Must see: The Great Global Warming Swindle

I'm having a Don Imus moment, my apologies for my mocking attitude. Sometimes I can relieve a days worth of frustration in a few choice words.

Ours is a remarkably clean environment if you consider that we are not very far removed from the beginning of the industrial age. I live in a megalopolises, with a temporary three hour commute. I spend the drive-time counting wild turkeys, deer, cranes, hawks, etc ...

Anybody who takes a moments time to contemplate their own morality wants a clean environment and is willing to make sacrifices to make that happen, the question is at what cost? It's basic economics, there is a point where the cost of reducing pollution exceeds the benefits from reducing it. As technology advances the costs of reducing it drop precipitously.

Any fool can proclaim, "I Want A Clean Environment!", and only a complete fool would say "I don't care if the environment is clean!". I'll fully agree, there are many bone-headed young republicans completely wrong on this issue, and even more liberals completely irrational and unrealistic about it.

I'm on record as equating global warming with the loch-ness monster, as I sit and wait for a foot of April snow, I think I'm safe. I'm obviously not an expert, and this is my last comment on this very tedious topic. By the way, CO2 is not pollution.

 

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1656640542976216573&q=climate+duration:long+swindle

trying to counter the Channel4 docu piece ...

 

Well, seven minutes into that "debunking" and lo and behold, he has the infamous "hockey stick" graph (since debunked AND retracted by the authors of the original study).

Nice try.

 

as far as i know what Mann did does not at all justify
the terms "debunked" or "retracted". please point me
to some source on that.

i would see something more like a heated debate with
arguments going back and forth:

http://stephenschneider.stanford.ed....edu/Climate/Climate_Science/Contrarians.html

 

and go to minute 37 and tell me what you think about
it.

 

http://www.technologyreview.com/Energy/13830/

 

Global Cooling drags on and on...

Weatherman said April is currently tracking as the coldest April in the US in 113 years . Even if there is late month moderation, April 2007 will likely keep the month in the top 7 coldest in history.

 

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php?p=8

 

and Mann et al. themselves:

http://holocene.meteo.psu.edu/Mann/EandEPaperProblem.pdf

 

Don't worry, the temperature at the South Pole will be 80 degrees Fahrenheit and these guys will be giving you links to how GW is false.

nitro