Operation Saturation: On the Threshold (Pt 1 of 4)

[DarthMai]

Welcome to the operation NUTJOB.!!! LOL

[DarthMai]

Dude , you are a nutjob!! CO2 ,Nitrogen in the form of Nitrogen oxides, dusts, Ozone, Sulfur oxides, Oxygen and water wapor, hydrocarbons have existed for millions of years, volcanic eruptions and forest fires have naturally occurred even before humans existed. Nature has a way of correcting itself. And this is governed by the Law of Partial Pressures. Human beings survives on oxygen levels of 19.5~ 21 % , and oxygen are continuously produced by plants/trees. And they need Carbon dioxide .

[sum1uallno]

youtube.com/user/funy2me 

[DarthMai]

Talking smart ...like educated when probably you are a hack.

[DarthMai]

Please if you are not a scientist, don't even comment. People just accept whatever the IPCC, politicians are saying that there is man-made global climate change. I have yet to see any proof that this is so. Water vapor is thermodynamically advantageous when it change phase due to temperature changes as the sun's heat changes. Without greenhouse gas.. such as water vapor, there will be a global ice age. THat is why I believe CO2 is a not a pollutant. If you are not a scientist as I am, shut it!

[MaxSafeheaD]

@DarthMai

Dear Mr. Scientist if you are not an Earth or Life scientist as I am, shut it!

If CO2 keeps us warm, what happens when levels get higher?

Climat has changed a lot in the past that much is true, but your complete lack of appreciation for the fact that 6.5bn humans where NOT THERE AT THE TIME leads me to question your mentality.

You are not a Scientist, you are a Fox news product. Ranting on about liberals and socialists, you sheep are more gullable than Hitler Youth.

Fuck you.

[DarthMai]

@MaxSafeheaD You idiot. CO2 has never l been a pollutant ...you moron!! CO2 is a part of nature. Carbon cycle and photosynthesis is a process of nature. Plants and trees consume CO2 as CO2 is condensed back by partially dissolving in humid /saturated air. I didn't say  we can't do damage on our environment but carbon tax is not the answer. The earth has always have been self healing itself. All compounds found on earth mostly biodegrade over time. Humans will be extinct ..get over it.

[aurex73]

@MaxSafeheaD Since you are very informed, could u explain what percent of GHG is Man Made CO2! My understanding its around .117 percent, of GHG, how is that contribution relevant to our climate.

[MaxSafeheaD]

@aurex73

Is that a proportion of GHG in the atmosphere or is that the proportion of warming due to artificial CO2?

90% of the human body is water so rapidly introducing 0.117% of lead would be insignificant?!

Can we at least agree that modern society would be in turmoil if there was more than a two degree increase in global temperatures (either natural OR anthropogenic?)

Carbonic acid is very bad news for the ocean too by the way.

[FLPman]

@MaxSafeheaD

And we are supposed to trust your opinion? Dont' get me wrong, if pressed for a decision I'd be taking the side of "it's real, let's do something about it", but your flagrant use of immature, profane, and presumtuous remarks don't help your cause.. it only makes you look petty and examplifies why nothing gets done.

b/c we are took caught up in the arugment. It's about figuring out how to put the message across.. IMHO you failed miserably

[MaxSafeheaD]

@FLPman

Don't trust my opinion, don't trust anyones "opinion" check out the scientific facts for yourself.

I gust get angry at the USA in general because if there's a threat that one american would suffer from terrorism, foreigners will die BUT if there's a rist millions of foreigners may die, the USA would prefer to be 110% sure first before they take any responsibility for their opulance.

Look up New Scientist magazine and see it's climate change section.

[FLPman]

@MaxSafeheaD

WTF does US foreign aide policy have to do with this conversation? I think you're overly emotional in your thought process and just reaching for arguments. FYI, the USA in general are regular folks like me and (possibly) you. I dont' agree with my governments policies all the time, but your arguments , once again, are doing little to help and more to muck up the communications...

[MaxSafeheaD]

@FLPman

I am emotional I spelled just with a "g" ffs!!! =P

What I am trying to say is that there is a massive cultural resistance in the US to social responsibility. Perhaps it's not just the US but it's definately most obvious there.

Oil corporations also have VAST wealth invested in the industry - we only have to look at the smoking industry to see how far people will go to protect their money at the expense of society.

I'm a poor embassador for the cause - that's why I say look for yourself.

[kkob]

@DarthMai I am constantly amazed that "scientists" can't understand even basic science. Frankly, if you're a scientist, I'd be truly amazed because your errors of logic and information are massive. So, because we think there is too much CO2 right now, you think that means we don't understand the Greenhouse Effect? What kind of scientist makes such a basic error in logic? What is your Ph.D in, basket weaving? It sure as heck is not in climate science.

[DarthMai]

Operation nutjob. Global climate change is changing for millions of years. Humans has been in existence for about 200,000 years. The earth heals itself. CO2 is not a pollutant and is part of the ecosystem. CO2 is partially soluble is water vapor and condensed with water as carbonic acid and is absorbed in the soil for plants and trees consumption. Save the earth? No, save us from environmental stupidity ...which the environmental movement has been infiltrated by socialists and leftists.

[MaxSafeheaD]

@DarthMai

Humans has been in existence for about 200,000 years.

Yea, but modern agriculture has rarely had to deal with climate change and where it has, even small societies failed to adapt, starved and died.

The Maya are a perfect example but there are numerous others.

CO2 is a natural chemical, but that dose not mean it's unimportant - just look at what too much wind and water did to New Orleans ffs.

Do some bloody research O'Reilly.

[griptick]

jesus christ your a mother fucking tool. The chair of the 7th largest company in the world is calling for it because he is in part CONTROLLING it.

Can some one tell me if this shill actually believes what hes saying or is he a just another plant?

[beatlemaniac1000]

if your disgusted with this teachers misuse of taxpayer funds call his boss @ Central High School

(503) 606-2217 his name is greg craven

[mikenewportbeach80]

2009 now we are looking at 30 years of cooling....and in early 70's we were taught were heading towards another ice age....oh no, what to do? And Exxon, Shell, BP, etc just don't want competition and want gov to protect them from fuel cells and also all the alt. engy patents they bought up but never acted on.

[MaxSafeheaD]

@mikenewportbeach80

"in early 70's we were taught were heading towards another ice age"

No, Time magazine published the predictions of ONE scientist, all the American media in with typical American paranoia, repeated the same unlikely story.

You might have been taught the ice age was coming but did you ever think to question your "teachers."

No, I didn't think so.

[NUGNESS123]

STAM BONUS, OHHHHH RIIIGGHHHTT

[LunarFuror]

Yay! Stam +10!

[TheLivingDeadOne]

Is aurex73 retarded? Is he just self centered? Is he selfish and self serving, and "who cares about future of mankind" if HE'S not gonna be here anyway???

ABSOLUTELY!

[KnightBiologist]

Greg, you're doing the world a great service. Thanks for giving constructive, reasoned arguments and suggestions. Pay no attention to these ignorant denialists. They are the doomsayers who contribute nothing but their paranoia and fantasy; "new world order!" "Illuminati!" "Gore's making money!" Oh, boo hoo for you.

[aurex73]

You convinced me the World is Going to End!

But, if statistics and track record of all End of The World Predictions by man in the past have been wrong. I highly doubt, this one is right either.

WIll the world end someday maybe, will happend to be in our life time, No!

If science lets us live to be a 1000, I am pretty confident the world will go on for thousand of years after we are gone!

If I was a follower of the Gorical! I switch to 2012 band wagon more hip and believable! :)

[MaxSafeheaD]

You seem to be under the impression science is in any way comparable to religion.

Science is the opposite of religion.

[wishtree]

co2 tax us into the new world order of totalitaran control

[MaxSafeheaD]

Wake up numbskull.

The only people that think CO2 isn't a problem are petrol addicted americans and the oil companies that own them.

Take a passing look at the revenues made from oil and compare them with ... well anything.

[DarthMai]

@MaxSafeheaD I am not a petrol addicted american. I am actually a sane person who believes that all animals breath out CO2 and a part of nature. Plants and trees consume CO2 and produce oxygen. Secondly, Carbon dioxide is never a pollutant and is not contributing to global warming. Climate change? Yes, climate change occurs for billions of years and not because of humans nor because of CO2. CO2 is partially soluble in water and is not a pollutant.

[MaxSafeheaD]

@DarthMai

Of corse CO2 is a part of nature, that's the whole ******* point.

Sulphur Dioxide is also a natural gas, and Methane but that dosn'yt mean they have no effect on the climate. The atmosphere of gas on the surface of the earth is the REASON we have climat at all so your claim that it's composition is irrelevant is utterly stupid. Sorry, but there's no other way to put it.

Sewage is natural, I suppose that isn't a pollutant either?

[DarthMai]

@MaxSafeheaD when you are in the city and there is smog, smoke..of course it smells bad. And the smoke and smog in Beijing is not CO2, CO2 is odorless. What you are actually complaining is the particulates in the exhausts. Thats why in coal fired plants there are particulate filters. THe GREEN MOVEMENT now is infiltrated by the REDS. Sewage is not a pollutant either, in fact sewage can be used as fertilizer. However, you are now talking about solid waste now, are u dumb?

[MaxSafeheaD]

@DarthMai

Did I mention smog? No.

"THe GREEN MOVEMENT now is infiltrated by the REDS"

Ok, now you really are showing your colours =P If you seriously think environmental awareness is an evil communist plot you are crazy.

My point was you can have too much of a good thing. Take Oxygen - it's essentioal for respiration but too much of it and it will kill you, not to mention the fire hazard. If you can't understand a basic principle of balance, there's no point continuing the discussion.

[bikestu]

If global warming is not serious enoungh, We aer facing peak oil very soon ,we are facing some huge problems and imafraid the future does not look good

[Darvas73]

Risk of chaos and destruction is exactly what the military wants. That's how they get more funding. They don't care whether it is a risk of global warming or cooling or communism as long as they get the money.

The CEO of Shell has simply weighed the long term financial cost of being on the side of the general opinion(dangerous AGW is real) or being against it and the former has won. He doesn't care if the IPCC is right or wrong, he is just trying to make the most money possible.

[DarthGaras]

Complete global saturation

[SupremeLordReptyle]

!>.>  nerd alurt !!!

[pigface72]

no one said human beings would last forever, stop worrying and live your life. Human nature is prone to destroy so unless in your plan is to reduce the population by eighty percent then your wasteing your time, and if that is part of the plan start by making your carbon footprint 0 and maybe your foolish followers will do the same and save us from hearing this tripe!

[Igivecrabs]

I'd love to reduce the human population by eighty percent. At least 79% less idiots. We should stop people from breeding. Biologically. That'll solve most of the world's problems, actually. As long as it's done evenly between all countries of the world. Irrefutable.

[aurex73]

I agree the West has taken the lead on this. Lets sterilize the 3rd World.

Then you and all the followers of "The End of Times CO2 Gospel" should commit a mass suicide!

As a Man Made Climate Change Denier I promise we will bury you in non-carbon emmiting coffins! :-)

[Zalobar]

What if we act and any or all our actions are the wrong ones in making every worst case scenario come true anyway??? 6.5 billion of us on earth are like a single horny gnat yelling to an eliphant "Brace yourself baby, here I come:!

[Zalobar]

co2 is not the culprit in global warming/climate change. There are larger more forcefull events taking place in this solar system. Not man made.

[Zalobar]

The earth needs co2 to supply plant growth and even the rocks are humgry for co2.

[Zalobar]

I agree global warming is happening. It is also happening on all the other planets in our solar system.

[Zalobar]

I get my info the same place you get yours, Youtube!!

[eddiequest2]

And?

It's a good idea to check your sources, to see how much they can be trusted. What are your sources for your recent statements, anyway?

Ps. My sources go FAR beyond Youtube.

[Zalobar]

You should make it YOUR job to obtain data on how much co2 came out of Mt. Saint Helens. And retreve data from astronomers using infrared spectrometers to measure the temp. of Venus Mars Jupiter and Saturn and see for your self that they also are experiencing global warming. In short Check YOUR sources. Or prove mine wrong. We are so quick to take credit for every OMG moment when we, humans arent a pile of squat in the greater picture.

[Zalobar]

Lightning is the earths great purifier. It cleans the air and earth by making ozone. or o3. Which restores balance to every unwieldy pollutant man has ever emited. !

[Zalobar]

Lightening is responsible for the maintenance of our air so it is fit to breathe. It maintains the ratios of Hydrogen, oxygen, nitrogen and a mulitude of other gasses in our air and. Along with the help of plant life, Including Co2. And if you dont think rocks absorb Co2. You better set down YOUR glass of wine long enough to prove that one wrong. Happy hunting

[Zalobar]

I would put links in here, They wont let me. So all you gotta do is type in your search engine. Rocks absorb Co2?

Then start reading the articles.

[eddiequest2]

Yes - I see it now. I tried to send you my links too. But nope. I guess the Utoob folks don't like that. On the issue of CO2 eating rocks, you may have something.

[Zalobar]

1980

Mt St Hellens emitted more co2 than all of humanity since the beggining of time.

[eddiequest2]

Zalobar - please read:

Not only is this false, it couldn't possibly be true given the CO2 record from any of the dozens of sampling stations around the globe. If it were true that individual volcanic eruptions dominated human emissions and were causing the rise inCO2 concentrations, then these CO2 records would be full of spikes -- one for each eruption. Instead, such records show a smooth and regular trend.

[pedro4374]

you are a kooool dude.keep up the good work.

[Errachttoo]

Thanks for all of your hard work wonderingmind42. It really matters.

[anil062007]

lol, what is this? go & find a job

[wwickeddogg]

get some more information

[NwZ2]

He has one but you're too illiterate to read his job description.

[cantonear1968]

Dude! Are you really in black face?

You are out of your fucking mind!

[Batman83]

global warming lol, biggest hoax ever.

[wwickeddogg]

True, the coal companies have you fooled.

[plazflot]

no no

[5hu4q]

The "I'll beleive them before you" means someone isn't doing his or her homework.

If we burned all the fossil fuels on this planet we wouldn't get one percent of one percent the amount of c02 in the Venus atmosphere + C02 becomes a significant greenhouse gas only when it reaches many times the amount right now.

[RyuDarragh]

To answer the worst possible scenario he couldn't bring himself to read.. well, in theory, although they dismissed it as unlikely, I can tell you one word to answer the *theoretical* worst case. The one that they say is unlikely in the extreme, but can *not* entirely rule out. Venus. That's the word & the place. Venus is a perfect example of runaway greenhouse effect. "Today, temperatures will be 30 degrees lower and a balmy 710. Acid index will be PH 2.2 and the Sulphur index an agreeable 20%"

[moveoncitizen]

The basic premise of this argument is false

Doing nothing is the smartest course bar none

CO2 is at a dangerously low level

Peak oil is a joke

In the next 200 years if we do not develop an alternative to oil/coal we deserve to be wiped out

We have more than 200 years to come up with an answer because:

CO2 rises nice and smoothly up and up no matter what we are doing

Temperatures fluctuate so that now is as cold as 1988 - and 1940 - and 988 and 940 (you get my drift) no matter what CO2 is doing

[pauldwaite]

So, there's no problem? The AAAS and the NAC are wrong, and you're right?

Have you got some references we could read supporting your assertions on CO2?

[alexedit1]

dude!! seriously - ok so take global warming out...WHAT ABOUT ENVIRONMENTAL POLLUTION!!! have you been to Beijing and taken a deep breath right out of the airport!?

[Justwannalogon]

I think running out of oil will cause more problems for us than all the Katrina's you could throw at us. But hey, at least it begins to solve what you are so worried about. ;) Less Co2 in the air. $10/g here we come.

[kkob]

@Justwannalogon Feedbacks. Deal with the feedbacks. Methane is rising in the atmosphere and is already up to 1.85 ppm after being no more than .7 or so for the last 400,000 years, at least. Methane is seeping from the Siberian Arctic sea area and all of the tundra. This is one of those positive feedbacks people like to pretend don't exist. They exist, and we've still got half the oil left. And coal. And nat gas.

THINK

[Justwannalogon]

@kkob So if you are right, we're doomed anyway, it sounds like to me. May as well not worry about it, right? Or how do you plan to stop the feedback? Global Warming is only a symptom of human greed and rapaciousness. Without addressing issues such as lifestyle and procreation, we'll never tackle Global Warming. We're just 'consumers'. The green movement is a joke of a trend that mostly poor people engage in.

[OlySvenson]

Thank you for all these videos. Reasoned argument seems to be a lost art, but you give me hope.

I don't understand why many are so afraid of considering that we cause climate change - what is the danger of becoming more efficient, improving technology, and making our civilization a bit more sustainable.

Keep up the good work!

[trenton1980]

The "fear" is that the cost is greater than the benefit of "becoming more efficient, improving technology, and making civilization more sustainable." Since you've assumed those 3 benefits ... let's assume it costs 50% of the world's population to get there. Because we focused all of our wealth on getting there, we neglect all needs of impoverished nations and all our wealth is now gone. Are your 3 benefits still worth 3 billion lives? What if you're wrong and GCC can't be stopped?

[OlySvenson]

Where did you get "costing 50% of the world's population"? Who's says "focus all our wealth" on GCC?

I'm not assuming we can stop GCC, but we can make ourselves *lots* more energy efficient - solar water heating, wind power, hybrid vehicles, cars that weigh less than the Titanic, better insulation, co-generation, etc. Better than doing nothing.

Those things also reduce our impact on the environment, CO2-wise and otherwise. These are all good things.

[trenton1980]

That's not a real number .. I was giving you a situation in which I legitimately become afraid of acting to stop GCC - A point at which the cost is too high to act.

I personally advocate efficiency, improved technology and making civilization more sustainable. And my advocation of those has nothing to do with GCC. The question is about how reasonable and feasible our goals are. Trimming your nails is good.. cutting off your fingers are bad. We need to take reasonable actions for reasonable goals

[cantonear1968]

Hey trenton. That "trimming your nails" quote is best I have seen for countering the "the earth's temperature is like the human body" scenario. I hope you won't mind if I use it in my own arguments.

[trenton1980]

ha ... I was using it to show that at some point, it becomes detrimental to "act" to prevent gcc. People are dying now of AIDS ... People might die later of gcc. Which is more important for us to focus our efforts on now?

[c02lies]

You need to get over yourself -- go and some real research and find the truth -- you are being fooled.

WAKE UP!!!!

[c02lies]

FACT:

Atmospheric C02 = 0.038% -- of that about 4% is man made that's = 0.0152.

0.0152% !!! get a clue -- C02 @ 0.038% is almost at saturation any further increases will do almost nothing just as any decrease will.

[c02lies]

FACT:

Atmospheric C02 = 0.038% -- of that about 4% is man made that's = 0.0152.

0.0152% !!! get a clue -- C02 @ 0.038% is almost at saturation any further increases will do almost nothing just as any decrease will.

[OlySvenson]

I think you need to check your math. 0.0152 is 40% of 0.038.

Also, do you have a published reference to the assertion that 0.038% is "saturation" - do you mean that more CO2 doesn't have any additional effect.

[c02lies]

Sorry - yes I made a mistake.

Atmospheric C02 = 0.038%(380ppm) - of that the IPCC says 4% is man made that's 0.00152%(15.2ppm)

Most of the GH effects of C02 are seen at 20ppm (0.002%) which gives about 3 degrees, after this point its effects roll off logarithmically (flaten out) quite fast. For example doubling C02 to 600ppm will not double its GH effect. @600ppm the effects would not even be mesurable.

Thus my previous point C02 @ 0.038 is nearing saturation point of it's GH effect.

[OlySvenson]

Thanks for the clarification. I understand the logarithmic flattening. Do you have a scientific reference for the saturation point in the earth's atmosphere for the wavelengths that are of interest?

[c02lies]

Here is an excellent article.

h t t p : // brneurosci . org / co2 . html

Remove the spaces

[c02lies]

Idiots like you think you know better than some of the most brilliant minds in the world but still you keep believing this line of bullshit started by the IPCC -- who BTW do NOT produce any scientific empirical evidence to back any of the their claims. The IPCC is a politician entity -- they are not interested in the science.

[OlySvenson]

Do you have references to this set of "the most brilliant minds" and their research? I'm open to reading more.

[supersimpleton]

wcfinvader we really are convinced. you are just another hardline skeptik

[epii10]

Oh, and I almost forgot. Thank you Greg Craven.

[epii10]

Greg Craven, you are doing it man!!!

You are freakin' doing it! Keep it up brother we are with you and getting your work out there. What you have done is historic.. I hope.

[wcfinvader]

I am not a believer any more but was at one point. I can prove that it isnt happening. I will give you one link to one article that proves my point PM me if you want more info heres the link and please decide for yourself if you believe in climate change or not oh and by the way the refer to it as climate change instead of global warming since 2003 because it is in fact not warming. But heres the link and please message me if you have questions. I am thinking about making a video w/ arguments

[wcfinvader]

it wouldn't allow me to post the link so here it is just delete the spaces

prison planet . com / articles / april 2008 / 040408 _ cools _ off . htm

[epii10]

Hey, wcfinvader.. um... "prison planet"??? You're not serious. You give credibility to Alex Jones?!!! That guy is a nutjob! He's a christian nutjob! Do yourself and the world a favor and read what the scientists are saying.

[bobcatkline]

gobal shift will cause mass destruction last time polar shifting happen alaska was in the equator and n.a.s.a. even says polar shift going to happen in 2012.....lol

[Johnnanna]

I can see by reading reports that there does seem to be an increase of temperatures, although slight. Too many sources show that the increase is actually from the output of the Sun. My question is: Are we going to try to cool the Sun? If the changes are not from the Sun, why are the ice caps melting on Mars? If the warming is from the Sun, what good will all of our efforts to combat global warming do? I remember in the 70's it was the impending Ice Age returning. Good video though.

[ShwangShwing]

watch "how this all ends" by the same guy. There these and many other questions addressed.

[TempestStormwind]

Johnnanna: The HIAE videos leve most of the technical questions to science websites, focusing instead on a rational call to action. (You still don't need to 'believe in GW' to decide that action is more rational.)

If your concerns are mostly technical, one such site that addresses all of what you've said (the sun, Mars, and the 70s 'cooling scare') and more with links to primary literature on the subject is here:

skepticalscience . com/argument . php

Hope that helps.

[kkob]

Too many? There is ZERO credible science with regard to solar activity causing short-term (at the decade or even century, or millenial level) climate change. ZERO. Show me one. Balliunas and Soon's work was debunked long ago. Got anything else?

[MaxSafeheaD]

@kkob

You don't think there's any evidence that more solar activity affects climate?

Are you insane?

[kkob]

@MaxSafeheaD Max, you are the nut here. Or just ignorant?Scientists used to wonder about solar influence. Guess what they did? They.... gasp!.... studied it. lots of papers out there on the topic. Of course the sun has an affect, but it is understood and accounted for and, over the time frames we are talking about, relatively stable. Or have you not noticed that we just went through a rather unusually deep solar minimum... and the planet kept warming. Facts, not ideology, OK?

[MaxSafeheaD]

@kkob

I'm not denying global warming.

Wind your neck in.

[kkob]

@MaxSafeheaD Then what the hell are you on about wrt the sun?

[frankodelic]

You Rock, my man... keep up the good work!

[AcolyteOfDeath]

You should do a video covering the specific mechanics and threat of abrupt climate change -- i.e. from a sudden methane clathrate release, triggering 1100 ppmv CO2 concentrations, and a return to Palaeocene-Eocene Thermal Maximum temperatures.

Iceless tropical hothouse world wracked by Category 5+ hurricanes. Good times.

[TempestStormwind]

He already covered that (at a layperson level) in How It All Ends: Scare Tactics.

For more technical details, the IPCC WG2 report or the CNA report (that's the one he mentions in this video, the navy-funded think tank link to the right) do a decent job at covering the impacts.

[AtticusAndy]

i would like to say

hehe i have stamina

ive watched all 6 hours

lol

[kriptonis]

or, free time!!!

[goney3]

Hey Greg! We sent you an invitation to the Science Teachers Conference! Get your butt over here and spread this news! We also sent a flier to your schools principle Sylvia. We hope to hear from you soon. (KITP)

[Takara8808]

YEAH, YEAAAAH

Go wonderingmind!

[AldenMarquette]

Wonderful.

Keep fighting friend, together we will overcome this crisis.

[djonova]

great video!

[whatmatt3rs]

Great Job!

[steeldawg34]

it would be awesome if we all could come up with a load of money one of these days & put a GW commercial on during a super bowl. I heard this year's projected audience is about 1 BILLION ppl. but I guess if we had that much money to by ad time, we could just put that money towards reseaching alternative fuels

[mactheo]

awesome video... keep it up

[Fringe111]

Awesome vid. Please keep this up, you are the voice of reason. Leave politics out of it and save our planet

5 stars

[O24Uallok]

Excellent job. I am loving this more each day. I have the bug too. And I have already infected some of my friends and relatvies. Yay. I need to get a digital video. I still havn't moved on from print. (was stuck in the dark ages a bit too long) better late than never. Looking forward to the good news.

[alphaspot]

Keep making these videos, you're doing more than your fair share with this. Hopefully you'll be able to change the minds of the skeptics.

[homedogdigity]

Good Efforts! Someone is doing their part!

[metafact]

wonderingmind42, obviously we have a chance to severely affect environmental policy in the upcoming election. My question to you is: which Republican and which Democratic candidate appears to be the strongest candidate for solving the global climate change problem if they get elected?

[wonderingmind42]

To be honest, since I'm in Oregon and therefore can have no effect on the primaries, I haven't paid much attention yet. When it comes down to it, I'm going to use things like VoteHelp and SolveClimate to research who is strongest on climate change. Am I a one-issue voter? You bet. To me, if it's not about carbon, it doesn't matter much.

[sharpshooter33]

Keep up the vids! some one has to help us understand what might be over our heads.