Matt Wuerker for August 28, 2013

Yes it’s too bad you are Not cute.

Oh, a few of us might survive to adapt. You and I won’t be around to see what we become, though, another hundred thousand years or so from now.

Amazing, isn’t it? I think I’ll make statements about economics or NASCAR or something I know next-to-nothing about and have no desire to study enough to learn about.

Well if temperatures continue to rise, however slowly, all the climate survivors will develop leathery skin, so win-win!

Well put.

“The good part about science is that even if you don’t believe in it, it still exists.” —Neil deGraffe Tyson

Trend 0.09C (0.52C/century)Statistically insignificant, you do know what that means, right?Oh and the RSS dataset shows a completely flat trend.Your argument is invalidated by the data.

Thank you, that is a very thorough and excellent site. What the deniers do not seem to realize is that it takes very little temperature change from 0 degrees centigrade for ice to melt. And the world’s ice IS melting. But because there is so much of this ice it seems to be melting at a relatively slow rate, but it is melting. This will have a very negative affect upon our weather patterns even within our own lifetimes.

So, not only do we need to reduce our hydrocarbon pollution of our atmosphere (and there are also other equally important reasons for doing this that have nothing to do with Rapid Global Climate Change) but we should also at least start to get ready for the affects that are inevitably going to take place regardless of what is now done about the main problem itself!!

Reptilian liberals, maybe.

Of course we can, given one or two billion years of future evolution.

Where do you obtain your information to make such a foolish statement? The hottest worldwideaverage temperatures on record have occurred mostly in the past decade.

Wow, the deniers are trying to use “science!” Unfortunately, they don’t know how…which is typical. Kind of defines deniers.Folks, the most eminent and QUALIFIED denier, Richard A. Muller, did research to test his concerns (which is what science is about), and despite being funded by the Koch brothers, said the following:

"“Three years ago I identified problems in previous climate studies that, in my mind, threw doubt on the very existence of global warming. Last year, following an intensive research effort involving a dozen scientists, I concluded that global warming was real and that the prior estimates of the rate of warming were correct. I’m now going a step further: Humans are almost entirely the cause.[The Berkeley project’s research has shown] “that the average temperature of the Earth’s land has risen by two and a half degrees Fahrenheit over the past 250 years, including an increase of one and a half degrees over the most recent 50 years. Moreover, it appears likely that essentially all of this increase results from the human emission of greenhouse gases.” And onguard is actually trying to claim because CO2 is a small percentage of the atmosphere, it doesn’t matter? Say, onguard, if you removed all of it, it would matter a lot since plant life would become extinct.

If you are denying man made climate change you are a fool or the highest degree. 98% of the world’s climatologist agree on this. I guess you know better

This isnt about natural climate change. Is everyone on the right as stupid as you? You go ahead and keep saying you know better than 98% of the worlds climatologist..wow what an idiot.

you need to have a talk with 98% of the worlds climatologist who agree we are in the midst of man made climate change, but I guess you know better eh? What is your degree in? IDIOT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

WRONG but hey nice pretty graph you posted, now tell us all you are the King of Siam and chow a cool pic of you wearing a crown. you are an IDIOT

There are too many variables about the earth that man is simply not smart enough to understand. The Earth warmed and cooled, sometimes at dramatic rates long before combustion engines and we haven’t a clue as to why. We are like fleas trying to explain the temperature of the dog.

LOL, care to provide a citation for that 5% number? Forget using John Cook’s paper as your citation, that load of trash has been taken apart numerous times . . .First of all, the picture used in the article is steam venting from the stack, not smoke. Yet the contrast of the picture was changed to make it look like smoke to give the article more weight. The rest of it is full of weasel words, but here’s the best part, “largely dismiss a recent slowdown in the pace of warming.” Even they have to admit the fact . . . They can’t reproduce it in their stupid models.The IPCC is hardly an unbiased set of individuals, they have an agenda. It’s pretty clear and when you consider some of the sources used in previous reports to create the alarmist agenda, sources that were later proven to be false or so severely skewed, it’s no wonder people doubt the alarmist.Climate changes, there are numerous factors, the computer models used to predict the dome and gloom and been proven to be essentially useless, they can not successfully hindcast climate and failed miserably when trying to forecast.

Gorebal Warming is as real as Manbearpig! I’m serial, cereal!

CO2 is not the primary, or even significant cause of climate change. There are too many other and more significant variables involved. CO2 is the red herring of the Progressive Left to push their enviromental radicalism on everyone.

What’s the worst that could happen? If we find and use alternative energy sources that reduce emissions of greenhouse gasses, and it makes no difference to climate change, we’ll have fewer respiratory problems like emphysema and asthma. We will also have gotten out from under the thumb of the Middle Eastern petroleum pushers. That’s the worst that can happen.

If we assume that there is no reason to change our habits, and we’re wrong, it means rising seas, salt water breaching fresh-water lakes/streams, increase in tropical diseases, possible large areas of coastline (where 2/3 of our population lives) unfit for human habitation, health issues (including respiratory), and on and on.

Well, how ‘bout it, punk? Are ya feelin’ lucky?

Didn’t think so, your failure to provide your citation invalidates your meme.Your belief that Nature is a respectable scientific journal speaks volumes as well.Tell me you scientific genius, what has a greater greenhouse impact, CO2 or water vapor in the atmosphere? Closed book test, no referring to your poorly kept notes, . . . .

Increasing temperatures, and habitat loss in the deserts, are wiping out reptiles as well (lack of thermal cover), so the toon misses a serious point, jus like “deniers” do, but there’s no point in talking to them about facts.

Ah, new evidence and new science proving — once again — that climate change deniers are on the wrong side of history.In brief, local and natural variations have masked the overall trend. It won’t last. See the Smithsonian Blog:http://blogs.smithsonianmag.com/science/2013/08/why-global-warming-has-paused-and-why-it-will-soon-start-up-again/#ixzz2dHuYQbtz

Climate change deniers won’t even look at the evidence.

We have to look at global warming as a tool. We can turn the heat up or down, depending on where we want real estate values to go up (or down). A little unwielding, I suppose, but it will give us hope.