Wed, Mar 4, 2015, 2:41 PM EST - U.S. Markets close in 1 hr 19 mins


% | $
Quotes you view appear here for quick access.


  • lonesome_polecatt lonesome_polecatt Feb 5, 2014 12:48 PM Flag

    Thank God and PT Barnum for global warming otherwise this could be much worse.

    Climate Depot

    4406 U.S. record cold temperatures in January – 1073 Snowfall records

    By: Marc Morano - Climate DepotFebruary 5, 2014 7:34 AM

    4406 Record Cold Temps

    1259 Record Warm temps

    1073 Snowfall records

    Record cold-31Jan14

    Climate Scientist Who Got It Right Predicts 20 More Years of Global Cooling: ‘For the next 20 years, I predict global cooling of about 3/10ths of a degree Fahrenheit, as opposed to the one-degree warming predicted by the IPCC,” said Geologist Dr. Don Easterbrook, professor emeritus of geology at Western Washington University and author of 150 scientific journal articles and 10 books, including “Evidence Based Climate Science,” which was published in 2011.

    Forget global warming!? Earth undergoing global COOLING since 2002! Climate Scientist Dr. Judith Curry: ‘Attention in the public debate seems to be moving away from the 15-17 year ‘pause’ to the cooling since 2002’ - Growing number of scientists are predicting global cooling: Russia’s Pulkovo Observatory: ‘We could be in for a cooling period that lasts 200-250 years’

    Record snowfall in New York City

    Antarctic Sea Ice Extent is 26% above normal as of Jan 30 2014: ‘On track to have the highest minimum in the modern satellite era’

    Sentiment: Buy

    SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Most Replied Expand all replies
    • you are a old fool! Funny how easily you'll take a politicians word over a scientists.

    • Your bridge is currently unattended. You best get back before another troll gets there and claims it.


      By JULIET WILLIAMS and JASON DEAREN | Associated Press | 1/31/2014

      SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) - Amid severe drought conditions, California officials announced Friday they won't send any water from the state's vast reservoir system to local agencies beginning this spring, an unprecedented move that affects drinking water supplies for 25 million people and irrigation for 1 million acres of farmland.

      The announcement marks the first time in the 54-year history of the State Water Project that such an action has been taken, but it does not mean that every farm field will turn to dust and every city tap will run dry.

      The 29 agencies that draw from the state's water-delivery system have other sources, although those also have been hard-hit by the drought.

      Many farmers in California's Central Valley, one of the most productive agricultural regions in the country, also draw water from a separate system of federally run reservoirs and canals, but that system also will deliver just a fraction of its normal water allotment this year.

      The announcement affects water deliveries planned to begin this spring, and the allotment could increase if weather patterns change and send more storms into the state.

      Nevertheless, Friday's announcement puts an exclamation point on California's water shortage, which has been building during three years of below-normal rain and snow.

      "This is the most serious drought we've faced in modern times," said Felicia Marcus, chairwoman of the State Water Resources Control Board. "We need to conserve what little we have to use later in the year, or even in future years."

      State Department of Water Resources Director Mark Cowin said there simply is not enough water in the system to meet the needs of farmers, cities and the conservation efforts that are intended to save dwindling populations of salmon and other fish throughout Northern California.

      For perspective, California would have to experience heavy rain and snowfall every other day from now until May to get the state back to its average annual precipitation totals, according to the Department of Water Resources.

      "These actions will protect us all in the long run," Cowin said during a news conference that included numerous state and federal officials, including those from wildlife and agricultural agencies.

      Friday's announcement came after Gov. Jerry Brown's official drought declaration in mid-January, a decision that cleared the way for state and federal agencies to coordinate efforts to preserve water and send it where it is needed most. The governor urged Californians to reduce their water use by 20 percent.

      It also reflects the severity of the dry conditions in the nation's most populous state. Officials say 2013 was the state's driest calendar year since records started being kept, and this year is heading in the same direction.

      A snow survey on Thursday in the Sierra Nevada, one of the state's key water sources, found the water content in the meager snowpack is just 12 percent of normal. Reservoirs are lower than they were at the same time in 1977, which is one of the two previous driest water years on record.

      State officials say 17 rural communities are in danger of a severe water shortage within four months. Wells are running dry or reservoirs are nearly empty in some communities. Others have long-running problems that predate the drought.

      The timing for of Friday's historic announcement was important: State water officials typically announce they are raising the water allotment on Feb. 1, but this year's winter has been so dry they wanted to ensure they could keep the remaining water behind the dams. The announcement also will give farmers more time to determine what crops they will plant this year and in what quantities.

      Farmers and ranchers throughout the state already have felt the drought's impact, tearing out orchards, fallowing fields and trucking in alfalfa to feed cattle on withered range land.

      Without deliveries of surface water, farmers and other water users often turn to pumping from underground aquifers. The state has no role in regulating such pumping.

      "A zero allocation is catastrophic and woefully inadequate for Kern County residents, farms and businesses," Ted Page, president the Kern County Water Agency's board, said in a statement. "While many areas of the county will continue to rely on ground water to make up at least part of the difference, some areas have exhausted their supply."

      Groundwater levels already have been stressed, after pumping accelerated during the dry winter in 2008 and 2009.

      "The challenge is that in last drought we drew down groundwater resources and never allowed them to recover," said Heather Cooley, water program co-director for the Pacific Institute, a water policy think tank in Oakland. "We're seeing long term, ongoing declining groundwater levels, and that's a major problem."

      Many towns and cities already have ordered severe cutbacks in water use.

      With some rivers reduced to a trickle, fish populations also are being affected. Eggs in salmon-spawning beds of the American River near Sacramento were sacrificed after upstream releases from Folsom Dam were severely cut back.

      The drought is highlighting the traditional tensions between groups that claim the state's limited water for their own priorities - farmers, city residents and conservationists.

      Chuck Bonham, director of the California Department of Fish and Wildlife, urged everyone to come together during the crisis.

      "This is not about picking between delta smelt and long-fin smelt and chinook salmon, and it's not about picking between fish and farms or people and the environment," he said. "It is about really hard decisions on a real-time basis where we may have to accept some impact now to avoid much greater impact later."

      Sentiment: Strong Buy

      • 2 Replies to elk_1l
      • Yes, droughts are terrible, and they are exacerbated by man, mostly from covering the world in concrete so that 95% of the water that does fall in the suburban sprawl zones just runs off to the ocean instead of replenishing water tables and aquifers. Add to the the poorly conceived canal/aqueduct system which loses about half the water it carries to evaporation and trouble doesn't have to come knocking, it's been given an open-door. Suburban sprawls do impact climate as the areas have been de-forrested and dried out. This certainly adds to the severity of the tiny and small drought cycles converging.

        Steinbeck lamented in East Of Eden about how during the years of drought (in Salinas Valley) people forget about the good times of excessive rain, and during the times of excessive rains and bountiful harvests they forget about the hard times of drought 30 years earlier.

        Right now the southwest is at the drought end of the small 30~40 year cycle and at the drought end of the tiny 7~10 year cycle...and the fact that about 60% of water that falls in California is lost to run-off and evaporation during delivery certainly isn't helping.

        Instead of covering canals with solar panels we cover the riverbeds with concrete. Humans are so stupid.

      • elk..................y ....................Y here.?...................come on what war r u in?.......................perna

    • lonesome -

      I trust you know the owner/operator of Climate Depot's education and background is political science. And, Climate Depot's principle source of funding is that of a uber rich 'right-wing' 'conservative' who tends to support 'conservative' public policy organizations.

      That which you state as fact should be juxtaposed with the source.


    • are living in the 90s I think....its called Climate Change, not Global warming.....and 95% of the scientist on this subject agree on it......get with the times and stop posting stupid things like this that mislead people....its 2014 now.... : D

      • 2 Replies to yags_2001
      • Give me a list of those scientists and their labs, not just Al Gore's bogus claim.

        Sentiment: Buy

      • The same scientists that led the charge of global warming and had the politicians decree that "we may never see snow again", those scientist agree on what exactly, and why should I care?

        Even without the existence of humans the planet mysteriously experiences changes in climate. Crazy, right? I know, but it is true! These changes occur in tiny, and small, and medium, and large, and extra-large, and gargantuan cycles within cycles. The tiny cycles are 7-10 years, small are 30-40 years, medium 150-250 years, large 1,000-1,500 years, extra-large 10,000-20,000 and the gargantuan 100,000+ years.

        The 'consensus' of man's affecting the weather is based upon an unchecked and unquestioned bit of data about how many tons of CO2 we are putting into the atmosphere, the number used is 60,000% larger than the weight of the oil that is burned to create it.

        If 95% of the 'scientists' agree that burning one pound of oil will result in 600 pounds of carbon dioxide, then there is nothing to debate because debating with a moron is a pointless venture.

        Many other things to take into account and consider, but my time is up. I leave yyou with this one...CO2 rises to the upper atmosphere and reacts to sunlight creating O3 (aka Ozone). You may have heard about the ozone layer protecting life on earth from excessive solar radiation, if not you might want to look into it.

6.97+0.17(+2.50%)Nov 13 3:59 PMEST

Trending Tickers

Trending Tickers features significant U.S. stocks showing the most dramatic increase in user interest in Yahoo Finance in the previous hour over historic norms. The list is limited to those equities which trade at least 100,000 shares on an average day and have a market cap of more than $300 million.