Added: 1 year ago
From: TheRealNews
Views: 5,966
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (766)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • Al Gore did not help by deviating from the actual science in his documentary and rhetoric

  • This guy is an idiot. He talks about the rogue scientists supported by the oil and coal companies disputing the "facts" about global warming. What he doesn't mention is that over 31000 independent scientists are disputing the idea of man made global warming.

    If guy looked at the actual data, he would realize that we have been in a warming spell for the last 10000 years, since the end of the last ice age, with temperature maximums in 1000AD and 1200BC. He's just trying to make money on his book.

  • @zettawatt

    "This guy is an idiot"

    Actually, an idiot is anyone propagating that 30,0000 scientists nonsense. Try researching who's actually on that list. The vast majority have no expertise in climate science whatsoever and most of them aren't even scientists. Since when do veterinarians and mathematicians qualify as climate experts?

  • @zettawatt

    Just noticed I've previously responded to your comment. Sorry for the repeat.

  • Gosh, seems to me Al Gore is a "climate crank".

  • By the way, science has never been about consensus. Scientific truth is never based on some mythical voting process as M Hertsgaard attempts to suggest here. He should know better than to present that faulty argument. But then again, propaganda only uses science to spice the soup they stir.

    Why can't someone profit from a book discussing the issue rather than having to resort to an extreme position? ... maybe because logic does not sell... fear does !

  • Mark Hertsgaard is a very eloquent presenter. Now if he could actually report news and unbiased information instead of promoting his book product via fear, he would become credible.

    If I'm going to read a book about climate change, it will be one discussing dynamics and a spectrum of arguments instead of one presenting a single biased approach. I am doubting Mr Hertsgaard knows how to sell information rather than fear.

    Our time is better spent looking for the win-win of new technology.

  • Republicans - particularly tea baggers - are a bunch of Neanderthal fucks! ):<

  • @makokun9

    Okay, so that sums up your "scientific" argument?

  • @RogerOnTheRight I`m sorry. Was I supposed to be?

  • What's really revealing is how these same people are often evo-deniers as well. I have never heard from a creationist who accepts the evidence for anthropogenic climate change. What does that tell you?

  • To be completely fair, there are those on the left that make us look like idiots, too. I live in Oklahoma; even the liberals here are often duped by theism, creationism, and climate change denial. I think we need to focus on the crux of the problem: people without the ability to sort anecdotal "fact" from demonstrable, empirical fact.

    Anyone who is a true skeptic of either argument until you've seen all evidence, seek out greenman3610's channel, and the plethora of research mentioned therein.

  • @Truthiness231 ... Propagandists such as greenman a raping science in order to drive their position. I am saddened you consider his propaganda as factual.

  • @WaterfrontConsultant What propaganda? On what subject? Please say you're just a climate denier and not an evolution denier or theist; those idiots are far less wacky than the religious ones...

  • What makes liberals tinks they can acuse anyone of being "against science" ... ?

    Being too insecure to deal with reality gives you no high ground moral position.

    Creating fantasies to justify your fears is the exact opposite of accepting science.

    Being to ignorant and gullible to know the difference between science an fraudulent agenda driven activism might be a measure of a sverlely stunted development.

  • You can not claim to support science UNLESS you adhere to the Scientific Method. Those who try to deceive others by falsifying their results are not scientists. They are liars that should be driven from their scientific field. Just watch the Dr Richard Muller's youtube presentation on "Hide the Decline". Muller is a warmists who exposes the "Hockey Team's" dishonesty clearer than any one else I've seen. This shouldn't even be a sceptic/alarmist debate on this.

  • @nlpjohn That's just BS. There was ZERO evidence of fraud. The only crime was the felony committed by the people who broke into the CRU computers and stole personal emails, and their co-conspirators who quickly published out-of-context phrases such as the one you allude to. ("HIde the decline" refers to a decline in the width of tree rings that had correlated well with thermometers until about 1957, then stopped correlating. The "trick" was to use spline functions to bridge this period.)

  • @JamesFromCA Then you are being willfully blind. Dr. Judith Curry (who is an alarmist) was also fooled by the hide-the-decline trick and she wrote a very angry letter about the dishonesty. And since when is it 'good science' to fuse themometer readings to proxy data? They didn't teach me that in science class. And who said someone broke into the CRU computers rather than a whistle blower from the inside who releasing the emails? Feel free to prove that it wasn't a whistle blower.

  • The Real News...now that's funny....

  • ZPG : Zero Population Growth movie 1972 written by Max Ehrlich

    /watch?v=p2skwjiDZyc

    Global Warming is for Genocide (no not made by Republicans, by Socialists)

    /watch?v=mSOFf6RB8hQ

    Demon Pigs in charge of the future American De-industrialization Al Gore:

    /watch?v=0tF3l7Mujas

  • In the middle ages grapes were being grown in Scotland and all over the UK, this proves that global climate change is natural because you cannot grow grapes here with the present climate.

  • ITS NOT GLOBAL WORMING, NIBIRU NOW VISIBLE TO THE NAKED EYE IN THE SOUTH, AND THAT IS THE REASON WHY ARE SUN IS GETTING MORE ACTIVE AS WELL!

    /watch?v=OaoNCp0OqLM

    /watch?v=JUqOg_X7lw8&feature=w­atch_response

    NIBIRU IS HAVING A MAJOR ELECTROMAGNETIC EFFECT NOT ONLY ON THE PLANETS BUT ANIMALS AND HUMANS AS WELL!

    ALL THESE EARTHQUAKES, ANIMALS DIEING, HUMAN UPRISINGS, ARE JUST THE BEGINNING OF 2012! THE SHITT IS ABOUT TO HIT THE FAN, AND THEY ARE NOT GOING TO TELL YOU SHITT!

  • The Republican Party is too intertwined with the fossil fuel industry to be interchangeable. They have become one of the same. The republican party are infested with the profits from large fossil fuel companies.

    Who wants us to burn more fossil fuels? Who says fossil fuels don’t cause pollution? Who spreads propaganda that fossil fuel pollution is good for the planet? Who spreads propaganda that the climate isn’t changed by the pollution we have pumped into it?

  • @kaieteurdevon

    If global warming is such a scientific slam-dunk, then why is it necessary to fake the evidence?

  • @RogerOnTheRight Evidence is everywhere. We have billions of humans burning billions of tons of fossil fuels, pumping billions of tons of pollutants into our atmosphere. Get a grip dude we have to deal with these serious problems, not deny its happening, that would be just plain stupid.

  • @kaieteurdevon

    "Evidence" would be actual evidence human activity is warming the planet. Or even that the planet is warming at all.

    Yet, as revealed by the East Anglia emails, it was necessary for some reason to fake evidence.

    Why do you suppose that was the case?

  • @RogerOnTheRight I can't believe you are still spouting on about the hacked emails, they prove nothing, there is no smoking gun in them.

  • @angrywhenroused

    Certainly there was. Clear, open discussions of shutting up dissenting scientists, by denying them publication. And discussion of techniques to "hide the decline", which was used to justify use of bogus data-- contrary to the insistence of even their political allies in the IPCC.

  • @RogerOnTheRight hide the decline is actually talking about tree ring data not actual temperature

  • @angrywhenroused

    Precisely my point. The IPCC had explicitly warned Mann about using tree ring data, since they are not reliable indicators of actual temperature. Indeed, when tree ring data showed decline in temperatures, Mann then decided to cherry pick data points to indicate increase, making a fraud of the data.

    And this was discussed in the email chain.

  • @kaieteurdevon Oh god. You remember in the 70's when the beating of the fear drum was about global cooling right? Let me guess your all about the green movement but you don't own one solar panel. I'm not saying that CO2 couldn't have that effect on the bio sphere but none of these "1000's of scientists that agree on global warming" can put together a weather model that tells us the average temperature tomorrow with the same degree of certainty as they are claiming they can 100 years from now.

  • @bkl139

    "You remember in the 70's when the beating of the fear drum was about global cooling right?"

    Try digging a little deeper into that "global cooling" crap. That was just headline fodder and was never the mainstream scientific opinion.

  • @fusedchromosome Ok ...another example then. In the Little Ice Age 1000's of executions were carried out because of coarse it had to be the "Weather Cookers" causing the drop in temperature. Now go out and hunt your witches captain planet.

  • @bkl139

    "...of course it had to be the "Weather Cookers"...Now go out and hunt your witches captain planet."

    You seem to be taking a sharp left turn into goofyville. I simply pointed out that "global cooling" was never in any way shape or form a mainstream scientific view. As for the witch hunt stuff, we can thank all of the self-appointed religious spokesmen who didn't know jack shit about the supernatural and even less about science.

  • @fusedchromosome You mean a self appointed religious spokesman that knows nothing about science like Al Gore? The green movement has become a religion.

  • @bkl139

    Trying to equate assertions based on scientific research with the supernatural crap that religions have been spewing for thousands of years is just a inept attempt at projection. Gore is certainly no scientist and I would never quote him, but just how far off do you think his presentations are from the scientific consensus and where did he get his data?

  • @bkl139 Our planet is being trashed by our global abuse of its ecosystems, that's not green or political just FACT. I am all about 'humanity' and its continued survival. Yes i own solar panels because they are amazingly simple, yet clever technology.

  • @kaieteurdevon Let me guess you get all 30-40 KWH per day from solar...lol When I say solar power I don't mean your citizens ecodrive watch or your pocket calculator. With current tech there is no way that you can make alt energy nearly as cost effective as coal.

  • He lost me at the 30 second mark when he called me a "crank" for noticing the myriad accounts of scientific fraud that was perpetrated in order to support the corporate media's hyped - since called "climate change" - fear-mongering in support of taxing - absolutely everything. Setting up a global (mono) government is darned expensive! Not to mention the need to destroy the governing diversity that presently exists.

  • This man is embaraasing! Inhofe tore him to bits and he still has the gall to argue, or rather talk to himself.

  • i am a collapsed catholic and i'm against the science non-sense too! now if we could get a democrat a muslim and a lesbian we could call it the unified race against science.

  • climate cranks rule, sorry warmies, changers, brainwashed products of the empire. perhaps you've felt guilty, or need to massage your ego thinking oh yeah, man is such a mighty influence on the planet...he isn't. i know you want to tax the living shit out of us. but what can you do about co2, stop breathing? i'm sick of all the repetition ad nauseum. if the u n science was so solid they wouldn't have needed to resort to all the lies and fraud. this dude is a lobbyist for the carbon trading scam

  • @BluesdesJours Wow. Are you a buffoon in real life, or do you just play one on the internet? Did you put even one second of thought into what you wrote? There was absolutely no evidence of "lies and fraud" as you put it, and where did you get the insane notion this journalist has any financial connection AT ALL with any kind of carbon trading scheme? All you've done is post a mindless, pointless, factually incorrect rant. If you weren't paid to do it, why embarrass yourself that way?

  • Comment removed

  • @BluesdesJours Breathing is carbon neutral, as you get the carbon from pant matter which originally took it out of the atmosphere. But you know science is just made up bullshit so it doesn't matter.

  • Better question is why did the media hype Global Warming as Fact and declare the debate is over when there hasn't been one?

  • @chewbaca1989

    Because you're thinking that rhetorical debate, and scientific debate are the same thing.

    In a debate where how you say something matters more than the evidence. Then that's not science.

  • Its like a Geographer arguing with a Flat Earther. There's no point.

  • @PersonalJesus348 or a climatologist with an warming activist. rediculous

  • @atomicapeboy yes everything that he says could apply to himself.the name calling and use of symbols ,the gestures from the intervierer = blatant propaganda

  • @thesparitan I could be wrong. Produce your sources for this information. If creditable, then I will agree with you.

  • I don't dispute man made global warming, I dispute the extent of damage that they claim. One volcanic eruption spews out more Carbon and sulfur dioxide than humans have EVER produced. Even a mild volcanic eruption adds more than the total contrabution of all nations since the industrial revolution. The Earth seems to have put up with constant volcanic eruptions and meteors crashing that spew millions or bilions of tons of debris into the air. Self correcting... for now. I guess.

  • @knutsenglenn 200 million tonnes of CO2 is from all volcanoes on average, the global fossil fuel CO2 emissions for 2003 tipped the scales at 26.8 billion tonnes. Thus, not only does volcanic CO2 not dwarf that of human activity, it actually comprises less than 1 percent of that value. So you are totally wrong and ignorant of the issue.

  • unsubscribing. i'm sick of this crap.

  • @kmica2008 Good we dont need ignorant fools watching our videos

  • @thesparitan you have enough ignorant fools watching, you don't need me.

  • We are currently in an interglacial period (warm period between ice ages) and closing in, if not at the peak of warm temperatures of this period. The earth will proceed to another ice age unless the cycle of ice ages has ended which I am doubtful has occurred.

    I think people like this author Mike, know this and are wanting to take credit for a nature procession back into the next ice age and want to sell their books. He never mentions anything of our current interglacial period which is fact.

  • @nvsyru

    You do realize that 100 years, within a 30,000 year milankovitch cycle is rather small, right?

    I mean sure, it's natural. But it's so dramatically slow, that to claim that that explains what's going on is completely ignorant.

  • Fox Noise won't even acknowledge that we are in a decided warming trend which is proven by simple data recordings from thermometers. That's like pretending you are not fat even though the scale says you have gained 40 pounds over ten years. It may not kill you but something is awry.

  • I WANT MY $5 BACK!

  • Bunk. Get a real job. 20 years pushing this bs.

  • @greyflcn actually you can burn wood & such to make biochar fertilizers so none of that is scarce. none of it. you can grow hemp in that soil or in various soils & produce oil and plastic from it. Biofuels are not any kind of pipe-dream: it's a working reality today, no limits whatsoever except the oil companies HOLDING it back. Shale gas: Co2 emissions can be very low, especially with use of the Bloom box for electric conversion.

  • @ytgv3fc7

    Bloom box are just glorified fuel cells. Which really don't do you much good especially when the process heat isn't used.

    And the "use biomass to get fertilizer because we don't have enough biomass" seems to be ignoring a lot....

  • @greyflcn isn't used because it doesn't need to be - the electrical output from nat-gas this way is almost twice what it is from burning it. Biochar addresses what I mentioned: we have PLENTY of biomass, untold amounts of biomass, that with biochar turn into fertilizer. 100% addressed - we have more than enough fertilizer, no petroleum product / synthesis required. None.

  • @ytgv3fc7

    No it isn't. The output is making the assumption you use the process heat. If you don't use the process heat, then it's effectively meaningless.

    And also really, your biochar argument is about as realistic as putting a windturbine ontop of a car, and expecting that to power it as you drive.

    Really, there is quite a scarcity of potassium and phosphorus in the world. And putting gigatons of it towards burning in our cars won't help.

  • @greyflcn no it isn't - it's a CHEMICAL process.

    The biochar argument has been tested repeatedly - it works very well. It lasts longer than other fertilizers. Little blocks of biochar aerate as they break down, resisting run-off like petrol-synthesis fertilizers. There's no biochar run-off & this moderately increasing aeration permits soil microbes to live there which petrol-fertilizers do not. Cheap, plentiful, long-lasting, repeatedly proven performance.

  • @greyflcn There is no scarcity of potassium in the world so long as you take the existing potassium from the left over plant material & continue to use it as biochar as I have mentioned. Really, you have studied none of the science & need to do a year of homework before attempting to speak again on this.

  • @ytgv3fc7

    Nitrogen is a chemical process (Mainly natural gas)

    Potassium and Phosphorous are largely obtained through mining.

    Pesticides are largely come from oil. Not fertilizers.

    And there's no scarcity of drinkable water in the world either. If you assume you can spend a huge amount of energy desalinating it. But that rather defeats the point if we're talking about creating energy.

  • @greyflcn potassium can be obtained without mining. Adding mining stock is fine. We need simply to re-use the potassium from the plant material left behind, by making biochar, a proven fertilizer technology superior to petrol fertilizers. Fertilizers today are largely synthesized from oil, not pesticides. You got it backwards. There's TONS of scarcity of drinking water in the world, always has been: bacteria, animal droppings, salt & heavy metals constantly make it undrinkable.

  • @ytgv3fc7

    And that's the point with your "plenty of fertilizer" argument.

    There's "plenty of fertilizer" in the same way that there's "plenty of fresh water".

  • @greyflcn not even close to the same way. The material is immediately available, bury it or biochar it. Done and done. Fertilizer. Fresh water is 100x as hard to obtain in terms of time, energy & storage capacity. Not even close to the same.

  • As the denialsts rant in displeasure at this list of 46 world renowned organizations that support the validity of "man-made global warming", please bear in mind H.L. Mencken's observation: “it is in the nature of the human species to reject what is true but unpleasant and to embrace what is obviously false but comforting”.

  • (cont.) Royal Society, United Kingdom American Astronomical Society American Chemical Society Australian Meteorological & Oceanographic Society Canadian Foundation for Climate and Atmospheric Sciences Canadian Meteorological & Oceanographic Society Engineers Australia European Academy of Sciences and Arts European Science Foundation Federation of American Scientists Geological Society of America Institute of Physics (cont.)
  • (cont.) Scientific American Academia Brasileira de Ciéncias,Brazil Académie des Sciences, France Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei, Italy Russian Academy of Sciences, Russia Royal Society of Canada, Canada Deutsche Akademie der Naturforscher Leopoldina, Germany Science Council of Japan, Japan Academy of Science of South Africa Chinese Academy of Sciences, China Indian National Science Academy, India Academia Mexicana de Ciencias, Mexico (cont.)
  • The following organizations support the validity of the Anthropogenic Global Warming phenomenon. National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration National Academy of Sciences Environmental Protection Agency American Geophysical Union American Institute of Physics American Meteorological Society National Research Council American Physical Society US Geological Survey US Dept of Agriculture National Center for Atmospheric Research NASA's Goddard Institute of Space Studies (cont.)
  • it's a mistake to confuse the viability of the solutions with the validity of the problem. - Those who discount anthropogenic global warming because they think cap and trade is ineffective need to take a class in logic.

  • Why are people so obsessed with al gore, most people that believe AGW is real dont even like him. Suppose al gore lied, and suppose he is going to get rich of global warming solutions, that would not make any difference about the claim that global warming is real. He is not a science, he has done no research, he has only got famous by leeching on a cause, something every politician does. These are not rational arguments people, use your brain please.

  • @thesparitan

    Using logic is the antithesis of Fox News and the Wrong wing. All they want to do is continue the pollution for the oil companies, so they don't have to use a fraction of their record-breaking profits to change their dirty practices.

    All Fox has to do bring up doubt, and put on some climate crank who claims that GW and GCC are BS and the uneducated audience thinks its all a plot by Al Gore and George Soros

    Its not just about "the environment", its about a threat to public health

  • @micahgee agreed

  • @greenlyest And this guy is an example of another reason why GW alarmists are losing ground. The general public tunes out people that are insulting. Way to shoot your foot there, G.

  • Hey cornflu let me construct your argument into a formal syllogism

    Premise A

    There is a problem

    Premise B

    there are no good solutions

    Conclusion

    therefore because there are no good solutions the problem is not real or less real in some cases.

    that is a clear fallacy of logic. Its not an argument

  • @thesparitan I come back a day later and this fucking loser is still at it...do you get any fucking sleep man?

  • @uwmbigb I work on the computer, this is something I do to avoid working lol. They wont let us play games on the computer because of some block so I do this when I am bored. Its actually a nice distraction. I can tell I have effected you deeply and you want revenge for making you feel so bad about yourself, but this is your doing. I dont have that kind of power over people. Also you are a hypocrite, just a fact.

    If you want to hurt my feelings you will have to do better then that.

  • @thesparitan *sigh* In less than small tidbits this might make more sense. The problem I have is with the great PUSH from global warming alarmists towards a false solution. If you tell me we need to change something that makes sense I will consider it. But if you want to get rich off a derivatives market (Gore), I can't take your ideas seriously (serial). The fact that GW alarmists can't stay on real solutions makes them less than credible. This is why your side is losing ground.

  • @CornFlu I put your argument into a perfect syllogism, solutions do not effect the veracity of a claim. You are just being stupid now. But there is a large debate in the scientific community and tons of great solutions have been proposed. I told you many examples, you are just not willing to even consider them but there they are. Just type in google solutions to AGW and you will see thousands of them.

    Your argument is ridiculous. Do I make my case yet?

  • @thesparitan And to make it even more clear:

    Premise A

    There is a problem

    Premise B

    there are no good solutions

    Conclusion

    Let's take money from the working class, set up a derivatives market for all the banks to get rich off (and people like Gore), and tell people to buy this green crap instead of brown crap so they feel better about their crap.

    Logical phallussy.....yep.

  • @CornFlu Fine ok lets take your syllogism as true, what would it prove. It proves that setting up market derivatives to prevent AGW is a stupid idea, congratulations you won the argument, I agree. So you believe AGW is real but believe that the cap and trade solution is a bad one. Fine there are a hundred better solutions like geoengineering, clear energy technology and many many more. So by this syllogism you agree with me totally, cool welcome to the team.

    What is your point.

  • @CornFlu

    How about you stop pretending that CO2, CH4, SO2 and NO2 emissions on a massive scale ISN'T a problem?

    Ignore everything about climate change for a moment, what about all the PCB's and other organochlorides that remain in the environment and accumulate in the food we eat and water we drink. Doesn't affect public health?

    Funny how the same party that claims to be pro-lif but says its ok to poison American mothers, fetuses and children.

  • @CornFlu

    Premise A

    There is a proble

    Premise B

    The solution will cost me money

    Conclusion

    Let's pretend theat the problem doesn't exist

  • it´s provem that there is no relation between co2 and temperature raise as it´s provem that co2 is very bad for us and our biosfere

    the need of eliminating co2 emitions is real, no matter the reason why

  • @lucagao No CO2 is not bad for us, but we do need to lower the amount of it in the atmosphere. CO2 is starting to pollute our oceans but that does not mean that we need to eliminate all CO2 in the atmosphere like we did with CFC's. CO2 is as needed as oxygen. Just making that clear to everyone. You need to be more factual in your posting in support of AGW, some denier will read that and have a field day with you.

  • what can you say? the average american is getting dumber by the day

  • regardless of what you believe, change is occurring. weather patterns are altering leading to droughts and floods. sea levels are rising and salinating pacific island water sources. Glaciers are melting and disrupting river cycles. These previously predictable and dependable hydro cycles have been the underpinning of human civilization for millennia. your children will probably see mass human migration and food shortages around the world. Pray they know only higher food prices and not famine.

  • CLIMATE CHANGE SUPPORTERS, YOU HAVE BEEN DUPED BY THE MEDIA.

    I'm sure if you google trend the media hype and support for Climate Change/ global warming.

    NOTE YOU WILL NOT FIND ANY "DEBATES" by opposing views in the IPCC

  • @chewbaca1989 Don’t be duped by the fossil fuel propaganda, they want you to continue using fossil fuels and handing over billions in profits, regardless if the pollution destroys our children’s future. Get a grip climate crank

  • @kaieteurdevon

    Listen, artificial scarcity is what you are being asked to buy into. It's like diamonds and Debeers. Can you wrap your head, suspend reality for a moment, around ARTIFICIAL SCARCITY? I'd like to point that developed countries are polluting less that underdeveloped countries, why? The sky is cleaner where I live than when I was a kid. We recycle now, I remember when we didn't. I agree that there is pollution, but Climate Change is a lie.

  • @chewbaca1989 not seeing any artificial scarcity. We have more people than we have food to feed, we have more people than we have energy for long-term. Climate change, a fact beyond all sane questioning, is shown in every day evidence. Winters that stop being winters - many nights were +3 to +8 C that are supposed to be -30 C in December. Everything's being ruined. Many animals stopped hibernating early. Some never went into hibernation that always did 20 years ago.

  • records indicate that the earth has been warmer, than now, 3 times .. let's kill the boogieman, and the ones that pull the strings of the boogieman..

  • @Dewdaahman The problem is not the absolute temperature. It´s the drastic change in water levels and local climate that will disrupt our trade and production. How will you cope with changes that normaly occure in 50 years now happen in 5 years. You will not be able to do that. It will be a bloody mess. And it will throw you americans to the Amish level. But maybe that is better for the rest of us. We are caught between christian and islamist idiots who believe in their imaginary friends.

  • @pcuimac if they quit goin' against Nature, quit sprayin' our skies and promotin' satanism we may have a chance..

  • Triggerhappy Americans as always. Kill your american banksters, that would be helpfull.

  • @pcuimac banksters and leaders of the USA.. I say we try them first for fraud and crimes against humanity, then kill (hang) them.. and do it in front of the kids to show them what they may need to do in 40 years, to their leaders..

  • you have been fed this your whole lives and now accept it, but saying co2 is a green house gas is like saying oil is a fossil fuel, misleading and false. any gardener will tell you plants thrive with more co2, which is a very low percentage of the air we breath. i'm no fan of the criminal oil companies, specialy considering their use of super toxic dispersants not to mention fucking with the arabs and economy. one of the first climate alarmists was charles manson, so there ya go.

  • @BluesdesJours Come on dude, get a grip. The fossil fuel industry wants you to buy more fuel. They want you to believe that the pollution from burning fossil fuels is good for the biosphere.

    Reality check. Fossil fuel pollution IS a disaster for our biosphere. Stop singing the mantra “They call it pollution - We call it life” It’s a Sick JOKE! watch?v=0_VmMIbWKoo

  • @BluesdesJours if you want a world with not many animals - certainly no people - and lots of plants, then sure, crank up the Co2. It will be 50 C, all tropical plants, no humans, is that OK with you? I'm not OK with making that happen in the next 100 years. 1000 years? Maybe. CO2 does not transmit infrared light, not well, nor does methane, very badly, and that makes them greenhouse gasses. It's a very high % of heat reflected back to us even at night. HEAT, not breathing, is the problem.

  • It's amazing how prevelant this "balanced argument" nonsense on climate change is.

    Climate change is happening, it's man made.End of story.

    1 +1 is not three!

    But look at what schools are teaching....

  • @grooverf

    It's happening yes, and man has a part to play in it. So why the hysteria?

  • @chewbaca1989 the hysteria is that we will all die if we don't fix it, and no one will fix it if we pretend the problem is not real. We are actually on the verge of destroying all human-kind with climate change. Food crops will be down so low that half the world's population is at risk of starvation inside of 20 years alone from that. With the loss of pollinators, who knows - 10 years from now there could be zero humans.

  • @ytgv3fc7

    We won't "die", Humanity is not on the verge. Vasts swaths of Land are available for agriculture in Africa and South America. Food crops will go down because of Global Cooling, not Global Warming. Warm periods are beneficial to mankind. The pollinating problem is caused by Monsontos and Roundup pesticides along with GMO. Hey, we are on a cooling trend that was predicted not by your "scientists" ok? When the cooling trend continues you'll pray it was warm.

  • @chewbaca1989 we will die - Humanity is on the verge of TOTAL extinction. None of that land can be used for agriculture. See this is how it works: you can't grow anything without seeds. There will be no seeds because only BEES will help you get them. That's what POLLINATION is for. It's sex for plants. It's how they make offspring. Food crops are going down because of global warming TODAY and global cooling is a non-science, non-reality myth proven to be wrong over and over.

  • @chewbaca1989 I can only pray the warming stops because it is already so bad it's killing off our food. If you pray for warmer and say it's cooler now, you're insane. Insane. It's hotter than ever & NASA proved it YET AGAIN - earthobservatory.n asa.g ov/IOTD/view.p hp?id=42392 - it's a warming trend getting even warmer, no cooling to date, no cooling in the future. None. Zero. Zippo. Impossible. Precisely the opposite of all global measurements at all times.

  • @ytgv3fc7

    I'd propose to you that it was warmer 2000 years ago and humanity flourishes because of it.

  • @chewbaca1989 I propose to you it was warmer this decade than in all recorded history & we are not better off for it.

  • Would Jesus believe in science? Lol...

  • @tubetib Jesus loves anal so he'd probably appreciate the lube but as he has a magic anus he wouldn't need it Himself.

  • He says this issue is a failure of the US media. That's not the case. From the point of view of the capitalists who own the media, it is a skillfuly evasive success. "Objectivity" is always trotted out to ensure that a journalist doesn't move from simply writing about events to a critical analysis of them. There is no "objectivity" on many major problems facing us, there is simply reality and propaganda.

  • Good hair dude!

  • What we all need to look at…. Who wants us to burn more fossil fuels? Who says fossil fuels don’t cause pollution? Who spreads propaganda that fossil fuel pollution is good for the planet? Who spreads propaganda that the climate isn’t changed by the pollution we have pumped into it?

  • @Foodjunky9 There you go, enjoy

    watch?v=boj9ccV9htk

  • Republicans are against the science because a large population of people that want to make money at the expense of humanity vote for them. Furthermore, a lot of theists vote for them as well. These are the two biggest piece of shit human beings alive and they are the electoral base of the republican party. Now... that being said, Democrats are no better in that there is only one party in the US: the corporate shill party. That's why when people vote, nothing changes. Don't Vote there's no hope.

  • Go watch on you tube

    The Great Global Warming Swindle

    Shown on Channel 4 UK

  • @Foodjunky9 the great swindle is that global warming is any kind of hoax. The hoax is a hoax. 1 week of winter we had no temps at -20 C or -30C. +3 to +8 for that week. December. That's global warming: it's been happening all over, weather maps do let us all check on that now.

  • @Foodjunky9

    No you aren't tell the truth.

    You are just repeating the lies made by a fake documentary.

    greyfalcon (dot) net/swindle3

    greyfalcon (dot) net/swindle

    That Volcano one in particular is amazingly false.

    greyfalcon (dot) net/carbon2

  • 'The planet is fine, its the people that are fucked....'

    -George Carlin

  • he thinks that science is like democracy and if 99% of scientists say something they must be right because that's the majority... how sick is that? science is about proof and evidence and not about beliefs or voting.

  • @noisygrass That's true to an extent. But how do you decide what has been proved and what the evidence says? Well, scientists debate it and test it and debate it some more until eventually there is some sort of consensus. 99% of scientists agreeing with a position sounds like a pretty good consensus to me, so I am willing to accept it as 'fact' until someone comes along with some more persuasive evidence to the contrary. This is how it's always been done and science works...

  • Daphne is distractingly cute!

  • The medieval warm period was GLOBAL, and it was even warmer than it was now. People like Michael Mann and his "hockey stick" are highly arrogant and refuse to accept contrary evidence that would put their global-warming jobs at risk. Also, the north pole had substantially LESS summer sea-ice 4,000 years ago than today.

  • 40 people would be the idiots left off the ark in the 2012 film.

    As the tsunami comes, "It's all a hoax. It's a liberal bias, I tell you! A liberal bias...." And then BOOM! WIPE-OUT. Gurgle. Gurgle.

  • Anthropogenic global warming is a myth.

  • Comment removed

  • It’s so obvious to anyone with a brain and even a small understanding of the science, that pollution from burning fossil fuels is messing with our biosphere. Don’t be duped by the fossil fuel propaganda, they want you to continue using fossil fuels and handing over billions in profits, regardless if the pollution destroys our children’s future. Get a grip climate cranks.

  • The Republican Party is too intertwined with the fossil fuel industry to be interchangeable. They have become one of the same. The republican party are infested with the profits from large fossil fuel companies.

  • @kaieteurdevon Check out how the Koch bros are dictating political strategy even down to the talkiing points to their bought and paid for representatives

  • @0urGaia this video is worth a look too

  • what A LOAD OF RUBBISH

    the ENTIRE human Race PUTS OUT A lot lot lot lot less per year co2

    Than What a VOLCANO produces PER YEAR FACT

    THIS WHOLE THING IS PART OFF THE NEW WORLD ORDER TO CONTROL ALL OFF US

    DONT FALL FOR IT !!!!

  • @Foodjunky9 That is a lie dimwit.

  • @nilbud Youre a coward. Right or wrong you cant make a single point without adding an unnecessary insult on the end of it. Youre on the internet talking tough and getting personal. You are the definition of a coward...

  • @uwmbigb Are you having a tantrum because I won't agree with your stupid illiterate lies? Maybe you should avoid believing in any old horseshit fairytale that you come across. You must only hang around with kindred gullible types all agreeing that FEMA death camps are probably where they're storing the fluorinated embryos for the alien army who will fly the UN black helicopters for the invading Chinese/NWO army.

    You are the coward, terrified by unreality, wasting time.

  • @nilbud Youre the one with the AlexJones vids favorited bro not me. Nobody tantrumed, I just made a statement that you end every point with an insult and you pretty much just keep validating me...

  • @uwmbigb No actually you are the coward, look at the 20 postings you made to another video that you found I had commented on. You are an insane person that is clear and a weak person. Emotionally weak people are a very unstable people it seems. Now leave these debates alone because its clear you cannot handle the emotional stress.

  • @thesparitan YOU sent me that video link and told me to watch it! I didnt hunt it down you brought it to my attention - this is the disconnect Im talking about. You lied about something I said and I called you on it - you said I said something that I didnt. Ive got every right to correct you. Get butthurt if you like just dont think youre going to pu words in my mouth and halt the convo on some juvenile shit. when tis convenient. You failed. Thanks, try again later=]

  • @uwmbigb LOL you dont get it do you. Mental illness can prevent one from seeing a large picture. You blocked me and then whined on other channel about me by writing maybe 7 500 character comments. You cannot let it go so you keep on finding me and commenting to me because I hurt your feeling, maybe that is because I was right. And I did try and talk to you rationally but you are a crazy fuck.

    Grow up and be a man, dont you have any self respect, telling on me, really?

  • @Foodjunky9 You're just plain wrong. According to this scientific article (with references) volcanoes emit less than 1% of theCO2 that humans do

    newscientist[dot]com/article/d­n11638-climate-myths-human-cos­ub2sub-emissions-are-too-tiny-­to-matter.html

  • @DeviantincTV THats doctored data

  • @Foodjunky9 Are you going to provide proof? An assertion is not a fact - you could rubbish any argument by simply dismissing evidence because 'that's doctored data' otherwise.

    Until you provide some concrete evidence that volcanoes produce more CO2 than humans I will continue to believe otherwise and you will continue to look like a troll....