Expert: We must act fast on warming

Sep 24, 2008 | Posted by: roboblogger | Full story: Kansas.com

Droughts, melting ice caps and glaciers, rising sea levels and mass extinctions will all be a reality unless the U.S. and the world cut back on carbon emissions dramatically, said James Hansen, director of ...

Comments (Page 1,258)

Showing posts 25,141 - 25,160 of26,704
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:

“Happy, warm and comfortable”

Since: Oct 10

Mountain hideaway, SE Spain

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#25977
Sep 19, 2012
 

Judged:

2

2

1

DumBozo wrote:
BTW, better my fans than yours!
I couldn't agree more.
PHD

Dallas, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#25978
Sep 19, 2012
 
Earthling-1 wrote:
<quoted text>Your correct I can't answer a second grade question and I couldn't agree more with your assesment of me.
Now you have it. It's time to fees up to correcting your useless babble tainted with hate. You can work on the rest later.

“Happy, warm and comfortable”

Since: Oct 10

Mountain hideaway, SE Spain

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#25979
Sep 19, 2012
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Fess up, not fees up, dumbo.
James Hansen

Hondón De Las Nieves, Spain

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#25980
Sep 19, 2012
 

Judged:

3

3

3

PHD wrote:
Now you have it. It's time to fees up to correcting your useless babble tainted with hate. You can work on the rest later.
Don't forget, same time next week, but I will be a little harder for you to chew.

“dening those who deny nature. ”

Since: Jun 07

Norfolk va

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#25981
Sep 21, 2012
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Patriot AKA Bozo wrote:
<quoted text>
I see, your only argument comes down to a conspiracy!
Actually it is history. You think this is the first time this silly idea has been fostered off on the public.

“dening those who deny nature. ”

Since: Jun 07

Norfolk va

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#25982
Sep 21, 2012
 

Judged:

2

2

1

PHD wrote:
<quoted text>Office cleaning doesn’t qualify you for any opinion on fuel. Oh W.V. coal mining announced today there will be a total shut down. Wind and solar now and always had a history of success but you couldn't recognize it being a total failure your self.
Then it is a good thing that I not relying on office cleaning. Maybe I should leave it to people like you to clean my office.

Also, try actually studying history before you talk about the history of success. Wind's last attempt left the landscape dotted with failures. Solar as a large scale energy source was even worse. At least there was a period when wind was king. Of course that period ended over a century ago.

Maybe you should take a few history courses. Or maybe a basic reading course. It is funny how you claim others are uneducated when you just proved that you are lacking in that same area.

http://toryaardvark.com/2011/11/17/14000-aban...

http://webecoist.momtastic.com/2009/05/04/10-...
sam

Newbern, TN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#25983
Sep 21, 2012
 

Judged:

2

2

1

tina anne wrote:
<quoted text>
Actually it is history. You think this is the first time this silly idea has been fostered off on the public.
You like to rewrite history ??? Typical Republican trait. If it doesn't fit with your agenda, it just didn't happen that way.......did it ??
sam

Newbern, TN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#25984
Sep 21, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

tina anne wrote:
<quoted text>
Then it is a good thing that I not relying on office cleaning. Maybe I should leave it to people like you to clean my office.
Also, try actually studying history before you talk about the history of success. Wind's last attempt left the landscape dotted with failures. Solar as a large scale energy source was even worse. At least there was a period when wind was king. Of course that period ended over a century ago.
Maybe you should take a few history courses. Or maybe a basic reading course. It is funny how you claim others are uneducated when you just proved that you are lacking in that same area.
http://toryaardvark.com/2011/11/17/14000-aban...
http://webecoist.momtastic.com/2009/05/04/10-...
Your arguments are amazingly weak. Haven't you recycled those links enough already ???

“CAPS LOCK CAUSE CLIMATE CHANGE”

Since: Dec 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#25985
Sep 21, 2012
 

Judged:

3

3

1

My argument about climate change mitigation and man made catastrophic global warming alarmism comes down to a lack of any experiment for those theories.

Since: Apr 10

Milwaukee, WI USA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#25986
Sep 22, 2012
 

Judged:

3

3

1

Brian_G wrote:
My argument about climate change mitigation and man made catastrophic global warming alarmism comes down to a lack of any experiment for those theories.
You will be interested in yesterday's Congressional testimony by Dr. John Christy:
http://energycommerce.house.gov/sites/republi...
He says:
"I’ve often stated that climate science is a “murky” science. We do not have laboratory methods of testing our hypotheses as many other sciences do. As a result what passes for science includes, opinion, arguments-from-authority, dramatic press releases, and fuzzy notions of consensus generated by preselected groups. This is not science"

Since: Apr 08

"the green troll"

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#25987
Sep 22, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Steve Case wrote:
...dramatic press releases...
LOL.

This is the man who presented Anthony Watts latest "game changing" paper to Congress.

Watts of course shut down his blog for a few days to build up suspense for said paper.

When it did come out, his co-authors immediately backed away from it because of the errors it contained.

Somebody on the Congress committee (not a Republican, obviously) asked Christy why he was presenting a non-peer reviewed paper.

Christy has given up on real science and does nothing except appeal to the press through Watts blog.

“Happy, warm and comfortable”

Since: Oct 10

Mountain hideaway, SE Spain

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#25988
Sep 22, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Steve Case wrote:
You will be interested in yesterday's Congressional testimony by Dr. John Christy:
http://energycommerce.house.gov/sites/republi...
He says:
"I’ve often stated that climate science is a “murky” science. We do not have laboratory methods of testing our hypotheses as many other sciences do. As a result what passes for science includes, opinion, arguments-from-authority, dramatic press releases, and fuzzy notions of consensus generated by preselected groups. This is not science"
On another occasion, he said:
”Yes, it’s called the scientific method, but much of what passes for climate science today is, arguments from authority, dramatic press releases, and fuzzy notions of consensus generated by a preselected group.”
And:
“...since 1960, there have been more all-time cold records set than hot records in each decade.”

Since: Apr 08

"the green troll"

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#25989
Sep 22, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Earthling-1 wrote:
“...since 1960, there have been more all-time cold records set than hot records in each decade.”
July saw 3,135 new daily high temperature records in the U.S.— over 100 per day. That overwhelmed new cold records by a factor of nearly 17 to 1, as this chart from Capital Climate shows.

For the year to date, new heat records are beating cold records by a remarkable 12 to 1, which trumps the pace of the last decade by more than a factor of 5!

I like the statistical aggregation across the country, since it gets us beyond the oft-repeated point that you can’t pin any one local record temperature on global warming. A 2009 analysis shows that the average ratio for the 2000s was 2.04-to-1, a sharp increase from previous decades. Lead author Dr. Gerald Meehl explained,“If temperatures were not warming, the number of record daily highs and lows being set each year would be approximately even.”

http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2012/08/05/6...

Since: Apr 08

"the green troll"

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#25990
Sep 22, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Earthling-1 wrote:
“...since 1960, there have been more all-time cold records set than hot records in each decade.”
Not world records:

Well, a really good way to look at global warming is to look at what it has done to warm temperature records. And if you didn't have a warming Earth, then you would have the same number of new cold records as you would warm records in any given year on average. Well, what we've been seeing for quite some time now is more and more hot records relative to cold records. And the last two years have really been screaming in terms of how many more hot records we've had than cold records.

http://www.earthfiles.com/news.php...

“Happy, warm and comfortable”

Since: Oct 10

Mountain hideaway, SE Spain

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#25991
Sep 22, 2012
 

Judged:

2

2

1

FuGyou wrote:
Not world records:
Correct, he wasn't talking about world records at that time.

“Happy, warm and comfortable”

Since: Oct 10

Mountain hideaway, SE Spain

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#25992
Sep 22, 2012
 

Judged:

2

2

1

FuGyou wrote:
July saw 3,135 new daily high temperature records in the U.S.— over 100 per day.
"The recent claims about thousands of new record high temperatures were based on stations whose length-of-record could begin as recently as 1981, thus missing the many heat waves of the 20th century. So, any moderately hot day now will be publicized as setting records for these young stations because they were not operating in the 1930s."

US state record highs and lows compared:
http://www.globalwarming.org/wp-content/uploa...

“Happy, warm and comfortable”

Since: Oct 10

Mountain hideaway, SE Spain

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#25993
Sep 22, 2012
 

Judged:

3

3

1

FuGyou wrote:
Watts of course shut down his blog for a few days to build up suspense for said paper.
You have evidence to support that claim, of course?
Can you prove he didn't close it due to pressure of the work he was involved in at the time?
PHD

Houston, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#25994
Sep 22, 2012
 

Judged:

2

2

1

Earthling-1 wrote:
<quoted text>#1You have evidence to support that claim, of course?#2Can you prove I didn't close it due to pressure of the infection I recieved in at the time?
#1 yes by your daily post of useless babble.#2 Yes your were warned to use protection and refused. WOW love that cut and paste thing you foster with each answer you post. You’re a great teacher of useless babble tainted with hate covered with spam cut and paste.
LessHypeMoreFact

Toronto, Canada

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#25995
Sep 22, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Steve Case wrote:
<quoted text>
You will be interested in yesterday's Congressional testimony by Dr. John Christy:
Dr. Christy lost a lot of credibility with his support of Roy Spencer's defective analyses of the MSU data. And his invitation to piss on the science was a Republican political initiative clearly indicated by the URL. " republicans.energycommerce.house.gov "

His 'points' seem more a disparagement of the science than a true reading of the state of the research, and are political opinions, not science.

But let us debate anyway.

1. Extreme events, like the recent U.S. drought, will continue to occur, with or without
human causation.

True but misleading. There will always be 'extremes' in any statistical distribution. But that is not the issue. THe issue is the frequency and severity of events compared to 'the normal'. The CHANGE in extreme event frequenqy and magnitude is what is noted.

"These recent U.S.“extremes” were exceeded in previous decades."

Again, misleading and misreading of the science. If the event was a 'once in a millenia' event, it will occur on average about once in 1000 years. But if you find that the distribution has shifted so that this level of extreme event happens once a century, this indicates a change in the location of the 'mean' and this means the whole distribution plot has shifted on the x axis. An indication of a change in the climate.

So his statements are true but misleading. The way of a 'good liar'.
LessHypeMoreFact

Toronto, Canada

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#25996
Sep 22, 2012
 
Steve Case wrote:
<quoted text>
You will be interested in yesterday's Congressional testimony by Dr. John Christy:
"2. The average warming rate of 38 CMIP5 IPCC models is greater than observations,
suggesting models over-react to CO2. "

Sort of true. THe fact is that warming of the *atmosphere* has lagged the forecasting, and this led to discoveries that the heat storage in the ocean penetrates farther than previously expected. This increases the LAG in the warming (more thermal mass) but by no means invalidates the 'climate sensitivity' figures from scientific studies.

"Policy based on observations will likely be far more effective than if based on speculative models, no matter what the future climate does. "

True but irredemably stupid. The point here is to set policy based on consequences of current action (or inaction) and you cannot set policy based on 'fait accompli'.

"Regarding Arctic sea ice loss, the average model response to CO2 engenders little
confidence because the models’ output fails when applied to Antarctic sea ice conditions."

True, but not a point. It is the fact that arctic ice has FAR exceedded the response we cautiously expected that is the 'warning flag' telling us that we have UNDERESTIMATED the impact of AGW on the polar regions. The models will now be 'refined' to take this into account but science is the process of LEARNING MORE and that will always continue.

On a POLICY front, the fact that models do not tell us EVERYTHING about the consequences of AGW just tells us that policy should be based on the PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE, at least avoiding the extremes that occur in the 'just adapt to it' camp.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Showing posts 25,141 - 25,160 of26,704
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" 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.

53 Users are viewing the Science / Technology Forum right now

Search the Science / Technology Forum:
Topic Updated Last By Comments
Is Time An Illusion? (May '10) 1 hr nanoanomaly 4,855
Should evolution be taught in high school? (Feb '08) 4 hr Kong_ 168,764
China says 1/5 of its farmland polluted 5 hr It is so Amazing 10
Nitrogen Powered Hybrid Automobile (Dec '11) 7 hr PROgress IDa Good People 127
Look Who Got Busted: How To Remove Your Mug Sho... (May '11) 7 hr khaled elgamal 134
Russia's Putin calls the Internet a 'CIA project' 9 hr jkvdsvsbvk 1
Travel Mate Pillow With Matching Blanket 11 hr Ruth Gilmer 1
•••
•••
•••
•••