Global warming 'undeniable,' scientis...

Global warming 'undeniable,' scientists say

There are 35606 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.

more deaf than dumb

Indianapolis, IN

#30464 Nov 19, 2013
litesong wrote:
<quoted text>
toxic topix AGW deniers love pretend scientists, without authority, with continuing & many errors in their papers. Its scientists like that who will overturn AGW..........NOT!!!
The few TIMES toxic topix AGW deniers attempt mathematics collapse into errors, from a thousand TIMES to as much as a thousand thousand thousand thousand thousand TIMES.
On the other side, global warming "experts" claim a consensus...It's strange though that the scientists we revere (Gallileo, Copernicus, Boyle, Newton), all stood against the consensus...and won.
Mothra

United States

#30465 Nov 19, 2013
Patriot AKA Bozo wrote:
<quoted text>
Not sure where you get your information. It is certainly not from scientists. BTW, I have never said one way or the other whether Al Gore is a hypocrite or not. The point is that the Earth is warming. CO2 is a GHG. Burning fossil fuels is increasing the CO2 in the atmosphere. Those are facts. Whining about AL Gore is not going to change them. I believe that our authority figures should set an example. Most of them don't. We must.
When you grasp the hypocrisy of Al Gore, you'll demonstrate critical thinking skills.

Until then, any effort will be wasted on you.
Cut n Paste

Minneapolis, MN

#30467 Nov 19, 2013
litesong wrote:
litesong wrote:
The few TIMES toxic topix AGW deniers attempt mathematics collapse into errors, from a thousand TIMES to as much as a thousand thousand thousand thousand thousand TIMES.
//////////
motheaten muffed:
blah, blah, blah....
//////////
litesong wrote:
motheaten admits it doesn't understand math.
Check your meds

Since: Apr 08

"the green troll"

#30468 Nov 19, 2013
more deaf than dumb wrote:
<quoted text>
On the other side, global warming "experts" claim a consensus...It's strange though that the scientists we revere (Gallileo, Copernicus, Boyle, Newton), all stood against the consensus...and won.
“They laughed at Galileo. They laughed at Newton. But they also laughed at Bozo the Clown.”
B as in B S as in S

Minneapolis, MN

#30469 Nov 19, 2013
Patriot AKA Bozo wrote:
<quoted text>
Not sure where you get your information. It is certainly not from scientists. BTW, I have never said one way or the other whether Al Gore is a hypocrite or not.
Exactly! Only when some 'expert' tells you what to think about Al Gore will you weigh in on the nature of the Vice President's blatant hypocrisy. Yes. We all know you will not defend or condemn the obvious contradictions of this Nobel Prize thief until you hear/read it first from the oracles of CAGW.

Now I am willing to admit being wrong, so if you would care to weigh in on this simple and easy issue please feel free to state your position and I will promptly apologize.

Personally, I suspect you are too ideologically driven AND too stupid to realize that acknowledging Gore's hypocracy in no way affects the nature of climate change.

May your faith in CAGW Orthodoxy bring you a warm fuzzy feeling.

“CO2 is Gaseous Love”

Since: Dec 08

Home, sweet home.

#30471 Nov 19, 2013
Fair Game wrote:
“They laughed at Galileo. They laughed at Newton. But they also laughed at Bozo the Clown.”
Newton demonstrated his theories with experimental tests and there's never been an experimental test of climate change mitigation.
LessHypeMoreFact

Orleans, Canada

#30472 Nov 19, 2013
more deaf than dumb wrote:
<quoted text>
On the other side, global warming "experts" claim a consensus...It's strange though that the scientists we revere (Gallileo, Copernicus, Boyle, Newton), all stood against the consensus...and won.
The geocentric model was *church* doctrine and no scientist disputed either Galileo or Copernicus. It was the CHURCH (religion) that forced Gallileo to 'recant'. Even 'recanting' is a word used in the CHURCH not in science.

What 'consensus' did Boyle or Newton fight against?? You are obviously not informed about science and tend to confuse it with religious dogma.
LessHypeMoreFact

Orleans, Canada

#30473 Nov 19, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>Newton demonstrated his theories with experimental tests and there's never been an experimental test of climate change mitigation.
AGW is an empirical test of climate change. Mitigation, well we need to stop AGW to test that. So you are arguing for reductions in GHGs. Nice of you to admit it.

Judged:

15

15

15

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!

“CO2 is Gaseous Love”

Since: Dec 08

Home, sweet home.

#30474 Nov 19, 2013
I wrote 'experimental tests' not 'empirical test'. If you want to stop AGW, go for it. Nobody is stopping you.

I argue that our lives produce carbon dioxide and that's a good thing. Plants need CO2 to live and we need plants to live; we both depend on carbon dioxide. Don't be a hater, it's fun and profitable to emit GHGs.

Judged:

17

17

17

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!
dont drink the koolaid

Minneapolis, MN

#30476 Nov 19, 2013
LessHypeMoreFact wrote:
<quoted text>
You are obviously not informed about science and tend to confuse it with religious dogma.
Dogma is the foundAtion of CAGW. Claims and assertions that superstorms, and tornadoes in November, and future floods in unspecified locations and wildfires in the fall and cold weather and wet weather and dry weather ... Yes anything you care to SUGGEST: all are unprovablly the result of CAGW. Statements and assurtions based on unproven or unprovable principles... Dogma.

Judged:

17

17

17

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!
LessHypeMoreFact

Orleans, Canada

#30477 Nov 19, 2013
dont drink the koolaid wrote:
<quoted text>
Dogma is the foundAtion of CAGW.
Science is the ANTITHESIS of dogma. Science find out the facts and learns from them. So you get one answer, but it isn't 'dogma'. It is just the reality.

Judged:

17

17

16

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#30478 Nov 20, 2013
B as in B S as in S wrote:
<quoted text>
Exactly! Only when some 'expert' tells you what to think about Al Gore will you weigh in on the nature of the Vice President's blatant hypocrisy. Yes. We all know you will not defend or condemn the obvious contradictions of this Nobel Prize thief until you hear/read it first from the oracles of CAGW.
Now I am willing to admit being wrong, so if you would care to weigh in on this simple and easy issue please feel free to state your position and I will promptly apologize.
Personally, I suspect you are too ideologically driven AND too stupid to realize that acknowledging Gore's hypocracy in no way affects the nature of climate change.
May your faith in CAGW Orthodoxy bring you a warm fuzzy feeling.
Apparently all you have is ideology. The discussion is about global warming. It is not about the life style of Al Gore. I suppose when that is the only viable argument that you can muster, then you must dwell upon it exclusively of any other.

But that is a sign of our times when hatred trumps reason.

The facts are. The Earth is warming. CO2 is a GHG. Burning fossil fuels increases the CO2 in the atmosphere. If you can dispute these, then perhaps your arguments will have some merit.

Judged:

13

13

13

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#30479 Nov 20, 2013
more deaf than dumb wrote:
<quoted text>
On the other side, global warming "experts" claim a consensus...It's strange though that the scientists we revere (Gallileo, Copernicus, Boyle, Newton), all stood against the consensus...and won.
The consensus was the Church and superstition. Galileo, Copernicus, Bruno, etc. were not against scientific consensus because there was none. They were the pioneers of the scientific movement. If there is no scientific consensus, the scientific method fails. Consensus is good.

Judged:

12

12

11

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!
Mothra

United States

#30480 Nov 20, 2013
Patriot AKA Bozo wrote:
<quoted text>
Apparently all you have is ideology. The discussion is about global warming. It is not about the life style of Al Gore. I suppose when that is the only viable argument that you can muster, then you must dwell upon it exclusively of any other.
But that is a sign of our times when hatred trumps reason.
The facts are. The Earth is warming. CO2 is a GHG. Burning fossil fuels increases the CO2 in the atmosphere. If you can dispute these, then perhaps your arguments will have some merit.
And once again you fail to grasp the argument. I'll type this slowly and hope you can keep up....

AL GORE says global warming is a crisis.

AL GORE says people need to reduce their CO2 emissions.

BUT AL GORE doesn't reduce his own.

IF it is a crisis, why the double standard?

And regardless if he buys carbon "offsets" is he not putting more CO2 into the atmosphere? Is not he saying the goal is to reduce CO2, not just "offset" it?

C'mon... show some intellectual honesty.

Again... thanks for bringing up good 'ol Al. I do love pointing out the double standards of warmists.

Judged:

16

16

16

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!
litesong

Everett, WA

#30483 Nov 20, 2013
Patriot AKA Bozo wrote:
The consensus was the Church and superstition. Galileo, Copernicus, Bruno, etc. were not against scientific consensus because there was none. They were the pioneers of the scientific movement. If there is no scientific consensus, the scientific method fails. Consensus is good.
Nah!

The consensus was around the Ptolemaic system, which was an extraordinary achievement, that fit all the facts up to the time of Copernicus & Galileo, BETTER than the theory of Copernicus! The only thing bad about the Ptolemaic system was that it was wrong. But so was the theory of Copernicus, & the Ptolemaic system fit the facts, in some ways BETTER than Copernicus....... even AFTER the invention of the telescope.

It took the uncompromising ability & regard for truth of Johannes Kepler (& his finally perfected PLANETARY ELLIPTICAL ORBITS THEORY WITH GREAT HELPS FROM THE OBSERVATIONAL ASTRONOMER TYCHO) to finally put the stamp of ingenuity & resounding power of truth to the understanding of the solar system. Even then, it wasn't till Sir Isaac Newton's Theory of Gravitation based on his invented mathematics of calculus, that mathematical understanding of orbital mechanics flourished.

Judged:

13

13

13

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!
LessHypeMoreFact

Orleans, Canada

#30484 Nov 20, 2013
Mothra wrote:
<quoted text>
And once again you fail to grasp the argument.
I fail to grasp that you have an argument either. Must be catching. Or more likely it is that you have no argument or reasoning skills.

Yup.

Judged:

17

16

16

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!
Mothra

United States

#30485 Nov 20, 2013
LessHypeMoreFact wrote:
<quoted text>
I fail to grasp that you have an argument either. Must be catching. Or more likely it is that you have no argument or reasoning skills.
Yup.
Well, you must not have been paying attention, or found the discussion to be an "inconvenient" truth.

d'Oh!

Judged:

17

17

17

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!

“CO2 is Gaseous Love”

Since: Dec 08

Home, sweet home.

#30486 Nov 20, 2013
dont drink the koolaid wrote:
Dogma is the foundAtion of CAGW. Claims and assertions that superstorms, and tornadoes in November, and future floods in unspecified locations and wildfires in the fall and cold weather and wet weather and dry weather ... Yes anything you care to SUGGEST: all are unprovablly the result of CAGW. Statements and assurtions based on unproven or unprovable principles... Dogma.
Man made carbon dioxide from fossil fuel use causes global warming is the dogma, untested experimentally. Another dogma is increased atmospheric CO2 comes from man made sources, also not experimentally tested.

Judged:

18

18

18

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!
LessHypeMoreFact

Orleans, Canada

#30487 Nov 20, 2013
Mothra wrote:
<quoted text>
And once again you fail to grasp the argument. I'll type this slowly and hope you can keep up....
It is still stupid even when it is half fast..
Mothra wrote:
<quoted text>
AL GORE says global warming is a crisis.
He is entitled to his opinion. It is shared by many. Reasoned aregument content ZERO. Science content ZERO.
Mothra wrote:
<quoted text>
AL GORE says people need to reduce their CO2 emissions.
He is entitled to his opinion. It is shared by many. Reasoned aregument content ZERO. Science content ZERO.
Mothra wrote:
<quoted text>
BUT AL GORE doesn't reduce his own.
Unfounded. And irrelevant. Like claiming that Paul Revere should be ignored because he is giving the alarm instead of being back there waiting in his own personal ambush while the town sleeps.
Mothra wrote:
<quoted text>
IF it is a crisis, why the double standard?
It will still be a SLOW MOTION crisis even if Al Gore fades away. Again, no or faulty reasoning. And no science. The arguments of a ten year old or a litter bug.
Mothra wrote:
<quoted text>
And regardless if he buys carbon "offsets" is he not putting more CO2 into the atmosphere?
AGW is here. How much any individual can or does do does NOT invalidate that fact. And like Paul Revere, he chooses to raise the alarm rather than trying to singlehandedly defeating the British.

All this is pure ad-hominem and 'shooting the messenger'. Of no value to rational decision making.
Mothra wrote:
<quoted text>
C'mon... show some intellectual honesty.
Intellectual honest is one thing you go to great lengths to avoid or ignore. Your entire arguement can be seen to be ad-hominem and equivalent to bitching about Paul Revere because he went to raise the alarm instead of 'proving himself' by trying to defeat the British single handedly. Anyone using REASONING skills will see just how intellectually dishonest your post is. It doesn't even TRY to debate AGW or how critical it is. It is pure Ad-Hominem arguments of no merit whatsoever.
Mothra wrote:
<quoted text>
Again... thanks for bringing up good 'ol Al. I do love pointing out the double standards of warmists.
Please show you have some intellectual honesty by complaining that Paul Revere had a 'double standard' for riding to warn the town instead of fighting the British.

You are SUCH an ass.

Judged:

22

22

20

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!
litesong

Everett, WA

#30488 Nov 20, 2013
[QUOTE who="lyin' brian"]Another dogma is increased atmospheric CO2 comes from man made sources, also not experimentally tested.[/QUOTE]

Isotopes of CO2 prove that CO2 is coming from oil deposits buried in the ground millions of years ago. You know this fact, because its been given to you a dozen times. You earn your name "lyin' brian" & your other characteristics are true..... slimy steenking filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AND alleged & proud threatener.

Judged:

23

23

23

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!

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 News Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News As anger over election of Donald Trump erupts, ... 2 min Moans6157 2,792
News Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 3 min USAsince1680 1,457,412
Election 'Fox News Sunday' to Host Kentucky Senate Debate (Oct '10) 4 min Injudgement 252,770
News President Obama: 'Michelle will never run for o... 6 min Massage2771 11
Find high paying jobs with little or no experience 8 min dabombjiggity 1
News Trump moves to quickly fill his top Cabinet ranks 10 min Coconutz9888 3
News BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit contesting... (Jan '09) 13 min Dr Guru 230,896
News The President has failed us (Jun '12) 28 min Popz7778 403,231
News Thousands of people march during rally at Bosto... 1 hr Frankie Rizzo 1,845
More from around the web