Global warming 'undeniable,' scientis...

Global warming 'undeniable,' scientists say

There are 37504 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.

litesong

Everett, WA

#35883 Aug 30, 2014
Wanderer2452 wrote:
The claim is, "Global warming is undeniable.'' I agree.
Deniers say it is a hoax. I disagree......
Considerable efforts were made to conquer a number problems including ozone layer depletion, air pollution, and industrial/auto emissions.
Then Reagan happened and environmentalism was equated to Communism, Capitalism became king, and corporations convinced the U.S. Government not to participate in the Kyoto protocol -- it would hurt business.
So, here we are, faced with a problem that climate change deniers refuse to consider for various reasons. There's little time to waste.
Either the world starts to cut emissions NOW or we continue playing this dangerous shell game.
I agree with you!!!
1 post removed

“CO2 is Gaseous Love”

Since: Dec 08

Home, sweet home.

#35885 Aug 30, 2014
SpaceBlues wrote:
The Carboniferous Rainforest Collapse (CRC) was an extinction event that occurred around 305 million years ago in the Carboniferous period.[1] It altered the vast coal forests (so called because the compacted remains of the dense vegetation formed coal seams) that covered the equatorial region of Euramerica (Europe and America), fragmenting the forests into isolated 'islands' and causing the extinction of many plant and animal species. The event occurred at the end of the Moscovian and continued into the early Kasimovian stages of the Pennsylvanian. The CRC can also be viewed as part of a broader transition of plant species called the "Carboniferous-Permian transition" that continued for another 10 million years into the early Permian. This larger transition has been recognized as one of the two largest extinction events recorded by changes in plant life.[2]

P.S. We are into the first man-made extinction event, sadly.
Sad you can't name even one species extinguished by man made global warming. I can name hundreds killed by overhunting, overfishing and habitat destruction but even after dozens of warnings you can't name a single species extinguished by man made climate change. What's up with that?
LIbEralS

Saint Paul, MN

#35886 Aug 31, 2014
Myth of arctic meltdown: Stunning satellite images show summer ice cap is thicker and covers 1.7million square kilometres MORE than 2 years ago...despite Al Gore's prediction it would be ICE-FREE by now

Seven years after former US Vice-President Al Gore's warning, Arctic ice cap has expanded for second year in row
An area twice the size of Alaska - America's biggest state - was open water two years ago and is now covered in ice
These satellite images taken from University of Illinois's Cryosphere project show ice has become more concentrated

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-27386...
Follow us:@MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

#35887 Aug 31, 2014
Visible satellite imagery from NASA’s Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS) reveal a diffuse ice cover in the Beaufort Sea, as well as in areas of the Laptev and East Siberian seas. Despite low ice concentrations, ice extent is right at the long-term average for the region, in stark contrast to 2012 when the ice edge had already retreated to north of 75 degrees latitude. Ice remains extensive in the Northwest Passage through the channels of the Canadian Arctic Archipelago. On the Eurasian side, the Northern Sea Route is mostly open except that some ice still blocks Vilkitsky Strait, the narrow strait between the Siberian coast and the islands of Severnya Zemlya separating the Kara and Laptev seas.

http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/

P.S. Ignore denier gossip here on topix.
1 post removed
fyi

Teague, TX

#35889 Aug 31, 2014

Since: May 14

Location hidden

#35890 Aug 31, 2014
Myth of arctic meltdown: Stunning satellite images show summer ice cap is thicker and covers 1.7million square kilometres MORE than 2 years ago...despite Al Gore's prediction it would be ICE-FREE by now

Seven years after former US Vice-President Al Gore's warning, Arctic ice cap has expanded for second year in row

An area twice the size of Alaska - America's biggest state - was open water two years ago and is now covered in ice

These satellite images taken from University of Illinois's Cryosphere project show ice has become more concentrated

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-27386...

“BET DAP”

Since: Feb 09

GOOM BOWN

#35891 Aug 31, 2014
litesong

Everett, WA

#35892 Aug 31, 2014
sciro coo coo wrote:
Myth of arctic meltdown:
Ah.... "sciro coo coo" thinks it owns the Arctic sea ice minimum for 2012.....NOT!!!

Average Arctic sea ice VOLUME for August 1, for the period 1980-89, was ~18,200 cubic kilometers. Present August 1, 2014 sea ice VOLUME is ~9600 cubic kilometers,~8600 cubic kilometers LESS than the 1980-89 average for August 1. Even compared to Arctic sea ice extent from 2013-current date, present Arctic sea ice extent is less.

"sciro coo coo" is a sleepy sleazy slimy steenking toxic topix AGW denier liar. It has no science chemistry astronomy physics algebra or pre-calc in a poorly (or non-) earned hi skule DEE-plooomaa. It supports errors of 1 million TIMES, 1000 TIMES, 3000 TIMES, 73 million TIMES, 500 million TIMES, 2.5+ trillion TIMES, 3.5+ trillion TIMES, & 1,000,000,000,000,000 TIMES.
brad

Bolton, CT

#35893 Aug 31, 2014
scirocco wrote:
Myth of arctic meltdown: Stunning satellite images show summer ice cap is thicker and covers 1.7million square kilometres MORE than 2 years ago...despite Al Gore's prediction it would be ICE-FREE by now
Seven years after former US Vice-President Al Gore's warning, Arctic ice cap has expanded for second year in row
An area twice the size of Alaska - America's biggest state - was open water two years ago and is now covered in ice
These satellite images taken from University of Illinois's Cryosphere project show ice has become more concentrated
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-27386...
The church of global warming has explained that inconvenient phenomenon recently.

The effects won't be seen for another 10 to 20 years,but that shouldn't stop the flow of taxpayer dollars in grants or carbon taxes,just in case.
SpaceBlues

Magnolia, TX

#35894 Aug 31, 2014
brad wrote:
<quoted text>
The church of global warming has explained that inconvenient phenomenon recently.
The effects won't be seen for another 10 to 20 years,but that shouldn't stop the flow of taxpayer dollars in grants or carbon taxes,just in case.
You should be standup comedian, LOL.
Obskeptic

Livonia, MI

#35895 Sep 1, 2014
SpaceBlues wrote:
<quoted text>
Sweet, another denier post. First, our climate data go back to millions of years. I used to post the global temperatures for 500 million years, I can fetch and post it later just for you. Of course, man-made global warming is real because of the evidence.
Now, your post is mostly standard denier material but you may be new to this activity. So kindly, I present to you
http://www.skepticalscience.com/argument.php
where all your alleged curiosity should be satiated. You just spot one of your interests and read by clicking on the response. I recommend you read all for satisfaction.
Just in case, you were diligent but still unsatisfied, would you please holler here for more?
So what it proves is that the climate has been in an ever constant state of change and cycles. Ice ages and warming trends. What makes you so arrogantly think that you or any group of men/women have the knowledge and the power to "stabilize" it? Government for the most part has proven time and again they do not have the best interest of man at heart. You trust them to get this right and make changes that they have no proof will make any significant difference? I would say I am more a realist then a denier. Your just a sucker and a fool.
SpaceBlues

Dallas, TX

#35896 Sep 1, 2014
Obskeptic wrote:
<quoted text>
So what it proves is that the climate has been in an ever constant state of change and cycles. Ice ages and warming trends. What makes you so arrogantly think that you or any group of men/women have the knowledge and the power to "stabilize" it? Government for the most part has proven time and again they do not have the best interest of man at heart. You trust them to get this right and make changes that they have no proof will make any significant difference? I would say I am more a realist then a denier. Your just a sucker and a fool.
You don't know me; I don't know you. So why do you engage in obscene and defaming posting in a public forum?

Dismissed.
Obskeptic

Livonia, MI

#35897 Sep 1, 2014
SpaceBlues wrote:
<quoted text>
You don't know me; I don't know you. So why do you engage in obscene and defaming posting in a public forum?
Dismissed.
But you know everything about things that just aren't so, and suggest because I disagree , and refuse to accept what common sense tells those with critical thinking skills is flat wrong. Just because you accept consensus as science does not mean the rest of us have too. Again I ask you, which group of government funded scientists have a computer model that factors in the effects of water vapor on the earths cooling?
Obskeptic

Livonia, MI

#35898 Sep 1, 2014
SpaceBlues wrote:
<quoted text>
You don't know me; I don't know you. So why do you engage in obscene and defaming posting in a public forum?
Dismissed.
If you had all of todays modern technology and the ability to dedicate all of the worlds wealth to it, do you think there is any group of scientists that could have prevented the dinosaurs from going extinct? Give some serious and objective thought to what you think man can do to control the weather and the climate on a short or long term basis. That alone should make a skeptic out of you.
1 post removed
Billy

Saint Paul, MN

#35900 Sep 1, 2014
Obskeptic wrote:
<quoted text>
If you had all of todays modern technology and the ability to dedicate all of the worlds wealth to it, do you think there is any group of scientists that could have prevented the dinosaurs from going extinct? Give some serious and objective thought to what you think man can do to control the weather and the climate on a short or long term basis. That alone should make a skeptic out of you.
OMG! Best post ever to prove deniers are 3rd graders! Beer through nostrils!
LessHypeMoreFact

Toronto, Canada

#35901 Sep 1, 2014
Obskeptic wrote:
<quoted text>
So what it proves is that the climate has been in an ever constant state of change and cycles. Ice ages and warming trends.
Anything in nature has some varibility. But you can distinguish (or more rational people can) between the seasonal high and low of a river stream and the devastation of a 100 year flood.
Obskeptic wrote:
<quoted text>
What makes you so arrogantly think that you or any group of men/women have the knowledge and the power to "stabilize" it?
Build a dam... there ARE some thing we ARE capable of doing, including creating the problem which would not exist without the 'forcing' of man made emissions so it is just common sense that we can moderate those changes to moderate their effectrs. No arrogance needed. YOU are arrogant in saying we cannot because YOU don't want it.
Obskeptic wrote:
<quoted text>
Government for the most part has proven time and again they do not have the best interest of man at heart.
A good government (i.e a Democracy responsive to the 'public good' would do much to alleviate the problem. It is the selfish and blind like you that prevent government form achieving anything since you promote the self interest of a few fossil fools along with yourself.
Obskeptic wrote:
<quoted text>
You trust them to get this right and make changes that they have no proof will make any significant difference? I would say I am more a realist then a denier. Your just a sucker and a fool.
One would never trust a government which is why you have to have an active Democracy (where the will of the people determines the goals and policies of those charged with leading) that can implement positive change. But not as long as barbarian keep preventing it with nonsense like yours (i.e denial of the facts and the political will to do the right thing).

“CO2 is Gaseous Love”

Since: Dec 08

Home, sweet home.

#35902 Sep 1, 2014
McKitrick paper: no warming for 19 years

The Guardian in 2009 predicted five years of rapid warming:
The world faces record-breaking temperatures as the sun’s activity increases, leading the planet to heat up significantly faster than scientists had predicted for the next five years, according to a study.

The hottest year on record was 1998, and the relatively cool years since have led to some global warming sceptics claiming that temperatures have levelled off or started to decline. But new research firmly rejects that argument.

The research, to be published in Geophysical Research Letters, was carried out by Judith Lean, of the US Naval Research Laboratory, and David Rind, of Nasa’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies.

Fail. Five more years of no warming followed.

Professsor Ross McKitrick says in a new paper that the warming pause has now lasted an astonishing 19 years at the surface and 16-26 years in the lower troposphere:....
http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt...
LIbEralS

Minneapolis, MN

#35903 Sep 2, 2014
LessHypeMoreFact wrote:
<quoted text>
A good government (i.e a Democracy responsive to the 'public good' would do much to alleviate the problem...
Like California?
LessHypeMoreFact

Toronto, Canada

#35904 Sep 2, 2014
Brian_G wrote:
McKitrick paper: no warming for 19 years
This is untrue. Warming is on track. It is just not in the air temperature (which is the basis for this 'hiatus' claim). Some lower trend due to higher reflection of sulphates (a higher than average volcanic activity) but mostly the HEAT added is just not going into the atmosphere because of the strong 'la nina' in the pacific. It goes into deep ocean instead.

http://tinyurl.com/lhwcwvb

I like that term. The 'faux pause'.. ;-)

The “faux pause” could buy the planet a few extra years beyond that date to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and avoid the crossover—but only a few.
LessHypeMoreFact

Toronto, Canada

#35905 Sep 2, 2014
LIbEralS wrote:
<quoted text>
Like California?
Stupid AND predictable. Your posts are just fodder for the usual partisan bickering. California is a leader in both research and development (why do you think silicon valley is there?). You, otoh, are living in the past. Ok for a few years living off of old strength but never for the long term.

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 In the wake of Al Franken, Democrats should rev... 2 min swampmudd 5
News Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 2 min Joy 1,641,536
News Roy Moore's sexual assault allegations cloud Al... 8 min swampmudd 188
News Gillibrand: Bill Clinton should've resigned ove... 10 min spud 74
News Star Tribune: Franken Wona t Resign, Staffer Says 10 min Julia 3
News BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit contesting... (Jan '09) 11 min loose cannon 242,998
News Diagnosing Trump: Did America elect a madman? 19 min THIS 216
News Plurality of Americans think Trump is failing (Mar '17) 1 hr About time 41,858
More from around the web