WIth today’s release of the phase two of the IPCC’s report which confirms climate change is highly likely to cause havoc on the earth, look forward to the dogmatist on the far right to raise their tired ghosts of stateism and junk science. 

Note: The IPCC included work and coordination of over 1,000 scientists from 120 countries.  The Oil Industry can only buy about 20 scientists (and half of Congress).

WIth today’s release of the phase two of the IPCC’s report which confirms climate change is highly likely to cause havoc on the earth, look forward to the dogmatist on the far right to raise their tired ghosts of stateism and junk science. 

Note: The IPCC included work and coordination of over 1,000 scientists from 120 countries.  The Oil Industry can only buy about 20 scientists.

illgramaticus knee o’kaun

Perhaps you should take your insightful analysis of the world and point it inwards. You might find it is a heavy burden being the center of the universe.
Replace the word global warming with global terrorism and the response is quite different.

No one commented on what you said b/c, quite frankly the majority of people are tired of this argument. The fact of the matter is humans ARE having an impact. I agree with you, the Earth has gone through cycles of hotter and colder periods, but never NEVER has the world’s temperatures risen this quickly or dramatically. We know this from SCIENTIFIC evidence such as ice core samples taken fromt the south pole done by SCIENTISTS not on a corporate payroll. There only reason for doing it is a desire to find the truth. I’m not even going to post a link to support the claim I just made—go to google, yahoo…Christ you can even go to Ask-freakin-Jeeves if you want to and find it on your own. This is not a liberal vs. conservative thing. Science superscedes such base and petty differences. I don’t think the US is bad, I don’t think business is bad, only responsible.

i find it amazing that nobody argues with my statement of a weeks ago, cause you know its true !!

global warming is a fact, its been going on for 150,000 yrs (this go around)

we humans are just a small factor in the big picture. we are not the begin or the end of creation, we do not control the planet, or the environment, no matter what we do the planet will continue to warm as it has been for 150,000 yrs (ice age)

lib’s just want to hang it all on humans and corporations cause it fits into your political biased template “people are bad !!! business is bad !! the USA is bad !! blah blah blah !!!

you can cut our CO2 admissions down to zero (not really ) but if you did, the planet would still continue to warm, until it starts to cool !! nothing stays the same, except lib dogma

illgramaticus knee o’kaun

Wow! If this guy does a media blitz and he gets 10 k from Exxon for each one, now he can move to his house on the Florida Keys.
Science works here, look at the talking clones.

I checked the site that Bruce B mentions:

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php?p=414#comment-29769

I found there two different explanations on this site for why co2, which is supposed to cause rises in temperatures, actually lags temperature rise by 800 years. One explanation says that when you average all the times, co2 still precedes temperature rise, but only by a slight amount (not stated). (IRRELEVANT ARGUMENT) A second explanation given elsewhere on the site says that, yes, co2 takes 800 years to rise after temperature rises, but then at that point c02 starts to cause temperature increases. (BIZARRE ARGUMENT) I know a little about statistics, and this sounds like a dog that doesn’t hunt.

The other site Bruce B mentions in his genuflection to “Actual Science” (I assume that the capital letters mean something) proves similarly murky in their attempt to discredit the idea of solar and celestial winds:

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2007/03/ cosmoclimatology-tired-old-arguments-in-new-clothes/

Maybe I’m dense, but I still don’t see anywhere why it would be that the other planets in our solar system are warming up, too, even though they don’t have any humans creating greenhouse gases.

And it still seems to me that co2 is a byproduct of global warming, and couldn’t possibly be a contributor. Disabuse me if you can.

Really, help me out, here, Bruce or anyone else. I really do want to learn; if you can explain what’s going on in clear engish, that would be great. I haven’t had time yet to watch the videos you posted, but will, probably next weekend when I have some time.

Anyway, don’t point me to any disinfo websites. For example, the website that purports to be “climate science for climate scientists,” but then else where on the site says its purpose is to “provide context” for journalists and the public,” and also does not reveal who sponsors it. Sounds like spin to me.

Lack of history? what about the warnings about a new ice age approaching imminently?

I know enough about the history of the “Actual Science” behind HIV/AIDS to be very suspicious. There’s lots of money to be made by scientists whose very livelihood depends on federal grants. The situation with climate research sounds a lot like what happened with AIDS researchers who couldn’t (and still can’t) get funded unless they hewed to the party line. Billions spent funding those who did hew to the party line, even though there was (and still is) no proof that AIDS is caused by HIV, that HIV could cause any disease, really. An untested hypothesis was simply declared to be true in 1984 and the money flowed. That story has been told many times (e.g., authors Duesberg, Farber, etc.).

Who benefits from claiming humans cause global warming? Pollution is the ultimate globalist cause—because pollution doesn’t respect national boundaries. Expect your rights to be curtailed, maybe we’ll have carbon taxes proposed, too. All for a lie? I remain to be convinced, but open to arguments.

Is this guy suggesting that we should let other countries reap the profits of advanced energy generation techniques, for example Toyota with the hybrid engines? The profits and prestige of state of the art solar generation, green appliances, etc. could belong to the U.S., rather than going into debt to buy them from other countries. Discouraging alternative energy research and development is terrible for our economy!

I am fascinated by the lack of history here! Doesn’t anyone remember the “hole in the ozone” fight of the late 60’s and seventies? The same industry types fought tooth and nail against the science community to disprove the “outlandish theory” that CFC’s destroyred ozone. The same “natural event” rationals, the commercials and propaganda, the paid for “scientific reports” were all part of the industries “ozone hole myth” campaign. Only when a satellite took an actual picture of the hole in the ozone, did industry and the world come together to ban CFC’s. So everyone should shove into the faces of these idiots the remembrance of their same folly of 40 years ago.

Kellina,
Keep that mind open for sure.  Propaganda that you refer to has been discredited by facts based on research over the past thirty years.  If you like YouTube as a reliable source, here is another:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gFDi4BZ4Ivk

I have just one response for these deniers:  “What if you’re wrong”?
Peace!
Mark

The Heritage Foundation - Just another American whorehouse!

BTW, just curious, can anyone point to a global warming denier/scientist who isn’t on Exxon/Mobil’s payroll?

Kellina’s reference to the BBC Global Warming Swindle video shows why it’s important to consider Actual Science and not a made-for-public-consumption piece of propoganda.  For the rest of the story, see

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php?p=414#comment-29769

as well as a discussion on ‘cosmoclimatology’, a close relative of astrology as far as explaining climate fluctuations…

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2007/03/cosmoclimatology-tired-old-arguments-in-new-clothes/

Part of the problem here is that there’s nothing really ‘conservative’ about conservatives anymore, it’s just a label for them to travel under, ‘nom de plume’, if you will, with no real obligation to examine any of the underlying concepts and principles involved. In theory, conservatives should be among the biggest conservationists out there, concerned about long-term human impact on the environment etc., but, as such economic altruism would run counter to the economic interests of some of their biggest donors, such as oil companies, well you can kind of see who’s writing their material, there.

i don’t like cold weather and where i live in sunny florida it gets too cold for my liking. i’m all in favor of global warming. i live 15 miles from the ocean, i don’t expect to have oceanfront property in my lifetime. i suppose that hurricanes may become more violent, but i have a lot of homeowners insurance and have experienced a lot of hurricanes in my lifetime. as a native my experience with hurricanes has always been, there is a party somewhere and what better excuse is needed to get drunk and cheer the storm than imminent peril. the tourists alway run to the local shelters, the unwanted newcomers always run to the home depot and buy generators and bottled water, as if there won’t be enough water when that baby hits. the last time a hurricane threatened my home city{Jacksonville} my lover and went into our front yard and danced naked while drinking Crown Royal. we toasted the hurricane,we made obesiance and together we saved the city and it’s 1 million inhabitants the worst the storm had to offer by acknowledging our powerlessness over it and giving kudos to that powerlessness. the two of us gave the hurricane what it asked for,while tens of thousands cowered in fear. the power of mother nature; revel in it, don’t fear it.

Guess, Global Warming is sort of like the weapons of mass destruction.
One can argue, one dead horse is enough. 
Let’s save the money to support the war, a much more worthy cause.

Is this guy for real? Check out his company’s list of contributors http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Competitive_Enterprise_Institute.. When Exxon and Ford sign his paycheck, what do expect him to say?

Hello Earth to Kellina at

http://www.620kpoj.com/pages/pages/thom_and_gelbspan.php

Check out a some facts about the Brit propaganda. An d interestingly enough let us know who funded this bit of “truth”.

Thanks,

Frosty The Snowman

I still believe that it’s good not to waste resources, not to pollute, not to disturb ecosystems. But let’s be clear—this debate is about whether or not humans are contributing to global warming. And nothing anyone has said here has convinced me.

I am inherently skeptical—of religion, that HIV causes AIDS, etc., you name it. I’m open to argument—real aruments. Ad hominem is not a good enough basis on which to place my trust. E.g., I don’t care if Martin whats-his-name believes that silicon implants make a great breakfast; the data on global warming are what we are discussing. Are you saying that he faked the data?

Just watch the video and read the article I posted. I thought people at this site were open-minded. Look at the data, and think for yourself. If you want to argue with me, you’ve got to make substantive points.

I especially like the post #61243 by Kellina. Science is inherently fallible, but to discredit one theory for another theory? You can’t disprove one theory by not proving the another. On either side of the argument, you need research funds. The second post is even more fascinating, Al Gore is somehow so much more threatening to democracy than the consolidation of economies and legislative powers. 
I think the underlying issue is where your faith lies. That is, if you believe humans don’t have any impact on the environment, then chances are you will refute anything thing that poses a challenge to that which has become your mundane lifestyle. (...speaking for myself, of course.)
If you think humans effect the environment - in any way shape or form - then you are happy that any public forum exists.
One thing which is difficult to debate (use your imagination and visit google earth) is the physical reduction of every ecosystem on the planet. Thus, if any dramatic event should occur with planet’s homeostasis severely compromised, then more dramatic are the consequences. No? I mean, exponential functions exist EVERYWHERE in nature.

Kellina - I guess scepticism is not your cup of tea.  That “documentary” on Ch4 about global warming, was made by Martin Durkin, who has been shown to use, to put this mildly, questionable methods in his previous films on such topics as the glories of silicone implants and genetic modification.  I am still snickering from perusing the rockwell site.

Christians, especially the born-again believers, are convinced that planet Earth is pre-destined to be destroyed by a vengeful God, in a final, “lake of fire”, doomsday scenario - it’s all clearly spelled out in the last book of the New Testament, “The Apocalypse”.

When a large bloc of Americans actually believe that we are in the “last days”, as Rev. Falwell, Rev. Robertson and other professional holymen proclaim, then their contempt for the planet’s ecosystem becomes more understandable. Why wash and wax your car if you “know” that it’s going to be totally destroyed in the immediate future?

It’s hard to argue with people who have surrendered their powers of reason to some self-serving cleric. As America sinks into deepening theocracy, common sense will become an increasingly scarce commodity.

Yes, the Earth is warming. But why? And can we do anything about it?

Watch the video shown on the BBC a couple of weeks ago: The Great Global Warming Swindle.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XttV2C6B8pU

It deconstructs, with data going back millenia, that the supposedly devastating correlation between rising temperatures and co2 is misleading. Co2 rises long after (hundreds of years after) temperature rises, and those temperature fluctuations are due to sun-spot (magnetic) activity. So yes, the Earth is warming, but so are other planets, and it’s due to the activity of the sun. We are not even warming as much as we warmed during the middle ages. And anyway, co2 is a minor part of the atmosphere—less than one percent; and just a fraction of that is man-made.

Here’s an even more indepth look at the issue, particularly Gore’s part:

http://www.lewrockwell.com/miller/miller21.html

Take a look for yourself. Just because something is posted on Truthdig, doesn’t mean it’s true.

K

I’m also an “environmental analyst.”  Found a certificate in a nut…

...wing-nut that is…

matt straight wears green lamé!  contradictions abound!

Once again the conservative “brain trust” tells us not to do anything that might hurt their god…money. You see nothing in the entire universe is as important as the almighty “economy”. However don’t let that almighty-ness fool you, something as simple as returning to more fuel efficient vehicles could be just enough to collapse the economic diety and send us all into oblivion.

Don’t let real numbers or statistics get in the way either. Our enlightened conservatives don’t use them when dealing with the economy so why use them when dealing with the environment. As a matter of fact numbers, stats and facts may be the work of the devil! At the very least they are all bad for the economy…

I am not sure that you can say that the jury is no longer still out on global warming.  As I clearly point out in my website http://www.globalwarming-factorfiction.com there is a ton of evidence both ways.  I will plan on doing a cross post on my site for this video since my goal is to show both sides of this important topic.

Yet 19 looney toons with boxcutters are well worth endangering the global economy.

hey guys is pouring here cats and dogs (who ever came up with that one). its been raining at a biblical proportion for over several months !!

god dammed George Bush causing global warning !!!  he is single handily destroying all of creation !!!!

point of history!!!- the planet has been warming for 150,000+ yrs, man came across the Bering straits 25,000 yrs ago, into the America’s because there was a land bridge there due o all the water being locked up in ice !!  I’m sure you all know this but it begs repeating and put into content !!  the Great Lakes and Long Island are geological structures formed by the receding ice capes !!! driving threw the North East everywhere you look you see rocks all over the landscape, big rocks, little rocks, and all these rocks are all due to the receding ice caps, they were deposited when the ice melted !! 20,000 yrs ago most of North America was under ice!!

yea global warming and cooling has been going on since the beginning of creation but its all George Bushes fault and evil mankind’s doing !!

how i dare to say mans not to blame for global warning am i blind ??!  well man is to blame of coarse for a small percentage of global warming like maybe 3% of it, but the planet has been warming for 150,000 years or maybe more mankind is about 30,000 years old so our camp fires for the first 25,000 yrs and fireplaces for the next 4800 yrs and our industrial smog for the last 200 didn’t cause global warming, we just slightly have added to it !!! and no matter what we do, it will keep warming too, until it starts to cool again, it will never stay the same, it never does!!!

of coarse mankind is so full of himself, the universe was created for us??? and we are the beginning and end of everything ??? its natural to believe, we are responsible for the weather and the state of the planet??? but its not true, either we blame our magical beings (god ) for causing the weather cause of some transgression we committed, or we blame those in power we already have problems with (George Bush and Corporations for libs, and blame America for the Europeans)

yes we need to curb carbon emissions, but i don’t believe it will really help that much. how about be prepared for the warming of the planet, move out of hurricane zones, or build better structures !!!

something that never got reported but i saw it, cause i watch almost every news conference,  a reporter asked Bush “with the hurricane season coming up, and with Katerina last year, is he willing to admit mankind is to blame for global warning” and what is he (Bush) going to do about it, he said (global warming is a fact, but whether mankind is to blame that’s debatable)  those were exact words two yrs ago !! i herd it from his mouth, but the lib press portrays him as saying, there’s no global warning,  they twist his words as in most cases, and one paper says it then two then 100 wackos on the nut-roots repeat it then every one says, it true, hes an idiot !!! y

Yes, he has deferred to the business and oil lobby’s, and he’s not going to destroy our economy to enact stricter guidelines, but that doesn’t mean he is unaware of the problem !!! and it doesn’t mean its all mankind’s fault !!! but that’s not in Gore’s award winning movie, cause it doesn’t meet with Gore’s or the nut-roots libs political agenda !!!

Bush and the Corporation always have to be the boogie man to please the nut-roots from 9/11 plots to 150,000 yrs of scientifically documented global warming its all Bush’s and the GOP’s fault

illgramaticus knee o’kaun

PS- this has been edited to take out personnel info and meet with today’s theme but i wrote this over 10 months ago in an email as Gore was releasing his movie to theaters !!

The one thing that these global warming deniers always fail to do is, supply “evidence” for their position. 

Instead, they twist and omit facts, appeal to ignorance and emotion, use circular logic and faulty analogies, and produce irrelevant conclusions.