As I said 1-2 weeks ago it seems to be obvious now that more and more people get fed up with this environmental con. Top scientists agree....my ass. He said: "The system is too complex to say exactly what the effect of cutting back on CO2 production would be or indeed of continuing to produce CO2. "It is ridiculous to see politicians arguing over whether they will allow the global temperature to rise by 2c or 3c." One just needs little bit of common sense, or being capable of relatively independent thought to understand the above. No need to be scientist.
Iceland glaciers, what about the rest of the glaciers? From Retreat of glaciers since 1850 Notice the average glacier thickness graph depicting a steady decline since 1960. Pretty pictures too on the site. Republicans citing science is like Bill Frist saying that Terri Schiavo appears to respond to visual stimuli and is not in a vegetative state - her autopsy showed she was blind and a vegetable.
Yeah, You see, uhmmm, Thats the problem..Ya had to kill her first before you could prove your science about life...Kind of ironic eh? i hope we don't do the same with the environment either...Like ban cars, radio and production and then 20 years later they say .."oops, my bad...and look out because the glaciers are still freezing"
The Globe Is Warming â and the Sky Is Falling: Inconvenient Truth or Convenient Deception? Jonathan Tarr Lew Rockwell.com Monday, March 5, 2007 As with so many other topics, any viewpoint that does not agree with the "mainstream" views is snuffed by the mainstream media. We can find many credible scientists that are not very concerned about human-induced global warming. They may agree that there is some global warming and that part of it could be from industrial emissions; however, they may not feel it is such an urgent issue. Instead of following the data, which there is certainly not enough of both temporally and geographically to make a firm conclusion, let us generate some alternate understanding of our comprehension and ability to predict the future. Look at the North American jet stream. It currently flows from west to east and dips and twists across the continent. A little more or less fluctuation has a pronounced effect on the climate including variations in temperature in the tens of degrees and not in fractions as postulated by "global warming". Now, consider how long the continent has supported humans â thousands of years at a minimum. How long have humans known of the jet stream and how much comprehensive data do we have on its behavior? Not very much. What causes the flow of the stream? No conclusive data exists. We can conceive that the rotation of the Earth, gravitational pull of the moon and tides and water currents all affect its flow. Certainly a volcanic eruption or other massive natural event will alter its course. Now how do we know the thing will continue to flow from west to east? Maybe the atmosphere will spontaneously and ever-dynamically rearrange so that it flows more from north to south or south to north or even east to west. It is not at all impossible to imagine. Obviously the climate would change drastically, orders of magnitude above what is predicted by the "warmers". Let us not ignore the fact that man, with his ever-amazing wisdom and instinct for self-preservation, has polluted this globe. It is a shame of course, but not a definitive cause of global warming (if it does in fact exist). The planet is highly dynamic and self-regulating. How can the "experts" who can barely tell you the temperature for tomorrow within a few degrees or the amount of precipitation within an inch be able to predict a fraction of a degree in a decade? Averages? What fraction of the Earthâs area is computed in those averages? A very small amount. Maybe if we measured 100 times as many geographic points, the data would show a global cooling. It happens over periods of 10,000s of years anyway. Glaciers were in the Southeastern USA. It is not logical to give merit to the warming predictions. And do not confuse the political scientists by giving them all the facts, they have already made up their minds, and their conclusions will bring them fortune and fame. Just look at Al Goreâs Oscar! Hollywood has become both honest and sincere (NOT). The main point is that it is important to collect as much of the available facts as possible before making any conclusions about a phenomenon. Listening to Al Gore or the mainstream media will certainly lead most to believe we are doomed by our own actions. Considering only the opposition will determine that there is nothing to worry about. However, if both arguments are considered objectively, one might conclude that there is no overwhelming evidence either way about man-made global warming. And that manâs contribution to climate can be snuffed in no time by Mother Nature herself. In fact, the planet has hosted a plethora of species that have come and gone as a result of natural weather deviations. Life goes on and the world adapts as it would with or without any contribution from Homo sapiens. The fallacy widely accepted up until the 1600s was that the Earth is the center of the universe and the latter revolves around the former. This same ignorance leads people today to still believe that the Earth was made for man and he is its master. Anyone who has experienced a tornado or earthquake or hurricane or tsunami might question this. Mark Twain said that if the Earth were the Eiffel Tower, man would be the top coat of paint at the very tip. We need to put things in perspective. It gives a warm feeling to accept Hollywoodâs depiction of global warming and its noble efforts to save us all from ourselves â this echoes big brotherâs intents exactly. And the Oscars went green! How many of the stars walked or rode the bus or their bicycles instead of taking limos or Hummers? Have a look at their electric bills. It is reminiscent of Bhagwan Shree Rajneesh who collected the fortunes of educated and affluent people on the belief that material possessions were evil, yet he had fleets of private jets and Rolls Royce cars. How many actors or politicians or academics would be willing to give up their comforts and live in rustic cabins to save the human race? Who in Hollywood is ever concerned with the facts, other than in their own financial and career advancements? We will never become enlightened and free to experience life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness until we learn to think for ourselves and reject the sensational generalizations of the ruling class. Thomas Jefferson said, "Educate and inform the whole mass of the people... They are the only sure reliance for the preservation of our liberty." Americans of all sects should learn about the logical thought process and the scientific method. It will help in all aspects of life and lead to a real understanding of the world. And then maybe we can pull together and fix the true problems that we face. It is unlikely that our "leaders" will solve these problems; it is their mindset that created them.
Try reading the site, the glaciers are not freezing, lol. And Schiavo was in '94 diagnosed in an irreversible vegetative state. So the science was always there, its just the republicans and the miracle of Sean Hannity who don't believe in science which explains the push to put religion in schools. Why bother with lernin an' all that book stuff, we can just pray to Jesus to get the answers to things.
this is a trading board. we all here are quite willing to give credit to unlikely, then finally turning out right calls. this thing was called fourty years back. good call in my eyes.
hee hee, father of global warming changed his mind... Acclaimed French Scientist Has Second Thoughts On Global Warming LAWRENCE SOLOMON National Post Monday, March 5, 2007 Claude Allegre, one of France's leading socialists and among her most celebrated scientists, was among the first to sound the alarm about the dangers of global warming. "By burning fossil fuels, man increased the concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere which, for example, has raised the global mean temperature by half a degree in the last century," Dr. Allegre, a renowned geochemist, wrote 20 years ago in Cles pour la geologie.." Fifteen years ago, Dr. Allegre was among the 1500 prominent scientists who signed "World Scientists' Warning to Humanity," a highly publicized letter stressing that global warming's "potential risks are very great" and demanding a new caring ethic that recognizes the globe's fragility in order to stave off "spirals of environmental decline, poverty, and unrest, leading to social, economic and environmental collapse." In the 1980s and early 1990s, when concern about global warming was in its infancy, little was known about the mechanics of how it could occur, or the consequences that could befall us. Since then, governments throughout the western world and bodies such as the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change have commissioned billions of dollars worth of research by thousands of scientists. With a wealth of data now in, Dr. Allegre has recanted his views. To his surprise, the many climate models and studies failed dismally in establishing a man-made cause of catastrophic global warming. Meanwhile, increasing evidence indicates that most of the warming comes of natural phenomena. Dr. Allegre now sees global warming as over-hyped and an environmental concern of second rank. His break with what he now sees as environmental cant on climate change came in September, in an article entitled "The Snows of Kilimanjaro" in l' Express, the French weekly. His article cited evidence that Antarctica is gaining ice and that Kilimanjaro's retreating snow caps, among other global-warming concerns, come from natural causes. "The cause of this climate change is unknown," he states matter of factly. There is no basis for saying, as most do, that the "science is settled." Dr. Allegre's skepticism is noteworthy in several respects. For one, he is an exalted member of France's political establishment, a friend of former Socialist president Lionel Jospin, and, from 1997 to 2000, his minister of education, research and technology, charged with improving the quality of government research through closer co-operation with France's educational institutions. For another, Dr. Allegre has the highest environmental credentials. The author of early environmental books, he fought successful battles to protect the ozone layer from CFCs and public health from lead pollution. His break with scientific dogma over global warming came at a personal cost: Colleagues in both the governmental and environmental spheres were aghast that he could publicly question the science behind climate change. But Dr. Allegre had allegiances to more than his socialist and environmental colleagues. He is, above all, a scientist of the first order, the architect of isotope geodynamics, which showed that the atmosphere was primarily formed early in the history of the Earth, and the geochemical modeller of the early solar system. Because of his path-breaking cosmochemical research, NASA asked Dr. Allegre to participate in the Apollo lunar program, where he helped determine the age of the Moon. Matching his scientific accomplishments in the cosmos are his accomplishments at home: Dr. Allegre is perhaps best known for his research on the structural and geochemical evolution of the Earth's crust and the creation of its mountains, explaining both the title of his article in l' Express and his revulsion at the nihilistic nature of the climate research debate. Calling the arguments of those who see catastrophe in climate change "simplistic and obscuring the true dangers," Dr. Allegre especially despairs at "the greenhouse-gas fanatics whose proclamations consist in denouncing man's role on the climate without doing anything about it except organizing conferences and preparing protocols that become dead letters." The world would be better off, Dr. Allegre believes, if these "denouncers" became less political and more practical, by proposing practical solutions to head off the dangers they see, such as developing technologies to sequester C02. His dream, he says, is to see "ecology become the engine of economic development and not an artificial obstacle that creates fear." Lawrence Solomon@nextcity.com - - - - Lawrence Solomon is executive director of Urban Renaissance Institute and Consumer Policy Institute, divisions of Energy Probe Research Foundation. CV OF A DENIER: Claude Allegre received a Ph D in physics in 1962 from the University of Paris. He became the director of the geochemistry and cosmochemistry program at the French National Scientific Research Centre in 1967 and in 1971, he was appointed director of the University of Paris's Department of Earth Sciences. In 1976, he became director of the Paris Institut de Physique du Globe. He is an author of more than 100 scientific articles, many of them seminal studies on the evolution of the Earth using isotopic evidence, and 11 books. He is a member of the U.S. National Academy of Sciences and the French Academy of Science.
better than, oh we did not do anything, too bad, now its too late we missed the turning point. i am afraid your argument is exactly the wrong conclusion - even if there was uncertainty. in trading that is called risk of ruin. and the newbies need some blown out accounts to get it. problem with this gloabl warming is that there is no second account.
1. if that is the worst name you find for me, i can live with that. 2. you might not get it that if we don't spend that 1% we endanger the other 99. 3. i sense a dumbass around here, but it ain't al gore.
There is no second chance?? Where do you enviro nuts come up with this stuff? how many times has the earth changed? ever hear of the ice age? the dinosaur? yet despite what happens, earth and life finds a way.