Do you think the heatwaves are due to global warming?

[The Adult Broker]

Vegas was 106 degrees and hard to breathe.

I come back to Los Angeles where it is 91 degrees at 11am in the morning

Wisconsin was at 104 plus 100% humidity

Chicago is sweltering in the high 90's

North Carolina I heard is just awful with major humidity in high 80's

What is going on?

[betabomb]

el nino, yo

[Chris1sMe]

It has been very hot here melting

[sh33p]

Yup, global warming...bigtime!

[Juicy D. Links]

all i know is it is hot as hell here in NY....

humid and like 90;s

[notabook]

If by heatwaves you mean hardons and by global warming you mean Angelina Jolie's lips, then yes!

[sweetgirl2006]

Yes i think heatwaves are caused by global warming. It's going to heat up in Vancouver in the next few days.

[B O B]

I dont know if the heatwave is from global warming, but wtf is with this weather shift that makes San Diego now look like Hawaii?

[ETCKon]

yeah new York rites City was pretty damn Scortching today.....i THink it was like in the low 90's with nineTeens chance of Rain fall.....Lots of Boys in Blue out today guarding all the SUBway stations right now....Butt besides the fake chemical trails in the sky, the ozOne layer is Fine....

[Laurel]

Yeah, it's hot in LA! I have coyotes coming by my front door looking for water.

[Scott McD]

Originally Posted by The Adult Broker

Vegas was 106 degrees and hard to breathe.

I could never have handled that shit. I found Vegas warm enough when i was there in January...

[diggz]

http://climatecrisis.net

Go see this movie and you won't be forming it as a question.

[Splum]

Its called summer?

[stickyfingerz]

Originally Posted by Splum

Its called summer?

I recall it being hotter back in the late 70's of course then we were worried bout the second iceage coming cause of all the florocarbons.

[Mr. Romance]

I am in the middle of winter....

Mr. Romance

[Splum]

Originally Posted by The Adult Broker

Vegas was 106 degrees and hard to breathe. I come back to Los Angeles where it is 91 degrees at 11am in the morning Wisconsin was at 104 plus 100% humidity Chicago is sweltering in the high 90's North Carolina I heard is just awful with major humidity in high 80's What is going on?

OH NOES@!1

[GrouchyAdmin]

I'm surprised to see that people aren't in here blaming Bush for this because of his refusal to sign Kyoto..

I'd say that as this is a common ecological occurance over time, that's my bet. It's been getting hotter over the last X years where X is any year that I have not been dead. It was hotter in the northwest last week than it is here in the southwestern desert.. that's just "not right", but has been progressively changing.

Also, cocks.

[bringer]

werent we heading for another ice age only 30 years ago?
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&l...&b tnG=Search

[minusonebit]

Bush is responsible somehow...

[Imortyl Pussycat]

Originally Posted by The Adult Broker

Vegas was 106 degrees and hard to breathe.

I come back to Los Angeles where it is 91 degrees at 11am in the morning

Wisconsin was at 104 plus 100% humidity

Chicago is sweltering in the high 90's

North Carolina I heard is just awful with major humidity in high 80's

What is going on?

Where did you disappear to at the show girly?? What parties did you hit? Or did you have a private one in your room? I was all freakin over the place. I told Raj I will try harder at the next show to contain myself. I say that every show but next time I am going to try my hardest. Missed you at the events! Hope your fully recovered.

[Cory W]

106 Lori? That is low balling it

It was 120 just outside the city.

[Thead]

Originally Posted by minusonebit

Bush is responsible somehow...

yeah right ...

"It is well known that in 1997 under the auspices of the United Nations, delegates from 168 countries, assembled in Kyoto, signed a protocol to reduce the emissions of greenhouse gases. Shortly after taking office in January, 2001, Bush withdrew the US adherence to the Kyoto protocol. Immediately indignation and even insults abounded, especially from Europe. Bush, it was said, cynically sacrificed our planet?s future to capitalist profit and in particular to the oil companies whose notorious puppet he is, as we were told. Unfortunately, the authors of this in-depth analysis neglected some facts that they could have easily researched. First and foremost, in 1997 under Clinton?s presidency, the American Senate had already voted against the Kyoto protocol by 95 votes to 0. Rightly or wrongly, this is another problem. The fact remains, however, that Bush was not responsible. Later, just before turning over his powers to his successor, Bill Clinton had signed an executive order re-establishing the American support for the famous protocol.

Good manners in a democracy dictate that executive orders issued by an outgoing president at the end of his mandate never deal with questions of high importance for the political future of the country. In this instance Clinton?s obvious intention was to pull a fast one on Bush and to leave him with a crown of thorns. Had he accepted the commitment, the new president would have had to confront the enormous difficulty of reducing gas emissions by 5.2 percent without painful and precipitous cuts in industrial production and energy consumption of individuals, which would have been an impossible challenge. A rejection, on the other hand, would unleash vociferous personal criticism from the whole world. This was what occurred. These criticisms were all the more hypocritical as their most vociferous authors who pilloried the US in front of all humanity in the name of ecological morals were most careful not to apply the same moral standards to themselves. In fact, by the middle of 2001, four years after the Kyoto conference, not a single one of the 167 other signatories and most prominently none of the European countries had ratified the protocol.

I have temporarily left aside the question whether the Kyoto protocol is realistic. Suffice it to say that some highly polluting countries, such as Brazil, China and India, demand that the US apply restrictions that they themselves do not feel obliged to respect. In a report published on 29 May 2001 the European Environment Agency observed a worsening of pollution in Europe, due mainly to a ?constant increase of transportation, especially those forms of transportation that are the least respectful of the environment (road and air traffic).? The agency also noted an increase in pollution due to home heating and of water pollution due to nitrates. Those who preach are definitely not showing a good example.

One could be tempted to take an additional step and to think that there is an anti-American psychopathology attempting to transform the US into the scapegoat for all sins committed by the rest of the world. The ecologists would refute that and observe that the US, with its approximately 5 percent of the world?s population, produces 25 percent of the planet?s industrial pollution. This may be true, though it should be added that it also produces 25 percent of the goods and services of this same planet. It must also be said that up to the middle of 2001 the 167 other signatories of the Kyoto Protocol had done absolutely nothing, collectively and individually, to begin to reduce their 75 percent of the pollution. We are in the middle of total incoherence. It was more important to excommunicate than to un-pollute.

Whatever criticism the American environmental policy deserves or does not deserve, one must realize that the core of the debate needs to be found elsewhere. The objective of the Western ecologists is to make the US, that is to say capitalism, the supreme and even the sole culprit of the planet?s pollution. Our ecologists are anything but ecologists. They are leftists. They are interested in the environment that they pretend to defend only as a means to attack free society. During the ?70s and ?80s they never denounced the pollution in the communist countries that was a thousand times more atrocious than in the West. It was not a capitalist pollution. They were silent when Chernobyl happened and they are silent now about the decrepit nuclear power plants that still exist all over the former Communist territories. They also remain silent about the hundreds of ex-Soviet submarines, armed to the teeth with nuclear weapons, that the Russians sank as they were in the Barents Sea. To demand that humanity be freed of this mortal peril that will endanger it for thousands of years would be useless from their socialist point of view. Indeed, this tiring enterprise would not in any way strengthen their crusade against the scourge of globalization that they consider to be a much more formidable danger. In the past, especially in the ?70s and especially in the US, there was a sincere environmentalism. But it has long been since recovered and transformed by an environmentalism full of lies that has become the mask of old Marxist theories under a shade of green. This ideological environmentalism sees nature threatened only in those nations that practice economic freedom and above all in the richest of them all."

Jean François Revel

[E$_manager]

Global warming is possible, El ninio - no.

[The Adult Broker]

Originally Posted by WEG Cory

106 Lori? That is low balling it

It was 120 just outside the city.

Oh well then I meant 106 at night

Call me a wimp but the heat did me in

[bdld]

LA is hot right now, and not in a good way

[tony286]

Originally Posted by stickyfingerzdotnet

I recall it being hotter back in the late 70's of course then we were worried bout the second iceage coming cause of all the florocarbons.

You recall you were like 3 yrs old oh stop lol

[KRL]

The polar caps are melting at an alarming rate. Once we lose our ice cubes, we're really fucked.

[Paul]

Originally Posted by toonpornblog

I'd say that as this is a common ecological occurance over time, that's my bet.

I saw an interesting program on the BBC that was arguing that historically the world has had climate changes all the time, so i suppose its possible we are in the middle of a cycle. Then again I'm no expert

Originally Posted by KRL

The polar caps are melting at an alarming rate. Once we lose our ice cubes, we're really fucked.

Why is that ? At least then we can see whats underneath the ice

[Heywood Jablome]

I have run numerous computer simulations, and I predict widespread hemispheric cooling in 2 months.

[Phoenix]

buy more gas and vote for bush...get a shotgun and sit in the hills

[blazi]

I believe global warming truly is getting worse each year!

[The Adult Broker]

What are the main variables of global warming, I would like to be educated further!

[Chris]

102 right now in texass

[Shok]

Just like life after death

global warming is a myth

[fantabulous]

Hot days for HOT deals

[12clicks]

Originally Posted by Thead

yeah right ...

"It is well known that in 1997 under the auspices of the United Nations, delegates from 168 countries, assembled in Kyoto, signed a protocol to reduce the emissions of greenhouse gases. Shortly after taking office in January, 2001, Bush withdrew the US adherence to the Kyoto protocol. Immediately indignation and even insults abounded, especially from Europe. Bush, it was said, cynically sacrificed our planet?s future to capitalist profit and in particular to the oil companies whose notorious puppet he is, as we were told. Unfortunately, the authors of this in-depth analysis neglected some facts that they could have easily researched. First and foremost, in 1997 under Clinton?s presidency, the American Senate had already voted against the Kyoto protocol by 95 votes to 0. Rightly or wrongly, this is another problem. The fact remains, however, that Bush was not responsible. Later, just before turning over his powers to his successor, Bill Clinton had signed an executive order re-establishing the American support for the famous protocol.

Good manners in a democracy dictate that executive orders issued by an outgoing president at the end of his mandate never deal with questions of high importance for the political future of the country. In this instance Clinton?s obvious intention was to pull a fast one on Bush and to leave him with a crown of thorns. Had he accepted the commitment, the new president would have had to confront the enormous difficulty of reducing gas emissions by 5.2 percent without painful and precipitous cuts in industrial production and energy consumption of individuals, which would have been an impossible challenge. A rejection, on the other hand, would unleash vociferous personal criticism from the whole world. This was what occurred. These criticisms were all the more hypocritical as their most vociferous authors who pilloried the US in front of all humanity in the name of ecological morals were most careful not to apply the same moral standards to themselves. In fact, by the middle of 2001, four years after the Kyoto conference, not a single one of the 167 other signatories and most prominently none of the European countries had ratified the protocol.

I have temporarily left aside the question whether the Kyoto protocol is realistic. Suffice it to say that some highly polluting countries, such as Brazil, China and India, demand that the US apply restrictions that they themselves do not feel obliged to respect. In a report published on 29 May 2001 the European Environment Agency observed a worsening of pollution in Europe, due mainly to a ?constant increase of transportation, especially those forms of transportation that are the least respectful of the environment (road and air traffic).? The agency also noted an increase in pollution due to home heating and of water pollution due to nitrates. Those who preach are definitely not showing a good example.

One could be tempted to take an additional step and to think that there is an anti-American psychopathology attempting to transform the US into the scapegoat for all sins committed by the rest of the world. The ecologists would refute that and observe that the US, with its approximately 5 percent of the world?s population, produces 25 percent of the planet?s industrial pollution. This may be true, though it should be added that it also produces 25 percent of the goods and services of this same planet. It must also be said that up to the middle of 2001 the 167 other signatories of the Kyoto Protocol had done absolutely nothing, collectively and individually, to begin to reduce their 75 percent of the pollution. We are in the middle of total incoherence. It was more important to excommunicate than to un-pollute.

Whatever criticism the American environmental policy deserves or does not deserve, one must realize that the core of the debate needs to be found elsewhere. The objective of the Western ecologists is to make the US, that is to say capitalism, the supreme and even the sole culprit of the planet?s pollution. Our ecologists are anything but ecologists. They are leftists. They are interested in the environment that they pretend to defend only as a means to attack free society. During the ?70s and ?80s they never denounced the pollution in the communist countries that was a thousand times more atrocious than in the West. It was not a capitalist pollution. They were silent when Chernobyl happened and they are silent now about the decrepit nuclear power plants that still exist all over the former Communist territories. They also remain silent about the hundreds of ex-Soviet submarines, armed to the teeth with nuclear weapons, that the Russians sank as they were in the Barents Sea. To demand that humanity be freed of this mortal peril that will endanger it for thousands of years would be useless from their socialist point of view. Indeed, this tiring enterprise would not in any way strengthen their crusade against the scourge of globalization that they consider to be a much more formidable danger. In the past, especially in the ?70s and especially in the US, there was a sincere environmentalism. But it has long been since recovered and transformed by an environmentalism full of lies that has become the mask of old Marxist theories under a shade of green. This ideological environmentalism sees nature threatened only in those nations that practice economic freedom and above all in the richest of them all."

Jean François Revel

exactly.
also, as was mentioned, in the 70s we thought an ice age was so iminent there were even plans to melt the ice caps.
Being let around by the nose because of natural fluctuations is silly. luckily we have a pres who understood that.


My take on it is as the caps melt, they cool the ocean, creating a gradual dip in temp. its a back and forth process thats been going on forever

[Tom_PM]

Clinton, Bush, whomever. States like New York are already passing within state a lot of measures similar to kyoto proposals. So it's kinda like gay marriage. States are already covering it, so maybe there's no need for the feds to play nanny as much. That'd be ok.

Global Warming is just one of those things that is never going to be easy to pinpoint. You can go and measure glaciers and say they're receeding faster in the last 10 years than all previous years measured. But in Earth time, thats half a blink of an eye, so I dont know that you can definitively say cause and effect by humans.

But anyway, as long as common sense happens it'll be ok. It makes sense to vent c02 in smarter ways. More "green" buildings go up all the time etc. Common sense stuff.

[diggz]

http://climatecrisis.net

go see it

[dynastoned]

Originally Posted by The Adult Broker

Vegas was 106 degrees and hard to breathe.

I come back to Los Angeles where it is 91 degrees at 11am in the morning

Wisconsin was at 104 plus 100% humidity

Chicago is sweltering in the high 90's

North Carolina I heard is just awful with major humidity in high 80's

What is going on?

vegas 106 degrees, say it ain't so!

LA 91 degrees at 11AM? OUTRAGEOUS!

Chicago in the high 90's, never seen that before..



yo that shit is normal its usually 110+ in vegas this time of year... summer is hot there is nothing unusual about any of the places you named so far.

[Paul]

Tommorrow is going to be the hottest day EVER recorded In Northern Ireland

[madawgz]

its fucking hot here in montreal too

[The Adult Broker]

Originally Posted by dynastoned

vegas 106 degrees, say it ain't so!

LA 91 degrees at 11AM? OUTRAGEOUS!

Chicago in the high 90's, never seen that before..



yo that shit is normal its usually 110+ in vegas this time of year... summer is hot there is nothing unusual about any of the places you named so far.

that may be 'usual' but considering lots of this weather started earlier than usual, islasting longer than usual and also the percentage of humidity is greater than normal along with the heat... and considering it is across the country, perhaps world, well then... it's not so 'usual'

[stickyfingerz]

Originally Posted by bringer

werent we heading for another ice age only 30 years ago?
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&l...&b tnG=Search

Look up a bit at me post.

[stickyfingerz]

Originally Posted by tony404

You recall you were like 3 yrs old oh stop lol

in 79 I was 6. You dont remember things when you were six?