Global warming 'undeniable,' scientists say

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. Full Story
Amused Slew

Seattle, WA

#23586 Feb 2, 2013
"I find Topix is mostly a waste of time."

In your case, a COMPLETE waste of time.

Judged:

10

10

10

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!
litesong

Everett, WA

#23587 Feb 2, 2013
[QUOTE who="marred & tinny joke"]Liberal's SIN[/QUOTE]

Liberal sins are more earned science, engineering & mathematics degrees than re-pubic-lick-uns, so practical wealth-building occurs.

Liberal sins are more voters getting in the way of re-pubic-lick-uns who give more money to rich people. Re-pubic-lick-uns have fewer people, so must politically gain power through back-door politics.

Good thing 'marred & tinny joke' ain't god, because he ain't good or just, but does believe that others need to sacrifice so that the royal kings & queens of money........ will have more money.

Since: Jan 13

Fairfax, VA

#23588 Feb 2, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
Do you know why Intelligent Design is bogus science? There are no experimental tests that show any effect that another theory can also explain. It just adds a metaphysical element, as if our greenhouse gas emissions might scorch the Earth for them. I'm not sterile, I've got kids and you've got to earn something to leave behind, if that's what you choose.
Actually a scorched earth IS part of the legacy you right wingers are leaving our children from ignoring global warming.

Other than droughts and failed agriculture harvests? Flooded coastlines from the melted ice caps and oceans in crisis from reduced fish harvests and coral reefs. See the added CO2 is also making the oceans warmer and more acidic.

It will take more than your money to fix the mess you are leaving them.

Judged:

10

10

9

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!
Amused Slew

Seattle, WA

#23589 Feb 2, 2013
Brain Gone has no money, just a moronic mouth and a simpleton attitude....
PHD

Overton, TX

#23590 Feb 3, 2013
litesong wrote:
<quoted text>
Liberal sins are more earned science, engineering & mathematics degrees than re-pubic-lick-uns, so practical wealth-building occurs.
Liberal sins are more voters getting in the way of re-pubic-lick-uns who give more money to rich people. Re-pubic-lick-uns have fewer people, so must politically gain power through back-door politics.
Good thing 'marred & tinny joke' ain't god, because he ain't good or just, but does believe that others need to sacrifice so that the royal kings & queens of money........ will have more money.
In addition, you think topix does not know what you publish. Attacks on me will not delete or erase what you are and what you do. You should stop making an ASSumption of your---self before you know the facts. Do contact topix to satisfy your accusations of the reprint BS your posting of what I said. You are a dumbASSumption of your---self again.
Amused Slew

Seattle, WA

#23591 Feb 3, 2013
YYes ?? Poor P-ppppenny...

Of course, I'm "postiong" dead, just like your Global Warming credibility.

If you REALLY want a laugh, imagine Penny putting all those "judging marks" up after we copy/paste posts....

Hi, Mistake a minute P-P-Penny,
How are Sheldon and Leonard...
Ps- Almost a moron, stick with it.
People say that you are the perfect idiot. I say that you are not perfect, but you are doing alright.
Ordinarily people live and learn. You just live

“I Luv Carbon Dioxide”

Since: Dec 08

Location hidden

#23592 Feb 3, 2013
Wallop10 wrote:
Actually a scorched earth IS part of the legacy you right wingers are leaving our children from ignoring global warming.
I've never recommended ignoring global warming, I just oppose climate change mitigation. If you want to adapt to climate, I think that's a wonderful idea; go for it. I'm for climate freedom, get government out of climate.

I'm not leaving scorched Earth by advocating using fossil fuels, all fuels, encouraging the distribution and use of energy and fuel should help our economy. At least our kids can have jobs!

I oppose restricting CO2 emissions; that's idiocy and greed. Higher taxes and more government control; I won't buy it!

.
Wallop10 wrote:
Other than droughts and failed agriculture harvests?
There have never been droughts and crop failures before the age of the automobile? That's not the history I've read.

You should learn more; people have always tried to scare others with news about droughts and crop failures; they used to burn witches to mitigate climate change. Get government out of climate change mitigation!

.
Wallop10 wrote:
Flooded coastlines from the melted ice caps
Ever visit Amsterdam or Venice? Flooded coastlines are picturesque; that's why people like to live near them. We shouldn't subsidize their bad decisions by subsidizing insurance or disaster aid beyond immediate relief and relocation.

.
Wallop10 wrote:
and oceans in crisis from reduced fish harvests
That happens everywhere we overuse resources, the market might adjust to aquaculture and other sources of food. Government isn't the solution; they are the problem.

.
Wallop10 wrote:
and coral reefs. See the added CO2 is also making the oceans warmer and more acidic.
Coral reefs need CO2 to live, just like we need plants to use CO2. Don't be selfish; CO2 adds to the biosphere, in increases the range of life.

When the oceans warm, they release CO2 the same way a cold can of soda will release more CO2 as it warms. Don't confuse cause and effect.

.
Wallop10 wrote:
It will take more than your money to fix the mess you are leaving them.
No amount of cash can fix the climate. If you don't like your climate, move. Governments can't fix climate, but you can deal with it.
litesong

Everett, WA

#23593 Feb 3, 2013
brian_g stumble butt dumpster diver wrote:
I've never recommended ignoring global warming.....
"brian_g stumble butt dumpster diver" allegedly threatened AGW advocates so they would no longer post on toxic topix AGW forum threads.
Told Ya

Saint Paul, MN

#23594 Feb 3, 2013
A leaked report by a United Nations' group dedicated to climate studies says that heat from the sun may play a larger role than previously thought."[Results] do suggest the possibility of a much larger impact of solar variations on the stratosphere than previously thought, and some studies have suggested that this may lead to significant regional impacts on climate," reads a draft copy of a major, upcoming report from the U.N.'s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

#23595 Feb 3, 2013
Told Ya wrote:
A leaked report by a United Nations' group dedicated to climate studies says that heat from the sun may play a larger role than previously thought."[Results] do suggest the possibility of a much larger impact of solar variations on the stratosphere than previously thought, and some studies have suggested that this may lead to significant regional impacts on climate," reads a draft copy of a major, upcoming report from the U.N.'s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).
You just told a lie.

Deniers lie and cheat.
Amused Slew

Seattle, WA

#23596 Feb 3, 2013
You own post weakens the credibility.
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

#23597 Feb 3, 2013
Haha it happened again, AmS, cross posted.

Since: Jan 13

Fairfax, VA

#23598 Feb 3, 2013
Told Ya wrote:
A leaked report by a United Nations' group dedicated to climate studies says that heat from the sun may play a larger role than previously thought."[Results] do suggest the possibility of a much larger impact of solar variations on the stratosphere than previously thought, and some studies have suggested that this may lead to significant regional impacts on climate," reads a draft copy of a major, upcoming report from the U.N.'s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).
it said regional impact only. Did you notice that.

And solar variations have been relatively stable over the last 30 years, declining a little recently.

Yet temperatures have been climbing. So they still wouldn't be saying CO2 isn't the primary culprit.

Isn't that clear to you?
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

#23599 Feb 3, 2013
Amused Slew wrote:
You own post weakens the credibility.
Whatever you said was not to me. Right?
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

#23600 Feb 3, 2013
Wallop10 wrote:
<quoted text>
it said regional impact only. Did you notice that.
And solar variations have been relatively stable over the last 30 years, declining a little recently.
Yet temperatures have been climbing. So they still wouldn't be saying CO2 isn't the primary culprit.
Isn't that clear to you?
This is a much better response than mine.

Since: Jan 13

Fairfax, VA

#23601 Feb 3, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>I've never recommended ignoring global warming, I just oppose climate change mitigation. If you want to adapt to climate, I think that's a wonderful idea; go for it. I'm for climate freedom, get government out of climate.
Are you aware govt research & development was used for the transcontinental train building. That the Dept of Defense financed R&D for helicopters and airplanes, NASA financed R&D for satellities and the telecommunications industry, and on and on. NASA also paid for windtunnel testing and air traffic control systems used today by the airlines.

Typically what happens is commercial companies then take over the production after the R&D has been paid for the government. The same parallel is what needs to happen with alternative fuels.
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm not leaving scorched Earth by advocating using fossil fuels, all fuels, encouraging the distribution and use of energy and fuel should help our economy. At least our kids can have jobs!
The plan of the Democrats was to retool buildings to use alternataive energy which would create new jobs. Republicans were determined to give Democrats no successes.
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>
I oppose restricting CO2 emissions; that's idiocy and greed. Higher taxes and more government control; I won't buy it!
Are you aware the problem of mercury in ocean fish has been traced to coal plant emissions? More CO2 will lead to more droughts and when the ice cap melts, there will be flooding of the coastal cities? This will be extremely expensive -- far more than controlling CO2 emissions. Food prices will go up and insurance prices will go up, a lot.
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>
<quoted text>There have never been droughts and crop failures before the age of the automobile? That's not the history I've read.
No the number of hot days have increased, and the number of cold days have decreased. NASA has a graph that shows there have been something like double the warmer days, and half the normal cooler days. Droughts are the worst on record for most of the world, and expected to increase.

See, warmer temperatures evaporate the moisture in the ground. This has to be replaced with either rain or irrigation. We have a water problem out West too you know.
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>
You should learn more; people have always tried to scare others with news about droughts and crop failures; they used to burn witches to mitigate climate change. Get government out of climate change mitigation!
I agree with you some on mainstream news -- they need to attract audiences. I read science sources. The latter does not talk about polar bears or hurricanes very much for example.
Brian_G wrote:
<
<quoted text>Ever visit Amsterdam or Venice? Flooded coastlines are picturesque; that's why people like to live near them. We shouldn't subsidize their bad decisions by subsidizing insurance or disaster aid beyond immediate relief and relocation.

Venice had a bad flood not to long ago. See the houses are still built on foundations. They don't float. Holland pays for very expensive dikes to keep the water out. Would cost us a fortune for both -- far more than prevention of CO2 emissions.

[QUOTE who="Brian_G"]<
<quoted text>That happens everywhere we overuse resources, the market might adjust to aquaculture and other sources of food. Government isn't the solution; they are the problem.
No, because agricultural scientists are testing for drought resistant crops, and they say so far they have found some success, but eventually they still need to have some water.... ie there is still a big problem
here.

con't next post.

Since: Jan 13

Fairfax, VA

#23602 Feb 3, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
When the oceans warm, they release CO2 the same way a cold can of soda will release more CO2 as it warms. Don't confuse cause and effect.
The oceans have absorbed about 80% of the increase in CO2, from the articles I have read. Scientists do worry the oceans will saturate and let CO2 off the way you describe. That puts it back in the atmosphere and warms up the Earth.
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>No amount of cash can fix the climate. If you don't like your climate, move. Governments can't fix climate, but you can deal with it.
Well the top scientists are telling us we need not to put the trash up in the atmosphere to begin with. What is your solution???

Since: Apr 08

"the green troll"

#23603 Feb 3, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
When the oceans warm, they release CO2 the same way a cold can of soda will release more CO2 as it warms. Don't confuse cause and effect.
Trying that old lie again, huh?

Maybe an experiment would tell us if it's really happening?
An international team of scientists found that oceans have taken in about 118 billion metric tons of carbon dioxide from human activities between 1800 and 1994, accounting for nearly a third of their long-term carrying capacity.

The 15-year study, conducted and analyzed with the help of several researchers around the world, looked at nearly 72,000 samples taken in the Atlantic, Pacific and Indian oceans.
http://www.planetark.com/dailynewsstory.cfm/n...
The amount of carbon dioxide being absorbed by the world's oceans has reduced, scientists have said.

University of East Anglia researchers gauged CO2 absorption through more than 90,000 measurements from merchant ships equipped with automatic instruments.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/7053903.st...
Scientists have issued a new warning about climate change after discovering a sudden and dramatic collapse in the amount of carbon emissions absorbed by the Sea of Japan.

The shift has alarmed experts, who blame global warming.

Working with Pavel Tishchenko of the Russian Pacific Oceanological Institute in Vladivostok, Lee and his colleague Geun-Ha Park used a cruise on the Professor Gagarinskiy, a Russian research vessel, last May to take seawater samples from 24 sites across the Sea of Japan.

They compared the dissolved CO2 in the seawater with similar samples collected in 1992 and 1999. The results showed the amount of CO2 absorbed during 1999 to 2007 was half the level recorded from 1992 to 1999.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/ja...
litesong

Everett, WA

#23604 Feb 3, 2013
Wallop10 wrote:
Well the top scientists are telling us we need not to put the trash up in the atmosphere to begin with. What is your solution???
'brian_g stumble butt dumpster diver' wants to push man-made atmospheric CO2 to such levels that total CO2 will be past 1000 ppm. Of course, an increasing percentage of building interiors would have concentrated CO2 levels in the 4000-6000 ppm, a level where detrimental CO2 poisoning would occur in some people.

But the oil-can job of 'brian_g stumble butt dumpster diver' would be secure. Of course,'brian_g stumble butt dumpster diver' wouldn't go visit people the hospital, poisoned by CO2, because he would be securing a good future for his children.
PHD

Overton, TX

#23605 Feb 4, 2013
litesong wrote:
<quoted text>
'brian_g stumble butt dumpster diver' wants to push man-made atmospheric CO2 to such levels that total CO2 will be past 1000 ppm. Of course, an increasing percentage of building interiors would have concentrated CO2 levels in the 4000-6000 ppm, a level where detrimental CO2 poisoning would occur in some people.
But the oil-can job of 'brian_g stumble butt dumpster diver' would be secure. Of course,'brian_g stumble butt dumpster diver' wouldn't go visit people the hospital, poisoned by CO2, because he would be securing a good future for his children.
And you think topix doesn’t know what you publish? Attacks on me won't delete or erase what you are and what you do. You should stop making an ASSumption of your---self before you know the facts. Do contact topix to satisfy your accusations of the reprint BS your posting of what I said. You are a dumbASSumption of your---self again.

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.

Barack Obama Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
The President has failed us (Jun '12) 8 min EAGLE EYE1 294,277
BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit contesting... (Jan '09) 29 min Guru 182,025
Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 43 min johnplustwomore 1,155,536
Judge rejects lawsuit against Obama on immigration 1 hr OId Sailor 24
Anti-gay Tenn. billboard stirs religion debate 1 hr Rick in Kansas 3,001
Going it alone, Obama rocked the boat in 2014 3 hr barefoot2626 31
Obama: Racism, bias in US will take time to tackle 3 hr spocko 447
More from around the web