IPCC Report Nov 2014
Act Now on Climate Change
Biggest news you missed this weekend USA TODAY - 49 minutes ago Top scientists blame humans for climate change. Warning of "irreversible and dangerous impacts," some of the world's top scientists Sunday released the most comprehensive assessment of climate change ever done ...
UN panel warns opportunity to stop climate change fading fast Sydney Morning Herald - 52 minutes ago Copenhagen: The world must stop almost all greenhouse gas emissions through a phased elimination of fossil fuels by 2100 if we are to avoid the worst impacts of climate change, a new United Nations report says ...
Act now on climate change, says new IPCC report The Hindu - 23 minutes ago Chairperson of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) R.K. Pachauri on Sunday said the window of action on tackling climate change was closing rapidly and warned that the path of inaction would be more costly than the path of action.
IPCC report warns greenhouse gas levels at highest point in 800000 years ABC Online - 42 minutes ago The world's top scientists have given their clearest warning yet of the severe and irreversible impacts of climate change.
The United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has released its synthesis report, a summary Atlanta Journal Constitution - 1 hour ago If the timetable for exactly when countries need to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions has always seemed a little vague to you, well, we just got a deadline — 2100. That's according to a new report by the United Nations' Intergovernmental Panel ...
'Time is not on our side': UN panel issues stark climate change warning CTV News - 1 hour ago COPENHAGEN, Denmark -- Climate change is happening, it's almost entirely man's fault and limiting its impacts may require reducing greenhouse gas emissions to zero this century, the UN's panel on climate science said Sunday. The fourth and final volume ... U.N. panel: Invest now or face 'irreversible' effects of climate change wtvr.com - 32 minutes ago
The cost of fighting climate change will only climb if industrialized nations don't take steps to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, the United Nations' panel on the matter warned Sunday in its wrap-up report
IPCC: Window rapidly closing on least-cost cuts to greenhouse gases Christian Science Monitor - 2 hours ago Warming, especially since the 1950s, “is unequivocal,” the IPCC report reiterates, adding that it's “extremely likely” that greenhouse-gas emissions from burning fossil fuel and from land-use changes have been the dominant cause of warming since the '50s.
UN Panel Reaffirms That Climate Change Is “Irreversible” USA NEWS - 10 minutes ago The U.N. panel charged with a five-year mission to assess global climate alter and supply a essential course of action in order to stem its unfavorable effects lastly released a Synthesis Report detailing their findings in stark black-and-white ...
IPCC: Cut emissions to zero by 2100 to avoid worst impact of climate change Irish Times - 1 hour ago The IPCC report says options available to cut emissions, include using energy more efficiently, switching to renewable energy sources and investing in large-scale afforestation. Topics: News • Environment • John Kerry ...
Fossil Fuel 'Budgets' Suggested to Curb Climate Change Bloomberg - 2 hours ago In fixing a limit for the amount of fossil fuels that can be burned if the world is to hold back climate change, a panel of scientists gathered by the UN set out with mathematical precision the choice facing policymakers. The findings in a United Nations report ...
UN Climate Change Report Offers Stark Warnings on Global Warming Wall Street Journal - 2 hours ago U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon comments on the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's report during a news conference in Copenhagen on Sunday. Reuters. Associated Press. Nov. 2, 2014 11:35 a.m. ET. 47 COMMENTS.
Climate Change: The Effects Of Global Warming Broken Down By Continent International Business Times - 46 minutes ago Women walk through a coastal ghost forest believed to be caused by sea level rise on Assateague Island in Virginia. Reuters. A report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, IPCC, paints a dire picture for the future if climate change goes ...
Climate Change Dangers Are 'Higher Than Ever': UN Report NBCNews.com - 2 hours ago Pollution and climate change due to human influence is “clear,” and the observed effects are “unprecedented,” according to a report released Sunday by a United Nations panel. The 116-page report is the fifth since 1990 prepared by the Intergovernmental ...
UN: End Greenhouse Emissions By 2100 Or Risk 'Irreversible' Damage KPBS - 1 hour ago Manuel Pulgar-Vidal, Peru's Minister of Environment, U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Chairman Rajendra Pachauri and Renate Christ, Secretary of the IPCC present the Synthesis Report during a ...
Fossil fuels 'must be phased out by 2100': UN report warns ... Daily Mail - 1 hour ago The use of fossil fuels must be phased out by the end of the century, UN scientists have warned despite growing concerns over energy supplies. The UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change issued stark predictions that continued greenhouse gas ...
IPCC climate change report : main points Irish Times - 2 hours ago U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon during a news conference on the IPCC report. Photograph: Niels Ahlmann Olesen/Scanpix Denmark/Reuters. Frank McDonald. Topics: News • Environment • Un; More Topics. Sun, Nov 2, 2014, 13:53. First published: Sun ...
UN: Climate Change Fight Affordable Voice of America - 2 hours ago COPENHAGEN — Governments can keep climate change in check at manageable costs but will have to cut greenhouse gas emissions to zero by 2100 to limit risks of irreversible damage, a U.N. report said on Sunday. The 40-page synthesis, summing up ... Sanders calls on GOP to respect climate science BURLINGTON, Vt. - Senator Bernie Sanders says it's time for Republicans to respect the views of the scientific community when it comes to climate change. Sanders' call comes as the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Sunday released its final report ...
IPCC says Politicians must rise to safeguard our world from climate change The Westside Story - 1 hour ago According to a new climate change report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), politicians have been advised by climate experts to take up the challenge to protect our world from climate change by making policies that ensure that gas ...
UN climate report offers warnings, but also hope TODAY online - 1 hour ago COPENHAGEN — Climate change is happening, it is almost entirely man's fault and limiting its impact may require reducing greenhouse gas emissions to zero this century, the United Nations' panel on climate science said yesterday. The fourth and final ...
The U.N. Just Released Its Final Report on Climate Change — and It's Terrifying TakePart - 11 minutes ago Science has spoken: Fossil fuels should be phased out by the end of the century. The United Nation's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change on Sunday released the final installment of its four-part assessment published over the past 13 months ...
UN climate report underscores necessity of swift carbon cuts Al Jazeera America - 2 hours ago Climate change is happening, it's almost entirely man's fault and limiting its impacts will require reducing greenhouse gas emissions to zero this century, the United Nation's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) said in a report published ...
End fossil fuels by 2100 - the dramatic 'final warning' on climate change The Independent - 3 hours ago Time is running out if the world wants to avoid potentially catastrophic climate change, according to the most definitive report to date by the UN body charged with formulating expert advice for governments around the globe. In what amounts to a “final warning” ...
UN Climate Change Panel Issues Bleak Global Warming Report The Inquisitr - 7 minutes ago The UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change issued a bleak report on Sunday, describing a myriad of global warming threats in the starkest of terms. The global warming report painted what could be described as an apocalyptic vision of the coming ...
IPPC report - Fossil fuels should be 'phased out by 2100' BBC News - 3 hours ago The unrestricted use of fossil fuels should be phased out by 2100, if the world is to avoid dangerous climate change, a UN-backed expert panel says. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's Synthesis Report summarises the causes, impacts of ...
UN Climate Change panel calls for phasing out fossil fuels The Hindu - 3 hours ago Chairperson of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) R. K. Pachauri on Sunday launching the Panel's Synthesis Report in Copenhagen, said, “There is no room for complacency.” He suggested that India's National action plan on climate ...
Hunt says coal power can be cleaned up Sky News Australia - 33 minutes ago Environment Minister Greg Hunt believes Australia does not have to give up its coal habit completely despite dire warnings from United Nations climate experts. In the crowning summary of a landmark review, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change ...
Unrestricted use of fossil fuels must end to avoid dangerous climate change Saudi Gazette - 31 minutes ago COPENHAGEN — The unrestricted use of fossil fuels must end soon if the world is to avoid dangerous climate change, the UN-backed Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) revealed ...
COMMENTS
(representative sampling in response to USA Today article)
Terry Wisdom · Top Commenter · Golden High School The UN is involved, so we all know it's illegitimate. Reply · Like · 99 · Follow Post · 16 hours ago
Steve Downie · Top Commenter · NARA National Archives at NARA National Achives Just as expected and right on cue Mark. Missing is your "it is all the white mans fault" hate text, Reply · Like · 84 · 15 hours ago Travis Turner · Top Commenter · University of Oklahoma Mark Wilson Has anything ever happened in the history of time that you cannot blame on Fox News? And you claim that everyone else is brainwashed. Amusing. Reply · Like · 69 · 15 hours ago Bill Johnson · Top Commenter · Purdue/Univ. of Chicago And loonie-tunes Mark Wilson believes in it. 'Nuff said. Reply · Like · 25 · 14 hours ago Larry Gilbert · Top Commenter Mark, you do understand that over half of corporations are run by Rich libbers. Reply · Like · 25 · 14 hours ago Mike Smith · Top Commenter · Owner at North Central Flooring Solutions Larry Gilbert That post was WAY too lucid to be the real Mark Wilson. There must be 2 of em. Reply · Like · 10 · 14 hours ago Jake Settell · Top Commenter · Southeast Community College Mark Wilson whatever your point was, I didn't read it. as soon as I see a fox news reference, some obama word play, or a hitler analogy, I move on to another commentary that isn't trite, unoriginal, and simplistic. stop being a slave to the bipartisan system of us vs. them. Reply · Like · 18 · 14 hours ago Steve Chalk · Top Commenter · Yorktown, Indiana You can kill the messenger all you want, but you can't discredit the message. Yes: it's tough sacrificing some short-term comfort (and profits) for longer-term environmental sustainability, but we are stewards for future generations. I'd hate to know how those folks judge us (yes, yes: we'll all be dead by then) if a bunch of anti-government conspiracy theorists continue to obstruct needed change. Reply · Like · 21 · 13 hours ago John James · Top Commenter · Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania Mark Wilson ..suddenly, you are worried about our Grandkids after Obama has put $8 TRILLION of debt on them??????? Reply · Like · 24 · 13 hours ago John James · Top Commenter · Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania Steve Chalk ..spoken like a true Marxist. Take your speech to China! Reply · Like · 9 · 13 hours ago David Desser · Top Commenter Mark Wilson 12,000 years ago, mile high glaciers covered most states, including Ohio and Michigan. Warming caused them to recede, creating the Great Lakes. Now all of the sudden some people want to say the last 50 years of warming is solely man caused. What about the previous tend line that is 11,950 years long? Reply · Like · 13 · 13 hours ago John Schmidt · Top Commenter · White Lake, Michigan Mark Wilson the same corporations that "don't create jobs?" Those corporations?! Reply · Like · 16 · 13 hours ago Cesar Figueroa · Top Commenter · Los Angeles, California The administrations response is cap n trade, because there's billions of dollars that they get their hands on, this is the only reason, follow the money trail and you'll find a bunch of fat liberal cats feeding, just as they scare everyone over race accusations, war on women, there never is a solution, only attacks at an emotional level, just look at the bank accounts of all these individuals fighting for a better planet, the truth hurts. Reply · Like · 15 · 13 hours ago Bill Halstead · Top Commenter · UT-Austin Terry Wisdom: You're so ignorant, your horse should be riding you... Reply · Like · 2 · 13 hours ago Marc Compton · Top Commenter · Lakeland High School and 75% of republifools think evolution is junk science, Reply · Like · 12 · 13 hours ago John Schmidt · Top Commenter · White Lake, Michigan David Desser I saw on Discovery or such, that some "scientists" used a hollow drill digging down into some glacier. The tube of ice they pulled out supposedly revealed the cycles of freeze/thaw over some extensive period of time. This supposedly revealed that the current thaw period has happened upon us faster than all previous cycles over the thousands of years represented by a tube of ice.
In other words, do these "scientists" referenced in Liberal media mention the fact that freeze/thaw cycles naturally occur, or does Liberal Media intentionally leave out this fact in order to trick the sheeples into believing it's "95% certain" global warming has never occurred before, thus it can only be the fault of man?
I say it's 100% certain that Liberal Media is leaving out any mention of freeze/thaw cycles to fool the sheeples. Reply · Like · 6 · 13 hours ago Rusty Shackleford · Follow · Top Commenter · La Porte, Texas Marc Compton Blatantly false. And you know it. Reply · Like · 8 · 12 hours ago Jim Sibley · Top Commenter · DSU Mark, you will find the cost to you and us will be much higher, maybe even our Freedom, and yes, climate change is real, as it has always been, and our superior brains will never materially change that scenario. Reply · Like · 6 · 12 hours ago Joe Lucido · Top Commenter Mark Wilson Yea, yea, yea, we have heard from all the people like you who need a religion to hold onto, and you guys conveniently leave out all the facts that have been debunked. Every time. Now I'm not saying climate change is not happening, but I find it rather curious that when something has been challenged, people like you refuse to look at it, and make an informed decision, rather than take it as gospel. Reply · Like · 5 · 12 hours ago Aaron Bowen · Top Commenter Mark Wilson --Since they're so irresponsible, please stop buying any products or services manufactured or provided by corporations. And please tell me how well the federal government would run if it could not collect tax dollars either directly from corporations or from the employees who work for corporations. Let me know how safe you feel flying on that "mom and pop" airliner, driving in your co-op produced automobile, or taking medicine mixed up by your next door neighbor, Dougie. Reply · Like · 7 · 12 hours ago Glen Erickson · Top Commenter · University of Advanced Learning Climate change. The only cause in the world where the advocates DON'T have to change their lifestyle for their cause. How many CC advocates have you seen giving up their car? I haven't seen a single one. Reply · Like · 11 · 11 hours ago Glen Erickson · Top Commenter · University of Advanced Learning Larry Gilbert "That is not true" - Mark Cuban, Bill Gates, & Tom Steyer. Reply · Like · 2 · 11 hours ago Larry Hubble · Top Commenter · Phoenix, Arizona Not buying this crap, and most Americans agree. Vote the libs out on Tuesday, and vote Conservatives in before the libs start issuing carbon taxes on everyone. Get out the Conservative vote! Reply · Like · 6 · 11 hours ago Skip Carlsen · Top Commenter · Works at Ankara, Turkey Mark Wilson Your desperation is almost palpable! Reply · Like · 4 · 11 hours ago Shodrick Shodney · Top Commenter · Chicago, Illinois Travis Turner : Sure, Mark Wilson also blames the dreaded Koch Bros. for the woes of the U.S. and world. Reply · Like · 7 · 11 hours ago Glenn Howard · Top Commenter Larry Hubble Yeah because over the last 15 years, conservatives have done such a good job !
When they arent in power, they refuse to work and when they are in power, they fck even a wet dream up.
But since they do the right amount of crying and finger pointing, the ignorant will ignore the facts. Reply · Like · 7 · 10 hours ago Terry Mayer · Top Commenter · Central Collegiate Institute Science shouldn't be a liberal versus conservative issue. I would expect those arguments about what to do about it, with liberals emphasizing a more active role for government and conservatives emphasizing the abilities of private industry to come to the rescue.
Unfortunately, primarily in the US, climate change has become a political issue to the point where the RW denies climate change despite massive evidence and the endorsement of the National Academies of Science of all major countries.
Although the GOP embraced Climate Change at one point, their leadership has chosen to follow the money rather than the science. Reply · Like · 10 · 9 hours ago Tony Mathis · Top Commenter Terry Mayer
http://www.petitionproject.org/ Reply · Like · 2 · 9 hours ago Larry Hubble · Top Commenter · Phoenix, Arizona Terry Mayer, the problem is, there is no consensus, no overwhelming proof that climate change exists, and certainly not in the magnitude that liberals everywhere try to propagate. There are just as many scientists who disagree with climate change theory as those who support it. Libs are rushing to an overwhelming response to something, that, at best, MIGHT happen or MIGHT BE happening. The truth is that there is not enough hard evidence to say for a certainty one way or another, and even at that, there is no evidence to say that the bulk of any supposed climate change is "man-made". Until there is something conclusive that everyone can agree on, there is no point in pushing theory, because people just won't buy it. Nor should they. Reply · Like · 5 · 9 hours ago Terry Mayer · Top Commenter · Central Collegiate Institute This is utter and complete BS.
The National Academies of Science from over 80 countries all agree.
The trolls and the ignorant often through the quote -- like you do -- that many scientists disagree. They aren't climate scientists. Would you put credibility in a botanist debunking astrophysics? Reply · Like · 7 · 9 hours ago Tony Mathis · Top Commenter Terry Mayer
Climate scientist who's careers, funding and future depend on just such conclusions.
Here's an idea. Let's allow only those who pay taxes to determine the appropriate level of taxation and those who pay more to have more votes on the subject. Wonder how that will turn out. Reply · Like · 2 · 9 hours ago Scott Saenz · Top Commenter Tony Mathis Do you also not believe your doctor when he gives you a diagnosis, since his career is based on those that are sick? Reply · Like · 9 · 9 hours ago Terry Mayer · Top Commenter · Central Collegiate Institute Great analogy!!!! Reply · Like · 1 · 9 hours ago Chuck Knowles · Top Commenter · East Carolina University Mark Wilson Just like "science" used to believe the Earth was flat, and the center of the Solar System too, right? Reply · Like · 1 · 9 hours ago Aaron Smith · Top Commenter · Insignificant peon at Fate's Vicissitude Tony Mathis That is the dumbest thing I have ever heard. Climatologists are lying about measurable facts because...if they don't, they will lose their job? I didn't know that if without pollution and climate change that climatologists would suddenly no longer be needed. What a SILLY statement. Reply · Like · 3 · 8 hours ago Larry Hubble · Top Commenter · Phoenix, Arizona Terry Mayer, please keep believing all this silly climate mumbo-jumbo. If we do nothing, nothing will happen, I assure, you, so stop worrying about something that has no effect on us. Like Ebola, this climate change stuff is all contained..... Reply · Like · 2 · 8 hours ago Terry Mayer · Top Commenter · Central Collegiate Institute You need to do some research outside of the RW media. Reply · Like · 3 · 8 hours ago Terry Mayer · Top Commenter · Central Collegiate Institute The "You can't believe climate scientists because they are paid" is one of the lamest arguments ever.
It would appear that you have to dedicate your life in an unpaid position for your research to be relevant. What a ludicrous proposition.
More importantly, it ignores two other very important facts:
1) The anti-climate change gets their funding from somewhere too so the same standard needs to be applied.
2) The are actually doing research and science. If you objectively look at the denial stuff, it's not based upon scientific research for the most part - it's cherry picked data or quotes out of context. I have yet to see a lot of "real science" trotted out here as part of the "proof". Most of it is pretty lame and reasonably intelligent high school student in a mediocre school could poke holes through it. Reply · Like · 4 · 8 hours ago Tony Mathis · Top Commenter Terry Mayer
"The "You can't believe climate scientists because they are paid" is one of the lamest arguments ever."
followed up by
"1) The anti-climate change gets their funding from somewhere too so the same standard needs to be applied."
Sure. And unless they get their funding from an industry directly affected by climate change politics their motives shouldn't be questioned. Reply · Like · 2 · 8 hours ago Tony Mathis · Top Commenter Scott Saenz
When my doctor diagnoses the flu as Ebola then I'll look for another doctor.
If Obamacare allows it. Reply · Like · 1 · 8 hours ago Tedd French · Top Commenter · Wright State University Halstead
Don't quit your day job...oh wait-this IS your day job. Nevermind Reply · Like · 4 · 8 hours ago Chris Lynch · Top Commenter What's funny is reading people berate others for their lack of scientific knowledge, then typing out a paragraph proving they failed every basic science class in high school.
Or, they claim "scientists" used to think the Earth was flat, therefore Science is wrong. I wonder why you would be jailed for suggestion the Sun did not revolve around the Earth? Reply · Like · 2 · 8 hours ago Tim Carroll · Top Commenter Mark Wilson science, facts and evidence from an organization that has fudged science, facts and evidence. Reply · Like · 1 · 7 hours ago Tony Mathis · Top Commenter Scott Saenz
Having thought about your post let me relay a personal experience.
When my daughters were 5 and 7 years old they both came down with a persistent respiratory illness that on several occasions landed them in the hospital in oxygen tents. Usually for 3-5 days. We moved and I lost my health insurance. A week afterward they both became sick again. I took them to the doctor fully expecting him to send them to the hospital. Dr. Weaver was an old small town doctor so I certainly didn't expect the cutting edge modern medicine. He examined my daughters wrote a prescription and gave them both a shot. They never suffered those same symptoms again.
To this day I believe that the modern high priced medical care they received before we moved was exaggerated and prolonged because we had insurance. I've talked to friends and family members in the medical field and all have affirmed the belief that either economics reasons or defensive medicine to be the reason.
Fact remains my kids for nearly 8 months suffered an on going respiratory illness that was cured by a doctor who saw no benefit in prolonging it. Save your idealized notions of human nature based on profession. Credential are meaningless where ethic are concerned. Reply · Like · Edited · 7 hours ago Glenn Howard · Top Commenter Chuck Knowles LOFL, your reference goes back several hundred years and you even get that wrong as that was a belief and science proved otherwise. Reply · Like · 2 · 7 hours ago Larry Richards · Top Commenter Glenn Howard The problem is some in science believe a statistical correlation is scientific proof and that is not true.
Statisticians tells us a correlation is not proof of causation. Reply · Like · 6 hours ago Joshua Williams · Top Commenter · Boston, Massachusetts Ironically, most of those who are denying the scientists claim are many of the same ones who'll attempt to guise their bigotry on other posts by using the Bible or religious beliefs to defend their ignorance. Would be funny if it weren't so pathetically tragic. Reply · Like · 2 · Edited · 6 hours ago Glenn Howard · Top Commenter Larry Richards Actually I would disagree. Why? The scientific method Reply · Like · 6 hours ago Larry Gilbert · Top Commenter Terry Mayer, the science is very weak....hard to support predictions which change all the time. Reply · Like · 1 · 5 hours ago Jim Lawrence · Follow · Top Commenter · Pawleys Island, South Carolina Hubble, you're on a different thread quoting and interpreting scripture contained within a religion for which "there is no consensus, no overwhelming proof that it exists". Reply · Like · 5 hours ago Walt Knoch · Top Commenter Mark Wilson Ovomits debt will crush our kids long before the earth becomes inhabitable. Reply · Like · 4 hours ago Glenn Howard · Top Commenter Walt Knoch You mean the out of control debt that Bush started ?
Admins for decades to come are going to have to deal with Bush's FU. Reply · Like · 2 · 4 hours ago James D. Coke · Friends University Mark Wilson With all due respect, sir, you are a dupe and a sucker, not to mention highly ignorant. The random forces of nature have produced countless monumental changes in climate over many millions of years, long before humans existed. The earth has been completely covered with ice a number of times throughout its history, and may become completely covered with ice again in the next 10,000 years. We humans have virtually nothing to due with earth's climate. Reply · Like · 4 hours ago Walt Knoch · Top Commenter Glenn Howard FU too kid. It's this fucn Communist bankrupting us. Reply · Like · 4 hours ago Glenn Howard · Top Commenter Walt Knoch how typical. Reply · Like · 1 · 4 hours ago Larry Richards · Top Commenter Glenn Howard Both parties are guilty. Most of Bush things were all bipartisan.The current admin has done nothing to help. Reply · Like · 1 · Edited · 4 hours ago George W. Carlisle Jr. · Top Commenter · University of Missouri–St. Louis WANT TO COMPLETE THE DESTRUCTION OF EARTH? Then send more Tea Party Republicans to Congress.
For a few extra pennies of profits for their millionaire and billionaire friends, they will gladly destroy the only planet that we know of, which will support human life.
Persons who will vote to send additional Tea Party Republicans to Congress, must be some special kind of stupid - mustn't they? Reply · Like · 2 hours ago James D. Coke · Friends University Mark Wilson Not to be rude Mark, but you don't seem to make much sense. The "planet" has survived many more cataclysmic, radical changes over millions of years than anything happening now. Do you know that the earth has been completely covered with ice a number of times over hundreds of millions of years, and at other times during those millions of years earth was warmer than it is now, even though humans didn't exist at that time. Reply · Like · 2 hours ago Terry Mayer · Top Commenter · Central Collegiate Institute I don't think that it's a question of whether the planet will survive or not -- it certainly will -- it's a matter of the economic, social and political effects that are the issue.
The costs are projected to be high by all studies, with some areas/countries affected more than others. If you are a western country and your country offers disaster relief as the US does, then you as a taxpayer are going to contribute big time if the projections are correct.
Here's one opinion: The net present value of the federal government’s liability for unfunded disaster assistance over the next 75 years could be greater than the net present value of the unfunded liability for the Social Security program http://www.ceres.org/resources/reports/inaction-on-climate-change-the-cost-to-taxpayers/view Reply · Like · Edited · 2 hours ago Lafayette Wonderer · Top Commenter · Long time ago Glenn Howard "ignorant and ignore the facts." That describe you perfectly. ROFLMAO Reply · Like · 1 · about an hour ago Lafayette Wonderer · Top Commenter · Long time ago George W. Carlisle Jr. - You shouldn't vote. Reply · Like · 1 · about an hour ago Larry Richards · Top Commenter Terry Mayer Some estimates of all unfunded liabilities of the US government are around 75 trillion. I expect to see the US go broke long before the world is under water. Reply · Like · about an hour ago
Greg Dinunzio · Top Commenter · SUNY Oneonta as a kid in the 1950s I used to look at a nearby smokestack and wonder where all that 'crap' was going...I now know. Reply · Like · 32 · Follow Post · 16 hours ago
Bill Johnson · Top Commenter · Purdue/Univ. of Chicago What you saw were mostly particulates which floated back to earth. The rest was mainly water vapor and CO2, the same as what YOU were exhaling. I guess you haven't gotten very far in 60 years. Reply · Like · 47 · 14 hours ago Larry Gilbert · Top Commenter Greg....that crap was not CO2.. It was a combination of particulates and other noxious gases....most of which have been reduced dramatically by scrubbers and electrostatic precipitators to meet epa requirements...thanks to Nixon for creating the epa. Reply · Like · 21 · 14 hours ago James Regier · Top Commenter Bill Johnson I would have to therefore assume that the uninformed , ignorant comment you just made means your not a teaching professional at this prestigious college ? Or is this the opinion of the janitor ? Reply · Like · 13 · 13 hours ago
View 18 more Walt Knoch · Top Commenter Guess we need to get rid of some people huh? Lets start w/ these scientists. Reply · Like · 31 · Follow Post · 16 hours ago
Cynthia Quen · Top Commenter We can't continue to pollute with impunity, expecting no repercussions. If we pollute, we can expect the earth to be damaged. We can expect that the weather will be affected, that entire species will die off, that ecosystems will suffer. It's not rocket science; it's simple logic. If I shatter a glass, it is broken and it is my fault. Same thing. If we use natural resources wastefully, if we cause pollution, we can expect that nature will suffer. Simple. Look Walt, we don't need to "get rid of" scientists, we need to listen to them. Don't tell me CO2 is ok, naturally occurring. No. "82% of greenhouse gas emissions comes from human activities. The main human activity that emits CO2 is the combustion of fossil fuels (coal, natural gas, and oil) for energy and transportation, although certain industrial processes and land-use changes also emit CO2." http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/ghgemissions/gases/co2.html. Reply · Like · 28 · Edited · 14 hours ago Larry Gilbert · Top Commenter Cynthia, pollution is bad...but is the gas we exhale, CO2, really a pollutant? My covers is that with all the focus on CO2 there is not enough global attention on truly dangerous pollutants. Reply · Like · 12 · 14 hours ago Chance Burton · Follow · Top Commenter · Sam Houston State University We have 300 M people, the world has 6 Billion plus, we can't do it alone, so stop blaming someone, just do your part, and promote Natural Gas, it is the cleanest fossil fuel we have, and if you like all the other cleaner ideas. Reply · Like · 6 · 14 hours ago
View 29 more Michael Barrett · Top Commenter Plenty of scientists say climate change is a bunch of lies - like Joe Biscardi the most accurate weatherman. Those scientists poushing this view in this article are simply looking for more government handouts for their junk science studies. Reply · Like · 58 · Follow Post · 16 hours ago
Dick Wilson · Top Commenter · San Diego, California Google doesn't know Joe Biscardi, weatherman, at least in the first several pages it doesn't. It knows the Facebook page of some guy from New York named Joe Biscardi though. Perhaps you have a link? I have a link. It's from NASA Goddard Space Center and it shows a graph of the land-ocean Instrumental global surface temperature record from 1880-2000. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instrumental_temperature_record#mediaviewer/File:Global_Temperature_Anomaly.svg
The 10 warmest years in the 134-year record have all occurred since 1998, with 2010 and 2005 ranking as the warmest years on record. Since 665,000 years ago carbon dioxide levels have never been above 300 ppm. with a mean avg. of approx. 240 ppm. Today it is about 400 ppm. The heat-trapping nature of carbon dioxide and other gases was first explained by Svante Arrhenius. H... See More Reply · Like · 22 · Edited · 14 hours ago Larry Gilbert · Top Commenter Dick, the warmest periods in the past several thousand years were the Roman period and Middle Ages, not the 19th or 20th certuries. Reply · Like · 16 · 14 hours ago John James · Top Commenter · Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania Dick Wilson ..warmest from what base temperature? Reply · Like · 5 · 14 hours ago
View 34 more Dennis Buckley · Top Commenter · Groton High School, Groton, MA Climate Change is inevitable...History has proven that....Did humans cause the "little ice age" in the 12th and 13th century?....Our existence and use of fossil fuels have certainly damaged the atmosphere...We have attributed to the acceleration of Global Warming...but to say we caused it is absurd.... Reply · Like · 19 · Follow Post · 16 hours ago
Dennis Buckley · Top Commenter · Groton High School, Groton, MA Interesting how for years they called it Global Warming, and then when they couldn't prove the Earth was warming, they changed it to "climate change"....lol Reply · Like · 34 · 16 hours ago Larry Gilbert · Top Commenter Dennis, warming of the earth, regardless of causative factors, has enabled more crop production to feed a growing population. We need more warming and a way to stop or delay another ice age which would kill billions. Reply · Like · 9 · 14 hours ago Marc Compton · Top Commenter · Lakeland High School did your high school diploma tell you that or rush"s high school diploma?LOL Reply · Like · 5 · 13 hours ago
View 14 more Carl Nordhielm · Top Commenter · Works at Saddle Up Saloon & Dancehall Pollution is certainly a bad thing and whatever we due to curb it is positive. On the other hand, man has overestimated their own importance from the time when 'top scientists' declared that the earth was the center of the universe. Nature has a way of surprising our 'experts' and accommodating our missteps. Remember when the experts declared the permanent and devastating impacts of the Exxon/Valdiez and BP debacles? There is a place in our priority list for trying to reduce our negative impact, but I agree with many of the posts that these scientists have an economic motive for keeping us the drama. Any money directed to real life threatening issues like Ebola and radical Islam and even rampant unemployment takes away from the scientists career progress. Reply · Like · 15 · Follow Post · 16 hours ago
Dan Jelson · Top Commenter · Works at Rational Hub Bad timing on the release of this one. It's snowing west of Boston today! Reply · Like · 5 · 10 hours ago Tony Mathis · Top Commenter In other news. The KKK today announced all the worlds problems are caused by blacks. Reply · Like · 6 · 10 hours ago Sam Taylor · Top Commenter · Mississippi State University Carl, nobody ever sad the effects of the Exxon Valdex spill would be permanent. Permanent is a long time. However, you can still find damage in the gulf of Alaska if you look close enough. Some types of fish and animals still haven't come back. Reply · Like · 1 · 9 hours ago
Chuck Beishl · Top Commenter · Temple University What Scientists? What Science? The facts are they cherry pick data that supports there theories and use computers to create fairy tales that support there stands. Statistics is not Science, and statistics can be skewed to support any point you want to make. Reply · Like · 36 · Follow Post · 16 hours ago
John James · Top Commenter · Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania True, when their "models" can accurately predict the temperature, they can come back and discuss their theories with us. Reply · Like · 7 · 14 hours ago Steve Chalk · Top Commenter · Yorktown, Indiana The science is ubiquitous, Chuck. You can pretend it's not there, but genuine scientists don't cherry-pick data, and they're not inventing the reality of anthropomorphic climate change. The only ones cherry-picking are internet-driven conspiracy theorists who have a vested interest in maintaining the status quo--at the significant detriment of their descendants. Reply · Like · 15 · 13 hours ago Larry Gilbert · Top Commenter Steve, the data ARd cherry picked. Example ...the rate of sea level increase in the past 10-20 years is identical to the rate of increase from 1930-1950, despite HUGE differences in CO2 emissions. Yet this comparison is ignored by so called experts. The data ARE being misused to drive a self serving agenda. Go back and look at ALL expert climate predictions from 10 years ago...they are ALL off by 80-90%. About as accurate as weather forecasting. Reply · Like · 15 · 13 hours ago
View 9 more Ron Dirkse · Top Commenter FOX will do its usual ranting and raving Reply · Like · 12 · Follow Post · 16 hours ago
Zak Kogut · Top Commenter · Pittsford (town), New York Like all the idiots above you on here. Reply · Like · 16 · 16 hours ago Andrew Pearson · Top Commenter Very interesting how obsessed you guys are with Fox.... In the real world it's called stalking and harassment. Now run along to MSNBC, who clearly isn't skewed towards the views of the Liberal Left. Hypocrisy much? Reply · Like · 35 · 14 hours ago Zak Kogut · Top Commenter · Pittsford (town), New York Andrew Pearson I'm obsessed with how quickly the idiot Republican masses will follow satire news like Faux News over a cliff. Reply · Like · 18 · 14 hours ago
View 19 more Preston Lenze · Top Commenter · Manager at Continental Airlines/United Airlines I will leave it up to you to imagine why our politicians are demanding control of the planet’s resources, control of how we use our property, and increasing demands of our money.
Just be glad that they no longer demand that we throw virgins into volcanoes. Although it might not hurt to throw liberals into volcanoes. Reply · Like · 26 · Follow Post · 15 hours ago
Steve Chalk · Top Commenter · Yorktown, Indiana Of course: this is all a liberal conspiracy to take away your "freedoms." Never mind the actual science on anthropomorphic climate change, which is overwhelming and settled. You just hold tight to your pocketbook, and don't worry about the needs of future generations on this Earth. Reply · Like · 7 · 13 hours ago Chuck Yanus · Top Commenter · University of Colorado Boulder Steve Chalk - I love how liberal arguments and evidence are always touted as "overwhelming" or "indisputable" or some other terms to indicate that their side is obviously right. Such words are the bastions of people whose arguments cannot take hold with rationale, thinking people. Reply · Like · 14 · 13 hours ago Lesley Black · Top Commenter Preston, exactly how many "liberal virgins" do you think there are? Lol Reply · Like · 7 · 13 hours ago
View 20 more Chance Burton · Follow · Top Commenter · Sam Houston State University We know that because we are the only ones here, So what are each of you willing to do to help, like cool less, heat less, drive less, stop taking airplane trips, Or will you look around to find someone else to blame like most do Reply · Like · 3 · Follow Post · 15 hours ago
Chance Burton · Follow · Top Commenter · Sam Houston State University God put all the fuels on earth for us to use, we started with the easiest and dirtiest, coal and wood, then oil , it.is time we promote Natural gas , we have plenty and it is cheap Reply · Like · 5 · 15 hours ago Robert Phallan · Top Commenter · Building Maintenance at Government Contractor I wouldn't say politicians flatulence comes at a cheap price...... Wait, you're talking about natural gas under the ground aren't you? My bad. Reply · Like · 2 · 14 hours ago Mike Smith · Top Commenter · Owner at North Central Flooring Solutions Robert Phallan Now there's a study we should fund, a flatulence comparison between cows and politicians. Of course, cows are useful...... Reply · Like · 6 · 14 hours ago
Eric Schuh · Top Commenter God also gave us the means to improve technology. Maybe that is his true path. God gave us polio should we not have created a vaccine against it? Reply · Like · 1 · Edited · 12 hours ago Tj Mikkelson · Follow · Top Commenter How about we all go back and live like like they did 300 years ago, would that make the environmentalists happy, no cars, tv, phones, computers, or electricity. At least we wouldn't have to listen to all the whiners anymore. So let's get rid of all Technologies we take for granted nowadays and go back to the simpler days. Reply · Like · 3 · 10 hours ago Eric Schuh · Top Commenter Tj Mikkelson Why do you have to jump to extremes. Can't we wean ourselves off of fossil fuels? It will run out eventually. Put money into research so we are ready. Reply · Like · 1 · 9 hours ago Tj Mikkelson · Follow · Top Commenter How much money has been spent on research so far? That's the reason nobody trusts the climatologists, they know the more fear they create, the more money they get. Reply · Like · 1 · 5 hours ago Bill Halstead · Top Commenter · UT-Austin Chance Burton: Simpleton... Reply · Like · 2 hours ago
Dave Maddog Osojnicki · Top Commenter How could seven billion people possibly have any effect on the earths climate? Scientists deal in facts. Politicians deal in lies. Only a complete moron would believe a lobbyist funded politician. Reply · Like · 7 · Follow Post · 15 hours ago
Larry Richards · Top Commenter I agree most politicians deal in lies, but even scientists sometimes confuse statistics with science and do not realize correlation does not imply causation. Reply · Like · 3 · 13 hours ago George W. Carlisle Jr. · Top Commenter · University of Missouri–St. Louis WANT TO COMPLETE THE DESTRUCTION OF EARTH? Then send more Tea Party Republicans to Congress.
For a few extra pennies of profits for their millionaire and billionaire friends, they will gladly destroy the only planet that we know of, which will support human life.
Persons who will vote to send additional Tea Party Republicans to Congress, must be some special kind of stupid - mustn't they? Reply · Like · 1 · 2 hours ago Larry Richards · Top Commenter George W. Carlisle Jr. This article has nothing to do with Tea party.
I know thats all you know, Reply · Like · about an hour ago
Ted Nolan · Top Commenter · Stanford University Top leftist scientists blame humans for climate change. Reply · Like · 7 · Follow Post · 15 hours ago
LyRad Fles · Top Commenter It's ok to call them Marxist scientist. Reply · Like · 13 hours ago George W. Carlisle Jr. · Top Commenter · University of Missouri–St. Louis Ted Nolan - What if climate change (global warming) is partially caused by something other than humans.
If we could do something that might extend the current atmosphere for another million years or so, would we want to do that "something"?
Then why don't we "get busy"! Reply · Like · about an hour ago
Ted Nolan · Top Commenter · Stanford University I live in the south and had 8 inches of global warming fall onto my house Halloween night. If global warming can be caused by mankind, then let's crank it up. Reply · Like · 10 · Follow Post · 15 hours ago
Steve Chalk · Top Commenter · Yorktown, Indiana Of course you deliberately and fundamentally misunderstand the nature of climate change, which is characterized by greater and greater weather anomalies and extremes. Warming at the poles is pushing the polar vortex lower, causing the kind of phenomena you describe. But why opt for nuance when we can have simple-minded derision and dismissal? Reply · Like · 5 · 13 hours ago Mac Baird · Top Commenter · Senior Recruiter at Expert Search Group http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BB0aFPXr4n4 Reply · Like · 3 hours ago James D. Coke · Friends University Steve Chalk The last I've heard, the amount of ice on both poles has increased significantly. Reply · Like · 2 hours ago
View 1 more Ted Nolan · Top Commenter · Stanford University It's difficult to find the names of people in this UN group, but Emma Lindberg is a well known Swedish leftist and socialist. Without the global warming fraud, most of these groups (with thousands of highly paid employees) would have no funding and its members, unemployed at real jobs. Of course, they'll do anything to keep up the fraud. Reply · Like · 12 · Follow Post · 15 hours ago
Steve Chalk · Top Commenter · Yorktown, Indiana Global warming fraud? Right: everything is a leftist conspiracy theory, and thus can "safely" be ignored. While Rome burns. I suspect Stanford University is capable of far more rigorous thinking than the mass ad hominem attacks characterizing your posts. Reply · Like · 4 · 13 hours ago Chuck Yanus · Top Commenter · University of Colorado Boulder Steve Chalk - and everything you disagree with is a right-wing conspiracy., to be thrown in the waste bin. This somehow makes you morally superior? Reply · Like · 3 · 13 hours ago Glen Erickson · Top Commenter · University of Advanced Learning Steve Chalk Let me know when you give up your cars and replace them with non-polluting bicycles. Reply · Like · 6 · 11 hours ago
View 1 more Thomas Cotney · McMurry University And if the real underlying cause is over-population, why don't they just call it over-population change. Reply · Like · 1 · Follow Post · 15 hours ago
Brian Leve · Top Commenter Not this shlt again. Reply · Like · 5 · Follow Post · 15 hours ago
Scott Hardy · Top Commenter · Works at Self-Employed You bet ... and we're going to keep on pushing it until you understand it. Unfortunately, most Americans won't get the message until their homes are under water. Reply · Like · 6 · 13 hours ago LyRad Fles · Top Commenter Scott Hardy What are you talking about? Houses under water? Where? In your mind? NA just has one of the coldest years on record, wild fires are down, drought is down (except California), tornado's down, Hurricanes are down, and you still believe Al Gore? Reply · Like · 6 · 13 hours ago Scott Hardy · Top Commenter · Works at Self-Employed LyRad Fles Yes, houses under water. On coasts. Al Gore is buffoon. I believe my fellow scientists. North America is not the globe. Indeed, it was nippy here, but globally September 2014 was the hottest September in the historical record. Reply · Like · 6 · 13 hours ago
View 11 more Grant Price · Follow · Top Commenter · Driver at FedEx Ground The Easter bunny wrote this Reply · Like · 4 · Follow Post · 14 hours ago
Mac Baird · Top Commenter · Senior Recruiter at Expert Search Group http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BB0aFPXr4n4 Reply · Like · 3 hours ago
Aaron King · East Carolina University And all along I thought that global warming was caused by the heat of the sun. I was unaware that CO2 had the capacity to warm anything. Now if you told me that the sun has cycles in which it emits more or less heat energy I could grasp that logic and believe it.
But not CO2.
I refuse to believe science that was written by people that have a direct financial interest in the results. Or science that used intimidation to silence critics of the report. The end result and hope will be a carbon tax for Americans.... not a reduction of carbon. The end result will be the redistribution of funds from "wealthy" countries to poor ones. (Since America is bankrupt….maybe we can keep our money to put our own fiscal house in order before we start contributing to the Dictators fund of Africa and South America. ) Reply · Like · 9 · Follow Post · 14 hours ago
Terry Mayer · Top Commenter · Central Collegiate Institute Actually if you want to do your research, this was hypothesized in the 19th century.
It's also known as the greenhouse effect. The sun's radiation hits the earth and a portion of it is reflected back into space. C02 absorbs the infrared heat.
This was proven in the 1950s and is the basis of the science. If you want to disprove the science, this is where you start.
Here's a good primer http://www.skepticalscience.com/empirical-evidence-for-co2-enhanced-greenhouse-effect.htm Reply · Like · 4 · 12 hours ago Aaron King · East Carolina University Terry Mayer The greenhouse effect and global warming are nothing without the solar cycles.
CO2 by itself does not create heat. If it is proven that the sun's energy does fluctuate over time it must be considered as a source of the "problem". Since it was left out, intentionally, then you must debunk the conclusions of the "finding". Reply · Like · 6 · 12 hours ago Tony Mathis · Top Commenter Terry Mayer
The single largest greenhouse gas is water vapor. BY A HUGE MARGIN! What do you propose we do about clouds? Reply · Like · 1 · 9 hours ago
View 1 more Larry Gilbert · Top Commenter Ocean levels are 400 feet higher than the ice age minimum 25000 years ago and 6 ft lower than the max in the past 150000 years. We are in a normal range....why do we think we can keep sea levels exactly where they are forever? Also, total ice levels in the combined artic and antarctic have gone up substantially in the past several years....people will debate land vs sea ice...but overall ice coverage is rising. This year is an ElNino year and history shows the planet always warms with this event....followed by several years of cooling. So in a few years we will know if climatologists are just overreacting to a normal cycle to drive their agenda, or not. Reply · Like · 6 · Follow Post · 14 hours ago
Terry Mayer · Top Commenter · Central Collegiate Institute You're a joke with comments like Total ice levels have gone up over the last several years. There is year to year variation -- and the deniers or the clinically stupid always do the comparison directly or indirectly to the record low in the Arctic in 2012.
In fact, the ice level loss in Antarctica is measurable now by gravity.
http://www.esa.int/Our_Activities/Observing_the_Earth/GOCE/GOCE_reveals_gravity_dip_from_ice_loss Reply · Like · 6 · 12 hours ago Tony Mathis · Top Commenter Terry Mayer
There are ways to combat climate change without the draconian measures that liberals espouse. Why do they chose such slash and burn policies? Never miss an opportunity to create a crisis and never let a crisis go to waste.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cloud_reflectivity_modification http://reveal.uky.edu/algae_part1_howitworks http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iron_fertilization http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_power
Why must coal miners lose their jobs, third world poor die from lack of cheap energy, the middle class see their standard of living destroyed and the people see their freedoms curtailed when these options are available?
Because these options don't enrich and empower politicians who have vested themselves on the ground floor of expensive so-called green energy.
http://www.forbes.com/fdc/welcome_mjx.shtml http://www.biggreenradicals.com/sierra-club-partners-with-solar-company-for-kickbacks/ http://www.carolinajournal.com/articles/display_story.html?id=11434 Reply · Like · 8 hours ago
Stephen Ard · Top Commenter just for arguments sake say I agree,
Tomorrow ,the United States could go to complete reliability on nuclear, wind and solar power, make everyone walk to work, shut down all pig and bovine farms and at the end of the day if China, India and Africa are not forced to do the same thing then there is no point. Reply · Like · 8 · Follow Post · 14 hours ago
Jerry Suttles · Top Commenter · Kennett, Missouri You are correct,it will take hundreds of years of a world wide effort to reduce the green house gasses and in the mean time Wall St.and 1/2 of Florida will be under water. Reply · Like · 1 · 12 hours ago Glen Erickson · Top Commenter · University of Advanced Learning Every bit helps. So there is NO reason why advocates can't change their lifestyle tomorrow. Or course selfishness creeps in and they decide they won't give up their car, their TV, their computers and furnaces. Reply · Like · 7 · 11 hours ago Mac Baird · Top Commenter · Senior Recruiter at Expert Search Group Jerry Suttles http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BB0aFPXr4n4 Reply · Like · 3 hours ago
Bill Johnson · Top Commenter · Purdue/Univ. of Chicago "some of the world's top scientists" Are these some of BarryO's advisors? They've done a bang-up job on our economy, let's turn them loose on the world. Studies have shown that most of these "top scientists" are nutritionists or worse. When the top scientists at MIT reach a consensus that man-made global warming is a farce, I listen. Reply · Like · 5 · Follow Post · 14 hours ago
Terry Mayer · Top Commenter · Central Collegiate Institute Idiotically wrong.
The National Academies of Science of all the major nations issued a joint statement in 2005 that begins with the sentence
CLIMATE CHANGE IS REAL
http://www.google.ca/url?sa=t&rct=j&q&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CB0QFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fnationalacademies.org%2Fonpi%2F06072005.pdf&ei=Az1WVNWFL8eYyAT3lYBw&usg=AFQjCNE5ghRuabMvKwbr6bc55x7tJdBI5A Reply · Like · 6 · 12 hours ago Glen Erickson · Top Commenter · University of Advanced Learning Terry Mayer So what have you done to help solve the problem, Terry? I see you still use computers. Reply · Like · 4 · 11 hours ago
Donald Vetter · Top Commenter · Locally Duh! Was someone blaming animals? Reply · Like · Follow Post · 14 hours ago
Mike Smith · Top Commenter · Owner at North Central Flooring Solutions Obama has a new plan for the environment, and the USA has the propaganda. Just like the CDC nurse, Hickox, fighting against quarantines, all well coordinated to influence the low info voters. Reply · Like · 2 · Follow Post · 14 hours ago
Karl Lukis · Top Commenter just imagine the good that could be done if every registered democrat stopped using anything to do with oil, coal, etc etc. Reply · Like · 7 · Follow Post · 14 hours ago
David Swain · Top Commenter · Chesapeake, Virginia Very cleverly worded bias: "The Earth is headed toward its hottest year ever recorded, along with its highest level of atmospheric carbon dioxide in at least 800,000 years."
The "recorded" temperatures only cover 150 years or so, yet they are mentioned in the same sentence as CO2 levels over 800,000 years. Hilarious.
According to the scientists who study the ice ages and ancient geology, we have had much warmer periods than today in the past 800,000 years - despite the fact that CO2 levels were lower.
Could human-produced CO2 have contributed to the temperature rise of the 20th century? Yes, probably so. But no one has any convincing evidence that it is a catastrophe. Reply · Like · 5 · Follow Post · 14 hours ago
Scott Hardy · Top Commenter · Works at Self-Employed CO2 and temperature track quite closely 90% of geological time. Reply · Like · 5 · 14 hours ago John James · Top Commenter · Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania Scott Hardy ..Google Dr Arthur Robinson and Carbon Dioxide. He disagrees with you. http://www.oism.org/pproject/s33p36.htm Reply · Like · 2 · Edited · 14 hours ago Scott Hardy · Top Commenter · Works at Self-Employed John James The geological record agrees with me. Reply · Like · 3 · 13 hours ago
View 15 more James Regier · Top Commenter Want a real laugh ? I went over to FAUX NEWS TO SEE SOME OF THE COMMENTS ON THIS SUBJECT , AND IT SAID THAT THE COMMENTS ON THIS ARTICLE WERE CURRENTLY CLOSED . Fair and Balanced ...LMAO Reply · Like · Follow Post · 14 hours ago
Glen Erickson · Top Commenter · University of Advanced Learning Not too late to stop being a hypocrite, James. Will you post my beliefs on your FB account? Reply · Like · 3 · 11 hours ago Ellen Hayes · Top Commenter · Watertown High School James, thats because liberals were over there spewing their hate Reply · Like · 2 · 11 hours ago Johnny Rose · Top Commenter · Wolfe County High School James Regier --If you want to read other folk's comments on climate change, check out the Los Angeles Times. Wait, I forgot, they don't allow comments disputing global warming there. Reply · Like · 1 · 10 hours ago
View 3 more Eric Lyon · Top Commenter So just to make sure I get this right, is the Ebola outbreak due to global warming? I'm still trying to convince my manager it's to blame for my sagging sales numbers Reply · Like · 3 · Follow Post · 14 hours ago
John Smith · Top Commenter · Reno, Nevada no Reply · Like · 12 hours ago
Jerry Wasunyk · Top Commenter Please read, "Review of Global Warming" by Dr Paul Drallos and then form your conclusion about glpbal warming.. Sun spot activity and a plethora of factor contribute to rhe cllimate. Global warming caused by humans is bunk to create a global tax on energy consumption. Reply · Like · 5 · Follow Post · 14 hours ago
Dwayne Landry · Top Commenter · Alpharetta, Georgia This is a politically driven fraud to take money from companies and people. Do mot buy into in. Reply · Like · 5 · Follow Post · 14 hours ago
John James · Top Commenter · Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania Another hypothesis put forward by the INCREASED TAXATION and WEALTH REDISTRIBUTION crowd.
Fine, they can have their opinions if they like, just keep your hands out of our wallets!!!! Go preach to the Chinese, Indians and others who have no pollution laws.....we (USA) are not going to LOSE MORE JOBS over the UN!!! Reply · Like · 3 · Follow Post · 13 hours ago
Lesley Black · Top Commenter As someone that studies an area of science myself I have to say there are no absolutes. Nature is always changing. Once you think you have and absolute fact, it will get proven wrong.
If there were absolutes then all diseases would be known and eradicated. Man's best efforts to effect nature have failed. If man was capable of changing nature then believe me we'd have succeeded at killing off all the mosquitos and cockroaches by now, we would have harnessed lightning for energy and kept the world from having wildfires.Lol we certainly have tried.
We are like a few fleas on the back of an elephant, we can annoy the elephant but cannot be arrogant enough to think we can do much else. Reply · Like · 2 · Follow Post · 13 hours ago
Matthew Prout · Pinconning, Michigan Yep.. now all they need to do is get together to see how much they need to tax us for this so called problem to be solved! Reply · Like · 3 · Follow Post · 13 hours ago
Terry Mayer · Top Commenter · Central Collegiate Institute You are lulled by the false premise that doing nothing costs nothing and doing something has a huge cost.
The startling reality: •America's taxpayers paid three times what private insurers paid out to cover losses from extreme weather. •The federal government spent more taxpayer money on the consequences of 2012 extreme weather than on education or transportation. http://www.nrdc.org/globalwarming/taxpayer-climate-costs.asp
The net present value of the federal government’s liability for unfunded disaster assistance over the next 75 years could be greater than the net present value of the unfunded liability for the Social Security program http://www.ceres.org/resources/reports/inaction-on-climate-change-the-cost-to-taxpayers/view
According to the report's findings the total climate change cost in South Asia will increase over time and will be prohibitively high in the long term. Without global deviation from a fossil-fuel-intensive path, South Asia could lose an equivalent 1.8% of its annual gross domestic product (GDP) by 2050, which will progressively increase to 8.8% by 2100
http://www.adb.org/publications/assessing-costs-climate-change-and-adaptation-south-asia Reply · Like · 5 · 13 hours ago Steve Hankins · Top Commenter · Works at Training Support Center San Diego And carbon taxes will correct all of this... Reply · Like · 3 · 12 hours ago Terry Mayer · Top Commenter · Central Collegiate Institute Absolutely not. What carbon taxes will do is spur innovation and conservation efforts -- and also help if it's directed towards things like carbon sequestration.
There are many more common sense things that can and should be done too. Unfortunately none of the common sense things seem to be progressing, so if you are intent on changing the outcomes, only drastic measures like carbon taxes are left on the table. It's like ignoring a medical issue until something like amputation becomes the only alternative. Reply · Like · 2 · 12 hours ago
View 7 more Gregory Wiseman · Top Commenter I am not qualified in climate science to dispute these findings so I hope this report is simply an overreaction to a normal statistical deviation in temperature over the course of earth's existence. However, I'm not a big fan of hope as a plan. I see no harm in at least taking steps to reduce emissions.
Based on a lot of comments, it would take your house being a pile of ashes before you would admit that it might be on fire. Reply · Like · 4 · Follow Post · 13 hours ago
Ron William · Top Commenter How do we know the climate isn't in a cycle it was thousands of years ago? We don't. Another media driven crisis. Reply · Like · 5 · Follow Post · 13 hours ago
Terry Mayer · Top Commenter · Central Collegiate Institute Many reasons. Because the natural factors that influence the cycles are known and their effects can be measured. We know where we are in the Milankovitch cycle for instance -- and it's in the neutral area heading towards colder. We know the sun's output -- it runs in cycles -- and it has been decreasing suggesting that we should be getting colder, not warmer.
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn24512-solar-activity-heads-for-lowest-low-in-four-centuries.html#.VFY1GI0tDIU
Not all the C02 is the same either -- and the ratio of C02 isotopes also is very telling
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2004/12/how-do-we-know-that-recent-cosub2sub-increases-are-due-to-human-activities-updated/
There's lots of evidence, all the way from absurdly technical to anecdotal. Unfortunately many let their political perspectives rather than the science dictate their views. Reply · Like · 3 · 13 hours ago
Dave Phillips · Top Commenter · Wake Forest, North Carolina The cause of climate change while interesting and useful information has little to do with what should be done.The real question is do we want it to happen and if not what do we do about it.Many unpleasant and undesirable things occur that aren't "man -made" but (floods,forest fires,shark attacks....) that doesn't mean we don't do anything prevent them or lessen their impact.Pretending they aren't happening has never made any of them go away though. Reply · Like · 2 · Follow Post · 13 hours ago
John Schmidt · Top Commenter · White Lake, Michigan "95% certainty," great, now my employer will no longer require me to drive 85 miles per day back and forth to work, and allow me work from home. I mean, "science" is NEVER wrong, right? Reply · Like · 1 · Follow Post · Edited · 13 hours ago
Larry Gilbert · Top Commenter Can anyone explain why ALL expert climate projections from just a decade ago are off by at least 80%? Seems long range climate predictions are about as reliable as predicting the weather. How many climate change advocates would invest their money with Vegas bookies based on current climate forecasts.... Reply · Like · 3 · Follow Post · 13 hours ago
Terry Mayer · Top Commenter · Central Collegiate Institute How many times have I pointed out that you make statements like this without any supporting documentation? This is required in a discussion of scientific issues. Just saying it doesn't make it so. The source of these "facts" is just as important.
I can only think of one reason why you don't do this. Reply · Like · 5 · 13 hours ago
Richard DellaValle · Top Commenter · Cornell University Just like religious zealots, these freaks never give up. They don't realize they have cried wolf far too many times. Why don't they all just give the government all their money and go to Africa somewhere and just drink laced kool-aid? That should solve the problem. Reply · Like · 3 · Follow Post · 13 hours ago
Dave Melges · Follow · Top Commenter · Owner at Dave Melges Fine Art Photographer · 1,653 followers I really don't have a problem with the tiny minority who so loudly claim that the scientists are wrong.
Most of us know that that tiny minority, for whatever weird, personal reasons, are determined to ignore the evidence. They're not stupid so much as just in denial.
What I DO have a problem with, is knowing that those deniers and their children and their grandchildren will be getting equal portions of the dwindling resources.
If you REALLY want to push your agenda of "it's just made up," I really think you should put your future money where your mouth is, and sign something that says:
"And if I'm wrong, let me and my family be the first to go without."
I'd be genuinely curious how many people would sign away their children's future out of sheer stubborness. Reply · Like · 5 · Follow Post · 13 hours ago
Jack Herron · Top Commenter So, using less words, agree with us or we wont allow you to have or use any resources.
So much for tolerance from the left.
Or, perhaps we could sign you up to be the very first person to live a 100% green lifestyle, using absolutely no nonrenewable resources.
What a hypocrite..... Reply · Like · 2 · 10 hours ago
Eric Toth · Top Commenter · Wayne State University Every major scientific organization on earth says the same thing, so of course the cult of conservative idiots demands that we do nothing.
Yet 2 cases of Ebola hit our shores and they demand we take swift and expensive action that won't affect the situation in the slightest.
Why are conservatives so stupidly militant against reality? Reply · Like · 2 · Follow Post · 13 hours ago
John James · Top Commenter · Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania Why do you ask, you seem to know everything. Reply · Like · 5 hours ago
David Desser · Top Commenter 12,000 years ago, mile high glaciers covered most states, including Ohio and Michigan. Warming caused them to recede, creating the Great Lakes. Now all of the sudden some people want to say the last 50 years of warming is solely man caused. What about the previous tend line that is 11,950 years long? Reply · Like · 3 · Follow Post · 13 hours ago
Jerry Wasunyk · Top Commenter Climate "changes" are the result of a multitude of causes. Please take time to read Dr. Paul Drallos article on Global Warming and then make a rational decisiion on man's impact on it. You will be suprised on what amount we contribute to it.....very minimal if any at all. If the UN is involved, they are fishiing for the support of a global energy tax on consumption of energy. Reply · Like · 3 · Follow Post · 13 hours ago
Thomas Carper · Top Commenter China is now the earth's worst offender. Every time you buy something made in China you support their role in pollution and climate change. That said, any moron that doesn't believe in climate change is just that- - a moron. Reply · Like · Follow Post · 13 hours ago
Dan Tompsett · Top Commenter · Kimberly, Idaho There's no point in arguing with the deniers. The not-too-distant generations will come to know of them as the foolish, the greedy, the liars, but unfortunately it won't benefit anyone except maybe some future politicians. Reply · Like · 1 · Follow Post · 13 hours ago
Fred Lander · Top Commenter · Works at Nielsen Media Research More hysteria from the left wing wackos. First of all nobody can tell the future(except left wing fortune tellers) and secondly just of many top scientists if not more call this absolutely ridiculous. Leftists lie so easily that they actually believe their lies. Ignore them is the best advice you can give the normal public! Reply · Like · 5 · Follow Post · 13 hours ago
David Patterson · Follow · Top Commenter · Sanford, Florida this human being blames the scientists for creating globalist banking sponsored through the UN climate change. Reply · Like · 1 · Follow Post · 13 hours ago
Ken Szymanski · Top Commenter · Walsh College of Accountancy and Business James regier, the option of a janitor is regarded higher then yours. Reply · Like · Follow Post · 13 hours ago
James Regier · Top Commenter My option ?? Did you mean OPINION ??? Did you mean than , instead of then ??? Wow , you really are sharp .... Reply · Like · 1 · 9 hours ago
Jefferson Thomas · Top Commenter · Works at WhiteWater West Industries Ltd. Believers in this just park your car for good, ride a bicycle, pull the plug on utilities and leave the rest of us alone. Reply · Like · 2 · Follow Post · 13 hours ago
John Monteiro · Top Commenter · Owner at Self-Employed Not many governments have moved swiftly and aggressively against climate change. This C/C news has been out for a long time but those with the power (oil) to reverse it, have played politics, because of their "bottom lines". We haven't seen anything yet. The churches around the world will be filled, everyday with worshippers praying for relief, but relief won't come. It will seem like a science fiction movie, but your (not me) going to be living it. I have known for a long time that The Master has given us life, light and immortality. Reply · Like · Follow Post · 13 hours ago
George Mizzell · Top Commenter · University of Alabama at Birmingham Remember the only ones allowed to attend these meetings are those who AGREE with each other. Those with alternative scientific arguments are excluded.
Of course after you eliminate the worst of the environmental contributors - volcanoes and lava flows under the pacific ocean and then forest fires, I guess we could be next on the list. I guess these people cry every night that they did not live in the times of the ice ages. Since there is 6 or 7 times as many people on the planet now as there were 200 years ago you would think that has a big impact too. Next thing they will be recommending is exterminating everyone but themselves so they can live in utopia:) Reply · Like · 1 · Follow Post · 13 hours ago
Terry Mayer · Top Commenter · Central Collegiate Institute Volcanoes are only a minor contributor to global warming -- their main effect is global cooling
Our studies show that globally, volcanoes on land and under the sea release a total of about 200 million tonnes of CO2 annually. ..... the global fossil fuel CO2 emissions for 2003 tipped the scales at 26.8 billion tonnes. Thus, not only does volcanic CO2 not dwarf that of human activity, it actually comprises less than 1 percent of that value.
http://hvo.wr.usgs.gov/volcanowatch/archive/2007/07_02_15.html Reply · Like · 1 · 12 hours ago
Ken Szymanski · Top Commenter · Walsh College of Accountancy and Business Steve chalk, science is never settled. Things change all the time. Only an idiot would claim science is ever settled. Reply · Like · 2 · Follow Post · 13 hours ago
Bob Wilke · Top Commenter · Dubai, United Arab Emirates SOME of the "Top Scientists"... Just how do you define who is a "Top Scientist". WE are experiencing the earliest snowfalls and lowest temperatures in decades.
If Liberals are concerned about man-made CO2, they should hold their breath until they stop breathing. Reply · Like · 3 · Follow Post · 13 hours ago
Terry Mayer · Top Commenter · Central Collegiate Institute Here's are a cartoon that seems appropriate for you
http://macleodcartoons.blogspot.ca/2014/01/polar-vortex-and-climate-change.html
You might want to look up the terms GLOBAL and AVERAGE Reply · Like · 1 · 12 hours ago Mark Smith · Top Commenter Terry Mayer I think its time for you to run down to the beach and argue with the tide about coming in. You've got that at 10. Your 10:30 is with the wind. Make sure and tell it not to blow. At 11 you have the trees to tell them not to drop their leaves. Lol I would get on here and try but you do it better. It's the exact same people on here every time. You know nothing you could say will make a dent and still you try. I guess if can put some doubt in one head it would be worth it. The deniers have been thoroughly brainwashed. Reply · Like · 1 · 12 hours ago John James · Top Commenter · Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania Mark Smith ..say anything you like. Just try getting a tax increase passed after Jan. You are dinosaurs. Reply · Like · 1 · 5 hours ago
View 3 more George Mizzell · Top Commenter · University of Alabama at Birmingham I guess they had to dig hard to find that photo. Since the 60s the only smoke stacks that looked like that in the US were either on start up or had just had a mechanical problem. Opacity limits kept a lot of units with load limits if they did not fix it right away. Reply · Like · 1 · Follow Post · 13 hours ago
James Regier · Top Commenter Again , an uninformed idiot who apparently did not read the story . It says that the picture is from Germany . What bearing would or does that have on the context of this anyway ??? Reply · Like · 9 hours ago Tony Mathis · Top Commenter James Regier
Relax! I'm sure none of this will affect your grant status. With any luck you'll be out of a job after the midterms anyway. Reply · Like · 3 hours ago
Steve Evets · Top Commenter "Those who choose to ignore or dispute the science so clearly laid out in this report do so at great risk for all of us and for our kids and grandkids,"
The counter argument is: As long as there is a buck to be made or a tax dollar saved, screw human caused climate change and let our kids and grandkids take care of themselves. After all, it is a YOYO world--You're On Your Own. Reply · Like · Follow Post · 13 hours ago
Tony Mathis · Top Commenter http://www.petitionproject.org/ Reply · Like · 3 hours ago
Bob Wilke · Top Commenter · Dubai, United Arab Emirates OK, let the Liberals and Climate Change propagandists make a major dent in the problem. Don't eat beef, don't buy commercial food, don't drive, don't use electricity, don't fly and don't breathe. That should help. Reply · Like · 4 · Follow Post · 13 hours ago
James Regier · Top Commenter How is it going to begin to be changed when people like you are never going to accept the truth until it is to late . I personally hope they are wrong , because if they are right and we do not start taking steps to seriously curb this trend and move towards green , sustainable energy , then our grandchildren are going to inherit a very bad situation . Reply · Like · 9 hours ago Tony Mathis · Top Commenter James Regier
How's those green stocks doing? I'm guessing not good considering the hysteria in your post. Reply · Like · 3 hours ago
CaptainBuzz Nichols · Top Commenter · Saint Augustine, Florida John Kerry doesn't know squat about the environment let alone how to do his job. He is an Obama puppet. Reply · Like · 4 · Follow Post · 13 hours ago
William Craig · United States Naval Academy Why did the founder of the weather channel say this was all bull, that man was not responsible? Reply · Like · 1 · Follow Post · 12 hours ago
Terry Mayer · Top Commenter · Central Collegiate Institute Why would you care what a weatherman says about science over actual climate scientists? Reply · Like · 1 · 12 hours ago William Craig · United States Naval Academy Terry Mayer The founder of Greenpeace says the same thing. It seems like there is a lot of money to be made by shouting "Global Warming". It just makes me suspicious. Reply · Like · 3 · 11 hours ago Darlene Zavalney · San Pedro, California The Weather Channel agrees with the scientist: http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2014/10/the-weather-channels-climate-change-john-coleman/382176/ The founder of the Weather Channel may be working on trying to land a job on Fox News, where the interests of big business always takes priority over factual information. Reply · Like · 7 hours ago
View 1 more Steve Janeway · Top Commenter · Parachute, Colorado Wallow in your corporate ignorance.
Global warming CAN"T be real. Why, because it hinders our worship of the dollar. We corporate people know more about the earth than you highly educated scientists, so F*k off. Reply · Like · Follow Post · 12 hours ago
Randy Short · Follow · Top Commenter · Saddleback my 10 year old is doing a school paper on climate change. He asked me how there was an Ice age 125,000 years ago if there were no humans to cause it. ( True Story).
Maybe some of these scientist can explain it. from what I understand the real story is the hundreds that wouldn`t go to the conference because climate CHANGE has been debunked. Follow the money. Health care Democrats, Climate Change Democrats. Gota spread the wealth around. Reply · Like · 4 · Follow Post · Edited · 12 hours ago
Terry Mayer · Top Commenter · Central Collegiate Institute Did you tell him about the Milankovitch cycles? or the effects of volcanoes? Or explain the natural rhythms of the earth's climate and how the current one is an anomaly? Reply · Like · 1 · 12 hours ago Steve Janeway · Top Commenter · Parachute, Colorado Terry Mayer Did he tell him ??? Highly doubtful, he is raising a dutiful little Republican. Reply · Like · 12 hours ago Randy Short · Follow · Top Commenter · Saddleback Read the black print not the one you imagine Terry mayer and steve Janeway Reply · Like · 2 hours ago
View 3 more John Hupp · Jefferson-Morgan Jr. Sr. High School True VERIFIED science states that during the history of the Earth there have been at least four different and distinct ice ages. Which means that the globe has warmed and cooled at least 4 separate occasions. AND most if not all of these occurred before mans arrival on the planet. Therefore, GLOBAL WARMING IS A NATURALLY OCCURING WEATHER CYLCE! Is it occuring now? Possibly. Is it man made? Definitely not. Reply · Like · 5 · Follow Post · 12 hours ago
Terry Mayer · Top Commenter · Central Collegiate Institute There are many natural factors which affect warming and cooling. Just add man.
An analogy would be you know that the sun heats up black objects so therefore an oven can't
Scientists are so sure that it is manmade BECAUSE the natural factors that have caused the other ice ages/warmings have been identified, quantified and eliminated. Reply · Like · 3 · 12 hours ago