Emissions of CO2 are nothing compared to what industries do to the environment. They cut trees, cause erosion of land, contaminate the seas. Resources on our planet are not infinite, and if we just keep depleteting them for the sake of making money, we are going to perish sooner than we think. Global Warming (if it is real) would be just a minor part or the pollution we are causing.
this is so stupid. Carbon is necessary, but it is also a greenhouse gas. It traps heat, and takes around 100 years to come back into the system of our plants. 99.7% of all scientists say that global warming is real, and 50% of the .3 percent that say its a fraud ARE PAYED BY MAJOR OIL COMPANIES. And it is not only CO2, there are many other causes that don't have such a major effect in there. This is mainly not correct, please go rot in hell :)
Not only don't you know what you are talking about, but your numerical figures indicating support for ot against the belief in man-made global warming are incorrect.
Doesn't Al Gore own stock in a company that would have "exclusive rights" to sell pollution shares (that companies would have to buy in order for them to do business)??? If it is true... that kind of conflict of interest should lead to his beheading.
Ah, someone who looks at the cycles of the earth for the past forever at 3:00. Global warming is just a cycle, and right now we are at the peak of temperatures. I'm not saying that we shouldn't try to be more green, but the government has no need to make it part of their political agenda.
You can say what you want... Thing Is... Climate Change is REAL.... We ARE Destroying our planet... You are only saying this to protect the Auto Industry and keep it from being accountable for what it makes... Not only that but allowing the ones that make the Bad Emissions that are causing it feel better about what they do... We all need to wake up and start being more aware of what we are doing to this planet...
You can say what YOU want, but man-made global warming is a fraud.
And if you think that I've taken the position we have to protect the auto industry or the oil industry, then you're wrong. NO ONE is a bigger proponent for alternative fuels and technologies then us...NO ONE.
@FlyWDragons You have no idea of the magnitude of the forces at work cooling our planet. Humans are nothing, they are less than a pimple on the skin of our Planet. Do try to get a sense of size and forget the tiny trace gas. The Sun is inactive just now and is mimicking the Dalton minimum,the Pacific is cooling as is every level of the atmosphere. The Greenhouse Theory is history and global warming was based on faulty computer models.
@david222444 ewww...really? you really fell for that one? ok ok...ask fox news , which I assume is part of your league of teachers, how come bats in a huge danger of extintion atm, ....cause what i know is that bats: General speaking, bats are important indicators of a healthy environment. Because bats are sensitive to high pollution and pesticide levels, they are useful as a warning sign to potential environmental problems.
@MsKahla Ok Batman, who mentioned these flying mamals? they breath out co2 just like us. Since when did a gas that forms the basis of the human food chain ( co2 ) become a pollutant? Plant life shuts down at 150 ppm co2 and we are at 390 ppm, why not double to 800 ppm ? it would benefit all life on the planet without any effect on the climate as it is mainly found near ground level due to it being heavier than air. The main driver of our climate is The Sun. Ask a 3yr old.
i don't have a specific side for or against,but if we can develop methods of living which can decrease pollution,harness green energy etc. i don't see how that is a bad thing.
I always tell my daughters that when you lose your temper you've lost the argument. The other day Al Gore lost it BIG TIME and was cursing heavily at the "deniers" (adding NOTHING to the discussion).
Why do people blame cars for most of the co2 (carbon dioxide) output when cars actually produce co (carbon monoxide)...also how can putting more carbon dioxide in the air hurt the earth or plants? Plants use carbon dioxide for food, putting less of it in the air would be putting less food for plants
John is correct. Fred Bailey has discovered the underlying nataural mechanism that regulates Sunspot production and Climate Change, there is a connection between them but Sunspots have nothing to do with Climate Change, Google solarchords and you will see for yourself.
Global warming is nothing but a money making scheme of progressive liberals. There are many scientists today who have the science behind them to give a more than reasonable argument against global warming. People simply, blindly believe, whatever the lame stream media feeds them.
The fact of the matter is Co2 is a gas that is needed for plants, and also man kinds contribution is a small percentage of something that is a small percentage of our atmosphere. What they're saying is that mankind of so powerful that we have the power to change the weather of a rock that's been floating around a son for millions upon millions of year.
I think realistically we need to focus on more dangerous gases like carbon monoxide and oxides of nitrous rather than Co2
When a volcano goes off the world temperatures plummets. Volcanoes release more than 130 million tons of CO2 into the atmosphere every year, and larger explosive volcanoes can pour billions. The little ice age was caused the eruption of the volcano Laki in 1783. It would seem the more CO2 you pour into the atmosphere the colder (not hotter) it becomes. But Sheeple must blindly follow the scientists who claimed global freezing in the 60-70s and now claim GW, because there's more money in it!
@politicstop Oh, I guess NASA and top climatologists forgot about volcanoes, the sun and other natural factors. I did not realize NASA PhDs were that dumb - lol.
You would know the experts isolated the natural factors if you bothered to read the NASA papers on their website. They state that only man-made emissions can account for the abnormal rise in global temperatures.
Maybe you should go down to NASA and explain that volcanoes emit CO2 and also fix their supercomputer climate models.
@politicstop Actually, the majority of scientists were actually predicting global warming in the 1970s.
The idea of cooling was from a magazine that stated some scientists thought we would see cooling, but it did not represent the views of the scientific community.
In fact, 6x more scientists in 1970 predicting warming vs. cooling. Blame the media for being wrong and covering a minority view, not the scientific community.
Google:
Did scientists predict an impending ice age in the 1970s?
@politicstop "It would seem the more CO2 you pour into the atmosphere the colder (not hotter) it becomes. "
I guess you know more than NASA?
10/15/10. Carbon dioxide has always received the most media attention as the leading cause of climate change, and a new study from NASA does more than concur with this assessment: It finds CO2 is overwhelmingly responsible for raising Earth's temperature.
Carbon dioxide (CO2). A minor but very important component of the atmosphere, carbon dioxide is released through natural processes such as respiration and volcano eruptions and through human activities such as deforestation, land use changes, and burning fossil fuels. Humans have increased atmospheric CO2 concentration by a third since the Industrial Revolution began. This is the most important long-lived "forcing" of climate change.
@politicstop Uhm. Look up Mount Pinatubo eruptions and other volcano eruptions. From what I have studied, the CO2 cannot have a recent effect right after the eruption. Volcanic smoke blocks some sunlight, and releases heat collecting in the mantle. Heat is radiates into space, sunlight heat is kept from warming the planet. This prevents CO2 from creating greenhouse effect. There is a current study of this by scientists who study volcanology and by geologists. Volcanology has no money in it...
So you didn't actually watch the videos and read the text reports. If you did you can't say that he laid out position well, but doesn't know what he's talking about...unless you back up that statement with contradictory evidence.
And the contradictory evidence would have to contradict not just Coleman, but all the people he includes in his reports.
Now, if you can do that, in a manner that is equally well laid out, I would be happy to publish your entire findings.
1) I commented on this vid about what was presented in it, so a complaint that I didn't go to your website and read your editorial & videos there is off target
2) What Coleman said here is so consistently flawed as to establish that he doesn't understand much of the basics of this issue.
3) Through eyeballing, I don't trust some of his data, though some of it is certainly basically correct. The problem isn't so much the evidence, but his inability to properly *understand* it!!
What you, and some others miss is that Coleman's comments about man-made global warming are not only based on his personal study (which is comparable to that of any other scientist) but he presents a large number of other scientists and studies that support the conclusion that man-made global warming is a fraud. If you actually took the time to watch the videos and then to read the associated text reports you would learn this. But why bother with truth when myths are so much fun.
Global warming aside, doesn't nature smell better than the city? So where is the harm in trying to switch to cleaner fuels? With the research that has been going on we have been finding more economically friendly solutions to the pollution issue. I feel its a win win either way. I would like to be able to breathe without smelling fumes and smog when I'm in a city, and I think the residents would appreciate it also. Big oil should be able to find a way to make profits off of cleaner products easy
We believe that you are exactly correct, and that's why The Auto Channel takes the position that we you don't have to believe in the man-made global warming garbage to enjoy clean air and appreciate how alternative fuels and energy can result in enormous financial benefits. This is also the position that John Coleman take. He says so in his videos.
@a1rh3add HOLY SHIZNICK!!! FINALY! Someone who actualy makes sense, but TheAutoChannel had to mess up what you said. It's NOT about Al Gore and John Coleman being garbage. It's about making a change for the good. Who cares if Global Warming exist. Gore and Coleman both believe we should go green, and that's what I agree on with their points. Though this proves that Coleman loses his point when he says keep doing what you are doing (burn fuel) and quickly notes about alternate energy. (coverup)
One more comment and I leave this site never to return, but isn't it funny that The Auto Channel is employing John Coleman to prove that Gas is Great??? The tactic kind of reminds me of the "Doctors Can't be Wrong" ads the tobacco companies used back in the day...
@intr0verti What about all those scientists with their government grants to prove this and then they give dum dum(Al Gore) the nobel prize. What a joke reminds me of the predictions of the man eating ants that were going to come from South America and destroy the United States. We need more coal plants or nuclear. Stop wasting our resources on this expensive ineffective renewable energy. It is taking food from the mouths of poor children.
@thinkingthingsthru Oil companies profit $4 Billion in taxpayer subsidies every year. Look it up. Someone talks green and makes money from it, somehow he's the devil? Coal plants produce so-so energy, short life and destroys the land and air around it.(note air travels). Nuclear: expensive, dangerous and nuclear waste, Three Mile Island, Chernobyl, and Fukushima (look these up). I built a shack with solar panel the size of a twin bed, (not expensive), I play PS3 with CRT tv for hours easy.
@thinkingthingsthru Funny you say that it's taking food from mouths of poor children. SJSU and other universities and groups have volunteered and donated solar panels to poor neighborhoods and countries. One African town had the solar panel energize a pump that pulls water from a croc filled river to a poor farm. No need to buy gas or coal or have a giant uranium filled plant to work. Fewer croc attacks, and more food for the families (poor children too). Turns itself on when needed due to sun.
I mean we can argue until blue in the face, about this intangible event of global warming (Global Climate Shift is more appropriate), or look into other reasons why oil is bad.
@TheSnoopy1750 Problem: The US depends too much on Big Oil. Without it, the whole economy will crash. That's why Big Oil has it's pants unzipped and Uncle Sam has a milk beard. I wonder how much Coleman is making with his brown nose?
And to mention we should look for alternatives that can yield an unlimited resource. Now that may be impossible, but it is a better mindset than settling on a fuel source that can BE PROVEN as limited. Especially a source that IS toxic and is proven as such, by just simply looking at the short term effects of last year's oil spillage that is slowly keeping up the East Coast and killing the sea life, which is killing industry that harvests that sea life.
Ok, ok... We get it. However wouldn't it be nice to have an alternative to fossil fuels? I mean, take Los Angeles or Bangkok for example, where the heated climates cause the emissions to gather at a fast rate. You can't even see objects from miles away due to the obstructive haze.
Theres nothing more scary than a group of people who will believe anything that they're told, regardless of facts or logic. A liberal is a truly dangerous beast.
@NickLiu25 Wow - talk about no logic. Global warming deniers are the ones not listening to facts or using logic.
98% of the world's top climatologists and all of the top scientific organizations believe GW is occurring.
"Liberals" are just listening to the experts who have done decades of research on the matter and have PhDs in the subject matter. Who exactly should they listen to? Some weatherman with no science background?
@NickLiu25 LOL! I hope you didn't side anyone, but if you side Coleman, then it seems like you are believing what you are told. Lack of thinking is a truly dangerous kitten.
"Global" Warming isn't really that global. It's a term used to spread panic among the population. While most of the earth is warming, parts of it are cooling. We do need to lower our emissions, but we also need to investigate which areas do warming positively and negatively affect.
@mrdrfez Look up North Atlantic Current, heat capacitance, h2o structure...wait, what grade are you in? Global changes with warming and cooling IS a sign of global warming. If you don't know what I mean, then study and come back later. You are right about emissions if you are linking that to areas of warming. Keep studying and see you here in at least four years.
John Coleman - University of Illinois journalism degree (1957). No education in the field of climate change.
Wow, Coleman has ABSOLUTELY NO science background? I think I'll trust the MIT science PhDs.
Weather is what atmosphere conditions are over a short period of time, and climate is how the atmosphere "behaves" over relatively long periods of time.
If I want to know if it will rain tomorrow, I will check Coleman's Weather Channel. For climate, I trust climatologists with PhDs.
You think that a few years of debauched textbook study is more meaningful than 50 years in the daily hands-on vocational application of the same subject matter?
If you'd rather rely on the former and not the latter then there's no wonder why you have been conned.
So when you need a tooth pulled, you'd rather get that done by a hygienist with 50 years on the job than an actual DDS fresh out of college? OK, got it.
@TheAutoChannel He studied things 50 years ago with technology from 50 years ago. Computers were basicaly useless back then. First microcomputer introduced in the 70's, though these were not common due to price. Do I really need to explain what affordable pocket sized phones can do now a days. For crying out loud. I can guide ballistic missles while facetiming friends and writing posts on this site...Ooops! Did I say that out loud.
@BarryOcuda I do not use Al Gore as support for GW - he is not a climatologist, just an advocate.
I only listen to the top climatologists (98% believe in GW) and the very top scientific organizations (NASA, NOAA, National Academy of Sciences and Royal Society), which have all concluded GW is real.
I guess you believe a weatherman with no scientific background. I will stick with NASA.
@TheSnoopy1750 What's Al Gore's background? Let's see, Divinity School and Law Scholl and several decades as a lying politician. So why am I supposed to believe him? Because he stands to make billions if he can get our government to force us to adhere to his recommendations to combat a hoax?
@TheSnoopy1750 So you choose to ignore the fact that tempretures have been dropping; that the hockey stick was exposed as a fraud; the revelation that the "scientist" supporting the theory were actively suppressing the work of dissenting scientist and that 0ver 31,000 Scientists signed a onto the conclusion that there is no such a phenomenon as manmade global warming?
We just had the hottest global decade in modern history - google it.
Who are these 31,000 scientists? I am sure they are not the top climatologists as 98% of them agree that GW is happening. Biochemists, jet propulsion scientists etc. have zero expertise in climatology.
Name ONE peer-reviewed study from a well-regarded scientific organization that disputes global warming. I will continue to believe NASA, NOAA, Nat'l Academy of Scientists.
@TheSnoopy1750 What planet have you been on for the last 14 months? So it's not a science it's your religion and one that requires you to ignore anything counter to your faith. Listen only to the High Priests of your faith while the rest of the world laughs at you, fool!
@ram0166 Scientific conclusions are a result of empirical data and rigorous analysis.
There are 100s of GW studies. These studies are then reviewed by other scientists for validity. Then the top scientific organizations come to a conclusion after further review and debate.
NASA, NOAA, EPA, NAS, RS, IPCC etc. have gone through this process.
These organizations as well as 98% of the top climatologists have concluded, based on this data, that GW is real and primarily man made. Is this wrong?
@ram0166 My point is that these 31,000 scientists obviously couldn't convince top scientific organizations that GW is not happening.
Furthermore, the top experts on global climate, climatologists, are in almost complete agreement that GW is happening and is primarily man made.
Who are these 31,000 scientists? Are they energy company scientists or maybe meteorologists and chemists? Why are they more qualified to make an assessment vs. climatologists?
@TheSnoopy1750 No, 98% of of the bureaucrats at the UN, NASA, etc..If you would have paid attention you would know that it has been exposed that these people have been harrassing scientist with a dissenting view and preventing their studies from being peer reveiwed by threats of smears and to funding. You would also know that Michael Mann was exposed as a fraud and that the IPCC admitted that there has not been any warming since the late 90's.
@ram0166 No - 98% of top climatologists that publish on GW, NOT bureaucrats. Do you just make up these lies?
So since it is so obvious that it is a fraud, then NASA, NOAA, National Academy of Sciences, Royal Society will reverse their GW conclusions.
Then all of the nations that are going to spend billions to comply with IPCC GW agreements will stop these plans. After all, why would China, the U.S. etc. spend so much if they don't need to?
@ram0166 The study that showed 98% of top climatologists that research and publish extensively concluded that man-made GW is real was in a June 22, 2010 BBC News report. Just google it.
They were actual working scientists, not UN bureaucrats as you claim. Like Fox News, you just make shit up. You lack the qualifications to judge all of the GW data and research, yet you cherry pick data that supports your anti-GW views. Why do no other top scientific organizations agree with you?
@ram0166 "So you choose to ignore the fact that tempretures have been dropping"
I am still waiting for your support for that "fact" about dropping global temperatures. Do you really think people won't call you out on these blantant lies?
As July continues to sizzle in much of the United States, a new U.S. report says the 2000-2009 decade was the Earth's warmest on record and "global warming is undeniable." About 300 scientists from 48 countries contributed to the 2009 State of the Climate report released Wednesday by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.
Let me guess, you will now claim that thermometers all over the world are part of the vast GW conspiracy. You are pathetic.
Here in Ohio our winters have been getting really cold lately. My son is in 3rd grade, and so far not a winter has gone by that his school was cancelled for a few days due to temperature/weather.
@Alexandra22773 That may be true, but remember GW is a global phenomenon (hence the term "global") and temperatures vary widely by area. A reason some prefer "climate change" is that variation will be higher so some areas are hotter, some colder.
The important thing to realize is that the contiguous 48 states are only 1.5% of the world's surface. Scientists must look at the total average global temperatures - the last decade was the warmest in modern history and 2010 may be the hottest year.
@TheSnoopy1750 lol 300 scientist said.. if one million said that i still wont beleave it. the fact is the states are taxing people for somthing that occurs naturally how is that right? how is that good? and all the money in the world is not going to remove the CO2 which plants need. dont forget we need plants or at least the animals we eat, need plants....
@iandegia "if one million said that i still wont beleave it. the fact is the states are taxing people for somthing that occurs naturally how is that right?"
So you ignore the experts? lol
You're starting with the wrong premise - yes, greenhouse gases occur naturally but man-made greenhouse gases are the ones causing the incremental problem. If you add billions of tons of CO2 every year into the atmosphere, do you not realize that causes warming? NASA and 98% of top climatologists think so.
@TheSnoopy1750 experts lol experts in lies. the truth is i dont know and nor do you but what mainstream science has come up with so far is PROPAGANDA. id much rather make my own "THEORY" and when i say what mainstream science(media) i mean that in the most broadest stroke. science became a circus years ago clowns canons and dancing girls...
@iandegia I love how GW deniers just ignore all the "mainstream" science because they don't like the conclusions. Classic delusional thinking.
So you have more faith in your own "theories" than those of NASA scientists, 98% of the world's top climatologists and National Academy of Sciences, the world's top scientific body? May I ask your scientific credentials?
That shows me that you are not a rational person as your beliefs are not based on sound scientific facts, but rather ideology.
@TheSnoopy1750 mainstream scientist dont want to listen to alternative theories let alone investigate them. why wont nasa look into the strange structors on the moon or mars?, what about nikola tesla's inventions, why are there droughts around the world and at the same time american scientist wont look into cloud seeding. who do these so called scientist work for?, what happens if they dont do what there bosses want from the do?
@TheSnoopy1750 what happens if they dont do what there bosses want from them? why do you ask for my scientific credentials? it dosnt take a scientist to see that mainstream science isnt science.
all somone has to do is unplug from this system of blind obeobedience and make up there own mind...
@iandegia "it dosnt take a scientist to see that mainstream science isnt science."
So 97% of the top climatologists, NASA, NOAA, NAS etc. say GW is real and your retort is that broad scientific consensus is "mainstream" so it's not real science? lol
Wow, you are stunningly stupid. I know who has been listening to Sarah Palin's "lamestream media" remarks.
You also say one needs to "make up there own mind". Gee, how can you come to the right conclusion when you ignore climate experts?
@TheSnoopy1750 im not saying the climate is not changing. my problem is idiots saying co2 is a poison and its connected to the climate change. did you know plants yes PLANTS love that poison the very same poison that we are getting taxed on and did you know we need plants.
try and bend your mind around this one, we exhale that evil, deadly, poisonous gas. taxable gas lol
i bet your one of those people that believe the govenment story of what happened on 11th september lol
@TheSnoopy1750 well use that powerful interlect of yours and understand that the earth can cope with it. dont forget when a volcano blows up it releases all sorts of crap. loads of money to be made from iceland lol. money is the real reason some people are made to beleave in all those lies, its easy to train people or shall i say sheeple, when they are scared of the bogie man. you obviously cant think out side the box yet so ill finish on this note. open your mind and see life for what it is....
@iandegia What profit??? Yeah, scientists go into science for the big bucks - lol.
What I find amazing is you completely ignore that money coming from energy companies to spread misinformation - they are trying to protect their billions of profits. The Koch brothers alone have given $50 million of their own money for various groups to protect their interests.
So any government worker that does his job is biased? Do the guys who fill in potholes go out at night and dig up the street? Moron.
Unfortunately your paid by the government PHDs have lost the trust of the American people in a very big way. The agenda is exposed. The scientists who cried wolf have lost their credibiltiy! I'll go with Mr. Colemans explanation any day!
@TheSnoopy1750 Unfortunately your PHDs who have made billions off their theory have lost the trust of the American people in a very big way. The agenda is exposed. The scientists who cried wolf have lost their credibiltiy! I'll go with Mr. Colemans explanation any day!
But not the warmest year in the earth's history, not by far. If you read enough you'll find this out.
Hey look, I know we'll not settle anything here on YT but I just want to say, I used to believe in GW too.
Here's why I don't: I did my own reading. Greenland used to be green, not covered in ice. It used to be a lot warmer on the earth than today and we had nothing to do with it.. The icecaps are still there, the polar bears did not all die and the oceans did not rise.
@AshtonPhoto I can tell that you are a GW denier by the fact you can't read - I said 2010 was the warmest year in modern history (fact).
There has been a significant increase in global temps in the last 20 years that cannot be explained by natural variations. NASA, top climatologists etc. have done massive amounts of analysis and they conclude that it is due to man made GW.
The key point is that there is scientific consensus that greenhouse emissions are warming the earth.
@TheSnoopy1750 2011- It was the fifth coolest March in the tropics, where the average temperature fell 0.35 C (about 0.63 degrees Fahrenheit) below seasonal norms. Three of the five coldest tropical Marches in the 33-year satellite temperature record have happened in the past dozen years: 5th, 2011, -0.35 C: 3rd, 2000, -0.42; and 2nd, 2008, -0.58 C. The records for Jan-Feb are much the same. 2011 is destined to be one of the coldest in 33 years.
@politicstop Sure, you can cherry pick any cold spots or months you want to to preserve your delusion NASA and the top climatologists know less than you about climatology - lol.
Fact: 2010 was tied as the warmest global year in modern history and 2000-2009 was the hottest decade in modern history. It's GLOBAL warming.
So you think man dumping billions of tons of greenhouse gases (GG) into the atmosphere every year will have no impact when GG causes warming?
@TheSnoopy1750 Who's cheery picking, the UAH charts show the world surface temps in freefall. This is due to La Nina of course, but none the less, freefall. When a La Ninos hits they will certainly rise. The earth temps rise and fall no matter what we do. Be realistic, I'm not saying everyone should start burning trash, but I'm also not on the carbon credit band wagon (as you probably are). I'm a realist and CC taxes are a fraud. I appreciate that my post was worth your rant though, thanks
1.Yes many things affect climate, and yes the earth has cycles of climate, this doesn't mean ours isn't casued by CO2
2while we can't be too sure, scientist do believe the MWP was cooler than the modern period furthermore we know why those warming period happened and we know they aren't happing now, they also aren't happing as fastly
3.We are sure it's not the sun
4.The graph only shows 10 years.....
5.Climate gate, was blown out of proportion it's misleading.
@applefrog111 "3.We are sure it's not the sun" is probably the stupidest thing I've ever heard. Do you know the sun could vaporize us at any moment? Moron.
"Could" being the Key word. Just because the Sun CAN kill us all doesn't mean it is currently causing climate change. On a completely unrelated note do you use the word moron in all of your comments?
Better go check your history, Chicken Little. And this is why the Global Alarmist are losing the battle. You can't get your facts straight and you draw conclusions that anyone with a little common sense would realize is wrong. Next, you will tell me that the earth is flat because you can see it with your own two eyes.
Global warming has gotta be a hoax, and people are making money from it. the earth is gonna do what it does, no matter how much fossil fuel we go through. people in this country are so gullible. you can thank all the liberal dumbasses
@TheAutoChannel You're response does not come across as very intelligent. Ooops, I criticised you, so now I'm going to get a mouthful from you just like dcochran12.
If you mean to say that we would attempt to respond to outrageous lies and misconceptions, and label that response as "a mouthful," then yes, that's what you would get. But in truth, we don't have to say anything further since the several videos that we have posted, plus the very long debunking that we have posted on our website gives all the intelligent argument needed to point out that "man-made global warming" is a fraud.
Actually he has qualifications much greater than awareness than yours. put basically where is the warming it has been cooling for the last 15 years according to Phil Jones of the IPPC so where is the science behind that dipshit explane that but they can't????
@Warhead3000 studies the weather...Not the planet...Not the sun...Not the oceans that cover most of the planet. (look up water capabilities). Are you sure they can't EXPLAIN that? Have you asked? Have you studies their studies? When do you finish middle school so you can visit them?
Wheres the heating the Earth ??has been cooling for the last 15 years??even that has occured when 3 times more C02 has been put in the air? prove that didckhead and use scince not bull shit use actual references not BS and "prove your theory of C02 which has never been proven in a lab or in real times. C02 follows heating not preceeds it. Get a fucking education, please stoip me telling me how to tell you how to think as it is fucking stupid.
@Warhead3000 Cooling for last 15 years? With how much statistical significance? Is the trend you mention 3 years averaged or 5 year averaged? Have you checked the absorbtion spectrum of CO2?
Where's the cooling? The ten warmest years on record have all occurred since 1998. All cooling arguments I've seen have compared 2008 with another year in the last ten. 2008 was unusually cool because of a strong la nina and comparing it to other of the top ten warmest years on record is cherry-picking.
The earth has been cooling over the last 15 years according to Phil Jones (IPCC and University of Anglia) so where is C02 as a mechanism being doing at the same time??? nothing. Where s the warming 3 times more C02 has enteed the air yet temps have dropped. Science is al about observation not prediction that does not happen
Stupidity for humor is funny. Stupidity because of mental deficiency is excusable. Stupidity because you're stupid is indefensible. I don't think you're trying to be funny, you don't seem to be retarded; therefore you are just stupid. For you to say that there is no science behind the debunkers is proof of that.
All of the highly respected studies you refer to are bogus. My in-depth analysis can be found on TheAutoChannel website by searching "Debunking Man-Made Global Warming"
@TheAutoChannel Throw man's predicted CO2 (and methane and nitrous oxide) emissions into the model, and the disparity is accounted for. Anyways, this video does raise suspicions about your agenda, especially seeing as you have a channel devoted to CO2 and CO emitting automobiles. ;)
If you actually took the time to see what The Auto Channel is devoted to, you would have seen that we hate gasoline and insist upon the immediate use of alt fuels.
But then, if you were the type of person that actually does research then you wouldn't believe in the global warming B.S.
If you actually have something of value to say, you're always welcome. If you just want to be a schmuck, do it elsewhere.
The atmosphere and climate is very complex and no one has ever made accurate predictions and to state that the debate is over (as Al Gore does and his scientific advisors whom have a clear agenda like Hansen whom is an outspoken alarmist and whom has recently manipulated historical satellite data for an upward trend are not impartial and cannot be trusted). We need the transparency of this to make our own decisions otherwise its back to the Roman Catholic Church telling us the world is flat
how are we supposed to know, what is right, and what is wrong, when Al Gore in his movie An inconvenient truth shows the exact same interglacial period picture, just where it's the exact opposites of Coleman's? (4:08)
There isn't an "exact opposite," per se. What there is are clear and correct explanations for what the data may show, and/or how the data was collected, which in some instances were false or taken out-of-context.
Do some research for yourself and you will find that the Earth has been cooling for the last 15 years ( a direct quote from Phil Jones head of the university in the climategate scandal) even though we have placed 4 times more carbon dioxide into the air yet temperatures have fallen? get educated for yourself and you will see our money would be better spent on controlling pollution and not C02. The earths temperature is controlled by the sun and always has been.
Where is your reference and where is his on Scientific concensus??????. I could go all year saying that I have scientific concensus on that the moon was in "fact" made of chalk I could state that the whole scientific community was behind my comments but of course science doesn't work on consensus and no independant poll has ever been taken unless you could supply me with one? But of course you can't because it dosen't exists.
john coleman is a JOURNALIST! That is what he studied in college. What doe he have to back up his opinion? Nothing. No studies and no respected scientific institutions to back him up. What a fool. I wonder what corporate think tank is funding his efforts. They care not for the health of our future generations.
Funny how this fool talks about Gore, Gore, Gore, ...
Gore made no scientific predictions or conclusion. He tells us what the experts say. UCSUSA(dot)org
Coleman is NOT a credible expert. He studied journalism in college. He doesn't have a study nor is he likely capable of completing one. He is a weatherman and a business man. Why would anyone want to think he has a clue about humanity's role in climate? Usually it's because they have such shaky support for their nay saying opinions they'll grasp for anything, even a guy like coleman.
Let's say that Coleman studied Underwater Basketweaving in college, but then spent the next 50 years in the daily, hands-on vocational study and reporting of the weather. You would have to be a complete unadulterated moron to think that he doesn't know what he is talking about, or that he's not an expert in meteorology.
Your protestations about his credibility are what are not credible!
What is Al Gore he is no scientist and has no science background in climate research. Dude research for your self and you will find there is no man made global its a naterual cycle.
@Warhead3000 I would never say that Gore has a background in scientific research. But dude, how about stepping back and looking at the big picture. Gore is NOT the source of the science. He has been telling us what the experts have been saying for over 30 years. Here's where you can read what our respected scientific insititutions have concluded.
Google: Scientific Opinion On Climate Change Wikipedia
Then try reading James Hansen's new book, Storms Of My Grandchildren
Unbelievable that some of you actually buy this bunk from a lobby dependent upon ignorant morons to continue (or increase) it's irresponsible wasteful use of our FINITE natural resources.
We are running out, you know. We consume more than there is to harvest. Our decisions are based on big business finance - NOT common sense.
If you believe this shit here, then you are a part of the problem. NOT the solution.
Unbelievable that some of you actually buy this SHIT from a lobby dependent upon ignorant morons to continue (or increase) it's irresponsible wasteful use of our FINITE natural resources.
We are running out, you know. We consume more than there is to harvest. Our decisions are based on big business finance - NOT common sense.
If you believe this shit here, then you are a part of the problem. NOT the solution.
It's a shame that you didn't take the time to find out that John Coleman, and The Auto Channel (although we have no connection other than playing his videos) are great supporters of alt fuels, technologies, and a clean environment. The Auto Channel especially hates the use of gasoline. However, we are completely opposed to the man-made global warming horse shit.
@BustedSoulO You are part of the lie. Even Mr. Coleman is for looking for alternate energy. There is just no good reason to create a global warming scare. The reason why you don't get to hear this side much is not because the data against the scam isn't there, it's because you're dammned if you believe otherwise. Global Warming is to push a bad agenda not in the best interest of the people of the world. Thank You Mr. Colman for the video.
@BustedSoulO What is sad is that the vested interests propagate disinformation about global warming despite the overwhelming scientific evidence.
Coleman is a journalist by training and knows nothing about it. Try reading what the experts have been saying for over 30 years. Read NASA's James Hansen's new book, Storms Of My Grandchildren.
Also, here's where you can read position statements.
Google... Scientific Opinion on Climate Change Wikipedia
I'd rather believe this guy who is mentally stable and rational, than Obama's Science Czar who believes in forcing abortion, sterilizing people through the water supply, forcing single mothers to give up their children, and more wacky Hitlerian ideas. This lie was put out because of population control. (See John Holdren's book Ecoscience (straight out of the 3rd Reich mindset) Hurrah for John Coleman for his truth telling. He is so full of sense.
Sigh* There's no hope for humanity...the earth is populated by morons.
This was made by the auto channel...is it far fetched of me to say that they have an interest in convincing you that global warming doesn't exist so that you can keep guzzling fossil fuels (And handing them your cash in the process) without guilt?
Boy are you a schmuck. If you took any time to read our position on alternative fuels and energy you would learn how strongly we advocate the immediate cessation of "fossil fuels." But then you'd actually have to know how to read and comprehend the words. We are, however, against the man-made global warming fraud.
@TheAutoChannel Note that my comment did not insult you directly at all...I called all humanity morons which includes me. You however try to de-legitimize views by calling me an illiterate shmuck. I'd like to point out that you still failed to answer my question: Is it far fetched of me to say that you gain in convincing people that global warming doesn't exist? I certainly don't think it is.
This has been flagged as spam show
Emissions of CO2 are nothing compared to what industries do to the environment. They cut trees, cause erosion of land, contaminate the seas. Resources on our planet are not infinite, and if we just keep depleteting them for the sake of making money, we are going to perish sooner than we think. Global Warming (if it is real) would be just a minor part or the pollution we are causing.
giancarlo3000 4 days ago
Comment removed
giancarlo3000 4 days ago
this is so stupid. Carbon is necessary, but it is also a greenhouse gas. It traps heat, and takes around 100 years to come back into the system of our plants. 99.7% of all scientists say that global warming is real, and 50% of the .3 percent that say its a fraud ARE PAYED BY MAJOR OIL COMPANIES. And it is not only CO2, there are many other causes that don't have such a major effect in there. This is mainly not correct, please go rot in hell :)
the4thdemension 1 week ago
@the4thdemension
Not only don't you know what you are talking about, but your numerical figures indicating support for ot against the belief in man-made global warming are incorrect.
TheAutoChannel 1 week ago
Comment removed
shaynedasilva 1 month ago
Doesn't Al Gore own stock in a company that would have "exclusive rights" to sell pollution shares (that companies would have to buy in order for them to do business)??? If it is true... that kind of conflict of interest should lead to his beheading.
MatthewRider1 2 months ago
Ah, someone who looks at the cycles of the earth for the past forever at 3:00. Global warming is just a cycle, and right now we are at the peak of temperatures. I'm not saying that we shouldn't try to be more green, but the government has no need to make it part of their political agenda.
mranderson2323 3 months ago 3
Well maybe you don't know about how 4 billion years ago we had an atmosphere made of Co2, and the earth was molten magma
schmitty422 4 months ago
@schmitty422
That long ago? It's doesn't seem like a day more than 3 billion.
TheAutoChannel 4 months ago
You can say what you want... Thing Is... Climate Change is REAL.... We ARE Destroying our planet... You are only saying this to protect the Auto Industry and keep it from being accountable for what it makes... Not only that but allowing the ones that make the Bad Emissions that are causing it feel better about what they do... We all need to wake up and start being more aware of what we are doing to this planet...
FlyWDragons 4 months ago
@FlyWDragons
You can say what YOU want, but man-made global warming is a fraud.
And if you think that I've taken the position we have to protect the auto industry or the oil industry, then you're wrong. NO ONE is a bigger proponent for alternative fuels and technologies then us...NO ONE.
TheAutoChannel 4 months ago 5
@FlyWDragons You have no idea of the magnitude of the forces at work cooling our planet. Humans are nothing, they are less than a pimple on the skin of our Planet. Do try to get a sense of size and forget the tiny trace gas. The Sun is inactive just now and is mimicking the Dalton minimum,the Pacific is cooling as is every level of the atmosphere. The Greenhouse Theory is history and global warming was based on faulty computer models.
david222444 3 months ago 2
@david222444 ewww...really? you really fell for that one? ok ok...ask fox news , which I assume is part of your league of teachers, how come bats in a huge danger of extintion atm, ....cause what i know is that bats: General speaking, bats are important indicators of a healthy environment. Because bats are sensitive to high pollution and pesticide levels, they are useful as a warning sign to potential environmental problems.
MsKahla 2 weeks ago
@MsKahla Ok Batman, who mentioned these flying mamals? they breath out co2 just like us. Since when did a gas that forms the basis of the human food chain ( co2 ) become a pollutant? Plant life shuts down at 150 ppm co2 and we are at 390 ppm, why not double to 800 ppm ? it would benefit all life on the planet without any effect on the climate as it is mainly found near ground level due to it being heavier than air. The main driver of our climate is The Sun. Ask a 3yr old.
david222444 2 weeks ago
i don't have a specific side for or against,but if we can develop methods of living which can decrease pollution,harness green energy etc. i don't see how that is a bad thing.
Flash13Magic 4 months ago 3
@Flash13Magic
We agree with you.
TheAutoChannel 4 months ago 3
but celebrity's like Madonna and politicians say global warming is real hmmm a weather man for 30 years what would he know ? lol
virgogreg 4 months ago
I always tell my daughters that when you lose your temper you've lost the argument. The other day Al Gore lost it BIG TIME and was cursing heavily at the "deniers" (adding NOTHING to the discussion).
jscottupton 5 months ago 6
Comment removed
TheSnoopy1750 5 months ago
Why do people blame cars for most of the co2 (carbon dioxide) output when cars actually produce co (carbon monoxide)...also how can putting more carbon dioxide in the air hurt the earth or plants? Plants use carbon dioxide for food, putting less of it in the air would be putting less food for plants
8143ryan1 5 months ago
John is correct. Fred Bailey has discovered the underlying nataural mechanism that regulates Sunspot production and Climate Change, there is a connection between them but Sunspots have nothing to do with Climate Change, Google solarchords and you will see for yourself.
howardsway782 5 months ago
To all who INSIST global warmin...Al Gore style...is real.
Thank you for proving the adage about a SUCKER being born every minute.
Pat yourselves on the back, and the rest of us will applaud you while laughing at you.
freeamericausa1 6 months ago
Global warming is nothing but a money making scheme of progressive liberals. There are many scientists today who have the science behind them to give a more than reasonable argument against global warming. People simply, blindly believe, whatever the lame stream media feeds them.
republicanrule 6 months ago
The fact of the matter is Co2 is a gas that is needed for plants, and also man kinds contribution is a small percentage of something that is a small percentage of our atmosphere. What they're saying is that mankind of so powerful that we have the power to change the weather of a rock that's been floating around a son for millions upon millions of year.
I think realistically we need to focus on more dangerous gases like carbon monoxide and oxides of nitrous rather than Co2
raymith2012 8 months ago
ah! Key phrase there at 8:10 "our earth is going to be just fine AS LONG AS THEY LAST"
mrsexy886 8 months ago
Distroying, so says the last slide.
mariomasher1990 8 months ago
He said he is a TV METEOROLOGIST in the first sentence! Okay?! Dim wits. Its okay, they are training cows to wade now.
pjamesbda 8 months ago
So true!
BasketballJoe2010 8 months ago
When a volcano goes off the world temperatures plummets. Volcanoes release more than 130 million tons of CO2 into the atmosphere every year, and larger explosive volcanoes can pour billions. The little ice age was caused the eruption of the volcano Laki in 1783. It would seem the more CO2 you pour into the atmosphere the colder (not hotter) it becomes. But Sheeple must blindly follow the scientists who claimed global freezing in the 60-70s and now claim GW, because there's more money in it!
politicstop 9 months ago
@politicstop Oh, I guess NASA and top climatologists forgot about volcanoes, the sun and other natural factors. I did not realize NASA PhDs were that dumb - lol.
You would know the experts isolated the natural factors if you bothered to read the NASA papers on their website. They state that only man-made emissions can account for the abnormal rise in global temperatures.
Maybe you should go down to NASA and explain that volcanoes emit CO2 and also fix their supercomputer climate models.
TheSnoopy1750 9 months ago
@politicstop Actually, the majority of scientists were actually predicting global warming in the 1970s.
The idea of cooling was from a magazine that stated some scientists thought we would see cooling, but it did not represent the views of the scientific community.
In fact, 6x more scientists in 1970 predicting warming vs. cooling. Blame the media for being wrong and covering a minority view, not the scientific community.
Google:
Did scientists predict an impending ice age in the 1970s?
TheSnoopy1750 9 months ago
@politicstop "It would seem the more CO2 you pour into the atmosphere the colder (not hotter) it becomes. "
I guess you know more than NASA?
10/15/10. Carbon dioxide has always received the most media attention as the leading cause of climate change, and a new study from NASA does more than concur with this assessment: It finds CO2 is overwhelmingly responsible for raising Earth's temperature.
TheSnoopy1750 9 months ago
@politicstop From NASA website:
Carbon dioxide (CO2). A minor but very important component of the atmosphere, carbon dioxide is released through natural processes such as respiration and volcano eruptions and through human activities such as deforestation, land use changes, and burning fossil fuels. Humans have increased atmospheric CO2 concentration by a third since the Industrial Revolution began. This is the most important long-lived "forcing" of climate change.
TheSnoopy1750 9 months ago
@politicstop Uhm. Look up Mount Pinatubo eruptions and other volcano eruptions. From what I have studied, the CO2 cannot have a recent effect right after the eruption. Volcanic smoke blocks some sunlight, and releases heat collecting in the mantle. Heat is radiates into space, sunlight heat is kept from warming the planet. This prevents CO2 from creating greenhouse effect. There is a current study of this by scientists who study volcanology and by geologists. Volcanology has no money in it...
MegaDarb69 5 months ago
come on .. Al Gore can't be lieing about global warming .. I mean the man did invent the internet .. LOL
TheBeatlesCom 9 months ago
i believe alternative energy needs to be discovered and used, but as for global warming that is just a silly myth.
BowToMySkill 9 months ago
On the plus side, Coleman lays out his case clearly.
On the minus side, by laying his case out clearly, he demonstrates even more clearly that he doesn't have a clue WTF he's talking about.
VeryEvilPettingZoo 10 months ago 3
@VeryEvilPettingZoo
So you didn't actually watch the videos and read the text reports. If you did you can't say that he laid out position well, but doesn't know what he's talking about...unless you back up that statement with contradictory evidence.
And the contradictory evidence would have to contradict not just Coleman, but all the people he includes in his reports.
Now, if you can do that, in a manner that is equally well laid out, I would be happy to publish your entire findings.
TheAutoChannel 10 months ago 2
@TheAutoChannel
1) I commented on this vid about what was presented in it, so a complaint that I didn't go to your website and read your editorial & videos there is off target
2) What Coleman said here is so consistently flawed as to establish that he doesn't understand much of the basics of this issue.
3) Through eyeballing, I don't trust some of his data, though some of it is certainly basically correct. The problem isn't so much the evidence, but his inability to properly *understand* it!!
VeryEvilPettingZoo 10 months ago
@TheAutoChannel clearly you are not paying attention...
Thegungfuguy 7 months ago
You're totaly right. Your probalby smarter then all the motherfucking scientist in the world today. NOT!
philipboy34 10 months ago
@philipboy34
What you, and some others miss is that Coleman's comments about man-made global warming are not only based on his personal study (which is comparable to that of any other scientist) but he presents a large number of other scientists and studies that support the conclusion that man-made global warming is a fraud. If you actually took the time to watch the videos and then to read the associated text reports you would learn this. But why bother with truth when myths are so much fun.
TheAutoChannel 10 months ago
@TheAutoChannel Do you know where I can find the associated text reports?
tayxctrk 10 months ago
@tayxctrk
The reports and other items can be found on The Auto Channel website. Look for the story titled "Debunking the Myth of Man-Made Global Warming."
TheAutoChannel 10 months ago
@TheAutoChannel That's why the lack of global warming is fun and relaxing. No stress needed.
MegaDarb69 5 months ago
Global warming aside, doesn't nature smell better than the city? So where is the harm in trying to switch to cleaner fuels? With the research that has been going on we have been finding more economically friendly solutions to the pollution issue. I feel its a win win either way. I would like to be able to breathe without smelling fumes and smog when I'm in a city, and I think the residents would appreciate it also. Big oil should be able to find a way to make profits off of cleaner products easy
a1rh3add 11 months ago 2
@a1rh3add
We believe that you are exactly correct, and that's why The Auto Channel takes the position that we you don't have to believe in the man-made global warming garbage to enjoy clean air and appreciate how alternative fuels and energy can result in enormous financial benefits. This is also the position that John Coleman take. He says so in his videos.
TheAutoChannel 11 months ago
@a1rh3add HOLY SHIZNICK!!! FINALY! Someone who actualy makes sense, but TheAutoChannel had to mess up what you said. It's NOT about Al Gore and John Coleman being garbage. It's about making a change for the good. Who cares if Global Warming exist. Gore and Coleman both believe we should go green, and that's what I agree on with their points. Though this proves that Coleman loses his point when he says keep doing what you are doing (burn fuel) and quickly notes about alternate energy. (coverup)
MegaDarb69 5 months ago
One more comment and I leave this site never to return, but isn't it funny that The Auto Channel is employing John Coleman to prove that Gas is Great??? The tactic kind of reminds me of the "Doctors Can't be Wrong" ads the tobacco companies used back in the day...
intr0verti 1 year ago
@intr0verti
You wrote "...but isn't it funny that The Auto Channel is employing John Coleman to prove that Gas is Great???"
What the hell are you talking about? Are you on drugs?
TheAutoChannel 1 year ago
@intr0verti What about all those scientists with their government grants to prove this and then they give dum dum(Al Gore) the nobel prize. What a joke reminds me of the predictions of the man eating ants that were going to come from South America and destroy the United States. We need more coal plants or nuclear. Stop wasting our resources on this expensive ineffective renewable energy. It is taking food from the mouths of poor children.
thinkingthingsthru 11 months ago
@thinkingthingsthru Oil companies profit $4 Billion in taxpayer subsidies every year. Look it up. Someone talks green and makes money from it, somehow he's the devil? Coal plants produce so-so energy, short life and destroys the land and air around it.(note air travels). Nuclear: expensive, dangerous and nuclear waste, Three Mile Island, Chernobyl, and Fukushima (look these up). I built a shack with solar panel the size of a twin bed, (not expensive), I play PS3 with CRT tv for hours easy.
MegaDarb69 5 months ago
@thinkingthingsthru Funny you say that it's taking food from mouths of poor children. SJSU and other universities and groups have volunteered and donated solar panels to poor neighborhoods and countries. One African town had the solar panel energize a pump that pulls water from a croc filled river to a poor farm. No need to buy gas or coal or have a giant uranium filled plant to work. Fewer croc attacks, and more food for the families (poor children too). Turns itself on when needed due to sun.
MegaDarb69 5 months ago
I mean we can argue until blue in the face, about this intangible event of global warming (Global Climate Shift is more appropriate), or look into other reasons why oil is bad.
intr0verti 1 year ago 2
@intr0verti "we can argue until blue in the face, about this intangible event of GW , or look into other reasons why oil is bad."
That is the point. The Koch brothers and Big Oil are spreading misinformation hoping that people will become confused.
If people faced the scientific facts, we may actually focus on reducing our use of oil, which would hurt their massive profits.
Big Oil's plan: Confuse and obfuscate. Luckily, there are a lot of uninformed people who buy into their lies.
TheSnoopy1750 11 months ago
@TheSnoopy1750 Problem: The US depends too much on Big Oil. Without it, the whole economy will crash. That's why Big Oil has it's pants unzipped and Uncle Sam has a milk beard. I wonder how much Coleman is making with his brown nose?
MegaDarb69 5 months ago
And to mention we should look for alternatives that can yield an unlimited resource. Now that may be impossible, but it is a better mindset than settling on a fuel source that can BE PROVEN as limited. Especially a source that IS toxic and is proven as such, by just simply looking at the short term effects of last year's oil spillage that is slowly keeping up the East Coast and killing the sea life, which is killing industry that harvests that sea life.
intr0verti 1 year ago 2
Ok, ok... We get it. However wouldn't it be nice to have an alternative to fossil fuels? I mean, take Los Angeles or Bangkok for example, where the heated climates cause the emissions to gather at a fast rate. You can't even see objects from miles away due to the obstructive haze.
intr0verti 1 year ago 2
Theres nothing more scary than a group of people who will believe anything that they're told, regardless of facts or logic. A liberal is a truly dangerous beast.
NickLiu25 1 year ago
@NickLiu25 Wow - talk about no logic. Global warming deniers are the ones not listening to facts or using logic.
98% of the world's top climatologists and all of the top scientific organizations believe GW is occurring.
"Liberals" are just listening to the experts who have done decades of research on the matter and have PhDs in the subject matter. Who exactly should they listen to? Some weatherman with no science background?
You are quite delusional.
TheSnoopy1750 1 year ago
@NickLiu25 LOL! I hope you didn't side anyone, but if you side Coleman, then it seems like you are believing what you are told. Lack of thinking is a truly dangerous kitten.
MegaDarb69 5 months ago
"Global" Warming isn't really that global. It's a term used to spread panic among the population. While most of the earth is warming, parts of it are cooling. We do need to lower our emissions, but we also need to investigate which areas do warming positively and negatively affect.
mrdrfez 1 year ago
@mrdrfez Look up North Atlantic Current, heat capacitance, h2o structure...wait, what grade are you in? Global changes with warming and cooling IS a sign of global warming. If you don't know what I mean, then study and come back later. You are right about emissions if you are linking that to areas of warming. Keep studying and see you here in at least four years.
MegaDarb69 5 months ago
John Coleman - University of Illinois journalism degree (1957). No education in the field of climate change.
Wow, Coleman has ABSOLUTELY NO science background? I think I'll trust the MIT science PhDs.
Weather is what atmosphere conditions are over a short period of time, and climate is how the atmosphere "behaves" over relatively long periods of time.
If I want to know if it will rain tomorrow, I will check Coleman's Weather Channel. For climate, I trust climatologists with PhDs.
TheSnoopy1750 1 year ago
@TheSnoopy1750
You think that a few years of debauched textbook study is more meaningful than 50 years in the daily hands-on vocational application of the same subject matter?
If you'd rather rely on the former and not the latter then there's no wonder why you have been conned.
TheAutoChannel 1 year ago
@TheAutoChannel But it is not the same subject matter.
Weather and Climate are not the same. Look up the definition of both.
It's like saying a dentist and cardiologist are equally qualified to perform heart surgery.
TheSnoopy1750 1 year ago
@TheAutoChannel
So when you need a tooth pulled, you'd rather get that done by a hygienist with 50 years on the job than an actual DDS fresh out of college? OK, got it.
pexw 1 year ago
@pexw
If you went to a dentist that had been practicing for 50 years it wouldn't make a difference where he went to school and what his degree was in.
TheAutoChannel 1 year ago
@TheAutoChannel He studied things 50 years ago with technology from 50 years ago. Computers were basicaly useless back then. First microcomputer introduced in the 70's, though these were not common due to price. Do I really need to explain what affordable pocket sized phones can do now a days. For crying out loud. I can guide ballistic missles while facetiming friends and writing posts on this site...Ooops! Did I say that out loud.
MegaDarb69 5 months ago
@TheSnoopy1750 hmm, can you remind me of where Al Gore got his PhDs in the field of climate change.
BarryOcuda 1 year ago
@BarryOcuda I do not use Al Gore as support for GW - he is not a climatologist, just an advocate.
I only listen to the top climatologists (98% believe in GW) and the very top scientific organizations (NASA, NOAA, National Academy of Sciences and Royal Society), which have all concluded GW is real.
I guess you believe a weatherman with no scientific background. I will stick with NASA.
TheSnoopy1750 1 year ago
@TheSnoopy1750 What's Al Gore's background? Let's see, Divinity School and Law Scholl and several decades as a lying politician. So why am I supposed to believe him? Because he stands to make billions if he can get our government to force us to adhere to his recommendations to combat a hoax?
ram0166 1 year ago
@ram0166 I give Al Gore's opinion on GW little, if any credit as he is not a climate scientist.
What I care about is the conclusions of the world's top scientists, especially climatologists as that is their field of study.
Once again, 98% of the top climatologists and every top scientific organization has come to the conclusion that GW is real.
Until NASA, National Academy of Sciences etc. change their views, I will accept the current scientific conclusion that GW is happening.
TheSnoopy1750 1 year ago
@TheSnoopy1750 So you choose to ignore the fact that tempretures have been dropping; that the hockey stick was exposed as a fraud; the revelation that the "scientist" supporting the theory were actively suppressing the work of dissenting scientist and that 0ver 31,000 Scientists signed a onto the conclusion that there is no such a phenomenon as manmade global warming?
ram0166 1 year ago
@ram0166 Where do you come up with these lies?
We just had the hottest global decade in modern history - google it.
Who are these 31,000 scientists? I am sure they are not the top climatologists as 98% of them agree that GW is happening. Biochemists, jet propulsion scientists etc. have zero expertise in climatology.
Name ONE peer-reviewed study from a well-regarded scientific organization that disputes global warming. I will continue to believe NASA, NOAA, Nat'l Academy of Scientists.
TheSnoopy1750 1 year ago
@TheSnoopy1750 What planet have you been on for the last 14 months? So it's not a science it's your religion and one that requires you to ignore anything counter to your faith. Listen only to the High Priests of your faith while the rest of the world laughs at you, fool!
ram0166 1 year ago
@ram0166 Scientific conclusions are a result of empirical data and rigorous analysis.
There are 100s of GW studies. These studies are then reviewed by other scientists for validity. Then the top scientific organizations come to a conclusion after further review and debate.
NASA, NOAA, EPA, NAS, RS, IPCC etc. have gone through this process.
These organizations as well as 98% of the top climatologists have concluded, based on this data, that GW is real and primarily man made. Is this wrong?
TheSnoopy1750 1 year ago
@ram0166 My point is that these 31,000 scientists obviously couldn't convince top scientific organizations that GW is not happening.
Furthermore, the top experts on global climate, climatologists, are in almost complete agreement that GW is happening and is primarily man made.
Who are these 31,000 scientists? Are they energy company scientists or maybe meteorologists and chemists? Why are they more qualified to make an assessment vs. climatologists?
Are you saying there is a vast conspiracy?
TheSnoopy1750 1 year ago
Comment removed
TheSnoopy1750 1 year ago
@ram0166 If you are considering heart surgery, do you also consult ophthalmologists, dermatologists and podiatrists?
You do realize that "scientist" is a broad term? For GW, a climatologist is most similar to a cardiologist in my example.
So if 98% of top climatologists agree on global climate, we must also consult with biochemists before believing the climatologists?
Do you not understand how ridiculous your argument is?
TheSnoopy1750 1 year ago
@TheSnoopy1750 No, 98% of of the bureaucrats at the UN, NASA, etc..If you would have paid attention you would know that it has been exposed that these people have been harrassing scientist with a dissenting view and preventing their studies from being peer reveiwed by threats of smears and to funding. You would also know that Michael Mann was exposed as a fraud and that the IPCC admitted that there has not been any warming since the late 90's.
ram0166 1 year ago
@ram0166 No - 98% of top climatologists that publish on GW, NOT bureaucrats. Do you just make up these lies?
So since it is so obvious that it is a fraud, then NASA, NOAA, National Academy of Sciences, Royal Society will reverse their GW conclusions.
Then all of the nations that are going to spend billions to comply with IPCC GW agreements will stop these plans. After all, why would China, the U.S. etc. spend so much if they don't need to?
When can we expect to see these reversals?
TheSnoopy1750 1 year ago
@ram0166 The study that showed 98% of top climatologists that research and publish extensively concluded that man-made GW is real was in a June 22, 2010 BBC News report. Just google it.
They were actual working scientists, not UN bureaucrats as you claim. Like Fox News, you just make shit up. You lack the qualifications to judge all of the GW data and research, yet you cherry pick data that supports your anti-GW views. Why do no other top scientific organizations agree with you?
TheSnoopy1750 1 year ago
@ram0166 "So you choose to ignore the fact that tempretures have been dropping"
I am still waiting for your support for that "fact" about dropping global temperatures. Do you really think people won't call you out on these blantant lies?
TheSnoopy1750 1 year ago
@ram0166
July 28, 2010 USA Today
As July continues to sizzle in much of the United States, a new U.S. report says the 2000-2009 decade was the Earth's warmest on record and "global warming is undeniable." About 300 scientists from 48 countries contributed to the 2009 State of the Climate report released Wednesday by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.
Let me guess, you will now claim that thermometers all over the world are part of the vast GW conspiracy. You are pathetic.
TheSnoopy1750 1 year ago
@TheSnoopy1750
Here in Ohio our winters have been getting really cold lately. My son is in 3rd grade, and so far not a winter has gone by that his school was cancelled for a few days due to temperature/weather.
Alexandra22773 1 year ago
@Alexandra22773 That may be true, but remember GW is a global phenomenon (hence the term "global") and temperatures vary widely by area. A reason some prefer "climate change" is that variation will be higher so some areas are hotter, some colder.
The important thing to realize is that the contiguous 48 states are only 1.5% of the world's surface. Scientists must look at the total average global temperatures - the last decade was the warmest in modern history and 2010 may be the hottest year.
TheSnoopy1750 1 year ago
@TheSnoopy1750 lol 300 scientist said.. if one million said that i still wont beleave it. the fact is the states are taxing people for somthing that occurs naturally how is that right? how is that good? and all the money in the world is not going to remove the CO2 which plants need. dont forget we need plants or at least the animals we eat, need plants....
iandegia 1 year ago
@iandegia "if one million said that i still wont beleave it. the fact is the states are taxing people for somthing that occurs naturally how is that right?"
So you ignore the experts? lol
You're starting with the wrong premise - yes, greenhouse gases occur naturally but man-made greenhouse gases are the ones causing the incremental problem. If you add billions of tons of CO2 every year into the atmosphere, do you not realize that causes warming? NASA and 98% of top climatologists think so.
TheSnoopy1750 1 year ago
@TheSnoopy1750 experts lol experts in lies. the truth is i dont know and nor do you but what mainstream science has come up with so far is PROPAGANDA. id much rather make my own "THEORY" and when i say what mainstream science(media) i mean that in the most broadest stroke. science became a circus years ago clowns canons and dancing girls...
iandegia 1 year ago
@iandegia I love how GW deniers just ignore all the "mainstream" science because they don't like the conclusions. Classic delusional thinking.
So you have more faith in your own "theories" than those of NASA scientists, 98% of the world's top climatologists and National Academy of Sciences, the world's top scientific body? May I ask your scientific credentials?
That shows me that you are not a rational person as your beliefs are not based on sound scientific facts, but rather ideology.
TheSnoopy1750 1 year ago
@TheSnoopy1750 mainstream scientist dont want to listen to alternative theories let alone investigate them. why wont nasa look into the strange structors on the moon or mars?, what about nikola tesla's inventions, why are there droughts around the world and at the same time american scientist wont look into cloud seeding. who do these so called scientist work for?, what happens if they dont do what there bosses want from the do?
iandegia 1 year ago
@TheSnoopy1750 what happens if they dont do what there bosses want from them? why do you ask for my scientific credentials? it dosnt take a scientist to see that mainstream science isnt science.
all somone has to do is unplug from this system of blind obeobedience and make up there own mind...
iandegia 1 year ago
@iandegia "it dosnt take a scientist to see that mainstream science isnt science."
So 97% of the top climatologists, NASA, NOAA, NAS etc. say GW is real and your retort is that broad scientific consensus is "mainstream" so it's not real science? lol
Wow, you are stunningly stupid. I know who has been listening to Sarah Palin's "lamestream media" remarks.
You also say one needs to "make up there own mind". Gee, how can you come to the right conclusion when you ignore climate experts?
TheSnoopy1750 11 months ago
@TheSnoopy1750 im not saying the climate is not changing. my problem is idiots saying co2 is a poison and its connected to the climate change. did you know plants yes PLANTS love that poison the very same poison that we are getting taxed on and did you know we need plants.
try and bend your mind around this one, we exhale that evil, deadly, poisonous gas. taxable gas lol
i bet your one of those people that believe the govenment story of what happened on 11th september lol
iandegia 11 months ago
@iandegia The issue is not that CO2 is "poison".
The issue is the greenhouse effect. I am sure you can google a paper on how it works, but here is a summary:
- Sun's rays come into the earth's atmosphere but much of it bounces back into space.
- Greenhouse gases (CO2, methane etc.) prevent some from leaving through reflection/absorption.
- As man emits billions of tons of GG per year, more heat gets trapped.
- As a result, you see a gradual increase in temps over what would naturally occur.
TheSnoopy1750 11 months ago
@iandegia "i bet your one of those people that believe the govenment story of what happened on 11th september lol"
No, but I have taken 9th grade science and actually understand the concept of the greenhouse effect, which you obviously do not.
You should really read some articles about it and it's relationship to global warming. Being ignorant is no way to go through life.
TheSnoopy1750 11 months ago
@TheSnoopy1750 well use that powerful interlect of yours and understand that the earth can cope with it. dont forget when a volcano blows up it releases all sorts of crap. loads of money to be made from iceland lol. money is the real reason some people are made to beleave in all those lies, its easy to train people or shall i say sheeple, when they are scared of the bogie man. you obviously cant think out side the box yet so ill finish on this note. open your mind and see life for what it is....
iandegia 11 months ago
@iandegia So your proof that NASA and the top climatologists are wrong about global warming is where exactly?
I see a bunch of meaningless assertions that conveniently dodge the issue.
Being stupid is no way to go through life. Try to have a nice life anyways.
TheSnoopy1750 11 months ago
@TheSnoopy1750 im not saying the climate isnt changing im saying i dont trust all the people who profit from it happening....................
iandegia 11 months ago
@iandegia What profit??? Yeah, scientists go into science for the big bucks - lol.
What I find amazing is you completely ignore that money coming from energy companies to spread misinformation - they are trying to protect their billions of profits. The Koch brothers alone have given $50 million of their own money for various groups to protect their interests.
So any government worker that does his job is biased? Do the guys who fill in potholes go out at night and dig up the street? Moron.
TheSnoopy1750 11 months ago
Comment removed
MegaDarb69 5 months ago
Unfortunately your paid by the government PHDs have lost the trust of the American people in a very big way. The agenda is exposed. The scientists who cried wolf have lost their credibiltiy! I'll go with Mr. Colemans explanation any day!
americansforfreedom 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@TheSnoopy1750 Unfortunately your PHDs who have made billions off their theory have lost the trust of the American people in a very big way. The agenda is exposed. The scientists who cried wolf have lost their credibiltiy! I'll go with Mr. Colemans explanation any day!
americansforfreedom 1 year ago
@TheSnoopy1750
No, you trust the media.
Nothing more.
AshtonPhoto 11 months ago
@AshtonPhoto Nice deflection. No, I am not listening to the media - I am listening to the top climate experts.
Let's take a look at facts:
- 97% of top climatologists say GW is happening and is primarily man made.
- NASA and the NOAA agree that GW is happening.
- The top scientific groups also agree (Nat'l Academy of Sciences, Royal Society, American Association for the Advancement of Science).
- The world has just experienced the hottest decade and 2010 is the warmest year in modern history.
TheSnoopy1750 11 months ago
@TheSnoopy1750
But not the warmest year in the earth's history, not by far. If you read enough you'll find this out.
Hey look, I know we'll not settle anything here on YT but I just want to say, I used to believe in GW too.
Here's why I don't: I did my own reading. Greenland used to be green, not covered in ice. It used to be a lot warmer on the earth than today and we had nothing to do with it.. The icecaps are still there, the polar bears did not all die and the oceans did not rise.
AshtonPhoto 11 months ago
@AshtonPhoto I can tell that you are a GW denier by the fact you can't read - I said 2010 was the warmest year in modern history (fact).
There has been a significant increase in global temps in the last 20 years that cannot be explained by natural variations. NASA, top climatologists etc. have done massive amounts of analysis and they conclude that it is due to man made GW.
The key point is that there is scientific consensus that greenhouse emissions are warming the earth.
Do you get it now?
TheSnoopy1750 11 months ago
@TheSnoopy1750
It didn't take long for you to get rude did it?
Conversation over.
AshtonPhoto 11 months ago
@AshtonPhoto Classic GW denier behavior.
When their bogus arguments are called out, they go home.
Surely that is not the first time you have been called a moron. I am guessing that started pretty early in life for you.
TheSnoopy1750 11 months ago
@TheSnoopy1750 2011- It was the fifth coolest March in the tropics, where the average temperature fell 0.35 C (about 0.63 degrees Fahrenheit) below seasonal norms. Three of the five coldest tropical Marches in the 33-year satellite temperature record have happened in the past dozen years: 5th, 2011, -0.35 C: 3rd, 2000, -0.42; and 2nd, 2008, -0.58 C. The records for Jan-Feb are much the same. 2011 is destined to be one of the coldest in 33 years.
politicstop 9 months ago
@politicstop Sure, you can cherry pick any cold spots or months you want to to preserve your delusion NASA and the top climatologists know less than you about climatology - lol.
Fact: 2010 was tied as the warmest global year in modern history and 2000-2009 was the hottest decade in modern history. It's GLOBAL warming.
So you think man dumping billions of tons of greenhouse gases (GG) into the atmosphere every year will have no impact when GG causes warming?
Get a clue.
TheSnoopy1750 9 months ago
@TheSnoopy1750 Who's cheery picking, the UAH charts show the world surface temps in freefall. This is due to La Nina of course, but none the less, freefall. When a La Ninos hits they will certainly rise. The earth temps rise and fall no matter what we do. Be realistic, I'm not saying everyone should start burning trash, but I'm also not on the carbon credit band wagon (as you probably are). I'm a realist and CC taxes are a fraud. I appreciate that my post was worth your rant though, thanks
politicstop 9 months ago
@politicstop What I posted were facts, but I welcome your explanation of how you are more of an expert on GW than NASA or top climatologists.
It must be nice living in a fact-free reality where you can claim everything is a scam or hoax with no support.
TheSnoopy1750 9 months ago
1.Yes many things affect climate, and yes the earth has cycles of climate, this doesn't mean ours isn't casued by CO2
2while we can't be too sure, scientist do believe the MWP was cooler than the modern period furthermore we know why those warming period happened and we know they aren't happing now, they also aren't happing as fastly
3.We are sure it's not the sun
4.The graph only shows 10 years.....
5.Climate gate, was blown out of proportion it's misleading.
applefrog111 1 year ago
@applefrog111 "3.We are sure it's not the sun" is probably the stupidest thing I've ever heard. Do you know the sun could vaporize us at any moment? Moron.
philthyphil6 1 year ago
@philthyphil6
"Could" being the Key word. Just because the Sun CAN kill us all doesn't mean it is currently causing climate change. On a completely unrelated note do you use the word moron in all of your comments?
applefrog111 1 year ago
i live in northern MN. I'll believe in global warming when i see it.
beefygreenapples 1 year ago
I checked into it. The IPCC says the internal combustion engine caused the end of the ice age. It was that or Mammoth farts.
666sigma 1 year ago
@666sigma
It ended the "Little Ice age".
applefrog111 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@applefrog111
Better go check your history, Chicken Little. And this is why the Global Alarmist are losing the battle. You can't get your facts straight and you draw conclusions that anyone with a little common sense would realize is wrong. Next, you will tell me that the earth is flat because you can see it with your own two eyes.
666sigma 1 year ago
Global warming has gotta be a hoax, and people are making money from it. the earth is gonna do what it does, no matter how much fossil fuel we go through. people in this country are so gullible. you can thank all the liberal dumbasses
rlh450rr 1 year ago
Coleman could have summarized his talk by saying "I don't understand it, therefore it cannot be true" and saved us 8 minutes of our lives.
dcochran12 1 year ago
@dcochran12
You could have just said "I'm a schmuck" out loud and saved you and us from having to learn that there is yet another schmuck living on Earth.
TheAutoChannel 1 year ago
@TheAutoChannel You're response does not come across as very intelligent. Ooops, I criticised you, so now I'm going to get a mouthful from you just like dcochran12.
grundgemonster 1 year ago 2
@grundgemonster
If you mean to say that we would attempt to respond to outrageous lies and misconceptions, and label that response as "a mouthful," then yes, that's what you would get. But in truth, we don't have to say anything further since the several videos that we have posted, plus the very long debunking that we have posted on our website gives all the intelligent argument needed to point out that "man-made global warming" is a fraud.
TheAutoChannel 1 year ago 5
@TheAutoChannel he founded the weather channel for Christ's sake dcochran. your stupidity is capable of killing intelligent people from laughter.
BryanLim14 1 year ago
@dcochran12 Um, he is explaining it if you were listening.
MikeG11986 1 year ago
@dcochran12 It took you 8 minutes to read that? Your a moron.
philthyphil6 1 year ago
@dcochran12 It took you 8 minutes to read that? You're a moron.
philthyphil6 1 year ago
@qsteveens
Actually he has qualifications much greater than awareness than yours. put basically where is the warming it has been cooling for the last 15 years according to Phil Jones of the IPPC so where is the science behind that dipshit explane that but they can't????
Warhead3000 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Warhead3000 studies the weather...Not the planet...Not the sun...Not the oceans that cover most of the planet. (look up water capabilities). Are you sure they can't EXPLAIN that? Have you asked? Have you studies their studies? When do you finish middle school so you can visit them?
MegaDarb69 5 months ago
@qsteveens
Wheres the heating the Earth ??has been cooling for the last 15 years??even that has occured when 3 times more C02 has been put in the air? prove that didckhead and use scince not bull shit use actual references not BS and "prove your theory of C02 which has never been proven in a lab or in real times. C02 follows heating not preceeds it. Get a fucking education, please stoip me telling me how to tell you how to think as it is fucking stupid.
Warhead3000 1 year ago
@Warhead3000 Cooling for last 15 years? With how much statistical significance? Is the trend you mention 3 years averaged or 5 year averaged? Have you checked the absorbtion spectrum of CO2?
ShwangShwing 1 year ago
@Warhead3000 "Wheres the heating the Earth?"
Where's the cooling? The ten warmest years on record have all occurred since 1998. All cooling arguments I've seen have compared 2008 with another year in the last ten. 2008 was unusually cool because of a strong la nina and comparing it to other of the top ten warmest years on record is cherry-picking.
jgoemat 1 year ago
@qsteveens
The earth has been cooling over the last 15 years according to Phil Jones (IPCC and University of Anglia) so where is C02 as a mechanism being doing at the same time??? nothing. Where s the warming 3 times more C02 has enteed the air yet temps have dropped. Science is al about observation not prediction that does not happen
Warhead3000 1 year ago
Nature does nuclear fusion from water
JonThm 1 year ago
@qsteveens
Stupidity for humor is funny. Stupidity because of mental deficiency is excusable. Stupidity because you're stupid is indefensible. I don't think you're trying to be funny, you don't seem to be retarded; therefore you are just stupid. For you to say that there is no science behind the debunkers is proof of that.
All of the highly respected studies you refer to are bogus. My in-depth analysis can be found on TheAutoChannel website by searching "Debunking Man-Made Global Warming"
TheAutoChannel 1 year ago
@TheAutoChannel Throw man's predicted CO2 (and methane and nitrous oxide) emissions into the model, and the disparity is accounted for. Anyways, this video does raise suspicions about your agenda, especially seeing as you have a channel devoted to CO2 and CO emitting automobiles. ;)
TheR3volutionary 1 year ago
@TheR3volutionary
If you actually took the time to see what The Auto Channel is devoted to, you would have seen that we hate gasoline and insist upon the immediate use of alt fuels.
But then, if you were the type of person that actually does research then you wouldn't believe in the global warming B.S.
If you actually have something of value to say, you're always welcome. If you just want to be a schmuck, do it elsewhere.
TheAutoChannel 1 year ago
The atmosphere and climate is very complex and no one has ever made accurate predictions and to state that the debate is over (as Al Gore does and his scientific advisors whom have a clear agenda like Hansen whom is an outspoken alarmist and whom has recently manipulated historical satellite data for an upward trend are not impartial and cannot be trusted). We need the transparency of this to make our own decisions otherwise its back to the Roman Catholic Church telling us the world is flat
Warhead3000 1 year ago
how are we supposed to know, what is right, and what is wrong, when Al Gore in his movie An inconvenient truth shows the exact same interglacial period picture, just where it's the exact opposites of Coleman's? (4:08)
Tranceorgange 1 year ago
@Tranceorgange
There isn't an "exact opposite," per se. What there is are clear and correct explanations for what the data may show, and/or how the data was collected, which in some instances were false or taken out-of-context.
TheAutoChannel 1 year ago
@Tranceorgange
Do some research for yourself and you will find that the Earth has been cooling for the last 15 years ( a direct quote from Phil Jones head of the university in the climategate scandal) even though we have placed 4 times more carbon dioxide into the air yet temperatures have fallen? get educated for yourself and you will see our money would be better spent on controlling pollution and not C02. The earths temperature is controlled by the sun and always has been.
Warhead3000 1 year ago
@Tranceorgange
Where is your reference and where is his on Scientific concensus??????. I could go all year saying that I have scientific concensus on that the moon was in "fact" made of chalk I could state that the whole scientific community was behind my comments but of course science doesn't work on consensus and no independant poll has ever been taken unless you could supply me with one? But of course you can't because it dosen't exists.
Warhead3000 1 year ago
john coleman is a JOURNALIST! That is what he studied in college. What doe he have to back up his opinion? Nothing. No studies and no respected scientific institutions to back him up. What a fool. I wonder what corporate think tank is funding his efforts. They care not for the health of our future generations.
Funny how this fool talks about Gore, Gore, Gore, ...
Gore made no scientific predictions or conclusion. He tells us what the experts say. UCSUSA(dot)org
qsteveens 1 year ago
@qsteveens
There is no corporate think tank funding Coleman's efforts.
TheAutoChannel 1 year ago
@TheAutoChannel
Coleman is NOT a credible expert. He studied journalism in college. He doesn't have a study nor is he likely capable of completing one. He is a weatherman and a business man. Why would anyone want to think he has a clue about humanity's role in climate? Usually it's because they have such shaky support for their nay saying opinions they'll grasp for anything, even a guy like coleman.
qsteveens 1 year ago
@qsteveens
Let's say that Coleman studied Underwater Basketweaving in college, but then spent the next 50 years in the daily, hands-on vocational study and reporting of the weather. You would have to be a complete unadulterated moron to think that he doesn't know what he is talking about, or that he's not an expert in meteorology.
Your protestations about his credibility are what are not credible!
TheAutoChannel 1 year ago
@qsteveens
What is Al Gore he is no scientist and has no science background in climate research. Dude research for your self and you will find there is no man made global its a naterual cycle.
Warhead3000 1 year ago
@Warhead3000 I would never say that Gore has a background in scientific research. But dude, how about stepping back and looking at the big picture. Gore is NOT the source of the science. He has been telling us what the experts have been saying for over 30 years. Here's where you can read what our respected scientific insititutions have concluded.
Google: Scientific Opinion On Climate Change Wikipedia
Then try reading James Hansen's new book, Storms Of My Grandchildren
qsteveens 1 year ago
i think erath is warming up because of the sun and not cause of man am i right
xAWZxman04 1 year ago
@xAWZxman04
That is the position that MOST scientists take.
TheAutoChannel 1 year ago
@TheAutoChannel can u explain it to me more simple
xAWZxman04 1 year ago
@xAWZxman04
Visit The Auto Channel website and read search "Debunking the Myth of Man-Made Global Warming."
TheAutoChannel 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Unbelievable that some of you actually buy this bunk from a lobby dependent upon ignorant morons to continue (or increase) it's irresponsible wasteful use of our FINITE natural resources.
We are running out, you know. We consume more than there is to harvest. Our decisions are based on big business finance - NOT common sense.
If you believe this shit here, then you are a part of the problem. NOT the solution.
BustedSoulO 1 year ago
Unbelievable that some of you actually buy this SHIT from a lobby dependent upon ignorant morons to continue (or increase) it's irresponsible wasteful use of our FINITE natural resources.
We are running out, you know. We consume more than there is to harvest. Our decisions are based on big business finance - NOT common sense.
If you believe this shit here, then you are a part of the problem. NOT the solution.
BustedSoulO 1 year ago
@BustedSoulO
It's a shame that you didn't take the time to find out that John Coleman, and The Auto Channel (although we have no connection other than playing his videos) are great supporters of alt fuels, technologies, and a clean environment. The Auto Channel especially hates the use of gasoline. However, we are completely opposed to the man-made global warming horse shit.
TheAutoChannel 1 year ago
@BustedSoulO You are part of the lie. Even Mr. Coleman is for looking for alternate energy. There is just no good reason to create a global warming scare. The reason why you don't get to hear this side much is not because the data against the scam isn't there, it's because you're dammned if you believe otherwise. Global Warming is to push a bad agenda not in the best interest of the people of the world. Thank You Mr. Colman for the video.
Bifrons 1 year ago
@BustedSoulO What is sad is that the vested interests propagate disinformation about global warming despite the overwhelming scientific evidence.
Coleman is a journalist by training and knows nothing about it. Try reading what the experts have been saying for over 30 years. Read NASA's James Hansen's new book, Storms Of My Grandchildren.
Also, here's where you can read position statements.
Google... Scientific Opinion on Climate Change Wikipedia
don't be a gullible puppet.
qsteveens 1 year ago
I'd rather believe this guy who is mentally stable and rational, than Obama's Science Czar who believes in forcing abortion, sterilizing people through the water supply, forcing single mothers to give up their children, and more wacky Hitlerian ideas. This lie was put out because of population control. (See John Holdren's book Ecoscience (straight out of the 3rd Reich mindset) Hurrah for John Coleman for his truth telling. He is so full of sense.
dawnthi 1 year ago 3
@dawnthi
Those "wacky Hitlerian" ideas, Mr. History Buff, are judaistic-bolshevistic ideas.
Obama is and was raised as communist, and the "white house" is quite FULL of zionists.
USA is a scam pointing fingers at some made up history, invading the globe whereever convenient
to them or their masters, while walking on the skeletons of the natives who once owned the land.
So don't insult dead men, Hitler in this case, who was way more legal than your last five presidents.
Thanks. ;)
Suckkors 1 year ago
@Suckkors alright big boy xD
MachikiRox 1 year ago
Sigh* There's no hope for humanity...the earth is populated by morons.
This was made by the auto channel...is it far fetched of me to say that they have an interest in convincing you that global warming doesn't exist so that you can keep guzzling fossil fuels (And handing them your cash in the process) without guilt?
Jerakay 1 year ago
Boy are you a schmuck. If you took any time to read our position on alternative fuels and energy you would learn how strongly we advocate the immediate cessation of "fossil fuels." But then you'd actually have to know how to read and comprehend the words. We are, however, against the man-made global warming fraud.
TheAutoChannel 1 year ago
@TheAutoChannel Note that my comment did not insult you directly at all...I called all humanity morons which includes me. You however try to de-legitimize views by calling me an illiterate shmuck. I'd like to point out that you still failed to answer my question: Is it far fetched of me to say that you gain in convincing people that global warming doesn't exist? I certainly don't think it is.
Jerakay 1 year ago
@Jerakay
Watch the videos and then r