I repeat, there is NO global warming. I repeat… er wait that's not me that says that…. it's Faux News. Nevermind!
"The report is the third such examination of how climate change is affecting the U.S. specifically, and is the product of more than four years of work by hundreds of scientists. Since the second such assessment was published in 2009, climate science findings have become clearer and more dire.."
#ClimateChange #GlobalWarming
"The report is the third such examination of how climate change is affecting the U.S. specifically, and is the product of more than four years of work by hundreds of scientists. Since the second such assessment was published in 2009, climate science findings have become clearer and more dire.."
#ClimateChange #GlobalWarming
Climate Change Now Impacts Daily Life, U.S. Report Finds
Global warming is now affecting Americans’ daily lives, and can no longer be dismissed as an issue for only the distant future, a new report says.
The Earth warms and the Earth cools. This has been going on since the beginning of time, and will continue. The Government can not fix this, any more then they can fix the Deficit. In the 70's it was "Global Cooling", then came "Global Warming", now it's called " Climate Change". We will all be wearing filters in our Arse's if Envirowackos have their way. It's all about the Money.
The sky is falling the sky is falling..give this BS a rest..
There is NO Global Warming, … no "Man-Made" Global Warming. Fox News has constantly and consistently proven that. This Mashable article only illustrates that a climate change is happening but doesn't even come close to pointing any fingers on who to blame for it….which is no one.
Yes, it is all about the money but, the question is, whose money.
"Fox News has constantly and consistently proven that."
Idiots at every turn. As if Fox "News" has ever proven anything. Oh right, you take it on faith, and faith is your proof.
Morons.
+Michael Balsley you may want to look into actual scientific evidence instead of just believing what outlets like Fox News claim. 96% of climate scientists agree that Global Warming is real, and is being accelerated by humans. If you feel you know something they don't then please present your evidence, otherwise your denialism doesn't really have any value
+V. Torch Napeñas "Fox News has constantly and consistently proven that".
Haha, that's an excellent one; I'm going to save that for future laughs. Fox News has never tried to prove anything; they are a propaganda/entertainment outfit pure and simple. Open your mind and look at real evidence, from unbiased sources, if you are actually interested in truth.
+Michael Balsley You're right on one thing… it IS all about the money. Who exactly do you think it shoveling in the profits? Fossil fuel producers… the people who don't want you to believe in climate change due to man because it would cut into their profits. It's THOSE wackos that will have you wearing a filter in your ass.
uh +V. Torch Napeñas it says it in the article and if you actually click through and read the report it says: "The global warming of the past 50 years is primarily due to human activities, predominantly the burning of fossil fuels."
I never said anything about Fox News, and I do agree the Earth is warming, but it has nothing to do with Humans. 5,000 years of recorded History tells us the weather patterns. The whole Climate Change scare is just another way for Government to have more control and power.
Who's going to address the serious issue of cow farts? If you live near a major ranching operation your air is warm moist and really stinky!! But truly if we want to help eat local grow and grass feed beef. these huge corn based feed lots are a real environmental problem.
This recent thing is more like " crap Obamacare is still hated, midterms look bleak.. wait look over there it's Impending Doom from Climate change" "or hey look Squirrel!!" Because have you seen the real numbers on who's the biggest global warmer percent wise? China is #1 and US is something like 40-60% smaller in size at #2 or #3. China still accounted for 70 percent of the global increase in CO2 emissions in 2012. ( EU-based Emission Database for Global Atmospheric Research. source) Then our southern neighbor exports a lot of smog plus people, Hola #10. So what's the real reason for this being a crisis now????
Must be midterm elections, Democrats have nothing to run on.
Whit… the vast majority of your post makes zero sense. The first paragraph makes no sense.
This isn't recent… and it's not localized to the US. This report just focuses specifically on the impact ON the US. The UN reports detailed the exact kind of findings, it just wasn't focused specifically on the US. And the UN doesn't care about Obamacare so I don't know how in the hell you made that leap.
I'm not sure how China pumping out more now impacts this in anyway. In fact, I think it would only help further push the point. Nobody said this wasn't a global issue.
Well, global warming is clearly here but the question remains: "Which do you fear more, global warming or the Gov't response to global warming?"
Don't have TV so don't watch FOX.
I'm still waiting for all these scientists, many of who are economists, to define the function that is Climate and to produce the first time derivative of that to show that there is even such a thing as Climate Change. They can't do it, but we need a war on something as excuse for the money. What happened to Wind Power? No subsidies, no tax credits, failed technology = no new pinwheels.
+Steve Illyes Seriously, shut the fuck up because you make Republicans look retarded with statements like that. The report is put together by a coalition of 13 separate government agencies. It has nothing to do with midterms.
Look, there is a very credible report out by several highly respected scientists – including Freeman Dyson, whom many people revere as the smartest human alive today – saying that 1) any observed climate change is not due to humans, and 2) an increase in CO2 is actually a good thing for life on earth. Also, help me get past this: CO2 is one of THE LEAST EFFECTIVE greenhouse gasses there are, so if the amount of warming we've observed recently was due to CO2, there would have to be SO much of it in the air that all life on earth would be dead. Since that's clearly not the case, how can the increase be attributed to CO2?
Also, what about reports that tell us that every planet in our solar system are experiencing the same warming at the same time as the earth? Are we suddenly going to ignore that?
The point is, there are reports out that say global warming is real, and it's going to kill us all unless we act… and there are reports that say that climate change has happened during the entire history of earth, and this is no different, and it's going to be a good thing for us. Why is it suddenly "gospel truth" because the Obama Administration funded a study that came back with "we're all doomed"?
Children, of course climate change now impacts daily life. The climate always changes so climate change has always impacted daily life. It is normal, don't be frightened of the weather. Make sure we define terms the same way. Climate is the average of weather over a period of at least 30 years. Now, the weather certainly has changed from year to year over the past 30 years, there is no doubt (30 years = smallest, most recent climate period). For the first 15 years it was generally getting warmer – you can argue about how much. From the satellite data in the last 15 years the global surface temperature has stalled, global warming stopped. ( http://www.drroyspencer.com/latest-global-temperatures/ ).
30 years ago the CO2 count was at 346ppm, by 15 years ago it had jumped up 24ppm. The world panicked . But in the last 15 years, as of 04/14, we have seen an additional 31ppm rise in the CO2 count but there has been zero effect on the global surface temperature anomaly. ( ftp://aftp.cmdl.noaa.gov/products/trends/co2/co2_mm_mlo.txt )
Quite simply, those experts were wrong. They based their guesses on faulty models and are now too embarrassed to admit error. Reputations are at stake.
You don't have to take anything on faith. Don't be lazy, look it up yourself. If you got hosed by the global warming hoax the sooner you admit it the easier it will be for you and the tougher you will be to fool on the next scare.
Paul Spoerry, insulting people just adds to your lack of credibility. Ever heard of freedom of expression or do you expect that everyone folds under your little propaganda piece. Buwahahah
Anone that watches fox news and thinks its actually a news station needs to pull there head out of there ass, My best friend was a program director for fox news and left because he was disgusted how they operate .
I find it interesting that a 24 ppm increase is considered significant. That means that CO2 as a % of the atmosphere went from 0.0346% to 0.0370%. It increased by a whopping 24 thousandths of a percentage point. Not 2.4%, not 0.024% but only 0.0024%. Just think if at one point CO2 levels were 1 ppm that would mean a 24 ppm increase would justify the headline "Here Comes Man Made Global Warming – CO2 in Atmosphere Increases by 2,400%!!!".
The real issue here is you have correlation without causation because without designing an experiment where all other factors are held constant except for man made CO2 (you would need an Earth twin to do this – a model will not suffice) you cannot say increased CO2 causes climate change. If correlation was all you needed, then you could say since in cities with high numbers of crimes there are a high number of churches, then churches must cause crime when in fact it is probably only true that there are a large number of churches in cities with a large number of crimes because both happen in large cities.
One of the most important guiding principal in science is that correlation does not prove causation. Historical patterns of correlation do not prove causation.
Yes there is global warming. Since they announced global warming, I now pick my noise and flick the boggers at pictures of Harry Reid. So you see, they are right.
There is a plethora of scientifically illiterate individuals in here. Climate denialists are on par with creationists.
It does affect me everyday, hearing about all the money wasted on it to be made by corporations by all the pathetic bleeding hearts who push this crap. How often have you heard someone say when wasting a sheet of paper "Its ok its being recycled". Yet the "recycled" paper now will require energy, manpower, maintenance of equipment and sales to be reused again. I am sure that costs NOTHING since they all work for free since it helps the planet…
Don't like Fox News, don't watch it. Works for me with the MSM.
This rock we live on is an incredibly complex piece of work. The earth is a speck in our solar system, this solar system is a speck in our universe. The arrogance of these scientists how they think with some computer models to mimic how the world and its climate works! And the uber arrogance to predict what will happen. Its driven by politics and money.
People worldwide, especially in countries like China and India that don't give a crap about the worlds resources and nature, should focus on doing the right think and limit pollution. Regardless of all the nonsense these "scientists" & politicians cook up.
A high majority of scientists disagree with this author. Your 100 scientists were proven wrong years ago. Get over it already!!
+John Baker Are you saying that the 97% consensus of climate scientists, which is the absolute majority, disagree with this author? Those numbers don't really mesh.
BTW my issue is that even if the earth is warming; and the earth warms to a point where it causes problems that affect us in a negative way, we cannot know that it is the result of man made CO2 or even naturally occurring CO2.
I am curious to know if the climate models take into account the increase in CO2 absorbing vegetation that would result over time in response to increases in CO2 (essentially fertilizer for plants) in the atmosphere? Experiments with side by side control groups of plants have shown that increases in CO2 are overcome by an increase in plant growth to absorb the increased CO2.
I wonder if Mr. Spoerry can provide examples where Fox News (not one of its guests) said categorically said there was no global warming?
HMMMM…Well, Global Warming turned out to be BS and made us liberals look pretty stupid…It would make us look even more idiotic if we called it Global Cooling and then it started warming up again…Hey I got it! Climate Change!
+Paul Spoerry
It has everything to do with midterms! Get people talking about GW so they dont have to defend their record. we have been in a global cooling for years.
+Jim Dustin
This was incredibly easy to find.
http://mediamatters.org/video/2010/11/19/hannity-global-warming-doesnt-exist/173596
Global Warming = Global Scaming
You sound like a fair and balanced guy Paul. 1st words out of your mouth–a shot at Fox, then you tell the opposition to shut the F@@k up. Way to go son….
+V. Torch Napeñas
I'd rather take the advice of a scientist in matters related to science than a talking head that advises on what toothpaste to use
Believe and Science, said best through a comic strip:
"The Universe doesn't care what you believe. The wonderful thing about science is that it doesn't ask for your faith, it just asks for your eyes."
http://xkcd.com/154/
To the deny-ers out there: even if "science" was only 50% certain global warming was occuring/has-occured, and that humans caused it, would you ignore that? Science is rarely about absolutes, but about evidence. Listen to it.
One more: http://xkcd.com/54/
+Robert Anderson
Is it hard to understand that burning millions of years of carbon quickly would have an effect on climate? Did you think it just flew up to outer space? Skipped science class didn't' you.
Dan, Could you comment on the correlation vs. causation issue i wrote about earlier?
+Jim Dustin
They did say it was fake, now they say it is happening but natural, next they'll blame the poor.
Global Warming is all about money. Carbon trade what is a big bs. As long the world population keep on growing we will need new energy demand , so regardless how much you caught down the demand will keep on growing with the sheer number of the population.Lesser people lesser energy need. The other issue is deforestation. Why not the US and other nation ban the import of exotic wood all together? My friend did a living room floor someone in Cali years ago for a $100.000 from an African wood called Swahili. Pitch black, rock hard and wont float in water, for a hundred grand just for the wood! Green technology is untouchable for the average Joe. It is the biggest business today, so if you build a house will cost you twice as much as the tech of today. Green=Money. And now how do we force China to pay pollution fee? Or the Russians? So we will end up covering the cost for everyone, and China is known to be the biggest polluters of all , with all their coal powered power plants.And finally deserts use to have great variety of vegetation, as you find oil, so as dinosaurs there.Means had to support wild life on large scale. Is anyone ever asked the question why did they turned in to deserts before automobile ever invented, the underwater cities in India, japan and other places , as some of them lays in a 100 feet of water, somewhere had to be cold to freeze the water levels, and when it warmed up it flooded the cities…we are not 7.300 year old or so , as the Bible claims it that case we could just manufacture oil ourselves. All their computer models failed so far, and the biggest "for it" scientist cant explain why and as a lot more people born then dies the demand for power and raw resources will only grow, regardless of all of our efforts. lets deal with the real cause….OVERPOPULATION
+Paul Spoerry Never fails… When liberals are loosing their arguments they are at least consistent. They change the subject and then resort to name calling .
A friend of mine was a very highly placed political appointee at NOAA during the most recent Bush years. Towards the end of his presidency I was drinking with this person in DC and brought up the subject. They told me, 'of course we know humans contribute a great deal to global warming. We read the reports, we are not stupid. But, we are sent to Washington by people who will not benefit from any change in pollution policy so we don't acknowledge it and we do our best to undermine the science. Besides, we will all be dead and gone before it's really a problem. Live it up, we've got it pretty good.' And then we ordered more bourbon.
Faux News! That's hilarious! Paul… did you make that up? You are so edgy and liberal!
+Benjamin Lankout Your an idiot. I suggest you read the book "Freakonomics" to find out why!
Christopher Baron, cool story, bro. You might think about committing yourself. You're seeing and hearing things that aren't really happening.
Sigh… oh republican'ts beat on your war drum a little harder. Democrats and republicans are funny as hell. If a democrat says the sky is blue a republican will say its red. Damn shame that attitude is sinking our country. Every one always bickers like children since Lil bush was in office. Clearly the two party system is not working. I would love for a gay couple to get married and degend their pot garden with guns.
+Daniel Giles 96% of the scientist at the time of Galileo said the sun went around the Earth. There has been no global warming for 17 years but there is more C02 in the atmosphere. CO2 is plant food. More of it, better plant growth. Better plant growth, more oxygen…which humans, among other animals need. Ice core samples from Vostok station, Antarctica, showed that temperatures in the past went up before CO2 levels went up. And so much more if you really want to do the research. However, if we insist on shutting down coal-fired energy plants, electricity prices will go up substantially, as President Obama said. That means the poor, of which many are the elderly on fixed incomes, will have to choose between food or heat in the winter. Solar and wind power is too expensive and, as yet, not reliable. And then there's the story of Germany's green energy push which is failing and they are having to open coal-fired plants to cover the energy demand. http://www.forbes.com/sites/realspin/2013/03/14/germanys-green-energy-disaster-a-cautionary-tale-for-world-leaders/
Humanity is primarily constructed on socio-political and economic foundations. If climate change does affect weather patterns and disrupts food supplies, economic centers like New York, creates new disease for living life, coastal parts of the world, and other basic human needs, it will be financial disaster. You can not just unravel a few thousands years of money exchange, or ownership of wealth, master-slave relationships, and, expect anything but chaos. And, to build it anew is almost impossible with major problems in survival. Humans are different than any creature ever evolved here on earth, and survival comes at an exchange of time for hands full of pennies, nickels, dimes and quarters—-and, keeps people occupied, so, the elite can do what they want. The repercussions of drastic climate change would be immense, and, throw humans into complete turmoil. And it is coming.
+Daniel Giles
I'll take Fox News over any Lying BS ridden CBS (rest Dan Rather's soul) or MSNBC ( Libs have planted a speaker so far up their News? peoples butt all they need to do is move lips to complete the lies). Global warming .. Hmm .. this Tea Party member is sort of confused ( I hear the libs yuks ,,, try to remember that as lame as we are that we laid across the RR tracks to avoid OB-Care ,,, and you still don't get it) anyhow … Global warming ? Lets see… we have BO threating Russia, Iran is probably painting that missing airliner with the US Air logo so they can deliver their nuke, we have so many Mexicans in Texas that congress wants to move the border to Louisiana then give Texas back to Mexico ( probably save a $Trillion$ in welfare). .. and your worried about < 2 degree climate change over 150 years .. Duh .. I know I ain't got too many smarts but wasn't that an ICE Age what killed all those dinosaurs … and didn't it warm up since then?? If it warms up again then won't that be the 2nd time we had Global Warming?
this is for the guy at te top LL""}} u must be up obama ass that u cant not feel the climate//// that earth changes natural over the years //and it dosnot cost no money ????? like obama cronies they want to charge u money down with obama lair
+Steve Illyes Dude.. first of all this was my post. You're the one who commented on it. You already saw my position; and you chose to comment.
Secondly,
"Paul Spoerry, insulting people just adds to your lack of credibility. Ever heard of freedom of expression or do you expect that everyone folds under your little propaganda piece. Buwahahah"
Uh… I think that was me I exercising my freedom of expression. Or does that only work for you and not for me?
+jonathan raney Thanks for finding that so quickly.
+Tim Liddle When exactly did I change the subject? Someone made what I considered a really dumb statement about how it's all a Democrat ploy against the Republicans. I told him he made Republicans look dumb (I was standing up for the "conservative" side) and then noted that the report was put together by 13 separate government agencies. That's exactly on-point in regards to the comment that was made. Never fails… When an idiot doesn't understand what was actually said and hasn't read the article in question but still decides to make some dumb statement in response to another dumb statement, and then inaccurately accuse someone else of changing the subject when in fact they were addressing the comment of the person and was exactly on topic, they just look even less intelligent than the person who made the initial ridiculous comment
Only an ignnoramus would not believe that global warming IS real and IS caused by all of us!
u mama???
+Michael Balsley Please look at the temperature charts from NASA on the following site. http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Features/GlobalWarming/page2.php
and then tell me there is no evidence of global warming! The problem is that you have focused in on what is a relatively small statistical fluctuation on a scale that is totally consistent with similar fluctuations over the past, but the trend is ABSOLUTELY and TOTALLY undeniable. The same site also shows increases in CO2 and Methane.
To be fair to you, as a scientist myself, I acknowledge that the public pronouncements by some scientists about the exact causes for Global Warming are still speculative and it ultimately undermines the trustworthiness of science to engage in overreach, but the impact of human society most certainly is not total speculation. The problem is that the climate models simply are not accurate enough to make those cause and effect conclusions with total confidence, but that does not mean to say that therefore the opposite conclusion is true.
I would remind you that the primary opposition to Galileo was driven by the Church because his empirical observations conflicted with their ideology. In the present debate, the opposition is driven by right wing and GOP, again because it conflicts with their ideology.
+Paul Spoerry I don't doubt that Global Warming will happen, I just find the way people freak out is B.S. And I have to admit that it is being used for the elections to get these "Green Folks" to go to the polls. And attacking Fox News isn't gonna change it. They have their opinion, and it should be respected. People have good intentions there, trust me, I would know. They believe what they say.
+Michael Balsley . Sorry Michael. I posted my response to the wrong person. My intended response was to +DAVID MITCHELL
The attitude of most of the right wing to global warming is truly depressing. I imagine that most failed civilizations told themselves the same kind of lies before eventually experiencing ecological collapse. Also, the earth is round, we evolved from monkeys, and oil is not an infinite resource that magically replenishes itself, regardless of whatever you may have learned from watching Fox News.
Na uh. According to the gospel of the flying spaghetti monster we evovled from pirates and global warming is caused by a lack of pirate cannon balls mixing the cold deep ocean with the warm top water. Also kiwi birds are not flightless they are just lazy.
+David Smith All very well said.
+Kenneth Endfinger I'm unsure why I should trust you that people there have good intentions; how would you know? I do believe that some of them believe what they say, but I'm not sure how what they believe has any bearing on the scientific evidence.
+steven reynolds I didn't want to bring up that aspect of climate change. I'm an ordained Pastafarian Minister (yes, this statement is totally true) and didn't want to turn this into a religious discussion.
This is a political report… chock full of propaganda and outright BULLSHIT… Paul "Pudd Puller" Spoerry is a mouthpiece for the leftists are pushing this Global Warming garbage…. the same leftists who pushed the "Coming Ice Age" BULLSHIT back in the 70s. You lied then, you're spreading more nonsense that furthers the cause of Marxism now. Scaring idiots with tales of storms and droughts "never before seen by mankind"….only problem is, we've been seeing the same kind of events since the dawn of time. Shove it up your ass Paul.
A "Pastafarian"…..which basically means you're an idiot. Shove your propaganda and your flying spaghetti monster up your ass too Paul. Where the Hell is that ICE AGE you Marxist Alarmists promised just a few decades ago? Moron
+Paul Spoerry How often do you watch Fox News? Do you only read about it?
I don't know if you read much, but I would suggest reading "No Spin Zone" by Bill O'Reilly. The basics of this book is, that he doesn't let people spin what they say, as I see a lot of people have done. If you watch his show, even if you disagree, you still have to admire his quest for the truth. That is only one of the people on there who I admire. My point is, even if you disagree, it doesn't mean that they have bad intentions. I'm sure you have good intentions on informing others about Global Warming. I have a few doubts about it I admit mostly because of the spin others put here, and their determination to force their opinion on me only yields that they themselves don't know the truth, and probably only mimic what their political leaders think. Also, just so you know, I am a teenager. Figured I should point that out, because I think a lot of adults tend to be too like-minded sometimes, and forceful on their views.
Sorry I heard something about evolution. And ed carman it seems you are the mouth piece of the right that was trying to terrorize every one by saying terrorists are trying to rape your daughter and Iraq has wmds.
Scientist Ben Franklin mocks the debate in: http://www.amazon.com/Foundering-Fathers-Jefferson-Franklin-Abigail-ebook/dp/B00FEZG8UW/ref=tmm_kin_swatch_0?_encoding=UTF8&sr=1-1&qid=1397005287
+Ed Carman I'm just as mad as you for people who spread lies like this, but you are only making a fool of yourself.
+Michael Balsley
You have the right of it. The climate has gotten and colder since the earth was formed, created, etc. A few decades ago they were claiming the earth was getting cooler, then they claimed it was getting warmer and found that it was NOT getting warmer. So then they changed it from global warming to climate change. That way they are correct which every way it goes. If polar ice melts it is climate change.If there is more polar ice it is still climate change. Same with rain or drought.
So how do we know which is correct? A good method is to follow the money. Who is getting the money? Well so far the people who are crying wolf is collecting the money and in most cases the US citizens are not getting any returns for the tax money given to counteract climate change.
The issue is more than Global Warming. So say you for some reason do not think Global Warming is human caused or that it is causing the issues that are being observed. Fossil fuels still have numerous other problems that are harder to challenge. Burning fossil fuels puts pollution in the area which ends up in the air, land and water that causes negative health impacts. Transportation and drilling/mining fossil fuels pollutes the air/land/water as well. Oil often comes from countries that we don't like. The price of oil increases thus causing greater strain and risk on people and business financials. Finally, there is a finite amount of fossil fuels in the planet. So even if you disagree with Global Warming, there are still numerous other reasons that we need to make changes to use less energy and use cleaner energy.
Anyone know CO2 concentration in commercial greenhouses?
Study out of MIT – for Grant Burton – says we will never run out of natural gas and we make more of it world-wide every day. Scares the heck out of environmentalists. Gotta Google Pastafarian.
1) turn off worthless liberal TV
2) stop buying worthless liberal newspapers
3) stop paying to see worthless liberal movies
4) stop visiting worthless liberal fake news sites
5) stop sending the kids to worthless high-priced liberal colleges
DONE with my fair share!!
+Kenneth Endfinger I'm very familiar with O'Reilly. I used to listen to Fox more than watch. I had a two hour commute and I would try to listen to both sides and let each tech. At some point after several years of this I arrived at the conclusion that I wasn't going to listen to Fox News anymore because they weren't even anything close to "news".
+Daniel Giles Dan,
Try taking a look at the data for yourself. It is readily available to anyone who wishes to find information on global climate change. The truth is, the climate has never stopped changing. The question is, how much is man contributing to the climate change.
The planet has been in a warming cycle for the last 13,000 years. It is hubris to believe we can reverse that trend. However, we can adapt to the inevitable warming. An example is irrigation techniques that we use in the grain belt.
I am all for cleaner air. I have asthma and it only gets worse as I get older. I do not need to be lied to by scientist who tell people what they want to hear to get funding for their research.
Before Scientists take on the "WORLD WIDE CLIMATE CHANGE", I want them to control Hurricanes and steer them to states that need water more than others. They should bring the wet side of the storm close enough to the land but keep it far enough away to minimize property damage. After they learn to control Hurricanes, I would like them to shut down tornadoes before they destroy millions of dollars of property. When Tornadoes are no longer a threat, Scientists can turn their attention to stopping earthquakes. Shutting down earthquakes from destroying infrastructure should be a prime directive. With Scientists eliminating earthquakes, they will be able to stop random lightening strikes that burn up millions of acres of land everyday and pollute the environment. When lightening is no longer a problem, Scientists can focus on the problem of solar activity from the sun. Scientists could create a solar shield in deep space in order to shade the earth from radiation and damaging solar flares. Once the solar shield project is completed, Scientists can turn their attention to tsunamis…wait a minute, there won't be any more tsunamis because Scientists would have already stop earthquakes. Fine then, go ahead and have scientists take on flooding. When Scientists get flooding under control, then and only then should they be allowed to address "Global Warming". Read (Job 38 NLT) for greater understanding.
I DO NOT believe in any of the politicians and their "experts" about climate change. I believe in the ONE who made the Earth and the heavens. God has it all in control, and I do not need a bunch of arrogant, "experts" to sell me their propaganda. Every thing that they do, is related to, and revolves around money, and power, and how to obtain more and more of it. Thats what they care about, it's what drives them….money power politics.
If the US enacted EVERY change recommended by Kyoto it would make a negligible (if any) difference in the problem. India, China? Anyone?
It's about reliable knowledge. When every national climate body on the planet agrees to something that's a powerful consensus. The evidence has become overwhelming that global warming, which causes climate change, has sped up dramatically.
Yes, in the 70's scientists thought that global cooling could be occuring. Then new ways of unearthing evidence came about and, like science does, it corrected itself. Now the evidence has been piling up that global warming at a MUCH more rapid pace is occuring and the likely cause is us.
Look on the bright side . . . global warming's gonna make the next ice age a lot more bearable!!
Fox news is CRAP. Hello.
Jeff, every "national political climate body agreed" – although the Dean of Harvard Economics quit the IPCC because they fudged the data. It is not science. It is politics and what can be done about moving the money. Need a good war and we don't have one yet so bring on the War on Climate Change.
There's climate change, and it's really bad cause we say so. Now give us more grant money and let us put taxable restrictions everywhere. AAAhhhhhhhh, that's better.
+Benjamin Lankout you take everything on faith too. Ass
So how can we tax the air????????
Well, here in VT they're prepping to tax the water. And that is a real global issue. I have lived in KSA where they run disgusting oil-powered, of course, desalination plants outside of Jeddah.
We have real clean air and water concerns. Why are they messing this up with Climate Change, which isn't happening, and Global Warming, which isn't happening?
Only the message matters.
The most interesting piece about Obama meeting with the Met guys today – and getting beat up in that – is the issue of media penetration. Sounds R-rated to me, but it is about what message do you need to preach to the choir to get their support?
It is not about science!
Before anyone furthers the existential fallacy (i.e. universal premise of a discreet plausibility) "undeniable evidence of global warming," please cite one of the following:
– Your unique individual research with accompanying journal articles/research
– Peer reviewed journals or statistical evidence with accompanying mathematical modeling, source code, etc.
For example:
Dissenting views of global warming in peer reviewed journal articles:
Spencer, Roy W.; Braswell, William D. (2011). "On the Misdiagnosis of Surface Temperature Feedbacks from Variations in Earth’s Radiant Energy Balance". Remote Sensing 3 (8): 1603–1613
Labohm, Hans. "Climate scepticism in a nutshell." Energy & environment 17.5 (2006): 767-776.
<State claims or professional commentary/opinion here and include statistical defense>
It would strengthen your argument and promote personal and/or peer-peer education beyond the overwhelming large amount of vomit spewed by 24- hour media (i.e. MSNBC, CNN, FOX, etc)
Paul Spoerry, A ordained Pastafarian, eh? That should convince everyone that you are a beer short of a six pack. So Pastafarian prays to pasta, tells people to shut the fuck up, cheap shoots news organizations and than cries that its his post? Wow, just wow. Have some cheese with your whine. Buwaha
OK. let's suppose that global warming is real and humans are the cause. That being the case, Obama and his adoring devotees should immediately present themselves to the public and end their lives. Problem solved, so long as we don't cremate them and release more carbon into the atmosphere!!!!!!!
Russel Smith, ha ha I will support your solution. And down with Pastafaries !
Well, I agree with Jason, except for that peer review thing. It is all a market niche including journals. Have to get out this month's edition. I am a fan of Roy Spencer though, so I'm not being critical except of what folks have to gain by being in certain trenches and not others.
Thanks for the fun, Paul. Have to go to bed. Nothing wrong with being a Pastafarian. In Saudi, an Imam with a doctorate in comparative religion from Cambridge, said I was Muslim because I believed but had issues with God taking the life of his child = Unitarian. Who said this Climate Change wasn't religious?
For whatever record, my cousin made the Nature Conservancy into what it is today and died of undiagnosed diabetes. I supported him with all I had. This deal about Climate Change is unsubstantiated HS.
I am not a right-wing Koch advocate of harvesting coal and oil. I'm a research scientist with a keen sense of BS.
I'll check in tomorrow.
Good stuff,
Jim
To those who say that the planet is too big and complex for human behavior to change it, a localized example of that very thing was the dust bowl in the 1930s. To those of you who say that scientists and science are overrated, try living without almost every creature comfort you see around you. Scientists are people and so of course they're fallible. That fact does not serve to undermine the overwhelming consensus of specialists in the field. For all those of you who snidely dismiss the evidence and bellow about the global cooling (or whatever it was called) in the 70s, the technological advancements in data collection, computational power, satellite imagery and so much over the past 40 years makes the comparison worthless. I'll cast my lot with science over uninformed opinion. With regard to the question of the impact on the environment by China and other developing countries and what to do about it – I totally agree it's a huge issue and until the problem is recognized by all countries, there's is little that the US can, or should, do alone.
+Steve Illyes I'm also a non-Pastafarian ordained minister as well. But faith has nothing to do with this issue so I'm not sure how that's relevant; in fact I stated that I hadn't wanted to turn it into a religious discussion.
+David Alpern Totally agree… we've come a long way since the 70s; in all areas of science. And yes emerging markets will have to be addressed but that doesn't mean that we don't do anything until they do. We're world leaders right?
+Paul Spoerry Yeah… that last sentence of mine wasn't quite what I meant. I'll try again. For starters, it's clear that the world would still go off a cliff even if the US reduced absolutely all emissions contributing to climate change. The US won't do anything of the sort (if anything at all) with science and scientists no longer respected and above the partisan fray but right in the center of it. I don't know what it would take to convince the unconvinced that human actions are the primary cause of the climate change. My suspicion is, short of the messiah appearing (your choice of messiah) and pronouncing it so, there will be no convincing. While the US is a world leader, sometimes in the best sense of the phrase but too often in less noble pursuits, I'm pessimistic that there is any politician to lead the charge as they would be massively targeted by the Republican party and summarily voted out of office by an electorate that is worn down, skeptical and mistrustful of politicians and government. While most people will gladly recycle, drive fuel efficient vehicles and use low energy light bulbs, almost none of them, Republican or Democrat alike, would be willing to make the sacrifices required to have a real impact. Especially if they feel like they're doing so while the rest of the world doesn't. One final thought. I read somewhere that the problem of climate change is so huge and the consequences so profoundly and existentially frightening, that people simply can't face up to it. It's just too scary to contemplate. Sounds about right to me.
+David Alpern Agree on all points. I was genuinely hoping that for his second term Obama would have made a declaration to solar similar to what Kennedy did with the moon program. Make a national declaration of increasing solar efficiency, use, etc to some standard within 10 years. Sadly, there was that one debacle with one solar company and that became a toxic political thing. It's unfortunate, because any nascent tech will stumble, have failed companies, etc.
It is definitely a global issue. Several have mentioned not doing anything because China (as one example) are chugging out pollution on a massive scale. I think that's a poor excuse for us NOT to do something. Additionally, Wired just did an article on how China may in fact be the one that solves a major pollution problem via coal. It's an interesting read. You can find it here: http://www.wired.com/2014/03/clean-coal/
+Paul Spoerry Actually the number of bankrupt or troubled solar companies backed by the present administration is around 50.
http://dailycaller.com/2012/10/30/as-many-as-fifty-obama-backed-green-energy-companies-bankrupt-or-troubled/
And by the way, according to the original global warming theory, now climate change (which is silly, because the climate always changes) the island nation of Vanuatu was supposed to be under water by now… but it isn't.
Yeah… if I have time to go research later I will. But this article starts by sourcing The Heritage Foundation which is an immediate red flag for me.
Solar companies. In defense of the Obama administration, the main failure for the Solar companies was that the Chinese started to sell Solar Panels at or below cost and thats something the US has never learned how to compete. Now they have the market and are raising prices. And we manufacture zero solar panels anymore. If you can fault anyone its our tax code and lack of government subsidies during the RD phase of development.