we call it propaganda.... fools buy it without questioning it. http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PO0805/S00122.htm Global warming hysteria: the pendulum has swung Thursday, 8 May 2008, 10:21 am Press Release: New Zealand Climate Science Coalition From the NZ Climate Science Coalition Global warming hysteria: how the pendulum has swung It has become commonplace knowledge, and is unchallenged, that global average temperature has not increased since 1998. This corresponds to a 9-year period during which the level of atmospheric carbon dioxide, in contrast, did increase, and that by almost 5%. The greenhouse hypothesis - which asserts that carbon dioxide increases of human origin will cause dangerous global warming - is clearly invalidated by these data. s if that were not enough, a leading computer modelling team has recently published a paper in Nature which acknowledges what climate rationalists (the so-called âscepticsâ) have always asserted. Which is that, contrary to IPCC assessments, any human influence on global temperature is so small that it cannot yet be differentiated from natural cycles of climate change. The same modellers have even predicted (after the start of the event, of course) that cooling will now occur for at least the next few years. Mortal strike two against dangerous, human-caused warming.......
Ratboy I read the article and I have an open mind to view the facts and information and theories, on both sides. You have to admit this isn't a black and white issue, it is an open question and an on going question that there is no absolute answer for at this time. But my question is serious what is causing the glaciers and northern ice cap melting. The glaciers are in fact melting, there are photos showing that, I don't think they are doctored photos. And from what I've read the northern ice cap melting is pretty well documented. By the way I enjoy your conspiracy theory arguments, it's entertaining and I read a lot of the links you post. I'm usually open to hearing the other side.
The problem is more the melting of the northern ice(greenland). Less salty water will actually cool Northern Europe. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/4485840.stm As the article goes on to say, it is unknown whether this is a natural cycle or not. But if the ice continues to melt Europe will cool. I have no opinion either way...I personally think ET is a myth.
fair enough... yes, i agree we all must keep an open mind. i come to this argument from a different perspective. i find it very suspect that just 30/40 yrs ago "our leaders" were scaring us with the threat of global cooling... a new ice age. now it is global warming and humans are to blame. the solution is to give them more money through a global carbon tax. then you have al gore winning oscars and nobel prizes.... anyone else find this comical? In the past year we are hearing "global warming" replaced with "climate change." i guess the weather isn't cooperating with their plans?
The ice caps aren't melting. The glaciers aren't melting. The fact that you can actually go to a glacier and see how most of them have shrunk over the past 50 years is a massive conspiracy using mirrors. Anyway, how could you be so gullible as to believe that the the coming increase in the burning of fossil fuels in rapidly developing countries where clean air legislation is either weak or non-existent could possibly represent a threat to human health or the environment? I mean, that idea is just crazy!!. You probably believe that the WTC towers were brought down by aircraft!!. What's that? The reduction of greenhouse gas emission is probably a good idea regardless of whether the ice caps are melting? The coming increases in emissions in the urban areas of so many developing countries will likely cause health problems for a lot of people regardless of whether the generic 'global warming' claims are true? What the hell are you, some kind of commie??
Yeah, didn't you know that the sun has heated up by 25% in the past 30 or so years? That's why the ice caps have suddenly started to shrink after tens of thousand of years of consistent size. The sun is just way hotter than it has been for the past 3 billion years. Sheesh. Everyone knows that.
"When heralded Canadian environmentalist Lawrence Solomon first set out two years ago â on a bet, no less â to find credible dissenters to the well-entrenched climate change dogma, he thought he might perhaps unearth enough material for a few National Post columns. Instead, like Alice passing through the looking glass, Mr. Solomon entered a world wherein it soon became clear the much-ballyhooed idea of a "scientific consensus" was as nonsensical as "Jabberwocky." "I had picked several of the most essential and/or most widely publicized 'building blocks' of the case for catastrophic global warming," Mr. Solomon writes. "In each case, not only was I able to find a truly eminent, world-renowned leader in the field who disputed the point in question, but in each case the denier had more authority, sometimes far more authority, than those who put forward the building block in the first place." The debate over anthropogenic â that is, human induced â climate change, is, in other words, just a bit more complicated than Al Gore suggested on "Oprah." http://washingtontimes.com/article/20080506/EDITORIAL/404827900/1013
I might have to challenge AAA for the first time. I think conservatives are conservationists. Prior to Rush Bush and other Neo Cons conservative has a long history of conservation and preservation. If you ponder externalities long enough you must become a conservationist. Why should we let people overfish or over pollute? Why should tax payers bear the cost of cleanup. If mitigation is necessary it must be priced into the cost of the good for the markets to work efficiently.