No, it's not Al Gore. It's the Club of Rome who have teamed up with the Illuminati, 911 truthers and Stanley Kubric to create a massive hoax to establish a left wing New World Order. Their first mission is to put a man on the moon because we never sent 21 people there in seven separate missions thirty years ago. Then they're going to microchip everyone and prove Charles Darwin wrong.
We're relying on people like you, who know more than all of the world's climate scientists combined to save us!
No, I'm old enough and, more importantly, SMART ENOUGH, to remember the "coming ice age" that these "scientists" were milking in the 1970s. Care to explain what happened to that gem?
Name ONE single prediction that's come true. Al Gore tried to claim at the Copenhagen conference that the summer ice has a 75% chance of disappearing in 5 years. Even the guy he tried to quote whent "WTF?".
You may be old enough but probably NOT SMART ENOUGH. The popular media was interested in the work of a scientist named Schneider who wrote a paper suggesting particulate matter in the atmosphere caused by humans may block enough sunlight to cool the globe. Real science never took it seriously and Schneider later recanted.
I'll stick to actually reading peer reviewed articles for my science, not Newsweek or the back of cereal packages thanks.
YOU mentioned Schneider and Newsweak, and then accuse me of referencing them? That's about as intellectually dishonest as you can get.
All this in the context of some faggy sing-along and then you try to talk about "peer reviewed articles"?
The "coming ice age" was another "universally accepted" and "consensus" idea that proved unsupportable, so the lefty greens went the other way and you're not smart or honest enough to admit it.
I mentioned Schneider because he was the ONLY scientist who wrote a paper on "Global Cooling". NOBODY ELSE did. The popular press blew the story up.
Deniers like you continue to chant the same bullshit even when it's refuted because you can't handle evidence and critical analysis. Then you laughably attempt to occupy the moral and intellectual high ground LOL.
What a crock. This Dana Beach guy is one for the books. His organization likes to use strong arm tactics (including entrapment) to get their way. Watch out for these characters - cause they will take your rights away.
People stop being stupid! Global warming is as real as Santa Claus, there is no such thing. This is just a scam for more government regulations. Google: Hegelian Principle, and be prepared to learn something you will not find in any university. No need to thank me, and sorry for calling you guys stupid but I needed your attention.
The Global Warming issue has made Al Gore a very rich man. That fact, in itself, is not a problem for me. The problem I have is; Gore does not live the example of what he says are important to avoid distruction, therefore; he must not believe what he preaches. Typical Politician!
Just found an interesting study on the temperature foring effect of CO2. If concludes that each doubling of CO2 in the atmosphere will cause an increase in temperature of between .4 and .6 deg C. This includes positive feedback. The IPCC advertises 6 times as much. Plug this into your google to read the paper.
If you're name is banned/removed/whatever, it's not the League doing it. Why would we want to limit the discussion? -- the whole point is more discussion.
I don't know. I suspect socialism or enforcement of newspeak. But blogagog is banned here. I made 3 comments that never appeared as blogagog, which didn't appear. Then I created this username, and voila, the post appeared!
btw, blogagog is still banned here, I just checked by making a comment and seeing it not be posted.
The only person who can ban a username from posting on a video is the owner, in this case, the individual named 'conservationleague'. Sorry, but there is no other explanation :(.
BTW, isn't the 'league' part of your name a little disingenuous?
Being that ozone has no ability to reflect energy from the sun away from the Earth, your proposal is extremely unlikely. In fact, ozone absorbs ultraviolet light, which increases the overall world temp a tiny fraction.
Does everyone on this thread believe that man is bad for the planet? Geez, what are they teaching people in school these days?
OMG! I guess I have to load up on carbon credits, drive an overpriced hybid and vote Democrat because the media assumes that Global Warming is coming full force and is all our fault ...
Joe, its Accelerated Global Warming that humans are causing, learn a little about it before you speak.
Of course the Earth has warming cycles, but it is what humans are doing that is causing global climate change. It shouldnt really be called global Warming at all, really, its global climate change.
"Change" being the operative word that scares so many people. It's unclear that humans have any effect on the climate. Maybe. Maybe not. It's just creepy that progressives (name implying progress) want to stop all progress to fight the boogieman that is global warming.
And if you disagree with them, they come at you like the SS, suggesting that you are evil, work for big oil, flattening the tires of your SUV etc. The religion of global warming is creating some scary people.
Oh yeah, this video here about global warming is real impending. I'm glad you equated global warming with the killing of 6 million Jews. To correlate the holocaust with people whose message is we want to survive is irresponsible. You Anti-Semitic jerk. Talk about evil. Jerk.
please tell me you just didnt say you were more pro-Jew than most Jews are. You dont even see when you are being anti-semitic. You're dissing most Jews and saying they are not proud Jews? Why would you say that? Why do you think that?
Good Lord you people are disingenuous. Just to change the subject, you cook up a lie to discredit me? That's pretty lame. Almost as lame as... making fun of someone's moniker! ;)
what I don't get is how people beleave global warming is somehwow man made. When in fact other planets in our solar system are warming up as well. for example mars's polar icecaps are actually melting. So how does our SUVs cause other planets to warm up aswell?
Crabs, We don't believe it is man made, but humans are contributing to global climate change to a point to where it is now destructive. And it not what we 'think' anymore, it is what we know. The jury is out, go do some homework.
Global warming hysteria is just that. To assume humans could destroy the planet is crazy. The Powers That Be are having "left leaning" public figures lie about Global Warming, then the govt. mandates will come, further stealing from the American public and further ushering in the New World Order. Wake Up AMERICA!!!!!
Oh, humans cant destroy the planet? Ever heard of Nuclear Bombs? Ever heard of AIDS and other diseases? Keep dividing yourself by this left and right debate. Your glib comments are ill conceived. Well, thats because they are not yours, you are just another follower sheep zombie. Oy vey.
Man are you a wack a doo. AIDS can destroy the planet? Thanks for the best laugh of the day, now go use the new word you learned from Tom Cruz on another thread. Rtard, you can't even understand that it is the 'left aganist the right' BS play in our media that allows such hysteria to breed. You are the zombie.
Thats fine. Just leave this to us. Please, PLEASE dont believe in AGW or anything like it. We dont need you or want you on this side. Leave the important, life saving, responsible humanitarian efforts to us. We can take it from here, small guy.
your right, believeing that NYC is going to be under water in 30 years and that we are going to fry ourselves in our man made mess, is exactly what a guy like you is cut out for. If it was not for dolts like you they would never be able get away with spreading such propaganda.
TommYXZ, you might as well give up. These people have swallowed the cult of global warming, hook, line and sinker. Science is on your side, but the masses of lemmings willing to believe what they are told about the climate are not.
It's going to be a long hard slog convincing non-scientific people that their warming fears are utter hogwash. But we must do this, if we are proponents of growth of homo-sapiens.
Wow, someone who actually makes sense on these threads. Lemmings, the right word. I mean, you have to give lots of the credit to the people who are making the "left leaning" do their bidding. people who are smart and good meaning are being fooled, this is too bad. What is scary is when these types lash out at me, thinking I am a loyal Bushie, so simple minded.
I'm not lashing out at you, and I am one of these 'types' (nice generalization by the way. A very psychotic trait) I could care less about you. Just do the right thing in life. Karma's a bitch, bro; I dont care either way. Do good and good will come your way. If you haven't done bad then you have nothing to worry about.
Like I need you to tell me that? get bent. And it is not a general statement to call people like you types. I have clearly defined the parameters for such an adjective. Just want to make the point, as in EVERY adverse response to one of my statements, the FACTS are not discussed.
Heh, you take a stupid idea you created and just run with it, huh? First attempt to insult me with name calling. Then you say I don't have a tree farm, which was a lie. Next you say I'm anti-semitic, which is a lie. Why don't you just quit while you're behind, whatacountry?
Well either you are racist, or dumb. Giving you the benefit of the doubt, we decided you were just dumb. You know, the type that never thinks before he acts or speaks. But we can change our mind if you would like.
If you ACTUALLY think that CO2 is bad, then your course is clear. Don't recycle. Bury your waste paper and plastic deep in the ground, and you will lock that carbon there. People like me will grow more trees, locking in more carbon, and use more of the oil to make new plastic (although to be honest, we only make ethylene glycol where I'm employed), and you will be saving the Earth, as far as your mind can comprehend.
Can't make it more clear than that :(. Bury organic garbage deep in the ground to lock the carbon in it out of the atmosphere. When tree farms like ours grows more trees, the net carbon in the air will decline a little. Over time, a lot.
I sort of do that already, as I compost. Google it if you don't know what it is.
So 'when' tree farms like yours? I call BS. You dont have a tree farm, c'mon, man. We knew you were a liar but that is taking it a bit too far. We see you chopping down old growth trees like the greedy animal you are.
You don't understand then :(. Composting is great for gardening, but it is breaking down organic material and generating CO2. To keep the carbon in the ground, you have to bury it deep and have a lot of pressure on it (in the form of dirt) so that it won't decompose (aka compost).
No, YOU dont understand! U think u r a Jedi but I guarantee u I can see what u r up 2 a mile away. Of all the things that can happen 2 organic materials, composting is best. Burning puts material in the air as CO2. Burying in a landfill causes production of methane gas, which is 20X worse than CO2 as a g-house gas. In composting 60% of carbon is slowly returned 2 atmosphere, but the other 40% is very helpful in stimulating rapid plant growth & soil life which can absorb CO2 4 many years. CONT'D
and because you think you are funny and a smart ass, I'll add that yes, we HAVE to get rid of waste, and that waste will have some CO2. But we do it in the way that has the least ecological footprint. I'm SURE you don't compost, recycle, or do anything resourceful at this point.
We have waste matter, no matter what. We DONT have to burn Fossil Fuels, though. There are alternatives.
Ok I put the photos up. "blogiburton blogspot com" (you supply the dots). I made it the third most recent post since it's only for you to look at.
You are forgetting one of the things that can happen to organic material. It can be made to not decompose at all, generating zero CO2 or methane. Have you ever heard of stories where people go to landfills and find 100 year old newspapers, 0% decomposed? It's a fact, and it's easily do-able, if lowering CO2 in the air is one of your concerns
Don't get me wrong. We make and use compost by the ton in that little garden we have. But I don't care if extra CO2 is in the air (in fact, I and my plants welcome it!). I support your making of compost, but it's a little hypocritical if you are truly concerned with the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere.
Ok, but I hope you will, if not apologize for calling me a liar, at least express that I am not.
It is (a bit) hypocritical because you know of a way to make less CO2 with those grass clippings, leaves, wood-based products, plastics, etc. If you put them in a traditional burying landfill, the carbon will likely never return to a gas. Hence, it will be locked in the Earth's crust.
If you recycle/compost, it will DEFINITELY become CO2 or methane in the future. Composted material will be decomposed by bacteria. Waste plastics will most likely be burned for energy, becoming CO2, sooner or later.
So you have a choice: have your garbage make 0lbs of CO2, or let it decompose completely. You seem to be choosing the high CO2 option.
So, what, no apology? You must be a progressive :(.
Your information is factually incorrect. 100% of the carbon in a compost heap becomes CO2. Plant roots cannot absorb fixed carbon (non-gaseous carbon) unless it is in the form of a sugar. Sugars are not created by composted. Rather, they are consumed.
Question: Do you think that if you compost, the garbage man isn't going to show up at your house to see if you have garbage to throw away? If not, then your argument makes little sense.
Ok Sorry, yes, you are master gardener, my apologies. re: the garbage man, if more people c-posted there would be many less garbage trucks. Supply & Demand. Yes, a progressive & proud of it! See, its not JUST about me. U probably dont even vote right? How could 1 vote count, right?
C-posting is not just about CO2, its about greenhouse gasses in general.
It helps reduce methane emissions. Methane can be way worse than CO2.
Thank you for that non-heartfelt apology! Will you now admit that I probably am a chemical engineer as I said? Or do I have to prove that too? Face it, I'm the environmentalist's worst nightmare: A person who loves the land and also understands science. A person who spouts the truth is the anti-Christ to an environmentalist.
Assuming 'C-posted' means 'composted', your argument makes great sense. But only in cities. In rural areas, the trucks have to visit each house no matter what, and usually leave without a full load.
So, are you promoting composting in inner city areas? If so, have you ever visited inner cities? Charleston is near you. Think you could find spots for them to compost?
Let me ask you something than, environment lover: What are YOU doing for the environment? Except arguing with people that are trying to fight for a cleaner planet?
Good question, my smug friend! I am running a tree farm where we plant ~30 acres of pine saplings a year (it runs about 60/40 slash/loblolly). We have enough space to go for 4 or 5 more years. But don't assume I'm one of those sissy hippie liberals. I clear-cut when they are mature, and then do it again. So here's my advice to you:
Here is the interesting thing about global warming I am just noticing: most of its detractors could give a crap about the environment to begin with. They dont care, they have never cared about any enviro issues. They dont recycle, conserve, or educate themselves about how to live cleaner. Its really not about global warming at all for these people, its the general lack of caring about themselves, their offspring and all others on earth the bogger picture. Can a brotha get a witness?
To add, these are concepts that just cannot be understood by a feeble mind, which is why when you challenge a detractor, they fall apart at the seems almost immediately. Its awesome sometimes because agw is proven, and they have the burden of disproving now, which they cannot seem to do. At all.
Again, you are mistaken, whattacountry :(. We care deeply about the environment. But you are correct if you say we don't care about environmentalists or their issues. But that's just because they are hippies, and prone to make wildly inaccurate predictions. Environment - good. Environmentalists - bad.
Look, we know exactly what a scientist would do when they are convinced a catastrophe is coming and the politicians ignore them. They build a rocket and launch their children to safety.
Since no scientist has yet done this, clearly there is no catastrophe coming. -- EricJ.
It's a joke, referencing every old scifi movie that predicted doom and gloom for the Earth. Sorry it went over your head.
Here's something that isn't a joke! "U.S. Senate Report: Over 400 Prominent Scientists Disputed Man-Made Global Warming Claims in 2007". And these are not the kind of scientists that are paid by the UN to skew their data. They work for free!
Actually, I only had to explain it to you. Everyone else got it. And scientists often do scientific study for free if they are important enough.
Theories on gravity, relativity, origin of the species, etc were all done for free. The damage that can be done to the world by trying to solve the non-issue of global warming is becoming so important that concerned scientists are willing to help out sans paycheck.
I wish you'd stop with the name-calling. It is difficult to hold discussions with someone who acts like a child :(.
Nevertheless, Einstein was quite poor in 1905 when he developed his theory. He was not paid for it.
We agree, Darwin was not paid for his work, and Newton was not paid for his initial work. Yes, he ended up making money from it's practical applications, but he was not paid beforehand, like the UN scientists were.
This is where the problem lies. People paid to do a study, or predictive science, are invariably swayed by what their employers want the study to say. Much like you would doubt a study paid for by Exxon/Mobil, you should doubt a study paid for by the UN. Yet you don't. You should look at the data yourself. Yet you don't. It's lemming mentality, and I despise it.
"This is where the problem lies. People paid to do a study, or predictive science, are invariably swayed by what their employers want the study to say. Much like you would doubt a study paid for by Exxon/Mobil, you should doubt a study paid for by the UN."
All right up until the UN part. Exxon Mobil is a company will billion dollar execs. CONTINUED
The UN is a HUGE, extremely democratic structured organization based upon the GNU of countries with an enormous voting contingency.
your entire argument is breaking doen before our eyes now you are blaming the Un, c'mon guy. You are almost there! Open your eyes. We wont blame you for seeing the light now.
You know what. Fuck it. We dont need you on our side you are good for nothing. The environment needs caring, pro active individuals that are willing to make a sacrifice for the sake of human kind. It takes courage. If it were up to you and we did nothing, then where are we? So lets do something.
SO say GW doesnt exist. Would not it better to do something than nothing? Lets clean up the Earth. GW causes pollution, cancer, disease and robs the land of space and resources it needs to keep us and all life alive.
Is this so tough to accept and do something about?
"The UN is a HUGE, extremely democratic structured organization"
Oh dear. If you truly believe that, we are operating on different levels of reality. Any one of 5 nations has absolute veto power over any UN security rule, and if it gets past that, China, pop. 1.3 billion, has the same voting power of Lichtenstein, pop, 25 thousand. Not to mention that a third to half of the countries in the UN are not democracies at all. But rather despots or kings.
"SO say GW doesnt exist. Would not it better to do something than nothing?"
I am saying this exact thing. It would be MUCH better to do nothing, and use the money we save to help poor and starving people. Imaginary problems are not worth investing time and energy on, especially since we have so many REAL problems that need solving right now.
You are the negative one. I'm being quite positive. The world is not being damaged by people. No doom and gloom here!
I will say I'm a scientist, but you may disagree. I have a BS ChemE and have worked in computer simulations of chemical plants (specifically in wastewater cleanup and urea plant design)
Your childish name calling and statements like 'pwned' have no effect on me whattacountry :).
Just stay far away from this issue, my town and my kids. Better leave this responsibility to us. You stay home and keep writing your blog, we'll take it from here, little man.
We dont need you, and, we have never wanted people like you anyway! Long live the Hummer, George Bush, and greed, right!? Woo Hoo!
I'm totally fine with you wasting your life on this non-issue! The best thing about the US is that we are free. Just don't try to pass laws that make me pay because you are a worrier. Is that too much to ask? Remember, with all this angst you are building up about how we are destroying the world, you could write poetry or something! Wouldn't that be great for a person like you?
Read up on the concept of radiative forcing. That's the influence of an element acting on the climate system (e.g. CO2, or changes in solar output) on the greenhouse effect.
As it turns out, while there may be some SMALL variations in solar output, the radiative forcing of the sun is only 1/14th of human activities.
In other words, while the changes in the sun's output can have an effect on global climate, it is minuscule compared to greenhouse gases.
See, this is another theory that is wholly disproven by historical data, jg. We have had thousands of times more CO2 in our atmosphere, +thousands of times more CH4, and yet the Earth cooled!
It's suspected that the temp went up a bit, which led to more clouds, which are light reflecting ice crystals, which led to the cooling, but we don't know for sure. All we DO know is that massive amounts of CO2 didn't hurt the planet.
Ever notice how every time the Drudge Report posts something (anything) about global warming/climate change, it's always right next to an article about it snowing nearby. The only thing that annoys me more than his editorial decisions is the fact that I read him damn page often enough to notice trends.
Drudge is actually a believer in the global warming religion. Back when he had a radio show he would explain nightly that he totally bought the bile Gore was spewing.
Continuing what I was saying to sumpeeple, the gasses that were spewed out by these volcanoes were not the sole cause of the death of nearly fifty percent of all life on earth at the time. No, for they needed a comet to hit them, brand-new forms of flowers to poison the animals, and many other things. My point is that the volcanoes erupted so much ash, so many horrible gasses, that they should have destroyed the environment on their own.
They did not, however. For the environment is not a fickle, delicate thing. It is very rigid. There are examples all throughout history that say this. The lesser known Eocene Extinction, for example. The earth got cooler, and the Tethys sea dried out. The environment did not do "Crazy Things," it just got continually colder over time.
Wow did you copy THAT right out of a book!! You missed something though.. (well, you missed MANY things actually) how many humans were around 65 million years ago?
They were not. The volcanoes are explainable by the fact that they still exist, they're just very worn down.. The ash is explainable by what's called carbon dating. What else did I miss?
P.S, let's try and avoid obnoxiousness, alright? Let's just keep this at debate, not argument, level.
Are you a creationist? I can understand how you would be unable to comprehend this concept if you were. However, this would mean that you have no scientific opinion whatsoever as you are unable to accept obvious, sometimes visual, evidence.
As well, what book are you referring to that I took my information out of? And another thing, did you research your information, either? This is not mentioning your unbelievable attitude towards me in this debate. Children are obnoxious during a fight. Children become red-faced during a fight. I am trying to avoid both. Obviously you are obnoxious. You are also probably very red-faced if you are intelligent enough to read this paragraph.
Am I? Are you trying to shut me up or are you serious? Was that entire thing just an attempt at starting a fight? And as for my speech, I assure you, I am quite mad. That does not make me wrong.
And furthermore, I am quite relaxed thank you. This is just how author's write their responses on the computer. I am aware that it makes me sound like I'm fuckin' nuts.
At any rate, Sumpeeple, you're an asshole and I hope I never have the displeasure of meeting you. Global warming will help the environment recover after the human race is gone, and if you don't like the way I feel, well, go fuck yourselves.
Anyways, let's get back to the subject, alright? The point I made earlier was very simple; the volcanoes in the Cretaceous did not kill off every living thing on the planet, although they did rather badly damage it for a short time, so why would a tiny amount of Greenhouse Gas emissions? And, as I said before, the environment is very straightforwards in both the short term and long term. If it gets warmer, it gets warmer. It doesn't just go nuts.
Well, I just came back one last time to see if you had a parting blow to give out. Since it's pretty clear you know you're wrong-or perhaps your mommy has tucked you in-I will leave this video until tomorrow. So be sure to give some irrational statement about my sanity while I'm gone.
Ok you got me, you got me! You are SO funny! Uncle!!!
PLEASE re-read you postings one day. We were on the floor, we couldnt breathe! Your a pretty funny guy, I'll give you that much! We all actually thought for a second that you were for real! Good one.
Thats actually an interesting character to play.."angry weirdo GWG detractor guy". Do you do other posts? Please please please send them to me!!!
Just one last thing; if you really are too thick to understand what I said before, than you're probably just some dumbass kid that I've wasted my time talking to. It's nice knowing just how stupid people without lives are.
Re-read your postings. From one posting to the next you become a classic, psychotic character. My belly really, really hurts from laughing. So you are not true. You had us for a second, though! We are on to you now! Your sooo funny! Wait a second, your not Canadian, are you? A HA HA HA HEE HA HA HEE HA HAW HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA!!!!!!!!!!!
Go learn about climate change and get back to me! I cant have a conversation with someone who is pulling comments out of their arse. But you're Canadian, so half of me forgives you! Must be the water.
Again, I am not Canadian. And, again, I know far more about the climate than you. Pull your head out of your own ass and listen to someone who is currently studying climatology at Oxford University. Honestly, I can understand why you are such a jackass, probably being a Yank, but calling me a Canadian? Jesus!
Touche. You know, I'm surprised that you know what Canada is; the Americans are nothing more than a bunch of retards who all hate their presidents. From what I hear, most of you don't even know that there are countries outside of the United States. Oh, and another thing, I'm from Alberta. Trust me, there's nothing wrong with us. You're thinking of the guys from Ottawa and Quebec. Over here the only problem is that half of us call guys from Edmonton "City Folk."
And as for you're opinion on Canadian water, it's frozen for nine months of the year, which kills anything bad in it. We're smarter, stronger, and generally better than any Yank could ever hope to be.
In most scientific circles the issue is no longer whether or not climate change is a potentially serious problem, but rather, how the problem will develop, what its effects will be, how these can be best detected, and what measures can be taken to reduce the damage. The media, at times, leaves the impression that scientists are still discussing whether or not the climate is really changing as a result of emissions of greenhouse gases. This is not the case.
In actuality there is a broad agreement on this issue among scientists and experts, as represented by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). No scientific material has ever been presented in scientific form which challenges the main conclusions of the IPCC, in spite of the fact that the IPCC has an open process that invites critical views.
Well, finally we're back on topic. Anyone who says the debate is over is mistaken. Climatologists are slowly gaining ground on the proof that global warming is not harmful, and probably does not exist. Furthermore, you are still not listening to what I have said about the Cretaceous Extinction. The volcanoes in India spewed out so much gas and ash, far worse than that let out by us.
Despite this gas, the earth could not be destroyed. It was damaged, but it took a comet to finish the job. We cannot cause anything worse than what the Indian volcanoes did. And furthermore, we cannot cause anything even close to what they did.
My point still remains is that global warming is quite harmless and even beneficial. Life does better when the earth gets warmer. Droughts, contrary to belief, decrease in number. The water vapor in the atmosphere does not cause the environment to go crazy, it just rains down. For a time it may deflect some sunlight, but it already does that and without much consequence.
And then every man and woman at the University of Alberta. Look them up on Wikipedia or on google, I don't care. Regardless of who they are, this really doesn't change the fact in what I am saying.
Fred Singer = special interest tool. A 2007 Newsweek cover story on climate change denial reported "In April '98 a dozen people from the denial machine including the Marshall Institute, Fred Singers group & EXXON, met at the Amer Petrol Institute's DC HQ's. They proposed a $5 mil campaign, according to a leaked 8-page memo, to convince the public that the science of gw is riddled with controversy & uncertainty."
The plan was reportedly aimed at "raising questions about & undercutting the prevailing scientific wisdom" on climate change". According 2 Newsweek the plan was leaked 2 the press & therefore was never implemented.
RP is consciously using his training as a pol scientist & his platform 2 shape the debate about g clim change. He is doing this 2 further both policy goals that he favors AND his career. Nothing about this is wrong per se, BUT those who disagree w his policy goals & the assumptions from which they either precede or follow need 2 recognize that his playbook is political AND scientific; not solely scientific.
Trying 2 meet Roger Pielke on the basis of science alone will in the long run be a losing game. In other words, the issue is not only the science, but the tactics.
Touche. Anyways, I don't want to argue anymore. Let's just have a truce; neither of us are convinced of anything, and neither will be. I'm stubborn, you're stubborn. Whatever. You're a damn fine opponent, Sumpeeple.
Oh come on, it was just getting good. I was enjoying reading the back and forth and while you had some interesting points jackhenry, i think sumpeeple got the better of you.
Hmm...thanks for your support? Is that what I'm supposed to say? Whatever. I'd rather not continue the argument. Let that blogagog guy, or maybe you, finish the fight.
Look at this internet tough girl, blogogag. Ever wonder why our world is in the crapper? Its because of ladies like her. Her blog is the biggest piece of stinking dog doo, its horrible.
i fully agree. 'blogogags' blog is riggity rank. sucks big time. i think she is a kid its not written too well. and to sumpeeple: u totally picked apart jackhenry by the way that was fun to watch. i was hoping that u actually knew what u were talking about! i like that when u made ur point she ran away with her tail in between her legs
"I did not believe in AGW until 1 week ago. My boyfriend is a staunch AGW detractor, but his arguments always had holes in it. together with gagonhisblog's bs website and immature rantings, along with real science from sumpeeple, made me absolutely take my first real stance that AGW does in fact, exist. Al Gore, sorry for doubting you at first. watching AIT again, it makes SO MUCH SENSE!"
I just wanted to say you negative folk need to get a life. You're getting so worked up over a music video on youtube and signing on to leave comments every other hour debating global warming since the video went up two weeks ago. Get over it...global warming is real and viewing this video only creates more hits to make this an even more popular debate...which is what us global warming believers want!
oh, and thanks for entertaining me for those of you that feel like you need to correct each other's grammar and spelling, all the while slamming global warming believers...you guys are out to save the world one word at a time
People who don't believe global warming is affect by man are not 'negative'. We are very positive in fact! The world is great, and it will continue to be great. We're not the ones predicting doom and gloom. Worry about it if you want, but leave me out of it (meaning, don't try to pass laws forcing me to adjust my habits because of your worries) and all will be good!
WAY WAY cool. Great video, great message! Thanks!
Scientologee 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
NEW truth - just out!
Global Warming -
SEE "Lord Christopher Monckton: From Global Warming to Global Governance"
A MUST see . . .
SEE "Lord Christopher Monckton: From Global Warming to Global Governance"
This has become a lot worse than we ever thought it could, and "Lord Christopher Monckton: From Global Warming to Global Governance" shows us why.
NEW truth - just out!
Global Warming - SEE "Lord Christopher Monckton: From Global Warming to Global Governance"
A MUST see . . .
weallknowitstrue 2 years ago
Talentless enviro-fags making a grade-school video.
They couldn't sell "global warming", so now it's "Climate Change".
Meanwhile, AlGore's making a $ Billion.
Suckers!!!
sjsample 2 years ago
No, it's not Al Gore. It's the Club of Rome who have teamed up with the Illuminati, 911 truthers and Stanley Kubric to create a massive hoax to establish a left wing New World Order. Their first mission is to put a man on the moon because we never sent 21 people there in seven separate missions thirty years ago. Then they're going to microchip everyone and prove Charles Darwin wrong.
We're relying on people like you, who know more than all of the world's climate scientists combined to save us!
thefutureisvegan 2 years ago
No, I'm old enough and, more importantly, SMART ENOUGH, to remember the "coming ice age" that these "scientists" were milking in the 1970s. Care to explain what happened to that gem?
Name ONE single prediction that's come true. Al Gore tried to claim at the Copenhagen conference that the summer ice has a 75% chance of disappearing in 5 years. Even the guy he tried to quote whent "WTF?".
sjsample 2 years ago
You may be old enough but probably NOT SMART ENOUGH. The popular media was interested in the work of a scientist named Schneider who wrote a paper suggesting particulate matter in the atmosphere caused by humans may block enough sunlight to cool the globe. Real science never took it seriously and Schneider later recanted.
I'll stick to actually reading peer reviewed articles for my science, not Newsweek or the back of cereal packages thanks.
thefutureisvegan 2 years ago
YOU mentioned Schneider and Newsweak, and then accuse me of referencing them? That's about as intellectually dishonest as you can get.
All this in the context of some faggy sing-along and then you try to talk about "peer reviewed articles"?
The "coming ice age" was another "universally accepted" and "consensus" idea that proved unsupportable, so the lefty greens went the other way and you're not smart or honest enough to admit it.
sjsample 2 years ago
I mentioned Schneider because he was the ONLY scientist who wrote a paper on "Global Cooling". NOBODY ELSE did. The popular press blew the story up.
Deniers like you continue to chant the same bullshit even when it's refuted because you can't handle evidence and critical analysis. Then you laughably attempt to occupy the moral and intellectual high ground LOL.
thefutureisvegan 2 years ago
MIT PHD Richard Lindzen..Deconstructing global warming...google it
hamletundone 2 years ago
What a crock. This Dana Beach guy is one for the books. His organization likes to use strong arm tactics (including entrapment) to get their way. Watch out for these characters - cause they will take your rights away.
luswinton 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
People stop being stupid! Global warming is as real as Santa Claus, there is no such thing. This is just a scam for more government regulations. Google: Hegelian Principle, and be prepared to learn something you will not find in any university. No need to thank me, and sorry for calling you guys stupid but I needed your attention.
Quiksilver209 3 years ago
Only stooges to nuclear power try and publisise global warming , the UK had the worst summer on record last year!
JonThm 3 years ago
Only stooges to nuclear power try and publisise global warming , the UK had the worst summer on record last year!
JonThm 3 years ago
CO2 supports life on Earth. Nuclear power thought up GW top kill it.
JonThm 3 years ago
your a dumbass
masler25 3 years ago
It's "You're a dumbass", dumbass.
FilmPA 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
The Global Warming issue has made Al Gore a very rich man. That fact, in itself, is not a problem for me. The problem I have is; Gore does not live the example of what he says are important to avoid distruction, therefore; he must not believe what he preaches. Typical Politician!
hokushin99 4 years ago
Global Warming was only ever a flight of academic fiction - supported by computer models, not reality!
JonThm 4 years ago
Just found an interesting study on the temperature foring effect of CO2. If concludes that each doubling of CO2 in the atmosphere will cause an increase in temperature of between .4 and .6 deg C. This includes positive feedback. The IPCC advertises 6 times as much. Plug this into your google to read the paper.
dietze co2 estimation forcing
vsaluki 4 years ago
I love this video
utoobmytoob 4 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Luckily, you can make another (thanks for the idea, guy who is whattacountry/sumpeeple/inthistowinthis!)
gagonblog 4 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Look out. If you try to spread the truth, the conservation league will ban your username!
gagonblog 4 years ago
If you're name is banned/removed/whatever, it's not the League doing it. Why would we want to limit the discussion? -- the whole point is more discussion.
ConservationLeague 4 years ago
I don't know. I suspect socialism or enforcement of newspeak. But blogagog is banned here. I made 3 comments that never appeared as blogagog, which didn't appear. Then I created this username, and voila, the post appeared!
gagonblog 4 years ago
btw, blogagog is still banned here, I just checked by making a comment and seeing it not be posted.
The only person who can ban a username from posting on a video is the owner, in this case, the individual named 'conservationleague'. Sorry, but there is no other explanation :(.
BTW, isn't the 'league' part of your name a little disingenuous?
gagonblog 4 years ago
great vid Global warming is real ! ! !
xxxxDovertheManxxxx 4 years ago
Except it's caused by the sun, not people.
blogagog 4 years ago
its caused by holes in the ozone layer that were cause by smog and shit ... cause by people
xxxxDovertheManxxxx 4 years ago
Being that ozone has no ability to reflect energy from the sun away from the Earth, your proposal is extremely unlikely. In fact, ozone absorbs ultraviolet light, which increases the overall world temp a tiny fraction.
Does everyone on this thread believe that man is bad for the planet? Geez, what are they teaching people in school these days?
blogagog 4 years ago
Global warming is not man made and it is being used as an excuse to suck the wealth out of the middle class. Learn about the New World Order.
WTC7WasPulled 4 years ago
I think you have the GW debate confused with the Iraqi War.
$480,000,000,000 and (still) growing $275 million per day.
THAT is what is killing the middle class.
whattacountry 4 years ago
what was that girl sniffing at 0:45
jelloofhell 4 years ago
coal dust
Lohrrito 4 years ago
OMG! I guess I have to load up on carbon credits, drive an overpriced hybid and vote Democrat because the media assumes that Global Warming is coming full force and is all our fault ...
joehiogovernor 4 years ago
Joe, its Accelerated Global Warming that humans are causing, learn a little about it before you speak.
Of course the Earth has warming cycles, but it is what humans are doing that is causing global climate change. It shouldnt really be called global Warming at all, really, its global climate change.
utoobmytoob 4 years ago
"Change" being the operative word that scares so many people. It's unclear that humans have any effect on the climate. Maybe. Maybe not. It's just creepy that progressives (name implying progress) want to stop all progress to fight the boogieman that is global warming.
And if you disagree with them, they come at you like the SS, suggesting that you are evil, work for big oil, flattening the tires of your SUV etc. The religion of global warming is creating some scary people.
blogagog 4 years ago
Oh yeah, this video here about global warming is real impending. I'm glad you equated global warming with the killing of 6 million Jews. To correlate the holocaust with people whose message is we want to survive is irresponsible. You Anti-Semitic jerk. Talk about evil. Jerk.
whattacountry 4 years ago
I did WHAT!? Don't be silly. I'm more pro-Jew than most Jews are.
blogagog 4 years ago
please tell me you just didnt say you were more pro-Jew than most Jews are. You dont even see when you are being anti-semitic. You're dissing most Jews and saying they are not proud Jews? Why would you say that? Why do you think that?
whattacountry 4 years ago
I didn't say anyone wasn't a proud Jew. You did. I never even mentioned Jews until you tried to make up the fact that I was anti-semitic.
blogagog 4 years ago
Yeah, that was wrong, gagonablog. Im not even trying to be funny now. Stop with the anti-jew stuff, thats uncalled for.
sumpeeple 4 years ago
Good Lord you people are disingenuous. Just to change the subject, you cook up a lie to discredit me? That's pretty lame. Almost as lame as... making fun of someone's moniker! ;)
blogagog 4 years ago
Didn't cook up anything. You wrote it, its here in b & w. But I digress.
Global Warming is going to get worse if we keep this industrial creschendo of greenhouse gases spewing into our atmosphere.
CONSERVE, REUSE, RECYCLE, INFORM.
Don't let those who don't care about this planet get you down! I love life! Power to the PEOPLE.
whattacountry 4 years ago
And probably illegal, Gagsonurblog.
inthistowinthis 4 years ago
i forgive you. Your just didnt think before you wrote it. please let it be that!
whattacountry 4 years ago
I in turn accept your apology for you repeated lies expressed by you and your sockpuppet 'sumpeeple'!
Just don't do it anymore, ok? Thanks.
blogagog 4 years ago
what I don't get is how people beleave global warming is somehwow man made. When in fact other planets in our solar system are warming up as well. for example mars's polar icecaps are actually melting. So how does our SUVs cause other planets to warm up aswell?
crabbyx24 4 years ago
Holy crap!! Your car blew up Mars, too!?! Those things really are too big!!!
CampHazzard 4 years ago
Crabs, We don't believe it is man made, but humans are contributing to global climate change to a point to where it is now destructive. And it not what we 'think' anymore, it is what we know. The jury is out, go do some homework.
utoobmytoob 4 years ago 2
Global warming hysteria is just that. To assume humans could destroy the planet is crazy. The Powers That Be are having "left leaning" public figures lie about Global Warming, then the govt. mandates will come, further stealing from the American public and further ushering in the New World Order. Wake Up AMERICA!!!!!
TommYYZ 4 years ago
Oh, humans cant destroy the planet? Ever heard of Nuclear Bombs? Ever heard of AIDS and other diseases? Keep dividing yourself by this left and right debate. Your glib comments are ill conceived. Well, thats because they are not yours, you are just another follower sheep zombie. Oy vey.
utoobmytoob 4 years ago 3
Man are you a wack a doo. AIDS can destroy the planet? Thanks for the best laugh of the day, now go use the new word you learned from Tom Cruz on another thread. Rtard, you can't even understand that it is the 'left aganist the right' BS play in our media that allows such hysteria to breed. You are the zombie.
TommYYZ 4 years ago
Thats fine. Just leave this to us. Please, PLEASE dont believe in AGW or anything like it. We dont need you or want you on this side. Leave the important, life saving, responsible humanitarian efforts to us. We can take it from here, small guy.
utoobmytoob 4 years ago
your right, believeing that NYC is going to be under water in 30 years and that we are going to fry ourselves in our man made mess, is exactly what a guy like you is cut out for. If it was not for dolts like you they would never be able get away with spreading such propaganda.
TommYYZ 4 years ago
who is this "they" you speak of?
whattacountry 4 years ago
TommYXZ, you might as well give up. These people have swallowed the cult of global warming, hook, line and sinker. Science is on your side, but the masses of lemmings willing to believe what they are told about the climate are not.
It's going to be a long hard slog convincing non-scientific people that their warming fears are utter hogwash. But we must do this, if we are proponents of growth of homo-sapiens.
blogagog 4 years ago
hysterical! Notice we are having this dialogue on a pro-global warming web-page.
whattacountry 4 years ago
Wow, someone who actually makes sense on these threads. Lemmings, the right word. I mean, you have to give lots of the credit to the people who are making the "left leaning" do their bidding. people who are smart and good meaning are being fooled, this is too bad. What is scary is when these types lash out at me, thinking I am a loyal Bushie, so simple minded.
TommYYZ 4 years ago
I'm not lashing out at you, and I am one of these 'types' (nice generalization by the way. A very psychotic trait) I could care less about you. Just do the right thing in life. Karma's a bitch, bro; I dont care either way. Do good and good will come your way. If you haven't done bad then you have nothing to worry about.
whattacountry 4 years ago
Like I need you to tell me that? get bent. And it is not a general statement to call people like you types. I have clearly defined the parameters for such an adjective. Just want to make the point, as in EVERY adverse response to one of my statements, the FACTS are not discussed.
TommYYZ 4 years ago 2
tell it to the judge.
anyhoo
1. REPLACE INCANDESCENT LIGHT BULBS WITH COMPACT FLUORESCENTS
2. REUSE, CONSERVE, RECYCLE
3. PLANT A TREE
4. BUY LOCAL
5. CONSIDER THE IMPACT OF YOUR INVESTMENTS
whattacountry 4 years ago
gagonablog, take your anti-semitic posts to another web page please.
whattacountry 4 years ago
Heh, you take a stupid idea you created and just run with it, huh? First attempt to insult me with name calling. Then you say I don't have a tree farm, which was a lie. Next you say I'm anti-semitic, which is a lie. Why don't you just quit while you're behind, whatacountry?
blogagog 4 years ago
Well either you are racist, or dumb. Giving you the benefit of the doubt, we decided you were just dumb. You know, the type that never thinks before he acts or speaks. But we can change our mind if you would like.
whattacountry 4 years ago
You are projecting. Please stop. Also, have you stopped beating your pets yet? That's sick, whattacountry. Beating animals is wrong.
blogagog 4 years ago
oh my god Tommy you worthless.
sumpeeple 4 years ago
god i cant take this anymore! where are all these wackos coming from? why are these right wing ding dongs searching for global warming on
youtube if they don't believe in it?
they are SO full of it!
whattacountry 4 years ago
If you ACTUALLY think that CO2 is bad, then your course is clear. Don't recycle. Bury your waste paper and plastic deep in the ground, and you will lock that carbon there. People like me will grow more trees, locking in more carbon, and use more of the oil to make new plastic (although to be honest, we only make ethylene glycol where I'm employed), and you will be saving the Earth, as far as your mind can comprehend.
blogagog 4 years ago
huh?
utoobmytoob 4 years ago
Can't make it more clear than that :(. Bury organic garbage deep in the ground to lock the carbon in it out of the atmosphere. When tree farms like ours grows more trees, the net carbon in the air will decline a little. Over time, a lot.
blogagog 4 years ago
I sort of do that already, as I compost. Google it if you don't know what it is.
So 'when' tree farms like yours? I call BS. You dont have a tree farm, c'mon, man. We knew you were a liar but that is taking it a bit too far. We see you chopping down old growth trees like the greedy animal you are.
whattacountry 4 years ago
You don't understand then :(. Composting is great for gardening, but it is breaking down organic material and generating CO2. To keep the carbon in the ground, you have to bury it deep and have a lot of pressure on it (in the form of dirt) so that it won't decompose (aka compost).
blogagog 4 years ago
You doubting my farm is easily rectified. Give me about 10 minutes and go to my website. I'll have photos up for you.
blogagog 4 years ago
No, YOU dont understand! U think u r a Jedi but I guarantee u I can see what u r up 2 a mile away. Of all the things that can happen 2 organic materials, composting is best. Burning puts material in the air as CO2. Burying in a landfill causes production of methane gas, which is 20X worse than CO2 as a g-house gas. In composting 60% of carbon is slowly returned 2 atmosphere, but the other 40% is very helpful in stimulating rapid plant growth & soil life which can absorb CO2 4 many years. CONT'D
whattacountry 4 years ago
CONT'D
and because you think you are funny and a smart ass, I'll add that yes, we HAVE to get rid of waste, and that waste will have some CO2. But we do it in the way that has the least ecological footprint. I'm SURE you don't compost, recycle, or do anything resourceful at this point.
We have waste matter, no matter what. We DONT have to burn Fossil Fuels, though. There are alternatives.
whattacountry 4 years ago
Ok I put the photos up. "blogiburton blogspot com" (you supply the dots). I made it the third most recent post since it's only for you to look at.
You are forgetting one of the things that can happen to organic material. It can be made to not decompose at all, generating zero CO2 or methane. Have you ever heard of stories where people go to landfills and find 100 year old newspapers, 0% decomposed? It's a fact, and it's easily do-able, if lowering CO2 in the air is one of your concerns
blogagog 4 years ago
Don't get me wrong. We make and use compost by the ton in that little garden we have. But I don't care if extra CO2 is in the air (in fact, I and my plants welcome it!). I support your making of compost, but it's a little hypocritical if you are truly concerned with the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere.
blogagog 4 years ago
Please explain how it is hypocritical.
whattacountry 4 years ago
Ok, but I hope you will, if not apologize for calling me a liar, at least express that I am not.
It is (a bit) hypocritical because you know of a way to make less CO2 with those grass clippings, leaves, wood-based products, plastics, etc. If you put them in a traditional burying landfill, the carbon will likely never return to a gas. Hence, it will be locked in the Earth's crust.
blogagog 4 years ago
If you recycle/compost, it will DEFINITELY become CO2 or methane in the future. Composted material will be decomposed by bacteria. Waste plastics will most likely be burned for energy, becoming CO2, sooner or later.
So you have a choice: have your garbage make 0lbs of CO2, or let it decompose completely. You seem to be choosing the high CO2 option.
If it's any consolation, I do too.
blogagog 4 years ago
You are forgetting about the abundant CO2 used by the huge, polluting trucks hauling it to and from the landfills.
Garden Compost = 60% carbon slow return to air, 40% goes back into soil which grows big trees that absorb Co2, so it even outs over time.
NO trucks to haul garbage to landfill, or anywhere else for that matter.
whattacountry 4 years ago
So, what, no apology? You must be a progressive :(.
Your information is factually incorrect. 100% of the carbon in a compost heap becomes CO2. Plant roots cannot absorb fixed carbon (non-gaseous carbon) unless it is in the form of a sugar. Sugars are not created by composted. Rather, they are consumed.
Question: Do you think that if you compost, the garbage man isn't going to show up at your house to see if you have garbage to throw away? If not, then your argument makes little sense.
blogagog 4 years ago
Ok Sorry, yes, you are master gardener, my apologies. re: the garbage man, if more people c-posted there would be many less garbage trucks. Supply & Demand. Yes, a progressive & proud of it! See, its not JUST about me. U probably dont even vote right? How could 1 vote count, right?
C-posting is not just about CO2, its about greenhouse gasses in general.
It helps reduce methane emissions. Methane can be way worse than CO2.
whattacountry 4 years ago
Thank you for that non-heartfelt apology! Will you now admit that I probably am a chemical engineer as I said? Or do I have to prove that too? Face it, I'm the environmentalist's worst nightmare: A person who loves the land and also understands science. A person who spouts the truth is the anti-Christ to an environmentalist.
I can play that role :).
blogagog 4 years ago
Assuming 'C-posted' means 'composted', your argument makes great sense. But only in cities. In rural areas, the trucks have to visit each house no matter what, and usually leave without a full load.
So, are you promoting composting in inner city areas? If so, have you ever visited inner cities? Charleston is near you. Think you could find spots for them to compost?
blogagog 4 years ago
Let me ask you something than, environment lover: What are YOU doing for the environment? Except arguing with people that are trying to fight for a cleaner planet?
whattacountry 4 years ago 2
Good question, my smug friend! I am running a tree farm where we plant ~30 acres of pine saplings a year (it runs about 60/40 slash/loblolly). We have enough space to go for 4 or 5 more years. But don't assume I'm one of those sissy hippie liberals. I clear-cut when they are mature, and then do it again. So here's my advice to you:
blogagog 4 years ago
Here is the interesting thing about global warming I am just noticing: most of its detractors could give a crap about the environment to begin with. They dont care, they have never cared about any enviro issues. They dont recycle, conserve, or educate themselves about how to live cleaner. Its really not about global warming at all for these people, its the general lack of caring about themselves, their offspring and all others on earth the bogger picture. Can a brotha get a witness?
whattacountry 4 years ago 2
Amen.
bbarrie 4 years ago 3
Thanks, bbarrie. Obviously a very smart man.
To add, these are concepts that just cannot be understood by a feeble mind, which is why when you challenge a detractor, they fall apart at the seems almost immediately. Its awesome sometimes because agw is proven, and they have the burden of disproving now, which they cannot seem to do. At all.
whattacountry 4 years ago 2
Hehe, you just called someone 'a very smart man' simply because he agreed with you. That's funny :).
blogagog 4 years ago
Again, you are mistaken, whattacountry :(. We care deeply about the environment. But you are correct if you say we don't care about environmentalists or their issues. But that's just because they are hippies, and prone to make wildly inaccurate predictions. Environment - good. Environmentalists - bad.
blogagog 4 years ago
Good Stuff! Thanks!
Here's some info from the net.
No credible scientific institutions disagree with Al Gore's basic contention. Humanity is contributing with dire consequences.
ReduceGHGs 4 years ago
Look, we know exactly what a scientist would do when they are convinced a catastrophe is coming and the politicians ignore them. They build a rocket and launch their children to safety.
Since no scientist has yet done this, clearly there is no catastrophe coming. -- EricJ.
blogagog 4 years ago
When has that ever happened? Stop speaking in generalities and back up that statement there, gagonblog.
whattacountry 4 years ago
It's a joke, referencing every old scifi movie that predicted doom and gloom for the Earth. Sorry it went over your head.
Here's something that isn't a joke! "U.S. Senate Report: Over 400 Prominent Scientists Disputed Man-Made Global Warming Claims in 2007". And these are not the kind of scientists that are paid by the UN to skew their data. They work for free!
blogagog 4 years ago
Actually nooo, it went waaay UNDER our heads. That sucks when you have to explain your jokes, eh?
By the way real scientists do not work for free, get a clue. Look into it.
whattacountry 4 years ago
Actually, I only had to explain it to you. Everyone else got it. And scientists often do scientific study for free if they are important enough.
Theories on gravity, relativity, origin of the species, etc were all done for free. The damage that can be done to the world by trying to solve the non-issue of global warming is becoming so important that concerned scientists are willing to help out sans paycheck.
blogagog 4 years ago
gagonblog, you are a horrible joke. And way too easy to negate!
Theory of Relativity - 1908 Albert Einstein, filthy wealthy from tons of patents.
Origin of the Species - 1859 Charles Darwin was so independently wealthy he NEVER had to earn an income.
Laws of Gravity - 1666 (approx) Sir Isaac Newton, died a VERY wealthy man from publishing all of his works
THIS IS ALL COMMON KNOWLEDGE DUMB DUMB
Can you cite ANY RECENT REAL scientists that even know what global warming is?
We Didnt think so!
whattacountry 4 years ago
I wish you'd stop with the name-calling. It is difficult to hold discussions with someone who acts like a child :(.
Nevertheless, Einstein was quite poor in 1905 when he developed his theory. He was not paid for it.
We agree, Darwin was not paid for his work, and Newton was not paid for his initial work. Yes, he ended up making money from it's practical applications, but he was not paid beforehand, like the UN scientists were.
blogagog 4 years ago
This is where the problem lies. People paid to do a study, or predictive science, are invariably swayed by what their employers want the study to say. Much like you would doubt a study paid for by Exxon/Mobil, you should doubt a study paid for by the UN. Yet you don't. You should look at the data yourself. Yet you don't. It's lemming mentality, and I despise it.
blogagog 4 years ago
"Can you cite ANY RECENT REAL scientists that even know what global warming is?"
Certainly. Hudreds. I'm one of them.
"We Didnt think so!"
Do you have a mouse in your pocket or something? Who is 'we'? How many people comprise 'whatacountry'?
blogagog 4 years ago
you didnt asnswer the question.
Tho thank you for proving our point anyhoo.
To quote you:
"This is where the problem lies. People paid to do a study, or predictive science, are invariably swayed by what their employers want the study to say. Much like you would doubt a study paid for by Exxon/Mobil, you should doubt a study paid for by the UN."
All right up until the UN part. Exxon Mobil is a company will billion dollar execs. CONTINUED
whattacountry 4 years ago
The UN is a HUGE, extremely democratic structured organization based upon the GNU of countries with an enormous voting contingency.
your entire argument is breaking doen before our eyes now you are blaming the Un, c'mon guy. You are almost there! Open your eyes. We wont blame you for seeing the light now.
CONTINUED
whattacountry 4 years ago
You know what. Fuck it. We dont need you on our side you are good for nothing. The environment needs caring, pro active individuals that are willing to make a sacrifice for the sake of human kind. It takes courage. If it were up to you and we did nothing, then where are we? So lets do something.
CONTINUED
whattacountry 4 years ago
SO say GW doesnt exist. Would not it better to do something than nothing? Lets clean up the Earth. GW causes pollution, cancer, disease and robs the land of space and resources it needs to keep us and all life alive.
Is this so tough to accept and do something about?
whattacountry 4 years ago
I answered the only question you asked. The answer was 'yes'. I suggest you re-read my comment.
blogagog 4 years ago
"The UN is a HUGE, extremely democratic structured organization"
Oh dear. If you truly believe that, we are operating on different levels of reality. Any one of 5 nations has absolute veto power over any UN security rule, and if it gets past that, China, pop. 1.3 billion, has the same voting power of Lichtenstein, pop, 25 thousand. Not to mention that a third to half of the countries in the UN are not democracies at all. But rather despots or kings.
blogagog 4 years ago
"SO say GW doesnt exist. Would not it better to do something than nothing?"
I am saying this exact thing. It would be MUCH better to do nothing, and use the money we save to help poor and starving people. Imaginary problems are not worth investing time and energy on, especially since we have so many REAL problems that need solving right now.
blogagog 4 years ago
semantics shmamantics. Human Accelerated Global Warming is not up for discussion. Its proven.
Go do something about it.
Actually, leave that to us...you go bitch.
whattacountry 4 years ago
Scientists "DO". You do not "DO". You Don't.
Please don't tell me your a scientist. You're just not. You are just a silly wanna be pundit with negativity.
pwned.
whattacountry 4 years ago
You are the negative one. I'm being quite positive. The world is not being damaged by people. No doom and gloom here!
I will say I'm a scientist, but you may disagree. I have a BS ChemE and have worked in computer simulations of chemical plants (specifically in wastewater cleanup and urea plant design)
Your childish name calling and statements like 'pwned' have no effect on me whattacountry :).
blogagog 4 years ago
Just stay far away from this issue, my town and my kids. Better leave this responsibility to us. You stay home and keep writing your blog, we'll take it from here, little man.
We dont need you, and, we have never wanted people like you anyway! Long live the Hummer, George Bush, and greed, right!? Woo Hoo!
whattacountry 4 years ago
I'm totally fine with you wasting your life on this non-issue! The best thing about the US is that we are free. Just don't try to pass laws that make me pay because you are a worrier. Is that too much to ask? Remember, with all this angst you are building up about how we are destroying the world, you could write poetry or something! Wouldn't that be great for a person like you?
blogagog 4 years ago
Great, great video!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
whattacountry 4 years ago
jack,
Read up on the concept of radiative forcing. That's the influence of an element acting on the climate system (e.g. CO2, or changes in solar output) on the greenhouse effect.
As it turns out, while there may be some SMALL variations in solar output, the radiative forcing of the sun is only 1/14th of human activities.
In other words, while the changes in the sun's output can have an effect on global climate, it is minuscule compared to greenhouse gases.
jgmellor 4 years ago
See, this is another theory that is wholly disproven by historical data, jg. We have had thousands of times more CO2 in our atmosphere, +thousands of times more CH4, and yet the Earth cooled!
It's suspected that the temp went up a bit, which led to more clouds, which are light reflecting ice crystals, which led to the cooling, but we don't know for sure. All we DO know is that massive amounts of CO2 didn't hurt the planet.
blogagog 4 years ago
Ever notice how every time the Drudge Report posts something (anything) about global warming/climate change, it's always right next to an article about it snowing nearby. The only thing that annoys me more than his editorial decisions is the fact that I read him damn page often enough to notice trends.
bbarrie 4 years ago
Drudge is actually a believer in the global warming religion. Back when he had a radio show he would explain nightly that he totally bought the bile Gore was spewing.
blogagog 4 years ago
Ouch! I got thumbs down for reporting a fact? Sheesh. Tough thread!
blogagog 4 years ago
OBAMA 08!!!
karynrae2001 4 years ago
Continuing what I was saying to sumpeeple, the gasses that were spewed out by these volcanoes were not the sole cause of the death of nearly fifty percent of all life on earth at the time. No, for they needed a comet to hit them, brand-new forms of flowers to poison the animals, and many other things. My point is that the volcanoes erupted so much ash, so many horrible gasses, that they should have destroyed the environment on their own.
jackhenry1925 4 years ago
They did not, however. For the environment is not a fickle, delicate thing. It is very rigid. There are examples all throughout history that say this. The lesser known Eocene Extinction, for example. The earth got cooler, and the Tethys sea dried out. The environment did not do "Crazy Things," it just got continually colder over time.
jackhenry1925 4 years ago
Wow did you copy THAT right out of a book!! You missed something though.. (well, you missed MANY things actually) how many humans were around 65 million years ago?
sumpeeple 4 years ago
They were not. The volcanoes are explainable by the fact that they still exist, they're just very worn down.. The ash is explainable by what's called carbon dating. What else did I miss?
P.S, let's try and avoid obnoxiousness, alright? Let's just keep this at debate, not argument, level.
jackhenry1925 4 years ago
Are you a creationist? I can understand how you would be unable to comprehend this concept if you were. However, this would mean that you have no scientific opinion whatsoever as you are unable to accept obvious, sometimes visual, evidence.
jackhenry1925 4 years ago
As well, what book are you referring to that I took my information out of? And another thing, did you research your information, either? This is not mentioning your unbelievable attitude towards me in this debate. Children are obnoxious during a fight. Children become red-faced during a fight. I am trying to avoid both. Obviously you are obnoxious. You are also probably very red-faced if you are intelligent enough to read this paragraph.
jackhenry1925 4 years ago
Dude your making me laugh. Re read what you wrote its like the ravings of a mad man. Take a chill pill.
You are right, OK.
global warming doesnt exist. It never did.
Breathe.
sumpeeple 4 years ago
Am I? Are you trying to shut me up or are you serious? Was that entire thing just an attempt at starting a fight? And as for my speech, I assure you, I am quite mad. That does not make me wrong.
jackhenry1925 4 years ago
And furthermore, I am quite relaxed thank you. This is just how author's write their responses on the computer. I am aware that it makes me sound like I'm fuckin' nuts.
jackhenry1925 4 years ago
At any rate, Sumpeeple, you're an asshole and I hope I never have the displeasure of meeting you. Global warming will help the environment recover after the human race is gone, and if you don't like the way I feel, well, go fuck yourselves.
jackhenry1925 4 years ago
Why do gw detractors frequently turn out to be psychotic?
If anybody else wants to take over and have a decent, sane conversation please do.
sumpeeple 4 years ago
Oh, for Christs sakes. You're just insulting me now to get off with the fact that you're wrong. Grow up, pal. Grow up.
jackhenry1925 4 years ago
Anyways, let's get back to the subject, alright? The point I made earlier was very simple; the volcanoes in the Cretaceous did not kill off every living thing on the planet, although they did rather badly damage it for a short time, so why would a tiny amount of Greenhouse Gas emissions? And, as I said before, the environment is very straightforwards in both the short term and long term. If it gets warmer, it gets warmer. It doesn't just go nuts.
jackhenry1925 4 years ago
I did research this. A lot.
jackhenry1925 4 years ago
Well, I just came back one last time to see if you had a parting blow to give out. Since it's pretty clear you know you're wrong-or perhaps your mommy has tucked you in-I will leave this video until tomorrow. So be sure to give some irrational statement about my sanity while I'm gone.
jackhenry1925 4 years ago
Ok you got me, you got me! You are SO funny! Uncle!!!
PLEASE re-read you postings one day. We were on the floor, we couldnt breathe! Your a pretty funny guy, I'll give you that much! We all actually thought for a second that you were for real! Good one.
Thats actually an interesting character to play.."angry weirdo GWG detractor guy". Do you do other posts? Please please please send them to me!!!
sumpeeple 4 years ago
Goddamnit, kid, I really am a GW detractor. so, ah hell. You know what? I'm just gonna go now. You can piss off.
jackhenry1925 4 years ago
Just one last thing; if you really are too thick to understand what I said before, than you're probably just some dumbass kid that I've wasted my time talking to. It's nice knowing just how stupid people without lives are.
jackhenry1925 4 years ago
oh my god!! stop!! roflmao! Your killing me! HA HA HA HA HA HA!!!!!!!
sumpeeple 4 years ago
Ugh. Tell me what is so funny. How do you find what I am saying funny? Just tell me.
jackhenry1925 4 years ago
Re-read your postings. From one posting to the next you become a classic, psychotic character. My belly really, really hurts from laughing. So you are not true. You had us for a second, though! We are on to you now! Your sooo funny! Wait a second, your not Canadian, are you? A HA HA HA HEE HA HA HEE HA HAW HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA!!!!!!!!!!!
sumpeeple 4 years ago
I've reread all of my postings. From what I can tell, you can't focus on the subject so you just make fun of me and laugh at me. And no, I'm British.
jackhenry1925 4 years ago
Go learn about climate change and get back to me! I cant have a conversation with someone who is pulling comments out of their arse. But you're Canadian, so half of me forgives you! Must be the water.
sumpeeple 4 years ago
Again, I am not Canadian. And, again, I know far more about the climate than you. Pull your head out of your own ass and listen to someone who is currently studying climatology at Oxford University. Honestly, I can understand why you are such a jackass, probably being a Yank, but calling me a Canadian? Jesus!
jackhenry1925 4 years ago
Tell us then why your information says you are from Canada, eh?
sumpeeple 4 years ago
Touche. You know, I'm surprised that you know what Canada is; the Americans are nothing more than a bunch of retards who all hate their presidents. From what I hear, most of you don't even know that there are countries outside of the United States. Oh, and another thing, I'm from Alberta. Trust me, there's nothing wrong with us. You're thinking of the guys from Ottawa and Quebec. Over here the only problem is that half of us call guys from Edmonton "City Folk."
jackhenry1925 4 years ago
And as for you're opinion on Canadian water, it's frozen for nine months of the year, which kills anything bad in it. We're smarter, stronger, and generally better than any Yank could ever hope to be.
jackhenry1925 4 years ago
In most scientific circles the issue is no longer whether or not climate change is a potentially serious problem, but rather, how the problem will develop, what its effects will be, how these can be best detected, and what measures can be taken to reduce the damage. The media, at times, leaves the impression that scientists are still discussing whether or not the climate is really changing as a result of emissions of greenhouse gases. This is not the case.
sumpeeple 4 years ago
In actuality there is a broad agreement on this issue among scientists and experts, as represented by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). No scientific material has ever been presented in scientific form which challenges the main conclusions of the IPCC, in spite of the fact that the IPCC has an open process that invites critical views.
sumpeeple 4 years ago
Well, finally we're back on topic. Anyone who says the debate is over is mistaken. Climatologists are slowly gaining ground on the proof that global warming is not harmful, and probably does not exist. Furthermore, you are still not listening to what I have said about the Cretaceous Extinction. The volcanoes in India spewed out so much gas and ash, far worse than that let out by us.
jackhenry1925 4 years ago
Despite this gas, the earth could not be destroyed. It was damaged, but it took a comet to finish the job. We cannot cause anything worse than what the Indian volcanoes did. And furthermore, we cannot cause anything even close to what they did.
jackhenry1925 4 years ago
My point still remains is that global warming is quite harmless and even beneficial. Life does better when the earth gets warmer. Droughts, contrary to belief, decrease in number. The water vapor in the atmosphere does not cause the environment to go crazy, it just rains down. For a time it may deflect some sunlight, but it already does that and without much consequence.
jackhenry1925 4 years ago
Lets take this one by one. You say "Climatologists" are slowly gaining ground.
Who are these climatologists? Name them here now, first.
sumpeeple 4 years ago
Well, let's start with a physicist. Fred Singer.
Then,a meteorologist, Roger Pielke.
And then every man and woman at the University of Alberta. Look them up on Wikipedia or on google, I don't care. Regardless of who they are, this really doesn't change the fact in what I am saying.
jackhenry1925 4 years ago
Anyways, I've gotta go. I got a date. I'll get back to you in a few hours.
jackhenry1925 4 years ago
Fred Singer = special interest tool. A 2007 Newsweek cover story on climate change denial reported "In April '98 a dozen people from the denial machine including the Marshall Institute, Fred Singers group & EXXON, met at the Amer Petrol Institute's DC HQ's. They proposed a $5 mil campaign, according to a leaked 8-page memo, to convince the public that the science of gw is riddled with controversy & uncertainty."
sumpeeple 4 years ago
The plan was reportedly aimed at "raising questions about & undercutting the prevailing scientific wisdom" on climate change". According 2 Newsweek the plan was leaked 2 the press & therefore was never implemented.
sumpeeple 4 years ago
OK, now Roger Pielke.
RP is consciously using his training as a pol scientist & his platform 2 shape the debate about g clim change. He is doing this 2 further both policy goals that he favors AND his career. Nothing about this is wrong per se, BUT those who disagree w his policy goals & the assumptions from which they either precede or follow need 2 recognize that his playbook is political AND scientific; not solely scientific.
sumpeeple 4 years ago
Trying 2 meet Roger Pielke on the basis of science alone will in the long run be a losing game. In other words, the issue is not only the science, but the tactics.
sumpeeple 4 years ago
Touche. Anyways, I don't want to argue anymore. Let's just have a truce; neither of us are convinced of anything, and neither will be. I'm stubborn, you're stubborn. Whatever. You're a damn fine opponent, Sumpeeple.
jackhenry1925 4 years ago
Oh come on, it was just getting good. I was enjoying reading the back and forth and while you had some interesting points jackhenry, i think sumpeeple got the better of you.
bbarrie 4 years ago
Hmm...thanks for your support? Is that what I'm supposed to say? Whatever. I'd rather not continue the argument. Let that blogagog guy, or maybe you, finish the fight.
jackhenry1925 4 years ago
no thanks, the guy's a tard :).
blogagog 4 years ago
Just so ya know, I'm the one who gave you the first positive rating. :)
jackhenry1925 4 years ago
Right back at ya then :).
blogagog 4 years ago
Look at this internet tough girl, blogogag. Ever wonder why our world is in the crapper? Its because of ladies like her. Her blog is the biggest piece of stinking dog doo, its horrible.
Nothing original, just recycled poop.
Oh, blogogag, I get it..You blog, then gag.
sumpeeple 4 years ago
i fully agree. 'blogogags' blog is riggity rank. sucks big time. i think she is a kid its not written too well. and to sumpeeple: u totally picked apart jackhenry by the way that was fun to watch. i was hoping that u actually knew what u were talking about! i like that when u made ur point she ran away with her tail in between her legs
utoobmytoob 4 years ago
utoobmytoob, Can I use your endorsement on my website m'lady?
blogagog 4 years ago
sure gag, actually here you can quote me:
"I did not believe in AGW until 1 week ago. My boyfriend is a staunch AGW detractor, but his arguments always had holes in it. together with gagonhisblog's bs website and immature rantings, along with real science from sumpeeple, made me absolutely take my first real stance that AGW does in fact, exist. Al Gore, sorry for doubting you at first. watching AIT again, it makes SO MUCH SENSE!"
utoobmytoob 4 years ago
No, I want to use the one where you say "'blogogags' blog is riggity rank." I'll even fix the spelling for you without putting a [sic] next to it.
Thanks!
blogagog 4 years ago
I just wanted to say you negative folk need to get a life. You're getting so worked up over a music video on youtube and signing on to leave comments every other hour debating global warming since the video went up two weeks ago. Get over it...global warming is real and viewing this video only creates more hits to make this an even more popular debate...which is what us global warming believers want!
hangie157 4 years ago
oh, and thanks for entertaining me for those of you that feel like you need to correct each other's grammar and spelling, all the while slamming global warming believers...you guys are out to save the world one word at a time
hangie157 4 years ago
People who don't believe global warming is affect by man are not 'negative'. We are very positive in fact! The world is great, and it will continue to be great. We're not the ones predicting doom and gloom. Worry about it if you want, but leave me out of it (meaning, don't try to pass laws forcing me to adjust my habits because of your worries) and all will be good!
blogagog 4 years ago