The Weather IS Becoming More Extreme

Climate Science Watch has a devastating and detailed debunking of Richard Lindzen’s April 16 op-ed in Newsweek, “Why So Gloomy?”

Let me expand on one point. Lindzen writes, “There is no evidence, for instance, that extreme weather events are increasing in any systematic way.”

That is just plain wrong.

http://climateprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2007/05/sec-extreme_weather_2000_10.gif

As far back as 1995, analysis by the National Climatic Data Center (http://www.gcrio.org/CONSEQUENCES/spring95/Climate.html) showed that over the course of the 20th century, the United States had suffered a statistically significant increase in a variety of extreme weather events, the very ones you would expect from global warming, such as more — and more intense — precipitation. That analysis concluded the chances were only “5 to 10 percent” this increase was due to factors other than global warming, such as “natural climate variability.”

And since 1995, the climate has gotten much more extreme. For instance, a 2004 analysis by the Center found an increase during the 20th century of “precipitation, temperature, streamflow, heavy and very heavy precipitation and high streamflow in the East.” They found a 14 percent increase in “heavy rain events” of greater than 2 inches in one day, and a 20 percent increase in “very heavy rain events”-best described as deluges-greater than 4 inches in one day.These extreme downpours are precisely what is predicted by global warming scientists (http://www.env.duke.edu/people/faculty/hegerl/hegerlextremesresub.pdf) and models.

The deluge that socked the mid-Atlantic and Northeast the last week of June 2006 fits this global-warming-type drought. Washington, DC, for instance, was drenched with over seven inches of rain in one 24-hour period. And this deluge happened at the same time that 45 percent of the continental United States as a whole was experiencing moderate to extreme drought.

For more on the global warming/extreme weather connection, read Chapter Two of Hell and High Water (http://www.amazon.com/Hell-High-Water-Warming-Politics/dp/006117212X).

http://climateprogress.org/2007/05/16/the-weather-is-becoming-more-extreme/

The Weather IS Becoming More Extreme

Climate Science Watch has a devastating and detailed debunking of Richard Lindzen’s April 16 op-ed in Newsweek, “Why So Gloomy?”

Let me expand on one point. Lindzen writes, “There is no evidence, for instance, that extreme weather events are increasing in any systematic way.”

That is just plain wrong.

http://climateprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2007/05/sec-extreme_weather_2000_10.gif

As far back as 1995, analysis by the National Climatic Data Center (http://www.gcrio.org/CONSEQUENCES/spring95/Climate.html) showed that over the course of the 20th century, the United States had suffered a statistically significant increase in a variety of extreme weather events, the very ones you would expect from global warming, such as more — and more intense — precipitation. That analysis concluded the chances were only “5 to 10 percent” this increase was due to factors other than global warming, such as “natural climate variability.”

And since 1995, the climate has gotten much more extreme. For instance, a 2004 analysis by the Center found an increase during the 20th century of “precipitation, temperature, streamflow, heavy and very heavy precipitation and high streamflow in the East.” They found a 14 percent increase in “heavy rain events” of greater than 2 inches in one day, and a 20 percent increase in “very heavy rain events”-best described as deluges-greater than 4 inches in one day.These extreme downpours are precisely what is predicted by global warming scientists (http://www.env.duke.edu/people/faculty/hegerl/hegerlextremesresub.pdf) and models.

The deluge that socked the mid-Atlantic and Northeast the last week of June 2006 fits this global-warming-type drought. Washington, DC, for instance, was drenched with over seven inches of rain in one 24-hour period. And this deluge happened at the same time that 45 percent of the continental United States as a whole was experiencing moderate to extreme drought.

For more on the global warming/extreme weather connection, read Chapter Two of Hell and High Water (http://www.amazon.com/Hell-High-Water-Warming-Politics/dp/006117212X).

http://climateprogress.org/2007/05/16/the-weather-is-becoming-more-extreme/

Excellent information but get ready for an onslaught of nay-saying ostriches to 'prove' the info wrong. :rolleyes:

"Certainly, you've seen the articles about what global warming might do in the future to fragile or low-lying areas of the world. Such pieces usually mention the possibility of enormous migrations of the poor and desperate. But we don't usually think about that in the "homeland."

Maybe we should (http://www.thenation.com/doc/20071203/engelhardt)."

The Earth goes through cycles. No one has proven Global Warming is man made.

The Earth goes through cycles. No one has proven Global Warming is man made.
Yeah.....I'm sure the Industrial Revolution has had a zero-impact on the quality of the World's environment. :rolleyes:


http://www.aesi1.com/images/air-pollution-systems.jpg

Excellent information but get ready for an onslaught of nay-saying ostriches to 'prove' the info wrong.

"prove it wrong".........?!?!?

ROTFL. They seem to me to have little to no grasp of how science works and how scientific research is applied in the real world; how systemized knowledge derived through experimentation, observation, and investigation leads scientists to logical conclusions and to proposals for how to address the problems they are researching.

The naysayers in these parts never seem to be able to offer anything substantive in the way of refutation; their responses consisting primarily of -- "Nuh unnnh!! nuh unnnnh!!"

A prime example;

""No one has proven Global Warming is man made.""

It is akin to saying --"Well science hasn't ever proven that gravity exists....all they have is some hokey 'theory'."

It is akin to saying --"Well science hasn't ever proven that gravity exists....all they have is some hokey 'theory'."

That is correct, we have no idea what gracity is, Einstein's general relativity theory (which IS proven) suggests that it is an illusion greated by curved space :)

Global Warming is a scientific fact, the cause is somewhat uncertain, but it is also a fact that we have introduced more greenhouse gases than what is naturally occurring. That is why it is very reasonable to assume that our activity is adding to the problem to a smaller or greater degree.

Global Warming is a scientific fact, the cause is somewhat uncertain, but it is also a fact that we have introduced more greenhouse gases than what is naturally occurring. That is why it is very reasonable to assume that our activity is adding to the problem to a smaller or greater degree.

Bravo. That's about as well as I have ever heard it put here.

(Of course, you will now be informed by those sage anti-science posters here who are members of God's Own Party (the GOP) that the entire issue of global warming is merely a nefarious lie being concocted by the nationwide scientific community, put forth by them for no other reason than that they secretly wish for the downfall of America. :rolleyes: )

Bravo. That's about as well as I have ever heard it put here.

(Of course, you will now be informed by those sage anti-science posters here who are members of God's Own Party (the GOP) that the entire issue of global warming is merely a nefarious lie being concocted by the nationwide scientific community, put forth by them for no other reason than that they secretly wish for the downfall of America. :rolleyes: )

Well, I always find conspiracy theories entertaining :)

Bravo. That's about as well as I have ever heard it put here.

(Of course, you will now be informed by those sage anti-science posters here who are members of God's Own Party (the GOP) that the entire issue of global warming is merely a nefarious lie being concocted by the nationwide scientific community, put forth by them for no other reason than that they secretly wish for the downfall of America. :rolleyes: )
i'm still waiting for the coming ice age i was promised in the 70s:corn:

i'm still waiting for the coming ice age i was promised in the 70s:corn:

It may very well end up with that eventually :)

It may very well end up with that eventually :)
warming causing cooling is up there on the hokey scale way above being poof-ed into existance....by aliens.
http://i122.photobucket.com/albums/o245/mikezila_bucket/40c1c653.gif

warming causing cooling is up there on the hokey scale way above being poof-ed into existance....by aliens.
http://i122.photobucket.com/albums/o245/mikezila_bucket/40c1c653.gif

Nope...
If the golf current stop, northern europe will freeze over.
Anyway, the earth has gone through iceages many times, so its nowhere near the hokey scale...

To say the climate is getting more extreme and use that as some kind of global warming argument is rubbish

What's the time frame for these profound observations? 1 year, 2 years, 100 years? - even if somebody could look at a trend over 1000 years - it'd mean NOTHING - the earth is billions of years old, the climate changes all the time.

This is not to say that man may well be influencing the climate - certainly he is influencing it with all the greenhouses gasses pumped into the atmosphere - but nobody can look at the weather and say look there is a problem.

Global warming is potentially a FUTURE problem - but it 'aint no scientific FACT as mentioned above - there are plenty of scientists out there who say global warming is BS.

Nope...
If the golf current stop, northern europe will freeze over.
Anyway, the earth has gone through iceages many times, so its nowhere near the hokey scale...
pity it just hasn't happend (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gulf_Stream)-

At present, most available data show that Gulf Stream flow was stable over the past 40 years.[9] One report, based on a snapshot survey, suggested that the deep return flow has weakened[10] by 30% since 1957, which would imply a weakening in the North Atlantic Deep Water production.[11] However, this should have caused a temperature drop of several degrees in northwest Europe, which has not been observed. It was later discovered, using the first cross-Atlantic array of moored current meters, that variations within one year were just as large

"prove it wrong".........?!?!?

ROTFL. They seem to me to have little to no grasp of how science works and how scientific research is applied in the real world; how systemized knowledge derived through experimentation, observation, and investigation leads scientists to logical conclusions and to proposals for how to address the problems they are researching.

The naysayers in these parts never seem to be able to offer anything substantive in the way of refutation; their responses consisting primarily of -- "Nuh unnnh!! nuh unnnnh!!"

A prime example;

""No one has proven Global Warming is man made.""

It is akin to saying --"Well science hasn't ever proven that gravity exists....all they have is some hokey 'theory'."

I'm sure you smelled the sarcasm dripping from my post, yes?

As far as yer post goes...... HAHAHAHAHAAA!!!!

Hey, I'm too tired to come up with something witty so I'll just laff instead...

~ :D :D ~ :D :D ~ :D :D ~ :D :D ~ :D :D ~

pity it just hasn't happend (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gulf_Stream)-

Pity you didn't read the next paragraph :)

At present, most available data show that Gulf Stream flow was stable over the past 40 years.[9] One report, based on a snapshot survey, suggested that the deep return flow has weakened[10] by 30% since 1957, which would imply a weakening in the North Atlantic Deep Water production.[11] However, this should have caused a temperature drop of several degrees in northwest Europe, which has not been observed. It was later discovered, using the first cross-Atlantic array of moored current meters, that variations within one year were just as large.[12] At least part of the apparent weakening of the Gulf Stream (if real) may be cyclical and connected to recent positive values of North Atlantic Oscillation.[13] Recent research[14] shows that Gulf Stream volume transport during the Little Ice Age was ten per cent weaker than today’s, implying that diminished oceanic heat transport may have contributed to the 16th- to the mid-19th-century cooling in the North Atlantic.

Anyway you misunderstood my post, I said iceages had occured many times before, not that they were caused by the golf current. The golf current hasn't been around for that long. My point was that global warming and global cooling follows in cycles.

Global warming is potentially a FUTURE problem - but it 'aint no scientific FACT as mentioned above - there are plenty of scientists out there who say global warming is BS.

Well, it is a fact to the extent there has been measured an increase in global average temperature.

Global warming is the increase in the average temperature of the Earth's near-surface air and oceans in recent decades and its projected continuation.

The global average air temperature near the Earth's surface rose 0.74 ± 0.18 °C (1.33 ± 0.32 °F) during the 100 year period ending in 2005, which is higher than the earlier estimate of 0.6 ± 0.2 °C for the period ending in 2000.[1] The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) concludes "most of the observed increase in globally averaged temperatures since the mid-20th century is very likely due to the observed increase in anthropogenic greenhouse gas concentrations"[1] via the greenhouse effect. Natural phenomena such as solar variation combined with volcanoes probably had a small warming effect from pre-industrial times to 1950 and a small cooling effect from 1950 onward.[2][3] These basic conclusions have been endorsed by at least 30 scientific societies and academies of science, including all of the national academies of science of the major industrialized countries. While individual scientists have voiced disagreement with the conclusions of the IPCC, the overwhelming majority of scientists working on climate change are in agreement with the conclusions.[4]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_warming

More stuff:
"A guide to facts and fiction about climate change"
http://royalsociety.org/downloaddoc.asp?id=1630

"This document examines twelve misleading arguments put forward by the opponents of urgent action on climate change and highlights the scientific evidence that exposes their flaws. It has been prepared by a group led by Sir David Wallace FRS, Treasurer of the Royal Society, and Sir John Houghton FRS, former chair of Working Group I of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). This document has been endorsed by the Council of the Royal Society, and draws primarily on scientific papers published in leading peer-reviewed journals and the work of authoritative scientific organisations, such as the IPCC and the United States National Academy of Sciences."

I see no reason why I should believe these people are a part of some elaborate international conspiracy against human civilization...

What's the time frame for these profound observations? 1 year, 2 years, 100 years? - even if somebody could look at a trend over 1000 years - it'd mean NOTHING - the earth is billions of years old, the climate changes all the time.
Climate change is relevant over a timeframe of civilization or so, roughly 7000 years. The age of the Earth is not relevant, because ultimately what environmentalism has to do with is not the preservation of the Earth, but rather maintaining the Earth for us in our temperature ranges. The Earth will survive just fine no matter what we do, even if we take a bunch of nuclear bombs to it.

Climate change is relevant over a timeframe of civilization or so, roughly 7000 years. The age of the Earth is not relevant, because ultimately what environmentalism has to do with is not the preservation of the Earth, but rather maintaining the Earth for us in our temperature ranges. The Earth will survive just fine no matter what we do, even if we take a bunch of nuclear bombs to it.

Exactly.
The billions of years argument is valid as for the planet which wont go anywhere until the sun dies in 4-5 billion years, but we are talking about our very voulnerable civilization which heavily depend on the current climate.
We have 150 years of scientific weather observations, a few centuries of other logs and greenhouse gas data is collected for the last 650000 years as well, so we actually do have a fair bit of data.

Bravo. That's about as well as I have ever heard it put here.

(Of course, you will now be informed by those sage anti-science posters here who are members of God's Own Party (the GOP) that the entire issue of global warming is merely a nefarious lie being concocted by the nationwide scientific community, put forth by them for no other reason than that they secretly wish for the downfall of America. :rolleyes: )
....And, what better way to counter the scientific-community's lies, than to bring-in Big Oil's scientists (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/03/17/60minutes/main1415985.shtml)!!!

*

"Cooney, the former oil industry lobbyist, became chief-of-staff at the White House Council on Environmental Quality."

Anyway, the earth has gone through iceages many times, so its nowhere near the hokey scale...
I'm sure you can provide a timeline, identifying each o' those times. :rolleyes:

I'm sure you can provide a timeline, identifying each o' those times. :rolleyes:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ice_age

The Weather IS Becoming More Extreme

Climate Science Watch has a devastating and detailed debunking of Richard Lindzen’s April 16 op-ed in Newsweek, “Why So Gloomy?”

Let me expand on one point. Lindzen writes, “There is no evidence, for instance, that extreme weather events are increasing in any systematic way.”

That is just plain wrong.

http://climateprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2007/05/sec-extreme_weather_2000_10.gif

As far back as 1995, analysis by the National Climatic Data Center (http://www.gcrio.org/CONSEQUENCES/spring95/Climate.html) showed that over the course of the 20th century, the United States had suffered a statistically significant increase in a variety of extreme weather events, the very ones you would expect from global warming, such as more — and more intense — precipitation. That analysis concluded the chances were only “5 to 10 percent” this increase was due to factors other than global warming, such as “natural climate variability.”

And since 1995, the climate has gotten much more extreme. For instance, a 2004 analysis by the Center found an increase during the 20th century of “precipitation, temperature, streamflow, heavy and very heavy precipitation and high streamflow in the East.” They found a 14 percent increase in “heavy rain events” of greater than 2 inches in one day, and a 20 percent increase in “very heavy rain events”-best described as deluges-greater than 4 inches in one day.These extreme downpours are precisely what is predicted by global warming scientists (http://www.env.duke.edu/people/faculty/hegerl/hegerlextremesresub.pdf) and models.

The deluge that socked the mid-Atlantic and Northeast the last week of June 2006 fits this global-warming-type drought. Washington, DC, for instance, was drenched with over seven inches of rain in one 24-hour period. And this deluge happened at the same time that 45 percent of the continental United States as a whole was experiencing moderate to extreme drought.

For more on the global warming/extreme weather connection, read Chapter Two of Hell and High Water (http://www.amazon.com/Hell-High-Water-Warming-Politics/dp/006117212X).

http://climateprogress.org/2007/05/16/the-weather-is-becoming-more-extreme/

Weather is Cyclical.Always has been,You Doofus drought.
Remember the Dust Bowl years of the 30's.Very dry & HOT.
And windy.
Then there was a cooling off the last half Century.Time Magazine ran a
cover story explaining the new Ice Age.
There were more and powerfull Hurricane pre-1960.
Gore will go down in history as a Scaremonger.He did it just because
he could and is a baby.Wasn't officially elected President,so he decided
to make himself Weather King.

Climate change is relevant over a timeframe of civilization or so, roughly 7000 years. The age of the Earth is not relevant, because ultimately what environmentalism has to do with is not the preservation of the Earth, but rather maintaining the Earth for us in our temperature ranges. The Earth will survive just fine no matter what we do, even if we take a bunch of nuclear bombs to it.

You are missing the point. I know just fine the earth will be ok - the point is that these astounding observations about climate change are IRRELEVANT - the time frame is too short - they mean absolutely nothing.

You are missing the point. I know just fine the earth will be ok - the point is that these astounding observations about climate change are IRRELEVANT - the time frame is too short - they mean absolutely nothing.

What do you base this one?

What do you base this one?


Absurdity.

Well, obviously this rock will be much better of when the human race is extinct, and climate does not affect the rock the slightest as it is just a breeze on its skin. However that is utterly irrelevant to this discussion as it is exactly human civilization we are concerned about...

You are missing the point. I know just fine the earth will be ok - the point is that these astounding observations about climate change are IRRELEVANT - the time frame is too short - they mean absolutely nothing.
They mean a great deal. Whenever global climate changes even a little, so does life--climate change is one factor that can influence evolution. Personally, I don't give a damn about climate change, as I think we'll probably adapt, or if we don't, die off...but it's pretty obvious that it's happening, for some reason or another.

The western world will most likely do ok, it is the poor who will suffer the most.

The western world will most likely do ok, it is the poor who will suffer the most.
If so, then I will continue to not give a damn.

If so, then I will continue to not give a damn.
I agree.

It amuses me how AMERICAN politicians are crucified for GLOBAL warming... like the United States is the only culprit in any CO2 rise.

*yes, i know we can do our part.. but the point remains

The western world will most likely do ok, it is the poor who will suffer the most.

I think animals will suffer the most and that is completely upsetting.

Well, to me anyway.

:eek:

I think animals will suffer the most and that is completely upsetting.

Well, to me anyway.

:eek:
We already knew that animal rights activists preferred the lives of animals over those of humans, don't worry.

I think animals will suffer the most and that is completely upsetting.

Well, to me anyway.

:eek:
I find it extremely hard to care.

We already knew that animal rights activists preferred the lives of animals over those of humans, don't worry.
now thats NOT TRUE and you know it so maybe you should not judge people.i care much about humans,however at this point in my life that is not my focus.ill have you know i was very much into the breast cancer issue and still am and had someone very close to me who had it.it was then i got involved in raising awareness about it.im also very much against violence and bullying in schools.im OF COURSE against racism and sexism and am very active about it here at home!just bc all i post on here is animal stuff DOES NOT mean thats all i care about.its bc most people are aware of racism and sexism and violence bc it happens so much.animal abuse happens a lot too but is mostly hidden so thats why i focus on it.i did not like that you just assumed animal rights activists dont care about humans as much as animals.that was very wrong to say and disrespectful.

now thats NOT TRUE and you know it so maybe you should not judge people.i care much about humans,however at this point in my life that is not my focus.ill have you know i was very much into the breast cancer issue and still am and had someone very close to me who had it.it was then i got involved in raising awareness about it.im also very much against violence and bullying in schools.im OF COURSE against racism and sexism and am very active about it here at home!just bc all i post on here is animal stuff DOES NOT mean thats all i care about.its bc most people are aware of racism and sexism and violence bc it happens so much.animal abuse happens a lot too but is mostly hidden so thats why i focus on it.i did not like that you just assumed animal rights activists dont care about humans as much as animals.that was very wrong to say and disrespectful.
Actually, it's quite correct, at least vis-a-vis the nuts who disagree with animal testing. Animal testing brings us drugs that can save human lives.

animals are diff. than humans and the results of a test on them could be diff. than if tested on ppl.(im not saying we should test on ppl)

and no its not true.i care just as much for ppl.

I heard we can take human skin samples and test on those, but it just costs more money. I guess some people care more about money then actual living things.
no, just you.:)

:thumbs: We already knew that animal rights activists preferred the lives of animals over those of humans, don't worry.



I'm not at all worried :thumbs: but you seem to be including ALL animal rights activists in yer analogy.

Tsk tsk tsk.....

I find it extremely hard to care.

Wow

Actually, it's quite correct, at least vis-a-vis the nuts who disagree with animal testing. Animal testing brings us drugs that can save human lives.

Not all animal rights activists agree with everything in the animal rights spectrum. We aren't all clones, ya know.

Some of them are hardcore vegetarians and some are avid meat eaters.... and the list goes on but I'm gonna zip it for now.

I think there are other boards about this so.....

~*~ ZIP ~*~

Wow

Why - Wow? - she's being honest. Most people when faced with something cruel or unnecessary would press the red stop button - but beyond that level of passive caring - most people do not care. It's normal & I don't really care either.

Just because somebody posts here about how much they do care - doesn't mean they actually care a hoot. If they did care they'd be off crusading around the world - truth is - they are just dishonest.

A lot of people use their "care for an issue" as some kind of trendy outfit - something cool - "hey look at me - I'm an animal activist, I'm green...blah blah"

Humans have an inability to care for anything that involves large numbers - we care on a one to one basis - our family, our friends, the people we meet - thats they only real way humans can care about much.

When it comes to global warming, the ozone layer, animals in zoo's, animals used for drug testing and the thousand other causes out there - I couldn't really give a shit about any of them to be honest & I certainly do not care at all if they are never going to impact me. That doesn't mean I wouldn't go out of my way to help somebody I knew, or somebody in need - it just means on the big issues - I'd rather just watch TV or drink a beer instead. You do gooders have it covered anyway.

When it comes to global warming, the ozone layer, animals in zoo's, animals used for drug testing and the thousand other causes out there - I couldn't really give a shit about any of them to be honest & I certainly do not care at all if they are never going to impact me. That doesn't mean I wouldn't go out of my way to help somebody I knew, or somebody in need - it just means on the big issues - I'd rather just watch TV or drink a beer instead. You do gooders have it covered anyway.

I think you summed up the main problem with the human race right there.
Most people simply don't care...

Many pretend to care tho, but even most of those don't care enough to do something about it. On the other hand it is governments job to care, and when they make policies to correct problems, like pollution for instance, these people get pissed that someone force them to care.

I'm always amused when we interrupt the sleep of those who couldn't care less for anybody than themselves and those around them who they care for.

I would never be happy with my life if I didn't do something that contributed to the progress of the human race, being it education, promoting rational though over superstition, progress in science or relief of suffering. I have decided to contribute in the area of scientific progress, and it is the main reason I went back to school.

Most the western world reaps the benefits of the hard workers and great minds of the past as the lazy parasites they are, but I can't help having faith in humanity still...

the weather is more extreme then when? Since you were a little kid? hardly a long enough time to say "the weather is more extreme". And it sure is nice that during a colder then normal winter the global warming fanatics still have somehting to point to. So now instead of warming, its "extreme". Of course if the winter was real warm extreme wouldn't be the issue, it would be how warm it is!

the weather is more extreme then when? Since you were a little kid? hardly a long enough time to say "the weather is more extreme". And it sure is nice that during a colder then normal winter the global warming fanatics still have somehting to point to. So now instead of warming, its "extreme". Of course if the winter was real warm extreme wouldn't be the issue, it would be how warm it is!

The scientists actually researching this are not pointing at random local weather to back up their claims, on the contrary, they are very careful to say anything about that for the reasons you just mentioned.

The western world will most likely do ok, it is the poor who will suffer the most.
Kick ass. What a load off. And Al had me shaking in my boots....that silly bastard.

i'm still waiting for the coming ice age i was promised in the 70s You were doing way too many drugs in the 70's. What Ice Age? Who made that promise?

What's the time frame for these profound observations? 1 year, 2 years, 100 years? - even if somebody could look at a trend over 1000 years - it'd mean NOTHING - the earth is billions of years old, the climate changes all the time. That is a gross simplification of the issue. Scientists can and do look at trends over thousands of years, through evidence such as core samples taken from glaciers (what's left of them). What happened billions of years ago does not matter. What matters is what has been happening to the atmosphere in the last 200 years and the rate at which it is happening. The problem is that this warming process is like a really huge battleship and will take decades, if not centuries, to turn around. Good posts, AngelinaC.

the weather is more extreme then when?
Last week. It's fucking cold! *shivers*

That is a gross simplification of the issue.
And perhaps you're needlessly obscuring it. The point is, you simply don't know, and whether or not you wanna hear this is immaterial, but the "science" behind their figures is guesswork masquerading as "fact" proffered by people who are looking to gain an edge, either politically or financially, and supercilious coneheads like you are eating it up because these guys are sss-eye-uuun-tists. :rolleyes: That aside, NO ONE (and I do mean no one) wants to deliberately fuck up our Earth, and currently, measures are being taken to lessen the green house effect, but hyping the issue to the point of causing hysteria is ludicrous in the extreme. I mean, hell......half the time, I think you condescendingly dogmatic highbrow types are the ones who, paradoxically, wanna paint our meteorological situation as so freaking bleak that you actually expect us to think we're living in that shit-fest of a movie, "The Day after Tomorrow".

Oh, and to affirm what Mike said, they (and by that, I mean the "scientific" community) did predict a coming ice age in the '70's. I don't wanna look it up.

You were doing way too many drugs in the 70's. What Ice Age? Who made that promise?

i was 6 you dope:slap:

i was 6 you dope:slap:For ten years? :eek:

For ten years? :eek:
sure, why not? my Aunt has been 29 for the last 30:banana:


but i was 6 in 1974 (http://www.junkscience.com/mar06/Time_AnotherIceAge_June241974.pdf).

but i was 6 in 1974 (http://www.junkscience.com/mar06/Time_AnotherIceAge_June241974.pdf).
Do you think climatology, as a science, has advanced since you were six in 1974?

Do you think climatology, as a science, has advanced since you were six in 1974?
they still can't get the extended forcast right.:rolleyes:

they still can't get the extended forcast right.:rolleyes:OK.

Do you think climatology, as a science, has advanced since you were six in 1974?

(And I think the weather forecast is meteorology, anyway.)

OK.

Do you think climatology, as a science, has advanced since you were six in 1974?

(And I think the weather forecast is meteorology, anyway.)

Say...Pops.before you run off on a Libby scum tangent,STOP & Tink.
If a meterologist can't accurately forecast from one week month to
the next,what in Hellfire makes you think some Bozo Like Gore and
his paid core of hired-on scientist can make dire doom & gloom long
range forecast.?
And don't say,because they eat only Free range chickens and the
eggs they plop.

climate is what to expect, weather is what you get....what we're told to expect has been farther off since then. i think it's degrading.

i was 6 you dope

You have been on drugs since you were 6?!
Well, that certainly explains a lot about you... :slap:

You have been on drugs since you were 6?!
Well, that certainly explains a lot about you... :slap:
that's almost as funny as you holding a job!http://petiteflower.homestead.com/files/Dippie.gif

Don't be a hater because I have a job and you can't hold one down...

:thumbs:
db

QUOTE=DrewM]Why - Wow? - she's being honest. [/QUOTE]

I too, am being honest.

Most people when faced with something cruel or unnecessary would press the red stop button -

Perhaps, but you must not continually categorize me with "most people".


but beyond that level of passive caring

Level of passive caring. That's a hoot!

most people do not care.

For one thing, that is YOUR opinion but again, please don't label me as "most people".

It's normal & I don't really care either.

No, it's NOT normal and I don't give two shits if YOU care or not.


Just because somebody posts here about how much they do care - doesn't mean they actually care a hoot.

Well, ok. I guess there can certainly be some great imposters who post here, but about animal rights? (????) I seriously doubt it. I mean... WHY?.

If they did care they'd be off crusading around the world - truth is - they are just dishonest.

Crusading around the world??? HAHAHAHA!!! You are so funny! You can do just as much, if not MORE from your beloved PC :)


A lot of people use their "care for an issue" as some kind of trendy outfit - something cool - "hey look at me - I'm an animal activist, I'm green...blah blah"

Ya, "BLAH BLAH" is right… LMFAO!!!

Humans have an inability to care for anything that involves large numbers

Oh? An inability to care, ya say? Please go on.

we care on a one to one basis - our family, our friends, the people we meet - thats they only real way humans can care about much.

Pardon me, but what planet are you from again?

When it comes to global warming, the ozone layer, animals in zoo's, animals used for drug testing and the thousand other causes out there - I couldn't really give a shit about any of them to be honest & I certainly do not care at all if they are never going to impact me.

Gosh! I'm so perplexed by all of this!!!!!

That doesn't mean I wouldn't go out of my way to help somebody I knew, or somebody in need - it just means on the big issues - I'd rather just watch TV or drink a beer instead.

Two thumbs up! At least you know what's best for YOU :rolleyes:

You do gooders have it covered anyway.

Not yet, but give us a little more time and we'll surely get there :thumbs:

Don't be a hater because I have a job and you can't hold one down...

:thumbs:
db
being a 24/7 cry-ass is a career field?:confused:

you might want to double check with DOL on that:thumbs:

climate is what to expect, weather is what you get....what we're told to expect has been farther off since then. i think it's degrading.Good.

I wanted to make sure that's what you thought.

Now I won't feel bad about dismissing your remarks out of hand.

Good.

I wanted to make sure that's what you thought.

Now I won't feel bad about dismissing your remarks out of hand.
how was hurricane season? the SE is still in a drought as i recall.

being a 24/7 cry-ass is a career field?

It is the closest thing to a job you have! :slap:

It is the closest thing to a job you have! :slap:
You've got cry-ass experience, dharma? Polish up that resume and shoot it over to me, I might have just the spot for you!

You've got cry-ass experience, dharma?

Nope, sorry. Thats Mikey's department. He has cry-ass experience going back decades...

It is the closest thing to a job you have! :slap:
don't hate me because i'm getting paid to stay home. hate me because i still make more than you:lolhit:

don't hate me because i'm getting paid to stay home. hate me because i still make more than you

I didn't realize you could make six figures off unemployment and social security...

:rolleyes:
db

I didn't realize you could make six figures off unemployment and social security...

:rolleyes:
db

In your dreams, we could all do thatm Dhrama... dumbass.

You've got cry-ass experience, dharma? Polish up that resume and shoot it over to me, I might have just the spot for you!

You need a lazy prick and a socialist hack? I hear that Mao Jr. is looking for a good job scrubbing toilets.

In your dreams, we could all do thatm Dhrama... dumbass.

Someone with your grammar and spelling shouldn't be calling anyone else "dumbass"... glass houses and all that.

:thumbs:

don't hate me because i'm getting paid to stay home. hate me because i still make more than you:lolhit:

I have shit stool pieces that are more knowledgeable and worthy of pay than Dhrama.

It is the closest thing to a job you have! :slap:

May I take your order? Yes Sir, we have Mocha Java with whippped cream! would you like me to "blow the cup" for you?

LOL

I have shit stool pieces ...

Nice grammar Einstein...

You keep pieces of your stool? Well, I can't say I am surprised. Seems like something a sociopath would do...

May I take your order?

Now I see how a financial "genius" like yourself made your "fortune".

ROFLMFAO!!!!

And you would be the "stool" expert. I now dub you "Dhrama the fecal master"

And you would be the "stool" expert. I now dub you "Dhrama the fecal master"
You should consider not posting while drunk.

You should consider not posting while drunk.

Does he ever post while sober? I can't tell the difference.

You should consider not posting while drunk.
can't drive drunk, can't dial drunk, can't post drunk, what's next???


if it weren't for beer, quite a few of us wouldn't be here!:banana:

http://web.ukonline.co.uk/thursday.handleigh/images/jokes/beer-ugly-men.jpg

Do you think climatology, as a science, has advanced since you were six in 1974?
Of course it has, but it doesn't change the fact that we're dealing with (slightly more informed) supposition here. You can't say there's not guesswork to what they're proffering as the reason for our climate change.

The biggest problem with it is the purposeful occlusion of huge factors such as the cycles of the sun and other natural cycles way beyond our control or comprehension. If you listen to the alarmist the sun is a non factor, and only if you question the directly will they even acknowledge it may have a slight role to play. Otherwise, they leave it out as it does not help their agenda to have people think we may not be in control of our own climate.

Of course it has, but it doesn't change the fact that we're dealing with (slightly more informed) supposition here. You can't say there's not guesswork to what they're proffering as the reason for our climate change.I never said otherwise.

I just think it's absurd to bring up predictions of an Ice Age from the 1970's when discussing climatology today. We have a lot more satellites and ways of collecting data than we used to; the data collected is orders of magnitude greater than what it once was. The computer I'm using to write this post probably has more processing power than than all of NASA had in 1970.

IOW, it's a whole new ballgame.

I never said otherwise.

I just think it's absurd to bring up predictions of an Ice Age from the 1970's when discussing climatology today. We have a lot more satellites and ways of collecting data than we used to; the data collected is orders of magnitude greater than what it once was. The computer I'm using to write this post probably has more processing power than than all of NASA had in 1970.

IOW, it's a whole new ballgame.
and still just as wrong...what happened to hurricane season this year?

The Earth goes through cycles. No one has proven Global Warming is man made.
It doesn't (much) matter, anymore (http://www.businessweek.com/ap/financialnews/D8U1HCM80.htm)!!! :thumbs:

I just think it's absurd to bring up predictions of an Ice Age from the 1970's when discussing climatology today.
Truth be told, so do I.
We have a lot more satellites and ways of collecting data than we used to; the data collected is orders of magnitude greater than what it once was.
Very true.
The computer I'm using to write this post probably has more processing power than than all of NASA had in 1970.

IOW, it's a whole new ballgame.
All things considered, I completely agree.

All things considered, I completely agree.Someday (probably soon) I'm gonna have to set down what I really think about global warming.

It may surprise a few people. :)

Oooh... Do tell, sedan!

I'll second that notion.

I'd relish the chance to hear sedan set out his beliefs on anything, in detail.

Just make sure you do it in PM's, please.

Just make sure you do it in PM's, please.
Hey, your avatar is talking to you. :)

Give me a week, folks. I've been thinking about this for a while now and I'm nearly ready. Thanks for the encouragement.

You should consider not posting while drunk.

Juts cuz yuz gits all Fuzzy over a couple meager draughts
don't meanie utters can't handley their suds.

Just make sure you do it in PM's, please.

Why? This is a thread about global warming, sedan has just as much right to express his opinion as anyone else, and not only in PMs to people who want to know it.

Just make sure you do it in PM's, please.

Trav, I don't think he's anywhere near as radical as you think. Even though I disagree with his politics, I always respect his insight.

Maybe this global warming thing isn't so bad after all...Most of New York State up around 70 degrees yesterday. Didn't have to wear a coat to work. Of course if I was one of the people that lost their homes yesterday due to the freaky January tornadoes I might have a different opinion. But those tornadoes were in Kentucky and Tennessee and other Red States. They don't believe in global warming anyway...

But those tornadoes were in Kentucky and Tennessee and other Red States. They don't believe in global warming anyway...
Hell YEAH! I hope those inbred, sister humping, gun toting, warmongers died horrible fuckin' deaths, too.