ocean conditions are changing due to Rapid Global Climate Shift

Yes, I know the left keeps trying.
but the China is "gonna" and the USA is "gonna" posts you made is 'gonna's. None of them is "did'.
And a whole BUNCH of stuff get's repealed after 2014.
http://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php/State_by_State_Voter_ID_Laws
A more or less peaceful political Revolution is COMING 2014!
these ain't 'gonna's but laws already on the books, even before 2012, but couldn't do IDs in 2012 because "not enough time to get IDs out".
that excuse won't wash 2014.
We're taking America back!

 

An interview with World Bank President Jim Yong Kim on the Diane Rehm show.

"A conversation with Jim Yong Kim, president of the World Bank. His plans to reduce extreme poverty by 2030 and address the effects of climate change in the world's poorest nations."

Live at 11am Eastern Time.
Click on LISTEN TO WAMU

Listen to the interview anytime, sometime in the afternoon.

 

I'm always amused by people saying they're going to 'take the country back.' I think what they really mean is that they want to take it backwards.... to the good old days that never were.

 

Maybe the "not quite so crappy" days would be an acceptable compromise. Like when a single average income was enough to give a quite decent standard of living and even finance a house. Or when children could be children and then grow into adults, without this synthetic "adolescence" that means many never grow up. At any rate, the old days where a kindy teacher telling your child about the delights of homosex would have had them (the teacher) in major big trouble. Those old times where your children were yours to raise and you were responsible for your brats, and they weren't stolen from you by the government. Back when in school you actually did learn to read, write and calculate, and had some knowledge of grammar, history, geography, science, and philosphy (and knew the difference). Back in the days when your land was yours to use, not for some fascist to dictate you what they decide you may use it for. Back in the days when public servants that philandered had the decency to keep it discreet. Those simple old days when you could fish and camp and hunt without multiple permits for this, fees for that and fines after all. Back when everyone knew the laws and weren't perpetually afraid and confused at whatever the idiots would come up with next. Those halcyon days where you could speak your mind, but kept it polite and rational because ********s were shunned and loudmouth revilers too far out of line got a punch up the conk, with no legal nanny to help cover up lack of character. The old days when murderers and rapists hung, speedily, rather than lounge on public expense while the lawyers spun out the case into decades of yachts and sports cars and country clubs. The old days where a burglar that was injured on the job didn't complain or get compensation for screwing up. The old days where if something broke it was worth fixing, and often even fun to fix. The old days where weather was weather, and not an excuse for tyranny. It wasn't perfect, but it wasn't like now. There isn't any going back, either. Too many progressives now. Maybe there will be another civilisation spring up in the last empty continent: Antarctica, but I doubt it. No more Normandies, no more Mayflowers. Global utopia, no need for Berlin Walls anymore because everywhere is now a paradise of social justice and equality and sustainability. Hooray.

 

Ladies and gentlemen, I rest my case. I couldn't have done better if I had written it myself.

 

We are going BACK!

 

this is the typical insults you on this forum offer. I have been polite and explain the issues using data as I see it and than you AGAIN resort to insults rather than offer rational explanations.

It appears you have no ability to engage in civil discourse so you have to go back to insults.

 

I think he was offering his honest opinion, rather than just falling back on personal insults as a debating tactic.

 

Who do you mean by we? I think he didn't want to be included in your "we."

 

Petros, you were the one who originally wrote to say you were clueless as to the reasons for climate change. I am simply agreeing with what you wrote. Why criticize me for agreeing with what you wrote?

However, it is not true that everyone is clueless about the causes for climate change, so in that sense BPL is right that your use of the word "we" was far too inclusive, if you meant to include everyone.

 

I am still trying to recover from the panic they caused in the 70's, when I was in highschool, and they told us that World Freezing was coming. All the crops were going to fail, oceans would retreat and there would be massive famines and deaths by the millions.

 

Gonzo, do you recall who "they" were?

 

I do... it was mostly a few science fiction writers and sensationalizing journalists, who latched onto proposed scenarios that were never seriously accepted by mainstream science..

It's completely inaccurate to hold that viewpoint up as the equivalent of today's well-studied and researched theories, which are supported by an overwhelming majority of scientists all over the world.

 

Gonzo, on a more specific note, here is what the Wikipedia article on "global cooling" says about perceptions on this topic during the 1970s.

"In the 1970s, there was increasing awareness that estimates of global temperatures showed cooling since 1945. Of those scientific papers considering climate trends over the 21st century, only 10% inclined towards future cooling, while most papers predicted future warming.[2] The general public had little awareness of carbon dioxide's effects on climate, but Science News in May 1959 forecast a 25% increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide in the 150 years from 1850 to 2000, with a consequent warming trend.[3] The actual increase in this period was 29%. Paul R. Ehrlich mentioned climate change from greenhouse gases in 1968.[4] By the time the idea of global cooling reached the public press in the mid-1970s temperatures had stopped falling, and there was concern in the climatological community about carbon dioxide's warming effects.[5] In response to such reports, the World Meteorological Organization issued a warning in June 1976 that a very significant warming of global climate was probable.[6]"

 

this is wrong at every level, guess you did not read it that carefully. I never said me. Humans (as in "we") are ignorant of the forces that controls global climate. Every model they develop has been hopelessly flawed when compared to actual climate data. Anyone that tells you they know the forces that shape the climate is lying to you. They can speculate, extrapolate, or make wild-*** guesses, but the bottom line is humans are clueless about all of the forces that regulate climate. the earth is not a closed system, we do not even know if it is a valid assumption that the solar system is closed or isolated of outside influence. I have read the reports, none of them claim to have all of the answers (and they would be fools if they did), it is only politicians who claim that we can predict the future, and oh yes, the answer always is a new tax.

There are some clues and some data, none of it explains everything we see in nature. No amount of sophistry will change that. Likely if they can ever catalog and quantize all of the influences it will behave more like Chaos Theory, you can only predict probabilities, not certainties.