Why don't Letsrunners believe in global warming?

another average american wrote:

Al Gore is a hypocritical idiot. That doesn't change what the science says.

I love how whenever the topic of conversation comes to climate change, people point out Al Gore's hypocrisy, as if the only evidence for climate change is "Al Gore says so" and if he's not practicing what he preaches, then it must not be true. Please.

well, he is the face of the movement. Maybe they need a new face, if they want the issue to be taken seriously.

Racehorse wrote:

used to be cool wrote:

Touche!

But take a look at where most Americans live right now. In the South and on the coast, where Winters are temperate. I think that, with or without global warming, Canada's still going to be too cold for most, plus there's the perception that Canada's a socialist country, which will scare away the Tea-partiers. I do worry about our freshwater though and what will happen when the U.S. runs out in many regions.

Wow! Talk about ignorant. The most populated city in the US is New York City. I would not call that a temperate winter. Add in Boston, Philadelphia and other NE cities and you have to say "Wow, how ignorant can Canadians be?"

Ummm... New York is on the coast and technically classified as having a humid, sub-tropical climate (although it is on the very edge of this category). While it may get heavy snowfalls every now and then, it is warmer in the Winters than anywhere in Canada other than coastal B.C.

I said in my post that most Americans live in the South and on the Coast. That would mean that population density in the Northern interior would be low, yes? Take a look at which states have the lowest population density:

1. Alaska (obviously)

2. Wyoming

3. Montana

4. North Dakota

5. South Dakota

These are the coldest locations in the U.S.

Anyhow, cities on the Eastern Coast of the U.S. got a head start on the rest of the country, as they were founded much earlier. If you look at the statistics of which states are growing the fastest, states in the NE have the lowest growth in the U.S (sometimes negative). Since the invention of air conditioning, the population has slowly been drifting in a Southwesterly direction.

Apparently I'm less ignorant about the U.S. than you are.

well of course wrote:

Argue all you want, but what exactly can we do about it?

If everyone out there who REALLY believes humans are causing this climate change would put their actions where their mouths are, they would stop driving automobiles, stop using petroleum products, electricity, and refuse to accept sustenance from fossil fuel generated products.

If they are that afraid of the effects of AGW, they should commit to their version of the fix.

Why government needs to lead and set guidelines.

Ummm... New York is on the coast and technically classified as having a humid, sub-tropical climate (although it is on the very edge of this category). While it may get heavy snowfalls every now and then, it is warmer in the Winters than anywhere in Canada other than coastal B.C.

I said in my post that most Americans live in the South and on the Coast. That would mean that population density in the Northern interior would be low, yes? Take a look at which states have the lowest population density:

1. Alaska (obviously)

2. Wyoming

3. Montana

4. North Dakota

5. South Dakota

These are the coldest locations in the U.S.

Anyhow, cities on the Eastern Coast of the U.S. got a head start on the rest of the country, as they were founded much earlier. If you look at the statistics of which states are growing the fastest, states in the NE have the lowest growth in the U.S (sometimes negative). Since the invention of air conditioning, the population has slowly been drifting in a Southwesterly direction.

Apparently I'm less ignorant about the U.S. than you are.[/quote]Well, you said warmer winters, and NY does not qualify. You said nothing about population shifts, but mentioned where they lived, which was incorrect. Now, you say Alaska is Northern interior and not on the coast, while Alaska has more coastline than the other states. You never mentioned growth, but populations. Get your facts stated correctly or I will continue to cal you ignorant (and be correct).

Racehorse wrote:

another average american wrote:

Al Gore is a hypocritical idiot. That doesn't change what the science says.

I love how whenever the topic of conversation comes to climate change, people point out Al Gore's hypocrisy, as if the only evidence for climate change is "Al Gore says so" and if he's not practicing what he preaches, then it must not be true. Please.

well, he is the face of the movement. Maybe they need a new face, if they want the issue to be taken seriously.

Yeah, I mean he won a Nobel Prize specifically for it. You need a new spokesman.

another average american wrote:

Al Gore is a hypocritical idiot. That doesn't change what the science says.

I love how whenever the topic of conversation comes to climate change, people point out Al Gore's hypocrisy, as if the only evidence for climate change is "Al Gore says so" and if he's not practicing what he preaches, then it must not be true. Please.

Hey Average American, I accepted your offer, if you would still like to engage in that. It's whatever, but I would be glad to discuss/debate it with you.

I said they lived in the South AND on the COAST!!!!! What are you disputing here? At any rate, I didn't say that every square foot of the coast had a high population density. I said that many of the areas of high density were found along coastlines, where Winters tend to be milder (with the exception of Alaska) than the continental interior. There is a difference.

New York has warmer Winters than the 5 states with the lowest population densities and warmer Winters than anywhere in Canada other than Coastal B.C.

I'm terribly sorry for not mentioning Alaska in my original post but it's not part of the contiguous United States and I figured that it was a given that it had low population density and cold temperatures due to its latitude. I guess I should have made it more clear so that you could understand what I meant.

Perhaps you're just bitter because you're getting pawned at U.S. geography by a Canadian.... that or I'm getting trolled. Either way, I think that I've made my point and I'm not responding to this tangent anymore.

This is probably just a case of a whiny New Yorker with the mistaken impression that he knows anything about REAL winter.

Blowing.Rock Master wrote:

Your link is a summary discourse on greenhouse gases (which completely ignores water vapor, by far the most infuential), nobody disputes the information there. But it didn't contain ANY empirical evidence of anything, much less any evidence that the current warming is human caused and not a natural event.

So it's not that you don't understand the science, you are a either a liar or a troll.

The above link discusses water vapor in lurid detail and it full of empirical data (data derived from reliable measurement and observation). E.g. ice cores, carbon and boron isoptopes, "the empirical relationship between stomatal pores on tree leaves and atmospheric CO2."

All of the empirical data supports the same conclusion: Current climate change is anthropogenic.

Yeah water vapor is a red herring. The amount of water in the atmosphere IS a significant cause of warming - but that amount is largely determined by temperature! It's a positive feedback mechanism, not a stabilizer.

Hey Someone Else, you can email me at ay.mous@yahoo.com.