Once slow-moving threat, global warmi...

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

There are 60670 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

Houston, TX

#32029 Aug 15, 2012
Earthling-1 wrote:
The MWP was global.
Again you’re the commander of useless babble.

“Happy, warm and comfortable”

Since: Oct 10

Mountain retreat, SE Spain

#32030 Aug 15, 2012
PHDumbo wrote:
Again you’re the commander of useless babble.
You're posting here at 06:00 hrs local time, don't you have a life?

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#32031 Aug 15, 2012
Teddy R wrote:
<quoted text>
Dude.
You're the one who interjected Ken Burns into a political discussion in the first place.
I'm a big fan of his work, btw - as a film-maker.
Only because folks need to understand the implications of what a depression consists of. Not because of any political ramifications. I believe the series is apolitical and simply presents a picture of the conditions at the time.
koz

Akron, OH

#32032 Aug 15, 2012
Patriot AKA Bozo wrote:
I suppose you are one of the Reich Wing folks who would not approve of giving public works jobs to folks who had no livelihood because of the collapse of capitalism.
Capitalism has never collapsed, even under the burden of parasitic socialist schemes.
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

#32033 Aug 15, 2012
By not acting on global warming, the consequences are increasingly high. The floods of 2010 were an example of how the largest annual storms are increasingly extreme.

Hannah Plon, an organizer for Environment Rhode Island.
Teddy R

San Francisco, CA

#32034 Aug 15, 2012
SpaceBlues wrote:
By not acting on global warming, the consequences are increasingly high.
Still waiting to hear the specific practical actions you expect to be taken on global warming, who exactly you're holding responsible for taking them, deadlines for action, their cost, and the projected effect on global avg temps that will result from these actions.

If you can't articulate a specific plan of action with assigned responsibilities that is practical and achieveable, you really have no reason to be whining about people not acting.
SpaceBlues

United States

#32035 Aug 15, 2012
Teddy R wrote:
<quoted text>
Still waiting to hear the specific practical actions you expect to be taken on global warming, who exactly you're holding responsible for taking them, deadlines for action, their cost, and the projected effect on global avg temps that will result from these actions.
If you can't articulate a specific plan of action with assigned responsibilities that is practical and achieveable, you really have no reason to be whining about people not acting.
Excellent post.

Some things don't cost but save. For example, we can reduce our personal carbon footprint by 20 percent in the next year.

How about you?

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#32036 Aug 15, 2012
koz wrote:
<quoted text> Capitalism has never collapsed, even under the burden of parasitic socialist schemes.
Several times the bubble burst. Each time folks had to suffer. In earlier times there were enough rural folks to weather the downfall because they had access to food. In the dirty thirties, the drought interacted with the depression to cause much suffering. The toll on lives and democracy probably itself would have been nearly unbearable if the government had not propped up capitalism. Yes, capitalism collapsed. If it was not for Roosevelt, the country undoubtedly would have gone Socialist. He saved Capitalism. Read your history.
kal

Richland, WA

#32037 Aug 15, 2012
Teddy R wrote:
<quoted text>
Still waiting to hear the specific practical actions you expect to be taken on global warming, who exactly you're holding responsible for taking them, deadlines for action, their cost, and the projected effect on global avg temps that will result from these actions.
If you can't articulate a specific plan of action with assigned responsibilities that is practical and achieveable, you really have no reason to be whining about people not acting.
oh but 'teddy', the cost of specific actions, are to this day. a waste and there seems to be no projected effect. it seems the whole fairytale idea of global warming caused by man can only be fought with large amounts of fairy dust. perhaps they will find a big pile of it on mars. the bottom line is weather is nature, climate is nature. man made global warming is nothing but b.s.

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/08/15/newly-d...
Northie

Spokane, WA

#32038 Aug 15, 2012
Teddy R wrote:
<quoted text>
Still waiting to hear the specific practical actions you expect to be taken on global warming, who exactly you're holding responsible for taking them, deadlines for action, their cost, and the projected effect on global avg temps that will result from these actions.
If you can't articulate a specific plan of action with assigned responsibilities that is practical and achieveable, you really have no reason to be whining about people not acting.
Dude. Be honest. You are a political fanatic who won't be swayed by scientific evidence, and much less by economic analyses that doesn't pass your conservative political filter.

If you actually cared about climate economics and policy recommendations, you might read the widely available studies published by McKinsey, MunichRE, or this one by former UK Chancellor of the Exchequer Nicholas Stern:

http://tinyurl.com/4nhf24f
SpaceBlues

United States

#32039 Aug 15, 2012
kal wrote:
<quoted text>oh but 'teddy', the cost of specific actions, are to this day. a waste and there seems to be no projected effect../
You are out of your mind.

What are you saying? NONSENSE.

Are you drunk?
SpaceBlues

United States

#32040 Aug 15, 2012
Teddy R wrote:
<quoted text>
Still waiting to hear the specific practical actions you expect to be taken on global warming, who exactly you're holding responsible for taking them, deadlines for action, their cost, and the projected effect on global avg temps that will result from these actions.
If you can't articulate a specific plan of action with assigned responsibilities that is practical and achieveable, you really have no reason to be whining about people not acting.
I guess you wish to restart the forum.
SpaceBlues

United States

#32041 Aug 15, 2012
The benefits of strong, early action on climate change outweigh the costs.

Climate change threatens the basic elements of life for people around the
world - access to water, food production, health, and use of land and the
environment.

The damages from climate change will accelerate as the world gets warmer.
SpaceBlues

United States

#32042 Aug 15, 2012
Achieving these deep cuts in emissions will have a cost. The Review estimates the annual costs of stabilisation at 500-550ppm CO2e to be around 1% of GDP by 2050 - a level that is significant but manageable.

Resource cost estimates suggest that an upper bound for the expected annual cost of emissions reductions consistent with a trajectory leading to
stabilisation at 550ppm CO2e is likely to be around 1% of GDP by 2050.

There is still time to avoid the worst impacts of climate change if strong collective action starts now.

http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTINDONES...
kristy

Palm Bay, FL

#32043 Aug 15, 2012
Patriot AKA Bozo wrote:
<quoted text>
Several times the bubble burst. Each time folks had to suffer. In earlier times there were enough rural folks to weather the downfall because they had access to food. In the dirty thirties, the drought interacted with the depression to cause much suffering. The toll on lives and democracy probably itself would have been nearly unbearable if the government had not propped up capitalism. Yes, capitalism collapsed. If it was not for Roosevelt, the country undoubtedly would have gone Socialist. He saved Capitalism. Read your history.
FDR had 6 million pigs slaughtered and destroyed crops while people were starving in order to raise the price of food. The toll of FDRs experimental policies made the suffering longer, especially his NRA, which crushed capitalism for the little guy.
kal

Richland, WA

#32044 Aug 15, 2012
kristy wrote:
<quoted text>
FDR had 6 million pigs slaughtered and destroyed crops while people were starving in order to raise the price of food. The toll of FDRs experimental policies made the suffering longer, especially his NRA, which crushed capitalism for the little guy.
oh my goodness 'kristy', that is almost exactly what obama is doing as we speak.

http://washingtonexaminer.com/examiner-editor...
SpaceBlues

United States

#32045 Aug 15, 2012
Teddy R wrote:
<quoted text>
Still waiting to hear the specific practical actions you expect to be taken on global warming, who exactly you're holding responsible for taking them, deadlines for action, their cost, and the projected effect on global avg temps that will result from these actions.
If you can't articulate a specific plan of action with assigned responsibilities that is practical and achieveable, you really have no reason to be whining about people not acting.
Waiting your response. In the meantime:

1. reduce our personal carbon footprint by 20 percent in the next year.

2. stop subsidizing fossil fuels.
SpaceBlues

United States

#32047 Aug 15, 2012
Not waiting for Teddy R:

1. reduce our personal carbon footprint by 20 percent in the next year.

2. stop subsidizing fossil fuels.

3. vote for Obama/Biden.
kristy

Palm Bay, FL

#32048 Aug 15, 2012
kal wrote:
<quoted text>oh my goodness 'kristy', that is almost exactly what obama is doing as we speak.
http://washingtonexaminer.com/examiner-editor...
Holy Cow!!! This just exemplifies how government is the problem. 40% of our corn going to fuel cars to get votes from Illinois and the corn belt states and then the ranchers have no food for their cattle so the government buys up the meat to keep the votes from the corn belt states instead of just lifting the ethanol mandate and in the process raising food prices for all consumers. And Obama keeps telling us that we need the government to save us.
rider

Gwinn, MI

#32049 Aug 15, 2012
kristy wrote:
<quoted text>
Holy Cow!!! This just exemplifies how government is the problem. 40% of our corn going to fuel cars to get votes from Illinois and the corn belt states and then the ranchers have no food for their cattle so the government buys up the meat to keep the votes from the corn belt states instead of just lifting the ethanol mandate and in the process raising food prices for all consumers. And Obama keeps telling us that we need the government to save us.
Why did the Neo-cons take down the twin towers and WTC 7? NEVER FORGET! Neocons and Bin Laden took down the towers. Immortal Technique- The Cause of Death- YouTube
Jun 7, 2006 ... Immortal Technique's "The Cause of Death," viva la revolucion!

http://www.youtube.com/watch ...- 145k -

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.

US House of Representatives Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Evolution vs. Creation (Jul '11) 50 min Blitzking 201,768
News Top StoryObama signs bill requiring labeling of... 1 hr Jack 7
Election 'Fox News Sunday' to Host Kentucky Senate Debate (Oct '10) 2 hr Cornelius Scudmister 233,673
News 31 scientific societies just told Congress to t... 3 hr IB DaMann 310
News Rebellious Democrats disrupt House, stage protest 3 hr Retired SOF 445
News Cummings: Protesters during DNC speech were 'di... 7 hr Oh No You Di-nt 1
News Democratic chief Wasserman Schultz quits amid S... 7 hr Go Blue Forever 69
More from around the web