November 25, 2017
Nation Latest News | Poll Questions | Black Friday | Michael Flynn | Net Neutrality

Comments for: This US summer is ‘what global warming looks like’

Guidelines for posting on bangordailynews.com

The Bangor Daily News and the Bangor Publishing Co. encourage comments about stories, but you must follow our terms of service.

  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):

  • Anonymous

    “Global warming doesn’t exist!”  Just keep saying this and it will come true….  Remember that when you stick your head in the sand, your other end is what everyone else sees.   

    • Anonymous

      Oh, I think ‘global warning’ is pretty well established, at least as a natural climate variation. But  man-caused global warming, the kind that the people who chant “Global warming! Global warming!” want everyone to turn the reins of power over to them to prevent, not so much.

      Incidentally, one ‘weather prediction’ that’s already been proven is that warm weather would be cited as ‘global warming’ and cold weather dismissed as ‘just weather’.

      • Anonymous

        That is unfortunately how things will happen. ‘Global Warming’ doesn’t just mean everything will get hotter all around. It means the climate hits more and more extremes. Cold weather will still exist, and in some areas, will likely get worse. But overall, the world in total will be increasing in temperature steadily.

        There was a report recently by … either a government agency or an industry agency… that said that if we stopped using fossil fuels (coal, oil, etc) today, and switched to all clean energy, we could see the environment turn to normal by 2030-2050. And it make sense, the planet knows how to regulate itself. Give it a break and it will clean up the air for us.

        • Anonymous

          “either a government agency or an industry agency” or maybe it was your aunt bessie!
          LOL

          • Anonymous

            LOL yourself, at your attempt at humor.  I’ve run out of aunts but I’ll bet the ones I had would not be denialists like you.

      • We Are All ‘Climate Test Dummies’ Now, Providing Data On How Humans Respond To Extreme Weather

        By Joe Romm on Jul 2, 2012 at 5:41 pm

        We have turned ourselves into test subjects for the single most terrifying “crash” the world will ever know — the crash of a livable climate.

        Since we have done so wittingly, and continue blissfully subjecting
        ourselves to the impending climate crash without making any serious
        effort to stop it in spite of the gravest warnings from the most credible sources, that makes us little better than crash test dummies:
         

      • Anonymous

        Actually if you read, and try to understand Global warming, it does lead to unnaturally cold winters. 

        • Anonymous

           Yes, but the issue isn’t “global warming” but “man-caused global warming.” If the changes are within normal climate variation, as shown in the historic record (and they appear to be), then there’s no evidence of anything that government action can affect. And calls for needless government action often come from those who figure to benefit by it, and from the bedazzled innocents they’ve enlisted.

          • Anonymous

            Not so.  And it’s the denialists who are propagandizing.

      • Anonymous

        Read.  Reread, especially paragraph 4.  And the statements that local conditions may resemble GW effects but difficult to establish.  However, if you want a glimpse into the future, observe what’s going on.

    • Anonymous

       The sand is better than where you stuck your head!

    • tag

      Assuming you are an Obama supporter, that is a pretty funny statement considering you must be forced to stick your head in the sand on a daily basis.

      • Anonymous

        And Faux News supporters use the Rush memorial sandbox?

    • Anonymous

      Or, to continue being a denialist is whistling in the dark, or whistling past the graveyard.

  • Jonathan Smith

    Keep drinking the Kool Aid. In the 1970’s, it was Global Cooling  – with so-called intelligent people screaming of the next ice age. Global Warming turned out to be a load of garbage so now it’s “climate change”.  The Earth can sustain anything – I would be more concerned with all the evil in our world.

    • Anonymous

      That’s the beauty of science – we can learn more about a subject from continued study, and revise our understanding based on that additional knowledge. If you want to deny the obvious reality of global warming, go ahead. It won’t make things any cooler. And it won’t make you appear intelligent, either.

    • Anonymous

      yes because 98% of our scientist are just dumb. you know more and understand more then they do. 

      • Anonymous

        LOL

    • Anonymous

      Maybe the earth can sustain anything, but how about us?  Don’t use this bully pulipt of yours to evaluate intelligence.

  • We the people need to act. Climate change is a problem that is not going to go away. The longer we wait the more damage is done.

    We need to stand up to the polluters. The money being spent to spread misinformation comes from the fossil fuel industries. The profit made for extracting and selling fossil fuels is huge. The industry is more concerned with profits today not the long term quality of life on our planet.

    If we do not act many will die and suffer from the impacts of climate change. I am not going to sit back and let this happen. I will protest, organize, and resist the corporate take over of my planet. 

    • Anonymous

      Gonna be tough to protest from your computer chair…

      • Anonymous

        Happens all the time, possibly more successful than in-your-facew onfrontation

  • Anonymous

    We wonder why our education system is so bad all our scientist believe in something that we obviously know to be just plain wrong. 

    • Anonymous

      Yeah…because ‘all the scientists’ are apparently complete nitwits, have little to no training or education, clearly all have biased agendas (you know like working for oil and gas companies) and who have all secretly joined together in a universal conspiracy to make up  something like global warming which is based on absolutely nothing to do with all the weather changes we are all currently experiencing……silly scientists!!!!

    • Anonymous

      I worry more about the education (system or not) that produces false “beliefs” expressed by denialists here and elsewhere.

  • Anonymous

    Those same “scientists” cant tell us what the weather will be next week, but will tell us they are 100% certain they know what the climate was 3000 years ago. I think you have to be a willing stooge to believe these “scientists”. Nobody can really be that stupid. These are the same “scientists” who have been caught manipulating their own studies on the climate but you still believe them anyways. I think its just a sign of how dishonest the left is. They cant even keep their own lies straight.

    • Anonymous

      Once again, there’s a difference between weather and climate, especially trends.  And the scientific observations aren’t political.  The solutions are, out of necessity.  Lies?  Try the propaganda coming out of the conservative side of almost any issue.

  • Anonymous

     I remember the early 70s in mid maine,sometimes 20-30 below for weeks at a time,strong winds.A little global warming doesn’t seem so bad.I think they should call it global pollution instead,easier to understand.

    • Anonymous

      Pollution is the main driver of the problem.

  • Anonymous

     “Experts say it had energy readings five times that of normal thunderstorms.”
    What in the heck is an “energy reading??”  Wind? Rain? Electrical activity? Magic? What?  It’s this kind of number twisting and ambiguous terminology that causes the general public to panic.  They see “five times higher something something something”… UH OH!! The end is near!

    • I believe that you could get the explanation if you put in a small amount of effort. If it is beyond your understanding it must be someone twisting the facts to scare you:

      • Anonymous

        I’m just saying, news articles are supposed to inform the reader, not scare them..  I shouldn’t have to look something up after reading about it in an article, just to understand the article..
        I get what the article is saying, I’m just pointing out the ambiguity of the statement.  It makes no mention of what factors are taken into account when they measure “energy.” 
        This article was written by someone who is clearly biased, as there is only one paragraph that mentions the possibility that is ISN’T direct evidence of global warming… 

        • Anonymous

          Looking up something new is called “learning”…

          • Anonymous

            Thank you for clarifying.

        • There is no evidence of no global warming. This article should scare you. That is why it was written. To scare you into taking action to save your planet.

          • Anonymous

            I see it as natural.  The climate fluctuates on its own, naturally.  There’s always going to be a period of time where temperatures are higher than they were the last time they were at their peak..  This just happens to be one of those times.  In my opinion, people freaking out about the world ending because of fires and storms are wasting their time and energy.  There will always be fires and storms worse than those before them..  I have confidence that the planet is not going to implode, or self-destruct, or change so dramatically that it results in the end of humans.  This is my opinion.

          • “What we’re seeing really is a window into what global warming really looks like,”
            said Princeton University geosciences and international affairs
            professor Michael Oppenheimer. “It looks like heat. It looks like fires.
            It looks like this kind of environmental disasters.”

            Oppenheimer said that on Thursday. That was before the East Coast
            was hit with triple-digit temperatures and before a derecho — an
            unusually strong, long-lived and large straight-line wind storm — blew
            through Chicago to Washington. The storm and its aftermath killed more
            than 20 people and left millions without electricity. Experts say it had energy readings five times that of normal thunderstorms.

            Greenhouse gases from man-made sources are putting a lot of extra
            energy into the atmosphere. In fact, the radiative forcing of all the
            CO2 humans have dumped into the air is equal to about 1 million Hiroshima nuclear bombs per day.

            Scientists often compare that extra energy to a baseball slugger on steroids.
            While it’s difficult to look at a specific home run and say steroids
            were the only reason it happened, it’s much easier to show that the
            drugs increased the likelihood the ball made it over the fence. The same
            is true for climate steroids like CO2. All that extra energy in the
            atmosphere increases the probability and intensity of extreme weather
            events, making the droughts, storms and wildfires Americans are facing
            this summer far more likely and far more destructive.
             

          • Anonymous

            The first half of your comment is directly from the article… I already read it, man.. I don’t want to read it again..

            Where did you copy and paste the rest from?
            If I wanted to read what scientists are saying about global warming, I’d Google it..

          • It came from Climate Progress. Do you not respect science? What shapes your views?

          • Anonymous

            He should have put it in quotes but as I previously mentioned, it needs re-reading since either you didn’t read all the way through or you couldn’t (or didn’t want to) comprehend it.

          • Anonymous

            Who said anything about the world ending?  Your snug little cocoon-like world may well disappear.  Good you labeled this as your opinion because it’s not well-based.

        • Anonymous

          No bias at all, the entire article was quite straightforward and middle of the road.  See my previous comment.

    • Anonymous

      Listen to some intelligent weather forcasts (NBC news outlets, Weather Channel), etc., and you’ll see ‘energy used a lot when discussing storm systems.  Thunderstorms and the like are gigantic heat engines and the energy derives from the condenstion of water in the upper atmosphere (the properties of water/water vapor/ice are way off the charts.

      Time for some reeducation on your part.  Won’t cost you a penny (except power for your TV).

  • Anonymous

    Those of you who deny man made global warning are the weak minded non-critical thinkers the oil and gas industry knew you would be. This is why they spend millions spreading these lies. To consider it a hoax is to also think there is a worldwide conspiracy in which 99% of climate scientists and world leaders are involved.

    If you believe all of this you are an easily manipulated tool of billionaires who will destroy your childrens world and offer you nothing in return. What a bargain.

    Your absurdity is a danger to us all.

    • tag

      It’s not that we don’t believe you, it’s that we don’t really care!

      (You know, the same way you don’t care about leaving future generations with third world economic conditions.)

      • Anonymous

        Your lack of care is obvious, on this and other issues.  We want to leave all descendents a habitable world.

    • Anonymous

      Not sure if you realize this, but the world leaders and people who “run” the oil and gas industry live on this planet too… Doesn’t make sense that they would knowingly destroy their own home for the purposes of making money, which is useless once the planet is destroyed..
      I disagree with any and all conspiracy theories regarding this matter.

  • COMING SOON TO MAINE TAR SANDS OIL FROM CANADA

    The dog greeted us by the river with his tail wagging, black shaggy
    fur matted and damp on his underbelly. “Hey, that dog is covered in
    oil!” one of us joked, and at the time, we laughed. We realized only
    later that it was true.

    It was the oil we had come for. The four of us—two journalists, the
    Director of the local Sierra Club, and a grad student—wanted to see the
    latest in a long string of pipeline oil spills with our own eyes. It had
    been a week since hundreds of thousands of litres had been leaked into
    the Red Deer River in southern Alberta, a week since the men in hazmat
    suits had begun the long process of cleaning it up.

    So what does progress look like?

    When the pipeline ruptured, the river was already high from heavy
    rains and snowmelt, and it would get higher in the coming days. It would
    carry the oil in its quickening flows towards Glennifer Lake, from
    which the city of Red Deer, population 92,000, draws its drinking water.

    Those who lived near the ruptured pipe knew first what was wrong. The
    air, which on a normal day smells like pines and plains and earth, had
    turned sour. Those who lived downwind didn’t need to be told what it
    meant; they’d been through this before.
     

  • tag

    Just a few degrees warmer and I will save thousands in heating oil and have oceanfront property!!!

    • Anonymous

      Just checked my Geologic contour map and myhouse is at 160 feet so if I flood, we had all better start looking for gopherwood.

  • Anonymous

    Moon  Bats…..lol…

    • Anonymous

      You mean the denialists, of course,don’t you?

You may also like