ENVIRONMENT  
AlterNet / By Scott Thill
comments_imageCOMMENTS: 189

Firestorms and Deep Freeze: Climate Change May Bring Both

Global warming deniers keep pointing to snowstorms as proof that climatologists are wrong. But both extreme heat and cold are on tap.
February 16, 2009  |  
 
 
LIKE THIS ARTICLE ?
Join our mailing list:

Sign up to stay up to date on the latest Environment headlines via email.

 
 
Advertisement
 

Last week, the heaviest snowfall since the '90s blanketed the U.K., disrupting bus, rail and air transportation and costing areas like London a cool billion in lost revenue.

Meanwhile, in Australia, a punishing, record drought was worsened by the nation's worst heat wave and worst wildfires, wherein over 400 conflagrations killed over 200 people (and counting), torched a thousand homes and renewed calls for a country with its environmental head up its ass to finally launch its still-hibernating national warning system.

Those who would argue that these are isolated events do so at their own peril. The more time passes, the more both examples of extreme weather resemble two sides of the same fearsome coin known as catastrophic climate change.

And depending on how the science plays out, it could get much worse indeed, and fast.

Deniers of catastrophic climate change have been clinging to extreme rainstorms and snowstorms, such as those recently witnessed in the U.K. or American East Coast, like life rafts off the Titanic.

They still argue that such record-breaking deep freezes disprove global warming. But they're desperately seeking semantics, while the rest of the world is waking up to reality. Which is this: Catastrophic climate change will feature as much ice as fire. It probably already has.

"Scientifically, it would not be correct to make the statement that the current weather in Australia, the U.K. and U.S. are examples of climate change," explains Jian Liu, chief of the Division of Environment Policy Implementation's climate change adaptation unit at the United Nations Environmental Program. "Rather, these are extreme climate events; whereas climate change is something that can only be observed by looking at the average conditions over long periods of time. But while the general average trend is one of a warming climate, this does not mean that extreme cold events or snowstorms will not take place.

"In fact, as you rightly point out, climate change may even contribute to an increasing intensity of snowstorms, as moisture levels in the atmosphere rise."

Liu's point is a good one: It's only climate change, scientifically speaking, once you've had hundreds, or hundreds of thousands, of years to chart the differences and gradations in weather, extreme and otherwise. But we don't have hundreds of thousands of years to wait for that data to come through, which is probably why few scientists ever run for public office, where life-and-death decisions are made in advance of the data, often to influence it.

But disciplinary differences aside, this much is certain: Extreme weather has taken hold of our planet, the only one in our known universe capable of sustaining lives and habitats like ours, and we don't have hundreds of thousands of years to get our act together to forestall even worse events, ones that are exponentially taking many lethal forms.

"Numerous long-term changes in the climate have been observed, including extreme weather such as droughts, heavy precipitation, floods, heat waves and increasing intensity of tropical cyclones," Liu says. "Trends towards more powerful storms and hotter, longer dry periods have been observed. As a result of reduced precipitation and increased evaporation, water-security problems are projected to intensify by 2030 in some regions, and significant loss of biodiversity is projected to occur by 2020 in some ecologically rich sites.

"As to your question on winter storms and cold events, those pointing at intense winter storms or extreme cold events as evidence that global warning is not happening are confusing weather and climate."

That arguably deliberate confusion has slowed our response to a danger that is snowballing by the day, but may disappear if some of climate change's more unlikely, but terrifying, possibilities come to pass.

In one scenario that has taken by storm, pardon the pun, scientists and disaster-cinema stalwarts like director Roland Emmerich -- director of the enviro-horror blockbusters The Day After Tomorrow and 2009's 2012 -- excessive concentrations of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere shut down our oceans' thermohaline circulation and plunges regions of Earth into a miniature ice age. Which regions? Wait for it: The U.K. and the American East Coast.

This thesis has been treated like an environmental, and geopolitical, football by scientists and policymakers alike, who have yet to agree on the scientific data or even what the data is looking for. But everyone seems to agree that the possibility of such an extreme global event warrants vigorous study.


View as a single page
 
Scott Thill runs the online mag Morphizm.com. His writing has appeared on Salon, XLR8R, All Music Guide, Wired and others.
Email
Print
Share
Post on reddit
Post on stumbleupon
Post on facebook
Post on digg
Post on twitter
Post on delicious
LIKED THIS ARTICLE? JOIN OUR EMAIL LIST
Stay up to date with the latest Environment headlines via email
See more stories tagged with: global warming, climate change

comments COMMENTS ( 189 )
READ COMMENTS
LOGIN OR REGISTER TO POST A COMMENT
 

Comments are closed-

Yeah we get it already
[Report this comment]
Posted by: teel on Feb 16, 2009 12:32 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
All hail the omnipotent climate scientist. Let us bask in your glory and rejoice in your wisdom as we move back into the caves we should never have abandoned in the first place. Wrath and vengeance be upon the heretics who dare question our faith and blessed be such circumstances that allow us who were once without research grants to feed at the trough of panic. Verily I say unto thee, repent! Sell thine car and bicycle lest ye doom us all to everlasting warm winters. Let fear strike the hearts of the unbeliever, let lightning strike him down as moisture in the air increases with his heresy. The global warming God is coming, kneel before his representatives on earth and tremble at their inconclusive evidence and fear mongering. To those who would say that the climate changes naturally and that mankind does not make it shift, ye are most despised of people. You shall be placed upon a media altar and your credibility laid to waste with outraged rhetoric and many, many pie charts. But for thee who will wither and die a little inside every time a car is started, for thee who lie awake at night worrying that somewhere a polar bear is hungry I say unto thee. Blessed art thou you most frightened of persons, for you shall inherit the world after the big collapse. You shall be the ruler of all caves and muddy huts, and none shall doubt your absolute knowledge. Let it be so.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» How does it feel Posted by: kegbot1
» RE: How does it feel Posted by: teel
» RE: How does it feel Posted by: caerbannog
» RE: How does it feel Posted by: particle
» RE: How does it feel Posted by: Squarehead
» RE: How does it feel Posted by: particle
» RE that was very funny.. LOL! Posted by: HANGTRAITORS
» RE: that was very funny.. LOL! Posted by: Squarehead
» RE: that was very funny.. LOL! Posted by: HoboHomo
» RE: that was very funny.. LOL! Posted by: HoboHomo
» RE: that was very funny.. LOL! Posted by: Squarehead
» RE: All that cleverness... Posted by: Cybershaman
» RE: Oh, BTW... Posted by: Cybershaman
» RE: Oh, BTW... Posted by: pelican beak
» RE: Midnight heh... Posted by: Cybershaman
» RE: Midnight heh... Posted by: pelican beak
» RE: How does it feel Posted by: Squarehead
» Excellent!! Posted by: zooeyhall
» RE: Yeah we get it already Posted by: aristopus
» RE: Yeah we get it already Posted by: sirios
» RE: Yeah we get it already Posted by: angdave
» RE: Yeah we get it already Posted by: monkeywrench
» Oh my Posted by: teel
» RE: Oh my [Why so bitter, teel? Posted by: Squarehead
» RE: Oh my Posted by: Zeugitai
» RE: Yeah we get it already Posted by: theoldguy

Comments are closed-

You can't say it enough...
[Report this comment]
Posted by: fatalevasion on Feb 16, 2009 1:07 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I would like to start first by asking whom else was attracted to this article specifically because of the video still taken from the Disney film Bambi??? I'll admit I was.

Moving on...

While I must admit that dearest commenter and internet acquaintance Teel's reply was humorous, "Yeah we get it already..." doesn't give me such a warm & fuzzy feeling. I'll admit that a majority of the time topics are beaten to death! But what one may forget is that there are two kinds of people
1) those who 'know-it-all'
2) those who still don't know how babies are made
So until that reverie of a day where action has been taken and these problems no longer exist becomes reality, you're going to be 'getting' a lot more of it.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Not Bambi, Bitterroot Posted by: Compassion

Comments are closed-

BA
[Report this comment]
Posted by: mnstra on Feb 16, 2009 2:40 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I DON'T APPRECIATE THE PICTURE.........MANIPULATIVE

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: BA Posted by: sirios
» what picture? Posted by: dkm

Comments are closed-

An airport bus conversation at Midway in 1997
[Report this comment]
Posted by: kegbot1 on Feb 16, 2009 2:45 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I sat, by chance next to a research meteorologist from the Argonne National Laboratories on a Midway airport shuttle back in '97. He spoke about people like our poster 'teel' and their pointing at snowfall and relying on corporate propaganda dispensed by Rush Limbaugh.

Basically he said the whole point about global climate change now starting to occur was that we would NOT see a corresponding rise in temperature leading to blazing summers and nonexistent winters but severe weather fluctuations on both sides of the climate spectrum - exactly what we are seeing in 2009.

He bemoaned the general ignorance of the American public and hoped that we would understand what truly was happening before it was too late.

And there's that little matter of the permafrost melt in Siberia releasing all those millions of tons of methane . . .

http://tinyurl.com/3omvm3

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

"We need to get some broad based support, to capture the public's imagination...
[Report this comment]
Posted by: tony_opmoc on Feb 16, 2009 3:35 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
So we have to offer up scary scenarios,
make simplified, dramatic statements
and make little mention of any doubts...
Each of us has to decide what the right balance
is between being effective and being honest."
- Stephen Schneider,
Stanford Professor of Climatology,
lead author of many IPCC reports

"Unless we announce disasters no one will listen."
- Sir John Houghton,
first chairman of IPCC

"It doesn't matter what is true,
it only matters what people believe is true."
- Paul Watson,
co-founder of Greenpeace

"We've got to ride this global warming issue.
Even if the theory of global warming is wrong,
we will be doing the right thing in terms of
economic and environmental policy."
- Timothy Wirth,
President of the UN Foundation

"No matter if the science of global warming is all phony...
climate change provides the greatest opportunity to
bring about justice and equality in the world."
- Christine Stewart,
fmr Canadian Minister of the Environment

"The only way to get our society to truly change is to frighten people with the possibility of a catastrophe."
- emeritus professor Daniel Botkin


"We are on the verge of a global transformation.
All we need is the right major crisis..."
- David Rockefeller,
Club of Rome executive member

"The concept of national sovereignty has been immutable, indeed a sacred principle of international relations.
It is a principle which will yield only slowly and reluctantly to the new imperatives of global environmental cooperation."
- UN Commission on Global Governance report

http://green-agenda.com/index.html

Anyone notice a theme of FEAR beginning to emerge. Very much like the Global War on Terror?

World populations are being programmed by propaganda by very powerful factions who's objective is World Government Dictatorship.

The current World Financial Crisis is a further component of this World Terrorism.

Check out who the members are at the top of organisations like the Club of Rome, the United Nations, Council on Foreign Relations. Whilst they may at first appear to have divergent political views, their real objective soon becomes apparent - and they will frighten and impoverish us all to death to achieve it. They have no qualms about crashing the entire economic system resulting in Billions starving to death - because in their view - we are the problem and need to be culled.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

Why don't global warming "hoaxers" act a bit like hoaxers?
[Report this comment]
Posted by: Perry Logan on Feb 16, 2009 3:41 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Global warming deniers like to say global warming is a hoax. But a look at the behavior of the scientists who are trying to warn us about global warming disproves this.

When a hoax is exposed, the hoaxers usually fudge, hem and haw, and retreat forthwith. This is inevitable, since a hoax has nothing to back it up. Once the ruse is revealed, hoaxers must generally withdraw from the field, often very hastily.

But the people warning us about global warning are not acting at all like hoaxers who've been exposed. Quite the contrary, they are pressing the attack, presenting new evidence that the situation is worse than they thought, reasserting their case, debunking the opposition, publishing new reports, etc.

A child can tell you--this is not the way hoaxers behave.

In sharp contrast, every global warming denier in the world has a different story, based on different crackpot theories. This is far more consistent with a hoax than the behavior of the global-warming proponents. Quod erat demonstrandum, baby.

I recommend an excellent science blog out of Austraslia called Deltoid which puts the kabosh on global warming deniers, over and over again.

8 Years without a Leader

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Bush, Cheney, Rummy..... Posted by: Squarehead

Comments are closed-

Former astronaut speaks out
[Report this comment]
Posted by: MyLeftFoot on Feb 16, 2009 4:58 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Former astronaut speaks out on global warming
By Associated Press | Sunday, February 15, 2009 | http://www.bostonherald.com | Around the Nation
SANTA FE, N.M. - Former astronaut Harrison Schmitt, who walked on the moon and once served New Mexico in the U.S. Senate, doesn’t believe that humans are causing global warming.

"I don’t think the human effect is significant compared to the natural effect," said Schmitt, who is among 70 skeptics scheduled to speak next month at the International Conference on Climate Change in New York.

Schmitt contends that scientists "are being intimidated" if they disagree with the idea that burning fossil fuels has increased carbon dioxide levels, temperatures and sea levels.

"They’ve seen too many of their colleagues lose grant funding when they haven’t gone along with the so-called political consensus that we’re in a human-caused global warming," Schmitt said.

Dan Williams, publisher with the Chicago-based Heartland Institute, which is hosting the climate change conference, said he invited Schmitt after reading about his resignation from The Planetary Society, a nonprofit dedicated to space exploration.

Schmitt resigned after the group blamed global warming on human activity. In his resignation letter, the 74-year-old geologist argued that the "global warming scare is being used as a political tool to increase government control over American lives, incomes and decision making."

Williams said Heartland is skeptical about the crisis that people are proclaiming in global warming.

"Not that the planet hasn’t warmed. We know it has or we’d all still be in the Ice Age," he said. "But it has not reached a crisis proportion and, even among us skeptics, there’s disagreement about how much man has been responsible for that warming."

Schmitt said historical documents indicate average temperatures have risen by 1 degree per century since around 1400 A.D., and the rise in carbon dioxide is because of the temperature rise.

Schmitt also said geological evidence indicates changes in sea level have been going on for thousands of years. He said smaller changes are related to changes in the elevation of land masses — for example, the Great Lakes are rising because the earth’s crust is rebounding from being depressed by glaciers.

Schmitt, who grew up in Silver City and now lives in Albuquerque, has a science degree from the California Institute of Technology. He also studied geology at the University of Oslo in Norway and took a doctorate in geology from Harvard University in 1964.

In 1972, he was one of the last men to walk on the moon as part of the Apollo 17 mission.

Schmitt said he’s heartened that the upcoming conference is made up of scientists who haven’t been manipulated by politics.

Of the global warming debate, he said: "It’s one of the few times you’ve seen a sizable portion of scientists who ought to be objective take a political position and it’s coloring their objectivity."

___

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Former astronaut speaks out Posted by: caerbannog
» So right. Posted by: thekidde
» RE: Former astronaut speaks out Posted by: MyLeftFoot
» RE: Former astronaut speaks out Posted by: MyLeftFoot
» RE: Former astronaut speaks out Posted by: mandiwrite

Comments are closed-

What really burns me up...
[Report this comment]
Posted by: smendler on Feb 16, 2009 5:26 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
... is when rightwingers look at some local phenomenon and think it disproves the larger pattern -- e.g., "Global warming? Hell, we just had a huge BLIZZARD in North Dakota! What kind of global warming is THAT, huh??!?" It's depressing, not just because the person is WRONG, but because the very statement indicates a level of self-assured ignorance that seems almost impossible to overcome.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: pfeifer999 and evidence Posted by: Ratskii
» RE: What really burns me up... Posted by: Zeugitai

Comments are closed-

Um how to say this
[Report this comment]
Posted by: HillbillyRob on Feb 16, 2009 5:32 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I lived in South Florida for almost 20 years and did see a change in climate.
Weather did become more extreme, like drought, the usual summer/wet-winter dry shift to drought. Early on at 3 pm every day there was a short, but intense shower for 10-20 minutes for years, centuries even look at the records, then later drought and the Everglades burning, salt-water intrusion into the water table of arguably fresh water wells(smells like swamp even chorined to a fair thee well). I lived near the beach the entire time I lived in fla, so I saw the ocean every day. I did not measure sea rise but it did appear to me that water in the canals near where I lived were almost a foot higher on the sea walls by the time I left.
Why is everyone arguing to continue pissin in our wells? What does it profit us as people to continue to put sewerage in our drinking water (rivers)? You and I do not profit, only corps profit not us, we the people.
I lived there up to 2002. We had several reasons to move, jobs outsourced, the housing bubble about to burst, energy costs going up, amBushco ignoring infrastructure problems(recall jebbie amBushco ruled fla in a fishy election).
'conservatives' (selfservatives?) have no clue that we should stop pollution just because it MIGHT interfere with their profits. You can't spend the profits if you are dead from suffocation, drowning in garbage, sewerage, methane, co2 etc.
The basic point tho is that we can be green, save the ecology and save a bunch of bucks. We moved to an abandoned tobacco field that was played out, using ancient traditional non chemical methods we have had better crops here than our neighbors have using chemicals, and this is only our second year.
These clean coal, gas and oil ads are just bull.
If we go solar/wind with battery back up we can generate the power we need 'free'. We don't need to burn anything. We live in rural NC and have cut our energy consumption by about 30% in 2 years, with no lost comfort and its paying for itself as we go. In fact we have spent less than $3000.00. Instead of paying exxon etc we upgrade insulation, cfls and leds, lots of little things, like insulated curtain liners. We like to froze the first year, but doing insulation etc we have cut out using the central air and use a small kero heater that is 23,000 btu compared to the 75,000 btu the central uses, and the house is warm all over. We will be putting in solar water heater and radiant floor heating and a solar air heater over the summer. We will only need the kero or the fire place when it gets really cold as is on 40 degree days I can heat the house with solar gain, and the house holds at 73 and drops to 65 over night if it does not go down past 30 overnight if it drops to 25 it drops to 60 inside and I light the heater for an hour or two until day light starts hitting the windows.
I tell ya conservation is sound conservative economics. So instead of whining that scientists are stupid, go get some insulation, quit being mental, venal and intellectually lazy and learn something about what using renewable can do for you and our environment.
I realise for now we will need fossil fuel for autos, but we can do a lot of things to save our Earth. I use canvas shopping bags. There is an area of the Pacific that is more than 2x the size of Tx that is a dead zone from the plastic we throw away that ends up in the rivers and makes its way to the Pacific Gyre..which by the way is a breeding ground for fish we eat, the fish and the wild life there are dying and that breaks the food chain.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Um how to say this Posted by: Shaman666
» RE: Um how to say this Posted by: Squarehead

Comments are closed-

Incomprehensible?
[Report this comment]
Posted by: ProgressiveManiac on Feb 16, 2009 5:50 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Where I live in Maine we had record cold temperatures this winter and last winter we had record snowfall. As the author suggests, the numerous climate-change deniers point to these events as clear evidence that the earth is not warming. It does no good to argue with them, their minds are unalterably made up.

And yet these same people were, in 2001-2003 firmly convinced that Muslims were out to destroy the U.S. and that we had to defend ourselves against the onslaught by whatever means necessary, even discarding our constitutional rights in the process. Certainly the defense was well worth the expenditure of hundreds of billions of dollars to fight a war against them.

Many are still convinced that the war was necessary, but climate change is an absurd notion. How do these people reach these conclusions while others (myself included) reach exactly the opposite conclusions that climate change is an extremely serious threat while the Muslim invasion is a figment of right-wing imagination?

The only answer I can come up with is that we trust different sources of information. Personally, I reject as unreliable anything I hear on FOX and most of the MSM unless it is perhaps about an observable event like a fire or plane crash, and I tend to believe scientists and some academics and independent journalists. A fortunately declining number of people seem to trust and distrust exactly the opposite sources.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Climate Change Proof Posted by: ProgressiveManiac
» RE: Incomprehensible? Posted by: davidgmills1
» RE: Incomprehensible? Posted by: HoboHomo
» RE: Incomprehensible? Posted by: HoboHomo

Comments are closed-

The Geologic record...
[Report this comment]
Posted by: adp3d on Feb 16, 2009 6:03 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...shows many events of climate change, but most came at a geologic pace. The quick changes such as we are experiencing now came with relative increases in green house gases, usually caused by periods of intense volcanism. Up until very recently current changes were considered at a linear pace. Factors such as outgassing of methane by melting permafrost were not considered. Now factors that cause climate change are being considered logarithmically and there is a legitimate reason to panic. The planet Venus is choked in greenhouse gases with wildly fluctuating climate extremes - this could be the fate of the earth...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

This article was almost enough to make a make a believer a skeptic
[Report this comment]
Posted by: mrxls on Feb 16, 2009 6:23 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I was hoping for some hard evidence linking the events on the East Coast and UK to a change in the strength of the gulf stream but instead I'm treated to unsupported half baked conjecture piecing together unrelated worst case scenarios.

If you believe in greenhouse gas driven global warming is melting the Greenland ice cap then you can pretty much forget about the idea that shutting down the Gulf Stream is going to pile two miles of ice a thousand miles south on Long Island. There simply isn't enough "cold" to do that.

One theory of the Younger Dryas period, a time a bit over 10,000 years ago when Europe got so cold it lost it's trees and turned back to tundra for a millenium, is that the Gulf Stream was shut down by a rush of cold fresh water from the sudden release of accumulated melting ice in North America. Well the Younger Dryas wasn't an ice age, just a cold stretch in small part of the planet during an overall warming trend.

No reputable climate scientist is projecting a new ice age from greenhouse gasses, just like no reputable client scientist is a global warming skeptic.

Look, I like Alternet but when they put garbage like this at the top of their Monday morning newsletter it makes me wonder...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

The new God, "Runaway Global Warming" is punishing us.
[Report this comment]
Posted by: wagner on Feb 16, 2009 6:44 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Realistically or not, there is hardly any aspect of human, animal and plant life, for which no correlation with carbon dioxide levels can be plotted. Therefore, whenever disaster strikes, the convenient answer is carbon dioxide-generated "runaway global warming". I wonder how the "leading experts" can leave out earthquakes? They already included extreme cold during winter without explaining the model the entire ploy is based on, the greenhouse effect. Let's face it, the extreme cold is evidence to disprove the model the theory is based on. Anyway, are the data solely based on temperature and carbon dioxide measurements during the last one or two centuries or so adequate enough to be scientifically acceptable as the basis for an extrapolation to "runaway global warming"? Well, in the light of the above parameters, how are we supposed to handle other measurable aspects of human, animal and plant life? A wide range of other observations show as good a correlation with the carbon dioxide levels during the same period, as any of the temperature measurements, and nobody is using them to draw scientific conclusions. Here are just a few, rightfully considered by most to be silly, examples but quite suitable to illustrate the point: Can we reduce the number of teenage pregnancies by keeping our youngsters in an environment depleted of carbon dioxide? Or can we blame the global increase of obesity and starvation on increasing carbon dioxide levels? Or can we further enhance athletic performance (e.g. in track and field, in swimming, in speed skating, in skiing, the distance and accuracy of golf shots, etc., etc.) by holding competitions in an atmosphere enriched in carbon dioxide? What about speed records of automobiles, air plains, boats, horses, etc.?
Instead of the rhetoric, hype, politics, incomplete or even biased scientific data, scare-mongering and guilt trips, anyone uttering words such as "global warming", especially "runaway global warming", "anthropogenic" factors influencing the climate, "(global) climate change", etc. should present scientifically verifiable evidence. In spite of its high publicity and promotion by individuals who joined the distinguished group of other Noble peace price winners (e.g. Yasir Arafat), the debate on the "runaway global warming" leading to epic destruction of life on Earth has a questionable scientific foundation at best and, consequently, limited, if any, practical relevance. Nobody rightfully claiming to be a scientist can escape the obligation to reconcile all the already available and confirmed scientific data, and to carry out necessary additional research in compliance with the standards generally recognized by the scientific community. It would be absurd to argue against carbon dioxide being a fundamental, absolutely essential prerequisite for life on Earth. How can anyone portray it as the villain destroying life on Earth? In reality carbon dioxide is and always has been a precious resource and it ought to be treated accordingly.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

a win-win situation for the climate hysterics/new religion
[Report this comment]
Posted by: zooeyhall on Feb 16, 2009 6:45 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If it's too hot--it's global warming!!

If it's too cold--it's global warming!!

Too much rain--it's global warming!!

Too little rain--it's global warming!!

So unless it stays a comfortable 70 deg with year round rains regularly spaced the world over--

the Global Warming neo-Luddites won't be satisfied with anything less then a forced return to a life of candlelight and mule power.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Beck Posted by: Squarehead
» RE: LMAO [Indeed, let's be clear. Posted by: Squarehead

Comments are closed-

An increase in temp can mean much MORE snow
[Report this comment]
Posted by: Gabba_Gabba_Hey on Feb 16, 2009 6:45 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Yes, global warming can mean much more snow in certain places -- as I keep trying to explain to clueless Southerners and native Californians who don't know anything about snow except to ski in.

Anyone who has grown up in a snowy place is aware that there is more snowfall within a certain range of temperature, upper 20s to 32 degrees F. The most snowfall is at the higher end near the freezing mark of 32, and even a degree or so above that if conditions are right.

There's a common expression "too cold to snow," which to this casual weather buff seems to be around 18-20. (No claims to scientific rigor here, & exceptions of course, but probably someone here knows for sure how this works?) Anyway you're extremely unlikely to have a 12" storm at 12 degrees - much more likely at 32, in fact.

So for instance, if a place's average temperature in January used to be 24 degrees and is now (after some climate change) more like 28, there's probably going to be more snow, maybe even a LOT more snow.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

Weather Systems
[Report this comment]
Posted by: vkobaya1 on Feb 16, 2009 6:52 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
What deniers fail to understand is weather is caused by systems transporting energy in the form of water vapor. Thus both hot and cold weather are the result of global warming. The system oscillates more violently as more energy is put in and thus more water vapor is transported around the world. In winter we get the extremely violent cold freezing storms as that water condenses into snow. Weather is cyclic on a daily and yearly basis as well as larger weather cycles and the more violently it oscillates in one direction, the more violently it has to oscilate in the opposite direction.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

Don't click on that link (IDENTITY THEFT!)
[Report this comment]
Posted by: GuitarBill on Feb 16, 2009 9:41 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This asshole is not trying to protect your privacy; he's trying to steal your identity.

If you click on his "Privacy Center" hyperlink, the server the link points to will install a keylogger on your computer, which is used to steal your credit card number, SSN, etc.

Please, report the comment to Alternet's staff.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Alternet? Are you listening? Posted by: frantic1971

Comments are closed-

No mention of chemtrail and HAARP weather Warfare
[Report this comment]
Posted by: HANGTRAITORS on Feb 16, 2009 7:03 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I have looked at the evidence .. these are all manufactured crisis...they will try to deflect the blame on you the people.. The solutions presented to you will invariably be more centralized power and control... You people need to ask yourself who is benefiting from these "crisis"...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

Reactive Systems
[Report this comment]
Posted by: magistre on Feb 16, 2009 8:44 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The planet Earth's weather is in long run do to "reaction". That is to say that the system is a reactive system. Reactive systems seek the "norm" for parameters of importance. The important factor for Earth is the salinity of ocean water. Right now salinity is falling and the Earth will try to increase salinity/reduce fresh water by putting fresh water up on dry land. When it again runs off into the ocean the system will go the next step in keeping it on land: Ice Age. This is the statistical norm for the planet Earth.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: eactive Systems Posted by: Zeugitai

Comments are closed-

Blinder's off
[Report this comment]
Posted by: kick on Feb 16, 2009 9:15 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I have been invloved in defending the enviroment since the sixties. During the seventies, after Three Mile Island, there were protest all over the country against nuclear power plants. Operaters at a nearby plant threatened our lives when we protested outside the facility. I was gassed during the sixties for protesting. I have been arrested and pushed around and almost run over by cops on horses. My generation paved the way for many of today's protest. My children are involved in the enviromental movement. One is at the fore front. Over the years us old guys have learned to not argue with or give recognition to those that can not see. You can lead a horsse to water but you cannot make the horse drink. Research and study is the best way to not only support your own ideas and thoughts, but the best way to indirectly correst the misguided. Some will never see, until it is too late.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

kogi indians
[Report this comment]
Posted by: sirios on Feb 16, 2009 9:19 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
here is a non scientific tid bit about global warming. The kogi indians of columbia, saw global warming coming about twenty to thirty years ago with no scientific knowledge and little or no contact with the outside world since the invasion of the spanish. If they could figure it out by way of simple observation [actually there was more to it than that ] then how is it that the so called super intelligent modern man always needs to rely on something outside himself to confirm truth?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Hand over that peyote chief Posted by: edgar1
» RE: kogi indians Posted by: Zeugitai

Comments are closed-

Inconvenient
[Report this comment]
Posted by: edgar1 on Feb 16, 2009 9:51 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
when hasn't there been climate change over realatively short periods of time? A thousand years is nothing in the history of the planet. We've had the temperatures predicted by the climate change alarmists before. The planet survived. We've had Ice Ages. They were far more destructive to human development and to the survival of species.

What's new? Nothing. No proof any carbon tax or limitation on carbon emissions as the genius Obama has proposed will stop significant climate change over the next century or more.

Sorry Al Gore. Your multimillion dollar consulting business may just burn up.

Just like your generally worthless career.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

Global Warming "religion" no different then xtian "endtimes" thinking
[Report this comment]
Posted by: frantic1971 on Feb 16, 2009 9:56 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Hasn't there been drought in Australia before?

Hasn't Britain had severe winters in the past?

Isn't there always drought present somewhere in the world at any given time?

You can't take something as inherently unpredictable as the weather and use it to justify such drastic social/political/economic changes.

"Global Warming" bears striking resemblence to the right-wing "end times" philosophy. They are always pointing to every earthquake and storm that happens as "proof" that what they say is true.

The Global Warming crowd also is strikingly similar to the end times people by their shrillness and their tendency to label everyone who disagrees with them as "heretics" and "the enemy".

I am also Progressive so please don't start calling me a right-wing hack. Another tactic of the Global Warming people.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» The difference. Posted by: dkm

Comments are closed-

check out this youtube clip-- Britain: Winter 1962
[Report this comment]
Posted by: frantic1971 on Feb 16, 2009 10:16 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Clip of Britain in the winter of 1962:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_bT5zlj_usY

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

It's unfortunate...
[Report this comment]
Posted by: Pirate1 on Feb 16, 2009 11:15 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
That the term initially used to describe climate change was "Global Warming" because all the linear thinkers out there, and if you were educated in the average American public school this means you, then see that if things aren't getting progressively warmer all the time to their immediate perceptions, it isn't really happening. Rising temperatures are a fact, whether or not you choose to believe that is your business but don't express outrage later on when climate related phenomenon eliminate many of the foods you now take for granted and turn the woodsy areas you used to play in as a kid to chaparal or sand. The main thing about a warming atmosphere is greater evaporation of the abundant water here. More water evaporating, bigger, denser clouds that block sun to small areas of the planet sufficiently enough for that area to become very cold and because there is more moisture in those clouds you get record rains or snow even though the global atmospheric mean is indeed growing warmer overall.

You see, storms are the atmosphere's way of equalizing disparities in the temperature of air masses that come in contact with each other. Massive evaporation saturates an air mass and when that air mass containing all that moisture encounters one say blowing down from the poles that is relatively colder, that moisture condenses out into dense clouds along the border where these masses meet (this is called a front) and we on the ground experience that meeting of two air masses as a storm. These storms rage until the moisture has rained or snowed out and the temps of both masses are more or less equalized. This phenomenon will grow ever more dramatic as the global mean temperature increases.

So all you scoffers above take heed... a general warming results in more extreme weather events, not just generally warmer temperatures. When the polar caps are completely gone and sea leavels have inundated most coastal cities and communities, it will STILL snow, things will still freeze... records are more likely to be broken under those circumstances... I know this fucks with your simplistic view of how the atmosphere of your home planet behaves but even though you scoff today, any descendents you leave behind will surely know a world closer to what I have described than the apparent belief you have that things are going to pretty much be the same and all this climate change talk is nonsense.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: It's unfortunate... Posted by: Squarehead
» RE: It's unfortunate... Posted by: tony_opmoc

Comments are closed-

CO2 TOXIC?
[Report this comment]
Posted by: liviaturner on Feb 16, 2009 11:38 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Global Warming deniers, or Climate Change deniers, whatever fits your silly thinking, need to understand CO2 is NOT a toxic gas, we breath it out, plants breath it in. CO2 is not a pollutant and is not a significant greenhouse gas that is triggering runaway global warming. Climate change is natural and has been happening for thousands of years on this plantet. Growing up in the 70's, we were warned of a new Ice Age! Stop buying into this scam. Its a way to tax us, just do your homework and see what is coming, "Carbon Taxes".

I am probably more environmentaly aware and active than most, so don't tell me about the environment, I have argued, demonstrated and acted numerous times for the environment.

You lost me on this one.

Wake up America!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: CO2 TOXIC? Posted by: Squarehead
» RE: CO2 TOXIC? Posted by: zola77

Comments are closed-

Naive
[Report this comment]
Posted by: uncleeddie on Feb 16, 2009 12:05 PM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Anyone who believes CO2 (a life giving substance much like oxygen and H2O) is causing the planet to overheat would probably believe a black man can save the U.S.A. It's time to wake up and realize that if CO2 is really the cause the recent cold waves hitting the earth would not be possible. To say that all temperature and weather is the result of global warming is pure arrogance.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Naive Posted by: Squarehead
» Naive Liberal Racism Posted by: edgar1
» RE: Naive Posted by: Quist
» RE: Naive Posted by: zola77

Comments are closed-

Warm Air Holds more Moisture
[Report this comment]
Posted by: Noah_Scape on Feb 16, 2009 12:06 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The simple fact that we need to keep in mind is that warmer air holds more moisture. It is basic physics.

The result, climatologically, is that rain will not fall until there is a lot of water in the clouds, and then there will be a more massive deluge. This creates drought, and flooding.

Snowfalls will be deeper too, but not as often, and will occur in places that have not usually seen snow because it gets carried further along in the air currents.

Also, the snowmelt is occuring earlier in the spring, and the glaciers are smaller and between those two things thee rivers are drying up before summer's end.

So, the delicate, and wonderfull, perfect, balance we had going is ruined by the artificial warming due to human activities. Age the earth ages, we were coming into the most stable period ever seen, but now that is being lost to climate change. CO2 is at LEAST adding to this problem of warming, if not the main cause.

As for the number of know-it-all deniers here who write as if they KNOW something about WHY the atmosphere is warming, you are treading on dangerous ground, thin ice, narrow ledges on tall cliffs, etc. Fear breeds [with] ignorance, and you are going to give birth to a catastrophe.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

Time to awaken
[Report this comment]
Posted by: Greenhouse Neutral Foundation on Feb 16, 2009 12:44 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The writer and those others contibuting to this piece should be thanked for their candour. Many all to frequently confuse weather and climate. What we are seeing is our future unfold to one where many lives will be lost and many more put in peril. When we see the loss of ilfe that has devastated Australia in the recent weeks we do not confuse this with lives were put in peril - they were killed. These fires were intensified by prolonged drought that will continue to be the norm in Australia in the coming years. The Australian Government continues with the decade of denial under John Howard with prolonged procrastination on emissions reductions. The science community all to often waits for multiple levels of verifiable data while our political leaders ponder endlessly on their advice. 'Best available science'is not keeping up. We no longer have time for them to catch up - verify - report and act. Unless we now wake from our illogical sleepwalk mankind - you and I will push us to collective extinction. My question has been and will remain will we inevitably on our present course reach the point where we have gone too far? Will emissions continue to rise? What is the upper level that will result in catastropic climate change? Which ever prediction is right, we will inevitably know. We will then be able to say "Oh that was it, that was the point where we went too far"
We have 20/20 hindesight on the past, of which it is said we can be wise. We have 20/20 foresight on the future we are committed to, will we be wise?
Bob Williamson
Founder and Chair
Greenhouse Neutral Foundation
http://www.greenhouseneutral.net

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Time to awaken Posted by: Zeugitai

Comments are closed-

Just Think How Much Goodness Could Be Done If...
[Report this comment]
Posted by: tony_opmoc on Feb 16, 2009 1:05 PM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Instead of employing these scare mongers preaching nonsense about global warming - they were retrained to become plumbers and engineers and teachers and redeployed to extremely poor parts of the world to build very basic infrastructure - to deliver clean water and effective sewage systems

However the people employing them won't do that - because they think that the people currently dying due to polluted water supplies and living in their own shit would fuck more and have more kids and make overpopulation even worse

But that is because they are stupid - and don't realise that overpopulation is because they are used to seeing 8 out of their 10 children die - so overbreed to compensate.

Check out the birth rate in Germany and Italy and come to the correct logical conclusion

The solution is to make things better for the poorest in the world - not make things worse.

Tony

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

It is EXTREMELY Cold in Central Europe At The Moment - 20 Degrees
[Report this comment]
Posted by: tony_opmoc on Feb 16, 2009 1:52 PM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
However - The Snow Conditions Are Extremely Good For Sledging

Well Apart From The Visibility

But you don't think that would stop a bunch of English Teenage Kids who have spent the last 18 months saving up for a ski-ing holiday with their school mates

Just from an ordinary English mixed Comprehensive School. If it had been 10 days earlier they wouldn't have got out of England cos we were all snowed up and feeling completely useless - cos we had got rid of nearly all our snow ploughs - because we believed Al Gore

Our daughter got awarded skier of the week last year

She doesn't believe in God or any religion except Global Warming

She says I am mad when I keep saying its getting colder

I don't know what's wrong with her.

I gave up religion when I was 15 - when the priest wanted to know the details of my confession - naughty, rude and cheating

He wanted all the naughty bits

So I told him all my fantasies about the girl I fancied in my class - as if I had actually done them

And he was getting rather excited

As he was wanking in his pants

I decided I was not going back to church any more

This did not go down well with My Mum and Dad and my older brothers and sisters

But the priest was probably relieved

I used to be his altar boy and had a red gown and white cossack

Of course this meant that I would no longer get any funeral or wedding "tips" - but even when I was getting them I of course had to donate them to the priest's "poor fund"

Incidentally I am still friends with a very old Roman Catholic Priest who is living with a Muslim bloke

But you probably didn't want to know that.

I don't think he is gay but he really does not like Israelis and unlike the BBC promotes the Gaza appeal

http://www.warchild.org.uk/

Tony

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

RE: sloppy reasoning
[Report this comment]
Posted by: tony_opmoc on Feb 16, 2009 2:25 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
pfeifer999,

Brilliant Post

Thank You for saying it so well.

Tony

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

RE: sloppy reasoning
[Report this comment]
Posted by: Squarehead on Feb 16, 2009 2:38 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
So, where's your data?

Numbers, or sites, or sources, or all.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: sloppy reasoning Posted by: tony_opmoc
» RE: sloppy reasoning Posted by: particle

Comments are closed-

RE: sloppy reasoning
[Report this comment]
Posted by: zola77 on Feb 16, 2009 10:08 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
No scientists have said that CO2 is toxic - its mainly written by journalists who dont know how to interpret scientific data.

The atmosphere needs to be balanced for life to succeed. Too much or too little of one element (including oxygen) can be poisonous - in the wrong doses. Over the last 100 years scientists have been tracking the climate, and have been warning for that time that deforestation coupled with increased burning of fossil fuels unbalanced the atmosphere.

CO2 and methane, at their current (and increasing) levels are toxic for life on earth.

Its like baking a cake. You have a balanced recipe to make a cake. You have a little wiggle room to experiment, but you have to stay within certain parameters to make the cake successful. If you add too much flour and too little water, you dont get a cake - you get a big mess, because you have gone outside those parameters.

Thats what we have now. We have gone outside the parameters and are now making a mess. The answer is trying to restore a balance, and keep it.


The answer is balance, balance, balance ---- we are falling off balance.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

RE: sloppy reasoning [Bullcrap + +.
[Report this comment]
Posted by: Squarehead on Feb 17, 2009 7:57 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Bullcrap + +.

You, pfeifer999 have a facility with language, which is not allied to analytical skill. By which I mean the underlying stuff, not a capacity to twist and suggest meaning, where none exists.

"Everything now is political first, and scientific second; most people fit the science to their politics." That was always and ever true, but especially of yourself.

As regards your belief that Darwinian evolution is a flawed theory; well of course. All of humanity's theories are flawed. But it's better than any other.

You present your dense prose "In terms of predictive power, "evolution" is a bust. Not in the 150+/- years since Darwin sailed to the Galapagos has any human being seen or measured "evolution" between species, much less assemble enough evidence to prove that protozoa could start down the road to humanity." with a pseudo-scientific veneer of words. I presume you convince yourself that way.

But you are deluding yourself, primarily, in your desire to deny. Your attachment to whatever (I presume Christian) religious beliefs you have, stops you from seeing the real science 'out there'.

Now, personally, I am not a believer. I describe myself as agnostic, or functionally atheist, because I acknowledge that 'I don't know'.

But I concede that believers are, logically, just as close to, or far from, the 'truth' as myself, if they can see the basics of the physical sciences, and that these basics in no way are opposed to religious belief, of that 20th century variety (e.g de Chardin)

So. It's very simple, very logical. And it does not matter that it's proven to be not the whole truth; it's a working hypothesis.

There was a moment 5,000 million (?) years ago, when a pre-existing energy converted to mass. (Big Bang) The initial creation of hydrogen rapidly, by nucleo-synthesis, created helium, and most of the first part of the Periodic Table (of the elements) within nano or milli seconds.

There are completely reputable studies showing creation of other elements within the stars (more nucleo-synthesis) There is a very good study (Glasgow University, 1997- 2001) on the origins of life. (The Geochemical Origins of Life by Michael J. Russell & Allan J. Hall)

That very many millions of Americans choose to deny these common sense observations; well it's not really a surprise. Chomsky has pointed out the nature of control, in so-called 'democratic' societies. (I mean, also, that USA has some / many democratic virtues, but many, many of it's citizens are fundamentally deluded)

The theory of evolution first publicised by Darwin, is a reasonable fit to the observed facts. The nuanced appreciation which is modern Darwinism, is in no sense oppositional to Christianity, or Islam, or Hinduism, etc., etc., etc.

The fear and suspicion of the Right of the political spectrum, which is in the main where the climate change deniers, and the intelligent design advocates reside; is at a basic level, daft.

Openness, transparency, no rubbish about Plots to Take Us Over, that is how we (now all of us) will solve our (humanity's) problems.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

To Give An Example Of How These Religious and Political Divisons Are Ridiculous
[Report this comment]
Posted by: tony_opmoc on Feb 16, 2009 3:29 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
And Nothing To Do with either science or morality

On Saturday a Guy I first met over 10 years ago and who I hadn't seen for several years - though my wife had seen him on TV and instantly recognised him

He recognised me - and said where is your lovely wife - she is over there

Oh yes - How you been doing mate?

I thought I know this guy - but couldn't remember his name

Anyway he has spent the last 10 years travelling the World mostly as an independent journalist

He said he was travelling in Pakistan and Afghanistan independently in 2001

I said you are lucky you didn't have a suntan or you might now be in Guantanamo Bay

I really had no idea what his political views are on the subject - and I did not interrogate him - I just wanted him to share his experiences with us and I introduced him to friends of ours

I know he has tremendous courage and relishes dangerous places - the last time I talked to him about 4 years ago he had just come back from South America

But since then - all his hair has been shaved off - which is probably why I didn't immediately recognise him.

I stroked his head

And this other mate of mine with extremely long hair - looking like the absolute aging hippy - starts giving him a really hard time

And he tried to say you haven't a fucking clue what it is really like in Afghanistan and of course I immediately realised he had been with British soldiers and had seen them die at first hand

And he is a big bloke and he really didn't want to flatten this hippy

And I bought him and his mate pints of bitter

But he had to leave

And I shook the aging hippies hand

I said Yes I agree with you - and my wife said that she did too - but that wasn't the point

And as he was leaving he gave me some money. He said Tony I want to stay but it is not possible - can you give this to the band

WAR CHILD

Tony

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Oi, what's all this then? Posted by: tony_opmoc

Comments are closed-

True enough, totally sloppy.
[Report this comment]
Posted by: dkm on Feb 16, 2009 3:31 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Pfeiffer999 entitled his piece "sloppy reasoning." And he's right. It was some of the sloppiest reasoning that has appeared on this message board yet. His dismissal of evolution on the basis of unarguably false statements about the evidence is a typical example of how the anti-intellectual element thinks. Then it gets worse when he tries to argue against global warming.

It is cretins who think like this that have been an anchor on the tail of progress since the first person to build a fire was killed by his cave mates. Look, guys, if this country and this world is ever going to get out of the problems that face us, we need to deal with reality, not hopelessly twisted justifications for a predetermined reactionary viewpoint. The people who thought that Sarah Palin would make a good VP because she was like them are symptomatic of this lack of acquaintance with reality.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: True enough, totally sloppy. Posted by: tony_opmoc
» RE: Here you go? OK then.... Posted by: Squarehead
» RE: Bollocks yourself........ Posted by: Squarehead

Comments are closed-

The Signature List Of People Who Want To Prosecute Tony Blair is Rising Quite Rapidly
[Report this comment]
Posted by: tony_opmoc on Feb 16, 2009 4:02 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
http://blairfoundation.wordpress.com/letter/

To The President of The United Nations General Assembly, H.E. Father Miguel d’Escoto Brockmann, and The Attorney General of the United Kingdom, and their successors in office.

RE ANTHONY CHARLES LYNTON BLAIR
We, the citizens of the United Kingdom and other countries listed, wish to uphold The United Nations Charter, The 1998 Rome Statute of The International Criminal Court, The Hague and Geneva Conventions and the Rule of International Law, especially in respect of:-

1: 1949 Geneva Convention IV: Article 146
The High Contracting Parties undertake to enact any legislation necessary to provide effective penal sanctions for persons committing, or ordering to be committed, any of the grave breaches of the present Convention.

2: 1907 Hague Convention IV: Article 3
A belligerent party which violates the provisions of the said regulations shall, if the case demands, be liable to pay compensation. It shall be responsible for all the acts committed by persons forming part of its armed forces.

We therefore call on you to indict Anthony Charles Lynton Blair in his capacity as recent Prime Minister of the UK, so long as he is able to answer for his actions and however long it takes, in respect of our sample complaints relating to the 2003 Iraq War waged by the UK as ally to the United States of America.

We are concerned that without justice and respect for the rule of law, the future for us and our progeny in a lawless world is bleak, as revealed by recent US declarations about the use of torture and the events of December 2008 in Gaza show.

The following are our sample complaints relating to the Iraq War 2003-2009:

1: Deceit and conspiracy for war, and providing false news to incite passions for war, causing in the order of one million deaths, 4 million refugees, countless maimings and traumas.

2: Employing radioactive ammunition causing long-term destruction of the planetary habitat.

3: Causing the breakdown of civil administration, with consequent lawlessness, especially looting, kidnapping, and violence, and consequent breakdown of womens’ rights, of religious freedom, and child and adult education.

4: Failing to maintain the medical needs of the populace.

5: Despoliation of the cultural heritage of the country.

6: Supporting an ally that employs ‘waterboarding’ and other tortures.

7: Seizing the assets of Iraq.

8: Using inhumane restraints on prisoners, including dogs, hoods, and cable ties.

9: Using Aggressive Patrolling indiscriminately, traumatising women and children and wrecking homes and property.

10: Marking bodies of prisoners with numbers, writing, faeces and other degrading treatment.

11: The use of cluster bombs and other indiscriminate weapons including white phosphorous on “shake and bake” missions.

12: Supporting indiscriminate rocket attacks from F16 fighter planes on women and children in Fallujah in Nov 2004

13: Supporting the shooting up of ambulances and medical personnel in Fallujah in Nov 2004

14: Supporting the expulsion of the entire population of Fallujah save for young men of military age, for a reprisal attack on that city in Nov 2004.

Copy to the Secretary General of The United Nations, Ban Ki-moon

Issued by secretaries to Foundation: David Halpin, MB, FRCS and Nicholas Wood MA, RIBA, FRGS
PO BOX 64656 NW3 9NG (UK)
Email: blairfoundation@yahoo.co.uk

You too can sign the letter at
http://www.petitiononline.com/BWCF/petition.html

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Don't hit me please, UN!! Posted by: edgar1

Comments are closed-

In London - Where i AND mY wIFE aRE iMMIGRANTS
[Report this comment]
Posted by: tony_opmoc on Feb 16, 2009 5:40 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
From Lancashire

And where we have lived for over half our lives

It is a Truly Multi-Racial Society

We Have Every Culture From Under The Sun

We Have Every Food From Under The Sun

And we look at merica

And we see all this fucking right wing and left wing nonsense and you trying to control the world with your bombs and guns and hollywood movies and tv

And we think

you are so primative

tony

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

Through the haze
[Report this comment]
Posted by: troy on Feb 16, 2009 7:29 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The fact that some global warming proponents have alterior motives (political manipulation, business profiteering-insurance companies for example)does not make the overall thesis incorrect. The evidence is compelling enough for prudent action for the benefit of future generations of humans and other life forms.
I am disappointed, however, that global warming is getting such attention when there are worse environmental problems: 1)Species extinction-the greatest and quickest loss of species on this planet in 64 million years. At some point in the future (how near?) whole limbs of the food chain will collapse precipitating catastrophy; 2) We are creating novel, omnipresent, persistent toxins which are diminishing the health of most life forms; 3) Overpopulation is increasing the likelihood that common human viruses will mutate into mass killers.
Anti-environmentalists are playing into the hands of manipulators who want cheap labor and expanding markets, and those who want more tithing believers.
Politics will never be easy again.

TRC

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

The Most Important Advice I Can Give When Your Global Warming Wife Has Fallen Out With You
[Report this comment]
Posted by: tony_opmoc on Feb 16, 2009 8:16 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
And she has gone into a bit of a sulk - and you have too

Is to clear up all the beer cans - clean up the kitchen and make it look immaculate

Such that when she gets up in the morning

The kitchen does not look like a devasted wasteland

And looks clean and nice

If you really want to go for it

Then get up before her and bring her a cup of coffee in bed and yoghurt and blueberries

You will be forgiven before she even noticed that you weren't keeping her warm with your snores and farts and cuddles

Tony

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

You have no idea what you are talking about
[Report this comment]
Posted by: FreeAmerica on Feb 16, 2009 9:51 PM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
There is a lot of history for abrupt climate change. Look it up, chuck.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

Fact check time..
[Report this comment]
Posted by: FreeAmerica on Feb 16, 2009 11:24 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Lets do some facts..

We need to be cleaner. Fact.

Global warming is not science or settled science. Science involves proof usually with a hypothesis, experiment and control, and a conclusion. We are at the hypothesis stage.It is a theory, nothing more. Likewise, people that blame everything from teen pregnancy to Katrina on global warming, you only have a wild untested theory based on a wild untested theory, and are most likely full of shit.

Humans represent 0.33% of the global biomass. CO2 is a trace gas. It is 0.038% of the atmosphere.

We have people that actually believe that we should trash the global economy and modern way of life so that 0.038% of the global biomass reducing their CO2 output 50% of a trace gas that represents 0.038% of the atmosphere will actually change the climate? Wow. Falling is the sky..

Proxies show that CO2 concentration rises follow warming trends as the oceans warm and the carrying power of the CO2 in solution falls as the water expands. Those same proxies also show pretty significant climate change when we hit a tipping point about where we are now. The problem is, it is not a warming trend that they show. See the Volstok and Greenland ice cores.

Nowhere in this discussion did I hear the words obliquity, precession or nutation.Why, don't those things matter>?

If you want to cleanse the atmosphere of greenhouse gasses, start by distilling the water out of it. Water vapor is responsible for most of the greenhouse effect. Chasing CO2 is foolish, it has a non-linear effect on the greenhouse effect. In other words, at some point the effect of additional CO2 becomes less of an effect on the heat retention.

Global warming worshipers are quick to label skeptics as Exxon shills. Exactly who funds your scientists? Would they get paid next year if they said that CO2 was no threat, or should they propagate the lies and keep making 100G plus?

I can go on and on, but why? The worshipers of the sky gods gore and hansen would not listen anyway.

Hats off to the skeptics that actually knew about the solar cycles, Younger-Drias, and the Maunder.

Global warming is a scheme for the UN and the gifted ones to take control of energy, the key to our modern prosperity. Control energy,and you will control the population and economy.

The thing you should be worrying with global warming is how to cause it. With the presently occurring solar minimum altering the climate of the next few decades, it will come in handy. We already have a negative PDO and second La Nina year. The oceans and planet are cooling my little watermelons, not warming.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

FACTS FACTS FACTS FACTS FACTS
[Report this comment]
Posted by: nigelbest on Feb 16, 2009 11:59 PM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
CO2 has NEVER caused warming, according to REAL science.

On the half billion year graph, on the 10,000 year graph, on the 20th C graph, there is ZERO CORRELATION between CO2 and warming

On the 400,000 year graph (the one Gore used) there is close correlation, but CO2 FOLLOWS warming, by around 800 years - why? - because the oceans are a CO2 sink and higher temps release CO2

So zero correlation - CO2 has never caused warming and science has known it for decades.

30,000 scientists say so, and are now SUING GORE FOR FRAUD to try to get the facts heard - the 2500 scientists of the IPCC are mythical - only 25 peer-review scientists and some disagreed and the rest are computer model scientists - and their predictions have been shown to be false by observational data

The computer modellers LEFT OUT the negative feedback elements to get their sensational results (!!!!)

The media have gone for the sensational stories, and for the party line of the media owners, the superrich, who plan to make trillions from this global warming scam

Correlation between solar activity and global temps is very high - ie, solar activity is the cause, virtually the whole cause, and nothing else is the cause.

The hockey stick graph is FALSE DATA, caused by urban heat island effect, corrected by weather balloon and satellite data.

The IPCC summary CONTRADICTS THEIR OWN scientific data. The IPCC suppressed the long-established, well-known medieveal warm period that they had in their own reports.

The clear, simple science has been kept out of the media, which has financial interest in sensationalism, and which serves its masters.

The superrich are playing the left like a harp. The simpleminded on the left think that the opposite of whatever the rich say must be true. The rich are playing both sides. The left like green, so the right pretend to be green. People think: Bush is bad, so Gore must be good. Just like in the 1920s in Britain, the left thought that capitalism is bad, so communism must be right. Both unlimited-fortunes capitalism and communism were and are fascist, totalitarian and bad - wealthpower giants, just the same. Lying and fooling the suckers, which is most people.

The opposite of unlimited fortunes capitalism and communism is justly-limited-fortunes capitalism. No one can work more than twice as hard as the average. The American and French republics were founded on prevention of unlimited fortunes, which are tyranny, which works largely through lies (they're cheaper than guns).

Go to youtube and start with Bob Carter and view around from there and you'll get all the data. The scientific FACTS are on youtube.

nigel@orcon.net.nz

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

Re: The talking points of the biostitutes are a joke
[Report this comment]
Posted by: watching-n-waiting on Feb 17, 2009 12:23 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This planet is choking on greed.The deniers need to duck before they're slammed by the boomerang of stupidity. I've met denier-types, the entitled, overfed and willfully ignorant. I've met corporate industry paid "biostitutes" and they're just plain insane.
I've been to Antarctica and Greenland and seen the melting ice. I've been to Australia to look upon where the Murray Darling River system used to be (it once covered one 17th of that continent).

Our own MidWest is heating and drying up twice as fast as the rest of the world; the Colorado River no longer even reaches the sea!

What the deniers need to do is channel their fear energy into motivation.
Not only that but- and this isn't a new argument- even if they insist that the globe isn't warming to the degree that HUNDREDS of SCIENTISTS have determined it is- would it kill them to drive a bit less, walk a bit more, eat a bit less and produce less waste and pollution?
Deniers need to familiarize themselves with the term Catastrophic Global Climate Change.
The changes on the planet are not restricted to tumultuous weather patterns. The acidification of the oceans alone (apart entirely from any change in temperature) has the potential to devastate the planets most critical ecosystems and food sources. Indeed it already is. People who fear the oceans will be fished out need fear no longer because the oceans vast diversity is rapidly shrinking and will more likely be wiped out due to a spiraling shift in water chemistry. Some say 30 years is a conservative time frame.

If we all pitch in and do our bit- the ramifications and impact of these changes can be, if not reversed, at least minimized

Oil is to our energy needs as trees and cotton are to our paper and clothing needs. In other words among the many exciting fuel alternatives we need to grow hemp! It's cheap to grow (thrives in drought conditions) and is very high profit.

We need to regard peak oil as an opportunity to lighten our footstep and embrace positive change.

The deniers can't deny that the Arctic ice cap will shrink more than 40 percent by 2050 (probably closer to 60% by 2030). In Antarctica a vast ice shelf, hanging on by a thin strip, will be the next chunk to break off from the Peninsula. An iceberg measuring 25 miles by 1.5 miles has broken away from The Wilken Ice Shelf. The entire ice shelf, about 6,180 square miles, is collapsing.
It was predicted in 1993 that the northern part of the Wilkins Ice Shelf was likely to be lost within 30 years if warming continued at the same rate. The demise of the planet is 50% AHEAD OF SCHEDULE!

With our innovative spirit and long history of manufacturing prowess The United States could be spearheading the solutions instead we're part of the axis of evil (America, China and Australia). But we can beat Exxon Mobile at their own game because, second only to Australia, America has the largest geothermal resources in the world (wind and solar capacity). Our beleaguered midwest is capable of producing enough wind-power to meet ALL of Americas electricity needs while the southwest could do the same (without the need for even a single rooftop solar panel) while also fueling a plug-in hybrid for every single American. PLUS: hemp thrives in dry conditions so, again, lets embrace the possibilities!

For a fraction of the cost of the "city-sized" "embassy we're built in Iraq, we could begin to upgrade our ancient power-transmission system so that we can deliver solar, wind and other renewable energy across the country thus becoming a "glowing example" and global inspiration! Aside from massively reducing Global Warming and reversing Catastrophic Global Climate Change, of course, the added benefit would be restoring the shattered economy by boosting home bred industry- once the pride of our teetering but still great nation.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

NO, Obviously we do not, at least, George Wills does not, yet get it!!!!!
[Report this comment]
Posted by: artie on Feb 18, 2009 3:22 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Read the plethora of specious claims in George Will's recent Washington Post article. That should provide ample proof that 'we' do NOT yet get it.
The number of fools who will be duped by Wills ' flagrantly irresponsible journalism moves us further away from the truth.
How can someone with no expertise whatsoever in Earth Science make false claims about current global climatic conditions?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

CENSORSHIP BY ALTERNET
[Report this comment]
Posted by: FredJones on Feb 20, 2009 5:45 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Do any of you realize how easy it is to be kicked off of Alternet?

It happens all the time.

One minute, you're having a perfectly reasonable and calm debate with people, and the next you have an email that says 'BANNED' in the subject line. There is no explanation of why you were banned, or where you crossed the line.

I know one person to whom this happened and it turned out that the editor of the subject matter just took a personal dislike to the person posting.

There are some very harsh censors on this website, so be careful what you say.

They pretend to be pro-democracy, and pretend to support free discussion of issues, but the reality is very different. Say something they don't approve of and you'll find yourself banished to the gulag......with no warning.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Alternet Comments:

Comments are closed-

Yeah we get it already
[Report this comment]
Posted by: teel on Feb 16, 2009 12:32 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
All hail the omnipotent climate scientist. Let us bask in your glory and rejoice in your wisdom as we move back into the caves we should never have abandoned in the first place. Wrath and vengeance be upon the heretics who dare question our faith and blessed be such circumstances that allow us who were once without research grants to feed at the trough of panic. Verily I say unto thee, repent! Sell thine car and bicycle lest ye doom us all to everlasting warm winters. Let fear strike the hearts of the unbeliever, let lightning strike him down as moisture in the air increases with his heresy. The global warming God is coming, kneel before his representatives on earth and tremble at their inconclusive evidence and fear mongering. To those who would say that the climate changes naturally and that mankind does not make it shift, ye are most despised of people. You shall be placed upon a media altar and your credibility laid to waste with outraged rhetoric and many, many pie charts. But for thee who will wither and die a little inside every time a car is started, for thee who lie awake at night worrying that somewhere a polar bear is hungry I say unto thee. Blessed art thou you most frightened of persons, for you shall inherit the world after the big collapse. You shall be the ruler of all caves and muddy huts, and none shall doubt your absolute knowledge. Let it be so.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» How does it feel Posted by: kegbot1
» RE: How does it feel Posted by: teel
» RE: How does it feel Posted by: caerbannog
» RE: How does it feel Posted by: particle
» RE: How does it feel Posted by: Squarehead
» RE: How does it feel Posted by: particle
» RE that was very funny.. LOL! Posted by: HANGTRAITORS
» RE: that was very funny.. LOL! Posted by: Squarehead
» RE: that was very funny.. LOL! Posted by: HoboHomo
» RE: that was very funny.. LOL! Posted by: HoboHomo
» RE: that was very funny.. LOL! Posted by: Squarehead
» RE: All that cleverness... Posted by: Cybershaman
» RE: Oh, BTW... Posted by: Cybershaman
» RE: Oh, BTW... Posted by: pelican beak
» RE: Midnight heh... Posted by: Cybershaman
» RE: Midnight heh... Posted by: pelican beak
» RE: How does it feel Posted by: Squarehead
» Excellent!! Posted by: zooeyhall
» RE: Yeah we get it already Posted by: aristopus
» RE: Yeah we get it already Posted by: sirios
» RE: Yeah we get it already Posted by: angdave
» RE: Yeah we get it already Posted by: monkeywrench
» Oh my Posted by: teel
» RE: Oh my [Why so bitter, teel? Posted by: Squarehead
» RE: Oh my Posted by: Zeugitai
» RE: Yeah we get it already Posted by: theoldguy

Comments are closed-

You can't say it enough...
[Report this comment]
Posted by: fatalevasion on Feb 16, 2009 1:07 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I would like to start first by asking whom else was attracted to this article specifically because of the video still taken from the Disney film Bambi??? I'll admit I was.

Moving on...

While I must admit that dearest commenter and internet acquaintance Teel's reply was humorous, "Yeah we get it already..." doesn't give me such a warm & fuzzy feeling. I'll admit that a majority of the time topics are beaten to death! But what one may forget is that there are two kinds of people
1) those who 'know-it-all'
2) those who still don't know how babies are made
So until that reverie of a day where action has been taken and these problems no longer exist becomes reality, you're going to be 'getting' a lot more of it.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Not Bambi, Bitterroot Posted by: Compassion

Comments are closed-

BA
[Report this comment]
Posted by: mnstra on Feb 16, 2009 2:40 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I DON'T APPRECIATE THE PICTURE.........MANIPULATIVE

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: BA Posted by: sirios
» what picture? Posted by: dkm

Comments are closed-

An airport bus conversation at Midway in 1997
[Report this comment]
Posted by: kegbot1 on Feb 16, 2009 2:45 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I sat, by chance next to a research meteorologist from the Argonne National Laboratories on a Midway airport shuttle back in '97. He spoke about people like our poster 'teel' and their pointing at snowfall and relying on corporate propaganda dispensed by Rush Limbaugh.

Basically he said the whole point about global climate change now starting to occur was that we would NOT see a corresponding rise in temperature leading to blazing summers and nonexistent winters but severe weather fluctuations on both sides of the climate spectrum - exactly what we are seeing in 2009.

He bemoaned the general ignorance of the American public and hoped that we would understand what truly was happening before it was too late.

And there's that little matter of the permafrost melt in Siberia releasing all those millions of tons of methane . . .

http://tinyurl.com/3omvm3

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

"We need to get some broad based support, to capture the public's imagination...
[Report this comment]
Posted by: tony_opmoc on Feb 16, 2009 3:35 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
So we have to offer up scary scenarios,
make simplified, dramatic statements
and make little mention of any doubts...
Each of us has to decide what the right balance
is between being effective and being honest."
- Stephen Schneider,
Stanford Professor of Climatology,
lead author of many IPCC reports

"Unless we announce disasters no one will listen."
- Sir John Houghton,
first chairman of IPCC

"It doesn't matter what is true,
it only matters what people believe is true."
- Paul Watson,
co-founder of Greenpeace

"We've got to ride this global warming issue.
Even if the theory of global warming is wrong,
we will be doing the right thing in terms of
economic and environmental policy."
- Timothy Wirth,
President of the UN Foundation

"No matter if the science of global warming is all phony...
climate change provides the greatest opportunity to
bring about justice and equality in the world."
- Christine Stewart,
fmr Canadian Minister of the Environment

"The only way to get our society to truly change is to frighten people with the possibility of a catastrophe."
- emeritus professor Daniel Botkin


"We are on the verge of a global transformation.
All we need is the right major crisis..."
- David Rockefeller,
Club of Rome executive member

"The concept of national sovereignty has been immutable, indeed a sacred principle of international relations.
It is a principle which will yield only slowly and reluctantly to the new imperatives of global environmental cooperation."
- UN Commission on Global Governance report

http://green-agenda.com/index.html

Anyone notice a theme of FEAR beginning to emerge. Very much like the Global War on Terror?

World populations are being programmed by propaganda by very powerful factions who's objective is World Government Dictatorship.

The current World Financial Crisis is a further component of this World Terrorism.

Check out who the members are at the top of organisations like the Club of Rome, the United Nations, Council on Foreign Relations. Whilst they may at first appear to have divergent political views, their real objective soon becomes apparent - and they will frighten and impoverish us all to death to achieve it. They have no qualms about crashing the entire economic system resulting in Billions starving to death - because in their view - we are the problem and need to be culled.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

Why don't global warming "hoaxers" act a bit like hoaxers?
[Report this comment]
Posted by: Perry Logan on Feb 16, 2009 3:41 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Global warming deniers like to say global warming is a hoax. But a look at the behavior of the scientists who are trying to warn us about global warming disproves this.

When a hoax is exposed, the hoaxers usually fudge, hem and haw, and retreat forthwith. This is inevitable, since a hoax has nothing to back it up. Once the ruse is revealed, hoaxers must generally withdraw from the field, often very hastily.

But the people warning us about global warning are not acting at all like hoaxers who've been exposed. Quite the contrary, they are pressing the attack, presenting new evidence that the situation is worse than they thought, reasserting their case, debunking the opposition, publishing new reports, etc.

A child can tell you--this is not the way hoaxers behave.

In sharp contrast, every global warming denier in the world has a different story, based on different crackpot theories. This is far more consistent with a hoax than the behavior of the global-warming proponents. Quod erat demonstrandum, baby.

I recommend an excellent science blog out of Austraslia called Deltoid which puts the kabosh on global warming deniers, over and over again.

8 Years without a Leader

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Bush, Cheney, Rummy..... Posted by: Squarehead

Comments are closed-

Former astronaut speaks out
[Report this comment]
Posted by: MyLeftFoot on Feb 16, 2009 4:58 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Former astronaut speaks out on global warming
By Associated Press | Sunday, February 15, 2009 | http://www.bostonherald.com | Around the Nation
SANTA FE, N.M. - Former astronaut Harrison Schmitt, who walked on the moon and once served New Mexico in the U.S. Senate, doesn’t believe that humans are causing global warming.

"I don’t think the human effect is significant compared to the natural effect," said Schmitt, who is among 70 skeptics scheduled to speak next month at the International Conference on Climate Change in New York.

Schmitt contends that scientists "are being intimidated" if they disagree with the idea that burning fossil fuels has increased carbon dioxide levels, temperatures and sea levels.

"They’ve seen too many of their colleagues lose grant funding when they haven’t gone along with the so-called political consensus that we’re in a human-caused global warming," Schmitt said.

Dan Williams, publisher with the Chicago-based Heartland Institute, which is hosting the climate change conference, said he invited Schmitt after reading about his resignation from The Planetary Society, a nonprofit dedicated to space exploration.

Schmitt resigned after the group blamed global warming on human activity. In his resignation letter, the 74-year-old geologist argued that the "global warming scare is being used as a political tool to increase government control over American lives, incomes and decision making."

Williams said Heartland is skeptical about the crisis that people are proclaiming in global warming.

"Not that the planet hasn’t warmed. We know it has or we’d all still be in the Ice Age," he said. "But it has not reached a crisis proportion and, even among us skeptics, there’s disagreement about how much man has been responsible for that warming."

Schmitt said historical documents indicate average temperatures have risen by 1 degree per century since around 1400 A.D., and the rise in carbon dioxide is because of the temperature rise.

Schmitt also said geological evidence indicates changes in sea level have been going on for thousands of years. He said smaller changes are related to changes in the elevation of land masses — for example, the Great Lakes are rising because the earth’s crust is rebounding from being depressed by glaciers.

Schmitt, who grew up in Silver City and now lives in Albuquerque, has a science degree from the California Institute of Technology. He also studied geology at the University of Oslo in Norway and took a doctorate in geology from Harvard University in 1964.

In 1972, he was one of the last men to walk on the moon as part of the Apollo 17 mission.

Schmitt said he’s heartened that the upcoming conference is made up of scientists who haven’t been manipulated by politics.

Of the global warming debate, he said: "It’s one of the few times you’ve seen a sizable portion of scientists who ought to be objective take a political position and it’s coloring their objectivity."

___

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Former astronaut speaks out Posted by: caerbannog
» So right. Posted by: thekidde
» RE: Former astronaut speaks out Posted by: MyLeftFoot
» RE: Former astronaut speaks out Posted by: MyLeftFoot
» RE: Former astronaut speaks out Posted by: mandiwrite

Comments are closed-

What really burns me up...
[Report this comment]
Posted by: smendler on Feb 16, 2009 5:26 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
... is when rightwingers look at some local phenomenon and think it disproves the larger pattern -- e.g., "Global warming? Hell, we just had a huge BLIZZARD in North Dakota! What kind of global warming is THAT, huh??!?" It's depressing, not just because the person is WRONG, but because the very statement indicates a level of self-assured ignorance that seems almost impossible to overcome.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: pfeifer999 and evidence Posted by: Ratskii
» RE: What really burns me up... Posted by: Zeugitai

Comments are closed-

Um how to say this
[Report this comment]
Posted by: HillbillyRob on Feb 16, 2009 5:32 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I lived in South Florida for almost 20 years and did see a change in climate.
Weather did become more extreme, like drought, the usual summer/wet-winter dry shift to drought. Early on at 3 pm every day there was a short, but intense shower for 10-20 minutes for years, centuries even look at the records, then later drought and the Everglades burning, salt-water intrusion into the water table of arguably fresh water wells(smells like swamp even chorined to a fair thee well). I lived near the beach the entire time I lived in fla, so I saw the ocean every day. I did not measure sea rise but it did appear to me that water in the canals near where I lived were almost a foot higher on the sea walls by the time I left.
Why is everyone arguing to continue pissin in our wells? What does it profit us as people to continue to put sewerage in our drinking water (rivers)? You and I do not profit, only corps profit not us, we the people.
I lived there up to 2002. We had several reasons to move, jobs outsourced, the housing bubble about to burst, energy costs going up, amBushco ignoring infrastructure problems(recall jebbie amBushco ruled fla in a fishy election).
'conservatives' (selfservatives?) have no clue that we should stop pollution just because it MIGHT interfere with their profits. You can't spend the profits if you are dead from suffocation, drowning in garbage, sewerage, methane, co2 etc.
The basic point tho is that we can be green, save the ecology and save a bunch of bucks. We moved to an abandoned tobacco field that was played out, using ancient traditional non chemical methods we have had better crops here than our neighbors have using chemicals, and this is only our second year.
These clean coal, gas and oil ads are just bull.
If we go solar/wind with battery back up we can generate the power we need 'free'. We don't need to burn anything. We live in rural NC and have cut our energy consumption by about 30% in 2 years, with no lost comfort and its paying for itself as we go. In fact we have spent less than $3000.00. Instead of paying exxon etc we upgrade insulation, cfls and leds, lots of little things, like insulated curtain liners. We like to froze the first year, but doing insulation etc we have cut out using the central air and use a small kero heater that is 23,000 btu compared to the 75,000 btu the central uses, and the house is warm all over. We will be putting in solar water heater and radiant floor heating and a solar air heater over the summer. We will only need the kero or the fire place when it gets really cold as is on 40 degree days I can heat the house with solar gain, and the house holds at 73 and drops to 65 over night if it does not go down past 30 overnight if it drops to 25 it drops to 60 inside and I light the heater for an hour or two until day light starts hitting the windows.
I tell ya conservation is sound conservative economics. So instead of whining that scientists are stupid, go get some insulation, quit being mental, venal and intellectually lazy and learn something about what using renewable can do for you and our environment.
I realise for now we will need fossil fuel for autos, but we can do a lot of things to save our Earth. I use canvas shopping bags. There is an area of the Pacific that is more than 2x the size of Tx that is a dead zone from the plastic we throw away that ends up in the rivers and makes its way to the Pacific Gyre..which by the way is a breeding ground for fish we eat, the fish and the wild life there are dying and that breaks the food chain.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Um how to say this Posted by: Shaman666
» RE: Um how to say this Posted by: Squarehead

Comments are closed-

Incomprehensible?
[Report this comment]
Posted by: ProgressiveManiac on Feb 16, 2009 5:50 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Where I live in Maine we had record cold temperatures this winter and last winter we had record snowfall. As the author suggests, the numerous climate-change deniers point to these events as clear evidence that the earth is not warming. It does no good to argue with them, their minds are unalterably made up.

And yet these same people were, in 2001-2003 firmly convinced that Muslims were out to destroy the U.S. and that we had to defend ourselves against the onslaught by whatever means necessary, even discarding our constitutional rights in the process. Certainly the defense was well worth the expenditure of hundreds of billions of dollars to fight a war against them.

Many are still convinced that the war was necessary, but climate change is an absurd notion. How do these people reach these conclusions while others (myself included) reach exactly the opposite conclusions that climate change is an extremely serious threat while the Muslim invasion is a figment of right-wing imagination?

The only answer I can come up with is that we trust different sources of information. Personally, I reject as unreliable anything I hear on FOX and most of the MSM unless it is perhaps about an observable event like a fire or plane crash, and I tend to believe scientists and some academics and independent journalists. A fortunately declining number of people seem to trust and distrust exactly the opposite sources.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Climate Change Proof Posted by: ProgressiveManiac
» RE: Incomprehensible? Posted by: davidgmills1
» RE: Incomprehensible? Posted by: HoboHomo
» RE: Incomprehensible? Posted by: HoboHomo

Comments are closed-

The Geologic record...
[Report this comment]
Posted by: adp3d on Feb 16, 2009 6:03 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...shows many events of climate change, but most came at a geologic pace. The quick changes such as we are experiencing now came with relative increases in green house gases, usually caused by periods of intense volcanism. Up until very recently current changes were considered at a linear pace. Factors such as outgassing of methane by melting permafrost were not considered. Now factors that cause climate change are being considered logarithmically and there is a legitimate reason to panic. The planet Venus is choked in greenhouse gases with wildly fluctuating climate extremes - this could be the fate of the earth...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

This article was almost enough to make a make a believer a skeptic
[Report this comment]
Posted by: mrxls on Feb 16, 2009 6:23 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I was hoping for some hard evidence linking the events on the East Coast and UK to a change in the strength of the gulf stream but instead I'm treated to unsupported half baked conjecture piecing together unrelated worst case scenarios.

If you believe in greenhouse gas driven global warming is melting the Greenland ice cap then you can pretty much forget about the idea that shutting down the Gulf Stream is going to pile two miles of ice a thousand miles south on Long Island. There simply isn't enough "cold" to do that.

One theory of the Younger Dryas period, a time a bit over 10,000 years ago when Europe got so cold it lost it's trees and turned back to tundra for a millenium, is that the Gulf Stream was shut down by a rush of cold fresh water from the sudden release of accumulated melting ice in North America. Well the Younger Dryas wasn't an ice age, just a cold stretch in small part of the planet during an overall warming trend.

No reputable climate scientist is projecting a new ice age from greenhouse gasses, just like no reputable client scientist is a global warming skeptic.

Look, I like Alternet but when they put garbage like this at the top of their Monday morning newsletter it makes me wonder...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

The new God, "Runaway Global Warming" is punishing us.
[Report this comment]
Posted by: wagner on Feb 16, 2009 6:44 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Realistically or not, there is hardly any aspect of human, animal and plant life, for which no correlation with carbon dioxide levels can be plotted. Therefore, whenever disaster strikes, the convenient answer is carbon dioxide-generated "runaway global warming". I wonder how the "leading experts" can leave out earthquakes? They already included extreme cold during winter without explaining the model the entire ploy is based on, the greenhouse effect. Let's face it, the extreme cold is evidence to disprove the model the theory is based on. Anyway, are the data solely based on temperature and carbon dioxide measurements during the last one or two centuries or so adequate enough to be scientifically acceptable as the basis for an extrapolation to "runaway global warming"? Well, in the light of the above parameters, how are we supposed to handle other measurable aspects of human, animal and plant life? A wide range of other observations show as good a correlation with the carbon dioxide levels during the same period, as any of the temperature measurements, and nobody is using them to draw scientific conclusions. Here are just a few, rightfully considered by most to be silly, examples but quite suitable to illustrate the point: Can we reduce the number of teenage pregnancies by keeping our youngsters in an environment depleted of carbon dioxide? Or can we blame the global increase of obesity and starvation on increasing carbon dioxide levels? Or can we further enhance athletic performance (e.g. in track and field, in swimming, in speed skating, in skiing, the distance and accuracy of golf shots, etc., etc.) by holding competitions in an atmosphere enriched in carbon dioxide? What about speed records of automobiles, air plains, boats, horses, etc.?
Instead of the rhetoric, hype, politics, incomplete or even biased scientific data, scare-mongering and guilt trips, anyone uttering words such as "global warming", especially "runaway global warming", "anthropogenic" factors influencing the climate, "(global) climate change", etc. should present scientifically verifiable evidence. In spite of its high publicity and promotion by individuals who joined the distinguished group of other Noble peace price winners (e.g. Yasir Arafat), the debate on the "runaway global warming" leading to epic destruction of life on Earth has a questionable scientific foundation at best and, consequently, limited, if any, practical relevance. Nobody rightfully claiming to be a scientist can escape the obligation to reconcile all the already available and confirmed scientific data, and to carry out necessary additional research in compliance with the standards generally recognized by the scientific community. It would be absurd to argue against carbon dioxide being a fundamental, absolutely essential prerequisite for life on Earth. How can anyone portray it as the villain destroying life on Earth? In reality carbon dioxide is and always has been a precious resource and it ought to be treated accordingly.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

a win-win situation for the climate hysterics/new religion
[Report this comment]
Posted by: zooeyhall on Feb 16, 2009 6:45 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If it's too hot--it's global warming!!

If it's too cold--it's global warming!!

Too much rain--it's global warming!!

Too little rain--it's global warming!!

So unless it stays a comfortable 70 deg with year round rains regularly spaced the world over--

the Global Warming neo-Luddites won't be satisfied with anything less then a forced return to a life of candlelight and mule power.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Beck Posted by: Squarehead
» RE: LMAO [Indeed, let's be clear. Posted by: Squarehead

Comments are closed-

An increase in temp can mean much MORE snow
[Report this comment]
Posted by: Gabba_Gabba_Hey on Feb 16, 2009 6:45 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Yes, global warming can mean much more snow in certain places -- as I keep trying to explain to clueless Southerners and native Californians who don't know anything about snow except to ski in.

Anyone who has grown up in a snowy place is aware that there is more snowfall within a certain range of temperature, upper 20s to 32 degrees F. The most snowfall is at the higher end near the freezing mark of 32, and even a degree or so above that if conditions are right.

There's a common expression "too cold to snow," which to this casual weather buff seems to be around 18-20. (No claims to scientific rigor here, & exceptions of course, but probably someone here knows for sure how this works?) Anyway you're extremely unlikely to have a 12" storm at 12 degrees - much more likely at 32, in fact.

So for instance, if a place's average temperature in January used to be 24 degrees and is now (after some climate change) more like 28, there's probably going to be more snow, maybe even a LOT more snow.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

Weather Systems
[Report this comment]
Posted by: vkobaya1 on Feb 16, 2009 6:52 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
What deniers fail to understand is weather is caused by systems transporting energy in the form of water vapor. Thus both hot and cold weather are the result of global warming. The system oscillates more violently as more energy is put in and thus more water vapor is transported around the world. In winter we get the extremely violent cold freezing storms as that water condenses into snow. Weather is cyclic on a daily and yearly basis as well as larger weather cycles and the more violently it oscillates in one direction, the more violently it has to oscilate in the opposite direction.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

Don't click on that link (IDENTITY THEFT!)
[Report this comment]
Posted by: GuitarBill on Feb 16, 2009 9:41 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This asshole is not trying to protect your privacy; he's trying to steal your identity.

If you click on his "Privacy Center" hyperlink, the server the link points to will install a keylogger on your computer, which is used to steal your credit card number, SSN, etc.

Please, report the comment to Alternet's staff.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Alternet? Are you listening? Posted by: frantic1971

Comments are closed-

No mention of chemtrail and HAARP weather Warfare
[Report this comment]
Posted by: HANGTRAITORS on Feb 16, 2009 7:03 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I have looked at the evidence .. these are all manufactured crisis...they will try to deflect the blame on you the people.. The solutions presented to you will invariably be more centralized power and control... You people need to ask yourself who is benefiting from these "crisis"...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

Reactive Systems
[Report this comment]
Posted by: magistre on Feb 16, 2009 8:44 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The planet Earth's weather is in long run do to "reaction". That is to say that the system is a reactive system. Reactive systems seek the "norm" for parameters of importance. The important factor for Earth is the salinity of ocean water. Right now salinity is falling and the Earth will try to increase salinity/reduce fresh water by putting fresh water up on dry land. When it again runs off into the ocean the system will go the next step in keeping it on land: Ice Age. This is the statistical norm for the planet Earth.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: eactive Systems Posted by: Zeugitai

Comments are closed-

Blinder's off
[Report this comment]
Posted by: kick on Feb 16, 2009 9:15 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I have been invloved in defending the enviroment since the sixties. During the seventies, after Three Mile Island, there were protest all over the country against nuclear power plants. Operaters at a nearby plant threatened our lives when we protested outside the facility. I was gassed during the sixties for protesting. I have been arrested and pushed around and almost run over by cops on horses. My generation paved the way for many of today's protest. My children are involved in the enviromental movement. One is at the fore front. Over the years us old guys have learned to not argue with or give recognition to those that can not see. You can lead a horsse to water but you cannot make the horse drink. Research and study is the best way to not only support your own ideas and thoughts, but the best way to indirectly correst the misguided. Some will never see, until it is too late.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

kogi indians
[Report this comment]
Posted by: sirios on Feb 16, 2009 9:19 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
here is a non scientific tid bit about global warming. The kogi indians of columbia, saw global warming coming about twenty to thirty years ago with no scientific knowledge and little or no contact with the outside world since the invasion of the spanish. If they could figure it out by way of simple observation [actually there was more to it than that ] then how is it that the so called super intelligent modern man always needs to rely on something outside himself to confirm truth?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Hand over that peyote chief Posted by: edgar1
» RE: kogi indians Posted by: Zeugitai

Comments are closed-

Inconvenient
[Report this comment]
Posted by: edgar1 on Feb 16, 2009 9:51 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
when hasn't there been climate change over realatively short periods of time? A thousand years is nothing in the history of the planet. We've had the temperatures predicted by the climate change alarmists before. The planet survived. We've had Ice Ages. They were far more destructive to human development and to the survival of species.

What's new? Nothing. No proof any carbon tax or limitation on carbon emissions as the genius Obama has proposed will stop significant climate change over the next century or more.

Sorry Al Gore. Your multimillion dollar consulting business may just burn up.

Just like your generally worthless career.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

Global Warming "religion" no different then xtian "endtimes" thinking
[Report this comment]
Posted by: frantic1971 on Feb 16, 2009 9:56 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Hasn't there been drought in Australia before?

Hasn't Britain had severe winters in the past?

Isn't there always drought present somewhere in the world at any given time?

You can't take something as inherently unpredictable as the weather and use it to justify such drastic social/political/economic changes.

"Global Warming" bears striking resemblence to the right-wing "end times" philosophy. They are always pointing to every earthquake and storm that happens as "proof" that what they say is true.

The Global Warming crowd also is strikingly similar to the end times people by their shrillness and their tendency to label everyone who disagrees with them as "heretics" and "the enemy".

I am also Progressive so please don't start calling me a right-wing hack. Another tactic of the Global Warming people.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» The difference. Posted by: dkm

Comments are closed-

check out this youtube clip-- Britain: Winter 1962
[Report this comment]
Posted by: frantic1971 on Feb 16, 2009 10:16 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Clip of Britain in the winter of 1962:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_bT5zlj_usY

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

It's unfortunate...
[Report this comment]
Posted by: Pirate1 on Feb 16, 2009 11:15 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
That the term initially used to describe climate change was "Global Warming" because all the linear thinkers out there, and if you were educated in the average American public school this means you, then see that if things aren't getting progressively warmer all the time to their immediate perceptions, it isn't really happening. Rising temperatures are a fact, whether or not you choose to believe that is your business but don't express outrage later on when climate related phenomenon eliminate many of the foods you now take for granted and turn the woodsy areas you used to play in as a kid to chaparal or sand. The main thing about a warming atmosphere is greater evaporation of the abundant water here. More water evaporating, bigger, denser clouds that block sun to small areas of the planet sufficiently enough for that area to become very cold and because there is more moisture in those clouds you get record rains or snow even though the global atmospheric mean is indeed growing warmer overall.

You see, storms are the atmosphere's way of equalizing disparities in the temperature of air masses that come in contact with each other. Massive evaporation saturates an air mass and when that air mass containing all that moisture encounters one say blowing down from the poles that is relatively colder, that moisture condenses out into dense clouds along the border where these masses meet (this is called a front) and we on the ground experience that meeting of two air masses as a storm. These storms rage until the moisture has rained or snowed out and the temps of both masses are more or less equalized. This phenomenon will grow ever more dramatic as the global mean temperature increases.

So all you scoffers above take heed... a general warming results in more extreme weather events, not just generally warmer temperatures. When the polar caps are completely gone and sea leavels have inundated most coastal cities and communities, it will STILL snow, things will still freeze... records are more likely to be broken under those circumstances... I know this fucks with your simplistic view of how the atmosphere of your home planet behaves but even though you scoff today, any descendents you leave behind will surely know a world closer to what I have described than the apparent belief you have that things are going to pretty much be the same and all this climate change talk is nonsense.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: It's unfortunate... Posted by: Squarehead
» RE: It's unfortunate... Posted by: tony_opmoc

Comments are closed-

CO2 TOXIC?
[Report this comment]
Posted by: liviaturner on Feb 16, 2009 11:38 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Global Warming deniers, or Climate Change deniers, whatever fits your silly thinking, need to understand CO2 is NOT a toxic gas, we breath it out, plants breath it in. CO2 is not a pollutant and is not a significant greenhouse gas that is triggering runaway global warming. Climate change is natural and has been happening for thousands of years on this plantet. Growing up in the 70's, we were warned of a new Ice Age! Stop buying into this scam. Its a way to tax us, just do your homework and see what is coming, "Carbon Taxes".

I am probably more environmentaly aware and active than most, so don't tell me about the environment, I have argued, demonstrated and acted numerous times for the environment.

You lost me on this one.

Wake up America!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: CO2 TOXIC? Posted by: Squarehead
» RE: CO2 TOXIC? Posted by: zola77

Comments are closed-

Naive
[Report this comment]
Posted by: uncleeddie on Feb 16, 2009 12:05 PM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Anyone who believes CO2 (a life giving substance much like oxygen and H2O) is causing the planet to overheat would probably believe a black man can save the U.S.A. It's time to wake up and realize that if CO2 is really the cause the recent cold waves hitting the earth would not be possible. To say that all temperature and weather is the result of global warming is pure arrogance.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Naive Posted by: Squarehead
» Naive Liberal Racism Posted by: edgar1
» RE: Naive Posted by: Quist
» RE: Naive Posted by: zola77

Comments are closed-

Warm Air Holds more Moisture
[Report this comment]
Posted by: Noah_Scape on Feb 16, 2009 12:06 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The simple fact that we need to keep in mind is that warmer air holds more moisture. It is basic physics.

The result, climatologically, is that rain will not fall until there is a lot of water in the clouds, and then there will be a more massive deluge. This creates drought, and flooding.

Snowfalls will be deeper too, but not as often, and will occur in places that have not usually seen snow because it gets carried further along in the air currents.

Also, the snowmelt is occuring earlier in the spring, and the glaciers are smaller and between those two things thee rivers are drying up before summer's end.

So, the delicate, and wonderfull, perfect, balance we had going is ruined by the artificial warming due to human activities. Age the earth ages, we were coming into the most stable period ever seen, but now that is being lost to climate change. CO2 is at LEAST adding to this problem of warming, if not the main cause.

As for the number of know-it-all deniers here who write as if they KNOW something about WHY the atmosphere is warming, you are treading on dangerous ground, thin ice, narrow ledges on tall cliffs, etc. Fear breeds [with] ignorance, and you are going to give birth to a catastrophe.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

Time to awaken
[Report this comment]
Posted by: Greenhouse Neutral Foundation on Feb 16, 2009 12:44 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The writer and those others contibuting to this piece should be thanked for their candour. Many all to frequently confuse weather and climate. What we are seeing is our future unfold to one where many lives will be lost and many more put in peril. When we see the loss of ilfe that has devastated Australia in the recent weeks we do not confuse this with lives were put in peril - they were killed. These fires were intensified by prolonged drought that will continue to be the norm in Australia in the coming years. The Australian Government continues with the decade of denial under John Howard with prolonged procrastination on emissions reductions. The science community all to often waits for multiple levels of verifiable data while our political leaders ponder endlessly on their advice. 'Best available science'is not keeping up. We no longer have time for them to catch up - verify - report and act. Unless we now wake from our illogical sleepwalk mankind - you and I will push us to collective extinction. My question has been and will remain will we inevitably on our present course reach the point where we have gone too far? Will emissions continue to rise? What is the upper level that will result in catastropic climate change? Which ever prediction is right, we will inevitably know. We will then be able to say "Oh that was it, that was the point where we went too far"
We have 20/20 hindesight on the past, of which it is said we can be wise. We have 20/20 foresight on the future we are committed to, will we be wise?
Bob Williamson
Founder and Chair
Greenhouse Neutral Foundation
http://www.greenhouseneutral.net

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Time to awaken Posted by: Zeugitai

Comments are closed-

Just Think How Much Goodness Could Be Done If...
[Report this comment]
Posted by: tony_opmoc on Feb 16, 2009 1:05 PM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Instead of employing these scare mongers preaching nonsense about global warming - they were retrained to become plumbers and engineers and teachers and redeployed to extremely poor parts of the world to build very basic infrastructure - to deliver clean water and effective sewage systems

However the people employing them won't do that - because they think that the people currently dying due to polluted water supplies and living in their own shit would fuck more and have more kids and make overpopulation even worse

But that is because they are stupid - and don't realise that overpopulation is because they are used to seeing 8 out of their 10 children die - so overbreed to compensate.

Check out the birth rate in Germany and Italy and come to the correct logical conclusion

The solution is to make things better for the poorest in the world - not make things worse.

Tony

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

It is EXTREMELY Cold in Central Europe At The Moment - 20 Degrees
[Report this comment]
Posted by: tony_opmoc on Feb 16, 2009 1:52 PM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
However - The Snow Conditions Are Extremely Good For Sledging

Well Apart From The Visibility

But you don't think that would stop a bunch of English Teenage Kids who have spent the last 18 months saving up for a ski-ing holiday with their school mates

Just from an ordinary English mixed Comprehensive School. If it had been 10 days earlier they wouldn't have got out of England cos we were all snowed up and feeling completely useless - cos we had got rid of nearly all our snow ploughs - because we believed Al Gore

Our daughter got awarded skier of the week last year

She doesn't believe in God or any religion except Global Warming

She says I am mad when I keep saying its getting colder

I don't know what's wrong with her.

I gave up religion when I was 15 - when the priest wanted to know the details of my confession - naughty, rude and cheating

He wanted all the naughty bits

So I told him all my fantasies about the girl I fancied in my class - as if I had actually done them

And he was getting rather excited

As he was wanking in his pants

I decided I was not going back to church any more

This did not go down well with My Mum and Dad and my older brothers and sisters

But the priest was probably relieved

I used to be his altar boy and had a red gown and white cossack

Of course this meant that I would no longer get any funeral or wedding "tips" - but even when I was getting them I of course had to donate them to the priest's "poor fund"

Incidentally I am still friends with a very old Roman Catholic Priest who is living with a Muslim bloke

But you probably didn't want to know that.

I don't think he is gay but he really does not like Israelis and unlike the BBC promotes the Gaza appeal

http://www.warchild.org.uk/

Tony

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

RE: sloppy reasoning
[Report this comment]
Posted by: tony_opmoc on Feb 16, 2009 2:25 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
pfeifer999,

Brilliant Post

Thank You for saying it so well.

Tony

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

RE: sloppy reasoning
[Report this comment]
Posted by: Squarehead on Feb 16, 2009 2:38 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
So, where's your data?

Numbers, or sites, or sources, or all.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: sloppy reasoning Posted by: tony_opmoc
» RE: sloppy reasoning Posted by: particle

Comments are closed-

RE: sloppy reasoning
[Report this comment]
Posted by: zola77 on Feb 16, 2009 10:08 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
No scientists have said that CO2 is toxic - its mainly written by journalists who dont know how to interpret scientific data.

The atmosphere needs to be balanced for life to succeed. Too much or too little of one element (including oxygen) can be poisonous - in the wrong doses. Over the last 100 years scientists have been tracking the climate, and have been warning for that time that deforestation coupled with increased burning of fossil fuels unbalanced the atmosphere.

CO2 and methane, at their current (and increasing) levels are toxic for life on earth.

Its like baking a cake. You have a balanced recipe to make a cake. You have a little wiggle room to experiment, but you have to stay within certain parameters to make the cake successful. If you add too much flour and too little water, you dont get a cake - you get a big mess, because you have gone outside those parameters.

Thats what we have now. We have gone outside the parameters and are now making a mess. The answer is trying to restore a balance, and keep it.


The answer is balance, balance, balance ---- we are falling off balance.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

RE: sloppy reasoning [Bullcrap + +.
[Report this comment]
Posted by: Squarehead on Feb 17, 2009 7:57 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Bullcrap + +.

You, pfeifer999 have a facility with language, which is not allied to analytical skill. By which I mean the underlying stuff, not a capacity to twist and suggest meaning, where none exists.

"Everything now is political first, and scientific second; most people fit the science to their politics." That was always and ever true, but especially of yourself.

As regards your belief that Darwinian evolution is a flawed theory; well of course. All of humanity's theories are flawed. But it's better than any other.

You present your dense prose "In terms of predictive power, "evolution" is a bust. Not in the 150+/- years since Darwin sailed to the Galapagos has any human being seen or measured "evolution" between species, much less assemble enough evidence to prove that protozoa could start down the road to humanity." with a pseudo-scientific veneer of words. I presume you convince yourself that way.

But you are deluding yourself, primarily, in your desire to deny. Your attachment to whatever (I presume Christian) religious beliefs you have, stops you from seeing the real science 'out there'.

Now, personally, I am not a believer. I describe myself as agnostic, or functionally atheist, because I acknowledge that 'I don't know'.

But I concede that believers are, logically, just as close to, or far from, the 'truth' as myself, if they can see the basics of the physical sciences, and that these basics in no way are opposed to religious belief, of that 20th century variety (e.g de Chardin)

So. It's very simple, very logical. And it does not matter that it's proven to be not the whole truth; it's a working hypothesis.

There was a moment 5,000 million (?) years ago, when a pre-existing energy converted to mass. (Big Bang) The initial creation of hydrogen rapidly, by nucleo-synthesis, created helium, and most of the first part of the Periodic Table (of the elements) within nano or milli seconds.

There are completely reputable studies showing creation of other elements within the stars (more nucleo-synthesis) There is a very good study (Glasgow University, 1997- 2001) on the origins of life. (The Geochemical Origins of Life by Michael J. Russell & Allan J. Hall)

That very many millions of Americans choose to deny these common sense observations; well it's not really a surprise. Chomsky has pointed out the nature of control, in so-called 'democratic' societies. (I mean, also, that USA has some / many democratic virtues, but many, many of it's citizens are fundamentally deluded)

The theory of evolution first publicised by Darwin, is a reasonable fit to the observed facts. The nuanced appreciation which is modern Darwinism, is in no sense oppositional to Christianity, or Islam, or Hinduism, etc., etc., etc.

The fear and suspicion of the Right of the political spectrum, which is in the main where the climate change deniers, and the intelligent design advocates reside; is at a basic level, daft.

Openness, transparency, no rubbish about Plots to Take Us Over, that is how we (now all of us) will solve our (humanity's) problems.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

To Give An Example Of How These Religious and Political Divisons Are Ridiculous
[Report this comment]
Posted by: tony_opmoc on Feb 16, 2009 3:29 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
And Nothing To Do with either science or morality

On Saturday a Guy I first met over 10 years ago and who I hadn't seen for several years - though my wife had seen him on TV and instantly recognised him

He recognised me - and said where is your lovely wife - she is over there

Oh yes - How you been doing mate?

I thought I know this guy - but couldn't remember his name

Anyway he has spent the last 10 years travelling the World mostly as an independent journalist

He said he was travelling in Pakistan and Afghanistan independently in 2001

I said you are lucky you didn't have a suntan or you might now be in Guantanamo Bay

I really had no idea what his political views are on the subject - and I did not interrogate him - I just wanted him to share his experiences with us and I introduced him to friends of ours

I know he has tremendous courage and relishes dangerous places - the last time I talked to him about 4 years ago he had just come back from South America

But since then - all his hair has been shaved off - which is probably why I didn't immediately recognise him.

I stroked his head

And this other mate of mine with extremely long hair - looking like the absolute aging hippy - starts giving him a really hard time

And he tried to say you haven't a fucking clue what it is really like in Afghanistan and of course I immediately realised he had been with British soldiers and had seen them die at first hand

And he is a big bloke and he really didn't want to flatten this hippy

And I bought him and his mate pints of bitter

But he had to leave

And I shook the aging hippies hand

I said Yes I agree with you - and my wife said that she did too - but that wasn't the point

And as he was leaving he gave me some money. He said Tony I want to stay but it is not possible - can you give this to the band

WAR CHILD

Tony

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Oi, what's all this then? Posted by: tony_opmoc

Comments are closed-

True enough, totally sloppy.
[Report this comment]
Posted by: dkm on Feb 16, 2009 3:31 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Pfeiffer999 entitled his piece "sloppy reasoning." And he's right. It was some of the sloppiest reasoning that has appeared on this message board yet. His dismissal of evolution on the basis of unarguably false statements about the evidence is a typical example of how the anti-intellectual element thinks. Then it gets worse when he tries to argue against global warming.

It is cretins who think like this that have been an anchor on the tail of progress since the first person to build a fire was killed by his cave mates. Look, guys, if this country and this world is ever going to get out of the problems that face us, we need to deal with reality, not hopelessly twisted justifications for a predetermined reactionary viewpoint. The people who thought that Sarah Palin would make a good VP because she was like them are symptomatic of this lack of acquaintance with reality.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: True enough, totally sloppy. Posted by: tony_opmoc
» RE: Here you go? OK then.... Posted by: Squarehead
» RE: Bollocks yourself........ Posted by: Squarehead

Comments are closed-

The Signature List Of People Who Want To Prosecute Tony Blair is Rising Quite Rapidly
[Report this comment]
Posted by: tony_opmoc on Feb 16, 2009 4:02 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
http://blairfoundation.wordpress.com/letter/

To The President of The United Nations General Assembly, H.E. Father Miguel d’Escoto Brockmann, and The Attorney General of the United Kingdom, and their successors in office.

RE ANTHONY CHARLES LYNTON BLAIR
We, the citizens of the United Kingdom and other countries listed, wish to uphold The United Nations Charter, The 1998 Rome Statute of The International Criminal Court, The Hague and Geneva Conventions and the Rule of International Law, especially in respect of:-

1: 1949 Geneva Convention IV: Article 146
The High Contracting Parties undertake to enact any legislation necessary to provide effective penal sanctions for persons committing, or ordering to be committed, any of the grave breaches of the present Convention.

2: 1907 Hague Convention IV: Article 3
A belligerent party which violates the provisions of the said regulations shall, if the case demands, be liable to pay compensation. It shall be responsible for all the acts committed by persons forming part of its armed forces.

We therefore call on you to indict Anthony Charles Lynton Blair in his capacity as recent Prime Minister of the UK, so long as he is able to answer for his actions and however long it takes, in respect of our sample complaints relating to the 2003 Iraq War waged by the UK as ally to the United States of America.

We are concerned that without justice and respect for the rule of law, the future for us and our progeny in a lawless world is bleak, as revealed by recent US declarations about the use of torture and the events of December 2008 in Gaza show.

The following are our sample complaints relating to the Iraq War 2003-2009:

1: Deceit and conspiracy for war, and providing false news to incite passions for war, causing in the order of one million deaths, 4 million refugees, countless maimings and traumas.

2: Employing radioactive ammunition causing long-term destruction of the planetary habitat.

3: Causing the breakdown of civil administration, with consequent lawlessness, especially looting, kidnapping, and violence, and consequent breakdown of womens’ rights, of religious freedom, and child and adult education.

4: Failing to maintain the medical needs of the populace.

5: Despoliation of the cultural heritage of the country.

6: Supporting an ally that employs ‘waterboarding’ and other tortures.

7: Seizing the assets of Iraq.

8: Using inhumane restraints on prisoners, including dogs, hoods, and cable ties.

9: Using Aggressive Patrolling indiscriminately, traumatising women and children and wrecking homes and property.

10: Marking bodies of prisoners with numbers, writing, faeces and other degrading treatment.

11: The use of cluster bombs and other indiscriminate weapons including white phosphorous on “shake and bake” missions.

12: Supporting indiscriminate rocket attacks from F16 fighter planes on women and children in Fallujah in Nov 2004

13: Supporting the shooting up of ambulances and medical personnel in Fallujah in Nov 2004

14: Supporting the expulsion of the entire population of Fallujah save for young men of military age, for a reprisal attack on that city in Nov 2004.

Copy to the Secretary General of The United Nations, Ban Ki-moon

Issued by secretaries to Foundation: David Halpin, MB, FRCS and Nicholas Wood MA, RIBA, FRGS
PO BOX 64656 NW3 9NG (UK)
Email: blairfoundation@yahoo.co.uk

You too can sign the letter at
http://www.petitiononline.com/BWCF/petition.html

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Don't hit me please, UN!! Posted by: edgar1

Comments are closed-

In London - Where i AND mY wIFE aRE iMMIGRANTS
[Report this comment]
Posted by: tony_opmoc on Feb 16, 2009 5:40 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
From Lancashire

And where we have lived for over half our lives

It is a Truly Multi-Racial Society

We Have Every Culture From Under The Sun

We Have Every Food From Under The Sun

And we look at merica

And we see all this fucking right wing and left wing nonsense and you trying to control the world with your bombs and guns and hollywood movies and tv

And we think

you are so primative

tony

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

Through the haze
[Report this comment]
Posted by: troy on Feb 16, 2009 7:29 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The fact that some global warming proponents have alterior motives (political manipulation, business profiteering-insurance companies for example)does not make the overall thesis incorrect. The evidence is compelling enough for prudent action for the benefit of future generations of humans and other life forms.
I am disappointed, however, that global warming is getting such attention when there are worse environmental problems: 1)Species extinction-the greatest and quickest loss of species on this planet in 64 million years. At some point in the future (how near?) whole limbs of the food chain will collapse precipitating catastrophy; 2) We are creating novel, omnipresent, persistent toxins which are diminishing the health of most life forms; 3) Overpopulation is increasing the likelihood that common human viruses will mutate into mass killers.
Anti-environmentalists are playing into the hands of manipulators who want cheap labor and expanding markets, and those who want more tithing believers.
Politics will never be easy again.

TRC

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

The Most Important Advice I Can Give When Your Global Warming Wife Has Fallen Out With You
[Report this comment]
Posted by: tony_opmoc on Feb 16, 2009 8:16 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
And she has gone into a bit of a sulk - and you have too

Is to clear up all the beer cans - clean up the kitchen and make it look immaculate

Such that when she gets up in the morning

The kitchen does not look like a devasted wasteland

And looks clean and nice

If you really want to go for it

Then get up before her and bring her a cup of coffee in bed and yoghurt and blueberries

You will be forgiven before she even noticed that you weren't keeping her warm with your snores and farts and cuddles

Tony

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

You have no idea what you are talking about
[Report this comment]
Posted by: FreeAmerica on Feb 16, 2009 9:51 PM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
There is a lot of history for abrupt climate change. Look it up, chuck.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

Fact check time..
[Report this comment]
Posted by: FreeAmerica on Feb 16, 2009 11:24 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Lets do some facts..

We need to be cleaner. Fact.

Global warming is not science or settled science. Science involves proof usually with a hypothesis, experiment and control, and a conclusion. We are at the hypothesis stage.It is a theory, nothing more. Likewise, people that blame everything from teen pregnancy to Katrina on global warming, you only have a wild untested theory based on a wild untested theory, and are most likely full of shit.

Humans represent 0.33% of the global biomass. CO2 is a trace gas. It is 0.038% of the atmosphere.

We have people that actually believe that we should trash the global economy and modern way of life so that 0.038% of the global biomass reducing their CO2 output 50% of a trace gas that represents 0.038% of the atmosphere will actually change the climate? Wow. Falling is the sky..

Proxies show that CO2 concentration rises follow warming trends as the oceans warm and the carrying power of the CO2 in solution falls as the water expands. Those same proxies also show pretty significant climate change when we hit a tipping point about where we are now. The problem is, it is not a warming trend that they show. See the Volstok and Greenland ice cores.

Nowhere in this discussion did I hear the words obliquity, precession or nutation.Why, don't those things matter>?

If you want to cleanse the atmosphere of greenhouse gasses, start by distilling the water out of it. Water vapor is responsible for most of the greenhouse effect. Chasing CO2 is foolish, it has a non-linear effect on the greenhouse effect. In other words, at some point the effect of additional CO2 becomes less of an effect on the heat retention.

Global warming worshipers are quick to label skeptics as Exxon shills. Exactly who funds your scientists? Would they get paid next year if they said that CO2 was no threat, or should they propagate the lies and keep making 100G plus?

I can go on and on, but why? The worshipers of the sky gods gore and hansen would not listen anyway.

Hats off to the skeptics that actually knew about the solar cycles, Younger-Drias, and the Maunder.

Global warming is a scheme for the UN and the gifted ones to take control of energy, the key to our modern prosperity. Control energy,and you will control the population and economy.

The thing you should be worrying with global warming is how to cause it. With the presently occurring solar minimum altering the climate of the next few decades, it will come in handy. We already have a negative PDO and second La Nina year. The oceans and planet are cooling my little watermelons, not warming.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

FACTS FACTS FACTS FACTS FACTS
[Report this comment]
Posted by: nigelbest on Feb 16, 2009 11:59 PM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
CO2 has NEVER caused warming, according to REAL science.

On the half billion year graph, on the 10,000 year graph, on the 20th C graph, there is ZERO CORRELATION between CO2 and warming

On the 400,000 year graph (the one Gore used) there is close correlation, but CO2 FOLLOWS warming, by around 800 years - why? - because the oceans are a CO2 sink and higher temps release CO2

So zero correlation - CO2 has never caused warming and science has known it for decades.

30,000 scientists say so, and are now SUING GORE FOR FRAUD to try to get the facts heard - the 2500 scientists of the IPCC are mythical - only 25 peer-review scientists and some disagreed and the rest are computer model scientists - and their predictions have been shown to be false by observational data

The computer modellers LEFT OUT the negative feedback elements to get their sensational results (!!!!)

The media have gone for the sensational stories, and for the party line of the media owners, the superrich, who plan to make trillions from this global warming scam

Correlation between solar activity and global temps is very high - ie, solar activity is the cause, virtually the whole cause, and nothing else is the cause.

The hockey stick graph is FALSE DATA, caused by urban heat island effect, corrected by weather balloon and satellite data.

The IPCC summary CONTRADICTS THEIR OWN scientific data. The IPCC suppressed the long-established, well-known medieveal warm period that they had in their own reports.

The clear, simple science has been kept out of the media, which has financial interest in sensationalism, and which serves its masters.

The superrich are playing the left like a harp. The simpleminded on the left think that the opposite of whatever the rich say must be true. The rich are playing both sides. The left like green, so the right pretend to be green. People think: Bush is bad, so Gore must be good. Just like in the 1920s in Britain, the left thought that capitalism is bad, so communism must be right. Both unlimited-fortunes capitalism and communism were and are fascist, totalitarian and bad - wealthpower giants, just the same. Lying and fooling the suckers, which is most people.

The opposite of unlimited fortunes capitalism and communism is justly-limited-fortunes capitalism. No one can work more than twice as hard as the average. The American and French republics were founded on prevention of unlimited fortunes, which are tyranny, which works largely through lies (they're cheaper than guns).

Go to youtube and start with Bob Carter and view around from there and you'll get all the data. The scientific FACTS are on youtube.

nigel@orcon.net.nz

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

Re: The talking points of the biostitutes are a joke
[Report this comment]
Posted by: watching-n-waiting on Feb 17, 2009 12:23 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This planet is choking on greed.The deniers need to duck before they're slammed by the boomerang of stupidity. I've met denier-types, the entitled, overfed and willfully ignorant. I've met corporate industry paid "biostitutes" and they're just plain insane.
I've been to Antarctica and Greenland and seen the melting ice. I've been to Australia to look upon where the Murray Darling River system used to be (it once covered one 17th of that continent).

Our own MidWest is heating and drying up twice as fast as the rest of the world; the Colorado River no longer even reaches the sea!

What the deniers need to do is channel their fear energy into motivation.
Not only that but- and this isn't a new argument- even if they insist that the globe isn't warming to the degree that HUNDREDS of SCIENTISTS have determined it is- would it kill them to drive a bit less, walk a bit more, eat a bit less and produce less waste and pollution?
Deniers need to familiarize themselves with the term Catastrophic Global Climate Change.
The changes on the planet are not restricted to tumultuous weather patterns. The acidification of the oceans alone (apart entirely from any change in temperature) has the potential to devastate the planets most critical ecosystems and food sources. Indeed it already is. People who fear the oceans will be fished out need fear no longer because the oceans vast diversity is rapidly shrinking and will more likely be wiped out due to a spiraling shift in water chemistry. Some say 30 years is a conservative time frame.

If we all pitch in and do our bit- the ramifications and impact of these changes can be, if not reversed, at least minimized

Oil is to our energy needs as trees and cotton are to our paper and clothing needs. In other words among the many exciting fuel alternatives we need to grow hemp! It's cheap to grow (thrives in drought conditions) and is very high profit.

We need to regard peak oil as an opportunity to lighten our footstep and embrace positive change.

The deniers can't deny that the Arctic ice cap will shrink more than 40 percent by 2050 (probably closer to 60% by 2030). In Antarctica a vast ice shelf, hanging on by a thin strip, will be the next chunk to break off from the Peninsula. An iceberg measuring 25 miles by 1.5 miles has broken away from The Wilken Ice Shelf. The entire ice shelf, about 6,180 square miles, is collapsing.
It was predicted in 1993 that the northern part of the Wilkins Ice Shelf was likely to be lost within 30 years if warming continued at the same rate. The demise of the planet is 50% AHEAD OF SCHEDULE!

With our innovative spirit and long history of manufacturing prowess The United States could be spearheading the solutions instead we're part of the axis of evil (America, China and Australia). But we can beat Exxon Mobile at their own game because, second only to Australia, America has the largest geothermal resources in the world (wind and solar capacity). Our beleaguered midwest is capable of producing enough wind-power to meet ALL of Americas electricity needs while the southwest could do the same (without the need for even a single rooftop solar panel) while also fueling a plug-in hybrid for every single American. PLUS: hemp thrives in dry conditions so, again, lets embrace the possibilities!

For a fraction of the cost of the "city-sized" "embassy we're built in Iraq, we could begin to upgrade our ancient power-transmission system so that we can deliver solar, wind and other renewable energy across the country thus becoming a "glowing example" and global inspiration! Aside from massively reducing Global Warming and reversing Catastrophic Global Climate Change, of course, the added benefit would be restoring the shattered economy by boosting home bred industry- once the pride of our teetering but still great nation.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

NO, Obviously we do not, at least, George Wills does not, yet get it!!!!!
[Report this comment]
Posted by: artie on Feb 18, 2009 3:22 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Read the plethora of specious claims in George Will's recent Washington Post article. That should provide ample proof that 'we' do NOT yet get it.
The number of fools who will be duped by Wills ' flagrantly irresponsible journalism moves us further away from the truth.
How can someone with no expertise whatsoever in Earth Science make false claims about current global climatic conditions?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

CENSORSHIP BY ALTERNET
[Report this comment]
Posted by: FredJones on Feb 20, 2009 5:45 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Do any of you realize how easy it is to be kicked off of Alternet?

It happens all the time.

One minute, you're having a perfectly reasonable and calm debate with people, and the next you have an email that says 'BANNED' in the subject line. There is no explanation of why you were banned, or where you crossed the line.

I know one person to whom this happened and it turned out that the editor of the subject matter just took a personal dislike to the person posting.

There are some very harsh censors on this website, so be careful what you say.

They pretend to be pro-democracy, and pretend to support free discussion of issues, but the reality is very different. Say something they don't approve of and you'll find yourself banished to the gulag......with no warning.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

 
Advertisement
From The Blog
 
Clownish Far-Right Lawmaker Calls for Another Administration Official to Resign
 
How Fair Are the Criticisms of Rahm Emanuel?
 
The Hollywood Double Standard: Tiger gets cooked, Charlie Sheen gets another free pass
 
Is Greece the New AIG?
 
Confused About Nutrition? Eat Food!
 
Insurer Denies Life-Prolonging Treatment To Five-Year-Old Boy With Cancer
 
Budget Paranoia
 
Why Does the U.S. Assassinate Americans?
 
Jon Stewart: Why Does Sarah Palin Need a Cheat Sheet?
 
We Must Lift the Veil on US Troops in Pakistan
 
MORE 
ALL BLOGS 
 
 
Most Read
Most Emailed
Most Discussed
On REDDIT
On DIGG
 
  1. Shadow Elite: How the World's New Power Brokers Are Upending Our Democracy
  2. New Poll Results Are Proof That Republicans Don't Think
  3. White "Savior-Afflicted" Christians, Black Haitian Babies: This Won't End Well
  4. Why I Had to Stop Making Hardcore Porn
  5. Sarah Palin Aims to Bust Up the Republican Party -- And the Tea Party Movement
  6. One Company Thinks They've Created Fast Food With a Conscience -- Are They Right?
  7. The Newest Diet Trend: What Would Jesus Eat?
  8. Could Your Cell Phone End Up Killing You?
  9. Half-Naked Hot Chicks and Beer: The Sexist Guyland of the Super Bowl Beer Commercial
  10. Top 10 Problems with America Killing Its Own Citizens
loading ...
POWERED BY DIGG'S USERS
ABOUT DIGG