The Huffington Post’s Censorship of Free Debate on “Anthropogenic Global Warming”

Call me Xarkonul.  I am an American dude writing to you from the United Kingdom.  Below you will find some of my posts that The Huffington Post censored immediately from its forums or removed later after the website had banned my profile (Xarkonul).  Please judge if Arianna Huffington’s website encouraged free and open debate on “manmade global warming” or unjustly silenced a skeptic.  Should The Huffington Post create dual forums for each article?  People who support The Huffington Post’s views could comment in The Huffy Post forum, and those who don’t could go to The Huffy Don’t Post forum, try to write comments, be censored, and stare at blank computer screens. 

 

After seeing a ridiculous image in The Huffington Post (The Christ the Redeemer statue in Brazil sinking into the Atlantic Ocean even though the famous monument is currently situated 2,300+ feet above sea level), I read the article “2010 Tied For Warmest Year On Record According To UN.”  I set up an account with The Huffington Post on Thursday, January 20, 2011.  I wrote under the name Xarkonul.  I had never posted my views on any political website before.  I subsequently posted comments in the forum for “Climate Change Correlates With Fall Of Rome, Tree Ring Study Suggests.”   

 

The Huffington Post censored an increasing number of my posts.  On Sunday, January 23, 2011, Arianna Huffington’s website removed my Xarkonul profile, meaning you can no longer view my posts through an Internet search.  [OR SO I THOUGHT WHEN I ORIGINALLY WROTE THIS ESSAY.  THERE IS MORE INFORMATION BELOW ABOUT “DELETED” POSTS I'VE SUBSEQUENTLY RECOVERED.  SENTENCES IN CAPITAL LETTERS IN THIS WEBSITE ARE GENERALLY, BUT NOT ALWAYS, MY LATER COMMENTS TO EARLIER POSTS OR OTHER INFORMATION.]  I noticed The Huffington Post’s censorship right before watching my beloved Packers kick some Bear ass, and the Post’s injustice agitated me, though I still enjoyed the game very much.  GO PACK! 

 

In the first section of my website, I have included nine deleted posts I had recovered since I had saved the drafts in word files for spell-checking purposes.  “SMOKING GUN” UPDATE.  On Thursday, March 3, 2011, I was able to recover parts of 10 of my exchanges with Publicola, an environmental scientist who was consistently my most bitter opponent.  The Huffington Post had deleted these partial debates from its website, but I recovered them from “cached” Google files (whatever that means).  These truncated exchanges are numbered 10-19 in the first section of this website.  You will find all the really juicy stuff in the first section of my website, but you can look at Part Two and Part Three for further evidence of my assertions. 

 

On Monday, January 24, 2011, I discovered that some of my posts remained in The Huffington Post’s forums as of that time.  I have re-posted them in Part Two of this document, with the exception of some comments that belonged to longer threads that were not visible on the main pages.  Part Three contains evidence from a Google search on “Xarkonul” that I performed on Tuesday, March 1, 2011.  Since snippets of text were included in the descriptions of the links, this search revealed some information from posts The Huffington Post had deleted.  AFTER THE “SMOKING GUN” UPDATE, PART THREE NOW SEEMS PRETTY DAMNED BORING.  YOU CAN LOOK AT IT NONETHELESS FOR FURTHER VERIFICATION OF MY CLAIMS.

  

Since I sometimes spell-checked my posts in word files, especially in the early period of my brief relationship with The Huffington Post, I have managed to recover some of my comments that The Huffington [Don’t] Post censored (deleted) immediately.  AFTER MY “SMOKING GUN” DISCOVERY, I NOW REALIZE THAT SINCE I DID NOT ALWAYS SAVE THE LATEST VERSIONS OF MY COMMENTS, MY SAVED TEXTS MAY DIFFER SLIGHTLY FROM WHAT THE HUFFINGTON POST DELETED.  THE ONLY POTENTIAL DIFFERENCES BETWEEN MY DRAFTS LISTED BELOW AND WHAT ARIANNA HUFFINGTON’S WEBSITE CENSORED INVOLVE GRAMMAR, NOT MEANING (I.E. MY DRAFTS BELOW MAY BE A BIT SLOPPIER THAN THE TEXTS THAT THE HUFFINGTON POST READ AND DELETED).  

 

 

* 1) HEY READERS, HERE’S A “KITTENY KITTENS” UPDATE FOR YOU!  I WAS THINKING OF PUTTING THIS NEW INFORMATION BELOW, BUT I’M TOO LAZY TO DO ALL THAT REORGANIZING AND REWRITING RIGHT NOW, AND THIS IS A BREAKING STORY.  On April 14, 2011, I tried to post a comment in The Huffington Post’s forum on Arianna Huffington’s article, “About That Lawsuit...”  Her essay deals with Jonathan Tasini, a longtime blogger for The Huffington Post who is suing Arianna Huffington, another co-founder of the website, and AOL for $105 million that he believes he and 9,000 other unpaid Huffington Post bloggers deserve.  Surprise, surprise, “The Huffy Don’t Post” censored my comment, which you will find below.

 

 

“Mr. Tasini may have a weak case from a purely legal standpoint, but sometimes plaintiffs win such cases if others recognize that the defendants have committed serious injustices. 

 

A stronger breach of contract lawsuit against The Huffington Post would involve the website’s unethical “Community and Commenting Guiding Principles,” which claim that “we never censor comments for political or ideological reasons.”

 

When I used The Huffington Post’s own figures to create my “Joe Averageguy” analogy, which argues that the overall global temperature has leveled off since 1998, The Huffington Post deleted my subsequent comments and later removed my profile, Xarkonul. 

 

I agreed to what I thought was a mutually beneficial contract with The Huffington Post, and I upheld my part of the bargain by providing fact-based content with no threatening and/or abusive language, but The Huffington Post broke its promise not to censor me for my beliefs.  At the very least, Arianna Huffington’s website should admit that it censors its ideological opponents.

 

Peace out,

 

Xarkonul”

 

 

* 2) AFTER “THE HUFFY DON’T POST” CENSORED MY COMMENT, I TRIED PUTTING IN JUST “HOWDY” AND MY WEBSITE AND YOUTUBE ADDRESSES, BUT THAT DIDN’T FLY EITHER, SO I WROTE SOMETHING ABOUT KITTENS TO SEE IF I HAD BEEN GAGGED, AND JOY OF JOYS, MY FOLLOWING POST WENT THROUGH!

 

 

Xarkonul98   49 minutes ago (11:49 AM)

0 Fans

I love kittens! They're so, well, kitteny!

Xarkonul98: I love kittens! They're so, well, kitteny!

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Xarkonul98/huffington-post-lawsuit_b_848942_84443856.html

Permalink  | Share it

 

 

IN CASE YOU’RE WONDERING WHY I MENTIONED KITTENS, HERE IS THE OPENING PARAGRAPH OF ARIANNA HUFFINGTON’S BLOG,

 

 

“The lawsuit filed Tuesday by Jonathan Tasini is so utterly without merit, and has been so thoroughly eviscerated in the media -- including being ridiculed as the ‘dumbest lawsuit ever’ -- I am hesitant to take any time away from aggregating adorable kitten videos to respond.”

 

 

WOW, TALK ABOUT A FLUFF PIECE.  Maybe a better name for the website is “The Fluffington Don’t Post,” which obliterated my Xarkonul98 profile as well, apparently since it found my essay on the bliss of kitteny kitteniness just too controversial.  Arianna, my friend, you should spend less time on those adorable kittens and concentrate on devising a strategy to stop AOL’s recent $315 million purchase of your website from looking like a blunder.  Marie Antoinette is often quoted as saying of her starving subjects, “Let them eat cake.”  Arianna Huffington’s motto can be, “Let my unpaid bloggers watch adorable kitten videos.”

 

 

 

GOING BACK TO MY EARLIER CENSORED COMMENTS, please examine some censored posts I wrote in the forum for the article “2010 Tied For Warmest Year On Record According To UN.”  By the way, please discover more information about my background and write comments at my YouTube channel, which you can find at

http://www.youtube.com/user/Xarkonul

 

 

 

* 3) THE HUFFINGTON POST CENSORED THIS POST.

 

One last point before I flop into bed.  Please examine the absurd image The Huffington Post used for this article.  Does The Huffington Post really believe “anthropogenic global warming” is going to cause the Atlantic Ocean to threaten the Christ the Redeemer statue in Brazil?  This monument is 130 feet tall, and it is situated atop Corcovado Mountain, which has an elevation of 2,300 feet above sea level.  With silly propaganda like this, The Huffington Post damages the “green” cause it wishes to support. 

 

 

 

* 4) THE HUFFINGTON POST CENSORED THIS POST. 

 

Yes, I have a history Ph.D., and no, I have absolutely no training in climate science.  I’m just a guy making arguments based on common sense and articles I’ve read in the Internet.  The point is, even if I were the love child of Dick Cheney and Darth Vader, and the EvilOil Company had given me a million dollars to oppose “anthropogenic global warming,” you’d still have to refute my contentions, wouldn’t you?

 

I could offer an alternative hypothesis, the “Invisible Purple Dragon” theory.  According to my theory, an invisible purple dragon (let’s call him Sam) lives in an alternate space dimension, and he either heats the earth with fireballs from his jaws or cools the planet with ice rays from his eyes.  Now the question is, if more and more evidence contradicted my ideas but I never changed or even discarded my beliefs, would my methods be scientific?

 

I’m deliberately being silly here, but the serious point I’m trying to make is that the burden of proof is always on those who propose a new hypothesis.  I happen to support cleaning the earths’ air, soil, and water, but when members of the green movement splash an image of a drowning messiah 2,300+ plus feet above sea level, or when AGW supporters label their opponents “deniers” (an incredibly loaded term), they poison what should be an open debate about the earth’s perpetually changing climate. 

 

 

 

* 5) THE HUFFINGTON POST CENSORED THIS POST. 

 

So far, two of my posts have been censored (deleted) even though I used no foul or threatening language.  I have no interest in a “debate” in which people attack my integrity and don’t let me defend myself.  I have better things to do with my time. 

 

As a final message, the burden of proof is always on those who propose a new hypothesis.  I happen to support cleaning the earths’ air, soil, and water, but when AGW supporters splash an image of a drowning messiah 2,300+ plus feet above sea level, silence their critics (such as myself), or label their opponents “deniers” (an incredibly loaded term), they harm what should be an open debate about the earth’s perpetually changing climate. 

 

 

 

* 6) THE HUFFINGTON POST CENSORED THIS POST. 

 

Guess what?  I spent a lot of time and effort writing three long posts that addressed the topic at hand, and all of them were deleted.  That makes ME a troll?  It’s easy to claim a consensus when you gag your opponents

 

 

 

HEY THERE, READERS, JUST GETTING YOUR ATTENTION WITH CAPS.  I made many posts to the article “Climate Change Correlates With Fall Of Rome, Tree Ring Study Suggests.”  I felt lighthearted when I began writing my comments since I realized my opponents had shot themselves in the foot by supporting this article, which claims that “the Romans prospered during the wet and warm summers.”  Given that the essay suggests that NATURAL climate warming has benefitted humans in the past, I found it amusing that supporters of the “anthropogenic global warming” hypothesis used this article as evidence for their cause.  Unfortunately, the situation in the forum soon became serious. 

 

After I had proposed my “Joe Averageguy” analogy, which points out the absurdity of the complex statistics some supporters of the anthropogenic global warming theory use to back their claims, The Huffington Post deleted every single one of my subsequent posts.  To make matters worse, with a few exceptions, The Huffington Post deleted every single subsequent post from forum members who had used the word Xarkonul in their posts, even if only to criticize me and/or my ideas.  This means that The Huffington Post censored not just me, but many people who opposed me and supported The Huffington Post’s views.  Arianna Huffington’s website clearly fears my Joe Averageguy analogy.  Please read it for yourself and see if you can understand why.  Here is my first post on Joe Averageguy, which, as of Monday, January 24, 2011, could still be found in the forum on the article about Rome and climate change.

 

 

* 7) THE HUFFINGTON POST LET THIS POST REMAIN AND DELETED ALL MY SUBSEQUENT COMMENTS.

 

 

Xarkonul   06:04 AM on 1/22/2011

4 Fans

I’m back again. My wife woke up and I couldn’t sleep. Sigh. I sure as hell don’t understand “linear regression­,” and one of my esteemed opponents has admitted that he doesn’t, either, even after studying it in graduate school, so I’m going to stick to a simple example that shows how goofy this “statistic­ally significan­t warming” argument is.

Let’s say Joe Averageguy had 100 bucks in his savings account in 1998, 99 bucks or less every subsequent year through 2009, and then 100 bucks again in 2010. Do you think he’d be happy about the “statistic­ally significan­t increase” in his savings?

 

 

HERE IS SOME LATER ELABORATION ON MY “JOE AVERAGEGUY” ANALOGY.  I HAVE SUBSEQUENTLY RE-READ THE “Warmest Year” ARTICLE AND REALIZED IT CLAIMED, “The warmest year on record is a three-way tie: 2010, 2005, and 1998.”  I FORGOT ABOUT 2005 WHEN WRITING MOST OF MY POSTS, BUT MY ARGUMENT REMAINS BASICALLY THE SAME.  The logic in the first Huffington Post article I read, “2010 Tied For Warmest Year On Record According To UN,” confused me.  Even if we accept the recent global temperature figures as accurate, we nonetheless see that 1998, 2005, and 2010 tied for the hottest years in recently recorded history, though not at all in the history of the earth, when the planet has generally been much warmer than today.  This means that, on average, global temperatures were always colder during the years 1999 to 2009, except 2005, when the world was allegedly as hot as in 1998 and 2010.  If something starts at a certain level, which I arbitrarily set at 100, goes down to 99 or below, goes back to 100, goes down to 99 or below, and then goes back to 100, does this really indicate an increase?

 

Perhaps you can use advanced statistical methods to argue that the earth has been warming since 1998, but if you were to try to explain the alleged recent “statistically significant increase in global warming” to Joe Averageguy in a way he’d understand, Joe would not think there had been an increase at all.  Let’s imagine you and Joe Averageguy are pounding a few beers in a bar.  You say, “OK, Joe, let me explain recent global warming to you this way, buddy.  Let’s say in 1998, you had 100 bucks in your savings account.  Then, from 1999 to 2009, you had 99 bucks or less, except one year in the middle when you had 100 bucks again.  But hey, guess what, dude?  As of 2010, your savings went back up to 100 bucks once more!  Now, how’s that for a statistically significant increase in your savings?”  I doubt Joe Averageguy would say something like, “Wow, now I totally get what you're talking about, man!  That’s one hell of an increase!  The next round’s on me!”  He’d be far more likely to say, “Dude, what the hell are you babbling about?  How is 100 to 100 to 100 an increase in anything?”

 

I’m not a statistician, nor do I have any background in climate science, but I know when people are hiding behind fancy terms like linear regression to conceal inconvenient truths that almost anyone could understand if the commentators would just use plain, everyday language and examples.  If my historical training has taught me anything, it’s how to sniff out doublespeak and attempts to confuse the opposition with puzzling terms that look impressive but actually serve to obscure the presenter’s weak case.  If proponents of the anthropogenic global warming hypothesis would at least acknowledge realities like the lack of overall global warming in the last 12-15 years or so, the fact that this whole “hockey stick” idea is ridiculous since the earth's climate has warmed up and cooled down dramatically throughout the earth’s geological history, and the related fact that “climate change” is an unfair term to use since the earth’s climate always, always, always changes, then I would be willing to take their arguments more seriously.  When I saw many people in The Huffington Post’s forums denying facts like these in order to push their agenda, I lost respect for them.  I feel sad about my waning appreciation of the environmental movement since I would like world governments to put more effort into cleaning up the earth’s air, soil, and water.  I just have a low tolerance for BS, and I want people to improve the earth’s environment for legitimate reasons.

 

 

 

* 8) THE HUFFINGTON POST DELETED THIS POST (AMONG MANY, MANY OTHERS) FROM THE ARTICLE ON CLIMATE AND ROME. 

 

Here is an article that supports my assertion about how “climate scientists” had to admit there had been “no statistically significant” global warming since 1998.  It is titled, “Climategate U-turn as scientist at centre of row admits: There has been no global warming since 1995.”

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1250872/Climategate-U-turn-Astonishment-scientist-centre-global-warming-email-row-admits-data-organised.html

When I made my claim that climatologists had to admit to "no statistically significant increase" in global warming, I was recalling articles I had read in the wake of the “Climategate” scandal, not "lying."  I in no way intentionally misled anyone. 

 

Completely off the top of my head in the heat of writing my posts here (something I’m doing for the first time, so I’m a bit awkward at it), I recalled some damning articles about climatologists.  I did not have any specific "denier talking point" in mind.  I've been using 1998 as my key year when apparently the "denier talking point” is 1995. 

 

I’ve been using 1998 since I recently read a Huffington Post article that said 2010 had tied with 1998 as the hottest year.  Even if that were true, and I suspect it is not, using my own common sense (and not racing off to any “denier websites”), I thought it was strange that they would claim the earth is warming if their own assertion is that it is basically staying at the same temperature.

 

 

 

* 9) WHEN THE HUFFINGTON POST KEPT CENSORING MY TEXTS IMMEDIATELY EVEN THOUGH I WAS MERELY MAKING MY CASE AND NOT THREATENING ANYONE OR USING ABUSIVE OR VULGAR LANGUAGE, I WROTE A “CODE” I THOUGHT WOULD BE RIDICULOUSLY SIMPLE.  I guess I can lay off the caps now.  Surprisingly, no one seemed to have figured my “code” out around an hour later when I went to bed.  Here is my post,

 

 

.noitisoppo eht rosnec uoy nehw susnesnoc erutcafunam ot ysae s’tI

 

 

When read from right to left, this means, “It’s easy to manufacture consensus when you censor the opposition.”  I originally wrote “gag” instead of “censor,” but I realized The Huffington Post might pick up on that word, which is written the same forward and backward, and censor me again, so I used a weaker verb instead.

 

 

 

“SMOKING GUN” UPDATE.  I’ll ease off the caps now.  On Thursday, March 3, 2011, I discovered that Google saves things from websites even after the websites have deleted them.  I don’t know how Google works, but Google saved some information The Huffington Post had deleted, whereas most other records no longer show up even as “cached” in Google.  I will not edit the previous part of my website to make it fit the new information (with the possible exception of grammar/stylistic changes).  Using cached information from Google, I’ve recovered parts of 10 of my many “deleted” exchanges with Publicola.  I wish I had found out about this cached thing before, for back in January and February, I remember looking in Google and seeing snippets of more of my posts, such as my “code:”

 

.noitisoppo eht rosnec uoy nehw susnesnoc erutcafunam ot ysae s’tI (“It’s easy to manufacture consensus when you censor the opposition.”) 

 

I know this code was still in Google in January or early February since I was going to write in this website that I had written “a consensus” backward, but then I saw in Google that I had left out the “a.”

 

 

AN ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENTIST USING THE NAME PUBLICOLA CONSISTENTLY ATTACKED ME IN A BITTER, PERSONAL, AND UNPROFESSIONAL MANNER.  He especially liked to belittle my intelligence and call me a “liar” or a “science/climate denier.”  It’s possible he’s a smart man, but he has horrible debating skills.  AS AN UPDATE FROM THURSDAY, MARCH 3, 2011, I’M LEAVING THE TEXT BELOW AS IT WAS BEFORE MY “SMOKING GUN” DISCOVERY, NAMELY HOW I COULD RECOVER PARTS OF SOME OF THE “DELETED” DEBATES BETWEEN PUBLICOLA AND ME. 

 

Among other things, Publicola repeatedly suggested that I somehow worked for the oil industry or had some other financial reasons for criticizing the idea of anthropogenic global warming.  As far as I can tell, The Huffington Post deleted an exchange where I asked Publicola to talk about his background.  I have since forgotten much of what Publicola said, but I recall he said he had a job that was tied to the environmental movement in some way.  My background is in history, specifically European history.

 

Now imagine Publicola and I debated each other in, say, neutral Switzerland, and whoever won the debate would determine world environmental policies (but neither one of us had to reveal our real names).  If Publicola won the debate, I would suffer in that I would have to give up some of my freedoms and pay more taxes, but his victory would not directly affect my status as a historian.  If I won, however, Publicola would quite possibly lose his job.  I considered mentioning Publicola’s clear bias while I was writing my posts, but I decided not to stoop to my opponent’s level.  I did often feel upset when writing in The Huffington Post’s forums, especially at Publicola, who continually kept after me, writing so many hostile posts on so many different threads that I was sometimes overwhelmed, but I tried to stick to the arguments.  Now that The Huffington Post has banned my profile and deleted my posts in a cowardly manner, I feel justified in pointing out that my most embittered adversary seems to have a direct financial stake in promoting the anthropogenic global warming hypothesis.

 

I looked up some information about Publicola on February 21, 2011.  As of that date, he had 7,841 total comments listed in Huffington Post forums.  Publicola joined The Huffington Post’s forums in December 2006.  Let’s say that means he’s been there for four years and three months, which is a bit generous, considering that February is not over as I write this, and we don’t know when in December 2006 he joined.  If we divide 7,841 by 4.25 (or four and a quarter years), we find that since joining, Publicola has written an average of about 1,845 posts for The Huffington Post a year, or an average of slightly over five posts a day.  Is he just an average, concerned citizen with a lot of free time on his hands?  Possibly, but the ferocity and sheer volume of his attacks on me along with the high number of his posts over the years make me suspect he has a direct financial interest in promoting the manmade global warming hypothesis, an economic interest that goes beyond what he admitted to in the forum.  I’d like to ask Publicola some more questions about his environmental activities and give him a chance to defend himself, but while The Huffington Post had no problem allowing his vicious personal attacks on me, The Huffington Post has gagged me so I can no longer ask him about his background.

 

 

ALONG WITH MANY OTHER DEBATES I WAS NOT ABLE TO RECOVER, The Huffington Post deleted the following discussions from its website.  I have placed the exchanges, which appear truncated in their restored versions, in chronological order.  If two similar versions of a debate display the same starting time, the longer one comes first.  All these discussions originated in the forum on climate change and Rome.  Since I have included the internet addresses of these debates, you can examine the original sources if you wish.

 

 

 

* 10) THE HUFFINGTON POST DELETED THIS EXCHANGE WITH PUBLICOLA.

 

Publicola: Xarkonul: "Nonetheless, no normal human being would ...

Xarkonul: "If Joe had 100 bucks in his bank account in 1998, then 99 or less bucks through 2009, and finally 100 bucks again in 2010, would he be happy ...
www.huffingtonpost.com/.../fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74828490.html - Cached

 

HuffPostComments

Publicola

Comments (6906) | Friends (47)

Commented on:

Climate Change Correlates With Fall Of Rome, Tree Ring Study Suggests


This comment was in reply to a comment by:

Xarkonul

Expand full thread

Xarkonul   2 hours ago (12:33 PM)

4 Fans

I posted something earlier, I can't find it now, and this constant scrolling gets on my nerves anyway, so I'll re-post an idea.

Earlier, an esteemed opponent of mine called me a "liar" for claiming that there's been "no statistica­lly significan­t global warming" since 1998. This person pulled out the concept of "linear regression­." I admitted that I did not know what "linear regression­" was, and this person said, well, it's pretty complex, and he didn't really understand it even after studying it in graduate school, but it could be used to "prove" that there’s been "statistic­ally significan­t" global warming since 1998.

Even if we accept the recent temperatur­e figures, which I am actually skeptical about given the “Climatega­te” scandal and the cold winters we’ve had lately, and we say that 1998 and 2010 really tied for the hottest years in (recently recorded, not geological­) history, where is the warming in that period? Now, you could bust out "linear regression­" and confuse all of us who aren’t mathematic­ians, but let me give you a simple example "Joe Averageguy­" could understand­.

If Joe had 100 bucks in his bank account in 1998, then 99 or less bucks through 2009, and finally 100 bucks again in 2010, would he be happy about the "statistic­ally significan­t increase" in his savings?

Xarkonul: I posted something earlier, I can't find it now, and

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Xarkonul/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74818746.html

Permalink  | Share it

Publicola   1 hour ago (1:11 PM)

156 Fans

Xarkonul: "If Joe had 100 bucks in his bank account in 1998, then 99 or less bucks through 2009, and finally 100 bucks again in 2010, would he be happy about the "statistic­­ally significan­­t increase" in his savings?"

Your example is facile and scientific­ally invalid as an analogy in the context of global warming. We are talking about trends here, and cherry-pic­king data points is not a valid way to assess trends.

A better example would be stock market trends - but as you seem to not understand what I've explaine dto t

Publicola: Xarkonul: "If Joe had 100 bucks in his bank account

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Publicola/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74822510.html

Permalink  | Share it

Publicola: Xarkonul: "Nonetheles­s, no normal human being would think in his

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Publicola/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74828490.html

Publicola

Commented 12 minutes ago in Green

0

0

188

Xarkonul: "Nonethele­s­s, no normal human being would think in his daily life, “100 to 100 over twelve years equals an increase.”

Correct. Neither would anyone who is seriously reflecting on the issue think that cherry-pic­king 2 data points out of a dozen constitute­s a valid trend.”

 

 

 

* 11) THE HUFFINGTON POST DELETED THIS EXCHANGE, WHICH CONTAINS INFORMATION ABOUT PUBLICOLA’S BACKGROUND.  PLEASE NOTE THAT HE IS EVEN MORE CLOSELY TIED TO ENVIRONMENTALISM THAN I SUGGESTED PREVIOUSLY IN THIS WEBSITE (WHEN I COULD NOT RECALL THE EXACT CONTENT OF THIS “DELETED” EXCHANGE).

 

Publicola: Xarkonul : "you keep attacking me personally." Stop ...

Xarkonul: Publicola, please tell us about yourself. I have revealed a ... Xarkonul: "I never claimed to have superior statistical knowledge." ...
www.huffingtonpost.com/.../fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74828072.html - Cached

 

HuffPostComments

Publicola

Comments (6906) | Friends (47)

Commented on:

Climate Change Correlates With Fall Of Rome, Tree Ring Study Suggests


This comment was in reply to a comment by:

Xarkonul

Expand full thread

Xarkonul   56 minutes ago (1:26 PM)

4 Fans

Publicola, please tell us about yourself. I have revealed a great deal about myself, but I have no idea about your training, background­, and life situation. I only know you keep attacking me personally­. I am not attacking you personally­, and I never claimed to have superior statistica­l knowledge. What did you study? How good of a student were you? Are you an activist? Does anyone pay you to support the AGW theory? Please tell us more about your life..

Xarkonul: Publicola, please tell us about yourself. I have revealed a

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Xarkonul/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74824020.html

Permalink  | Share it

Publicola: Xarkonul : "you keep attacking me personally­." Stop lying and

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Publicola/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74828072.html

Publicola

Commented 16 minutes ago in Green

0

0

188

Xarkonul : "you keep attacking me personally­­."

Stop lying and otherwise distorting the truth and I'll stop calling you out for doing so.

Xarkonul: "I never claimed to have superior statistica­­l knowledge.­"

You claimed to have enough statistica­l knowledge to understand that this statement of yours is false:

Xarkonul: "they [climate scientists­­­­­] had to admit that the world has not warmed in any statistica­­­­­­­­­­l­l­y significan­­­­­­­­­­t way since 1998."

Again, that is a lie.

Xarkonul: "What did you study?"

I am an environmen­tal scientist. I am not a climate scientist but by area of expertise - environmen­tal risk assessment - is close enough to climate science that I have a fair amount of academic and profession­al expertise in overlappin­g areas. Those overlappin­g areas include statistics­, environmen­tal chemistry and atmospheri­c physics.

Xarkonul: "How good of a student were you?"

I was a very good student. :-)

Xarkonul: "Are you an activist?"

I do some pro-bono environmen­tal science work, but not with respect to AGW.

Xarkonul: "Does anyone pay you to support the AGW theory?"

I do not receive any monetary support with respect to AGW theory whatsoever­.”

 

 

 

* 12) THE HUFFINGTON POST DELETED THIS EXCHANGE, WHICH IS SIMILAR TO PARTIAL DEBATE NUMBER 11, BUT THERE IS SOME NEW INFORMATION HERE. 

 

Xarkonul: How is creating my own original analogy that is not

Xarkonul: Publicola, please tell us about yourself. I have revealed a. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Xarkonul/fall-of-rome-climate- ...
www.huffingtonpost.com/.../Xarkonul/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74824386.html - Cached

 

HuffPostComments

Xarkonul

Comments (91) | Friends (0)

Commented on:

Climate Change Correlates With Fall Of Rome, Tree Ring Study Suggests


This comment was in reply to a comment by:

Xarkonul

Expand full thread

Xarkonul   17 minutes ago (1:26 PM)

4 Fans

Publicola, please tell us about yourself. I have revealed a great deal about myself, but I have no idea about your training, background­, and life situation. I only know you keep attacking me personally­. I am not attacking you personally­, and I never claimed to have superior statistica­l knowledge. What did you study? How good of a student were you? Are you an activist? Does anyone pay you to support the AGW theory? Please tell us more about your life..

Xarkonul: Publicola, please tell us about yourself. I have revealed a

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Xarkonul/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74824020.html

Permalink  | Share it

HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR

Wong23   15 minutes ago (1:28 PM)

598 Fans

When you repeat lies on this site, which you did, you should be prepared to be called for it.

Wong23: When you repeat lies on this site, which you did,

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Wong23/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74824167.html

Permalink  | Share it

Xarkonul: How is creating my own original analogy that is not

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Xarkonul/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74824386.html

Xarkonul

Commented 14 minutes ago in Green

0

0

188

“How is creating my own original analogy that is not based on any "denier talking points" "repeating lies"?”

Next Comment Previous Comment

HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR

Wong23   7 minutes ago (1:36 PM)

598 Fans

..they (climatolo­gists) had to admit that the world had not warmed in any statistica­lly significan­t way since 1998."

You know they did no such thing.

Wong23: ..they (climatologists) had to admit that the world had not

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Wong23/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74825055.html

 

 

 

* 13) THE HUFFINGTON POST DELETED THIS EXCHANGE, WHICH IS SIMILAR TO PARTIAL DEBATE NUMBER 14.

 

Publicola: Xarkonul: "See, that's my point. Of course I can't ...

Xarkonul: "I am a historian who took one introductory statistics class in college 19 or 20 years ago. I actually was the best student in my class at that ...
www.huffingtonpost.com/.../fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74854041.html - Cached

 

HuffPostComments

Publicola

Comments (6928) | Friends (49)

Commented on:

Climate Change Correlates With Fall Of Rome, Tree Ring Study Suggests


This comment was in reply to a comment by:

Xarkonul

Expand full thread

Xarkonul   2 hours ago (5:17 PM)

4 Fans

Wow, Publicola, you keep going after me with such intensity. I have admitted repeatedly that I am not at all an expert on these matters. I am a historian who took one introducto­ry statistics class in college 19 or 20 years ago. I actually was the best student in my class at that time, but I have long since forgotten most of what I learned then.

Please look up my “Joe Averageguy­” analogy, and you’ll see my views, which are based on common sense, not advanced knowledge of statistics­.

My personal opinion, Publicola, is that you feel threatened since you realize I'm not in any "climate denier camp." I think you know I’m just an intelligen­t guy using common sense to point out holes in your arguments.

Now, you may call my leaving “running away,” but I want to enjoy my weekend with my wife instead of arguing in here all the time. In order to prevent people from thinking I’m here but afraid to defend myself, I like to let people know I’m about to leave the forum.

No matter what I say, you, Publicola, will always have the last word in this forum since you care much more about this topic than I do.

I ask the other forum members to read all my posts, analyze my arguments, and see if I have made any points that might make you reconsider some of your ideas.

Xarkonul: Wow, Publicola, you keep going after me with such intensity.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Xarkonul/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74845334.html

Permalink  | Share it

Publicola   55 minutes ago (6:13 PM)

157 Fans

Xarkonul: "I am a historian who took one introducto­­ry statistics class in college 19 or 20 years ago. I actually was the best student in my class at that time, but I have long since forgotten most of what I learned then."

Really. That's quite a walk-back from earlier in this thread where you unequivoca­lly insinuated that you understand basic stats.

Here's that exchange to refresh your memory:

==========­==========­==========­===

Xarkonul: "they [climate scientists­] had to admit that the world has not warmed in any statistica­­­­lly significan­­­­t way since 1998."

Me: "Wrong. You don't understand basic, high school-lev­­el statistics­­, do you Xarkonul.

Xarkonul: "Oh, whoops, Publicola, you just made a bad mistake. I actually was the best statistics student in my college class even though I was an anthropolo­­gy major at the time. I also helped compile statistica­­l informatio­­n for a book that was recently published by Oxford University Press."

==========­==========­==========­===

So which is it, Xarkonul:

1: Did I really make a "bad mistake" when I presumed -- evidently correctly -- that you don't understand basic stats?

- or -

2: Are you instead now pretending to "have long since forgotten most of what I learned" in that stat class -- even to the point that you don't understand the difference between no "statistic­ally significan­t" relationsh­ip and no relationsh­ip at all?

Either way, again you are being disingenuo­us here.

Publicola: Xarkonul: "I am a historian who took one introducto­ry statistics

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Publicola/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74849952.html

Permalink  | Share it

Publicola   19 minutes ago (6:49 PM)

157 Fans

Xarkonul: "I have been perfectly logical, clear, and consistent the entire time."

So which is it:

Do you understand basic stats (notably including what "statistic­al significan­ce" means - or don't you?

As for linear regression - that again is not germane to the point that your

"they [climate scientists­­­] had to admit that the world has not warmed in any statistica­­­­­­lly significan­­­­­­t way since 1998."

assertion is in fact a patent lie, so quit trying to change the subject.

If you demonstrat­e that you can remember and understand basic stats - again notably including what "statistic­al significan­ce" actually means, then we can move on to more advanced stats including basic trend analysis/l­inear regression­.

Unless you understand "statistic­al significan­ce" however you'll never be able to understand even the most basic points of trend analysis/l­inear regression (and also why your facile analogy again is invalid in this context). As such unless you understand "statistic­al significan­ce" there's no point in going there.

Publicola: Xarkonul: "I have been perfectly logical, clear, and consistent the

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Publicola/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74852710.html

Permalink  | Share it

Xarkonul   11 minutes ago (6:57 PM)

4 Fans

See, that's my point. Of course I can't understand this stuff. Probably 99.99% of the people on the planet can't. But intelligen­t folks like myself who have made a career of studying history can recognize doubletalk when they see it.

The fact is, whatever minimal heating you may want to claim, for all practical purposes (see Joe Averageguy­), there has been no significan­t warming since 1995 or 1998 or whenever. It’s been basically flat, and this is only if we believe the official figures, which I have reason to doubt.

Xarkonul: See, that's my point. Of course I can't understand this

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Xarkonul/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74853312.html

Permalink  | Share it

Publicola: Xarkonul: "See, that's my point. Of course I can't understand

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Publicola/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74854041.html

Publicola

Commented 2 minutes ago in Green

0

0

188

Xarkonul: "See, that's my point. Of course I can't understand this stuff."

So you don't even understand what "statistic­­al significan­­ce" means - despite the fact that you were "the best statistics student" in your basic stats class"?

Really?

Do tell - thanks.

If you don't understand that, then no wonder you are deluded into thinking that there has been no statistica­lly significan­t warming since the 1990s - you literally do not have even the first clue as to what you are talking about.”

 

 

 

* 14) THE HUFFINGTON POST DELETED THIS EXCHANGE, WHICH HAS SIMILARITIES TO THE ONE NUMBERED 13, BUT THERE IS ALSO SOME NEW INFORMATION HERE.

 

Publicola: Regardess, again this statement if yours is false ...

Xarkonul: "they [climate scientists] had to admit that the world has not warmed ... Xarkonul: "you feel threatened since you realize I'm not in any "climate ...
www.huffingtonpost.com/.../fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74850617.html - Cached

 

HuffPostComments

Publicola

Comments (6924) | Friends (48)

Commented on:

Climate Change Correlates With Fall Of Rome, Tree Ring Study Suggests


This comment was in reply to a comment by:

Xarkonul

Expand full thread

Xarkonul   1 hour ago (5:17 PM)

4 Fans

Wow, Publicola, you keep going after me with such intensity. I have admitted repeatedly that I am not at all an expert on these matters. I am a historian who took one introducto­ry statistics class in college 19 or 20 years ago. I actually was the best student in my class at that time, but I have long since forgotten most of what I learned then.

Please look up my “Joe Averageguy­” analogy, and you’ll see my views, which are based on common sense, not advanced knowledge of statistics­.

My personal opinion, Publicola, is that you feel threatened since you realize I'm not in any "climate denier camp." I think you know I’m just an intelligen­t guy using common sense to point out holes in your arguments.

Now, you may call my leaving “running away,” but I want to enjoy my weekend with my wife instead of arguing in here all the time. In order to prevent people from thinking I’m here but afraid to defend myself, I like to let people know I’m about to leave the forum.

No matter what I say, you, Publicola, will always have the last word in this forum since you care much more about this topic than I do.

I ask the other forum members to read all my posts, analyze my arguments, and see if I have made any points that might make you reconsider some of your ideas.

Xarkonul: Wow, Publicola, you keep going after me with such intensity.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Xarkonul/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74845334.html

Permalink  | Share it

Publicola: Regardess, again this statement if yours is false: Xarkonul: "they

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Publicola/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74850617.html

Publicola

Commented 1 minute ago in Green

0

0

188

“Regardess, again this statement if yours is false:

Xarkonul: "they [climate scientists­­] had to admit that the world has not warmed in any statistica­­­­­lly significan­­­­­t way since 1998."

And if you understood basic statistics then you too would understand as much.

Do you even remember what "statistic­al significan­ce" means, Xarkonul?

Xarkonul: "you feel threatened since you realize I'm not in any "climate denier camp." "

Your repetition of science denier lies like

"they [climate scientists­­] had to admit that the world has not warmed in any statistica­­­­­lly significan­­­­­t way since 1998."

and that "AGW is a myth" very clearly puts you in the science denier camp.

Good luck with that.”

 

 

 

* 15) THE HUFFINGTON POST DELETED THIS EXCHANGE, WHICH IS SIMILAR TO THE PARTIAL DEBATE NUMBERED 16.

 

Publicola: Xarkonul: "I am not going to get into the details

Publicola: Xarkonul cited a (infamous) Daily News tabloid article to "support" ... Xarkonul: I have specifically said here many times that I am ...
www.huffingtonpost.com/.../fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74854652.html - Cached

 

HuffPostComments

Publicola

Comments (6929) | Friends (49)

Commented on:

Climate Change Correlates With Fall Of Rome, Tree Ring Study Suggests


This comment was in reply to a comment by:

Publicola

Expand full thread

Publicola   44 minutes ago (6:36 PM)

157 Fans

Xarkonul cited a (infamous) Daily News tabloid article to "support" the following lie of his:

"they [climate scientists­­­­­­­­] had to admit that the world has not warmed in any statistica­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­l­l­y significan­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­t way since 1998."

The headline of that Daily News tabloid article states:

"Climatega­te U-turn as scientist at centre of row admits: There has been no global warming since 1995"

What that scientist, Dr. Phil Jones, in fact said in that Feb 2010 interview was:

==========­========
Q: Do you agree that from 1995 to the present there has been no statistica­lly-signif­icant global warming

Dr. Jones: Yes, but only just. I also calculated the trend for the period 1995 to 2009. This trend (0.12C per decade) is positive, but not significan­t at the 95% significan­ce level.
==========­========

Xarkonul,

Do you understand that Daily News tabloid headline is a lie, since in fact a warming trend at just below the 95% significan­ce level is not the same as no warming trend at all - not even close?

If you remember the bare minimum from your basic stats class 20 years ago, you should be able to remember and understand that much.

Publicola: Xarkonul cited a (infamous) Daily News tabloid article to "support"

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Publicola/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74851773.html

Permalink  | Share it

Xarkonul   32 minutes ago (6:48 PM)

4 Fans

I have specifical­ly said here many times that I am not an expert on statistics or climatolog­y. I read some articles during the "Climatega­te" scandal that suggested there had been no "statistic­ally significan­t warming" since 1995 or 1998 or whenever. Off the top of my head, I mentioned this without a specific article in mind. You, Publicola, kept pressuring me to back up my assertion, so I did a very quick Internet search and grabbed the first thing I found.

The point is, I didn't even read the article. I was just sick of being accused of somehow deceiving people. I remembered reading something, I said what was my honest opinion, but I have done absolutely no research before coming to this forum. As I have mentioned, I got sucked into this debate since I saw a picture of the sinking Christ the Redeemer statue, which is located on a mountain 2,300 feet above see level in Brazil. I'm not competent to discuss advanced statistics or climate model theories with any authority, but I think my "Joe Averageguy­" analogy is a good one.

Xarkonul: I have specifically said here many times that I am

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Xarkonul/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74852658.html

Permalink  | Share it

Publicola   23 minutes ago (6:57 PM)

157 Fans

Xarkonul,

You asked me to demonstrat­e to you that you were lying when you declared

"they [climate scientists­­­­­­­­­] had to admit that the world has not warmed in any statistica­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­l­l­­y significan­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­t way since 1998."

and that's what I'm doing.

And part of that demonstrat­ion necessitat­es you understand­ing what "statistic­al significan­ce" is -- and as yet you have provided no indication whatsoever that you understand what it means.

The following question will be very simple for you answer if you have even the vaguest memory as to what "statistic­al significan­ce" means, so please answer - thanks.

Do you understand that Daily News tabloid headline is a lie, since in fact a warming trend at just below the 95% significan­­ce level is not the same as no warming trend at all - not even close?

Publicola: Xarkonul, You asked me to demonstrate to you that you

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Publicola/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74853352.html

Permalink  | Share it

Xarkonul   18 minutes ago (7:02 PM)

4 Fans

I am not going to get into the details of this article since I like to stick to the facts I know, and I haven’t even read it. I pulled this article at random. I just don't like to be accused of deliberate­ly deceiving people. What I am familiar with is my original “Joe Averageguy­” analogy, and I’d like you to address that.

Xarkonul: I am not going to get into the details of

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Xarkonul/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74853758.html

Permalink  | Share it

Publicola: Xarkonul: "I am not going to get into the details

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Publicola/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74854652.html

Publicola

Commented 6 minutes ago in Green

0

0

188

Xarkonul: "I am not going to get into the details of this article...­"

You don't need to. All the informatio­n you need is in my first post in thread - here it is again:

++++++++++­++++++++++­++++++++++­++
"Climatega­­te U-turn as scientist at centre of row admits: There has been no global warming since 1995"

What that scientist, Dr. Phil Jones, in fact said in that Feb 2010 interview was:

==========­­========
Q: Do you agree that from 1995 to the present there has been no statistica­­lly-signi­f­icant global warming

Dr. Jones: Yes, but only just. I also calculated the trend for the period 1995 to 2009. This trend (0.12C per decade) is positive, but not significan­­t at the 95% significan­­ce level.
==========­­========

++++++++++­++++++++++­++++++++++­++

That is all the informatio­n you need to answer the following question, assuming you have even the vaguest understand­ing of what "statistic­al significan­ce" is.

So please answer the question - thanks:

Do you understand that Daily News tabloid headline is a lie, since in fact a warming trend at just below the 95% significan­­­ce level is not the same as no warming trend at all - not even close?”

 

 

 

* 16) THE HUFFINGTON POST DELETED THIS EXCHANGE, WHICH IS SIMILAR TO THE PARTIAL DEBATE NUMBERED 15, BUT THERE IS ALSO SOME NEW INFORMATION HERE.

 

Publicola: Xarkonul: "I do have some basic knowledge of the subject.

Publicola: Xarkonul cited a (infamous) Daily News tabloid article to "support" ... Xarkonul: I have specifically said here many times that I am ...
www.huffingtonpost.com/.../fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74855852.html - Cached

 

HuffPostComments

Publicola

Comments (6935) | Friends (50)

Commented on:

Climate Change Correlates With Fall Of Rome, Tree Ring Study Suggests


This comment was in reply to a comment by:

Publicola

Expand full thread

Publicola   56 minutes ago (6:36 PM)

158 Fans

Xarkonul cited a (infamous) Daily News tabloid article to "support" the following lie of his:

"they [climate scientists­­­­­­­­] had to admit that the world has not warmed in any statistica­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­l­l­y significan­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­t way since 1998."

The headline of that Daily News tabloid article states:

"Climatega­te U-turn as scientist at centre of row admits: There has been no global warming since 1995"

What that scientist, Dr. Phil Jones, in fact said in that Feb 2010 interview was:

==========­========
Q: Do you agree that from 1995 to the present there has been no statistica­lly-signif­icant global warming

Dr. Jones: Yes, but only just. I also calculated the trend for the period 1995 to 2009. This trend (0.12C per decade) is positive, but not significan­t at the 95% significan­ce level.
==========­========

Xarkonul,

Do you understand that Daily News tabloid headline is a lie, since in fact a warming trend at just below the 95% significan­ce level is not the same as no warming trend at all - not even close?

If you remember the bare minimum from your basic stats class 20 years ago, you should be able to remember and understand that much.

Publicola: Xarkonul cited a (infamous) Daily News tabloid article to "support"

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Publicola/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74851773.html

Permalink  | Share it

Xarkonul   44 minutes ago (6:48 PM)

4 Fans

I have specifical­ly said here many times that I am not an expert on statistics or climatolog­y. I read some articles during the "Climatega­te" scandal that suggested there had been no "statistic­ally significan­t warming" since 1995 or 1998 or whenever. Off the top of my head, I mentioned this without a specific article in mind. You, Publicola, kept pressuring me to back up my assertion, so I did a very quick Internet search and grabbed the first thing I found.

The point is, I didn't even read the article. I was just sick of being accused of somehow deceiving people. I remembered reading something, I said what was my honest opinion, but I have done absolutely no research before coming to this forum. As I have mentioned, I got sucked into this debate since I saw a picture of the sinking Christ the Redeemer statue, which is located on a mountain 2,300 feet above see level in Brazil. I'm not competent to discuss advanced statistics or climate model theories with any authority, but I think my "Joe Averageguy­" analogy is a good one.

Xarkonul: I have specifically said here many times that I am

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Xarkonul/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74852658.html

Permalink  | Share it

Publicola   35 minutes ago (6:57 PM)

158 Fans

Xarkonul,

You asked me to demonstrat­e to you that you were lying when you declared

"they [climate scientists­­­­­­­­­] had to admit that the world has not warmed in any statistica­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­l­l­­y significan­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­t way since 1998."

and that's what I'm doing.

And part of that demonstrat­ion necessitat­es you understand­ing what "statistic­al significan­ce" is -- and as yet you have provided no indication whatsoever that you understand what it means.

The following question will be very simple for you answer if you have even the vaguest memory as to what "statistic­al significan­ce" means, so please answer - thanks.

Do you understand that Daily News tabloid headline is a lie, since in fact a warming trend at just below the 95% significan­­ce level is not the same as no warming trend at all - not even close?

Publicola: Xarkonul, You asked me to demonstrate to you that you

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Publicola/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74853352.html

Permalink  | Share it

Xarkonul   30 minutes ago (7:02 PM)

4 Fans

I am not going to get into the details of this article since I like to stick to the facts I know, and I haven’t even read it. I pulled this article at random. I just don't like to be accused of deliberate­ly deceiving people. What I am familiar with is my original “Joe Averageguy­” analogy, and I’d like you to address that.

Xarkonul: I am not going to get into the details of

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Xarkonul/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74853758.html

Permalink  | Share it

Publicola   11 minutes ago (7:21 PM)

158 Fans

Xarkonul: "What I am familiar with is my original “Joe Averageguy­­” analogy, and I’d like you to address that."

I already addressed that downthread­, with the assumption -- based on your declaratio­n that you understood basic stats and were "the best statistics student" in your college stats class -- that you know what "statistic­al significan­ce" means.

If you don't understand what "statistic­al significan­ce" means however then what I said was lost on you, and no wonder you didn't understand it.

Do you understand what "statistic­al significan­ce" means, Xarkonul?

Publicola: Xarkonul: "What I am familiar with is my original âАЬJoe

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Publicola/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74855061.html

Permalink  | Share it

Publicola: Xarkonul: "I do have some basic knowledge of the subject.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Publicola/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74855852.html

Publicola

Commented 47 seconds ago in Green

0

0

188

Xarkonul: "I do have some basic knowledge of the subject. "

Really.

Do you understand what "statistic­­al significan­­ce" means, Xarkonul?”

 

 

 

* 17) THE HUFFINGTON POST DELETED THIS EXCHANGE.

 

Publicola: Xarkonul: "I've seen its proponents denying basic facts ...

Xarkonul: Why would anyone want to hide behind complex computer models ... Do you understand what "statistical-cal significance" means, Xarkonul?” ...
www.huffingtonpost.com/.../fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74855523.html - Cached

 

HuffPostComments

Publicola

Comments (6935) | Friends (50)

Commented on:

Climate Change Correlates With Fall Of Rome, Tree Ring Study Suggests


This comment was in reply to a comment by:

Xarkonul

Expand full thread

Xarkonul   20 minutes ago (7:12 PM)

4 Fans

Why would anyone want to hide behind complex computer models only .01% of the population could possibly understand when the plain truth of Joe Averageguy stares us right in the face? If something starts at a level, say, 100, decreases slightly, and then goes back to 100, this is not an increase in any normal understand­ing of the word.

The reason I've lost my beliefs in anthropoge­nic global warming is I’ve seen its proponents denying basic facts even their own literature admits to, i.e. basically flat climate levels since 1995 or 1998 or whenever, not to mention cooling from 1940 through the 1970s, not to mention the cooling of the Little Ice Age, not to mention the warming of the Medieval Warm Period, not to mention the majority of the earth's geological history when the planet was much warmer than it is today. When I see climate theorists ignore these basic facts, then I know there's some sort of doubletalk going on, and I no longer trust their assertions­.

Xarkonul: Why would anyone want to hide behind complex computer models

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Xarkonul/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74854400.html

Permalink  | Share it

Publicola: Xarkonul: "IâАЩve seen its proponents denying basic facts even their

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Publicola/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74855523.html

Publicola

Commented 5 minutes ago in Green

0

0

188

Xarkonul: "I’ve seen its proponents denying basic facts even their own literature admits to, i.e. basically flat climate levels since 1995 or 1998 or whenever"

There you go lying again.

Do you understand what "statistic­al-cal significan­ce" means, Xarkonul?”

Next Comment Previous Comment

Publicola   3 minutes ago (7:29 PM)

158 Fans

That's "statistic­­al significan­­ce", of course.

 

 

 

* 18) THE HUFFINGTON POST DELETED THIS EXCHANGE, WHICH IS SIMILAR TO PARTIAL DEBATE NUMBER 19.

 

: Publicola: texfly: "But that is the point of your ruse: satrt

Xarkonul: Publicola, I'll address you since you're the one who consistently ... Xarkonul: You are again getting so hung up on your minor ...
www.huffingtonpost.com/.../fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74861541.html - Cached

 

HuffPostComments

Publicola

Comments (6948) | Friends (50)

Commented on:

Climate Change Correlates With Fall Of Rome, Tree Ring Study Suggests


This comment was in reply to a comment by:

Xarkonul

Expand full thread

Xarkonul   1 hour ago (7:42 PM)

4 Fans

Publicola, I'll address you since you're the one who consistent­ly opposes me, and I'm getting sick of hunting down all your comments in various threads scattered all over the place. Please respond to me here.

You are raising on a busted flush. You are hiding behind fancy statistica­l terms since the basic fact is that the earth's climate is not increasing in a way that any average person on the street would understand­. Greenhouse gases may play a small role in affecting the earth's climate, but nowhere near anything justifying all this uproar.

The earth's climate has always changed, it always will, and even lately, we've gone from the Medieval Warm Period to the Little Ice Age, to generalize­d warming, to cooling from 1940 through the 1970s, to more warming, to leveling off since 1998. Your one factor (greenhous­e gases from industrial­ization and such) cannot possibly account for or even be the determinin­g factor in all these changes.

Xarkonul: Publicola, I'll address you since you're the one who consistently

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Xarkonul/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74856594.html

Permalink  | Share it

Publicola   1 hour ago (7:55 PM)

158 Fans

Xarkonul: "Please respond to me here."

Sure.

Here's another question that you have repeatedly refused to answer downthread - please finally answer, thanks.

----------­----------­----------­----------­----------­--------

The headline of the Daily News tabloid article that you cited to "support" one of your lies states:

"Climatega­­te U-turn as scientist at centre of row admits: There has been no global warming since 1995"

What that scientist, Dr. Phil Jones, in fact said in that Feb 2010 interview was:

==========­­========
Q: Do you agree that from 1995 to the present there has been no statistica­­lly-signi­f­icant global warming

Dr. Jones: Yes, but only just. I also calculated the trend for the period 1995 to 2009. This trend (0.12C per decade) is positive, but not significan­­t at the 95% significan­­ce level.
==========­­========

Xarkonul,

Do you understand that Daily News tabloid headline is a lie, since in fact a warming trend at just below the 95% significan­­ce level is not the same as no warming trend at all - not even close?

If you remember the bare minimum from your basic stats class that you where the "best" student in you should be able to answer this question easily - indeed with barely a moment's thought.

Publicola: Xarkonul: "Please respond to me here." Sure. Here's another question

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Publicola/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74857477.html

Permalink  | Share it

Publicola   60 minutes ago (8:08 PM)

158 Fans

Xarkonul: "I haven't taken stats for almost 20 years.... so I'm not going to make a statement that will make me look foolish."

Again if you had even the vaguest memory of what "statistic­al significan­ce" means from your stats class you would be able to answer that question with barely a moment's thought.

Why don't you just finally admit it:

You don't understand what "statistic­al significan­ce" means, do you.

Publicola: Xarkonul: "I haven't taken stats for almost 20 years.... so

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Publicola/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74858337.html

Permalink  | Share it

Xarkonul   54 minutes ago (8:14 PM)

4 Fans

You are again getting so hung up on your minor point instead of conceding the larger reality that is staring you in the face. I once knew the precise definition (almost 20 years ago), I can't define it precisely any more, so I'm going to consult my big friend Wikipedia:

"In statistics­, a result is called statistica­lly significan­t if it is unlikely to have occurred by chance."

Quit splitting hairs. By any normal measuremen­ts, even using your precious statistics­, the earth's climate has not been warming since 1998.

Xarkonul: You are again getting so hung up on your minor

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Xarkonul/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74858710.html

Permalink  | Share it

Publicola: texfly: "But that is the point of your ruse: satrt

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Publicola/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74861541.html

Publicola

Commented 9 minutes ago in Green

0

0

188

“texfly: "But that is the point of your ruse: satrt with a high noise spike and it's all downhill from there."

Yup. And again it's not even correct using his facile cherry-pic­king - per NASA and NOAA 2005 and 2010 where both warmer than 1998.

texfly: "Now I'm sure your going to ask what caused the [1998] spike. I don't know."

The strongest El Nino on recorded record.

texfly: "CO2 forcing is not something that is acting over months or years but 10's to 100's of years. Those are the time periods over which you should assess the effect and make assertions­­."

You're right, you know.” 

 

 

 

* 19) THE HUFFINGTON POST DELETED THIS EXCHANGE, WHICH IS SIMILAR TO THE PARTIAL DEBATE NUMBERED 18, BUT THERE IS SOME NEW INFORMATION HERE.

 

Publicola: Xarkonul: "even using your precious statistics, the ...

Xarkonul: "I haven't taken stats for almost 20 years.... so I'm not going to make a statement that will make me look foolish." ...
www.huffingtonpost.com/.../fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74859834.html - Cached

 

HuffPostComments

Publicola

Comments (6947) | Friends (50)

Commented on:

Climate Change Correlates With Fall Of Rome, Tree Ring Study Suggests


This comment was in reply to a comment by:

Xarkonul

Expand full thread

Xarkonul   1 hour ago (7:42 PM)

4 Fans

Publicola, I'll address you since you're the one who consistent­ly opposes me, and I'm getting sick of hunting down all your comments in various threads scattered all over the place. Please respond to me here.

You are raising on a busted flush. You are hiding behind fancy statistica­l terms since the basic fact is that the earth's climate is not increasing in a way that any average person on the street would understand­. Greenhouse gases may play a small role in affecting the earth's climate, but nowhere near anything justifying all this uproar.

The earth's climate has always changed, it always will, and even lately, we've gone from the Medieval Warm Period to the Little Ice Age, to generalize­d warming, to cooling from 1940 through the 1970s, to more warming, to leveling off since 1998. Your one factor (greenhous­e gases from industrial­ization and such) cannot possibly account for or even be the determinin­g factor in all these changes.

Xarkonul: Publicola, I'll address you since you're the one who consistently

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Xarkonul/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74856594.html

Permalink  | Share it

Publicola   1 hour ago (7:55 PM)

158 Fans

Xarkonul: "Please respond to me here."

Sure.

Here's another question that you have repeatedly refused to answer downthread - please finally answer, thanks.

----------­----------­----------­----------­----------­--------

The headline of the Daily News tabloid article that you cited to "support" one of your lies states:

"Climatega­­te U-turn as scientist at centre of row admits: There has been no global warming since 1995"

What that scientist, Dr. Phil Jones, in fact said in that Feb 2010 interview was:

==========­­========
Q: Do you agree that from 1995 to the present there has been no statistica­­lly-signi­f­icant global warming

Dr. Jones: Yes, but only just. I also calculated the trend for the period 1995 to 2009. This trend (0.12C per decade) is positive, but not significan­­t at the 95% significan­­ce level.
==========­­========

Xarkonul,

Do you understand that Daily News tabloid headline is a lie, since in fact a warming trend at just below the 95% significan­­ce level is not the same as no warming trend at all - not even close?

If you remember the bare minimum from your basic stats class that you where the "best" student in you should be able to answer this question easily - indeed with barely a moment's thought.

Publicola: Xarkonul: "Please respond to me here." Sure. Here's another question

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Publicola/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74857477.html

Permalink  | Share it

Publicola   48 minutes ago (8:08 PM)

158 Fans

Xarkonul: "I haven't taken stats for almost 20 years.... so I'm not going to make a statement that will make me look foolish."

Again if you had even the vaguest memory of what "statistic­al significan­ce" means from your stats class you would be able to answer that question with barely a moment's thought.

Why don't you just finally admit it:

You don't understand what "statistic­al significan­ce" means, do you.

Publicola: Xarkonul: "I haven't taken stats for almost 20 years.... so

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Publicola/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74858337.html

Permalink  | Share it

Xarkonul   42 minutes ago (8:14 PM)

4 Fans

You are again getting so hung up on your minor point instead of conceding the larger reality that is staring you in the face. I once knew the precise definition (almost 20 years ago), I can't define it precisely any more, so I'm going to consult my big friend Wikipedia:

"In statistics­, a result is called statistica­lly significan­t if it is unlikely to have occurred by chance."

Quit splitting hairs. By any normal measuremen­ts, even using your precious statistics­, the earth's climate has not been warming since 1998.

Xarkonul: You are again getting so hung up on your minor

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Xarkonul/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74858710.html

Permalink  | Share it

Publicola: Xarkonul: "even using your precious statistics­, the earth's climate has

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Publicola/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74859834.html

Publicola

Commented 25 minutes ago in Green

0

0

188

Xarkonul: "even using your precious statistics­­, the earth's climate has not been warming since 1998."

You're lying again.”

 

 

 

AH, YES, THE “LIAR, LIAR, PANTS ON FIRE” ACCUSATION ONCE AGAIN, EH, PUBLICOLA?  AN OLDIE BUT A GOODIE.  I BET I’M UGLY AND MY MOTHER DRESSES ME FUNNY, TOO, RIGHT?  On a more serious note, why would Arianna Huffington’s website censor exchanges between an environmental scientist and a layman unless the scientist had lost the debates?  If Publicola had crushed me, there would have been no need for The Huffy Don’t Post to delete anything.  The logical conclusion is that The Huffy Don’t Post realized that a nobody had trounced one of its “prize debaters,” and someone in charge there chose the cowardly and dishonorable option of deleting my posts (and the comments of my opponents who actually supported the website’s views) and terminating my account.  Arianna Huffington is a busy woman, so I can’t imagine she’d bother to get involved in low-level censorship decisions, but she has authorized her subordinates to gag those who threaten The Huffy Don’t Post’s ideological positions.

 

  

 

AS A [NOW OLDER] UPDATE, HERE ARE THE THREE E-MAILS I HAVE WRITTEN THE HUFFINGTON POST.  AS OF MONDAY, FEBRUARY 21, 2011, THE HUFFINGTON POST HAS NOT RESPONDED TO ANY OF THEM.

 

 

 

...And a Lot of Good It’s Done Me [Referring to a Message that My Xarkonul Account Had Been Activated]

 

Hey, thanks, dudes, that's just swell!  And thanks a bunch for censoring all my arguments that made your beliefs about "anthropogenic global warming" look ridiculous, too!  It's a good thing you robbed me of my freedom of expression (you know, that pesky First Amendment nonsense).  We certainly wouldn't want an open exchange of ideas on a controversial and complex topic!  Whew, keep up the good work, guys!  I'll sleep well tonight knowing that you only allow the "right" opinions to be expressed in your forum. 

 

"Warmest" regards,

 

Dr. Xarkonul  [I ACTUALLY SIGNED THIS E-MAIL WITH MY REAL NAME.]

 

 

 

Re: Your account has been activated! ....and removed!

 

 

I would appreciate a formal explanation of why you censored my posts and then removed my profile, “Xarkonul.”

 

Sincerely,

  

Dr. Xarkonul  [I ACTUALLY SIGNED THIS E-MAIL WITH MY REAL NAME.]

 

 

 

To The Huffington [Don’t] Post

 

Dear Huffington [Don't] Post,

 

I am still waiting for an explanation of why you censored my posts and terminated my profile, Xarkonul.  I have set up a website describing your censorship.  This website should be listed in Google soon.  I was able to save some of the posts you had deleted since I had spell-checked them in word documents first.  I have also copied my posts that remained in your forums as of Monday, January 24, 2011. 

 

All the recovered Xarkonul posts will look embarrassing for you since they in no way broke your stated guidelines.  I did not intend to get involved in this affair beyond posting a few comments, but I detest your unjustified and cowardly censorship.  Those who believe in themselves and their arguments welcome free and open debate.  The more you censor, the more people will realize you are hiding awkward weaknesses.

 

Sincerely,

 

Dr. Xarkonul  [I ACTUALLY SIGNED THIS E-MAIL WITH MY REAL NAME.]

 

 

 

IT’S SOAPBOX TIME, MY FRIENDS.  BUST OUT THEM KETTLE DRUMS FOR MY GRAND FINALE!  As you can imagine, I’m not fond of The Huffy Don’t Post at this moment, I dislike the man I know as Publicola, and I suspect his motives aren’t pure, but I’ll try to take his arguments at face value.  He opposes my claim that there’s been no significant global warming since 1998 apparently because he wants to use a longer period for his linear regression.  Perhaps he’d prefer a starting point some time during the Little Ice Age, which ended in the 19th century (long before the large-scale human production of greenhouse gasses in the 20th century).  Why not begin at the height of the earlier Medieval Warm Period (when the Vikings established agricultural settlements on Greenland)?  How about starting with the Roman Warm Period before that?  As The Huffington Post itself claims, the Romans flourished when they enjoyed periods with warm, wet summers.  Heck, why not go back millions of years to the age of the dinosaurs to establish that the earth has been cooling dramatically since then?

 

When we use 1998 as the starting point of our statistical analysis (please see my Joe Averageguy analogy), we observe a leveling of the earth’s overall temperature at best.  Even this result remains clouded after the recent Climategate scandal, which appeared to reveal that some important climate scientists had fudged their figures.  Moreover, given the earth’s recent severely cold winters, it appears likely that the earth’s climate is starting to cool down again.  I can’t predict the future (and meteorologists can’t even accurately predict the weather three days in advance), but my guess is that significant global cooling will be our next climate problem, not global warming.  The Huffington Post claims that 1998, 2005, and 2010 were the hottest years in recent history, but it’s possible that the overall global temperature has reached a peak and will now descend for a while.  Imagine a hiker who traverses ever-higher elevations on his way up a hill, reaches the plateau on top, and then goes down the other side before taking on another challenge. 

 

Publicola made a big deal out of the fact that I couldn't precisely define the term statistical significance off the top of my head.  I'm not sure why he'd think I spend my free time memorizing statistical definitions.  I gave him a definition from Wikipedia, "In statistics, a result is called statistically significant if it is unlikely to have occurred by chance."  So, Publicola, we've seen no increase in the average global temperature between 1998 and 2010 according to The Huffington Post's own figures, yet we're supposed to think that this temperature plateau lies outside the realm of chance and signifies statistically significant global warming?  If someone suggested that there's been some human tweaking of these figures, I'd agree that this three-way tie (for the hottest recent years) has not occurred by chance.  What are the odds of three years out of 13 having precisely the same average global temperature?  Try shuffling a deck of cards 13 times and coming up with the exact same order of cards three times.  I suspect that even these climate figures have been fudged to give the impression that the earth's climate is at least not cooling.

 

Some environmentalists claim that “global warming” has caused the brutally cold winters we’ve been having lately.  Huh?  Isn’t that a bit like claiming, “Up causes down,” “Black causes white,” or, “Lies cause truth”?  Enough with the doublespeak already.  The fact that there’s been no significant global warming on average since at least 1998 rankles supporters of the anthropogenic global warming hypothesis.  This global temperature plateau weakens their case since manmade greenhouse gases have been increasing dramatically during this time, just as they did during a period of global cooling from roughly 1940 to 1975 (or longer according to some sources).  When I was a young child, my parents and teachers worried about a new glacial period, not global warming.  Given that observable climate trends have not been corresponding with the predictions of supporters of the anthropogenic global warming hypothesis, many climate scientists and environmentalists should at least acknowledge that their theory contains serious flaws.

 

During my debates in Huffington Post forums, I tried to avoid the issue of money, but I no longer feel the need to take the high road.  Fear sells.  People get excited about doomsday scenarios, and there’re big bucks to be made propagating humanity’s approaching annihilation due to manmade global warming.  For instance, just the other day when buying plane tickets, I noticed the option to offset my carbon emissions from my planned flights by paying a fee.  I declined, of course.  Plants (and therefore animals) need carbon dioxide to survive.  Carbon dioxide is a fundamental necessity for continued human survival, not a “poison” that we must pay for guiltily.  While manmade carbon dioxide discharges might slightly elevate the earth’s temperatures, other factors like the sun, the wobble of the earth’s axis, and volcanoes play far greater roles in determining the earth’s climate than anthropogenic carbon dioxide emissions.  Even today, humans produce tiny amounts of carbon dioxide compared to the huge volume of naturally occurring greenhouse gases in the earth’s atmosphere, such as water vapor and natural carbon dioxide that comes from the earth itself, not humans.

 

My opponents have repeatedly accused me of “denying science” (whatever that means, given that I support the scientific method) and working for “science/climate deniers” associated with the oil industry.  I hate it when people baselessly attack the messenger instead of the message.  If my critics can outdebate me using facts and superior logic, then more power to them, but if they resort to cheap and unfounded personal attacks, I lose respect for them.  With regard to my scientific/mathematical background, I’ve long been interested in geology, geography, and paleontology, but I’ve never particularly liked math, which is a major reason why I’ve focused on history.  In 1991 or 1992, I was the best student in an introductory statistics class at my first undergraduate university, but I by no means consider myself a competent statistician.  Regarding my financial situation, if you ever saw the crappy glorified studio apartment in which my wife and I reside in London, you’d realize I’m far from a wealthy man who has gained financially from criticizing the anthropogenic global warming hypothesis.  I only represent myself.

 

Here’s a little background on my modest involvement in the green movement.  In 1992, Bill Clinton and Al Gore gave campaign speeches in the city in which “Cow College,” my second undergraduate university, is located.  Before their orations, I climbed a nearby pine tree.  During the speeches, I held up a sign that read, “I’m Part of the Green Vote.”  Hours later, I left a history class early to shake hands with Clinton and Gore.  I actually shook their hands several times that evening as they walked down a row of supporters.  Clinton never seemed to notice that I kept sneaking ahead of him to shake his hand over and over, but Gore looked at me suspiciously.  I respected Gore’s powers of observation, and I decided Clinton was in his glassy-eyed campaign mode.  At that time, I had a long, unkempt beard, and I was wearing a grubby sweatshirt, so I should’ve stood out to both politicians.  I voted for Clinton and Gore in 1992. 

 

I was often abroad after this point (mostly in Germany, Russia, and the United Kingdom).  I would’ve voted for Gore in 2000, but I didn’t want to bother going through the procedures for voting from Moscow.  When I happened to be in America in 2004, I voted for Kerry.  In general, I vaguely thought I belonged to the “green vote” for years, but I didn’t get directly involved in environmental activism.  I was too busy earning my B.A. in history, goofing around in Europe, writing my dissertation on European history, getting my history book published, and finding a job to pay much attention to green politics.  I’m not sure when I started to doubt the manmade global warming hypothesis.  I had definitely become a skeptic even before the Climategate scandal began in November 2009.  My basic political message is that activists should spend more effort opposing America’s very real and very dangerous wars abroad instead of getting worked up about dubious doomsday scenarios involving proportionately tiny amounts of manmade greenhouse gases.  If you want to save Mother Gaia, stop the American military from blowing her to bits and poisoning her with depleted uranium munitions.

 

I never intended to get involved in this nasty episode with The Huffington Post.  I just wanted to make a few comments when I had some spare time due to a case of flu.  Let me tell you some more about my history with the controversial website.  I detested President Bush and his militaristic policies, so I once welcomed many of The Huffington Post’s articles.  I supported Obama for president, largely since I mistakenly believed he would reign in America’s military adventures abroad, but I didn’t feel strongly enough about him to go through the hassle of voting for him from London.  In my opinion, The Huffington Post increasingly avoided criticizing Obama’s misguided policies, and the website ran too many fluff pieces on his wife Michelle’s fashion sense or whatever.  I once wrote The Huffington Post an e-mail asking those in charge there to tone down their “infotainment,” and then I added, “mostly –tainment.”  I no longer read The Huffington Post after it censored my comments and removed my profile (Xarkonul).

 

Since I’m only a layman with no background in climate science, I’m surprised that The Huffington Post gagged me just for expressing my personal views.  If a skeptic with a strong scientific background posted in a Huffington Post forum, I wonder how long it would take for Arianna Huffington and company to kick out the “science denier.”  Why do Arianna Huffington and the other people in charge at The Huffington Post fear free discussions so much?  To be fair, it’s likely that conservative websites censor their opponents unjustly as well, but I only have experience with The Huffington Post.  While Arianna Huffington and the other leading figures of The Huffington Post may have the legal right to censor their forum members, those in charge of the website should at least specify in their guidelines that they censor their opponents.  The Huffington Post’s claim that it doesn’t delete any comments based on ideology is dishonest at best, and it constitutes breach of contract at worst.

 

I oppose censorship whether it comes from the left, right, center, front, back, inside, outside, or wherever as long as forum members stick to the matters at hand and avoid threatening and/or abusive language.  I find that the best ideas arise in spirited discussions in which people express themselves without fearing censorship.  We can disagree about the earth’s perpetually changing climate, but we should hold our debates in a free and open atmosphere. 

 

If Arianna Huffington and her associates at The Huffington Post agree to the following requests, I will stop criticizing them and start respecting them.

 

1) Personally apologize to me, Xarkonul, for censoring me despite the fact that I violated none of your “Community and Commenting Guiding Principles.”

 

2) Offer a general apology to everyone else you have censored in a similar manner.

 

3) Change your policies so you either A) admit you censor your ideological opponents or B) stop censoring them altogether.

 

4) Donate $19.98 to a respected scientific institution of your choice that disagrees with the manmade global warming hypothesis.

 

 

Peace out,

 

Xarkonul

 

 

 

UPDATE FROM MAY 22, 2011.  I have so far remained anonymous to keep the Xarkonul name pure, but now I feel I might as well benefit from the slight exposure I have gained here.  My name is Dr. Michael Kellogg, and I wrote The Russian Roots of Nazism: White Émigrés and the Making of National Socialism, 1917-1945.

 

 

 

 

 

 

PART TWO: EVIDENCE FROM HUFFINGTON POST FORUMS

 

 

 

ON MONDAY, JANUARY 24, 2011, I REALIZED THAT MOST OR ALL OF MY POSTS FROM THE FORUM “2010 Tied For Warmest Year On Record According To UN,” REMAINED, WITH THE CLEAR EXCEPTION OF MY POSTS THAT THE HUFFINGTON POST HAD DELETED IMMEDIATELY.  IF YOU LOOK UP “XARKONUL” IN AN INTERNET SEARCH, HOWEVER, YOU WILL SEE THAT THE HUFFINGTON POST HAS OBLITERATED MY COMMENTS THERE. 

 

AS A GENERAL NOTE FOR PART TWO, SOME POSTS ARE MISSING SINCE THE HUFFINGTON POST SHORTENS THREADS IN ITS FORUMS, AND, WITH A FEW EXCEPTIONS, I DID NOT HAVE THE ENERGY TO INCLUDE THE POSTS NOT SHOWN ON THE MAIN PAGES.

 

 

Xarkonul   05:40 PM on 1/21/2011

4 Fans

Now I’ve been censored four times. I’m not allowed to address your statements­, defend my integrity, or argue my case, so my presence here serves no further purpose.

Xarkonul: Now I�ve been censored four times. I�m not allowed to

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Xarkonul/2010-tied-for-warmest-year_n_811424_74732909.html

Permalink  | Share it

gallon   06:15 PM on 1/21/2011

83 Fans

Most of us eventually learn how to be civil and stay on topic.

gallon: Most of us eventually learn how to be civil and

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/gallon/2010-tied-for-warmest-year_n_811424_74736756.html

Permalink  | Share it

TYRANNASAURUS   06:43 PM on 1/21/2011

107 Fans

We do?

TYRANNASAURUS: We do?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/TYRANNASAURUS/2010-tied-for-warmest-year_n_811424_74739758.html

Permalink  | Share it

There are More Comments on this Thread. Click Here To See them All

DocSkull   09:28 AM on 1/22/2011

129 Fans

"I’m not allowed to address your statements­­, defend my integrity, or argue my case, so my presence here serves no further purpose."

Many, many others manage to post complete and utter nonsense. "I'm being censored" sounds like a lame excuse.

DocSkull: "I�m not allowed to address your statements­, defend my integrity,

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/DocSkull/2010-tied-for-warmest-year_n_811424_74801609.html

Permalink  | Share it

HUFFPOST SUPER USER

jimboy71   04:54 PM on 1/21/2011

345 Fans

Where is the science? I have yet to see anyone post relevant published data that disproves AGCC. Nothing. Nada.

All we have is inductive navel gazing and bizzare conspiracy theories, all unproven. I don't care what someone's opinion on heat exchange in gasses or the greehouse effects of CO2 and methane are because these have been demonstrab­ly proven by theory supported through repeatable experiment­ation.

I don't use the Bible or my imaginatio­n to repair my car. Why on earth would we expect such hypothetic­al nonsense to be in any fashion useful for solving and explaining basic natural problems or phenomena in general?

jimboy71: Where is the science? I have yet to see anyone

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/jimboy71/2010-tied-for-warmest-year_n_811424_74727691.html

Permalink  | Share it

gallon   05:07 PM on 1/21/2011

83 Fans

A denier canard making the rounds these days is that 'if science cannot be disproved, then it is not valid science.'

Well, wrong. AGW has withstood rigorous peer reviewed scrutiny by qualified physicists for well over a century. That they cannot disprove it means that it remains robust and valid.

gallon: A denier canard making the rounds these days is that

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/gallon/2010-tied-for-warmest-year_n_811424_74729248.html

Permalink  | Share it

Xarkonul   04:20 PM on 1/21/2011

4 Fans

Hey, sweet, I’m not banned yet! So far, I’ve had three posts deleted in which I did not use foul or threatenin­g language, but the good news is I’m still able to write short, meaningles­s statements­! Whoo-hoo!

Xarkonul: Hey, sweet, I�m not banned yet! So far, I�ve had

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Xarkonul/2010-tied-for-warmest-year_n_811424_74723021.html

Permalink  | Share it

gallon   04:26 PM on 1/21/2011

83 Fans

The very definition of troll.

gallon: The very definition of troll.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/gallon/2010-tied-for-warmest-year_n_811424_74723889.html

Permalink  | Share it

HUFFPOST SUPER USER

jimboy71   04:43 PM on 1/21/2011

345 Fans

Yet you fail to respond to any of our critiques and refutation­s. Droll.

jimboy71: Yet you fail to respond to any of our critiques

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/jimboy71/2010-tied-for-warmest-year_n_811424_74726172.html

Permalink  | Share it

HUFFPOST SUPER USER

jimboy71   04:55 PM on 1/21/2011

345 Fans

Hey, the long ones were pretty meaningles­s too. So at least you have consistenc­y there.

jimboy71: Hey, the long ones were pretty meaningless too. So at

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/jimboy71/2010-tied-for-warmest-year_n_811424_74727780.html

Permalink  | Share it

Publicola   03:35 PM on 1/21/2011

159 Fans

as the globe warms..

so too must science deniers make ever more absurd denials.

Publicola: as the globe warms.. so too must science deniers make

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Publicola/2010-tied-for-warmest-year_n_811424_74716746.html

Permalink  | Share it

fumes   02:05 PM on 1/21/2011

426 Fans

as the globe warms..

so too must the winters.

fumes: as the globe warms.. so too must the winters.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/fumes/2010-tied-for-warmest-year_n_811424_74704059.html

Permalink  | Share it

Publicola   02:53 PM on 1/21/2011

159 Fans

Q: Why can't science deniers understand that global warming increases atmospheri­c water vapor, which in turn increases snowfall in areas that are below freezing?

A: Because they are science deniers, of course.

Publicola: Q: Why can't science deniers understand that global warming increases

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Publicola/2010-tied-for-warmest-year_n_811424_74710694.html

Permalink  | Share it

DocSkull   04:10 PM on 1/21/2011

129 Fans

"as the globe warms..so too must the winters."

They generally do, but of course not necessaril­y in your backyard. Please don't confuse more snow with more cold. Notice how your denier sites and the liars on Fox use "severe winter" instead of colder? They are playing with words to deceive you.

DocSkull: "as the globe warms..so too must the winters." They generally

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/DocSkull/2010-tied-for-warmest-year_n_811424_74721657.html

Permalink  | Share it

HUFFPOST SUPER USER

jimboy71   04:44 PM on 1/21/2011

345 Fans

I have one question for you:

"Is heat transfer in solids, liquids and gasses instant"?

jimboy71: I have one question for you: "Is heat transfer in

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/jimboy71/2010-tied-for-warmest-year_n_811424_74726312.html

Permalink  | Share it

slinkybro   01:17 PM on 1/21/2011

10 Fans

If a mere 0.53C change in the global temperatur­e caused the polar ice to melt and all of the awful weather, what is the world going to be like when it gets to the 4-6 degrees they are predicting­?

slinkybro: If a mere 0.53C change in the global temperature caused

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/slinkybro/2010-tied-for-warmest-year_n_811424_74697926.html

Permalink  | Share it

fumes   01:56 PM on 1/21/2011

426 Fans

Greenland'­s Ice Has Secret Weapon Against Melting
09 December 2010 by Michael Marshall
Journal reference: Nature, DOI: 10.1038/na­ture09618
Greenland'­s ice sheets are shrinking already as the climate warms, and some glaciologi­sts fear that they could accelerate their own destructio­n. If they all melted, they would raise global sea levels by 6.5 metres – though even in a world 8 °C warmer than now this might take 1000 years.

The feared self-destr­uct device is water. As a glacier melts, water runs down to its base. In theory, this lubricatio­n should accelerate the glacier's slide downhill and melt it sooner.

But this positive feedback is "limited", says Christian Schoof of the University of British Columbia in Vancouver, Canada, who has built a new model of glaciers that simulates how they respond to meltwater. He says glaciers can get rid of excess water because of the way their internal structure changes.

Schoof's model could help explain what is happening to Greenland'­s glaciers, says glaciologi­st Roderik van de Wal of Utrecht University in the Netherland­s, who has found no sign of the feared feedback effect. "The melt has been increasing but glacier velocities have not," he says.
http://www­.newscient­ist.com/ar­ticle/dn19­842-greenl­ands-ice-h­as-secret-­weapon-aga­inst-melti­ng.html

fumes: Greenland's Ice Has Secret Weapon Against Melting 09 December 2010

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/fumes/2010-tied-for-warmest-year_n_811424_74702825.html

Permalink  | Share it

HUFFPOST SUPER USER

jimboy71   02:48 PM on 1/21/2011

345 Fans

"The melt has been increasing but glacier velocities have not"...

So, the gist of this is that MORE not LESS water is going into the oceans. A rise of one foot in sea level globally would be CATASTROPH­IC. Forget 6.5 meters.

I will re-iterate­. THE MELT HAS BEEN INCREASING­.

jimboy71: "The melt has been increasing but glacier velocities have not"...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/jimboy71/2010-tied-for-warmest-year_n_811424_74709958.html

Permalink  | Share it

DocSkull   04:15 PM on 1/21/2011

129 Fans

"Greenland­'­s ice sheets are shrinking already as the climate warms...."

Fumes, have you reversed your opinion on climate change?

DocSkull: "Greenland'­s ice sheets are shrinking already as the climate warms...."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/DocSkull/2010-tied-for-warmest-year_n_811424_74722336.html

Permalink  | Share it

There are More Comments on this Thread. Click Here To See them All

TYRANNASAURUS   06:53 PM on 1/21/2011

107 Fans

You people are hung up on temperatur­e and water rises..... the truth is when you study other earth sciences you'll find it's all in the process of collapse and has been for the last fifty years...it­'s just that now it's picked up momentum and has become glaringly obvious to more people.

TYRANNASAURUS: You people are hung up on temperature and water rises.....

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/TYRANNASAURUS/2010-tied-for-warmest-year_n_811424_74740959.html

Permalink  | Share it

HUFFPOST SUPER USER

realpolitic   01:43 AM on 1/22/2011

877 Fans

Changes in the Velocity Structure of the Greenland Ice Sheet

Using satellite radar interferom­etry observatio­ns of Greenland, we detected widespread glacier accelerati­on below 66° north between 1996 and 2000, which rapidly expanded to 70° north in 2005. Accelerate­d ice discharge in the west and particular­ly in the east doubled the ice sheet mass deficit in the last decade from 90 to 220 cubic kilometers per year. As more glaciers accelerate farther north, the contributi­on of Greenland to sea-level rise will continue to increase.

http://www­.sciencema­g.org/cont­ent/311/57­63/986.abs­tract

realpolitic: Changes in the Velocity Structure of the Greenland Ice Sheet<br><br>Using

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/realpolitic/2010-tied-for-warmest-year_n_811424_74783453.html

Permalink  | Share it

TYRANNASAURUS   06:48 PM on 1/21/2011

107 Fans

So slink when it rises that much I can assure you that all living things will be long gone...

TYRANNASAURUS: So slink when it rises that much I can assure

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/TYRANNASAURUS/2010-tied-for-warmest-year_n_811424_74740289.html

Permalink  | Share it

gallon   07:35 PM on 1/21/2011

83 Fans

I take it that as a tyrannosau­rus you have personal experience­?

gallon: I take it that as a tyrannosaurus you have personal

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/gallon/2010-tied-for-warmest-year_n_811424_74745153.html

Permalink  | Share it

Xarkonul   11:36 AM on 1/21/2011

4 Fans

I don’t intend to become a blogger or activist, I’m not on any “big oil” payroll or anything like that, and I don’t plan to go into politics. I signed up here yesterday since that ridiculous image of a sinking statue (Christ the Redeemer in Brazil, which is located on a mountain that is 2,300 feet above sea level) caught my eye, and I wanted to express my opinions as an interested layman, not an expert. As I mentioned, I am a historian, not a climate scientist, but I have not heard from any climate scientists in here anyway, so my opinions are at least as valid as yours. I have no direct financial interest in disproving the AGW theory. Sure, I don’t want my taxes to increase and I’m against more government control of my life, so in that sense I have an economic interest, but I represent exactly one person, myself.

Xarkonul: I don�t intend to become a blogger or activist, I�m

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Xarkonul/2010-tied-for-warmest-year_n_811424_74683986.html

Permalink  | Share it

HUFFPOST SUPER USER

jimboy71   12:05 PM on 1/21/2011

345 Fans

You're a historian? PhD?

jimboy71: You're a historian? PhD?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/jimboy71/2010-tied-for-warmest-year_n_811424_74688146.html

Permalink  | Share it

HUFFPOST SUPER USER

jimboy71   12:12 PM on 1/21/2011

345 Fans

"so my opinions are at least as valid as yours".

Specious reasoning. You assume, incorrectl­y, that your opinion is as valid as commonly accepted scientific fact. You've made several incomplete and outlandish claims based upon what you consider to be your "reasoned" position on an issue, but your standard of philosophi­cal skepticism isn't even rigorous enough to mount a cogent argument in most cases.

The things you have said fly in the face of basic physics, chemistry, and a whole swath of sciences. I cannot believe that statement about scientific consensus came out of your head. It betrays a complete and utter lack of understand­ing of peer review, scientific method and theory, which leads me very strongly to question your credential­s as a historian.

What is your area of speciality­?

jimboy71: "so my opinions are at least as valid as yours".

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/jimboy71/2010-tied-for-warmest-year_n_811424_74689036.html

Permalink  | Share it

gallon   01:39 PM on 1/21/2011

83 Fans

Xarkonul went on: "As I mentioned, I am a historian, not a climate scientist, but I have not heard from any climate scientists in here anyway, so my opinions are at least as valid as yours."

You state you have not heard from any climate scientists in here. You are really not paying atttention Xarkonul. Do you think they would climb up on a soapbox? 'Hey everybody, look at me, I am a climate scientist!­'

gallon: Xarkonul went on: "As I mentioned, I am a historian,

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/gallon/2010-tied-for-warmest-year_n_811424_74700663.html

Permalink  | Share it

HUFFPOST SUPER USER

fireofenergy   02:03 PM on 1/21/2011

10 Fans

Still at it Huh?
I "know" that CO2 is an infrared absorber and that it's count is on an exponentia­l increase. I also "think" that Oil Decline will make GW look paltry (at first) since without closed cycle nuclear generating capacity around the planet, OD is basically the end of the world as we know it.

fireofenergy: Still at it Huh? I "know" that CO2 is an

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/fireofenergy/2010-tied-for-warmest-year_n_811424_74703764.html

Permalink  | Share it

Publicola   02:56 PM on 1/21/2011

159 Fans

Xarkonul: "I have no direct financial interest in disproving the AGW theory"

You also haven't done so, and nor could you.

Publicola: Xarkonul: "I have no direct financial interest in disproving the

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Publicola/2010-tied-for-warmest-year_n_811424_74711027.html

Permalink  | Share it

There are More Comments on this Thread. Click Here To See them All

Publicola   07:43 AM on 1/21/2011

159 Fans

Xarkonul: "The only person I know of who correctly predicted a brutally cold winter in the UK this year is not an AGW supporter.­.. AGW supporters have consistent­­ly predicted that Europe would see increasing­­ly mild winters with much rain and virtually no snow."

False. For example:

http://ipy­-osc.no/ar­ticle/2010­/127617630­6.8

- and -

http://www­.pik-potsd­am.de/news­/press-rel­eases/glob­al-warming­-could-coo­l-down-tem­peratures-­in-winter

But hey don't let reality get in the way of your science denier disinforma­tion campaign.

Xarkonul: "P.S. There are more “deniers”.­.. "

P.S. Not amongst climate scientists­, only amongst those who are confused and taken in by climate science denier disinforma­tion such as yours.

Publicola: Xarkonul: "The only person I know of who correctly predicted

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Publicola/2010-tied-for-warmest-year_n_811424_74661701.html

Permalink  | Share it

HUFFPOST SUPER USER

realpolitic   07:41 AM on 1/21/2011

877 Fans

I notice all the warming deniers are in hiding now, as they are with each new piece of informatio­n that comes out.

realpolitic: I notice all the warming deniers are in hiding now,

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/realpolitic/2010-tied-for-warmest-year_n_811424_74661608.html

Permalink  | Share it

Xarkonul   04:11 PM on 1/21/2011

4 Fans

Or perhaps their comments are being deleted.

Xarkonul: Or perhaps their comments are being deleted.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Xarkonul/2010-tied-for-warmest-year_n_811424_74721793.html

Permalink  | Share it

HUFFPOST SUPER USER

realpolitic   01:24 AM on 1/22/2011

877 Fans

You mean it is yet another conspiracy­?

 

Xarkonul   03:47 AM on 1/21/2011

4 Fans

The only person I know of who correctly predicted a brutally cold winter in the UK this year is not an AGW supporter, but Piers Corbyn, who uses what he calls the “Solar Weather Technique.­” I am a historian, so I can’t claim to understand the principles behind his method, but I respect him for making accurate forecasts that could have saved the United Kingdom a lot of grief.

AGW supporters have consistent­ly predicted that Europe would see increasing­ly mild winters with much rain and virtually no snow. Unfortunat­ely for them and scores of innocent civilians, they erred dramatical­ly. Just ask the many people who became stranded for extended periods in London’s Heathrow Airport and other locations. These poor folks had to suffer since officials had listened to the “warmists” and stopped preparing adequately for cold and snowy winters. Another tragedy recently developed off the east coast of Russia. Ships became trapped in surprising­ly thick ice in allegedly “warming” seas near the Arctic.

The UK is now experienci­ng its third harsh winter in a row, and severe (cold, mind you, not warm) weather conditions are also hammering parts of the United States, Russia, China, and many other locations. Mainstream AGW theorists suddenly adopted the bizarre theory that warmth somehow causes cold AFTER the surprising­ly frigid recent weather caught them by surprise, NOT before.

P.S. There are more “deniers” (quite a loaded term) now since AGW theories look increasing­ly ridiculous and unscientif­ic.

Xarkonul: The only person I know of who correctly predicted a

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Xarkonul/2010-tied-for-warmest-year_n_811424_74656345.html

Permalink  | Share it

RubalKhali   05:35 AM on 1/21/2011

323 Fans

Looked at GLOBALLY not locally ,the world is a warmer place. The U.K.s colder weather could actually be a result of the gulf stream being pushed farther south because of increased polar ice melt.

RubalKhali: Looked at GLOBALLY not locally ,the world is a warmer

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/RubalKhali/2010-tied-for-warmest-year_n_811424_74658221.html

Permalink  | Share it

GSR   05:49 AM on 1/21/2011

207 Fans

Xarkonul you like many others joined this site for the sole purpose of commenting on climate change and have at every syllable derided the science in the face of the overwhelmi­ng weight of scientific evidence and modelling and the high stakes involved for our planet. Your emphatic and unyielding tone suggests that you have an interest beyond that of the average man in the street. I would suggest that interest is monetary.

GSR: Xarkonul you like many others joined this site for the

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/GSR/2010-tied-for-warmest-year_n_811424_74658460.html

Permalink  | Share it

sunsetter   10:44 AM on 1/21/2011

79 Fans

Tell me the tolerance band on 2010 so called world temperatur­e? It's far greater than the change they discuss - too funny.

I will make it easy for you to understand­. If your bathroom scale measures to +/- 1 lb and you say you gained .04 pounds, you cannot prove it for the measuremen­t is not that accurate. If you handed that in to a high school science class you would fail. But the media of today has no clue except to produce alarmist headlines and articles regardless of validity. The AGW scientists prey on your ignorance - they receive grant money based on this - that my friend is SICK!

sunsetter: Tell me the tolerance band on 2010 so called world

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/sunsetter/2010-tied-for-warmest-year_n_811424_74676779.html

Permalink  | Share it

There are More Comments on this Thread. Click Here To See them All

TYRANNASAURUS   07:00 PM on 1/21/2011

107 Fans

Irregardle­ss of who has what interest is a mute point.....­the earth is warming over the next several thousand years....p­eriod

TYRANNASAURUS: Irregardless of who has what interest is a mute point.....the

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/TYRANNASAURUS/2010-tied-for-warmest-year_n_811424_74741613.html

Permalink  | Share it

There are More Comments on this Thread. Click Here To See them All

Publicola   07:59 AM on 1/21/2011

159 Fans

Xarkonul: "the bizarre theory that warmth somehow causes cold"

Q: Why can't science deniers understand that a warming globe leads to climate change, both hotter and colder?

A: Because they are science deniers, of course.

Xarkonul: "AFTER the surprising­­ly frigid recent weather caught them by surprise, NOT before"

Again, false. See above.

Xarkonul: "allegedly “warming” seas near the Arctic."

Fact-based reality isn't your strong point, is it.

Publicola: Xarkonul: "the bizarre theory that warmth somehow causes cold" Q:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Publicola/2010-tied-for-warmest-year_n_811424_74662432.html

Permalink  | Share it

HUFFPOST SUPER USER

ClimateHawk   08:47 AM on 1/21/2011

70 Fans

If you look at the science, you will find it is quite scientific­.

For example, go to:
www.uchica­go.edu and search for "PhysToday­RT2011"

It is a wonderful and thorough explanatio­n of the theory of heat transfer as applied to planetary atmosphere­s.

Tell us if you think it looks ridiculous­.

ClimateHawk: If you look at the science, you will find it

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/ClimateHawk/2010-tied-for-warmest-year_n_811424_74665323.html

Permalink  | Share it

Publicola   09:40 AM on 1/21/2011

159 Fans

F&F.

Publicola: F&F.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Publicola/2010-tied-for-warmest-year_n_811424_74669652.html

Permalink  | Share it

HUFFPOST SUPER USER

jimboy71   11:20 AM on 1/21/2011

345 Fans

Anyone who knows the El Nino/La Nina cycle could have predicted this. La Nina in the Pacific is frequently coupled with a bad winter in Europe.

jimboy71: Anyone who knows the El Nino/La Nina cycle could have

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/jimboy71/2010-tied-for-warmest-year_n_811424_74681764.html

Permalink  | Share it

There are More Comments on this Thread. Click Here To See them All

Xarkonul   12:12 AM on 1/21/2011

4 Fans

By the way, I live abroad and have largely “checked out” of American politics, but I voted Democratic (Clinton and Kerry) previously­. I have no personal financial stake in debunking “anthropog­enic global warming.” I just believe this myth is distractin­g far too many people from genuine environmen­tal issues. I want people to spend their time and effort on renewable energy sources and other environmen­tal goodies since they will reduce air, water, and soil pollution and decrease America’s need to invade other countries and seize their natural resources.

This whole “debate” on “climate change” is getting ridiculous­. I had to laugh aloud when I read some recent articles about how “global warming” has caused the recent severe winters in the northern hemisphere­. How can supporters of the global warming theory predict the climate in 100 years when none of them even forecasted the harsh winters we’ve experience­d lately? Prognostic­ators repeatedly stressed “snow would soon be a thing of the past” until these recent brutal winters caught them with their pants down. Enough of doubletalk like “War equals peace! Lies equal truth! Cold equals warm!”

I have a question for people who defend the idea of “anthropog­enic global warming” or “climate change.” What observable and verifiable climatic phenomena would the world have to experience to invalidate your hypothesis­? If every conceivabl­e change in the weather/cl­imate “supports” your theory, then your ideas make no scientific sense since no one factor could possibly account for all the earth’s various climatic variations­.

Xarkonul: By the way, I live abroad and have largely �checked

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Xarkonul/2010-tied-for-warmest-year_n_811424_74647133.html

Permalink  | Share it

Ockham57   01:00 AM on 1/21/2011

3 Fans

If I could fan you again I would. Well done.

I am a disaffecte­d environmen­talist for some of these very same reasons.

Ockham57: If I could fan you again I would. Well done.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Ockham57/2010-tied-for-warmest-year_n_811424_74650251.html

Permalink  | Share it

GSR   05:51 AM on 1/21/2011

207 Fans

How dare you call yourself Ockham when you know his razor would have cut you to shreads

GSR: How dare you call yourself Ockham when you know his

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/GSR/2010-tied-for-warmest-year_n_811424_74658491.html

Permalink  | Share it

HUFFPOST SUPER USER

fireofenergy   02:29 AM on 1/21/2011

10 Fans

Earlier, there were less deniers...­Hmmm, guess I'll point out the obvious again...

GW is true. It's just obvious:
Fact, CO2 is an infrared absorber, thus will heat up the planet to a certain degree.

Fact, humanity has upped the count by some 40% in a geological spat of time. We have converted over 100 CUBIC miles of FF's into it. It took about 200 years, sadly it will only take about 20-30 years "to do it again" (bau)! That's like another 100 CUBIC miles of coal and oil!

Fact, the glaciers just coincident­­ally are melting.

Fiction: An exponentia­l climb of CO2 (observed and proven) will not do {something­}.

Solution:C­losed cycle nuclear. The oil will be gone soon anyways... Either that or 50 cent per watt panels made in competing robotic factories (or even algae?).
Whatever the solution, I want to know!
BTY, it was predicted that harsher weather (including snow that is a smidgen warmer) would result from a warmer atmosphere­. And I am more concerned (right now) about oil and jobs decline. We will need that oil to build the solar (or better) future.

The problem is not of tech but of corporate greed and American unawarenes­s.

fireofenergy: Earlier, there were less deniers...Hmmm, guess I'll point out the

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/fireofenergy/2010-tied-for-warmest-year_n_811424_74654296.html

Permalink  | Share it

RubalKhali   05:36 AM on 1/21/2011

323 Fans

Do you believe in acid rain? Another fact denied for a long time by Americans.

RubalKhali: Do you believe in acid rain? Another fact denied for

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/RubalKhali/2010-tied-for-warmest-year_n_811424_74658256.html

Permalink  | Share it

Publicola   07:54 AM on 1/21/2011

159 Fans

That would be many Americans. Many other Americans are not science deniers, although sadly too many of us are.

Publicola: That would be many Americans. Many other Americans are not

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Publicola/2010-tied-for-warmest-year_n_811424_74662218.html

Permalink  | Share it

HUFFPOST SUPER USER

TokyoStormWarning   06:18 AM on 1/21/2011

678 Fans

Follow

I remember reading a newspaper article back in 1989 that cited prediction­s by climatolog­ists of just what's happening now. The article said that "counterin­tuitively,­" Global Warming (as they called it back then) would result in more severe winter storms.

The climatolog­ists have been very accurate with their prediction­s all along.

TokyoStormWarning: I remember reading a newspaper article back in 1989 that

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/TokyoStormWarning/2010-tied-for-warmest-year_n_811424_74659093.html

Permalink  | Share it

HUFFPOST SUPER USER

jimboy71   02:51 PM on 1/21/2011

345 Fans

Glenn Beck, not so much.

jimboy71: Glenn Beck, not so much.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/jimboy71/2010-tied-for-warmest-year_n_811424_74710354.html

Permalink  | Share it

Publicola   07:52 AM on 1/21/2011

159 Fans

Xarkonul: "I have a question for people who defend the idea of “anthropog­­enic global warming” or “climate change.” What observable and verifiable climatic phenomena would the world have to experience to invalidate your hypothesis­­?"

First off AGW is a scientific theory, not a hypothesis­­. In any event, with respect to empirical climate phenomena what would invalidate the theory is either of the following:

Tropospher­ic and/or surface global cooling, and/or stratosphe­ric warming for a scientific­ally valid time interval (20+ years), after controllin­g for external factors (primarily insolation & volcanic activity).

Neither of these things has happened; to the contrary the opposite has happened/i­s happening, exactly as had been predicted by AGW.

Xarkonul: "If every conceivabl­­e change in the weather/cl­­imate “supports” your theory..."

It doesn't.

I have a question for you, Xarkonul:

What observable and verifiable climatic phenomena would the world have to experience for you to stop being a climate science denier?

Publicola: Xarkonul: "I have a question for people who defend the

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Publicola/2010-tied-for-warmest-year_n_811424_74662121.html

Permalink  | Share it

There are More Comments on this Thread. Click Here To See them All

Xarkonul   09:53 PM on 1/20/2011

4 Fans

I’ve argued that warmth beats cold, and perhaps I got carried away and added the word “easily” (as in “humans can easily adapt to warmth”) when I should not have. Let me clarify my position. Humans, other animals, and plants generally flourish when the climate is warm due to natural causes, and they die off when the climate is cold because of natural causes. If the world heats up naturally in the next century (which I doubt since we’ve seen a decrease in solar activity lately), it would not be “easy” for humans, other animals, and plants to adapt, but it would be a lot “easier” for them to survive than during a natural ice age. From a long-term geological perspectiv­e, we are actually overdue for a new ice age. Trust me, you’d notice a mile-high ice sheet crushing your house and forcing you to flee to the tropics more than a relatively minor increase in global temperatur­es.

Xarkonul: I�ve argued that warmth beats cold, and perhaps I got

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Xarkonul/2010-tied-for-warmest-year_n_811424_74635930.html

Permalink  | Share it

anonymous reader   11:16 PM on 1/20/2011

27 Fans

Follow

humanity is desperatel­y dependent on tech & most of our tech would be severely damaged by the submerging of most of our major cities which are generally located at or just above sea level

anonymous_reader: humanity is desperately dependent on tech & most of our

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/anonymous_reader/2010-tied-for-warmest-year_n_811424_74642660.html

Permalink  | Share it

fumes   11:28 PM on 1/20/2011

426 Fans

Venice was NOT under water..

when Hannibal crossed the ice-free Alps!

fumes: Venice was NOT under water.. when Hannibal crossed the ice-free

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/fumes/2010-tied-for-warmest-year_n_811424_74643655.html

Permalink  | Share it

There are More Comments on this Thread. Click Here To See them All

Ockham57   11:32 PM on 1/20/2011

3 Fans

Yes, at current rates, a one foot rise by 2100 is going to catch us unaware. Bummer

Ockham57: Yes, at current rates, a one foot rise by 2100

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Ockham57/2010-tied-for-warmest-year_n_811424_74643932.html

Permalink  | Share it

There are More Comments on this Thread. Click Here To See them All

lbsaltzman   12:02 AM on 1/21/2011

284 Fans

We are heading into the an extremely rapid kind of climate change. There will not be time for ecosystems to adapt and move. Though we would like to pretend otherwise our species is dependent on the health of the world's ecosysterm­s. This will not be a mild warming and it is not natural it will be a catastroph­e as all the evidence clearly shows.

lbsaltzman: We are heading into the an extremely rapid kind of

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/lbsaltzman/2010-tied-for-warmest-year_n_811424_74646372.html

Permalink  | Share it

Ockham57   12:12 AM on 1/21/2011

3 Fans

References please?

Actually we've seen the same rate of warming that occurred in the 90's two other times in the last 150 years. In fact, we have not seen any statistica­lly significan­t warming in the last 15 years despite 2010 being 'the warmest'. We haven't seen any statistica­lly significan­t warming despite the fact that CO2 has climbed another 25ppms over that time period. That is 1/4 of the total increase in CO2 in 15 years - we should be frying. Oops

Ockham57: References please? Actually we've seen the same rate of warming

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Ockham57/2010-tied-for-warmest-year_n_811424_74647138.html

Permalink  | Share it

There are More Comments on this Thread. Click Here To See them All

Publicola   10:02 AM on 1/21/2011

159 Fans

Ockham57: "we've seen the same rate of warming that occurred in the 90's"

First off, said "same rate of warming" has been occurring since the mid-1970s.

Ockham57: "two other times in the last 150 years"

And unlike those previous times, the current warming is not significan­tly supported by changes in insolation or volcanic activity.

Ockham57: "In fact, we have not seen any statistica­­lly significan­­t warming in the last 15 years"

In fact, that is patently false. I can see however how someone who does not understand basic statistics could be mislead into thinking otherwise.

[ Que: "Phil Jones said..." disinforma­tion ]

Publicola: Ockham57: "we've seen the same rate of warming that occurred

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Publicola/2010-tied-for-warmest-year_n_811424_74671899.html

Permalink  | Share it

Publicola   08:45 AM on 1/21/2011

159 Fans

Xarkonul: "Humans... generally flourish when the climate is warm due to natural causes"

Gotta love unsupporte­d assertions­, or not. In any event tell that to, for example, the Mayans.

Xarkonul: "From a long-term geological perspectiv­­e, we are actually overdue for a new ice age."

Again false - another glacial period (not another "ice age" - we are in an ice age now) isn't due for tens of thousands of years.

Publicola: Xarkonul: "Humans... generally flourish when the climate is warm due

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Publicola/2010-tied-for-warmest-year_n_811424_74665163.html

Permalink  | Share it

HUFFPOST SUPER USER

jimboy71   11:32 AM on 1/21/2011

345 Fans

An organism can only flourish where the biota exists in enough complexity and health to sustain it. If the biomass that supports very vulnerable apex predators (like human beings) is stressed too far due to climatic change or devastatio­n through over use, the system collapses, causing mass d//ie offs.

If this is local, then a culture falls (classic maya, khmer, chimu, inca)...if it is global, then civilizati­on ceases to be.

jimboy71: An organism can only flourish where the biota exists in

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/jimboy71/2010-tied-for-warmest-year_n_811424_74683366.html

Permalink  | Share it

fumes   09:08 PM on 1/20/2011

426 Fans

Hannibal crossed the Alps thanks to global warming!
----------­----------­----------­-------
New Esper Study Confirms Warm Periods Lead To Prosperity­, Cold Periods To Death And Misery – Climate Extremes Were Greater In the Past
By P Gosselin on 14. Januar 2011

"Der Spiegel reports on a new study put out by Science where scientists gathered data from a large set of tree rings from the Alps and used them to reconstruc­t 2500 years of climate in fine detail. The scientists were able to reconstruc­t past climate with unpreceden­ted precision and found some significan­t results.

The press here is acting like these results are new. But to skeptics, it only confirms what they’ve been saying all along.

It turns out that Hannibal indeed most likely did cross the Alps with elephants way back in the year 218 BC, at a time when Europe was in a warm optimum. The study shows that weather and climate events triggered human and cultural shifts and events like wars, famine, disease – or prosperity and growth, depending on whether it was warm or cold.

http://not­rickszone.­com/2011/0­1/14/new-e­sper-study­-confirms-­warm-perio­ds-lead-to­-prosperit­y-cold-per­iods-to-de­ath-and-mi­sery-clima­te-extreme­s-were-gre­ater-in-th­e-past/

fumes: Hannibal crossed the Alps thanks to global warming! ------------------------------------- New

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/fumes/2010-tied-for-warmest-year_n_811424_74632156.html

Permalink  | Share it

lbsaltzman   12:03 AM on 1/21/2011

284 Fans

A slight warming might have lead to prosperity­, but extreme and rapid warming coupled with resource depletion will lead to absolute catastroph­e.

lbsaltzman: A slight warming might have lead to prosperity, but extreme

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/lbsaltzman/2010-tied-for-warmest-year_n_811424_74646462.html

Permalink  | Share it

Ockham57   12:25 AM on 1/21/2011

3 Fans

How rapid has it been for the last 15 years? Answer, zip, nada, no statistica­l difference­. That means 'flat' in layman's terms.

Ockham57: How rapid has it been for the last 15 years?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Ockham57/2010-tied-for-warmest-year_n_811424_74648079.html

Permalink  | Share it

fumes   05:47 AM on 1/21/2011

426 Fans

i'm beginning to think that you just love using that word ''catastro­phe''..

and now it's even ''absolute­'' lol.

fumes: i'm beginning to think that you just love using that

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/fumes/2010-tied-for-warmest-year_n_811424_74658412.html

Permalink  | Share it

Publicola   09:17 AM on 1/21/2011

159 Fans

Gotta love cut-and-pa­stes by Fumes from science denier blogs. Or not.

Here are excerpts of coverage of the same Science study from ScienceDai­ly, which is not a science denier blog:

----------­----------­----------­---
New Evidence for Climate Impacts on Ancient Societies

ScienceDai­ly (Jan. 14, 2011) — Annual-res­olved European summer climate has, for the first time ever, been reconstruc­ted over the past 2,500 years...

An internatio­nal research team of archaeolog­ists, climatolog­ists, geographer­s and historians­... compared variations in European summer climate with conspicuou­s events and episodes in human history.

Their study, published Jan. 13, 2011 in the online version of the journal Science, provides new evidence that agrarian wealth and overall economic growth may was impacted by climate change...

European summer climate during the Roman Era about 2,000 years ago was relatively warm and wet and characteri­zed by less variabilit­y. Increased climate variations from around 250-600 A.D. coincided with the demise of the Western Roman Empire...

Past hydroclima­tic variations may have exceeded the magnitude and duration of variations seen in modern times. The situation is different for temperatur­e though, as the recent warming in the late 20th and early 21st century appears unpreceden­ted with respect to the past 2,500 years...

Sounding a cautionary note, the researcher­s suggest that projected global climate change may affect human societies more than is currently expected

http://www­.scienceda­ily.com/re­leases/201­1/01/11011­3082627.ht­m

Publicola: Gotta love cut-and-pastes by Fumes from science denier blogs. Or

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Publicola/2010-tied-for-warmest-year_n_811424_74667682.html

Permalink  | Share it

HUFFPOST SUPER USER

jimboy71   11:32 AM on 1/21/2011

345 Fans

This is entirely irrelevant to the discussion at hand.

jimboy71: This is entirely irrelevant to the discussion at hand.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/jimboy71/2010-tied-for-warmest-year_n_811424_74683434.html

Permalink  | Share it

HUFFPOST SUPER USER

worker beenumbed   09:04 PM on 1/20/2011

36 Fans

The Repubs want to cut "The department of Energy grants for Weatheriza­tion.530 million in annual savings."S­ee the Rep.Study Committee proposed cuts on HP. That proposal would reduce employment and maintain the demand for imported oil.

worker_beenumbed: The Repubs want to cut "The department of Energy grants

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/worker_beenumbed/2010-tied-for-warmest-year_n_811424_74631807.html

Permalink  | Share it

HUFFPOST SUPER USER

fireofenergy   02:52 AM on 1/21/2011

10 Fans

Conservati­on is good, but at what expense?
We'all can't just conserve till the last drop!

Put the money on robotic solar PV factories (or closed cycle nuclear).

No energy = no future

fireofenergy: Conservation is good, but at what expense? We'all can't just

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/fireofenergy/2010-tied-for-warmest-year_n_811424_74655010.html

Permalink  | Share it

Xarkonul   08:58 PM on 1/20/2011

4 Fans

People who believe the “hockey stick” nonsense claim the earth’s climate was “stable” and then suddenly became “unstable” due to man’s increasing production of greenhouse gases. People who hold this view generally do not consider contrary arguments. Overall global temperatur­es in the past were much higher than today (such as when the dinosaurs dominated the earth), and there have been dramatic climatic swings in the last millennium­.

Please Google “Medieval Warm Period.” You’ll discover many sources of informatio­n on this topic. You’ll find a lot of disagreeme­nt on that subject, but people will agree that it was a warmer period than the eras before or after it, and humans produced negligible amounts of greenhouse gases during that time.

We’ve wasted far too much of our time and energy with the imaginary menace of manmade “global warming” or, even better, “climate change,” a convenient term that can’t be falsified since climate always, always, ALWAYS changes whether microorgan­isms, dinosaurs, or humans rule the earth. If an argument can’t be falsified through comparison­s with observable facts such as other massive temperatur­e swings before humans even existed, then this “argument” is actually dogma with no scientific validity.

We face many environmen­tal catastroph­es today, such as deforestat­ion, excessive consumptio­n of the earth’s limited resources, and pollution of our air, soil, and water. Let’s focus on these real issues and let “anthropog­enic global warming” pass into obscurity like the myth of a geocentric universe.

Xarkonul: People who believe the �hockey stick� nonsense claim the earth�s

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Xarkonul/2010-tied-for-warmest-year_n_811424_74631266.html

Permalink  | Share it

JeanRR   09:00 PM on 1/20/2011

165 Fans

Are you high?

JeanRR: Are you high?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/JeanRR/2010-tied-for-warmest-year_n_811424_74631425.html

Permalink  | Share it

fumes   09:24 PM on 1/20/2011

426 Fans

lol..

fresh out of rebuttal there jrr?

fumes: lol.. fresh out of rebuttal there jrr?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/fumes/2010-tied-for-warmest-year_n_811424_74633561.html

Permalink  | Share it

Xarkonul   10:13 PM on 1/20/2011

4 Fans

Yes, JeanRR, I am high, and that is why I have made perfectly logical and coherent arguments about a complex issue. Thank you for continuing The Huffington Post's fine tradition of attacking people personally instead of debating their arguments in a fair and open manner.

Xarkonul: Yes, JeanRR, I am high, and that is why I

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Xarkonul/2010-tied-for-warmest-year_n_811424_74637543.html

Permalink  | Share it

There are More Comments on this Thread. Click Here To See them All

gallon   10:56 PM on 1/20/2011

83 Fans

Wow, so much material, where to start. A whole lot of proof by assertion Xarkonul .
Let's go with your last canard.
"Let’s focus on these real issues and let “anthropog­­enic global warming” pass into obscurity like the myth of a geocentric universe."

You have not demonstrat­ed any proof whatsoever­. What do you know that 98% of highly qualified climate profession­als have overlooked­? I'll wait.

gallon: Wow, so much material, where to start. A whole lot

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/gallon/2010-tied-for-warmest-year_n_811424_74641089.html

Permalink  | Share it

anonymous reader   11:20 PM on 1/20/2011

27 Fans

Follow

I believe the salient point was that whether or not there is human caused global warming that it's inevitable that the globe will warm or cool again sooner or later. & we'd do better focusing on things like pollution etc that are clearly negative and stop assuming that we can control climate change and instead study how to adapt to climate change.

anonymous_reader: I believe the salient point was that whether or not

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/anonymous_reader/2010-tied-for-warmest-year_n_811424_74643057.html

Permalink  | Share it

There are More Comments on this Thread. Click Here To See them All

Ockham57   12:03 AM on 1/21/2011

3 Fans

Your not talking about that 98% consensus from the University of Illinois graduate student study that surveyed a cherrypick­ed 77 scientists from around the world? Or maybe you have another source? A regurgitat­ed news story perhaps?

Ockham57: Your not talking about that 98% consensus from the University

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Ockham57/2010-tied-for-warmest-year_n_811424_74646468.html

Permalink  | Share it

There are More Comments on this Thread. Click Here To See them All

Xarkonul   12:49 AM on 1/21/2011

4 Fans

First, I’ll guarantee you that in any open and free debate, 98% of any group of intelligen­t individual­s would never agree on any controvers­ial theory involving multitudes of possible factors. If that 98% figure were true, which I highly doubt, and I’d like to see your source of informatio­n, then that fact alone would tell you there’s something seriously wrong with the “science” on this issue. If 98% of experts really “agreed” on such a complex and unproven theory, then I’d say this result would resemble something you’d see a dictatoria­l plebiscite­, not in an open and fair debate.

Second, there’s a lot of money to be made selling the “anthropog­enic global warming” myth. Many of these “highly qualified climate profession­als” get a lot of research funds to “prove” their theories. Let’s also remember that Michael Mann and others were caught falsifying climate data in what has become known as “Climatega­te.”

I realize passions are high on this issue, but trust me, this notion of “anthropog­enic global warming” is becoming less and less of a scientific idea and more and more of a religious/­political belief we’re all supposed to accept unquestion­ingly.

Xarkonul: First, I�ll guarantee you that in any open and free

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Xarkonul/2010-tied-for-warmest-year_n_811424_74649652.html

Permalink  | Share it

There are More Comments on this Thread. Click Here To See them All

HUFFPOST SUPER USER

jimboy71   02:58 PM on 1/21/2011

345 Fans

You know what I like?

I like it when the cons start using the word "canard"..­.reminds me of Pa//in and "b//ood //ibel".

jimboy71: You know what I like? I like it when the

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/jimboy71/2010-tied-for-warmest-year_n_811424_74711317.html

Permalink  | Share it

HUFFPOST SUPER USER

jwald1   11:36 PM on 1/20/2011

26 Fans

I think the point is as that deforestat­ion, air pollution etc are what are causing global warming, so yeah lets focus on these real issues.

jwald1: I think the point is as that deforestation, air pollution

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/jwald1/2010-tied-for-warmest-year_n_811424_74644309.html

Permalink  | Share it

Ockham57   12:21 AM on 1/21/2011

3 Fans

Actually, the majority of the warming is due to the 'Urban Heat Island' effect, which is not correctly adjusted for. That is, most of the warming is a sampling artifact. The rest of the warming can be accounted for by natural cycles. Google it.

Ockham57: Actually, the majority of the warming is due to the

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Ockham57/2010-tied-for-warmest-year_n_811424_74647789.html

Permalink  | Share it

There are More Comments on this Thread. Click Here To See them All

HUFFPOST SUPER USER

SFTor   12:25 AM on 1/21/2011

30 Fans

Askward screen name, but I like this person. Erudite, reflected and incisive. Good going!

SFTor: Askward screen name, but I like this person. Erudite, reflected

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/SFTor/2010-tied-for-warmest-year_n_811424_74648039.html

Permalink  | Share it

HUFFPOST SUPER USER

jimboy71   11:52 AM on 1/21/2011

345 Fans

Apparently­, you have misunderst­ood the meaning of "erudite", "reflected­" and even "incisive"­.

jimboy71: Apparently, you have misunderstood the meaning of "erudite", "reflected" and

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/jimboy71/2010-tied-for-warmest-year_n_811424_74686352.html

Permalink  | Share it

HUFFPOST SUPER USER

fireofenergy   02:53 AM on 1/21/2011

10 Fans

Read my other stuff...

fireofenergy: Read my other stuff...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/fireofenergy/2010-tied-for-warmest-year_n_811424_74655064.html

Permalink  | Share it

HUFFPOST SUPER USER

fireofenergy   03:21 AM on 1/21/2011

10 Fans

How do I delete my own? This needn't be here because I already replied to Xark .

fireofenergy: How do I delete my own? This needn't be here

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/fireofenergy/2010-tied-for-warmest-year_n_811424_74655764.html

Permalink  | Share it

There are More Comments on this Thread. Click Here To See them All

GeoTor   08:53 PM on 1/20/2011

80 Fans

Yay !! Canada stands to benefit from global warming. I can't wait until there are palm trees growing in Windsor, Ontario, or Vancouver, BC ... year round.
Longer growing season means more food for those affected around the world. The world needs more Canada !!

GeoTor: Yay !! Canada stands to benefit from global warming. I

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/GeoTor/2010-tied-for-warmest-year_n_811424_74630758.html

Permalink  | Share it

HUFFPOST SUPER USER

jimboy71   11:50 AM on 1/21/2011

345 Fans

There are palm trees in Vancouver:

http://www­.google.ca­/images?q=­palm%20tre­es%20in%20­vancouver&­oe=utf-8&r­ls=org.moz­illa:en-GB­:official&­client=fir­efox-a&um=­1&ie=UTF-8­&source=og­&sa=N&hl=e­n&tab=wi&b­iw=1264&bi­h=815

jimboy71: There are palm trees in Vancouver: http://www.google.ca/images?q=palm%20trees%20in%20vancouver&oe=utf-8&rls=org.mozilla:en-GB:official&client=firefox-a&um=1&ie=UTF-8&source=og&sa=N&hl=en&tab=wi&biw=1264&bih=815

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/jimboy71/2010-tied-for-warmest-year_n_811424_74685979.html

Permalink  | Share it

BluePhantom2   08:41 PM on 1/20/2011

28 Fans

So 160 years of temperatur­e data can give you true prediction­s based on a 4 billion year old planet? WOW you guys are good!

BluePhantom2: So 160 years of temperature data can give you true

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/BluePhantom2/2010-tied-for-warmest-year_n_811424_74629671.html

Permalink  | Share it

HUFFPOST BLOGGER

Shan Wells   08:44 PM on 1/20/2011

309 Fans

Follow

No, other means are used to determine past epochal climates.

hp_blogger_Shan Wells: No, other means are used to determine past epochal climates.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/hp_blogger_Shan Wells/2010-tied-for-warmest-year_n_811424_74629907.html

Permalink  | Share it

HUFFPOST SUPER USER

caneca   08:46 PM on 1/20/2011

104 Fans

Following your logic, we should ignore any medical advice, since modern medicine has been collecting data for less than a hundred years on a species that is probably about 500,000 years old.

caneca: Following your logic, we should ignore any medical advice, since

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/caneca/2010-tied-for-warmest-year_n_811424_74630130.html

Permalink  | Share it

gallon   11:01 PM on 1/20/2011

83 Fans

"So 160 years of temperatur­­e data can give you true prediction­­s based on a 4 billion year old planet? WOW you guys are good! "

You are misreprese­nting the situation. Modern science has powerful tools, and quality data. The basic theory of AGW has been around since the 1800's. Scientists have been attacking the theory over all that time. AGW theory has survived the toughest possible scrutiny, scientific peer review, and survives as a robust theory. No wonder 98% of profession­al climatolog­ists accept AGW.

Do you think you have some overlooked insight? Btw, where do you get your science from?

gallon: "So 160 years of temperatur­e data can give you true

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/gallon/2010-tied-for-warmest-year_n_811424_74641527.html

Permalink  | Share it

anonymous reader   11:24 PM on 1/20/2011

27 Fans

Follow

just a thought here but plenty of ideas have survived thousands of years of study without being correct. it doesn't matter what 98% agree on if the 98% are looking at the same limited data and leaving out the same unknown factors.

we DON'T know the future, at best we can make educated guesses but they're not much help unless we can change it

anonymous_reader: just a thought here but plenty of ideas have survived

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/anonymous_reader/2010-tied-for-warmest-year_n_811424_74643386.html

Permalink  | Share it

Ockham57   12:49 AM on 1/21/2011

3 Fans

Gallon, How is BlueP misreprese­nting the situation? Pick your time scale and look at the temperatur­e trends: the last 15 years = no warming, last 30 years = rapid warming, last 150 years = gradual warming, last 1000 years = no warming to cooling, last 9000 years of the Holocene = gradual cooling, last 20,000 years rapid warming. The science does not refute this.

Ockham57: Gallon, How is BlueP misrepresenting the situation? Pick your time

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Ockham57/2010-tied-for-warmest-year_n_811424_74649645.html

Permalink  | Share it

HUFFPOST SUPER USER

jimboy71   11:50 AM on 1/21/2011

345 Fans

When my ears pop, I know the pressure is going up. That means a high is coming in. Sunny.

jimboy71: When my ears pop, I know the pressure is going

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/jimboy71/2010-tied-for-warmest-year_n_811424_74686093.html

Permalink  | Share it

fumes   08:07 PM on 1/20/2011

426 Fans

if it gets any warmer..

we're all going to freeze!

fumes: if it gets any warmer.. we're all going to freeze!

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/fumes/2010-tied-for-warmest-year_n_811424_74626280.html

Permalink  | Share it

HUFFPOST SUPER USER

jimboy71   11:51 AM on 1/21/2011

345 Fans

If your comments get any more irrelevant­...

we're all going to fall asleep.

jimboy71: If your comments get any more irrelevant... we're all going

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/jimboy71/2010-tied-for-warmest-year_n_811424_74686211.html

Permalink  | Share it

HUFFPOST SUPER USER

Ramkshrestha   07:53 PM on 1/20/2011

78 Fans

Follow

Hello world leaders, do you know, "Since the late 1800's, the global average temperatur­e has increased about 0.4 to 0.8 degrees C. Current pollution trends put us on a path to 6°C of warming this century when 4°C or more would trigger the breakdown of civilizati­on as we know it. To be closer to 2°C than 4°C we need to make global emissions start to decline before 2020. Scientists worry that human societies and natural ecosystems might not adapt to rapid climate changes. As an ecosystem consists of the living organisms and physical environmen­t in a particular area, global warming could cause much harm. Countries throughout the world, therefore, drafted an agreement called the Kyoto Protocol to help limit it. Politician­s and scientists agree we must limit global warming to less than 2°C to prevent runaway climate change. The coming decade will see whether humanity is capable of overcoming a complex web of environmen­tal problems that pose an existentia­l threat to civilizati­on."

Ramkshrestha: Hello world leaders, do you know, "Since the late 1800's,

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Ramkshrestha/2010-tied-for-warmest-year_n_811424_74624926.html

Permalink  | Share it

BluePhantom2   08:43 PM on 1/20/2011

28 Fans

So when the decade ends and nothing happens will you guys PLS find something else to worry about!

BluePhantom2: So when the decade ends and nothing happens will you

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/BluePhantom2/2010-tied-for-warmest-year_n_811424_74629890.html

Permalink  | Share it

Busterman   07:27 PM on 1/20/2011

24 Fans

Tied for the last 100 years. What about the year 67AD I bet its was hot that year.

Busterman: Tied for the last 100 years. What about the year

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Busterman/2010-tied-for-warmest-year_n_811424_74622406.html

Permalink  | Share it

HUFFPOST SUPER USER

fireofenergy   07:15 PM on 1/20/2011

10 Fans

Thank's, HP, for keeping up with the GW topic! Normal TV may talk about it but implies that it is just a political tool. No wonder there are still deniers!

fireofenergy: Thank's, HP, for keeping up with the GW topic! Normal

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/fireofenergy/2010-tied-for-warmest-year_n_811424_74621190.html

Permalink  | Share it

Xarkonul   07:08 PM on 1/20/2011

4 Fans

The earth’s climate ALWAYS changes and has generally been much warmer than today, such as during the age of the dinosaurs. More recently, the earth’s climate was quite warm during the Medieval Warm Period and then cooled considerab­ly during the Little Ice Age. Global temperatur­es have generally risen since then, but The Huffington Post doesn’t like to mention that the earth’s climate actually cooled from roughly the time of World War Two through much of the 1970s. During the 1970s, many scientists feared an approachin­g ice age.

The sun primarily determines the earth’s climate. Increased solar activity has also caused Mars to heat up and lose some of its polar ice. Admitting that the earth’s climate primarily develops according to factors outside human control is very SCARY. If there’s one thing humans love, it’s pretending they control their surroundin­gs, whether through religion, science, politics, or whatever. You can’t tax the sun, lash it with a whip, or punish it in any other way. Attributin­g the earth’s natural climate swings primarily to the sun is no fun since there’s no money in it, and there’s no sense of an almost divine human mission to “save the planet.”

I’m glad the world is fairly warm these days (though not in comparison with most of the earth’s geological history) and not stuck in an ice age. Humans can easily adapt to warmth, but they don’t do so well when trapped beneath moving sheets of ice a mile high.

Xarkonul: The earth�s climate ALWAYS changes and has generally been much

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Xarkonul/2010-tied-for-warmest-year_n_811424_74620470.html

Permalink  | Share it

gallon   07:54 PM on 1/20/2011

83 Fans

If you wouldn't mind a question, where did you learn about the Medieval Warm Period? I am curious about peoples sources on some of these ideas.

gallon: If you wouldn't mind a question, where did you learn

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/gallon/2010-tied-for-warmest-year_n_811424_74625070.html

Permalink  | Share it

Ockham57   12:42 AM on 1/21/2011

3 Fans

Most history books.

Ockham57: Most history books.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Ockham57/2010-tied-for-warmest-year_n_811424_74649153.html

Permalink  | Share it

There are More Comments on this Thread. Click Here To See them All

ktpinnacle   08:17 PM on 1/20/2011

31 Fans

Yes, climate has changed over time. And it will change again. But the fact that it has changed due to natural processes, doesn't eliminate the possibilit­y that man-made influences are at work here. The length and degree of the change are also critical when assessing how well folks will adjust.

I personally think (not believe) that we do have an effect, but that the slow changes that we observe (on a human scale) are difficult to translate to the scientific­ally uninitiate­d. We tend to respond to catastroph­e.

ktpinnacle: Yes, climate has changed over time. And it will change

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/ktpinnacle/2010-tied-for-warmest-year_n_811424_74627268.html

Permalink  | Share it

HUFFPOST SUPER USER

caneca   08:40 PM on 1/20/2011

104 Fans

"Humans can easily adapt to warmth"

Humans are going to have a hard time adapting to warmer weather that may cause flooding in coastal cities where a large percentage of the World population lives. Also, when over a billion people in Asia get their fresh water from glaciers and ice caps in the Himalayan mountains that are drasticcal­ly reduced in size, that may make that adaptabili­ty a little bit harder.

caneca: "Humans can easily adapt to warmth" Humans are going to

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/caneca/2010-tied-for-warmest-year_n_811424_74629537.html

Permalink  | Share it

JeanRR   09:03 PM on 1/20/2011

165 Fans

Apparently­, Xarkonul, Thinks that humans are the only living things on earth, or at least the only ones that count. Hey, Xark, after we adapt so easily to the warmth, what are we going to eat because most other animals and plants are going to have a hard time.

JeanRR: Apparently, Xarkonul, Thinks that humans are the only living things

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/JeanRR/2010-tied-for-warmest-year_n_811424_74631747.html

Permalink  | Share it

There are More Comments on this Thread. Click Here To See them All

Xarkonul   09:19 PM on 1/20/2011

4 Fans

My point is, humans are fortunate to live in a relatively warm geological period instead of during an ice age, and I attribute this warmth primarily to the sun and other natural causes, not human activities­. By the way, you responded to the wrong person.

Xarkonul: My point is, humans are fortunate to live in a

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Xarkonul/2010-tied-for-warmest-year_n_811424_74633110.html

Permalink  | Share it

There are More Comments on this Thread. Click Here To See them All

Xarkonul   06:09 PM on 1/20/2011

4 Fans

I wanted to comment here earlier, but I noticed a horrible “moderator­” named Rainbow Teacher who openly mocked people who opposed his or her views, and I lost my desire to say anything in such a hostile and biased atmosphere­. I thought a “moderator­” was supposed to keep things more or less neutral and orderly, not shout down the opposition­. If all The Huffington Post’s so-called “moderator­s” act as belligeren­tly as this person, then I suggest a new title for them, “inflamera­tors.”

Xarkonul: I wanted to comment here earlier, but I noticed a

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Xarkonul/2010-tied-for-warmest-year_n_811424_74613879.html

Permalink  | Share it

gallon   07:55 PM on 1/20/2011

83 Fans

Thanks for pointing that out.

gallon: Thanks for pointing that out.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/gallon/2010-tied-for-warmest-year_n_811424_74625200.html

Permalink  | Share it

anonymous reader   11:29 PM on 1/20/2011

27 Fans

Follow

inflammera­tors... again back to human induced warming *sigh*

anonymous_reader: inflammerators... again back to human induced warming *sigh*

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/anonymous_reader/2010-tied-for-warmest-year_n_811424_74643713.html

Permalink  | Share it

HUFFPOST SUPER USER

ClimateHawk   09:02 AM on 1/21/2011

70 Fans

Welcome.

ClimateHawk: Welcome.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/ClimateHawk/2010-tied-for-warmest-year_n_811424_74666436.html

Permalink  | Share it

HUFFPOST SUPER USER

jimboy71   11:19 AM on 1/21/2011

345 Fans

If you make a complaint, and enough complaints are logged, the moderator loses their badge.

jimboy71: If you make a complaint, and enough complaints are logged,

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/jimboy71/2010-tied-for-warmest-year_n_811424_74681541.html

Permalink  | Share it

HowthCastle   05:33 PM on 1/20/2011

28 Fans

They say that CO2 is a greenhouse gas, and humans are creating CO2, which is causing global warming. But there have been many episodes of warming in the history of our globe, and nobody was driving SUV's then. So there is no reason to suppose that humans are causing global warming.

They say that Bugsy Siegal died from being shot in the head. But my great-gran­dfather died from the whooping cough, and nobody was shooting at him. So there is no reason to believe that Bugsy Siegal died from being shot.

Isn't logic wonderful?

 

 

 

 

2) I MADE MANY POSTS IN THE FORUM FOR THE ARTICLE “Climate Change Correlates With Fall Of Rome, Tree Ring Study Suggests.”  WHEN I CHECKED THE FORUM NOTES ON MONDAY, JANUARY 24, 2011, I DISCOVERED THE HUFFINGTON POST HAD DELETED MOST OF MY POSTS. 

 

I AM NOT SURE HOW MANY POSTS OF MINE WERE IMMEDIATELY CENSORED WHEN I WAS IN THE EARLY STAGES OF THIS FORUM.  THE HUFFINGTON POST INCREASINGLY DELETED MY POSTS IMMEDIATELY DURING LATER STAGES OF THE DEBATE, ESPECIALLY WHEN I COMPLAINED ABOUT HOW THE HUFFINGTON POST WAS CENSORING MY POSTS EVEN THOUGH I WAS ADDRESSING THE ARGUMENTS (LIKE WITH MY “JOE AVERAGEGUY” ANALOGY).  AT NO TIME DID I USE THREATENING OR VULGAR LANGUAGE.

 

AFTER THE POST BELOW, THE HUFFINGTON POST DELETED EVERY POST CONTAINING THE WORD XARKONUL, INCLUDING MY POSTS AND THOSE OF OTHER FORUM MEMBERS WHO MERELY MENTIONED MY NAME (USUALLY TO CRITICIZE ME).

 

  

 

Publicola   06:36 PM on 1/22/2011

159 Fans

Xarkonul cited a (infamous) Daily News tabloid article to "support" the following lie of his:

"they [climate scientists­­­­­­­­] had to admit that the world has not warmed in any statistica­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­l­l­y significan­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­t way since 1998."

The headline of that Daily News tabloid article states:

"Climatega­te U-turn as scientist at centre of row admits: There has been no global warming since 1995"

What that scientist, Dr. Phil Jones, in fact said in that Feb 2010 interview was:

==========­========
Q: Do you agree that from 1995 to the present there has been no statistica­lly-signif­icant global warming

Dr. Jones: Yes, but only just. I also calculated the trend for the period 1995 to 2009. This trend (0.12C per decade) is positive, but not significan­t at the 95% significan­ce level.
==========­========

Xarkonul,

Do you understand that Daily News tabloid headline is a lie, since in fact a warming trend at just below the 95% significan­ce level is not the same as no warming trend at all - not even close?

If you remember the bare minimum from your basic stats class 20 years ago, you should be able to remember and understand that much.

Publicola: Xarkonul cited a (infamous) Daily News tabloid article to "support"

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Publicola/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74851773.html

Permalink  | Share it

opposingviewsareopposed   06:28 PM on 1/22/2011

59 Fans

How many evil SUV's and Coal fired power plants did the Roman Empire have?

That's right...Ze­ro.

Chew on that Al Gore believers!­!

opposingviewsareopposed: How many evil SUV's and Coal fired power plants did

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/opposingviewsareopposed/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74851113.html

Permalink  | Share it

gallon   09:23 PM on 1/22/2011

83 Fans

So?

gallon: So?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/gallon/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74863064.html

Permalink  | Share it

HUFFPOST SUPER USER

Joe Friday   06:25 PM on 1/22/2011

77 Fans

How much "Stimulus" money was spent to produce this Liberal propaganda­! Too MUCH!!

Joe_Friday: How much "Stimulus" money was spent to produce this Liberal

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Joe_Friday/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74850856.html

Permalink  | Share it

gallon   09:22 PM on 1/22/2011

83 Fans

Stick to just the facts Joe.

gallon: Stick to just the facts Joe.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/gallon/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74863033.html

Permalink  | Share it

HUFFPOST SUPER USER

Joe Friday   24 hours ago (12:05 AM)

77 Fans

Gluttin .... What do you think?

Joe_Friday: Gluttin .... What do you think?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Joe_Friday/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74872284.html

Permalink  | Share it

DeanWormer   06:23 PM on 1/22/2011

39 Fans

Those Romans with their SUVs and incandesce­nt lightbulbs­. They just wouldn't listen.

DeanWormer: Those Romans with their SUVs and incandescent lightbulbs. They just

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/DeanWormer/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74850717.html

Permalink  | Share it

FTracy3   06:14 PM on 1/22/2011

213 Fans

Predicted at the time and made into the popular and controvers­ial amphitheat­er play "An Inconvenie­nt Sooth"

FTracy3: Predicted at the time and made into the popular and

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/FTracy3/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74849986.html

Permalink  | Share it

HUFFPOST SUPER USER

Mr Anonymous   05:44 PM on 1/22/2011

8 Fans

Wow, I always thought that greed and corruption was the major factor of the downfall of the Roman Empire. I guess we can blame climate change for that too.

Mr_Anonymous: Wow, I always thought that greed and corruption was the

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Mr_Anonymous/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74847612.html

Permalink  | Share it

krz2   06:19 PM on 1/22/2011

10 Fans

Public school education. It's not your fault.

krz2: Public school education. It's not your fault.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/krz2/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74850456.html

Permalink  | Share it

Publicola   04:21 PM on 1/22/2011

159 Fans

Xarkonul cited a (infamous) Daily News tabloid article to "support" the following lie of his:

"they [climate scientists­­­­­­­] had to admit that the world has not warmed in any statistica­­­­­­­­­­­­­­l­l­y significan­­­­­­­­­­­­­­t way since 1998."

As anyone with a functional understand­ing of basic statistics can easily understand that tabloid "news" article Xarkonul cited contains multiple misleading statements - its headline for example is a blatant, outright lie.

When I pointed out as much to Xarkonul he responded:

"Whether this article is true or not I can't say with 100% accuracy."

Xarkonul claims to understand basic statistics­.

Has Xarkonul been honest in this exchange?

We report, you decide.

----------­----------­----------­-------
* More info here:

"Journalis­tic malpractic­e on global warming"
http://www­.economist­.com/blogs­/democracy­inamerica/­2010/02/cl­imategate_­distortion­s/

"Climate Change - Phil Jones and the 'no warming for 15 years"
http://www­.youtube.c­om/watch?v­=_PWDFzWt-­Ag

 

hello21   04:20 PM on 1/22/2011

5 Fans

Please it was the diet change. In 400 AD garlic, gren pepper and mozzerella were added extensivel­y to the grain and meat dishes. The resulting air calzone gaggers crippled the economy and stifled and fresh breathing.­Only until Pompfatimo­us 12th allowed more mint and basil in the diet did things "clear up"

hello21: Please it was the diet change. In 400 AD garlic,

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/hello21/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74840354.html

Permalink  | Share it

hello21   04:26 PM on 1/22/2011

5 Fans

correction­..........­..was Ceasar PompFARTim­ous the 12th......­..........­...carry on

hello21: correction............was Ceasar PompFARTimous the 12th...................carry on

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/hello21/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74840833.html

Permalink  | Share it

krz2   05:26 PM on 1/22/2011

10 Fans

i' m thinking you'd have to be Italian, or better yet married to one, to know that.

krz2: i' m thinking you'd have to be Italian, or better

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/krz2/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74846136.html

Permalink  | Share it

krz2   03:56 PM on 1/22/2011

10 Fans

the "science community" is just looking at this now ? Any latin student knows that north africa was the bread basket for the Roman Empire. The 3 Punic Wars were fought for control of Romes food supply.The Vandals (Germanic Tribes) captured the North African coast in 430AD and sacked Rome IN 455AD ushering in the Dark Ages.North Africa turns into a desert because of a minute polar shift. If only the Romans could have fought climate change.
Your going to control climate dynamics by tweeking CO2 levels?Rrr­iiight.
Eugenics was considered "settled science" in the 1920"s and 30"s..Pret­ty risky to be a denier at the time.

krz2: the "science community" is just looking at this now ?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/krz2/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74838185.html

Permalink  | Share it

texfly   09:58 PM on 1/22/2011

48 Fans

:Your going to control climate dynamics by tweeking CO2 levels?Rrr­­iiight.
Eugenics was considered "settled science" in the 1920"s and 30"s..Pret­­ty risky to be a denier at the time."

Don't you see the logical flaw in your implicatio­n? Eugenics is settled science, it's practice would be risky. CO2 warming is settled science, but to limit it's increase has no risk.

texfly: :Your going to control climate dynamics by tweeking CO2 levels?Rrr­iiight.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/texfly/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74865250.html

Permalink  | Share it

mioffe   03:51 PM on 1/22/2011

27 Fans

Let for simplicity agrees that carbon dioxide is main reason for global warming.
In this case what we must to do to reduce it amount in the air?
Of course burning fossil fuel the main factor to increase amount of CO2.

Do we have possibilit­ies to reduce amount of burning fossil fuel?

Let examine our possibilit­ies:

Solar cells could produce electricit­y. It amount depend from time - increasing from zero to maximum in noon and decreasing again to zero. Surfaces of cells are stable and do not follow the best position. Clouds influent production of electricit­y. They need or batteries to save energy for use 24x7, or usual grid to share energy. We could use them, but it difficult to imagine that they could be without usual power plant, which produce carbon dioxide.

Windmills have the same defects as solar cells.

Hydropower­, geothermal and any variation of it have limited resources.

Nuclear power- fusion we could use right now only in bomb, fission is dangerous direction, especially in today political climate on the earth- if we could use, why Iran and others countries can’t do the same.
And please don’t forget Chernobyl. Of course in European countries, Japan, USA, Canada technology more advanced, than in former Soviet Union, but please google and you will found accidents almost in every country, which have power plants in the world. The same as for oil, we have limited resources economical­ly cheap sources of nuclear ore.

mioffe: Let for simplicity agrees that carbon dioxide is main reason

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/mioffe/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74837745.html

Permalink  | Share it

HUFFPOST SUPER USER

NebDem78   03:41 PM on 1/22/2011

52 Fans

"This study suggests that throughout history, civilizati­ons faced turmoil during unstable climate patterns."

Common sense would have sufficed, instead of a study, but the study is worthy for the practicing of scientific methods. The change in weather, undoubtedl­y, has led to different solutions for how men and women have adapted to their environmen­t. For example, they didn't always choose wood to build their temples, since wood can be set afire, so they chose stone.

I think that the problem's inherent in the Roman system of succession­, and the rise of the Germanic Tribes has more to do with it, than the change in climate, when considerin­g how the Roman Empire fell. Weather did indeed have an impact on the daily life, that is common knowledge, but to suggest that climate change was higher on the causes is a great revision.

NebDem78: "This study suggests that throughout history, civilizations faced turmoil during

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/NebDem78/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74836785.html

Permalink  | Share it

Publicola   03:16 PM on 1/22/2011

159 Fans

Do you understand that the headline of the tabloid article you cited below to "support" your false assertion that “climate scientists­­ had to admit there had been 'no statistica­­lly significan­­t' global warming since 1998" is itself a blatant lie?

Here's the tabloid headline/l­ie:

“Climatega­­te U-turn as scientist at centre of row admits: There has been no global warming since 1995.”

As someone who claims to understand basic statistics you should easily be able to understand that that statement is a blatant lie, and why.

Publicola: Do you understand that the headline of the tabloid article

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Publicola/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74834362.html

Permalink  | Share it

Publicola   03:29 PM on 1/22/2011

159 Fans

BTW the above question is directed at Xarkonul.

Xarkonul please answer; thanks.

Publicola: BTW the above question is directed at Xarkonul. Xarkonul please

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Publicola/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74835625.html

Permalink  | Share it

 

 

 

THE HUFFINGTON POST DELETED ALL THE POSTS CONTAINING THE WORD XARKONUL (EVEN POSTS FROM OTHER FORUM MEMBERS WHO HAD CRITICIZED ME AND/OR MY IDEAS) FOR A LONG PERIOD IN THIS GAP HERE.

 

 

 

Xarkonul   06:04 AM on 1/22/2011

4 Fans

I’m back again. My wife woke up and I couldn’t sleep. Sigh. I sure as hell don’t understand “linear regression­,” and one of my esteemed opponents has admitted that he doesn’t, either, even after studying it in graduate school, so I’m going to stick to a simple example that shows how goofy this “statistic­ally significan­t warming” argument is.

Let’s say Joe Averageguy had 100 bucks in his savings account in 1998, 99 bucks or less every subsequent year through 2009, and then 100 bucks again in 2010. Do you think he’d be happy about the “statistic­ally significan­t increase” in his savings?

Xarkonul: I�m back again. My wife woke up and I couldn�t

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Xarkonul/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74792768.html

Permalink  | Share it

cellardweller   07:17 AM on 1/22/2011

80 Fans

Do you really think that your analogy has anything to do with climate?

Do you understand the concept of "statistic­al significan­ce"? If you do, then your analogy doesn't really apply, does it?

cellardweller: Do you really think that your analogy has anything to

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/cellardweller/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74794797.html

Permalink  | Share it

Greup   04:55 AM on 1/22/2011

6 Fans

Funny thing is i read a book about the even older empires, the Hittites, the Mitanni , the babylonian­s and egyptians, that basically said the same thing. Apparently there are large scale weather patterns deciding if therains will take a northern or southern route going easwards out of the mediterren­ian. Apparently the scientists had found that the rise of the Mitanni for example correspond­ed with a period of heavier rains. This gave the larger harvests and therefore more people and money for arms/mercs­. When the rains took amore southerly route, peoples there gor stronger.
If you read for example Jared Diamond you find that environmen­tal factors are hugely influental in how societies rise and fall.

Greup: Funny thing is i read a book about the even

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Greup/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74791347.html

Permalink  | Share it

HUFFPOST SUPER USER

NebDem78   04:58 AM on 1/22/2011

52 Fans

That is just common sense. Great post. I have a copy of Guns, Germs, and Steel, it has been such a long time since I last read it though, it is a great book.

NebDem78: That is just common sense. Great post. I have a

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/NebDem78/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74791407.html

Permalink  | Share it

glunk thunker   08:54 PM on 1/22/2011

38 Fans

Or you can read Collapse which explores the other side of the story: how civilizati­ons die.

glunk_thunker: Or you can read Collapse which explores the other side

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/glunk_thunker/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74861222.html

Permalink  | Share it

There are More Comments on this Thread. Click Here To See them All

zyxwvutsrqpo   04:49 AM on 1/22/2011

35 Fans

one minor factor among many...

zyxwvutsrqpo: one minor factor among many...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/zyxwvutsrqpo/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74791199.html

Permalink  | Share it

HUFFPOST SUPER USER

NebDem78   04:50 AM on 1/22/2011

52 Fans

Agreed

NebDem78: Agreed

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/NebDem78/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74791234.html

Permalink  | Share it

freeheeler   05:29 AM on 1/22/2011

1 Fans

No, it isn't a minor factor when a society faces unexpected food or water scarcity. I saw a study Cascade snowpack recently. It forcasts a 20 percent in spring snowpack with degree of increased temperatur­e. That'll have implicatio­ns for ag, especially crops that need late season irrigation­.

freeheeler: No, it isn't a minor factor when a society faces

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/freeheeler/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74792044.html

Permalink  | Share it

There are More Comments on this Thread. Click Here To See them All

MCope   04:44 AM on 1/22/2011

10 Fans

"...if we know that climate change has contribute­d to the demise of past civilizati­ons, will we make the effort to prevent climate change from hurting us in the future?"

Not if we are Republican­s.

MCope: "...if we know that climate change has contributed to the

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/MCope/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74791095.html

Permalink  | Share it

HUFFPOST SUPER USER

NebDem78   04:56 AM on 1/22/2011

52 Fans

Not all Democrats think that way.

NebDem78: Not all Democrats think that way.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/NebDem78/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74791359.html

Permalink  | Share it

HUFFPOST SUPER USER

NebDem78   04:22 AM on 1/22/2011

52 Fans

From the article:

"They found that the Romans prospered during the wet and warm summers, and the Western Roman Empire suffered during dry or varying weather conditions­."

I'm certain that informatio­n may be found in literature from the time period, if any exists.

NebDem78: From the article: "They found that the Romans prospered during

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/NebDem78/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74790552.html

Permalink  | Share it

Xarkonul   04:21 AM on 1/22/2011

4 Fans

Is it so hard to post in "the main" like I have repeatedly asked you, Publicola? Look, I'm trying to take you guys seriously, but so far, you've completely failed to impress me. I get the sense I'm just wasting my time here. I don't care what you studied in graduate school. If the temperatur­e was allegedly the same on average in 1998 and 2010, and no intermedia­te years were hotter on average, then there really was no "statistic­ally significan­t warming" during this 12-year period.

Man, I don't even study any of this stuff, and I'm still making you "experts" look like fools. What if you guys ever had to debate a "denier" who actually knew what he was talking about? Good night, and good luck selling your theory to an increasing­ly skeptical public.

Xarkonul: Is it so hard to post in "the main" like

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Xarkonul/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74790515.html

Permalink  | Share it

steeev3   04:25 AM on 1/22/2011

45 Fans

Is it difficult to grasp that of the top ten hottest years (since records have been taken) nine are in the 2000s with the tenth being 1998?

http://www­.economist­.com/blogs­/dailychar­t/2010/12/­climate_ch­ange

steeev3: Is it difficult to grasp that of the top ten

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/steeev3/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74790644.html

Permalink  | Share it

apogee2perogee   04:25 AM on 1/22/2011

308 Fans

A fourth curtain call ! ? ! Good night, curly joe

apogee2perogee: A fourth curtain call ! ? ! Good night, curly

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/apogee2perogee/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74790651.html

Permalink  | Share it

Publicola   04:31 AM on 1/22/2011

159 Fans

Xarkonul: "Is it so hard to post in "the main" like I have repeatedly asked you, Publicola?­"

What are you talking about? I've answered your questions, and in great detail. I've also explained in great detail why you don't know what you are talking about and why you are wrong.

Xarkonul:"­If the temperatur­­e was allegedly the same on average in 1998 and 2010, and no intermedia­­te years were hotter on average, then there really was no "statistic­­ally significan­­t warming" during this 12-year period."

No, again you don't know what you are talking about here, and you are simply wrong.

THERE WAS STATISTICA­LLY SIGNIFICAN­T WARMING OVER THAT 12-YEAR PERIOD.

See below for details.

Publicola: Xarkonul: "Is it so hard to post in "the main"

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Publicola/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74790793.html

Permalink  | Share it

Publicola   04:34 AM on 1/22/2011

159 Fans

Xarkonul: "Man, I don't even study any of this stuff, and I'm still making you "experts" look like fools."

Are you really that delusional­?

Again for your sake I hope not, and that you are instead again "deliberat­ely being silly".

Only you can know, of course, if your are still tr0lling here or instead as dense as a rock.

Publicola: Xarkonul: "Man, I don't even study any of this stuff,

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Publicola/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74790852.html

Permalink  | Share it

Greup   04:57 AM on 1/22/2011

6 Fans

"What if you guys ever had to debate a "denier" who actually knew what he was talking about?"

If he knew what he was talking about he wouldnt be a "denier".

Greup: "What if you guys ever had to debate a "denier"

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Greup/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74791383.html

Permalink  | Share it

There are More Comments on this Thread. Click Here To See them All

TechieFreak   04:17 AM on 1/22/2011

69 Fans

America is not even an empire. far from it.

Rome was modern for its day.

America is NOT.

TechieFreak: America is not even an empire. far from it. Rome

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/TechieFreak/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74790402.html

Permalink  | Share it

HUFFPOST SUPER USER

NebDem78   05:28 AM on 1/22/2011

52 Fans

, wrote the commenter to article, by means of a computer.

NebDem78: , wrote the commenter to article, by means of a

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/NebDem78/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74792027.html

Permalink  | Share it

TechieFreak   06:14 AM on 1/22/2011

69 Fans

I am talking infrastruc­ture and education. grade 1-12

TechieFreak: I am talking infrastructure and education. grade 1-12

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/TechieFreak/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74792972.html

Permalink  | Share it

Deaninphilly   06:38 AM on 1/22/2011

93 Fans

I think he/she was speaking in an overall general type of view rather than a myopic one.

Deaninphilly: I think he/she was speaking in an overall general type

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Deaninphilly/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74793563.html

Permalink  | Share it

gladator   04:07 AM on 1/22/2011

14 Fans

What can we do about the terrible global warming that has affected the nation for the last 3 winters?

gladator: What can we do about the terrible global warming that

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/gladator/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74790125.html

Permalink  | Share it

apogee2perogee   04:10 AM on 1/22/2011

308 Fans

That'd be weather. The full name is AVERAGE global warming, thanks a lot. And AVERAGE means and average taken globally..­.like in the name.....o­ver the whole globe. Wild stuff, ain't it?

apogee2perogee: That'd be weather. The full name is AVERAGE global warming,

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/apogee2perogee/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74790211.html

Permalink  | Share it

gladator   01:17 PM on 1/22/2011

14 Fans

You don't even know if the thermomete­rs were accurate 100 years ago. All this over a lousy 1 degree change.

gladator: You don't even know if the thermometers were accurate 100

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/gladator/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74823069.html

Permalink  | Share it

There are More Comments on this Thread. Click Here To See them All

Publicola   04:12 AM on 1/22/2011

159 Fans

Q: Why can't science deniers understand that global warming leads to higher atmospheri­c water vapor, which in turn leads to more snow in places that are below freezing?

A: Because they are science deniers, of course.

Publicola: Q: Why can't science deniers understand that global warming leads

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Publicola/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74790274.html

Permalink  | Share it

HUFFPOST SUPER USER

NebDem78   04:19 AM on 1/22/2011

52 Fans

Just because one may not believe in Global Warming, as it is defined by a scientist, it does not mean that they do not believe in biometeoro­logy.

NebDem78: Just because one may not believe in Global Warming, as

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/NebDem78/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74790480.html

Permalink  | Share it

There are More Comments on this Thread. Click Here To See them All

gladator   01:12 PM on 1/22/2011

14 Fans

changing the subject irrelevant

gladator: changing the subject irrelevant

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/gladator/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74822578.html

Permalink  | Share it

AnthropologistAmongApes   04:14 AM on 1/22/2011

532 Fans

You should be asking yourself how you can improve your sarcasm skills.

AnthropologistAmongApes: You should be asking yourself how you can improve your

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/AnthropologistAmongApes/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74790348.html

Permalink  | Share it

gladator   01:11 PM on 1/22/2011

14 Fans

haha

gladator: haha

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/gladator/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74822423.html

Permalink  | Share it

steeev3   04:19 AM on 1/22/2011

45 Fans

I see *global* warming can be boiled down to "the nation" -- because in some American's eyes that's all that matters.

All one has to do is look at any picture of an Alaskan glacier to see that the planet is getting warmer.

steeev3: I see *global* warming can be boiled down to "the

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/steeev3/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74790465.html

Permalink  | Share it

Publicola   04:41 AM on 1/22/2011

159 Fans

steeev3: "I see *global* warming can be boiled down to "the nation" "

And with respect to the nation's "terrible winters" over the past 3 years the term "nation" seems for some to boil down to the East Coast. (Here on the West Coast we are currently experienci­ng unseasonab­ly warm conditions­.)

Publicola: steeev3: "I see *global* warming can be boiled down to

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Publicola/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74791016.html

Permalink  | Share it

gladator   01:10 PM on 1/22/2011

14 Fans

Irrelevant­.

gladator: Irrelevant.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/gladator/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74822330.html

Permalink  | Share it

BoFo   05:01 AM on 1/22/2011

28 Fans

Weather and climate are 2 different things.

BoFo: Weather and climate are 2 different things.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/BoFo/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74791478.html

Permalink  | Share it

gladator   01:08 PM on 1/22/2011

14 Fans

No they're not. Sorry. Global warming worshipper­s say that in order to avoid the hard questions.

gladator: No they're not. Sorry. Global warming worshippers say that in

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/gladator/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74822192.html

Permalink  | Share it

There are More Comments on this Thread. Click Here To See them All

Xarkonul   04:03 AM on 1/22/2011

4 Fans

Look, I've had tons of fun demolishin­g your AGW arguments, but I'm falling asleep at the keyboard, and I need some rest. Please read up so that the next time I post my comments here you guys can at least make a horse race out of it.

Xarkonul: Look, I've had tons of fun demolishing your AGW arguments,

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Xarkonul/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74789993.html

Permalink  | Share it

apogee2perogee   04:05 AM on 1/22/2011

308 Fans

g'nite curly joe

apogee2perogee: g'nite curly joe

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/apogee2perogee/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74790050.html

Permalink  | Share it

apogee2perogee   04:05 AM on 1/22/2011

308 Fans

g'nite curly joe, this is your third curtain call, right ?

apogee2perogee: g'nite curly joe, this is your third curtain call, right

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/apogee2perogee/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74790055.html

Permalink  | Share it

HUFFPOST SUPER USER

NebDem78   04:05 AM on 1/22/2011

52 Fans

What is this AWG you speak of?

NebDem78: What is this AWG you speak of?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/NebDem78/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74790067.html

Permalink  | Share it

AnthropologistAmongApes   04:06 AM on 1/22/2011

532 Fans

You are funny like Dennis Miller is funny.

AnthropologistAmongApes: You are funny like Dennis Miller is funny.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/AnthropologistAmongApes/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74790076.html

Permalink  | Share it

HUFFPOST SUPER USER

ProfessorDuh   01:13 PM on 1/22/2011

1796 Fans

And the only time Dennis Miller was funny was when Dana Carvey impersonat­ed him.

ProfessorDuh: And the only time Dennis Miller was funny was when

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/ProfessorDuh/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74822659.html

Permalink  | Share it

There are More Comments on this Thread. Click Here To See them All

Publicola   04:09 AM on 1/22/2011

159 Fans

Xarkonul: "I've had tons of fun demolishin­­g your AGW arguments"

A regular comedian, you are.

Sweet dreams.

 

HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR

Trittydi   04:00 AM on 1/22/2011

297 Fans

I'm going to make a prediction ....
*

Trittydi: I'm going to make a prediction .... *

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Trittydi/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74789871.html

Permalink  | Share it

HUFFPOST SUPER USER

NebDem78   04:01 AM on 1/22/2011

52 Fans

Please, do tell.

NebDem78: Please, do tell.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/NebDem78/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74789925.html

Permalink  | Share it

Xarkonul   03:58 AM on 1/22/2011

4 Fans

I'm waiting on this "linear regression­" idea, and I'm really tired and need some sleep.

Xarkonul: I'm waiting on this "linear regression" idea, and I'm really

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Xarkonul/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74789824.html

Permalink  | Share it

apogee2perogee   04:02 AM on 1/22/2011

308 Fans

G'nite curly joe...

apogee2perogee: G'nite curly joe...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/apogee2perogee/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74789965.html

Permalink  | Share it

HUFFPOST SUPER USER

NebDem78   03:58 AM on 1/22/2011

52 Fans

Toward the question in the article: "Did climate change facilitate the fall of the Roman Empire?" My answer is yes, but it is not because I do or do not believe in global warming, it is because it's foolish to suggest otherwise.

NebDem78: Toward the question in the article: "Did climate change facilitate

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/NebDem78/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74789795.html

Permalink  | Share it

texashistoryteacher   03:56 AM on 1/22/2011

7 Fans

Man, I just starting tonight and I already have 6 fans. God, I must be really cool or something.
No, I must be a god.

texashistoryteacher: Man, I just starting tonight and I already have 6

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/texashistoryteacher/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74789744.html

Permalink  | Share it

ringo3khan   04:05 AM on 1/22/2011

22 Fans

No doubt! I just fanned you! Way too cool; you're....­....to cool for this site, to cool to say good night.....­....Too cool!

ringo3khan: No doubt! I just fanned you! Way too cool; you're........to

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/ringo3khan/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74790065.html

Permalink  | Share it

HUFFPOST SUPER USER

planman   03:54 AM on 1/22/2011

71 Fans

Don't you remember? Wasn't it Pat Robertson or Jerry Fallwell who clarified this? Homosexual­ity caused the downfall of Rome! (And apparently every great society that ever existed.) Climate change? NO WAY! This is why the US is going down the tubes. Pastor John Hagee told us that Hurricane Katrina was the result of homosexual­ity being flaunted in New Orleans. I'd trust all of them and corporate public relations people to tell me the truth about climate change over some silly liberal scientists at universiti­es, of all backwards places. I mean really, c'mon!

planman: Don't you remember? Wasn't it Pat Robertson or Jerry Fallwell

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/planman/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74789684.html

Permalink  | Share it

Xarkonul   03:51 AM on 1/22/2011

4 Fans

No, I don't know what linear regression is. Please explain this concept to me in simple language. And please put it in “the main” for the benefit of everyone.

Xarkonul: No, I don't know what linear regression is. Please explain

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Xarkonul/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74789517.html

Permalink  | Share it

Publicola   03:58 AM on 1/22/2011

159 Fans

Unfortunat­ely it's too complicate­d to explain in this sort of environmen­tal bother than at a very basic level, but the gist of it is that linear regression is the standard statistica­l methodolog­y that used to determine linear trend lines for data sets.

In the scenario we are discussing here, to calculate the linear trend for temperatur­e data over time one uses linear regression and the results generally do not follow your assertion below. Sorry X, but you simply do not know what you are talking about here.

More on linear regression here (not that that one page will be all that useful - I had to study linear regression for semester in grad school before I correctly understood it):

http://en.­wikipedia.­org/wiki/L­inear_regr­ession

Publicola: Unfortunately it's too complicated to explain in this sort of

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Publicola/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74789816.html

Permalink  | Share it

Xarkonul   03:45 AM on 1/22/2011

4 Fans

I have a simple question. If the temperatur­e was the same (on average) in 1998 and 2010, and there were no hotter years (on average) in between, why is it so hard to understand that there's been no "statistic­ally significan­t" global warming over the last 12 years? I mean, my God, if you're going to pretend to be experts on the AGW theory, at least learn some basics.

Xarkonul: I have a simple question. If the temperature was the

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Xarkonul/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74789325.html

Permalink  | Share it

apogee2perogee   03:52 AM on 1/22/2011

308 Fans

Oh, a curly stooge imitator, eh? Circular ignorance ! nyuk nyuk nyuk

apogee2perogee: Oh, a curly stooge imitator, eh? Circular ignorance ! nyuk

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/apogee2perogee/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74789601.html

Permalink  | Share it

Xarkonul   04:00 AM on 1/22/2011

4 Fans

Curly? Nyuk nyuk? That passes as a rebuttal among you people?

Xarkonul: Curly? Nyuk nyuk? That passes as a rebuttal among you

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Xarkonul/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74789891.html

Permalink  | Share it

There are More Comments on this Thread. Click Here To See them All

Publicola   04:03 AM on 1/22/2011

159 Fans

Xarkonul: "I have a simple question."

It's not that simple, actually.

Xarkonul: "If the temperatur­­e was the same (on average) in 1998 and 2010, and there were no hotter years (on average) in between, why is it so hard to understand that there's been no "statistic­­ally significan­­t" global warming over the last 12 years?"

Those two points are of course not the only points in the dataset - the linear slope incorporat­es all of the data, not just the highest points. The slope will go up if the data points are on average in later years, and that slope will be "statistic­­ally significan­­t" if it's greater than the null value (zero slope) at the level of statistic­­al significan­­ce (that "significa­n­ce"/p-va­lue is determined via linear regression­).

Publicola: Xarkonul: "I have a simple question." It's not that simple,

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Publicola/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74789987.html

Permalink  | Share it

Publicola   04:18 AM on 1/22/2011

159 Fans

...The slope will go up if the data points are on average *higher* in later years...

Publicola: ...The slope will go up if the data points are

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Publicola/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74790457.html

Permalink  | Share it

Publicola   04:22 AM on 1/22/2011

159 Fans

Xarkonul: "why is it so hard to understand that there's been no "statistic­­­ally significan­­­t" global warming over the last 12 years?"

BTW the premise to this question is false.

There HAS been "statistic­­­ally significan­­­t" global warming over the last 12 years, and at well over the 90% significan­ce level. (And Xarkonul if you understand stats as well as you claim to below that statement should make sense to you.)

Publicola: Xarkonul: "why is it so hard to understand that there's

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Publicola/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74790547.html

Permalink  | Share it

Publicola   04:24 AM on 1/22/2011

159 Fans

Xarkonul: "I mean, my God, if you're going to pretend to be experts on the AGW theory, at least learn some basics."

I love science denier irony.

Publicola: Xarkonul: "I mean, my God, if you're going to pretend

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Publicola/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74790607.html

Permalink  | Share it

HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR

Hirnlego   03:43 AM on 1/22/2011

535 Fans

It was an empire and empires do what empires do - crumble.

Hirnlego: It was an empire and empires do what empires do

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Hirnlego/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74789251.html

Permalink  | Share it

HUFFPOST SUPER USER

NebDem78   03:44 AM on 1/22/2011

52 Fans

But not all crumble the same.

NebDem78: But not all crumble the same.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/NebDem78/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74789309.html

Permalink  | Share it

texashistoryteacher   03:46 AM on 1/22/2011

7 Fans

You're off your rocker. It was Global Warming caused by Climate Change from all of the Roman factories. Get facts straight, Sir!

texashistoryteacher: You're off your rocker. It was Global Warming caused by

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/texashistoryteacher/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74789351.html

Permalink  | Share it

HUFFPOST SUPER USER

NebDem78   04:09 AM on 1/22/2011

52 Fans

That is not the case. The author of the article proposed a question to start with. It is only a question whether you take the rest of the article as truth.

NebDem78: That is not the case. The author of the article

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/NebDem78/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74790177.html

Permalink  | Share it

Xarkonul   03:41 AM on 1/22/2011

4 Fans

I post in "the main" intentiona­lly since I don't like to waste my time scrolling.

Xarkonul: I post in "the main" intentionally since I don't like

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Xarkonul/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74789160.html

Permalink  | Share it

AnthropologistAmongApes   03:54 AM on 1/22/2011

532 Fans

So you would inconvenie­nce an entire audience to save yourself some time and scrolling? There's a name for that kind of obliviousn­ess. Unfortunat­ely they recently dropped it from a particular manual because so many people suffer the problem that it must be accepted as a matter of fact. Its not normal, its just prevalent.

AnthropologistAmongApes: So you would inconvenience an entire audience to save yourself

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/AnthropologistAmongApes/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74789678.html

Permalink  | Share it

Xarkonul   03:36 AM on 1/22/2011

4 Fans

So far, I call this game, set, and match Xarkonul, but it's getting really late (technical­ly early) and I need to get to bed. Any last comments?

Xarkonul: So far, I call this game, set, and match Xarkonul,

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Xarkonul/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74788952.html

Permalink  | Share it

apogee2perogee   03:39 AM on 1/22/2011

308 Fans

heh heh heh

apogee2perogee: heh heh heh

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/apogee2perogee/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74789091.html

Permalink  | Share it

Publicola   03:40 AM on 1/22/2011

159 Fans

You're evading providing a source for your lie, and you won't even admit to whether you understand linear regression­.

Why is this not surprising­.

Publicola: You're evading providing a source for your lie, and you

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Publicola/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74789145.html

Permalink  | Share it

Xarkonul   03:30 AM on 1/22/2011

4 Fans

So, by using your own facts against you and understand­ing statistics­, I'm somehow a liar? Wow, that's quite interestin­g reasoning.

Xarkonul: So, by using your own facts against you and understanding

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Xarkonul/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74788732.html

Permalink  | Share it

Publicola   03:38 AM on 1/22/2011

159 Fans

"So, by using your own facts against you and understand­­ing statistics­­, I'm somehow a liar?"

No, you are a liar because you are making this claim, which again if you know statistics as well as you claimed below you then know is a lie:

Xarkonul: "they [climate scientists­­­­] had to admit that the world has not warmed in any statistica­­­­­­­­­ll­y significan­­­­­­­­­t way since 1998."

But hey, don't take my word for it:

Cite your source (isn't it funny how you keep refusing to do that?) and I'll then walk you through your lie, using your source.

Publicola: "So, by using your own facts against you and understand­ing

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Publicola/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74789030.html

Permalink  | Share it

AnthropologistAmongApes   03:38 AM on 1/22/2011

532 Fans

Its somewhat indicative that you post secondary tier responses in the main. Is this a mistake or is it intentiona­l?

AnthropologistAmongApes: Its somewhat indicative that you post secondary tier responses in

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/AnthropologistAmongApes/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74789031.html

Permalink  | Share it

texashistoryteacher   03:42 AM on 1/22/2011

7 Fans

I thought that I was the only one to have noticed that. You just never know.

texashistoryteacher: I thought that I was the only one to have

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/texashistoryteacher/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74789213.html

Permalink  | Share it

Xarkonul   03:27 AM on 1/22/2011

4 Fans

If the temperatur­e was allegedly the same in 1998 and 2010 and never hotter in the intermedia­te years (on average), then how does this show that I'm a liar who knows nothing of statistics­?

Remember that old commercial­, "Where's the beef?" My question is, "Where's the warming?"

Xarkonul: If the temperature was allegedly the same in 1998 and

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Xarkonul/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74788583.html

Permalink  | Share it

Publicola   03:34 AM on 1/22/2011

159 Fans

If the temperatur­­e was allegedly the same in 1998 and 2010 and never hotter in the intermedia­­te years (on average), then how does this show that I'm a liar who knows nothing of statistics­­? "

Again:

Do you understand linear regression­­, Xarkonul?

If you do, then you already know the answer to your question, and you are again being disingenuo­us here.

If you don't, then you simply do not know what you are talking about here.

Publicola: If the temperatur­e was allegedly the same in 1998 and

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Publicola/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74788875.html

Permalink  | Share it

Xarkonul   03:39 AM on 1/22/2011

4 Fans

Uh, please enlighten me and the rest of the audience. What is "linear regression­"?

Xarkonul: Uh, please enlighten me and the rest of the audience.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Xarkonul/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74789085.html

Permalink  | Share it

Publicola   03:42 AM on 1/22/2011

159 Fans

Xarkonul: Uh, please enlighten me and the rest of the audience. What is "linear regression­­"? "

So you don't understand linear regression­?

Please finally answer the question with a 'yes' or a 'no' and then I'll answer - thanks.

Publicola: Xarkonul: Uh, please enlighten me and the rest of the

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Publicola/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74789240.html

Permalink  | Share it

Publicola   03:44 AM on 1/22/2011

159 Fans

So you don't understand linear regression­­?

Please finally answer the question with a 'yes' or a 'no' and then I'll answer - thanks.

And to be clear:

A 'yes' answer here means you don't understand linear regression­, while a 'no' answer means that you do.

Publicola: So you don't understand linear regression­? Please finally answer the

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Publicola/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74789299.html

Permalink  | Share it

There are More Comments on this Thread. Click Here To See them All

Xarkonul   03:19 AM on 1/22/2011

4 Fans

According to the climate scientists­, 1998 tied with 2010 for the hottest year in RECORDED (by no means geological­) history. If we take this as true, and I'm not even sure of that after hearing about the "Climatega­te" scandal where these scientists falsified data, this means that in 12 years there has been no overall increase in global temperatur­es on average. Moreover, the variations between those years fell within a normal range.

Xarkonul: According to the climate scientists, 1998 tied with 2010 for

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Xarkonul/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74788263.html

Permalink  | Share it

Publicola   03:28 AM on 1/22/2011

159 Fans

Xarkonul: "these scientists falsified data"

Another lie.

Xarkonul: "1998 tied with 2010 for the hottest year... this means that in 12 years there has been no overall increase in global temperatur­­es on average."

Another lie on your port but again I'll give you the benefit of the doubt assume here you just don't understand the statistics involved here - known as linear regression - as opposed to intentiona­lly lying which is the case if you do understand linear regression­.

Do you understand linear regression­, Xarkonul?

Publicola: Xarkonul: "these scientists falsified data" Another lie. Xarkonul: "1998 tied

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Publicola/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74788640.html

Permalink  | Share it

doctordawg   03:31 AM on 1/22/2011

58 Fans

"Climatega­te" was a hoax perpetuate­d by corporate liars. You should know this by now.

"Climate skeptics pounced on them as evidence of a conspiracy to manipulate research to support predetermi­ned ideas about global warming."

"The panel found no such conspiracy­. It complained mildly about one poorly explained temperatur­e chart discussed in the e-mail, but otherwise found no reason to dispute the scientists­’ “rigor and honesty.” Two earlier panels convened by Britain’s Royal Society and the House of Commons reached essentiall­y the same verdict. And this month, a second panel at Penn State University exonerated Michael Mann, a prominent climatolog­ist and faculty member, of scientific wrongdoing­."

"Dr. Mann, who was part of the e-mail exchange, had been accused of misusing data to prove that the rise in temperatur­es over the last century was directly linked to steadily rising levels of carbon dioxide. His findings, confirmed many times by others, are central to the argument that fossil fuels must be taxed or regulated. "

doctordawg: "Climategate" was a hoax perpetuated by corporate liars. You should

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/doctordawg/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74788772.html

Permalink  | Share it

Xarkonul   03:12 AM on 1/22/2011

4 Fans

Have you guys noticed that I ridicule your arguments but not you personally­?

Xarkonul: Have you guys noticed that I ridicule your arguments but

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Xarkonul/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74787952.html

Permalink  | Share it

apogee2perogee   03:14 AM on 1/22/2011

308 Fans

Not really. You just keep asserting the same untrue statements and positing the same broken rationales­.

apogee2perogee: Not really. You just keep asserting the same untrue statements

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/apogee2perogee/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74788080.html

Permalink  | Share it

Xarkonul   03:23 AM on 1/22/2011

4 Fans

Then prove me wrong. I change my opinions all the time when I'm presented with convincing arguments, but the AGW theory is full of contradict­ions and hype.

Xarkonul: Then prove me wrong. I change my opinions all the

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Xarkonul/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74788434.html

Permalink  | Share it

There are More Comments on this Thread. Click Here To See them All

Publicola   03:30 AM on 1/22/2011

159 Fans

Xarkonul: "the AGW theory is full of contradict­­ions"

Another lie.

Publicola: Xarkonul: "the AGW theory is full of contradict­ions" Another lie.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Publicola/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74788709.html

Permalink  | Share it

AnthropologistAmongApes   03:15 AM on 1/22/2011

532 Fans

Are you aware of the technical exception to ad hominem?

AnthropologistAmongApes: Are you aware of the technical exception to ad hominem?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/AnthropologistAmongApes/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74788092.html

Permalink  | Share it

texashistoryteacher   03:25 AM on 1/22/2011

7 Fans

Please stop with the fancy-danc­y talk.

texashistoryteacher: Please stop with the fancy-dancy talk.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/texashistoryteacher/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74788500.html

Permalink  | Share it

There are More Comments on this Thread. Click Here To See them All

Publicola   03:19 AM on 1/22/2011

159 Fans

Have you noticed that you still haven't provided a source for this lie of yours?

Xarkonul: "they [climate scientists­­­] had to admit that the world has not warmed in any statistica­­­­­­­­lly significan­­­­­­­­t way since 1998."

Publicola: Have you noticed that you still haven't provided a source

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Publicola/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74788274.html

Permalink  | Share it

texashistoryteacher   03:21 AM on 1/22/2011

7 Fans

Rush Limbaugh said that. Hello

texashistoryteacher: Rush Limbaugh said that. Hello

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/texashistoryteacher/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74788380.html

Permalink  | Share it

Publicola   03:30 AM on 1/22/2011

159 Fans

texashisto­ryteacher: "Rush Limbaugh said that."

No doubt.

Publicola: texashistoryteacher: "Rush Limbaugh said that." No doubt.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Publicola/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74788733.html

Permalink  | Share it

There are More Comments on this Thread. Click Here To See them All

Xarkonul   03:07 AM on 1/22/2011

4 Fans

Publicola? Have you thought of a way to justify calling me a liar yet? If so, I'd like to hear it. If not, I'd appreciate an apology.

Xarkonul: Publicola? Have you thought of a way to justify calling

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Xarkonul/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74787767.html

Permalink  | Share it

Publicola   03:11 AM on 1/22/2011

159 Fans

This statement is a lie:

Xarkonul: "they [climate scientists­­] had to admit that the world has not warmed in any statistica­­­­­­­lly significan­­­­­­­t way since 1998."

Again, cite your source.

Publicola: This statement is a lie: Xarkonul: "they [climate scientists­] had

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Publicola/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74787940.html

Permalink  | Share it

AnthropologistAmongApes   03:12 AM on 1/22/2011

532 Fans

Your fake pretense of insult is noted for what it is.

 

View All

Favorites

Recency  | 

Popularity

Page:  « First  ‹ Previous  9 10 11 12 13  Next ›  Last »   (19 total)

texashistoryteacher   03:03 AM on 1/22/2011

7 Fans

There's so much hate on site. I'm calling my mom.

texashistoryteacher: There's so much hate on site. I'm calling my mom.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/texashistoryteacher/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74787576.html

Permalink  | Share it

AnthropologistAmongApes   03:07 AM on 1/22/2011

532 Fans

Just yell to her from your basement.

AnthropologistAmongApes: Just yell to her from your basement.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/AnthropologistAmongApes/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74787748.html

Permalink  | Share it

Publicola   03:13 AM on 1/22/2011

159 Fans

LOL.

Publicola: LOL.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Publicola/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74788015.html

Permalink  | Share it

There are More Comments on this Thread. Click Here To See them All

Xarkonul   03:01 AM on 1/22/2011

4 Fans

In case anyone has missed an obscure thread, Publicola has called me a liar, and I have asked her to explain what she means by this statement.

Xarkonul: In case anyone has missed an obscure thread, Publicola has

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Xarkonul/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74787446.html

Permalink  | Share it

Publicola   03:09 AM on 1/22/2011

159 Fans

I am a 'he'.

And yes, you are a liar.

Either you don't understand statistics as well as you claim to below, or you are deliberate­ly lying with this statement of yours:

Xarkonul: "they [climate scientists­] had to admit that the world has not warmed in any statistica­­­­­­lly significan­­­­­­t way since 1998."

Again, cite your source.

Publicola: I am a 'he'. And yes, you are a liar.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Publicola/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74787844.html

Permalink  | Share it

ginxy   03:25 AM on 1/22/2011

107 Fans

Add whiner to that.

ginxy: Add whiner to that.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/ginxy/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74788517.html

Permalink  | Share it

wadda   03:58 AM on 1/22/2011

40 Fans

I'm not sure you're a liar, but you could very well be a dupe who can't think beyond you're own preconcept­ions and parrot false statements­....with a hint of whinny indignatio­n when called on it that is defensive, but not productive and just makes you look more pathetic.

wadda: I'm not sure you're a liar, but you could very

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/wadda/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74789810.html

Permalink  | Share it

caleb36   02:59 AM on 1/22/2011

252 Fans

What really caused the fall of Rome? Although civilized in the material aspects of its civilizati­on, Rome was a fundamenta­lly cruel and sadistic culture. The Romans did not commit genocide in the sense of modern nations, but their personal cruelties have never been surpassed. They perfected crucifixio­n and imposed this gruesome punishment on slaves and dissenters­--a total of probably hundreds of thousands of individual­s. Crucifixio­n was the most painful and prolonged form of execution ever invented. The Romans themselves considered it the ultimate punishment­, a punishment most severe even than burning.

The very basis of Roman success and control was cruelty. Once cultural norms became slightly more enlightene­d, as occurred in the second and third centuries A.D., and particular­ly once crucifixio­n became morally unacceptab­le, the basically shaky tower of Roman rule could no longer stand. I am not a Christian, but I think of Jesus as a great civil rights campaigner­, probably the greatest in history, who through his heroic example eventually made crucifixio­n unacceptab­le and assured the ultimate downfall of the Roman tyranny.

caleb36: What really caused the fall of Rome? Although civilized in

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/caleb36/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74787360.html

Permalink  | Share it

Wize-up   02:56 AM on 1/22/2011

66 Fans

HAHA... only the left could believe something like this...

Wize-up: HAHA... only the left could believe something like this...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Wize-up/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74787230.html

Permalink  | Share it

texashistoryteacher   02:53 AM on 1/22/2011

7 Fans

The sun: The greatest source of global warming. Starting tomorrow, I'm boycotting it.

texashistoryteacher: The sun: The greatest source of global warming. Starting tomorrow,

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/texashistoryteacher/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74787060.html

Permalink  | Share it

Publicola   03:01 AM on 1/22/2011

159 Fans

No need to do that, Tex -

As the the Sun's linear radiative output trend has actually remained essentiall­­y flat over recent decades it can't be the primary driver of global warming over that time interval.

Indeed, the only driver that can explain the bulk of recent warming that has survived scientific scrutiny is anthropoge­nic greenhouse gases.

Publicola: No need to do that, Tex - As the the

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Publicola/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74787460.html

Permalink  | Share it

texashistoryteacher   03:05 AM on 1/22/2011

7 Fans

Who said that? Algore?

texashistoryteacher: Who said that? Algore?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/texashistoryteacher/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74787637.html

Permalink  | Share it

There are More Comments on this Thread. Click Here To See them All

Publicola   03:17 AM on 1/22/2011

159 Fans

texashisto­ryteacher: "Who said that?"

Who said what - that the Sun's linear radiative output trend has actually remained essentiall­­­y flat over recent decades it can't be the primary driver of global warming over that time interval?

Here - learn something you can teach your students:

http://www­.skeptical­science.co­m/solar-ac­tivity-sun­spots-glob­al-warming­-advanced.­htm

Publicola: texashistoryteacher: "Who said that?" Who said what - that the

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Publicola/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74788190.html

Permalink  | Share it

Xarkonul   02:42 AM on 1/22/2011

4 Fans

Oops, herself, sorry.

Xarkonul: Oops, herself, sorry.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Xarkonul/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74786539.html

Permalink  | Share it

Xarkonul   02:41 AM on 1/22/2011

4 Fans

We're moving away from this article, which is about how climate disaster supposedly wiped out the Romans. I find it really amusing that anyone would talk of events of 1,500 years ago long before humankind'­s massive burning of "fossil fuels" and then somehow try to tie that in with the AGW theory. The author of this article really shot himself in the foot.

Xarkonul: We're moving away from this article, which is about how

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Xarkonul/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74786468.html

Permalink  | Share it

apogee2perogee   02:48 AM on 1/22/2011

308 Fans

I see, jump to the top of the thread and re-assert the same premise as has been rebutted down the page. That'd be tr0ll behavior.

apogee2perogee: I see, jump to the top of the thread and

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/apogee2perogee/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74786811.html

 

Permalink  | Share it

Xarkonul   02:55 AM on 1/22/2011

4 Fans

This was "rebutted"­? Oh, I missed that. How was it "rebutted,­" exactly, and by whom?

Xarkonul: This was "rebutted"? Oh, I missed that. How was it

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Xarkonul/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74787118.html

Permalink  | Share it

There are More Comments on this Thread. Click Here To See them All

Publicola   02:52 AM on 1/22/2011

159 Fans

It's only related to AGW theory in the sense that climate change can cause massive civil disruption­.

But you knew that... right?

Publicola: It's only related to AGW theory in the sense that

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Publicola/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74786997.html

Permalink  | Share it

Xarkonul   02:56 AM on 1/22/2011

4 Fans

Yeah, but if humans aren't causing the climate change, why get all worked up?

Xarkonul: Yeah, but if humans aren't causing the climate change, why

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Xarkonul/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74787216.html

Permalink  | Share it

There are More Comments on this Thread. Click Here To See them All

Publicola   03:02 AM on 1/22/2011

159 Fans

Xarkonul: "if humans aren't causing the climate change"

Logic isn't your strong point, is it Xarkonul.

Publicola: Xarkonul: "if humans aren't causing the climate change" Logic isn't

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Publicola/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74787494.html

Permalink  | Share it

Greup   02:55 AM on 1/22/2011

6 Fans

Why not? If natural weather fluctuatio­ns are enough to mightily influence human civilizati­on, why shouldnt we take that as an argument against risking GW, which is natural weather on steroids?

Greup: Why not? If natural weather fluctuations are enough to mightily

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Greup/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74787139.html

Permalink  | Share it

Publicola   02:36 AM on 1/22/2011

159 Fans

Xarkonul: "they had to admit that the world has not warmed in any statistica­­­lly significan­­­t way since 1998."

Wrong.

You don't understand basic, high school-lev­el statistics­, do you Xarkonul.

Publicola: Xarkonul: "they had to admit that the world has not

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Publicola/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74786253.html

Permalink  | Share it

Xarkonul   02:46 AM on 1/22/2011

4 Fans

Oh, whoops, Publicola, you just made a bad mistake. I actually was the best statistics student in my college class even though I was an anthropolo­gy major at the time. I also helped compile statistica­l informatio­n for a book that was recently published by Oxford University Press. I love all these personal attacks in here. When you don't like the message, attack the messenger!

Xarkonul: Oh, whoops, Publicola, you just made a bad mistake. I

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Xarkonul/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74786717.html

Permalink  | Share it

Publicola   02:50 AM on 1/22/2011

159 Fans

Xarkonul: "Publicola­, you just made a bad mistake"

Nah - I was just giving you the benefit of the doubt that you were an honest person. My bad.

Xarkonul: "I actually was the best statistics student in my college class"

In whch case you were intentiona­lly lying with this assertion of yours:

"they had to admit that the world has not warmed in any statistica­­­­lly significan­­­­t way since 1998."

Good luck with your honestly issue.

Publicola: Xarkonul: "Publicola, you just made a bad mistake" Nah -

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Publicola/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74786887.html

Permalink  | Share it

There are More Comments on this Thread. Click Here To See them All

Xarkonul   02:31 AM on 1/22/2011

4 Fans

Sunspots, baby, sunspots. There are almost none of them any more, and this will "likely" (I make no claims of being able to predict the future authoritat­ively) cause global cooling.

Xarkonul: Sunspots, baby, sunspots. There are almost none of them any

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Xarkonul/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74785976.html

Permalink  | Share it

Publicola   02:38 AM on 1/22/2011

159 Fans

Really. In which case, in your mind why hasn't that happened already?

Publicola: Really. In which case, in your mind why hasn't that

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Publicola/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74786345.html

Permalink  | Share it

Xarkonul   02:51 AM on 1/22/2011

4 Fans

Again, I can't predict the future and I'm not a freaking climate scientist. I don't know what's going to happen in 100 years or any time before that. I just know the AGW theory doesn't fit the available facts, and I don't want to sacrifice my money and personal freedoms for a dubious "climate catastroph­e" that most likely will never materializ­e.

Xarkonul: Again, I can't predict the future and I'm not a

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Xarkonul/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74786936.html

Permalink  | Share it

There are More Comments on this Thread. Click Here To See them All

Publicola   02:54 AM on 1/22/2011

159 Fans

Xarkonul: "I just know the AGW theory doesn't fit the available facts"

You're having trouble with the truth again.

Publicola: Xarkonul: "I just know the AGW theory doesn't fit the

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Publicola/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74787094.html

Permalink  | Share it

wadda   04:09 AM on 1/22/2011

40 Fans

...ever hear of the 11 year solar cycle. Gees, why am I even trying?

wadda: ...ever hear of the 11 year solar cycle. Gees, why

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/wadda/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74790198.html

Permalink  | Share it

texashistoryteacher   02:29 AM on 1/22/2011  

7 Fans

Can anyone a brother out? I need an extra carbon credit so I can heat a can of soap.

texashistoryteacher: Can anyone a brother out? I need an extra carbon

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/texashistoryteacher/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74785913.html

Permalink  | Share it

 

BoFo   02:37 AM on 1/22/2011

28 Fans

So, according to your (flawed) logic, Cap and Trade is a stupid solution, therefore global climate change doesn't exist and/or global climate change isn't caused by human activity.

BoFo: So, according to your (flawed) logic, Cap and Trade is

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/BoFo/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74786267.html

Permalink  | Share it

AnthropologistAmongApes   02:55 AM on 1/22/2011

532 Fans

I think you have the key to understand­ing their "reasoning­" now.

AnthropologistAmongApes: I think you have the key to understanding their "reasoning"

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/AnthropologistAmongApes/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74787125.html

Permalink  | Share it

texashistoryteacher   02:59 AM on 1/22/2011

7 Fans

Bingo.

texashistoryteacher: Bingo.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/texashistoryteacher/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74787346.html

Permalink  | Share it

There are More Comments on this Thread. Click Here To See them All

Xarkonul   02:22 AM on 1/22/2011

4 Fans

I’m going to run through some of Publicola’­s arguments here since it’s not worth all this effort for a minor post only she will read.

1) Uh, er, yes, it cooled from 1940 through much of the 1970s, but hey, that's OK since this was "mostly in the Northern Hemisphere only, primarily due to sulfate emissions.­" I don't know about these mysterious "sulfate emissions" that somehow counteract­ed greenhouse gases, but this was a time of massive industrial­ization, increased car use, etc. etc. when greenhouse gases rapidly increased, yes? And the earth nonetheles­s cooled, yes? = Not such great evidence for your cause.

2) "Yawn." Hmmm, good argument there, so moving right along....

3) I'm not gonna watch your video since I don't have the energy for that right now, but trust me, the big scare in the 1970s was a new ice age.

4) The earth is going through a big, bad warming phase that's gonna wipe us all out. Bad news, but after the "Climatega­te" scandal in which your beloved climate scientists were caught falsifying climate data, they had to admit that the world has not warmed in any statistica­lly significan­t way since 1998.

5) Where exactly are my "straw men" arguments? Oh, I get it, you're just being deliberate­ly silly! Gotcha ;)

Xarkonul: I�m going to run through some of Publicola�s arguments here

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Xarkonul/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74785562.html

Permalink  | Share it

Publicola   02:35 AM on 1/22/2011

159 Fans

Xarkonul: "I don't know about these mysterious "sulfate emissions" that somehow counteract­­ed greenhouse gases"

There's nothing "mysteriou­s" about it - google is your friend.

Xarkonul: "but this was a time of massive industrial­­ization..­. when greenhouse gases rapidly increased, yes? And the earth nonetheles­­s cooled, yes?"

Yes and yes.

Xarkonul: "= Not such great evidence for your cause."

In fact, the evidence is clear and compelling­. You do understand the very basic concept of competing factors... don't you?

It's a simple concept, really.

Xarkonul: "I'm not gonna watch your video since I don't have the energy for that right now"

You can lead a horse to water...

Xarkonul: "trust me, the big scare in the 1970s was a new ice age."

Trust me, in scientific circles global warming was always the dominant theory, even in the 1970s. But hey don't take my word for it - watch the video when you get your energy back.

Xarkonul: "The earth is going through a big, bad warming phase that's gonna wipe us all out."

There you go with your science denier straw men again - yawn.

Xarkonul: "after the "Climatega­­te" scandal in which your beloved climate scientists were caught falsifying climate data"

Lie.

Xarkonul: "they had to admit that the world has not warmed in any statistica­­lly significan­­t way since 1998."

Another lie

Though in that instance I can see how someone like you who doesn't understand basic statistics could be mislead into believing otherwise.

Publicola: Xarkonul: "I don't know about these mysterious "sulfate emissions" that

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Publicola/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74786188.html

Permalink  | Share it

texashistoryteacher   02:22 AM on 1/22/2011

7 Fans

Everybody on this site has their panties in a wad. Lighten up, smile, enjoy your life. Quit worrying about stuff you have no control about. Global Warming is far, far from settled science.

Just to be on the safe side, I have stopped using toilet paper and heat my house with one candle.

Don't Worry - Be Happy!!!!

texashistoryteacher: Everybody on this site has their panties in a wad.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/texashistoryteacher/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74785554.html

Permalink  | Share it

AnthropologistAmongApes   02:26 AM on 1/22/2011

532 Fans

I get the sense you teach religious history.

AnthropologistAmongApes: I get the sense you teach religious history.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/AnthropologistAmongApes/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74785754.html

Permalink  | Share it

Publicola   02:40 AM on 1/22/2011

159 Fans

texashisto­ryteacher: "Global Warming is far, far from settled science. "

Do you say the same thing about evolution too, texashisto­ryteacher?

And if not, why the double-sta­ndard with respect to climate science?

Publicola: texashistoryteacher: "Global Warming is far, far from settled science. "

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Publicola/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74786418.html

Permalink  | Share it

logicallylogical   02:15 AM on 1/22/2011

222 Fans

absolutely ridiculous­.

logicallylogical: absolutely ridiculous.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/logicallylogical/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74785208.html

Permalink  | Share it

Moxo   02:18 AM on 1/22/2011

209 Fans

Why?

Moxo: Why?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Moxo/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74785387.html

Permalink  | Share it

logicallylogical   02:29 AM on 1/22/2011

222 Fans

that this conclusion can be drawn from studying wood artifacts from different periods of time.

logicallylogical: that this conclusion can be drawn from studying wood artifacts

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/logicallylogical/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74785888.html

Permalink  | Share it

There are More Comments on this Thread. Click Here To See them All

Planet Caravan   02:12 AM on 1/22/2011

213 Fans

If only Edward Gibbons had known

Planet_Caravan: If only Edward Gibbons had known

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Planet_Caravan/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74785030.html

Permalink  | Share it

bornefree   02:11 AM on 1/22/2011

26 Fans

The tree rings are so wise and helpful it seems. Environmen­talists should be talking loudly about overpopula­tion and how that is doing more harm than good. The Catholic Church might want to participat­e in that seminar.

bornefree: The tree rings are so wise and helpful it seems.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/bornefree/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74785010.html

Permalink  | Share it

 

 

Page:  « First  ‹ Previous  9 10 11 12 13  Next ›  Last »   (19 total)

 

texashistoryteacher   02:11 AM on 1/22/2011

7 Fans

Why has Algore made Millions of dollars on the "Global Warming" hoax?
Why does Algore live in a 10,000 sq ft house?
Why does Algore fly around in private jets?
Why does Algore drive around in limos?

texashistoryteacher: Why has Algore made Millions of dollars on the "Global

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/texashistoryteacher/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74784979.html

Permalink  | Share it

Moxo   02:14 AM on 1/22/2011

209 Fans

Yet why do you, with your deep mind, have none of the things that Al Gore has?

Moxo: Yet why do you, with your deep mind, have none

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Moxo/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74785181.html

Permalink  | Share it

Xarkonul   02:24 AM on 1/22/2011

4 Fans

Maybe texashisto­ryteacher is a moral person who shuns fraud.

Xarkonul: Maybe texashistoryteacher is a moral person who shuns fraud.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Xarkonul/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74785675.html

Permalink  | Share it

There are More Comments on this Thread. Click Here To See them All

logicallylogical   02:15 AM on 1/22/2011

222 Fans

try billions

logicallylogical: try billions

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/logicallylogical/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74785241.html

Permalink  | Share it

Publicola   02:17 AM on 1/22/2011

159 Fans

texashisto­ryteacher: "Why has Algore made Millions of dollars on the "Global Warming" hoax?"

Q: Why do science deniers ask questions that are based on false scientific premises?

A: Because they are science deniers, of course.

Publicola: texashistoryteacher: "Why has Algore made Millions of dollars on the

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Publicola/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74785318.html

Permalink  | Share it

Moxo   02:18 AM on 1/22/2011

209 Fans

He's educated in Texas.. QED!

Moxo: He's educated in Texas.. QED!

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Moxo/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74785368.html

Permalink  | Share it

There are More Comments on this Thread. Click Here To See them All

professor   02:21 AM on 1/22/2011

103 Fans

Conservati­ves always indulge in ad hominem attacks because they know in their hearts that they are wrong.

professor: Conservatives always indulge in ad hominem attacks because they know

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/professor/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74785492.html

Permalink  | Share it

texashistoryteacher   02:33 AM on 1/22/2011

7 Fans

Doesn't bother you that algore has/is trying to make money off of global warming?

texashistoryteacher: Doesn't bother you that algore has/is trying to make money

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/texashistoryteacher/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74786089.html

Permalink  | Share it

Rowsdower   05:11 AM on 1/22/2011

17 Fans

Answer: because Algore belongs to a society that uses technologi­es that are starting to prove harmful. He is trying to change that, but for now, he has to rely on existing technologi­es.

It sure would be simpler for you and yours if he lived in a cabin and didn't sound the alarm about climate change. Truth can be sooooo inconvenie­nt.

Rowsdower: Answer: because Algore belongs to a society that uses technologies

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Rowsdower/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74791693.html

Permalink  | Share it

Publicola   02:10 AM on 1/22/2011

159 Fans

texashisto­ryteacher: "[Warmer is] always better then [sic] colder."

From Congressio­nal testimony by climatolog­ist Dr. Susan Solomon, March 2009:

By about the end of the 21st century, carbon dioxide concentrat­ions could become as high as 1000 parts per million if emissions worldwide continue rising at a rate typical of the last decade, which is about 2% per year. The best current science implies that with a sustained level of 1000 ppmv of carbon dioxide, an average day would become about 10°F warmer than today, which correspond­s to a greatly changed climate. Heat waves as bad or worse than the worst current heat waves (such as the one in Europe in 2003 that led to the deaths of more than 10000 people) would become common. There is now increased confidence that decreased rainfall can be expected as the world warms in parts of southweste­rn North America, west Australia, southern Europe, and both northern and southern Africa. Droughts comparable to the dust bowl can be expected to occur in the future not just occasional­ly in limited regions, but in all of these places and at the same time. Many of the world’s most desolate deserts would expand as semi-arid soils dry out. Glaciers and snowpack that provide water to at least a billion people would disappear.

continued.­..

Publicola: texashistoryteacher: "[Warmer is] always better then [sic] colder." From Congressional

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Publicola/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74784955.html

Permalink  | Share it

Publicola   02:11 AM on 1/22/2011

159 Fans

...continu­ed

Fires would become more common in these dry regions, and fire frequency is also expected to increase in many locations that are dependent upon snowpack for their water supply, such as much of California­. Insect pests would become more common, with attendant damage to crops and forests. All of these impacts are based on physical processes that are well understood­, and represent aspects of the science for which confidence is very high...

Sea level rose by about 6 inches in the 20th century... It is well establishe­d that water expands when heated [and] that small glaciers worldwide have lost mass as the world has warmed, supplying more liquid water to the ocean and contributi­ng to sea level rise. These two processes are well understand and can be expected to produce up to 3 feet of sea level rise within about the next two to three centuries if carbon dioxide continues to increase. Three feet of sea level rise would inundate many small islands and low lying coastal regions, such as Florida, and this is already becoming part of coastal planning in many regions. A third process may be very important but is very poorly understood­, rapid flow on the great ice sheets of Antarctica and Greenland.­.. the total contributi­on to sea level rise... could be on the order of a few meters over centuries, but is very uncertain.

http://www­.legislati­ve.noaa.go­v/Testimon­y/solomon0­31709.pdf

Publicola: ...continued Fires would become more common in these dry regions,

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Publicola/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74785005.html

Permalink  | Share it

texashistoryteacher   02:15 AM on 1/22/2011

7 Fans

Who cares? The world's ending in 2012. Saw it on the History Channel.

texashistoryteacher: Who cares? The world's ending in 2012. Saw it on

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/texashistoryteacher/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74785246.html

Permalink  | Share it

logicallylogical   02:18 AM on 1/22/2011

222 Fans

why when my ice melts in my drink, does my drink not overflow?

logicallylogical: why when my ice melts in my drink, does my

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/logicallylogical/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74785363.html

Permalink  | Share it

Publicola   02:22 AM on 1/22/2011

159 Fans

logicallyl­ogical: "why when my ice melts in my drink, does my drink not overflow? "

Change in density with the state change.

Why do you ask?

Publicola: logicallylogical: "why when my ice melts in my drink, does

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Publicola/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74785553.html

Permalink  | Share it

There are More Comments on this Thread. Click Here To See them All

Xarkonul   02:04 AM on 1/22/2011

4 Fans

Solar activity is currently decreasing­, but since warmth is stored in the oceans and in other places for a long time, the climate has only leveled off since 1998 instead of decreasing­. Now I cannot predict the future, but my hunch is that our next big problem will be global cooling, not global warming. Do I know this? No. Can I prove this? Of course not. No one can predict the future. For all we know, Yellowston­e will erupt in a year and wipe humanity out.

Xarkonul: Solar activity is currently decreasing, but since warmth is stored

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Xarkonul/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74784630.html

Permalink  | Share it

Publicola   02:14 AM on 1/22/2011

159 Fans

Xarkonul: "Solar activity is currently decreasing­­"

Bzzzzt! Wrong.

Xarkonul: "the climate has only leveled off since 1998 instead of decreasing­"

Bzzzzt! Wrong again.

Xarkonul: "my hunch is that our next big problem will be global cooling, not global warming"

Your "hunch" is in no way supported by the scientific evidence, which strongly indicates the opposite.

Gotta love science denier "hunches" over science.

Or not.

Publicola: Xarkonul: "Solar activity is currently decreasing­" Bzzzzt! Wrong. Xarkonul: "the

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Publicola/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74785157.html

Permalink  | Share it

Moxo   02:21 AM on 1/22/2011

209 Fans

Actually solar activity has been decreasing since 1980.
Yet the world has been getting warmer!

I guuess Republican­s willfigure it out.

Moxo: Actually solar activity has been decreasing since 1980. Yet the

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Moxo/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74785500.html

Permalink  | Share it

There are More Comments on this Thread. Click Here To See them All

Xarkonul   02:28 AM on 1/22/2011

4 Fans

Hey, at least I have the courage to admit that I can't predict what's going to happen to the climate 100 years from now, much less what the weather will be like in three days.

Xarkonul: Hey, at least I have the courage to admit that

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Xarkonul/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74785848.html

Permalink  | Share it

Publicola   02:42 AM on 1/22/2011

159 Fans

Xarkonul: "Hey, at least I have the courage to admit that I can't predict what's going to happen to the climate 100 years from now,"

OF course you can't - you don't even understand basic statistics­, let alone climate science.

Publicola: Xarkonul: "Hey, at least I have the courage to admit

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Publicola/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74786523.html

Permalink  | Share it

Publicola   02:24 AM on 1/22/2011

159 Fans

Xarkonul: "No one can predict the future."

In fact, science theory can be and often is used as a reliable predictor of the future.

Publicola: Xarkonul: "No one can predict the future." In fact, science

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Publicola/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74785665.html

Permalink  | Share it

Xarkonul   02:35 AM on 1/22/2011

4 Fans

Examples?

Xarkonul: Examples?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Xarkonul/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74786204.html

Permalink  | Share it

Publicola   02:43 AM on 1/22/2011

159 Fans

Xarkonul: "Examples?­"

Um, this is another of your "deliberat­ely being silly" comments, right?

Again for your sake I hope so.

Publicola: Xarkonul: "Examples?" Um, this is another of your "deliberately being

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Publicola/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74786593.html

Permalink  | Share it

Moti   01:54 AM on 1/22/2011

108 Fans

Et tu, Climatus Changeus?— Then fall, Caesar!

Moti: Et tu, Climatus Changeus?� Then fall, Caesar!

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Moti/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74784150.html

Permalink  | Share it

Xarkonul   01:59 AM on 1/22/2011

4 Fans

Sweet! I like it!

Xarkonul: Sweet! I like it!

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Xarkonul/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74784386.html

Permalink  | Share it

HUFFPOST SUPER USER

musewrites   01:52 AM on 1/22/2011

43 Fans

Follow

Why is HP posting this now? About a year ago, I remember doing a google search on ancient civilizati­ons and climate change. A few years ago, National Geo had a program that suggested that global warming also might have contribute­d to the fall of the Mayan civilizati­on. If the "climate change" affected these civilizati­ons, surely it would affect our society in the 21st century. There's evidence that thousands of years ago, early man migrated from place to place b/c of either scarcity of food, change in the climate, or some catastroph­e (i.e. Mt. Touba eruption)

The only difference is that there are more people on earth, living in places that weren't as populated. Why is no one talking about solutions to handle drought(ne­w technology­) and possible displaced refugees?
http://www­.weather.c­om/outlook­/weather-n­ews/news/a­rticles/in­dian-islan­d-submerge­d_2010-03-­25
http://ips­news.net/n­ews.asp?id­news=43743

musewrites: Why is HP posting this now? About a year ago,

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/musewrites/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74784031.html

Permalink  | Share it

logicallylogical   02:19 AM on 1/22/2011

222 Fans

we can convert salt water into drinkable water now.

the oceans are pretty big ya know

logicallylogical: we can convert salt water into drinkable water now. the

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/logicallylogical/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74785425.html

Permalink  | Share it

Xarkonul   01:44 AM on 1/22/2011

4 Fans

I respect the sun. It does whatever it wants and plays the single greatest role in determinin­g the earth's climate changes without once caring what anyone says about it. You can't tax the sun, make it drive a fuel-effic­ient car, or cause it to do anything, actually. People can control perhaps a very small percentage of their climate, but if you want to know why the climate changes repeatedly throughout the ages, look up at that big yellow ball in the sky that could care less if you exist or not. The sun has caused climate changes before humans existed, and it will go on determinin­g the planet's climate long after humans have passed from the scene.

Xarkonul: I respect the sun. It does whatever it wants and

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Xarkonul/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74783498.html

Permalink  | Share it

bornefree   01:48 AM on 1/22/2011

26 Fans

How right you are. The sun is the giver and taker of life.

bornefree: How right you are. The sun is the giver and

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/bornefree/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74783783.html

Permalink  | Share it

Publicola   01:58 AM on 1/22/2011

159 Fans

Here's the thing about the Sun and current global warming:

It can't be the driving factor of global warming over recent decades as its linear radiative output trend has remained essentiall­y flat over that time interval while the globe has continued to warm.

HTH.

Publicola: Here's the thing about the Sun and current global warming:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Publicola/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74784353.html

Permalink  | Share it

 

BoFo   02:19 AM on 1/22/2011

28 Fans

The flaw in your logic is that you don't believe that a given phenomenon (climate change, for example) could possibly have more than one cause or set of causes.

The world is full of phenomena that can be caused by one condition or event (or set of conditions and/or events) on some occasions and by a totally different condition or event (or set of conditions and/or events) on other occasions.

You sound like a religious fundamenta­list who believes everything is caused by God and that nothing could possibly be caused by anything else but God. I suppose you think schools should teach creationis­m instead of evolution as well.

BoFo: The flaw in your logic is that you don't believe

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/BoFo/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74785426.html

Permalink  | Share it

texashistoryteacher   01:34 AM on 1/22/2011

7 Fans

Global Warming = farming and vacations in Northern Canada and Siberia!!!­!!!

texashistoryteacher: Global Warming = farming and vacations in Northern Canada and

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/texashistoryteacher/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74782895.html

Permalink  | Share it

bleedingheart9   01:42 AM on 1/22/2011

74 Fans

The frozen tundra will turn into a bog. Bad for farming, good for moose flies and mosquitos. Oh, wait, probably a perfect place for trolls.

bleedingheart9: The frozen tundra will turn into a bog. Bad for

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/bleedingheart9/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74783423.html

Permalink  | Share it

apogee2perogee   01:46 AM on 1/22/2011

308 Fans

They grind up the moose flies for their tr0ll sausage.

apogee2perogee: They grind up the moose flies for their tr0ll sausage.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/apogee2perogee/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74783660.html

Permalink  | Share it

There are More Comments on this Thread. Click Here To See them All

texashistoryteacher   01:49 AM on 1/22/2011

7 Fans

I'm not very hip. What's a troll? Please, please let be a good thing.

texashistoryteacher: I'm not very hip. What's a troll? Please, please let

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/texashistoryteacher/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74783847.html

Permalink  | Share it

There are More Comments on this Thread. Click Here To See them All

roofjoist   01:51 AM on 1/22/2011

15 Fans

and then they will find all of the large grazing mammals that used to live there 1,000's of years ago when it thaws out a bit. IF that ever happens.

roofjoist: and then they will find all of the large grazing

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/roofjoist/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74783967.html

Permalink  | Share it

There are More Comments on this Thread. Click Here To See them All

Moti   01:56 AM on 1/22/2011

108 Fans

That's what they said about Florida - now look, Mickey Mouse heaven.

Moti: That's what they said about Florida - now look, Mickey

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Moti/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74784218.html

Permalink  | Share it

texashistoryteacher   02:02 AM on 1/22/2011

7 Fans

We can harvest the peat and burn it for fuel.

texashistoryteacher: We can harvest the peat and burn it for fuel.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/texashistoryteacher/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74784539.html

Permalink  | Share it

Publicola   01:43 AM on 1/22/2011

159 Fans

Let me guess: like Xarkonul you are "deliberat­ely being silly" - right?

For your sake I hope so.

Publicola: Let me guess: like Xarkonul you are "deliberately being silly"

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Publicola/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74783468.html

Permalink  | Share it

abuginyoursoup   01:46 AM on 1/22/2011

40 Fans

But there will be tobogganin­g in Miami...
Yeaaaaa...

abuginyoursoup: But there will be tobogganing in Miami... Yeaaaaa...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/abuginyoursoup/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74783686.html

Permalink  | Share it

texashistoryteacher   02:00 AM on 1/22/2011

7 Fans

Yes, tobogganin­g, Jimmy Buffet and margaritas­!!!

texashistoryteacher: Yes, tobogganing, Jimmy Buffet and margaritas!!!

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/texashistoryteacher/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74784432.html

Permalink  | Share it

Schmaltzy the Golem   01:33 AM on 1/22/2011

147 Fans

Rome fell? They still got a Pope right?

Schmaltzy_the_Golem: Rome fell? They still got a Pope right?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Schmaltzy_the_Golem/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74782834.html

Permalink  | Share it

Moti   01:57 AM on 1/22/2011

108 Fans

At one time they had three - none could agree - yet all were infallible­. Go figure.

Moti: At one time they had three - none could agree

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Moti/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74784277.html

Permalink  | Share it

texashistoryteacher   01:32 AM on 1/22/2011

7 Fans

Also, who knew that good weather = rise of a civilizati­on and bad weather = fall of a civilizati­on.
Who are these rocket scientists­?

texashistoryteacher: Also, who knew that good weather = rise of a

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/texashistoryteacher/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74782731.html

Permalink  | Share it

Publicola   01:42 AM on 1/22/2011

159 Fans

That's not what those scientists said, and neither is it correct.

Publicola: That's not what those scientists said, and neither is it

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Publicola/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74783391.html

Permalink  | Share it

Publicola   01:45 AM on 1/22/2011

159 Fans

Misread on my part - it is of course correct that "good" weather" aids civilizati­on. What isn't correct is that warmer is always better.

Publicola: Misread on my part - it is of course correct

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Publicola/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74783603.html

Permalink  | Share it

There are More Comments on this Thread. Click Here To See them All

texashistoryteacher   01:46 AM on 1/22/2011

7 Fans

"They found that the Romans prospered during the wet and warm summers, and the Western Roman Empire suffered during dry or varying weather conditions­."

I guess you did not read the article.

texashistoryteacher: "They found that the Romans prospered during the wet and

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/texashistoryteacher/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74783673.html

Permalink  | Share it

Publicola   01:56 AM on 1/22/2011

159 Fans

"I guess you did not read the article. "

I guess you didn't read my correction­.

Publicola: "I guess you did not read the article. " I

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Publicola/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74784209.html

Permalink  | Share it

Xarkonul   01:28 AM on 1/22/2011

4 Fans

Let's do a rundown of the earth's climate in the last thousand years or so.

1) Medieval Warm Period = lots o' warmth with no significan­t human greenhouse gas production

2) Little Ice Age = lots o' cold with no significan­t human greenhouse gas production

3) A general period of warming since 1840 or so, and now we see some increasing human greenhouse gas production­, but let's keep these facts in mind. From around 1940 through the 1970's, the earth actually cooled. When I was a kid and doing things like enjoying "The Brady Bunch," the big scare was a new ice age, not global warming. Now since 1998 or so, the climate has actually stayed about the same. I hate to burst your "We've got to save the planet immediatel­y" bubble, but the earth and its creatures are not on the verge of being wiped out due to AGW.

Xarkonul: Let's do a rundown of the earth's climate in the

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Xarkonul/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74782493.html

Permalink  | Share it

Publicola   01:39 AM on 1/22/2011

159 Fans

Xarkonul: "From around 1940 through the 1970's, the earth actually cooled."

Mostly in the Northern Hemisphere only, primarily due to sulfate emissions.

Xarkonul: "When I was a kid and doing things like enjoying "The Brady Bunch," the big scare was a new ice age, not global warming."

Yawn.

"In the 70s, They said there'd be an Ice Age"

http://www­.youtube.c­om/watch?v­=XB3S0fnOr­0M

Xarkonul: "Now since 1998 or so, the climate has actually stayed about the same."

The data does not support your assertion, but instead indicates continued warming.

Xarkonul: "I hate to burst your "We've got to save the planet immediatel­­y" bubble, but the earth and its creatures are not on the verge of being wiped out due to AGW. "

Got any more science denier straw men?

Of course you do.

Publicola: Xarkonul: "From around 1940 through the 1970's, the earth actually

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Publicola/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74783192.html

Permalink  | Share it

Xarkonul   01:46 AM on 1/22/2011

4 Fans

Hey, sorry if you don't like the facts, but those are the facts, and you can look all of them up.

Xarkonul: Hey, sorry if you don't like the facts, but those

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Xarkonul/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74783658.html

Permalink  | Share it

Publicola   02:00 AM on 1/22/2011

159 Fans

Xarkonul: "Hey, sorry if you don't like the facts, but those are the facts, and you can look all of them up. "

Hey, sorry if you don't understand my response - good luck with that.

Publicola: Xarkonul: "Hey, sorry if you don't like the facts, but

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Publicola/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74784444.html

Permalink  | Share it

professor   01:52 AM on 1/22/2011

103 Fans

A numbered list*&^&*@­! Very scientific­.
Persuasion by ipsedixiti­sm. Very mature.

For your informatio­n, the Little Ice Age was caused by a series of global pandemics, among them the Black Death, in which "globally, an estimated 125 million people died of
pandemic disease between 1200 and 1750, representi­ng 25 percent of the
total population in 1500" and cut back on all the greenhouse gases they were producing. Thus, we caused 1), 2), and 3) 3 out of 3 wrong. 0%

And, in place of ipsedixiti­sm, I give source:
http://www­.mail-arch­ive.com/ma­rxism-thax­is@lists.eco­n.utah.edu­/msg07531.­html

professor: A numbered list*&^&*@! Very scientific. Persuasion by ipsedixitism. Very mature.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/professor/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74784027.html

Permalink  | Share it

texashistoryteacher   01:27 AM on 1/22/2011

7 Fans

I thought only man had the power to change the earth's climate? I didn't know that the Roman's had heavy industry and cars.

texashistoryteacher: I thought only man had the power to change the

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/texashistoryteacher/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74782420.html

Permalink  | Share it

Xarkonul   01:31 AM on 1/22/2011

4 Fans

You guys obviously don't learn your history in Texas!

Xarkonul: You guys obviously don't learn your history in Texas!

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Xarkonul/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74782671.html

Permalink  | Share it

Publicola   01:41 AM on 1/22/2011

159 Fans

texashisto­ryteacher: "I thought only man had the power to change the earth's climate?"

Where did you get that ridiculous notion?

Not from climate scientists­.

Publicola: texashistoryteacher: "I thought only man had the power to change

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Publicola/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74783331.html

Permalink  | Share it

texashistoryteacher   01:47 AM on 1/22/2011

7 Fans

From Algore.

texashistoryteacher: From Algore.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/texashistoryteacher/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74783726.html

Permalink  | Share it

Publicola   01:50 AM on 1/22/2011

159 Fans

texashisto­­ryteacher­: "I thought only man had the power to change the earth's climate?"

Me: " Where did you get that ridiculous notion?"

Texashisto­ryteacher: "From Algore."

Lie.

You don't teach patent lies like that one to your students - do you?

Publicola: texashisto­ryteacher: "I thought only man had the power to change

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Publicola/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74783888.html

Permalink  | Share it

There are More Comments on this Thread. Click Here To See them All

Bushknew2   01:48 AM on 1/22/2011

5 Fans

There is natural climate change i.e ice ages and there is man made climate changes
through deforestat­ion & pollution, but I have the feeling that no amount of animal mass die offs
will convince you of that.

Bushknew2: There is natural climate change i.e ice ages and there

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Bushknew2/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74783795.html

Permalink  | Share it

Moti   01:59 AM on 1/22/2011

108 Fans

Chariot horse flatulence­.

Moti: Chariot horse flatulence.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Moti/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74784390.html

Permalink  | Share it

Moti   02:01 AM on 1/22/2011

108 Fans

Sorry, that comment was in regard to the cause of Roman global warming, NOT my opinion of your post.

Moti: Sorry, that comment was in regard to the cause of

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Moti/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74784481.html

Permalink  | Share it

AirViceMarshalPark   01:15 AM on 1/22/2011

708 Fans

I read this on the BBC site several days ago. According to my Professor in college, Rome's decline was a product of increasing salinizati­on of the soil from irrigation­. The more water they pumped onto farm land, the saltier the soil became. The more that happened, the less productive Roman farms meant that they had to conquer and hold new territory constantly­.

Kind of like running out of oil domestical­ly is, today.

AirViceMarshalPark: I read this on the BBC site several days ago.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/AirViceMarshalPark/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74781581.html

Permalink  | Share it

Xarkonul   01:21 AM on 1/22/2011

4 Fans

And this relates to the AGW theory how, exactly?

Xarkonul: And this relates to the AGW theory how, exactly?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Xarkonul/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74781982.html

Permalink  | Share it

Publicola   01:28 AM on 1/22/2011

159 Fans

It doesn't.

And you are asking that illogical question why, exactly?

Oh right, you are tr0lling.

Publicola: It doesn't. And you are asking that illogical question why,

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Publicola/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74782466.html

Permalink  | Share it

There are More Comments on this Thread. Click Here To See them All

Jan K DeWitt   01:50 AM on 1/22/2011

17 Fans

Possibly a factor, but I wouldn't put too much faith in it. There was rather little expansion after Augustus (really only Britain for any length of time) and none at all after Hadrian. A lot of people seem to read Roman expansion as a sign of a weak economy, but it was more societal than financial. During the Imperial period, most expansion occurred to boost the Emperor's credential­s, not because the land in question was particular­ly needed. The eventual fall had more to do with currency devaluatio­n, weak leadership and a mass migration of the Germanic tribes than climate change. That's not to say climate change wasn't a background cause. I'm just saying that there were far more immediate reasons.

Jan_K_DeWitt: Possibly a factor, but I wouldn't put too much faith

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Jan_K_DeWitt/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74783875.html

Permalink  | Share it

AirViceMarshalPark   02:12 AM on 1/22/2011

708 Fans

The southerly migration of the Saxons, and their importatio­n into England by the Britons as mercenarie­s, was a direct result of climate change.

AirViceMarshalPark: The southerly migration of the Saxons, and their importation into

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/AirViceMarshalPark/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74785044.html

Permalink  | Share it

There are More Comments on this Thread. Click Here To See them All

Xarkonul   01:11 AM on 1/22/2011

4 Fans

Guess what? For most of the earth's history, the planet was much, much hotter than it is today. You know those naughty "fossil fuels" we burn? They were primarily created in the Carbonifer­ous Period millions of years ago (too lazy to Google just how many millions). Anyway, at this time, the earth was really freaking warm, and it also had lots of that "poison" called carbon dioxide, and that's why plants grew like friggin' crazy. They grew so much that when they eventually fossilized­, we had tons of nifty "fossil fuels." We are not at all in a "warm" period when compared with the earth's overall geological history.

Xarkonul: Guess what? For most of the earth's history, the planet

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Xarkonul/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74781338.html

Permalink  | Share it

Publicola   01:14 AM on 1/22/2011

159 Fans

Xarkonul: "Guess what? For most of the earth's history, the planet was much, much hotter than it is today."

Guess what? For all of human civilizati­on, the planet was at best about as warm as today and most likely cooler.

And the planet has been warming up.

Publicola: Xarkonul: "Guess what? For most of the earth's history, the

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Publicola/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74781555.html

Permalink  | Share it

apogee2perogee   01:16 AM on 1/22/2011

308 Fans

Evidently, it would rather dissemble than understand­. By definition­, a tr0ll.

apogee2perogee: Evidently, it would rather dissemble than understand. By definition, a

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/apogee2perogee/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74781653.html

Permalink  | Share it

There are More Comments on this Thread. Click Here To See them All

Publicola   01:17 AM on 1/22/2011

159 Fans

"Evidently­, it would rather dissemble than understand­­. By definition­­, a tr0ll."

You're right, you know.

Publicola: "Evidently, it would rather dissemble than understand­. By definition­, a

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Publicola/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74781741.html

Permalink  | Share it

bornefree   01:55 AM on 1/22/2011

26 Fans

It's pretty cool where I am. Redwoods. I think climate is shifting as it does and has done since the beginning. We don't control Earth or the sun. Hang on for the ride, it's going to be a fun one!

bornefree: It's pretty cool where I am. Redwoods. I think climate

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/bornefree/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74784196.html

Permalink  | Share it

HUFFPOST SUPER USER

elspaniard   01:18 AM on 1/22/2011

19 Fans

Apparently you haven't seen L.A. on a "heavy" day.

elspaniard: Apparently you haven't seen L.A. on a "heavy" day.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/elspaniard/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74781779.html

Permalink  | Share it

sarahtonin   01:09 AM on 1/22/2011

60 Fans

That you can demonstrat­e that turmoil and climate patterns have some kind of relationsh­ip means little and is likely only some freak correlatio­n. It does not mean that one necessaril­y causes the other.

Attempts to restart the climate hysteria are starting to feel quite desperate.

sarahtonin: That you can demonstrate that turmoil and climate patterns have

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/sarahtonin/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74781206.html

Permalink  | Share it

HUFFPOST SUPER USER

Hank26   01:06 AM on 1/22/2011

130 Fans

Al Gore lived during the Roman Empire?

Hank26: Al Gore lived during the Roman Empire?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Hank26/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74780972.html

Permalink  | Share it

AirViceMarshalPark   01:19 AM on 1/22/2011

708 Fans

You did, and the retirement home just called and said that they will come pick you up wherever you are. Just don't take off your pajamas this time.

 

HUFFPOST SUPER USER

Hank26   01:06 AM on 1/22/2011

130 Fans

Al Gore lived during the Roman Empire?

Hank26: Al Gore lived during the Roman Empire?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Hank26/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74780972.html

Permalink  | Share it

AirViceMarshalPark   01:19 AM on 1/22/2011

708 Fans

You did, and the retirement home just called and said that they will come pick you up wherever you are. Just don't take off your pajamas this time.

AirViceMarshalPark: You did, and the retirement home just called and said

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/AirViceMarshalPark/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74781853.html

Permalink  | Share it

HUFFPOST SUPER USER

PartOfTheSolution   01:05 AM on 1/22/2011

176 Fans

Rome fell for the same reason this country is declining so fast that it will happen before we know it - they got fat and lazy. Also, as I learned in high school Latin class in 1970, the Romans used lead pipes in their aqueducts, which gave everyone lead poisoning.

PartOfTheSolution: Rome fell for the same reason this country is declining

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/PartOfTheSolution/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74780904.html

Permalink  | Share it

HUFFPOST SUPER USER

musewrites   01:55 AM on 1/22/2011

43 Fans

Follow

...And like Rome, we're spreading ourselves thin in other countries all in the name of "democracy­".

musewrites: ...And like Rome, we're spreading ourselves thin in other countries

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/musewrites/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74784173.html

Permalink  | Share it

bornefree   02:00 AM on 1/22/2011

26 Fans

That's what the Chinese are doing. Shipping lead all over the world via their products. It's the biggest treachery of them all.

bornefree: That's what the Chinese are doing. Shipping lead all over

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/bornefree/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74784431.html

Permalink  | Share it

Xarkonul   01:04 AM on 1/22/2011

4 Fans

Let's have a refresher course. Can anyone explain the scientific method to me?

Xarkonul: Let's have a refresher course. Can anyone explain the scientific

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Xarkonul/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74780838.html

Permalink  | Share it

Xarkonul   12:43 AM on 1/22/2011

4 Fans

I want to be sure I understand this right. AGW theorists say the earth is facing a climate catastroph­e because of increased human production of greenhouse gases, and to back this assertion up, they’re mentioning a civilizati­on that collapsed due to extreme climate changes long before humans even started producing large amounts of greenhouse gases? We actually don’t need “deniers” at all. You guys are doing a great job of demolishin­g your own case.

Xarkonul: I want to be sure I understand this right. AGW

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Xarkonul/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74779082.html

Permalink  | Share it

Publicola   12:49 AM on 1/22/2011

159 Fans

There you go just "deliberat­­ely being silly" again - right?

If not, again logic is definitely not your strong point.

Publicola: There you go just "deliberat­ely being silly" again - right?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Publicola/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74779625.html

Permalink  | Share it

Xarkonul   12:52 AM on 1/22/2011

4 Fans

Where's the flaw in my logic?

Xarkonul: Where's the flaw in my logic?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Xarkonul/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74779887.html

Permalink  | Share it

There are More Comments on this Thread. Click Here To See them All

Publicola   01:02 AM on 1/22/2011

159 Fans

Xarkonul: "Where's the flaw in my logic? "

What, you aren't "deliberat­­­ely being silly" this time?

Really?

Publicola: Xarkonul: "Where's the flaw in my logic? " What, you

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Publicola/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74780681.html

Permalink  | Share it

apogee2perogee   12:51 AM on 1/22/2011

308 Fans

So you don't understand that adding to natural pressures causing global warming with greenhouse gases can make a bad situation worse? Is this an example of that thing they call 'willful ignorance'­? Honest, I'm just curious...

apogee2perogee: So you don't understand that adding to natural pressures causing

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/apogee2perogee/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74779769.html

Permalink  | Share it

Xarkonul   01:02 AM on 1/22/2011

4 Fans

I'm too lazy to Google "wilful ignorance.­" What does that mean?

Xarkonul: I'm too lazy to Google "wilful ignorance." What does that

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Xarkonul/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74780728.html

Permalink  | Share it

There are More Comments on this Thread. Click Here To See them All

HUFFPOST SUPER USER

avantgarder   01:45 AM on 1/22/2011

11 Fans

You're missing the point of the article. It's not saying greenhouse gases do or do not contribute to climate change. It's saying that climate change in general (due to any cause -- in the case of the Romans, non-man made climate change) seems to affect the growth/dec­line of civilizati­ons.
That conclusion makes sense, as we know that extended droughts and winters do not help contribute to what makes societies grow. It's much easier to grow crops and work the land to support a society when water is abundant and vegetation can grow. We know that the Ice Age killed off species that could not adapt quickly enough.
As to what is causing the apparent change in climate these days, to suggest the impact of billions of people all over the planet burning carbon 24/7 would not affect climate on *some* level, is to rest reality in the hands of a higher power and not what science and reason bear.

avantgarder: You're missing the point of the article. It's not saying

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/avantgarder/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74783572.html

Permalink  | Share it

apogee2perogee   01:51 AM on 1/22/2011

308 Fans

Nicely said, avantgarde­r... F&F

apogee2perogee: Nicely said, avantgarder... F&F

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/apogee2perogee/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74783965.html

Permalink  | Share it

HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR

motoGpifupleez   12:39 AM on 1/22/2011

563 Fans

The Roman Empire fell because their public sector unions bled the treasury dry and they couldn't give more tax cuts to the rich, therefore jobs couldn't be created.

I saw it on the new FOX "News" 'History according to Republican­s' channel.

motoGpifupleez: The Roman Empire fell because their public sector unions bled

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/motoGpifupleez/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74778691.html

Permalink  | Share it

kwyang   12:46 AM on 1/22/2011

11 Fans

No no, you got it all wrong, it was because of sword control laws combined with CaesarCare­. Not being allowed to whip Plebs to death is socialism!

kwyang: No no, you got it all wrong, it was because

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/kwyang/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74779337.html

Permalink  | Share it

Xarkonul   01:06 AM on 1/22/2011

4 Fans

I don't know why the Roman Empire collapsed, but I can guarantee you it wasn't because of manmade global warming.

Xarkonul: I don't know why the Roman Empire collapsed, but I

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Xarkonul/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74780957.html

Permalink  | Share it

Xarkonul   12:34 AM on 1/22/2011

4 Fans

You guys are pressing an argument that defeats your basic theory. This is good stuff. Maybe I should just sit back and watch the fun.

Xarkonul: You guys are pressing an argument that defeats your basic

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Xarkonul/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74778335.html

Permalink  | Share it

Publicola   12:37 AM on 1/22/2011

159 Fans

Xarkonul: "You guys are pressing an argument that defeats your basic theory."

There you go "deliberat­ely being silly" again.. right?

If not, again logic isn't your strong point, is it.

Publicola: Xarkonul: "You guys are pressing an argument that defeats your

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Publicola/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74778529.html

Permalink  | Share it

jumpingjackflash   12:41 AM on 1/22/2011

19 Fans

Hello!! McFly!!! Pay attention. No matter how they tried to spin it at the end of this story, it shows that climate change is a natural event and outside of man's control.

jumpingjackflash: Hello!! McFly!!! Pay attention. No matter how they tried to

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/jumpingjackflash/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74778937.html

Permalink  | Share it

There are More Comments on this Thread. Click Here To See them All

Xarkonul   12:44 AM on 1/22/2011

4 Fans

If I have offended you with my inferior intellect, I humbly apologize.

Xarkonul: If I have offended you with my inferior intellect, I

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Xarkonul/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74779177.html

Permalink  | Share it

There are More Comments on this Thread. Click Here To See them All

Publicola   12:45 AM on 1/22/2011

159 Fans

jumpingjac­kflash: "No matter how they tried to spin it at the end of this story, it shows that climate change is a natural event and outside of man's control."

Q: Why can't science deniers comprehend the very simple concept of multiple causality?

A: Because they are science deniers, of course.

Publicola: jumpingjackflash: "No matter how they tried to spin it at

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Publicola/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74779221.html

Permalink  | Share it

There are More Comments on this Thread. Click Here To See them All

apogee2perogee   12:41 AM on 1/22/2011

308 Fans

If natural global warming can challenge societies, then a sped-up global warming accelerate­d by higher greenhouse gas levels could challenge the ecosystems and food webs. The historical events and our possible future are milestones along a road repeated..­..but now at a higher speed. If the ecosystems and food webs crash, because they can't cope fast enough, we're done. Anthropoge­nic global warming has added heating and a new variable in the system.

apogee2perogee: If natural global warming can challenge societies, then a sped-up

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/apogee2perogee/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74778953.html

Permalink  | Share it

hayness   01:14 AM on 1/22/2011

57 Fans

Climate change has occurred in the past due to natural causes. I think we all know that.

That does not preclude (look it up) the possibilit­y that human activities are contributi­ng to the current episode of global warming.

hayness: Climate change has occurred in the past due to natural

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/hayness/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74781503.html

Permalink  | Share it

jumpingjackflash   12:33 AM on 1/22/2011

19 Fans

It was the large SUV chariots that caused the problem

jumpingjackflash: It was the large SUV chariots that caused the problem

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/jumpingjackflash/fall-of-rome-climate-change_n_810419_74778208.html

Permalink  | Share it

roofjoist