An Open Letter To President Obama: The time on the Doomsday Clock...

is five minutes to midnight.


http://www.thebulletin.org/web-editi...inutes-to-midn
An open letter to President Obama: The time on the Doomsday Clock is five minutes to midnight

By Robert Socolow, Thomas Rosenbaum, Lawrence J. Korb, Lynn Eden, Rod Ewing, Alexander Glaser, James E. Hansen, Sivan Kartha, Edward "Rocky" Kolb , Lawrence M. Krauss, Leon Lederman, Ramamurti Rajaraman, M. V. Ramana, Robert Rosner, Jennifer Sims, Richard C. J. Somerville, and Elizabeth J. Wilson | 14 January 2013 Article Highlights

The Bulletin's Science and Security Board announces its 2013 decision to keep in place the minute hand of the Doomsday Clock: It will remain at five minutes to midnight. In this open letter to US President Barack Obama, the Board presents its views on the key issues that affected its decision and provides the president with recommendations to consider in 2013 and throughout his second term.

An alarmist article. And untrue.

From your link:

Quote:

---

2012 was the hottest year on record in the contiguous United States, marked by devastating drought and brutal storms. These extreme events are exactly what climate models predict for an atmosphere overburdened with greenhouse gases.

---

From National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration National Climatic Data Center
Link: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/global/2012/1

Quote:

---

Global Highlights

• The combined global land and ocean average surface temperature for January 2012 was the 19^th warmest on record at 12.35°C [[54.23°F), which is 0.35°C [[0.63°F) above the 20^th century average of 12.0°C [[53.6°F). The margin of error associated with this temperature is +/- 0.08°C [[0.14°F). This January is the coolest of all months on record since February 2008. However, it also marks the 26^th January and 323^rd consecutive month with a global temperature above the 20^th century average. The last month with below average temperatures was February 1985.
• Separately, the global land surface temperature was 0.61°C [[1.10°F) above the 20^th century average of 2.8°C [[37.0°F), making this the 26^th warmest January on record. The margin of error is +/- 0.18°C [[0.32°F). Warmer-than-average conditions occurred across most of North America, the northern latitudes of Europe and Asia, southern South America, and most of Australia. Cooler-than-average regions included China, Mongolia, Kazakhstan, south central Russia, much of the Middle East, northern India, north Africa, and southwestern Greenland.
• Separately, the global land surface temperature was 0.49°C [[0.88°F) above the 20^th century average of 2.8°C [[37.0°F), making this the 28^th warmest January on record. The margin of error is +/- 0.17°C [[0.31°F).
• The Arctic Oscillation climate pattern played a large role in temperatures in the Northern Hemisphere during January. The positive phase during the first half of the month contributed to well-below average monthly temperatures across Alaska and above-average temperatures across the contiguous United States. The negative phase during the second half of the month contributed to warmth in Canada and also to a cold snap that began during the last week in January across Central and Eastern Europe and North Africa.
• The January global ocean surface temperature was 0.30°C [[0.54°F) above the 20^th century average of 15.8°C [[60.5°F), making it the 17^th warmest January on record. The margin of error is +/- 0.04°C [[0.07°F). The warmth was most pronounced across the north central and southwestern Atlantic Ocean, the central and western Pacific, and the southeastern Indian Ocean.
• The January global ocean surface temperature was 0.30°C [[0.54°F) above the 20^th century average of 15.8°C [[60.5°F), making it the 17^th warmest January on record. The margin of error is +/- 0.04°C [[0.07°F).

---

Odd, I don't see anything labed "warmest ever"...
What do you think could be the problem with NOAA? Maybe they didn't read the alarmist climate link there!
[[Sarcasm)

Maybe all the environmentalists should rush over to China and demand the worlds greatest polluter do something to curb their massive spew of junk into the atmosphere, rather then harrassing companies in the United States who are inspected, fined and punished by a powerful EPA already in place?
Ever look at the Global Pollution map? A huge portion of pollutants in North America ORIGINATE IN ASIA.

Or maybe they just like it here because in the United States they can sue, make money and bend the ear of sympathetic politicians, where in comparison China would kick them out, laugh at them and tell them to go pound salt.

You just posted a bunch of information for only January 2012, Papasito.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by noise

You just posted a bunch of information for only January 2012, Papasito.

---

Hmmm.. really. Thanks Noise. You are correct. He has compiled info. regarding one month.

This is what I found reported...2012 hottest year on record, federal agency says

The first eight months of 2012 were the hottest ever recorded in the continental United States and the summer period of June, July and August was the third hottest ever, the National Climatic Data Center reported Monday.

http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2012/09/18...l-agency-says/

blah, blah, blah..blah... FAIL! lol

It's not just the temperature - it's many other climatic issues, the jet stream, the atlantic conveyor, etc. There have been more problems with crops developing early only to be hit by a killing frost.

Once again, the ignoramuses refuse to accept facts and have nothing to offer but their easily-disproven bullshit

one by one they joined Hitler's regime... i'm sure there were all kinds of alarmists overruled by the ignorant...

wake up and smell the coffee... the alarm bells are ringing folks...maybe faintly at first... the bible has been predicting "fire" all along eh... self prophecy is a bitch... the end.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Papasito

An alarmist article. And untrue.

From your link:

From National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration National Climatic Data Center
Link: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/global/2012/1

Odd, I don't see anything labed "warmest ever"...
What do you think could be the problem with NOAA? Maybe they didn't read the alarmist climate link there!
[[Sarcasm)

Maybe all the environmentalists should rush over to China and demand the worlds greatest polluter do something to curb their massive spew of junk into the atmosphere, rather then harrassing companies in the United States who are inspected, fined and punished by a powerful EPA already in place?
Ever look at the Global Pollution map? A huge portion of pollutants in North America ORIGINATE IN ASIA.

Or maybe they just like it here because in the United States they can sue, make money and bend the ear of sympathetic politicians, where in comparison China would kick them out, laugh at them and tell them to go pound salt.

---

Well I for one am happy regulations and actions by my city helped drive two coal power plants out of business. The air is cleaner and two clean manufacturing companies are looking to move to the vacated land and bring JOBS. There's evidence to support local pollution was directly responsible for health problems in children...not somewhere beyond our control. To top it off voters allow my city to shop around for electricity and can drop a provider when the price is high or the air gets dirty. Polluting plants have been eliminated from the city's portfolio. The people decided they wanted to give the city that power. Not just handful of environmentalists.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wolverine

Well I for one am happy regulations and actions by my city helped drive two coal power plants out of business. The air is cleaner and two clean manufacturing companies are looking to move to the vacated land and bring JOBS. There's evidence to support local pollution was directly responsible for health problems in children...not somewhere beyond our control. To top it off voters allow my city to shop around for electricity and can drop a provider when the price is high or the air gets dirty. Polluting plants have been eliminated from the city's portfolio. The people decided they wanted to give the city that power. Not just handful of environmentalists.

---

This is probably good for the people of Chicago and Chicago's aethetics. Natural gas is presently less expensive as a fuel and in plentiful supply or were you thinking of cranking up Illinois' numerous nukes? If so, how does Chicago plan to protect the rest of the Country from its nuclear waste for the next 20,000 years? The shutdown of coal power plants around the County has led to larger exports to places like China and India where environmental controls are not as strict. The relative lack of environmental controls in such places and reduced US demand for coal allows for cheaper manufacturing overseas.

This is being recognized. The Governor of Washington will have to decide if new ports will be opened to transport US coal to China. He doesn't like the idea because, as he points out, Seattle still breathes China's air pollution. http://thinkprogress.org/climate/201...int/?mobile=nc

US coal producers presently plans to export an additional 190,000 tonnes of coal a year. Exporting coal to countries with lower pollution standards flies in the face of President Obama's rhetoric about global warming in his inaugural address. What to do? Anyway, good for Chicago.
http://www.trust.org/alertnet/news/e...limate-pledges

Random Though : Global Warming aka Climate Change TAX

Let's say for a moment Global Warning/Climate Change is fact and not theory. Let's say that we are headed to climate armageddon, the Earth is getting hotter at an alarming rate, we are going to fry. Sea levels are going to rise, Florida is going underwater, and all the alarmist claims are going to come true.

So the Government proposes all of these carbon taxes, climate taxes, and environmental taxes to "combat" this "climate change". The tax proposals are already on the table, they have been.

What exactly is the Government going to do with this money to "combat" "climate change" ?
Do they have the technology to be able to REVERSE the warming? Are they intending to create giant atmosphere enhancing machines to change the global climate?
Even if the world unites for this cause, what are they going to do with our dollars to change the climate of the planet?

What can they do? How can they do it? How long does it take? What are the results going to be? Can there be any results at all? How much will it cost? Are they even capable of changing the Earth's temperature?

My point is this:
If our Governments can not alter the climate of the planet, reverse the planet's climate from warm to cool, then why give them $1 of our money?
They will literally spend these tax dollars on other things and consider the money they take in a "penalty" for your "behavior" that "leads to global warming".

If the Governments can't take the money and use every dollar they take in and modify the global temperature with it, then they don't deserve any money at all.



Point One: America can tax the hell out of us and it wont make a difference. For every American who emits a little less carbon, for every power plant that stops burning coal, for every business that is more eco friendly, one springs up in a third world country or China that does double to harm the Earth than we did, nullifying any effort we make. The result is : More tax dollars collected for nothing.
America's economy goes further into recession, other countries get an unfair advantage over us, energy becomes more scarce and unaffordable, the United States moves further into decline.

Point Two: Pollution and Global Warming are two different things. Throwing trash in the ocean or chemicals in a river should be legally punished. But exhaling carbon monoxide taxable? Cow farting methane taxable?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Papasito

Random Though : Global Warming aka Climate Change TAX

Let's say for a moment Global Warning/Climate Change is fact and not theory.

---

It is both. It is a theory EXACTLY like gravity is a theory. It is supported by facts from a dozen scientific disciplines.

Let's look at what happens if we go forward to stop it: cleaner energies, less dependence on fossil fuels, cleaner air, cleaner water, maintenance of biodiversity, new jobs. Not one of those is a bad thing. too bad if it inconveniences a few multi-millionaires and billionaires who haven't got the sense to work it.

Your understanding of science and the scope of a world-wide issue is breathtaking in its utter lack of existence.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rb336

it is both. It is a theory exactly like gravity is a theory. It is supported by facts from a dozen scientific disciplines.

Let's look at what happens if we go forward to stop it: Cleaner energies, less dependence on fossil fuels, cleaner air, cleaner water, maintenance of biodiversity, new jobs. Not one of those is a bad thing. Too bad if it inconveniences a few multi-millionaires and billionaires who haven't got the sense to work it.

Your understanding of science and the scope of a world-wide issue is breathtaking in its utter lack of existence.

---

thank you.

just a chart...Attachment 18032