Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: Meteorologist Piers Corbyn: Debunking More Climate Change Mumbo-Jumbo

Posted 10 years ago on Dec. 14, 2011, 7:53 a.m. EST by newjustice22 (49)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

236 Comments

236 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 11 points by GirlFriday (17435) 10 years ago

'Cept Piers Corbyn is a well known liar and you have to be really damn stupid to fall for it. :D http://www.durangobill.com/Swindle_Swindle.html

[-] 1 points by Mattholck (51) 10 years ago

[-] 1 points by Brandon37 (372) 10 years ago

So is Al Gore.

[-] 1 points by GirlFriday (17435) 10 years ago

Brandon, Brandon, Brandon. What are we going to do with you?

It is not a case of: if one than the other.

[-] 1 points by Brandon37 (372) 10 years ago

The global warming craze was proven to be based in lies.

[-] 1 points by GirlFriday (17435) 10 years ago

It is fact, Brandon.

[-] 1 points by Brandon37 (372) 10 years ago

No, I'm sorry, it's not. The only fact we have is that the climate is changing. It has been changing since the earth came into existence.

[-] 1 points by GirlFriday (17435) 10 years ago

Did you read any f the stuff that I brought in any of this?

[-] 1 points by Brandon37 (372) 10 years ago

Yes, but I don't need to. There is no substantial evidence that humans cause global warming. I have read it all before. Now, the global warming nuts want to halt the production of natural gas saying that fracking caused the OK earthquakes. I cannot believe people who are this opportunistic.

[-] 1 points by GirlFriday (17435) 10 years ago

You are in deep in denial, Brandon. Deep.

[-] 1 points by Brandon37 (372) 10 years ago

I don't buy into in man. I think it has a political agenda.

[-] 1 points by Mattholck (51) 10 years ago

everyone is looking for opportunity

[-] 1 points by AndyJ0hn (129) 10 years ago

Piers Corbyn has a first class honours degree in physics at Imperial College London. does that make him a liar? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piers_Corbyn

[-] 3 points by GirlFriday (17435) 10 years ago

Cept Piers Corbyn is a well known liar and you have to be really damn stupid to fall for it. :D http://www.durangobill.com/Swindle_Swindle.html

[-] -1 points by theaveng (602) 10 years ago

Repeating the same post twice is not only poor netiquette...... it's a commn sign of a Spammer/troll.

I think I will borrow your spam, but with some minor corrections: "GirlFriday is a well known corporatist (she wants government to run all corporations from factories to stores), and you have to be really damn stupid to fall for her posts."

[-] 3 points by GirlFriday (17435) 10 years ago

theavenge is a paid-to-post troll that cannot back his shit up while oddly resembling backed up shit. :D

[-] -1 points by blackbloc (-19) 10 years ago

what does physics have to do with climate change?

[-] 0 points by AndyJ0hn (129) 10 years ago

do a google search for "physics of climate change'

[-] -1 points by blackbloc (-19) 10 years ago

nah i will not be taking the advice of a physics expert when it comes to climate change sorry

[-] 0 points by AndyJ0hn (129) 10 years ago

who would you be taking advice from? An accountant?

[-] -1 points by blackbloc (-19) 10 years ago

a climate change expert of course which he is not

[-] 0 points by AndyJ0hn (129) 10 years ago

what would they have a degree in climate change? it doesnt exist.

[-] -1 points by blackbloc (-19) 10 years ago

environmental science, meteorology

[-] 1 points by Tinhorn (285) 10 years ago

Most Meteorologists are liers, they tell me all the time it's going to be sunny out and it usually rains that day.

[-] 0 points by theaveng (602) 10 years ago

That's a nice LIMITED graph that Girlfriday posted. Here's a full graph of the last 2000 years which shows our current temperature is only 0.2 higher than the temperature was in 1200 A.D.

Then it cooled off. Then it warmed up again. We're just looking at natural temperature fluctuations..... the same way human bengs warm-up and cool-off during the day. LINK - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:2000_Year_Temperature_Comparison.png

Damn those inconvenient truths.

[-] 1 points by Mattholck (51) 10 years ago

[-] 8 points by ZenDogTroll (13032) from South Burlington, VT 10 years ago

yeah-ya

mumbo jumbo

meanwhile the North West Passage will soon be open to shipping and there are any number of business interests who think they will profit from a warmer earth -

they forget to consider what happens when land based ice melts

or how many hundreds of millions of environmental refugees will be displaced causing global social instability

never mind Pentagon analysis of the anticipated friction caused by changing weather patterns directly affecting water supplies worldwide

or agricultural impacts which are anticipated to be devastating

go peddle your bullshit somewhere else nimrod

[-] 3 points by beautifulworld (23644) 10 years ago

Why not protect the earth? No matter what.

[-] 3 points by ZenDogTroll (13032) from South Burlington, VT 10 years ago

I hate liars

the repelican party is DONE

DONE I said.

One day soon people all over America are going to wake up

and they will realize -

they've been lyin'

through their teeth.

the repelican party is DONE

[-] 0 points by NewEnglandPatriot (916) from Dartmouth, MA 10 years ago

Both have been lying, we need to scrap the system - format the hard drive and reload the operating system. We need to get the malware , spyware, and viruses OUT! It is obvious it is failing and is destined to ultimately fail on its present course. The corporations and banks have hijacked the system with lobbyists and politicians.

[-] 1 points by ZenDogTroll (13032) from South Burlington, VT 10 years ago

It isn't just the savings/lending institutions.

At sourcewatch, under Goldman Sux Coal Issues they demonstrate that Goldman is heavily into fossil fuels.

And that's just Goldman.

What I find interesting, is this fact from sourcewatch:

Goldman Sux

  • Goldman Sachs gave $478,250 to federal candidates in the 05/06 election period through its political action committee - 35% to Democrats and 65% to Republicans. 112

35% to dems

65% to repelicans

in federal elections - so I would presume that means that the dems are only half as useful.

[-] 0 points by NewEnglandPatriot (916) from Dartmouth, MA 10 years ago

We need campaign finance reform to level the field, and to get real people elected. We need corporate interests out of the electoral systems, and need corporate lobbyists out of the lawmaker offices as well. Bottom line, good post

[+] -4 points by Brandon37 (372) 10 years ago

Lies huh? You mean all the leaked emails showing that Al Gore is indeed the liar?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2011/nov/22/fresh-hacked-climate-science-emails

[-] 3 points by GirlFriday (17435) 10 years ago

http://berkeleyearth.org/study.php

Heritage is a right wing think take. :D Look at the study.

[-] -3 points by Brandon37 (372) 10 years ago

Who cares. The emails clearly show Al Gore was using false data for financial gain.. Just 5 years ago, he was telling people Florida would be underwater in 50 years. It's a scam The earth is changing and has been since it's inception, but it's not us behind the change.

[-] 3 points by GirlFriday (17435) 10 years ago

http://berkeleyearth.org/study.php cherry on top And this is the study that was funded in part by the Koch heads. By all means have a look at the methodology.Came out this past October.

[-] -1 points by Brandon37 (372) 10 years ago

OK, I don't want to hear about the Koch brothers. They are not excellerating climate change. I don't understand global warming proponents who claim to follow science when science shows a different story.

If you like links, here is one for you. It's short and to the point. Notice how the earth has been changing from period to period. The polar caps will continue to melt and parts of the US will eventually be underwater. We cannot stop that from happening. We also cannot speed up the process.

I strongly suggest you watch this and rethink your global warming stance. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r5P4NuYFddk

[-] 2 points by GirlFriday (17435) 10 years ago

I am relying on science and you want me to watch a video.

YOU ARE LYING and for what?

[-] -1 points by Brandon37 (372) 10 years ago

Call the person who compiled the data the liar. Why should I believe modern global warming nuts when the data has been there for decades?

The earth will always be changing. Just like both you and I will age, so will the earth.

[-] 2 points by GirlFriday (17435) 10 years ago

http://berkeleyearth.org/study.php

cherry on top And this is the study that was funded in part by the Koch heads. By all means have a look at the methodology.

[-] 1 points by Brandon37 (372) 10 years ago

Buddy. What is your argument? That we have ruined the earth, or that the earth temperature is changing?

[-] 2 points by GirlFriday (17435) 10 years ago
  1. It is occurring.
  2. Men are influencing it http://www.logicalscience.com/consensus/consensus.htm#Journals
  3. Oil Lobby Offers $10,000 Payments To Global Warming Deniers To Push Back On Climate Study By Faiz Shakir on Feb 1, 2007 at 9:32 pm The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the most authoritative group on global warming, will report on Friday that it is “very likely” that human activities were the main cause of warming in the past 50 years. Prominent global warming deniers, such as Rush Limbaugh and Sen. James Inhofe, have already been downplaying the report and contravening the science. But the Guardian reports that there is a more orchestrated movement going on below the radar to confound the public about the IPCC’s report. The oil lobby is so desperate to push back on the new climate change report that they have been offering to pay global warming skeptics to speak out: Scientists and economists have been offered $10,000 each by a lobby group funded by one of the world’s largest oil companies to undermine a major climate change report due to be published today. Letters sent by the American Enterprise Institute (AEI), an ExxonMobil-funded thinktank with close links to the Bush administration, offered the payments for articles that emphasise the shortcomings of a report from the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Travel expenses and additional payments were also offered. [...] The letters were sent by Kenneth Green, a visiting scholar at AEI, who confirmed that the organisation had approached scientists, economists and policy analysts to write articles for an independent review that would highlight the strengths and weaknesses of the IPCC report. AEI has received more than $1.6 million from ExxonMobil. The well-heeled oil lobby is a primary reason why doubt still exists in the general public about the cause of global warming. As Al Gore’s An Inconvenient Truth pointed out, despite the fact that no peer-reviewed scientific articles published in recent years express any doubt that climate change is happening, more than 50 percent of news media coverage of the issue includes the oil industry’s position on the subject. http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2007/02/01/10025/oil-lobby-payments/

we know the game

[-] 0 points by Brandon37 (372) 10 years ago

We are not this powerful. People with this line of thinking were around in the 13th century. The believed the earth was flat.

[-] 2 points by GirlFriday (17435) 10 years ago

You are lying. And for what?

[-] 1 points by badconduct (550) 10 years ago

Yeah. And now people believe that CO2 isn't warming the Earth. It's not like people believed the Earth was round, and a bunch of scientists proved it was flat. They believed the Earth was flat, and were still skeptical even after science proved it otherwise.

Global Warming is a for-sure. There's 7 billion people, we have increased CO2 in the atmosphere by almost 40% in the last century.

Yes, it does affect the climate. The studies show there is a clear connection. I certainly wouldn't consider it a sign of "power", it is more a weakness.

I don't understand what is so hard to comprehend, it's common sense. The daily low 14-day forecast in my city this week doesn't even cross the average low. That's not 'normal'.

http://www.theweathernetwork.com/fourteenday/caon0512?ref=qlink_st_14day

It's not a conspiracy. NASA clearly shows the ice is melting. Even if a cycle did exist, CO2 is accelerating it. It's obvious, you can see it in the charts. You can see it in the studies. You can see it all around you. Al Gore may have been in it for the money, but he's not a scientist. He's a politician and a movie maker.

[-] 0 points by Brandon37 (372) 10 years ago

Can you not see that your "lying" defense holds no water? I have not posted anything that isn't backed by modern science.

[-] 1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 10 years ago

What hath man messed with that he didn't mess up?

The oceans are almost fished out

The great lakes are a mess.

Blowing up mountains is causing all kinds of problems.

Abandoned mining operations are poisoning land and water tables.

What makes you think we can't mess up the air?

[-] 1 points by Brandon37 (372) 10 years ago

What would you equate it to if you were alive in the Ice Ages?

[-] 1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 10 years ago

What's that got to do with anything?

How does it answer any question asked?

How does it answer the question I asked?

It doesn't

[-] 0 points by Thrasymaque (-2138) 10 years ago

"It has to do with everything. The earth has gone through much more drastic climate changes before humans ever emitted a damn thing. A 16 year old high school student can see this is nothing more than a campaign for the more expensive green energy alternative"

This is a very weak argument. It's not because the earth has gone through great climactic changes in the past that we can't be messing up the atmosphere ourselves today. One of the great climatic changes is thought to have been caused by a large meteor hitting the Earth and messing up the atmosphere. You need to read some science.

[-] 0 points by Brandon37 (372) 10 years ago

It has to do with everything. The earth has gone through much more drastic climate changes before humans ever emitted a damn thing. A 16 year old high school student can see this is nothing more than a campaign for the more expensive green energy alternative.

[-] -1 points by Tinhorn (285) 10 years ago

It doesn't fall into the fear mongering of OWS so you won't win this debate no matter how may links you post. They don't want to hear facts, they want conspiracy theory or buzzword of the day.

[-] 0 points by Brandon37 (372) 10 years ago

I see that. It's incredible.

[-] 2 points by chrispoole (3) 10 years ago

Hi from the UK

If Global Warming or Climate Change or whatever it's called this week is a reality, then the British government doesn't believe in it. I have seen nothing change in this country to reduce the CO2 emissions to suggest they believe in it other more tax on fuel and road tolls.

In fact every change made uses more fuel.

If they were truly concerned they would stop using fossil fuels and turn to ethanol from cellulose biomass which is carbon zero and as a by-product you get more food. And if you use Hemp you get 50,000 other uses as well.

http://www.votehemp.com/

http://www.voteindustrialhemp.com/

And a bit of history, I'm not sure how true this is but it's a good read if not a bit long and dry.

http://www.whale.to/b/davis_william.html

[-] 2 points by Arditum (37) 10 years ago

The world temperature is raising. <-- fact

If it raises just by two degrees the results will be catastrophic. <-- fact

But hey! Let's just pump greenhouse gases in the atmosphere! It can't do any bad, right?

It seems some people can't go past whether it's their fault or the earth's. The point is, it doesn't matter. We must refrain from making the earth any hotter than it already is. Unfortunately the fact that greenhouse gases have a greenhouse effect on the earth is yet another fact.

[Deleted]

[-] 2 points by badconduct (550) 10 years ago

Fact: The Sun is currently responsible for 18 - 30% of climate change. CO2 accounts for the majority.

Fact: Cold climates are getting warmer. See next fact.

Fact: Canadians 'migrate' in winter because of Christmas vacation. Canada is a beautiful place in the winter, many people come here for the winter sports (especially BC). Well, it used to be. We don't get the cold temperatures as often, or for as long.

Fact: clubbing animals easily because of climate change does not help your argument. Contradiction.

Fact: I don't recommend eating any drowned animals you find on shore. It may be hazardous to your health.

Fact: That's irrelevant to global warming.

Fact: Also irrelevant.

[-] 1 points by Skippy2 (485) 10 years ago

Fact: simplesimon is correct

[-] 0 points by NewEnglandPatriot (916) from Dartmouth, MA 10 years ago

Now your cooking with gas! I am gonna go outside a fart a few times and hope the wind goes in their direction ;)

[-] -1 points by Thrasymaque (-2138) 10 years ago
  • Fact - Winters in Canada are majorly messed up.
    • Fact - The raining seasons in Indonesia are majorly messed up.
    • Fact - Polluting less is better no matter what you think of Global Warming.

[Deleted]

[-] 0 points by Thrasymaque (-2138) 10 years ago

Exactly, monsoons are normal here in Indonesia. The problem is we are not getting any. The last two raining seasons have been extremely dry and the farmers are suffering greatly.

Obviously, there are cycles and the Sun plays a big role. But the pollution we create also causes a problem because the atmosphere is also an important factor influencing the Earth's temperature. It's a fact that we can mess up the atmosphere. As humans we have a lot of power in that regards.

From what Iv'e read, there is no debate. The percentage of scientists that believe in Global Warning is upwards 90%.

What's funny is that people even care. We should just consider Global Warming as being real and dangerous, and pollute less. I don't see the point in trying to deny it.

Conspiracy theorists just love to talk about 9-11 and Global Warming. They get big hard-ons from these subjects. I'm not sure why.

[-] 1 points by NewEnglandPatriot (916) from Dartmouth, MA 10 years ago

That believe and offer no proof, just hype. That has been proven. The real scientists are paid to shut up, and the ones with no clue say whatever they are told. If they don't their government grants stop. So they do what they are told, just like most of the crap that is forced upon is. Seek truth.

[-] 1 points by Arditum (37) 10 years ago

This is laughable. As if 90% of scientists would study and write books on something they know is false. You fool, a scientist gives his life to science, what's some petty cash to him? Why would any scientist need a grant to study something he doesn't believe in? Laughable! Only someone greedy and without honor could even think of that..

[-] 0 points by NewEnglandPatriot (916) from Dartmouth, MA 10 years ago

I offer the proof of all data. Everyone is brainwashed and ignores it. The scientists they hire believe in theories based on models. The models work only if all data from other models is ignored. Go back before 50 years, use ice analysis from core drillings where air samples are trapped. They measured them.

Use the fact that all planets are warming no CO2 factor...hmmm

Let me give you an example They tried in the 70s that global cooling was caused by fossil fuels. People bought into it, and when things started "warming" they changed it to warming instead of cooling. Google it. Piers Corbyn debunked global warming due to CO2 and can predict the weather using solar models almost a year in advance w/ 80% accuracy.

Other countries are starting to see the light that this is BS, from CO2 Global warming is real, natural cycle of ALL PLANETS. NO CO2 on Mars Jupiter Pluto, etc. CO2 comes from every carbon based organism, including you and me. CO2 is aspirated by trees, so you want to kill the trees? CO2 can not be converted to liquid form, into ocean water from air. That comes from ocean floor.

If you feel CO2 is so bad , hold your breath and o your part. Get rid of every form of technology. Get rid of cars, do not fly, do not use any fuel, heat air conditioning or electricity since it is so bad. Cut down all vegetation on planet, and then you have a say.

This is to tax us wait and see - they are starting this in Europe and are trying to make the 3rd world countries not develop - They are holding them back and stealing their oil and resources.

Such a great government - do as I say not as I do and I will tax you for this. Wait....It has been planned and will happen.

[-] 1 points by Arditum (37) 10 years ago

Firstly, Mars' atmosphere is for 95% CO2. With this your credibility is already close to nil in my eyes, but let's continue.

The cooling-warming dilemma stems from the complexity of the processes involved, but it's not some secret conspiracy, it's all there in the research. I won't say "a little googling is enough", because GW is a serious topic of research and trying to argue it without complete knowledge of all the factors involved is, again, laughable.

While it's true that most living organisms on earth produce CO2 and the Earth has CO2 cycles, this is a matter of influence. Human excess CO2 production can speed up and topple a delicate equilibrium. If Global Warming is part of the Earth's cycle, then we must pay even more attention to it, as it becomes a battle against nature and not just someone's interest.

Streamlining public transport and reducing the number of cars is long overdue only because of the industrial interests in car sale. Smaller, lighter and therefore much more efficient and less expensive cars would change the face of the cities the world over, if just there wasn't such a convenient market for them. However, even before that, what is most important is to become aware of our contribution and combat a dangerous phenomenon such as global warming whether it's natural or artificial.

Finally, third world countries don't develop not because of emission regulation (industries are already rare in the third world), but because of corporate exploitation and lack of an egalitarian culture.

If there is a conspiracy in act, it's the one enacted by those who need to preserve their interests in hyper-production, cost-cutting and consumerism.

Please get your facts straight before taking a position that goes against the smartest and least self-interested people in the world: scientists.

[-] 0 points by NewEnglandPatriot (916) from Dartmouth, MA 10 years ago

Hey, I said no humans on mars no suvs, co2 is not the ONLY reason ALL planets cannot be OUR fault. You keep grasping at straws like the data used for "cause" you support. You are obviously afraid were all going to die if something is not done. The only thing we can do to help ourselves and planet is no clean up our act, pollution, etc. The gas is irrelevant. There is prehistoric CO2 in the ice, that has shown more than now. It is those of you who will tax us all into ground that is why they are trying to get us to argue over it. HUMAN CO2 is what we are being blamed for. Fish exhale in ocean volcanoes HUMAN CO2 is not a factor on other planets, some do not have CO2. You are a finger pointer nothing more. Look at all planets, Mars ok cow but no humans. Jupiter Hydrogen, no CO2 still warming. ALL PLANETS WARMING CO2 IS NOT THE COMMON FACTOR , THE SUN . MY ONLY POINT.AGAIN YOU CHERRY PICK, I say one thing, it is pulled out of context etc. I am not against the cause to clean up for pollution reasons, in which are mercury with coal, sulfur dioxide with coal/oil production/generation, hydrocarbons, particulates. You people need to stop swearing allegiance to anti CO2, and look at the fact all planets are warming, maybe we should revisit.

The very catalytic converters on all vehicles turn CO, NOX, O2, HC into CO2. One could say it cleans up worse gases, and makes another CO2 so evil.

If you put more oxygen in your home, you could tecnically breathe better. Your heart rate woult slow, breathing rate would slow, less stress. Now more CO2, trees would aspirate more, and flourish, grass would be greener. There is a system of compensation. The problem is not you or I.

It is those that follow the pied piper "Gores, Gates, and all of them" They give money to cause, still fly their jets, heat their mansions, and use people like you to build a base under an agenda. I agree reduce pollution, for the right reasons, this is a white paper issue like abortion, hate crimes, etc. Everthing technically is a hate crime, so if a black muders black, not hate? You see how they play us against each other, I am simply trying to show all the facts and each of you has a belief system that they anchor to. Do it for the right reasons, not Al Gore and all of them who say DO AS I SAY, they do not do anything but pay money for cause and have very huge carbon footprints. That is where problem lies, do your part, but do not support them for taxing power generation, etc as those costs will come to you not them Get it???? I am only trying to help here - This seems to be the most active post, I am trying to get all of you to wake up. The pied piper is the TV and leaders. They have changed this issue from Global cooling, then its warming, now climate change. It was always climate change., they hang onto warming for now so the carbon tax agenda can push through. Nature does not belong to government or corporations. We need to Occupy EPA, and Polluters, etc not support them. My only point please understand we are on the same team.

[-] 1 points by badconduct (550) 10 years ago

You're whole argument here is; "Some people have an agenda; therefore all the scientists who used valid science and came to this conclusion based on their own findings are discredited."

When someone says "I need to quit smoking", do they just put the cigarette down and quit? No, it's a habit. Doesn't make it right.

Here, I'll not cherry pick.

"I said no humans on mars no suvs, co2 is not the ONLY reason ALL planets cannot be OUR fault."

We don't live on other planets. So scientifically, it would be impossible for us to affect their climates. We do live on Earth. You are comparing the possible to the impossible.

"You are obviously afraid were all going to die if something is not done."

Yes, there are numerous concerns. Cost for repairs, infrastructure damage, crops dying, flooding. The cost this year alone is $350 for catastrophes, which is a record amount. Source - http://www.ctv.ca/CTVNews/CanadaAM/20111215/swiss-re-preliminary-estimate-costs-disasters-111215/

"The only thing we can do to help ourselves and planet is no clean up our act, pollution, etc."

Not a coherent sentence.

"It is those of you who will tax us all into ground that is why they are trying to get us to argue over it."

See: "It is those that follow the pied piper "Gores, Gates, and all of them" They give money to cause, still fly their jets, heat their mansions, and use people like you to build a base under an agenda."

They will be paying the most tax, obviously. We don't use that much CO2. Corporations will also being paying taxes as well. Since they basically pay none, I don't see why this is a problem. This is similar to increasing the cost of cigarettes. It's not a money grab, it's deterrent.

"UMAN CO2 is what we are being blamed for. Fish exhale in ocean volcanoes HUMAN CO2 is not a factor on other planets, some do not have CO2."

That is correct. It's measurable that CO2 has incresaed almost 40% since the industrial age.

"Human activities add a worldwide average of almost 1.4 metric tons of carbon per person per year to the atmosphere. Before industrialization, the concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere was about 280 parts per million. By 1958, the concentration of carbon dioxide had increased to around 315 parts per million, and by 2007, it had risen to about 383 parts per million. These increases were due almost entirely to human activity. "

Source: http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/oco/news/oco-20090113.html

"You are a finger pointer nothing more. Look at all planets, Mars ok cow but no humans. Jupiter Hydrogen, no CO2 still warming. ALL PLANETS WARMING CO2 IS NOT THE COMMON FACTOR , THE SUN . MY ONLY POINT.AGAIN YOU CHERRY PICK, I say one thing, it is pulled out of context etc. "

Source of this information: ""Evidence that CO2 is not the principle driver of warming on this planet is provided by the simultaneous warming of other planets and moons in our solar system, despite the fact that they obviously have no anthropogenic emissions of greenhouse gases. Mars, Triton, Pluto and Jupiter all show global warming, pointing to the Sun as the dominating influence in determining climate throughout the solar system.""

Debunked - http://www.skepticalscience.com/global-warming-other-planets-solar-system.htm

We don't have the proper measurements to make any claims like that. "The notion that Mars is warming came from an unfortunate conflation of weather and climate. Based on two pictures taken 22 years apart, assumptions were made that have not proved to be reliable. There is currently no evidence to support claims that Mars is warming at all." "The notion that Jupiter is warming is actually based on predictions, since no warming has actually been observed." "Observations of changes in luminosity on the surface of both Neptune and its largest moon, Triton, have been taken to indicate warming caused by increased solar activity. In fact, the brightening is due to the planet’s seasons changing, but very slowly. Summer is coming to Neptune’s southern hemisphere, bringing more sunlight, as it does every 164 years." "The warming exhibited by Pluto is not really understood. Pluto’s seasons are the least understood of all: its existence has only been known for a third of its 248 -year orbit, and it has never been visited by a space probe."

All debunked. Planets are not warming, only Earth.

" I am not against the cause to clean up for pollution reasons, in which are mercury with coal, sulfur dioxide with coal/oil production/generation, hydrocarbons, particulates."

A lot of those processes result in high amounts of CO2 being produced, CO2 is a good start for cleaning up industry. Ultimately, we will deal with those consequences as well. But CO2 is an immediate concern.

" You people need to stop swearing allegiance to anti CO2, and look at the fact all planets are warming, maybe we should revisit."

Not a fact. You are incorrect.

"The very catalytic converters on all vehicles turn CO, NOX, O2, HC into CO2. One could say it cleans up worse gases, and makes another CO2 so evil."

CO2 isn't good or evil, it serves a purpose. Eating McDonalds will make you fat, but that's only if you eat to much. McDonalds isn't evil.

"If you put more oxygen in your home, you could tecnically breathe better. Your heart rate woult slow, breathing rate would slow, less stress. Now more CO2, trees would aspirate more, and flourish, grass would be greener. There is a system of compensation. The problem is not you or I."

Deforestation has cleared out 80% of the natural forests. There are no trees to thrive, they cannot clear out the CO2 because we don't compensate for it. The corals are also dying off, which are a primary CO2 cleaning source.

The rest I said previously.

[-] -1 points by NewEnglandPatriot (916) from Dartmouth, MA 10 years ago

NO , what I am saying is all scientists study. They study a range of time with limited data and the conclusions are correct. The elites fund the scientists, with their agendas to take a microscope if you will to examine a specific area to produce data that will advance the agenda. A soap bubble if you will

What I am trying to help with is think for yourself. Stop letting others decide, and sway your thoughts. If you do that then you are free. Strip away all the scare tactics,. spin, etc. The agenda is to get a carbon tax. It will not stop the global warming I promise you. The planetary cycle will run its course, things will cool again and thats that. Stop polluting for your own reasons, not their reasons. I agree on a lot of things , but for reasons in my heart. Not saying you don't, until you burrow deeper down the hole and take the blinders off and see everything then you will know. I used to be like all of you.

Then I died. Yep I was dead for 7 minutes. It was like I was born all over and could see through everything. It was like when a kid, I question everything until I find the answer.

At one time you stood in a field. You saw only a field. You thought, what is that dark shadowy thing, a curve on the horizon. You moved toward it one day, it was a hill. Next there was another. It was a mountain. It was a higher point, where you could now see a bigger picture. You then realize, that this point fixed where you observed the field was fixed and it is YOU that moved, and changed THE perspective. The field is still there (the scientist/study), but there are other points of observation(other studies) I think what I am trying to say is free yourself from the narrow path and understand there are others that use us for another purpose. I will agree to disagree. I love the debate and all of you. Someday you will see you wasted time and they used you. I was there once my brothers and sisters. They cause the division amongst us. It is time to rise...

[-] 1 points by badconduct (550) 10 years ago

You don't understand. I am thinking for myself. I went through everything you said, found where it was sourced from originally, and found it has already be proven incorrect. There are no anti-climate change arguments left, it's a fact. CO2 is increasing in the atmosphere and it's causing the planet to warm.

We had an ice age when the temperature was 4 degrees below current norms, a 2 degree increase in a short period of time will have serious consequences. That's how they make predictions about damages and ice melting speeds.

I can see the climate changing, it's absolutely changing. And it's changing very quickly.

I edited my post and countered every fact you put. There is 0 evidence that this warming is caused by solar cycles. None. Every planet that has been warming has an explination

It's not going to run a course. They said it would get worse back in 2002, and it has gotten a lot worse.

[-] 0 points by NewEnglandPatriot (916) from Dartmouth, MA 10 years ago

You forget about balance. This planet will shake things up and cool itself. Many will die off, if we run out of petro the same thing will happen.
Petro fertilizes make food, energy all that increased population. This planet is billions of years old. It is us that will pay for the shortcut our industrial generation took. If we stayed out of the oil we would have made all whales extinct. Then maybe, we would have sought another solution then. The bottom line is that we are going to run out, or destroy ourselves. Either way, the result will be the same. Less of us, things will balance out and we will start at bottom again.

[-] 0 points by NewEnglandPatriot (916) from Dartmouth, MA 10 years ago

We need to stop developing land and plant trees. Forests are burning, forests were cleared. Helping nature as much as possible wil help the CO2 factor. I feel It is too far gone as far as energy is concerned. Again other factors, NASA is wrong, other scientists are wrong.... Who is right??? CO2 is a factor, underwater volcano activity is picking up also nobody seems to get it. It is like a soda can bubbling it to surface. This planet is about to go through a big transition, famine, floods, earthquakes, volcanic eruptions and tsunamis are going to get a lot lot worse. Lets blame just CO2 and forget the fact that earth core is shifting toward Siberia. The Sun my friends is about to give us all a surprise and CO2 will be the last thing we are worrying about. I agree we have messed this planet up, but carbon taxes will not stop this. Tell Gore to abandon is jet, or Gates to stop heating his mansions, etc. Why do you not freeze in winter, not drive. I walk and mountain bike. I have my energy as efficient as possible. I will be off grid when this tax comes. I do not need oil. You must do the same if the cause will make a difference in pollution. Don't forget the NOX, SO2, HC, HG and other contaminants. They seem to get a free pass. Catalytic Converters actually complete the combustion process of these so CO2 and water is all thats left. Yep, an emission component that produces more CO2.
Dry ice, CO2. Carbonic acid, soda CO2. We need to address the enitre board before placing some sources under study. I am for pollution reduction, and conservation. Plant trees help whatever way you can. But tax is not going to do anything but put us into further poverty. Another solution is required.

Carbon Sequestration, not taxes is the only viable solution

[-] 1 points by badconduct (550) 10 years ago

NASA is right, other scientists are right.

All of those green house gasses are considered as well - http://www.skepticalscience.com/GHG-Climb_WMO.html

I don't have to tell Gates or Gore anything. No one is going to abandon their comfortable life style, especially when people claim global warming doesn't exist and have no science to back up that claim, except conspiracy theories and "They do it, so it must be good".

"I will be off grid when this tax comes."

That's the purpose of the tax.

"You must do the same if the cause will make a difference in pollution."

I'm joining the army.

"Another solution is required."

OK, agreed. But the problem is still CO2.

[-] 0 points by NewEnglandPatriot (916) from Dartmouth, MA 10 years ago

And I quote "You have been looking throughout an allochromatic glass; you have been snatching at soap-bubbles, you were thinking that the hill, onto which the church of your village is standing, was the highest mountain on earth, because it was your highest point of view; because you stood at one unjustified place. Now rise here,onto the place here, where We stand, and look out anew into the world – and astonish! A different, new, wonderful world!"

They know this world exists, they dictate to us using this and once you rise to this level, you escape.

At one time people like those that buy into just certain "soap bubbles" such as the Earth is flat. People believed this. They were afraid to venture further thinking they would fall off the edge. Then , people took risks. Curiosity led to exploration and knowledge was gained. Please understand I am for reducing pollution. Global Cooling was the soap bubble used previously. When it popped, it was changed to warming, then Climate change. They steer the ship, and keep us hooked. Stand on the mountain, go into space and see from that point of view. Break the shackles and take off the blinders. Global warming is happening on all other planets, other studies NASA National Geographic other scientists. This now has to be considered as a factor. Don't let them tax us based on CO2 - plant more trees, stop building cities and wrecking nature. Let nature do its work and do your best. Stop letting the government run us. They try to control us by controlling everything and how we think. If we fail to unite for our reasons, the ones they give us, then you can NEVER truly be free.

[-] 1 points by badconduct (550) 10 years ago

Look, you accused global warming of fear mongering, but here you are, fear mongering. We won't reach Hubberts Peak for 100 years at least. We aren't even certain of what purpose (if any) oil serves in the environment. http://www.canada.com/reginaleaderpost/news/story.html?k=28834&id=e8d57969-0078-41b0-a8d5-df4dccf664d3

There are peak - oil skeptics too: http://joer4x4.hubpages.com/hub/Peak-Oil-or-Nonsense

[-] 0 points by NewEnglandPatriot (916) from Dartmouth, MA 10 years ago

What are you afraid of? I am not conveying fear. Throwing it all out on the table for debate. Nothing more. I am afraid of nothing. Not even death, as I know I will die someday. I monger no fear. Don't be afraid, there is nothing to be afraid of - ever. I like the debate. Isn't this fun, this back and forth? I am having fun, look at it like interactive media. We keep going back and forth. People reading this are also intrigued. If it gets us off our butts, then it is working. It starts with ideas and debates. Anybody reading this will see how passionate we all can be. Peak oil is a fact. Hubbert was laughed at in the 70s, hubbert's peak is right on track. I never used fear mongering term in any exact context, only that people are afraid the planet is going to die if we don't stop burning fossil fuels. It will not die, we will. Another fact misunderstood. This planet will never go away. Species always evolve, or go extinct. We are a species, and the media uses the fear mongering to scare people with the spin. I repeat this over and over.

As I stated I died for 7 minutes. No heart beat, and was a miracle I came back. It stumped all. I can actually slow my own heart down to approx 25 bpm and stay awake. I have full control of my body. I got in another accident, they said I suffered irreversible neurological damage, and would never feel pain from waist down again. I would never be able to talk right again, etc. I accepted no way and my nerves re connected. No drugs, no therapy. I am back, again. You can do it to if you let go of ego, what you are told about life,etc. I should be dead, I beat the odds every time, and refuse to give into conventional medicine. We all have a power, I encourage you to seek it. You are your own limitations, my friends. Love you all.

[-] 1 points by badconduct (550) 10 years ago

The primary source of CO2 = Oil. There could very well be a correlation between CO2 and environmental damage in general. Ironically, the biggest CO2 producers happen to be the most destructive to the environment.

Is the solution to tax CO2? No; that won't solve the problem over night. But it is certainly better than doing nothing, and if the CO2 does go down a measurable amount, it can be used to further the study.

Media certainly made global warming popular, but it isn't debunked. You can already tell from the articles you have found that there are people trying to find another explanation. There's no conspiracy here, just the scientific method in action.

[-] 1 points by NewEnglandPatriot (916) from Dartmouth, MA 10 years ago

It isnt debunked, and isnt solved. Taxing wont solve it. Fund alternative energies instead of research pointing fingers.
Reward companies that pursue and develop alternatives give them tax breaks. Increase tax load to companies that want to milk the oil cow dry. Then you will see some changes. Alternative energies are here, some are not released or cost-effective. If they took this money and put it to work instead of finger pointing we would have given up on oil a long time ago. They will milk the oil until it is dry.

Electric cars are a joke too. Electric grid is a waste. So much power is lost on the lines, we pay for that as well. Electricity - burns fossil fuels to turn turbines to create juice; transmit the juice. Plug in your car, it technically costs more per mile to drive these cars then you save. Electric cars are a dead end too. They sound great, but look at your electric bill when you charge up. They draw a lot for what they deliver. We really need to stop wasting time with dead ends, the oil companies already know some of the secrets, they bought them some time ago. One secret is using dynamo toroid forces to harness planetary energy.

The answers are on this site http://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=112826

Tesla built a toroid system, if you combine these technologies you can produce power from the earths magnetic field that gets some power from the sun. Combine this with photon collection, with diamond optics and the possibilities are endless. I have experiments , and small LED lights that power themselves all the time. It can be done, but large scale like cars is a ways away.

[-] 1 points by badconduct (550) 10 years ago

"The underwater volcanoes emit CO2, I never said it was the heat."

Do you understand what a volcano is? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X0lFXKPw7vQ

All of these things have been taken into consideration. The suns activity has decreased, so it can't be warming the globe. That article basically argued that internal heat from the earth, even through volcanic activity, has minimal impact on rapid temperature increases. It's very balanced and slow.

I found the study. http://news.discovery.com/earth/deep-sea-lava-climate.html

And other interesting information..

(Reuters) - A vast network of under-sea volcanoes pumping out nutrient-rich water in the Southern Ocean plays a key role in soaking up large amounts of carbon dioxide, acting as a brake on climate change, scientists say.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2010/03/15/us-climate-volcanoes-idUSTRE62E0QJ20100315?feedType=RSS&feedName=environmentNews&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+reuters%2Fenvironment+%28News+%2F+US+%2F+Environment%29

Doesn't change the fact that humans have greatly increased the amount of CO2 on a measurable level. The Earth is balanced, none of these studies claim that volcanoes explain global warming, only third parties that quote them as evidence.

[-] 0 points by NewEnglandPatriot (916) from Dartmouth, MA 10 years ago

Earth is not balanced, but she will get there with or without us. Suns activity is picking up again, I sent the link from NASA. Just another factor though, not the sole reason.

Humans are a factor. Again, a piece of the pie; I will not feel guilty as this was not my fault. It was theirs, the greed and oil led us here.

When we run out, (hubberts peak) we will, we will suffer. Or the climate will change and we will suffer.
We had tornadoes here , crazy T storms you name it. It id 56 degrees out. Temp will swing back to teens next week. This is the solar flares, bow shock, and electrojet disruption. That controls the weather, CO2 is a factor I do not disagree. I never said the magma was relevant, CO2 does come from the ocean volcanoes. There is no way to measure it the numbers are part of that too. Please re-read.

Every action has an equal and opposite reaction. If we heat it up , it will cool down to compensate, don't you worry.

Take the heat chases no heat theory based on this. It applies to everything. Balance will be achieved welcomed or not, despite what we do. This is all I am trying to say. The heat we create will cool us down. It will happen.

Not debunked, part of the big picture. I debunk narrow paths, and unite all sources. The sun is picking up Did you follow the NASA link? This will bring more heat and as consequence, more cold later on. Every action has an equal and opposite reaction. This is a law and cannot be debunked. It may take time, sit back and observe you may see one day beyond the mountain ;)

[-] 1 points by badconduct (550) 10 years ago

"The oceans main source is underwater volcanoes, another factor in a bigger picture. CO2 gas does not return to ocean as CO2 gas. Fish also produce it, and there is a whole ecosystem that aborbs it. We threw off the balance to an extent, I agree."

Debunked - http://www.skepticalscience.com/heatflow.html

And everything else; I agree. It doesn't change the fact that CO2 is increasing the temperature.

[-] 1 points by badconduct (550) 10 years ago

There are no living organisms in Soda...? Nor is there movement in the can.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solubility_pump http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biological_pump

Weak.

[-] 0 points by NewEnglandPatriot (916) from Dartmouth, MA 10 years ago

What about the soda can in a vessel? Do it yourself.
Take a can of soda, place inside a sealed vessel. Let CO2 evap, it will never return to the soda, leave it for years. The soda will remain flat, therefore the CO2 gas itself cannot return to the ocean. Some remaining carbonic acid will react with atmospheric elements and return as acid. but it will allways remain mostly gas. The ocean CO2 is par the CO2 evaporating from the ocean volcanoes. This study cannot be undone.

[-] 0 points by NewEnglandPatriot (916) from Dartmouth, MA 10 years ago

The global warming human carbon taxers will only narrowly use us as the only primary reason. Why do the not say, in addition to the volcanoes, the sun, etc human output is X. They cannot tell exactly, so they take measurements. Industry is only part. There are more and more underwater volcanoes. emitting CO2. The magma is not the only source of heat. They cannot measure the CO2 from UW volcanoes, melting ice caps, or other sources. Just approximate our amounts and blame it all on us. This is my only point.The other sources of pollution, NO2, HC, HG, SO2, etc are still ignored and they are factors also. We do have to change but none of the other factors have been debunked, just ignored and not taken into consideration. Once they milk this cow they will go after something else. There is always another waiting in line. We are a factor, industry is a factor, deforestation is a factor, China is a factor, the list is almost infinite. We crossed the line a long time ago and this will not change what has happened to our climate for a long time even if we shut down completely now. Our climate will change us , and it is happening. There will be less off us until Mother earth achieves this balance and she will, and always does.

[-] 0 points by NewEnglandPatriot (916) from Dartmouth, MA 10 years ago

Again a factor as I continue to point out amongst many that are never taken into consideration, etc. The issue is a larger part of many we cannot control. The "magma" has nothing to do with it, I was talking the CO2 from the ocean volcanoes and acidification of ocean. See you misunderstand me, and misread my point. The underwater volcanoes emit CO2, I never said it was the heat. Please understand. Just another factor adding co2 to atmosphere. It rises to top and bubbles off like a soda does. Another factor besides "humans" - factor are all I point at, there are so many, some cannot be addressed. We do have control of our output to an extent.

Look at this link, read down and see all the soda bubbles, another factor of CO2. CO2 is another factor of warming, combined with the sun, do you see what we are up against? this is the point we are trying to plug holes in dams with fingers soon to collapse. I never disagree with you. There are many factors http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/08/11/undersea-volcanoes-might-be-more-common-than-previously-thought/

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/08/11/undersea-volcanoes-might-be-more-common-than-previously-thought/

[-] 1 points by badconduct (550) 10 years ago

"Not so, the facts I point out show the sun is and will continue be a major factor."

In the last 35 years of global warming, the sun has shown a slight cooling trend. Sun and climate have been going in opposite directions.

Debunked.

"I am doing something."

Good. Unfortunately, for me and most people that live in cities, everything needs to be controlled from the outside. We do not get much choice because the infrastructure already exists.

[-] 0 points by NewEnglandPatriot (916) from Dartmouth, MA 10 years ago

And it has, and will warm again with solar cycle 24 predicted to be pretty crazy. Ionospheric convection is up (bad for ice caps) and angles of tilt are changing.

Sunspot activity is picking up big time.

http://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2011/14apr_thewatchedpot/

Things are about to get very , very hot. Always remember, every action has an equal and opposite reaction. Heat chases no heat. Trust me, things will balance out.

It will get very hot, then very cold again, if we are still alive (meaning it may take a long time before you and I see it)

I feel bad that you are confined to a city. It is so different living in confined areas, I couldn't do it I tried. I am tied to nature myself.

Every action has an equal and opposite reaction. Earth will prevail on its own, trust me. We will pay for the mistakes of the past, in which you and I had no say in this destiny. We are trying, true - but sit back and watch. The ride is about to get bumpy - the ride on this planet I mean.

[-] 1 points by badconduct (550) 10 years ago

Your argument, and all of your theories, have nothing to do with Global Warming, admit it. Everything you said about global warming was incorrect.

You think this is part of a greater agenda to try and control the world, turning everyone into second class citizens, and reducing the world population.

Relax, the world isn't coming to an end. Those illusions are being sold to you, and they are based on misquotes and information being taken out of context.

The Occupy movement proved that there wasn't very much support for a socialist revolution, most people weren't willing to give up their jobs and lifestyle to occupy a location.

Make a choice, right now. A. Go do something about it.

B. Stop worrying about it, as it has no measurable difference on your life.

[-] 0 points by NewEnglandPatriot (916) from Dartmouth, MA 10 years ago

"Your argument, and all of your theories, have nothing to do with Global Warming, admit it. Everything you said about global warming was incorrect. "

Not so, the facts I point out show the sun is and will continue be a major factor. I never said CO2 was not a factor. Sun is warming all planets, where we and our actions are not a factor. That is a fact I continue to point out.

I am doing something. I plant trees in desolate areas. I started 20 years ago. There are mini-woodland areas now where I planted. The groups I worked with made a difference. I show people before/after pics of this and encourage it. It is perpetuating. It may be a drop in the bucket, but I am doing.

The Occupy movement has raised awareness, I will give it that. It also proved further how bad the media spins things.

I reduced MY carbon footprint as much as humanely possible. It saved energy, and has paid off in my wallet and my heart.

I use alternative energy, solar arrays charge batteries and light my home with LED technology. I Have devices I put in my south facing windows that generate heat in winter. I insulated, I did some things. It helped save money and I did something, a lot of things...

I never said the world is going to end, as we know it - Humanity will end as we know it. We will destroy ourselves. It is us that will pay for our climate crimes of the industries. This is a fact. It is already taking place on more than one front.

I encourage debate.
Oil was the worst thing ever discovered. I am simply stirring debate. I am not worried, as I stated I look at things from the outside in, from within me and have a front row seat to the show. I await my death again.

The Occupy movement will manifest in different ways. It will help raise more awareness. But will not stop the darkness from overtaking humanity.

[-] 1 points by badconduct (550) 10 years ago

"No they should not tax air we breathe."

You won't be taxed on the air you breath.

"Plants aspirate CO2, plant more trees. Done."

You mean Carbon Offsets?

Actually, the ocean is the number one when it comes to removing CO2. Increases in CO2 in the atmosphere from humans are absorbed into the ocean and increases ocean acidity. This is killing off plankton and corals, which means less CO2 is being aspirated.

"I am for reducing pollution, taxing is not the answer, they will still operate, and the Gores, Gates , KOCH's etc have a large carbon footprint with jets, vehicles, mansions, etc. "

Taxes go to the Government to help pay off their ridiculous debts. The rich will always be rich, they are in a position of power and own wealth. That has nothing to do with taxing or carbon dioxide. They might have a large carbon footprint, but that's nothing compared to factories in China and India, or oil refineries.

And again; who is going to be paying this tax? Obviously the people who use the most CO2.

"They pay very little taxes, they launder their monies through ..."

This has nothing to do with climate change. You are taking one source and turning into a fact. You are building your own reality based on what you want the world to be, and not what is actually happening. It's kinda scary how distant you are.

People AREN'T going to change their ways, it has to be enforced.

70's Ice Age predictions debunked - http://www.skepticalscience.com/ice-age-predictions-in-1970s.htm

Reducing CO2 would also reduce temperature changes in the Arctic. It's the ocean temperature that is melting the ice, not the sun.

[-] 0 points by NewEnglandPatriot (916) from Dartmouth, MA 10 years ago

The oceans main source is underwater volcanoes, another factor in a bigger picture. CO2 gas does not return to ocean as CO2 gas. Fish also produce it, and there is a whole ecosystem that aborbs it. We threw off the balance to an extent, I agree. Maybe some carbonic acid. Take another example. Take a soda can open it and put in sealed vessel. The CO2 will never return to the ocean (soda) Some will return as acid, again there is another pandora's box of factors. The acidification is also a double whammy - sulfur dioxide, from pollution and volcanic activity. We pump our sewage in the ocean too. We discharge acids from metal manufacturing. It is across the board. Many factors, all must be addressed to afflict change. I agree human activity is one major factor, it won't stop and will not change the outcome.
Man will suffer at the hand of burning the fuels, or running out whichever comes first. Either way things will eventually achieve balance again, they always do despite our presence ; our presence on this ball of water and gases in a vast space.

What we need is to set off a few volcanoes - that will happen, and we will cool down. Or some nukes? That will happen too.

[-] 0 points by NewEnglandPatriot (916) from Dartmouth, MA 10 years ago

If I am scaring you, then I hope it is striking a nerve of truth. I am telling you, that I agree with a lot. Stop buying into their world. I have given up a lot of my energy and soon to be free. Have you? They will tax air we breathe, it will be some sort of default base tax everyone will pay so even those who do not drive, cook, burn fossil fuels etc. They will tax us into poverty, we are at bottom of the pyramid. I am not arguing with you, just the system. Please understand my insight. They will tax companies, they will continue to go overseas. Power plants, they will shut down. They will charge more based on less supply and increased demand. Or pass taxes onto you and me. The force comes from the government, this OWS movement only proves my theories. We are oppressed. We are trying to break away from their control, and revamp the system However we are toast. I try to help, taxes do not pay off anything, just the interest. Hence why the debt clock keeps counting up. Game is soon to be over. I have faith in us and this movement, but division amongst all other issues will always hold us back and we will always fall into the abyss. It will take a major event to unite humanity, one that is not too far away I promise you. I have a front row seat to the freak show in America. We will see how bad it will get despite what we do. We have been here before folks, and its coming again... I love all of you, but many of you shall perish in the abyss. So the great cycle will determine all of our fate. Blaming, killing, finger pointing, arguing right to our graves. I am just an observer everyone.... Not a participant. I learned long ago.

[-] 1 points by badconduct (550) 10 years ago

"They were afraid to venture further thinking they would fall off the edge."

You are afraid to tax CO2 because you feel society will fall off the edge. The science is there. They spend as much money trying to prove they are incorrect as they do trying to prove they are correct.

Do you really think scientists spend all their time trying to make accurate claims? No, they will test the opposite hypothesis as well. Unfortunately, that hypothesis proved to be incorrect from the data they had.

The original issue was Green House gases with CFC's burning holes in the Ozone layer. Since than, these have been greatly reduced after passing laws to ban it. Unfortunately, with CO2, it's not a chemical. Taxing is just a band-aid solution.

You are putting too much value on the purpose of the tax, and you are not putting enough value on the consequences of continuing to increase our CO2 output.

[-] 1 points by badconduct (550) 10 years ago

I am an anarchist, I don't have any "leaders." And they aren't "leaders", they are politicians, not scientists. Scientists don't usually attract large amounts of attention to themselves, that's not their job. Gore did his job, and he was successful. He gathered awareness. He is not a scientist, he just presented the information. Be

There are no "rules". If they do make "rules", such as a carbon tax, they will be paying for it too. I won't be paying carbon taxes, as I don't produce any carbon! Other than cost increases on products I know are bad, which will just change my habits to avoid shopping for carbon producing products (like plastics), I have no issue with it. The taxes will increase Government spending and reduce their debt. Oil refineries won't stop producing oil, it's too profitable. Alternate energy will be better able to compete and we will be less dependent on corporate supply lines and more self sufficient.

I do see it, I know exactly what it is you feel is coming. We all feel it.

But that does not make it so.

[-] 0 points by NewEnglandPatriot (916) from Dartmouth, MA 10 years ago

Nobody answers the do as I say, not as I do concern I address. You support your leaders of this movement. Gore, Gates, etc but they break the rules worse than all. But thats OK. They are "helping" This is why I do not follow their leads. Try to argue on this point , you will lose. Do as I say, not as I do. That is their approach, and they keep the 3rd world in that status - we will be 3rd world in America, no resources left, poverty disease, famine you don't see it. I do. I am in space looking down at the anthills now. They will be in Panama, Africa, Mexico while we destroy ourselves. We are toast. Good luck to us all. A line must be drawn here, no further....

[-] 0 points by NewEnglandPatriot (916) from Dartmouth, MA 10 years ago

No they should not tax air we breathe. Plants aspirate CO2, plant more trees. Done. Stop letting them tax us. It will not hurt the companies, costs will pass onto us. bottom line. I am for reducing pollution, taxing is not the answer, they will still operate, and the Gores, Gates , KOCH's etc have a large carbon footprint with jets, vehicles, mansions, etc. They pay very little taxes, they launder their monies through Swiss bank accounts, and get write-offs contributing to foundations and studies claiming to benefit mankind when they themselves do not change their ways. I take in all data and it shows not only factor. There is still hole in ozone and one in magnetosphere. They need to stop milking the petroleum cow and start growing hydrogen cows ;) It is 40 years away, it costs too much, etc.
And BTW here is another one, the ozone hole closing is causing more greenhouse effect. The reduction of CFCs, resulting in the Ozone closure is contributing factor to global warming....

http://www.theozonehole.com/ozonehgood.htm

[-] 0 points by simplesimon (121) 10 years ago

I have no idea why 9-11 people like their conspiracies....

Global warming is a money maker, and scientists know it. Wanna log roll a grant? Attach a global warming study to it. It's science for profit. I don't have a problem with that.

I think the research that ties global warming to being caused by human beings more than other factors is bullshit. Scientists know where to find the gravy train.

That certainly doesn't make me a "flat earther".

[-] 0 points by NewEnglandPatriot (916) from Dartmouth, MA 10 years ago

I feel 9/11 was an excuse used to get us into the wars. A war on terror - no defined enemy. It may have been "allowed" to happen, one will never know. I think of the 9/11 commission like the Warren Commission. There is something foul with 9/11, time will show us. Tower 7 collapsed no plane they claim fire, and there were explosions. No way a fire with building codes and sprinklers would have put it out. There was no plane wreckage at pentagon. We will never know the truth on this. over 100,000 have died in Iraq (our troops, theirs, and insurgents or terrorists - mostly civilians) It was a nation building exercise, it is sad that we could not stop this war. The powers that be will always have their way and spin it whatever way they want. Whenever there is reasonable doubt, their is a cover up of some sort. This one will go down in history books like JFK. Maybe someday we will know, by then nobody will care or it will be erased from our history books.

[Deleted]

[-] 0 points by NewEnglandPatriot (916) from Dartmouth, MA 10 years ago

Good, thanks for the update. When I hear from actual people, it closes the chapter. I do not take sides until I hear personal accounts. Tower 7 still bothers me though.

[-] 0 points by NewEnglandPatriot (916) from Dartmouth, MA 10 years ago

Agreed. I have tried to explain this and they don't understand. I can see now why you come on here. So many are tied to belief systems and egos. They cannot throw things out and think for themselves. I know the truth here, just more cherry pick studies. The bottom line is they want to tax everyone with carbon taxes on energy and make money. That is what its all about. People sell their souls to the cause to wake up in 10 years in poverty. Just another NAIL in the coffin.

[-] 1 points by simplesimon (121) 10 years ago

Exactly. We have come up with a way to tax the frikkin' air.

Ridiculous.

[-] 0 points by NewEnglandPatriot (916) from Dartmouth, MA 10 years ago

Scroll down and browse... I proved over and over with taking into all accounts all planets warm from sun, nasa, nat geo. CO2 rains down in water she said, i proved ocean volcanoes and fish aspirate, then it is pollution EEK no idea how to think for oneself we are doomed (or maybe we will survive) Never a response to any of the facts, just one precious 50 year narrow study....Mind control is really out there, I was always immune and thought of as weird to have a brain I guess.

[-] 0 points by NewEnglandPatriot (916) from Dartmouth, MA 10 years ago

These people will not ever get this. It is a dead issue but I have to keep spreading the truth. The second you hit them with facts, they change from warming to climate change to pollution to save this or that. They are media programmed robots that don't get it.

[-] 1 points by GirlFriday (17435) 10 years ago

It is CO2. You know it, I know it, and the rest of the world knows it.

[-] 0 points by NewEnglandPatriot (916) from Dartmouth, MA 10 years ago

Then hold your breath or commit suicide to do your part. ( I don't really want you to do this, just bear with me) No scientific model is complete without taking in all data. I salute your effort but you will never lower the CO2. The ocean volcanoes produce CO2, go try and plug it up.

Emissions from fossil fuels are a drop in bucket.

You still do not explain or accept global warming on all planets, so blame the aliens with the hummers and coal plants there I guess.

This issue was invented in the 90s, like all issues.

Mother Earth has always achieved balance, more CO2 ,more plant life = more oxygen a natural cycle. Natural cycle of planet, proven.

Gates and other foundations want to carbon tax us to our graves in name of this issue and people like you will pay until you die to support a snake oil cause that was hijacked - it is natural.

Gates is even for population control with vaccination - he slipped twice. They own you.

Other planets we, industry, vehicles, etc are not factors on other planets. Earth is special I guess and is exempt from solar influence.

You are a follower and change nothing - you would march to the gas chamber if they told you it was to save the planet.

[-] 0 points by Thrasymaque (-2138) 10 years ago

It's one thing for a few scientists to sell themselves for money, but it's a different story for 90% of them to do this. I know many scientists, and most of them have a lot of integrity. People who become scientists and study until they achieve a PHD usually care about science quite a bit. To think that a huge percentage of them would care more about money than science is ridiculous and nothing but conspiracy theory nutjob talk.

[-] 2 points by simplesimon (121) 10 years ago

Maybe...I really don't care anything about the global warming discussion at all. I am sure that most scientists have integrity, and I am also sure that many like that grant money too.

Now, am I accusing most or all scientists of log rolling? Nope. Does it happen? Yes.

Really, I don't care anything about the issue. I has no effect on how I live...the sun controls the issue and people don't.

The day scientists can predict precise times and dates and severities of solar flares is the day I will pay more attention to global warming science.

[-] 1 points by Arditum (37) 10 years ago

I am a scientist and i can assure you i didn't spend my life studying a few specific topics for cash. If a scientist makes false cards to get money, it's only because he needs that money to further the research he believes in. If anyone cashes in from GW it's not us scientists.

[-] 2 points by simplesimon (121) 10 years ago

Is most of the grant money made available through the federal government? How large is the block for climate change / global warming and related sciences compared to other sciences?

I never said that scientists cash in, but you have verified "making false cards" to get money, only because he needs the money to research what he believes in.

That troubles me a little.

[-] 1 points by Arditum (37) 10 years ago

That's because scientists are humans as well. A regular person steals money for his own benefit, a real scientist can only steal money for a greater cause than himself. It's our nature. If 90% of scientists say GW is real i wouldn't put it above me to spend my life trying to prove it wrong, even though i believe GW is real. That's how science works. There will always be detractors for ANY theory or scientific law out there. In light of this, to say the majority of scientists is part of a scam is simply laughable.

[-] 1 points by simplesimon (121) 10 years ago

I also didn't say that scientists are part of a scam, but you didn't answer the questions I posed to you.

The questions are straightforward.

  1. Is most of the grant money made available through the federal government?

  2. How large is the block (of the total grant money made available by the federal government) for climate change / global warming and related sciences compared to other sciences?

Thank you for admitting that some scientists commit fraud to obtain money for their research. I submit that the element of fraud is perhaps more common than you realize. If a scientist wants a grant on x, and 2 percent of the grant money available is for x, and climate change comprises 30 percent or more of the money available, a scientist could commit fraud to get his grant money.

I also submit that your, and other university boards of directors, are revenue chasers. Their priorities are sports revenues, revenues derived from Sallie Mae loans, and direct pay revenues from tuition.

Grant money chasing is farther down the list, but I am willing to bet you that your BOD has as much of a say in what you research as you (meaning your peers, not you personally) do. Grant money is potential revenue as well.

I also submit that the federal government is the number one agenda driving research machine in the world.

One last question; what percentage of climate change grant money is provided by the federal government compared to privately available money?

[-] 1 points by Arditum (37) 10 years ago

I can't answer any of those questions because i currently live in Europe. I started my career in Europe thanks to a joint project as well. This is however fitting for this argument, as the climate change research in my city is organized by multiple universities and faculties and entirely financed by taxes and capped private donations. The law assures universities have a yearly budget, and the faculties decide how to organize their work without evident external pressure through yearly assemblies and public events, where the program is presented and discussed. If something, research on Global Warming is constantly criticized whenever new theories and details come to light in the scientific community, since it involves taxpayer money.

To try answering your questions, in my region GW research is the one financed through donations the most. Those come from environmental groups and various public health institutions and even agrarian cooperatives of which this region is rich.

While there are always private interests playing a part, i just don't see GW research as one easy to misdirect, considering how much the public is interested in it. It is a real issue and a complex topic of research

It's easy to become biased living in the US, where even science has to bow to corporate interests, but even in the US universities keep a high enough degree of freedom to be able to decide whether a research has actual meaning or not.

[-] 1 points by simplesimon (121) 10 years ago

Ok. fair enough. Thanks for taking the time to respond. While common sense does prevail, meaning, we of course should take care of our environment, any research that hails the end of the earth as we know it because we think we can control certain factors to stop the inevitable is far-reaching. Predictability is never exact, never precise, especially when we are extending probable conclusions decades or millenia from now. Global warming is not on my list of things to worry about.

We modern human beings, as we like to call ourselves, are arguably applying mere decades of modern measurement on cycles that have occured for millions of years before we even existed. Of course our understanding is better about many things, but I think we understand a lot less than we think.

Perhaps you would agree, perhaps not. That's my take on it.

Thanks again.

[-] -1 points by NewEnglandPatriot (916) from Dartmouth, MA 10 years ago

If a scientist sells out under false cards to get money? Maybe not you but some do. It advances research. But it is still not in name of humanity and learning - name of greed and control. They want studies so they can tax us. Take in all data from all sources and put the brain born with to work. We can all see that all planets warm, this is a cycle, and CO2 is a factor, not a main cause.

[-] -1 points by NewEnglandPatriot (916) from Dartmouth, MA 10 years ago

If you believe in global warming from CO2, then you were taught this. Hence programmed. If you paid for this education a refund is due your way, I would be demanding it. Use the scientific method. Study the data, and the facts and the full range of time. Study solar cycles, maxes, minimums, go for it all. It tells me that CO2 is not the factor on Mars, Venus, Pluto, Jupiter. The sun is the only factor for warming. CO2 plants "breathe" it. They produce the oxygen we need, perpetual natural balance that existed way before us. Use this data, and reports from real science, not unproven theories. None of these GW theories has been proven by the scientific method. Use the simple tool and procedure you were taught and you will reach the conclusion.

[-] 0 points by Thrasymaque (-2138) 10 years ago

"If you believe in global warming from CO2, then you were taught this. Hence programmed."

There has been a lot of scientific research on the matter. These is evidence. There are experiences you can make. It's observable. Scientists learn to doubt and demand proof for the claims of others. They don't just believe what they are taught like conspiracy theorists such as yourself.

[-] 0 points by NewEnglandPatriot (916) from Dartmouth, MA 10 years ago

Never take an answer you are told from one source. Enjoy paying your carbon taxes people, and energy shortages. This is what they use to get majority support, meanwhile companies they lobby with like GE pay no taxes and the laws do not apply. Those with money/power obviously it is still working with this cult movement. You are all showing legion to the cause for the wrong reasons, they supply money select the right data and push an agenda. Politics and you are obviousy owned by it. I try, and I do not like pollution etc. I save energy to conserve. The companies /CEOS like gates KOCH thoise with all your money HAVE a carbon foot print of a 3rd world country - but that is ok let the pied pipers lead you all off a cliff.

[-] 0 points by Thrasymaque (-2138) 10 years ago

I don't take my answer from one source, I take it from many many serious papers from many many scientists. I don't believe all scientists are part of a major conspiracy theory like you believe.

You're the one limiting your sources by using a logical fallacy: appeal to motive. You dismiss the serious work of many many scientists by saying they are all working on a major conspiracy theory. Lame.

[-] 0 points by NewEnglandPatriot (916) from Dartmouth, MA 10 years ago

No but the conspiracy is this. The ones at top fund certain projects, this is a fact. The media outlets they use spin the facts, and leave out certain details. They tell you how to think, align to a brand or a culture. That is all. The scientists don't have the agenda. They study an area. This world has become so compartmentalized in a sense. Therefore we also operate in compartments and remain divided. I love all of you and hope someday you will break the chains and free yourself to the knowledge that we all are born with ....

[-] 0 points by Thrasymaque (-2138) 10 years ago

The scientists do there thing and most of them are honest. There is no conspiracy. The huge majority of scientists from all over the world agree that Global Warming is real and caused by humans.

[-] -1 points by Thrasymaque (-2138) 10 years ago

It's more a question of atmospheric makeup than solar flares.

[-] 1 points by NewEnglandPatriot (916) from Dartmouth, MA 10 years ago

No real Earth atmosphere or humans on the other planets. But they are warming...Not a factor, Solved....Next...

[-] 0 points by Thrasymaque (-2138) 10 years ago

The atmosphere plays a huge part in the warming process. Gases trap heat, not has much has liquids, but they still do. The type gases with have an effect, just like the type of liquid does. Study some physics.

[-] 0 points by NewEnglandPatriot (916) from Dartmouth, MA 10 years ago

I did. I suggest you study thermodynamics, and you will see that that too is a factor. Solar wind and ionospheric convection, ultraviolet radiation, neutrinos that "microwave ocean" One must not ignore all factors before coming to conclusion, and take in all data from all sources to get to the answer.

[-] 0 points by Thrasymaque (-2138) 10 years ago

Oh, I never said solar winds were not a factor. I simply said the composition of the atmosphere is also a factor. Please re-read what I wrote.

[-] 0 points by NewEnglandPatriot (916) from Dartmouth, MA 10 years ago

I never said there was NO global warming either, just the facts are out there. They (the establishment) hijack issues, and micro select pieces of data and do studies. Once one takes all facts into consideration - then CO2 is not the only factor. We humans breathing are one to create, yes pollution is a factor. I am not targeting anyone out here, just trying to get some of you to think for yourselves and not anchor egos down to a belief system and follow like sheep. The global warming crowd has good intentions at heart to help reduce pollution and clean things up. The establishment is trying us at this level feel guilty about it. Girl Friday is die hard to the cause, but does not accept the other factors....We do need to clean up pollution. But we cant do all of that over night. Global warming was converted from global cooling to now they are calling it "climate change" warming is a factor. The sun is still the primary cause of the thaw. Only point I was trying to make. I was pointing out other planets warming too, and they cherry pick little bits of info and stick to that only without the other facts, because it would take wind out of their sails. Outside in approach, look at all facts. If we all stop letting them dictate how to think, by solving "issues" for us we will fall for anything. I agree with clean up the planet, reduce pollution, etc. But don't let them tell you that its your fault. The guilt is what drives this stuff, and again they only look @ 50 year windows and bits & pieces. The scientists are not wrong, use their study combined with all other studies and you will see what I see. Do your best to maintain as low carbon footprint as possible, dont pollute, conserve. I do all of this, they are planning to use this as a reason to increase energy costs on us via carbon taxes, nothing more. That is all I am trying to say......I love all of you, and understand - help by helping each other and ourselves. Do so for the right reasons, not the reasons they convince you of (not saying you directly, you all in general)

[-] 0 points by Thrasymaque (-2138) 10 years ago

Iv'e read on this topic far and wide. I agree with the scientific consensus, and not the conspiracy theorists. It doesn't matter how many long winded paragraphs you write, it won't change my mind.

[-] 0 points by NewEnglandPatriot (916) from Dartmouth, MA 10 years ago

The conspiracy is the media, owned by corporate interests. They bash the OWS movement, do you agree with that?

[-] 0 points by Thrasymaque (-2138) 10 years ago

i don't follow the mass media. I don't have a television. I read scientific papers and they all agree that Global Warming is caused by humans. I don't care about the likes of Alex Jones. I think their idiots.

[-] 0 points by NewEnglandPatriot (916) from Dartmouth, MA 10 years ago

I think its all entertaining. I salute you for turning off your TV. It is crap. I also enjoy the debates we have. Humans and industry are factors, I never disagreed with you on this. Factors, the Sun is also a major one. Not just with radiant heat, thermodynamics, Ionospheric convection, etc. They are all factors and I hope you understand we are on the same team. I am just pointing out other factors. We should not suffer at the hands of the top. If they really cared about us and the planet, they would fund research into alternatives ; some are, but they are milking the petro cow until the end in the name of money. Instead they fund things to keep us divided and our eyes off the ball. We retreat into our lives and nothing ever gets done to benefit the whole.

[-] 0 points by Thrasymaque (-2138) 10 years ago

You're a conspiracy theorist. We are not on the same team. 90% of scientists throughout the world is a very big number. That's too many people publishing too many serious scientific papers to all be in on a conspiracy. If you want to believe Alex Jones instead of thousands of serious scientists, that's your beef. I'm not going down that very lame road.

Global Warming is a serious problem and it has been proven without a doubt that it is in a big part caused by humans.

[-] 0 points by NewEnglandPatriot (916) from Dartmouth, MA 10 years ago

You are a name caller, and wear blinders. You follow a pied piper. I think for myself, I take in all sources and use logic to come to a conclusion. Let go of your anger and bias. I agree with you on many pieces of the GW front, pollution must be regulated. The government must stop letting corporate interests run the show. In the end, the companies will get taxed and we will all pay. They will not change they will tax you and me bottom line. I have no allegiance to Alex Jones, he is out there on some things. I see through all media spin, and take in all facts, all considerations which must be done with this manufactured "issue" I bet you think its OK for the EPA to raise detection regulations for radioisotopes, because some scientist went along with it. I am tired of government and corporations deciding my fate based on changes they must make. The scientists you worship fail to take in all sources of data. They get a consensus amongst many, and the others are correct as well but ignored. We must all take our own action, I conserve energy, ride a bicycle, and plant trees. The all mighty dollar is what this agenda is about. Good luck to you and I hope you enjoy paying your carbon taxes/pas through costs. The ones at the top never pay, costs are passed to you and me. Enjoy

[-] 0 points by Thrasymaque (-2138) 10 years ago

"You are a name caller, and wear blinders."

I am a name caller at times, but I am most likely one of the most open-minded individuals you will ever meet. However, you must understand that being open-minded doesn't mean believing everything you hear and not being critical. Critical thought is actually one of the most important qualities that leads to an open-mind. Believing in conspiracy theories is being gullible because these theories don't provide evidence for their claims.

"Let go of your anger and bias."

I have absolutely no anger. And what you call my being bias, I call critical thinking. Critical thinkers do not accept conspiracy theories.

"The scientists you worship fail to take in all sources of data."

What I worship is not the scientists themselves, but the scientific method they use. If all the scientists in the world come to a near consensus (about 90% agree) that Global Warming is in large part caused by humans, it is not because of some magical conspiracy theory. They publish articles that are peer-reviewed and that provide evidence for their findings and conclusions. There's nothing secret here. Anybody can pick up these publications and read the science for themselves. It's also important to note these are not only American scientists, but scientists from all over the world.

"Good luck to you and I hope you enjoy paying your carbon taxes/pas through costs."

I don't mind paying taxes for important things such as the environment, health-care, social programs, education for all, etc... I think it's important to help others and the planet. We are part of the 1% if we take on a global outlook. I live in Indonesia where the average annual salary is somewhere around 4000$ / year. Even if I don't make that much and a big part goes to taxes, I still live much better than many people.

[-] 0 points by simplesimon (121) 10 years ago

Do tell! Ask your scientist friends, concerning the sun's 11 year cycle, how far in advance they can predict solar flares. Then ask them if it is possible for solar flares to cripple eletricity grids, satellites, and all radio communication.

Then ask them if they can predict that phenomenon.

Get back to me after they give you the answers.

[-] 1 points by HarryCrew07 (433) 10 years ago

You're right, they can't. All scientists can tell is how much more carbon/other materials are in the air than in previous centuries. And it is a significant amount more. What the actual outcome of this change could be is unknown still.

[-] 2 points by simplesimon (121) 10 years ago

Right. They can measure. The art of prediction is exactly that. We can't even predict the weather with certainty.

[-] 0 points by Thrasymaque (-2138) 10 years ago

"We can't even predict the weather with certainty."

That statement is incomplete and false. We can predict the weather, but the further our prediction is in the future, the less accurate it is. It's important to understand this. If it's raining heavily, I can predict that in 2 seconds it will still be raining heavily. We can also predict weather patterns. It think it's time you take a introductory science class. Most of your statements are either incomplete or incorrect, and I believe this is what confuses you and your readers. Perhaps you should stop using conspiracy websites?

[-] 1 points by simplesimon (121) 10 years ago

I don't read conspiracy sites...and perhaps you can forgive my use of hyperbole to make a point.

[-] 0 points by Thrasymaque (-2138) 10 years ago

Your point?

[-] 1 points by badconduct (550) 10 years ago

Fact - 14-day trend is unseasonally warm in Ottawa, ON, Canada: http://www.theweathernetwork.com/fourteenday/caon0512?ref=qlink_st_14day

Fact - 2002 study shows that flooding will increase from climate change - http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2002/01/0130_020130_greatfloods.html

Fact - Record cost ($350 billion) for damages from catastrophes this year - http://www.vancouversun.com/news/Catastrophes+cost+economy+billion+2011+Swiss/5866215/story.html

[-] 1 points by NewEnglandPatriot (916) from Dartmouth, MA 10 years ago

We are polluting less and less. Emissions controls on cars, coal plants, factories are at the most tight standards. In the name of not only pollution but efficiency to utilize all fuel and burn cleaner as result because of cost. Hey we reached peak oil, 30-50 years left Hubbert's predictions are right on track. So the next thing you will have to worry about will be feeding the population. The fertilizers they produce are from petroleum. Packages to seal and make food last, plastic from oil. Nature will correct itself, if we don't destroy ourselves first. Somehow I think the latter will happen. The output is lower. As Simon says, one major volcano eruption, and we may see a serious effect within the year. This will happen. Nature is more powerful than you think. Fuel injection systems on vehicles that replaced obsolete carburetors, tighter engine clearances, catalytic converters all help. Even a fuel injected car, runs at optimum 14.7:1 ratio shortly after start-up, and oxygen sensors keep it there in optimum range for economy and emissions.

The planet has been here for billions of years, we will be the ones to give way to its plan.. We are ants on a big hill. Good luck to your colony.

[-] 0 points by Thrasymaque (-2138) 10 years ago

We are not polluting less and less. Yes, the emission controls are tighter, but there are a lot more cars and people that before. You have to understand that the atmosphere takes time to adapt. If we mess it up, it won't suddenly get better as soon as we stop sending more pollution. Pollution builds up.

You should travel a bit. You'll see that many countries still have old cars that pollute a lot. Brand new clean cars are owned by a small percentage of the world's citizens.

"As Simon says, one major volcano eruption, and we may see a serious effect within the year. "

Sure, but that's a lame argument. One major crash with a truck and it doesn't matter if you had your seatbelt or not, you will die. Does that mean you shouldn't wear a seatbelt?

[-] 0 points by NewEnglandPatriot (916) from Dartmouth, MA 10 years ago

Read the chart that they use for global warming 50 years at the Berkley edu site, you see the period of cooling (drop in line) after 1980. That is Mt st helens eruption. Then it returns to original pattern.

Yes we are factors, but CO2 needs to be addressed by nature do your part - plant trees, grass, etc. They will clean it as we do. Other countnes pollute Hydrocarbons and Nitrogen Oxide which are particulate and actually block the sun. CO2 is a gas that cannot turn to liquid from rain. The ocean CO2 is from volcanoes. We are a factor, true but if we were not here, or burning fossil fuels we still would have CO2. You will see soon with solar max cycle 24 that it is going to get very hot, then we go into ice age called mauder minimum. I have been studying climatology, geoscience, oceanography for many years from the best, in the field - not school. In the real world - NOAA, USGS,

You are all my friends in humanity. I love you all and this planet. Do what you can, but don't put all your eggs in one basket. Simple common sense and you will see they are exploiting this issue and making you feel guilty for what they do. And leave you the part that CO2 is natural. The pollution we must stop is Nuclear radioactive isotopes/waste, Nitrogen Oxide, Hydrocarbon pollution. This is what is bad for everything.

[-] 0 points by Thrasymaque (-2138) 10 years ago

"We are a factor, true but if we were not here, or burning fossil fuels we still would have CO2. "

Nobody is disputing this. What is being disputed is that humans could produce less CO2. Plants can't survive without it, it's needed. The problem is when there is too much.

[-] 1 points by GirlFriday (17435) 10 years ago

Thank you, Thrasy. So, help me this is like talking to a wall.

[-] 0 points by Thrasymaque (-2138) 10 years ago

There's not much that can be said to convince conspiracy theorists. They eschew the scientific method, and instead decide something is true from the onset then try to find ways to fit the evidence. His whole line of discussion is based on his idea that scientists lie to us in order to get more grants, to make more money. That's a logical fallacy: appeal to motive, and shows he doesn't understand how science works.

[-] 2 points by NewEnglandPatriot (916) from Dartmouth, MA 10 years ago

Then hold your breath, each breath you take makes CO2. Plant more trees and grass they will thrive and give us back more oxygen, problem solved. CO2 is not cause SUN is NO CO2 ON other planets?

http://seoblackhat.com/2007/03/04/global-warming-on-mars-pluto-triton-and-jupiter/

No people, or SUVs on Mars, Pluto, Jupiter. Time to put this to bed. No report ever has an actual conclusion, just a time line from the 70s up to now. Go over the data from the ice core drillings, we are melting and will freeze again. Next Mauder Minimum Earth will freeze and you will wish for heat. Please understand this is an example of history to teach a lesson. No bias held to this point of view. Pay attention....

Hey I got one for you, Lets abolish a certain race of people because they are a certain religion, and are imperfect. Oh wait Hitler convinced many of this, they bought into it and exterminated Jews. See my point? The ones in charge have you under such as spell, only the idea is different. Hitler convinced his followers with "scientific" proof, took measurements of body parts and features, hair and eye color - determined who was supreme and who could breed an who would be sterilized. It is the same thing, but this example is extreme. You fell for it and when they convince you to jump off a bridge, either wake up, or jump and spare us some of your CO2. I am joking but please wake up and abandon this falsehood!

[-] 2 points by Bambi (359) 10 years ago

I remember in Earth Science class that the earth is in cycles....like 25-45 years.

My only question is..........why is the US always blamed? Look at India...China.......etc

[-] 1 points by newjustice22 (49) 10 years ago

Because america is rich or use to be the point is to bankrupt all country's to bring in a new world order. Look at what they are doing to Europe its been planed for over 50 years to do that.

[-] 1 points by NewEnglandPatriot (916) from Dartmouth, MA 10 years ago

That is the range that they want you to look at when trying to prove this myth. Over the last 50 years the planet has warmed and the polar caps have started to melt.....Take it back 200, 500 , 1000, 1,000,000 years and the story loses credibility the further back you go. Cycles are approx 10,000 years, we are at the end phase of the thaw (Nature Magazine, 2001 forget the month but I have this somewhere) where science already made the call about the hype. The more data used the more accurate the fact that it is a myth due to CO2. Then compare to other planets warming, with no CO2 or other gases or human influence of any kind, then the Sun is all that remains as a prime factor. The sun, lets blow it up? What you need to do is understand that we have real issues. The reason for climate change, earthquakes, tsunamis, severe weather is due to the Sun also, mainly the effect on the magnetosphere and ionosphere. I monitor the satellites daily, as well as USGS/ANSS and the earthquakes are caused by the sun also.

Magnetism.. Iron Nickel core...North & South Poles. Lines of flux. All under control of the sun, and the sun is what allows this planet to live and influences each and every major change or event. I am down to 3 days I can predict an earthquake somewhere on the planet 4.5 /above based on solar wind pressure and ionospheric convection. I still am crunching the #s to match the Carrington rotations to the position of latitude/longitude and using stereo satellites. I am sure they can do it by now. We are in for some crazy earth shaking and waves my friends. March 4th-11th major eruptions, and pressure. Earthquake March 11th. I don't have a PHD, but I have a brain and an IQ you would not believe. I never learned anything they tried teaching me, I saw through the filter and bias. I always made the professors think... I dropped out and never stick to the same thing. Too boring...

[-] 1 points by Bambi (359) 10 years ago

Thanks for all the info. I've argued with many that I think "global warming" is earth and the universe doing its thing...........It just makes sense that's what it is. Someone was saying "but the earthquakes.....we are getting more than ever"...How would they know that? This earth is old old old. I also tried to explain that it's like a ripple effect....but they don't believe it. That's when say "you just proved to me you slept through Earth Science" L

[-] 0 points by NewEnglandPatriot (916) from Dartmouth, MA 10 years ago

These people , I love them as my brothers and sisters - but they have no idea how to take all facts into consideration. If they were locked in a basement from birth and told to watch videos and read books they would only be able to think with that information. No matter what they would have trouble learning anything else, and if the book was old and said the earth was flat they would stick to that belief. Information is not knowledge. Logic is problem solving, they do not use this. They are tied to belief system of information they select. These people , I love them to death - someday they will awaken to the truth - by then it will be too late. They let the media do their thinking for them, the way it was designed.

[-] 0 points by NewEnglandPatriot (916) from Dartmouth, MA 10 years ago

I was watching TV waiting for the news report, I was online and knew once I saw the data. Here is the site DIVX player needed to watch. Watch the solar wind pressure. When it starts doing this, we get big earthquakes. FACT http://www2.nict.go.jp/y/y223/simulation/realtime/movie.html

Scroll down to March, after the blast the satellite had to reboot from the mag overload. Luckily my brother can translate Japanese.
The sun is the factor of everything. They are watching it because the big one is coming. I hate to scare people but the truth cannot be denied. Good luck to us all. We will need it.

[-] 1 points by NewEnglandPatriot (916) from Dartmouth, MA 10 years ago

Why do you think the FEMA camps were being erected, the underground shelters, the NASA message to employees, the major disasters, the NEW Nationwide Emergency alert system test. I cannot reveal my sources. I can give hints. They let people point at HAARP, mind control, weather control, the "coffins" as long as nobody figures it out. Google NLE 2011 New Madrid Fault. Google FEMA IPAWS. FEMA PLAN. There is a real cover up, this data was calculated from monitoring this and other major quakes and the pieces were put together. Everyone is sensing some sort of doom, and government cover up. The legislation being passed is so they can retain order when it hits. I am so tired of conspiracy theories, so I offer truth based on fact and ability to use logic to solve problems with info I have. Simon, debunk this one....;)

http://news.cnet.com/8301-1023_3-20061435-93.html

Some facts are true, just broken up through the media filters. Bottom line, Nationwide disaster...hmmm Michio Kaku telling us to get away from fault zones....hmmm telling us big solar storms to come....hummm..Implementation of Haarp...Hole in magnetosphere..FEMA camps....FEMA building stockpiles of food and fuel...hmmm Government performing practice in the very area they expect the STHTF...Coffins are down there. Displacment. Same as Katrina most of them ended up at camp Edwards/OTIS AFB in my area. Nobody was killed, but they were sent to these places until they could be relocated... More camps coming online..Tsunami drills... Do the math 2+2 = Big EQ/Solar/ Power grid disruption and chaos to come. It will happen, don't know when exactly, but where...

[-] 0 points by fandango (241) 10 years ago

I read about HAARP awhile ago.

[-] 0 points by NewEnglandPatriot (916) from Dartmouth, MA 10 years ago

HAARP is nothing compared to the big picture, the real deal is the magnetosphere is collapsing, they are preparing for a disaster. The nationwide EAS alert test, earthquake and tsunami exercises in this country, FEMA funding it is all related to one thing. What happened in Japan will happen here. They are getting ready for the real deal. The banks, economies, politics, etc are all distractions. Another reason our economy keeps buring in debt is defense spending. Not just the war they are stockpiling food for millions, and preparing. Why??? Open up. One day the TV will go off w/EAS, your cell phone, you will be instructed to remain indoors and it will happen the power is going to go out in many places, the tsunami alarms were already installed on Atlantic east coast. HAARP is part of the hole they are trying to plug in the field. But it is only so strong. The chemtrails build up cloud cover to reflect out the solar radiation. Once solar cycle 24 really picks up you are in for the time of your life. I got hit with a geo mag storm in November, power windows went up & down alarms kept going off and that was a baby one. Wait until the sun wakes up....Have fun people!

[-] 0 points by NewEnglandPatriot (916) from Dartmouth, MA 10 years ago

I am not trying to debunk global warming - It is warming and has been for the past 9,000 or so years. I know All planets are warming, sun is cause not us. Not SUVs, not CO2, not anything. The sun is at another max upcoming. It is about to get hotter, I could have told you that 8 years ago. That is all, Yes its true. However Bill Gates funds this and I know good old Bill..I likes to blame CO2. what plants breathe to create oxygen. I agree it is warming, it is not CO2. The sun the sun the sun.... That is the only point I am making my friend...

[-] 1 points by GirlFriday (17435) 10 years ago

AND THE KOCH Heads funded it. A-ha.


It's the 'other CO2 problem', global warming's little brother, and ocean acidification could be even more damaging than had previously been thought according to new research on how fish are affected. As the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere rises, more of it is dissolved into the sea, forming carbonic acid, making the sea more acidic.

While negative effects have been recorded for many simple marine creatures - coral reefs, shellfish, urchins and plankton for example - no research had shown that fish were damaged, until now.

Research published in Nature Climate Change by a team from Stony Brook University in New York dismisses the so-called 'fish are OK' theory.

According to the new research, the belief that fish were relatively unaffected by more acidic oceans ignored the effect of CO2 on fish larvae and even eggs.

Christopher Gobler and Hannes Baumann, both professors at the Stony Brook University School of Marine and Atmospheric Science (SoMAS) studied how higher concentrations of CO2 impacted on the eggs of the inland silverside - a common river estuary fish.

Gobler and Baumann examined levels of CO2 concentration which are predicted for later this century. At the moment the level is 400 parts per cubic metre (ppm3), which is expected to rise to 600ppm3 by the middle of the century and 1,000ppm3 by the 2200.

They found a terrible toll. Eggs and larvae of the inland silverside were very sensitive to rises in CO2 levels and at the levels predicted for the end of the century, CO2 was killing 70% of the fish within a week of their hatching. Those larvae that did survive were significantly smaller than under current conditions.

"We knew from the study of other ocean animals, such as scallops and clams, that earliest life stages such as larvae are most sensitive to CO2 and thus targeted the same life stage during our investigation of fish," said Professor Gobler.

Brad Warren, Science Director of Sustainable Fisheries Partnerships warned of the possible damage to the fishing industry.

He said: "This study is a shot across the bow and shows that some important fish stocks may be eroded by high CO2 levels. And keep in mind, as estuarine fish, inland silversides are likely to be adapted to higher levels of CO2 than many fish found in the open ocean, where chemistry is much more stable. This suggests that many commercially harvested marine fish stocks may be vulnerable too. Pelagic spawners, such as albacore, bigeye, yellowfin, and bluefin tuna, whose larvae are not adapted to acidified waters, could be particularly vulnerable."

The researchers now intend to carry out more research across a range of fish species. http://www.earthtimes.org/pollution/co2-fish-eggs-larvae-ocean-acidification/1706/


Steep increase in global CO2 emissions despite reductions by industrialised countries with binding Kyoto targets Global emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2) – the main cause of global warming – increased by 45 % between 1990 and 2010, and reached an all-time high of 33 billion tonnes in 2010. Increased energy efficiency, nuclear energy and the growing contribution of renewable energy are not compensating for the globally increasing demand for power and transport, which is strongest in developing countries.
This increase took place despite emission reductions in industrialised countries during the same period. Even though different countries show widely variable emission trends, industrialised countries are likely to meet the collective Kyoto target of a 5.2 % reduction of greenhouse gas emissions by 2012 as a group, partly thanks to large emission reductions from economies in transition in the early nineties and more recent reductions due to the 2008-2009 recession. These figures were published today in the report "Long-term trend in global CO2 emissions", prepared by the European Commission's Joint Research Centre and PBL Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency.
The report, which is based on recent results from the Emissions Database for Global
Atmospheric Research (EDGAR) and latest statistics for energy use and other activities, shows large national differences between industrialised countries. Over the period 1990- 2010, in the EU-27 and Russia CO2 emissions decreased by 7% and 28% respectively, while the USA’s emissions increased by 5 % and the Japanese emissions remained more or less constant. The industrialised countries that have ratified the Kyoto Protocol (so called ‘ratifying Annex 1 countries’) and the USA, in 1990 caused about two-thirds of global CO2 emissions READ MORE HERE: http://edgar.jrc.ec.europa.eu/news_docs/JRC-PBL%20news%20release%20CO2%20emissions%20report%20-%2021%20Sept.pdf


CO2.......................yep.

[-] 0 points by NewEnglandPatriot (916) from Dartmouth, MA 10 years ago

CO2 is still not the main cause of global warming. They extrapolate theory, use data but leave out the other causes conveniently. If they use all the data their model does not prove as 100% true, only true based on data they analyze and leave out the big picture. It is a co-factor, but the sun allows extra seaweed in the ocean that part is left out. The other water pollution is left out treated septic waste and products of metal industries are allowed to discharge acid. Catalytic converters make CO2 gas, so maybe they need another approach? Acid rain and water ph is caused mostly by sulfur to factors that remain left out of the research. Acid rain is caused in part by sulfuric acid formed by industry, but Mostly from underwater volcanoes a natural problem that is on the rise. The CO2, in underwater volcano discharge is the main culprit of this. CO2 is a gas and does NOT LIQUEFY from the atmosphere. If you take a soda can and open it it realeases CO2 gas. If you let it out in a container the gas will escape the liquid and not return to the liquid on its own. CO2 in the ocean comes from the ocean floor. If you know chemistry and physics, then you know you cannot convert CO2 gas to liquid form by rain. It is not possible to turn a gas to liquid unless you cool it or compress it. It is natural and bubbles up from the ocean and is not the main factor in global warming. What about global warming on Mars, Jupiter, Pluto, Venus? That is not man made. CO2 does not exist on many planets. All of the elements in the earth, if burned by us or burned by the volcanoes, the result is the same off gassing always occurs, oxygen, nitrogen and carbon dioxide are still natural. Man has very little impact on the total emissions, you me and the rest of population breathe it out. Plants will grow and breath in. More plants thrive to compensate. I can go on and on from many sources you quote this one study. The Gore/Gates/Koch bunch that blames just us. Once all factors from nature considered we a part, but this would happen no matter what. Global warming on other planets at same time, temp rise, Pluto esp are all in line with our thaw. You live on the planet, I look from the outside in approach. We live in space, and factors out there have been proven to invoke climate change.
Until they take in all the data available and do a study and prove it then I will listen. But knowing what I know based on fact that if they include all data the model will fail to prove their case and it will crash like the other studies.

http://volcanoes.usgs.gov/hazards/gas/climate.php http://iceagenow.com/Ocean_Warming.htm http://www.livescience.com/3544-life-thrives-active-underwater-volcano.html http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrothermal_vent

[-] 0 points by NewEnglandPatriot (916) from Dartmouth, MA 10 years ago

Girl I like your discussions but you are going to have to stop thinking with what you are told and read from one source. Example: a food additive that is considered bad for you the FDA approves called sodium benzoate. Converts to benzene in bdy , causes disease. FDA approves it and says it is safe. But Europe begs to differ and proved it is bad. Now because you live in the US and FDA says its ok, then does that mean it is only a toxin in Europe? I take in data from all sources. It is all about money, funding and studies prove this additive safe, but if FDA takes in all data it would not be approved. They only listen to one side as does the American people. Drink up. I seek truth, go to all sources, apply scientific method and climatology oceanography research, geological research, atmospheric, and every study combined and this model only works for the data they select. You must take in all data, and the result is always nature is the prime CO2 emitter and the sun is the cause of global warming all planets.

[-] 0 points by NewEnglandPatriot (916) from Dartmouth, MA 10 years ago

Girl Friday, I salute your effort, but you only look at what appeals and ignore the rest. I am telling you warming is true. It is a 10,000-10,500 year freeze/thaw cycle with mini ice ages in between known as Mauder Minimums from the sun. I was taught based on fact they are not changing the facts I know the facts.

They are doing a study based on data that cannot be measured over total sampling time and some is - synthesized. IE fabricated IE made up IE a guess. They tell you this right there. Looks @ only 50 years. 50 years is better but not enough. Go back 100,000 and see that this happens, there are studies out there that already disprove this because the data is not all-inclusive. It is missing the past 100,000 years, which can ne restructured from ice cores and cave crystal growth rates. They can age them and know the temp based on that data. See the dip in temp on the chart, 1980, Mt st Helens erupted and cooled us off for a little while...I know this chart like the back of my hand this is the one Gore likes to refer to (maybe not exact chart but the 50 year range and the trend as a whole I have seen it before) Our cleaning up our smog actually sped up the warmth. Cutting down rainforests, that may have not helped but the CO2 blame pie has to stop!!!!! That is my only point.

All bets off, all planets warming, only factor = sun this has been proven.

Look at the chart, see the dip, that is Mt st Helens eruption. The rise continued and caught ack up once the atmosphere returned to normal hence the spike.

http://berkeleyearth.org/FAQ.php#funding

[-] 0 points by NewEnglandPatriot (916) from Dartmouth, MA 10 years ago

If you want to stop global warming, start burning everything you can, and try to detonate a volcano, it is your only hope. IT is a natural cycle that must run its course.

[-] 0 points by GirlFriday (17435) 10 years ago

http://berkeleyearth.org/study.php

cherry on top

And this is the study that was funded in part by the Koch heads. By all means have a look at the methodology.

[-] 1 points by Arditum (37) 10 years ago

The US is blamed because it is supposedly a progressive, powerful country of the western world. It is expected to set an example, not to be the money grubbing fat bully it usually is. Since 90% of world scientists recognize the existence of Global Warming the western world should the example for everyone, and like it or not, the US is the most representative western country.

[-] 1 points by GirlFriday (17435) 10 years ago

Because, the US is the country with the most pollution and the one that consistently refuses to sign treaties to knock it off, although China may have surpassed us by now in regards to pollution.

How do you not know this?

[-] 0 points by Bambi (359) 10 years ago

You are throwing around in accurate info.........

The Top 10 worst polluted places in the world are:

Chernobyl, Ukraine Dzerzhinsk, Russia Haina, Dominican Republic Kabwe, Zambia La Oroya, Peru Linfen, China Maiuu Suu, Kyrgyzstan Norilsk, Russia Ranipet, India Rudnaya Pristan/Dalnegorsk, Russia

[-] 1 points by GirlFriday (17435) 10 years ago

China is set to outpace the US by 2017.

It still stands. China already emits more carbon per person than France and Spain and on current trends will surpass the United States in per person emissions as early as 2017, according to the report conducted by the Netherlands Environmental Assessment agency and sponsored by the European Commission. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/china/8793269/China-population-to-become-worlds-biggest-polluters.html

[-] 1 points by Bambi (359) 10 years ago

LMAO you better do some more research about the "facts" that you posted.....Like the Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency LOL...You are priceless........just priceless

[-] 1 points by GirlFriday (17435) 10 years ago

LMAO @ YOU. China is set to outpace the US by 2017. It still stands. China already emits more carbon per person than France and Spain and on current trends will surpass the United States in per person emissions as early as 2017, according to the report conducted by the Netherlands Environmental Assessment agency and sponsored by the European Commission. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/china/8793269/China-population-to-become-worlds-biggest-polluters.html

[-] 1 points by Bambi (359) 10 years ago

ROFLMAO

[-] 1 points by GirlFriday (17435) 10 years ago

:D

LMAO @ YOU. China is set to outpace the US by 2017. It still stands. China already emits more carbon per person than France and Spain and on current trends will surpass the United States in per person emissions as early as 2017, according to the report conducted by the Netherlands Environmental Assessment agency and sponsored by the European Commission. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/china/8793269/China-population-to-become-worlds-biggest-polluters.html

[-] 1 points by Bambi (359) 10 years ago

troll

[-] 1 points by GirlFriday (17435) 10 years ago

Yes, you most definitely are a troll.

We knew this already.

[-] 0 points by fandango (241) 10 years ago

sorry friday, china IS the most polluted country.

[-] 2 points by GirlFriday (17435) 10 years ago

China already emits more carbon per person than France and Spain and on current trends will surpass the United States in per person emissions as early as 2017, according to the report conducted by the Netherlands Environmental Assessment agency and sponsored by the European Commission. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/china/8793269/China-population-to-become-worlds-biggest-polluters.html

Sorry, Fandago, not yet.

[-] 0 points by Thrasymaque (-2138) 10 years ago

Who ever said the US was always blamed?

[-] 0 points by Bambi (359) 10 years ago

Just listen to the liberals and US haters..........There's your answer.

This comment is right below.....

GirlFriday 0 points 13 hours ago Because, the US is the country with the most pollution and the one that consistently refuses to sign treaties to knock it off, although China may have surpassed us by now in regards to pollution. How do you not know this?

[-] 1 points by JesseHeffran (3903) 10 years ago

Bambi, have you ever heard of tough love. It means you hold your nation accountable. Some times being a hater is a good thing. This is not a football game, and pretty, little cheerleaders need not apply.

[-] 1 points by Bambi (359) 10 years ago

darn

[-] 1 points by GirlFriday (17435) 10 years ago

Why do you lie?

In fact, why do you lie to harm the American public? How can you do this to your own people? You are disgusting and filthy and, frankly, a traitor.

[-] 1 points by Bambi (359) 10 years ago

LMAO!!!!!!!!!!! OMG thank you for the laugh this morning GF........Talk about disgusting!

"How can you do this to your own people?"............Do what? What you do is lie and say that AMERICA is the worse polluter. I just posted a list of the worse polluters in this world and AMERICA is not on it.

You obviously are not from this country......so..........STFU

[-] 1 points by GirlFriday (17435) 10 years ago

I am 100% from this country you moronic twit.
China is set to outpace the US by 2017. It still stands. China already emits more carbon per person than France and Spain and on current trends will surpass the United States in per person emissions as early as 2017, according to the report conducted by the Netherlands Environmental Assessment agency and sponsored by the European Commission. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/china/8793269/China-population-to-become-worlds-biggest-polluters.html

[-] 0 points by Bambi (359) 10 years ago

ROFLMAO................I think I'm getting to you.....Gotta love it

[-] 1 points by GirlFriday (17435) 10 years ago

:D

No, your stupidity is really funny though. You graduated from Beck U, huh?

[-] 1 points by Bambi (359) 10 years ago

Nope....I hate Beck

[-] 0 points by GirlFriday (17435) 10 years ago

You smell just like him. :D

[-] 0 points by fandango (241) 10 years ago

ask the blame america first crowd. it's what they do.

[-] 1 points by Bambi (359) 10 years ago

Those blame America first crowd should go live in India or China where life is so much better

[-] 2 points by JesseHeffran (3903) 10 years ago

I can only blame the country I was born in. to blame others is to pass the buck.

[-] 1 points by fandango (241) 10 years ago

why not include cuba,.............a paradise according to michael moore. how about venezuela? north korea? iran?

[-] 1 points by Bambi (359) 10 years ago

Excellent fandango

[-] 0 points by fandango (241) 10 years ago

The sun ( our star) is solely the reason the the earths temperature.

[-] -1 points by Thrasymaque (-2138) 10 years ago

What a naïve claim. And, soley is not a word, you should have said "the sole reason".

[-] -1 points by fandango (241) 10 years ago

Fine , the sun ( our star) is SOLELY the reason for the earths temperature.

[-] 1 points by NewEnglandPatriot (916) from Dartmouth, MA 10 years ago

Scientific fact, all of the planets are experiencing global warming. No SUVs/Hummer H2s coal plants, etc on Venus, Mars people. Piers Corbyn debunked "global warming" and anyone following Gore needs to wake up. The Sun is the major factor. CO2 is lower than any point in history, planet undergoes a thaw freeze cycle. CO2 will help plants breathe, and our post industrial age is cleaner than ever. Look back to the pollution during the industrial revolution. There was real Black smoke, no regulation or control. Even during the times when volcanoes were polluting heavily; The atmosphere is cleaner than ever, minus the recent radioactive isotopes from Japan. That is the problem, Radioactive isotopes are NG for us. Carbon Dioxide is a natural gas, we should all commit suicide then, since we make more CO2 collectively than any industrial process. The greenhouse gas theory was debunked. We need to focus on real issues. The more CO2, the more plants thrive, they produce oxygen good for us and animals. Please lets put this to rest. Now radioactive isotopes, I have a problem with that.....

[-] 1 points by NewEnglandPatriot (916) from Dartmouth, MA 10 years ago

More CO2 = more plants thrive, re-balancing O2 for nature, it is a natural balancing mechanism. The scientists they hijack for their theories are theories, nothing more. Google real climatologists, and dig for the truth. It is out there. At least we can breathe CO2, how about some Radioactive Iodine, or Xeon? That is not compatible with life and is outright toxic. Problem with coal is mercury. But thats ok, cause they put it in our tooth fillings, our green light bulbs, and computer displays. Depends on what they plan taxing or regulating next. Once these carbon tax laws get out of control, we will personally be responsible for not only our energy carbon footprint, but the actual footprint they deem per person and have to pay a tax on the air we exhale.

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2007/02/070228-mars-warming.html

http://seoblackhat.com/2007/03/04/global-warming-on-mars-pluto-triton-and-jupiter/

http://www.british-gazette.co.uk/climate-change-a-fraud-exposed-scientist-piers-corbyn-debunks-the-climate-change-alarmists/

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/global-warming-skeptic-predicts-brutal-winter-warns-you-aint-seen-nothing-yet/

[-] 0 points by Thrasymaque (-2138) 10 years ago

Ah! Conspiracy theorists are so tiring. If you don't believe in Global Warming, then just keep polluting.

[-] 0 points by NewEnglandPatriot (916) from Dartmouth, MA 10 years ago

So stop ? You guys are the Conspiracy theorists. Your scientists invented this issue and convince more and more. Man bear pig..... All planets are warming. You ignore facts. Hold your breath since you pollute with this natural CO2 that was here before us. I do not say we are not a "factor" You only hear what you want, I listen to all sides of story, you people find one scientist model 50 year study where they "synthesise" data , which means guess. There studies do not have complete conclusions and have changed several times in last 20 years. So they were right, then wrong, then right, then wrong? how can this be? Who do you explain it on other planets? How do you explain this: http://www.columbia.edu/~vjd1/carbon.htm http://www.dakotavoice.com/2009/06/nasa-study-shows-sun-responsible-for-planet-warming/

[-] 1 points by Anachronism (225) 10 years ago

Meterologist..lol

[-] 1 points by Arditum (37) 10 years ago

Still arguing about overwhelming scientific evidence. Well, of course, if some people can deny evolution, this is not surprising. However, as both evolution and global warming are based on the application of the scientific method and scientific community, you shouldn't believe anything science produces. Turn off your TV, computer and even light bulbs, they don't exists. I just debunked their existence.

[-] 1 points by badconduct (550) 10 years ago

I found a website that does a fantastic job of debunking all of the global warming hoax material - http://www.durangobill.com/Swindle_Swindle.html It's pretty cut and dry

[-] 1 points by badconduct (550) 10 years ago

Yo, bad news. Climate change is real. I don't think the UN would be debating how to best scam us all for tax money to pay for a none-existent issue if the evidence didn't exist.

Alex Jones is right in that people are using global warming as an excuse to make a quick buck. But he's wrong in saying that it doesn't exist, or that it's a giant tax money scam. The problem exists, the US consumer based economy is a linear system. Our generation is going to suffer the consequences in the next 20 years.

[-] 1 points by newjustice22 (49) 10 years ago

Sorry to break it to you but its the normal cycle in fact they have been planning this global warming scam for over 60 years. Thats how they plan to fund the one world government.

[-] 2 points by badconduct (550) 10 years ago

Therefor; a bunch of bankers convinced top scientists that global warming exists? Or are they all in on it too?

No, the correlation exists. "Increased carbon dioxide (CO2) in the atmosphere is making the Pacific coast acidic far more rapidly than previously believed, potentially wreaking havoc for creatures living in it that are unable to tolerate the swiftly changing environment."

They can measure ocean acidity from too much CO2 in the atmosphere. There might be a normal cycle in place, but we are accelerating it.

"Oceans, like trees, absorb CO2 from the atmosphere, playing a big role in slowing down climate change. When carbon dioxide dissolves in water, it forms carbonic acid. This extra acidity can dissolve seashells, making life particularly hazardous for many shellfish, as well as all creatures from ducks to humans that depend on them as a source of food."

"The statistics paint a grim picture. According to the World Resources Institute, more than 80 percent of the Earth’s natural forests already have been destroyed. Up to 90 percent of West Africa’s coastal rain forests have disappeared since 1900."

It's obvious. Taxes on carbon are not the solution. That's a money grab. But the issue is real, and they can't think of a solution that doesn't involve everyone mutually agreeing to stop buying cheap manufactured goods, burning less oil and using less energy.

[Removed]

[-] 1 points by opensociety4us (914) from Norwalk, CT 10 years ago

"Mumbo Jumbo" says all I need to hear about this post.

[-] 1 points by TheMaster (63) 10 years ago

Sure is cold today.

[Removed]

[-] 1 points by Joetheplumbed (76) 10 years ago

There is never a complete consensus on anything. But usually its better to go with what the informed majority of independent researchers has arrived at on a particular issue.

[-] 1 points by bereal (235) 10 years ago

A consensus does not make something true. That is not how science is supposed to work.

[-] 1 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 10 years ago

Actually, that's exactly how science works.

How that consensus is reached is important, though. When tens of thousands of scientists in varying disciplines looking at data form hundreds of sources all arrive at the same conclusion, that consensus is pretty rock-solid science. Meteorologists are not climatologists, though. They look at weather. Weather is not climate.

The evidence is overwhelming. Global anthropogenic climate change is real. If anything, the warnings of what was happening have been shown to be far too conservative. http://www.realclimate.org/

[-] 0 points by bereal (235) 10 years ago

Wrong. A consensus does NOT make something true. A thing is what it is, no matter what people think it is.

Climate change is real and has been in a state of flux since the Earth began. The climate has changed by dozens even scores of degree over the eons. Sometimes the changes are slow, sometime fast. The temperatures go up and down a little or a lot. The climate is always changing and has been long before cars, hair spray, cow farts, and enviromentalist hot air. The point is, man isn't changing it and man can't stop it.

[-] 1 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 10 years ago

Science does not mean "truth" but knowledge.. All science is decided by consensus, including things as fundamental as the theory of gravity. Your denial of this only demonstrates your compete lack of understanding of science, yet you feel unencumbered in making scientific statements.

As I suspected, you didn't go to the link or read one word of it.

But it's always amusing to see declarations by people who know nothing about a subject (other than predigested propaganda) proclaim they are the gatekeepers of truth, based on ignorance.. It's especially amusing to see them regurgitate repeatedly debunked arguments as if they are saying something new.

If you don't read the actual science you have the credibility of a blowhard.

[-] 0 points by bereal (235) 10 years ago

And yet somehow I made it to the top 5% designing, manufacturing, and selling scientific equipment world wide. What an ignorant little twit you are. LOL

[-] 1 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 10 years ago

And yet you don't understand the science or are compleetly incurious about finding out about it.

Have you actually read the science on the link I posted, or are you just blowing smoke out of your ass?

Until you actually read IT the actual science by actual mainstream climatologists, not the paid shills of the oil companies (including Republican Senators) , your evaluation of the science has no foundation.

[-] 0 points by bereal (235) 10 years ago

I've been studying global warming since it was global cooling back in the 70's. Remember "The Coming of the Next Ice Age" bs? Oops. So much for THAT consensus.

[-] 1 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 10 years ago

There was no consensus about global cooling: it was a dramatic story in the headlines alone (mostly an article in Newsweek that went viral.) Some scientists were concerned, but there was nothing CLOSE to a consensus.

Concern about global cooling peaked in the early 1970s, though the possibility of anthropogenic warming dominated the peer-reviewed literature even then

Popular magazine articles are hardly an acceptable substitute for science.

And, of course, you have STILL not read any of the science I pointed you to. You are like a pit bull with a bone. Your jaw is locked on the mythology and you won't let it go.

You won't read the science. If you do, it might make you question what other unfounded myths you cling to and your entire world view could come crashing down. Can't have that now, can we?

[-] 0 points by bereal (235) 10 years ago

I am reading it. So far it's the same 'ol shit. Like I said, I'm not new at this.

[-] 1 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 10 years ago

Same ol' shit that has debunked every misstatement you have made.

You misstated the nature of scientific knowledge, you mischaracterized the global cooling "news" as consensus. That's just two. Either you don't know or you engage in deliberate distortion. Either way does not lend weight to your other statements.

You are (perhaps) an engineer who makes machines passing yourself off as someone who understands climate science. And you blithely dismiss the work of tens of thousands of independent climate scientists worldwide, and published in peer reviewed journals, scientists who have spent their lives doing research, and have all agreed that anthropogenic climate change is real, as "shit" in favor of oil and coal company's versions of climate science. The fact that you have NO qualifications to make that determination does not dissuade you. Scientific knowledge means giving up one's prejudices in order to discover something truer. Your ideology trumps that. Scientific knowledge is gained over time in any given area of study, yet you dismiss current knowledge based on preliminary findings of a few scientists (not a consensus by any stretch of the imagination) of over forty years ago. It is another example of your lack of understanding of science or an ideological predisposition.

You claim you are not new at this, but the only "this" you have demonstrated is a willingness to repeat denier theories proven false years ago. Your "this" seems to be listening to the likes of Inhofe or Limbaugh, as opposed to Hanson or Mann.

If you build your machines with the same integrity or accuracy you have demonstrated here, God help those who might depend on one of them.

I seriously doubt you are reading anything, certainly not with any understanding, certainly not in depth, and without the least genuine attempt to learn anything.

[-] 1 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 10 years ago

You fucking moron. Fox News is your source? "Climategate", too has been COMPLETELY debunked.. The quotes, taken completely out of context in order to appear that scientists were being dishonest, were shown to be utterly, completely benign. 5 separate investigations have all come to the same conclusions: the emails did NOT indicate the least bit of misdeeds. There is no Climategate. there is only the right wing's intentionally deceptive fabrication of it.

Tens of thousands of independent scientists have not gotten together secretly to defraud the world or perpetuate a hoax? The very notion is laughable. And it's scary that anyone would be so delusional as to believe it.

Realclimate.org, by the way, addresses the substance of the emails in depth. I guess I was correct when I said you didn't read much, if anything, from that site.

Fox News. Yeah, they have never been shown to have an agenda, cherry pick quotes, or distort information. ROTFLMFAO. Do you go there to get your technical specs for the latest medical machines too? http://www.ucsusa.org/global_warming/science_and_impacts/global_warming_contrarians/debunking-misinformation-stolen-emails-climategate.html

http://mediamatters.org/research/200912010002

http://climatecrocks.com/2011/08/23/climategate-debunked-again-climate-deniers-mike-mann-born-in-kenya/

http://www.nsf.gov/oig/search/A09120086.pdf http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/07/12/climategate-debunking-get_n_642980.html

[-] 0 points by bereal (235) 10 years ago

No reply button on your post below so I'm responding here......

"Global warming hacks cleared of wrong doing by their global warming hack buddies" Who'd a thunk it?

[-] 1 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 10 years ago

Yeah, it's a conspiracy. The National Science Foundation is a hack, as is The NOAA Inspector General's office.

You, on the other hand, are a climate science expert because you make and sell machines.

Idiot.

[-] 0 points by bereal (235) 10 years ago

Did you even read the article? And your sources are not bias? LOL

[-] 1 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 10 years ago

Six official investigations have cleared scientists of accusations of wrongdoing.

A three-part Penn State University cleared scientist Michael Mann of wrongdoing.

Two reviews commissioned by the University of East Anglia"supported the honesty and integrity of scientists in the Climatic Research Unit." A UK Parliament report concluded that the emails have no bearing on our understanding of climate science and that claims against UEA scientists are misleading.

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Inspector General's office concluded there was no evidence of wrongdoing on behalf of their employees.

The National Science Foundation's Inspector General's office concluded, "Lacking any direct evidence of research misconduct...we are closing this investigation with no further action."

Other agencies and media outlets have investigated the substance of the emails.

The Environmental Protection Agency, in response to petitions against action to curb heat-trapping emissions, dismissed attacks on the science rooted in the stolen emails.

Factcheck.org debunked claims that the emails put the conclusions of climate science into question.

Politifact.com rated claims that the emails falsify climate science as "false."

An Associated Press review of the emails found that they "don't undercut the vast body of evidence showing the world is warming because of man-made greenhouse gas emissions."

Yeah, comparable to Fox news bias. And I've got a bridge to sell you.

[-] 1 points by Joetheplumbed (76) 10 years ago

No it is not. Nor have I claimed so.

[-] 0 points by Spankysmojo (849) 10 years ago

NYT today: As Permafrost Thaws, Scientists Study the Risks.

Permafrost in the arctic is thawing....

[-] 0 points by Spankysmojo (849) 10 years ago

Anyone can debunk anything. Who do you choose to believe?

[-] 0 points by Thrasymaque (-2138) 10 years ago

I choose to believe the consensus of scientists which is that Global Warming is being caused by humans.

[-] 1 points by badconduct (550) 10 years ago

This global warming bullshit is more painful than the 9/11 bullshit. I am blaming this one on Alex Jones too.

[-] 0 points by Spankysmojo (849) 10 years ago

How right you would be, then.

[-] 0 points by bereal (235) 10 years ago

The Earth's climate is and always has been in a state of constant flux. What makes anyone think that the current temperature is the "perfect" temperature? Actually, I am hoping for more global warming, it gets pretty cold up here in the winter. I think we should all be glad we are not heading towards another ice age.

I'd like to personally thank GirlFriday, ZenDog, BlueRose, and all the other OWS members for releasing vast amounts of hot air on a regular basis.

[-] 0 points by freedomanddemocracy (72) 10 years ago

Piers who? The CNN guy? Whoever this idiot is, he's one lone voice in the sea of scientists who believe otherwise!!!

[-] -1 points by EXPOSED (222) 10 years ago

We're emmiting SO MUCH greenhouse gases that there's now global warming in Mars, Jupiter and Saturn!

Mars, Jupiter and Saturn desperately need Al Gore...$$$$$