Comments on: White House Sounds Alarm On Climate Change
Global Warming Damage Happening Now, Says Most Urgently Worded Federal Science Study Yet
Add a Comment See all 108 Comments
- by -----One-American----- June 16, 2009 12:09 PM PDT
Uh, and your ranch is where? What are your irrigation rights? Storage rights? Do you have beetle kill? Have you noticed your peak flows changing? Perhaps your crops budding first with the early warm weather, and then being wiped out with a sudden storm?
Nope -can't answer - guess not. You have no clue as to where your food comes from, do you? You are just a pawn of the rich Limbaughs and Hannities who are mouthpieces of the Elite Big Oil.
Climate change is real. - Reply to this comment
-
- Um when is the climate not changing? Hey libs, if you don't want us burning oil fine, come up with something better... I'll buy that, but I won't buy man made global warming. Free market works but you gotta get off your a** and create something that works better then good ol' petrol.
- In addition to these national academies, the following institutions specializing in climate, atmosphere, ocean or earth sciences have endorsed the science of Climate Change and think it is time to take action:
NASA's Goddard Institute of Space Studies (GISS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), National Academy of Sciences (NAS), State of the Canadian Cryosphere (SOCC), Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Royal Society of the United Kingdom (RS), American Geophysical Union (AGU), American Institute of Physics (AIP), National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR), American Meteorological Society (AMS), Canadian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society (CMOS).
So when you talk about disagreement, what the h*ll are you talking about??? Glen Beck??? - Reply to this comment
- The experts don't disagree. Here are the national academies of science that explicitly endorse the science of climate change and the conclusions of the IPCC:
Academia Brasiliera de Ciências (Bazil), Royal Society of Canada, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Academié des Sciences (France), Deutsche Akademie der Naturforscher Leopoldina (Germany), Indian National Science Academy, Accademia dei Lincei (Italy), Science Council of Japan, Russian Academy of Sciences, Royal Society (United Kingdom), National Academy of Sciences (United States of America), Australian Academy of Sciences, Royal Flemish Academy of Belgium for Sciences and the Arts, Caribbean Academy of Sciences, Indonesian Academy of Sciences, Royal Irish Academy, Academy of Sciences Malaysia, Academy Council of the Royal Society of New Zealand, Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences - Reply to this comment
- Remember, NASA, Ubrew, the space agency that has actually sent humans and machinery through the atmosphere and been in space????
They are saying global warning is JUNK SCIENCE, that they have oberserved climate events for years affected by cyclic events due to the SUN!!!! - Reply to this comment
- Well, NO, not nearly every Academy of Science on the planet has formally agreed with this KRAP!!! Thousands of scientists are saying this THEORY is junk science!!!
Even NASA, did you get that, NASA, has said that the climate change is due to the cyclic events caused by the SUN!!!! - Reply to this comment
- About the only know fact here is most experts agree to disagree on the issue.
- Reply to this comment
-
- The experts don't disagree. Here are the national academies of science that explicitly endorse the science of climate change and the conclusions of the IPCC:
Academia Brasiliera de Ciências (Bazil), Royal Society of Canada, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Academié des Sciences (France), Deutsche Akademie der Naturforscher Leopoldina (Germany), Indian National Science Academy, Accademia dei Lincei (Italy), Science Council of Japan, Russian Academy of Sciences, Royal Society (United Kingdom), National Academy of Sciences (United States of America), Australian Academy of Sciences, Royal Flemish Academy of Belgium for Sciences and the Arts, Caribbean Academy of Sciences, Indonesian Academy of Sciences, Royal Irish Academy, Academy of Sciences Malaysia, Academy Council of the Royal Society of New Zealand, Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences
- In addition to these national academies, the following institutions specializing in climate, atmosphere, ocean or earth sciences have endorsed the science of Climate Change and think it is time to take action:
NASA's Goddard Institute of Space Studies (GISS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), National Academy of Sciences (NAS), State of the Canadian Cryosphere (SOCC), Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Royal Society of the United Kingdom (RS), American Geophysical Union (AGU), American Institute of Physics (AIP), National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR), American Meteorological Society (AMS), Canadian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society (CMOS).
So when you talk about disagreement, what the h*ll are you talking about??? Glen Beck???
- The experts don't disagree. Here are the national academies of science that explicitly endorse the science of climate change and the conclusions of the IPCC:
- Same old sad story from the same old head in the sand deniers, praying fervently that their gross over materialistic lifestyle will not be taken away from them, by those who are forward enough thinking, to see the enormous danger we are placing our future generations in.
The evidence is overwhelming. put your fool brains into gear. - Reply to this comment
-
- The evidence is overwhelming that there are many factors other than man made greenhouse gases affecting our climate. Learn some actual science.
- Idiot
The history of the Earth tells us that the climate is always changing; from warm periods when the dinosaurs flourished, to the many ice ages when glaciers covered much of the land. Climate has always changed due to natural cycles without any help from people.
The United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is a political organization promoting a theory that recent minor temperature increases may be caused largely by man-made carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions. CO2 is an infrared gas, and increasing concentrations can potentially increase the average global temperature as the gas absorbs radiation from the Earth and emits the absorbed energy at longer wavelengths. However, the warming ability of CO2 is limited because much of the absorption spectrum is near or fully saturated. When CO2 concentrations were ten times greater than today the Earth was in the grips of one of the coldest ice ages.
The history of climate and CO2 concentration shows that temperature changes precede CO2 changes and can not be a significant driver of climate. Temperature changes over different time scales have been well correlated to solar cycles, cosmic ray flux and cloud cover. Recent research shows that cosmic rays act as a catalyst to create low clouds, which cool the planet. When the Sun is more active, the solar wind repels the cosmic rays, reducing low cloud cover allowing the Sun to warm the planet.
Therefore, the comparison of observed data to computer models proves that CO2 is not the main climate driver. In atmosphere layers near 5 km, the modelled trend from 1980 is 100 to 300% higher than observed. Real world data shows that high clouds cause a strong negative feedback on climate, but climate models assume that clouds cause a positive feedback. The computer models are programmed to forecast a constant water vapor relative humidity with increasing CO2 resulting in a large water vapor feedback. Actual data shows the relative humidity has fallen 21% since 1948 in the upper troposphere where the models predict the greatest feedback. A new greenhouse effect theory by Miskolczi shows that the Earth maintains a saturated greenhouse effect. Adding CO2 to the atmosphere just replaces an equivalent amount of water vapour to maintain an almost constant greenhouse effect.
Several planets and moons have warmed recently along with the Earth, confirming a natural warming trend. Over longer time periods, as the solar system moves in and out of the galactic arms the cosmic ray flux changes, causing ice ages and warm ages. A comparison of temperature and solar activity proxy data suggests that solar effects can explain at least 75% of the surface warming during the last 100 years.
CO2 is plant food and the increase in the CO2 concentration may have increased the global food production by 15% since 1950 resulting in huge benefits for people. For Canada, any CO2 warming effect would also benefit us by reducing our space heating costs and making a more pleasant climate.
The IPCC predicts that global average temperatures will increase by 0.17 to 0.38 oC per decade to the end of the century depending on the rate of CO2 growth in the atmosphere and other assumptions. The projections assume that no action is taken to limit CO2 emissions. However, these predictions are unrealistic because they falsely assume that the recent temperature changes are driven solely by CO2 and that the Sun has little effect on climate. A recent study of past climate change used by the IPCC has been shown to be wrong due to the use of a faulty algorithm, and the inappropriate selection of data.
The land temperature record is contaminated by the urban heat island effect. Fully correcting the land temperature record would reduce the warming trend from 1980 to 2002 by half. The IPCC historical CO2 record may be incorrect due to inappropriate adjustments to the ice core data, and ignoring direct historical CO2 measurements. The IPCC selects and adjusts data to conform to its CO2 warming hypothesis and ignores alternative climate theories. This is the wrong way to do science. Many scientists strongly disagree with the IPCC conclusions.
The sea level data shows no increase in the recent rate of sea level rise, and no such increase is expected over the next hundred years. There has been no detected increase in severe storms and there is no reason to expect an increase in the number or intensity of hurricanes resulting from any warming assumed to be from human caused CO2 emissions.
The benefits of CO2 emissions greatly exceed any likely harmful effects. Several authorities who have studied solar cycles have warned that the Earth may soon enter a cooling phase as the Sun is expected to become less active. The atmosphere may warm because of human activity, but if it does, the expected change is unlikely to be more than 1 ºC, and probably less, in the next 100 years. - Reply to this comment
- As Sun spot activity decreases, Earth & other planets are COOLING NOT WARMING:
From Community naturalcures.com, November 20, 2008
Don?t believe that? Well?you can?t deny REALITY:
China recently experienced its coldest winter in 100 years while northeast America was hit by record snow levels and Britain suffered its coldest April in decades as late-blooming daffodils were pounded with hail and snow on an almost daily basis. The British summer has also left many yearning for global warming,
In actual fact, figures from the Colorado Centre For Astrodynamics Research show that global sea levels, after having risen since 2000, have been falling significantly over the last 2 years.
?Summer heat continues in short supply, continuing a trend that has dominated much of the 21st Century?s opening decade,? reports the Chicago Tribune. ?There have been only 162 days 90 degrees or warmer at Midway Airport over the period from 2000 to 2008. That?s by far the fewest 90-degree temperatures in the opening nine years of any decade on record here since 1930.?
Actually your so called deniers look at the actual facts and all of them and aren't simply trying to scare into profits. Actually you are the lazy ones, who believe everything hear. I know since global cooling came about it all because of global warming. Please explain why several planets have warmed along with us. Climate changes have been going on for BILLIONS OF YEARS without the help of man. Get a clue.
According to an Associated Press report, The Farmers Almanac is now also predicting ?below-average temperatures for most of the U.S.? The publication boasts of an 85 per cent accuracy rate for its forecasts which are given two years in advance.
According to a report from the World Meteorological Organization last month, the first half of 2008 was the coolest for at least five years, adding that it may actually be the coolest since 2000.
Meanwhile, Arctic ice has expanded by 30 per cent since this time last year as respected scientists predict a new mini ice age within 10 years.
Continuing the trend, parts of Kenya just experienced unprecedented ice storms after which 4 inch deep hail covered the ground - Reply to this comment
- Blah, Blah, Blah, The sky is falling.
- Reply to this comment
- Reading is not something GW skeptics do. WRITING, now thats their forte. Pick a subject, any subject...
- Reply to this comment
- Those of us who care about the planet are recyling, voting for efforts to stop co2 pollution, and trying to make idiots like leeann finally see the light
- Reply to this comment
- Because, as we all understood from the Bush White House: scientists don't do new research, the White House does. (Honestly, I'm surprised some of you people have heard of the internet)
- Reply to this comment
- Global Warming will create extreme weather conditions... that has been stated from the beginning, but some are too stupid to understand...get used to it
- Reply to this comment
- Sad song lyrics in 2050:
"They did not listen then, they're not listening now, perhaps they never will..."
paraphrased from Vincent - Reply to this comment
- Since you are apparently not sitting on your b u t t, what are you doing to make changes besides bellyache on the CBS website?
- Reply to this comment
- Yes, it has occured since time began, and it is always the earth reacting to events, like volcanic eruptions and meteor strikes. Now it is again reacting to events, namely OUR pollution of the earth and oceans. Open your eyes and see the evidence that is everywhere! There is a 1-to-1 causal relationship between the mounting CO2 and our CO2 producing society and the warming of the planet ("warming" was so misused by many it was changed to "climate change" - how was it misued? By idiots making claims that extreme cold in some areas proved global cooling - but global warming will cause extremes: some areas will be colder some hotter some drier some wetter etc... .EXTREMES) Welcome to the future. Be prepared for some real HE[[
- Reply to this comment
- If we are having global warming, I'd like to have some now. Where I live, we have not had one day this entire May or June that was warm enough to let children play outside in the water. Today is cold and blustery. I'd like good ol Al to come out here and give his Global warming speech at SUU outside in the stadium in a short-sleeved shirt. He would freeze his buns off.
- Reply to this comment
- What do you drive? Where do you live? There people who need power in their jobs to deliver goods and services (such as truck drivers) in areas that are not on flat land (such as in the mountains). Sorry, but a small hybrid doesn't work in all situations.
- Reply to this comment
- "Liberal scare tactics - just so they can have an excuse to heavily tax your energy consumption."
If you follow the money on this over the past twenty years, those who have the most to gain (and lose) are the energy CEOs. They have created pseudo-scientists to pohh pooh the mounting evidence and have invent talking points for Limbaugh and the rest of the right to follow so as to create doubt and debate, instead of action to stop the warming. True scientists are naturally objective and do not invent data to prove a point. We better pay attention instead of playing games to see who can argue better and name calling. Our grandchildren need to be prepared for a horrible environment that the right wing will have created. - Reply to this comment
-
- If you follow the money and the political trail you find just the opposite. There are millions in govt. grants going to climate change studies and alternate energy. Most fellow scientists and engineers I know and associate with do not work for energy companies (I wish I did; I could use the jack). I haven't met one who believes humans are responsible...based on actual data and knowledge of the complex system of processes making up our climate system. The truth is we do not have a thorough understanding of all the components that affect our climate. The main ones who claim that have a political agenda or a poor understanding of the scientific method.
