Read the commenting rules carefully because they will be enforced!
Global Warming: The Myth
But, but, but, but, what about Bali?
Specifically, the "consensus" about anthropogenic climate change entails the following:
1) the climate is undergoing a pronounced warming trend beyond the range of natural variability;
2) the major cause of most of the observed warming is rising levels of the greenhouse gas CO2;
3) the rise in CO2 is the result of burning fossil fuels;
4) if CO2 continues to rise over the next century, the warming will continue; and
5) a climate change of the projected magnitude over this time frame represents potential danger to human welfare and the environment.
These conclusions have been explicitly endorsed by ...
Academia Brasiliera de Ciências (Bazil)
Royal Society of Canada
Chinese Academy of Sciences
Academié des Sciences (France)
Deutsche Akademie der Naturforscher Leopoldina (Germany)
Indian National Science Academy
Accademia dei Lincei (Italy)
Science Council of Japan
Russian Academy of Sciences
Royal Society (United Kingdom)
National Academy of Sciences (United States of America)
Australian Academy of Sciences
Royal Flemish Academy of Belgium for Sciences and the Arts
Caribbean Academy of Sciences
Indonesian Academy of Sciences
Royal Irish Academy
Academy of Sciences Malaysia
Academy Council of the Royal Society of New Zealand
Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences
In addition to these national academies, the following institutions specializing in climate, atmosphere, ocean, and/or earth sciences have endorsed these conclusions:
NASA's Goddard Institute of Space Studies (GISS)
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)
National Academy of Sciences (NAS)
State of the Canadian Cryosphere (SOCC)
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
Royal Society of the United Kingdom (RS)
American Geophysical Union (AGU)
American Institute of Physics (AIP)
National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR)
American Meteorological Society (AMS)
Canadian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society (CMOS)
I'll take this "consensus" over the 400 "scientists" handpicked by Sen Inhofe for his minority skeptics report.
Global Warming has been a myth since I was wee-lad.
When the Global Freezing didn't happen, it was due to Global Warming and NYC was going to be under water by 1980...then 1990.
The whole thing is a retarded sham and always will be.
Nice try at spin but we cannot be spun here.
I do believe brewski has had one too many brewskis.
I saw this report as well. Actually the same day that I had meetings with a laboratory studying climate change. It might take me hours to replay those discussions, and even then it would fall on "deaf ears" (or silent keyboards). By the way, notable in their absence from the list on notable institutions who argue the opposition.
Luckily for me (and I dare say, most of you), even if you're wrong, we'll long burtied before it comes to pass.
I do no believe that global warming is strictly a man made problem. It is probably more attributable to a cicular process that the earth goes through on its own. I do believe we should, on our own and without being guilted into it, conserve energy, try to find alternatives energy sources, etc., but to say that the elimination of fossil fuels should be eliminated or is the primary cause of global warming is not feasable.
I have heard the arguments and most of the fears of global warming appear to come from the emotional level and appear to be rooted in the need to solely blame the human race for all of our problems. Do I believe that we can help? Yes. Do I believe we are the primary reason for global warming? Abosolutely not!
I personally try and buy cars that are good on gas milage, but primarily to help my wallet and secondary to help the enviroment. The same goes for conserving energy at home. I do not take any of the fear mongering seriously at all and will never take it seriously as long as it primarily blames humans for the problem.
As for the likes of Gore and the UN spear heading the fight, the fighters of global warming could not have picked a person and and organization that has less credibility with me then these two. As for them winning the nobel peace prize, that prize lost all significance to me when they awarded it to a terrorist, Yasser Arafat. How can anybody take this prize seriously when it awards it to the likes of him.
Just remember, conservation should occur without being guilted into it. Alternative fuels should be looked for, because fossil fuels will eventually run out, but fossil fuels are still useful and can be burned cleaner as new technologies emerge, however we still need them and will still need them for many years to come. So we should all support domestic drillinf for oil to cut our dependence on foreign oil, especially form the likes of a dictator like Hugo Chavez and to help in cutting down on the price of fossil fuels.
Please do not allow yourselves to be sucked in to believe humans are the primary reason for so called global warning, but take steps to help on your own. Turn off lights when not in that room, buy cars that are get better gas milage and give off lower emmissions, support looking for alternative energy sources, etc. However, remember demand by the consumer will drive these things, not government regulations and laws. If corporate america sees the demand, then they will provide the supply. Just look at countries that allow government to dictate what can be sold and what can't, double the unemployment then in the US, in most cases double the taxes then in the US, and economies that run significantly more sluggishly than in this country.
I would hope that this issue is taken seriously as a matter of logic, not because it is driven by fear and guilt.
There are no "facts" pertaining to global warming other than it has happened thousands of times in the past, and will happen thousands of times in the future...as did/will global cooling.
Never trust ANY government entity: they, like all the physicists I know and work with, claim much that is, in reality, theory, to be fact. However, even a limited education and experience in science tells you that there are no facts: it is ALL based on know theorem. That is why it is called science.
Back to brewski's limited analysis of entities he thinks are worth believing in lock-step, each and every one of them has an agenda, and that is make sure that taxpayer money continues to pour into their personal fields and, more accurately, their projects. Does he not remember the Ice Age we were told was coming in the 1970s, which was caused by man, or the so-called ozone layer disappearing a few years back, which was claimed by the experts to be caused by man and his Right-Guard deodorant, and the subsequent terror our so-called experts in climatology cited was going to happen? Mind you, the latest "consensus” on the ozone layer is that it has increased and is continuing to expand.
These same clowns moaned about the record melting of the Arctic Ice Shelf last spring, and that the seas level was going to rise, flood cities, kill hundreds of thousands of lowlanders…typical hyperbole by the elitists. And then what happened last week. By God! The Arctic Ice Shelf has reversed itself…so much so that as of December 15, 2007, it has refroze to the level of what it should have achieved by February 2008! How can this be? I though the Algore…the man who invented the Internet, discovered Love Canal, built the house he was born in …by hand… and now a multi-million dollar fraud on global climatology, said the sea would rise hundreds of feet. The closest any one has ever come to is that if all the ice were to melt on the planet, seas levels would rise less than 5 feet on average.
Lastly, what is so damn hard to understand about change? At one time in Earth’s history all the land above water was connected into Gondwana (or Gondwanaland) back in the Cambrian. Land will rise, land will fall…seas will change currents, asteroids will collide and devastate, wildlife will mutate and become extinct…new life forms will appear. Our sun will eventually burn out, long after what we know as humankind are gone from this rock we call Earth.
So people need to get over the idea we know what the hell is happening today!
So much for experts.
T.J.
The Earth is in a cycle. Get over it.
See http://www.jennifermarohasy.com/...-core-
petit.png for some ACTUAL DATA
How much coal was being burned 110,000 years ago ?
Any debate without reference to the Vostok data is meaningless. Unless IPCC's models can explain the past they are not worth diddley squat.
I guess they have first hand accounts from 110,000 years ago?
LOL!
Just sayin'.
Just because many of the 400 scientists are economists does not mean that they don't know their atmospheric science. My corporation has helped to fund many of those 400 scientists and I can attest that they are the very best and most reliable researchers around.
Commenting by HaloScan
