Stuart Carlson by Stuart Carlson

Stuart Carlson

Comments (14) (Please sign in to comment)

  1. wbr

    wbr said, over 2 years ago

    yes it will be hotter in 2 months

  2. Stipple

    Stipple said, over 2 years ago

    Where I live it has been getting steadily warmer for months now.
    Putting the information on a graph starting with New Year’s day puts the temperature at 167 degrees F by the end of August.
    Sure do wish we had listened to math before we got to the end of life as we know it.

  3. motivemagus

    motivemagus said, over 2 years ago

    Nice, simple websites with clear graphs and clear writing with lots and lots of evidence…
    http://climate.nasa.gov/evidence
    http://ncse.com/climate/climate-change-101

  4. Enoki

    Enoki said, over 2 years ago

    Says Chicken Little…

  5. mikefive

    mikefive said, over 2 years ago

    Mr. Carlson’s use of the tornado as an indicator of climate change is not a very accurate pointer. (c/NOAA National Climatic Data Center—Historical Records and Trends)

  6. Robert Landers

    Robert Landers said, over 2 years ago

    @mikefive

    Rapid Global Climate Change is steadily increasing extreme and very extreme weather conditions. Tornadoes are a very good example of extreme weather. So expecting worse and worse of such conditions is certainly not an exaggeration at all!!

  7. mikefive

    mikefive said, over 2 years ago

    @Robert Landers

    “Rapid Global Climate Change is steadily increasing extreme and very extreme weather conditions.

    I see that you do not agree with NOAA’s position even though the NOAA explains why using tornado statistics is a dubious indicator of climate change. I do believe in climate change, but after having actually read NOAA’s reasoning, I have to agree with them.

  8. Robert Landers

    Robert Landers said, over 2 years ago

    @mikefive

    Then, I would like to see the link to that data, as I find it somewhat illogical that Rapid Global Climate Change is not having an affect upon global extreme weather considerations. I am (as usual) at least willing to be convinced, but I do find it at least somewhat illogical.

  9. Robert Landers

    Robert Landers said, over 2 years ago

    See my reply to mikefive. The real problem is the timing of the changes that are occurring. Indeed in the past the same kinds of global changes have occurred. But while these changes have been rapid as far as geologic times scales are concerned. In terms of Earthly history time scales they have occurred in thousands of years (instead of the changes in actual geology of millions of years). However, the changes that are occurring now, have happened only since the start of the industrial revolution only some 200 years (at most) ago!


    Also, as the changes in the past have been natural, they have eventually reached some kind of a reasonable equilibrium. But, if our industrialism snow upsetting this kind of eventual equilibrium (especially as these changes seem to be more and more exponential in nature), then our reasonably immediate descendants could be in for a very hard time. Somehow, I do not think that they will be so very thankful that we choose not to do the reasonable things that could have prevented their misery!!

  10. Enoki

    Enoki said, over 2 years ago

    Condoreggs, the IPCC has consistently been wrong on every prediction they make. The modelling climate scientists use has been wrong for the last 16+ years as temperatures have leveled off.
    The new “study” from the US government is no better. The NOAA can’t predict the weather for the next six months accurately.
    The Farmer’s Almanac did better the last three years than the NOAA did.
    .
    What possible reason do I have to believe those crying doom and gloom on Gorebal Warming?

  11. mikefive

    mikefive said, over 2 years ago

    @Robert Landers

    “… I would like to see the link to that data…”

    You have the site name and the routing once you get there in my post. NOAA is not say that tornadoes haven’t changed, just that they are not good indicators and why.

  12. wbr

    wbr said, over 2 years ago

    a poss cause of gobal warming i first saw pub tv Earth’s magnetic field takes between 1,000 and 10,000 years to reverse, and in the process, it greatly diminishes before it re-aligns. “It’s not a sudden flip, but a slow process, during which the field strength becomes weak, very probably the field becomes more complex and might show more than two poles for a while, and then builds up in strength and [aligns] in the opposite direction,” said Monika Korte, the scientific director of the Niemegk Geomagnetic Observatory at GFZ Potsdam in Germany.

    The scientists say it’s the weak in-between phase that would be roughest on Earthlings.

    According to John Tarduno, professor of geophysics at the University of Rochester, a strong magnetic field helps protect Earth from blasts of radiation from the sun. “Coronal mass ejections (CMEs) occasionally occur on the Sun, and sometimes hurtle directly toward Earth,” Tarduno said. “Some of the particles associated with CMEs can be blocked by Earth’s magnetic field. With a weak field, this shielding is less efficient.”

  13. Robert Landers

    Robert Landers said, over 2 years ago

    So, what the deniers are basically saying is that pollution is good for all living things, including we human beings. So, go out and jog in the good clean air over our cities (which is, of course, getting even cleaner all the time as we burn more and more fossil fuels), it is indeed good for your lungs especially. And those people that agree with the 99+% of the scientists are morons??

  14. Robert Landers

    Robert Landers said, over 2 years ago

    @Robert Landers

    I wish to thank all of the non deniers here (yes, and even some of the more reasonable semi deniers as well) for the civil and reasoned discussion on this particular thread, it is really a treat to have such a discussion. I admit however, to sometimes wondering just who is going to win the issue race in this area. Is mankind going to run out of these very precious fossil fuels before we actually so pollute the atmosphere as to make at least human life untenable on this planet, or are we going to kill off that very humanity with that pollution before we actually run out of the means to continue that very pollution. I actually hope and even pray that I am wrong in that very dilemma, but I am just not so sure anymore!!

  15. Refresh Comments.