and many a search on Kyoto will reveal the costs and that these were accepted as reasonable during the negotiation process. They were known and accepted despite the recognition that Kyoto would do very little to slow global warming.
Now, you have quite a lot of questions to answer from the previous post no?
Chris: Gosh… sarcasm… I assume that if you think that we should continue to spend money to achieve nothing that we can all recognize that spending to give you a college education was a similar exercise in futility?
The average temperature last month was 77.6 degrees — 3.3 degrees above the average 20th-century temperature, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration reported on Wednesday. … A hot July also contributed to the warmest 12-month period ever recorded in the United States, the statistics showed.
A prominent NASA scientist, James E. Hansen, reported in a journal article published on Monday that recent extremes of hot weather have been so pronounced that scientists can say with near-certainty that events like the Russian heat wave of 2010 or the Texas heat wave of 2011 would not have happened unless global warming was under way.
I swear visiting Forumosa is a lot like going to a movie theater and instead of the movie ever starting you just get a big dose of FOX news and it won’t end unless you leave.
Why do these wacky conservatives promote their whackadoodle talking points HERE of all places? This entire thread is based on an article published by a conservative think tank that hires fake scientists to write fake skepticism over issues that real scientists are no longer in serious debate over. Funded by billionaires and proudly declaring its agenda is to promote a counter point to actual scientists, the Heartland Institute does such classy things as host events with the likes of the Koch brothers’ sleazy lapdog, Scott Walker, governor of Wisconsin. None of this has anything to do with real science or real world problems… it has to do with big money putting doubt in people’s minds about science and preventing concerned humans from restricting corporations from regulations to keep the world cleaner and kinder.
And here we are on a web forum board for ex-pats living in Taiwan who come from countries all around the world, finding out that FOX news is on… even here.
[quote=“adguy”]I swear visiting Forumosa is a lot like going to a movie theater and instead of the movie ever starting you just get a big dose of FOX news and it won’t end unless you leave.
Why do these wacky conservatives promote their whackadoodle talking points HERE of all places? This entire thread is based on an article published by a conservative think tank that hires fake scientists to write fake skepticism over issues that real scientists are no longer in serious debate over. Funded by billionaires and proudly declaring its agenda is to promote a counter point to actual scientists, the Heartland Institute does such classy things as host events with the likes of the Koch brothers’ sleazy lapdog, Scott Walker, governor of Wisconsin. None of this has anything to do with real science or real world problems… it has to do with big money putting doubt in people’s minds about science and preventing concerned humans from restricting corporations from regulations to keep the world cleaner and kinder.
And here we are on a web forum board for ex-pats living in Taiwan who come from countries all around the world, finding out that FOX news is on… even here.[/quote]
To be fair there are only 3-4 people like that on Fcom. And probably only 2 of them are sincere.
And just last year when North America was relatively cold, it was the exact opposite. Those who subscribe to global warming alarmist views could not wait to berate (poetry in motion )those who looked to localized weather conditions as being “only weather” and sniff “not climate.” So a year goes by, conditions are different and even more important for a group that prides itself on its scientific rigor… the standards do as well… gosh… what is one to think?
[quote=“adguy”]I swear visiting Forumosa is a lot like going to a movie theater and instead of the movie ever starting you just get a big dose of FOX news and it won’t end unless you leave.
Why do these wacky conservatives promote their whackadoodle talking points HERE of all places? This entire thread is based on an article published by a conservative think tank that hires fake scientists to write fake skepticism over issues that real scientists are no longer in serious debate over. Funded by billionaires and proudly declaring its agenda is to promote a counter point to actual scientists, the Heartland Institute does such classy things as host events with the likes of the Koch brothers’ sleazy lapdog, Scott Walker, governor of Wisconsin. None of this has anything to do with real science or real world problems… it has to do with big money putting doubt in people’s minds about science and preventing concerned humans from restricting corporations from regulations to keep the world cleaner and kinder.
And here we are on a web forum board for ex-pats living in Taiwan who come from countries all around the world, finding out that FOX news is on… even here.[/quote]
:roflmao: well said! My analysis is that nobody listens to conservatives anyway. They’re just happy to have their little circle jerk here on Forumosa. They just sit around spinning their bullshit to each other. Its not like with all their typing for all these years they changed even one buxiban teacher’s mind. I mean their batting average must be worse than the Mormons or other Christians here (no disrespect, but its very hard to convert Taiwanese). Anyway I will enjoy a little laugh when Obama buries Romney in the election. Don’t take their bait. Don’t feed the trolls. Just start your own threads with your own provocative titles. I notice they have little to say about the current electoral vote projection. I don’t know which is better news, the Obama landslide, or the fact that it shut them up for a while.
That doesn’t link to the article you quoted. It’s just a home page of a group called the Copenhagen Consensus Center. There’s no search function either.
Yes, but we’re not at a place to talk about solutions yet. One of the main components of your argument is that climate scientists don’t really agree on the reasons for global warming. Have you conceeded that the National Academy of Sciences article is accurate in stating that 97-98% of the world’s active climate researchers (defined as climate researchers with a minimum of 20 publications) agree the IPCC’s tenets, including the conclusion that most of the global warming of the last century is due to human activity? You keep dancing around this issue. Maybe I missed your answer in your lengthy, clause by clause responses. A simple yes or no would suffice.
2011 was not warm relative to the past century. It was the 9th warmest year on record, despite heavy snow events in North America and Europe. From NASA:
[quote]The global average surface temperature in 2011 was the ninth warmest since 1880, according to NASA scientists. The finding continues a trend in which nine of the 10 warmest years in the modern meteorological record have occurred since the year 2000.
NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) in New York, which monitors global surface temperatures on an ongoing basis, released an updated analysis that shows temperatures around the globe in 2011 compared to the average global temperature from the mid-20th century. The comparison shows how Earth continues to experience warmer temperatures than several decades ago. The average temperature around the globe in 2011 was 0.92 degrees F (0.51 C) warmer than the mid-20th century baseline.
“We know the planet is absorbing more energy than it is emitting,” said GISS Director James E. Hansen. “So we are continuing to see a trend toward higher temperatures. Even with the cooling effects of a strong La Niña influence and low solar activity for the past several years, 2011 was one of the 10 warmest years on record.”
The difference between 2011 and the warmest year in the GISS record (2010) is 0.22 degrees F (0.12 C). This underscores the emphasis scientists put on the long-term trend of global temperature rise. Because of the large natural variability of climate, scientists do not expect temperatures to rise consistently year after year. However, they do expect a continuing temperature rise over decades.
The first 11 years of the 21st century experienced notably higher temperatures compared to the middle and late 20th century, Hansen said. The only year from the 20th century in the top 10 warmest years on record is 1998.
[b]Higher temperatures today are largely sustained by increased atmospheric concentrations of greenhouse gases, especially carbon dioxide. These gases absorb infrared radiation emitted by Earth and release that energy into the atmosphere rather than allowing it to escape to space. As their atmospheric concentration has increased, the amount of energy “trapped” by these gases has led to higher temperatures.
The carbon dioxide level in the atmosphere was about 285 parts per million in 1880, when the GISS global temperature record begins. By 1960, the average concentration had risen to about 315 parts per million. Today it exceeds 390 parts per million and continues to rise at an accelerating pace.[/b]
The temperature analysis produced at GISS is compiled from weather data from more than 1,000 meteorological stations around the world, satellite observations of sea surface temperature and Antarctic research station measurements. A publicly available computer program is used to calculate the difference between surface temperature in a given month and the average temperature for the same place during 1951 to 1980. This three-decade period functions as a baseline for the analysis.
The resulting temperature record is very close to analyses by the Met Office Hadley Centre in the United Kingdom and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s National Climatic Data Center in Asheville, N.C.
Hansen said he expects record-breaking global average temperature in the next two to three years because solar activity is on the upswing and the next El Niño will increase tropical Pacific temperatures. The warmest years on record were 2005 and 2010, in a virtual tie.
“It’s always dangerous to make predictions about El Niño, but it’s safe to say we’ll see one in the next three years,” Hansen said. “It won’t take a very strong El Niño to push temperatures above 2010.”[/quote]
So much laughing about Republicans… why it almost reminds me of the many years that the US has spent under Republican presidents. Oh Reagan… what an idiot… oh George HW Bush… what a wimp… Oh George W… what a gunslinging cowboy fool… oh Romney… are we back to wimp again? really?
True the Republicans often laugh at Democrats for being out-of-touch elitists in Hollywood. Wait. Isn’t that what Republicans are being attacked for here?
Then, of course there is the whole religious fervor thing. Republicans beaten up for believing in God and acting upon their beliefs, which is so RIDICULOUS especially when we look at the Democrat and liberal shibboleths of more government is better always better and the whole Communism thing which no one ever mentions anymore now that we have grown into the global warming alarmism phase… The redistibution remains the same though.
So all these great Democrat and socialist and liberal and leftist ideas and one bankrupt inefficient, uncompetitive system after another. Greece? Much of Europe? California? Illinois? Detroit? New Orleans? the former Washington DC? and all this after Thatcher took a good whack at the system and spurred its competitiveness and all this after Communism and the Soviet and Maoist models FAILED EVERYWHERE. And the UN aid and assistance (remember Oil for Food?) and Third Worldist NeoColonialist redistributive efforts ALL FAILED? and yet, despite all these failures, we have a board full of laughter about the Republicans?!! especially from some here who used to bewail all sorts of evil failings in George W only to fall silent when Obama not only maintained his programs but went so much further? No… Laughter is not called for here. Sickening wrenching vomits of disgust and contempt and disbelief generated by too much irrational “motion.”
[quote=“fred smith”]So much laughing about Republicans… why it almost reminds me of the many years that the US has spent under Republican presidents. Oh Reagan… what an idiot… oh George HW Bush… what a wimp… Oh George W… what a gunslinging cowboy fool… oh Romney… are we back to wimp again? really?
True the Republicans often laugh at Democrats for being out-of-touch elitists in Hollywood. Wait. Isn’t that what Republicans are being attacked for here?
Then, of course there is the whole religious fervor thing. Republicans beaten up for believing in God and acting upon their beliefs, which is so RIDICULOUS especially when we look at the Democrat and liberal shibboleths of more government is better always better and the whole Communism thing which no one ever mentions anymore now that we have grown into the global warming alarmism phase… The redistibution remains the same though.
So all these great Democrat and socialist and liberal and leftist ideas and one bankrupt inefficient, uncompetitive system after another. Greece? Much of Europe? California? Illinois? Detroit? New Orleans? the former Washington DC? and all this after Thatcher took a good whack at the system and spurred its competitiveness and all this after Communism and the Soviet and Maoist models FAILED EVERYWHERE. And the UN aid and assistance (remember Oil for Food?) and Third Worldist NeoColonialist redistributive efforts ALL FAILED? and yet, despite all these failures, we have a board full of laughter about the Republicans?!! especially from some here who used to bewail all sorts of evil failings in George W only to fall silent when Obama not only maintained his programs but went so much further? No… Laughter is not called for here. Sickening wrenching vomits of disgust and contempt and disbelief generated by too much irrational “motion.”[/quote]
Ha! You have completely forgotten about social democracy. You have no intellectual credibility!
[quote=“fred smith”]…and the whole Communism thing which no one ever mentions anymore now…
…all this after Communism and the Soviet and Maoist models FAILED EVERYWHERE. [/quote]
Why do you go on and on about communism? When right-wingers use the C word (as well as the word “socialism”), they look like comic book characters to us liberals. (And we pretty much only use these words when we’re making mocking imitations of right-wingers.)
Know this: we on the left despise communism as much as you do. None of us would have wanted to live in Soviet Russia. The thing is, we don’t obsess about it. Communism is dead and buried, never to rise again. Nobody in the US has seriously advocated it since the 1930s.
You know, Archie Bunker was a parody of right-wingers, which is why the script writers of All In The Family had him mention communists and communism all the time. Even in the 70s, that kind of talk sounded comical. It’s even more ridiculous sounding now.
My advice to any right-winger who wants to be taken seriously: don’t say “communism” or “socialism”. It means they don’t know what they’re talking about, and that that they have lost the argument
)those who looked to localized weather conditions as being “only weather” and sniff “not climate.” So a year goes by, conditions are different and even more important for a group that prides itself on its scientific rigor… the standards do as well… gosh… what is one to think?