the stack of scientific evidence showing global warming continues to grow, and the amount of physical evidence does also. But as long as Corporations can hire Politicians to protect them against costly regulatory rules, we are stymied. Then, of course, there is the 15-20% of the population that actually look forward to the end of the earth..Evangelical Nuts.
Posted by T2 at November 4, 2009 08:13 AMcalberserkly, the link you provide for "Over", AIM, is a Right Wing Wacko site still going on about Obama's Birth Cert, and his secret plan to turn America into a Nazi Socialist Commie nation. There zero credibility at their site and with your screed.
Posted by T2 at November 4, 2009 09:25 AMhumm....I see that the aformentioned comment by a troll has been deleted...
Posted by T2 at November 4, 2009 09:27 AMT2, it wouldn't be the end of the Earth, just the end of humans. Well, except for the few super rich who'll be able to take care of themselves somehow. But golly, what will they do without a rabble to build them things and provide servants for them?
But really, when people are caught up in trying to feed their kids and keep their families healthy in a hostile world, how the hell are you going to get them to care about problems a decade or two away when they're wondering how they'll survive the week? Clearly, the only ones who care are the deniers, because pissing off liberals is like food and medicine to them, while they piss away their future for spite.
Posted by Twinky P* at November 4, 2009 09:28 AMI think Republicans have found another planet to migrate to. Otherwise why would none of their senators appear for the hearing on Global Warming?
Posted by suresh at November 4, 2009 11:06 AMwatching Alan Greenspan's wife on MSNBC trying her best to use the NJ and VA governor elections to spell the end for Obama....tossing off as incidental the fact that two more Dem votes were added to the House yesterday. Axelrod had none of it, but she would not stop demanding he admit that Obama is finished due to to Corzine's loss. What a strange world those Villagers live in.
Posted by T2 at November 4, 2009 11:12 AMDang it, T2, they've got a narrative, and they're sticking to it! Don't try to inject facts into it! You'll confuse the rubes.
Posted by Twinky P* at November 4, 2009 11:43 AMreality based fact and/or research: the bane of criminal cultists wishing the apocalypse on us all..
take that anal onar..
We're totally whipping those glaciers. Rack one more up for the humans.
Posted by at November 4, 2009 01:46 PM...except for the few super rich who'll be able to take care of themselves...
I know what...uhhh, who...I'll be having for lunch.
Posted by phidipides at November 4, 2009 03:59 PMBTW, nice post, Turkana, and on the rec list again. Good for you.
Posted by Twinky P* at November 4, 2009 05:35 PMSo....Turk-E posts about how people are too stupid to understand global warming and you people are too stupid to comment on the subject at hand.
Beautiful. No wonder the left can't understand complex issues. Like....the real reason for the melting snows on Kilimanjaro has nothing to do with global warming. Posted an article from the right wing mag Time on this but it was deleted. Can't be telling the people that the world is not really flat can we?.
Posted by manapp99 at November 4, 2009 05:36 PMso, manape also has another handle...calberserkly...you idiot.
Posted by T2 at November 4, 2009 06:30 PMDeleting comments is a symptom of what's wrong with the progressives and why there was a swing in yesterday's election. The progressives are so full of themselves that they're ignoring what the American people want or what real scientists are saying. The progressives are totally driven by making government bigger. They believe they know how to spend your money better than you do.
Posted by Portia at November 4, 2009 10:22 PMyou know *wink, wink* "real scientists" like the bought and sold mf's the energy mega-companies buy and sell...as opposed to lib'rul scientists working at NASA and NOAA...
try again portia peter
Excellent post. But depressing, incredibly sad and depressing.
Turkana, you might find this piece from Living On Earth interesting.
Posted by Mary at November 5, 2009 12:03 AMMount Kilimanjaro looks so beautiful with its glaciers on top. The mountain will never be the same again without the ice...
I think to solve the global warming problem, it must be stormed at the national and international levels.But the total success is built upon the action of every individual, regardless of nationality, to conserve energy and live in a greener, cleaner community.
they're ignoring what the American people want
So, peter, progressives aren't American people? And you wonder why you get deleted. Fuck off.
Posted by Twinky P* at November 5, 2009 05:07 AMNo wonder the left can't understand complex issues. Like....the real reason for the melting snows on Kilimanjaro has nothing to do with global warming. Posted an article from the right wing mag Time on this but it was deleted.
"Nothing to do with global warming" you say?
That's not what the Time piece says.
It's here.
And it says this;
All of this back-and-forth might suggest on first blush that the scientists are arguing over whether global warming is even happening. That would be a mistake. While he doesn't think Thompson's case is proven, Mote has no doubt that the climate is changing and that humans are largely responsible; he just doesn't think Kilimanjaro's glaciers are being melted out of existence.
Still, even if Mote is right, that doesn't rule out global warming as a root cause of glacier retreat. Climate scientists have long maintained — and evidence from the real world is already confirming — that warming doesn't just result in higher temperatures. It also leads to changes in weather patterns, including more intense precipitation in some areas, more severe droughts in others (and sometimes, as in the case of the American Southeast, a little of both). And that may well be what's happening at Kilimanjaro. While strongly disputing Thompson's explanation, Georg Kaser of the Institut für Geographie in Innsbruck, Austria, writes that "we are confident that global warming is the ultimate driver of glacier shrinkage on Kilimanjaro due to the strong relation between Indian Ocean dynamics and East African precipitation."
In short, the answer to the question "Is it global warming or changes in weather patterns?" may be, simply, yes.
It's douche noozles like you manapp99 who are too stupid to understand a complex issue like "global warming". Here's a little help. As the Time piece clearly atempts to illustrate for simpletons such as yourself, human induced "global warming" is much more complex than simply looking at average temperatures at particular places on earth and seeing that they are rising over time.
Are you really that stupid or is the intellectual dishonesty just too ingrained?
manapp99,
The whole point of the Time article is that "global warming" is MORE COMPLEX than simple rising temps. You did exactly what idiots like yourself always do. You simplified the entire issue, in this case of the glaciers on Kilimanjaro, into a "but it's actually still below freezing on the top of the mountain so it can't be global warming" argument. You completely missed the entire point of the article which is about the complexity of the global affect of warming on the planets weather.
"And in fact, the temperature on the summit of Kilimanjaro is essentially always below freezing, which makes it hard to accept warming as the reason [for glacier loss]."
Warming. That sentence talks about "warming". Not "global warming". Imbecile. If you knew anything about global warming you would know that it is more then just a blanket rising of temperatures. Global warming causes shifts in weather patterns. Some areas see warming. Some see cooling. Some shift from drier to moister climates. Some the opposite. The point is we are fucking with the planets weather patterns. No one in that Time article denies that.
You stated, "the melting snows on Kilimanjaro has nothing to do with global warming". Nothing in that Time article supports that statement. In fact, the conclusion of the author flatly contradicts it.
In short, the answer to the question "Is it global warming or changes in weather patterns?" may be, simply, yes.
Get it? global warming and the shifting weather patterns are one and the same.
I'm not the one ignoring the facts here. Improved reading comprehension will help you to recognize the facts in the things you read. But only if you want to. It's only a one page piece for god's sake. Try a bit harder to keep up.
Posted by snark at November 5, 2009 08:11 AM"The whole point of the Time article is that "global warming" is MORE COMPLEX than simple rising temps."
The point is that when the earth temps were sinking...from the 40's to the 70's this was proclaimed as global cooling. Simply. No nuances. When the temps in the 90's were rising it was proclaimed global warming, no complexities. Now that the temps are falling GW believers are nuancing the position. Now any climate change is allegedly due to global warming. More severe hurricane seasons WERE due to global warming but the less severe seasons we are now seeing are NOT signs of cooling. Believers have been trying to make the changing facts fit the theory instead of admitting they might have been wrong. This is why the author of the article is trying so hard to make the ice melt on Kilimanjaro fit the global warming theory because it it the one that they have bought into.
Posted by manapp99 at November 5, 2009 08:41 AM"In short, the answer to the question "Is it global warming or changes in weather patterns?" may be, simply, yes."
Another reporter could have said this statement this way:
In short, the answer to the question" Is it globar warming or changes in weather patters many be, simply, no"
Because there are also articles pointing to the deforestation leading to less precipitation causing the vanishing snows of Kilimajaro. This was not even part of the article which shows that reporter did not want to include all the theories, just the ones that bolstered the preconceived belief.
Posted by manapp99 at November 5, 2009 08:49 AMBelievers have been trying to make the changing facts fit the theory instead of admitting they might have been wrong.
The theories have been evolving with the evidence. But you know that.
This is why the author of the article is trying so hard to make the ice melt on Kilimanjaro fit the global warming theory because it it the one that they have bought into.
You presented this article as evidence that global warming has nothing to do with the melting glaciers. And now that you realize you completely misunderstood the article you are attacking the character of the author. LOL! Typical.
In short, the answer to the question" Is it globar warming or changes in weather patters many be, simply, no"
But that wasn't the answer in the article that YOU linked. And that answer does not support your position either.
Because there are also articles pointing to the deforestation leading to less precipitation causing the vanishing snows of Kilimajaro.
Deforestation? And who is responsible for the deforestation? Is the deforestation naturally occuring? And a decrease in percipitation is what? A changing weather pattern maybe? Imagine that! A changing weather pattern may be responsible! Where have I read that before? Oh yeah, it was part of the conclusion of the article that you linked.
This was not even part of the article which shows that reporter did not want to include all the theories, just the ones that bolstered the preconceived belief.
That would be an opinion, not a fact. The author concluded that global warming and/or changing weather patterns could be likely causes of the melting glaciers. Weather the changing weather patterns are induced by global warming or deforestation the FACT is that they are both human induced conditions and they are both having radical affects on our planet that need to be addressed. Or are you a fan of increased deforestation too?
Sorry you didn't understand the article you posted. It's a complex issue. Better luck next time.
Posted by snark at November 5, 2009 09:10 AM