i love greenpeace! this movement will save even the people who spit on us. if only fox wouldnt be such bourgeoisie assfaces it would make this transition alot easier. the world doesnt HAVE to be run by money and evil corperations, we just let it
I just ran over a deer in my land rover as i was driving from the airport after my private jet flight while eating a hamburger and throwing rubbish out of the window.
Saint Al Gore, and his cabal of IPPC/WTO funded scientists, have done a great job. Gore has earned the $200 million he's made from GLOBAL WARMING TERROR!! since the release of his academically-challenged commercial for Kleiner Perkins. I lie - Al's movie was a heartfelt reminder of how much he cares about nature and polar bears. And Exxon, Shell and Bayer...
So, as jungles and oceans continue to create more Co2 than us, we will continue to be 'Climate Deniers'.
Yeah, Al Gore is so partisan and biased unlike gold salesman Glenn Beck. Look, you conservatives talk about how great it is when people make money, but God forbid a liberal should do the same. Have you seen the price of a barrel of oil? Gore could make a killing investing in oil, but he is putting his money where his mouth is and taking a huge gamble by investing in green tech. Sure conflicts of interest should be examined carefully, but a good idea is a good idea no matter who is endorsing it.
In capitalism there is a process called creative destruction in which older industries are replaced by newer and more efficient ones. For instance, the train replaces the stage coach; the computer replaces the type writer; green tech replaces reliance on fossil fuels (which are disappearing). And if you don't buy my arguments, do you suggest that we keep relying on fossil fuels when oil reserves are drying up? Is that your plan?
Conservative! Glenn Beck! Have you seen my channel!?
I know that the ones protesting against Global Warming are mostly good people, but they have been duped.
Gore is investing in Green Tech because the Copenhagen gang are pushing to make it THE moneyspinner of the 21st century, regardless of the damage it will do to Third World economies and our own financial and personal freedoms.
Friend, how can you put so much faith in a theory that 40,000 respected scientists say is nonsense?
The whole climate change debate is a weird kettle of fish because depending on what evidence you use and whom you believe, it could be a total hoax or the gospel truth. And of course the other side is wrong and being manipulated. For me, I understand that green tech is business and won't be a transcendent ladder to heaven. It will make people money, but the truth is that we are running out of oil and our economy will need some other source of energy.
The real manipulators are the oil interests. Think about it. Imagine that since the 19th century, every time an internal combustion engine has been turned on, one oil company or another gets a fee. That would make them fabulously wealthy. Now imagine that an upstart thinks that he can give the consumer energy in a way that doesn't give money to an oil company. Of course the oil companies would get mad. The truth is that our lives are already being regulated by big oil; we just can't see it.
ok , so global warming does not exist, because al gore made 200 milion dollars. i say global warming exhist because our climate in italy is changing from mediterranian to tropical with heavy short rains and other characteristics, but yea, let's focus on al gore.
No, lets focus on the 40,000+ scientists who say the theory is all wrong. Lets focus on the Third World leaders who pulled out of Copenhagen because they know this scam will literally decimate their people, and economies. Lets focus on the amount of people who have been silenced for daring to speak against this government-led initiative. Lets focus on the leaked emails that show the numbers have been manipulated. So much more to focus on, not enough space to do it in...
I would like to attract your attention on the extremely interesting work, for the resolution of most of the environmental problems, by Dr Steven Greer and his friends, The Disclosure Project (Projet Révélation). You will find the links on Wikipedia.
As well, I invite you to see the introductive videos on the subject in my YouTube playlist called ' Time for UFO '
Depopulation of the entire human race (except for me) is the only answer. We must erase the human parasite plague that endlessly leeches upon our limited resources. We, the Wealthy Elite shall eradicate Global Warming, snuffing out the human life whoes very breath suffocates our Goddess Earth. With your help we'll create a better pandemic, a more lethal virus, a deadlier plague, in hopes that one day, the disease called Humans are utterly extinct. Because the world is a better place without YOU.
I tend not to revile the central bankers. It smacks of fascism to scapegoat an entire class of people because of the misdeeds of a few. Not all central bankers are sinister assholes stealing the wealth of the country.
look the criminals always have to surround themselves with good and naive people. If they have come this far with the police state, gigantic government ever growing, bought most of the congress and senate and dumbed down a majority of the US population they are pretty smart and know how top protect their asses. Today they surround themselves with these greenpeace idiots because that was hip. Now I see them shifting to the right already as all this is coming out as a giant fraud
I am just as repulsed by the police state, and the massive invasive gov't. Just understand that NOT ALL the uber wealthy are behind it. The ones who oppose it stay off the radar, while guys like soros love the attention.
well now get ready for the avalanche of these know nothing parasites trying to run your life and if you oppose them there is the army right behind them.
When did I write that all wealthy are behind it? You're not writing to some retarded commie here chief.
Calm down now, I'm aware you aren't a pinko. Don't worry about the army BTW, we aren't behind the global socialists. We took an oath to The Constitution, not the government or the people pulling it's strings.
are you saying your in the military? If so are you saying the military will not follow Obama's executive orders to round up Americans if they don't comply with the parasites sent after us?
Have you heard or read the MIAC report and Virginia Domestic Terrorism assessment reports?
I absolutely am saying the vast majority of the military will not follow orders to round up innocent civilians. Remember, the military is made up of civilians, all of whom have friends and family in the population. Most would take their weapons home if things were bad enough to warrant it. A certain segment will actively defend the civilian population from those remaining obamabots should they execute orders to violate the Constitution.
"I just hope we can transcend our differences and come to a consensus."
I would like to know whyanyone would be interested in coming to a consensus on a hoax? Sure, the people making billions off of it would also like that too. I just have to wonder, why is it still the "theory" of relativity, or the "theory" of gravity. Yet the MMGW "theory" is "settled science", inspite of the numerous actual scientists who question or outright reject the hoax.
100% of scientists say climate change is a reality. Around 90% of them argue it is man made. Every major national scientific body agrees on this point. You can disagree with them if you want, but don't pretend like the debate is more vigorous than it really is. That would be distorting the facts and I just know how much you climate change deniers insist on remaining faithful to the facts.
Yes, out of every peer reviewed scientific article from the mid 90s on, each one argued that climate change was happening. Scientifically, it has no longer become possible to claim that climate change is a fiction, but those who want to stall action have argued that climate change is not induced by people.
Global warming is a HOAX??? And what is YOUR theory as to why glaciers have been INEXORABLY RECEDING and increasing the surface water exponentially, KarrensClottedPussy?
And spare us all your blow-hard bullshit about defending this country. As far as I'm concerned, you are a FLAG-STAINING COWARD, KarrensStankySkankyPUSSY!
When we go into this cap and trade system and we have to send all kinds of money to poor African countries, what do they do with the money? They will buy cars and trucks so how does this help the enviroment? None of the money will go to clean up polution, it will end up making things worse and the Al Gores of this world will make even more profits.
It costs our city over $4,000.00 per ton to pick up recycled plastic and glass and for that they recieve $35.00 per ton for the product. Boy that sounds like a really smart idea. This same thing applies to almost ever aspect of recycled goods, it costs more and does nothing to help save the planet. You call that common sense? I would like to end polution, but real polution like sewage and crap along the roads etc. Mountains of garbage dumped in dumps instead of insineration generating power.
How do you know this for a fact? How do you know that the person you're listening to is telling any more of the truth than anyone else?
And don't call me a sheep. I recycle because it's common sense that we should try to minimise waste. I walk because it's better for me than driving, plus cheaper.
You're not stupid. You know we [humans in general] treat the world like shit, so why not just accept some responsibility and stop being so stubborn about it?
The red herring that the poorer nations will become rich is absurd. It's the oil companies that are stifling competition. Every time you fill up your tank, it is like paying a tax to Big Oil. Imagine if you could get your energy from the sun, the earth (geothermal), the wind, or plentiful cultures of algae. It would put the oil companies out of business. The only way China could become rich is if they developed clean energy quicker than the rest of the world and we have to buy their tech.
And even if you are right and climate change is a hoax, fossil fuels are becoming depleted. That is a fact. Remember when oil shot up to over $4.00 a gallon? The days of cheap oil are gone; expensive oil is a reality. Think about it. If oil keeps dwindling and we have no alternative energies to turn to, we are held hostage to Big Oil. We'll have to pay whatever they demand.
If you had a brain in your head you would see what is really happening and it is all political, nothing else. The world temperatures change all the time and one valcano puts more CO2 into the air than all mankind. This global warming is a scam to make some people rich while idiots like you help them continue the sham, you are all being duped.
First, it's climate change, not global warming. Climate change theory argues that weather will become more intense. Droughts, floods, winters and summers will all become more severe. Some places (like the Arctic) will become warmer. Some places (like the North Atlantic) will become colder. Some places, like Kansas, will receive more flooding and some places like Spain will become deserts. The fact that it is -46 in Winnipeg should tell you that something is fishy.
Ok, so by your logic, an object closer to the sun should be hotter. On Mercury, the surface temperatures range from about 90 to 700 K (−183 °C to 427 °C, −297 °F to 801 °F),
On Venus, the CO2-rich atmosphere, along with thick clouds of sulfur dioxide, generates the strongest greenhouse effect in the Solar System, creating surface temperatures of over 460 °C (860 °F). This makes Venus's surface hotter than Mercury's which has a minimum surface temperature of -220 °C and maximum surface temperature of 420 °C, even though Venus is nearly twice Mercury's distance from the Sun and thus receives only 25% of Mercury's solar irradiance.
If you're going to use venus as an example to back up "global whining", you should acknowledge that the temp on venus is fairly uniform over the entire planet. On earth, we see record low temperatures somewhere on the planet every year. If your arguement was correct, we would only see record heat, EVERYWHERE and NO record lows. Further, CO2 accounts for %3 of our warming, and humans contribute %3 of that. Therefore, we are not the cause of any change, it's all bullshit to scam money from gov't.
I say this again and again. It's climate change; not global warming. Climate change theory stipulates that the weather will become more intense, extreme and unpredictable everywhere across the globe. The record colds are actually extremely ominous: they are consistent with a pattern of more extreme weather.
I repeat myself a lot too. The climate has changed since the dawn of time. The most extreme changes ever, happened before humans existed. Furthermore, this past year had one of the most mild hurricane seasons. There are no new extremes being recorded one way or another. The highest temp ever recorded was 134F in AZ. That was 1913. There has been no "pattern of more extreme weather".
dailyexpress UK had an article today titled "CLIMATE CHANGE IS NATURAL: 100 REASONS WHY"
I was a liberal environmentalist 15 years ago. I know better now. I was convinced humans would have made the planet uninhabitable by now. I'm not saying CC isn't happening, I'm saying human endeavors play absolutely zero role in it. You're using wikipedia? Anyone can put anything on that, it's not credible. If you really wanted to learn more you'd do some honest research.
I'm using wikipedia, but I always check the sources. Usually the sources are legitimate news agencies like the BBC or the statement of science academies themselves. Speaking of legitimate sources, have you seen what the Daily Express looks like? It's a British tabloid, not a respected newspaper.
Correction 136 °F Al 'Aziziyah, Libya 1922, when somewhere else hits 140 comebother me. Until then, I'll continue to live comfortably.
Besides, if everyone who believed CO2 was causing "man made climate change" would just put a plastic bag over their heads, and tie it tight, this issue would be solved over night.
Well, it looks like we've come to an impasse. On my side I have every national scientific body and around 90% of scientific consensus. On your side, you have the fact that it was hot in Arizona, er correction Libya. Yup, a real debate here. Incidently, go to any news service and find out which decade is the warmest on record. I'll give you a hint. It wasn't the 20s or even the 30s. Go to wikipedia and do a quick search for "instrumental temperature record" to see that temps have been rising.
Your side claims %90 scientific consensus? Wow, that's horse shit. Something should click in your head when so many people claim to agree on an issue that allows them to demand more govt money and authority. Then, when some of their contemporaries dispute them, they're ridiculed and marginalized. Also, in the 70's they squealed about a man made ice age. Every winter for the past few years, it's "climate change", and once again this summer it will be Global Warming again. Same bullshit every year
Go to wikipedia and type in "Scientific opinion on climate change." "In February 2007, the IPCC released a summary of the forthcoming Fourth Assessment Report. According to this summary, the Fourth Assessment Report finds that human actions are "very likely" the cause of global warming, meaning a 90% or greater probability." Furthermore, think about it. The scientists themselves wouldn't make money off of climate change. What would agencies like NASA have to gain by falsifying data?
Do you have any idea how many careers would be ruined if it came out that scientists were falsifying data? The real money to be had from global warming would be from green tech businesses in the private sector and these scientists who study global warming are mostly in the public sector or academia, not prime places to make money off of global warming. Look, deny climate change all you want, but don't pretend like there is a scientific debate.
There isn't a scientific debate and until Beck, Hannity or Limbaugh publish a peer reviewed scientific article, there won't be a debate on whether or not climate change is happening.
@newsradiohead It has come out that these "scientists" were falsifying and covering up data. The leftist media has hidden that as well as they can. If ther was any money in "green" technology, it wouldn't have to be subsidized. Yet all of it is. You're right, there isn't a "debate", the activist "scientists" in the hoax refuse to debate.
@KarrensMan69 Are you trying to bring up "climate gate"? Really? Climate Change deniers were hoping to find marching orders from George Soros or Al Gore or Maurice Strong, but there was nothing like that in the emails. The New Scientist has an article about why Climate Gate is one big fizzle. Read answer #9 on the "50 Reason . . ." article for more about that. Also, if you would like to find out more about how science world, why some ideas gain more traction than others, read Thomas Khun.
@KarrensMan69 As for you other points, green tech isn't viable right now. But with R&D it can be. So why should we act? Here is one compelling reason: the American auto industry for years argued that the government mandating tougher admissions standards would be a jobs killer. All the while the car companies in Japan and Europe raised their standards. The result? GM goes bankrupt and the other American car industries are on the ropes. In capitalism, you innovate or die.
Take South Korea for instance. It has to import all of its oil, just like America does, but its oil companies are smaller than America's so it doesn't have as much influence. The Koreans got sick of sending their money overseas so they have made a commitment to put money into green tech. Now, when the price of a barrel of oil shoots up to over $150, who do you think people are going to go to for their energy needs, the Koreans or Americans?
@KarrensMan69 And as for your argument that scientists won't debate the reality of climate change, that's because it is already accepted as a fact. Debating climate change is like debating if the world is flat or whether evolution exists: there isn't a debate if only one side has a real argument. If you have reservations about climate change, then find a scientist who can write a peer reviewed article that debates the reality of climate change. Until then, the debate is settled.
And something should click in your head when industry opposes the idea that climate change is man made. Think about it. A few years back, oil was $4.00 a gallon. Fossil fuels are dwindling, and image if we don't have any alternatives for oil when the last reserves are tapped. Big Oil would make a killing, and we would have no choice but to pay whatever they demanded.
@newsradiohead The oil industry opposes the idea? Wow, I have to wonder why they run articles that support your point of view and waste funds to try and appeal to your point of view by accepting the bullshit premise that their product has anything to do with CC. Massive contradiction there.
@KarrensMan69 Go to the Guardian's web page. George Monboit wrote about a post, "The Climate Denial Industry is Out to Dupe the Public. And It's Working." The industry's response to climate change has been much like Sarah Palin's answer to the question of climate change she made in the VP debate: there is no proof of climate change going on, but we need to switch to renewable energy. Of course, without any pressing reason to switch over, the decision to do so can be delayed indefinitely.
@KarrensMan69 And I'm sorry that you feel burned when global cooling turned out to be a bust, but you should understand that the consensus on global cooling was never as settled as is the consensus on climate change. What's more, the overall premise of global cooling was correct: human exploitation of the world's resources was having a profound effect on the world's ecology.
You're still not getting at the heart of the issue: if Venus' atmosphere is compressed, why is it compressed? Gravity can compress it. Of course, Venus and Earth have the same gravitational mass. It can also be compressed because there is a lot of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. This is the reason why Venus is so hot and the atmospheric pressure is so high. According to that article, there is as much c02 on earth as on Venus, but on earth the c02 is contained in things like the oceans . . .
. . . rocks and soil whereas on Venus it's all in the atmosphere. I might not know everything about science, but I know that my general argument is correct: Venus is hot because of the concentration of its greenhouse gases.
It's not the question of being scientist, it's a fact of enormous, unimaginable pressure of the air on Venus - the air there is hot, because so compressed, not because of CO2!
Go back to school. You lack elementary science education.
The air is compressed on Venus, true. But it is compressed with greenhouse gases like c02. The atmosphere is also compressed on the gas giants like Jupiter but that is because of its immense gravitational pull. Venus' gravitational pull on the other hand is about equal to earth's. Look: the Australians agree with me, and the Australians are never wrong: smh[dot]com[dot]au/articles/2007/11/28/1196036983400[dot]html
The pressure is caused by a density of greenhouse gases. Think about diving to the bottom of the ocean. The pressure at the bottom of the ocean is immense because water is so dense. On Venus, reaching the surface is like wading into an atmospheric ocean of c02, a greenhouse gas.
Actually, I am an avid capitalist. The vested interests (i.e. oil companies) have stifled competition by creating a monopoly in the energy market. The government needs to apply pressure points the in energy industry to stimulate R&D for products which are in demand.
total propaganda nonsense and even if they did dwindle the free market would decide what type of energy sources would be most effective. The problem is they don't want any free market. They want to depopulate the world and the global warming agenda will do just that.
yeah that's why all major oil companies are funding this global warming scam and genocide. The criminal Rothchilds just came up with the best Eugenics program in the history of mankind
Oh you crazy conspiracy theorists. You're just so cute with your paranoid delusions. You actually think someone cares about you enough to try to kill you or put you into a fema camp. The oil companies don't want to kill you; if they killed everyone, who would buy their overpriced oil? Trust me, they are much more interested in taking your money than killing you.
oh you retarded know nothing parasite... you think they don't have enough money? The only reason they haven't killed you or me yet is they don't want to live in the bunkers. Besides it's not what I think but what THEY are saying but of course like every other retard you will refuse to acknowledge what is a public knowledge. They don't want to kill everyone but surely dream about the population falling under 1 billion.
If all these greenhouse gases are "warming" our earth then what caused other warm periods in past centuries? Greenhouse gases are NOT the only factor in climate change as some people are saying.
Going green certainly does mean going local, but like it or not we currently live in a global economy of our own making. We therefore have a global responsibility to those (poorer) countries who will be first and worst hit by climate change.
1 VOLCANO SPITS MORE CO2 AND SO CALLED GREEN HOUSE GASES, THAN THE LAST 100 YEARS OF HUMAN INDUSTRIALIZATION
So say 31000 REAL scientists vs 700 hoaxter scientists, sellout politicians and elitist eugenicist rooting for world population reduction and a global police state?
This treaty is the devils tool of enslavement , payed and bought with our future taxes and insurance.
This MYTH is BUSTED !
Going green means local solutions , not global taxes !
Climate change is subtly different than global warming. Climate change scientists have evidence that argues that weather will become more extreme everywhere on earth. Rainy areas will receive more rain (i.e. flooding); hotter areas will receive less rain (e.g. drought, forest fires, dead crops etc.); winters will be colder in some areas; summers will be hotter in other areas. The early snows in Houston should tip all of us off that something disconcerting is happening to our world.
Look, the most intelligent people in the world agree that the climate is changing. If they can't convince you, then certainly I can't. Just know that climate change is more important than you and me: it's about the future of the human race. If you want to give your children a world that is trashed, then go ahead and keep denying climate change. Just know that even conservatives are recognizing that climate change is an important issue. Research JBL, the wrestler . . .
. . . and businessman. He is concerned about climate change because it would be bad for business if costal cities were flooded and we couldn't grow enough crops to sustain ourselves. Also, there is money to be made in new green industries. I can't understand why conservatives are so hellbent against admitting that billions of people releasing all sorts of gasses into the atmosphere isn't having an adverse effect on the environment.
Research JBL. He is a very intelligent investor, businessman, and communicator. He hasn't done any of the science, but is a smart enough businessman to know that conflict and wars over resources is bad for you bottom line.
Ok, fair enough. You should look at the evidence too. Most of the rest of the world says that climate change is happening. Smaller, poorer countries are eager to combat climate change. The US is large and rich so we can probably weather climate change better than other countries that aren't so privileged. Also, liberal politicians, neutral scientists, and conservative businessmen all are calling for measure to combat climate change. What motive would they have other than saving the environment?
Furthermore, most people arguing against climate change have an economic interest in leaving things the way they are. These are major corporations who only care about their bottom line, not about you or me. Think about it. Corporations don't have your best interest in mind so why should you stick up for them?
It has a lot to do with the carbon tax that their trying to instate.
And these smaller countries are only in it for the money. The Un taxes us and who are they going to give it to? Under-developed countries who are pointing the finger at us. And if this catastrophe is really on it's way, what does any corporation stand to gain? Definitely not real estate or more consumers if floods and storms will wipe a lot of people out. Not to mention the fact that the scientific community isn't even close...
...to settled on the subject. I'm not sticking up for them, I'm sticking up for me. This country doesn't need another depression over science that isn't proven or even particularly likely. And I have looked at the evidence. That's exactly why i think this naked australian, al gore, the IPCC and everyone else pushing this madness on a large level are either lying or without a clue.
The scientific community believes that climate change is occuring. Just how severe it will be is up for debate. And American innovation won't push us into a depression; it will be the next big boom cycle. Everyone around the world wants clean tech. Nobody wants to rely on fossil fuels because they are dirty, inefficient, and fossil fuels are running out. For instance, Detriot got their butts handed to them but the Japanese because Detriot argued that the gov demanding higher fuel efficiency . .
. . . would be a 'job killer.' Sound familiar? If we are not careful, when the rest of the world demands more fuel efficient tech, they will turn to the Europeans, or East Asians, not Americans. If we are not careful, the story of GM and Detriot will be played out on a grand scale. Already there is a Chinese wind farm in east Texas. If we aren't careful, this will be our future.
You clearly haven't seen it from both sides. This whole movement is pushing for a carbon tax by the UN. Do you REALLY think that we'll have the finance for green energy while we're taxed to death so that third world nations can further their green tech? And when did anyone in this conversation bring up the idea that continuing to use fossil fuels was a good idea btw?
Just do a quick Wikipedia search. There is consensus on climate change. Truth by assertion should have died with the Bush administration. Just because you keep repeating that there is no concensus on climate change doesn't make it so. It's you versus the global scientific community, and I'll take their word over yours. Look, if you don't believe me, think about when gas was over $4 a gallon and you'll agree that we need to switch to alternative sources of energy.
Do you really think you are poor because all of your tax money is going to the brown people? Give me a break. Whenever we give out aid, there are strings attached. We only give out money when it is in our national interest. The point of green tech is to create American patents. When the rest of the world wants to buy a smart grid or solar panels, ideally they will buy American. Right now, East Asia and Europe are leading in the green tech race.
Soon, already when people want to buy a car, they will buy a Japanese hybrid, not a Detroit gas guzzler. When they want to buy a wind farm, they will go to the Chinese. When they want to switch from gas to algae to power their cars, they will go to the Swedes. Nobody will want our dirty, fossil fuel based tech. Seriously, that is what fossil fuels have to do with the conversation.
Except no one brought it up but you. I never said anything about being opposed to green tech. You planted it in this conversation. And it isn't just me, it's over 30,000 scientists and experts on the subject and everyone supporting honest un-censored, un-altered data.
And you know what? I'm done here. Because I just went through a few news sites, and country after country is backing out of making any kind of deal.
I guess i can keep the money I'd have spent on the third world after all...
I brought up green tech because it's all related. Here's how: if there is doubt about climate change, then there is no impetus to switch to green tech. As long as we are using dirty fossil fuels, the oil companies profit; thus, the oil companies have a vested interest in keeping down green tech. Now, believe it or not, oil is cheaper for the U.S. than it is for the rest of the world.
Oil is cheap for us because the House of Saudi cuts us a good deal. Unfortunately, the cheap oil has become addictive and we cannot break our dependence because of powerfully vested interests. Gas is more expensive in Europe and Japan. They have long had the insentive to switch over and that is why their green tech is better than ours. The oil companies love people like you. They are gouging you, and sacrificing our national interests for the sake of their corporate profits.
And you just can't help sticking up for the oil companies, taking their side against the international community of scientists who are trying to save your ungratefuly hide and the few good politicians who are trying to transition to sustainable energy.
I'll tell you something. The middle class is under assault. The financial and credit industries have picked my bones and your bones too. Hordes of advertisers tell us that it's better to go into debt than go without the newest piece of plastic
garbage they are forcing upon us. And corporations have shipped our manufactoring jobs overseas, which in itself isn't a bad thing IF they funded educational programs that trained people in the high tech science jobs that could replace them. But guess what? They don't want to pay taxes and you are defending them. They are screwing you hard and you are asking for more with your narrow outlook. They are screwing you hard, but they wear pressed suits and drive fancy cars. . .
. . . so they can't be the thieves. They tell you the brown people are to blame; they tell you the brown people and the socialists in the government are going to take the money they have already picked from your pockets and you take the bait, hook line and sinker. Keep all of the $9.75 you make at Long John Silver's if you want. Horde your little piece of cheese like a rat, but mark my words, people like you can't see that if things keep up like this, America is no better than a sinking ship,
jesus titty-fucking christ....is this a programmed response?
I JUST SAID i wasn't against green energy/tech.
I take public transit for that VERY reason. READ what i'm saying, damn you! I'm talking about NOT HAVING A CARBON TAX PUT ON US BY THE UN (was that big enough for you to see it?). And I don't work a long john silver's. I don't work anywhere because our great and wonderful president has done such an awesome job of ruining the economy and doubling unemployment.
Ok, I was reading over my responses, and I am sorry I got so worked up. You should know that the carbon tax thing was a proposal by the weaker nations. It never had a chance of working because not only were the world's strongest nations opposing it, but even stronger developing nations like China were oppsoing it. It was basically a negotiating tactic: if you are only getting one slice of pie, demand the whole pie and you maybe get two slices.
I'm sorry I was shooting my mouth off like a jerk, but I just get so upset because people should not be taken in by scare tactics employed by the most powerful corporations. Things like carbon tax actually help capitalism because it forces companies to innovate and be viable over the long haul. Think about how much more competitive GM would be if Clinton had forced them to raise fuel efficiency standards. I know everyone's piece of the pie is shrinking,
but this is exactly the moment when we can't lose our heads. We need to know all the facts and not let the very people who picked our pockets frighten us into working against our own best interests.
i've just read your whole thread... i think you need to look into the role of c02 in and on the earth. we need c02 and so do our plants. plants don't grow without it. and nor will our food. glasshouse tunnels are pumped with c02 to make plants grow bigger and faster. the issue at hand is not about c02, it's about eliminating poisoning pollutions. the planets climate changing is another whole issue. and most scientists think that it has more to do with the sun, than humans driving cars.
I don't appreciate you clouding the terms of the debate. Most scentists believe that climate change is man made. End of story. The sun causing climate change is one dissenting theory used to explain climate change among many. And as for your argument that co2 is good, I have to agree that co2 is good in moderation, but all I have to do is look at Venus to know what happens when too much co2 gets into the atomosphere.
What is your question? I don't have much scientific background, but it seems obvious to me. Venus is too hot. Mars is too cold but Earth is just right. Spend centuries pumping greenhouse gases into the atmosphere though, and all that changes . . .
Here's what the climate change debate reminds me of. Right now, climate change is so drastic that nobody is denying it is occuring. So instead of denying that climate change is happening, people are casting doubt on whether or not it is man made. Scientists say it is about 90% certain that climate change is man made. Now, back in the 16th century when Galileo made his telescope, scientists were 90% certain that his telescope could magnify the moon, but some argued that while they saw an object
at the end of Galileo's telescope, it might be an illusion caused by a demon, or nothing more than a painting drawn on one of the lenses. Some people were genuinely skeptical, but many had a vested interest in denying Galileo's findings, especially the Church, because it challenged their interests. Today we face a similar problem where some people are genuinely skeptical of climate change, but many cynically deny climate change because of their vested interests.
When comparing look also at the atmospheric pressure of all three (Earth added) - maybe even without scientific background, you can make it to understand that conditions at Venus do not depend on CO2.
Like I said, I am not a scientist, but it seems that the atmosphere of Venus is very dense. The atmosphere of Mars is very thin and Earth is in the middle. This means that while Mars and Venus may both have around 95% of their atmosphere made up of C02, because Venus' atmosphere is more dense it has quantitatively more c02. It is no surprise therefore that Venus is hotter than Mars even if percentage wise 95% of their atmosphere is made up of C02.
It would depend. My opinions and the opinions of any organization (Greenpeace included) will never match up 100%, but if I believe they are ultimately doing the right thing, I will support them to the best of my ability.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Hackers expose the Global Warming Theory Fraud
Hackers have tried to prove global warming researchers are massaging the figures - after stealing sensitive emails from one of the UK's leading climate research centres. The documents were then made available to the public from a Russian server.
Hackers break into University emails and uncover the global warming conspiracy. Mainstream media is whitewashing this story
Very nice made! I like the idea...But there's a break in continuity on 0.38 /0.39 among several others and it would have been better if it's a bit shorter.
You're trying to shove in too much info in 2mins35; You'r losing me @ 2.00.
Are people catching on that the CO2 argument isn't really cutting the mustard with the general public any more and something else scary is needed?
If the wealthy nations of the world want the developing nations to use a green refrigerant the solution is blindingly obvious. GIVE IT to them... for free with no strings attached. They'd be mad not to use it. And the hypocritical, corporately owned politicians of the West can then shut the f*ck up with their endless whinging and no real answers
Would you do yourself a favour and do even 5 minutes research before making such scurrilous slurs on A-grade activists working to make the world a safer place for our children? If the world had listened to Greenpeace nearly 20 years ago, and made the shift to natural refrigerants, we would now be in a much better position to reduce the chances of catastrophic climate change. Well done Dave for a great video, I just hope GP gives this campaign the resources it needs to empower national offices!
For your information, I was there 20 years ago giving Greenpeace my hard earned financial support. Since then, I have slowly come to believe that Greenpeace has been well and truly played. I totally agree with their intent, but unfortunately they've been used for the ulterior motives of others. I'll leave it up to you if you want to research that a little more. xx
So was I, working to generate financial support, and getting arrested for Ozone layer demos. Since then the science has comprehensively proved concerns about ozone depleting and very high global warming potential refrigerants, and completely vindicated Greenpeace's advocacy and actions on these issues. Believe what you like, but if you want to be part of the solution rather than the problem, let's look for the facts and be skeptical of conspiracy theories...;-)
"amazonas rainforest" looks like it is in good shape :P
tazztone 1 month ago
Spoke to a friend of mine who flies choppers off ships. He say's that there was too much swell to operate safely. And that's about the bottom line.
kevgza1 7 months ago
WTF!? Is that a cock sock!?
IceSlushi 9 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@IceSlushi
Clarification, a willy warmer :P
Garrastia 1 month ago
it could be done with a chick^^
TheNicutube 1 year ago
a little hairy but ide still do him. hahaha
i love greenpeace! this movement will save even the people who spit on us. if only fox wouldnt be such bourgeoisie assfaces it would make this transition alot easier. the world doesnt HAVE to be run by money and evil corperations, we just let it
353864pisces 1 year ago
there is one problem, is natrual refrigerants compatible with older machines? does it perform just as well?
98770 1 year ago
@NewWorldRebel
call yourself the fox-news-parrotting rebel
the "thousands of scientists against man made warming" is a shameless, several times debunked hoax... like nearly ALL the "sceptic arguments".
aerobique 1 year ago
Put down your Holy Gorans, Mann-made Gorebull Warming is a hoax.
DuctapePenguin 2 years ago
kanter you are a hero.
op5072 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I just ran over a deer in my land rover as i was driving from the airport after my private jet flight while eating a hamburger and throwing rubbish out of the window.
SUCK ON THAT HIPPIES!!
needabloodyname 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
This is an awesome video guys!
Aphrodisiac000 2 years ago
What a hip ad!
Saint Al Gore, and his cabal of IPPC/WTO funded scientists, have done a great job. Gore has earned the $200 million he's made from GLOBAL WARMING TERROR!! since the release of his academically-challenged commercial for Kleiner Perkins. I lie - Al's movie was a heartfelt reminder of how much he cares about nature and polar bears. And Exxon, Shell and Bayer...
So, as jungles and oceans continue to create more Co2 than us, we will continue to be 'Climate Deniers'.
Wake Up!
NewWorldRebel 2 years ago
Yeah, Al Gore is so partisan and biased unlike gold salesman Glenn Beck. Look, you conservatives talk about how great it is when people make money, but God forbid a liberal should do the same. Have you seen the price of a barrel of oil? Gore could make a killing investing in oil, but he is putting his money where his mouth is and taking a huge gamble by investing in green tech. Sure conflicts of interest should be examined carefully, but a good idea is a good idea no matter who is endorsing it.
newsradiohead 2 years ago
In capitalism there is a process called creative destruction in which older industries are replaced by newer and more efficient ones. For instance, the train replaces the stage coach; the computer replaces the type writer; green tech replaces reliance on fossil fuels (which are disappearing). And if you don't buy my arguments, do you suggest that we keep relying on fossil fuels when oil reserves are drying up? Is that your plan?
newsradiohead 2 years ago
Conservative! Glenn Beck! Have you seen my channel!?
I know that the ones protesting against Global Warming are mostly good people, but they have been duped.
Gore is investing in Green Tech because the Copenhagen gang are pushing to make it THE moneyspinner of the 21st century, regardless of the damage it will do to Third World economies and our own financial and personal freedoms.
Friend, how can you put so much faith in a theory that 40,000 respected scientists say is nonsense?
NewWorldRebel 2 years ago
The whole climate change debate is a weird kettle of fish because depending on what evidence you use and whom you believe, it could be a total hoax or the gospel truth. And of course the other side is wrong and being manipulated. For me, I understand that green tech is business and won't be a transcendent ladder to heaven. It will make people money, but the truth is that we are running out of oil and our economy will need some other source of energy.
newsradiohead 2 years ago
The real manipulators are the oil interests. Think about it. Imagine that since the 19th century, every time an internal combustion engine has been turned on, one oil company or another gets a fee. That would make them fabulously wealthy. Now imagine that an upstart thinks that he can give the consumer energy in a way that doesn't give money to an oil company. Of course the oil companies would get mad. The truth is that our lives are already being regulated by big oil; we just can't see it.
newsradiohead 2 years ago 7
ok , so global warming does not exist, because al gore made 200 milion dollars. i say global warming exhist because our climate in italy is changing from mediterranian to tropical with heavy short rains and other characteristics, but yea, let's focus on al gore.
almax84 2 years ago 10
No, lets focus on the 40,000+ scientists who say the theory is all wrong. Lets focus on the Third World leaders who pulled out of Copenhagen because they know this scam will literally decimate their people, and economies. Lets focus on the amount of people who have been silenced for daring to speak against this government-led initiative. Lets focus on the leaked emails that show the numbers have been manipulated. So much more to focus on, not enough space to do it in...
NewWorldRebel 2 years ago
I would like to attract your attention on the extremely interesting work, for the resolution of most of the environmental problems, by Dr Steven Greer and his friends, The Disclosure Project (Projet Révélation). You will find the links on Wikipedia.
As well, I invite you to see the introductive videos on the subject in my YouTube playlist called ' Time for UFO '
CandlesOfUnity 2 years ago
Depopulation of the entire human race (except for me) is the only answer. We must erase the human parasite plague that endlessly leeches upon our limited resources. We, the Wealthy Elite shall eradicate Global Warming, snuffing out the human life whoes very breath suffocates our Goddess Earth. With your help we'll create a better pandemic, a more lethal virus, a deadlier plague, in hopes that one day, the disease called Humans are utterly extinct. Because the world is a better place without YOU.
HardlineAthiest 2 years ago
Organized Crime in Charge of EU Carbon Trade, Europol Says
/watch?v=oL-e33oaI94&feature=sub
CRAPCANNONS 2 years ago 2
I tend not to revile the central bankers. It smacks of fascism to scapegoat an entire class of people because of the misdeeds of a few. Not all central bankers are sinister assholes stealing the wealth of the country.
KarrensMan69 2 years ago
look the criminals always have to surround themselves with good and naive people. If they have come this far with the police state, gigantic government ever growing, bought most of the congress and senate and dumbed down a majority of the US population they are pretty smart and know how top protect their asses. Today they surround themselves with these greenpeace idiots because that was hip. Now I see them shifting to the right already as all this is coming out as a giant fraud
TheEbonicslover 2 years ago
I am just as repulsed by the police state, and the massive invasive gov't. Just understand that NOT ALL the uber wealthy are behind it. The ones who oppose it stay off the radar, while guys like soros love the attention.
KarrensMan69 2 years ago
well now get ready for the avalanche of these know nothing parasites trying to run your life and if you oppose them there is the army right behind them.
When did I write that all wealthy are behind it? You're not writing to some retarded commie here chief.
TheEbonicslover 2 years ago
Calm down now, I'm aware you aren't a pinko. Don't worry about the army BTW, we aren't behind the global socialists. We took an oath to The Constitution, not the government or the people pulling it's strings.
KarrensMan69 2 years ago
are you saying your in the military? If so are you saying the military will not follow Obama's executive orders to round up Americans if they don't comply with the parasites sent after us?
Have you heard or read the MIAC report and Virginia Domestic Terrorism assessment reports?
TheEbonicslover 2 years ago
I absolutely am saying the vast majority of the military will not follow orders to round up innocent civilians. Remember, the military is made up of civilians, all of whom have friends and family in the population. Most would take their weapons home if things were bad enough to warrant it. A certain segment will actively defend the civilian population from those remaining obamabots should they execute orders to violate the Constitution.
No, I haven't read any of that.
KarrensMan69 2 years ago
"I just hope we can transcend our differences and come to a consensus."
I would like to know whyanyone would be interested in coming to a consensus on a hoax? Sure, the people making billions off of it would also like that too. I just have to wonder, why is it still the "theory" of relativity, or the "theory" of gravity. Yet the MMGW "theory" is "settled science", inspite of the numerous actual scientists who question or outright reject the hoax.
KarrensMan69 2 years ago
100% of scientists say climate change is a reality. Around 90% of them argue it is man made. Every major national scientific body agrees on this point. You can disagree with them if you want, but don't pretend like the debate is more vigorous than it really is. That would be distorting the facts and I just know how much you climate change deniers insist on remaining faithful to the facts.
newsradiohead 2 years ago
WHAT??? 100% my ass!!! You say stupid shit like this and in the same paragraph talk about facts? You have no concept of what a fact is do you?
KarrensMan69 2 years ago
Yes, out of every peer reviewed scientific article from the mid 90s on, each one argued that climate change was happening. Scientifically, it has no longer become possible to claim that climate change is a fiction, but those who want to stall action have argued that climate change is not induced by people.
newsradiohead 2 years ago
Global warming is a HOAX??? And what is YOUR theory as to why glaciers have been INEXORABLY RECEDING and increasing the surface water exponentially, KarrensClottedPussy?
And spare us all your blow-hard bullshit about defending this country. As far as I'm concerned, you are a FLAG-STAINING COWARD, KarrensStankySkankyPUSSY!
budavol 1 year ago
When we go into this cap and trade system and we have to send all kinds of money to poor African countries, what do they do with the money? They will buy cars and trucks so how does this help the enviroment? None of the money will go to clean up polution, it will end up making things worse and the Al Gores of this world will make even more profits.
This does not sound like a good idea to me.
justanoldman1 2 years ago
It costs our city over $4,000.00 per ton to pick up recycled plastic and glass and for that they recieve $35.00 per ton for the product. Boy that sounds like a really smart idea. This same thing applies to almost ever aspect of recycled goods, it costs more and does nothing to help save the planet. You call that common sense? I would like to end polution, but real polution like sewage and crap along the roads etc. Mountains of garbage dumped in dumps instead of insineration generating power.
justanoldman1 2 years ago
How do you know this for a fact? How do you know that the person you're listening to is telling any more of the truth than anyone else?
And don't call me a sheep. I recycle because it's common sense that we should try to minimise waste. I walk because it's better for me than driving, plus cheaper.
You're not stupid. You know we [humans in general] treat the world like shit, so why not just accept some responsibility and stop being so stubborn about it?
hmmmmm1988 2 years ago
The red herring that the poorer nations will become rich is absurd. It's the oil companies that are stifling competition. Every time you fill up your tank, it is like paying a tax to Big Oil. Imagine if you could get your energy from the sun, the earth (geothermal), the wind, or plentiful cultures of algae. It would put the oil companies out of business. The only way China could become rich is if they developed clean energy quicker than the rest of the world and we have to buy their tech.
newsradiohead 2 years ago
And even if you are right and climate change is a hoax, fossil fuels are becoming depleted. That is a fact. Remember when oil shot up to over $4.00 a gallon? The days of cheap oil are gone; expensive oil is a reality. Think about it. If oil keeps dwindling and we have no alternative energies to turn to, we are held hostage to Big Oil. We'll have to pay whatever they demand.
newsradiohead 2 years ago
If you had a brain in your head you would see what is really happening and it is all political, nothing else. The world temperatures change all the time and one valcano puts more CO2 into the air than all mankind. This global warming is a scam to make some people rich while idiots like you help them continue the sham, you are all being duped.
justanoldman1 2 years ago
First, it's climate change, not global warming. Climate change theory argues that weather will become more intense. Droughts, floods, winters and summers will all become more severe. Some places (like the Arctic) will become warmer. Some places (like the North Atlantic) will become colder. Some places, like Kansas, will receive more flooding and some places like Spain will become deserts. The fact that it is -46 in Winnipeg should tell you that something is fishy.
newsradiohead 2 years ago
...The weather is getting colder?! Is it really?
Stop making stuff up to back up your argument!
hmmmmm1988 2 years ago
typing about it won't make him look cool, but he'd be really cool if he rapped about it!!
NZtrillion 2 years ago
Ok, so by your logic, an object closer to the sun should be hotter. On Mercury, the surface temperatures range from about 90 to 700 K (−183 °C to 427 °C, −297 °F to 801 °F),
newsradiohead 2 years ago
On Venus, the CO2-rich atmosphere, along with thick clouds of sulfur dioxide, generates the strongest greenhouse effect in the Solar System, creating surface temperatures of over 460 °C (860 °F). This makes Venus's surface hotter than Mercury's which has a minimum surface temperature of -220 °C and maximum surface temperature of 420 °C, even though Venus is nearly twice Mercury's distance from the Sun and thus receives only 25% of Mercury's solar irradiance.
newsradiohead 2 years ago
Seriously people, when did America become to scientifically illiterate? I am a clueless humanities major and even I know what the hell is going on.
newsradiohead 2 years ago
If you're going to use venus as an example to back up "global whining", you should acknowledge that the temp on venus is fairly uniform over the entire planet. On earth, we see record low temperatures somewhere on the planet every year. If your arguement was correct, we would only see record heat, EVERYWHERE and NO record lows. Further, CO2 accounts for %3 of our warming, and humans contribute %3 of that. Therefore, we are not the cause of any change, it's all bullshit to scam money from gov't.
KarrensMan69 2 years ago
I say this again and again. It's climate change; not global warming. Climate change theory stipulates that the weather will become more intense, extreme and unpredictable everywhere across the globe. The record colds are actually extremely ominous: they are consistent with a pattern of more extreme weather.
newsradiohead 2 years ago
I repeat myself a lot too. The climate has changed since the dawn of time. The most extreme changes ever, happened before humans existed. Furthermore, this past year had one of the most mild hurricane seasons. There are no new extremes being recorded one way or another. The highest temp ever recorded was 134F in AZ. That was 1913. There has been no "pattern of more extreme weather".
KarrensMan69 2 years ago
"The climate has changed since the dawn of time"
The New Scientist has an article entitled, "50 reasons why global warming isn't natural." Please please read it and keep an open mind.
newsradiohead 2 years ago
dailyexpress UK had an article today titled "CLIMATE CHANGE IS NATURAL: 100 REASONS WHY"
I was a liberal environmentalist 15 years ago. I know better now. I was convinced humans would have made the planet uninhabitable by now. I'm not saying CC isn't happening, I'm saying human endeavors play absolutely zero role in it. You're using wikipedia? Anyone can put anything on that, it's not credible. If you really wanted to learn more you'd do some honest research.
KarrensMan69 2 years ago
I'm using wikipedia, but I always check the sources. Usually the sources are legitimate news agencies like the BBC or the statement of science academies themselves. Speaking of legitimate sources, have you seen what the Daily Express looks like? It's a British tabloid, not a respected newspaper.
newsradiohead 2 years ago
Correction 136 °F Al 'Aziziyah, Libya 1922, when somewhere else hits 140 comebother me. Until then, I'll continue to live comfortably.
Besides, if everyone who believed CO2 was causing "man made climate change" would just put a plastic bag over their heads, and tie it tight, this issue would be solved over night.
KarrensMan69 2 years ago
Well, it looks like we've come to an impasse. On my side I have every national scientific body and around 90% of scientific consensus. On your side, you have the fact that it was hot in Arizona, er correction Libya. Yup, a real debate here. Incidently, go to any news service and find out which decade is the warmest on record. I'll give you a hint. It wasn't the 20s or even the 30s. Go to wikipedia and do a quick search for "instrumental temperature record" to see that temps have been rising.
newsradiohead 2 years ago
Your side claims %90 scientific consensus? Wow, that's horse shit. Something should click in your head when so many people claim to agree on an issue that allows them to demand more govt money and authority. Then, when some of their contemporaries dispute them, they're ridiculed and marginalized. Also, in the 70's they squealed about a man made ice age. Every winter for the past few years, it's "climate change", and once again this summer it will be Global Warming again. Same bullshit every year
KarrensMan69 2 years ago
Go to wikipedia and type in "Scientific opinion on climate change." "In February 2007, the IPCC released a summary of the forthcoming Fourth Assessment Report. According to this summary, the Fourth Assessment Report finds that human actions are "very likely" the cause of global warming, meaning a 90% or greater probability." Furthermore, think about it. The scientists themselves wouldn't make money off of climate change. What would agencies like NASA have to gain by falsifying data?
newsradiohead 2 years ago
Do you have any idea how many careers would be ruined if it came out that scientists were falsifying data? The real money to be had from global warming would be from green tech businesses in the private sector and these scientists who study global warming are mostly in the public sector or academia, not prime places to make money off of global warming. Look, deny climate change all you want, but don't pretend like there is a scientific debate.
newsradiohead 2 years ago
There isn't a scientific debate and until Beck, Hannity or Limbaugh publish a peer reviewed scientific article, there won't be a debate on whether or not climate change is happening.
newsradiohead 2 years ago
@newsradiohead It has come out that these "scientists" were falsifying and covering up data. The leftist media has hidden that as well as they can. If ther was any money in "green" technology, it wouldn't have to be subsidized. Yet all of it is. You're right, there isn't a "debate", the activist "scientists" in the hoax refuse to debate.
KarrensMan69 2 years ago
@KarrensMan69 Are you trying to bring up "climate gate"? Really? Climate Change deniers were hoping to find marching orders from George Soros or Al Gore or Maurice Strong, but there was nothing like that in the emails. The New Scientist has an article about why Climate Gate is one big fizzle. Read answer #9 on the "50 Reason . . ." article for more about that. Also, if you would like to find out more about how science world, why some ideas gain more traction than others, read Thomas Khun.
newsradiohead 2 years ago
@KarrensMan69 As for you other points, green tech isn't viable right now. But with R&D it can be. So why should we act? Here is one compelling reason: the American auto industry for years argued that the government mandating tougher admissions standards would be a jobs killer. All the while the car companies in Japan and Europe raised their standards. The result? GM goes bankrupt and the other American car industries are on the ropes. In capitalism, you innovate or die.
newsradiohead 2 years ago
Take South Korea for instance. It has to import all of its oil, just like America does, but its oil companies are smaller than America's so it doesn't have as much influence. The Koreans got sick of sending their money overseas so they have made a commitment to put money into green tech. Now, when the price of a barrel of oil shoots up to over $150, who do you think people are going to go to for their energy needs, the Koreans or Americans?
newsradiohead 2 years ago
@KarrensMan69 And as for your argument that scientists won't debate the reality of climate change, that's because it is already accepted as a fact. Debating climate change is like debating if the world is flat or whether evolution exists: there isn't a debate if only one side has a real argument. If you have reservations about climate change, then find a scientist who can write a peer reviewed article that debates the reality of climate change. Until then, the debate is settled.
newsradiohead 2 years ago
And something should click in your head when industry opposes the idea that climate change is man made. Think about it. A few years back, oil was $4.00 a gallon. Fossil fuels are dwindling, and image if we don't have any alternatives for oil when the last reserves are tapped. Big Oil would make a killing, and we would have no choice but to pay whatever they demanded.
newsradiohead 2 years ago
@newsradiohead The oil industry opposes the idea? Wow, I have to wonder why they run articles that support your point of view and waste funds to try and appeal to your point of view by accepting the bullshit premise that their product has anything to do with CC. Massive contradiction there.
KarrensMan69 2 years ago
@KarrensMan69
I have to wonder why they run articles that support your point of view,
should have said ADS, not articles
KarrensMan69 2 years ago
@KarrensMan69 Go to the Guardian's web page. George Monboit wrote about a post, "The Climate Denial Industry is Out to Dupe the Public. And It's Working." The industry's response to climate change has been much like Sarah Palin's answer to the question of climate change she made in the VP debate: there is no proof of climate change going on, but we need to switch to renewable energy. Of course, without any pressing reason to switch over, the decision to do so can be delayed indefinitely.
newsradiohead 2 years ago
@KarrensMan69 And I'm sorry that you feel burned when global cooling turned out to be a bust, but you should understand that the consensus on global cooling was never as settled as is the consensus on climate change. What's more, the overall premise of global cooling was correct: human exploitation of the world's resources was having a profound effect on the world's ecology.
newsradiohead 2 years ago
Compressed on Jupiter !? Are you kidding ? On Jupiter you have from 5x lower to 2x higher pressure than on Earth - go back to school, I told you.
mr58kjp 2 years ago
You're still not getting at the heart of the issue: if Venus' atmosphere is compressed, why is it compressed? Gravity can compress it. Of course, Venus and Earth have the same gravitational mass. It can also be compressed because there is a lot of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. This is the reason why Venus is so hot and the atmospheric pressure is so high. According to that article, there is as much c02 on earth as on Venus, but on earth the c02 is contained in things like the oceans . . .
newsradiohead 2 years ago
. . . rocks and soil whereas on Venus it's all in the atmosphere. I might not know everything about science, but I know that my general argument is correct: Venus is hot because of the concentration of its greenhouse gases.
newsradiohead 2 years ago
For God's sake, that Australian article reads, "Venus ruined by greenhouse gases." What more do you want?
newsradiohead 2 years ago
It's not the question of being scientist, it's a fact of enormous, unimaginable pressure of the air on Venus - the air there is hot, because so compressed, not because of CO2!
Go back to school. You lack elementary science education.
mr58kjp 2 years ago
The air is compressed on Venus, true. But it is compressed with greenhouse gases like c02. The atmosphere is also compressed on the gas giants like Jupiter but that is because of its immense gravitational pull. Venus' gravitational pull on the other hand is about equal to earth's. Look: the Australians agree with me, and the Australians are never wrong: smh[dot]com[dot]au/articles/2007/11/28/1196036983400[dot]html
newsradiohead 2 years ago
The pressure is caused by a density of greenhouse gases. Think about diving to the bottom of the ocean. The pressure at the bottom of the ocean is immense because water is so dense. On Venus, reaching the surface is like wading into an atmospheric ocean of c02, a greenhouse gas.
newsradiohead 2 years ago
little commie parasites! You just can't wait to run our lives, can you?
TheEbonicslover 2 years ago
Actually, I am an avid capitalist. The vested interests (i.e. oil companies) have stifled competition by creating a monopoly in the energy market. The government needs to apply pressure points the in energy industry to stimulate R&D for products which are in demand.
newsradiohead 2 years ago
That is to say, green tech which countries all over the world are demanding or will soon demand because fossil fuels are dwindling.
newsradiohead 2 years ago
total propaganda nonsense and even if they did dwindle the free market would decide what type of energy sources would be most effective. The problem is they don't want any free market. They want to depopulate the world and the global warming agenda will do just that.
TheEbonicslover 2 years ago
yeah that's why all major oil companies are funding this global warming scam and genocide. The criminal Rothchilds just came up with the best Eugenics program in the history of mankind
TheEbonicslover 2 years ago
Oh you crazy conspiracy theorists. You're just so cute with your paranoid delusions. You actually think someone cares about you enough to try to kill you or put you into a fema camp. The oil companies don't want to kill you; if they killed everyone, who would buy their overpriced oil? Trust me, they are much more interested in taking your money than killing you.
newsradiohead 2 years ago
oh you retarded know nothing parasite... you think they don't have enough money? The only reason they haven't killed you or me yet is they don't want to live in the bunkers. Besides it's not what I think but what THEY are saying but of course like every other retard you will refuse to acknowledge what is a public knowledge. They don't want to kill everyone but surely dream about the population falling under 1 billion.
TheEbonicslover 2 years ago
Wow, thanks for the heads up that the new world order is looking to kill 5 billion people. I'll make sure to invest in the funeral industry.
newsradiohead 2 years ago
one minor question... why do you use the term 'climate change' if you believe it should be 'global warming' ?
NZtrillion 2 years ago
No, I believe in climate change. Very simply, climate change theory stipulates that the weather will become more extreme in all places on the globe.
newsradiohead 2 years ago
OK once you make your your "fortune" I'll make sure to buy a PUT option on the value of your parasitic life.
TheEbonicslover 2 years ago
Wow sexy! What do you say, Tizi?
ytrogergt 2 years ago
If all these greenhouse gases are "warming" our earth then what caused other warm periods in past centuries? Greenhouse gases are NOT the only factor in climate change as some people are saying.
ohmahboi 2 years ago
Comment removed
ohmahboi 2 years ago
Going green certainly does mean going local, but like it or not we currently live in a global economy of our own making. We therefore have a global responsibility to those (poorer) countries who will be first and worst hit by climate change.
neonmadwoman 2 years ago
well done
BestFruitNow 2 years ago
very good :D
aerobique 2 years ago
1 VOLCANO SPITS MORE CO2 AND SO CALLED GREEN HOUSE GASES, THAN THE LAST 100 YEARS OF HUMAN INDUSTRIALIZATION
So say 31000 REAL scientists vs 700 hoaxter scientists, sellout politicians and elitist eugenicist rooting for world population reduction and a global police state?
This treaty is the devils tool of enslavement , payed and bought with our future taxes and insurance.
This MYTH is BUSTED !
Going green means local solutions , not global taxes !
dddiegopan 2 years ago
funny how Houston got its earliest snowfall. :p
ohmahboi 2 years ago
Climate change is subtly different than global warming. Climate change scientists have evidence that argues that weather will become more extreme everywhere on earth. Rainy areas will receive more rain (i.e. flooding); hotter areas will receive less rain (e.g. drought, forest fires, dead crops etc.); winters will be colder in some areas; summers will be hotter in other areas. The early snows in Houston should tip all of us off that something disconcerting is happening to our world.
newsradiohead 2 years ago
Climate has always been changing. This is nothing new.
ohmahboi 2 years ago
Look, the most intelligent people in the world agree that the climate is changing. If they can't convince you, then certainly I can't. Just know that climate change is more important than you and me: it's about the future of the human race. If you want to give your children a world that is trashed, then go ahead and keep denying climate change. Just know that even conservatives are recognizing that climate change is an important issue. Research JBL, the wrestler . . .
newsradiohead 2 years ago
. . . and businessman. He is concerned about climate change because it would be bad for business if costal cities were flooded and we couldn't grow enough crops to sustain ourselves. Also, there is money to be made in new green industries. I can't understand why conservatives are so hellbent against admitting that billions of people releasing all sorts of gasses into the atmosphere isn't having an adverse effect on the environment.
newsradiohead 2 years ago
Just type in "JBL" and "Global Warming" into a search engine and read the articles that come up.
newsradiohead 2 years ago
would this wrestler be one of these 'most intelligent people in the world'? lol
don't mistake fame for intelligence, dude...
romeosevendelta 2 years ago
Research JBL. He is a very intelligent investor, businessman, and communicator. He hasn't done any of the science, but is a smart enough businessman to know that conflict and wars over resources is bad for you bottom line.
newsradiohead 2 years ago
i did a search and now have about as much respect for him as i do the governator.
romeosevendelta 2 years ago
just look into the politics and science of this whole climate change thing and then ask yourself if it's legitimate.
look at both sides of the argument equally.
i used to think it was a real threat, but then i really got knee-deep in all the available information.
it's utter nonsense, even without all the drama of the hacked CRU emails.
romeosevendelta 2 years ago
Ok, fair enough. You should look at the evidence too. Most of the rest of the world says that climate change is happening. Smaller, poorer countries are eager to combat climate change. The US is large and rich so we can probably weather climate change better than other countries that aren't so privileged. Also, liberal politicians, neutral scientists, and conservative businessmen all are calling for measure to combat climate change. What motive would they have other than saving the environment?
newsradiohead 2 years ago
Furthermore, most people arguing against climate change have an economic interest in leaving things the way they are. These are major corporations who only care about their bottom line, not about you or me. Think about it. Corporations don't have your best interest in mind so why should you stick up for them?
newsradiohead 2 years ago
It has a lot to do with the carbon tax that their trying to instate.
And these smaller countries are only in it for the money. The Un taxes us and who are they going to give it to? Under-developed countries who are pointing the finger at us. And if this catastrophe is really on it's way, what does any corporation stand to gain? Definitely not real estate or more consumers if floods and storms will wipe a lot of people out. Not to mention the fact that the scientific community isn't even close...
romeosevendelta 2 years ago
...to settled on the subject. I'm not sticking up for them, I'm sticking up for me. This country doesn't need another depression over science that isn't proven or even particularly likely. And I have looked at the evidence. That's exactly why i think this naked australian, al gore, the IPCC and everyone else pushing this madness on a large level are either lying or without a clue.
romeosevendelta 2 years ago
The scientific community believes that climate change is occuring. Just how severe it will be is up for debate. And American innovation won't push us into a depression; it will be the next big boom cycle. Everyone around the world wants clean tech. Nobody wants to rely on fossil fuels because they are dirty, inefficient, and fossil fuels are running out. For instance, Detriot got their butts handed to them but the Japanese because Detriot argued that the gov demanding higher fuel efficiency . .
newsradiohead 2 years ago
. . . would be a 'job killer.' Sound familiar? If we are not careful, when the rest of the world demands more fuel efficient tech, they will turn to the Europeans, or East Asians, not Americans. If we are not careful, the story of GM and Detriot will be played out on a grand scale. Already there is a Chinese wind farm in east Texas. If we aren't careful, this will be our future.
newsradiohead 2 years ago
You clearly haven't seen it from both sides. This whole movement is pushing for a carbon tax by the UN. Do you REALLY think that we'll have the finance for green energy while we're taxed to death so that third world nations can further their green tech? And when did anyone in this conversation bring up the idea that continuing to use fossil fuels was a good idea btw?
romeosevendelta 2 years ago
And the scientific community is divided on the subject. 10 to 1 against the idea.
Like it or not, that's how it is.
romeosevendelta 2 years ago
Just do a quick Wikipedia search. There is consensus on climate change. Truth by assertion should have died with the Bush administration. Just because you keep repeating that there is no concensus on climate change doesn't make it so. It's you versus the global scientific community, and I'll take their word over yours. Look, if you don't believe me, think about when gas was over $4 a gallon and you'll agree that we need to switch to alternative sources of energy.
newsradiohead 2 years ago
Do you really think you are poor because all of your tax money is going to the brown people? Give me a break. Whenever we give out aid, there are strings attached. We only give out money when it is in our national interest. The point of green tech is to create American patents. When the rest of the world wants to buy a smart grid or solar panels, ideally they will buy American. Right now, East Asia and Europe are leading in the green tech race.
newsradiohead 2 years ago
Soon, already when people want to buy a car, they will buy a Japanese hybrid, not a Detroit gas guzzler. When they want to buy a wind farm, they will go to the Chinese. When they want to switch from gas to algae to power their cars, they will go to the Swedes. Nobody will want our dirty, fossil fuel based tech. Seriously, that is what fossil fuels have to do with the conversation.
newsradiohead 2 years ago
Except no one brought it up but you. I never said anything about being opposed to green tech. You planted it in this conversation. And it isn't just me, it's over 30,000 scientists and experts on the subject and everyone supporting honest un-censored, un-altered data.
And you know what? I'm done here. Because I just went through a few news sites, and country after country is backing out of making any kind of deal.
I guess i can keep the money I'd have spent on the third world after all...
romeosevendelta 2 years ago
I brought up green tech because it's all related. Here's how: if there is doubt about climate change, then there is no impetus to switch to green tech. As long as we are using dirty fossil fuels, the oil companies profit; thus, the oil companies have a vested interest in keeping down green tech. Now, believe it or not, oil is cheaper for the U.S. than it is for the rest of the world.
newsradiohead 2 years ago
Oil is cheap for us because the House of Saudi cuts us a good deal. Unfortunately, the cheap oil has become addictive and we cannot break our dependence because of powerfully vested interests. Gas is more expensive in Europe and Japan. They have long had the insentive to switch over and that is why their green tech is better than ours. The oil companies love people like you. They are gouging you, and sacrificing our national interests for the sake of their corporate profits.
newsradiohead 2 years ago
And you just can't help sticking up for the oil companies, taking their side against the international community of scientists who are trying to save your ungratefuly hide and the few good politicians who are trying to transition to sustainable energy.
I'll tell you something. The middle class is under assault. The financial and credit industries have picked my bones and your bones too. Hordes of advertisers tell us that it's better to go into debt than go without the newest piece of plastic
newsradiohead 2 years ago
garbage they are forcing upon us. And corporations have shipped our manufactoring jobs overseas, which in itself isn't a bad thing IF they funded educational programs that trained people in the high tech science jobs that could replace them. But guess what? They don't want to pay taxes and you are defending them. They are screwing you hard and you are asking for more with your narrow outlook. They are screwing you hard, but they wear pressed suits and drive fancy cars. . .
newsradiohead 2 years ago
. . . so they can't be the thieves. They tell you the brown people are to blame; they tell you the brown people and the socialists in the government are going to take the money they have already picked from your pockets and you take the bait, hook line and sinker. Keep all of the $9.75 you make at Long John Silver's if you want. Horde your little piece of cheese like a rat, but mark my words, people like you can't see that if things keep up like this, America is no better than a sinking ship,
newsradiohead 2 years ago
and you will be no better than a drowned rat when things implode, and frankly you will have no one to blame but yourself.
newsradiohead 2 years ago
jesus titty-fucking christ....is this a programmed response?
I JUST SAID i wasn't against green energy/tech.
I take public transit for that VERY reason. READ what i'm saying, damn you! I'm talking about NOT HAVING A CARBON TAX PUT ON US BY THE UN (was that big enough for you to see it?). And I don't work a long john silver's. I don't work anywhere because our great and wonderful president has done such an awesome job of ruining the economy and doubling unemployment.
romeosevendelta 2 years ago
Comment removed
newsradiohead 2 years ago
Comment removed
newsradiohead 2 years ago
Ok, I was reading over my responses, and I am sorry I got so worked up. You should know that the carbon tax thing was a proposal by the weaker nations. It never had a chance of working because not only were the world's strongest nations opposing it, but even stronger developing nations like China were oppsoing it. It was basically a negotiating tactic: if you are only getting one slice of pie, demand the whole pie and you maybe get two slices.
newsradiohead 2 years ago
I'm sorry I was shooting my mouth off like a jerk, but I just get so upset because people should not be taken in by scare tactics employed by the most powerful corporations. Things like carbon tax actually help capitalism because it forces companies to innovate and be viable over the long haul. Think about how much more competitive GM would be if Clinton had forced them to raise fuel efficiency standards. I know everyone's piece of the pie is shrinking,
newsradiohead 2 years ago
but this is exactly the moment when we can't lose our heads. We need to know all the facts and not let the very people who picked our pockets frighten us into working against our own best interests.
newsradiohead 2 years ago
i've just read your whole thread... i think you need to look into the role of c02 in and on the earth. we need c02 and so do our plants. plants don't grow without it. and nor will our food. glasshouse tunnels are pumped with c02 to make plants grow bigger and faster. the issue at hand is not about c02, it's about eliminating poisoning pollutions. the planets climate changing is another whole issue. and most scientists think that it has more to do with the sun, than humans driving cars.
NZtrillion 2 years ago
I don't appreciate you clouding the terms of the debate. Most scentists believe that climate change is man made. End of story. The sun causing climate change is one dissenting theory used to explain climate change among many. And as for your argument that co2 is good, I have to agree that co2 is good in moderation, but all I have to do is look at Venus to know what happens when too much co2 gets into the atomosphere.
newsradiohead 2 years ago
Ever studied atmospheric conditions on Mars? No, eh?
mr58kjp 2 years ago
What is your question? I don't have much scientific background, but it seems obvious to me. Venus is too hot. Mars is too cold but Earth is just right. Spend centuries pumping greenhouse gases into the atmosphere though, and all that changes . . .
newsradiohead 2 years ago
Here's what the climate change debate reminds me of. Right now, climate change is so drastic that nobody is denying it is occuring. So instead of denying that climate change is happening, people are casting doubt on whether or not it is man made. Scientists say it is about 90% certain that climate change is man made. Now, back in the 16th century when Galileo made his telescope, scientists were 90% certain that his telescope could magnify the moon, but some argued that while they saw an object
newsradiohead 2 years ago
at the end of Galileo's telescope, it might be an illusion caused by a demon, or nothing more than a painting drawn on one of the lenses. Some people were genuinely skeptical, but many had a vested interest in denying Galileo's findings, especially the Church, because it challenged their interests. Today we face a similar problem where some people are genuinely skeptical of climate change, but many cynically deny climate change because of their vested interests.
newsradiohead 2 years ago
Ever compared how much CO2 on Mars and Venus?
When comparing look also at the atmospheric pressure of all three (Earth added) - maybe even without scientific background, you can make it to understand that conditions at Venus do not depend on CO2.
mr58kjp 2 years ago
Like I said, I am not a scientist, but it seems that the atmosphere of Venus is very dense. The atmosphere of Mars is very thin and Earth is in the middle. This means that while Mars and Venus may both have around 95% of their atmosphere made up of C02, because Venus' atmosphere is more dense it has quantitatively more c02. It is no surprise therefore that Venus is hotter than Mars even if percentage wise 95% of their atmosphere is made up of C02.
newsradiohead 2 years ago
I am a broke ass student up to my nose in debt but I still give $15 a month to Greenpeace. Go Greenpeace!
newsradiohead 2 years ago
Why waste your money on greenpeace? Save that $15.
ohmahboi 2 years ago
would you quit your payments if one day you realised they were supporting a cause that you thought was wrong?
NZtrillion 2 years ago
It would depend. My opinions and the opinions of any organization (Greenpeace included) will never match up 100%, but if I believe they are ultimately doing the right thing, I will support them to the best of my ability.
newsradiohead 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
SOY GAY!!!
butberry23 2 years ago
How mature.
morrowray1 2 years ago
well said. go Earth!
skatespom 2 years ago 5
really creative, nice job! communicates the fairly shocking facts on F gases without boring the viewer.
danfinnman5 2 years ago 5
this is a great way to make people aware about climate change
thinker24 2 years ago 7
This has been flagged as spam show
brilliant. well done
bayoudog22 2 years ago 3
This comment has received too many negative votes show
put your clothes back on, bub.
the climate change party is over. climate-gate much?
oh, and uh, stop picking on the marsupials. it's not nice...
romeosevendelta 2 years ago
Australia...........
Past ABORIGINE MASSACRE
Current KANGAROO DINGO CAMEL MASSACRE
whalingo 2 years ago
LOved it! Dave is awesome, and he is totally right ! ;) greetings from Guatemala! :* :*
bless..
laspapisdelrollo 2 years ago 4
<3 greenpeace
Antarax 2 years ago 4
Haha! Well done :)
NZeilemaker 2 years ago
very creative, and it really touches the sense... wow
thanks
ecologist hugs from brazil
*
michelesato 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Hackers expose the Global Warming Theory Fraud
Hackers have tried to prove global warming researchers are massaging the figures - after stealing sensitive emails from one of the UK's leading climate research centres. The documents were then made available to the public from a Russian server.
Hackers break into University emails and uncover the global warming conspiracy. Mainstream media is whitewashing this story
TheBorg01 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
the only natural refrigerant is ice ! There are no ways to make a refrigerant gas without using chemicals !
strikenetter 2 years ago
Big ups greenpeace..spread da holistic approach 2 environ. problmz
scandalouskid 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Well done. But please, Greenpeace, fool someone else.
Johannesmania 2 years ago
Hi,
Very nice made! I like the idea...But there's a break in continuity on 0.38 /0.39 among several others and it would have been better if it's a bit shorter.
You're trying to shove in too much info in 2mins35; You'r losing me @ 2.00.
Ginesa123 2 years ago
pls sign the petition is our turn to make the change
funnybunny679 2 years ago 2
Booooooo HFC's. Keeping food un-spoiled so people don't starve! Boooooooo!
...idiots...
avengemm9dog 2 years ago
it's sad that you have to get naked for people to listen to this topic.
but i have to admit that i was all EYES and not so much EARS. i think that i have to watch it again to get what you were talking about.
missmarnip 2 years ago 2
Are people catching on that the CO2 argument isn't really cutting the mustard with the general public any more and something else scary is needed?
If the wealthy nations of the world want the developing nations to use a green refrigerant the solution is blindingly obvious. GIVE IT to them... for free with no strings attached. They'd be mad not to use it. And the hypocritical, corporately owned politicians of the West can then shut the f*ck up with their endless whinging and no real answers
TheHolySpirit 2 years ago
Would you do yourself a favour and do even 5 minutes research before making such scurrilous slurs on A-grade activists working to make the world a safer place for our children? If the world had listened to Greenpeace nearly 20 years ago, and made the shift to natural refrigerants, we would now be in a much better position to reduce the chances of catastrophic climate change. Well done Dave for a great video, I just hope GP gives this campaign the resources it needs to empower national offices!
greencooling 2 years ago 6
For your information, I was there 20 years ago giving Greenpeace my hard earned financial support. Since then, I have slowly come to believe that Greenpeace has been well and truly played. I totally agree with their intent, but unfortunately they've been used for the ulterior motives of others. I'll leave it up to you if you want to research that a little more. xx
TheHolySpirit 2 years ago
So was I, working to generate financial support, and getting arrested for Ozone layer demos. Since then the science has comprehensively proved concerns about ozone depleting and very high global warming potential refrigerants, and completely vindicated Greenpeace's advocacy and actions on these issues. Believe what you like, but if you want to be part of the solution rather than the problem, let's look for the facts and be skeptical of conspiracy theories...;-)
greencooling 2 years ago 2
What a nutter - but that's no bad thing, a creative way of doing it! Off to sign the petition!
MoonmothMedia 2 years ago
this videos scare me =/!!! but with the naked guy there!! no prob!!! (=!
nanananajojojo 2 years ago
Needs to play on deception with stripping to cover up hes just reading a script and doesnt know anything at all about the science.
kakapoable 2 years ago
Great. Creative.
Anything that could help to save the climate, even nude men, are welcome. Just signed the petition! Your turn :-)
johanneseva 2 years ago 4
Yeah dude I signed it too, that was great.
Illonaxpg 2 years ago
Comment removed
EDUARDO7771231 2 years ago
yeah very creative :)
BeTheirVoice 2 years ago 4