An interesting upcoming debate. Who do you think will win?

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.

Who will win the debate, Lurch or Chubby Cheeks?

  • Kerry

    Votes: 9 30.0%
  • Newt

    Votes: 4 13.3%
  • None, there both losers

    Votes: 9 30.0%
  • I dont care

    Votes: 8 26.7%

  • Total voters
    30
  • Poll closed .
Can't believe somebody voted they didn't care.
The planet is about to explode and some deadbeat votes that he doesn't care.
Moron.

dbs
 
My vote is for Kerry.

If the debate is about whether global warming exists, then Kerry can't lose.

If they both agree that global warming is a problem, and they're past that issue, and the the debate is instead about what the right solutions are, then it's much more wide open. I think Newt is a tool, but he's a decent debater.
 
Yikes: permanent drought predicted for the American southwest, post-2050.

-----
Report: Global Warming to Change Climate of American Southwest

By Marc Kaufman
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, April 5, 2007; 2:16 PM

Global warming will permanently change the climate of the American Southwest, making it so much hotter and drier that Dust Bowl-scale droughts will become common, a new climate report concludes.

While much of the nation west of the Mississippi River is likely to get drier because of the buildup of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, the greatest effect will be felt in the already-arid areas on both sides of the U.S.-Mexico border. By the end of the century, the climate researchers predict, rainfall in that region will have declined by a worrisome 10 to 20 percent annually.

A similar drying out of the "subtropical" belt above and below the equator will hit the Mediterranean region and parts of Africa, South America and South Asia, the report says, as the overall warming of the oceans and surface air transforms basic wind and precipitation patterns around the Earth.

The prediction of a drier Southwest was made by 16 of 19 climate computer models assembled by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the international scientific effort to assess the impact of global warming, which is releasing a new report Friday . The drought results were analyzed separately in a paper published on-line today by the journal Science, which also predicted that regions outside the drying belt will get more rain.

"It's a situation of the poor getting poorer and the rich getting richer when it comes to rainfall," said Yochanan Kushnir of the Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory of Columbia University, one of the paper's authors. "From a climate perspective, these changes are quite dramatic."

He said the authors of the new paper had a very high level of confidence that the droughts will develop and that they will be the result of increases in atmospheric greenhouse gases created through burning fossil fuels and other human activities.

The researchers said future droughts in the affected regions will be different from those in the past, which were caused by local weather conditions and the effects of El Niño and La Niña ocean temperature variations. The Southwest has seen significantly below-average rainfall since 1999, and there is some preliminary information to suggest that global warming is already playing a role the current drought.

As the planet warms, the researchers said, basic climate dynamics will change. Currently, hot air from the equatorial tropics rises about eight to 12 miles until it hits the stratosphere and is blocked, then spreads to the north and south and remains aloft until it passes 10 to 30 degrees latitude before cooling and descending again. The computer models show that with more carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases making the planet hotter, the area where the hot air remains aloft -- and suppresses rainfall -- will widen. Dry areas will become drier, and the arid areas will expand.

The prospect of a drier Southwest is particularly troublesome because the region has some of the nation's fastest growing cities, including Las Vegas and Phoenix.

Richard Seager, also from Lamont-Doherty and a lead author on the paper, said the region will have to rethink how it uses the available water. Governments "need to plan for this right now, coming up with new, well-informed and fair deals for allocation of declining water resources," he said.

The climate models generally assumed a gradually increasing amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere until 2050, at which point they assume that the nations of world will have found ways to replace fossil fuels as the main source of energy. Because climate responds steadily but slowly to the buildup, however, the full effect on precipitation changes would not be felt until 2100.

The changes are already in progress and will not be stopped for decades even by dramatic reductions in greenhouse gas emissions, the researchers said.

The current drought that has affected much of the Southwest since 1999 may already be the result of global warming as much as regional weather patterns, they said. For instance, Kushnir said, the drought continued last year even though there was a significant El Niño effect -- which normally produces increased rainfall in the area.

Climate scientists have debated whether the increased dryness projected is a function of greater evaporation as a result of hotter temperatures or of decreases in rainfall. The broad consensus from the 19 new climate models puts the blame on decreased rainfall, Kushnir said.
 
diamond said:
Can't believe somebody voted they didn't care.
The planet is about to explode and some deadbeat votes that he doesn't care.
Moron.

dbs

I just now voted that I don't care, before I saw this post. Why would I care what Newt thinks about something he doesn't believe in? Why would I care at all what Newt thinks about anything?
 
I voted for number 3. Kerry will get his facts all wrong, which will make me shake my head in disgust, and Newt will find a way to blame illegal immigrants who speak Spanish for global warming.
 
diamond said:
Can't believe somebody voted they didn't care.
The planet is about to explode and some deadbeat votes that he doesn't care.
Moron.

dbs

Sorry man....I cliked the wrong button.:wink:
 
Reminder for all my open minded, fact oriented, truth seeking friends here:



The debate, hosted by New York University’s John Brademas Center for the Study of Congress, will take place next Tuesday, April 10, at 10 a.m. in the Russell Senate Office Building.

:wave::sexywink:
 
diamond said:


Last time I checked, today is the 9th, Einstein.

Hey Diamond, see that thing in the sky right above you? That's my joke going way way over your head.




















Read the part I quoted of yours and then read what I wrote. Disregard the date. EINSTEIN.:|
 
Last edited:
albert-einsteinhfm.jpg
 
I didn't vote, but Kerry's a much better debater, if we're going by that. But, a lot of Americans don't know what makes a good or poor debater, so people will probably think that Newt wins.
 
you're such a doofus, dear diamente

diamond said:
Can't believe somebody voted they didn't care.
The planet is about to explode and some deadbeat votes that he doesn't care.
Moron.

dbs

Time for you to wake the hell up, sunshine. Not everyone is in the US and, wait for it, not everyone cares what some seppo politicians think!
:wink:
 
I think the debate will be more along the lines of how best to go forward politically, economically, scientifically and socially in a world that appears to be warming...rather than the cause.

Newt will be optimistic, rational, conversant and encourage private sector solutions. Kerry will be call for increased government regulation and control, higher taxes and blame Bush for everything. And probably botch a joke or two along the way.

Then they will both board their private jets and head back home to their stately manors.
 
INDY500 said:


Newt will be optimistic, rational,

This morning I almost commented on this statement saying Newt and rational don't go together, but it seems like for the first time Newt actually has turned to rational thinking.

Good for him, hopefully more conservatives will pull their heads out and join him.
 
Good strategy. Aims for the middle.
Hopefully it's more than just appeasement talking.
 
I think in the other thread about Newt
the Spanish is Ghetto one

I said something like
"Newt is not stupid'

I did not watch,
Who won the debate?
 
Do see people this debate also as a discussion about a topic that deserves some serious talking, or is it really just kind of a competition where the only big question is, "Who has won?"

I would say: Nature has won.
 
Back
Top Bottom