Didn't a front page thread on this topic (unless you count oil spill discussions), and I wanted to give kudos on the clever prop work done in this video even if the speechifying wasn't as good.

Also, this came out recently:

7/17/2010 9:57:09 PM

it's summer again, time for this to be in the news again i guess

7/17/2010 10:32:39 PM

yeah basically, its fake in the winter (b/c extreme weather only counts as climate change if its in the hot direction), hyper-real in the summer (b/c a good story matters more than good reporting on science), such is life

7/17/2010 10:38:27 PM

your criticizing the winter stuff when an ice sculpture in summer was used to illustrate climate change? Your video is even called "Ice sculpture illustrates climate change." What a joke, "HEY GUYS, ICE MELTS IN THE SUMMER"

7/17/2010 10:52:58 PM

Did you watch the video?

It's supposed to be like an hourglass measuring time as the opportunity to get on top of man-made climate change melts away.

Some idiot at CNN screwed up the video title.

7/17/2010 10:57:18 PM

Quote :

"your criticizing the winter stuff when an ice sculpture in summer was used to illustrate climate change? Your video is even called "Ice sculpture illustrates climate change." What a joke, "HEY GUYS, ICE MELTS IN THE SUMMER""

Yes, and there is absolutely no contradiction in giving kudos to prop-work that grabs some earned media and still thinking the winter-fake/summer-real reporting is idiotic, even if you do use a lot of caps.

7/17/2010 10:57:34 PM

http://thewolfweb.com/message_topic.aspx?topic=549171&page=47

7/18/2010 12:37:59 AM

^Bumping an old thread that had fallen off the front page? Fine by me if you want two threads running on the related topics (but not exact same topic) of climate change & global warming.

grabbing from some random site
http://www.grinningplanet.com/2007/01-02/global-warming-vs-climate-change.htm

Quote :

"GLOBAL WARMING AND CLIMATE CHANGE Definitions Global Warming — An overall warming of the planet, based on average temperature over the entire surface. Climate Change — Changes in regional climate characteristics, including temperature, humidity, rainfall, wind, and severe weather events. Let's explore the differences between these two concepts in more detail."

Or if you prefer:

http://www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/features/climate_by_any_other_name.html

Quote :

" Definitions Global warming: the increase in Earth’s average surface temperature due to rising levels of greenhouse gases. Climate change: a long-term change in the Earth’s climate, or of a region on Earth. "

[Edited on July 18, 2010 at 1:22 AM. Reason : .]

7/18/2010 1:22:04 AM

the two topics are linked and both are discussed under the other thread. and it couldn't have fallen off the front page long, the last post was less than 6 days ago.

But if there is a lot of info coming out on regional humidity and whatever that it deserves a seperate thread, thats cool.

I just made the other thread to avoid a new thread being created everytime a new piece of climate controversy erupted (as the case was before). *shrug* but so goes the way of the Soap Box.

[Edited on July 18, 2010 at 2:01 AM. Reason : ``]

7/18/2010 1:48:18 AM

oh, didn't realize you had started thread, i'll back off, we can let this thread go

7/18/2010 2:04:15 AM

message_topic.aspx?topic=438755

7/18/2010 2:23:24 AM

oh snap, hooks w/ the even older/longer thread!

7/18/2010 2:28:02 AM

at Socks``, too!

7/18/2010 2:31:11 AM

so which thread is king out of all 3 of which have slightly different but related topic focuses?

the oldest/longest one that had fallen off the front page the farthest that has now been bumped back to the front page as a response to this thread (hooksaw)

the middle age/length one that had fallen off the front page but not by much that has now been bumped back to front page as a response to this thread (socks)

the new/short one that was the only one on the front page when it was created which contains new content on "climategate" (supplanter)

these are mad times that we're living in. i propose pon farr to settle this (also known as claw-plach)

7/18/2010 5:03:05 AM

imagine that, Supplanter making a thread that wasn't needed because there were other recent threads discussing the very same topic!

7/18/2010 4:11:20 PM

imagine that, burros being an ass in the soapbox [pun intended]

and if there are no threads on the topic on the front page, i consider it fair game

[Edited on July 18, 2010 at 4:20 PM. Reason : .]

7/18/2010 4:20:03 PM

if only we had a search function...

7/18/2010 4:29:12 PM

then socks might have found hooks thread and never produced his own 47 page thread that no body was interested in and is a thread that i'm sure you called out for being repetitive, alas so no such function seems to exist

(all this is in jest at this point, i already offered to back off, i don't care which of the older threads takes over, but at this point i'm still going to go tit for tat on pointless responses in this thread)

[Edited on July 18, 2010 at 4:35 PM. Reason : .]

7/18/2010 4:33:21 PM

actually, I think I did bitch about the making of Socks`` thread, lol

7/18/2010 6:08:06 PM

I guess you're going to call out the Tea Party vs NAACP thread here:
http://www.thewolfweb.com/message_topic.aspx?topic=598798

for being redundant for the Tea Party vs NAACP thread here:

http://www.thewolfweb.com/message_topic.aspx?topic=598428
that was still on the front page, even near the top

7/18/2010 6:09:41 PM

is there really a need to call out HOOPS MALONE? i mean, really...

7/18/2010 6:11:56 PM

but you're the only one who can stop him! you are our last hope.

7/18/2010 6:19:25 PM

I’m guessing you’re going to call people for having a President Obama Credibility & President Obama Flip-Flops threads both on the front page too?

I’m guessing you’re upset with Earthdogg for starting the bank bill thread when there was already a Wall Street reform thread & a Consumer Protect Agency thread too?

I mean, you wouldn’t complain just b/c its me who made the thread, even though I did it when there was no similar topic on the front page, would you?

[Edited on July 18, 2010 at 7:26 PM. Reason : .]

7/18/2010 7:23:26 PM

nah, those are two different threads

7/18/2010 7:26:23 PM

Global warming indirectly causes global climate change.

7/19/2010 10:03:32 PM

Stupid threads indirectly cause troll posts.

7/20/2010 2:17:16 AM

If by climate change you mean making the climate warmer, then yes, global warming does do that. Otherwise, you are merely attempting to move the goalpost.

7/20/2010 2:18:23 AM

I did not say directly. Do you know what an indirect effect is? You pretend to be retarded just to push your capitalist agenda.

Global warming warms the planet slightly.

Slight warming of the planet melts glacial ice.

Melting of glacial ice causes changes in ocean salinities and temperatures

Changes in ocean salinities and temperatures cause changes in climate-driving ocean currents

Each change causes a subtle domino effect "standing wave" similar to those noticed in el nino and la nina.

Get some education on the subject and holla at me later.

7/20/2010 2:23:48 AM

Done. the whole salinity thing had been thoroughly discredited long before the movie came out. More to the point, even if scientists believed it was possible, there is no evidence that it is occurring, so you are double fail.

7/20/2010 2:28:00 AM

It doesn't have to be salinity (even though you're wrong) The currents are both driven by temperature and salinity. Water surface temperatures have changed in many areas. The deep ocean currents which would have a broader impact on climate are what have not been proven to be changing.

[Edited on July 20, 2010 at 2:50 AM. Reason : Its a mixture of density and convection currents]

7/20/2010 2:49:49 AM

Lonesnark, ignore the troll. Let this unneeded thread die.

7/20/2010 1:34:54 PM

I'm gonna side NASA on this one.

http://climate.nasa.gov/evidence/

7/20/2010 4:47:56 PM

fyi, there is a 47 page thread and a 62 page thread on the front page, and neither of them have embedded audio either

this thread is completely unnecessary

7/20/2010 4:52:04 PM

^I've already pointed out several instances of multiple threads on the same topic on the front page

but this thread, unlike some of the others, was created when there were no similar topics on the front page (rather, the authors of the old threads saw this was one, bumped their threads that had fallen away, and said pay more attention to me please)

And as I've stated, I have no problem with that, which is why I was willing to embed a stupid sound into this one. But this thread was started when no other threads like it were on top, and it gets called out.

But the 2 tea party vs naacp threads, or 2 anti obama threads, or 3 wall street reform related threads, those all get to coexist without burros calling them out.


I'm fine with letting this thread not be the main thread since the old authors want to be back in the spot light, but I'm not cool with any implication that this thread was somehow unfair to them, when the other thread multiples get to exist even when they are already on the front page together.

7/20/2010 4:59:24 PM

i dont think this thread is 'unfair' to anyone, but one of the few topics I follow in TSB is climate change, so I was well aware that there are other threads on the topic that have been going on for literally years, and have the advantage over this one of already having pages and pages and pages of links, studies, etc

7/20/2010 5:03:57 PM

who gives a shit if there was another thread. stop being boy scouts and just ignore it if you dont want to discuss it.

and if you're going to discuss it, try not to argue about something you have absolutely no schooling on...

7/20/2010 8:17:59 PM

mambagrl:

Quote :

"try not to argue about something you have absolutely no schooling on..."

what

7/20/2010 9:15:09 PM

Quote :

"who gives a shit if there was another thread."

people who would rather discuss a topic in a 40+ or 60+ page thread, with years of comments/data/info, than a brand new thread that is talking about the same topic...ie, messageboard etiquette

Supplanter doesn't have an issue with this and he created the thread, why do you have an issue?

7/20/2010 10:14:09 PM

global warming is not the same topic and the other thread is about a movie. whatever though i don't care. i just care that you guys go all up in arms over silly shit.

7/20/2010 10:35:45 PM

lol those 2 other threads are dying again & this ones still here

maybe i should embed more sounds

7/21/2010 8:12:51 PM

http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/07/23/senate.climate.change.bill/index.html?iref=allsearch

Quote :

"Senate's top Democrat to introduce scaled-down energy bill "Many of us want to do a thorough, comprehensive bill that creates jobs, breaks our addiction to foreign oil and curbs pollution," Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid told reporters Thursday. "Unfortunately, this time we don't have a single Republican to work with in achieving this goal." Reid had promised to bring a bill to the Senate floor by the August recess. The Nevada Democrat said he will put four requirements in the new bill: • Holding BP accountable to "ensure that they clean up their mess" in the Gulf of Mexico and to deal with "things like this that happen in the future." • Lessening the country's dependence on foreign oil by investing in the manufacturing of natural gas vehicles -- mainly big trucks. • Adding an energy efficiency program that he said creates jobs and lowers consumers' energy costs. • Putting money back into the land and water conservation fund. Reid said all four of the requirements have bipartisan support. But most notably absent from Reid's scaled-down bill? The so-called cap-and-trade provision. Climate change legislation stalled in the Senate after the House of Representatives passed its own energy bill last year. The House plan included a cap-and-trade system in which a price is set for greenhouse gas emissions, such as carbon dioxide, and polluters can obtain and trade credits for emissions over a set threshold. Republicans are against such a plan. Oil and coal producers also oppose a cap-and-trade system, but supporters say it is the best way to start to reduce the nation's dependence on fossil fuels."

A scaled down ruined bill for a ruined a thread

[Edited on July 23, 2010 at 11:19 PM. Reason : .]

7/23/2010 11:19:09 PM

The fewer things an "energy bill" has, the better.

7/23/2010 11:42:45 PM

So are you saying this small bill is a good bill? Or do you oppose all efforts? Or, what would you like to see in the bill?

7/23/2010 11:50:38 PM

All the energy bills needs to say is: We're making fusion technology our Apollo Project. America #1!

7/24/2010 5:29:24 AM

I think they finally learned their lesson that people only believe in climate change when its hot.

Just read the site for the next UN Climate Change convention:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_United_Nations_Climate_Change_Conference

Quote :

"The 2010 United Nations Climate Change Conference will be held in Cancún, Mexico"

Probably a better choice than Copenhagen.

7/24/2010 4:34:39 PM

7/24/2010 8:48:34 PM

^^ people who think climate change is warming

7/24/2010 10:14:25 PM

^agreed

7/24/2010 11:30:17 PM

nearly on page 2, might as well get it there, and see if it dies naturally with a non-sound page

7/25/2010 4:26:55 AM

so close

7/25/2010 4:27:31 AM