Pages: 1
Posted by: dual-sporter
I don't know if this has been posted yet....
this video is the opposing view: the great global warming swindle
it does however have some propaganda, like the gore video.... but is much more realistic.
gore is a politician.
environmentalism needs to be declared a religion- ban it from public schools and government policy making, and eliminate it from current policy.
the goal of those supporting it is fascism- complete and total control of everyone's lives to the point that they no longer have time or means to fight them. Sounds like modern day communism to me.... where an elite few have absolute power over the many.
Posted by: JohnO
The information regarding a warming of the Earth is fairly solid. It's happening, slowly.
What we do not know is why. Greenhouse gases? Maybe, maybe not. There is proof that CO2 levels are rising, but no direct link to the current levels causing a warming of the earth. CO2 can cause temperatures to rise via the greenhouse effect, but is that what is actually happening? We're just not sure.
Fact is, the Earth's climate does change on occasion. There was the major ice age. Then, there was a mini ice age, back in the 1400's. Average temperature in N. Europe dropped 20 degrees, and they don't know why. Sunspots, a change in the jetstream... no real cause is known. It lasted for over 100 years, and didn't totally recede.
Ever wonder why Greenland got it's name, even though it's covered in ice and snow? Before the mini ice age, when the Vikings visited, Greenland had forests, which is why they gave it that name.
So, yes, the climate is changing. Is it man made, or a force of nature beyond our control?
Posted by: reconranger
Down here (So. Calif.), we seem to be getting a lot more of the "monsoon" effect in the early summer (humid conditions with lots of desert and mountain thunder storms). More VERY hot days during summer. Winter seem milder, and the rains come later in the winter or early spring when it isn't as cold, so the mountains get less snowfall.
This fall and early winter, it has been mild overall and very windy. Last week it was in the 80's, this week it snowed at my house (which it hasn't done in 20 years). Right now, it is bitterly cold......and freezing every night and the orange trees are dying. Go figure..........
And what happened to the monster hurricane season the Atlantic was supposed to have this year? Kind of fizzled, didn't it.
The truth is that it is just to hard to seperate short term local weather changes from anything global. If you look historically at So. Calif. weather, it cycles between very wet and very dry conditions about every 10 years. A few years ago when we were in the middle of a dry period, everybody was predicting the end of civilization. A few years later, it's pouring rain and we are all getting flooded out.......
The liberal left just loves this kind of stuff! They operate by creating problems where there are none, or by blowing little problems way out of proportion. Then, they set themselves up as everybody's "savior"........you must give them political power, because ONLY THEY CAN SAVE YOU!
It's a pity that all this global warming thing has gotten politicized, and left the realm of science far behind. The left uses it as a tool for their own selfish ends, and the right senses the leftist scam, so they don't want anything to do with it and call it a joke. If it's the real deal, all the politics is just going to blow it for everybody........
Whatever you do, don't give political power to any of the whining leftists like Gore! Find another way, like supporting real science by real scientists that don't have a hidden political agenda (if you can find any)!
Posted by: 440EX026
All very interesting thoughts (well maybe except for mr gores lol).
Surely everything that happens has an affect on the things around it just like how water running down a mountain side causes it to erode etc, but one thing or thought I dont see mentioned often (though it was sort of hinted earlier here) is the fact that our planet is still recovering from an ice age. I had not really thought of this until someone had discussed it once, and it does make some sense, but so does the fact that many things about our planet run in cycles, and long term temp and weather changes are some of them.
Still no matter what you or I believe this type of hype even if totally correct will not gain full world wide support due mostly to politics, and economics, and how there is a very different way of doing things in other parts of the world, and especially the developing areas.
As much as I would be the first one to claim I wouldnt expect to see many changes on a meaningfull level (sort of how most govt limitations are towards the smallest problems like personal autos or atvs etc and very few are towards the largest ones like industrial concerns) I also have seen noticable changes in the strength of the sun. Yes the suns rays hitting us definately feel stronger than they have in the past, and I couldnt tell you if this is the result of changes in the sun itself or something else like our outer atmosphere thinning or even just changing, but I know its different, and also that the previous changes in emissions levels on autos and others are of such a small percentage of the total that they will not cause anything to change if this is even the cause in the first place.
When you just consider how long we have been dealing with the mbte gas additive that is a known carcinagin and causes all kinds of health problems for everyone just because of its economic value to the petroleum makers who would we be fooling if we thought for even a moment that any of this would take a front seat to the continued profits of our corporations, and foreign corps and countries.
Another interesting observation is that though the averages may show a slight increase there has not been many new records set around here, and we have been enjoying one of the nicest falls I remember, but still very few broken records for the year.
Then I think about how many millions of years our planet has been around, and how were just trying to figure out cycles that last longer than man has been around based on a 100 or so years worth of information.
Posted by: 440EX026
Quote
Originally posted by: SawHugger
Science is about impartial experiments and evaluations. When science starts being used to promote a political agenda it stops being science.
Good point!!
Plus how can we take this guy seriously when its beyond obvious that his only objectives are promoting himself, his idea of his creating the internet, and making anyone believe he should be president (just like mommy and daddy told him all his life).
I am sorry but for more reasons than I care to type out this guy really scares me.
Posted by: 440EX026
Just wanted to add this since I saw something interesting on the tube tonight.
It seems that though it may not be precisely known if global warming is as largely created by the actions of man as some may believe it seems to be that there are many things happening with our world that do show there are changes happening.
These may be very serious, and some cause major loss of life like the tsunamis, hurricanes, and earthquakes that we all have seen on the news over the past so many years, but even if in the end we were to find that mans decisions and actions created, or just added to the problem it seems that there is little that would actually be done in time to make a difference even after such a thing would be proven if it is true.
Consider the economics, and how many govt's live and react to the problems of "today" and then add in how the US (and other countries) are not even directly involved on a intl level for dealing with or discussing the issue. Then I looked at what those who commented had to say, and how it directly effected the US consumer (mostly auto related) and would be tearing more dollars from their incomes, but also totally ignored those corporations and industries that are producing the overwhelming majority of the pollutants that are thought to be at the root of the problem in the first place.
In other words if those who believe that and global changes or warming over time are the result of man made pollutants are correct then it will be a tough battle since its obvious the real needed changes in industry (everything from plastics, rubber, electicity, paper, oil refining, and a host of others) will most likely not take place, and the govt will just look to once again tax and penalize the citizens who dont have the lobby power or potential future political donations.
Until this changes it doesnt really seem to matter which side of the fence you stand on because money and greed seem to continue to control, and we as everyday people couldnt cause enough change on our own if we wanted to, and the changes (if you believe these changes would make a difference, or if there is even a problem in the first place) needed would either not be coming, or would be too late to make a difference.
Posted by: 440EX026
Quote
Originally posted by: GJRonK
-
We all (I HOPE) realize by now that this whole situation is strictly a political scheme devised by those who wish to punish the USA for being successful. I mean, consider, the Kyoto Accords allow China and India (with others) to not have any consequenses for any emissions as they are "underdeveloped countries" that need special concessions. It makes sense to not force China to have to adhere to anything since they wouldn't anyway, and then the rest of the world doesn't have to feel defeated.
There is now a big, growing market to sell/trade credits for not producing harmful emissions so that one company can sell their credits to another so they can pollute more. As I understand it, Company A has 10 credits and pollutes only 5 credits worth. Company B has 10 credits and pollutes 15 credits worth. So if A sells B, 5 credits, then B can pollute it's full 15 credits since it bought the rights to do so. Well, now, that sure keeps the polution down, doesn't it? No wonder I never made it big in business--I never came up with schemes like that. (A little aside here, remember when the Democrats castigated President Bush for his "scheme" to let people have a small portion of their Social Security money directed to investments they wanted? Remember? These are the same kind of people who don't apparently consider the emission credit stuff a "scheme". Figure that out!)
GJRonK
Interesting points.
I especially like the credits scheme as it is almost identical to the one used around here that allows developers, land owners, and political types etc to make millions or more trading off these credits for land use and purchases within the pinelands preservation area here (one of the only remaining undeveloped or underdeveloped areas left in this corrupt state).
I am sure that international or national systems would be as hypocritical as the ones here on a state level. I mean in how its perfectly acceptable to those who stand up for the environment and push all this in the first place to see things manipulated to allow development within a restricted area, and a select few making fortunes from state programs filled with tax payer dollars, and how all is well as long as the dreaded off road rider is kept out and legislated to be a criminal.
All I can suggest to everyone is to look at the model for pollution, corruption, and grand schemes (good ole NJ) and see just how well these liberals (and even many conservatives too) can play the system, and how in the end nothing is sacred except the dollar. If the obvious errors of this place are not lesson enough then I can not think of what in the world would prepare the rest of the country to prevent it from happening all over, but it seems so many have chosen sides (dem or rep) that reality, and common sense has taken a back seat to rallying behind your team.
Seems were dooomed
Posted by: 440EX026
Quote
Just what we needed here in So Cal to drive out more businesses. Last year alone 30,000 tax payers left the state, and half a million tax takers moved in.
Cant be sure if this is really on topic, but when a state offers more to takers than payers it only makes sense that things work as they are today.
Its not much different than here in NJ except more of the takers here seem to have relations with or to a legislator or state contractor etc, and not as many have relations with Mexico.
Posted by: 440EX026
Quote
Mon February 05, 2007 1:08 PM (NEW!)
IMO Global Warming is designed to undermine USA economy. Man-Made Global Warming does not exist. Global Warming is a fraud. Ever notice how China ignores all the Global Warming movement claims?
IMO Global Warming movement is a purely political movement to gain money by high taxes and power by inflicting fear into the general public.
Motorsports
-------------------------
"Sorry if anything I posted caused you any offense or pain"
Its the part below the dotted line I got a problem with BR>
I think something would be wrong if I (we, you etc) didnt offend someone sometimes because then it would seem like nothing was getting accomplished since so many disagree on so many points that there is no way to do the right thing without pissin someone off pretty good.
Have to wonder if this is the deal with global warming too>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>.
Posted by: 440EX026
Quote
Originally posted by: DeeDawg
Originally posted by SawHugger: Would any one like to buy some carbon credits?
Compared to Ar-nold and algore, I should be able to burn nuclear-redwood-baby-whales every time I drive my SUV to work!!!!!
Let em burn
Posted by: 440EX026
Ever notice how these political types are becoming little more than a fan?
The liberals suck, and the conservatives blow.
Guess all that really matters is which side of the fan your in front of BR>
Sadly both have become so pre occupied with their specific party agendas and their greed to put their parties future and power ahead of anything else that any real sulutions to problems (present, future, and even imaginary) is completely lost.
That leaves us with more propaganda than we can weed thru, countless fabrications of various stories designed only to push public opinion in a manner that supports their party or its supporters, and problems that only mutate and multiply.
You have to wonder how much all of America would do to help or protect the environment, or back controversial medical research etc if all of our legislators would just cut all the BS and give it all up straight. I mean its obvious that just about everything from uncountable gadgets to reduce auto emissions (most dont work right anyhow) right on up to carbon credits (lmao) has little to do with the problems obviously avoiding the largest areas (ever consider that industrial pollution out numbers autos by many times, but only has seen a portion of the regulation) in favor of victimizing the weaker political contributors who also happen to offer a much larger potential for income to the govt as well.
Still no matter global cooling or warming its gonna cost us somehow, and its all only financing the wealthy, or continuing our countries decent into socialism. Either way its gonna suk or blow.
Posted by: 440EX026
Originally posted by: gas300
TAKE A LOOK AT THIS ..
Story of Two Houses
LOOK OVER THE DESCRIPTIONS OF THE FOLLOWING
TWO HOUSES AND SEE IF YOU CAN TELL WHICH
BELONGS TO AN ENVIRONMENTALIST.
HOUSE # 1:
A 20-room mansion (not including 8 bathrooms) heated by natural gas. Add on a pool (and a pool house) and a separate guest house all heated by gas. In ONE MONTH ALONE this mansion consumes more energy than the average American
household in an ENTIRE YEAR. The average bill for electricity and natural gas runs over $2,400.00 per month. In natural gas alone (which last time we checked was a fossil fuel), this property consumes more than 20 times the national
average for an American home. This house is not in a northern or Midwestern "snow belt," either. It's in the South.
HOUSE # 2:
Designed by an architecture professor at a leading national university, this house incorporates every "green" feature current home construction can provide. The house contains only 4,000 square feet (4 bedrooms) and is nestled on arid high prairie in the American southwest. A central closet in the house holds geothermal heat pumps drawing ground water through pipes sunk 300 feet into the ground. The water (usually 67 degrees F.) heats the house in winter and cools it in summer. The system uses no fossil fuels such as oil or natural gas, and it consumes 25% of the electricity required for a conventional heating/cooling system. Rainwater from the roof is collected and funneled into a 25,000 gallon underground cistern. Wastewater from showers, sinks and toilets goes into underground purifying tanks and then into the cistern. The collected water then irrigates the land surrounding the house. Flowers and shrubs native to the area blend the property into the surrounding rural landscape.
HOUSE # 1 (20 room energy guzzling mansion) is outside of Nashville, Tennessee. It is the abode of that renowned environmentalist (and filmmaker) Al Gore.
HOUSE # 2 (model eco-friendly house) is on a ranch near Crawford, Texas . Also known as "the Texas White House," it is the private residence of the President of the United States, George W. Bush.
So whose house is gentler on the environment? Yet another story you WON'T hear on CNN, CBS, ABC, NBC, MSNBC or read about in the New York Times or the Washington Post. Indeed, for Mr. Gore, it's truly "an inconvenient truth."
NO KIDDING!
Just wanted to see this again
Oh and to ask what was it that Al inveneted again????
Posted by: Scootergptx
While there are some things that probably could be done for the better, I wouldn't let one persons movie make my decision.
Just as Gore made his point, there are at least 100 other people that could make points that Global warming is not an issue. Always easier to get your point across when you have no one to dispute any facts (or lack of) in return.
I wouldn't sweat it, we gonna get hit by a huge asteroid, cast into a nuclear winter and relive (maybe) the ice age all over.
Posted by: Scootergptx
Random stupidity is more of a threat than warming or freezing of the earth.
Posted by: Scootergptx
I did dump a cooler of ice in the back yard. So the earth does have a cool spot now.
Of course, I may have inadvertantly contributed to global warming now. The earth, feeling the cold, may have turned up the thermostat to compensate.
Posted by: Scootergptx
I wish someone would tell the electric company the planet is warmer.
Posted by: NLWarrior01
I've seen a dramatic change in the winters where I live over the course of my lifetime. Growing up as a kid we always had nice winters with lots of snow from november through april ... now we're lucky to get snow by January and it's gone again before the end of march.
Ever since I've had kids I've been worried about the world that will be left to them. So many people are not concerned about that. They're only concerned about now. We'll have to pay some day, and if not us, our kids and grand kids for certain.
Posted by: NLWarrior01
Atta boy!! Denial is the best policy ... if we don't concede that there's a problem then there can't be a problem can there ...
Posted by: NLWarrior01
I guess one plus on an ice age .. great sledding ..
Posted by: NLWarrior01
can you proove unequivocably that they are "made up" ?? Other than of course Al Gore's sketchy past ...
You said yourself in your thoughts above that things may or may not be happening. Why not err on the side of caution? Just in case ...
What I base my feelings on is what I've seen and experienced over my lifetime around my home. Winters are way way shorter than they used to be, when we do get them. Storms are more random in their intensity than they used to be .. the climate is changing. Catastrophically?? I don't know. But I'm not going to deny that something is happening and close my eyes pretending it can't affect me if I can't see it.
Posted by: NLWarrior01
That's fair enough GJ. I appreciate someone who looks at both sides and draws their own conclusions and/or opinions about an issue. For the record, I haven't said in here that the world is coming to an end, or anything remotely like it.
I do fear, as a parent, the world that my children will inherit from me, and I think that most parents are probably in the same set. Not all environmentally either .. there's drugs and violence and all those other social issues which, to me, are far more frightening.
Perhaps you're right and we're just in a particular cycle that has nothing to do with emmissions and rain forest destruction. I've also heard it said, that the trend which we are currently in, would continue unabated even if we stopped every negative thing we do to the environment right now.
What seems to me is there are two groups which are at the extreme: The enviro-wackos who predict doom and destruction because of our evil ways of burning fossil fuels, limbing forests and killing seals. Then there are those who don't give a damn if their actions ARE harming the environment, as long as they're having fun and their way of life is not being imminently impacted.
There seem to be very few people in the middle who want to strike a blance between progress and preservation, between quality of life and longevity.
Posted by: NLWarrior01
Well I finally got to watch some of the movie. A lot of the claims seem pretty sensational in their nature, but then I suppose Columbus' claims that the world was round instead of flat probably seemed pretty sensational at the time too ... now look at the world?? Well .. it's not truly (or rather perfectly) round, but it's more round than flat.
I was disappointed with is reflections back to his political career. WTF does his political career have to do with Global Warming? It also wasn't lost on me the fact that a lot of the time he was, as you say, travelling in a private jet, or in a big limo or such.
Ahh well ... I think we do need to pay more attention to our actions on the environment, but I don't think that we need to stop living. And I think we need to stop with the attitude of "big industry creates big pollution, so what if my quad creates a little smoke" it's a self defeating attitude where everyone blames someone else for what's happening.
Just my .02 + tax
Posted by: regor
Al Gore is a total whack job. He should be in an asylum somewhere, anywhere. Europe would be a good place for him, along with the people that said we were gong to have another ice age. Right along the people that believe in Nostradomus.
Posted by: regor
Let's see you've been around for 30 to 40 years, and because in your world some of the winter weather flucuates. Were all going to die from global warming. I'd say you responded just the way the wackos wanted you too. Only they can save us from ourselves.
Posted by: regor
J- there it is the truth in 2 little lines. It's so refreshing to hear the truth. We never get that from the wackos, somehow their able to use a few cherry picked stats, or even just a picture to take us from one earth shattering crisis to another.
Posted by: enFORCER
Al Gore? Didn't he invent the Internet? LOL.....He is a career politician and pathological liar. People like him always have a hidden agenda. Did you know that ol' Al lives in a big energy wasting mansion, with a power bill of some $2000 a month? He drives around in a motor cade of SUV's. Oh yes, then the hypocrite makes a lame ass movie about how every one else needs to conserve energy in order to save the planet. He's one of those "do as I say, not as I do" low life's.... Perhaps he should start practicing what he preaches....
Posted by: deanz400
Hey everybody really good points ,to think man has that big of a effect on earth just think back to that huge sunami ,new orleans hurricans ,earth quacks ,just wait till old Mamaearth gets sick of us bugs on her back and decides to get rid of us ,would take about a minute to end man kind .
I say do what you can to keep it clean ,and enjoy life .
Posted by: deanz400
Heard a really interesting talk show last night .he was a professor that was saying that the earth has a 1500 year cycle for warming and cooling ,and right now were in a warming cycle .
example ) he said during the Roman era it was really much warmer .they actually grew grapes for wine in England .now they can't get them to grow hardley at all .
he also stated that there was a very warm period that ended at the end of the dust bowl era in the early 1930
all his evidence is proven and backed up by facts .but there is also mini warming and cooling cycles in the larger one.
Posted by: deanz400
I didn't come to that conclusion ,the professor said the data came from ice cores from both north and south poles .
Also from core samples taken from the bottom of the ocean .
also from some sample from some bristol cone pines that are really old .
they did all the testing for what the co2 levels and oxygen content of the atmosphere .
they can also tell by what little bacteria in some of the ocean sample that they can live only in certain enviroments ,
the guy has a book out explaining it all ,but no big media outlet will give him air time .
they have been keeping track of temps since the 1860 .
so no they don't have a writen record persee but they do have records of old record describeing what people grew in various areas around the world .
Posted by: deanz400
Sawhugger pretty precise listing on the global warming crowd .one thing about ATVs thou is they don't want anybody to go into the forests .well maybe on foot .so the animals are not disturbed .
Oh yea one more thing all humans should die so mother earth can return herself back to her pristine self , with Volcanos belching green house gases ,and earth quacks destroying the lands ,and our old friend the tsunami whioing the shore lines clear
Posted by: deanz400
Nice point there GJRonK ,I've know that for a while
Posted by: mywifesquad
The so called genuises have been keeping track of the earths temp for a little over 100 years. Those same genuises think the earth is around 500 billion years old. Not a big enough time sample for me to get worried. And because Al Gore thinks its important, Im even less concerned.
Posted by: mywifesquad
Quote
Originally posted by: Scootergptx
Random stupidity is more of a threat than warming or freezing of the earth.
I think it will be easier to fix the global warming that doesnt exist.
Posted by: mywifesquad
deanz400, How did they come to the conclusion that the earth has 1500 year cycles when they have only been keepiing track of the temp for a little over 100 years?
Posted by: mywifesquad
Quote
Originally posted by: reconranger
The liberal left just loves this kind of stuff! They operate by creating problems where there are none, or by blowing little problems way out of proportion. Then, they set themselves up as everybody's "savior"........you must give them political power, because ONLY THEY CAN SAVE YOU!
We have a winner!!
Posted by: Deeplaker60
Where I'm sitting right now, there was a 2-mile thick ice sheet 25,000 years ago. It melted long before there were coal fired power plants and people driving cars or riding ATV's.
I've got my fireplace blazing as I face the third night in row where the temp is dipping below -20. It might even drop past -30. Last night it got to -27. A weather broadcaster on local TV said it's been the coldest month in a decade. This makes it difficult to take global warming seriously.
I saw where a Canadian scientist labeled Al Gore's movie as "the Da Vinci Code of climatology." Gore is a slick presentor, but don't forget he's a politician trying to position himself for a possible presidential run in 2008.
Still, he could be right. Complicated issue.
Posted by: DeeDawg
Originally posted by 67fastback: ......What if he is wrong then so what!
I agree...so what if we ruin the entire western way of living? Just because Algore zooms around the world in a private jet promoting his movie and is escorted every where by a posse of SUVs and has three 10,000 square foot houses, there is no reason the rest of us can't ride bicycles to work and live in mud huts.
Posted by: DeeDawg
The earth has been warming and cooling for billions of years and will continue to do so no matter what mankind or Algore does.
Posted by: DeeDawg
redhornet - well said
Posted by: DeeDawg
Originally posted by deanz400: Hey everybody really good points ,to think man has that big of a effect on earth just think back to that huge sunami ,new orleans hurricans ,earth quacks ,just wait till old Mamaearth gets sick of us bugs on her back and decides to get rid of us ,would take about a minute to end man kind .
I say do what you can to keep it clean ,and enjoy life .
So you are saying is that before the SUV was invented, there where no tsunamis, hurricanes, or earthquakes? And now when we have one they are caused by man? If you ask me it's all caused by algore's hotair and his zinc mine.
Posted by: DeeDawg
Originally posted by SawHugger: Let me see if I can follow the logic of the global warming fanatics. Here are the points I get:
All automobiles (except those belonging to the priviliged elite) should be taken out of service, smashed, melted down and made into Toyota Prius
All ATVs should be eliminated because they destroy the environment which helps cool the earth and they burn fuel
All power plants that burn coal or natural gas should be taxed more then shut down (don't dare suggest replacing them with nuclear power plants)
The big oil companies should be taxed, shut down and their managers thrown in jail
Trucks and trains should be taxed more then eliminated
All large corporations that develop and produce the things that the peons of the world flock to Wal-Mart to purchase should be taxed then shut down
Wal-Mart should be taxed then shut down
The U. S, Military should be dis-banded
All the above dis-placed workers should be entitled to government subsidies and free health care
The U. S. government should turn it's self over to the United Nations
All animals such as cattle, hogs and buffalo that eat grass or corn or other vegitable matter should be eliminated
All people should become vegitarians
Farmers should stop growing vast fields of crops
If we just do all of these things and sign the Keoto treaty the world will freeze solid in 100 years.
Let me add that earthquakes that cause tsunamis will also stop.
Thats a pretty good annalist of liberals. I?d like to point out however, that some of this is already happening. The UN already owns parts of the US such as Yellowstone, since it is a ?global? asset. If you think I am wrong go ahead and do your own research.
Posted by: DeeDawg
Originally posted by mikelb: Pardon me if these points have been previously made. I did not read every post.
1. AlGore is a wack-a-doo.
2. AlGore is a nut job.
3. AlGore is loony tunes.
and 4. AlGore is crazy.
Just another do-gooder democrat/socialist/communist scheme to tax you into subservience. Bend over. Take it with a smile. Don't forget to thank them after they f*** you up one side and down the other.
Lets not forget about our "Right Wing Conservative" president giving billions and billions to ILLEGAL aliens - not to mention Arnold, our "Fiscally Conservative" governor. Just what we needed here in So Cal to drive out more businesses. Last year alone 30,000 tax payers left the state, and half a million tax takers moved in.
Posted by: DeeDawg
Originally posted by reconranger: Winter seem milder.......this week it snowed at my house (which it hasn't done in 20 years). Right now, it is bitterly cold......and freezing every night and the orange trees are dying. Go figure..........
recon, I agree.....
record cold this past week-end......I'm sure someone on the looney left will say that the cold is caused by global WARMING!!!!!!
Posted by: DeeDawg
Check out this article by Canadas premier climatologist, the first person in the country to receive a PHD in Climatology.
http://www.canadafreepress.com/2007/global-warming020507.htm
in it he says Global Warming is not due to human contribution of Carbon Dioxide. He goes on to say the planet is now entering a cooling period, what will the liberals have to say then?
Posted by: DeeDawg
Cambodia is the coldest it's been in 27 years. Check it out :
http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/0206/p04s01-woap.html
According to the leading climatologist in Canada, the earth is COOLING not warming. I guess I'll have to drive my SUV more to prevent the earth from freezing!!!!
Posted by: DeeDawg
Originally posted by Motorsports: He goes on to say the planet is now entering a cooling period, what will the liberals have to say then? IMO the lib's will blame any cooling on global warming!
Good point!!! Here's food for thought......Last year So Cal was very wet because of....global warming.
This year So Cal is very dry because of.....global warming!!!!!!!
Posted by: DeeDawg
Originally posted by Motorsports: Globle Issue ! Inconvenient Truth
gore: not so green!
gore's TN massive house uses 20 times more power than the national average!
al gore has $30000 per year electric bill!
And gore is telling us what kind of light bulbs to use??
And that is just ONE of his FOUR houses. Not to mention his zink mine, private jet, entourage of SUVs that travel everywhere with him, etc, etc....
Typical liberal hypocrisy.
Posted by: DeeDawg
Originally posted by SawHugger: Would any one like to buy some carbon credits?
I have some for sale as well!!!!!! I have 160 acres of woods in NW Mn, so I and everyone I know should be guilt free for the rest of our lives!!!! I mean, if Ar-nold can send a couple of bucks to a forest in Nor Cal every time he flies on a private jet, I should be good forever!!!! Compared to Ar-nold and algore, I should be able to burn nuclear-redwood-baby-whales every time I drive my SUV to work!!!!!
Posted by: DeeDawg
Originally posted by rodeo999: Global warming is happening. 30,000 years ago the majority of Michigan, Minnesota, Wisconsin and Iowa were under a glacier. Oh, 35,000,000 years ago their were no polar caps and Iowa was in the tropics. Ahh, the tropics, I'm ready.
Good point. Here is another: The largest intact fossilized rain forest ever studied is in eastern Illinois. It is the remains of a rain forest from 300 million years ago. "It would be hot, extremely humid, really uncomfortable to be standing around there," Elrick said. "Something out of Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's 'Lost World.'"
QUOTE FOR TODAY:
If anyone did make an effort to Free Tibet, the next day all of those stickers would be replaced by "U.S. out of Tibet!" Mark Steyn
Posted by: DeeDawg
Global Warming Equals Socialism
Philip V. Brennan Wednesday, Feb. 7, 2007
http://www.newsmax.com/archive...2007/2/6/155027.shtml
QUOTE FOR TODAY:
The Oregon petition was signed by 19,000 professionals and scientists who don`t agree with the idea that we are causing climate change. ROY SPENCER, PH.D, FORMER SENIOR CLIMATE SCIENTIST, NASA
Posted by: DeeDawg
Originally posted by squeege: You didn't hear that the current burning down of the rainforest causes 75% of all CO emissions??
I didn't hear that, but scientists don't agree that CO2 is even a factor in global warming -Astrophysicist Dr. Nir Shaviv February 2, 2007 Canadian National Post
QUOTE FOR TODAY:
"If you want to take my gun, why would I trust you?"
Posted by: Motorsports
Global climate change, global warming, what-ever you call it. IMO it is all about money. IMO it is a scare tactic to get more money from you.
FOLLOW THE MONEY
Is algore the guy who claimed he invented the internet?
Have a Merry Christmas and Happy New Year,
Motorsports
Posted by: Motorsports
IMO Global Warming is designed to undermine USA economy. Man-Made Global Warming does not exist. Global Warming is a fraud. Ever notice how China ignores all the Global Warming movement claims?
IMO Global Warming movement is a purely political movement to gain money by high taxes and power by inflicting fear into the general public.
Motorsports
Posted by: Motorsports
Corn prices have about doubled in the last year or so. I heard that by 2008 1/2 of the USA corn crop will go to making ethanol. So how high will corn cost then??
Quote
He goes on to say the planet is now entering a cooling period, what will the liberals have to say then?
IMO the lib's will blame any cooling on global warming!
Motorsports
Posted by: Motorsports
Quote
A Globle Issue ! Inconvenient Truth
The GLOBAL SCAM to raise taxes sky high and to take away more of our freedom!
Quote
Originally posted by: 67fastback
http://www.climatecrisis.net/
Wow! I just watched this movie by Al Gore. Whether you like him or not that is your chioce but i must say he put up some pretty convenicing story of the earth and what my children are in for in the next 50 years.I must say if he is wrong then put up your evidence to do so!
We can do something about this! One person at a time, but time is running out!
This is one man's opinion about very compeling reality!
What if he is wrong then so what!
But what if he is right? Kind of like the Bible and choosing from right and wrong and making sure to get on the right side!
This is just a political movement by the liberals to get more money out of your wallet and create regulations to control how we live and what we can and can not do. Look what they started calling anyone who questions their 'global warming religion'!
There is no global warming or global climate change caused by humans.
Motorsports BR>
Posted by: Motorsports
Quote
A Globle Issue ! Inconvenient Truth
gore: not so green!
gore's TN massive house uses 20 times more power than the national average!
al gore has $30000 per year electric bill!
And gore is telling us what kind of light bulbs to use??
Motorsports BR>
Posted by: squeege
Originally posted by: DeeDawg
Global Warming Equals Socialism
Philip V. Brennan Wednesday, Feb. 7, 2007
http://www.newsmax.com/archive.../6/155027.shtml
QUOTE FOR TODAY:
The Oregon petition was signed by 19,000 professionals and scientists who don`t agree with the idea that we are causing climate change. ROY SPENCER, PH.D, FORMER SENIOR CLIMATE SCIENTIST, NASA
You didn't hear that the current burning down of the rainforest causes 75% of all CO emissions??
Posted by: 67fastback
http://www.climatecrisis.net/
Wow! I just watched this movie by Al Gore. Whether you like him or not that is your chioce but i must say he put up some pretty convenicing story of the earth and what my children are in for in the next 50 years.I must say if he is wrong then put up your evidence to do so!
We can do something about this! One person at a time, but time is running out!
This is one man's opinion about very compeling reality!
What if he is wrong then so what!
But what if he is right? Kind of like the Bible and choosing from right and wrong and making sure to get on the right side!
Posted by: flyinscrammy
Global warming??? Duh, what do you think ended the ICE AGE? We've been warming for a billion years.....
Posted by: flyinscrammy
Quote
Originally posted by: Scootergptx
I did dump a cooler of ice in the back yard. So the earth does have a cool spot now.
Of course, I may have inadvertantly contributed to global warming now. The earth, feeling the cold, may have turned up the thermostat to compensate.
OMG!!!! You didn't leave the beer out there on the lawn too did you?
Posted by: Fulltiltrider
You want to talk about liberalism, A university somewhere, cant remember the name, has designed a 4 door sedan that can travel 400 miles at 70 mph on compressed air. But you will never see it because the liberals want the oil money. Could you imagine pulling into a gas station popping a quater in th air pump, and your on your way! i say build these things and save that gas for my quad!!!
Posted by: godIlove2ride
I think if we all ask O.J. nicely, he won't stop until he finds the REAL cause of the end of the world.
Posted by: GJRonK
-
I have not seen the movie, but I have a couple of thoughts. First, the ENTIRE planet may or may not be heating up--many of those people who say one thing or the other have their own motives. Second, the earth has been cooling and heating up (remember the ICE AGE eleven thousand years ago?) on it's own for millions of years. Third, based on questionably recent flawed research (remember how the EXPERTS said the planet was cooling and heading into an ice age just 20 years ago?), how can anyone say humans are to blame?--and then say it's all the fault of the USA and it's okay that China and India don't have any responsibility!
Give me a break!
Do I need to list the number of lies that Al Gore told to the public when he was running for President? And before?
GJRonK
Posted by: GJRonK
Quote
Originally posted by: NLWarrior01
Atta boy!! Denial is the best policy ... if we don't concede that there's a problem then there can't be a problem can there ... hr>
Sure, in place of denial, why don't we make up facts and ignore thousands of years of history. That's real clever.
GJRonK
Posted by: GJRonK
Quote
Originally posted by: SawHugger
The global warming issue is about one thing.
That thing is opposition to capitalism.
Good point! Today it's called socialism and is practiced by liberal European countries and liberals in the USA. In the "olden days", these people were called communists. Of course their means of preventing achievment meant destruction of success as opposed to a capitalist's idea of freedom to grow. It really is the same today.
You might add "envy". But even now, there are those (besides Gore) who want this as a way to profit--like selling emmission credits, research financing, and blackmail. These people are often liberals/socialists who don't realize how hypocritical they continue to be--even the notorious ACLU (you know, the Atrocious Communist Liberating Usurpers).
NLWarrior: Again I'll state that there is a big difference between using our history for 20 years, 50 years, or 100 years to extrapolate the future and ignore the last 11,000 years. What period of time do you think would be appropriate? As to my stating that the change "may or may not be happening", was mearly a polite way of trying to be somewhat non-judgemental in my response--besides that I've heard logical "facts" from both sides.
GJRonK
Posted by: GJRonK
Quote
Originally posted by: SawHugger
Our children and grandchildren will have much better prospects for a brighter future if liberalism does not prevail.
I agree that liberalism is the most incidious, however, as NL suggests, EXTREMISM is potentially the most to be feared. Actually, there are probably many more people who ARE actually in the middle, but those are the ones who do not speak out because they are too busy just staying alive to have the energy, knowledge of the FACTS, or desire to be active in their future.
GJRonK
Posted by: GJRonK
-
We all (I HOPE) realize by now that this whole situation is strictly a political scheme devised by those who wish to punish the USA for being successful. I mean, consider, the Kyoto Accords allow China and India (with others) to not have any consequenses for any emissions as they are "underdeveloped countries" that need special concessions. It makes sense to not force China to have to adhere to anything since they wouldn't anyway, and then the rest of the world doesn't have to feel defeated.
There is now a big, growing market to sell/trade credits for not producing harmful emissions so that one company can sell their credits to another so they can pollute more. As I understand it, Company A has 10 credits and pollutes only 5 credits worth. Company B has 10 credits and pollutes 15 credits worth. So if A sells B, 5 credits, then B can pollute it's full 15 credits since it bought the rights to do so. Well, now, that sure keeps the polution down, doesn't it? No wonder I never made it big in business--I never came up with schemes like that. (A little aside here, remember when the Democrats castigated President Bush for his "scheme" to let people have a small portion of their Social Security money directed to investments they wanted? Remember? These are the same kind of people who don't apparently consider the emission credit stuff a "scheme". Figure that out!)
GJRonK
Posted by: gas300
The only thing Al Gore care about is one world Government ,I'am glad you like the movie because that only thing he is good at actor!!!!!!
Posted by: gas300
TAKE A LOOK AT THIS ..
Story of Two Houses
LOOK OVER THE DESCRIPTIONS OF THE FOLLOWING
TWO HOUSES AND SEE IF YOU CAN TELL WHICH
BELONGS TO AN ENVIRONMENTALIST.
HOUSE # 1:
A 20-room mansion (not including 8 bathrooms) heated by natural gas. Add on a pool (and a pool house) and a separate guest house all heated by gas. In ONE MONTH ALONE this mansion consumes more energy than the average American
household in an ENTIRE YEAR. The average bill for electricity and natural gas runs over $2,400.00 per month. In natural gas alone (which last time we checked was a fossil fuel), this property consumes more than 20 times the national
average for an American home. This house is not in a northern or Midwestern "snow belt," either. It's in the South.
HOUSE # 2:
Designed by an architecture professor at a leading national university, this house incorporates every "green" feature current home construction can provide. The house contains only 4,000 square feet (4 bedrooms) and is nestled on arid high prairie in the American southwest. A central closet in the house holds geothermal heat pumps drawing ground water through pipes sunk 300 feet into the ground. The water (usually 67 degrees F.) heats the house in winter and cools it in summer. The system uses no fossil fuels such as oil or natural gas, and it consumes 25% of the electricity required for a conventional heating/cooling system. Rainwater from the roof is collected and funneled into a 25,000 gallon underground cistern. Wastewater from showers, sinks and toilets goes into underground purifying tanks and then into the cistern. The collected water then irrigates the land surrounding the house. Flowers and shrubs native to the area blend the property into the surrounding rural landscape.
HOUSE # 1 (20 room energy guzzling mansion) is outside of Nashville, Tennessee. It is the abode of that renowned environmentalist (and filmmaker) Al Gore.
HOUSE # 2 (model eco-friendly house) is on a ranch near Crawford, Texas . Also known as "the Texas White House," it is the private residence of the President of the United States, George W. Bush.
So whose house is gentler on the environment? Yet another story you WON'T hear on CNN, CBS, ABC, NBC, MSNBC or read about in the New York Times or the Washington Post. Indeed, for Mr. Gore, it's truly "an inconvenient truth."
NO KIDDING!
Posted by: gohip2000
lol, I've also noticed that Minnesota is having unusually warm weather for this time of year with no snow, which always used to come by the end of October or earlier. This sucks, I like the snow. is it global warming caused by humans? maybe. Is it global warming caused by natural planet and star aging? maybe. Is it that the earths orbit is changing and when the northern hemispheres is experiencing winter, the earth is closer to the sun than previous years? maybe. All I know is that the temps and climate have been changing steadily over the years to a warmer climate for longer periods of time. We may be the cause, but we may not. I guess if we fry and use all the avalibe oil, then the world starts to become unlivable for humans and we become extinct; after that if the world starts to cool down, then it is safe to say it is us humans that where the cause of the global warming.
It is a fact that we will run out of oil if we keep using it at the rate we are, But people, including me, will continue to use oil. The sooner we run out, the sooner human population will curve off and we will be back to animal, wind, and water drawn buggies, plows, and machines. Then oil will start to be reproduced again in the ground over a very long time (I can't remember how long it takes to form oil, like millions or billions of years).
Any ways, this could be exactly what happens, My thoughts could be right, but they could be dead wrong too. There is some things that can be scientifically proven as fact, but global warming, while it can be proven, can not be proven as a fact that humans are completely responsable for it.
I say, as far as global warming and oil go, let's enjoy it well we got it
Posted by: SawHugger
The global warming issue is about one thing.
That thing is opposition to capitalism.
Posted by: SawHugger
Our children and grandchildren will have much better prospects for a brighter future if liberalism does not prevail.
Posted by: SawHugger
Science is about impartial experiments and evaluations. When science starts being used to promote a political agenda it stops being science.
Posted by: SawHugger
Let me see if I can follow the logic of the global warming crowd.
Here are the points I get:
All automobiles (except those belonging to the privileged elite) should be taken out of service, smashed, melted down and made into Toyota Prius
All ATVs should be eliminated because they destroy the environment which helps cool the earth and they burn fuel
All power plants that burn coal or natural gas should be taxed more then shut down (don't dare suggest replacing them with nuclear power plants)
The big oil and coal mining companies should be taxed, shut down and their managers thrown in jail
Trucks and trains should be taxed more then eliminated
All large corporations that develop and produce the things that the peons of the world flock to Wal-Mart to purchase should be taxed then shut down
Wal-Mart should be taxed then shut down
All the above dis-placed workers should be entitled to government subsidies and free health care
The cutting of trees for lumber, clearing land or gathering and burning of firewood should stop
Farmers should stop growing vast fields of crops
All animals like cattle and buffalo that eat grass and produce methane should be eliminated
All people should become vegetarians
The U. S, Military should be dis-banded
The U. S. government should turn it's self over to the United Nations
If we will just do all of these things and sign the Keoto treaty then the world will freeze solid in 100 years.
Also earthquakes that cause tsunamis will stop
Bush sucks
Did I miss anything?
Posted by: SawHugger
The only potential scientific problem I can see with the above is that if all seven billion people in the world become vegetarians they will pass more gas and the Antarctic ice cap will melt after all.
Posted by: SawHugger
Would any one like to buy some carbon credits?
Posted by: redhornet
Do you all realize how much impact just a few sunspots have on the earth? How about Volcanos? They produce far more pollutants that cause greenhouse gases to be trapped then man could ever come up with in a century.
Right now, the sun is in one its most active periods and is likely the culprit of the slight wrming of the planet. The planet has been through several warming/cooling periods in the last couple thousand years and anything that happened more than 50 years ago has NOTHING to do with man.
Who can imagine that our tiny little existence could actually affect the planet. The beauty of the planet is its ability to balance itself, a true sign of a wonderful God who designed this planet and knew what man would develop. Thik of it, more warming means more moisture in the air, which will lead to more rain, which will cool the planet. More rain meens more foilage which means a cooler planet.
We can't stop industry and spend trillio0ns of dollars fighting a battle we don't even know exists and if it does we have no clue we are responsible for any of it.
Even if America chipped in, China and Russia would not be able to curb their emmissions because they don't have themoney nor are their countries full of a bunch of tree huggers like the US.
Enjoy life, do what you can to find alternative fuels, but don't go crazy.
Remember, 30 years ago they were crying that we were heading into an ice age. 20 years ago the Ozone layer was going to disappear and kill us all. 10 years ago the population of the earth was going to explode and we would die because our resources were goung to be used up.
All this hype is submitted by those that want to see an end to capitalism, industry, corporations, profit and wealthy people. All the things that made America the most powerful nation in history. Let's don let them ruin what our forefathers had the wisdom to set in motion.
Posted by: labianka
Right-o DeeDawg!!!! Big Al does show us how to conserve. what a hippocrit he is. What the @#*% is a lawyer doing commenting on things he has no educational background in. Law schools get filled with peolple who wanted to be a Doctor of something and folded when they hit their first hard science class.
Thanks for your dedication to country.
Seven years haze grey, was there the first time around, you guys got it alot tougher now.
Posted by: rodeo999
Global warming is happening. 30,000 years ago the majority of Michigan, Minnesota, Wisconsin and Iowa were under a glacier. Oh, 35,000,000 years ago their were no polar caps and Iowa was in the tropics. Ahh, the tropics, I'm ready.
Posted by: mikelb
Pardon me if these points have been previously made. I did not read every post.
1. AlGore is a wack-a-doo.
2. AlGore is a nut job.
3. AlGore is loony tunes.
and 4. AlGore is crazy.
Just another do-gooder democrat/socialist/communist scheme to tax you into subservience. Bend over. Take it with a smile. Don't forget to thank them after they f*** you up one side and down the other.
Posted by: Rekd
Quote
Originally posted by: NLWarrior01
Atta boy!! Denial is the best policy ... if we don't concede that there's a problem then there can't be a problem can there ... hr>
There ya go, lets totally change our lifestyle for something we know reletively NOTHING about and believe the half-truths and left-out facts.
:twak:
I love blind ignorance.
Quote
1. Carbon Dioxide?s Effect on Temperature. The relationship between global temperature and carbon dioxide (CO2), on which the entire scare is founded, is not linear. Every molecule of CO2 added to the atmosphere contributes less to warming than the previous one. The book?s graph on p. 66-67 is seriously misleading. Moreover, even the historical levels of CO2 shown on the graph are disputed. Evidence from plant fossil-remains suggest that there was as much CO2 in the atmosphere about 11,000 years ago as there is today.
2. Kilimanjaro. The snows of Kilimanjaro are melting not because of global warming but because of a local climate shift that began 100 years ago. The authors of a report in the International Journal of Climatology ?develop a new concept for investigating the retreat of Kilimanjaro?s glaciers, based on the physical understanding of glacier?climate interactions.? They note that, ?The concept considers the peculiarities of the mountain and implies that climatological processes other than air temperature control the ice recession in a direct manner. A drastic drop in atmospheric moisture at the end of the 19th century and the ensuing drier climatic conditions are likely forcing glacier retreat on Kilimanjaro.?
3. Glaciers. Glaciers around the world have been receding at around the same pace for over 100 years. Research published by the National Academy of Sciences last week indicates that the Peruvian glacier on p. 53-53 probably disappeared a few thousand years ago.
4. The Medieval Warm Period. Al Gore says that the ?hockey stick? graph that shows temperatures remarkably steady for the last 1,000 years has been validated, and ridicules the concept of a ?medieval warm period.? That?s not the case. Last year, a team of leading paleoclimatologists said, ?When matching existing temperature reconstructions?the timeseries display a reasonably coherent picture of major climatic episodes: ?Medieval Warm Period,? ?Little Ice Age? and ?Recent Warming.?? They go on to conclude, ?So what would it mean, if the reconstructions indicate a larger?or smaller?temperature amplitude? We suggest that the former situation, i.e. enhanced variability during pre-industrial times, would result in a redistribution of weight towards the role of natural factors in forcing temperature changes, thereby relatively devaluing the impact of anthropogenic emissions and affecting future temperature predictions.?
5. The Hottest Year. Satellite temperature measurements say that 2005 wasn't the hottest year on record ? 1998 was ? and that temperatures have been stable since 2001 (p.73). Here?s the satellite graph:
6. Heat Waves. The summer heat wave that struck Europe in 2003 was caused by an atmospheric pressure anomaly; it had nothing to do with global warming. As the United Nations Environment Program reported in September 2003, ?This extreme wheather [sic] was caused by an anti-cyclone firmly anchored over the western European land mass holding back the rain-bearing depressions that usually enter the continent from the Atlantic ocean. This situation was exceptional in the extended length of time (over 20 days) during which it conveyed very hot dry air up from south of the Mediterranean.?
7. Record Temperatures. Record temperatures ? hot and cold ? are set every day around the world; that?s the nature of records. Statistically, any given place will see four record high temperatures set every year. There is evidence that daytime high temperatures are staying about the same as for the last few decades, but nighttime lows are gradually rising. Global warming might be more properly called, ?Global less cooling.? (On this, see Patrick J. Michaels book, Meltdown: The Predictable Distortion of Global Warming by Scientists, Politicians, and the Media.)
8. Hurricanes. There is no overall global trend of hurricane-force storms getting stronger that has anything to do with temperature. A recent study in Geophysical Research Letters found: ?The data indicate a large increasing trend in tropical cyclone intensity and longevity for the North Atlantic basin and a considerable decreasing trend for the Northeast Pacific. All other basins showed small trends, and there has been no significant change in global net tropical cyclone activity. There has been a small increase in global Category 4?5 hurricanes from the period 1986?1995 to the period 1996?2005. Most of this increase is likely due to improved observational technology. These findings indicate that other important factors govern intensity and frequency of tropical cyclones besides SSTs [sea surface temperatures].?
9. Tornadoes. Records for numbers of tornadoes are set because we can now record more of the smaller tornadoes (see, for instance, the Tornado FAQ at Weather Underground).
10. European Flooding. European flooding is not new (p. 107). Similar flooding happened in 2003. Research from Michael Mudelsee and colleagues from the University of Leipzig published in Nature (Sept. 11, 2003) looked at data reaching as far back as 1021 (for the Elbe) and 1269 (for the Oder). They concluded that there is no upward trend in the incidence of extreme flooding in this region of central Europe.
11. Shrinking Lakes. Scientists investigating the disappearance of Lake Chad (p.116) found that most of it was due to human overuse of water. ?The lake?s decline probably has nothing to do with global warming, report the two scientists, who based their findings on computer models and satellite imagery made available by NASA. They attribute the situation instead to human actions related to climate variation, compounded by the ever increasing demands of an expanding population? (?Shrinking African Lake Offers Lesson on Finite Resources,? National Geographic, April 26, 2001). Lake Chad is also a very shallow lake that has shrunk considerably throughout human history.
12. Polar Bears. Polar bears are not becoming endangered. A leading Canadian polar bear biologist wrote recently, ?Climate change is having an effect on the west Hudson population of polar bears, but really, there is no need to panic. Of the 13 populations of polar bears in Canada, 11 are stable or increasing in number. They are not going extinct, or even appear (sic) to be affected at present.?
13. The Gulf Stream. The Gulf Stream, the ocean conveyor belt, is not at risk of shutting off in the North Atlantic (p. 150). Carl Wunsch of MIT wrote to the journal Nature in 2004 to say, ?The only way to produce an ocean circulation without a Gulf Stream is either to turn off the wind system, or to stop the Earth?s rotation, or both?
14. Invasive Species. Gore?s worries about the effect of warming on species ignore evolution. With the new earlier caterpillar season in the Netherlands, an evolutionary advantage is given to birds that can hatch their eggs earlier than the rest. That?s how nature works. Also, ?invasive species? naturally extend their range when climate changes. As for the pine beetle given as an example of invasive species, Rob Scagel, a forest microclimate specialist in British Columbia, said, ?The MPB (mountain pine beetle) is a species native to this part of North America and is always present. The MPB epidemic started as comparatively small outbreaks and through forest management inaction got completely out of hand.?
15. Species Loss. When it comes to species loss, the figures given on p. 163 are based on extreme guesswork, as the late Julian Simon pointed out. We have documentary evidence of only just over 1,000 extinctions since 1600 (see, for instance, Bj?rn Lomborg?s The Skeptical Environmentalist, p. 250).
16. Coral Reefs. Coral reefs have been around for over 500 million years. This means that they have survived through long periods with much higher temperatures and atmospheric CO2 concentrations than today.
17. Malaria and other Infectious Diseases. Leading disease scientists contend that climate change plays only a minor role in the spread of emerging infectious diseases. In ?Global Warming and Malaria: A Call for Accuracy? (The Lancet, June 2004), nine leading malariologists criticized models linking global warming to increased malaria spread as ?misleading? and ?display[ing] a lack of knowledge? of the subject.
18. Antarctic Ice. There is controversy over whether the Antarctic ice sheet is thinning or thickening. Recent scientific studies have shown a thickening in the interior at the same time as increased melting along the coastlines. Temperatures in the interior are generally decreasing. The Antarctic Peninsula, where the Larsen-B ice shelf broke up (p. 181) is not representative of what is happening in the rest of Antarctica. Dr. Wibj?rn Karl?n, Professor Emeritus of Physical Geography and Quaternary Geology at Stockholm University, acknowledges, ?Some small areas in the Antarctic Peninsula have broken up recently, just like it has done back in time. The temperature in this part of Antarctica has increased recently, probably because of a small change in the position of the low pressure systems.? According to a forthcoming report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, climate models based on anthropogenic forcing cannot explain the anomalous warming of the Antarctic Peninsula; thus, something natural is at work.
19. Greenland Climate. Greenland was warmer in the 1920s and 1930s than it is now. A recent study by Dr. Peter Chylek of the University of California, Riverside, addressed the question of whether man is directly responsible for recent warming: ?An important question is to what extent can the current (1995-2005) temperature increase in Greenland coastal regions be interpreted as evidence of man-induced global warming? Although there has been a considerable temperature increase during the last decade (1995 to 2005) a similar increase and at a faster rate occurred during the early part of the 20th century (1920 to 1930) when carbon dioxide or other greenhouse gases could not be a cause. The Greenland warming of 1920 to 1930 demonstrates that a high concentration of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases is not a necessary condition for period of warming to arise. The observed 1995-2005 temperature increase seems to be within a natural variability of Greenland climate.? (Petr Chylek et al., Geophysical Research Letters, 13 June 2006.)
20. Sea Level Rise. The United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change does not forecast sea-level rises of ?18 to 20 feet.? Rather, it says, ?We project a sea level rise of 0.09 to 0.88 m for 1990 to 2100, with a central value of 0.48 m. The central value gives an average rate of 2.2 to 4.4 times the rate over the 20th century...It is now widely agreed that major loss of grounded ice and accelerated sea level rise are very unlikely during the 21st century.? Al Gore?s suggestions of much more are therefore extremely alarmist.
21. Population. Al Gore worries about population growth; Gore does not suggest a solution. Fertility in the developed world is stable or decreasing. The plain fact is that we are not going to reduce population back down to 2 billion or fewer in the foreseeable future. In the meantime, the population in the developing world requires a significant increase in its standard of living to reduce the threats of premature and infant mortality, disease, and hunger. In The Undercover Economist, Tim Harford writes, ?If we are honest, then, the argument that trade leads to economic growth, which leads to climate change, leads us then to a stark conclusion: we should cut our trade links to make sure that the Chinese, Indians and Africans stay poor. The question is whether any environmental catastrophe, even severe climate change, could possibly inflict the same terrible human cost as keeping three or four billion people in poverty. To ask that question is to answer it.?
22. Energy Generation. A specific example of this is Gore?s acknowledgement that 30 percent of global CO2 emissions come from wood fires used for cooking (p. 227). If we introduced affordable, coal-fired power generation into South Asia and Africa we could reduce this considerably and save over 1.6 million lives a year. This is the sort of solution that Gore does not even consider.
23. Carbon-Emissions Trading. The European Carbon Exchange Market, touted as ?effective? on p. 252, has crashed.
24. The ?Scientific Consensus.? On the supposed ?scientific consensus?: Dr. Naomi Oreskes, of the University of California, San Diego, (p. 262) did not examine a ?large random sample? of scientific articles. She got her search terms wrong and thought she was looking at all the articles when in fact she was looking at only 928 out of about 12,000 articles on ?climate change.? Dr. Benny Peiser, of Liverpool John Moores University in England, was unable to replicate her study. He says, ?As I have stressed repeatedly, the whole data set includes only 13 abstracts (~1%) that explicitly endorse what Oreskes has called the ?consensus view.? In fact, the vast majority of abstracts does (sic) not mention anthropogenic climate change. Moreover ? and despite attempts to deny this fact ? a handful of abstracts actually questions the view that human activities are the main driving force of ?the observed warming over the last 50 years.?? In addition, a recent survey of scientists following the same methodology as one published in 1996 found that about 30 percent of scientists disagreed to some extent or another with the contention that ?climate change is mostly the result of anthropogenic causes.? Less than 10 percent ?strongly agreed? with the statement. Details of both the survey and the failed attempt to replicate the Oreskes study can be found here.
25. Economic Costs. Even if the study Gore cites is right (p. 280-281), the United States will still emit massive amounts of CO2 after all the measures it outlines have been realized. Getting emissions down to the paltry levels needed to stabilize CO2 in the atmosphere would require, in Gore?s own words, ?a wrenching transformation? of our way of life. This cannot be done easily or without significant cost. The Kyoto Protocol, which Gore enthusiastically supports, would avert less than a tenth of a degree of warming in the next fifty years and would cost up to $400 billion a year to the U.S. All of the current proposals in Congress would cost the economy significant amounts, making us all poorer, with all that that entails for human health and welfare, while doing nothing to stop global warming.
Posted by: pimpsmurf
Protestors: "FREE TIBET! FREE TIBET!"
Peter: "I'll take it!"
<dials phone>
Peter: "Hello China, I think I have something you might want..."
-JNY
