New climate report says global warming is 'human-induced' »
Posted By ameliog 4 months, 1 week ago in Science & Technology"Global Climate Change Impacts in the United States," was released in Washington by the interagency Global Climate Research Program. The report is based on research generated during Republican and Democratic administrations and was produced by experts from 13 government agencies and several major universities.
The report unequivocally said global warming "is due primarily to human-induced emissions of heat-trapping gases."
Read Full Story at rgj.com »
564 Views Share Story 88 Comments Report
Submitted By:
ameliog
If it is true that there is always more than one way of construing a text, it is not true that all interpretations are equal ...
Who Also Submitted:
RSS Join the Discussion
+ Add CommentComments So Far: 88 (view all)
-
48%
pc254 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
you apparently missed the latest Obama fiasco........
Reply
http://www.propeller.com/story/2009/06/30/media-ig...
Media Ignore EPA Suppressing Skeptical Global Warming Report-
70%
GWHayduke4 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
A shameless link to your own submission?
Reply
Stooping pretty low, but we expect no less.
Here's how it works, pc.
Consumer behavior drives economic activity, particularly demand.
Those consumers with an inkling of responsibility for something other than themselves, want to be environmental stewards.
Consumer behavior is changing.
Greenhouse gas reducing technology can actually SAVE consumers money and generate new jobs.
The old manufacturing economy is dead and cannot be revived.
The future in the US is technology and service.
Participate or be diminished - not by your government, but by the global economy. -
-
0%
Tangent0014 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
This 'suppressed report' is pure bunk:
Reply
http://www.grist.org/article/2009-06-24-scant-evid...
-
-
82%
NoWayMan4 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
and once again, the naysayers are at least a step behind the arguement.
Reply
they keep trying to tell us its not happening, or that it has nothing to do with humans, but right or wrong (um, they're wrong) all that is moot at this point.
cause we're already moving on it. things are already happening.
the arguement now is about what to do, not if we should or shouldn't do anything at all.
like cap and trade for instance. that idea deserves and demands a real discussion, and there are many on both sides of the aisle who support this flawed system.
so naysayers, time to catch up with the rest of us. collectively, we're already well beyond what you're trying (and failing) to convince us of. its time for you guys to stop trying to tell us the world is flat (cause it ain't) and time to start dealing with the fact that the world is round.-
40%
tadair9194 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"Warming Trend: PDO and Solar Correlate Better Than CO2" by Joe D’Aleo, Consulting Meteorologist (2008)
Reply
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2008/01/25/warming-tren...
-
-
50%
tadair9194 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
the idea that co2 causes global warming is a causal idea that was promulgated by the so-called intellectual class. public opinion has adopted this idea based on the "hockey-stick" which shows a huge disproportionate spike in earth temperature in relationship to a rise in co2. but we are very bad at determining causal relationships.
Reply
we've all seen the headline that reads "red-wine drinkers live longer," yes? and haven't we all thought to ourselves, "gee, maybe drinking red wine once a day will make me live longer, too?" But this line of reasoning neglects the fact that red-wine drinkers typically fall into a certain socio-economic status. of which, charts show tha people who live in this lifestyle are happier, and happier people live longer. Could this have nothing to do with red wine? Naw, that's too complicated...
But that is precisely the problem. It is our constant drive for a 30-second sound byte that allows us to falsely believe in causal relationships that do not exist. Once we have accepted the idea by the intellectuals, then we will accept anything that fits into this paradigm, and reject anything that does not.
Chart after chart after chart clearly shows that warming *proceeds* c02, not the other way around. but time, and time again, the scientists who also rely on established belief systems will do whatever necessary to justify the fallacy as the egg coming before the chicken.
so it is. public opinion is adopted purely by the intellectual class who don't see the irony of accusing the "detractors" of "denial," coming right out of the mouths of the enslaved deniers who detract from the real science of it.
READ: c02 follows changes in temperature, *not* the other way around.
wrap your head around it here: http://icecap.us/images/uploads/CO2,Temperaturesan... -
47%
tadair9194 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"A full 900,000 years of ice core temperature records and carbon dioxide content records show CO2 increases **follow** increases in Earth’s temperature instead of leading them. This makes sense because the oceans are the primary source of CO2, and they hold more CO2 when cool than when warm. Warming causes the oceans to release more CO2."
Reply
--Jay Lehr, Ph.D. science director of The Heartland Institute.-
40%
BB644 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I'm not sure of Lehr, but from the reports presented years ago by the Natural History Museum of London, they claimed that a huge increase of CO2 caused the Ice Ages. High CO2 was found at the same times as the fast freezes. I still think this is cyclical with the movements and health of our sun. I still haven't found enough evidence explaining the Global Warming claims. The science doesn't support this. Ice cores can be helpful but they're not explaining the full picture. That plus if we're having real warming, the samples have been corrupt. That plus there are glaciers increasing in the Southern Hemisphere so again, I question their validity.
Reply -
93%
Dionys4 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"The Heartland Institute."
Reply
Enough said.
"The Heartland Institute is an American libertarian/conservative free market-oriented public policy think tank based in Chicago, Illinois."
"The institute is a member organization of the Cooler Heads Coalition, "an informal and ad-hoc group focused on dispelling the myths of global warming".[4]"
"In April 2008, environmental journalist Richard Littlemore wrote that a bibliography written by Dennis Avery and posted on Heartland’s Web site, titled "500 Scientists with Documented Doubts of Man-Made Global Warming Scares,”[8] included at least 45 scientists who neither knew of their inclusion as "coauthors" of the article, nor agreed with its claims regarding global warming. "
LOOK! MORE LIES PROMULGATED BY THE HEARTLAND!
"Dozens of the scientists asked the Heartland Institute to remove their names from the list; for instance, Gregory Cutter of Old Dominion University wrote, "I have NO doubts... the recent changes in global climate ARE man-induced. I insist that you immediately remove my name from this list since I did not give you permission to put it there." Dr. Robert Whittaker, Professor of Biogeography, University of Oxford wrote "Please remove my name. What you have done is totally unethical!""
A global warming sceptic group being unethical and lying?!?!? NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
-
-
53%
BB644 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
They're quoting weather reports claiming an increase? How about the decrease we've seen over the last 10 years.
Reply
I'm still waiting for someone to explain how you can have about 120 years of semi-accurate data concerning world temperatures but then make such huge claims when the planet by your own standards is over 5 billion years old. The info you have doesn't meet your room for error. What scientific method do you use? Where is your actual work? You've drawn a conclusion with less than convincing evidence. How did you do it. I don't mean fancy computer generated pictures, movies from a failed presidential candidate searching for a purpose or some fat-a$$ed wannabee movie producer. Where is your proof that can be repeatedly confirmed as truthful?
I've asked for this but apparently this is a religion and not based on any scientific data. They'll post a bunch of fluff sites from the usual twigs & berries groups but rarely is there any convincing proof. We know the planet's weather moves in cycles. There are hot years and there are cooler years. But again, this doesn't follow any of their models. -
vmoptions-web-directoryComment removed: Hard Banned2 Replies
-
33%
4cprocess4 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Just for the hell of it one night I decided to do a little "test" myself using a little simple math. Reason being that I remember growing up in the 60's and 70's of all the hype that surrounded the "over population" of our earth. Everywhere you turned there were doomsday articles about food shortages, water shortages, power/fuel shortages, disease, and all the other scenarios that come with the "sky is falling" ideology of certain groups.
Reply
So just for the sake of argument, knowing that the world's population has at least doubled since that time I used the world's population figure of 8 billion as a starting point. Keep in mind that this is not rocket science but simple math.
If you take the world's population today and placed every man, woman and child in a 6 foot square area (36 sq. ft) I wondered how much of an area that would require?
Using simple math I figured the square foot of area in an acre and then a square mile and divided by 36. The total sum came to somewhere (give or take a few square miles) around 10,000 square miles.
Now that sounded like a whole lot to me at the time so to put things in perspective I ran a list of the square mile area of each state in the United States and one state came within a couple of hundred square miles to the exact figure. Just off the top of your head can you guess what state?
The answer is Massachusetts. Surprised? I was profoundly surprised especially when I got up and walked over to my globe knowing that this earth consists of only 25 percent land mass and looked at how small this state looked on a global perspective.
That's when I realized how naive man can actually be. To actually believe that such a small component on this great globe could have such a tremendous impact on it was simply incomprehensible let alone totally ludicrous. Try it, if you have a globe get up and take a look at how the state of Massachusetts compares to the grander scheme of things.
To take matters just a small step forward I wondered how that would compare to a county in a neighboring state and found one not that far away in North Carolina with the same area. That's one county in one state! One single county in a single state could hold the entire population of the world.
So as I read these headlines both pro and con on today's news networks and I hope you would too, is I let it remind me about how wrong we were back then and how little we have learned since then. Funny thing about all of this is it was a simple education in basic math that let me to the answer that I sought which simply was, how large of a "footprint" does man really have on this great earth that we all so much cherish.
The answer I came up with was right there before my eyes.
Not much.
In God We Trust-
80%
Dionys4 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"To actually believe that such a small component on this great globe could have such a tremendous impact on it was simply incomprehensible let alone totally ludicrous."
Reply
Maybe you should let all the fishermen and women who realize the ocean's completely overfished know that they're mistaken. Or all the people affected by toxic waste? Or all those people who are dying because of lack of potable water due to humanity's influence?
Please stop cutting and pasting your crap that is plainly intended to trick stupid people into believing that humanity doesn't have an impact on the earth.
-
-
13%
Wolfie20074 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Here's the report Obama wouldn't release.
Reply
http://www.propeller.com/story/2009/06/30/media-ig...-
Neutral
Tangent0014 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Here's a link to a story regarding the report with a slightly different 'take'.
Reply
http://www.grist.org/article/2009-06-24-scant-evid...
-
-
PetesakeComment removed: Hard Banned10 Replies
-
100%
QuailMan4 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"Chart after chart after chart clearly shows that warming *proceeds* c02, not the other way around. but time, and time again, the scientists who also rely on established belief systems will do whatever necessary to justify the fallacy as the egg coming before the chicken." For this and other, similar lag/lead questions: Read up on global warming "feedback," especially how water factors in. If read responsibly, that should answer all your questions.
Reply
4cprocess, no offense intended here, simply curious: Why do you end your posts with "In God We Trust?" It does seem an odd choice, given the phrase's past.-
100%
jakesguile4 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Some people here posit that they are of the morally righteous and quote God-related things or Bible verses while not technically being "Christians," in the true sense of the word. They believe in God and Jesus, but they don't follow Jesus' teachings of peace and love. These are not true Christians you see, they are morally vacant, like the creepy chick in S. Darko
Reply -
Neutral
4cprocess4 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
No offense taken. Just wish others here would be more tolerant of those who choose to believe in God and trust me, they know who they are.
Reply
Not sure what you are referring to about the phrase's past but I use the phrase to acknowledge my belief with others that putting our trust (which I believe is a sacred thing) in God will surely lead us and keep us on the right course for a greater life and brotherhood among men.
Hope this answer was sufficient.
In God We Trust
-
-
14%
lloydm654 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
So now we have a new global warming report.When the old one didn't convince anyone to write the government,and insist they wanted their taxes raised expediently they change it to climate control,but now we're going with global warming Two.
Reply -
-
100%
antibrainwasher4 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Correct Mr S. As Paul krugman pointed out, the denyers are traitors to humanity. I've been on this right wing sponsered time warner blog long enouth to recognize the tenicles of the Coal industry, BB64 and Simon Sez are both deniers paid by Coal and petroleum industry to spew misinformation and charlatan science.
Reply
These con deniers are indeed traitors, their self intrest and greed trump any thought for the well being of their own children. All they can see or hear or think about is greed.
The only principle behind the rethug parth of cons is to make the rich richer, and there is no better example of reality deniers like the flat earth lockstepping cons that would murder generations of children, choking the planet in a cloud of burned fossil fuel, just to line their pockets. -
-
-
-
100%
Progressive4 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
A picture is worth a thousand words.
Reply
http://www.caglecartoons.com/images/preview/%7B612... -
83%
pokydoke4 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I really don't understand global warming deniers. If we react to global warming and reduce pollutants and green house gases and we're wrong, well the worst we've done is clean up things. If on the other hand we do nothing because we believe these deniers with their flimsy rational and we find out they were wrong,well then we are dead and dieing. Doesn't take a genius to figure out which way to go. Even Klarissa and BB64 should be able to see that.
Reply-
Neutral
Klarissa4 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
poky - you are incorrect in thinking that people who think that we don't know enough to take drastic action do not believe in being caretakers of the earth.
Reply
Please get out of the black/white mode of thinking.
We in California have a lot of rural areas - and some of the drinking water has been poisoned by MTB.
that is what happens when the so called "cure", based on incomplete information, is worse that the original problem.
Just perhaps we are more concerned about doing the VERY BEST thing than you are, because it sounds as if you think that we know enough about the cause of climate change to do dumb things like some scientists have suggested.
For one - floating a bunch of tinfoil in the air to reflect the sun.
Or bringing back smog - which reflected the sun. -
Neutral
ameliog4 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
That's a reasonable approach to the issue pokyduke. This has been posted on propeller quite awhile ago but it discusses the options and risks to each position, along the lines of what you mentioned.
Reply
The Most Terrifying Video You'll Ever See
-
More News
Download Squad
Windows 7 already bigger than Snow Leopard and Linux combined
You spend more time on MSN Messenger than ANYTHING else
Mozilla Jetpack contest winner harnesses GPU power to process data
Fugly Friday : Aiseikai Hospital has no opthamologist on staff
Balloons: launch a balloon from your iPhone, see who finds it
Science Daily
Hubble Image Showcases Star Birth In M83, The Southern Pinwheel
Raising 'Good' Cholesterol Levels May Benefit Clogged Arteries
Nothing But Net: The Physics Of Basketball Free Throws
'Optical Biopsy' For Breast Cancer Increasingly Accurate, Research Finds
Precuneus Region Of Human And Monkey Brain Is Divided Into Four Distinct Regions
Submit a Story
Advertisement
Add a Comment
Sign In With Your Propeller Account
Please keep your comments relevant to this story.
To create a live link, simply type the URL (including http://) or email address and we will make it a live link for you. You can put up to 3 URLs in your comments. Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted — no need to use <p> or <br /> tags.