 10 years), proper comparisons, showed only a 15% increase. By the end of 2013, the Arctic sea ice was only 1% greater. Presently, Arctic sea ice VOLUME is 1% less than normal for this decade.
/////////
"ratdownthemiddledownwron ggully" knows all this. But, "ratdownthemiddledownwron ggully" is a sleazy slimy steenking toxic topix AGW denier liar, who continues to stonewall.
"ratdownthemiddledownwron ggully" earns its name, "ratdownthemiddledownwron ggully".
I ain't its teacher, & from whom it failed to learn, the first go around. "drag its goony face" can't be smarter than its lack of science, chemistry, astronomy, physics & pre-calc in a poorly (or non-) earned hi skule DEE-ploomaa, would truly indicate.
yet i keep schooling your dumbazz on a daily basis, right?

“BET DAP”

Level 4

Since: Feb 09

GOOM BOWN

#162 May 7, 2014
litesong wrote:
Correction: DEE-ploomaa should be DEE-plooomaa.
hopefully you'll get one of those shingles someday.

from what i can see......it will be a while.

“BET DAP”

Level 4

Since: Feb 09

GOOM BOWN

#163 May 7, 2014
litesong wrote:
<quoted text>
Sleazy slimy steenking toxic topix AGW denier liars have less science, chemistry, astronomy, physics, algebra & pre-calc in their poorly (or non-) earned hi skule DEE-plooomaas & should be demeaned.
you psychotic bird killing idiot.

keep up the 'good' work. you are a prime example to how fuqued up alarmists are.

lol

please please please keep posting?!?!

i so much sharing your lunacy to other's!!

LOL
Mechanic

Marthaville, LA

#164 May 7, 2014
SpaceBlues wrote:
<quoted text>Start thinking like that.for solutions.
This forum is known for publishing solutions. However, it is not your private tutor.
My question wasn't posed to you.

“BET DAP”

Level 4

Since: Feb 09

GOOM BOWN

#165 May 7, 2014
Christsharia Law wrote:
<quoted text>
No cretin, I was correcting your basic misunderstanding/troll.
There are effects now.
That does not mean, as you posted, that there are not going to be future effects also.
Every qualified scientist accepts the basic mechanism. There are supplied ranges of possible, future effects. Everyone knows this. Everyone with half a brain knows what a trend is, what kinds of things might mitigate or worsen that trend, and roughly what sorts of results we would see from each scenario.
Again, this is how knowledge and science work - people are interested in predictive ideas.
you confuse opinions with facts, son!!
http://townhall.com/columnists/johnhawkins/20...

then....what are the effects now? i want facts....not your useless opinion!!

you claimed there would be future effects!!! what exactly are they?? if the 'science' is settled....surely you can tell us where it's going to be warmer....or colder....or drier....or more flooding with some degree of certitude, right? after all....everyone with half a brain "KNOWS" this, right???

"every qualified scientist accepts this"????? show me that data.......or just admit you're lying.

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.

Weird Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Denny Crain's Place (May '10) 7 min Rider on the Storm 32,384
"3 words beginning with similar Letters!" (Dec '12) 13 min andet1987 366
Gangsta 15 min andet1987 1
Word association (Jun '07) 30 min -Papa-Smurf- 7,172
The Song Title Game (Jul '10) 1 hr Rider on the Storm 16,090
What's for dinner? (Feb '12) 1 hr Pardon Pard 9,643
Does anyone remember? (Apr '13) 1 hr Pardon Pard 1,965
Poll What are you thinking right now? (May '08) 2 hr Focus on THIS 6,738
El's Kitchen (Feb '09) 2 hr Chilli J 76,605
What song are you listening to right now? (Apr '08) 8 hr wichita-rick 226,066
More from around the web