Added: 4 years ago
From: wonderingmind42
Views: 22,591
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:
see all

All Comments (254)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • Man Pollo. I read that as the Spanish word for chicken - manchicken.

  • Slow down for fuck's sake !!

  • Good video. Are you a physics teacher or some guy high on science weed?

  • @phantomscolts2 Goddamnit, I missed the thumbs-down button on your post. How do I undo my accidental thumbs-up?

  • @Jacaero I think he might tell you if you can provide a reasonable explanation as to why you dislike the video.

  • the ant iterrorest disproves this ... dont believe

  • Comment removed

  • By posting this chart, you may have lost 90% of the people who weren't following you. Plus you're a science teacher; probably 75% + of your dissenters probably disliked as a class. It's too bad, because you took a lot of time on all these videos... overall, you have hit the best possible part of your goal, and broadened people's perspectives. And to anyone who may think I'm saying those who don't agree are stupid. But if you post that, you will actually be saying that yourself.

  • this man's awesome.

  • Hes a stupid deluded, arrogant piece of shit who insults the intelligence of a 10yr old.

  • Stupid? Hardly

    Deluded? doubt it.

    Arrogant? maybe

    I don't give two shit's about what he's done; he still speaks the truth.

  • Well what you call the 'truth' isn't exactly backed up by any science is it?

  • Actually yea; it is.

  • Well, thats the thing dogmas doesn't 'cut it' with me. I've enjoyed watching the inevitable fall of the IPCC.

    It really has been a great victory for scientific reason. Yet the people pretending to be scientific about this are actually very unbalanced, left brained zombies... DESPERATE to protect the perceived integrity of yet another 'official story'

    The world is waking up and the 'Mr Logicals' of this world will just get left behind.

  • It's not a dogma nor is it a "leftist" thing. My organic chemistry teacher, who is completely conservative, acknowledges anthropogenic Climate change. The man champions Limbaugh and other conservative douche-bags. Still; he has knowledge about the subject. You're argument, on the other hand, is completely dogmatic. It's politically based and has nothing to do with science.

    PS: How has the IPCC fallen? Just because you say so doesn't make it true...

  • Im sorry how can you say someone has even a shred of credibility when they build an argument based on fudged science?

    This is not my dogma. The IPCC dont even get most of there data from environmental groups like Greenpeace lol. And other seemingly reliable date e.g. satellite data they pick parts that support there cause and omit parts that dont. That is classic corruption and they have been caught. They are 'coming down' because they are being discredited..

    Google: "IPCC scam"

  • It's not fudged science nor were they discredited. Certain (moronic) groups are trying to flood the media with the perception that they have been "caught". The same exact thing happened with cancer and the cigarette industry, and creationism vs. evolution.

    "And other seemingly reliable date e.g. satellite data they pick parts that support there cause and omit parts that dont. " Provide for me a direct source where you can prove this; I dare you.

  • "It's not fudged science nor were they discredited"

    NASA data - FUDGED (earth is cooling)

    Hottest USA year - FUDGED

    Himilayan Glaciers melting -FUDGED

    DISCREDITED- Rajendra Pachauri is a criminal, even Greenpace are calling for his resignation lol

    Even the BBC are ending a 90 yr contract with the CRU at East Anglia uni because of false/inaccurate weather predictions

    There has been no warming since 1998 - FACT ( check data sets)

    All this has been confirmed in the IPCC report. Go and check

  • Now, this is where your argument falls apart.

    Site (Exact) sources for where you've received this information.

    Answer: you won't because you can't find any credible SCIENTIFIC sources that will agree with you.

  • Are you stupid? Or have you been hiding under a rock?

    Seriously, have you not heard heard of any of the points ive mentioned. or do I really have to wipe your ass for you and pull out each document one by one for you...jesus where have you been living

  • I've heard them mentioned by denialists; but that's it.

    The reason for siting your sources is not to "wipe [...] ass" but to prove that you're telling the truth

  • OK, I'll do some digging and drop them in your inbox

  • Following the methods in this analysis, if one could conjecture the probabilities of the various levels of action occurring (not what SHOULD be done, but what will MOST LIKELY end up being done), then we could be an expected value for the future of the planet, given the most likely human response (A through E). I wonder if the value would be good or bad?

  • as a governement run project, you can expect the result of such a manpollo project to reflect the wishes of the governement

    what is the motivation of the governement, to halt GW ? they (as a group) are not interest in the environemnt for the environement's sake

    they will either want to avoid famine, societal collapse while increasing their power over their population at all costs

    since the "opposition" is not organized it cannot commission such a project but if it did it would be as biased

  • Im have all the right to judge so called professionals/scientists because there professional integrity has been breached, they will do anything for money icluding LYING to the public!

    YOU ARE A DUMB PIECE OF SHIT TELLING ME WHO I CAN AND CANNOT QUESTION FUCK YOU!

  • Apparently the best the climate change detractors can do is call people names.

  • I think that is more an attribute of dialogue on youtube, than it is of global warming

  • obviously you only read the comments with name calling, your a moron. well at least you'll read this one.

  • now we know why children in the american public school system are so far behind other industrialized countries. this guy is a complete idiot. didn't george w bush use the same retarded logic for going into Iraq. and what price are we paying for it. Come on people THINK FOR YOURSELF.

  • In order not to be biased you can do your own research and metrics and draw your own conclusions. Our planet is going into big trouble, we may like or not, we may ignore it or not. Facts - not the ones I like or claim but the ones you test and prove -prevail

  • Comment removed

  • you must be joking! This man is trying to save our planet, even if his assumption is wrong we are better off supporting him

  • sorry I'm not as naive as you, how in the world is this idiot going to save the planet, if you want to help the planet then there are millions of things an individual can do and should do, but what this Moron supports is the government doing something, which means more taxes, a larger more bloated government, and less freedom. if you want to be green, then live green as I do, I am the only person I can control, I do not try controlling others and don't support a government that does the same.

  • ok im into this, and its a real prob, but what is your explanation on the warming of all other planets at the same rate? im not sayin you are wrong, but, what is your take on that?

  • YOU SHOULD DO A SERIES FOR RELIGION, I'D LIKE TO HEAR YOUR STANCE ON IT!.....was Jesus real?....is any of it 'real'???

  • Jesus may have been real, but it doesn't matter. the gospels written 200-400 years later were not accurate (and indeed contradicting). the important thing to discuss is the fact that the CONCEPT of jesus is real, and people base lives around it, and sadly it has some avoidable negative results. The argument should be whether Jesus is a good idea and not whether he existed.

    Either way, GCC is measurable, religious beliefs are not, hence no point in arguing if you have no evidence to examine.

  • Comment removed

  • Comment removed

  • Comment removed

  • well, if it was scientifically provable as plausible and indeed probable, we might have.

  • Yes, exactly, not scientifically provable. Thank you for underscoring my point. Don't forget that it is for political and monetary gain as well.

  • I said provable as plausible. provable empirically is letting the "moonster" eat us all and then deciding to pay.

    so the question here is clear, the more you wait for evidence of catastrophe, the more expensive it will be to make a U-turn. At some point it's TOO late. problem here is when to believe there's ENOUGH evidence, and while evidence to trust, and is that evidence not selectively collected, etc.

  • You contradicted yourself. so thanks for proving my point again.

    Apparently you yourself believe you cant prove Global Warming, erm I mean CLIMATE CHANGE, or maybe its the next Ice Age, give it five years see how it changes next.

  • straw man, dude. I have no idea what your point is anymore. Greg explains very clearly that the risks are too high for the small price we'll have to pay to start cutting emissions by a large margin. it's worth the risk, even if you don't think it's real.

    you also forget, the even if GCC is fictitious, you still have the resource crunch looming, and you do NOT want to hit that, with tens of millions starving and maybe an india-pakistan nuke war breaking.

  • Risks to high, for what, changing the world economy on a straw horse called GCC, oh yeah GCC has been shown to be a scandal.

  • read again. even if GCC is bunk, you are also reaching the end of cheap oil. you will have major shifts to alternative fuels and electricity, meaning industries will collapse and rise, etc.

    elso the issues of clean water, badly damaged land that can't be immediately used for agriculture and such... there are many reasons to rethink our way of life even if GCC doesn't happen

  • Comment removed

  • When virtually all peer reviewed journals publish articles supporting your claim I would likely be in support of that. Especially if you would provide me with a rational explanation for why the moon would be alive.

  • Virtually all ... hardly.

    Peer reviewed ... confirmation from those who already agree is no confirmation.

    Rational explanations apparently are no longer needed. Poltical angling for funds and control are the order of the day.

    Thank you for underscoring my point.

  • so hundreds of thousands are wrong and a few dozen are right? can you link to the undenyable fact-based studies that show it, because they are really hard to find. I look around the web and I see mainly briken bits of since-falsified claims.

  • "since-flasified claims", lol, hacked e-mails. Are you waking up out of you propaganda induced stupor yet?

  • what do the hacked emails of last week got to do with the argument we had 2-3 months ago? have you read them yourself or did you feel satisfied with the 2-3 lines cherry-picked and out-of-context? it's a mailbox with 13 years of email exchanges, and new evidence is piled each year, for the worse.

    I have a feeling you are just trolling, haven't really gone to read the FACTS. start at realclimate.

  • I read about 30 of them, and didnt need to go further. And if you read any of them you would see they are far worse than the stuff being cherry picked. And I only read the recent ones not the old stuff.

  • When Mommy gets back from the bowling alley, she is going to be really mad that he wrote on the walls.

  • he has a wife and kids.

  • Will the last two posters, sawdust and AnImperialV, please pay attention to the lecture? You are welcome to comment with regards to the video and content on the video. Otherwise, your just blurting the first inanity that comes to mind, and you'll need to be sent to the principal's office!

  • KnightBiologist uses words like inane to compensate for his tiny biceps, his tiny bank account and his tiny... well you know.

    Nobody of substance fears the principal's office - why?

    Because if you live big, you are risking far more than having a negative encounter with some milk-toast school administrator.

    Get out from behind your microscope, put your beaker down and get out and live your life. It's risky, but it's wonderful.

  • Heres a scenario: Lava's micro-electrical atomic structure cools in accordance with the magnetic field of the Earth at time of cooling. A number of ancient lava flows shows the Earth changed is magnetic axis a number of times. 2012 marks the age of Galactic Equinox. We will be in direct line of the black hole in the center of our little galaxy. This is a fact that both Mayans AND NASA agree on. just got less than 100 charaters left, so I'll end by saying "Hold on to your a

  • NO, here's an oversimplification. Religious beliefs condemned scientific research for ages. Science overpowered our human rationale and killed the planet in a few centuries. Now it wishes to fix the problem. How's that? Is it any wonder that the earth is about to shift its poles and possibly fry the entire planet in the process at this time? Coincidence? Also, it's not just economic harm, its scientific egoism. They break it, fix it once, then assume they can do it again, everytime. Right?

  • +1 you are right!

  • I really really cant understand why people are so hostile to the idea of being envirnmental and limiting the destruction we cause. Whats the worse that will happen, we wont need to relly on energy sources that are running out? air will be cleaner? We will save money?

    Science isnt saying we all need to stop everything and go back to the stone age! In fact its saying the opposite. I really cant understand why?

  • If you enjoyed this video, you may be interested in a blog of mine, which has to do with how climate change relates to issues such as credibility and risk management. It's been doing quite well and I'd love to spread these logical ideas around.

    Link on my profile page, or Google "climatesight" (one word). Thanks!

  • What happens happens no action by us, small action by us ,large action by us. I for one would rather change our energy solutions reduce population with laws incentives and penilties

    than sit by and get a big shit taken on us. We will make the lemming over the cliff myth look real and be real if we sit on our asses.

  • Oh, Professor Douche there is no global warming. There are 500% more Polar Bears than there were in the 1900's. Also, I don't know if you heard the news yet, but the missing ice from the Arctic Ocean was found. Yes, the National Snow and Ice Data Center (NSIDC) made a mistake and they found the ice that "melted". Wow, maybe that puts a damper on your ignorant liberal party, who want to tax us to death. So you see, professor Douche we shouldn't spend trillions on Douche Science, JUST BECAUSE.

  • I actually don't think that the polar bears are cute anyways. I say kill the bastards.

  • It used to be both legal and popular to hunt polar bears. Maybe you should consider taking at least the most obvious facts into consideration when making up your mind on issues.

  • I will research that because I truly have not, but what about the missing Ice sheet that appeared like magic in the arctic. was it popular to hunt ICE and now its not so its growing back.

  • Aside from how out of date your position is it wholly ignores the undisputed fact that the sea level is rising. Frankly you need to do more research on this subject outside the climate change denier community, that is assuming you care about the actual reality of the issue.

  • obama promised we'd see the sea level drop as soon as he's elected, so no worries there...

  • Look my name is professor Douche and I can't do any more god damn columns so leave me alone.

  • bullshit. the world will be fine. 50 years ago they said the same end of the world crap to my father. only differents is. the quantity of humans on earth. the more humans there are most likely resources being used up. kill humans lmao

  • I agree that the world will be fine. Only, I don't care about the world, I don't care about planet earth. I care about me and my children, and hopefully sometime, their children. If the most respected scientific organisation say GCC will happen, I would bet on the take action possibility. If you look at all of the other video wonderingmind42 made, you will see that he has good argument coming from reliable sources. He names organisatin, websites,...

  • So if you say "bullshit" I find this a interesting theory, based on ... what sources? what arguments? If you could share your arguments and sources, (reliable ones, not your father) please do, if not, please go out of the way.

  • This guy is fucking great

  • around 6 mins. i was suddenly hit by the awesomeness of that hat!

  • Probabilistically weight the scenarios !!!!

  • Public opinion moves nations; Public Policy enslaves them. Create an stoppable catastrophe, and claim saviourism. Machiavelli 101

  • that might be great but you talk so fast that it's really difficult for whoever doesn't have English as 1st language.

    I find it difficult to get it all although I'm on my 7th year learning English at school and I guess I'm in the top 10% most fluent at English in my class.

  • watch?v=5ZhZVYYpQYo

    If you watch that video and follow the link to PBS Frontline, you realize Americans aren't the only capitalist CO2 energy gouging hogs. Communists are now greedy capitalists.

    As usual, our greed is overriding our sense of communal safety.

  • I'm wondering if the nation blew it when Nuclear energy was discarded by fears of 3 mile island?

    It was certainly less disastrous then Chernobyl.

    Well, nuclear waste seems like a lessor evil then global warming....in the long term. Environmental safety VS Global safety.

    Seems like nuclear waste could be delt will later on, unlike Global warming.

  • They're non-linear dynamical systems w/ unrealistically high positive feedback coefficients !!!!!!!

    Owned

  • nature will survive, humans won't... it's a natural selection, if you're smart enough - you survive

  • A few humans will survive unfortunatelly.

    Nature has been destroyed already.

  • Since when are scientists liberals?

    Why would you trust the prior government with their lasse fare political and economic doctrine which left us in financial ruin. Military activity does not count as social doctrine.

    It was proven that the Bush administration deliberately censored scientists about their opinions on global warming per Censoring Science: Inside the Political Attack on Dr. James Hansen and the Truth of Global Warming.

    He's just saying the risk is greater if nothing is done.

  • Something great about the idea of all scientists being liberals, or AGW being a liberal conspiracy - Dr James Hansen describes himself as a conservative, and, in the "policy" parts of all his presentations, includes something like "as long as it complies with the free market".

  • TO MANY BIG WORDS AAAAAAAAAAAA no i feel ya bro i belive

  • i can see your points. i believe that human nature is to destroy so we are the cause partially, also natural disasters and naturally occuring manifestations can also be part of the cause. its difficult to say at all even if you analyze it like this but effort i dont think could go wrong to fix our mess. but thats my opinion and not nessicarily the opinion of the next guy, so lets just see where we go while we try to improve our standards of life.

  • This talk is simple and moves to preaching obsolete malthusian theory that is inapplicable to reality. There is a reason why economics is divided into macroeconomics and microeconomics, reality cannot be quantified (yet). Humanity has always raised the "carrying capacity" much faster than could ever meet it. Exponential technological progress is forgotten, ever heard about the Green Revolution, Nanotechnology, Crop rotation? Climate change will become easy climate control in the coming decades.

  • I really hope you're right. It'd be great if we could fix it with our technology. Let's get on it quick.

  • slow down with the speaking , im interested listening and i still gotta pause the vid rewind and watch again , ure a bloody chipmonk mate

  • You forgot a possibility! D:

    There is a distinct, if small, possibility that the world will simply end before any of these eventualities play out! :D

  • economically speaking you would then favor kaynesian theory then, in terms of what we could do for the environment on a macro level, i assume?

  • some skeptics just got owned

  • The ice caps have lost mass as CO2 ppm is going up. This much is FACT, so even if the "bad people" use GW as an excuse to make even more money, so be it, (just keep your guns), because they will convert oil rigs to EGS rigs, deserts to mirrors and thus GW to history!

    People are afraid of this debate because it threatens them... so they say it's BS and thus cherry pick info to "prove it". In all cases (of climate) will there be variables such that anyone could use to his or her incredibility!

  • unless you find a way to save the world while, at the same time, making billions for the men in power, rest assured that nothing will get done. the few people who can bring about a change have all of this info. it is not a problem of conflicting science. it is one of ethics. the leaders of politics and business will not lift a finger unless it means filling their own pockets in the short run. if saving the world requires any sacrifice on their part, then we're probably doomed.

  • Right > GW IS about POLITICS and POWER PLAYS on a GLOBAL SCALE. It is a GEO-POLITICAL manipulation of the IGNORANT masses. I can prove this.

    (WRONG) >> THERE is a GREATTTTT conflict between scientists on this issue and the fact that YOU do not know this is a testament to how utterly corrupt and powerful the mainstream liberal media has become. At this moment, there is a petition being circulated by over 30,000 "earth and weather scientists to OPEN a PUBLIC DEBATE on the issue. GW is a SCAM.

  • i never said there WAS'T conflicting science, the conflicting ideas are well publicizced, i said that that wasn't THE PROBLEM. that the main problem is one of corruption. the people who have made their fortunes taking advantage of the world and its citizens, are not going to give up their opportunity to make, yet another, extra buck

  • NO! the problem is whether we should run the risks that global warming may cause the next dark age or take proactive action which may cause the next dark age.

  • mush, in which case, shouldnt we learn how to make bread and plant food so that survivers will know how to live in dark age like times? How bad could that be really? as long as you plant your genetically modified one generation seeds, yearly. And bater for trades and goods, you and your family may have many happy years together loving and defending your land from eggheads who forgot how to make bread and plant seeds and want to take yours. Pretty simple life, enjoy the idea it could be freedom.

  • but this distinguishes between voluntary individual action and compulsory collective action. The former is freedom, the latter is serfdom.

  • it doesnt matter who is doing it! if we don't fix it we are all screwed. could you imagine if you were sitting in a hospital and they told you that you had a high high risk of getting cancer, or some worse disease, and they were debating whether to act or not? thats exactly what we are doing! we are the doctors, the WORLD is our patient, and the disease? global climate disruption or whatever he said.

  • It's more like a doctor telling you you have cancer and in order to remove the cancer you will lose your voice and 1/2 of your lung capacity, do you want to go through with the treatment or just die. We are the doctors and the patient and we need to ask ourselves if the medicine is worth the cure.

  • good english

  • I hate your cliff hangers!

  • Before YES and NO you can write in what ewer you want. All are possibility's.

    What if the minor planet comes? What if massive epidemic comes? What if sun disappears? But why is climate is the subject? Because you see whether whit you own eyes or are you blind? I live in area that has -15C at this time year and now for the 5 year +3 to -5. Forget ice fishing. Now think it this way that nature is well balanced system. No do you rely think that our actions got 0 effect whit our global actions?

  • Wow, Even the founder of the weather channel called man made global warming BS. I wonder what pseudo-science organizations told him it was man made?

  • Comment removed

  • This is basic formal logic. Blah blah blah, well argued, but you can use the same arguement to argue that toasted blueberry muffins are the cause of brain cancer. Or is it brain cancer leads to toasted blueberry muffins? Yes, I have watched all the videos. The problem is logic versus real life data. Sorry to tell you, but when everyone stops asking questions and take the unproven for fact (AKA Global warming), then it is not science but a religon. Don't be lazy, look for answers yourself.

  • wtf is wrong with America? Logic bad, God good. something doesn't become a religion just because you don't understand data, and even if there was no data, still not a religion, i think u meant to say belief (different than a religion). Any level of common sense will tell you that we are damaging the planet. look around you. LOGIC isn't just good, it's great, and hope we all can learn to use it. I'm praying for something to redeem humanity, weve come sooo far yet were still so stupid.

  • if the world is heating up, why is england in the coldest winter since 1913?

  • because its the mean (average) global temperature that's on the rise. not the temperature where you in particular live.

  • no we was told our winters were going to get warmer. this is not the case.

  • Please watch "Scare Tactics, Part 3". It has to do with ocean flows, and other factors.

  • im still freezing my tits off.......

  • i have been seeing my winters warmer

  • have you taken a ice age into account. scienist say we could be on the blink of a ice age. you can have all the global warming in the world. or no global warming at all the fact is when its goes cold we are screwed and what can we do to stop that.

    what will all this ACTION do then.

    plus all the TAX MONEY spent

    and it goes cold anyway

    "ALL SCIENIST WILL AGREE ICE AGE WILL HAPPEN AGAIN"

    SO LEARN HOW TO THINK

  • i've not seen ur vids but hasn't there been a much warmer period than we are in now. theres also alot of scienist that say man is not the cause of global warming. there is no evidence to charge humans. its far to early. the evidence only suggests. your basically promoting a theory. a suggestion. like i said i have not seen your videos. but have you taken into account the intensity of the sun. have you taken into account anything you bashed. maybe man made contribution is just a fraction

  • Watch, then comment.

  • The problem is that _you don't know how to think_. Without commenting on any thing you're saying, and without any ad hominem arguments or insults, I honestly mean to say that you DO NOT KNOW HOW TO THINK. But you clearly _want to_. I bet, if you got yourself a Ph.D. in logics from a good school, you would re-make all of your videos.

  • So you're enjoying being a Logician with a Doctorate then?

  • My Ph.D. is in Philosophy of Economics, but that's what _I_ enjoy. Seems like this guy is a lot more into logics - seems like something _he_ would really enjoy and from which he could benefit a great deal. As I say, I have no interest in commenting on this man or anything he's saying. It's as though this were a video of a kid trying to ride a bicycle, but _on his back_. You could make fun of the kid, or you could suggest he look into the wide wide world of biking that already exists.

  • If we can heal ourselves so can the earth heal itself..sure its better to be as clean as possible...but the earth has been through way more disaterous events then global warming...we are being lied to about global warming so a global carbon tax can be indtroduced...could it be we have been coming out of an ice age and the earth is simply running it's course?? If it means are end then thats what is meant to happen...after all I think we could use a clean slate at this point:)

  • I think the problem here is mainly part of a much bigger one. If you use simple arithmetic, you will see that we are using up far too many natural rescources far too quickly within the confines of a biosphere that DOESN'T GROW. When you stop to think about it, trying to solve the 'economics' of this situation will have you chasing your tails. Maybe it's our whole ECONOMICS SYSTEM that is to blame. Chew on that for awhile:)

  • Since we all know that the world goes through climate changes, and it's part of the life of Earth itself... it gets cold, then warms up... I just wonder that, if instead of warming, the world was getting colder.... Would these idiots want to build big heaters to warm the world? Probably so, because afterall, they are idiots.

    Dude, you THINK you are smarter and more important than you actually are.

    Slow down, take the pills you were prescribed, and realize how tiny you are...

  • alright guys think about it we wont get taxed cause the government is doing shit about this like they normally do. all we need to do is easy carpool,windmills,wood/pellets­toves because we wont be wasteing fuel and doing as much pollution. ya it might really cost some money but we wont be getting txed or go in civil depression because its up to us not the damn goverment because they cant make everyone do it.

  • oh they could... they just choose not to for the sake of capitalism, freedom of choice, and democracy.

    :-)

  • Here's the question that I have not seen from all of these videos. What are we supposed to do about it that is going to cost so much money?

  • i think the purpose of these videos isn't to tell you what you should do, but rather convince that you should, in fact, do something at all.

  • If it is not man made(which it isn't), then we shouldn't just do something to the environment for the sake of doing it.

  • I AGREE. The main detail is 'the system' that 'we' look to for solutions. How about using your logic toward a much more significant problem affecting our civilization. Suffering is brought about by lack and scarcity...inevitable 'economic harm' has zero to do with climate.

  • This man should think more carefully.

    This is the atmostphere we breathe:

    78% - Nitrogen

    20.95% - Oxygen

    0.93% - argon

    0.038% - carbon dioxide

    Thats one third of one percent.

    World temperatures have always and will always be driven by... wait for it..

    The Sun..

    CO2 fear mongering is designed to bring about a global taxation system known as Carbon Trading.

  • There is truth(god)in this mans words.

    Zombies r everywhere,armies of mongrel hoard's decapitating innocence along 0ur borders.Find solace in the 1 truth(god), only then will the sheep be returned to the Shepard Jesus Christ the son of god,he who has shown us the path to eternal life in the eternal sea.The earth Over run with sinners,they disobey the righteousness of truth and feast on carnal desires. Is it so hard to believe u r being judged,as prophesied thousands of years ago by a carpenter.

  • Please let us know when and where your book will be available...bless your heart and your logic!

  • I wish I could speak that fast.

  • What is aliens really exist and are ready to destroy our civilization because of our stupidity and ignorance? Perhaps we should rally all the worlds powers and resources to prepare for our global defense.

    Good argument to prepare for TEOTWAWKI due to GCC. Geez.

    BTW, consensus is not science. Carefully prepared experiments with repeatable results that stand the scrutiny of peer review and the test of time are the only way scientific theories are considered law, and are then considered reliable

  • You are supposed to question scientist you idiot. That is the POINT of science. Just because a handfull of lemmings whos jobs DEPEND on the theory to be true is NOT the way science decides what the truth is.

    You are a pseudo-scientist just like MANY of the government worker sponsored concensus are.

  • No Problem.

    Run out of oil, occupied Iraq.

    Run out os land and water, Canada

    Run out of Food, South America

    The world is big enough for us to take

  • And let the rest of the world, starve and thirst to death?

    Thank you very much.

  • WTF We wont give you any land! or water!!!

    canada is our land... bitch.

    no, just kidding! you're not a bitch! but the world won't hand you all these things on a silver platter. the U.S. has lost a lot of respect in the past couple years and I don't think it would be very cool if you just asked for shit from everyone.

  • at 5 minutes he says government action is a boogey man....and says the government will grow the economy...,GOVERNNMENT IS FORCE/VIOLENCE and the greatest polluter of the land sea and air("sovereign immunity"). the US military alone is worse than the world's top four private polluters combined! government simply doesnt work it sucks like a parasite.,

  • complicated. huh?

  • There is another possibility: yes==>doomsday and no===> doomsday. That is, no matter what you do...it goes disaster.

  • what a dumm ass we will see when the boondoggler is right and your killing people for food retard keep those comments to your self...... Wow this guy is asome!!! And smart!!

  • Boondogglers will always use fear of some future doom to enrich themselves. This guy isn't a boondoggler, he's just a useful idiot. Al Gore is the biggest boondoggler of them all. When he left the White House in 2001 he was worth a couple million. Now he's worth north of $100 million. Hey, fear works.

  • Ok. That's him. So?

  • You better be riding scooters or car pooling, growing your own food, habitually turning off lights, fanning yourself instead of using AC, 3 layers of clothing in the winter instead before you even think about using the heater OR I"M GONNA COME AND SHOVE THAT CHART UP YOUR ASS.

  • wow, if u dont have anything good to say...don't say it. GO SOMEWHERE ELSE SKEPTIC. AT LEAST SAY SOMETHING SMART!

    :) have a nice day,

  • Al Gore flies in private jets, uses 3 plasma TVs as monitors, spends $30,000 a month in electricity bills. And I'm supposed to tighten my belt for you idiot eco freaks so rich hypocrites like Al Gore can make money off the Climate Change scare.

    Just Google around, there's plenty of opposition to man-made Climate Change farce.

  • *$30,000 a year

  • the comment below was directed to nosePickingSob

  • screw your stupid chart, eco freak!! I better not catch you riding cars or eating imported food, like Al Gore was caught with his hypocrisy. eco freak!! There are more scientists who say humans are not responsible.

  • OMG U R so stupid! where r the scientist who say we r not responsible 2)so what if Gore was doing "ungreen" activities? this doesn't mean he is wrong or that global warming and pollution don't exist. all it means is that,because we are not sustainable, it's very hard, even for a person in his position to be 100% green. The way our world is at the moment it is impossible to be 100% green, unless you're willing to extremely alter your life.little by little we r becoming greener - YOU IDIOT!!!!

  • actually, 7000 scientists world wide have agreed that global warming exists but we are not the ones causing it. Men contributes only to 1% of the whole picture, and CO2 is only a consequence of the rise in temperature and not the cause. In the medieval ages temperature was higher than it is now.

  • i almost generated a response to your extremely ignorant comment. I was going to proof that we are causing it and that you are not taking under consideration the health risks of burning fossil etc etc...but, when someone has the amount of shit you have in their head...it'd be a waste of keystrokes...just continue on

  • first, all I said it's true, therefore not based on ignorance but based on scientific facts, second, I did not offend you. Third, it's clear you have no idea what you are talking about, fourth, fuck you

  • God if Al Gore is doing all of this that means it's ten times worse we cant even sustain a single fact long enough to make a differnce

  • Clearly, this guy is a sincere believer.

    The problem still remains: CO2 is a result of warming, not the other way around.

    Being environmentally friendly is a good idea, but it won't change the temperature even a little. - Sorry about that.

  • "The problem still remains: CO2 is a result of warming, not the other way around."

    Not understand. Please explain?

  • how's this for a thought, it does both.

  • you are so true..