Climate change is the process of weather systems shifting and changing caused by global warming fyi

So Rebecca, we had global warming during the Wisconsin Glacial Episode? How? There weren't any cars!

Volcanoes released massive amounts of greenhouse gases as well as particulates that traps sunlight to cause and then accelerate the rate of warming

agree the problem is that people are living in places they never did 30-50 years ago
(more shoreline development, battery park city, lake & river side....) the storms are NOT worse than they used to be and stop spouting the liberal nonsense

seriously? how about some data bucko.
Go ahead and show stats from like 50 years ago with the same numbers (note: not the same impact or same stats, those are variables too).
I'm not an alarmist, but seriously putting your fingers in your ears and shouting nahnahnahnahnahnah only goes so far before you look foolish

@elkor. He does not need proof.And in 51 years and his is alive he can always claim it is a 100 year cycle. And in 101 years those who agree with him will claim it is 200 year cycle and so on.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/28/us/28climate.html?_r=0

Scientists are still trying to figure out if storms are getting stronger. But they do agree that increased coastal development is a problem.

Cool app. Put in any location and you can see ecvery storm that has hit for the last 100+ years.

http://www.csc.noaa.gov/hurricanes/#app=3d30&3e3d-selectedIndex=0

cycle? lol yeah thats why its going to be almost 70 in the middle of Novmber on Monday wow

@David White. Listen you are wrong. God brought us that storm. He hates New Jersey because our govenor Chris Christie Denied Mitt Romney Request To Appear At Campaign Event Days Ahead Of 2012 Election.

You do not mess with the Mormon God.

umm, just an fyi, the jet stream is part of the climate too. It's affected by thing like.. ocean temperatures and such. Just saying.
The track of the storm could have had nothing to do with climate change, but blaming it on the jet stream isn't disproving it either

On that note, I found it interesting that the face of doom & gloom himself (Al Gore), bought ocean front property back in 2010.

It is interesting, but also unrelated and moot.
Hell, he's got money and I have absolutely no idea if he's of the "enjoy it while you can" or "hahaha suckers mindset"

Could be either, but I don' tbelieve it to be unrelated. Especially to the post I was replying to about not building on the coast (house on the coast) due to climate change (house on the coast built by the face of Global Warming).

Plants also need water. However when you give them too much of it what happens? Throwing out line like "plants need C02" is utter nonsense.
Really we are in a cooling cycle now? What empirical evidence do you base this on?

We ARE entering a cooling cycle.

http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/285746

Wow Barb - That proves it. I was wrong - you reference one article that describes the opinion of one scientist and his team from Germany. Case closed!

All four major global temperature tracking outlets (Hadley, NASA's GISS, UAH, RSS) have released updated data. All show that over the past year, global temperatures have dropped precipitously.

http://www.dailytech.com/Temperature+Monitors+Report+Worldwide+Global+Cooling/article10866.htm

Really Barb? - Come on - your link is from 2008. It's a blog where the author end his post by saying that "The views and comments are those of the author only."

A cooling cycle relative to already increased data points. let's look at the temps in only the cooling cycles, say the last 5, see any trends?

and to the OP, there used to be a lot more forested land and open plains in 1889 or around then as well...

@elkor - Forested lands in the continental US are statistically the same as in 1900. The low point was in the 1920s; the north has somewhat more forested land now than in 1900.

http://www.fia.fs.fed.us/slides/major-trends.pdf

@whosthis:

Why just look at the continental US? Lest I checked, atmosphere was kind of a global thing.

really? lol Is that why the last 10 summers keep getting hotter and why Nj is now dealing with Hurricanes? oh thats right Sandy wasnt a Hurricane lol tell that to the ppl who lost it all let me know how you make out
and oh yeah dont file those fema claims either they are immoral according to mittens

Who was talking about politics into this thread? I thought this was about the climate.

That's a thick skull ya got there dan.

Yes just the facts with statements like "scientists have been bullied into perpetuating the anthropogenic global warming myth in order to continue receiving research grants and allow leftists to implement global governance under the guise of saving the planet"...please...

?
and... all of those things that you say are related (and I'm not saying they aren't) have NOTHING to do with the "warming myth", that's just a standalone thing, and a myth, right?
ever consider that research grants are given to study things like solar weather, earthquakes, the electromagnetic field, pole migration, the jet stream, and storm tracks? Clearly it's a lefty plot to secretly govern you.

Please explain Antarctic ice growth.

Not sure if you were talking to me bluebeam, but I think you may think that antarctic ice growth == cooling.
This is not the case, in fact large portions of sea ice in Antarctica regularly freeze and melt according to seasonal temperature change and as such i a poor indicator of global trending.
You also need to take into account that sea ice that forms in winter is directly proportionate to not only the temperature but salinity levels. As freshwater glacial runoff (land ice) reduces the salinity it makes it easier for sea ice to form.

Will that do?

You know, I just noticed this:

* In this post you state: "The jury is still out on whether or not humans have had any measurable impact on the environment"

* And in the next post down, also by you, not even a minute later you state: "Fact is, if there is no human link to climate change"

Guess the verdict was expedited eh?

So wouldn't the same be true of the deniers? Aren't they being funded by various corporations and think tanks who have a vested interest in keeping things status quo? Why is there no possibility for conflict there that concerns you?

and what exactly is that fact, the one that proves no link. Scientists study all kinds of things you know.

ever own a fish tank? Left alone with good starting conditions and a decent balance, a reef can usually take care of itself. Introduce something? You had better be paying attention because things can (and do) go wrong quickly.
I agree that we shouldn't feel self important given our time on this sphere, I'm also not blind.

Bluebeam - Could you provide a little more background?
How do you think "environmentally friendly" products should be made more affordable?
What specific UN laws and EPA regulations are you talking about?

@Great HOax

Mittens lost he said fema is immoral so i hope you dont file a claim
but what Bain Capital does is ok? lol your right the decine of America continues
but I bet Mittens gets his free Medicall and Pension for being the ex Gov

agree with you there

The Koch brothers "wasted" $50 million? Was it not theirs to spend as they saw fit? In contrast, the federal government spent $90 billion on corporate welfare and favoritism by funding Green start-ups while attempting to thwart efforts to bring energy to market through traditional sources. How many Greens went belly up and who took the financial hit when they did? How much do you want to pay to heat and light your home and fill up your gas tank? Do you enjoy helping to pay for your neighbor installing solar panels on his roof and how thrilled are you over the fact that what your neighbor might be saving is coming out of your pocket?

Sure, theirs to spend as they see fit, no argument there. Care to ask why they saw fit to spend it where they did?
Personally, I don't mind paying a little more to heat and light my home if things will be better in the long run for it. Simarially, I have no issue with my neighbor and his solar panels or if his savings *might* be coming out of my pocket.
It's not all about greed and what's mine is mine dammit you know.

Please explain to me how I was "wrong again", Frank. Actually, when and what was I wrong about the first time let alone again?
You know Peak Oil theory, right, Frank? When will we actually reach that theoretic point? Why is it that Oil Reserves keep getting larger and larger and the supposed drop-dead dates keep getting pushed out further and further?
And what of China? China is more dependent on foreign energy sources than the U.S. with the prospect of things only getting worse for China. China is already in crisis with millions and millions of its population living in abject poverty and our problems will pale in comparison with what's on the horizon for the People's Party. Estimates put over 128 Million Chinese subsisting on less than $1.25/day. You see, that's the official poverty rate in China so if you're one of the untold millions who live on less than $2/day, you should feel fortunate that you're not in poverty. Good luck with that.
Here's what my study of energy requirements and supply taught me over a year ago: 60% of NYC’s power needs currently supplied by coal and natural gas could be replaced by 4 Nuke Plants generating 1,000 megawatts of power each with a footprint of 2 sq. miles (8 square miles total). The same energy output generated by Solar Panels would have a footprint of seventy-four square miles and would require 145 million solar panels generating 175 watts of power each; quite inefficient to say the least.
Bottom line, not yet ready for prime time.

Explain how solar panels hold up in hurricane strength winds...

You seem like a pretty bitter guy paul.
And as for your "study", yep that's probably true. However given solar dependancy on surface area I don't recall anyone suggesting we power NYC with it.
Could run your house though, oh that's right you don't want to spend the cash in case your savings comes out of your neighbor's pocket.
And... Really? You really, really think oil will last forever eh? You do realize that it's made from things that were, and are no more right? It's finite? or maybe you just don't care as long as it lasts long enough for you.

I just want to go on the record stating here I am not a green nut, global warming preacher. But I simply stand all the gibberish and greed to the contrary.
Nobody's perfect, but it will never get better until you try.

Oh and @BN: I imagine they hold up about as well as a roof would. Perhaps better.

If only we could drill baby drill through the deniers thick skulls. Think of all that could have been done with that money - for the betterment rather than the detriment of society.

The APS includes over 50,000 physicists. Giaever -- not a climate scientist, but someone in the narrow specialty of superconductors -- disagreed with the overwhelming consensus, including among hundreds of Nobel-laureate physicists and thousands of other scientists, at the APS.

In a fit of pique, Giaever quit the APS when he lacked support for his fringe views. However, in view of his well-publicized fuss, the APS revisited ALL the science, and reaffirmed the same climate-change policy statement that caused Giaever to loudly resign. Climate-change deniers like to point to Giaver; most scientists, including the evenhanded and universally respected NAS, discounted him after reviewing his claims.

Regarding the WSJ article you cite, the WSJ is now owned and controlled by Rupert Murdoch's News Corp. (the same company that controls The New York Post). The WSJ has been on a vendetta against climate change ever since the far-right Murdoch acquired ownership.

Which brings me to the next point. The letter submitted to the WSJ was largely signed by scientists employed by the oil and gas industry, which has been mounting a similar campaign of misinformation employed by the tobacco industry regarding cancer. "Follow the money," indeed!

The WSJ letter was soundly refuted by numerous independent scientists.

See: http://www.yaleclimatemediaforum.org/2012/02/wsj-no-need-to-panic-op-ed-prompts-heated-exchanges-leading-to-long-awaited-last-word-not-really-of-course/

donald is a typical leftist fool. he thinks if he keeps repeating the same thing over and over again it will be true. he claims everything that has been proven true has been "refuted" he claims that every scientist on the planet is in agreement when that is true however the agreement is that there is no such thing as global warming. He claims hat since rupert murdoch owns the wsj the paper cannot be listened to then he cites studies that are paid for by leftists that make millions pushing the leftist global warming agenda.

Wow, that is irony at it's finest Lloyd.
I don't even understand your sentence regarding Donald, I'm not sure I even understand it. What I do understand however is that the man did not state anything as fact. He simply said that he happens to agree with the majority of climatologists who seem to belive that this is the case. He went on to say that the WSG has been on a vendetta against climate change, while this may be his opinion it certainly seems to have some data behind it. Opinion it is however.
You however used 'leftist' in your brief post 3 times, followed by "fool" "make millions" and "global warming agenda". That sounds pretty paranoid.
Nobody is out to take your stuff. And politics *shouldn't* enter into it at all. Everybody lives here.

Well, Monk, as reported in the Proceedings of the NAS, 97% of the nation's professional scientists (comprising hundreds of thousands of technically trained folks), and virtually every leading scientific organization throughout the world, accept the peer-reviewed evidence demonstrating the reality of human-induced climate change. Most major governments -- including China! -- have also accepted it. (They also have considered the issues you raise, but I already spent an inordinate amount of time responding on this topic, both here and on another post by Jeff Tittel.)

In my opinion, the firmly held belief of the foregoing legions of professional scientists around the globe cannot be so easily dismissed under the simple rubrics of "pandering" or "political correctness," especially when there are abundant financial incentives to support the oil and gas industry (O&G). (ExxonMobil was once my client.)

In any event, even according to NAS, there are still some 3% of scientists -- including those folks whose livelihood is directly tied to O&G -- sharing your skepticism. For my grandchildren's sake, I would prefer you to be correct. But this retired, pensioned engineer -- beholding to no one -- has read many of the scientific papers supporting climate change, as well as counter-arguments to the research findings, and I firmly believe that the continuing accumulation of greenhouse gasses indeed constitutes an existential threat to the Earth, at least as we currently know it.

@donald
An existential threat?
Well, at least its not an actual threat!

For my part, I simply cannot accept that a little pollution here and a little ecological imbalance there anywhere nearly approaches the serious threats to civilization that are complacently accepted. Abortion on demand is more serious, for example. Appeasing throat-slitting jihadists is pretty serious. Systematically abolishing freedoms is very serious.

When people get their morality straight, a lot of problems go away. Can we really expect a society that condones abortion to give a rip about the climate? I don't mean to diverge. I mean to put it into perspective.

You don't mean to diverge?
And you tack *that* on to the end to explain your reasoning?!?
Calling it perspective?!??
Your perspective perhaps.

You sir, don't strike me as a skeptic, rather as one who has made up his mind already.
You state, in your defense, that morality is far more concern to human existence and that if people cannot conform to what you perceive as moral than we can't expect them to pay attention to anything else that *you* may consider less pressing.
It's thinking like this that causes that nice head-shaped indentation in my desk.
Look, I could not care less what you think is moral, as long as you believe in it and you are happy about the way you live your life according to it, that's fine.
I don't even care if you are "green", I am certainly not most of the time.
But burying your head in the sand and using "well until people realise abortion is wrong" as the excuse is just plain stupid dude. sorry, but it is. Apples and oranges are too closely related to even be used as an adequate analogy here.
As to "human impacts are insignifigant in comparison", ever hear of a little place called Hiroshima? Really man, just knock it off and stop pretending to be looking at things objectively, it's ok if you don't, but if that's going to be the case just don't use the pretense eh?

@babyboat:
"Well, at least its not an actual threat!"

sigh...
try looking it up. go ahead, we'll wait.
really, I don't even know why I bother sometimes.
...

elkor, maybe I should have left off the comparisons. But how does one put something into perspective without them? If you regard abortion as less significant than pollution, that's your prerogative. And Hiroshima has been rebuilt, elkor. The effects of human activity on the earth are over-rated.

Like you, I was using comparisons. They rebuild things after earthquakes and volcano eruptions too. This does not mean that the lingering effects both on the earth and in the minds of the populace from these events can be repaired as quickly as concrete and steel.

Oh for christmas sake,
Does NOBODY own a dictionary anymore?
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/populace

Apparently, at least Monk does or pays attention to spell check at least
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/prerogative

@LogicSeeker: at least double check before you call out the grammar police:
“Prerogative” is frequently both mispronounced and misspelled as “perogative.” It may help to remember that the word is associated with PRivileges of PRecedence.

Sigh....
Apparently lacks the ability to read as well.

To be honest, I don't get so worked up about the weather (I see what you did there ;-) ). I simply do not understand the mentality of ignoring it either.

I'll be the first to admit that I do not have a quick and easy solution and that I am perhaps as guilty as any of us in the respect of not doing anything about it. I just think ignoring the facts or assuming that just a hair over 7 billion tool-using mammals could have the capability to seriously screw stuff up is a bad idea.
After all, just one of the aforementioned idiots with a match can burn down a forest and leave a record of it in glacial ice (if you can find some) 10,000 years from now. That makes them at least as influential as lightning.

Barney

kinda like you with your fema application ?
Yep lotta smart republicons out there lol sure
take a look at a map and look at red states and blue states and let me know where the smarter ppl live Hint its not in red states
but feel free to MOVE before Agenda 21 or Obama takes Christ from Christmas lol

@ Barney

did you miss church today?

There is NO "separation of church and state" even mentioned in the Constitution. What it actually says is "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion". Translation: There is no recognition of an official state religion. This means you can be an American citizen regardless of your religious beliefs. Nowhere does it say or imply nativity scenes should be banned or high school athletes can't say a prayer before a game. Organized atheist groups are just a collection of sad, bitter people with an insatiable appetite for vengeance and attention.

Hey BN,

Off to the soup kitchen yet?? Free turkey for the union guys too!

Ta ta,

Barneylicous

On this day, we should be thankful for the 53% who pay for the other 47% to get their free stuff. Mitt is on his yacht eating turkey and laughing at all of you deadbeat haters who are still unemployed, poor and homeless but have Obama as your President. Oh, the irony!

Logic seeker - Mondale was destroyed in 84 and Clinton beat HW in 92.

Thanksgiving day trivia - if Democrats help the poor and needy, then why after $16.2 trillion of debt, do we still have poor and needy? Why is Camden worse off today than it was 10, 20 or 30 years ago. Shouldn't something be fixed by now?

Barney

Union guys can buy their own turkeys
Soup kitchen? only to help what about you hypocrite
need help with you fema app? works better if you use a pen
you could always jump off a bridge Barney dressed in your kkk outfit

but Barney you might wanna look at a map
you wil find that the red states are the least educated
they are the ones on welfare oh yeah and dont forget they are also on 16 and knocked up kinda like Bristol spreadem drunk Palin and just how would she have paid for the bundle of joy ? oh yeah welfare
they are the ones willing to work at less then a wage where they can support themselves hold up with their guns

come on Barney say it Obummer is going to take Christ out of Chrismas lol

Hey Genius,

I thought NJ had a Republican Governor??

Another fact, 96.7% of the ghettos voted for Obama.

So what is your point??

Again, the only reason Mr Welfarebama is your President is because the COUNTRY HAS MORE PARASITES TODAY THAN YEARS BEFORE.

Free is good! White and rich is evil! ~~~ We get it.

When the country runs out of money for the parasites to devour, the Republ;icans will be needed again.

But for now, we are either Nicaragua or Kenya.

My tax return is a lot more than yours I can guarantee it. You should just say thanks for my contribution to your existence.
How much is from social security, medicare or welfare or other entitlement spending?

This years budget deficit is $1.1 Trillion and it aint from the wars but stick to the talking points since just like Obama they make you feel better while it's getting worse.

Good for Mitt, he's drinking a martini right now and laughing at you and your homeboy Obama as am I.

Aaaaahhh, the old fashiioned race card from a liberal? But the anti-religeous comments are just fine nowadays! I am not very religeous B N.

I guess you come from the inner city.

I can tell from your grammar. Good Ol'e NJ school system!

One of the Abbott districts outputs no doubt. Ever notice the racists are the ones always calling others racist. Susan Rice is incomptent. Saying so isn't racist. She just is.

Susan Rice is incompetent. It was a spontaneous reaction to a video.....LOL!!!!!

Another day of Democrat leadership and another day of billions more in debt and still no one is less poor, smarter or employed. I keep waiting to see where liberal policies work. It sure as heck isn't helping Camden

Hey good for your son. What about the 25 million others who don't have any job offers? How's Obama working out for them? And yeah, we believe your 6 figure job offer out of college story.

How many people in Camden are doing better today thanks to Obama? Unemployment 20%+