Climate Change Denier James Inhofe to Lead Senate Environment Committee

Environment • Views: 48,000

The very last person you’d ever want to see in charge of the Senate Environment Committee will now probably be in charge of the Senate Environment Committee.

On handing Republicans control of the Senate on Tuesday, Americans effectively voted for the party’s hostile plans against President Barack Obama’s environmental legacy. Their votes also put the Senate’s environment and climate policy into the hands of the worst science-denier in national politics: Oklahoma Senator James Inhofe, who is almost certainly the next chair of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee.

Inhofe claimed in 2003 that global warming might help humanity. “It’s also important to question whether global warming is even a problem for human existence. Thus far no one has seriously demonstrated any scientific proof that increased global temperatures would lead to the catastrophes predicted by alarmists. In fact, it appears that just the opposite is true: that increases in global temperatures may have a beneficial effect on how we live our lives.”

[…]

Inhofe refuted climate change science in 2012 by citing the Bible. “[T]he Genesis 8:22 that I use in there is that ‘as long as the earth remains there will be seed time and harvest, cold and heat, winter and summer, day and night.’ My point is, God’s still up there. The arrogance of people to think that we, human beings, would be able to change what He is doing in the climate is to me outrageous.”

Jump to bottom

120 comments
1 Justanotherhuman  Nov 5, 2014 4:29:10pm

The Senate is going to be as much of an obstructionist joke as the House.

2 teleskiguy  Nov 5, 2014 4:33:02pm
3 Skip Intro  Nov 5, 2014 4:34:46pm

The 2014 Democratic strategy of pretending everyone running for office were really Republicans sure worked out well. I wonder what other goodies are in store for us?

4 EPR-radar  Nov 5, 2014 4:36:30pm

Inhofe as chair of the Senate Environment committee.

Well, fuck me gently with a chainsaw.

5 freetoken  Nov 5, 2014 4:37:01pm

Because Je$u$.

6 Internet Tough Guy  Nov 5, 2014 4:38:42pm

Welp, time to move inland.

7 Skip Intro  Nov 5, 2014 4:40:44pm

On the bright side, at least the totally dysfunctional state of Florida will once again disappear beneath the waves.

8 dog philosopher  Nov 5, 2014 4:42:51pm

reminds me of when they used to joke about ronald reagan working for 17th Century Fox

9 nines09  Nov 5, 2014 4:42:59pm

Just the person to crush reality with a hammer of ignorance. “Why is Johnny flunking science?” BECAUSE IT’S A TOOL OF THE DEVIL!!!!

10 dog philosopher  Nov 5, 2014 4:44:06pm

re: #7 Skip Intro

On the bright side, at least the totally dysfunctional state of Florida will once again disappear beneath the waves.

if you see a very large round object bobbing around in the waves, cancel its radio show

11 Kryptik  Nov 5, 2014 4:44:15pm

So not only can we expect rapid impeachment charges come January, we should also gird ourselves for the upcoming Michael Mann trials when these assholes start charging climate scientists for grand high treason.

Fan-fucking-tastic. I need to take up drinking.

12 Justanotherhuman  Nov 5, 2014 4:44:44pm

Obviously, if the Repubs’ first act is to pass the XL pipeline, as Old Turtle indicated, Inhofe doesn’t intend to do a damn thing on that committee except sleep.

13 freetoken  Nov 5, 2014 4:45:51pm

re: #12 Justanotherhuman

He’ll invite his friend, the Lord High Denier, to give a speech.

14 SteveMcGazi  Nov 5, 2014 4:49:21pm

re: #11 Kryptik

re: #12 Justanotherhuman

I disagree with both. The last thing the R’s are going to do is generate any backlash like Clinton’s impeachment did. As long as D voters are willing to sit on their asses (Now I remember why I became a Republican all those years ago) I wouldn’t expect Mitch and Boner to motivate them.
Also, that committee is going to have a lot of work to do to create legislative loopholes for their patrons for the days (someday) when Democrats get their shit together.

15 Skip Intro  Nov 5, 2014 4:49:57pm

Congressman elect Jody Hice on women’s rights.

”If the woman’s within the authority of her husband, I don’t see a problem,” Dr. Jody Hice of the Bethlehem First Baptist church in Barrow County said of women in positions of political power.

An Ayatollah couldn’t have said it better.

16 Justanotherhuman  Nov 5, 2014 4:50:05pm

Bastards.

Owners of a New Zealand coal mine where 29 workers were killed say they won’t go back into mine to recover bodies - @nzherald
read more on nzherald.co.nz

17 klystron  Nov 5, 2014 4:51:00pm

re: #14 SteveMcGazi

I disagree with both. The last thing the R’s are going to do is generate any backlash like Clinton’s impeachment did. As long as D voters are willing to sit on their asses (Now I remember why I became a Republican all those years ago) I wouldn’t expect Mitch and Boner to motivate them.
Also, that committee is going to have a lot of work to do to create legislative loopholes for their patrons for the days (someday) when Democrats get their shit together.

You mean, like the backlash they got for the government shutdown?

That sort of backlash?

18 meteor  Nov 5, 2014 4:52:36pm

The return of James Watt, who didn’t care about trees because Jesus was coming back, or something like that…

19 Skip Intro  Nov 5, 2014 4:53:19pm

re: #17 klystron

You mean, like the backlash they got for the government shutdown?

That sort of backlash?

They really took a beating for that, as well as threatening to default on the US debt if Obama didn’t comply with their demands.

Both of those really fired up the Democratic base to the extent that some of them actually bothered to vote yesterday.

20 EPR-radar  Nov 5, 2014 4:53:49pm

re: #14 SteveMcGazi

I disagree with both. The last thing the R’s are going to do is generate any backlash like Clinton’s impeachment did. As long as D voters are willing to sit on their asses (Now I remember why I became a Republican all those years ago) I wouldn’t expect Mitch and Boner to motivate them.
Also, that committee is going to have a lot of work to do to create legislative loopholes for their patrons for the days (someday) when Democrats get their shit together.

That is a sensible piece of analysis. However, one important fact is missing. The only threat most GOPers in the House face is being primaried by a loon that is further to the right.

Self-preservation is going to make impeachment and other GOP nuttiness the top priority in the House. The few grown-ups left in the GOP might try to stop this nonsense, but I don’t see it succeeding.

21 freetoken  Nov 5, 2014 4:54:04pm

The AP strikes again:

Day after defeats, Obama strikes defiant tone

For anyone expecting postelection contrition at the White House or vows to change course after a disastrous election for Democrats, President Barack Obama had one message Wednesday: Think again.

A day after Democrats lost control of the Senate and suffered big losses in House and governors’ races across the country, Obama struck a defiant tone. He defended his policies, stood by his staff and showed few signs of changing an approach to dealing with congressional Republicans that has generated little more than gridlock in recent years.

[…]

Because we all know the gridlock is Obama’s fault.

22 dog philosopher  Nov 5, 2014 4:54:39pm

denier
ⲍenyər/
noun
noun: denier; plural noun: deniers

1. a unit of weight by which the fineness of silk, rayon, or nylon yarn is measured, equal to the weight in grams of 9,000 meters of the yarn and often used to describe the thickness of hosiery.
“840 denier nylon”

2. historical
a French coin, equal to one twelfth of a sou, which was withdrawn from use in the 19th century.

23 EPR-radar  Nov 5, 2014 4:55:41pm

re: #21 freetoken

The goddamned main stream media really needs to stop with the magical balance fairy shit.

24 Kryptik  Nov 5, 2014 4:56:24pm

re: #21 freetoken

The press has stopped only just short of asking Obama “Why won’t you simply concede defeat and resign for the good of the country?” Instead, we’re going to get 2 years of why Obama is the worst, most hyper-partisan obstructionist America-hating horror story in the history of ever.

25 Justanotherhuman  Nov 5, 2014 4:57:16pm

re: #21 freetoken

The AP strikes again:

Day after defeats, Obama strikes defiant tone

Because we all know the gridlock is Obama’s fault.

Did the AP pick that up from MSNBC or vice versa?

“Contrition”, my ass.

26 Skip Intro  Nov 5, 2014 4:57:32pm

Charles PIerce’s House of Cranks article today is as good a map as any to show where we go from here.

esquire.com

27 TedStriker  Nov 5, 2014 4:57:46pm

re: #24 Kryptik

The press has stopped only just short of asking Obama “Why won’t you simply concede defeat and resign for the good of the country?” Instead, we’re going to get 2 years of why Obama is the worst, most hyper-partisan obstructionist America-hating horror story in the history of ever.

Yeah, pretty much.

And we’re gonna have to munch on this shit sandwich for the next two years, at least.

28 freetoken  Nov 5, 2014 4:58:21pm

re: #23 EPR-radar

It’s not even MBF - the headline is just as bad.

The US is barely a democracy, and the government is definitely not decided by a parliament. The office of the President is its own thing and can do what it wants, within the bounds of the limits in the Constitution, which are somewhat fuzzy anyway.

29 TedStriker  Nov 5, 2014 4:59:20pm

re: #19 Skip Intro

They really took a beating for that, as well as threatening to default on the US debt if Obama didn’t comply with their demands.

Both of those really fired up the Democratic base to the extent that some of them actually bothered to vote yesterday.

Oh, we’ll see a rerun of that before too long, mark my words.

30 freetoken  Nov 5, 2014 4:59:28pm

The AP knows it wants to stay in business, and what sells as “news” these days can be seen on a zillion outlets: outrage, fantasy, and all around absence of deep thought.

31 Justanotherhuman  Nov 5, 2014 5:04:49pm

When Christie is defiant and insulting, he gets away with it.

Pres Obama speaks in a calm manner about what he will, and won’t do, and it’s “defiance”.

Different skin tones altogether.

The racism in this country is just goddamned sickening.

32 Jenner7  Nov 5, 2014 5:05:26pm

re: #21 freetoken

Our liberal media at work…

33 klystron  Nov 5, 2014 5:06:06pm
34 Higgs Boson's Mate  Nov 5, 2014 5:06:48pm

re: #14 SteveMcGazi

I disagree with both. The last thing the R’s are going to do is generate any backlash like Clinton’s impeachment did. As long as D voters are willing to sit on their asses (Now I remember why I became a Republican all those years ago) I wouldn’t expect Mitch and Boner to motivate them.
Also, that committee is going to have a lot of work to do to create legislative loopholes for their patrons for the days (someday) when Democrats get their shit together.

The voters just handed over the Senate to these jokers. Do you really think that they’ll stop short of bringing articles of impeachment? So far their bad behavior had gained them control of the House since 2010 and control of the Senate for at least two years. I stopped saying that “they wouldn’t dare” during the Bush years.

35 Justanotherhuman  Nov 5, 2014 5:08:36pm

Keep calm and carry on, Lizards.

Later. : )

36 Backwoods_Sleuth  Nov 5, 2014 5:08:42pm

re: #33 klystron

[Embedded content]

Sleep it off, rest well, get better soonest.

Or just say fuck it and enjoy the sun.

37 freetoken  Nov 5, 2014 5:10:35pm

On Monday night, the three most watched TV shows in the US were (Live + SD, in millions):

NFL REGULAR SEASON 12.361
ABC Dancing with the Stars 13.09
CBS Scorpion 10.34

That’s about 35 and half million.

I don’t know how many people voted in the 50 states, but I suspect yesterday’s vote totals aren’t going to be much more than that.

38 Backwoods_Sleuth  Nov 5, 2014 5:10:50pm

re: #33 klystron

[Embedded content]

alernatively:
Hover at your peril.
Unless you bring soothing treats.

39 Jenner7  Nov 5, 2014 5:17:43pm
40 Vicious Piebola  Nov 5, 2014 5:20:19pm

How long before wingnuts start posting this election map as a GUN CRIME MAP!!!!1!!!!!!

41 BeachDem  Nov 5, 2014 5:20:57pm

re: #15 Skip Intro

Congressman elect Jody Hice on women’s rights.

“If the woman’s within the authority of her husband, I don’t see a problem,” Dr. Jody Hice of the Bethlehem First Baptist church in Barrow County said of women in positions of political power.

An Ayatollah couldn’t have said it better.

This seems appropriate here, courtesy of Charles P. Pierce. Contrary to the media “narrative” about how the GOP quieted the tea crazies this time:

…you have to take a careful look at the incoming class of rookies in the already bubbling river of sap that is the United States House of Representatives to realize that all that happened last night was that the Republicans sent the Tea Party to finishing school and, last night, it came out in its cotillion ball.

esquire.com

42 thecommodore  Nov 5, 2014 5:24:16pm

This is what happens when De.ocrats stay home. I understand their frustration, but don’t they realize that staying home hands the country over to these nutcases who will make things much worse?

It’s mind boggling!

43 Kragar  Nov 5, 2014 5:24:31pm

Naming worthless turd blossoms like Inhofe to head Senate Committees is why the GOP is going to lose big in 16. They’re going to go overboard appeasing their moron base and lose the nation as a result.

Too bad we’re going to be saddled with their idiocy for the nest 2 years

44 Indy GOP Refugee  Nov 5, 2014 5:25:58pm

re: #42 thecommodore

And why people like me have no where to go but on our own.

45 Backwoods_Sleuth  Nov 5, 2014 5:29:32pm

re: #40 Vicious Piebola

How long before wingnuts start posting this election map as a GUN CRIME MAP!!!!1!!!!!!

[Embedded content]

I like how they blur out a lot of the blue districts.

46 Kryptik  Nov 5, 2014 5:29:57pm

re: #43 Kragar

The Republicans put out batshit after batshit nationwide this election, and not only did they not pay for it or any of their craziness or outright failures, they’re being marketed as the moderates to the crazy hyperpartisanship of Obama and those dirty obstructionist Dems.

I don’t think it’s possible for Republicans to overreach anymore. Just when you think they’ve gone too far, the public tells us they simply haven’t gone far enough.

47 dog philosopher  Nov 5, 2014 5:32:24pm

re: #46 Kryptik

batshit after batshit

official unit of time for the 114th congress

48 A Mom Anon  Nov 5, 2014 5:34:52pm

re: #44 Indy GOP Refugee

I haven’t had anyone to vote for in YEARS here. Not to represent me on the federal level. One dem in 18 yrs. ONE. These fools run unopposed, it’s almost expected that no one challenges them. On the local and state level, we have dems, but they rarely win, and if they do, they are not at all liberal, left or anything close to that. DINOs in the truest sense of the word. They are barely liberal republicans with a D after their name. So welcome to my world. I’ve never voted here and not left a large portion of the ballot blank.

49 freetoken  Nov 5, 2014 5:35:06pm

I am very disappointed about President Obama and his response to this election. I really think he is failing to speak the truth to the American public, and instead is saying what his party operators and mechanics believe to be a strategy of some sort, in keeping a very particular public face.

For example, he shouldn’t say our democracy is fine, when people don’t vote.

One reason he loses support from males (and some females) is his lack of public demonstration of power. We are hierarchical apes and sometimes the alpha male has to stand up and beat his chest, or the group starts to doubt his alpha-ness. That’s why the wingnuts worship RWR - because he beat his chest.

Trying to be too intellectual has hurt President Obama’s achievement score. His 6 years has mostly been as a manager, the guy who makes sure paper pile A goes in basket B. His sole major accomplishment was the passing of a Republican inspired health bill that the GOP now despises and uses to hit him over the head with.

I did not vote for President Obama either times, because he never gave me a reason to, and I did not like the Democratic operatives who kept, in late 2007, pushing him as the obvious Democratic choice (over Hillary and the others) with their arguments being mostly theoretical about vote strategies.

Obama won in 2008 because Americans were war weary. If Gore had taken Florida in 2000 then today Barack Obama would still likely be just another Illinois politician.

I challenge the Democratic faithful to be more open to introspection on what it really means for them to be involved in politics these days. What do you really want?

During my lifetime I think there has only been 1 US President I can look back on and sort of admire as a national leader, and that was JFK, and he was quite a flawed man but somehow (perhaps enhanced through assassination) made a legacy that surpassed his flaws.

50 Resident of The United States of Jesus  Nov 5, 2014 5:36:48pm

re: #39 Jenner7

[Embedded content]

I cannot stress how good the last one was. I’m all prepped, got my phone charged in ready to go,

If you want to feel hope again, dial in and listen, The call # and codes is in the link Jenner7 posted.

51 Resident of The United States of Jesus  Nov 5, 2014 5:37:40pm

re: #41 BeachDem

I was in the dentist’s chair and may have missed if you found out if that exit poll question was legit?

52 BeachDem  Nov 5, 2014 5:44:02pm

re: #51 Resident of The United States of Jesus

I was in the dentist’s chair and may have missed if you found out if that exit poll question was legit?

Talked to the person at the state party, and she said they had heard about it but didn’t know if it was legit. Didn’t really get a sense of whether they’re going to pursue it. I will get back in touch with her later tonight and ask.

53 Resident of The United States of Jesus  Nov 5, 2014 5:44:58pm

re: #52 BeachDem

Talked to the person at the state party, and she said they had heard about it but didn’t know if it was legit. Didn’t really get a sense of whether they’re going to pursue it. I will get back in touch with her later tonight and ask.

Thank you. It pretty much went all over twitter.

54 Vicious Piebola  Nov 5, 2014 5:46:39pm

Derp gotta Derp

55 Kryptik  Nov 5, 2014 5:48:49pm

re: #54 Vicious Piebola

If only it was just Dipshit O’Douchebag trying to peddle this incoming class of Republicans as somehow super moderate wonks.

56 BongCrodny  Nov 5, 2014 5:49:41pm

I guess Imhofe must be another one of those “classic liberals” I keep hearing about.

57 OhNoZombies!  Nov 5, 2014 5:52:41pm

I keep running this election cycle through my head, and other than six million emails from the Dems. begging for $5, I don’t remember any kind of fire from the left.
I saw maybe one commercial and two emails from Fitzgerald (D-Ohio) in the governors race. Kasich had been running ads since January, and he won hands down. It wasn’t even a contest.
In my house we’re so disgusted that we’ve been watching Futurama on Netflix all night.

58 EPR-radar  Nov 5, 2014 5:53:07pm

re: #3 Skip Intro

The 2014 Democratic strategy of pretending everyone running for office were really Republicans sure worked out well. I wonder what other goodies are in store for us?

I think it likely that the Democrats will make a determined effort to lose the 2016 POTUS election. Oh joy.

59 Vicious Piebola  Nov 5, 2014 5:53:30pm

Wingnuts spew racist shit in “defense” of their trophy Mia Love.

They can’t help themselves.

60 Vicious Piebola  Nov 5, 2014 5:54:54pm

re: #58 EPR-radar

I think it likely that the Democrats will make a determined effort to lose the 2016 POTUS election. Oh joy.

If 2016 ends up being Hillary vs Jeb just shoot me now.

61 EPR-radar  Nov 5, 2014 5:56:09pm

re: #60 Vicious Piebola

If 2016 ends up being Hillary vs Jeb just shoot me now.

That would be ugly indeed. The only plus to that arrangement is that the GOP base would be most unhappy with Jeb Bush as the GOP nominee.

62 ObserverArt  Nov 5, 2014 6:03:18pm

re: #49 freetoken

I am very disappointed about President Obama and his response to this election. I really think he is failing to speak the truth to the American public, and instead is saying what his party operators and mechanics believe to be a strategy of some sort, in keeping a very particular public face.

For example, he shouldn’t say our democracy is fine, when people don’t vote.

One reason he loses support from males (and some females) is his lack of public demonstration of power. We are hierarchical apes and sometimes the alpha male has to stand up and beat his chest, or the group starts to doubt his alpha-ness. That’s why the wingnuts worship RWR - because he beat his chest.

Trying to be too intellectual has hurt President Obama’s achievement score. His 6 years has mostly been as a manager, the guy who makes sure paper pile A goes in basket B. His sole major accomplishment was the passing of a Republican inspired health bill that the GOP now despises and uses to hit him over the head with.

I did not vote for President Obama either times, because he never gave me a reason to, and I did not like the Democratic operatives who kept, in late 2007, pushing him as the obvious Democratic choice (over Hillary and the others) with their arguments being mostly theoretical about vote strategies.

Obama won in 2008 because Americans were war weary. If Gore had taken Florida in 2000 then today Barack Obama would still likely be just another Illinois politician.

I challenge the Democratic faithful to be more open to introspection on what it really means for them to be involved in politics these days. What do you really want?

During my lifetime I think there has only been 1 US President I can look back on and sort of admire as a national leader, and that was JFK, and he was quite a flawed man but somehow (perhaps enhanced through assassination) made a legacy that surpassed his flaws.

I think it is very dangerous to fall for the the alpha male characteristic. Many considered Bush 2 an alpha male and he let others take control (like Cheney and Rumsfeld) and cock walked around like the big man in charge.

They tend to be reckless, misguided by there own feelings of superiority and callous to the needs of others. Often hot-headed, violent, abusive and dismissive thinking only of and for themselves.

I’ll take considerate and thoughtful any day. Any. Day.

Are you confusing domineering and cocky with confidence and assertiveness?

I also feel many times the so-called Alpha male uses that as an excuse and cover for just being a jerk. I think you even touch on it with you use of the word demonstration. Think about that. Another word for demonstration is show. Is that what you really want, or do you want someone who gets things done by motivating and not insulting.

Do some reading about alpha male characteristics, often times considered a myth. It’s the old sizzle or steak comparison. You can be fooled into eating a crappy piece of meat by the surroundings and smells of the restaurant, and not even realize it.

63 nines09  Nov 5, 2014 6:12:46pm

re: #33 klystron

“Remember to chew, remember to chew, remember to….”

64 nines09  Nov 5, 2014 6:29:38pm

re: #49 freetoken

I am very disappointed about President Obama and his response to this election. I really think he is failing to speak the truth to the American public, and instead is saying what his party operators and mechanics believe to be a strategy of some sort, in keeping a very particular public face.

For example, he shouldn’t say our democracy is fine, when people don’t vote.

One reason he loses support from males (and some females) is his lack of public demonstration of power. We are hierarchical apes and sometimes the alpha male has to stand up and beat his chest, or the group starts to doubt his alpha-ness. That’s why the wingnuts worship RWR - because he beat his chest.

Trying to be too intellectual has hurt President Obama’s achievement score. His 6 years has mostly been as a manager, the guy who makes sure paper pile A goes in basket B. His sole major accomplishment was the passing of a Republican inspired health bill that the GOP now despises and uses to hit him over the head with.

I did not vote for President Obama either times, because he never gave me a reason to, and I did not like the Democratic operatives who kept, in late 2007, pushing him as the obvious Democratic choice (over Hillary and the others) with their arguments being mostly theoretical about vote strategies.

Obama won in 2008 because Americans were war weary. If Gore had taken Florida in 2000 then today Barack Obama would still likely be just another Illinois politician.

I challenge the Democratic faithful to be more open to introspection on what it really means for them to be involved in politics these days. What do you really want?

During my lifetime I think there has only been 1 US President I can look back on and sort of admire as a national leader, and that was JFK, and he was quite a flawed man but somehow (perhaps enhanced through assassination) made a legacy that surpassed his flaws.

The Dems have no one but themselves to blame. No fire or push back against unending lies. Just using the very words and deeds of the GOP. It’s like the insanity of breaking down the tenants of the ACA piece by piece and presenting it to people, and they like it. Call it Obamacare and people reject it out of hand. People want wages higher, but not for you. The right wing has played on fears and paranoia and it fucking works. That and the fact that a whole lot of democrats sat on their asses and let the GOP win because “Obama didn’t stop Keystone XL” or “He’s not really doing anything.” The media has the brass balls to say people are upset with Washington and yet half of the morons they polled didn’t know who controlled the House. Grimes in Kentucky could not bring herself to say she voted for Obama? WTF did she vote for? A Republican? No sand, and the money and the bigots and the anti everything you hold near and dear have a new bandolier of ways to fuck you and me both. the hyenas are drooling and the Democrats are looking at all them un hatched eggs wondering where the chickens that were promised are. Vote or lose. I’m not as angry as I was earlier, but for the love of…….Get the fuck off your asses, and attack the fucking loons, would you? Democratic leadership has no attack dogs, only people who act and seem to be shocked at the fact that the GOP wants to kill them and their legacy. Let’s loot Social Security and kill the ACA and privatize the entire prison system as we militarize the police and become that nation God wanted us to be. Orwellian.

65 elizajane  Nov 5, 2014 6:33:53pm

re: #6 Internet Tough Guy

Welp, time to move inland.

Only if you live in Florida or Manhattan. Otherwise it’s probably time to move to Seattle or Portland. Or maybe Vancouver if they’ll take you.

Seriously, I’m trying to gently encourage my three children to look to the Pacific northwest for colleges and jobs. It’s the place most likely to do well out of climate change, “well” being a relative term.

66 Skip Intro  Nov 5, 2014 6:49:45pm

re: #58 EPR-radar

I think it likely that the Democrats will make a determined effort to lose the 2016 POTUS election. Oh joy.

You mean like go with Hillary, so all the GOP has to do is recycle 30 years worth of smears to a base that already hates her guts?

Yeah, that’s probably what they’ll do and that’s what will happen.

67 S'latch  Nov 5, 2014 9:08:19pm

One of the main reasons the GOP has taken control of our government is the fact that our media are totally failing to do their jobs. As just one example, climate change denier’s like Inhofe should be regularly and consistently pressed and called out on their opinions. But, they are not. The climate change deniers are more regularly treated as if their opinions are entitled to equal consideration.

This Republican victory could not come at a worse time for our environmental future.

Where the hell were the young people on election day? Maybe the answer is where the hell were the media?

68 lostlakehiker  Nov 5, 2014 9:29:09pm

re: #34 Higgs Boson’s Mate

The voters just handed over the Senate to these jokers. Do you really think that they’ll stop short of bringing articles of impeachment? So far their bad behavior had gained them control of the House since 2010 and control of the Senate for at least two years. I stopped saying that “they wouldn’t dare” during the Bush years.

Yes I really do think they won’t bring articles of impeachment. So go ahead and give me 15 downdings now for saying that, but in two years we’ll see who was right and who was wrong. I’m saying “no impeachment”. Defined as—-the Senate doesn’t have to go through with the farce of trying a case with no substance, and acquitting on a party line vote if for no other reason, like, no case.

It’s possible some joker will introduce a motion to impeach. That’s not “impeachment”. Doesn’t count unless the House votes to bring charges. But I’ll bet the House doesn’t even formally entertain the notion, that it never gets out of committee.

69 lostlakehiker  Nov 5, 2014 9:47:22pm

re: #65 elizajane

Only if you live in Florida or Manhattan. Otherwise it’s probably time to move to Seattle or Portland. Or maybe Vancouver if they’ll take you.

Seriously, I’m trying to gently encourage my three children to look to the Pacific northwest for colleges and jobs. It’s the place most likely to do well out of climate change, “well” being a relative term.

Could be. Then again, it’s such a small stretch of territory. The cost of living there is already much higher than average. While this nation remains one nation, and that’ll probably continue for their lifetimes and more, there won’t be a Shire. Disasters on the East coast, droughts on the great plains, fires across the mountain west—-all shocks are transmitted throughout the system because disaster relief efforts have to be paid for by taxes on those who escaped the disaster. And because refugees from the disaster zones have a right to migrate between states. And because crop failures affect prices globally. And because the whole country will be the desired destination of climate refugees from around the globe.

My thinking is that apart from not indulging oneself in ownership of property near beaches, an extravagance and a folly even without global warming, there’s almost no way to run. Nowhere to run to. We have to win this now, in the coming decade or two, or win it later and at greater cost. Winston Churchill explained it all in one of his many great speeches, how sometimes you must either fight soon, when it will be easy, or later, when it will be harder, or too late, when the fight is not for winning or losing, but just for honor.

And we can win it. We’ll need China, India, and Europe on board. We’ll need to get over our nuclear energy phobia, because it’s an all hands on deck situation. We’ll need to enlist or conscript the engines of capitalism, with laws that allow big money to be made by those who put up massive solar or wind energy efforts and real money to be made or saved by those who tile their roofs in solar panels. And we’ll need all sorts of technological improvements. Nothing unachievable, but we could get more solar energy faster if prices were half what they are now. And that day is coming. Probably within 15 years. Possibly within 10.

70 Carl LaFong  Nov 6, 2014 6:41:39am

Global warming is the biggest scam of all time. Science by consensus is not science.

71 William Barnett-Lewis  Nov 6, 2014 6:50:14am

re: #70 Carl LaFong

But ignorance by consensus is the GOP.

72 Franklin  Nov 6, 2014 7:04:19am

re: #70 Carl LaFong

Global warming is the biggest scam of all time. Science by consensus is not science.

I’m not so sure about that. Google led me to this page here:

World’s greatest scams REVEALED

Instead of boring you with the details, I’ll spoil it by saying the #1 SCAM OF ALL TIME according to that site is a £599.99 iPhone app that just displays a shiny red gem. Now that is a scam.

So you may want to reorder your list of biggest scams.

But since you are blowing hot air, you may be interested to learn that #2 on that site above is paying £4 for a small popcorn at the theatre and getting 8p worth of kernels. The scam is the premium you pay for the hot air to pop it. Perhaps a career opportunity for you?

73 Carl LaFong  Nov 6, 2014 7:11:20am

re: #71 William Barnett-Lewis

But ignorance by consensus is the GOP.

Might be, could be, but global warming is still the biggest scam ever perpetrated on mankind. (mankind as in species, not gender.)

74 William Barnett-Lewis  Nov 6, 2014 7:20:29am

re: #73 Carl LaFong

Nah, not even close. Far more people’s lives have been destroyed by the lies of Reaganomics and Supply-side theft economics.

Thankfully climatology is real science (which is terrifying to the GOP I know) so we know it’s true unlike the gentle art of Economics which is easy for thieves to fake.

75 Carl LaFong  Nov 6, 2014 7:22:04am

re: #72 Franklin

I’m not so sure about that. Google led me to this page here:

World’s greatest scams REVEALED

Instead of boring you with the details, I’ll spoil it by saying the #1 SCAM OF ALL TIME according to that site is a £599.99 iPhone app that just displays a shiny red gem. Now that is a scam.

So you may want to reorder your list of biggest scams.

But since you are blowing hot air, you may be interested to learn that #2 on that site above is paying £4 for a small popcorn at the theatre and getting 8p worth of kernels. The scam is the premium you pay for the hot air to pop it. Perhaps a career opportunity for you?

OK, OK. I am now 100% convinced. You have changed my mind.

But I found this on YouTube. Felix Cavaliere and the boys. (Turn the volume, like so totally up.)
Youtube Video

76 wheat-dogghazi-bola-trality  Nov 6, 2014 7:25:14am

re: #70 Carl LaFong

Global warming is the biggest scam of all time. Science by consensus is not science.

Do you understand how peer-reviewed science works? It’s not the same kind of consensus as a group of committee members reaching a common conclusion they can all agree on. Scientific consensus means scientists have examined the data, repeated the experiments and data analysis, and drawn their own conclusions. If many different studies obtain the same results, then the original discovery or conclusion is confirmed.

In other words, scientists are not voting on whether anthropic global warming is valid or not. They are doing their own studies from a variety of different angles to see whether it is. And the vast majority have reached the same conclusion.

Of course, there are some studies that indicate otherwise, but they are comparatively few in number. Likewise, there are a few scientists who still don’t accept the theory of relativity or the Big Bang.

77 Carl LaFong  Nov 6, 2014 7:31:55am

re: #76 wheat-dogghazi-bola

But what about David Ruffin’s thesis on the end of the world? (See below and again, increase volume.)

No, I’ve changed my mind again. Global warming is a scam.
dailymotion.com

78 wheat-dogghazi-bola-trality  Nov 6, 2014 7:37:41am

re: #77 Carl LaFong

But what about David Ruffin’s thesis on the end of the world? (See below and again, increase volume.)

No, I’ve changed my mind again. Global warming is a scam.
dailymotion.com

I can see there’s no point in trying to discuss it with you. It is not a scam. If you want to remain ignorant as to why it is not a scam, be my guest. I have other things to do than try to talk sense to fenceposts.

79 William Barnett-Lewis  Nov 6, 2014 7:43:29am

re: #77 Carl LaFong

It must be a hard thing to live life with such utter disregard for reality. Does it hurt to understand how stupid you really are? Or to know how the liars at Faux and at the RNC have lead you by the nose? No? Well, I suppose being blissfully ignorant does help numb the pain of looking in the mirror and knowing you’re helping to murder hundreds of millions of children.

80 Carl LaFong  Nov 6, 2014 7:54:17am

re: #78 wheat-dogghazi-bola

I can see there’s no point in trying to discuss it with you. It is not a scam. If you want to remain ignorant as to why it is not a scam, be my guest. I have other things to do than try to talk sense to fenceposts.

re: #79 William Barnett-Lewis

It must be a hard thing to live life with such utter disregard for reality. Does it hurt to understand how stupid you really are? Or to know how the liars at Faux and at the RNC have lead you by the nose? No? Well, I suppose being blissfully ignorant does help numb the pain of looking in the mirror and knowing you’re helping to murder hundreds of millions of children.

Fencepost? Ignorant (x2)? That sounds like hate speech. Haters, damn.

Global cooling in 1975, global warming 2006. Tell me what happened. But first, turn up the volume and learn something about polar bears. Thanks.

Youtube Video

81 wheat-dogghazi-bola-trality  Nov 6, 2014 8:03:57am

re: #80 Carl LaFong

Fencepost, as in “dumb as a …”

I gave you a respectful reply to your comment that GW is a scam. I didn’t call you names. I tried to correct what I thought was a misunderstanding in an attempt to have an adult discussion.

You responded by repeating the same assertion and offering me a music video.

Then you turn around and call me and WBL haters, drop two factoids and a polar bear video, and run away.

You are clearly not interested in discussing global warming on a rational, adult level. So, I’m not going to try. It’s a waste of time and energy.

So, goodbye.

82 Backwoods_Sleuth  Nov 6, 2014 8:10:18am
83 William Barnett-Lewis  Nov 6, 2014 8:10:54am

re: #80 Carl LaFong

Fencepost? Ignorant (x2)? That sounds like hate speech. Haters, damn.

Global cooling in 1975, global warming 2006. Tell me what happened. But first, turn up the volume and learn something about polar bears. Thanks.

[Embedded content]

Sorry buddy. I pity you but I haven’t hated something like you since I scraped it off my shoe when I was 10 years old.

84 Carl LaFong  Nov 6, 2014 8:23:57am

re: #79 William Barnett-Lewis

It must be a hard thing to live life with such utter disregard for reality. Does it hurt to understand how stupid you really are? Or to know how the liars at Faux and at the RNC have lead you by the nose? No? Well, I suppose being blissfully ignorant does help numb the pain of looking in the mirror and knowing you’re helping to murder hundreds of millions of children.

Wow. Not too over the top. Murderer. Sounds hateful.

Keith Olberman says there are approx. 1.9 billion children (age 15 & under) in the world today or roughly 27% of total human population. Assuming by your statement that I am helping murder hundreds of millions of children means at least 200 million children, this is about 10% of the children on the planet. Seems like we would certainly notice this as there would be fewer adults later on. And stuff. And would probably mean we are going extinct. Like, can you provide some data. And stuff?

But first, watch this presentation about overpopulation.

Youtube Video

85 Carl LaFong  Nov 6, 2014 8:29:12am

re: #83 William Barnett-Lewis

Sorry buddy. I pity you but I haven’t hated something like you since I scraped it off my shoe when I was 10 years old.

Sounds like hate speech to me but I am still learning.

Was it a Payday? Those can be nasty, especially if in the sun for a while. What kind of shoes, if you don’t mind me asking.

86 William Barnett-Lewis  Nov 6, 2014 8:30:31am

re: #84 Carl LaFong

Help ensure global warming continues? Then that’s what you’re doing. I know, you don’t believe that. Truth doesn’t care what you believe. I only wish you had to dig graves for all the little lives you’re willing to destroy in your ignorant hate.

I tend to a universalist streak so perhaps when you’re in hell for what you’ve helped create, you’ll still be able to repent and rejoin god. You’d better hope so.

87 CuriousLurker  Nov 6, 2014 8:31:28am

88 William Barnett-Lewis  Nov 6, 2014 8:31:36am

re: #85 Carl LaFong

If you’re interested in hate speach, a tape recorder will help you. Speak into it then hit “play”. Instant example of the reality of hate speech.

89 William Barnett-Lewis  Nov 6, 2014 8:35:04am

re: #87 CuriousLurker

[Embedded image]

Oh, I know you’re right. It’s having a battle with a half wit.

Still, as I said upstairs, “I shouldn’t enjoy jerking his chain so much, I know. It really is a sin (I am supposed to love all my neighbors as myself, according to my Lord) but damn why are some sins so enjoyable?”

So, Herr LaFong, have a good day, may the Good Lord bless you and keep you and bring you to a place where you are able to repent of the evil you promote with your denial.

90 Carl LaFong  Nov 6, 2014 8:39:39am

Seriously, what happened between 1975 (global cooling) and 2006 (global warming)?

91 William Barnett-Lewis  Nov 6, 2014 8:41:35am

re: #90 Carl LaFong

Seriously, what happened between 1975 (global cooling) and 2006 (global warming)?

Read. The actual truth is out there if you are willing to learn. And with that, good day.

92 Backwoods_Sleuth  Nov 6, 2014 8:41:48am
93 Carl LaFong  Nov 6, 2014 8:45:59am

re: #91 William Barnett-Lewis

Read. The actual truth is out there if you are willing to learn. And with that, good day.

William, glad you are back. Provide a link please, and I will read and learn.

94 Eventual Carrion  Nov 6, 2014 8:46:13am

re: #90 Carl LaFong

Seriously, what happened between 1975 (global cooling) and 2006 (global warming)?

Positive feedback from greenhouse gas releases (methane specifically with larger releases happening to further feed the feedback loop) from the heating that was growing gradually to kick it into higher gear (from linear to exponentially). The supposed natural cycle was supposed to be towards cooling, but we were successful in stopping that and turning it around.

95 Carl LaFong  Nov 6, 2014 8:50:57am

re: #94 Eventual Carrion

Positive feedback from greenhouse gas releases (methane specifically with larger releases happening to further feed the feedback loop) from the heating that was growing gradually to kick it into higher gear (from linear to exponentially). The supposed natural cycle was supposed to be towards cooling, but we were successful in stopping that and turning it around.

Sounds complicated, oh dinner of crows. Can you provide some linkage here for me to ingest. Thanks.

96 Islamo-Masonic Vourdalak  Nov 6, 2014 9:02:02am

re: #90 Carl LaFong

Seriously, what happened between 1975 (global cooling) and 2006 (global warming)?

Different time scales.

97 Islamo-Masonic Vourdalak  Nov 6, 2014 9:04:25am

re: #70 Carl LaFong

Global warming is the biggest scam of all time. Science by consensus is not science.

Then you don’t understand how science works. The consensus is the way for the laymen to know what is the current state of the science. The consensus itself is not based on a bunch of guys agreeing with each other. It is based on research and analysis.

98 Charles Johnson  Nov 6, 2014 9:13:31am

Seriously… do climate change deniers think it makes them look intelligent to come into a place where people understand the issue and have seen all the denier’s bogus talking points before?

Because if that’s what you think, you’re doin’ it wrong. The same old pseudo-scientific BS, over and over, just like parrots.

99 Carl LaFong  Nov 6, 2014 9:34:57am

re: #97 Islamo-Masonic Vourdalak

Then you don’t understand how science works. The consensus is the way for the laymen to know what is the current state of the science. The consensus itself is not based on a bunch of guys agreeing with each other. It is based on research and analysis.

re: #94 Eventual Carrion

Positive feedback from greenhouse gas releases (methane specifically with larger releases happening to further feed the feedback loop) from the heating that was growing gradually to kick it into higher gear (from linear to exponentially). The supposed natural cycle was supposed to be towards cooling, but we were successful in stopping that and turning it around.

re: #92 Backwoods_Sleuth

[Embedded content]

re: #91 William Barnett-Lewis

Read. The actual truth is out there if you are willing to learn. And with that, good day.

re: #81 wheat-dogghazi-bola

Fencepost, as in “dumb as a …”

I gave you a respectful reply to your comment that GW is a scam. I didn’t call you names. I tried to correct what I thought was a misunderstanding in an attempt to have an adult discussion.

You responded by repeating the same assertion and offering me a music video.

Then you turn around and call me and WBL haters, drop two factoids and a polar bear video, and run away.

You are clearly not interested in discussing global warming on a rational, adult level. So, I’m not going to try. It’s a waste of time and energy.

So, goodbye.

re: #72 Franklin

I’m not so sure about that. Google led me to this page here:

World’s greatest scams REVEALED

Instead of boring you with the details, I’ll spoil it by saying the #1 SCAM OF ALL TIME according to that site is a £599.99 iPhone app that just displays a shiny red gem. Now that is a scam.

So you may want to reorder your list of biggest scams.

But since you are blowing hot air, you may be interested to learn that #2 on that site above is paying £4 for a small popcorn at the theatre and getting 8p worth of kernels. The scam is the premium you pay for the hot air to pop it. Perhaps a career opportunity for you?

re: #98 Charles Johnson

Seriously… do climate change deniers think it makes them look intelligent to come into a place where people understand the issue and have seen all the denier’s bogus talking points before?

Because if that’s what you think, you’re doin’ it wrong. The same old pseudo-scientific BS, over and over, just like parrots.

Please provide link (s) to your go-to, that’s-it / slam-the-door, paper/article/study on man-made global warming.

100 Interesting Times  Nov 6, 2014 9:47:56am

The troll will either lie about or completely ignore this, but I’ll provide it here anyway for the benefit of any guests lurking on this thread, or people who stumble across it in the future:

The human fingerprint in global warming

Also see:

Lindzen is a climate contrarian. Graph shows how his predictions compare with reality vs climatologist James Hansen

101 klystron  Nov 6, 2014 9:49:02am

102 Carl LaFong  Nov 6, 2014 10:34:12am

re: #100 Interesting Times

The troll will either lie about or completely ignore this, but I’ll provide it here anyway for the benefit of any guests lurking on this thread, or people who stumble across it in the future:

The human fingerprint in global warming

Also see:

Lindzen is a climate contrarian. Graph shows how his predictions compare with reality vs climatologist James Hansen

This is all based on modeling. It’s kind of like being convinced of future Kentucky Derby winners long before the races have been run.

The chart on the linked page was created in 2004 and did / does not predict the 15-year “hiatus” of global warming we are now in. The single most catastrophic event in human history, billions of dollars granted, invested and spent; thousands of universities, their students and their professors on the case, yet they missed it. Not only did the predictions fail, the earth actually got cooler since 1998. And those who claimed the “missing heat” was actually absorbed in the oceans were dealt a blow when a NASA / Jet Propulsion Laboratory study showed the oceans had not warmed.

It’s just a scam.

103 klystron  Nov 6, 2014 10:36:50am

scam cat!

104 Backwoods_Sleuth  Nov 6, 2014 10:37:47am
105 Interesting Times  Nov 6, 2014 10:39:55am

It’s hilarious when trolls demand others give links to back up their statements, and then “rebut” those links with a pile of pulled-from-assertions they fail to back up with any links of their own.

106 Charles Johnson  Nov 6, 2014 10:40:32am
107 Islamo-Masonic Vourdalak  Nov 6, 2014 11:03:08am

re: #99 Carl LaFong

IPCC AR 5.

108 goddamnedfrank  Nov 6, 2014 12:02:59pm

re: #102 Carl LaFong

Not only did the predictions fail, the earth actually got cooler since 1998.

Nope, total bullshit.

The past decade was the hottest on record globally. Each year from 2000 to 2010, except 2008, was in the 10 warmest recorded globally.

What’s most concerning is that it should be considerably cooler than average, not hotter. Since 1997, several natural climate factors have aligned that should have produced a discernible cooling effect on global temperatures.
Advertisement

A lull in solar activity from 2005 to 2010, combined with two very strong La Niña episodes from 2010 to 2012, would be expected to produce a strong decrease in global temperatures.

Yet the world hasn’t cooled. On the contrary, global surface temperatures are moving in the opposite direction to natural climate variations, due to greenhouse gas warming.

In fact 2005 and 2010 were both measurably warmer than 1998.

And those who claimed the “missing heat” was actually absorbed in the oceans were dealt a blow when a NASA / Jet Propulsion Laboratory study showed the oceans had not warmed.

More bullshit.

Research published Sunday concluded that the upper 2,300 feet of the Southern Hemisphere’s oceans may have warmed twice as quickly after 1970 than had previously been thought. Gathering reliable ocean data in the Southern Hemisphere has historically been a challenge, given its remoteness and its relative paucity of commercial shipping, which helps gather ocean data. Argo floats and satellites are now helping to plug Austral ocean data gaps, and improving the accuracy of Northern Hemisphere measurements and estimates.

“The Argo data is really critical,” said Paul Durack, a Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory researcher who led the new study, which was published in Nature Climate Change. “The estimates that we had up until now have been pretty systematically underestimating the likely changes.”

Durack and Lawrence Livermore colleagues worked with a Jet Propulsion Laboratory scientist to compare ocean observations with ocean models. They concluded that the upper levels of the planet’s oceans — those of the northern and southern hemispheres combined — had been warming during several decades prior to 2005 at rates that were 24 to 58 percent faster than had previously been realized.

…

The other ocean temperature study, also published Sunday in Climate Nature Change, used Argo and other data to tentatively conclude that all of the ocean warming from 2005 to 2013 had occurred above depths of 6,500 feet. During the same period, the Jet Propulsion Laboratory scientists who wrote the paper concluded, the expansion of those warming waters caused a third of the planet’s 2.8 millimeters of annual sea-level rise.

109 goddamnedfrank  Nov 6, 2014 12:10:38pm

re: #90 Carl LaFong

Seriously, what happened between 1975 (global cooling) and 2006 (global warming)?

Your assertion that global cooling ever dominated climate science is a myth that doesn’t withstand any serious review of the literature.

An enduring popular myth suggests that in the 1970s the climate science community was predicting “global cooling” and an “imminent” ice age, an observation frequently used by those who would undermine what climate scientists say today about the prospect of global warming. A review of the literature suggests that, on the contrary, greenhouse warming even then dominated scientists’ thinking as being one of the most important forces shaping Earth’s climate on human time scales. More importantly than showing the falsehood of the myth, this review describes how scientists of the time built the foundation on which the cohesive enterprise of modern climate science now rests.

All you do is swallow and regurgitate bullshit.

110 b_sharp  Nov 6, 2014 12:17:25pm

re: #90 Carl LaFong

Seriously, what happened between 1975 (global cooling) and 2006 (global warming)?

Even in the ’70s the climatologists who expected warming outnumbered the number who thought it should be cooling. The people who thought it should be cooling were talking in geological time frames, not short time frames.
The number who weren’t sure was even higher.

The uncertainty was because of the new information about orbital cycles (Milankovitch cycles ) and the effects on climate.

The idea that climate scientists all thought it should be cooling was from one magazine article & one scientist.

111 b_sharp  Nov 6, 2014 12:28:53pm

re: #99 Carl LaFong

Please provide link (s) to your go-to, that’s-it / slam-the-door, paper/article/study on man-made global warming.

The IPCC reports are all online. The information in those reports are taken from 1000s of peer reviewed papers published in the top journals. The UN (IPCC) doesn’t pay any of the climatologists who work on the reports or who do the research and write the papers.

As far as man-made, it’s quite simple. The amount of carbon produced by burning fossil fuels can be calculated quite accurately and the amount of human added CO2 is higher than the amount of measured CO2 increase in the atmosphere.

All of the new CO2 in the atmosphere is from burning fossil fuels. We’ve taken it from 280ppm to 400ppm.

The CO2/carbon cycle has been stable for several million years, varying between 260ppm and 300ppm. Only by releasing carbon sequestered for millions of years could the cycle be destabilized. Nothing in nature could pump that much CO2 into the atmosphere in just 120 years.

Besides, the 65 million old carbon has a different carbon14/carbon13/carbon12 balance than modern sources.

112 b_sharp  Nov 6, 2014 12:31:07pm

re: #102 Carl LaFong

This is all based on modeling. It’s kind of like being convinced of future Kentucky Derby winners long before the races have been run.

The chart on the linked page was created in 2004 and did / does not predict the 15-year “hiatus” of global warming we are now in. The single most catastrophic event in human history, billions of dollars granted, invested and spent; thousands of universities, their students and their professors on the case, yet they missed it. Not only did the predictions fail, the earth actually got cooler since 1998. And those who claimed the “missing heat” was actually absorbed in the oceans were dealt a blow when a NASA / Jet Propulsion Laboratory study showed the oceans had not warmed.

It’s just a scam.

You are misreading that NASA study. I assume you didn’t look any further than the headlines. It stated quite clearly that the oceans below 600m (I believe) were not warming but the ocean between 0 metres and 600 metres is.

113 b_sharp  Nov 6, 2014 12:32:46pm

re: #102 Carl LaFong

This is all based on modeling. It’s kind of like being convinced of future Kentucky Derby winners long before the races have been run.

The chart on the linked page was created in 2004 and did / does not predict the 15-year “hiatus” of global warming we are now in. The single most catastrophic event in human history, billions of dollars granted, invested and spent; thousands of universities, their students and their professors on the case, yet they missed it. Not only did the predictions fail, the earth actually got cooler since 1998. And those who claimed the “missing heat” was actually absorbed in the oceans were dealt a blow when a NASA / Jet Propulsion Laboratory study showed the oceans had not warmed.

It’s just a scam.

Tell me oh wise one, why does the CO2 in the atmosphere redirect more energy coming from the surface than coming from the sun. Why is it primarily a one way slowdown of energy transfer?

114 goddamnedfrank  Nov 6, 2014 12:34:10pm
The last time the concentration of Earth’s main greenhouse gas reached this mark, horses and camels lived in the high Arctic. Seas were at least 30 feet higher—at a level that today would inundate major cities around the world.

The planet was about 2 to 3 degrees Celsius (3.6 to 5.4 degrees Fahrenheit) warmer. But the Earth then was in the final stage of a prolonged greenhouse epoch, and CO2 concentrations were on their way down. This time, 400 ppm is a milepost on a far more rapid uphill climb toward an uncertain climate future.

115 lostlakehiker  Nov 6, 2014 1:43:56pm

re: #90 Carl LaFong

Seriously, what happened between 1975 (global cooling) and 2006 (global warming)?

In 1975, Time Magazine (or was it Look?) printed an article for public consumption about a possible coming ice age. It wasn’t like there was any real science behind it, apart from the fact that there had been ice ages ages ago.

Well before 1975, indeed, nearly a century before that, Arrhenius did a pencil and paper calculation suggesting that if atmospheric CO2 were to double, temperatures could rise significantly. With just pencil and paper, he wasn’t able to put the question to bed, but he was able to raise it. The matter has been on science’s radar screen since before radar, in other words.

Now, we’re seeing it materialize. Glaciers have been in retreat since the mid 1900s, including in 1975. The rate of retreat is too great to have been in force over the past 500 or 1000 years. So it’s a new thing. Likewise, permafrost is no longer so perma. And there’s more evidence.

I get a lot of flack here for my conservative views. Please don’t write me off as just another liberal. It’s not just liberals who raise the matter of global warming, and whoever raises the matter, it’s not primarily for the purpose of advancing a hidden agenda. It’s because the problem is real. It’s your problem too, whether you understand that or not. Go get yourself a cup of coffee, paying more than you used to pay because the coffee crops are in trouble around the world as the climate heats up, and reflect.

116 Islamo-Masonic Vourdalak  Nov 6, 2014 1:50:32pm

re: #115 lostlakehiker

OK, as a conservative, what are your thoughts on the conservative denial of the GW (not to mention the AGW)?

117 Carl LaFong  Nov 6, 2014 2:13:10pm

re: #109 goddamnedfrank

Your assertion that global cooling ever dominated climate science is a myth that doesn’t withstand any serious review of the literature.

All you do is swallow and regurgitate bullshit.

CO2, Brute? Sounds hatey hatey to me.

118 lostlakehiker  Nov 6, 2014 2:18:49pm

re: #116 Islamo-Masonic Vourdalak

OK, as a conservative, what are your thoughts on the conservative denial of the GW (not to mention the AGW)?

I’m incensed. How dare they? They bring dishonor and disrepute to the work of great men now gone who had good ideas about society. Liars and frauds, half of them. Cowards and trimmers, most of the rest.

But—-I still think Scott Walker did the right thing in Wisconsin. And I don’t think that Mary Burke, who headed Trek in Europe and it was a train wreck, would have been a better governor. I think that Illinois is badly governed and that the state will be the better for having got a long overdue regime change.

As to Texas, well, right now we have a lot of wind energy up and running. And more under construction. I’ve driven past seemingly endless arrays of wind turbines out West. We’re going to be part of the solution.

119 Backwoods_Sleuth  Nov 6, 2014 2:18:56pm
120 wheat-dogghazi-bola-trality  Nov 6, 2014 6:11:36pm

Troll is only concerned about his hurt feelings, and is not paying attention to global warming evidence or arguments. Don’t waste your time.


This article has been archived.
Comments are closed.

Jump to top

Create a PageThis is the LGF Pages posting bookmarklet. To use it, drag this button to your browser's bookmark bar, and title it 'LGF Pages' (or whatever you like). Then browse to a site you want to post, select some text on the page to use for a quote, click the bookmarklet, and the Pages posting window will appear with the title, text, and any embedded video or audio files already filled in, ready to go.
Or... you can just click this button to open the Pages posting window right away.
Last updated: 2023-04-04 11:11 am PDT LGF User's Guide RSS Feeds

Help support Little Green Footballs!

Subscribe now for ad-free access!Register and sign in to a free LGF account before subscribing, and your ad-free access will be automatically enabled.

Donate with
PayPal Cash.app
Recent PagesClick to refresh
Once Praised, the Settlement to Help Sickened BP Oil Spill Workers Leaves Most With Nearly Nothing When a deadly explosion destroyed BP’s Deepwater Horizon drilling rig in the Gulf of Mexico, 134 million gallons of crude erupted into the sea over the next three months — and tens of thousands of ordinary people were hired ...
Cheechako
Yesterday
Views: 61 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 0
Texas County at Center of Border Fight Is Overwhelmed by Migrant Deaths EAGLE PASS, Tex. - The undertaker lighted a cigarette and held it between his latex-gloved fingers as he stood over the bloated body bag lying in the bed of his battered pickup truck. The woman had been fished out ...
Cheechako
4 days ago
Views: 163 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 1