Climate scientists feeling the heat over global warming

[Robor007 0]

We're dipping into the lower 40's overnight and are even expected to see some upper 30's in the near future. The days will barely reach the lower 60's. Global warming my ####### - it's mothafcuking cold in Florida.

Cold in FL? It is winter time, it's supposed to be cold - even here in the land of 8 month summers. That said, I don't think we've had a single freeze warning this year. Winter has been very mild in my area.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

We're dipping into the lower 40's overnight and are even expected to see some upper 30's in the near future. The days will barely reach the lower 60's. Global warming my ####### - it's mothafcuking cold in Florida.

Cold in FL? It is winter time, it's supposed to be cold - even here in the land of 8 month summers. That said, I don't think we've had a single freeze warning this year. Winter has been very mild in my area.

Winter, shminter. I came down here to escape the cold weather. This morning, they said we were about 7F below normal. This freaken global cooling is going to push me further south. Fidel, here I come...

Edited January 26, 2007 by ET-US2004

[Peikko 1,575]

http://news.mongabay.com/2005/1124-climate.html

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/09/05/co2_ice_cores/

Will it/won't it? I don't know, but I think these ice core samples are at least interesting.

Added a Sept 2006 article

Edited January 26, 2007 by Purple_Hibiscus

[Hilarious Clinton 452]

I'd rather have higher sea levels than glaciers over most of the world.

[Peikko 1,575]

Do you live on top of a mountain?

The climate isn't a fixed thing of course, but I think I would prefer to see it remain how it's been for the last several thousand years than get either hotter or cooler. If scientist can work out how to keep that status quo, wouldn't that be a good thing?

Although, maybe these cycles are something that has to happen...

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

I'd rather have higher sea levels than glaciers over most of the world.

Couple feet would turn my home into beachfront property.

[Ban Hammer 14,569]

I'd rather have higher sea levels than glaciers over most of the world.

Couple feet would turn my home into beachfront property.

might be sooner than you think. another reason not to live in florida.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

I'd rather have higher sea levels than glaciers over most of the world.

Couple feet would turn my home into beachfront property.

might be sooner than you think. another reason not to live in florida.

Apparently, there are still enough reasons to live here. Florida, unlike many other states, has a net gain of residents at a rate of >1,000/day. And I seriously doubt that I'll get to see the day that my feet will stand in salty water when I step out of my house.

[Ban Hammer 14,569]

I'd rather have higher sea levels than glaciers over most of the world.

Couple feet would turn my home into beachfront property.

might be sooner than you think. another reason not to live in florida.

Apparently, there are still enough reasons to live here. Florida, unlike many other states, has a net gain of residents at a rate of >1,000/day. And I seriously doubt that I'll get to see the day that my feet will stand in salty water when I step out of my house.

let's hope that if such a day comes, you'd have sold by then

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Steven and Gary,

I think you both prove the point of this article by missing the point.

The article basically says that the complexities and subtleties of climate science get lost in the black-and-white "you're wrong and i'm right" of partisan politics and the popular media.

Not really. As I've stated before several times, if we chose the topic of brain surgery, would we be quoting opinions from auto mechanics? I think it's silly that a scientific issue such as evolution or global warming be so freely debated in the public. That's when it's politicized. The weight is in favor of those who've taken what the scientific community has overwhelmingly agreed upon and said we've got do something about it (that's my stance - I don't want to get into a debate over the science - I'm not a scientist). What the opposition has done was bypassed any debate over whether we should do something about it and instead questioned and attacked the science. They even question whether it's an accepted legitimate theory by the scientific community. Very clever on those who deliberately have done so (Exxon/Mobil to name one), but baffling to me as to how many Americans rubber stamp it.

Edited January 26, 2007 by Steven_and_Jinky

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

I'd rather have higher sea levels than glaciers over most of the world.

Couple feet would turn my home into beachfront property.

might be sooner than you think. another reason not to live in florida.

Apparently, there are still enough reasons to live here. Florida, unlike many other states, has a net gain of residents at a rate of >1,000/day. And I seriously doubt that I'll get to see the day that my feet will stand in salty water when I step out of my house.

let's hope that if such a day comes, you'd have sold by then

What I meant in my previous statement is that I think I will have kicked the bucket by then...

[Peikko 1,575]

Deep ice cores from Antarctica reveal there is more carbon dioxide in the atmosphere today than at any time in the last 800,000 years.

There's nothing theoretical about that, it's a fact. The theory is, how exactly will this extra carbon dioxide effect the climate.

It's all very well to think, "well whatever happens, it won't happen in my lifetime", but are you not even slightly concerned about future generations?

It's a fact that humans have changed the fundamental composition of our atmosphere. To think this change will have no noticable effect on anything seems a little...suprising.

[Hilarious Clinton 452]

Do you live on top of a mountain?

The climate isn't a fixed thing of course, but I think I would prefer to see it remain how it's been for the last several thousand years than get either hotter or cooler. If scientist can work out how to keep that status quo, wouldn't that be a good thing?

Although, maybe these cycles are something that has to happen...

It's been getting warmer since the end of the last ice-age, 12,000 years ago. Why do people think the climate should never change?

[one...two...tree 2,762]

...the part that nobody's talking about...

ExxonMobil: Funding the Global Warming Skeptics

The Union of Concerned Scientists published a report Wednesday that showed just how much ExxonMobil has paid to fund a whole slew of global warming deniers using the same tactics the Tobacco industry used to ward off regulations for decades.

According to the report, ExxonMobil has funneled nearly $16 million between 1998 and 2005 to a network of 43 advocacy organizations that seek to confuse the public on global warming science.

"ExxonMobil has manufactured uncertainty about the human causes of global warming just as tobacco companies denied their product caused lung cancer," said Alden Meyer, the Union of Concerned Scientists' Director of Strategy & Policy. "A modest but effective investment has allowed the oil giant to fuel doubt about global warming to delay government action just as Big Tobacco did for over 40 years."

One would think that this report would get some coverage in the news. One would be wrong. Right now on Google News, there is exactly one news report that covers this report. Obviously, the fact that a major company used deceptive tactics to hold back meaningful action to address greenhouse emissions so they could keep their dirty profits isn't news worthy these days. Even when we are reading reports that 2007 is predicted to be the hottest year ever.

What is news? Oh, how about the number of news sources publishing a story how Senators Rockefeller and Olympia Snowe wrote a letter to ExxonMobil that tries to "suppress global warming skeptics?" (There are seven versions of that story online right now.) That clearly is more important than the fact that the company has colluded with the Bush administration to deny the US public information needed to make timely decisions.

Do read the UCS report and ponder on the cynicism and greed it takes to put this type of campaign together. ExxonMobil deserves our deep animosity for the danger in which they've help put the world's future for their own profits.

http://www.ucsusa.org/news/press_release/E...ng-tobacco.html

Edited January 27, 2007 by Steven_and_Jinky