Added: 5 years ago
From: fatrabbit7
Views: 34,584
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:
see all

All Comments (337)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • In other words, if you have a dissenting opinion, you are going against ALL scientific bodies of national or international standing. That's just retarded. No, that's BEYOND retarded. That's INSANE. You'd have to be out of your frickin' mind to stand in dissenting opinion to ALL scientific bodies of national of international standing. Then again, there is certainly no shortage of people who ARE insane in the world.

  • Wikipedia article for Scientific_opinion_on_climate_­­change:

    "No scientific body of national or international standing has maintained a dissenting opinion; the last was the American Association of Petroleum Geologists..."

    Hmmm, wonder why??? NO REMAINING SCIENTIFIC BODY. ZERO. ZILCH. NADA. CERO. Got it???

  • John Stossel is a fucking clown.

  • @DanzaSlap John Stossel is a tank, unlike al gore whos own evidence contradicts his claims.

  • Read the NIPCC report.

  • Central Florida HAS LOST its commercial citrus groves since the mid-'80's due to the preponderance of hard freezes. The citrus-growers have moved south.

  • Wikipedia article for Scientific_opinion_on_climate_­change:

    "With the release of the revised statement by the American Association of Petroleum Geologists in 2007, no remaining scientific body of national or international standing is known to reject the basic findings of human influence on recent climate change."

    NO REMAINING SCIENTIFIC BODY. ZERO. ZILCH. NADA. CERO. Got it???

  • look whos giving you that info, think about it

  • i cant believe you use wikipedia as your source...fail

  • Yeah, the dissenters take a stance of non-committal because there is no definitive proof either way.

  • If the federal government did only what it properly should -- provide a military and a court system -- it would be much easier to trust scientific research on this topic.

  • Stossel must be miffed that he didn't make the NBC "A" team. Lindz talks about temperature changes with a very cavalier attitude for a "climatologist". The WMO defines climate as a minimum of 30 years of data. Longer is even better.

    The 17K signatures has to be the "Oregon Petition". Totally debunked as a scam. It now claims 31K sigs. Your pet goldfish could get its name on the petition.

  • I have an M.Eng., in 1986, btu nuclear power stopped my PhD in 2001.

  • LMAO

  • IPCC = stooges to nuclear power.

  • You = stooge to the republican party

    Does putting out random, completely baseless claims like that really accomplish anything? You're just polarizing the debate and making it impossible to rationally discuss the issue.

  • Hate to mention this, I am an english scientist. Who deals in truth, not nuclear fiction!

  • So deal with truth instead of shouting useless slogans at people without any kind of factual backing.

    And what, exactly, qualifies you as a "scientist"? I assume it's more than just an undergraduate degree in a technical field.

  • "I think it's tragic that someone has frightened these kids."

    Oh my, we wouldn't want to scare the children, now would we? I'm sorry but that's got to be the dumbest argument I've ever heard. 'Global warming scares the children so we should stop talking about it! Won't someone PLEASE think of the children?!" XD

  • Yeah, but we preach them a myth...

  • Are you idiot? Or yes?

    The kid said "we won't be able to breath".

    But that is just you - alarmists. No matter how idiotic the reason is it is good for you that people are scared.

  • Finally! Scientists agree that the earth has warmed. Must explain all the ice ages that ended due to my prehistoric SUV.

  • Go read about Milankovitch cycles, as well as multiple climate forcings.

  • Well, now scientist agree the world is warmer than then.

  • AgnesG2000 / you are an uneducated ASS!!! the only warming going on is the space FRYED between your ears.. Come pay my $500 gas/electric bill..ass face

  • "Come pay my $500 gas/electric bill..ass face"

    ROFLMAO! Oh my God, I haven't laughed like that in ages! I love it when people argue over things they know nothing about, libs and cons alike. You guys are morons!

    XD

  • the rushie herbert hoover neocons is the obstruction party of NO ... the neocons are mind controlled mega ditto heads ... the rushie meocons are concentrated in alaska, texas, louisiana ... look at global warming north pole ice, galveston island, and new orleans ... the meocons still believe that global warming is a joke and fully support the meocon rushbo as the official voice for the the grand oil party ... and they are responsible for having no other opinions and no media fairness doctrine

  • I love videos like this. It just shows how really silly the GW alarmists and their moronic followers are. Thank you John S.

  • Al Gore and the other alarmists have thought up an ingenious (inconvient) lie to earn money by terrifying the (common) people.

  • john stossel is awesome

  • I'd also like to point out in climatology saying the recent 10 year cooling is an indicator of a trend is just as mathematically valid as saying the 10 year mean is an indicator. I.e. the yearly trend says one thing, the 10 year trend says something else, the 100 year trend says something else etc etc.. In climatology saying 100 years shows a future trend is completely ludicrous, learn some maths! If you where a real scientist you would know the difference between correlation and causation!

  • We need renewable energy and it will help our economy. Lets remove dumb oil jobs and replace them with better ones.

  • If globalwarming don't kill US chin@ will they will create a new shit because they are filty bastards that will kill us all.

    !Death to dog eaters!

  • Here comes teh next ice age.

  • Do your part! Stop global scaremongering today!

  • oil at $140/barrel ... gasoline at nearly $5/gallon ... the rushie neocons don't have an energy plan because their energy program leader ken lay was caught and convicted at enron manipulating energy stealing billions ... it is all part of their war on the law and science ... so the saudis have raised the price of oil because the rushies must be stopped from running the world over with their 2 mpg gas guzzler hummers ... they are destroying the planet ... but the saudis don't want to die either

  • enron was the biggest supporter of anthropogenic global warming.

  • The IPCC are the biggest collection of self interest people on this planet. They are not sceintists.

  • here's the truth on that so called "petition"!

    "The names of the signers are available on the OISM's website, but without listing any institutional affiliations or even city of residence, making it very difficult to determine their credentials or even whether they exist at all. When the Oregon Petition first circulated, in fact, environmental activists successfully added the names of several fictional characters and celebrities to the list..."

    sourcewatch

  • more...

    "The institute is so lax about screening names, however, that virtually anyone can sign, including for example Al Caruba, a pesticide-industry PR man and conservative ideologue who runs his own website called the "National Anxiety Center." Caruba has no scientific credentials whatsoever..."

    sourcewatch

  • more! this is the truth on that so called "petition"!

    "Even in 2003, the list was loaded with misspellings, duplications, name and title fragments, and names of non-persons, such as company names."

    sourcewatch

  • here's the truth, from NASA...

    top 5 warmest years worldwide since the 1890's ...

    1) 2005 hottest

    2) 1998 ties with 2007

    3) 2002

    4) 2003

    5) 2004

  • 1998 was the hottest year on record dumbass!

    in fact we have cooled in the last 10 years also the "record" only goes back a couple of decades with good resolution and what about the med evil warm period eh??

  • nope, 2005 was the warmest year, and even if 1998 was the warmest year, the LONG-TERM TREND will still be INTACT!

    the current warming trend has gone down for awhile in the past, only to resume the rising trend! even if it has cooled for 10 years, it doesn't mean the long-term trend is not intact!

    that is SPIN from the fossil fuel industry!

    what about the med evil period??? tell me!

    get a BRAIN!

  • stopglobalwarming08

    There was the most CO2 in the 50's and it was cold. There was fear of global warming in the 30's and freezing in the 70's. Finally Al Gore does not follow what he says why?

  • 2005 warmest year? well the handly centre (global warming alarmist supporters by the way) disagree with you, all 5 of there temperature models show 1998 warmest year "on record" i.e. the CRUTEM3, CRUTEM3v, HadCRUT3, HadCRUT3v, HadSST2 data sets all show it!

    My 10yrs plus researching this and my degree ion paleo-climatology and geology shows otherwise, so maybe you should look up the facts before commenting!

    Its funny how alarmists always spew incorrect facts

  • using words like "alarmists" shows your BIAS OPINION!

    scientists are supposed to be OBJECTIVE!

    NASA GISS says 2005 is the hottest, MORON!

    i'd take NASA GISS over someone CLAIMING to have a degree...

    and even if 1998 was the hottest, so what?? that DOESN'T prove man-made global warming doesn't exist!

    funny how someone CLAIMING to be an "expert" just repeats FOSSIL FUEL INDUSTRY SPIN!

  • "scientists are supposed to be OBJECTIVE!"

    Another reason I'm disappointed in what many alarmists are saying.

  • "and even if 1998 was the hottest, so what?? that DOESN'T prove man-made global warming doesn't exist!"

    You're fully right. If you ground your opinion on the argument 1998 was the hottest, it's still possible that man-made global warming exists. But did I say that were all the arguments scientists have made? Nope.

  • Go read this article first for example - online.wsj[dot]com[slash]artic­le[slash]SB124597505076157449[­dot]html - (can't post links on Youtube) "The inconvenient truth is that the earth's temperatures have flat-lined since 2001, despite growing concentrations of C02."

  • In truth Al Dork's metric on 1998 was incorrect.. it was not the hottest... their whole 'global warming' argument is falling apart; hence, they've now switched to 'climate change'... that way they can cover the spread. You do know the idiot who started all this is also the same idiot who in the 70's said we were going to have an 'ice age'.... idiots, idiots, idiots... and we are idiots too if we fall for this crap.... oh wait... most have... I live in a country of average IDIOTS!

  • just hope they all get drafted for ww3, let all the dumb fuckers die in the trenches so humanities iq can go up a few points

  • Global warming movement are just misplaced communists/socialists. Earth is billions of years old and we have the audacity to believe we can destroy it in a couple hundred? The 1930's weather patterns were far worse then now...check it out. And one more thing. Recently read vitamin C doesn't do a damn thing for a cold. Yup something as basic as Vit C and scientist dont know if it does anything. How many times do you read an article thats starts out with "Scientists now believe" Changes constantly

  • all those ppl on this vid connected to EXXON?

    just do a search on global warming & exxon!

  • i meant "are all those ppl(sitting down) on this vid connected to EXXON?"

  • hahahah I love the scientist at the end. He's so like pissed off and frustrated about this global warming propaganda shit.

  • explain hurricanes..EXPLAIN the fucking Glaciers Melting EXPLAIN WTF WILL HAPPEN WHEN THOOSE ICE CAPS MELT AND LEAVE WATER FLOODING eXPLain fUCKERS EXPLAIn! AND if thoose fucking tardbags are smart enough they will know that 0 degrees is the freezing point and if it goes higher then that glaciers and ice will melt fucking tard

  • The ice we skate is gettin' pretty thin,the water's gettin' warmer so we might as well swim!Hey now,you're an all-star,get your game on get paid!!LMAO

  • GW is not happening! It was just fiction from nuclear power.

  • On my blgo I tell you how to do nuclear fusion: Power with no CO2, or toxic death. But you are probably not intereted in true science!

  • Our best bet for nuclear fusion is strip mining the moon.

  • We will never be able to cure all the control freaks in the world, but we can make it absoltely clear that we do not accept their demented excuses and scare mongering. After that - just say no to their incessant nagging for more money and power. Fight them on every front against their efforts to destroy humanity.

  • All the people obn this pannel are funded (primarily) from oil companies. Watch the documentary "Everything is Cool," they do a breakdown of this segment and the people in it. And they are talking about money?

  • The IPCC, the ultimate self motivation group, into phantom science. So not scientists big time!

  • polar ice caps serve to reflect sunlight that would otherwise stay within the ozone layer...a sort of natural thermostat as you may call it. as the temperature rises(yes! even 1 fucking degree" the ice caps melt which leaves less ice to reflect the sunlight causing the earth to warm quicker. It is a viscious cycle. And if any of you really payed any fucking attention...the world is not going to be underwater in a few years...this is a process that is getting quicker every year

  • anartica's ice is at record levels right now so can it!

    John coleman is sueing Al gore for fraudulantly raising false awareness of global warming.

    The green bubble is about to burst!

  • If you want to help end Global Warming, go to Answer4Earth and play the game. They make a donation to environmental foundations for every correct answer you give.

  • That would help global warming! Give money to people. Idiot

  • Instead of trying to fix the problem lets just look for excuses to ignore the problem, that way it is much easier. We don't have to change our lifestyle.

  • Algore and his partner Maurice Strong have a history of fraudulent schemes designed to get money from the government. Now the two of them are trying to hit it big, make billions, using this global warming scheme and trading carbon credits. It has been investigated. Read the article for yourself.

    tinyurl com/374kou

  • I disagree with Global warming. I'm not going to go into alot of detail about this. This s what I am doing my reserch paper on and I have discovered.

    -This happened before: 

    1890's- earth is warming

    1920's- earth is warming

    1940's- earth is cooling

    1950's - earth is warming

    1970's- earth is cooling

    1990's- earth is cooling

    now - earth is warming

    Wow now how many times did we change our predictions based on science.

  • Thank You finaly someone with the same research as myself! really we've gone thought all this before and we have to stop scareing the children and the normal people just watching the news i don't want a new tax beacause some ass on the hill wants some new money! Thanks Again Cheers

  • No problem

  • Shadow,

    Look at rural areas and you'll get a different picture again - NO warming at all, except in the Arctic (warming) and Antarctic (cooling)

  • You know I'm opposed to Global Warming right?

    I know that there is no real change except in the poles. And they are both cooling a little bit.

  • Yes. I assume that you mean that you're opposed to the theory that man is the cause of climate change. Most rational people agree with you.

    The Arctic is the only area that seems to be warming ... unless you have data to the contrary ?

  • the thing i can't understand about people who keep denying global warming is that they seem to not want people to clean up their environment. isn't this a good thing?? you know we've been pumping co2 into the atmosphere for decades, you know ice caps are melting at an alarming rate, you know animals are disappearing... what is your solution? to sit around and watch youtube? why is it bad to be an environmentally responsible person??

  • "they seem to not want people to clean up their environment. isn't this a good thing?? "

    Clean you ass off if you want. Just keep your hands off my wallet and my freedom.

    "you know we've been pumping co2 into the atmosphere for decades,"

    CO2 is not a pollutant. It is essential to life, and it makes plants grow better.

    "ice caps are melting at an alarming rate"

    Total combined Arctic and Antarctic sea ice is normal or slightly above normal at this time.

  • "keep your hands off my wallet and my freedom."

    oh please, here we go with the tough guy shit again.... no one's asking for your money or your freedom to clean the environment, put the gun down, i know you're tough, ok? you're very tough... i know....

    "CO2 is not a pollutant"

    too much co2 kills the atmosphere, do not deny the effect of greenhouse gases

    "Arctic and Antarctic sea ice is normal or slightly above normal at this time."

    ummmm, no it's not...??

  • jerk-slightly above normal??? ANd what exactly would be normal to you?

  • Well if we keep killing forests, and produce more and more co2 through unnatural methods it creates a severe unbalance. You can't just say it is there, and has been so its fine.

  • timg...did you know the ocean is capable of farting more methane gas than you can possibly imagine?

  • Yea, and I am capable of ripping off your head and throwing it.

  • lol oooo a tough keyboard jockey! i messed with the wrong button pushing treehugging homosexual didnt I? You are not capable of anything...you dont even know who i am or what i look like but i guess you assume just like you do about everything else, i.e global warming;.

  • I am still capable of ripping off your head and throwing it, so calm down tough guy, ermm I mean 12 year old trying to act tough.

  • lol no you are not hahahahaha u funny lil man

  • I have hands so I am capable of doing it, so get over it. This isn't my thinking btw it's yours with your the methane is capable of of farting more methane gas than I can imagine.

  • in order to rip someones head off you need more than hands...you need muscles poindexter and you just dont have them so get over it. BTW massive amounts of methane gas does erupt from the ocean occasionally...that is a fact. You could never rip anyones head off and you havent. Your analogy is shit timmy just like the retarded way you think

  • Hmm...well what if I anchored you to the ground, took a piece of rope tied it tightly around your head, and then attached the other end to a car and drove. Then throw your ripped off head.

    You truly are a simple minded fool incapable of thinking up even the simplest of situations.

  • lol Changing your claim now huh, the car would do it but you certainly could not. like i said fag boy...you dont have the muscle to rip off someones head comprende. The ocean farts methane gas on its own...it does it by itself without machines

    Now off to speech therapy with you cocksucker

  • haha the guy brings up alma-ata, which is in kazakhstan, as the city in siberia, much of a scientist he is

  • what caused the ice age?

  • I'm for the increase of global warming. It will warm up more areas of the earth for living on, so that people and animals and plants will have more space to live on happily. And also it is the sun causing it anyway.

  • I'm gonna run a little experiment of my own when I gain all the relavant data. I wanna see what happens on a microscale, and maybe the results will apply on a macroscale.

    I dunno, we'll see when I do some more research after that.

  • Paul, I don't need to be a scientist to form an intelligent opinion. I've listened to both sides of the debate and the only facts I'm convinced of is that the climate is warming and CO2 increasing. I don't believe GW is a crisis...despite your rather emotional comments.

  • Paul thanks for the warning, I've heard this for 20 years, i think I'll risk it.

  • Where are your creds and certs paulb5677?

    What are you using for a basis of fact in your opinions?

  • Listen, Im a scientist and I say that humans are caUsing global climate change by deforestation and CO2 emmisionS. This is a FACT!

    I think you will find out that Im right when your homes are flooded, burnt etc. But then its too late!

  • You are not a scientist. If you where understand that no predictions of flooding etc are not true and just exaggerations.

  • Yes I admit that there are exaggerations, but there is deffinitly scientific evidence that shows the Earth's climate is changing.

    Nature provides enough to satisfy every man's need, but not every man's greed.

    If we continue excess deforestation and polution, future generations will pay the consequences.

  • Possible the climate is changing. The surface record no longer shows any extreme warming trend outside the higher latitudes of the Northern hemisphere. Also remember the climate forcing of the 21st century is mostly poorly understood positive feedback effects. There is no consensus of a tipping point and runaway warming part of this debate.

  • look up temperature records that go back 3500 years. we used that data for other reasons, no need to spit on it now. when you look at long term data, it seems like we can expect the opposite of global warming. (thats right, cooling)

    the icecaps on other planets near us are melting with ours. (due to changes in the sun)

    please don't get emotional, either side could be wrong, but try not to only confirm your own belief. you need to look at both sides in order to have an opinion.

  • Global warming wreaks havoc with nature (polar bears, butterfiles, frogs, bats, squid, ... ) ... and they never say bee ... while the GW greenhouse gas infrared heat is killing the bumblebee and honey bee ... anyway ... food prices rise ... then soar .. then be not available no matter what the cost ... the rushie neocons say that GW is a hoax that food, drought water, and health care are not needed ... that the role of govt is not to care for its people but to get more oil in iraq

  • That's so true---a little warming in Canada would be nice right now.

  • Maybe because they were totally unaffected by the treaty since their economy could handle it just fine.

    My question to you. If the increase in CO2 over the last century in our atmosphere has only been %0.01 (from 280 to 380 ppm) then how can we expect man-made CO2 to be in big enough quantities to do anything?

  • "Maybe because they were totally unaffected by the treaty since their economy could handle it just fine."

    Many dont have to cut much GHG to reach their 1990 levels that does not exlpain the ones that do have to cut alot of GHGs.

    Are you a mertologist or climatologist.

    If not why are arguing somthing you know nothing about.

    Cynide in the body at .01% your fine... at .02% your dead. Just because somthing is a small %... does not mean it has no effect.

  • Here are the orgs that you are arguing against. NASA National Research Council American Association for the Advancement of Science NOVA/PBS WorldWIldlifeFund Geological Society of America National Geographic American Meteorological Society American Geophysical Union American Institute of Physics United Nations Can you name ONE crediable organization that disagrees with them?
  • If you really think GW is not real or not human caused then these countries are the only nations in the world that were not corrupted or deceived.

    Afghanistan, Chad, Comoros, Iraq, Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic, Saint Kitts, Nevis, San Marino, Tajikistan, Timor-Leste, Tonga, Turkey, Zimbabwe and USA (under Bush).

  • Could you be so kind and show me where I called all nations that signed onto Kyoto corrupt nations?

  • IF GW is a hoax and they are not corrupt then why did they sign it?

  • I'll say it again, maybe because they didn't have very much emissions to cut away in the first place.

  • You do realize that the Chief of NASA sees no point in combating global warming because we just rebounded from the coldest temperature range in the last 8,000 years right? Also PBS is a TV station, not an organization of real scientists, the same goes for the IPCC, only 250 of their thousands of employees are real scientists.

  • "Chief of NASA sees no point in combating global warming because we just rebounded from the coldest temperature range in the last 8,000 years right?"

    NASA's offcial position is here.

    nasa(.)gov/worldbook/global_wa­rming_worldbook(.)html

    (you need to put in the W W W part at the front)

  • Where's the rebuttal to what the chief of NASA said? This just repeats what MSM says.

  • Is the WWF an organization of climate researchers? The same goes for the GSA, and the AGU, and the AIP. I'm pretty sure national geographic is a Media group and nothing else, as for the UN, see my point on the IPCC.

  • American Meteorological Society

    American Association for the Advancement of Science

    And these guys....

    What are your sources again????

  • Would you like for me to pm them to you?

  • Tell you what. Since your such an expert on the issue, why don't you view my profile, and from there click the link that leads to my blog? I've summed up mostly all the reasons I became a skeptic after believing in AGW for six years. Rebut that and I will change positions again.

  • With regards to NASA being an organization that supports the idea of AGW, I'm pretty sure what one scientist in the vid mentioned answers your question. If NASA was offered billions to research something, would you expect them to say "It's not real, so we don't want 2 billion for anything," and move on from there?

  • Ohh they corrupt then...

  • Probably, they run the risk of losing funding everyday. AGW is just one more source of money for them.

  • The United Nations seems to be okay with children being raped in return for food, so I don't mind arguing against them.

  • I'm pretty sure there is a big difference between cyanide in the body and CO2 in the atmosphere.

  • The point still stands

  • No it doesn't. If you really think that cyanide in the body and a tiny change in the earth's atmosphere are a fair comparison then maybe you shouldn't be debating this issue.

  • This video does explain how spending trillions to cut emissions would result in higher energy costs and a dysfunctional economy. It's funny how you bring up the UN as a group that advocates AGW because these are scientists that are a part of it too. They sure don't seem very concerned about AGW consequences.

  • "This video does explain how spending trillions to cut emissions would result in higher energy costs and a dysfunctional economy"

    Why did so many developed countries sign Kyoto if it will cripple thier ecomonies.

  • I think this is the third time now. They signed on because it won't cripple their economies.

  • Why did so many developed countries sign Kyoto if it will cripple thier ecomonies.

    You are saying ALL other DEVELOPED countries, which are simular to the US, will get positive effect on thier economy. While the US will get a negative effect on thiers?

    Thats kinda backwards... The us has the strongest economy in the world, are you saying the US is the only country that cant handle it?

  • I didn't say they would get a POSITIVE effect, I said that those countries don't release as much CO2 to begin with, so it's not hard for them to follow the protocol. The only population that comes close to releasing the same amount of CO2 per person are the countries that make up the European Union. All those nations put together release 2.5 times less carbon emissions then the US.

  • I completely agreee the US is only 5% of worlds population while it contrubutes to 25% of the problem. To me thats means the US should cut GHGs more than any other country.

  • Which isn't possible. The US economy is too dependent on fossil fuels to possibly come close to reaching the Kyoto protocol without reaching the consequences mentioned in the above vid.

  • To sum up what I mean: It's obvious that contrary to what you may think, all other nations release several times less greenhouse emissions then the US. Do you really think the US and all other developed countries are in the same ballpark when it comes to greenhouse emissions? Of course not, the US can't meet up to the protocol without crippling the economy. See the above vid for more information on that.

  • How would investing in alternatives fuels cripple the economy, wouldnt taht help.

    As for cutting GHG that would be the burden of the fossil feul companies.

  • Because alternative fuels don't even come close to providing for our energy needs. While I've had some fun with using nanosolar and do agree that some time in the next few decades we can make some significant emission cuts, there is no known renewable energy source that can meet up to our needs.

  • Also the other source of this information on CO2 released per person: w w w dot carbon planet dot com. Just click on the links towards emissions by country and you'll see why the US has a long ways to go compared to other nations before it can follow the Kyoto protocol.

  • It seems that you saying that the US is so behind in tech that we should be cut some slack even tho we are the biggest polluters.

    Ande you saying the US is the only country that cant handle it?

  • We're not behind in tech, we just need more energy then any other nation on the planet. Just to give an example of how most alternatives are either just as bad as oil or can't meet up to our needs, see the video "myth: corn ethanol is great." It was a real eye opener for me, and perhaps you'll feel the same way.

  • Are you fucking kidding me...

    John Stossel's pattern:

    GW is not happening

    GW data in not in yet

    GW data is inconclusive

    GW is real but not human caused

    GW is real but its not really that bad

    AL Gore is a hypocrite

    And now he attacks the possible solutions to GW like ethanol and hybrids.

    You cant get me to believe GW is not real so you pitch the ethanol thing.

  • No, you pitched the issue of reducing emissions, so thus the issue of ethanol was brought up. And no, he didn't say there was no warming, he said just the opposite just after 30 seconds into the vid. Maybe it's about time for you to watch it.

  • "he didn't say there was no warming"

    Thats his stance over time.

    When poeple stop believe the first lie he moves on the next topic.

    Of course he is saying GE exists now, but a while back he denied GW was even happening.

    It very simple pattern that exposes the poeple that are always wrong.

  • Could you direct me to a vid where he said there was no warming at all? I don't see anything wrong with changing views once new evidence is available. Happened to me over a year ago.

  • I think the main reason why I can't get you to switch positions is that you're too entrenched in that belief. No matter how much evidence is put in front of you, you'll deny it means anything. But hey, I'm more than willing to switch back to being a believer.

  • Just look over the argument I have in my blog. I gave a link for it in my youtube profile. You don't have to agree with anything I say, but before you call me crazy at least explain what is flawed in my over all argument.

  • poeple can judge this thread for themselves .. thats enough for me.

  • Now that shows how unwilling you are to listen to what the other side is saying. Not a single person has ever offered any rebuttals to what I say there, no one at all. If you want you could be the first person to change that.

  • Are you honestly arguing that your side hasn't been begging the question, too? Science involves changing opinions over time. Some people have knee jerk skeptic reactions to things that others embrace whole heartedly. Nobody is holier than thou, here. The truth is that we need both kinds of scientists. YOu just seem pissed that people disagree with you and your favored authority figures.

  • You keep saying you have proof or evidence but you offer sources that will back to your cliams.

  • Of course, offering sources is pretty much the way things go when it comes to citing information. I do that on the blog because that's pretty much what you're supposed to do if you intend to give people accurate information.

  • You can see my entire argument here:

    patriotprodigy dot blogspot dot com

    I'm not saying there's anything wrong with going green, I intend on buying a chevy volt when they become available, but saying that GW is more important then the economy isn't something I agree with anymore.

  • "GW is more important then the economy isn't something I agree with anymore. "

    Well I know the energy companies would like everyone to think that way.

  • Actually some energy companies are thinking the other way around. One such company is Duke Energy. They actually are asking for help to "go green" because they don't want to be part of the problem in case it is man-made.

  • Some are some are not.

    Sorry dude but there is just way too much evidence supporting human caused GW.

    The world wide acceptance of it.

    The fact that I cant find one crediable scientific organization that says otherwise.

    All the most contravesal media and scientific individuals like John Stessel and Tim Ball say otherwise.

  • While the most respected media and scientific individuals like Dan Rather and David Sazuki agree.

    The weather is really fucked up lately.

    When you think about ...what did the earth look like the last time it burned off as much oil as we didi during a 200 strech.

    I cant comment on the actual science because it is someting I know next to nothing about.

  • If you really think Dan Rather is a respected and fair media person, then perhaps you should get out more. From what I can see the weather is the same that it has been for decades. I don't know what you mean by a 200 strech, elaborate on that. And if you know next to nothing on the actual science of it then what makes you so sure you have the right answer?

  • I trust Dan more more then John Stossel, Glen beck and Fox news.

    John Stossel did a story on how cigs do not cause cancer.

    The 200 years stretch is the industrial revolution. WHy do think the price of oil is doubling every 5 years. It is srarting to run out, thus we burnt off near all the oil that has been discovered within 200 years.

  • Could you direct me to that story on cigs not causing cancer? And what does that story have to do with global warming anyways?

    As for the rest of what you said, Stossel did a pretty good story on why they're rising in the first place. It's strictly supply/demand.

  • I disagree, there's way too much evidence that says otherwise. See the following site:

    patriotprodigy dot blogspot dot com.

    If a million people believe in a dumb idea, it's still a dumb idea. Why don't you show me some of this evidence?

  • How come you always provide links that are not scientific and that were created in the past 5 years. A neocon website, come on!!!!

    w w w(.)nasa(.)gov/worldbook/globa­l_warming_worldbook(.)html

    aaas(.)org/news/press_room/cli­mate_change/

    pbs(.)org/wgbh/warming/etc/syn­opsis(.)html

    geosociety(.)org/positions/pos­ition10(.)htm

    ametsoc(.)org/policy/climatech­angeresearch_2003(.)html

    agu(.)org/sci_soc/everyonecl(.­)html

    aip(.)org/gov/policy12(.)html

  • Which link did I provide that was unscientific? Also I would like for you to explain how it is a "Neocon" website.

  • No there arent. Do you even realise that the most important greenhouse gas (that affects global warming) is Vater vapor. Also there is this solar wind also, that changes tempetare in much more significant way, in fact we are all inside the sunds athmosephere.