ask the opposite question if we have no impact on temp are our activities able to effect either a warming of our planet or the reverse. its apparent that releasing gases into the air only causes warming as that is what they do in the natural life of planets.
@stickitupyourasteric Wow, you just discovered that changing temps are just natural.
I guess you missed it, NASA has said that there has been no increase in temp for the last 16 years. They also said that the CO2 has increased. Hmmmm? No increase in temp and an increase in CO2? Hey dummy there is no relationship between the two.
Tune into climate denial crock of the week buddy and you will see where you are mistaken. The glaciers are really melting as is the ice cap and Greenland is showing early signs of decreasing in ice cover, and your opinion does not change the fact that the atmosphere contains more CO2 which is caused by us. Can we change that? Maybe you are right there, but warming is happening.
@MrFitzwilly Greenland is called "Greenland" because it used to be green. Glaciers reached Indiana. We have been warming for 10,000 years. Humans have NOTHING to do with it. We can not control the temp. We don't need to waste money trying the impossible. CO2 has NOTHING to do with the temp. It has been higher in the past.
These are all facts that can not be disputed. If you are worried about warming buy another air conditioner.
Regards this video, listened to the first part but as it started out with a basic analogy fail (150 years of accumulating CO2 concentrations can be likened to putting hot water into a lake), I didn't take it further.
@TankUni I guess it was too complicated for libs to understand. Let me make it more simple. It you change C02 production by 1% it won't change anything. DUH.
If you put a tiny amout of hot water in a cold lake it won't change anything. DUH.
@gordonbloyershow Lets try some math here. If I increased anything by 1% every year it would have zero effect? or are you saying a negligible effect? How long until we hit a tipping point? With water there is a good analogy, if I increased the temperature by 1% every year it would eventually boil. It's called compounding, which is different than exponential growth. It's not a liberal or conservative issue, if you change one thing, eventually everything in that system will change.. equilibrium.
The analogy is completely off. The equivalent of adding hot water to a lake would be adding hot air to the atmosphere. The equivalent of adding CO2 to the atmosphere would be equivalent to blanketing the lake with a material that lets sunlight in, but reflects heat back in to the lake. As the days pass, the cumulative effect of the extra heat trapped in the lake would raise its temperature by a measurable amount.
What a load of bull there is in this video. I dont think he gets a single number correct about GHGs, not even close. But evn using his numbers. The Lake Michigan analogy is plain silly :
The average temperatur of Lake Michigan is about 15C, if you added 1% by volume (his number) of boiling water to it (not 100 gallons unless he thinks the lake contains only 10,000 gallons) it would raise the temperature of the lake by 0.85C ([100-15]/100).
I hope none of you were taken in by such nonsense.
@drkstrong This is no longer applicable since it has now been proven that there has been NO increase co2 in the atmosphere in the last 160 years. Global warming is a hoax.
@drkstrong LOL, Knorr's study is not disputed by anyone. NOT one of the junk scientists deny his research. YOU have no idea what you are talking about.
So Knorr was it? You apparently dont even understand the research they did.
Their result is about the proportion of CO2 that is absorbed by the oceans. It is 47% currently they claim (not confirmed) that it has been 47% for the last 150 years
47% of our emssions 150 years ago was not very much in tons dumped in the atmosphere but 47% of our current emissions is a huge number. So CO2 still builds up just like the measurements show
T'is you who does not know what you are talking about.
Snow cover over North America and much of Siberia, Mongolia and China is greater than at any time since 1966.
The U.S. National Climatic Data Center (NCDC) reported that many American cities and towns suffered record cold temperatures in January and early February. According to the NCDC, the average temperature in January "was -0.3 F cooler than the 1901-2000 (20th century) average."
jp, you are the idiot I am talking about when I mention foreign loud mouths. I don't care what you or your fellow countrymen think. You have no idea what you are talking about.
I don't think it's nonsense to, you know, "comfort" the earth by not producing too much chemicals or trash and dump it "into" it, but yea, I got mixed feelings about global warming and if it's not just very overrated and that the whole machine behind it got out of control.
It's unfortunate, Gordon, that irrespective of the fact that you put your opinions on YouTube, you're totally irreverent to those of others. We certainly do have a debate. I've outlined certain contentions, yet you continually neglect to address them. Rather you focus on my name, age and location. Why do you suppose that is? Perhaps you should man-up and speak to the issue instead.
ntw, just what don't you understand? I don't care what you think. No one else does. You like a child that keeps pulling on his mothers apron. Get lost.
Gordon, isn't your "100 gallon" analogy a bit flawed? If you're operating on the premise that man-made greenhouse gasses constitute 4% of the total, 100 gallons is nowhere near 4% of the volume of Lake Michigan.
Rather, if you had a 100 gallons of cold water and you added 4 gallons of hot water (4% of the total volume), the temperature of the water WOULD rise. It wouldn't rise by much, but it would rise nonetheless.
mtw, first you don't listen or you can't hear. The loons are talking about less than 1% reduction in man-made greenhouse gasses. If you had 100 gallons of cold water and added 1 gallon of hot water, the temp would not change. The (exact) percent in the analogy doesn't matter, even a moron could understand what it meant. Oh, I'm sorry you must be dumber than a moron.
mtw, I am sorry I forgot, you are from Canada. I don't care what you think. Go play with a polar bear, be careful their population is growing not declining.
Now Gordon, I was respectful when making my comments, you could surely do the same. I suppose it does speak to your confidence and credibility though, that you had to resort to calling me a moron and trying to mock my nationality as opposed to actually refuting my point.
Nonetheless, my original premise remains. The water WILL get warmer and so will our planet. I'm sure you know and understand the concept of enthalpy, and it's nothing more than that. In turn, this slight change in temperature, as I'm sure you've also seen (fires, droughts, heatwaves, etc.) has had drastic impacts on certain parts of the world, including OUR countries.
mtw, YOU have NO case. You are a nameless, faceless, phony with a fake username. YOUR opinions are nonsense. You hide behind a user name because you are afraid someone might know what you think. It is better to hide.
My name is Michael Williams, Gordon. My username is not fake, rather it is my initials.
You seem to hide behind this same excuse fairly often, as I've noticed you use it on many of your other videos as well.
You've failed to offer an ounce of insightful commentary here, instead resorting to pathetic little diatribes. I'm waiting to debate you, but you seem unwilling.
mtw, you crack me up, I should debate a 21 year old nobody from Canada. LOL You don't get it do you? There is no debate, isn't that what Gore said? YOU can not dispute what I said, reducing gasses by less than one percent will do nothing to the climate. That is just common sense. YOU don't need a degree in science to figure that out.
al gore 2x3 ft charts are in the october issue of the national geographic magazine ... in that chart co2 is now hockey sticking twice as high as ever before in the 400,000 years of the graph ... but at the same time, temperature is flat lining ... at its highest but not going any higher and has been like that for quite a while ... it is the ice in lemonaide effect where the glass of lemonaide stays cold until the polar ice caps melt ... then temperature soars higher .. melting ice cool drinks
You people can take the word of Gordo or Limbaugh all you want, these SCIENTIFIC groups, however, disagree with that stance.
IPCC, Joint Sciences Academies, US National Research Council, AMS, AGU, American Institute of Physics, American Astronomical Society, Federal Climate Change Science Program of 2006 (commissioned by the Bush Administration) -cont.
American Association for the Advancement of Science, Geological Society of London, Geological Society of America, American Chemical Society, Engineers Australia
-even Bill O'Reilly doesn't dispute the abundantly clear evidence of Global Warming
wake, did I saw there was NOT global warming? O'Reilly just says that there is warming and doesn't know why. He wants to take action even though he has no idea WHY? ONE MORE TIME, climate change is natural it is warming or cooling ALL the time. It is IMPOSSIBLE that reducing gasses by 1% will change anything.
You are speculating. The American Meteorological Society does not agree with you. So where can we get a reliable forecast from? The average temperature of the Earth has continued to climb. Do you install a burgular alarm on your house because you know someone is going to break in? No, you do it to aid in preventing a break in. You can not name one downfall in reducing man made greenhouse gasses.
I care about the environment not just for myself, but my kids, grandkids, etc. It's not even about right and wrong anymore. It's about Democrat or Republican. And comparing the atmosphere to a body of water is not a valid analogy.
Irrefutable? Is that your opinion? When you take science and put it out on a first grade level, I would hardly consider that irrefutable. Globally, 9 of the hottest years on record have been among the last 10, with 2005 being the warmest, how do you explain this?
wake, first that statement is NOT true. Second "on record" is nonsense. The world did not begin when we started keeping records. The climate has always changed and the Earth was warmer during the Medievil warming period, those years are NOT ON RECORD. You are brainwashed.
Go to Earth Policy Institute's website. 2005 is the hottest year on record. The average global temperature is continuing to rise. If the Medieval years are not on record, how are you legitimately saying that the Earth was warmer during that period? Hypothesizing about the future of the planet doesn't sound smart to me. I think erring to the side of safety is the wise choice.
This is the most asinine argument that occurs these days. There is not one downfall to conserving energy or cutting carbon emissions. You think I changed my stance on the environment because of Al Gore? Absolutely not. Saving the planet does not benefit just Democrats or Republicans, it benefits mankind.
environmentalists want it both ways.. they wouldn't let the forest department thin out trees and remove brush in southern cal. because man must never place his foot on mother nature, and when there's finally a huge fire they cry about carbon footprints.
hell, if al gore had his way, we'd still be putting people in jail for singing songs he and his lovely wife tipper found offensive.i guess he could'nt make enough money in that "political" venture.
muzaloth you bet.just google "P.M.R.C." there is all kinds of info.a rap group" called 2 live crew " were arrested on stage for preforming music from their new record. because the lyrics were found to be obscene by ,i believe it was a district court,thanks to the efforts of the pmrc headed by al and tipper
Absolutely correct. Liberals bow at the altar of the GREAT GLOBAL WARMING. Do a Wikipedia search and you will see that global cooling was the biggest concern 40 years ago.
ask the opposite question if we have no impact on temp are our activities able to effect either a warming of our planet or the reverse. its apparent that releasing gases into the air only causes warming as that is what they do in the natural life of planets.
stickitupyourasteric 2 months ago
@stickitupyourasteric Wow, you just discovered that changing temps are just natural.
I guess you missed it, NASA has said that there has been no increase in temp for the last 16 years. They also said that the CO2 has increased. Hmmmm? No increase in temp and an increase in CO2? Hey dummy there is no relationship between the two.
gordonbloyershow 2 months ago
Tune into climate denial crock of the week buddy and you will see where you are mistaken. The glaciers are really melting as is the ice cap and Greenland is showing early signs of decreasing in ice cover, and your opinion does not change the fact that the atmosphere contains more CO2 which is caused by us. Can we change that? Maybe you are right there, but warming is happening.
MrFitzwilly 1 year ago
@MrFitzwilly Greenland is called "Greenland" because it used to be green. Glaciers reached Indiana. We have been warming for 10,000 years. Humans have NOTHING to do with it. We can not control the temp. We don't need to waste money trying the impossible. CO2 has NOTHING to do with the temp. It has been higher in the past.
These are all facts that can not be disputed. If you are worried about warming buy another air conditioner.
gordonbloyershow 1 year ago
@gordonbloyershow
Argh! The stupid it burns!
Regards this video, listened to the first part but as it started out with a basic analogy fail (150 years of accumulating CO2 concentrations can be likened to putting hot water into a lake), I didn't take it further.
TankUni 1 year ago
@TankUni You are not too bright are you?
gordonbloyershow 1 year ago
@gordonbloyershow
See leet3lite's comment below for something closer to what would be a working analogy.
TankUni 1 year ago
@gordonbloyershow
Heh - bright enough to get by I think.
Also bright enough to feel that your hot water poured into Lake Michigan analogy doesn't really work.
TankUni 1 year ago
@TankUni I guess it was too complicated for libs to understand. Let me make it more simple. It you change C02 production by 1% it won't change anything. DUH.
If you put a tiny amout of hot water in a cold lake it won't change anything. DUH.
What part of that don't you understand?
gordonbloyershow 1 year ago
@gordonbloyershow Lets try some math here. If I increased anything by 1% every year it would have zero effect? or are you saying a negligible effect? How long until we hit a tipping point? With water there is a good analogy, if I increased the temperature by 1% every year it would eventually boil. It's called compounding, which is different than exponential growth. It's not a liberal or conservative issue, if you change one thing, eventually everything in that system will change.. equilibrium.
pureno1z 1 year ago
The analogy is completely off. The equivalent of adding hot water to a lake would be adding hot air to the atmosphere. The equivalent of adding CO2 to the atmosphere would be equivalent to blanketing the lake with a material that lets sunlight in, but reflects heat back in to the lake. As the days pass, the cumulative effect of the extra heat trapped in the lake would raise its temperature by a measurable amount.
leet3lite 1 year ago
What a load of bull there is in this video. I dont think he gets a single number correct about GHGs, not even close. But evn using his numbers. The Lake Michigan analogy is plain silly :
The average temperatur of Lake Michigan is about 15C, if you added 1% by volume (his number) of boiling water to it (not 100 gallons unless he thinks the lake contains only 10,000 gallons) it would raise the temperature of the lake by 0.85C ([100-15]/100).
I hope none of you were taken in by such nonsense.
drkstrong 1 year ago
@drkstrong This is no longer applicable since it has now been proven that there has been NO increase co2 in the atmosphere in the last 160 years. Global warming is a hoax.
gordonbloyershow 1 year ago
What?!!!! I would love to see the authoritative refeence on that one. I bet you dont have one.
Making stuff up is not an alternative to science.
drkstrong 1 year ago
@drkstrong How much money do you have?
gordonbloyershow 1 year ago
Probably a lot more than you bu that is not relevant in this debate. Where is your authoritative reference?
PS if you think it is the Knorr (GRL, doi:10.1029/2009GL040613) forget it, you have misunderstood the research. You lose.
drkstrong 1 year ago
@drkstrong LOL, Knorr's study is not disputed by anyone. NOT one of the junk scientists deny his research. YOU have no idea what you are talking about.
gordonbloyershow 1 year ago
So Knorr was it? You apparently dont even understand the research they did.
Their result is about the proportion of CO2 that is absorbed by the oceans. It is 47% currently they claim (not confirmed) that it has been 47% for the last 150 years
47% of our emssions 150 years ago was not very much in tons dumped in the atmosphere but 47% of our current emissions is a huge number. So CO2 still builds up just like the measurements show
T'is you who does not know what you are talking about.
drkstrong 1 year ago
Isn't neat how they all come out of the woodwork with insults and further nonesense?
Just for fun look at the percentage change from 280 PPM to 380 PPM - lots of zeros and a decimal of 1 percent. : )
steamgeek 3 years ago
How dare you think Global Warming is a Hoax?
I've got irrefutable proof, please see my you tube:
"Video Proof of Global Warming!"
(very short)
punchpringle1 4 years ago
Snow cover over North America and much of Siberia, Mongolia and China is greater than at any time since 1966.
The U.S. National Climatic Data Center (NCDC) reported that many American cities and towns suffered record cold temperatures in January and early February. According to the NCDC, the average temperature in January "was -0.3 F cooler than the 1901-2000 (20th century) average."
gordonbloyershow 4 years ago
"You don't need to be rocket scientist a meteorologist or anything else to understand that the whole Global Warming thing is a hoax"
HAHAHAHA Isn't that convenient? It's pretty obvious you're neither of those things that's for sure! You sound about as educated as a creationist.
jpbalkenende 4 years ago
jp, you are the idiot I am talking about when I mention foreign loud mouths. I don't care what you or your fellow countrymen think. You have no idea what you are talking about.
gordonbloyershow 4 years ago
I don't think it's nonsense to, you know, "comfort" the earth by not producing too much chemicals or trash and dump it "into" it, but yea, I got mixed feelings about global warming and if it's not just very overrated and that the whole machine behind it got out of control.
mrcuda 4 years ago
It's unfortunate, Gordon, that irrespective of the fact that you put your opinions on YouTube, you're totally irreverent to those of others. We certainly do have a debate. I've outlined certain contentions, yet you continually neglect to address them. Rather you focus on my name, age and location. Why do you suppose that is? Perhaps you should man-up and speak to the issue instead.
mtw7 4 years ago
ntw, just what don't you understand? I don't care what you think. No one else does. You like a child that keeps pulling on his mothers apron. Get lost.
gordonbloyershow 4 years ago
Gordon, isn't your "100 gallon" analogy a bit flawed? If you're operating on the premise that man-made greenhouse gasses constitute 4% of the total, 100 gallons is nowhere near 4% of the volume of Lake Michigan.
Rather, if you had a 100 gallons of cold water and you added 4 gallons of hot water (4% of the total volume), the temperature of the water WOULD rise. It wouldn't rise by much, but it would rise nonetheless.
mtw7 4 years ago
mtw, first you don't listen or you can't hear. The loons are talking about less than 1% reduction in man-made greenhouse gasses. If you had 100 gallons of cold water and added 1 gallon of hot water, the temp would not change. The (exact) percent in the analogy doesn't matter, even a moron could understand what it meant. Oh, I'm sorry you must be dumber than a moron.
gordonbloyershow 4 years ago
mtw, I am sorry I forgot, you are from Canada. I don't care what you think. Go play with a polar bear, be careful their population is growing not declining.
gordonbloyershow 4 years ago
Now Gordon, I was respectful when making my comments, you could surely do the same. I suppose it does speak to your confidence and credibility though, that you had to resort to calling me a moron and trying to mock my nationality as opposed to actually refuting my point.
mtw7 4 years ago
Nonetheless, my original premise remains. The water WILL get warmer and so will our planet. I'm sure you know and understand the concept of enthalpy, and it's nothing more than that. In turn, this slight change in temperature, as I'm sure you've also seen (fires, droughts, heatwaves, etc.) has had drastic impacts on certain parts of the world, including OUR countries.
mtw7 4 years ago
mtw, you just WANT to believe. Visit the tooth fairy again.
gordonbloyershow 4 years ago
I rest my case Gordon. You have nothing to repudiate with except flippant, childish remarks.
It's sad really.
mtw7 4 years ago
mtw, YOU have NO case. You are a nameless, faceless, phony with a fake username. YOUR opinions are nonsense. You hide behind a user name because you are afraid someone might know what you think. It is better to hide.
gordonbloyershow 4 years ago
My name is Michael Williams, Gordon. My username is not fake, rather it is my initials.
You seem to hide behind this same excuse fairly often, as I've noticed you use it on many of your other videos as well.
You've failed to offer an ounce of insightful commentary here, instead resorting to pathetic little diatribes. I'm waiting to debate you, but you seem unwilling.
mtw7 4 years ago
mtw, you crack me up, I should debate a 21 year old nobody from Canada. LOL You don't get it do you? There is no debate, isn't that what Gore said? YOU can not dispute what I said, reducing gasses by less than one percent will do nothing to the climate. That is just common sense. YOU don't need a degree in science to figure that out.
gordonbloyershow 4 years ago
The percentages you quote are wrong. Once I heard that I naturally came to the conclusion that you're clueless and killed the vid. L8R
iiopen 4 years ago
iio, they are NOT wrong, they are used even by Al Gore. You are the only clueless one.
gordonbloyershow 4 years ago
iio, sooooooo genius, tell all the youtubers the "real" percentage of gasses produced by humans?
gordonbloyershow 4 years ago
I'm curious how a whitehouse blowjob has anything to do with global warming? Or is this just a bash the dems video.
red05hemi 4 years ago
Hemp, I only block idiots. You are a idiot.
gordonbloyershow 4 years ago
Loong, idiots are not allowed to comment on my videos.
gordonbloyershow 4 years ago
Global Warming is NOT man made!
piscesgutt 4 years ago
Good video Gordon, what happened to 20 years ago when it was all about the second ice age?
chrismiddleton23 4 years ago
there is no proof that man made global warming
Evilfisher 4 years ago
how will a global tax help anyway?
Evilfisher 4 years ago
global warming is just a hoax... its all about money
Evilfisher 4 years ago
al gore 2x3 ft charts are in the october issue of the national geographic magazine ... in that chart co2 is now hockey sticking twice as high as ever before in the 400,000 years of the graph ... but at the same time, temperature is flat lining ... at its highest but not going any higher and has been like that for quite a while ... it is the ice in lemonaide effect where the glass of lemonaide stays cold until the polar ice caps melt ... then temperature soars higher .. melting ice cool drinks
AgnesBojaxhiu2000 4 years ago
You people can take the word of Gordo or Limbaugh all you want, these SCIENTIFIC groups, however, disagree with that stance.
IPCC, Joint Sciences Academies, US National Research Council, AMS, AGU, American Institute of Physics, American Astronomical Society, Federal Climate Change Science Program of 2006 (commissioned by the Bush Administration) -cont.
wakeboard77 4 years ago
American Association for the Advancement of Science, Geological Society of London, Geological Society of America, American Chemical Society, Engineers Australia
-even Bill O'Reilly doesn't dispute the abundantly clear evidence of Global Warming
wakeboard77 4 years ago
I get a thumbs down for this?
wakeboard77 4 years ago
wake, did I saw there was NOT global warming? O'Reilly just says that there is warming and doesn't know why. He wants to take action even though he has no idea WHY? ONE MORE TIME, climate change is natural it is warming or cooling ALL the time. It is IMPOSSIBLE that reducing gasses by 1% will change anything.
gordonbloyershow 4 years ago
You are speculating. The American Meteorological Society does not agree with you. So where can we get a reliable forecast from? The average temperature of the Earth has continued to climb. Do you install a burgular alarm on your house because you know someone is going to break in? No, you do it to aid in preventing a break in. You can not name one downfall in reducing man made greenhouse gasses.
wakeboard77 4 years ago
"So where can we get a reliable forecast from" (should say weather).
wakeboard77 4 years ago
Wake, fact less than 4% of greenhouse gasses are manmade. No one refutes that.
2. fact, the goal that the climate change nutballs want is to reduce man made gasses by 25%. Fact..25% of 4% is 1%. Nobody can refute that.
3. If you think that reducing total greenhouse gasses by ONE PER CENT will affect the Earths temp, YOU are INSANE.
gordonbloyershow 4 years ago
I care about the environment not just for myself, but my kids, grandkids, etc. It's not even about right and wrong anymore. It's about Democrat or Republican. And comparing the atmosphere to a body of water is not a valid analogy.
wakeboard77 4 years ago
Wake, you have no idea what you are talking about. What I said is irrefutable.
gordonbloyershow 4 years ago
Irrefutable? Is that your opinion? When you take science and put it out on a first grade level, I would hardly consider that irrefutable. Globally, 9 of the hottest years on record have been among the last 10, with 2005 being the warmest, how do you explain this?
wakeboard77 4 years ago
wake, first that statement is NOT true. Second "on record" is nonsense. The world did not begin when we started keeping records. The climate has always changed and the Earth was warmer during the Medievil warming period, those years are NOT ON RECORD. You are brainwashed.
gordonbloyershow 4 years ago
Go to Earth Policy Institute's website. 2005 is the hottest year on record. The average global temperature is continuing to rise. If the Medieval years are not on record, how are you legitimately saying that the Earth was warmer during that period? Hypothesizing about the future of the planet doesn't sound smart to me. I think erring to the side of safety is the wise choice.
wakeboard77 4 years ago
This is the most asinine argument that occurs these days. There is not one downfall to conserving energy or cutting carbon emissions. You think I changed my stance on the environment because of Al Gore? Absolutely not. Saving the planet does not benefit just Democrats or Republicans, it benefits mankind.
wakeboard77 4 years ago
I'd love to learn more about your credentials and the research you're using to substantiate your claims.
And, um, what does Bill Clinton's philandering have to do with Lake Michigan or global warming?
feistygeek 4 years ago
feisty, my credentials are the same as Al Gore's.
gordonbloyershow 4 years ago
environmentalists want it both ways.. they wouldn't let the forest department thin out trees and remove brush in southern cal. because man must never place his foot on mother nature, and when there's finally a huge fire they cry about carbon footprints.
Muzaloth 4 years ago
Gary, at the end of Lake Street.
gordonbloyershow 4 years ago
hell, if al gore had his way, we'd still be putting people in jail for singing songs he and his lovely wife tipper found offensive.i guess he could'nt make enough money in that "political" venture.
somonenamedray 4 years ago
hey ray, what are you referring to, did the greedy gores really try and make songs illegal?
Muzaloth 4 years ago
muzaloth you bet.just google "P.M.R.C." there is all kinds of info.a rap group" called 2 live crew " were arrested on stage for preforming music from their new record. because the lyrics were found to be obscene by ,i believe it was a district court,thanks to the efforts of the pmrc headed by al and tipper
somonenamedray 4 years ago
Send this video to Jim Inhofe. He's always shooting down Global Warming myths on the Senate floor.
JakeandElwoodBlues 4 years ago
Absolutely correct. Liberals bow at the altar of the GREAT GLOBAL WARMING. Do a Wikipedia search and you will see that global cooling was the biggest concern 40 years ago.
truthforamerica 4 years ago
Yeah ... sorry we bow at the alter of empirical evidence and the scientific method.
Sorry we like facts. Sorry.
reagankilledus 4 years ago
I agree 100%!!!!!!!
mieses2pieces 4 years ago