Global warming 'undeniable,' scientis...

Global warming 'undeniable,' scientists say

There are 36943 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.

“BET DAP”

Since: Feb 09

GOOM BOWN

#28603 Aug 2, 2013
never believed wrote:
what a bunch of sheep all you believers are ...It's the sun stupid...get it ....if you don't believe me then explain why the other planets also had a rise in temp? We sure don't live there...lol al gore sure couldn't answer the question and left the podium
but....but....but you don't understand!!! the sun doesn't offer a revenue stream to big government and political huxsters, so it can't be held responsible. nor can water vapor...or methane. deforestation, though leveling, can't be the culprit either (not enough money to feed the pig). only a minor trace gas can be identified from fossil fuels as the culprit!!! now that kind of taxation has some mileage for these clowns!!!
1 post removed
The Integral

Hilo, HI

#28605 Aug 2, 2013
Owl Gore wrote:
Unlikely Skeptic: A Liberal Environmentalist Challenges Global Warming Theory
Dr. Denis Rancourt speaks to Marc Morano on his views on the politics and science of global warming. "They look to comfortable lies" says Rancourt with regard to global warming believers.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =VWVXarkPOAoXX
Physicist Dr. Denis Rancourt, a former professor and environmental science researcher at the University of Ottawa, has officially bailed out of the man-made global warming movement.
In a hard-hitting and exclusive new exclusive video just released by Climate Depot, Dr. Rancourt declares that the entire man-made global warming movement is nothing more than a "corrupt social phenomenon." "It is as much psychological and social phenomenon as anything else," Rancourt, who has published peer-reviewed research, explained in a June 8, 2010 essay.
Now I know where the climate change deniers get their information. Global Depot. What a bunch of biased articles. Rancourt is a tenured professor that was kicked off of the campus. He also believes that ozone depletion was a hoax. What a nut case.

“BET DAP”

Since: Feb 09

GOOM BOWN

#28606 Aug 2, 2013
The Integral wrote:
<quoted text>
Now I know where the climate change deniers get their information. Global Depot. What a bunch of biased articles. Rancourt is a tenured professor that was kicked off of the campus. He also believes that ozone depletion was a hoax. What a nut case.
LOL....what a 'comfortable lie" and typical response from a left wing ideologue. attack the messenger while ignoring the message. you people are so transparent.

ohhhhhh. it's only the scientist who agree with your agenda who are to be so trusted!!!! got it!!! thanks for your 'scientific observation', gourd head.
LessHypeMoreFact

Etobicoke, Canada

#28607 Aug 2, 2013
ritedownthemiddle wrote:
<quoted text>let's ask you a non-rhetorical question.
It is more of a CLUELESS question. Which you excel in.
ritedownthemiddle wrote:
<quoted text> what facts do you have that man's actions or inactions will alter climate change?
Basically the 'cause and effect' logic of modern reasoned science. Or, if you are a total dick, try 'if it hurts when you do this, stop doing this'. Nuff said? Of course, it requires some faith in cause and effect, which the religious and the necromancers dispute. Which are you?
ritedownthemiddle wrote:
<quoted text>i haven't seen those facts.
Yes. I am sure that you rigorously avoid any science theory or publication. So? Your ignorance does NOT constitute an rebuttal.
ritedownthemiddle wrote:
<quoted text> i've seen many examples of coincidences cited..
Please cite such a citation and then demonstrate that it IS 'just coincidence'. Most science requires a logical causation as well as correlation and every science paper I have seen does establish such causation. Where do you get your reading material. Pampers?
ritedownthemiddle wrote:
<quoted text>.but that's it. reload.
More like retard. But facts continue to demonstrate their existence when minds like yours rebel. That is reality.
SpaceBlues

United States

#28608 Aug 2, 2013
Gored heads are coming to get you.
The Integral

Hilo, HI

#28609 Aug 2, 2013
ritedownthemiddle wrote:
<quoted text>LOL....what a 'comfortable lie" and typical response from a left wing ideologue. attack the messenger while ignoring the message. you people are so transparent.
ohhhhhh. it's only the scientist who agree with your agenda who are to be so trusted!!!! got it!!! thanks for your 'scientific observation', gourd head.
Please provide a reference that indicates that global warming is not occurring.

Here is a reference for you. Please read it carefully and get back to me.

http://climate.nasa.gov/evidence

Peter Christoff, writing in The Age (2007), said that climate change denial differs from skepticism, which is essential for good science. He went on to say that "almost two decades after the issue became one of global concern, the 'big' debate over climate change is over. There are now no credible scientific skeptics challenging the underlying scientific theory, or the broad projections, of climate change."

“Stuffs gettin better ”

Since: Aug 12

Location hidden

#28610 Aug 2, 2013
Glob Glob warming

Tee Heee!

Big Red Ball in Sky!!!!!

Judged:

10

10

10

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!
EXPERT

United States

#28611 Aug 2, 2013
The Integral wrote:
<quoted text>
Please provide a reference that indicates that global warming is not occurring.
Here is a reference for you. Please read it carefully and get back to me.
http://climate.nasa.gov/evidence
Peter Christoff, writing in The Age (2007), said that climate change denial differs from skepticism, which is essential for good science. He went on to say that "almost two decades after the issue became one of global concern, the 'big' debate over climate change is over. There are now no credible scientific skeptics challenging the underlying scientific theory, or the broad projections, of climate change."
1,122 Record Cold Temps in the U.S. in one week

July in the USA ends on a frigid note as record cold outpaces warmth nearly 10 to 1

71% Of The US Below Normal Temperature in 2013

South America in massive deep freeze

Judged:

13

13

13

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!
1 post removed
litesong

Everett, WA

#28613 Aug 2, 2013
middleofthedownwronggully wrote:
a free thinker like myself.......
You mistake "wind through the belfry" with proper thinking. You never earned a science or mathematics degree. Did you ever pass a science, chemistry, astronomy, physics, algebra or pre-calc class while poorly receiving a hi skule DEE-plooomaa? Not sure you got the hi skule DEE-plooomaa?

Judged:

16

15

14

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!
litesong

Everett, WA

#28614 Aug 2, 2013
Bushwhacker wrote:
...... where you spent too long brain dead....
To be brain dead, it must first have a brain. You know it is related to "lyin' brian' & dirtling(earthling has no brain).

Judged:

16

15

14

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!
SpaceBlues

United States

#28615 Aug 2, 2013
EXPERT wrote:
<quoted text>
1,122 Record Cold Temps in the U.S. in one week
July in the USA ends on a frigid note as record cold outpaces warmth nearly 10 to 1
71% Of The US Below Normal Temperature in 2013
South America in massive deep freeze
blah blah your post is all wet.

July analysis is not baked yet but June is here:

http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/national/2013/6

You are fired!

Judged:

16

15

14

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!

“Come Home America!”

Since: Nov 11

Claymont, Delaware 19809

#28616 Aug 3, 2013
ritedownthemiddle wrote:
<quoted text>based on the posts i read here and on other threads....i would think a republican endorsement would make you more skeptical of climate change than to settle the matter for a free thinker like myself. just saying.
Why would you think that a consensus on climate change that formed across political parties with different beliefs and visions for the country wasn't more proof of the human-induced climate change threat? Did both republicans and democrats agreement that the Cold War Soviet Union expansionism was a threat make it any less real?
Kyle

Columbia City, IN

#28617 Aug 3, 2013
ritedownthemiddle wrote:
<quoted text>but....but....but you don't understand!!! the sun doesn't offer a revenue stream to big government and political huxsters, so it can't be held responsible. nor can water vapor...or methane. deforestation, though leveling, can't be the culprit either (not enough money to feed the pig). only a minor trace gas can be identified from fossil fuels as the culprit!!! now that kind of taxation has some mileage for these clowns!!!
But....but....but you are willfully refusing to acknowledge the FACTS that make your implied claims of other causation ANTISCIENCE and DECEPTION, ftard. As I've oft posted (and was assiduously ignored by denier scumbags) the PATTERN of warming is 100% consistent with GHE causation, thereby making your claim that it might be the sun willful peddling of disinformation. Your invoking of the "trace gas" LIE has been addressed many times as well. Besides the FACT that you've previously admitted that it's CO2 keeping Earth from being an ice ball, you're ignoring the FACT that water vapor is a dependent variable - dependent upon temperature - as I've personally explained in detail. As for methane or the effects of land use? You're simply being a science denier as the effects of all of these have been and continue to be studied by SCIENTISTS who KNOW S#*T and who have concluded that YOU'RE WRONG by a very wide margin.

So why do you post thusly anyway?

Rhetorical question. Because you're anti-science
Kyle

Columbia City, IN

#28618 Aug 3, 2013
ritedownthemiddle wrote:
<quoted text>i'm still in the batters box, son. get serious!!! pick up a mitt and get in the game, dumbmutt.
ROTFLMAO!

What did I just say, LOSER?:

"Now, show us again what a dishonest weasel you are by failing to address any of it, by repeating a non sequitur - again, or spouting lies that have been revealed as such a million times"

I accept your OBVIOUS concession on all three points. An HONEST person would now cease to repeat what they've conceded.

But then you're not any more honest - or any less - than the scum sucking shills of the denial industry.

Oh, that's another oft made point that denier scum assiduously ignore, even as they repeat the asinine, ridiculously improbable, global conspiracy theory of scientists and governments that makes creationist conspiracy theories look almost sane by comparison.

You're not even trying anymore, denier scum. You're content to just blatantly ignore refutations; you're not even bothering to generate the usual dishonest smoke screens and non sequitur rants.

Does anyone think you're NOT obviously displaying every sign of extreme dogmatic thinking and that any remaking scrap of credibility is imploding?

ritedownthemiddle wrote:
<quoted text>i'm still in the batters box, son. get serious!!! pick up a mitt and get in the game, dumbmutt.
Kyle

Columbia City, IN

#28619 Aug 3, 2013
never believed wrote:
what a bunch of sheep all you believers are ...It's the sun stupid...get it ....if you don't believe me then explain why the other planets also had a rise in temp? We sure don't live there...lol al gore sure couldn't answer the question and left the podium
Well! That would be a powerful argument if it weren't complete BS that has been refuted by numerous means. See my previous comments inre the pattern of warming; I tire of repeating myself for each new know nothing that spouts this denier lie. It's a daily occurrence.
Kyle

Columbia City, IN

#28620 Aug 3, 2013
ritedownthemiddle wrote:
<quoted text>you people act like your argument is won and settled.....
Because it is "settled". There is no serious scientific argument against the consensus and that's what counts - the SCIENCE. It's only not "settled" in public opinion because of the efforts of the denialist industry and an incompetent popular media.

ritedownthemiddle wrote:
<quoted text>......but none of you can seem to answer the question, "what will man made co2 mitigation in our country do to benefit the global climate?" when you have a definitive answer on that.....the science will be settled.
And you REFUSE TO ACKNOWLEDGE THE FALLACIOUS NATURE OF THIS "ARGUMENT", you comically poor debater!

Explain to us how ANYTHING regarding arguments about mitigation can IN ANY WAY - even theoretically - have ANY EFFECT on the validity of the science that concludes that human CO2 emissions are responsible for current and impending destructive climate effects.

Again, knowing full well that you're far too intellectually dishonest to answer (that and because there's no possible answer), this was a rhetorical question.

I'm summary, the one argument that you always fall back on is blatantly illogical. As an argument against the scientific consensus inre what is happening and why, it's breathtakingly stupid.

Yet you've made it hundreds of times.

There are only two possibilities. Either you're dumber than a sack of hammers or you're a pathological liar that's perfectly willing to pretend to be dumber than a sack of hammers.

Which is it?
Kyle

Columbia City, IN

#28621 Aug 3, 2013
ritedownthemiddle wrote:
<quoted text>based on the posts i read here and on other threads....i would think a republican endorsement would make you more skeptical of climate change than to settle the matter for a free thinker like myself. just saying.
Don't you dare equate your dogmatism with free thinking. That's a most egregious lie.
As for your dismissal of the science, scientists, national science academies - all based on a brain dead conspiracy theory about demonic 'librulls'- and now including conservatives as well? Thanks for illustrating yet again that science denial is merely a subtype of conspiracism. One of the universal attributes of conspiracy theories is that any and all information that is counter to the CT is dismissed as being rooted in the conspiracy.
Thus, wingnut here writes off the conclusions of non-science denying conservatives (which is most conservatives outside of the US) in that classic, circularly reasoned, impenetrable fortress of willful ignorance.
Kyle

Columbia City, IN

#28622 Aug 3, 2013
Sunny wrote:
<quoted text>Rite you better watch out this KYLE guy is one mean umpire STIKE ONE,TWO,THREE AND YOUR OUT.
Real scary guy ya know got the world right by the you know what.
Thanks for not letting me down:

"Now, show us again what a dishonest weasel you are by failing to address any of it, by repeating a non sequitur - again, or spouting lies that have been revealed as such a million times."

Your concessions are getting to be so transparent.

Concession accepted.

“Come Home America!”

Since: Nov 11

Claymont, Delaware 19809

#28623 Aug 4, 2013
ritedownthemiddle wrote:
<quoted text>LOL....what a 'comfortable lie" and typical response from a left wing ideologue. attack the messenger while ignoring the message. you people are so transparent.
ohhhhhh. it's only the scientist who agree with your agenda who are to be so trusted!!!! got it!!! thanks for your 'scientific observation', gourd head.
"Yesterday 20 over-zealous Republicans in the United States House of Representatives voted to subpoena health data from Harvard University that the Republicans already have, data from EPA that the Republicans already know EPA does not have, and patient data from the American Cancer Society that legitimate researchers already can obtain by vowing to keep it confidential.

Hundreds of thousands of Americans do not know it yet, but these Republicans just voted to allow disclosure of their most confidential medical data and personal identities without requiring protection of this sensitive information.

This is all in service of a desperate political campaign against long-established science showing a clear causal association between fine soot pollution (PM2.5) and premature death. The politicians' ultimate agenda is to attack clean air health safeguards projected to save tens of thousands of lives and avoid hundreds of thousands of asthma attacks and heart attacks annually. " http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/jwalke/stop...
Kyle

United States

#28624 Aug 4, 2013
OK, denier scum. You regulars need to address the refutations of your BS in your very next posts. No repetitions of the BS without acknowledging them. Anything less is tantamount to an admission that the facts aren't on your side and you're engaged in willful ignorance.

Deniers routinely deny any of the science, even when doing so is self contradictory. You scumbags are no exceptions. Sometimes you claim non GHG causation. You might address the patterns of warming that only the greenhouse effect can explain - four different patterns.

The above mentioned patterns have compounding effects, resulting in a 10.7deg mid-winter increase at a Canadian Arctic weather station. Pretty effing hard to get that by subtle data manipulation. Explain how the sun (even if it's output were rising) would selectively warm most somewhere when the sun never rises.

Other times you claim it's not warming. Usually by invoking the laughable global conspiracy theory. See above. See Muller's Koch brothers sponsored meta study of temperature records that found MORE warming when the corrected data from problematic weather stations were omitted. See the short term, highly reliable temperature data that showed 1998 to be the warmest on record at the time, only to be eclipsed twice since then. See the precise, far less noisy, ocean temperature data that shows a massive recent increase down to hundreds of feet deep that represents 93.4% of the total global heat gain.

You know, just ANYTHING that's actually a fact based and rational argument.

Or just STFU and stop embarrassing yourselves. I'd suggest that you might admit your errors and accept the objective facts, but monkeys will fly out of your butt before you'll develop that level of intellectual integrity.

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 Politics Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Plurality of Americans think Trump is failing 1 min bad bob 7,657
News Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 2 min Sunnier 1,549,307
News James Comey fired as FBI director 5 min spocko 3,936
Election 'Fox News Sunday' to Host Kentucky Senate Debate (Oct '10) 8 min Julia 274,866
News BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit contesting... (Jan '09) 9 min Dr Guru 241,666
News POLL: Americans Trust James Comey Over Trump 12 min TRUMP 45 665
News Trump claims witch hunt, says he's most hounded... 19 min spocko 1,260
News Melania Trump keeps DC entry low key; Barron dr... 38 min Darly314 171
More from around the web