Britain's new low-carbon programme to develop wind farms and promote green jobs will boost the economy by 1.5 to 2 percent, offsetting the effect of fiscal tightening, the energy and climate minister said.
@Nightversionn How many billions did we just lose in cali promotin green energy. That 1.5 - 2 % needs to be seen to be beleived. None of the green job promises here have come to fruition or have cost the taxpayers huge amounts of money per job. When private business sees a profit in green energy then it will create real jobs. Government subsidized jobs are not real jobs..
The story of AL GORE&CARLYLY Group-S.Frisco-called EX PRESIDENTS co.(GREENHOUSE-GLOBAL WARMING-CLIMATE CHANGE- GREEN ENERGY-SMART ENERGY)-It's LIE-LIE! Thats why NAME keeps changing like LIES chg! You can call it CARBON CAP&TAX is what it does-Another Globalist Scheme so bunch of corrupt EX-Presidents-like RAMOS (Philippians,) MAJOR(Brit,)Al GORE can steal more $BILLIONS from TAXES-(ROMANS taxed WORLD)the GOV. PUPPETS must have to join the Ruling Elite ranks vs.FEMA death camps with us PLEBS!.
Cap and Trade didn't fail yet, in Cali they passed AB32 so it could happen state by state anyway, watch out, they are coming for your wallets, and by the way, you can't offset lead, mercury, arsenic, petrochemicals, lung disease and slave labor in indigenous cultures. Cap and Trade is a scam that gives polluters a cart blanch to pollute as much as they want, all while putting taxes on the people that disproportionately affect the poor. They banks are pushing global controls like Nazis want them.
Al Gore should be taped to a flag pole with his pants down while the school buses are coming in for school in the morning. Oh wait, yeah thats right that's already happened to him
Gore has set up carbon trading companies & clean & green companies with Goldman Sachs shysters all set to corner the market if Cap & Trade legislation is passed. Gore & pals created & promoted Global Warming to make a bundle. With the climategate emails, & malfeasance of the IPCC, you are showing a criminal intent to create the results you want. Add in $300+ million dollar ad campaign to promote it
GW is a racketeering operation that needs a congressional/criminal investigation
Those who know this GW charade is a fraud, all you have to do is explain to people that besides the nut job Al Gore being involved (the Al Gore who helped bring us the economically & environmentally destructive NAFTA, GATT, & WTO)
just tell people they have a Railroad Engineer in charge of the IPCC
How many IPCC members are also Lionel train collectors, or are model railroaders like their chief Choo Choo Charlie?
there was never a debate.. incidentally, i am a scientist, or used to be, one might say, and i know very well how the publishing business and grants work. I used to be totally convinced of the globar warming UNTIL i looked at the actual science. But whether you think it is real or not, it was always clear to me that NOTHING that was ever proposed had anything to do with protecting the climate.. from biofuels to "hydrogen" economy. and the Copenhagen is no different. It is just about exerting..
spread too much "new world order secrets" everywhere? ;)
Of course this is all about reducing pollution.
Based and published on the climate science FACTS.
That there are somewhere some evil agendas behind in contrast- is pure speculation by rightwingers hating al gore; big oil business and at least sheeplike conspiracy theorist.
I quit. You see, I READ these facts unlike you.. they are what one calls junkscience. For your information, BP and Shell are completely behind this global waming, and so is exxon after being pressed by Rockefellers "5%" of shares in it. Your dear corrupt siemens also funds this "research" and Al Gore stands to make billions. i see you are low on actual argumentation, but i dont blame you, i see what is being shown on German TV all the time
exxon, bp, shell and rightwingers created all this "debate" around climate issues
You say:
"BP and Shell are completely behind this global waming"
EYEROLL
Thats obviously the tactics they use to make the public think THEY(!) support pro-environmental actions. Im sorry but its VERY naive to believe this is what THEY basically aspire.
It will be a lot more of "achtung kontrolle" and "ordnungsamt" for you pretty soon. Te funniest thing is that you have Hitler on TV half of the time, and noone seems to see any parallels.. Schönen abend wünsche ich dir, ich verschwende meine zeit nicht weiter. Vielleicht bist du nur ein ossi, der seine Stasi vermisst.
by the way this is poor political-agenda propaganda against al gore and its absolutely not interesting, he just stands for this movie on stage- and i liked the movie afaik. You abuse the importance of our environment issues for this political superficiality.
you know these kind of research centers hide information that go against their claim. I'm not sure where i heard it and forgive me if i come off sounding uninformed, but i did hear that a college was hiding evidence that man made global warming doesn't exist.
Just what causes the onset of major and minor ice ages remains a mystery. Our knowledge of the mechanisms of climatic change is at least as fragmentary as our data, concedes the National Academy of Sciences report. Not only are the basic scientific questions largely unanswered, but in many cases we do not yet know enough to pose the key questions. {"Newsweek," Apr. 28, 1975}
Al Gore was worth about $2million when he left office. Now, thanks mostly to AGW fear, he's worth about $100million.
Look at the relation of giant species of fauna and global temperatures (Giant insects, mammals, snakes, fish, crocs).
Mars warms and cools at rate similar to Earth despite relatively low population of evil humans. Who stands to gain fiscally and/or politically from so-called Green Tech?
He lied about Serbia in the past. Because of him and Bill Clinton Serbia is now a country without a future. Their lies are just for one thing and that is money. If there is no money involved they do not speak at all!!!
Al Gore is a lying fraud who stands to make billions on this cap&trade tax he is trying to get passed. If the the people allow this bill to pass it will cost us jobs by the thousands and power rates will double.We have got to stop this sorry bastard before we have no economy to save.
Most people do not know that Al Gore stands to make BILLIONS of dollars when his global warming laws are passed. He has already profited about one hundred million from his activities on "global warming"
I think it's funny that before the world started heating up, it was global cooling. (WE'RE ALL GOING TO FREEZE TO DEATH !!) Then it got warmer, suddenly it's global warming. (WE'RE ALL GOING TO BURN UP!!!) really people, can't you find anything a little odd about that???
The major scientific organisations agree that there is global warming- go check wonderingmind42 videos. Anyone arguing against that will only succeed to fool the stupid people.
you want to drill?
oil is a finite resource.
The consumption rate is increasing everyday.
let me explain it to you. no matter how much money you got into the bank, if you continue spending more and more everyday, you will run out of money soon. ok?
And it took million of years for the oil to be created.
**The major scientific organisations agree that there is global warming**
2 to 5 years ago.
Go check again as a lot of the same organizations are starting to retract and cover there ass including the IPCC in there 4the report stating that human impact is minimal
**go check wonderingmind42 videos.**
Watched them
You do understand he is a Physics teacher,he babbled the GHG theory nonsece as "fact" on how global mechanics supposedly work,then suggest we allow government to tax and regulate us?
**And it took million of years for the oil to be created**
Tell that to the Oil field off New Oreleans that gives 15,000 barrels a day for 5 years, goes dry, then 10 years later you can take 15,000 barrels a day again out of it (Jared field)
And Tiger fields in Thailand wich is oil 5 miles deep in solid granite hammered a nail in the coffin of the stupid idea that oil is dead dinosaurs or plants,which any Geologist worth their salt know that Oil is related to plate movement & volcanic activity
*Oil is related to plate movement & volcanic activity**
Best exaple of that statement is the infamous oil fields od Saudi Arabia which is the byproduct of the Three continental plates colliding that it rests on.
Does this mean we can go about as business as usually,drill away, no cares or worry?
NO!!!
Burning fossil fuels to provide power is stupid and wasteful,especially cause our Tech depends on & is literally made from it
Use the oil & coal to build wind mills, SOlar panels,etc for power
'Oil is related to plate movement & volcanic activity'....????...hmmm... plate movement... even with my little knowledge of geography, I don't think plate movement produces oil. Plate movement= large area of land moving...so where do the oil come from? volcanoes produce lava which solidifies into rocks, not oil.
'Burning fossil fuels to provide power is' You said it yourself "fossil" fuel.
Deep earth. gases like methane pulverizes rocks like "shale" under great pressure and tempature,a lot of it where "continants collide" or plates separate or slide pass each other.
It is why drilling for oil in California might be a bad idea
If you take away the "lube" allowing the plates to slide pass each other there might be more earthquakes from the fricton
**volcanoes produce lava which solidifies into rocks, not oil**
Actually fossilized plants and bones are not even really the plants and bones but "moldings" of them from the plant or bone being burried then the deppresion being filled by seddimtary rock.
"fossil fuel" stuck as it once was believed they came from dinosaurs but modern science that can analyse oil sinds it more related to dimaons,shale rock,and granite then with plant or animal matter.
"Hydrocarbons" like Oil/coal exist on planets like Mars & Titan too
**Al Gore is THE stooge to nuclear power, as the world cools.**
Nah,
He was just trying to get Congress to impose a Carbon tax on the Nation,then own the companies authorized by congress to sell "tax credits"
Luckily for us his Scam failed as even the bozos in Congress knew the American people wouldn't be to thrilled being taxed for the air they breath so close to election time
Lol, good job making absolutely no sense, fringefries. For every scientist taking money from oil companies there's one taking money from the environmental groups and many more taking grant money that depends on the perceived importance of their studies. The fact is that almost everything Al Gore says about climate change is untrue or grossly exaggerated. Note the lack of references in his book as an indication of his lack of veracity. He's a preacher in the cult of global warming, nothing more.
So... you agree that there is global warming but someone else must lead by example. hmm interesting how selfish and stupid people are nowadays. Hurricanes, tornadoes, floods are affecing everyone but unless someone else do something first some fools prefer to suffer.
Private jets? lol
The only people against Al Gore are those whose job or income is tied to the oil industry which makes billions of dollars each year.
no moron,i dont agree,and the people crying that the sky is falling wont change their lifestyle so dont take one penny of my tax dollars for junkscience...got it?i drive to work and back and these morons flying to paris for lunch and u want me to change? i dont believe in it so let them pay for it!!!!
junkscience? The major scienfitific organisations agree on global warming.
You don't want to spend your tax dollars on cheap renewable energy but instead you want buy oil when we know that the price of oil will constantly increase. This is due to increasing demands from the developing contries such as china and india.
o i see ur only 28.so write back to me when u grow up and leave ur mommys house and get into the real world(and im not talking about mtv,s real world...lol
Oh, and dota remember these men own stock in the oil companies and many may be shills for them. When talking to them it's important to understand that if big oil loses THEY lose and their corporate sponsorship of our politicians also fails. This is about an ideological battle so don't let them fool you, they want to keep their power.FIGHT these vermin every chance you get because these are the demons of a stagnant and decaying ideology who have long since died inside. They ARE a MENTAL DISORDER.
**remember these men own stock in the oil companies and many may be shills for them. When talking to them it's important to understand that if big oil loses THEY lose.**
How can "Big Oil" lose when they are foremost Energy Source providers?
100 years from now your commercial Electric bill will still say GE (or local Electric company) and as you pull your air/electric car into the quickcharge station look up and it still be a Exxon,Shell,Chevron,BP,etc Franchise station..bet you a million
Volume of trade does not matter, return on investment that does.The oil industry is still very lucrative.**
Really?
You rather be granted 10 cent a gallon above cost by world governments (oil trade is highly regulated) then sell 1000 1.6GHZ at 170million dollars each? That's a bigger profit on 1 sale then the net profit of 12 billion on oil subsidies)
Till recently "Big Oil" wasn't allowed to R&D "green tech" by world governments & trade laws
**If it was not profitable, investors would be selling their shares**
You mean investors in the Futures Market on a 1% margin per 1000 contracts (over 10% or 20% per 1000) Which is why oil is such a volitile commodity, or do you mean Stock holder investors with stock prices prett stable?
**Again, Volume of trade does not matter, return on investment that does**
And 10 cents a gallon is a pretty bad return on investment..this makes the actual price per barrel of oil $4.70 not the futures price
You dont know me I dont get my crap from blogs like you.
I only do research and use data bases and peer reviewed findings for my data. Not crap from junk science and biased "scientists" who only care about where their money comes from
But apparently you know me. Amazing that. Hypocrite.
The junk science "scientists" who only care about where their money comes from are the ones pushing this global warming - oh, sorry, you renamed it now - this "climate change" scam. There's no money in debunking the scam and there's millions and billions of public dollars in perpetuating it.
NO the only money is for the people who would like to keep us on the path we are going.
Oil companies, coal companies, etc. They dont want us to switch to alternatives to their resources.
So they pay people like steve milloy to make up crap to scare people into thinking that scientists are trying to scare them.
The only money here is coming from companies to "scientists" whom I dont respect and would not call that. Because science is about figuring stuff out, not making up stuff for money.
Ha! What are you smoking? If the oil companies didn't want us to switch, they'd change the price of oil to undercut E85. Of course, that's not how oil prices are set, but you wouldn't know that.
There's TONS of money in scaring people with this made-up "global warming." From "research" dollars (which really just goes to keeping these crackpots in their palatial homes), to book and movie proceeds, to the "carbon offset" scam and more, there's billions of dollars to be made off the gullible.
Of course I know how oil prices are set. And the prices will never come down.
Theres no money or glory in research, scientists could have gotten research money for anything. And scientists live in much smaller homes than any fossil fuel tycoons and related rich people.
And oh yeah those people planting trees are making so much money from carbon offsets and not putting that money to good use at all.
Theres money to be made but only for the smart who adapt.
Well, that's odd because the oil prices did just come down and that led to a notable decrease in prices at the pump. Imagine how much more they would go down if your beloved Democrats would open up domestic drilling.
There are millions of dollars to be made in research grants. If you deny this, you are a liar. And scientists are well-paid for their research.
Finally, have you seen how much carbon offset scam artists charge for their services? It should be criminal!
Did I read movies and books and carbon offset scam? Billion of dollars... lol which movie? carbon offset scam... Major scientific organisatons are telling you that global warming is real. I bet you believe science only when it suits you.
Now lets compare this to the palace of the saudi rulers where the door knobs are made of gold. Oil companies making as much money in a day as all your 'movies and books' ever sold.
From everything to do with "global warming," yes, there's billions of dollars to be made. Algore is a... sorry, has a large chunk of that from his books, movie and appearances. And it shows. His energy-guzzling mansion is a sight to behold!
I believe in science when it is backed by facts, not biased opinions. Did you hear that the American Physical Society no longer supports the so-called "consensus" on "global warming?" I bet you didn't.
Let's drill domestically and keep the money here.
You want to drill to give more dollars to oil companies which have already too much money. The world population and demand is increasing. Whatever resources there are in the ground is limited but the demand will never stop increasing.
Compare the gains of those who have interests in the oil industry to those who are pro cleaner environment, there is a enormous difference.
Yes dotaonline these men are very old and their crippled minds can't handle the fact that the good guys are starting to win again. They don't like that their FAILED IDEOLOGY is more a MENTAL DISORDER than they had been falsely led to believe for the last 30 yrs. Their laze fair fiscal policies are a sign of mental decay and their inability to form new concepts out of their absolute and utter FAILURES makes them incapable of change.
*You want to drill to give more dollars to oil companies which have already too much money*
Actually world governments subsidize oil and Exxon's "12 billion profit" is net after moving 50 trillion gallons of oil at a "profit" of about 10 cents a gallon minus expenses and costs
*Compare the gains of those who have interests in the oil industry to those who are pro cleaner environment*
"Big Oil" is justr called that cause that is the product they move the most but they supply "Green tech" too
**"Big Oil" is justr called that cause that is the product they move the most but they supply "Green tech" too**
For Example it is Exxon that is developing the Volt Battery for the GM volt and they own all Uranium proccesing in the world,Shell is into Natural Gas,Chevron owns the largest Geothermal power plants,and BP owns the largest Solar Panel & Wind farms
Oh and "Big Oil" doesn't even make the gasoline the refiners do,Gas Wholesalers set wholesale price after taxes,the bulk of cost of gas
30 years ago, the majority of scientists were saying we were causing global cooling and headed to another ice age. What will the majority be saying in another 30 years?
And I always thought science was decided by experimentation, not group consensus.
**30 years ago, the majority of scientists were saying we were causing global cooling and headed to another ice age.**
Actually, that was Media and Print like Time Magazine saying such things....and they always have "Experts" that back up the story of the moment they are runnon...don't they
Any Meteorologist or Climatologist worth their salt would tell you cliamte is regional and Weather is local and both depend on the Season and Earth's orbit/axis tilt as well as the sun flare up/cold cycles
Two percent of all the CO2, outside of a plant, or a plankton that is, is in the atmosphere. The other 98% is in the ocean - CO2 loves water - especially cold water. We have "created" - in the whole of human existence - less than 30% of the less than 400 parts per million of the atmosphere that is CO2.
We deserve to be punished by who exactly? For why exactly?
The CARBON cycle. CARBON based life forms. Carboniferous. Shells. Skeletons. Not to mention plants or your children - made of CARBON
First off plants dont even keep all the CO2 they sequester. Some is lost back into the atmosphere when they open their stomata for air.
Second about 50% is in the atmosphere and half in the ground and water.
Also too much CO2 in the air isnt good for all plants and animals.
Too much in the water makes it acidic and too much in the air will create conditions where only a few plants that use CO2 the most efficiently will be able to live.
your right we add 25 billion tons of CO2 and volcanoes let off more then 25 billion tons. You are being misleading. The atmosphere is huge it is like dropping a tablespoon of salt in the ocean. Watch the video on my profile global warming applied to scientific method.
Yeah so we've doubled the amount from volcanoes, and we know volcanoes can change the globes temps. for years because of the stuff they put in the air.
So saying that isnt much is not accurate.
That is a lot, can you imagine anything else being measured in billions of tons and not taking up much room?
Yes CO2 look at how many billions of tons of "other" are in the atmosphere. Then you will realize how silly you sound. Watch the video global warming applied to the scientific method on my profile.
Did you even read what he said? Here, i'll quote if for you:
"If you're not a climate scientist, your opinion does not matter"
The media is not made up of climate scientists. Teachers are not climate scientists, so where did you get that from?
The solution to understanding more about climate science is listening to scientists, not politicians/media/non-scientists. Its the media and debate crap that makes the issue far too messed up.
I don't know why Gore's being mentioned again. Gore is not a climate scientist, and he isn't the one who began the AGW thinking. Everyone's knows that movie has flaws in it.
It always amuses me how non-scientists throw around words like "fact" and "proof". Scientists don't use these words, they use "evidence" and try to "disprove" theories. They go about this by assessing the evidence and then provide the MOST LIKELY cause of an effect-this is what science is, only the misinformed use the words proof and fact. According to all the world's major scientific organisations: humans are the "most likely" primary cause of the current rapid rate of warming on Earth.
Even funnier is the fact that ALL of the planets in the solar system are currently going through a period of warming. I guess they must have CFC's and SUV'd on Mars, right?
So how is Al going to stop global cooling? I recall in the 70's how it was the ice age we had to FEAR! The Globalists can't seem to get their story straight. Demockery at it's best.
On a more serious note. One should look up:
Codex Alimentarious.
It's just a little bit more pressing on the human race. Unfortunately, Humans are to blame for this one. Please look it up.
Take a glass of water and put a shit load of ice in it....mark the water line...let the ice melt. The water line will be the same.
Frozen water weighs as much regular water.Glaciers are ice on water and the level will be the same. The north and south poles move around because the earth is moving in space and ultra cold spots move at the same time....as something melts...something else is being frozen..that simple. If you can make a buck off fooling the people...you must be a politician..
Al Gore is saving us from that dirty oil and coal. He is our mesiah (he wishes he was) and i'd pay 1000.00's to eat next to him just like those people that pay $5000.00 a plate to sit next to him at his after-presentation-dinners--but im not worthy--NOT
truth is he's got a neurosis that was first seen by the world in the 2000 Florida recount and is now in our faces every single day-the man needs serious counseling.
There is no scientific consensus on manmade global warming frankwhatever, there never was. Consensus means complete agreement, and just a few months ago (December) over 400 scientists went on record saying they dispute the idea that global warming is mostly due to increases of CO2. And in 2006 the 60 scientists that advised the Prime Minister of Canada to go along with Kyoto in the first place are now saying they were mistaken,
Consensus doesn't mean 100% agreement. If that were the case we wouldn't have a consensus on gravity or evolution. What we're talking about is the OVERWHELMING majority of scientists, including the most prestigeous scientific organizations on the planet; IPCC, AAAS, NAS. With all the evidence at hand you'd either have to have an alterior motive or be stupid not to do everything possible to prevent climate change.
Every major national scientific academy (including the royal academy that has been around for 400 plus years) agrees with the IPCC report that we are the MOST LIKELY primary cause. NASA GISS and NOAA also agree with the IPCC. The junkscience challenge is just that, junk. Only a fool would ask you to try and prove a theory outright. Any scientist will tell you that theories can only be disproved. Junk science and steven milloy don't seem to realise this.
first of all consensus does mean complete agreement, look it up. secondly I got the info about the 400 on the website of the United States senate, and it seems rather idiotic to claim that a significant number are journalists, as the media is obviously not on the side of the sceptics. also, the stance that TV. Weathermen have no scientific training or a place in this matter has just about zero logic.
p.s. i'd love to know where you got your information about the gardeners.
the initial IPPCC reports..in which only the scientists were involved did suggest that there 99% scientific evidence that the earth is experiencing AGW..but later on when the final report was presented these findings were altered ..,,at the behest of the USA and China .,,that is why the final report says that there is close to 90% evidence on AGW..,,So yes in way ur correct to point out that the IPCC report is in under political pressure...,
Interestingly, it's a wonder that confirmation bias prevents people from checking their sources.
Both those lists are not lists of scientists. You will find TV weathermen, gardeners, and journalists in their lists.
Furthermore, as delayers are so prone to saying, 'science isn't done by consensus', so why would they think these lists are convincing? And if they are convincing, why aren't the list of thousands of scientists whose work was cited in the IPCC report convincing?
yea al gore is a complete idiot. only incompetent fools can believe his dumb ass! oh global warming! oh i got a great idea! ill hold a concert for global warming... gee i wonder how the fuck all those ppl got there Mr. Gore? did they all hop onto a magic flying carpet? what? the flew? they drove? they burned fossil fules to get there?! fucking idiot, im glad he isnt our prez, he would have declared war on global warming! bahahhaa
did you know Al Gores jet produces more co2 in one round trip than an H2 Hummer does in one year?
Did you also know that al gore has been invited to debate the president of the Czech Republic about global warming, but Al gore wont do it?
I guess he'd rather keep on flying his jet to his $200,000.00 speaking engagements than to debate someone on tv where everyone could watch for free and he also wouldnt have to fly his jet everywhere making all that co2
I can't speak for anyone else but we are living in the most opportune time for human existence. We are living in perfect temperate environment for the absolute growth abundances for food production. There is a low growth threshold in temperatures where plants grow well anything below about 65 degrees Fahrenheit puts plant into hibernation. Have you ever seen a farmer trying to grow his crops in the snow or planting in the winter? Come on people question everything even Al Gore.
Um, maybe if you knew anything about global warming you'd know that the earths temperature is only going to go up by 2-3 degrees. That is enough to cause total earth disaster. And if the ice caps completely melt, the ocean would rise 50 feet! Try growing your crops when around 30-40% of the earth has just gone under water. We wouldnt have enough dry land to grow enough crops to support the earths population. This could all happen within 50-100 years. Thats not an opportune human time.
nerdsofamerica LOL, IF, IF, IF, IF, sure are a lot of Ifs in your comment, but no facts, just projections based on incomplete data with NO proof. How do you know that any of the global warming is caused by man? 85 Parts Per Million of the total atmosphere, is man made CO2. If I had 1,000,000.00 dollars and gave you 85 dollars, you would be lucky to be able to fill your gas tank. Do you really think that 85 dollars is going to cause the earth to go bankrupt? All I ask is; think for your self.
You have to be kidding me. Let me ask you this - If we weren't around during the Ice Age, how did it melt? What - dinosaurs farting? I find it sad that anyone would agree with Al Gore. And when did they start taking the temperature of the atmosphere? Please - global warming is a joke.
Depending on where you live you might fall for the Al Gore scam If you live away from urban smog & take a morning run along an unspoiled beach every morning like I do you will be harder to convince urban smog is not global and the planet is far from smogged out In fact I travel a hell of a lot and in America I find people are so totally brain washed - ignorance is so disempowering in the land of the free & home of the brave all I see is CNN people
Have you heard that the Al Gore twisty straw light bulbs have dangerous amounts of mercury in them and must now be disposed of in a special manner?
They are not supposed to be just thrown in the garbage.
So now it's going to cost more to dispose of them because of:
firstly, separate handling in disposal,
and secondly, they must find a "safe" method of destruction for them so that they don't do real harm (unlike the contrived harm of 'manmade' global warming) to the environment.
I have those "twisty" bulbs throughout my home. I put them in when I moved into my home 8 years ago. So far not one of them has stopped working and I've been using only 20 percent of the power to keep them going. You whine, while I go laughing and skiping to the bank to count my extra cash.
Oh when a bulb does stop working I'll take it to the official disposal site in my town where they'll recycle it safely.
i love those twisty light bulbs! there great for when you wake up in the morning! instead of have a 60 watt burning your eyes out you got a nice soft 20 watts slowly heating up over a course of 10 mins.. and who the fuck cares about propper disposal when it burns out ill be sure to break it and throw it in the ocean, just to piss off these pansy ass enviromental retards!
ok who here lives in LA, really have you been in LA one a bad week? you wanna raise your kids in that! ok ...thats not good enough, just got back from chia and guess what to my suprize when it rained(on many days of my stay)my feet would get covered with black rainwater yea BLACK take my sandles off and you could see the strap marks of my foot ...wana raise you kids in that?
So you would have to reject global warming, CO2 is colorless. In fact the soot in the atmosphere would reflect sunlight and decrease the effect of global warming.
Calling all the people who don't think Global Warming is a problem. Move to Florida! Enjoy the hurricanes! Stay in your house when the waters rise! We could all do with cheering up.
Oceanus57 - Florida has always had hurricanes - there is no increasing trend over the 20th century as a result of global warming. Claims of increased storm damage are caused by more expensive property and people building houses where they know they shouldn't.
As for sea level rise it has been going on at much the same rate for the last 10,000 years since the end of the last ice age. Even the IPCC admits that sea levels rose slower in the 2nd half of the 20th C.
If this is so, and as you seem to believe the theory is all wrong (which I'm perfectly willing to contemplate)why do you think it's such a big issue? Have you seen Al Gore's film? I have, and I thought the arguments had a lot of merit.
I have seen Gore's film, and I have also read many refutations of the junk science in it. Why it's such a big issue is explained by politics and media spin in a positive feedback cycle. Some particular easy to check errors:
1. Not a single reputable scientist predicts 20 feet of sea level rise. Even the IPCC only suggest 35cm by 2100.
Polar bear numbers have increased from 5,000 to 25,000 - perhaps an all time historic high.
3. Tempertaure rises preceded CO2 rises, i.e. effect not cause.
Thomas, E. R., G. J. Marshall, and J. R. McConnell, 2008. A doubling in snow accumulation in the western Antarctic Peninsula since 1850. Geophysical Research Letters, 35, L01706, doi:10.1029/2007GL032529
Nyberg, J., B.A. Malmgren, A.Winter, M.R.
Jury, K.H. Kilbourne, and T.M. Quinn. 2007. Low Atlantic hurricane activity in the 1970s and 1980s compared to the past 270 years. Nature, 447, 698-702
I don't know enough about this field to comment on these papers (my guess is you don't either, as in my quest to google them turned up mostly skeptic sites citing these papers).
However, I know from my own area of expertise that many papers are taken out of context by people who have no understanding of it. Would you like to wager how many of those authors don't believe in GW?
I did, however, manage to find with relative ease a scientific paper that refutes Nyberg et al doi:10.1038/nature06576
jdeast01 - you admit you don't understand the science.
How am I supposed to be able to convince you then - if the only "evidence" you will accept is the pronouncements of the priesthood of eco-alarmists?
Tell you, what, using Popper's definition of what counts as science and what doesn't, what kind of data would you need to see to let you begi8n to question the CO2 hypothesis. You tell me, and I'll endeavour to probide it.
I'm just being honest; I'm not an expert in the field, and I can't comment on the validity of these papers or even if they prove your point or if they're simply taken out of context (I'm guessing you can't either, but if I'm wrong, please give me a non-expert scientist summary of your favorite).
This is not to say I don't understand the basic science behind GW or AGW, and in the only case I tried, I found another scientific paper arguing against one of the ones you mentioned.
So here's what I need: Make the connection between those papers and the evidence that AGW is incorrect. Right now, it seems circumstantial at best, and dubiously out of context at worst.
jdeast01 - OK I'll give it one last try on the basis that you are willing to read my reference in good faith - why don't you first have a look at the videos by coyoteblog on YouTube, and then you can go to his website and download for free an excellent layman's guide to understanding the flaws in the CO2 hypothesis.
jdeast01 - the IPCC summary for policy makers isn't real science - it's a political summary for policy makers - it was written and published 2 months before the actual scientific report - which - if you bothered to read it - you would find doesn't make these alarmist predictions. In fact the scientific report itself very carefully insists that its scenarios are projections not predictions. That's because it knows that all of its previous predictions have turned out to be false.
It's a summary of science for policy makers. It's certainly better science than the books you've mentioned as resources.
If you had actually read the IPCC summary, you'll find it's not alarmist either. The facts are alarming, but it's extremely conservative.
For example, they neglect the increase in the volume of water in the predicted sea level rise (they just go by the expansion of water). If you look back in history at the last time it was 3 degrees C warmer than now, that is alarming.
nonsense jdeast01 - the summary is much more alarmist than the IPCC scientific report - and the summary was written by a tiny minority of eco-alarmist bureaucrats and unrepresentative scientists.
The IPCC scientific report acknowledges that sea levels rose faster in the 1st half of the 20th century (i.e. before rise in fossil fuel emissions) than in the 2nd half. They've been rising for the last 10,000 years since the end of the ice age - at the same gradient - no observed acceleration.
Yes I can. Let's start with the notorious example from the 2nd report - well documented and written up for instance in the Wall Street Journal - that the lead Author Santer (under pressure from the Clinton/Gore administration deleted statements such as "None of the studies cited [ ] has shown clear evidence that we can attribute [climate] changes to the specific cause of increases in greenhouse gases." nad replaced with a claim to the contrary. No room for all the IPCC malpractice in one post...
al gore you with my spear
Regginyaga 2 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
NOT EVEN DEATH CAN SAVE YOU FROM ME al gore SAYS ONEWHITEDUCK :-)
^
GOOGLE "IT" al gore SAYS JOHN JOSEPH O'BRIEN :-)
TKTRV 11 months ago
I like this little movie. 'Can you save Al Gore?' My answer is: NO! I don't want to!!
Eikel66 1 year ago
Climate change news for serious people...
.
UK says green growth can boost economy by 2 pct.
.
Britain's new low-carbon programme to develop wind farms and promote green jobs will boost the economy by 1.5 to 2 percent, offsetting the effect of fiscal tightening, the energy and climate minister said.
.
Reuters
15 September 2010
Nightversionn 1 year ago
@Nightversionn How many billions did we just lose in cali promotin green energy. That 1.5 - 2 % needs to be seen to be beleived. None of the green job promises here have come to fruition or have cost the taxpayers huge amounts of money per job. When private business sees a profit in green energy then it will create real jobs. Government subsidized jobs are not real jobs..
zepproxx 1 year ago
What would they spend the carbon tax profits on anyway?
Sorry Mr. ozone.. can we settle this out of court? Here's a lil som som
ImTheKobold 1 year ago
The story of AL GORE&CARLYLY Group-S.Frisco-called EX PRESIDENTS co.(GREENHOUSE-GLOBAL WARMING-CLIMATE CHANGE- GREEN ENERGY-SMART ENERGY)-It's LIE-LIE! Thats why NAME keeps changing like LIES chg! You can call it CARBON CAP&TAX is what it does-Another Globalist Scheme so bunch of corrupt EX-Presidents-like RAMOS (Philippians,) MAJOR(Brit,)Al GORE can steal more $BILLIONS from TAXES-(ROMANS taxed WORLD)the GOV. PUPPETS must have to join the Ruling Elite ranks vs.FEMA death camps with us PLEBS!.
exposetruthwolf 1 year ago
Cap and Trade didn't fail yet, in Cali they passed AB32 so it could happen state by state anyway, watch out, they are coming for your wallets, and by the way, you can't offset lead, mercury, arsenic, petrochemicals, lung disease and slave labor in indigenous cultures. Cap and Trade is a scam that gives polluters a cart blanch to pollute as much as they want, all while putting taxes on the people that disproportionately affect the poor. They banks are pushing global controls like Nazis want them.
activistone 1 year ago
Al Gore should be taped to a flag pole with his pants down while the school buses are coming in for school in the morning. Oh wait, yeah thats right that's already happened to him
SuperGuitarman69 1 year ago
What else could it be but human activity? Volcanoes, earthquakes, other planets? Maybe some galactic alignment?
jerbiebarb 1 year ago
Gore has set up carbon trading companies & clean & green companies with Goldman Sachs shysters all set to corner the market if Cap & Trade legislation is passed. Gore & pals created & promoted Global Warming to make a bundle. With the climategate emails, & malfeasance of the IPCC, you are showing a criminal intent to create the results you want. Add in $300+ million dollar ad campaign to promote it
GW is a racketeering operation that needs a congressional/criminal investigation
"RICO"
Thisawareness 1 year ago
Prove humans exist according to the same rules as the "UltimateGlobalWarmingChallenge"
Can youy say RIGGED?
BeondaPale 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Those who know this GW charade is a fraud, all you have to do is explain to people that besides the nut job Al Gore being involved (the Al Gore who helped bring us the economically & environmentally destructive NAFTA, GATT, & WTO)
just tell people they have a Railroad Engineer in charge of the IPCC
How many IPCC members are also Lionel train collectors, or are model railroaders like their chief Choo Choo Charlie?
Thisawareness 2 years ago
You prove relativity, and I'll prove Global Warming. Welcome to modern science, where duplicate planet earths are in short supply... moron.
ubrew12 2 years ago
ad hominem
madraven07 2 years ago
98% of all reliable climate scientist support this theory all the time. Long time. And will support.
But the trick is here, no reliable scientist would give YOU the 100% "proof" because this issues are too complex. But they know...
aerobique 2 years ago
could you scientifically reference these 98% of scientists? its a rhetorical question ofcourse, you cant
dinkolino2 2 years ago
talk to scientists- go to institutes and ask, do your research on scientific facts.
there is no "debate" that alex jones,
fox news, truthers and scandal reporters suggest you about this issues. There IS NO debate.
watch?v=vbPFRoWLWdo
aerobique 2 years ago
there was never a debate.. incidentally, i am a scientist, or used to be, one might say, and i know very well how the publishing business and grants work. I used to be totally convinced of the globar warming UNTIL i looked at the actual science. But whether you think it is real or not, it was always clear to me that NOTHING that was ever proposed had anything to do with protecting the climate.. from biofuels to "hydrogen" economy. and the Copenhagen is no different. It is just about exerting..
dinkolino2 2 years ago
why are you no "scientist" anymore?
spread too much "new world order secrets" everywhere? ;)
Of course this is all about reducing pollution.
Based and published on the climate science FACTS.
That there are somewhere some evil agendas behind in contrast- is pure speculation by rightwingers hating al gore; big oil business and at least sheeplike conspiracy theorist.
aerobique 2 years ago
I quit. You see, I READ these facts unlike you.. they are what one calls junkscience. For your information, BP and Shell are completely behind this global waming, and so is exxon after being pressed by Rockefellers "5%" of shares in it. Your dear corrupt siemens also funds this "research" and Al Gore stands to make billions. i see you are low on actual argumentation, but i dont blame you, i see what is being shown on German TV all the time
dinkolino2 2 years ago
LOL
you were never any "scientist" ..
exxon, bp, shell and rightwingers created all this "debate" around climate issues
You say:
"BP and Shell are completely behind this global waming"
EYEROLL
Thats obviously the tactics they use to make the public think THEY(!) support pro-environmental actions. Im sorry but its VERY naive to believe this is what THEY basically aspire.
watch?v=vbPFRoWLWdo
aerobique 2 years ago
It will be a lot more of "achtung kontrolle" and "ordnungsamt" for you pretty soon. Te funniest thing is that you have Hitler on TV half of the time, and noone seems to see any parallels.. Schönen abend wünsche ich dir, ich verschwende meine zeit nicht weiter. Vielleicht bist du nur ein ossi, der seine Stasi vermisst.
dinkolino2 2 years ago
more control.. vertrauen ist gut, aber kontrolle ist besser, nicht war?
dinkolino2 2 years ago
yes i CAN
exxonsecrets(.)com
by the way this is poor political-agenda propaganda against al gore and its absolutely not interesting, he just stands for this movie on stage- and i liked the movie afaik. You abuse the importance of our environment issues for this political superficiality.
wheres my FUCKIN money, you hypocrites
aerobique 2 years ago
you know these kind of research centers hide information that go against their claim. I'm not sure where i heard it and forgive me if i come off sounding uninformed, but i did hear that a college was hiding evidence that man made global warming doesn't exist.
JAKEIZBAWM 2 years ago
they are behind you! watch out
aerobique 2 years ago
AL WHORE
AnotherAlexChannel 2 years ago 3
I live 10 mins from Gore in Nashville. I was a supporter of Gore. I feel ashamed now. He has gone mad with greed and propaganda
titans797979 2 years ago
Wow this is equally as desperate and as rigged as Kent hovinds $10,000 to prove evolution.
TheFluffyDuck 2 years ago
losers!
activistausa 2 years ago
Al Gore is not only one of the biggest douchebags living.. He is the biggest douchebag ever..
greatzable 2 years ago 3
Fr. an article on the oncoming imminent ice age:
Just what causes the onset of major and minor ice ages remains a mystery. Our knowledge of the mechanisms of climatic change is at least as fragmentary as our data, concedes the National Academy of Sciences report. Not only are the basic scientific questions largely unanswered, but in many cases we do not yet know enough to pose the key questions. {"Newsweek," Apr. 28, 1975}
ParadiseOnLand 2 years ago
Al Gore was worth about $2million when he left office. Now, thanks mostly to AGW fear, he's worth about $100million.
Look at the relation of giant species of fauna and global temperatures (Giant insects, mammals, snakes, fish, crocs).
Mars warms and cools at rate similar to Earth despite relatively low population of evil humans. Who stands to gain fiscally and/or politically from so-called Green Tech?
It's easy math.
theunknownknows 2 years ago
He lied about Serbia in the past. Because of him and Bill Clinton Serbia is now a country without a future. Their lies are just for one thing and that is money. If there is no money involved they do not speak at all!!!
armaggedonsblade 2 years ago 3
Seriously..
Global warming, The biggest challenge of the human race and the solution is ......
a Taxe.
fidzlefou 2 years ago
Al Gore has huge investments in firms that may profit from his policy push.
FreeAgain2 2 years ago
I am having hot flashes, does that count?
That has got to add some heat to the earth LOL for $100,000 I would quit griping about it.
shananagans5 2 years ago
Al Gore is a lying fraud who stands to make billions on this cap&trade tax he is trying to get passed. If the the people allow this bill to pass it will cost us jobs by the thousands and power rates will double.We have got to stop this sorry bastard before we have no economy to save.
riverrat460 2 years ago
al gore is full of HOT AIR
710britt 2 years ago
Your ignorance shines through like a beacon to all racists!!!
activistausa 2 years ago
wow, you're a retard.
megaminxmaster 2 years ago
Just because a profiteering fearmonging hypocritical asshole is in support of something doesn't mean it's not true.
The proof is simple, the lower atmosphere is warming and the upper is cooling. If you don't know what that implys look it up.
phookadude 2 years ago
Most people do not know that Al Gore stands to make BILLIONS of dollars when his global warming laws are passed. He has already profited about one hundred million from his activities on "global warming"
wolfinside 2 years ago 2
It's $500,000 now.
SailingCedar 2 years ago
Everyone just send Al Gore $5, maybe hell drop the issue.
TheJimbob111 2 years ago
al gore needs to lose weight
jap338kx 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Go to my favorites "rant on not taking care of environment" and we're gonna see whether or not global warming is a myth
Cousigreeno 2 years ago
I think it's funny that before the world started heating up, it was global cooling. (WE'RE ALL GOING TO FREEZE TO DEATH !!) Then it got warmer, suddenly it's global warming. (WE'RE ALL GOING TO BURN UP!!!) really people, can't you find anything a little odd about that???
dogxlover17 2 years ago 3
You'll have little to say about when you stand below the water.
ZelderuMaryoto2 2 years ago
Watch short film: Al Gore is Adolph Hitler ..... This short film is banned in some countries......
Rate, Comment, Subscribe...
andrewanguslive 2 years ago
Lol funny vid XD. 5/5
xtreme1002003 3 years ago
lets enslave him then also global warming is not man made duhhhhhhh retards al gore is just want america not to have power
ChrisBennett18 3 years ago 2
Dough! I almost had that 100000USD... If I could only produce any scientific proof.
grraadd 3 years ago 5
The major scientific organisations agree that there is global warming- go check wonderingmind42 videos. Anyone arguing against that will only succeed to fool the stupid people.
you want to drill?
oil is a finite resource.
The consumption rate is increasing everyday.
let me explain it to you. no matter how much money you got into the bank, if you continue spending more and more everyday, you will run out of money soon. ok?
And it took million of years for the oil to be created.
dotaonline 3 years ago
**The major scientific organisations agree that there is global warming**
2 to 5 years ago.
Go check again as a lot of the same organizations are starting to retract and cover there ass including the IPCC in there 4the report stating that human impact is minimal
**go check wonderingmind42 videos.**
Watched them
You do understand he is a Physics teacher,he babbled the GHG theory nonsece as "fact" on how global mechanics supposedly work,then suggest we allow government to tax and regulate us?
TheRealArchAngel 3 years ago
**And it took million of years for the oil to be created**
Tell that to the Oil field off New Oreleans that gives 15,000 barrels a day for 5 years, goes dry, then 10 years later you can take 15,000 barrels a day again out of it (Jared field)
And Tiger fields in Thailand wich is oil 5 miles deep in solid granite hammered a nail in the coffin of the stupid idea that oil is dead dinosaurs or plants,which any Geologist worth their salt know that Oil is related to plate movement & volcanic activity
TheRealArchAngel 3 years ago
*Oil is related to plate movement & volcanic activity**
Best exaple of that statement is the infamous oil fields od Saudi Arabia which is the byproduct of the Three continental plates colliding that it rests on.
Does this mean we can go about as business as usually,drill away, no cares or worry?
NO!!!
Burning fossil fuels to provide power is stupid and wasteful,especially cause our Tech depends on & is literally made from it
Use the oil & coal to build wind mills, SOlar panels,etc for power
TheRealArchAngel 3 years ago
'Oil is related to plate movement & volcanic activity'....????...hmmm... plate movement... even with my little knowledge of geography, I don't think plate movement produces oil. Plate movement= large area of land moving...so where do the oil come from? volcanoes produce lava which solidifies into rocks, not oil.
'Burning fossil fuels to provide power is' You said it yourself "fossil" fuel.
dotaonline 3 years ago 2
**so where do the oil come from?**
Deep earth. gases like methane pulverizes rocks like "shale" under great pressure and tempature,a lot of it where "continants collide" or plates separate or slide pass each other.
It is why drilling for oil in California might be a bad idea
If you take away the "lube" allowing the plates to slide pass each other there might be more earthquakes from the fricton
**volcanoes produce lava which solidifies into rocks, not oil**
"lava" is a complesx mixture
TheRealArchAngel 3 years ago
**You said it yourself "fossil" fuel.**
Actually fossilized plants and bones are not even really the plants and bones but "moldings" of them from the plant or bone being burried then the deppresion being filled by seddimtary rock.
"fossil fuel" stuck as it once was believed they came from dinosaurs but modern science that can analyse oil sinds it more related to dimaons,shale rock,and granite then with plant or animal matter.
"Hydrocarbons" like Oil/coal exist on planets like Mars & Titan too
TheRealArchAngel 3 years ago
"Burning fossil fuels to provide power is stupid and wasteful,especially cause our Tech depends on & is literally made from it
Use the oil & coal to build wind mills, SOlar panels,etc for power"
I totally agree with this statement.
dotaonline 3 years ago
Al Gore is THE stooge to nuclear power, as the world cools.
JonThm 3 years ago
**Al Gore is THE stooge to nuclear power, as the world cools.**
Nah,
He was just trying to get Congress to impose a Carbon tax on the Nation,then own the companies authorized by congress to sell "tax credits"
Luckily for us his Scam failed as even the bozos in Congress knew the American people wouldn't be to thrilled being taxed for the air they breath so close to election time
TheRealArchAngel 3 years ago 12
Lolz. You posted it on my B-day. but anyways, I'll try and help. :D
RayneMarie 3 years ago
Lol, good job making absolutely no sense, fringefries. For every scientist taking money from oil companies there's one taking money from the environmental groups and many more taking grant money that depends on the perceived importance of their studies. The fact is that almost everything Al Gore says about climate change is untrue or grossly exaggerated. Note the lack of references in his book as an indication of his lack of veracity. He's a preacher in the cult of global warming, nothing more.
Ricallbur 3 years ago
32,000 scientists, including 9,000 PHDs say AGW is bunk.
But Leonardo DiCaprio says the planet is warming up, so it must be true.
TheUberGopher 3 years ago 8
My friend, 32000 scientists? 9000 PHDs say global warming is bunk?...
hmmm. it smells something... I think it's... hmmm... bullshit!!!!!
dotaonline 3 years ago
What's the gain for pro environment like ALGore? Cleaner air, better health, saving animals and stable climate...
What's the gain for those who criticize AlGore and the studies of most scientists on climate change?
I don't know, may be I should ask the giant oil companies who employs them?
dotaonline 3 years ago
lead by example morons quit flying in ur private jets
cobraman96 3 years ago
So... you agree that there is global warming but someone else must lead by example. hmm interesting how selfish and stupid people are nowadays. Hurricanes, tornadoes, floods are affecing everyone but unless someone else do something first some fools prefer to suffer.
Private jets? lol
The only people against Al Gore are those whose job or income is tied to the oil industry which makes billions of dollars each year.
dotaonline 3 years ago
no moron,i dont agree,and the people crying that the sky is falling wont change their lifestyle so dont take one penny of my tax dollars for junkscience...got it?i drive to work and back and these morons flying to paris for lunch and u want me to change? i dont believe in it so let them pay for it!!!!
cobraman96 3 years ago
junkscience? The major scienfitific organisations agree on global warming.
You don't want to spend your tax dollars on cheap renewable energy but instead you want buy oil when we know that the price of oil will constantly increase. This is due to increasing demands from the developing contries such as china and india.
Is there there some logic in your thinking?
dotaonline 3 years ago
o i see ur only 28.so write back to me when u grow up and leave ur mommys house and get into the real world(and im not talking about mtv,s real world...lol
cobraman96 3 years ago
Oh so you you are very old. I should not talk to you because you probably don't understand new concept and ideas.
Stuck in the past? Hey science is improving , new discoveries are made and don't read your 1950 science book, it is outdated.
dotaonline 3 years ago
Oh, and dota remember these men own stock in the oil companies and many may be shills for them. When talking to them it's important to understand that if big oil loses THEY lose and their corporate sponsorship of our politicians also fails. This is about an ideological battle so don't let them fool you, they want to keep their power.FIGHT these vermin every chance you get because these are the demons of a stagnant and decaying ideology who have long since died inside. They ARE a MENTAL DISORDER.
fringefries 3 years ago
**remember these men own stock in the oil companies and many may be shills for them. When talking to them it's important to understand that if big oil loses THEY lose.**
How can "Big Oil" lose when they are foremost Energy Source providers?
100 years from now your commercial Electric bill will still say GE (or local Electric company) and as you pull your air/electric car into the quickcharge station look up and it still be a Exxon,Shell,Chevron,BP,etc Franchise station..bet you a million
TheRealArchAngel 3 years ago
'Oil companies supply green tech too' nice, so?
Volume of trade does not matter, return on investment that does.The oil industry is still very lucrative.
dotaonline 3 years ago
**Oil companies supply green tech too' nice, so?
Volume of trade does not matter, return on investment that does.The oil industry is still very lucrative.**
Really?
You rather be granted 10 cent a gallon above cost by world governments (oil trade is highly regulated) then sell 1000 1.6GHZ at 170million dollars each? That's a bigger profit on 1 sale then the net profit of 12 billion on oil subsidies)
Till recently "Big Oil" wasn't allowed to R&D "green tech" by world governments & trade laws
TheRealArchAngel 3 years ago
If it was not profitable, investors would be selling their shares .
BTW 170 million dollars( wherever you got this figure) is selling price and you should minus the cost price which may be 100 million
Because your example of 10 cents is margin of profit, you cannot compare it to 170 million.
Mc donalds may make $1 on each burger but it can be more profitable than someone selling shirts with a margin of $20.
Again, Volume of trade does not matter, return on investment that does.
dotaonline 3 years ago
**If it was not profitable, investors would be selling their shares**
You mean investors in the Futures Market on a 1% margin per 1000 contracts (over 10% or 20% per 1000) Which is why oil is such a volitile commodity, or do you mean Stock holder investors with stock prices prett stable?
**Again, Volume of trade does not matter, return on investment that does**
And 10 cents a gallon is a pretty bad return on investment..this makes the actual price per barrel of oil $4.70 not the futures price
TheRealArchAngel 3 years ago
You actually respect junkscience?
You know steve milloy is just a tool from every company that is against something.
He is an advocate that says ciggarettes dont cause cancer.
He says DDT is actually good for people and the environment.
He says the World Trade Centers wouldnt have fallen as easily if they would have used asbestos in them.
And he is a lobbyist.
He only cares about who is paying him enough money.
dougl126 3 years ago
Whoa! You read a blog! You must be a really respected scientist
Get some real information, not crap from the internet. Read some periodicals and studies.
dougl126 3 years ago
I read both, then unlike you, I filter out the garbage using common sense.
JMcH 3 years ago
Apparently your common sense then is lacking.
You dont know me I dont get my crap from blogs like you.
I only do research and use data bases and peer reviewed findings for my data. Not crap from junk science and biased "scientists" who only care about where their money comes from
dougl126 3 years ago
But apparently you know me. Amazing that. Hypocrite.
The junk science "scientists" who only care about where their money comes from are the ones pushing this global warming - oh, sorry, you renamed it now - this "climate change" scam. There's no money in debunking the scam and there's millions and billions of public dollars in perpetuating it.
JMcH 3 years ago
NO the only money is for the people who would like to keep us on the path we are going.
Oil companies, coal companies, etc. They dont want us to switch to alternatives to their resources.
So they pay people like steve milloy to make up crap to scare people into thinking that scientists are trying to scare them.
The only money here is coming from companies to "scientists" whom I dont respect and would not call that. Because science is about figuring stuff out, not making up stuff for money.
dougl126 3 years ago
Ha! What are you smoking? If the oil companies didn't want us to switch, they'd change the price of oil to undercut E85. Of course, that's not how oil prices are set, but you wouldn't know that.
There's TONS of money in scaring people with this made-up "global warming." From "research" dollars (which really just goes to keeping these crackpots in their palatial homes), to book and movie proceeds, to the "carbon offset" scam and more, there's billions of dollars to be made off the gullible.
JMcH 3 years ago
Of course I know how oil prices are set. And the prices will never come down.
Theres no money or glory in research, scientists could have gotten research money for anything. And scientists live in much smaller homes than any fossil fuel tycoons and related rich people.
And oh yeah those people planting trees are making so much money from carbon offsets and not putting that money to good use at all.
Theres money to be made but only for the smart who adapt.
dougl126 3 years ago 2
Well, that's odd because the oil prices did just come down and that led to a notable decrease in prices at the pump. Imagine how much more they would go down if your beloved Democrats would open up domestic drilling.
There are millions of dollars to be made in research grants. If you deny this, you are a liar. And scientists are well-paid for their research.
Finally, have you seen how much carbon offset scam artists charge for their services? It should be criminal!
JMcH 3 years ago
funny to read this comment that oil prices will never come down after they fell almost $100 in the last few months since
avsroc17 3 years ago
Did I read movies and books and carbon offset scam? Billion of dollars... lol which movie? carbon offset scam... Major scientific organisatons are telling you that global warming is real. I bet you believe science only when it suits you.
Now lets compare this to the palace of the saudi rulers where the door knobs are made of gold. Oil companies making as much money in a day as all your 'movies and books' ever sold.
dotaonline 3 years ago
From everything to do with "global warming," yes, there's billions of dollars to be made. Algore is a... sorry, has a large chunk of that from his books, movie and appearances. And it shows. His energy-guzzling mansion is a sight to behold!
I believe in science when it is backed by facts, not biased opinions. Did you hear that the American Physical Society no longer supports the so-called "consensus" on "global warming?" I bet you didn't.
Let's drill domestically and keep the money here.
JMcH 3 years ago
Whatever billions you are talking about, the oil industry make it in one day.
Drill for what?
dotaonline 3 years ago
You want to drill to give more dollars to oil companies which have already too much money. The world population and demand is increasing. Whatever resources there are in the ground is limited but the demand will never stop increasing.
Compare the gains of those who have interests in the oil industry to those who are pro cleaner environment, there is a enormous difference.
dotaonline 3 years ago
Yes dotaonline these men are very old and their crippled minds can't handle the fact that the good guys are starting to win again. They don't like that their FAILED IDEOLOGY is more a MENTAL DISORDER than they had been falsely led to believe for the last 30 yrs. Their laze fair fiscal policies are a sign of mental decay and their inability to form new concepts out of their absolute and utter FAILURES makes them incapable of change.
fringefries 3 years ago
*You want to drill to give more dollars to oil companies which have already too much money*
Actually world governments subsidize oil and Exxon's "12 billion profit" is net after moving 50 trillion gallons of oil at a "profit" of about 10 cents a gallon minus expenses and costs
*Compare the gains of those who have interests in the oil industry to those who are pro cleaner environment*
"Big Oil" is justr called that cause that is the product they move the most but they supply "Green tech" too
TheRealArchAngel 3 years ago
**"Big Oil" is justr called that cause that is the product they move the most but they supply "Green tech" too**
For Example it is Exxon that is developing the Volt Battery for the GM volt and they own all Uranium proccesing in the world,Shell is into Natural Gas,Chevron owns the largest Geothermal power plants,and BP owns the largest Solar Panel & Wind farms
Oh and "Big Oil" doesn't even make the gasoline the refiners do,Gas Wholesalers set wholesale price after taxes,the bulk of cost of gas
TheRealArchAngel 3 years ago
Billions TO BE made... haven't I told you that whatever billions you are talking about, the oil industry make it in one day.
You believe in sceince backed by facts?
So you are not a scientist? hmmm...
the MAJOR scientific organisations are saying that global warming is true.
It doesn't matter if 5 scientists who are paid by the oil companies say otherwise.
dotaonline 3 years ago
30 years ago, the majority of scientists were saying we were causing global cooling and headed to another ice age. What will the majority be saying in another 30 years?
And I always thought science was decided by experimentation, not group consensus.
JMcH 3 years ago 2
**30 years ago, the majority of scientists were saying we were causing global cooling and headed to another ice age.**
Actually, that was Media and Print like Time Magazine saying such things....and they always have "Experts" that back up the story of the moment they are runnon...don't they
Any Meteorologist or Climatologist worth their salt would tell you cliamte is regional and Weather is local and both depend on the Season and Earth's orbit/axis tilt as well as the sun flare up/cold cycles
TheRealArchAngel 3 years ago
Oh, yeah, right. The media just make these claims without having scientists to back it all up. Sure. Uh-huh. Tell me another one.
JMcH 3 years ago
its 0.5 mlnd USD now
WooferWegrow 3 years ago
Two percent of all the CO2, outside of a plant, or a plankton that is, is in the atmosphere. The other 98% is in the ocean - CO2 loves water - especially cold water. We have "created" - in the whole of human existence - less than 30% of the less than 400 parts per million of the atmosphere that is CO2.
We deserve to be punished by who exactly? For why exactly?
The CARBON cycle. CARBON based life forms. Carboniferous. Shells. Skeletons. Not to mention plants or your children - made of CARBON
moveoncitizen 3 years ago
First off plants dont even keep all the CO2 they sequester. Some is lost back into the atmosphere when they open their stomata for air.
Second about 50% is in the atmosphere and half in the ground and water.
Also too much CO2 in the air isnt good for all plants and animals.
Too much in the water makes it acidic and too much in the air will create conditions where only a few plants that use CO2 the most efficiently will be able to live.
dougl126 3 years ago
This is easy to prove to you.
Which is warmer? The Earth or the Moon?
The earth because of our atmosphere that keeps the energy from the sun in
About humans causing it. Think about this.
We add 25 BILLION TONS not just tons BILLION tons of CO2 per year. Thats a crap load.
Or since we've burned about 1.5 trillion barrels of oil over the past 150 years(about halfs been sequestered by plants and such)
So half of that is still up there picture that many barrels of oil floating around up in the air
dougl126 3 years ago
your right we add 25 billion tons of CO2 and volcanoes let off more then 25 billion tons. You are being misleading. The atmosphere is huge it is like dropping a tablespoon of salt in the ocean. Watch the video on my profile global warming applied to scientific method.
LifeLibertyLove 3 years ago
Yeah so we've doubled the amount from volcanoes, and we know volcanoes can change the globes temps. for years because of the stuff they put in the air.
So saying that isnt much is not accurate.
That is a lot, can you imagine anything else being measured in billions of tons and not taking up much room?
dougl126 3 years ago
Yes CO2 look at how many billions of tons of "other" are in the atmosphere. Then you will realize how silly you sound. Watch the video global warming applied to the scientific method on my profile.
LifeLibertyLove 3 years ago
If you're not a climate scientist, your opinion does not matter. Man made global warming IS happening.
lazychink9 3 years ago
your g-u-l-l-i-b-l-e if you believe everything your teachers tell you and the media tells you.
VIDE0GAMEADDICT 3 years ago
Did you even read what he said? Here, i'll quote if for you:
"If you're not a climate scientist, your opinion does not matter"
The media is not made up of climate scientists. Teachers are not climate scientists, so where did you get that from?
The solution to understanding more about climate science is listening to scientists, not politicians/media/non-scientists. Its the media and debate crap that makes the issue far too messed up.
KamiKaziChicken 3 years ago 3
I suppose I shouldn't listen to MIT's professor on Meterology, Richard Lindzen? He, among a list of scientists, would disagree.
In fact, not even the IPCC is consistent with Gore's claims in his distinctly unscientfic movie.
superdinoyoshi 3 years ago
He would disagree with what?
I don't know why Gore's being mentioned again. Gore is not a climate scientist, and he isn't the one who began the AGW thinking. Everyone's knows that movie has flaws in it.
KamiKaziChicken 3 years ago
Your right I am not, but the guy on my profile is. Watch global warming applied to scientific method. On my profile.
LifeLibertyLove 3 years ago
It always amuses me how non-scientists throw around words like "fact" and "proof". Scientists don't use these words, they use "evidence" and try to "disprove" theories. They go about this by assessing the evidence and then provide the MOST LIKELY cause of an effect-this is what science is, only the misinformed use the words proof and fact. According to all the world's major scientific organisations: humans are the "most likely" primary cause of the current rapid rate of warming on Earth.
sharkblubber 3 years ago
Even funnier is the fact that ALL of the planets in the solar system are currently going through a period of warming. I guess they must have CFC's and SUV'd on Mars, right?
cruzion 3 years ago
So how is Al going to stop global cooling? I recall in the 70's how it was the ice age we had to FEAR! The Globalists can't seem to get their story straight. Demockery at it's best.
On a more serious note. One should look up:
Codex Alimentarious.
It's just a little bit more pressing on the human race. Unfortunately, Humans are to blame for this one. Please look it up.
LiononoiL 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
ANOTHER SCIENTIST BECOMES A SKEPTIC
And this name is a HUGE one, the biggest name since Reid A. Bryson.
It is:
Kerry Emanuel, Professor of Earth, Atmospheric, and Planetary Science at MIT
To read about it search the web for this:
Hurricane Expert Reconsiders Global Warming's Impact
MagentaTrue 3 years ago
Take a glass of water and put a shit load of ice in it....mark the water line...let the ice melt. The water line will be the same.
Frozen water weighs as much regular water.Glaciers are ice on water and the level will be the same. The north and south poles move around because the earth is moving in space and ultra cold spots move at the same time....as something melts...something else is being frozen..that simple. If you can make a buck off fooling the people...you must be a politician..
beckpod1 3 years ago
To the people who believe global warming is dangerous I ask:
1)Did you know that the beginning of the 20th century was also the end of the little ice age?
2)What do you believe is supposed to happen at the end of an ice age?
3)Did you know that raising animals for food creates more greenhouse gas then all of the cars and the trucks in the world combined?
4)Are you going to become a vegetarian now? I won't be surprised if no one says yes to #4; good ol' Gore's gotta have his mansion.
osmaldz 3 years ago 2
This has been flagged as spam show
Al Gore is saving us from that dirty oil and coal. He is our mesiah (he wishes he was) and i'd pay 1000.00's to eat next to him just like those people that pay $5000.00 a plate to sit next to him at his after-presentation-dinners--but im not worthy--NOT
truth is he's got a neurosis that was first seen by the world in the 2000 Florida recount and is now in our faces every single day-the man needs serious counseling.
MagentaTrue 3 years ago
Another crappy video on the internet. No surprise there; LOL
predaker 3 years ago
So, junksciencecom is a group that believes in junk science... ha, wake and smell the scientific consensus, loser.
frankodelic 3 years ago
There is no scientific consensus on manmade global warming frankwhatever, there never was. Consensus means complete agreement, and just a few months ago (December) over 400 scientists went on record saying they dispute the idea that global warming is mostly due to increases of CO2. And in 2006 the 60 scientists that advised the Prime Minister of Canada to go along with Kyoto in the first place are now saying they were mistaken,
osmaldz 3 years ago
Consensus doesn't mean 100% agreement. If that were the case we wouldn't have a consensus on gravity or evolution. What we're talking about is the OVERWHELMING majority of scientists, including the most prestigeous scientific organizations on the planet; IPCC, AAAS, NAS. With all the evidence at hand you'd either have to have an alterior motive or be stupid not to do everything possible to prevent climate change.
frankodelic 3 years ago
Every major national scientific academy (including the royal academy that has been around for 400 plus years) agrees with the IPCC report that we are the MOST LIKELY primary cause. NASA GISS and NOAA also agree with the IPCC. The junkscience challenge is just that, junk. Only a fool would ask you to try and prove a theory outright. Any scientist will tell you that theories can only be disproved. Junk science and steven milloy don't seem to realise this.
sharkblubber 3 years ago
first of all consensus does mean complete agreement, look it up. secondly I got the info about the 400 on the website of the United States senate, and it seems rather idiotic to claim that a significant number are journalists, as the media is obviously not on the side of the sceptics. also, the stance that TV. Weathermen have no scientific training or a place in this matter has just about zero logic.
p.s. i'd love to know where you got your information about the gardeners.
osmaldz 3 years ago
IPCC is political not scientific.
lordofpokemon1212 3 years ago
the initial IPPCC reports..in which only the scientists were involved did suggest that there 99% scientific evidence that the earth is experiencing AGW..but later on when the final report was presented these findings were altered ..,,at the behest of the USA and China .,,that is why the final report says that there is close to 90% evidence on AGW..,,So yes in way ur correct to point out that the IPCC report is in under political pressure...,
luksaint 3 years ago
Interestingly, it's a wonder that confirmation bias prevents people from checking their sources.
Both those lists are not lists of scientists. You will find TV weathermen, gardeners, and journalists in their lists.
Furthermore, as delayers are so prone to saying, 'science isn't done by consensus', so why would they think these lists are convincing? And if they are convincing, why aren't the list of thousands of scientists whose work was cited in the IPCC report convincing?
TempestStormwind 3 years ago
Hehehe...the "heat of hipocracy". Al Gore is a pansy and a hipocrit.
ctorres1234 3 years ago 2
why would "god" only bless america? if this so called god is all loving, wouldnt he bless the entire world?
or does that not work into your religion based on fear and intimidation?
Th3Ch3m157 3 years ago
yea al gore is a complete idiot. only incompetent fools can believe his dumb ass! oh global warming! oh i got a great idea! ill hold a concert for global warming... gee i wonder how the fuck all those ppl got there Mr. Gore? did they all hop onto a magic flying carpet? what? the flew? they drove? they burned fossil fules to get there?! fucking idiot, im glad he isnt our prez, he would have declared war on global warming! bahahhaa
Th3Ch3m157 3 years ago
did you know Al Gores jet produces more co2 in one round trip than an H2 Hummer does in one year?
Did you also know that al gore has been invited to debate the president of the Czech Republic about global warming, but Al gore wont do it?
I guess he'd rather keep on flying his jet to his $200,000.00 speaking engagements than to debate someone on tv where everyone could watch for free and he also wouldnt have to fly his jet everywhere making all that co2
MagentaTrue 3 years ago 6
I can't speak for anyone else but we are living in the most opportune time for human existence. We are living in perfect temperate environment for the absolute growth abundances for food production. There is a low growth threshold in temperatures where plants grow well anything below about 65 degrees Fahrenheit puts plant into hibernation. Have you ever seen a farmer trying to grow his crops in the snow or planting in the winter? Come on people question everything even Al Gore.
questioneverything8 3 years ago 3
Um, maybe if you knew anything about global warming you'd know that the earths temperature is only going to go up by 2-3 degrees. That is enough to cause total earth disaster. And if the ice caps completely melt, the ocean would rise 50 feet! Try growing your crops when around 30-40% of the earth has just gone under water. We wouldnt have enough dry land to grow enough crops to support the earths population. This could all happen within 50-100 years. Thats not an opportune human time.
nerdsofamerica 3 years ago
nerdsofamerica LOL, IF, IF, IF, IF, sure are a lot of Ifs in your comment, but no facts, just projections based on incomplete data with NO proof. How do you know that any of the global warming is caused by man? 85 Parts Per Million of the total atmosphere, is man made CO2. If I had 1,000,000.00 dollars and gave you 85 dollars, you would be lucky to be able to fill your gas tank. Do you really think that 85 dollars is going to cause the earth to go bankrupt? All I ask is; think for your self.
questioneverything8 3 years ago
You have to be kidding me. Let me ask you this - If we weren't around during the Ice Age, how did it melt? What - dinosaurs farting? I find it sad that anyone would agree with Al Gore. And when did they start taking the temperature of the atmosphere? Please - global warming is a joke.
Ghostmaster667 3 years ago
ANTARCTIC ICE GROWS TO RECORD SIZE
It is now at 16.17 million sq. km.
The old record is 16.03 million sq. km
And the Antarctic is still growing.
In Al Gore's predictions this wasn't supposed to happen.
MagentaTrue 3 years ago 2
Depending on where you live you might fall for the Al Gore scam If you live away from urban smog & take a morning run along an unspoiled beach every morning like I do you will be harder to convince urban smog is not global and the planet is far from smogged out In fact I travel a hell of a lot and in America I find people are so totally brain washed - ignorance is so disempowering in the land of the free & home of the brave all I see is CNN people
theinvisiblewun 3 years ago 4
Yes, I can save Al Gore. But, will you give me the money ? _ Mary
frapp67 3 years ago
Have you heard that the Al Gore twisty straw light bulbs have dangerous amounts of mercury in them and must now be disposed of in a special manner?
They are not supposed to be just thrown in the garbage.
So now it's going to cost more to dispose of them because of:
firstly, separate handling in disposal,
and secondly, they must find a "safe" method of destruction for them so that they don't do real harm (unlike the contrived harm of 'manmade' global warming) to the environment.
MagentaTrue 3 years ago
I have those "twisty" bulbs throughout my home. I put them in when I moved into my home 8 years ago. So far not one of them has stopped working and I've been using only 20 percent of the power to keep them going. You whine, while I go laughing and skiping to the bank to count my extra cash.
Oh when a bulb does stop working I'll take it to the official disposal site in my town where they'll recycle it safely.
JohnFGrant 3 years ago 3
i love those twisty light bulbs! there great for when you wake up in the morning! instead of have a 60 watt burning your eyes out you got a nice soft 20 watts slowly heating up over a course of 10 mins.. and who the fuck cares about propper disposal when it burns out ill be sure to break it and throw it in the ocean, just to piss off these pansy ass enviromental retards!
Th3Ch3m157 3 years ago 3
this was kind of a cheapshot at Al Gore, but it shows that he is kind of a hippacrit
re4p3r1 3 years ago
I don't think the person who made this video even watched Al Gore's movie, lol... what a liar.
predaker 3 years ago
Who in their right mind would pay to see propaganda.
2289567 3 years ago
Well if you're going to make a video about a movie, it might help if you had actually seen the movie.
predaker 3 years ago
ok who here lives in LA, really have you been in LA one a bad week? you wanna raise your kids in that! ok ...thats not good enough, just got back from chia and guess what to my suprize when it rained(on many days of my stay)my feet would get covered with black rainwater yea BLACK take my sandles off and you could see the strap marks of my foot ...wana raise you kids in that?
I THINK NOT!
pi3573 3 years ago
So you would have to reject global warming, CO2 is colorless. In fact the soot in the atmosphere would reflect sunlight and decrease the effect of global warming.
2289567 3 years ago
The most ridiculous video I've ever seen...
Does this prove that global warming isn't happening? Does this prove anything? No.
It's just a personal attack against Al Gore and that's why it is so stupid...
KingSerjTankian 3 years ago
Calling all the people who don't think Global Warming is a problem. Move to Florida! Enjoy the hurricanes! Stay in your house when the waters rise! We could all do with cheering up.
Oceanus57 3 years ago
Oceanus57 - Florida has always had hurricanes - there is no increasing trend over the 20th century as a result of global warming. Claims of increased storm damage are caused by more expensive property and people building houses where they know they shouldn't.
As for sea level rise it has been going on at much the same rate for the last 10,000 years since the end of the last ice age. Even the IPCC admits that sea levels rose slower in the 2nd half of the 20th C.
minilemur 3 years ago
If this is so, and as you seem to believe the theory is all wrong (which I'm perfectly willing to contemplate)why do you think it's such a big issue? Have you seen Al Gore's film? I have, and I thought the arguments had a lot of merit.
Oceanus57 3 years ago
I have seen Gore's film, and I have also read many refutations of the junk science in it. Why it's such a big issue is explained by politics and media spin in a positive feedback cycle. Some particular easy to check errors:
1. Not a single reputable scientist predicts 20 feet of sea level rise. Even the IPCC only suggest 35cm by 2100.
Polar bear numbers have increased from 5,000 to 25,000 - perhaps an all time historic high.
3. Tempertaure rises preceded CO2 rises, i.e. effect not cause.
minilemur 3 years ago
jdeast101 - too many to choose from:
"Low sea-level rise projections from mountain glaciers and icecaps
under global warming" Sarah Raper & Roger Braithwaite Nature V.
439 (2006) p. 311-313
"Recent cooling of the upper ocean" J Lyman J Willis & G Johnson
Geophysical Research Letters 33 (2006) L18604
"Global warming & the Greenland ice sheets" P Chylek J E Box
& G Lesins Climatic Change (2004) 63 p. 201-221
minilemur 3 years ago
jdeast101
-
"Hockey sticks, principal components and spurious
significance" S McIntyre & R McKitrick Geophysical Research
Letters, Vol. 32 (2005) L03710
"Highly variable northern hemisphere temperatures
reconstructed from low- and high-resolution proxy data" A
Moberg et al Nature Vol. 433 (2005) p. 613-617
minilemur 3 years ago
jdeast101 -
Thomas, E. R., G. J. Marshall, and J. R. McConnell, 2008. A doubling in snow accumulation in the western Antarctic Peninsula since 1850. Geophysical Research Letters, 35, L01706, doi:10.1029/2007GL032529
Nyberg, J., B.A. Malmgren, A.Winter, M.R.
Jury, K.H. Kilbourne, and T.M. Quinn. 2007. Low Atlantic hurricane activity in the 1970s and 1980s compared to the past 270 years. Nature, 447, 698-702
minilemur 3 years ago
I don't know enough about this field to comment on these papers (my guess is you don't either, as in my quest to google them turned up mostly skeptic sites citing these papers).
However, I know from my own area of expertise that many papers are taken out of context by people who have no understanding of it. Would you like to wager how many of those authors don't believe in GW?
I did, however, manage to find with relative ease a scientific paper that refutes Nyberg et al doi:10.1038/nature06576
jdeast01 3 years ago
jdeast01 - you admit you don't understand the science.
How am I supposed to be able to convince you then - if the only "evidence" you will accept is the pronouncements of the priesthood of eco-alarmists?
Tell you, what, using Popper's definition of what counts as science and what doesn't, what kind of data would you need to see to let you begi8n to question the CO2 hypothesis. You tell me, and I'll endeavour to probide it.
minilemur 3 years ago
I'm just being honest; I'm not an expert in the field, and I can't comment on the validity of these papers or even if they prove your point or if they're simply taken out of context (I'm guessing you can't either, but if I'm wrong, please give me a non-expert scientist summary of your favorite).
This is not to say I don't understand the basic science behind GW or AGW, and in the only case I tried, I found another scientific paper arguing against one of the ones you mentioned.
jdeast01 3 years ago
So here's what I need: Make the connection between those papers and the evidence that AGW is incorrect. Right now, it seems circumstantial at best, and dubiously out of context at worst.
jdeast01 3 years ago
jdeast01 - OK I'll give it one last try on the basis that you are willing to read my reference in good faith - why don't you first have a look at the videos by coyoteblog on YouTube, and then you can go to his website and download for free an excellent layman's guide to understanding the flaws in the CO2 hypothesis.
minilemur 3 years ago
Google for "IPCC Summary for policy makers" first hit.
jdeast01 3 years ago
jdeast01 - the IPCC summary for policy makers isn't real science - it's a political summary for policy makers - it was written and published 2 months before the actual scientific report - which - if you bothered to read it - you would find doesn't make these alarmist predictions. In fact the scientific report itself very carefully insists that its scenarios are projections not predictions. That's because it knows that all of its previous predictions have turned out to be false.
minilemur 3 years ago
It's a summary of science for policy makers. It's certainly better science than the books you've mentioned as resources.
If you had actually read the IPCC summary, you'll find it's not alarmist either. The facts are alarming, but it's extremely conservative.
For example, they neglect the increase in the volume of water in the predicted sea level rise (they just go by the expansion of water). If you look back in history at the last time it was 3 degrees C warmer than now, that is alarming.
jdeast01 3 years ago
nonsense jdeast01 - the summary is much more alarmist than the IPCC scientific report - and the summary was written by a tiny minority of eco-alarmist bureaucrats and unrepresentative scientists.
The IPCC scientific report acknowledges that sea levels rose faster in the 1st half of the 20th century (i.e. before rise in fossil fuel emissions) than in the 2nd half. They've been rising for the last 10,000 years since the end of the ice age - at the same gradient - no observed acceleration.
minilemur 3 years ago
Can you give me quotes from both the scientific report and the summary that differ?
jdeast01 3 years ago
Yes I can. Let's start with the notorious example from the 2nd report - well documented and written up for instance in the Wall Street Journal - that the lead Author Santer (under pressure from the Clinton/Gore administration deleted statements such as "None of the studies cited [ ] has shown clear evidence that we can attribute [climate] changes to the specific cause of increases in greenhouse gases." nad replaced with a claim to the contrary. No room for all the IPCC malpractice in one post...
minilemur 3 years ago