Cloudy
79°
Cloudy
Hi 89° | Lo 63°

Letter: Strong words, strong action

President Obama’s plan to address global warming includes setting limits on carbon pollution from power plants, the largest source of carbon emissions in the country, advancing energy efficiency and increasing the nation’s commitment to renewable energy.

New Hampshire has been feeling the effects of climate change, from the aftermath of Hurricane Irene to increasing temperatures that are stressing the moose population to the decreasing snowfall damaging winter recreation.

The president’s policies are essential to implementing clean energy solutions to prevent further damaging consequences of climate change to our state and the nation.

I thank President Obama for backing up his strong words on global warming with strong action to clean up power plants, like Schiller and Merrimack Station, so that we can fulfill our obligation to our children and future generations by addressing global warming.

Now we need all of our elected officials to make serious efforts like the president’s.

GUS MASON

Concord

Some scientists actually believe that we are at the end of a Little Ice Age. The also believe that the ocean plays a big part in climate in regards to how the water in the ocean rises to the top every 30 or so years. We have also seen europe have some of the highest temps in the last four years cold wise. Check out Russia and Britian In the US 3,100 places reported the coldest temps this winter setting records. As far as Cook goes and his Skeptical Science. Most of what he has tried to put out there has been debunked. He said something like 93% of scientists agree with him. Yet out of 12,000 papers he cited, only 65 agreed with him, less than 1%. He also believes Al Gore is a Prophet. He also said that the amount of green house gases trapped can be compared to the rate of 4 Hiroshima Bombs per second. Yeah, he is creditable, NOT!

No, your post is confused. On your last point, the Skeptical Science post referred to discusses the additional heat being trapped as equivalent to 4 Hiroshima-type bombs every second. Here is the calculation ( note that the 4-digit numbers include exponents, so the first reads as 8 times 10 to the 21st power) : "...there has been no significant slowing in global heat accumulation, contrary to the mythical 'global warming pause'. So, how do we come up with 4 Hiroshima atomic bomb detonation equivalents per second from this data? The slope of the global heat accumulation graph tells us how rapidly the Earth's climate is building up heat. Over the past decade, the rate is 8 x 1021 Joules per year, or 2.5 x 1014 Joules per second. The yield of the Hiroshima atomic bomb was 6.3 x 1013 Joules, hence the rate of global heat accumulation is equivalent to about 4 Hiroshima bomb detonations per second. That's nearly 2 billion atomic bomb detonations worth of heat accumulating in the Earth's climate system since 1998, when we're told global warming supposedly 'paused'. That has to be the worst pause ever.The data used in Nuccitelli et al. (2012) are now available for download so you can check it out for yourself.

"Yet out of 12,000 papers he cited, only 65 agreed with him, less than 1%." That's a mighty powerful claim. How many of those papers did you read? I'd be very happy if you, Mr. Rabbit, could quote from as few as 5 PEER-REVIEWED papers that agree with your position. And while you're at it, since your argument includes record cold temperatures, perhaps you'll grace us with an exposition - in your own words - of the difference between temperature and heat. Just so we all see the full width and depth of your understanding of the science.

I suggest gracchus if you want to disprove anything I said you do the work. I do not give links anymore, because when I do, they get trashed, even if they are unbiased. I research what I say. Up to you to prove me wrong. And I have noticed that even when I am right, the folks who disagree with me have a very hard time admitting they are wrong. They just name call or change the subject.

Here is the deal Bruce. Nobody is denying Climate Change. The issue is not if we have change, the issue is how much, what is the cause, is it a cycle, etc. You assume the folks who disagree with you are denying everything. They are not. They are disagreeing with your radical views that you put forth and do nothing but fear mongering. That is because your agenda overrules everything. Your links are always biased and often times debunked, because of what you leave out in your postings. When you ask for a link and it is given, you deny that link, even if that link is unbiased. You pick and chose lines and ignore the whole debate. That is what the media does. You do this with every subject. When that does not work, you name call. It is very difficult to find a post from you that does not have name calling in it. To fix anything, you go to the extreme and never discuss what that will do in regards to jobs, economy, etc. You always believe your solution will not have bad side affects. That is why you get so angry at folks. You refuse to believe that what you champion may in fact have a bad outcome. Things can be fixed, or at least worked on to benefit everybody. Taking extreme measures without concern about the outcome solves nothing. Just keeps us stagnated.

To the contrary, with vague generalities, you've denied the climate is changing with every post you write. You say (and not for the first time): "Nobody is denying Climate Change. The issue is not if we have change, the issue is how much, what is the cause, is it a cycle, etc." But climate science has answered how much warming we've already experienced, has projected the increase we can expect by 2100, knows the causes of the present warming, and knows that we are over-riding the natural cycles of climate. You have consistently refused to acknowledge any of this. All you've ever actually acknowledged is that sometimes our planet has been colder, sometimes warmer--the rest is all a big mystery. You are in effect "denying everything" that climate science has learned in the past 4 decades.

The easiest topic to push your political agenda on is science. There are reasons for that. Folks will not call you on it unless they are well informed, and decide to take you on with your progressive Links. I have said it many times. If I give Glenn Beck as a link, I am an idiot because he is a radical. But you have no issues with providing links that are radical progressives. The hope is that folks are to uninformed to call you on it. When they do you do the same routine, name call and get arrogant. Some might even say you border on being nasty. That my friend is tunnel vision, hypocritical, and blinded by politics.

On the topic of climate change, the links I provide are always one or two mouse clicks away from the peer-reviewed science paper in question. The science and the scientists are apolitical when it comes to their research. For you to claim otherwise, by equating any of my posts on this topic as left-wing equivalents of Glenn Beck's idiocy, betrays your "tunnel vision, hypocritical, and blinded by politics." I've tried on these threads to respond to distortions and misinformation with accurate, honest, and factual scientific information. Which is more than you, sail, or itsa can say.

Sorry Bruce, I see pretty much all your links as biased. And when you are faced with a link or opinion that you disagree with, you name call and say that only your link is correct. That is not how it works. Many of you links in regard to anything are biased because of your source. Skeptical Scinece is a joke. They have been proven so time and again, yet you refuse to believe they are biased. If you do not cite a link, you just go to the name calling to support your claims, and often times do not address what is said. You take usually one sentence and leave out the rest of the post. Often times you are not concerned about cause and effect. Basically, you are all about big govt, hight taxation, and the idea that socialism works. Socialism does not work. Never has and never will.

Response to Rabbit below: You can make whatever claims you like about my links. But like it or not, they link to the actual findings of climate science. They are not "opinion"; they're the findings of numerous researchers in numerous peer-reviewed papers. Everyone is entitled to his/her own opinion, but not his own facts. The absence of actual facts in your posts betrays the extent to which your "facts" are uniquely your own.

Gus, Before granting the current resident of the WH semi-deity status because he made a speech when it was hot outside, remember we are in the "high" period of solar activity

The fact is that the Earth is warming because of man-made pollutants and has nothing to do with any type of solar activity. You really should stop listening to FOX and read what real scientists write in peer-reviewed scientific journals.

Walter, "..listen oi Fox". Disappointing - more soc/left ad hom attacks instead of addressing the data. There are points for consistency, however. Walt, how do you explain the repeated spikes in the plaents temprature - long before h.sapien?

Who are you listening to to make claims like "solar activity" is responsible for the increased warming? The number of credible climate scientists who might make that claim today probably approaches zero. How are the past episodes of warming explained? They're linked to the relationship between changes in the planet's tilt, its wobble, and orbital eccentricity, changes that happen in cycles that vary in duration, and sometimes coincide. The present warming is different; by the cycles we're in an interglacial, and might otherwise expect to enter another glacial era--in several hundred years. But we're over-riding the natural climate signals by pumping fossil CO2 into our atmosphere at an unprecedented rate, and adding it to the natural carbon cycle--the level of atmospheric CO2 is now higher than in the last two million years.

Bruce, I am impressed with you apparent grasp of the planetary science. Yes, H.Sapien has left a "footprint" of its presence on the planet - like all species do. However, we are also working to clean up and produce more "clean" tech than other other species does to the best of my knowledge. Not perfect but working on it. Practicality always impacvts the issue. clean electric/solar has been around for a long time but economically beyond the reach of many would use it for all thr right reasons. How do we solve that? (taxing all businesses out of existence is not a viable solution).

You will not get the left to address facts TCB. Their mind is made up. They have an agenda when it comes to everything, and any arguments about what the outcomes will be in regards to their agenda are never addressed or considered. Instead they will go to the extremes and ignore what is happening because of those extremes. They will call you a denier if you do not want to take the extreme approach to whatever issue they champion. The fear mongering with climate change is so the EPA can regulate everything. The EPA is a major job killer in this country and it is about to become even more extreme with the regulations they are about to enforce. There is no desire here to balance anything. The left have no clue how to balance anything. They want their agenda now, and could care less what that agenda destroys.

Response to Rabbit below: What "facts" have you addressed in any of your posts on the topic of climate change? You consistently garble the science in nearly every sentence you write. Then you impugn the motives of the scientists who study the problem, and of those who want this nation to begin to deal with the problem. There is no question that dealing with climate change will be costly, and will entail significant changes. But not dealing with the issue will be even more costly in the long term. Which path we choose will be decided by whether our economic and political systems are able to see beyond the next business quarter and beyond the 4 year election cycle. The deliberate distortions of the denier lobby do nothing to further rational debate on what is the most important issue facing our nation--it will not go away. And business as usual will only make things worse.

I'll have to try and guess what you meant to post here. Prior to h.sapiens the earth had no resemblance to what we populate now. So let's not compare apples to grapefruit, volcanic activity alone would have accounted for enough to effect the global climate.

Gus...President Obama significantly understated the global warming problem...Typical of politicians; they don't want to scare the general public.

Being a member of the "general public", a couple of things scare me. The first is the over the top, hysterical climate change crowd who would throw the baby out with the bath water if they could. The second is that anyone even listens to Obama who is the least credible authority on a host of subjects and issues. He fails to lead and focuses on ideological agenda.

Failure to lead? Leading on the issue of climate change is exactly what he's trying to do.

"Global warming is a cause embraced by scoundrel politicians and politicized scientists. They all have something to gain, and you have your freedom to loose. The "science" is an illusion and a transparent lie based on doctored data and corrupted computer models." “The planet is no longer warming. The brief warming episode of the late 20th century completed its course in the mid 1990s, and is now extinct. These are now uncontroversial statements.”

For a statistician's take on the temperature data up to the end of 2011, and who specifically addresses the false claim below that the "planet is no longer warming", see this link. http://tamino.wordpress.com/2012/01/21/2011-temperature-roundup/

LOL, he is failing to lead on every single issue. We are the laughing stock of the world. He is like a shepard and those following him are the sheep. The problem is that the shepard is saying....."this way, this way" leading the flock but in his head he is saying: "I have no clue where I am, but, I know everything so I am sure we will find our way home". It is stunning to watch the stupidity of this president and those who knee jerking support him at any cost.

Post a Comment

You must be registered to comment on stories. Click here to register.