Once slow-moving threat, global warmi...

Once slow-moving threat, global warming speeds up, leaving litt...

There are 60655 comments on the Newsday story from Dec 14, 2008, titled Once slow-moving threat, global warming speeds up, leaving litt.... In it, Newsday reports that:

When Bill Clinton took office in 1993, global warming was a slow-moving environmental problem that was easy to ignore.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Newsday.

PHD

Cibolo, TX

#33101 Dec 14, 2012
Science finds errors and make corrections to their errors to find that their corrections were in error.

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#33102 Dec 14, 2012
cricket wrote:
Fervent belief (faith) in what has already been scientifically proven to be wrong.
Do you also have the fervent belief that the hollow earth theory is real?
Why? Proof?
10 Most Famous Scientific Theories (That Turned out to be Wrong)
http://www.toptenz.net/top-10-most-famous-sci...
here's some more:
http://blog.chron.com/sciguy/2010/11/the-top-...
People used to believe that disease was transmitted by smell.
mmcc/cc will eventually join the list as one of the stupidest theories ever, that didn't pass even the most basic scientific smell test.
Are you trying to say that science is more often wrong than right? Are you anti science?
PHD

Cibolo, TX

#33103 Dec 14, 2012
Science finds errors and make corrections to their errors to find that their corrections were in error.
Teddy R

San Francisco, CA

#33104 Dec 14, 2012
PHD wrote:
<quoted text>Ah the privilege of living in a free America. You can make that choice unless you would like me to make it for you. Sorry the simple English language confuses you. And your point if indeed you had one would be? Well not only fractured but fragmented as well. If this were an spelling grammer thread than maybe an extra effort would be appropriate.
Okaayyy. I take it, then, that you had no point to make in your original post to me.

Thanks for making that clear.

Selah.
Teddy R

San Francisco, CA

#33105 Dec 14, 2012
Patriot AKA Bozo wrote:
<quoted text>
That is exactly why the market cannot solve all our problems.
Obviously.

Free markets aren't magic or all-powerful; they do one thing and really one thing only, but they do it better than any other means yet found - allocate economic goods and services optimally, maximizing aggregate economic output and the collective wealth of all participants in the economy.

If the solution to a problem involves fixing suboptimal or inefficient allocation of scarce economic goods and services, the the free market is the the first and best place to look to deliver a solution. If the markets are not working properly because of an identifiable market failure, like Government or somebody else (e.g. a monopoly or cartel) is meddling and tinkering and f**king up prices, you fix the failure if you can so the markets can get back to operating freely and efficiently.

But of course - if a societal problem does not have its root cause in some identifiable and fix-able market failure, one must look elsewhere for a solution.

“Denying those who deny nature”

Since: Jun 07

Norfolk va

#33106 Dec 14, 2012
Northie wrote:
<quoted text>
I thought so. Tina so loves her SUV subsidy that she's contradicting her own hyperventilating over the national debt and subsidies to build renewable energy infrastructure. It's not welfare if it lines her own pockets, right?
As for all Tina's howls for the absolutely essential Christian rightness of SUVs for construction and farming, I wonder if she's aware that pickups are better for those tasks? So why do pickups get fewer subsidies? Maybe because suburban Republicans prefer SUVs, and they hold more political sway?
More like I would love to dump every subsidy and let the chips fall where they may. Of course the SUV would leave the EV behind at that point.

As for howling, I see you doing more howling because those little EV and renewable energy are failing even with plenty of subsidies trying to prop them up.

And, by the way, I am a Libertarian not a Republican. Which means I would love to see the government trimmed down to a more manageable size, see an end to all subsidies and if I had my way there would be entire government agencies trimmed out of existance.

“Denying those who deny nature”

Since: Jun 07

Norfolk va

#33107 Dec 14, 2012
Patriot AKA Bozo wrote:
<quoted text>
I understand that money is all that you do understand. I suppose that you do not wish for America to innovate and develop, that this is best left to other countries such as China. That is a recipe for becoming a second rate country.
Who says he isn't interested in innovate and develop new things. The fact is that wind isn't new and neither is solar. The fact is that both have been tried in the past and suffered one major drawback, both are dependant on the weather.

The funny thing is that you and people like you are so intent on an agenda that you are even less interested in development. The EV could be a practical source if some innovations were developed but rather than do that you are more interested in shoving them onto the streets. Until they can come up with a practical energy storage solution. One that can be recharged from near zero to one hindred in minutes, provide similar ranges to a gasoline powered engine on one charge and can handle the real world which means someone who is driving with the windshield wipers, headlights, heater, and radio all going at the same time and provide more than a hour of drive time. That isn't drive time in sunny and seventy at the test track but stop and go driving then you have developed a practical EV.

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#33108 Dec 14, 2012
Teddy R wrote:
<quoted text>
Obviously.
Free markets aren't magic or all-powerful; they do one thing and really one thing only, but they do it better than any other means yet found - allocate economic goods and services optimally, maximizing aggregate economic output and the collective wealth of all participants in the economy.
...
So back to the original idea. It is not all about money, is it?
PHD

Cibolo, TX

#33109 Dec 15, 2012
Teddy R wrote:
<quoted text>
Okaayyy. I take it, then, that you had no point to make in your original post to me.
Thanks for making that clear.
Selah.
Goes hand in hand with your point. None, and thanks for making that clear to all.
Teddy R

Reston, VA

#33111 Dec 15, 2012
PHD wrote:
<quoted text>Goes hand in hand with your point. None, and thanks for making that clear to all.
Troll. Ignored.
PHD

Cibolo, TX

#33113 Dec 15, 2012
Teddy R wrote:
<quoted text>
Troll. Ignored.
But you replied. Now who is the TROLL why it's the "Teddy R".
Teddy R

Reston, VA

#33114 Dec 15, 2012
PHD wrote:
<quoted text>But you replied. Now who is the TROLL why it's the "Teddy R".
Troll ignored.
Its real

Tampa, FL

#33115 Dec 15, 2012
And it's to late. We're all doomed.
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

#33116 Dec 15, 2012
Teddy R wrote:
<quoted text>
Troll ignored.
Pretty clever response.

I did not ignore your reply to me re the Chinese characters. The trouble is that there were more points to comment on, to disagree with, etc. than I had time for.

Still your view is a mixed position; however, you don't like the Chinese. I think until the western interference of late in history, the Chinese were onto themselves and of mostly non-invading nature. But not anymore. You know whom to thank for that.
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

#33117 Dec 15, 2012
Its real wrote:
And it's to late. We're all doomed.
Come on. Not even 8pm yet.
litesong

Everett, WA

#33118 Dec 15, 2012
phdudd wrote:
Science finds errors and make corrections to their errors to find that their corrections were in error.
//////////
phdudd wrote:
Science finds errors and make corrections to their errors to find that their corrections were in error.
//////////
phdudd wrote:
The melting ice really really wouldn't melt if it were off that back burner.
//////////
litesong wrote:
The melting ice really really is melting........ thus, the definition of 'melting ice'.
November 1980 total Arctic sea ice=18000 cubic kilometers.
November 2012 total Arctic sea ice= 6200 cubic kilometers.
Arctic sea ice is in an uncontrolled plummeting collapse of AGW heated Arctic waters, including powerful feedbacks, piled on other powerful feedbacks.
PHD

Cibolo, TX

#33119 Dec 16, 2012
The global warming really really means nothing other than a new method for the scare monger AKA "litesout.
PHD

Cibolo, TX

#33120 Dec 16, 2012
litesout wrote:
phdudd wrote:
litesout wrote:
The melting ice really really is melting........ thus, the definition of 'melting ice'.
November 1980 total Arctic sea ice=18000 cubic kilometers.
November 2012 total Arctic sea ice= 6200 cubic kilometers.
Arctic sea ice is in an uncontrolled plummeting collapse of AGW heated Arctic waters, including powerful feedbacks, piled on other powerful feedbacks.
The melting ice really really means nothing other than a new method for the scare monger AKA "litesout.
H Gilmore

Brooklyn, NY

#33121 Dec 16, 2012
litesong wrote:
phdudd wrote:
Science finds errors and make corrections to their errors to find that their corrections were in error.
//////////
phdudd wrote:
Science finds errors and make corrections to their errors to find that their corrections were in error.
//////////
phdudd wrote:
The melting ice really really wouldn't melt if it were off that back burner.
//////////
litesong wrote:
The melting ice really really is melting........ thus, the definition of 'melting ice'.
November 1980 total Arctic sea ice=18000 cubic kilometers.
November 2012 total Arctic sea ice= 6200 cubic kilometers.
Arctic sea ice is in an uncontrolled plummeting collapse of AGW heated Arctic waters, including powerful feedbacks, piled on other powerful feedbacks.
Lafferty, Daniel
Teddy R

Reston, VA

#33122 Dec 16, 2012
SpaceBlues wrote:
<quoted text>Pretty clever response.
I did not ignore your reply to me re the Chinese characters. The trouble is that there were more points to comment on, to disagree with, etc. than I had time for.
Still your view is a mixed position; however, you don't like the Chinese. I think until the western interference of late in history, the Chinese were onto themselves and of mostly non-invading nature. But not anymore. You know whom to thank for that.
That response was to the anon proxy troll "PHD," not you.

As for our convo re: Chinese characters, that's been confined to a very narrow issue - their capacity (or otherwise) as a society to innovate.

I have seen no reason offered thus far to revise my view that no one need fear being "out-innovated" by China for the forseeable future. They do not innovate - they steal IP and imitate.

Now as for my "liking" the Chinese or not, you are drawing a premature conclusion based upon far too sketchy data.

I've lived in China for many years. I find the Chinese people and some aspects of modern China admirable. But I don't think Topix offers a canvas big enough to take on the vast discussion you're now proposing, of foreign influences on the last 200 years of Chinese history (the most prominent, by far, of course being Japan).

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.

California Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit contesting... (Jan '09) 19 min Dr Guru 219,262
News Leslie Van Houten, Manson follower, denied paro... 6 hr ted 1
Election California Proposition 19: the Marijuana Legali... (Oct '10) 8 hr Edrosenthaal 16,048
News Victorville ranked No. 9 on 'California's most ... Fri Lulubelle Fire 5
Why do black people hate cats? (Mar '09) Fri That girl 54
News Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex ma... (Aug '10) Fri Frankie Rizzo 201,877
News Gay marriage (Mar '13) Fri batbutt 61,405
More from around the web