I’m thinking that frog is just about boiled by now
I went out to bring in my newspaper this morning and thought I had been transported to south Florida. As I write, at 7:50 a.m. in the middle of January, it is 63 degrees outside.
And then of course there’s stuff like this:
A massive dust storm approaches the western coast of Australia by sea.
And that’s not all, not by a long shot:
WORCESTER, England — Britons may remember 2012 as the year the weather spun off its rails in a chaotic concoction of drought, deluge and flooding, but the unpredictability of it all turns out to have been all too predictable: Around the world, extreme has become the new commonplace.
Especially lately. China is enduring its coldest winter in nearly 30 years. Brazil is in the grip of a dreadful heat spell. Eastern Russia is so freezing — minus 50 degrees Fahrenheit, and counting — that the traffic lights recently stopped working in the city of Yakutsk.
Bush fires are raging across Australia, fueled by a record-shattering heat wave. Pakistan was inundated by unexpected flooding in September. A vicious storm bringing rain, snow and floods just struck the Middle East. And in the United States, scientists confirmed this week what people could have figured out simply by going outside: Last year was the hottest since records began.
“Each year we have extreme weather, but it’s unusual to have so many extreme events around the world at once,” said Omar Baddour, chief of the data management applications division at the World Meteorological Association, in Geneva. “The heat wave in Australia; the flooding in the U.K., and most recently the flooding and extensive snowstorm in the Middle East — it’s already a big year in terms of extreme weather calamity.”
Such events are increasing in intensity as well as frequency, Mr. Baddour said, a sign that climate change is not just about rising temperatures, but also about intense, unpleasant, anomalous weather of all kinds.
Palestinians in Hebron put the finishing touches on a snowman after record snowfalls hit the area. (AP)
– Jay Bookman
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
252 comments Add your comment
Keep Up the Good Fight!
January 11th, 2013
9:20 am
I’ll reserve judgement on the photos. the photos don’t impact my assessment of global warming one way or the other
Translation: I don’t need no stinkin facts or evidence. Benghazi!
Adam
January 11th, 2013
9:21 am
Matti @ 9:19a
DownInAlbany
January 11th, 2013
9:21 am
All time warm temperatures in places, all time lows in others…and they are BOTH caused by global warming? I understand Al Gore has some carbon credits he’ll sell you!
No joke, folks, there is no debating that it is warmer here than in the past. But, snow in Israel is caused by the same? Unfortunately, Jay’s cut-and-paste job doesn’t offer any viable solutions. Our business has investigated the possibility of installing solar panels. It will take us 12.3 years to recoup the initial investment. Economically, it doesn’t add up…at least not for us. A business associate is working to develop a 100-acre solar farm here, but, admittedly, he and his family already have more money than Belize.
F. Sinkwich
January 11th, 2013
9:24 am
“As will the Sinkwiches, of course.”
Not sure about the Mrs. but I will indeed.
td
January 11th, 2013
9:24 am
Welcome to the Occupation
January 11th, 2013
9:19 am
Yes, the proletariat must rise up and save the plant from the bourgeoisie.
Jm
January 11th, 2013
9:25 am
here you go dimwits
http://mashable.com/2012/10/29/fake-hurricane-sandy-photos/
The other half of your brain.
January 11th, 2013
9:25 am
Well I guess I can bring back my short-shorts.
JamVet
January 11th, 2013
9:26 am
DannyX,
Jerry Falwell Warns Christians: Global Warming is a Satanic Myth.
And…
Right-wing preacher Jerry Falwell is decrying global warming as “Satan’s attempt to redirect the church’s primary focus” from evangelism to environmentalism.
No worries, it’s probably a tad warmish where the Faith-based Fraud is these days! (grin)
Republicans are some of the strangest people in the history of our species…
Jm
January 11th, 2013
9:26 am
more?
http://theweek.com/article/index/235578/10-fake-photos-of-hurricane-sandy
Cherokee
January 11th, 2013
9:27 am
leading ’scientist”?
so there’s just one?
fedup
January 11th, 2013
9:27 am
JHM, that was a good one with C and F. You might have to explain to the cons. Science is not their strong point.
Welcome to the Occupation
January 11th, 2013
9:28 am
2: Leading scientist in the area to begin with are now coming out and either saying it is a hoax, is not really a problem or it may be a natural occurrence.
It’s clearly a “hoax”, yes. Just like the “hoax” of gun slaughters we’ve been hearing about. The devastation in places like Australia is just cooked up by some media cabal with overworked imaginations. If you were to go there in person and view it, then compare it to historical norms, you’d just shrug your shoulders and rest at ease. Just like if you were to go into one of these schools where dozens of children were ground up in the meat grinder of military assault weapons turned loose on them you’d just ignore your blood-drenched shoes and the floors strewn with the messy remains of the children, all the bone and brain and organ matter of still developing young children, laid to waste.
Cause after all, it’s just a hoax right?
JamVet
January 11th, 2013
9:29 am
so oopsy gets b*tch-slapped for saying the photo in question was doctored.
And then he does what?
He begs for more.
To the point in the last sentence in my last post, there is your evidence!
Bring back the Flat Earth or God will punish you!
Joe Hussein Mama
January 11th, 2013
9:29 am
jm — “more storm photos”
Those sure are some big haboobies.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haboob
Doggone/GA
January 11th, 2013
9:29 am
“more?”
you weren’t asked for examples of fake photos, we already know they exist. You were asked for PROOF that HALF of such photos are faked. Got proof?
Aquagirl
January 11th, 2013
9:30 am
here you go dimwits
Jm seems to be under the assumption everyone forwards and prints things without checking them out. Jay’s column isn’t like td’s e-mail, hon. It’s called using your brain.
stands for decibels
January 11th, 2013
9:30 am
By the way, this “debate” over climate change isn’t just about disagreeing with ME, personally
Good point. People seem to forget that the debate is really about whether or not Al Gore is fat.
Granny Godzilla
January 11th, 2013
9:30 am
td
Leading scientist in the area to begin with are now coming out and either saying it is a hoax, is not really a problem or it may be a natural occurrence.
.
.
.
Who is this leading scientist?
Keep Up the Good Fight!
January 11th, 2013
9:30 am
No joke, folks, there is no debating that it is warmer here than in the past. But, snow in Israel is caused by the same?
Yep can be. But if you were truly informed you would know that.
Funny how solar panels are not “effective” in Albany but they are in North Fulton for some businesses. But then perhaps assumptions differed, technology differed, opportunity costs differed.
Adam
January 11th, 2013
9:33 am
td: Leading scientist in the area to begin with are now coming out and either saying it is a hoax, is not really a problem or it may be a natural occurrence.
I know you say you provided links before, but honestly I cannot find them. I forgot the thread they are on. Can you please provide them again so I can read?
barking frog
January 11th, 2013
9:33 am
Keep Up
Allbenny is different.
Keep Up the Good Fight!
January 11th, 2013
9:33 am
Stands, you fool, the debate is not about whether Al Gore is fat or not?, its about whether he sold out to “them”
stands for decibels
January 11th, 2013
9:33 am
Who is this leading scientist?
And when did he sign the petition project?
td
January 11th, 2013
9:34 am
Welcome to the Occupation
January 11th, 2013
9:28 am
“meat grinder of military assault weapons”
Another huge hoax. The military does not use the AR-15. They are NOT military weapons.
Granny Godzilla
January 11th, 2013
9:35 am
Leading Scientist and associate.
http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=Mr.+Peabody&id=295AEB4031F5E1F39A70D445D6FFD950C66EACA7&FORM=IQFRBA#view=detail&id=295AEB4031F5E1F39A70D445D6FFD950C66EACA7&selectedIndex=0
GT
January 11th, 2013
9:36 am
The right has taken the trend of the dumbed down society and made it into a political party. Growing up in the south I would at an early age listen to straight face lies about why whites were superior and listen to some of the sorriest people I had ever met tell me how sorry someone else was. These people are trying to prove Darwin wrong in more than just Monkey Trials, they are showing us the less educated, truthful and moral have become the worshiped and models of the generation.
Reality trumps entertainment, as you grow old you will see this. To base your lives on a beauty contest of this looks better than that so we will take this path will get you lost every time, the sad think is you are taking all of us with you. We will be right but what good is living in hell, being right.
td
January 11th, 2013
9:36 am
Granny Godzilla
January 11th, 2013
9:30 am
Go to Jay’s other story this week on global warming. I posted at least 6 or 7 links from scientist (one of which was touted as a leading scientist on global warming 15 years ago).
Adam
January 11th, 2013
9:37 am
td: What is the civilian purpose of an AR-15?
stands for decibels
January 11th, 2013
9:37 am
its about whether he sold out to “them”
Dude. We dirty effing hippies long ago shorthanded the deniers’ argument to four simple words:
“Al Gore is fat.”
That’s all you need to know. The rest is commentary.
stands for decibels
January 11th, 2013
9:38 am
GG, don’t you DARE besmirch the inventor of the WABAC machine or his pet boy like that.
Granny Godzilla
January 11th, 2013
9:39 am
td
You mean with only 1 leading scientist YOU CAN”T EVEN REMEMBER HIS NAME?
Call me skeptical.
Aquagirl
January 11th, 2013
9:39 am
Leading Scientist and associate.
Piffle. These guys are clearly the scientists with the right stuff:
http://crave.cnet.co.uk/gadgets/top-ten-geek-haircuts-49293713/3/
Adam
January 11th, 2013
9:39 am
http://www.skepticalscience.com/The-Scientific-Guide-to-Global-Warming-Skepticism.html
DannyX
January 11th, 2013
9:40 am
“Who is this leading scientist?”
My guess is that this “leading scientist” recently deposited a big fat check signed by an oil company exec.
Granny Godzilla
January 11th, 2013
9:40 am
stands
i do sooo apologize for the besmirchering.
USinUK - not very ladylike (and former Girl Scout)
January 11th, 2013
9:41 am
“We dirty effing hippies long ago shorthanded the deniers’ argument to four simple words:”
there are days you so rock my world.
this is one of them
td
January 11th, 2013
9:42 am
Adam
January 11th, 2013
9:37 am
td: What is the civilian purpose of an AR-15?
The civilian purpose is the reason the founding fathers wrote the amendment to start with. To protect the nation from the tyrannical intent of the government.
Granny Godzilla
January 11th, 2013
9:44 am
Aquagirl
I find Dr. Honeydew strangely attractive….
Granny Godzilla
January 11th, 2013
9:45 am
“To protect the nation from the tyrannical intent of the government.”
.
.
.
.
Paranoia – Part of any good mental health check.
The other half of your brain.
January 11th, 2013
9:45 am
Our business has investigated the possibility of installing solar panels. It will take us 12.3 years to recoup the initial investment. Economically, it doesn’t add up…at least not for us. A business associate is working to develop a 100-acre solar farm here, but, admittedly, he and his family already have more money than Belize.
Down in Albany, You are missing hte big picture, you are supposed to invest like SOLYNDRA, then it will be provitable, you silly boy.
USinUK - not very ladylike (and former Girl Scout)
January 11th, 2013
9:46 am
“I find Dr. Honeydew strangely attractive….”
stands for decibels
January 11th, 2013
9:47 am
The civilian purpose is the reason the founding fathers wrote the amendment to start with. To protect the nation from the tyrannical intent of the government.
“every word [he] writes is a lie, including ‘and’ and ‘the’.”
mm
January 11th, 2013
9:47 am
“more than 1/2 the time these stupid photos are fake”
Everything is a fake or a lie unless it comes from the snout of Saint Rushbo.
The other half of your brain.
January 11th, 2013
9:47 am
Granny Godzilla
January 11th, 2013
9:45 am
“To protect the nation from the tyrannical intent of the government.”
.
.
.
.
Paranoia – Part of any good mental health check.
Granny, maybe you should ask some soldiers and Blacks about the experiments that were conducted on them by our Govt. Just sayin.
Joe Hussein Mama
January 11th, 2013
9:48 am
td — “The civilian purpose is the reason the founding fathers wrote the amendment to start with. To protect the nation from the tyrannical intent of the government.”
Show us your militia ID and dog tags.
Keep Up the Good Fight!
January 11th, 2013
9:48 am
Time to start my honeydewafterdark website.
Morality?
January 11th, 2013
9:48 am
And the brilliant know-it-all Jammy Codder predicted we would run out of gas in 1976! More hysteria from the Chicken Little’s of the world.
td
January 11th, 2013
9:48 am
From below:
“John Coleman, the founder of The Weather Channel, and various other critics have called the theory that human use of carbon-based fossil fuels will lead to catastrophic global warming or climate change a “hoax.” It is, but it’s more than that, it’s criminal.”
http://www.forbes.com/sites/markhendrickson/2012/09/16/climate-change-hoax-or-crime-of-the-century/2/
“nfluential scientist James Lovelock admits that he’s been a bit of an alarmist (read: fear-monger) when it comes to matters of global warming and climate change. Though he wouldn’t call himself a “denier” by any stretch of the imagination, he concedes that the earth really hasn’t changed as much as he apocalyptically predicted it would, and throws other environmental activists under the bus as well, including Al Gore.
“Before this century is over billions of us will die and the few breeding pairs of people that survive will be in the Arctic where the climate remains tolerable,” he said back in 2006. Now, 6 years later, he told MSNBC that he had been “extrapolating too far,” in recent years.
A favorite of the environmental movement, Lovelock is probably best-known for his “Gaia” model of the earth as a single organism. The 92-year-old scientist is writing a new book in which he will say climate change is still a very real issue, but that it’s just not happening as fast as he once thought.
Even though the world isn’t much warmer that it was 12 years ago, according to Lovelock’s old theories, “we were supposed to be halfway toward a frying world now,” which seems hardly the world we live in. He admitted, “The problem is we don’t know what the climate is doing. We thought we knew 20 years ago. That led to some alarmist books – mine included – because it looked clear-cut, but it hasn’t happened,” Lovelock said.”
“The world has not warmed up very much since the millennium. Twelve years is a reasonable time… it (the temperature) has stayed almost constant, whereas it should have been rising — carbon dioxide is rising, no question about that,” he added. Though he has not changed his mind about climate change, he has changed his extremist doomsday-laden positions, and calls Al Gore’s “An Inconvenient Truth” and Tim Flannery’s “The Weather Makers” as other examples of “alarmist” forecasts of the future.”
Sounds like some of the posters on here read his first book and took it as gospel.
Read more at http://www.inquisitr.com/224934/global-warming-scientist-james-lovelock-admits-to-being-an-alarmist/#gotHxccJl0Q1jCXS.99
td
January 11th, 2013
9:49 am
Joe Hussein Mama
January 11th, 2013
9:48 am
td — “The civilian purpose is the reason the founding fathers wrote the amendment to start with. To protect the nation from the tyrannical intent of the government.”
Show us your militia ID and dog tags.
The 2nd Amendment says I do not need them to own guns
Aquagirl
January 11th, 2013
9:50 am
I find Dr. Honeydew strangely attractive….
And this is where the thread takes a sudden turn to a dark place…..
stands for decibels
January 11th, 2013
9:50 am
“John Coleman, the founder of The Weather Channel
whose degree is in, what scientific discipline, again?
USinUK - not very ladylike (and former Girl Scout)
January 11th, 2013
9:50 am
“And the brilliant know-it-all Jammy Codder predicted we would run out of gas in 1976!”
bollocks.
no he didn’t.
he said that we would run out of petroleum – which we will (there is only so much on the planet) – but he didn’t say that it would happen BEFORE HE WAS ELECTED. numpty.
Rightwing Troll
January 11th, 2013
9:52 am
“Lotsa weather observations with no facts about cause. But as we’ve learned all too well over the last four years, a crisis, real or perceived, is a terrible thing to waste, particularily if it can be used to extract treasure from the productive for transfer to the not-so-much.”
Denier ilks are a funny lot… dissenting climate change denying scientists are to the field as Karl Rove, Dick Morris, and internal Republican pollsters were to the presidential polls last year…
Sea rising alarmists aside, this extreme weather we’re seeing was predicted as far back as the early 90’s.
Welcome to the Occupation
January 11th, 2013
9:52 am
td: “Another huge hoax. The military does not use the AR-15. They are NOT military weapons.”
You’re splitting hairs, trying to evade the issue. The model was designed for the US military. The fact that the military version is a different model is irrelevant. These are military-style weapons.
DannyX
January 11th, 2013
9:52 am
“SOLYNDRA”
Hey td, was that leading scientist Dr Solyndra Benghazi?
I hear he got his PhD from Phoenix University.
stands for decibels
January 11th, 2013
9:52 am
Granny, maybe you should ask some soldiers and Blacks about the experiments that were conducted on them by our Govt.
Hey, remember when the 2nd Amendment Right to Arm Bears saved those poor SOBs who were the subject of grotesque pseudo-science experimentation?
Neither do I.
td
January 11th, 2013
9:52 am
Granny Godzilla
January 11th, 2013
9:45 am
“To protect the nation from the tyrannical intent of the government.”
.
Paranoia – Part of any good mental health check.
So I guess our founding fathers were paranoid because it was their intent and the reason they wrote this individual right into the Constitution and specifically said “shall not be infringed” .
TBS
January 11th, 2013
9:55 am
Uh oh
“The difference now is the source: Muller is a long-standing, colorful critic of prevailing climate science, and the Berkeley project was heavily funded by the Charles Koch Charitable Foundation, which, along with its libertarian petrochemical billionaire founder Charles G. Koch, has a considerable history of backing groups that deny climate change. ”
http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-pn-kochfunded-climate-change-skeptic-reverses-course-20120729,0,7372823.story
stands for decibels
January 11th, 2013
9:56 am
I’ve posted variations on this theme in the past, but I think Rude Pundit has picked up the Hitler ball and run down the Hitler field and spiked the Hitler gun control arguments in the Hitler end zone pretty Hitler well.
Also Hitler.
http://rudepundit.blogspot.com/2013/01/sorry-gun-nuts-hitler-actually-relaxed.html
Here’s the deal, oh, sweet, stupid gun nuts: Have a history lesson. Gun control laws had nothing to do with the rise of the Nazis or the Holocaust. In fact, they were initially part of the Treaty of Versailles at the end of World War I, punishing Germany by eliminating private ownership of guns. In the Weimar Republic, new laws liberalized gun ownership, allowing hunting rifles and more. The other gun control laws in Germany post-WWI were specifically put in to prevent armed takeover of the government by groups like the Nazi Party, which did not, in fact, stage a coup, but used electoral power to solidify its hold on the government (along with the Gestapo and the repression of demonized Communist groups). In fact, Hitler and the Third Reich opened up gun ownership even more, even if they did ban all Jews from owning guns. Yeah, the 1938 law said “a hunting license entitles the holder to carry firearms and handguns.” That was new. It also lowered the age of gun ownership from 20 to 18 and changed one-year permits to three-year.
[...]
If you think you need to be armed with assault weapons because you might have to fight a government that wants to take your assault weapons away through laws passed by a legally-elected body, you are a traitor and kind of a dick. And if that’s the best you’ve got for your argument on why you need to have military style weapons, then you, dear, dumb friend, are believing a whole heaping shovelful of lies.
Aquagirl
January 11th, 2013
9:56 am
whose degree is in, what scientific discipline, again?
I’m confused as to who the leading scientist is, we have three possibilities:
1) An Economics professor who writes for Forbes.
2) The journalist who started the Weather Channel.
3) The 92 year old man who postulated the Gaia hypothesis, and says global warming is real.
Adam
January 11th, 2013
9:57 am
td: The civilian purpose is the reason the founding fathers wrote the amendment to start with. To protect the nation from the tyrannical intent of the government.
Actually that wasn’t the intent. The intent was to protect from FOREIGN invaders, as part of a well regulated militia, absent a standing army.
Look it up.
And anyway, what do you hope to accomplish against a “tyrannical” (you keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means) government that has drones? You think the second amendment allows you to have drones as well?
Keep Up the Good Fight!
January 11th, 2013
9:58 am
Kids must die so that we can be ready to fight the Tryanny of an American Castro or other imaginary government. Remember, its the wingnuts that decide what is tyranny. It will be 1776 all over again. why you would never hear that word used for, say, a duly elected President carrying out the will of the majority of Americans following the constitution.
And climate change is all part of the tyranny.
GOP buffoonery and a good reason to deny clowns who spout such buffoonery as too crazy to be permitted to have a gun.
Preppers be crazy.
Joe Hussein Mama
January 11th, 2013
9:58 am
td — ““John Coleman, the founder of The Weather Channel, and various other critics have called the theory that human use of carbon-based fossil fuels will lead to catastrophic global warming or climate change a “hoax.” It is, but it’s more than that, it’s criminal.”
From a few days ago, my dad’s a “doctor.” Can he do open-heart surgery on you?
He’s not a physician or a surgeon, but that shouldn’t bother you. After all, you’re citing the climatological opinion of a man who’s not a climatologist. So having my dad the microbiologist cut you open shouldn’t be a problem, either.
td — “The 2nd Amendment says I do not need them to own guns”
2nd Amendment says “well-regulated” militia. Founding fathers also said “no standing army.” So if cons want to be all ‘original intent’ and stuff, then the meaning is clear.
No standing military.
Militia instead.
And individuals desiring to own firearms should *be in* that “well-regulated” militia.
The other half of your brain.
January 11th, 2013
9:58 am
stands for decibels
January 11th, 2013
9:52 am
Granny, maybe you should ask some soldiers and Blacks about the experiments that were conducted on them by our Govt.
Hey, remember when the 2nd Amendment Right to Arm Bears saved those poor SOBs who were the subject of grotesque pseudo-science experimentation?
Neither do I.
Hey!, remember when you had a brain and could comprehend what people were writing. Thought not, sport.
td
January 11th, 2013
9:59 am
Welcome to the Occupation
January 11th, 2013
9:52 am
td: “Another huge hoax. The military does not use the AR-15. They are NOT military weapons.”
You’re splitting hairs, trying to evade the issue. The model was designed for the US military. The fact that the military version is a different model is irrelevant. These are military-style weapons.
You do not know what you are talking about. The AR-15 LOOKS like the M-16 but the functionality is totally different and is therefore not a military weapon. I guess it is the looks that scare all you progressives. The AR-15 is no different, functionality wise, then most of the guns hunters use everyday. Matter of fact, it is a smaller caliber (smaller bullet) then what hunters use.
the cat
January 11th, 2013
9:59 am
I have to give props to td. He/she/it is shot down, laughed at, ridiculed, proven wrong EVERY.SINGLE.DAY on here but he/she/it keeps coming back for more.
Most would just slink away.
indigo
January 11th, 2013
10:00 am
F. Sinkwich
Do you believe cigarete smoking is dangerous?
Or, is it just liberal Govt. propaganda?
td
January 11th, 2013
10:01 am
Joe Hussein Mama
January 11th, 2013
9:58 am
And you can cite SCOTUS decisions and quotes from our founding fathers to back up your interpretation?
mm
January 11th, 2013
10:02 am
““To protect the nation from the tyrannical intent of the government.”
Funny how this sh*t only comes up when a Democrat is in the WH. Same with the national debt.
Adam
January 11th, 2013
10:03 am
Behold, td’s “many links”
www. inquisitr.com/224934/global-warming-scientist-james-lovelock-admits-to-being-an-alarmist/#gotHxccJl0Q1jCXS.99
redwhitebluenews.com/?p=7670
www. infiniteunknown.net/2012/06/06/eco-fascist-james-hansen-admits-global-warming-is-not-man-made/
www. forbes.com/sites/markhendrickson/2012/09/16/climate-change-hoax-or-crime-of-the-century/2/
Three out of 4 are from anti-climate change sites spinning the whole thing as a hoax, and every single one of them is based on hearsay, not any science presented.
It’s one thing for a scientist to simply say “It’s a hoax!” and it’s another for them to present science that debunks the entire body of evidence that shows otherwise and does so in a peer-reviewed manner.
So let me take a look at these links for a bit, and I’ll be back with some choice passages showing just how much logical fallacy went into crafting the arguments.
indigo
January 11th, 2013
10:04 am
td
Do you enjoy posting ignorance?
http://facts.randomhistory.com/2009/01/29_global-warming.html
Adam
January 11th, 2013
10:04 am
Though he wouldn’t call himself a “denier” by any stretch of the imagination, he concedes that the earth really hasn’t changed as much as he apocalyptically predicted it would
Read more at http://www.inquisitr.com/224934/global-warming-scientist-james-lovelock-admits-to-being-an-alarmist/#YreWQvEAHHqj2Kw2.99
Which basically says only that he wasn’t right about prediction, not that he’s wrong about the earth warming.
That’s ONE, td.
Aquagirl
January 11th, 2013
10:04 am
And you can cite SCOTUS decisions and quotes from our founding fathers to back up your interpretation?
Will you accept blather from Forbes opinion writers and TV entrepreneurs in this matter? It seems good enough for you in others.
stands for decibels
January 11th, 2013
10:06 am
Actually that wasn’t the intent.
You’re saying…it was part of a constitution, and not a suicide pact?
Oh, now it makes sense. Thanks.
Mick
January 11th, 2013
10:06 am
Oh my freakin god!! Where art thou bosch? The paranoia contingent against tyranny – give me back my bullets???
Seriously Folks
January 11th, 2013
10:06 am
Okay. I cannot believe that folks think humans have NOTHING to do with climate change. So, here is a little experiment that you can do at home (although i HIGHLY recommend against it)! To start, we have to ALL agree that our planet supports life via the fact of the ozone…you know, keeps oxygen in to produce/support life? Got it?? (and if you lose ANYONE on this argument, i doubt they ever took a science class!!!). So, the ozone in our little experiment is used to keep things in to support life and protect us….so lets substitute the ozone (a protective shield, etc) for, say, your greenhouse (or garage..same concept). NOW…in your greenhouse, lots of things grow..filter the air, support life…got it? Now, go and park your car in the greenhouse, turn on the engine and let it run for a while….what the hell do you think would happen inside your greenhouse?? ANYONE?? (and by the way, I would not recommend entering the greenhouse and breathing the air)….
Just a shame that a simple experiment like that could elicit so much “disagreement”. Sheesh!!!
Joe Hussein Mama
January 11th, 2013
10:07 am
td — “And you can cite SCOTUS decisions and quotes from our founding fathers to back up your interpretation?”
How about you go ahead and do that right now?
Explain to us exactly when and where the SCOTUS held that the phrase “well-regulated militia” could be ignored by all and sundry?
barking frog
January 11th, 2013
10:08 am
The best argument for keeping assault weapons is for protection
from the pro-gun advocates.
Adam
January 11th, 2013
10:08 am
But today The Mail on Sunday can reveal that a leading member of Prof Muller’s team has accused him of trying to mislead the public by hiding the fact that BEST’s research shows global warming has stopped.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2055191/Scientists-said-climate-change-sceptics-proved-wrong-accused-hiding-truth-colleague.html#ixzz2HgCaiZHl
Except that BEST’s data says nothing of the sort. The person being accusatory is actually just being accusatory, and using cherry picked data to make the point. In fact, the cherry picked data shows up in the very graph Daily Mail presents:
http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2011/10/30/article-2055191-0E974B4300000578-6_634×639.jpg
As you can see, they chose only the last decade for the bottom graph, making it appear as though global warming has just stopped, and that means humans are not causing it.
This is not the case, as you can see from the top graph BEST’s own data shows. In fact, when placing that data against CO2 data, you see a strong correlation, which is the point Muller has been making.
That’s TWO, td.
td
January 11th, 2013
10:09 am
Adam
January 11th, 2013
9:57 am
td: The civilian purpose is the reason the founding fathers wrote the amendment to start with. To protect the nation from the tyrannical intent of the government.
Actually that wasn’t the intent. The intent was to protect from FOREIGN invaders, as part of a well regulated militia, absent a standing army.
Look it up.
[The Constitution preserves] the advantage of being armed which Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation…(where) the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms.
—James Madison,The Federalist Papers, No. 46.
Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed; as they are in almost every kingdom in Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops that can be, on any pretence, raised in the United States. A military force, at the command of Congress, can execute no laws, but such as the people perceive to be just and constitutional; for they will possess the power, and jealousy will instantly inspire the inclination, to resist the execution of a law which appears to them unjust and oppressive.
—Noah Webster, An Examination of the Leading Principles of the Federal Constitution (Philadelphia 1787).
stands for decibels
January 11th, 2013
10:10 am
give me back my bullets
You know, there seems to be a lot of dispute over just what that Skynyrd song is really all about.
http://www.songmeanings.net/songs/view/43507/
I don’t claim to know, myself.
Erwin's cat
January 11th, 2013
10:12 am
lions, and tigers, and bears…oh my!
td
January 11th, 2013
10:14 am
Joe Hussein Mama
January 11th, 2013
10:07 am
td — “And you can cite SCOTUS decisions and quotes from our founding fathers to back up your interpretation?”
How about you go ahead and do that right now?
Explain to us exactly when and where the SCOTUS held that the phrase “well-regulated militia” could be ignored by all and sundry?
Define militia as intended by the founding fathers?
Keep Up the Good Fight!
January 11th, 2013
10:14 am
“Quit using my quotes out of context for your prepper tyranny buffoonery. We fought a revolution against a King, not our own duly elected government.” – Thomas Jefferson
RB from Gwinnett
January 11th, 2013
10:14 am
USinUK, “rather than those of us who are trying to DO something to stop global warming)”
I sure wish ya’ll would make up your minds if it’s “global warming” or “global climate change” and stick with 1 irrational crisis to whine about. Tell me again what caused the warming after the ice age that killed the dinosaurs….Was that Bush’s bad environmental policy too?
Aquagirl
January 11th, 2013
10:15 am
Faux News Poindexter Soshalizm Alert!
““But even worse is the way some textbooks are pushing the liberal agenda,” the Fox News host explained, pointing to an algebra worksheet that Scholastic says gives students “[i]nsight into the distributive property as it applies to multiplication.”
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/01/10/eric-bolling-schools-pushing-the-liberal-agenda-by-teaching-algebra/
Adam
January 11th, 2013
10:15 am
Eco-Fascist James Hansen Admits Global Warming is Not Man-Made
http://www.infiniteunknown.net/2012/06/06/eco-fascist-james-hansen-admits-global-warming-is-not-man-made/
From one of the buried links in this one:
After spending more than a decade observing the glaciers in Greenland, scientists have concluded that they are not melting with the veracity that climate change alarmists would have us believe.
This means that the warning of several feet of rising seas that were purveyed by Al Gore in his film An Inconvenient Truth, will actually only be a significant rise by inches.
IOW, the “it’s a hoax” people are merely making the case that we do not have to worry about a rapid rise in sea levels that immediately overwhelms us, STILL letting us all know that, in fact, global warming is happening.
And then there’s this:
The consensus, Hansen claims is that “the warming is at least in part a consequence of increasing anthropogenic greenhouse gases (GHGs)” – asserting this is conjecture while ignoring the science that was actually given, and specifically suggesting the science doesn’t exist.
Although the climate change computer models used by the ICPP and Hansen are focused on “business as usual” scenarios with rapidly increasing GHGs, that has not been the case in real world observation by environmental scientists across the globe.
- Again making the case that global warming is real, just not as rapid as first predicted.
According to a press release, at the University of Alabama, Spencer said: “The satellite observations suggest there is much more energy lost to space during and after warming than the climate models show. There is a huge discrepancy between the data and the forecasts that is especially big over the oceans.”
- Again making the case that global warming is real, just not as rapid as first predicted.
Basically nothing in the article shows that global warming isn’t man made. Instead, it relies on the idea that the models predict a more rapid change than is now found to be happening, and then uses that to erroneously assert that this necessarily means that climate change is not man made.
For clarity, “man made” when I use it means “man assisted” and that man is mostly the cause, but does not deny that other natural factors do exist that keep the planet warm. IOW, man is causing a warming effect that would not be present without man’s assistance, hence “man made global warming.”
That’s THREE, td.
Peter
January 11th, 2013
10:16 am
Thank you Jm for this statement……… That said, climate change is real and needs addressing.
Hard to beleive with all the cutting of the Amazon, along with autos, tar, and cement, more folks don’t get it.
Southwillriseagain
January 11th, 2013
10:17 am
global warming…what a crock!!! The world has experienced extremes in the past and they will continue. No amount of money or regulations can change it…just like gun control bs…it’s all about control, nothing else!
USinUK - not very ladylike (and former Girl Scout)
January 11th, 2013
10:17 am
“I sure wish ya’ll would make up your minds if it’s “global warming” or “global climate change” and stick with 1 irrational crisis to whine about. ”
yes. because things can ONLY be called one thing. god forbid we have more than one name for something – it confuses the addle-minded.
td
January 11th, 2013
10:18 am
Joe Hussein Mama
January 11th, 2013
10:07 am
I think this founder was talking directly to you:
[W]hereas, to preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms, and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them; nor does it follow from this, that all promiscuously must go into actual service on every occasion. The mind that aims at a select militia, must be influenced by a truly anti-republican principle; and when we see many men disposed to practice upon it, whenever they can prevail, no wonder true republicans are for carefully guarding against it.
—Richard Henry Lee, The Pennsylvania Gazette, Feb. 20, 1788.
Erwin's cat
January 11th, 2013
10:18 am
any links to successful hindcasting?
Adam
January 11th, 2013
10:18 am
http://www.forbes.com/sites/markhendrickson/2012/09/16/climate-change-hoax-or-crime-of-the-century/2/
Climate Change: ‘Hoax’ Or Crime Of The Century?
This says EXACTLY NOTHING about whether climate change is real, or if humans have a cause, but merely says that the cost would be too great to do anything to reduce CO2 emissions. The headline is EXTREMELY misleading. And it was quite a short read too.
That’s FOUR, td. And the final one.
stands for decibels
January 11th, 2013
10:18 am
the advantage of being armed which Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation…(where) the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms.
Whereas we DO trust the people–in a well regulated militia. Sure.
That’s quite distinct from today’s right wing gun fellators won’t even stand for having their weapons registered, let alone attend regular Government-funded training so that they don’t do the kind of foolish things that are the stuff of legend among such folk.
RB from Gwinnett
January 11th, 2013
10:19 am
And while we’re at it, lib alarmists, if all this oil we’re sucking out of the ground is indeed from fossils as your beloved scientists THEORIZE, what was living in the vast wasteland that is the middle east oil fields in large enough quantities to have produced all this fossilized material? And what happened to all of it? Did that climate change too? And which Bush policy caused it?
JamVet
January 11th, 2013
10:19 am
…predicted we would run out of gas in 1976!
Yes, in the GOP world of made up stupidity, I’m sure that happened…
Adam
January 11th, 2013
10:20 am
Now then, I trust I’ve made my point, and td has been shown to present links that don’t actually make his but merely assert it, in headlines and badly written and badly sourced (by which I mean it’s clear even the author didn’t read them) articles.
the cat
January 11th, 2013
10:22 am
Stands-what a fabulous link, thanks!
Keep Up the Good Fight!
January 11th, 2013
10:23 am
Well there now, we the GOP wingnuts have a great solution to climate change. We make your kids into crude oil. Problem solved.
Now where do I order my $28 Obamacare pizza?
Adam
January 11th, 2013
10:23 am
As for guns, you have paranoid delusions if you think the government is angling to come and take all your guns from you so a dictator can be appointed. Especially since NO ONE has suggested confiscation on a level of law or regulation, and NO ONE has suggested ALL guns can be taken away.
SCOTUS said, and recently, that handguns for home defense are the epitome of “shall not be infringed,” but that SPECIFICALLY having guns in schools is the epitome of “reasonable regulation” that IS ALLOWED.
Who was the one who wrote that part of the majority opinion?
Scalia. Right down to the part about how the second amendment is NOT UNLIMITED.