[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Simon Says. Simon Says said: RT @TLW3: Atlantic currents have seen ‘drastic’ changes: study http://bit.ly/eG0Nqv #p2 #p21 #dems [...]

We are really, really sooooo fncked! This is a lot worse than it sounds.

We are really, really sooooo fncked! This is a lot worse than it sounds.

We are really, really sooooo fncked! This is a lot worse than it sounds.

A study on worldwide historical weather patterns based on the evidence from one part of the world that is less than 700 years old, as young as “recent decades” is not a reliable study, regardless of the tests performed on that period. I’m no scientist, but what I do know about weather patterns is they appear over thousands of years, not a few hundred. The weather ahead of us may mean we are “fricked”, but does not mean it was man-made. Keep on pushing the agenda though…..

93 out of every 100 scientists working in rigorous peer-reviewed environments on physical geography-related issues find themselves, reluctantly or otherwise, pointing to human-initiated increases in quantity of greenhouse gases as the current primary driver in climate shifts. This result isn’t really so hard to believe; the really breathable air is only about fifteen thousand feet deep on a planet only some seven thousand eight hundred miles in diameter, and we have 1,000,000,000 vehicles on the roads, plus over a 1,000,000 airplanes, helicopters, ships, motorboats, rockets, and trains (combined), plus millions of buildings and houses running on coal, oil, and gas. Uh, yeah, that IS enough to make significant inroads on temperature profiles. Along with the insurance companies, who are already doing so, expect greater energy in storms, heavy precipitation (including extraordinary snow events), longer and deeper droughts, big shifts in plant and animal communities, catastrophic crop losses, and sea level rise. Maybe even some oddball heat waves.

The only reason I can think of for all the vigorous trolling of such heavily verified science is that that’s what the super-rich want done, so they can keep playing with their toys a little longer. After all, most of the die-off will really be only in places like Africa and Bangladesh, yes? Yes?

Rather than “pushing the agenda”, how’s ’bout just making polluters clean up their pollution and see what happens. We’d all at least breath a little easier and perhaps live a little longer. Not to mention finding solutions to the pollution problems would, well, create jobs.

But I understand, it’s soooo much easier to keep poo-pooing what you don’t want to believe . . . least until proven wrong, but by then, if it happens, it’s too late. It’s a shame that 1% Doctrine only applies to killing people, not assisting them. But, that’s compassionate conservatism 21st Century Schizoid world.

You’re right. You’re no scientist.

Psy, when you decide to wake up I suspect it will be too late. What if the climate scientists are correct and you are wrong? And what if we do nothing because of this silly argument about whether humans cause the changes or they are natural (one thing is certain–that we humans have created a huge carbon load, right)? And when it is too late to do anything about it, the best that can be said as we all drown, freeze, get struck by lightning, or whatever the result, is WE TOLD YOU SO. What is the point of your argument?

I’d say the person responding to scientific facts with a childish, “I didn’t do it,” is the one pushing the agenda.

The FACT of the matter is that scientists are still debating anthropogenic warming. The discussion is not over, but don’t you think it odd that we aren’t even supposed to question this stuff?

The FACT of the matter is that scientists are still debating anthropogenic warming. The discussion is not over, but don’t you think it odd that we aren’t even supposed to question this stuff?

People who have bought into the corporationists view don’t “believe” in science because the truth interferes with the profit margin, even though they don’t get a dime from the corporations. They want to please daddy. Daddy does my thinking for me, and if daddy says it is bad, then it is bad.

Scientists are still debating anthropogenic climate change the way they are still debating the heliocentric solar system. The Flat Earth Society still has members, and if there was money to be made by denying that the Earth revolves around the sun, you would see them on Fox News, pretending that presenting the opposite of the accepted position constitutes ‘balance’. The evidence for anthropogenic climate change is much, much stronger than the average evidence for the safety of a new prescription drug or food additive; if people applied the same standards of proof to drug trials as they do to climate change data, you wouldn’t be able to get anything except antibiotics and Aspirin from you pharmacist.

zzzzzzzz, troll…

Um, weather patterns do not appear over thousands of years. You’re talking about climate, not weather. Weather is much shorter term. If you don’t know the basic terminology, don’t bother offering an opinion.

The only reason I can think of for all the vigorous trolling of such heavily verified science is that that’s what the super-rich want done, so they can keep playing with their toys a little longer.

Or maybe it has something to do with the fact that 10 years ago we were told that winters would be shorter and milder, snow would be a thing of the past, and the science is settled. Now, winters are harsher and there’s tons of snow, and it’s caused by global warming but the science is still settled, even though it seems to keep changing.

Speaking of the money, the government has spent nearly 80 Billion over the past 20 years on climate change research. This certainly pales in comparison to the millions spent by oil companies… Oh wait, it doesn’t, does it? It’s actually the other way around. Who wants to derail the government funded gravy train by publishing results that don’t parrot the party line?

Very few scientists are “debating” anything, and along with discussions not over are some groups that still insist prayer is better for an infection than antibiotics.

Science, knowledge, understanding. These are the things that built the world as we know it, not adhering to superstition or ignoring reality.

Look at who is opposing us getting off heavily polluting fuels. Sellers of heavily polluting fuels and people who don’t care what they destroy so long as they get more crap to play with. Neither of those groups allow facts or knowledge or reason to get in their way, and they will be content to kill us all so long as they get more crap to play with.

Every time I do the assessment, I come to the same conclusion. Humans are made up of two different sub-species. One group is still shit flinging monkeys, the other actually bothers to use their big brains and apply logic and reason to understand things. And it’s not the shit flingers that created the technology that makes life comfortable. Maybe the shit flingers should sit down and shut up and let the big brained people chart the course, hmm? After all, if not for the big brained types, the shit flingers would still be living in caves and beating each other over the head for food and sex.

Very few scientists are “debating” anything, and along with discussions not over are some groups that still insist prayer is better for an infection than antibiotics.

Science, knowledge, understanding. These are the things that built the world as we know it, not adhering to superstition or ignoring reality.

Look at who is opposing us getting off heavily polluting fuels. Sellers of heavily polluting fuels and people who don’t care what they destroy so long as they get more crap to play with. Neither of those groups allow facts or knowledge or reason to get in their way, and they will be content to kill us all so long as they get more crap to play with.

Every time I do the assessment, I come to the same conclusion. Humans are made up of two different sub-species. One group is still shit flinging monkeys, the other actually bothers to use their big brains and apply logic and reason to understand things. And it’s not the shit flingers that created the technology that makes life comfortable. Maybe the shit flingers should sit down and shut up and let the big brained people chart the course, hmm? After all, if not for the big brained types, the shit flingers would still be living in caves and beating each other over the head for food and sex.

Idiot. Science is all about questioning everything, constantly. The only thing scientists are debating about anthropocentric global atmospheric destabilization is how it works and what it’s doing. Only the right wing is “debating” (their word for “denial”) that it is anthropocentric.

Idiot. Science is all about questioning everything, constantly. The only thing scientists are debating about anthropocentric global atmospheric destabilization is how it works and what it’s doing. Only the right wing is “debating” (their word for “denial”) that it is anthropocentric.

It’s called “taking responsibility for your own actions” and conservatives hate that.

It’s called “taking responsibility for your own actions” and conservatives hate that.

$80 billion? Where’s your support for that? That’s a drop in the bucket compared to what the oil companies have spent and continue to spend, not only to operate and expand, but to suppress climate data and studies they don’t agree with. You are WAY off base buddy.

Is there anything on this in the Bible or the Constitution? No? It must be hoax.

Established weather patterns are an indication of climate in equilibrium. Chaotic weather is an indication that aspects of climate producing elements are in disequilibrium. Weather patterns do in fact appear over thousands of years, weather is local and of short duration, climate is global and over a long duration. Climate is observable in how weather patterns behave over a long time.

“Or maybe it has something to do with the fact that 10 years ago we were told that winters would be shorter and milder, snow would be a thing of the past, and the science is settled. ”

what moron told you that? .. and I could only find one source (after 6 pages of google) that states $80 bil a year, and she doesn’t source anything, just asserts a “total spent in all relation to climate stuff”. Not all that credible, and she’s suggesting (or at least others reading her stuff) that it’s a YEAR.. clearly bullshit.

as for the isolated harsher winter weather, climate DISRUPTION is expected to cause more sever swings as “normal” climatic engines become dislodged. But keep pretending you’re making sense by acting like two opposing things are happening at the same time and ignoring the larger understanding of systems overall.

When scientists told your kind the world was round, you strung them up because they “must have been working for Satan!”.. when they told you the earth revolved around the sun, you killed them because your “belief system” dictated the earth was the center of the universe. You said “bless you” (and probably still do) because you thought Satan was trying to get in your nose and that made you sneeze, but now scientists have bothered to understand that it is irritation in your nose, often by pollen, and made pills that keep you from sneezing from seasonal allergies.. or did they just find a way to kill Satan?

I have YET to find a denier that can actually show honest substantiation to their claims of “climate change fraud”. I keep looking, I keep trying to find their “facts”, and I keep ending up at the same place. Deniers are, well, in denial. That’s what they do, and they do it all the time and across all spectrums of their lives.

“Or maybe it has something to do with the fact that 10 years ago we were told that winters would be shorter and milder, snow would be a thing of the past, and the science is settled. ”

what moron told you that? .. and I could only find one source (after 6 pages of google) that states $80 bil a year, and she doesn’t source anything, just asserts a “total spent in all relation to climate stuff”. Not all that credible, and she’s suggesting (or at least others reading her stuff) that it’s a YEAR.. clearly bullshit.

as for the isolated harsher winter weather, climate DISRUPTION is expected to cause more sever swings as “normal” climatic engines become dislodged. But keep pretending you’re making sense by acting like two opposing things are happening at the same time and ignoring the larger understanding of systems overall.

When scientists told your kind the world was round, you strung them up because they “must have been working for Satan!”.. when they told you the earth revolved around the sun, you killed them because your “belief system” dictated the earth was the center of the universe. You said “bless you” (and probably still do) because you thought Satan was trying to get in your nose and that made you sneeze, but now scientists have bothered to understand that it is irritation in your nose, often by pollen, and made pills that keep you from sneezing from seasonal allergies.. or did they just find a way to kill Satan?

I have YET to find a denier that can actually show honest substantiation to their claims of “climate change fraud”. I keep looking, I keep trying to find their “facts”, and I keep ending up at the same place. Deniers are, well, in denial. That’s what they do, and they do it all the time and across all spectrums of their lives.

Like so many in the lay public, you confuse scientific controversy with “discussion” in the common use of the term. The controversy is not about whether climate change is happening or any longer the primary driving force, carbon dioxide, only what will be the magnitude and direction of the consequences.

So the answer to you question is really no. Scientists have long since moved on to studying the consequences, such as

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2011/01/atlantic-currents-drastic-study/

This is typical now. Read about the 5,000 birds dying in mid-air or the 100,000 fish and the thousands of other instances of dramatic changes to world ecosystems that don’t get any attention at all because the polluters who own the news media don’t benefit from the public thinking too much about the consequences and the less than astute get their information from Fox News, which advocates gold worship and tax cuts for the rich as the solution to all problems.

You are right though, at the current rate of climate change, we all might as well all be “Already dead”. Hope you enjoyed your big tax cut.

Like so many in the lay public, you confuse scientific controversy with “discussion” in the common use of the term. The controversy is not about whether climate change is happening or any longer the primary driving force, carbon dioxide, only what will be the magnitude and direction of the consequences.

So the answer to you question is really no. Scientists have long since moved on to studying the consequences, such as

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2011/01/atlantic-currents-drastic-study/

This is typical now. Read about the 5,000 birds dying in mid-air or the 100,000 fish and the thousands of other instances of dramatic changes to world ecosystems that don’t get any attention at all because the polluters who own the news media don’t benefit from the public thinking too much about the consequences and the less than astute get their information from Fox News, which advocates gold worship and tax cuts for the rich as the solution to all problems.

You are right though, at the current rate of climate change, we all might as well all be “Already dead”. Hope you enjoyed your big tax cut.

Pinroot always shows up making comments of any article about climate change you find on Raw Story. I think he is an industry funded hack.

Pinroot always shows up making comments of any article about climate change you find on Raw Story. I think he is an industry funded hack.

Pinroot always shows up making comments of any article about climate change you find on Raw Story. I think he is an industry funded hack.

Psy, I think you summarized your own post rather well, when you said “I’m no scientist”.

By the way, the role of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere has been a “settled” scientific fact for over 150 years. I know the 18th century appeals to the tea-party, just as feudalism does to republicans, but it doesn’t really alter the current reality that mankind is responsible for driving climate change. If you just think about it for a moment, it is obvious. One volcano can spew enough soot into the atmosphere to affect the weather if the eruption is at all sizable and anywhere near the equator. It is a well known fact that volcanoes on average account for less and less than 10% of the total carbon dioxide produced by humans in any single year.

Psy, I think you summarized your own post rather well, when you said “I’m no scientist”.

By the way, the role of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere has been a “settled” scientific fact for over 150 years. I know the 18th century appeals to the tea-party, just as feudalism does to republicans, but it doesn’t really alter the current reality that mankind is responsible for driving climate change. If you just think about it for a moment, it is obvious. One volcano can spew enough soot into the atmosphere to affect the weather if the eruption is at all sizable and anywhere near the equator. It is a well known fact that volcanoes on average account for less and less than 10% of the total carbon dioxide produced by humans in any single year.

Psy, I think you summarized your own post rather well, when you said “I’m no scientist”.

By the way, the role of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere has been a “settled” scientific fact for over 150 years. I know the 18th century appeals to the tea-party, just as feudalism does to republicans, but it doesn’t really alter the current reality that mankind is responsible for driving climate change. If you just think about it for a moment, it is obvious. One volcano can spew enough soot into the atmosphere to affect the weather if the eruption is at all sizable and anywhere near the equator. It is a well known fact that volcanoes on average account for less and less than 10% of the total carbon dioxide produced by humans in any single year.

that’s it Joe, eugenics…

that’s it Joe, eugenics…

another reason for all the vigorous trolling of such heavily verified science is that for many, Belief trumps Reason.
This is why we are so easily propagandized.
Fortunately, we are the most entertained public in history.
What time’s American Idol on?

another reason for all the vigorous trolling of such heavily verified science is that for many, Belief trumps Reason.
This is why we are so easily propagandized.
Fortunately, we are the most entertained public in history.
What time’s American Idol on?

another reason for all the vigorous trolling of such heavily verified science is that for many, Belief trumps Reason.
This is why we are so easily propagandized.
Fortunately, we are the most entertained public in history.
What time’s American Idol on?

yup, Belief over Reason.
Only one requires the effort to find and interpret the facts.
For the other, there’s Rush and Glenn.

yup, Belief over Reason.
Only one requires the effort to find and interpret the facts.
For the other, there’s Rush and Glenn.

yup, Belief over Reason.
Only one requires the effort to find and interpret the facts.
For the other, there’s Rush and Glenn.

Pinroot, your lack of knowledge of earth science is showing.

The increase in snow is a direct consequence of the fact that the arctic and near arctic seas are no longer fully ice covered in the winter, thereby providing a tremendous boost in atmospheric moisture. Temperatures on average are still rising, its just that when its less than 0 degrees Celsius (32 Degrees F) rain turns to snow. Temperatures in the Arctic are rising about 2-3 times as fast as anywhere else on the planet. Although we are seeing more snow, don’t expect the average annual temperatures to be lower. Last year was the highest on record, despite of a prolonged solar sunspot minimum.

Rest assured that there will be a price to be paid by bearing false witness about what the science is telling us.

Pinroot, your lack of knowledge of earth science is showing.

The increase in snow is a direct consequence of the fact that the arctic and near arctic seas are no longer fully ice covered in the winter, thereby providing a tremendous boost in atmospheric moisture. Temperatures on average are still rising, its just that when its less than 0 degrees Celsius (32 Degrees F) rain turns to snow. Temperatures in the Arctic are rising about 2-3 times as fast as anywhere else on the planet. Although we are seeing more snow, don’t expect the average annual temperatures to be lower. Last year was the highest on record, despite of a prolonged solar sunspot minimum.

Rest assured that there will be a price to be paid by bearing false witness about what the science is telling us.

Pinroot, your lack of knowledge of earth science is showing.

The increase in snow is a direct consequence of the fact that the arctic and near arctic seas are no longer fully ice covered in the winter, thereby providing a tremendous boost in atmospheric moisture. Temperatures on average are still rising, its just that when its less than 0 degrees Celsius (32 Degrees F) rain turns to snow. Temperatures in the Arctic are rising about 2-3 times as fast as anywhere else on the planet. Although we are seeing more snow, don’t expect the average annual temperatures to be lower. Last year was the highest on record, despite of a prolonged solar sunspot minimum.

Rest assured that there will be a price to be paid by bearing false witness about what the science is telling us.

Or maybe there are a cadre of trolls out there paid by big oil and coal to misinform?

Cayman Islands highest point 143.8 ft.suuuush! all their money is there when the current changes the banks will be washed away by a 144ft wave from a melting iceberg

Tornadoes in New York City.

Tornadoes in New York City.

Tornadoes in New York City.

Tornadoes in New York City.

Within a few years “children just aren’t going to know what snow is.” Snowfall will be “a very rare and exciting event.” Dr. David Viner, senior research scientist at the climatic research unit (CRU) of the University of East Anglia

http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/snowfalls-are-now-just-a-thing-of-the-past-724017.html

Also, from the same article :

David Parker, at the Hadley Centre for Climate Prediction and Research in Berkshire, says ultimately, British children could have only virtual experience of snow. Via the internet, they might wonder at polar scenes – or eventually “feel” virtual cold.

Also, “Similarly, the continental United States will experience an overall warming trend: Temperatures now experienced during the coldest two weeks of the year will be a past memory, and winter’s length will diminish as well, according to the model.” from http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2005/10/051019001040.htm

This took me about 2 minutes to look up, I am pretty sure there are more articles that can show that at least some predictions that were made are not turning out like people thought they would. We probably need a lot more study on this before we start saying that we “know” we have the answer, or that there is really even a problem. Even Al Gore’s mentor warned against making too quick of a judgement the role carbon dioxide has in the environment.

Lastly, just out of curiosity, why do you assume anyone that doesn’t think 100 percent the same as you is a Republican? And, what does the idea of the earth being round have to do with a discussion about climate?

Within a few years “children just aren’t going to know what snow is.” Snowfall will be “a very rare and exciting event.” Dr. David Viner, senior research scientist at the climatic research unit (CRU) of the University of East Anglia

http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/snowfalls-are-now-just-a-thing-of-the-past-724017.html

Also, from the same article :

David Parker, at the Hadley Centre for Climate Prediction and Research in Berkshire, says ultimately, British children could have only virtual experience of snow. Via the internet, they might wonder at polar scenes – or eventually “feel” virtual cold.

Also, “Similarly, the continental United States will experience an overall warming trend: Temperatures now experienced during the coldest two weeks of the year will be a past memory, and winter’s length will diminish as well, according to the model.” from http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2005/10/051019001040.htm

This took me about 2 minutes to look up, I am pretty sure there are more articles that can show that at least some predictions that were made are not turning out like people thought they would. We probably need a lot more study on this before we start saying that we “know” we have the answer, or that there is really even a problem. Even Al Gore’s mentor warned against making too quick of a judgement the role carbon dioxide has in the environment.

Lastly, just out of curiosity, why do you assume anyone that doesn’t think 100 percent the same as you is a Republican? And, what does the idea of the earth being round have to do with a discussion about climate?

97 actually, only 3% doubt it and they are usually not climate scientists.

97 actually, only 3% doubt it and they are usually not climate scientists.

97 actually, only 3% doubt it and they are usually not climate scientists.

Nothing will change for the Cayman Islands; they’ve been laundering the money of the top 1% for decades — what’s another wash cycle thrown in?

Nothing will change for the Cayman Islands; they’ve been laundering the money of the top 1% for decades — what’s another wash cycle thrown in?

Nothing will change for the Cayman Islands; they’ve been laundering the money of the top 1% for decades — what’s another wash cycle thrown in?

What’s corporate America care about us. They can always build a domed city to save themselves somewhere. They are an island to themselves.

What’s corporate America care about us. They can always build a domed city to save themselves somewhere. They are an island to themselves.

Scientists have accepted AGW. Now they are simply trying to figure out how bad it could get, and continue to underestimate because the reality is likely to be grim. Even shills and prostitutes like Lomborg have accepted AGW. Only kooks and Kochs haven’t.

I’ve heard that the gulf stream is starting to slow down due to the decreased ice in Greenland, but I can’t find by how much it’s slowing down. Once all the ice is gone, I’m certain that the gulf stream is going to stop. It’ll be one hell of a hurricane season when that happens. As for Europe, I hope everybody has skies.

Science fail. Why not just go straight to young earth creationism if that’s the best you can do? Jesus doesn’t want me for an iceberg….

Nobody told you that. You made it up. Unless it was your mom, or someone like that. James Hansen told you in 1988 that it was hitting the fan and the ride would be crazy, then Al Gore looked at the data and said Holy Sh!!!, then the rightards and their owners in the carbon industry decided that smart people suck when it might cost them money so it was all lies. Heck, I have seen articles in Popular Mechanics from the 1930s that warned of global warming due to carbon fuels.

I give you 3 points for the use of the word “anthropogenic”.
I would say that an entire industry devoted to discrediting the science, the ideas behind climate change goes a little beyond your carping use of the word “question”.
Don’t worry, the new Republican majority in the house will do all they can to make sure you can have you right to “question” and your right to burn all the petrol chemicals you care tyo buy at what ever price they want to charge you…..

Scientists are always debating , what’s that got to do with anything . Anyone who can’t look at what’s going on with weather patterns and figure out somethings very wrong is beyond reach or reason . The only ” scientists ” who are still denying global warming are those bought and paid for by the energy industry . You know , like the ” experts ” that proclaimed the gulf was just fine and the oil had magically disappeared . But I would say the issue is moot anyway , I believe we are well past the point of no return , I hope the greedy bastards enjoy their profits , I’ll bet their heirs will will be somewhat less sanguine .

It doesn’t matter if it is caused my man or not. What matters is we have the ability to slow the rise in CO2 levels and eventually reverse it and in the process build a better cleaner world. We have nothing to lose by trying and everything to lose if we don’t.

You’re right, I was sloppy, sir.

I’m not sure where you’re getting your information , but they have samples of ice cores from millions of years ago , complete with ancient air . They also have flora and fauna from which you can tell everything from temperature to general climate . You might want to stop listening to experts on Fox ( gag ) News or Limbaugh etc and actually research a bit . On your computer you’ll find a site called ” Google ” you can find most of the aforementioned information there .

“It doesn’t matter if it is caused my man or not.”

What they are not telling you is that all the planets are getting warmer and brighter (the polar caps on Mars are melting). This warming seems to be caused by sun cycles. They want a carbon tax so they can take more of our money.

Let us not confuse CO2 – carbon dioxide (what you breath out) with carbon monoxide (comes out car exhaust – they are not the same thing.

I am all for cutting pollution (carbon monoxide) and cleaning up our water ways. But the warming of the planet is not from us, it is planetary.

Citation?

Citation?

Eugenics? He didn’t say to destroy them, but to keep them from the controls of the run away train because they do not understand how the break system works.

Eugenics? He didn’t say to destroy them, but to keep them from the controls of the run away train because they do not understand how the break system works.

Thank you for trying to set the poor old man straight.

Thank you for trying to set the poor old man straight.

Global temperatures have been flat since 1998. In the 1970s environmental scientists were publishing papers about global cooling and how lower temperatures would cause a decline in the Green revolution of the 1950-60s leading to mass starvation and a decline in world population. Oops. Then there is the ozone layer – oops again – we were all going to get skin cancer – instead it was changes in sun tan lotion that was contributing to increased skin cancers. How many times have these scientists got it wrong. Predictions of smog effects in the 1970s had everyone in the LA basin getting sick and dying by the 1980s. Instead studies find people in LA healthier than the rest of the country. Today the air in the LA basin is cleaner than it was in 1980. Oops again.

Where is the great global flooding from global warming. By now Florida was supposed to be gone. Oops. CO2 is a natural gas – not a pollutant. The changes detected are very very small. There is a lot of religious junk science but nothing showing a correlation of increased CO2 to higher temperatures. While CO2 was rising through the 1950-60s global temperatures declined. Read the second Freak Economics if you want the truth.

Global warming is the new Christianity of our time with its need for constant money and blind religious faith. God forbid anyone actually question the facts – they are stoned as heretics and accused as blasphemer.

Global temperatures have been flat since 1998. In the 1970s environmental scientists were publishing papers about global cooling and how lower temperatures would cause a decline in the Green revolution of the 1950-60s leading to mass starvation and a decline in world population. Oops. Then there is the ozone layer – oops again – we were all going to get skin cancer – instead it was changes in sun tan lotion that was contributing to increased skin cancers. How many times have these scientists got it wrong. Predictions of smog effects in the 1970s had everyone in the LA basin getting sick and dying by the 1980s. Instead studies find people in LA healthier than the rest of the country. Today the air in the LA basin is cleaner than it was in 1980. Oops again.

Where is the great global flooding from global warming. By now Florida was supposed to be gone. Oops. CO2 is a natural gas – not a pollutant. The changes detected are very very small. There is a lot of religious junk science but nothing showing a correlation of increased CO2 to higher temperatures. While CO2 was rising through the 1950-60s global temperatures declined. Read the second Freak Economics if you want the truth.

Global warming is the new Christianity of our time with its need for constant money and blind religious faith. God forbid anyone actually question the facts – they are stoned as heretics and accused as blasphemer.

The disruption of oceanic conveyors (currents driven by differences in water temps and salinity) — caused by global warming– has been predicted by climatologists for some time. An immediate prediction of consequences was much colder winters in Northern Europe and harsher droughts in parts of Asia. Now coming true. Oh, and global temperatures have been increasing, with several records, each year for 20 years.

The disruption of oceanic conveyors (currents driven by differences in water temps and salinity) — caused by global warming– has been predicted by climatologists for some time. An immediate prediction of consequences was much colder winters in Northern Europe and harsher droughts in parts of Asia. Now coming true. Oh, and global temperatures have been increasing, with several records, each year for 20 years.

Good Lord. So all of those news stories about each year being hotter than the previous, averaged globally, for the last 20 years, are all part of a giant conspiracy too….. sell us… air conditioners and ice cream??

Good Lord. So all of those news stories about each year being hotter than the previous, averaged globally, for the last 20 years, are all part of a giant conspiracy too….. sell us… air conditioners and ice cream??

yes and we are not overfishing, its really pink elephants devouring all the fish in the sea.

This is BS btw.

yes and we are not overfishing, its really pink elephants devouring all the fish in the sea.

This is BS btw.

Your post contains no facts to question.

Please democrats, read this article into the Congressional Record, while the idiots are reading the constitution.

Good point. The deniers don’t have any facts, and they operate like a cult. They don’t want to explore the issues, because they would have to act like real conservatives and conserve.

Go away, you petty, small-minded turd.

They may have to get their clean jocko hands dirty and build the domes themselves; the rest of us will be drowned, burnt, or starved.

No, they care a lot about global warming. They stand to make a lot of money selling air conditioners, unpolluted water, air purification systems for households, and other things that solve problems caused by global warming which the masses don’t need today. Big corporations will sell these solutions to those who can afford it.

Disaster produces unforeseen needs that people will pay for, and global warming is a permanent disaster, with a captive market.

You’re damn straight you aren’t a scientist.
What are you?
Maybe you should stick to that or take some courses and learn a bit and then come back when you have more knowledge….or you could self educate,
but it looks like you’ve already tried that and it isn’t working out that well.

Btw, I don’t claim to be a climate expert either, but I’ve made my living in the field of science for a long time now and the lack of rational scientific thought by average Americans is disturbing.
I hope future generations get better education and training.

You’re damn straight you aren’t a scientist.
What are you?
Maybe you should stick to that or take some courses and learn a bit and then come back when you have more knowledge….or you could self educate,
but it looks like you’ve already tried that and it isn’t working out that well.

Btw, I don’t claim to be a climate expert either, but I’ve made my living in the field of science for a long time now and the lack of rational scientific thought by average Americans is disturbing.
I hope future generations get better education and training.

You’re damn straight you aren’t a scientist.
What are you?
Maybe you should stick to that or take some courses and learn a bit and then come back when you have more knowledge….or you could self educate,
but it looks like you’ve already tried that and it isn’t working out that well.

Btw, I don’t claim to be a climate expert either, but I’ve made my living in the field of science for a long time now and the lack of rational scientific thought by average Americans is disturbing.
I hope future generations get better education and training.

and of course this has nothing to do with the bp oil spill… anything but that…

how many articles were there on this between 1970 the spill?

nothing to see here… move along… it’s been going on since the 70s

and of course this has nothing to do with the bp oil spill… anything but that…

how many articles were there on this between 1970 the spill?

nothing to see here… move along… it’s been going on since the 70s

and of course this has nothing to do with the bp oil spill… anything but that…

how many articles were there on this between 1970 the spill?

nothing to see here… move along… it’s been going on since the 70s

And so it starts.

In the late 1990s, an international team of scientists went to the Antarctic to drill for ice core samples dating back to before the last great Ice Age. In studying the ice core samples from that period over 10,000 years ago, they discovered something strange.

Expecting the ice core samples to show that there was a cooling trend before the Ice Age began, they instead discovered that there was a sharp temperature rise in the earth’s atmosphere just before the world plunged into the Ice Age. And what was even more shocking was that this temperature increase occurred only over 30 year…then the Ice Age.

One of the theories offered at the time, after this Antarctic ice core sampling in the late 1990s, was that the increase in atmospheric temperatures (kind of like what is happening today, but with today’s warming being of longer duration) caused a whole lot of ice to melt, at the poles and among glaciers at high altitudes. This melting ice long ago (due to whatever caused the warming of the atmosphere) led to sharply-increased levels of freshwater mixing with the salt water in the oceans, and also, through evaporation, led to an increase in the moisture content in the atmosphere (just like we are seeing today). Conclusion reached?

All this freshwater entering the world’s oceans (especially in the northern/polar latitudes) disrupted the world’s ocean currents. This led to the Atlantic Gulf Stream not going as far north, thus disrupting the ocean’s transference of heat from equatorial latitudes to polar regions, and vice versa, cooler northern waters reaching the equatorial regions.

Result? The polar regions iced over again as northern latitudes were robbed of warmer current waters reaching the far north from the equatorial regions (along with the probability that whatever heat source that spiked the atmospheric temperatures abated over 30 years). Thus, the last great Ice Age began, and with glaciers at high altitudes growing, sweeping down valleys between mountains and hills, carving out the terrain.

Apparently, this 30-year-long “global atmospheric warming” that took place over 10,000 years ago, just before the last great Ice Age began, triggered over a thousand years of global cooling, with this cooling trend eventually freezing enough of the water into ice again (polar and glacial) that the Ice Age ended…and the world’s ocean currents returned to the pattern they’d followed before the Ice Age began, restoring the general equilibrium once again between northern latitudes and equatorial regions, with the glaciers retreating.

At least this is one of the theories. But I’ve read over the past decade that scientists (especially in England) have been keeping a close eye on ocean currents, just in case warmer waters from equatorial regions are being disrupted and aren’t making it as far north into the polar regions. This report appears to indicate that this is happening. Maybe not as rapidly as what happened before the last great Ice Age, yes, with the 30-year-long atmospheric temperature spike that preceded it, but still happening, as human Industrial Age activity and increased CO2 levels in the atmosphere heat up the earth’s atmosphere…while melting a whole, whole lot of the earth’s ice in the process.

And so it starts.

In the late 1990s, an international team of scientists went to the Antarctic to drill for ice core samples dating back to before the last great Ice Age. In studying the ice core samples from that period over 10,000 years ago, they discovered something strange.

Expecting the ice core samples to show that there was a cooling trend before the Ice Age began, they instead discovered that there was a sharp temperature rise in the earth’s atmosphere just before the world plunged into the Ice Age. And what was even more shocking was that this temperature increase occurred only over 30 year…then the Ice Age.

One of the theories offered at the time, after this Antarctic ice core sampling in the late 1990s, was that the increase in atmospheric temperatures (kind of like what is happening today, but with today’s warming being of longer duration) caused a whole lot of ice to melt, at the poles and among glaciers at high altitudes. This melting ice long ago (due to whatever caused the warming of the atmosphere) led to sharply-increased levels of freshwater mixing with the salt water in the oceans, and also, through evaporation, led to an increase in the moisture content in the atmosphere (just like we are seeing today). Conclusion reached?

All this freshwater entering the world’s oceans (especially in the northern/polar latitudes) disrupted the world’s ocean currents. This led to the Atlantic Gulf Stream not going as far north, thus disrupting the ocean’s transference of heat from equatorial latitudes to polar regions, and vice versa, cooler northern waters reaching the equatorial regions.

Result? The polar regions iced over again as northern latitudes were robbed of warmer current waters reaching the far north from the equatorial regions (along with the probability that whatever heat source that spiked the atmospheric temperatures abated over 30 years). Thus, the last great Ice Age began, and with glaciers at high altitudes growing, sweeping down valleys between mountains and hills, carving out the terrain.

Apparently, this 30-year-long “global atmospheric warming” that took place over 10,000 years ago, just before the last great Ice Age began, triggered over a thousand years of global cooling, with this cooling trend eventually freezing enough of the water into ice again (polar and glacial) that the Ice Age ended…and the world’s ocean currents returned to the pattern they’d followed before the Ice Age began, restoring the general equilibrium once again between northern latitudes and equatorial regions, with the glaciers retreating.

At least this is one of the theories. But I’ve read over the past decade that scientists (especially in England) have been keeping a close eye on ocean currents, just in case warmer waters from equatorial regions are being disrupted and aren’t making it as far north into the polar regions. This report appears to indicate that this is happening. Maybe not as rapidly as what happened before the last great Ice Age, yes, with the 30-year-long atmospheric temperature spike that preceded it, but still happening, as human Industrial Age activity and increased CO2 levels in the atmosphere heat up the earth’s atmosphere…while melting a whole, whole lot of the earth’s ice in the process.

I accidentally hit “liked” instead of reply, so please deduct one like, if you have any to deduct from.

“CO2 is a natural gas – not a pollutant” You idiot, lock yourself in a room please please please, and pump it full of CO2, and then come out and tell us that it is not a pollutant.

Wait, you won’t be coming out. Good riddance.

So you’re that gullible.

I mean, infowars has some good stuff on it, but try to be more discriminatory.

Try to discover your capacity for critical analysis.

Seriously, you have some nerve to post that crap.

For decades now, since the very earliest models were developed regarding the rise of the heat trapping gas CO2, global climatologists have predicted quite accurately, that one of the effects of global warming would be changes in climate while the average global temperature continues to rise.

Are you so completely ignorant of the science that you think severe snow events are indicative of some needed correction in the science?

You are one of these morons that was mocking Al Gore last year when a big snow storm dumped on the east coast, that he should be built an igloo in D.C.

Tornadoes in December say you’re a bloody fool.

Damn, I accidentally liked.

I do not like.

Your quotes mean absolutely zip to the science. That you think they are somehow cogent to the discussion proves you have a feeble mind, and in this area of discussion have mastered the art of the straw man argument.

I thought that the ocean circulation was controlled by the wind.

I thought that the ocean circulation was controlled by the wind.

I thought that the ocean circulation was controlled by the wind.

Weather is one thing. Climate takes decades to read.

Weather is one thing. Climate takes decades to read.

Weather is one thing. Climate takes decades to read.

[...] more via  Raw Story: Scientists have pointed to a disruption or shifts in the oscillation as an explanation for moist [...]

Mmmm… Rocky… Road?

Mmmm… Rocky… Road?

http://www.giss.nasa.gov/research/news/20100121/

http://www.giss.nasa.gov/research/news/20100121/

First – spending on global warming research is nothing near $81 billion – according to Science magazine, it is more in the range of $150 million a year. Over 20 years, that would be about 3 billion dollars. Just because Free Republic reports something doesn’t mean it is true. Secondly, global warming is causing weather to become more violent, as was predicted by climatologists years ago. Harsher winters are consistent with that theory. Thirdly, there is a huge difference between climate, which is global and long term, and weather, which is local and short term. The last decade was one of the warmest on record, despite the fact that the Northeastern US is having a harsh winter.

First – spending on global warming research is nothing near $81 billion – according to Science magazine, it is more in the range of $150 million a year. Over 20 years, that would be about 3 billion dollars. Just because Free Republic reports something doesn’t mean it is true. Secondly, global warming is causing weather to become more violent, as was predicted by climatologists years ago. Harsher winters are consistent with that theory. Thirdly, there is a huge difference between climate, which is global and long term, and weather, which is local and short term. The last decade was one of the warmest on record, despite the fact that the Northeastern US is having a harsh winter.

First – spending on global warming research is nothing near $81 billion – according to Science magazine, it is more in the range of $150 million a year. Over 20 years, that would be about 3 billion dollars. Just because Free Republic reports something doesn’t mean it is true. Secondly, global warming is causing weather to become more violent, as was predicted by climatologists years ago. Harsher winters are consistent with that theory. Thirdly, there is a huge difference between climate, which is global and long term, and weather, which is local and short term. The last decade was one of the warmest on record, despite the fact that the Northeastern US is having a harsh winter.

Climate Change is happening and it is real. It affects poorer Island countries first. Already over 1,000,000,000 people are having to relocate due to higher tides and ocean levels. Whether Climate Change is a result of mans actions or whether it is a result of natural phenomenon is no longer up for debate among educated people. It is a combination of both to most informed folks.

The point behind the carbon taxes are to ensure that corporations can not cover the entire planet is stinking factories, slash and burn all the rainforests etc etc.

Yes some people are getting very wealthy with the new carbon markets. However, big changes don’t happen quickly in business unless someone makes a profit.

There will be some pure profiteers in the market who do not care a rats ass for anything but money. However the system is setup so that those profiteers can make money SAVING something rather than just destroying everything.

Climate Change is happening and it is real. It affects poorer Island countries first. Already over 1,000,000,000 people are having to relocate due to higher tides and ocean levels. Whether Climate Change is a result of mans actions or whether it is a result of natural phenomenon is no longer up for debate among educated people. It is a combination of both to most informed folks.

The point behind the carbon taxes are to ensure that corporations can not cover the entire planet is stinking factories, slash and burn all the rainforests etc etc.

Yes some people are getting very wealthy with the new carbon markets. However, big changes don’t happen quickly in business unless someone makes a profit.

There will be some pure profiteers in the market who do not care a rats ass for anything but money. However the system is setup so that those profiteers can make money SAVING something rather than just destroying everything.

The Democrats are not your friends. Unless you’re a Repub or a Big Corporation.

The Democrats are not your friends. Unless you’re a Repub or a Big Corporation.

The Democrats are not your friends. Unless you’re a Repub or a Big Corporation.

The Democrats are not your friends. Unless you’re a Repub or a Big Corporation.

more that the ocean currents control the wind. There is a lot more energy in the ocean than in the atmosphere

more that the ocean currents control the wind. There is a lot more energy in the ocean than in the atmosphere

more that the ocean currents control the wind. There is a lot more energy in the ocean than in the atmosphere

more that the ocean currents control the wind. There is a lot more energy in the ocean than in the atmosphere

Actually they’re building floating luxurious mini-cities for billionaires and they’re all gonna float away to stay away from the angry masses. I’m not making this up:

The Really Creepy People Behind the Libertarian-Inspired Billionaire Sea Castles

The stinking rich are planning billion-dollar luxury liners that keep the land-based Americans they’ve plundered at a safe distance.

http://www.alternet.org/story/147058/

Actually they’re building floating luxurious mini-cities for billionaires and they’re all gonna float away to stay away from the angry masses. I’m not making this up:

The Really Creepy People Behind the Libertarian-Inspired Billionaire Sea Castles

The stinking rich are planning billion-dollar luxury liners that keep the land-based Americans they’ve plundered at a safe distance.

http://www.alternet.org/story/147058/

Actually they’re building floating luxurious mini-cities for billionaires and they’re all gonna float away to stay away from the angry masses. I’m not making this up:

The Really Creepy People Behind the Libertarian-Inspired Billionaire Sea Castles

The stinking rich are planning billion-dollar luxury liners that keep the land-based Americans they’ve plundered at a safe distance.

http://www.alternet.org/story/147058/

Actually they’re building floating luxurious mini-cities for billionaires and they’re all gonna float away to stay away from the angry masses. I’m not making this up:

The Really Creepy People Behind the Libertarian-Inspired Billionaire Sea Castles

The stinking rich are planning billion-dollar luxury liners that keep the land-based Americans they’ve plundered at a safe distance.

http://www.alternet.org/story/147058/

“I’m no scientist”

REALLY?!

Where are you getting those numbers from, Exxon?

I would hope industry funded hacks would be smarter than Pinroot!

OK Bernie Sanders, are you listening, please do this.

Nothing to see here. Drill baby drill, and burn baby burn.

Nothing to see here. Drill baby drill, and burn baby burn.

Nothing to see here. Drill baby drill, and burn baby burn.

How DARE scientists use reality-based measurements to discuss real topics.

How dare they.

Don’t they know that global climate change was invented by Al Gore? It was invented by him so he could invest in clean energy technology.

there are about 7 billion people on the planet (http://www.census.gov/main/www/popclock.html). So you’re claiming one in seven are now being displaced due to higher tides and ocean levels. I call bullshit.

Some people believe in AGW. Some people believe it’s not true. People can believe whatever the hell they want, but belief is not an argument.
Almost all the people who are in a position to see the evidence are convinced that the vast preponderance of the evidence clearly shows that global warming is happening and that human beings are playing a role in it.
Note the difference: Some people believe. Some people are convinced by a preponderance of evidence.

Science deals in evidence. More importantly, it deals in finding new evidence and revising its conclusions as new evidence appears. So when scientists say that they used to believe one thing but now they believe another, it isn’t a failure of science. It’s THE triumph of science.
And “science” doesn’t speak with one voice, it speaks in a discordant cacophony.

The change I’ve noticed most is that it seems more scientists are getting away from the term “Global Warming” and moving in the direction of using terms like “Global Weather Weirdness”.
This is probably a better term, because “global Warming” gives people the idea we’ll be basking on beaches of Newfoundland, while “Global Weather Weirdness” helps us to see its relationship to things like blizzards in New York, droughts in Russia and floods in Pakistan.

The claim that sea rise isn’t happening is ludicrous.

The revisions in the science I’ve seen lately have all been in the direction of: ‘Member what we said might happen by 2100? Now it looks like it might happen by 2040. Oops.

Insurance companies (who, of the big money players, have the most to lose if there’s an increase in global weather weirdness) are starting to take notice.
Could be fun to watch in Congress, the Battle of the Titans, the Insurance lobbyists vs the oil lobbyists. Guess who’ll lose no matter who wins.

Oops, don’t let the facts get in your way (Sun tan lotion?). Wouldn’t want to change our unsustainable lifestyles would we? Or heaven forbid, feel guilty about the damage that lifestyle has caused. So hey, the scientists are conspiring to get us top pay a carbon tax – that’s the ticket!
MORON!
“Deal with reality, or reality will deal with you”.

And your advanced degree is in…? Oh, sorry, you get your data from Alex Jones.

I look forward to becoming a pirate

You didn’t see the memo forbidding questioning of climate change? I’m going to have to report you. BTW your brain is already dead.

You didn’t see the memo forbidding questioning of climate change? I’m going to have to report you. BTW your brain is already dead.

You didn’t see the memo forbidding questioning of climate change? I’m going to have to report you. BTW your brain is already dead.

What really pisses me off is that inaction on climate change (caused by people like you) will kill us all, not just the deniers (that would be poetic justice).

What really pisses me off is that inaction on climate change (caused by people like you) will kill us all, not just the deniers (that would be poetic justice).

What really pisses me off is that inaction on climate change (caused by people like you) will kill us all, not just the deniers (that would be poetic justice).