Guidelines for posting on bangordailynews.com

The Bangor Daily News encourages comments about stories, but you must follow our terms of service.

In brief:

1. Keep it civil and stay on topic
2. No vulgarity, racial slurs, name-calling or personal attacks.
3. People who harass others or joke about tragedies will be blocked.

The primary rule here is pretty simple: Treat others with the same respect you'd want for yourself. Here are some guidelines (see more):

It should be noted this is not a comprehensive list.

• Don't insult one another or the subjects of BDN stories. You may be ticked off at what someone did or said, but you can explain that without resorting to name-calling or obscenity. Remember that young people are on this site too.
• That nasty line that makes your buddies go "haw, haw"? You're better than that.
• Comments should be your own work, not copied and pasted from elsewhere, though brief quoted passages to make your point are fine. And please don't use all capital letters. There's no need to shout.
• Stay focused on the issue in the article. Off-topic posts will be deleted.
• This isn't a forum to chat about your personal life.
• Some ideas — the fate of the earth, abortion, gun control, the nature of God — aren't going to be resolved in a reader forum, so no need to get frustrated if others don't see your point of view. State your position once and leave it at that.
• If you mouse over each comment you will see a "Flag" button. Please use it if you feel comments on the site are out of line. Quite often, we won't see a comment until it's reported.
• Questions about why a comment was — or wasn't — deleted? E-mail us at web@bangordailynews.com and let us know your username and where you posted or saw the comment.

That's about it: Stick to writing about the stories; be civil; be kind; enlighten your neighbors. And we'll keep moderating posts to try to ensure everyone meets those standards.

• kcjonez

  Like the weathah ’round heah?   

  Wait a minute.  

• Anonymous

  Hang tight readers, BDN has a problem mouthing the words Climate Change and Global Warming.
  BDN relies on car ads to keep its doors open. We now know cars are a primary source for Global Warming.

  the Bangor Daily News does to our minds what corporations have done to the land.
  we now think like New York City looks.

  see http://www.heatisonline.org

  http://thinkprogress.org/romm/issue/

• Hopier and Changier This Time

  3, 2, 1…cue the global warming Gore worshippers…

• Anonymous

  I’ll worship him if it will stay like this for the next four months. 

• Anonymous

  97% of scientists think global warming is primarily human-caused.  It is nothing but a lesson in human psychology that around 50% of Americans stubbornly cling to the idea that it’s a hoax.  Meanwhile glaciers melt, ecosystems shift northward, and diasters intensify.

  http://content.usatoday.com/communities/sciencefair/post/2010/06/scientists-overwhelmingly-believe-in-man-made-climate-change/1
   

• Anonymous

  Remember when people thought that earth was flat? Remember when people thought that the earth was the center of the universe (geocentric)? Remember when people thought that human caused global warming was a lie?  Oh, wait…….

• http://pulse.yahoo.com/_GTKGMUHLI6XEPPSCZHIQ7HODWE Duckman

  I’m torn, heating oil vs. ice fishing. More of one results in more of the other.

• Anonymous

  then why are you on its pages?  from the outset your comment is hypocritical. 

• Anonymous

  for the last 2 days the weather in Maine has been warmer than in Spring tx

• Anonymous

  Gee, I thought it was only the AGW deniers who considered climate change a religious issue.

  And, check the article.  No one is claiming that this quirk was casued by AGW.  Then again, AGW is likely to produce more weather extremes both in temps (warm or cool) and precipitation.  More like the result of the huge dip in the jet stream in the central part of the continent, it even dips down into Mexico.

• Anonymous

  And a lot of other places, check the map.  Also, note 4″ of snow in Memphis.

• Anonymous

  Your point?  You and one other poster are the only ones mentioning climate change and AGW.  Check my comment to the other poster.

• Anonymous

  Maybe the Midwest, South, and Southeast have been more “sinful” recently than righteous Maine?

• Anonymous

  You hit the nail on the head…..

• Anonymous

  Nice….

• Anonymous

  People in this country HATE taking responsibility for anything…….so this is nothing new.

  I have no problem admitting that I am 1 of billions that are slowly destroying the Earth.  I don’t know why people can’t just admit it….???

• Anonymous

  Cue those that stick their head in the sand………

• Anonymous

  LOL………+1

• PabMainer

  Finally something that Maine is #1 for that is not related to age, weight, diet, jobs, welfare……way to go Maine!

• Anonymous

  At one time, 97% of scientists insisted that the Earth was the center of the universe.

  Yes, there’s a psychology lesson in there, but not the one you think.

• Anonymous

  We’ve been warming up since the last Ice Age.  Global warming is not a hoax.  Man has only kept accurate weather statistics for the last 100 years.

• Anonymous

  It was not the scientists who thought the earth was the center of the universe, but Catholic theologians before Luther and the Reformation. Scientists, such as they were, were tortured, burned at the stake, and/or forced to recant. Any one who wanted to do any kind of research had to be careful not to allow the church or even their neighbors to see their research.
  Galileo (1564-1642) was one of the lucky ones. He was sentenced to house arrest around 1633 for having supported Copernicus’ theory of the sun as the center. This had been declared as a heretical philosophy by the Catholic Church in 1616. His biography makes interesting reading.

• Anonymous

  People don’t want to believe it because they, all of us will, have to change some of our life habits. 

  People also believe these events are caused by sunspots or aliens from outer space or that they’re just  “natural” because the oil and coal industries spend tens of millions every year to convince people that there’s nothing to worry about. 

   They use spokespeople like Rush Limbaugh, et al……and Fox “news” parrots that theme because they’re pretty much owned by heavy oil-using industries.

  It’s too bad because every day we keep burning more and more oil and coal and gas, we’re heating up the earth.  The carbon dioxide we create now will stay in the upper atmosphere for at least 100 years, keeping the sun’s heat in, instead of being a thin enough layer to let the heat out.  It’s cumulative, so what we do now counts – a lot.

  The weird and extreme weather events we’ve been seeing the past decade or so are not isolated events.  We, humans, are heating up the earth to our extinction point, if we do not slow down a lot and then stop burning fossil fuels.

  It can be done, but we must begin – and individual acts will help but will not do it.  Industry has to sign on as a first step.

• Anonymous

  Another display of ignorance. Please continue as it is very entertaining.

• Anonymous

  Gore?  You’ll see gore aplenty if we keep heating up the earth. 

  Climate change is already causing millions to leave their homes which are getting flooded due to ocean’s rising (ice melting in Arctic and glaciers, too) or because of drought.

  These millions are moving to where they believe there will be food and safety, but are being shunned by countries who don’t want responsibility for them.

  We here in America think we’re immune from trouble and strife – - do not fool yourself, we are not, and we will see plenty of strife if we do nothing to stop heating up earth now.

• Anonymous

  Not even close to the truth.  Ice cores have told the real story – - actual, genuine science, as opposed to oil and coal industry lies.

• http://michigal.net Sue

  Aren’t you saying the exact same thing with your two statements? You say global warming is a hoax, right after pontificating that we’ve been warming up since the last ice age.

  You’re contradicting (or maybe agreeing) with yourself.

• Anonymous

  It is the (relatively) rapid increase of warming since the beginning of the industrial revolution around 1800, and more specifically since the extensive use of oil since 1900, that is the concern. While we have only been keeping records for 100+- years we can trace changes in temperature over 1000s of years by trees, fossils, ice at the poles, etc.
  Around 1991 predictions were made based on then current research into global warming as to what the average world temperature would be by 2011 and the predictions came even closer than expected. Do some research from sources not supported by the oil and energy industry.

• Anonymous

  Is global warming happening; Yes, but much like thousands of years before, it will also start cooling
  Is global warming caused by man; Yes, but not to the degree that the Church of Gore wants us to believe
  Should we bow to the treehuggers doctrine of radical change; Oh Hell No, most every one has changed their lifestyles in one way or another, but a forced government mandate will make people resist more and more

• Anonymous

  See my post above concerning the source of the “earth is flat” and “earth is center of the universe”. It was declared heretical by the Catholic Church in 1616 to state the sun was the center of the universe. People were forced to agree or be tortured and killed by the church, not scientists.

• Anonymous

  Has anyone ever heard of any theory that could explain this ? 

• Smell Ya Later Occutards!

  Worship me! I need $$ for my jets and SUV’s!

• Anonymous

  let it all melt…..warm weather please stay FOREVER!!!!

• Anonymous

  As we know, and rationally…..it is not  a hoax!!

• Anonymous

  You nailed it , especially with your first comment.

• Anonymous

  Thank you Sue.  I didn’t finish my sentence correctly.

• Anonymous

  old news, wait until another snow storm comes into town…

• Anonymous

  Actually, it was the scientists just as much as the Church. Ptolemaeus was an astronomer in the 2nd century AD and wrote a book which explained in great detail how the Sun and planets revolved around the Earth. Totally wrong, of course, but nevertheless  for one thousand years scientists viewed it as the authoritative truth. 

  When Copernicus introduced his heliocentric theory, few astronomers accepted it – not just due to pressure from the Church, but due to scientific objections (they analyzed the data and the numbers seemed to work better with the Earth in the center).

• pbmann

  We could wait for a snowstorm so the climate-change deniers can all spout how it snowed so the world can’t possibly be warming.

• Anonymous

  Also, I never have seen mentioned about how much does each bomb that goes off contribute to this problem …………………….. just wondering !!!

• Anonymous

  Scientific study has improved quite a bit since then, wouldn’t you say?  How’s your computer and internet connection working for you?  

  Actually, the “father” of the scientific method was Francis Bacon, who died in 1626.  Before that, there weren’t really scientists  in the sense of using the stringent methods used today, though the actual definition of “scientist” is vague.

• Anonymous

  I get a laugh out of that every time.  They cannot even see the trending and that things don’t proceed consistently. Oh well….

• Anonymous

  In other news, it is 0 degrees in Fairbanks, AK. About 6 degrees warmer for the average low…

• Anonymous

  in all fairness, go to the comment section of the “October Snow storm” article to see all the science deniers claiming victory over the tree huggers.

  hard to solve problems together when all it takes is a warm or cold breeze to start the name calling and finger pointing. 

  (im not calling you a name caller, i’m just reflecting on the snow storm comments)

• Anonymous

  from the article:  “The normal high for late November is 32 degrees with a low of 18.”
  ***************************************************
  wrong.  the normal high for late November is 42 degrees.

• Smell Ya Later Occutards!

  Real world temperature data shows that the warming of the earth’s average
  temperature that started in the mid 1970s stopped near the turn of the
  millennium.

• Anonymous

  global whining

• Anonymous

  gotta love the hipocracy, remember the big summit last year when each member took their own jet and their own limo?

  even though theyre full of it, they should lead by example, fly commercial air, and take a bus from the airport to the conference center.

• Anonymous

  Can just imagine your source.

• Anonymous

  I think that some people would rather believe bronze age goat herders then modern day scientist..unless of course it benefits them.

• Anonymous

  Sure, science progresses, but human psychology doesn’t change much. The geocentrists interpreted the available data to fit their preconceived notions, and reached the wrong conclusions.  Many parallels to what we are seeing today, including the same counterproductive “the science is settled”, “there can be no questions” attitudes. 

• Anonymous

  Again your analogy fails because the scientific method wasn’t used then, and it is now.  The scientific method takes into account the kinds of failings you bring up. Multiple verifications are part of the process. Any verified failure of a valid hypothesis discredits the theory.  Plus, you’ve got a global community of scientists, transcending any single country, studying this, and it has taken them quite a while, many years of careful analysis, to reach the consensus they have attained.

  Unless it’s a global conspiracy of vast international proportion, for dubious purposes, the science is powerful and sound.

  It’s not a crazy theory.  CO2 and other gases trap heat.  We have released huge amounts of these into the atmosphere.  The math, chemical quantities, computer models and much more have been checked by experts all over the world.  The computer models in place are mapping what is happening now.  I emphasize:  the theories fit what is unfolding around us. They predict well.

  I can understand the science of it, on a basic level, and so can you.  You get what they are saying, don’t you?

  I don’t believe this at all, but let’s suppose the scientists are wrong.  It is still in our best interests to start acting like they are right–because if they are right, we can prevent some serious damage by curtailing emissions.  Even if you think there is a 90% you are right and I am wrong, that 10% is enough error to start taking precautions.  It’s a matter of weighing what will be lost vs. probabilities.  Even a low probability of massive ongoing catastrophes is reason to act.

  Let me end this post by pointing out that Big Oil has put half a billion dollars into propaganda to keep people from believing human-caused warming:

  http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/21/us/politics/21climate.html?_r=1&src=me&ref=homepage

• Anonymous

  I get what you’re saying and respect your position. But I think it illustrates another interesting aspect of human psychology – the “this time it’s different” attitude. 

  A few years ago we saw similar confidence in the financial markets – yes, there may have been crashes in the past, but we have much better systems now (designed by very smart people, multiple safety layers, many years of careful analysis, etc…). 

  Regarding prevention: to an extent, I agree regarding weighting what will be lost vs. probabilities, although it’s also questionable whether a modest rise in temperatures (as predicted by models) would be particularly catastrophic. And, of course, you also have to weigh what the “prevention” will cost and what are the chances of it succeeding.

• chris reid

  LOL… I’ve lived in Champaign,Ill, Scottsdale,, Worcester,Ma and Cleveland.. Every place says the same(“don’t like the weather wait…”)  The people in Scottsdale were all from Maine, Champaign,Worcester or Cleveland type places and were just having flashbacks.

• Anonymous

  actually global warming

• Anonymous

  Science says your not exactly right. What happens when fossil fuels run out. The only way we can move away from Fossil fuels is by mandate or if somethign horrible happens.  

• Smell Ya Later Occutards!

  NASA satellite data from the years 2000 through 2011 show the Earth’s atmosphere is allowing far more heat to be released into space than alarmist computer models have predicted.

• Anonymous

  looks like another Gore disciple…

• Anonymous

  The use of the term “scientific” to describe the endeavors of those before Galileo is debatable. Many would argue they were philosophers only. It was not until the invention of the telescope around 1608 that actual observations of planet and star movement could be determined. While mathematics was well developed, science was not much better than philosophy.
  The heliocentric view kept running into problems in accounting for all stellar movement and repeatedly required adding more spheres.

• Anonymous

  define “science”… there is more than enough junk science out there to “prove” just about anything. I challenge you to find irrefutable GW evidence that was 1) not influenced by liberal money 2)studied at a college/university that does not accept funding from liberal sources 3)produced by someone who is politically neutral.

  good luck.

• Anonymous

  Some of the consequences of taking action to reduce global warming now would be cleaner air and water, less dangerous chemicals in our food and environment. While I am sure there are those who do not care if their water is contaminated or the ground their kids play on contains high levels of lead, arsenic, mercury, etc. most people would benefit from reduced emissions of all chemicals in production processes.

• Anonymous

  The “available data” of that time was strictly from naked eye observation, hardly what we would consider scientific today.

• Anonymous

  I am not going get drawn into science debate based on Al-Almighty-Gore’s book of science, but your valid point about our finite energy resources does need to be addressed. One of our greatest losses in energy is caving in to treehuggers when they want to remove dams and block new wind power research. Between the NIMBY’s & treehuggers, we are fighting an uphill battle on new coal technology, further research into next generation solar cell development and more.

  Regretfully, in the end, a lot of progress will suffer because of politics, and surprisingly enough, the objections will come from the greenies.

• Anonymous

  You do know Gore is not the only one behind it right? Its Science plain and simple that is what I listen too.

• Smell Ya Later Occutards!

  Why does Moochelle fly in a separate plane 4 hours ahead of Ding Dong when they go on vacation?

• Anonymous

  ALots of college accept funding from liberal sources, also I believe in science. I am an educated person. The science is there. Also what about the man that was a huge climate change denier, did a study funded by Koch brothers and then completely changed his tune. Now it’s your turn to find evidence that refutes climate change that was 1. Not influenced by oil industry or conservative money 2. Studied at a university that did not accept conservative money. 3. Politically neutral
  .

  Good Luck

• Anonymous

  What objections? Coal Technology does not solve anything, just delays it.

• Anonymous

  We wonder why our education system is as bad as it is. We have people that will deny science. Its was a big deal that a republican candiate actually believe in evolution. People even said pual could not be elected as a republican because he said he believed in evolution, a sound sciencetific theory.

• Anonymous

  Should we insult the oceanic atmospheric climate system faster than we understand it?

  For profit?

  That is the question.

  I await yout answer.

• Anonymous

  Why is it that those of you who do not read or investigate global warming only know the name Gore. FYI; Al Gore speaks often to warn about the consequences of global warming. He is not a researcher or scientist. He is a spokesman only. Shut off Faux News and use that computer in front of you to do some independent research  for information from reliable sources. I suggest the National Academy  of Scientists to start. You might also look at the Berkeley Earth Surface Temperature Study, funded in part by your masters the Koch brothers. They got a surprise when they paid for real research.

• Anonymous

  You are at liberty to disprove any scientific assessment of climate, climate change, and its causes.

  In other words, a scientific discussion.

  Science, at heart, is refutable (unlike religion).

  Yet you call for “irrefutable” evidence with respect to “GW.”

  Your points that you label as 1), 2), 3) are all ad hominem.

• Anonymous

  It is cold here in Salta, Argentina this evening.

• Anonymous

  Dodging climate questions by citing Al Gore is the ultimate ad hominem argument.

• Anonymous

  My point exactly… If you do not want to do anything, then this entire discussion is useless.
  Technologies exist, that have been put into use and that have proven to reduce NO2 & SO2, but many narrow-minded self-professed experts say it cant be done,,, well it has worked and needs to be implemented so efficiency, lower emissions and other technologies can be further developed.

  But as you said, just delays it, then why dont we just quit now and not bother.

• Anonymous

  Again, you don’t prove a thing but repeat the cliche. I guess you didn’t bother to read 1421 about how the Chinese sailed home, north of Greenland and Russia. Talk about global warming. Remember in the early ’70′s the same elite group was predicting another ice age. And then they created the fabled and false hockey stick correlation that was bogus. The science here, of connecting the dots, is really scammed. But not to worry, you’ve bought into another bogus explanation, like your rants on Wall Street, forgetting the huge part played by Barney Frank and co.

• Anonymous

  I accept your challenge; Berkeley Earth Surface Temperature Study, funded by the oil billionaires the Koch brothers and led by a global warming denier. They got a surprise when the results of their research not only confirmed previous studies but actually indicated warming is occurring faster than previous studies indicated. Look it up.

• Anonymous

  I hear what you’re saying, but I disagree with the analogies you draw to Ptolemy and (later) financial confidence in markets. 

  The significant difference is that the scientific method is an incredibly accurate and powerful form of reasoning–it has brought us cars and laptops and so on–and it has built-in safeguards.  Once these safeguards are tested by an entire global community of scientists (the tests varied, and then checked and re-checked over and over, the statistical analysis done), and also the models accurate predict, the chance that global warming is not human caused is, rationally, very very low.

  It then comes down to trusting the scientists or Rush Limbaugh.  And I don’t see how a global conspiracy could be organized to enact a “hoax.”  I don’t see how all the scientists in all places could be victims of group-think.

  Also, global warming is very understandable.  You understand the model of CO2 gases, and so do I.  It makes sense and the effects are taking place.

  So, I’ll leave it at that.  Undecided readers can decide on my case and yours. Thanks for the rational and intelligent debate.

• Anonymous

  Entire island countries are in jeopardy.  I believe at least one island has sunk.  And on and on.  I’m out of time here!

• Anonymous

  At least we can save on heating costs if temperatures stay like this :)  

• Anonymous

  I guess you haven’t seen the latest emails yet.

• Anonymous

  At least we dont have to worry about heating costs with these Temperatures 

• Anonymous

  Berkley? as in Univ. California Berkley? re-read point 2

• Anonymous

  no, you first. you still have not proven anything. You found one person who denies CC who changed his mind. Some guy changing his mind does not constitute scientific proof.

• Anonymous

  and BTW, your point 2 is moot. conservative colleges dont waste time studying CC anyway.

• http://pulse.yahoo.com/_BE5K4BY6CK2TFMMTWIM5B22ZOE David

  I love it! The longer we can hold off damned winter the better!

• Anonymous

  already did, all you ask is find one

• Anonymous

  Good point, ewersmith – all the wars we taxpayers had no say about are using up much of the world’s finite supply of oil, metals, and other natural resources, not to mention dead Americans, Iraqis, Afghanis, Pakistanis, and all the other countries we’re invading or about to invade – why?

  The military-industrial complex that Eisenhower warned us about rakes in billions while stealing other countries’ resources – and why?

  Yes, we need a society where we, the people, make the decisions that affect our lives.  Real Democracy.  That was the goal of the American Revolution, and it’s still the goal of Americans and people everywhere. 

• Anonymous

  I think they call it secutity.  As in it is harder to guess which plane if they are seperate.

• Anonymous

  I may have to pack up and move again to beat the heat. I wonder if my GPS can get me to the north pole?

• Anonymous

  I think this unusual warming in Maine is being caused by too many bean suppers.  With the coming hard times and more than usual public bean suppers you can expect warmer than usual winters.

• Anonymous

  An active barometer of how dumb the Maine hacks are regarding Global Warming and Climate Change
  is Maine now has a Tropical Disease called West Nile Virus.OWS is the canary in the cage, eh?

• Anonymous

  The problem with people with your attitude and ignorance is that you label  anything which disagrees with your world view as liberal and dismiss it without actually looking at it. You like to use that word ‘liberal’ for anything you do not understand. It is called “the blissful ignorance syndrome”, characterized by those who know little about a subject and resist any attempt to learn about it. Show me a peer reviewed study which disproves global warming and has not been refuted.
  No doubt you do not believe cigarettes cause cancer because the research was not conducted by the tobacco companies

• Anonymous

  The hockey stick graph has in fact been proven to be accurate. Of course Faux Snooze won’t broadcast the relevant studies.

• Anonymous

  I’m clinging to my guns and the FACT that global warming is a hoax. Imagine how gullible people are when you had people paying for carbon offsets or whatever the heck that ridiculous scam was.
  This global warm nonsense is all about money…period. Go back and watch that stupid movie Gore put out, I didn’t waste my money to see that garbage, just needed to see a few clips to see it was full of lies. Let me tell you how criminal the Gore phenomenon was…he won the Nobel peace prize by beating out some woman who during WWII risked her life to save hundreds of children from gas chambers an accomplishment that to this day is beyond amazing with courage greater than any human alive today, but no, let’s give it to that hack Gore.

• Anonymous

   Man plans, God laughs.

• Smell Ya Later Occutards!

  http://bangordailynews.com/2011/11/30/news/world-news/hurricane-season-ends-without-%e2%80%98major%e2%80%99-us-storm/?ref=latest

  Six years without a hurricane making landfall in the USA. Huh…

• Anonymous

  You have confused short term vs long term signs of global warming. Look online for the article “How Can It Be Warming When It’s (Almost) Always Cooling”. It is the best explanation I have seen so far of why people have become confused.

• Anonymous

  I certainly hope your source for this information is not Gavin Menzies’ book ’1421; The Year China Discovered America’ which is loaded with flaws.

• Anonymous

  Thats the way the weather goes  .

• http://pulse.yahoo.com/_7T3YNF6MG3FPEAVTFIJC44VQUI Dlbrt

  And Denial is a River in Egypt!

• Anonymous

  All true. And the world is flat. I have been many places in the world and when I look around it is always flat never round. And the stars and sun go around the earth. If the earth was turning when I dropped a ball it would not hit at my feet. And the earth is only 6000 years old. I read it in that scientific journal – The Bible. There is no such thing as gravity. Every object wants to return to its place just like Aristotle said.  Scientist are all a bunch of clowns. They claim that vaccines prevent diseases but they actually causes diseases and autism.  God is the reason that people survive diseases and injuries not trained doctors, nurses or science. If we just used the ancient medicines and pray we would live much longer, we may even live into our 4o’s.  What would it take for me to change my mind? NOTHING. I know it; I believe it; that settles it. 

  You don’t realize this is satire.  You will not recognize it because of your cognitive dissidence. You are incapable of thinking critically. Your hatred toward Gore is seething in your words.  You are not a skeptic, you are a denier. You do not look for evidence to find the truth, you look for evidence to prove your ideas.  This is how the idealist looked for evidence to prove what they already knew, Suddam had WMDs.

  What would it take to change your mind? Nothing! But maybe someone who is on the fence will think critically about what they think.

  For the record – weather is not climate.

• Anonymous

  I get a kick out of you guys (gals), every little dif in the norm and it always is global warming.  Have you ever considered it may be a normal cycle.  Do you think the caps have never melted before?  Or is it just during your life span that things are going to hell?  just saying.  I bet not one of the global warming folks on here have stopped using carbon based fuels,cant do that! I dont mean, bought a fancy bio/battery flex car…no no now, do you heat your house with oil?.. but its everybody elses fault though isnt it..you made it, you eat it..ps buy an AC for your house!

• Anonymous

  Where do you get that bogus statistic? From your favorite magazine “Leftist Today”.  You are no better than the ows crowd that thinks you are smarter than the rest of us drones.

• Anonymous

  The only ones who cite little changes in the weather use it to prove global warming is false (It snowed in Florida therefore GW must be fraud). And yes, normal cycle has been taken into account. A normal cycle would see a rise or decrease in average temperature over a very long (1000 yrs) period. Global warming is the relatively quick rise since 1900 and especially in the last 30 years. At the risk of repeating myself, google the following articles online:
  “How Can It Be Warming When It’s (Almost) Always Cooling.”
  Berkeley Earth Surface Temperature Study
  and
  Soon and Baliunas Controversy

• Anonymous

  Two record high temperatures in Bangor in as many weeks and I have crocus and daffodils thinking it’s spring and beginning to sprout. Last year my PJM rhodo bloomed for a second time in the fall. To paraphrase Dylan “you don’t need a weather man to tell which way the wind’s blowing.” The temps they are a changing.

• Anonymous

  Talk to me about global warming in January when we are all freezing our butts off. 

• Anonymous

  Well said SpruceDweeler

• Anonymous

  Um, the record was 63, not 61. http://www.wunderground.com/history/airport/KBGR/2011/11/30/DailyHistory.html?req_city=NA&req_state=NA&req_statename=NA

• pbmann

  How about today when the temp is near 50 degrees on  Dec 1st?

• pbmann

  That is just luck, that’s all.  We had the third busiest hurricane season since 1851.

  By the way, the article said “major” hurricane not just a hurricane.

• Anonymous

  You are repulsive for using the word “denier” to describe someone who thinks differently. As a Jew I find pea brains like yourself offensive when you arbitrarily toss around a word which describes the likes of ahmadinejad who denies the slaughter of millions of people during the Holocaust. Repugnant. By the way, intimidation and arrogance that you portray does little to convince or enlighten those you look down your nose at.

• pbmann

  an investigation of the emails showed no actual or attempt to manipulate climate data but you would know that if you listen to something other than Fox News or Rush Limbaugh or understood scientific debate.

• pbmann

  How about using the data of 97% of the worlds climate scientists?

• pbmann

  NIce play on words “reduce NO2 and SO2″. 

  If I hold someone underwater for 30 minutes instead of an hour I have reduced the time underwater but the result is still the same.

• pbmann

  Because they have their heads in the sand or because they know thier funding will dry up if they find anything that disagrees with their masters?

• pbmann

  See Adamain’s reply.  He found a source funded by two of the most conservative anti-climate change people and they still found strong indisputable evidence for CC.

• Anonymous

  Good problem to give chemistry and engineering students.  Of course, the CO2 and pollution producing energy needed to prepare the explosives in the first place (as well as transportation including the rocket or aircraft) should also be figured in.

• pbmann

  We can accurately tell the temperature that existed when the ice was formed on Greenland.  The ration of oxygen isotopes found depend on the temperature when the ice formed.  We have accurate temperature readings for the past 100,000 years from Greenland and further back from Antartica.

• pbmann

  Eratosthenes accurately determined the circumference of the earth by measuring the shade in a well in egypt around 200BC  so scientist knew the earth was round.  It was with the birth of the CHristian CHurch and the Bible that the Flat Earth Theory came about.

  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eratosthenes

• Anonymous

  You’re right. Wonder how the BDN reporter missed that?

• pbmann

  Prove him wrong then,  if you can.

• pbmann

  He is quoting the US Today, a conservative newspaper.

• Anonymous

  And that was 1963.

• pbmann

  Before we started to regulate and control SO2 polution, Global CLimate Change was being hidden by the cooling effect of SO2.  Since we have reduced the amount of SO2 in the atmosphere the cooling effcet has been reversed. 

  SO2 polution was the main cause of the cooling of the atmosphere and was mistaken for a cooling trend.  But if you actually do some research on Climate Change in the 1970′s you will still find that the majority of scientist were predicting an increase in global temperatures even with the cooling effect of SO2.

• pbmann

  The GOP and other climate change deniers can only use authors, ie using Michael Crichton as their star witness because he wrote a book about one scientific paper that debunked Climate Change.  Unfortunately for the GOP, the scientist who wrote the paper said that Michael Crichton misunderstood the paper he based the novel on.

• pbmann

  Eratosthenes, a greek scientist was able to determine th circumference of teh earth using teh shadow in a well in Egypt quite accurately.  He could not have done this unless he determined that the Earth was round and the sun orbited around the Earth.

  Before Galileo discovered the Earth revolves around the Sun, mAthematicians were not able to determine orbits for the known planets effectively because they tried to use the Earth as the center of teh universe.  They did come up with some really strange explanations for this. 

  The reason a Flat Earth or Earth Centric Universe was allowed to exist for as long as it did was the power of the Church.  The Church killed, tortured or threw out anyone form the church who disagreed with them.

• Anonymous

  So lets just not do anything-

  Your why bother approach will be great for the auto industry, they will just love the new pbmann’s new anything goes emissions ruling

• Anonymous

  Really 97%,,,, of climate scientists????

  So the decades of research by thousands of scientists in many other fields, including climate and geology are all wrong, and we are to believe ”your 97% of climate scientists”. So you want us to discount the “fact” that there is “more” historical proof of dramatic climate change before the machine age is now all a non-issue…

  You otta run for office, the media can advertise it as a sitcom

• Anonymous

  It’s awesome- don’t you agree? People should enjoy it instead of freaking out about ” why “. Cold weather is definitely coming…….

• pbmann

  The ten warmest years on record are 1998, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2011 and the warmest on record 2005 and 2010. So I guess the earth is still warming.

  http://www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories2011/20110112_globalstats.html

• pbmann

  Cite your source with a link

• pbmann

  The same reason Bush and Chaney never flew on the same plane.

• Anonymous

  It would be great to hear from the Climate  Change Deniers in Los Angeles
  today
  http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2011/12/winds-tear-through-southern-california-leaving-damage-in-wake.html

• Anonymous

  see link full full story
  will climate change topple statute of liberty?
  http://www.wunderground.com/blog/JeffMasters/comment.html?entrynum=1995
  Lady Liberty not at risk from a storm surge
  As a side note, the Statue of Liberty is not vulnerable to a storm surge, since the good lady stands atop a 65-foot high foundation and 89-foot high granite pedestal. However, the 305′ height of the lady’s torch above the foundation means the statue will experience winds a full Saffir-Simpson category higher than winds at the surface. The statue is rated to survive a wind load of 58 psf, which is roughly equivalent to 120 mph winds (Category 3 hurricane). However, a mid-strength Category 2 hurricane with 105 mph winds will be able to generate 120 mph winds at a height of 300 feet, and would theoretically be capable of toppling the Statue of Liberty.

• Anonymous

  The question is how do we get rid of these hacks in Augusta and Washington
  when our tax dime is being used by taxpayer funded FBI  agents to commit voter fraud
  to make sure BIG OIL interests control the political dialogue , eh?
  see link for FBI agents committing voter fraud
  http://www.thelandesreport.com/Donsanto.htm

      The Cincinnati Bell-FBI
    scandal:  Leonard
    Gates, a Cincinnati Bell employee for 23 years, testified that in
    the late 1970′s and 80′s, the FBI assisted telephone companies with hacking
    into mainframe election computers in cities across the country.
    He spoke with agents from both the DOJ (U.S.
    Attorney Kathleen M. Brinkman) and FBI (Agent Love), but to his
    knowledge, neither agency took further action.  
        Leonard Gates 1987Deposition, plus
        1985 Background Material from Jim Condit, Jr.
    //Pandora’s Black Box
            &  
            http://www.votefraud.org/expert_strunk_report.htm (contains case
            number)   

• pbmann

  Where did I say scientist who study climate are wrong?  Neither did I say any other scientists are wrong.  Climate is constantly changing but in the past it happened over thousands or tens of thousands of years not 150 years.  It is not the fact that the climate is changing but the fact that it is changing too fast for most species and ecological niches to adapt.  This is going to cause many problems for the continued success of the Human Race.  We are not above the fray because we can invent things.

  The fact that we are dumping millions of years of sequestered CO2 and Methane into the atmosphere in 150 years is going to change the climate in such a way that our children and grandchildren will have a much harder time of life on this planet then we have had.

  We need to stop letting the oil and  coal industries and people like the Koch Brothers destroy the only planet that is known to support human life for their profit.

• pbmann

  First off you know nothing about my feeling about emissions.  Your plan for cleaner coal power plants would still pollute the environment much more than what I would like. Clean coal is an oxymoron, it doesn’t exist.  There is just cleaner coal, thus my analogy.

  My approach,if I had any say, would be to use the current green technologies (solar, wind, geothermal, hydro and bio fuels) to wean the country form fossil fuels.  We have the technology and means to do this now just not the political will.

  The South, southwest year-round and the rest of the country in the summer can provide enough solar energy for most of the country.
  The midwest can provide year round wind power with the Northeast and Northwest providing wind power in the winter months.

  Niety-eight percent of the US can harness geothermal power year round.

  Hydropower is available in large amounts in the west and tidal power is available along most coastline with a good tide.

  And biofuels can be produced nationwide.

  And I would tie it all together with a “smart” electrical grid that would shift power nationwide depending on teh season and power needs.  We can do this today and be energy independent in 20 years.

  An example of clean green energy is being built inCalifornia.  A solar/geothermal power plant that will provide as much power as a large nuclear power plant for a third of the cost of construction and cheaper electrical costs without the danger of nuclear power that will come on line in the nest 3 to 5 years. And unlike a conventional or nuclear power plant if something goes wrong with it there is no damage to the environment.

   Why are more states not doing that. 

  That is why I am not in favor of so-called clean coal power plants.  We already have the means to get rid of coal, oil and natural gas power plants.  We just need the political will.

• Anonymous

  Sorry to burst your bubble, but an across the board of shutting down coal-fired power plants not only isnt going to happen, but helping them change over to newer technologies. The technologies you mention are potentially viable, but unlike the company Obama backed, there are many that need to be funded further.

  And FYI, clean coal technology exists

• Anonymous

  I am surprised you didnt blame Bush.
  It is a fact that throughout history there has been a number of sudden climate changes. As I said before “Is global warming caused by man; Yes, but not to the degree that the Church of Gore wants us to believe”.

• Hopier and Changier This Time

  Moochelle is First Lady, not exactly in line for the Presidency…thank God.

  The real answer: Let them eat cake.

• Anonymous

  Where’s Thursday’s poll question? It’s after 2 PM. 

• pbmann

  How about if she flew with the President?  Would you say she is saving taxpayers money or too close to the decision making process or some other crap accusal.  The right wing will find fault with anything and everything done by either President Obama or his wife.

• pbmann

  Clean coal technology is only clean when compared to older dirtier coal technology.  So called clean coal technology is the second dirtiest form of electricity generation with only old coal fired power plants being dirtier.

• pbmann

  To many spelling errors to keep

• pbmann

  Sorry to burst your bubble but I never said shutdown all coal fired power plantsa today. I said that in 20 years we could totally revamp our energy needs from fossil fuels to clean green energy sources.

  I did say that we have the technology available today and that California has starting construciotn of a solar/geothermal power plant that will generate the same amount of electricity as a large nuclear power plant but at afraction of the cost to construct and generate electricity

• Anonymous

  Have you really looked into clean coal technology, there are plants striving to have “no” emissions what so ever.

• Anonymous

  You’re funny. Your ad hominem logical fallacies shows me what kind of person you are.  You find me repulsive for using the word “denier” but you are don’t find the use of the word repulsive.  You claim I am using it to describe someone who thinks differently than me not because he/she is a “denier.”  Yes I do look down my nose at anyone with such vial hatred.  If you read my comment you should know that I did not expect to convince or enlighten that person. I will continue be repulsive by using the word “denier” for anyone who will NOT LOOK at scientific evidence and other evidence, you included.  I refuse to call them skeptics, because a skeptic can change their mind with new facts. A denier will not.

  Your ahmadienjad comment is a non sequitur.  He too is a denier but what does that have to do with anything.

  By the way your handle makes me think of a porn star name.  (ad hominem humor)