Paxman hosts debate between a climate scientist and oil industry funded lobbyist

[scotsmaninusa]

the oil guy looks like the ugly cunt who played the sax in 'haircut 100'

watch?v=R7ayawh378Q

thank you and goodnight

[Mr777gio777]

Agriculture? The CO2 rises would cause warming. Just as low temperatures affect crops negatively so does high temps. Due to high heat ground water will be lost and plant water would evaporate at an accelerated rate. This means killing of of necessary plants to our survival and less CO2 filter thus more CO2 increase. What can we do? We can filter out CO2 from the exhaust of cars to only expel air. We could use nuclear, solar, hydroelectric, and wind energy to power home, businesses, and etc.

[Mr777gio777]

What will be affected first? Agriculture and fishing. Due to changing currents the temps of the oceans will be changed thus fish populations will begin to shift. Not too bad right? It is predicted that by 2100 ocean pH could drop by up to .3, this would make our oceans near neutral. By 2200 we might have acidic oceans and that means massive ocean extinction.

[Mr777gio777]

Climate Change is a natural thing. However we are putting CO2 into the atmosphere that hasn't been there before. CO2 causes warming due to the nature. In short it lets all light energy in but also holds onto heat energy thus its role in the greenhouse effect. What people are claiming now is nonsense... this isn't going to affect us now however in the future there will be many consequences. Mostly the change in ocean pH and ocean currents as well as temperatures.

[LongliveSnak2e]

THE JEWS DID IT!

[col13x]

Hi Ash . The single most limiting factor in the growth of any plant is not water, or sunlight but co2 ... if a plant receives more co2 it grows bigger and healthier. co2 exists in such a small quantity in ratio to all the other gasses present.. if you were looking for a culprit of global warming it would be water vapor, but even that avenue is unfounded. The true culprit of global warming ( if there is such a thing ) is the sun.

[crisisofconsciousnes]

@col13x THANKYOU, SANITY

[takioc]

@col13x Hi i'm not in the know with all this but believe there are conspiracies and agendas against mankind. Please can you explain in short if possible, what the score is with global warming and co2? i mean, is global warming real? i know many people who say nature's seasons are visibly changing. Thanks.

[col13x]

paxman is a bbc belligerent wanker and employed via and by the n.w.o... co2 .. IS NOT A CAUSE OF any kind of global warming... if you believe it is, then you are an idiot

[ash4432]

@col13x whats your proof. can you debunk the green house effect.

[gnarlyb]

@col13x

the guys is a scientist, the other guy is an oil motherfucker making a living helping the oil cartels ruin the planet and hold the world in economic bondage... and you're saying the scientist is part of the NWO?? dude wake the fuck up

[takioc]

@gnarlyb Well said friend, i can't go with the swearing because i'm a Christian but that does not make you wrong! :-)

[Mr777gio777]

@col13x

Anyone who resorts to name calling, use of the n.w.o, and believes the green house effect isn't true is an idiot. If you have any information or data to back up his association with the n.w.o or that the greenhouse effect doesn't exist please by all means share it... lol

[SebXUK]

"It doesn't take a political scientist to tell the world has problems"

-"Yeah but it takes a room full of morons to think that they're small enough for them to handle"

[stefman666]

ya know, i think i could take golbal warmin skeptics more seriously if some of them were actually climatologists or not funded by oil companies.

[kellygiz]

LOL, sounds like he says mr. evil :)

[crazywhapeles]

Any institution funded by government is political, period. People should stop denying human nature.

[anoniab]

Oxygen is a greenhouse gas too; perhaps the warmists would suggest we do away with it as well?

[jisf0rjosh]

Actually it isn't, water vapor and ozone are however

[dinkolino2]

lol

[stefman666]

@anoniab oh how clever. but seriously you should probably research before you say things like that.

[95xwolf95]

i love him

[InconspicuousPerson]

hes got beef

[JonThm]

read Nuclear fusion in molecular systems

Green plan ts evolved with a global level for CO2 of 40%. It is at 0.00037% now: More CO2, more life on Earth.

[gregrutz]

China is building a new coal fired plant every 2 weeks. Looks like we are in for a dirty hot earth.

[juscurious]

This interviewer Jeremy Paxman is an arrogant SOB and a real POS. He is typical of the types who work for the BBC. He is not a journalist. He already has his opinion and is going to try to structure the conversation to push his opinion rather than present both views. This is what the BBC is all about. That said this myth of Global Warming is starting to fall apart. It has been cooling for the last 8 years. The Climate ALWAYS changes. It has ALWAYS CHANGED. AWG is the fraud of the century.

[debaser102]

I'm amazed that people still think that global warming is a myth, or even that we have played no part in causing it! The IPCC is one of the most academically rigorous scientific organisations ever to have existed and has made explict our relationship to climate change. Please don't be fooled by decontextualised (or sometimes completely fabricated) science espoused by organisations such as the CEI.

[juscurious]

There is so much wrong with your post that I would exceed the 500 word limit correcting your mistakes. The IPCC is not an Academically rigorous scientific organization. It's a POLITICAL BODY engaging in politics. The conclusions drawn by the participants were individual but a small group wrote a conclusion that was contridictary to what many scientists wrote. Get your facts straight. Anyway SCIENCE DOES NOT PROCEED UPON CONCENSUS. There have many times where the concesus was wrong. Einstein?

[debaser102]

Please read:

Risbey, J.S. (2008) The New Climate Discourse: Alarmist or Alarming. Global Environmental Change vol. 18 pg 26

and

Garnaut, R. (2008) The Garnaut Climate Change Review. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK I'm sorry but you are misinformed, the IPCC website (and its conduct) makes it explicit that it is not a political body. The conclusion arrived at was approved by the vast majority of the scientists involved. The CEI bases its views on science that isn't peer review, why?

[debaser102]

Also, your point about science's relationship consensus is academic. Science procedes on being accountable and falsifiable. The findings submitted to the IPCC fulfilled both these criteria. Science cited by the CEI does not.

[dinkolino2]

are you still amazed?

[JonThm]

The world has been cooling for 4 years. As CO2 emissions have climbed!

[JonThm]

Global levels of CO2 arte fixed at 0.00037% today: though they rise in an ice age. CO2 does nothing!

[milosbez]

Paxman: "What is your beef then!"

What a LEGENDARY line rofl

[JonThm]

Plants evoled with 40% CO2. Thjere is now 0.00037% - adn you say this is a problem? Plants take it in, so more CO2. more life! More CO2, your in an ice age!

[Jadiustark]

Too bad today there is animal life that cannot survive those levels, corals other shell forming organisms that cannot survive an overly acidic ocean caused by excess CO2, and we (humans) have a delicate agriculture and food supply system that will collapse with drastically changing weather patterns. Oh yeah, don't forget that most urban centers are near sea level.

[gregrutz]

If we made more CO2 wouldn't the plants just use it up? Any studies on this?

[JonThm]

There is only 0.00037% CO2 in the air. Green plants evolved with 40% CO2 in the air. More CO2 = more life. and a cooler world as it happens!

[anoniab]

Looks like we're being piled on, my friend.

[JonThm]

@anoniab Nuclear Power is using its money to warm academic ideas! Hmm.

[kellygiz]

Yes. Of course. That's exactly what climatologists have been doing for the last several decades. Deforestation is of course, a big factor on how much CO2 can be absorbed by plants.

[JonThm]

Plants take in CO2, to support all life on Earth! O2 is their waste gas.

[telemetricsT]

You're right, and I learnt that in elementary school too. The problem here is an EXCESS of CO2 compared to what the plants can absorb, because we are pumping CO2 up (in the form of oil, gas and coal) from deep beneath the ground.

[Mikeishere1st]

JassuElla "ecosphere's limited capability to re-absorb the man-made surplus" Says WHO? Proven HOW? There's been over 5000! PPM CO2 on this planet in the past and it obviously got absorbed thus DISPROVING your theory. Almost all plants IMMEDIATELY start growing faster with more CO2. That ALSO undermines your theory. You have this ARROGANT idea that YOU can dictate some 'IDEAL' temperature for the planet & some 'IDEAL' amount of CO2. But you have ZERO basis for dictating either of them.

[Mikeishere1st]

Sat temps show COOLING since 2002 with CO2 going UP. NATURE is now proving econitwits WRONG!! James Hansen's predicted continued WARMING back in 2000.. WRONG!!! He's a FRAUD POLITICAL HACK; Gore is a SCAM ARTIST making million$. The last 10 years show ZERO correlation between CO2 and global warming. CO2 is a MINOR GHG to begin with + there's only .00038 of it in the air + we only add .04 of that = totally INSIGNIFICANT. IT'S THE SUN, water vapor, ocean currents, biomass, etc.

[leroideschoux]

Haha, I love how the presentator just kills him "but you are not a scientist are you? thank you" "he is at least a scientist"

lol at how he gets pissed off at the end ^^ Does turn into a political debate at the end

[eastendlukey]

yanks arent ready for us brits!! it is physically impossible for a yank to stand up to REAL questions. fox news and cnn are so wishy-washy. they never attempt to ask the hard-hitting questions

[baynrw92]

I don't think the yank did that badly

[masmit]

Interestingly, the scientist (Dr. Mitchell) is currently refusing to release his correspondence with other IPCC scientists, ignoring his responsibilities under the Freedom of Information Act - ironic considering all his claims of openness and peer review and so-on. These people are stonewalling for all they're worth - what are they hiding?

[CyrusGuitar]

funny reading the yank comments on here. dont they teach science in your schools? Or is your science curriculum supplied by exxon? Global warming is happening and you have your heads in the sand. Pathetic.

[Tatarize]

They teach science very badly. And actually yes, part of the science curriculum is actually supplied by Exxon. *Seriously*. An Inconvenient Truth was going to be distributed to science classrooms free of charge but they turned it down because they didn't want to lose Exxon's money.

[CyrusGuitar]

the poor yank didnt know what hit him. probably only went on fox previously.

[manwihthat]

CO2, CO2, and water vapor? Water vapor is the biggest green house gas making up 95 percent of all green house gases and thats only the gas. Now take into acount how much CO2 nature pumps out and realize it leaves us only making 6 percent of CO2 and this means the difference we could make is way to small to worry. We can't control the sun or

[JassuElla]

See, and that's where you are wrong.

The problem isn't the CO2 itself, but the ecosphere's limited capability to re-absorb the man-made surplus. Imagine a bucket with a small hole in the bottom, constantly receiving water and constantly emitting water. Imagine it being in a state of equilibrium, full but not overflowing. Now imagine what happens when we constantly add to the water that goes into the bucket, while simultaneously reducing the size of the hole (i.e. logging the rainforests).

[manwihthat]

And the higher the levels the weaker it becomes. The people logging replant their trees while the poor people are taking away the rainforests. In fact the forest in America have not really change in size in the past century. Even if you were not hear nature would make greenhouse gases with that land. You do know that the environmentalists pushing AGW have political agenda like control, population control, and socialism. You would not like any of these.

[dave46563]

Plus I find him quite funny sometimes, lol.

[OutlawTomFantastic]

It's incredible how biased the BBC is. The interviewer seems almost angry at the Competitive Enterprise Institute guy for daring to disagree with his cherished Global Warming hysteria. Do people in Britain realize how much propaganda the BBC pushes on them?

[dave46563]

Paxo is just trying to get the truth out of him...and it usually always works...Paxo is a great BBC asset and he's not afraid of upsetting people..He does it to get the truth and does'nt stand for people trying to avoid questions...and by the way, Paxo has even gone against his own employer, the BBC, live on air .

[ewanog]

ownnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnned. outlaw, have you ever even watched the bbc before?

[Olster81]

whether excess raises in climate are purely natural or contributed to by man is irrelevant anyway, you cant cover the whole world in concrete, and we are living organisms that come from nature, and need it to live! or at least i do anyhow, maybe you guys are superhuman and think this scientific shit is actually neccessary

[littleredbirdy]

I don't like News stations that have a preconceived opinion on a matter, even when they agree with my stance. This is pure vomit.

[clausenogbach]

I am amazed how little physics is debated. If just a small % of clouds is caused by cosmic radiation the effect is far larger than CO2. I try to save energy - but primarily because there is a limit to our coal and oil. And because of local pollution. I am far from convinced of CO2 as the important factor.....

I have read both IPCC + background material. I have also studied the cosmic radiation theory. I am far from convinced of CO2 as the most important factor.....

[776281]

Because most of the physics has already been done. CO2 absorbes different frequencies than clouds. NAture produces and absorbs more CO2 than man but Nature was in balance we have upset that balance.

[clausenogbach]

The basic physics has been done. But we are far far away from understanding the how the total system works. The climate projections are made with computer simulations. Having worked with computer simulations for years I am amazed to see how the results are misused of people that do not know the limitations. Nature is balance but vary within a relative large temperature range. Let's save energy for the right reasons... Pollution - and the fact that there are limited resources.

[776281]

Still comes out the same - need to save oil.

It is true there is so much we don't understand , so much research done on a shoestring, so much "insufficient data" but there is also a lot of "this is not normal variation"

In so many ways we are entering uncharted territory.

[Nichen]

FUCK YOU Exxonmobil

[Schabracke100]

yes. i thing there is a big conspirancy going on. hitler is producing the green house gases and the myths around it to beat USA´s economy. We must prevent Europe from doing this. AMERICANS, BUY BIGGER GAS GAZZLING CARS AND BIGGER HEATERS TO SAVE THE WORLD, without it our wolrd will not be able to produce oxygene, wuahahahahahahahahahahahahahah­ahahah

[oneoffmanmental]

I mildly lolled

[SnipaMasta]

"So there's no argument?" is a crucial question. Yes, there IS an argument. Not all scientists agree with the assertion CO2 is what is majorly causing global warming.

[oneoffmanmental]

Scientists who don't believe in Physics, clearly...maybe they believe it's caused by phlogistons!

[Nichen]

Fuckin climateterrorist!!!! Rot in hell!

[marplejo1]

Does a simple request for less atmospheric pollution really warrent damnation?

[BeachofDreams]

Carmexworks thinks pseudo-scientific arguments stand for scientific arguments.

[oneoffmanmental]

carmexworks: Your spamming of this post was unacceptable and has been deleted. Like I have said before, please read the IPCC literature.

[Worsthoofd]

Seriously. If you blindly believe that we could never produce enough greenhouse gases to harm the earth, I bet you also believe that we could obviously never damage the earth with our pollution, because 'the earth is so big!'.

CO2 might be good for plants, but disrupting the earth's elemental cycles can't be good.

As for the sun; yes, the flux of solar energy has risen slightly in the last century, but according to current models, it accounts for about 25% of global warming. At most.

[l3inaryl3urnout]

grrr bad audio past about 3:30 good interview though

[airlinesturkish]

these british guys, totally outspoke this bull shitting peace of trash

[oneoffmanmental]

No, that's not all. There's not pros and cons. There's scientists and liars and manipulators. The classic graph by Mann et al. includes solar forcings, but the CO2 forcing is well above what can be explained by solar forcings. This is accepted consensus, accept by the industry shills who are your "cons".

[oneoffmanmental]

Please read the actual science. Especially look up the meaning of "forcings" in climate science.

[nazpie]

I still don't understand all the anti-climate change brigade. From what I've read over 95% of the scientific reports out there support the fact that global warming is happening. If it is wrong what is the problem with taking a precautionary approach? I would rather be safe than sorry. Besides, I will go with the majority of SCIENTISTS on this issue, especially since pumping gases into the air, be it CO2 or any other greenhouse gas, is not good for my health or my family's.

[richard1easton]

i think its that they find it too hard to make simple changes within their lifestyles, changes that would benefit humanity in general!

Anyway, scientific fact or not, oil is a finite resource, sooner or later, we will all have to deal with our oil addictions, there is really no other way about it.

[bumble155]

eerrrmmm..... not sure if anybodys mentioned this or not but 'THE MET OFFICE' that Mr Mitchell is the head of is (or at least used to be, please correct me if I'm wrong) a department of the Ministry Of Defence (the Army etc). So he is in effect a government spokesman. With a beard and no moustache! ooh!

[oneoffmanmental]

Met Office is part of the MOD

[wzhartman]

"Killing trees", if they are replanted, reduces CO2. In fact, old growth forests do not reduce CO2; only younger forests do. A tree is mostly carbon which comes from CO2 in the air. So recycling newspapers INCREASES CO2. To decrease CO2 using trees, cut them down once they reach maturity, replant, and use the trees in some way that does not return them to the air. Also, of course, build nuclear power plants. Basically, just do whatever left-wing "ecologists" have fought against.

[Worsthoofd]

Also, of course, we should build more wind turbines and especially use more solar power panels. Then again, that's not what left-wing ecologists have fought against, so according to your logic it's all rubbish. Right?

[wzhartman]

The sun doesn't always shine and the wind doesn't always blow, so there has to be sufficient infrastructure to produce the peak load without these two alternatives. Even left-wing "ecologists" can be right on occasion. My point was that their "solutions" correlate poorly to the stated problem, and in many cases, even contribute to it. But their "solutions" correlate very well indeed to their political desire for a centralized command economy (socialism) within a "nanny state".

[JGoulding]

Nice impartial BBC presenting as usual. Not.

[richard1easton]

Oh cummon! Paxman slates whoever he speaks to. You you only have to watch one of the many shows paxman does to know that. no mater who the interviewee is, they will get slated. So yes, it is mostly impartial. just a shame that you based your comment upon one clip uploaded onto youtube. :)

[letzfaceit]

some things about Jeremy Paxman remind me of Roland Freisler. If you don't know who Roland Freisler you can find video of him in Google video.

[letzfaceit]

Al Gore is my sheperd

He is only aware of what he wants

He makes me lie down on park benches outside his mansion

He leads me beside the polluted water of his strip mine

He restores my doubt in brain dead politicians

He leads me in the path of Kyoto for his legacy sake

His lies make children sleepless

Though I walk dark in my house his 4 are lit like Vegas

Surely his lust for power will follow me all the days of my life

And I will see votes held to the light on thanksgiving forever

[oneoffmanmental]

I have to say I'm slightly annoyed that the global warming debate seems to be reduced to Al Gore. Remember, outside the US, Al Gore has very little to do with awareness of AGW and more to do with a more mature public scientific community.

[httprover]

Environmentalism needs to be science based. And the problem may not just be greenhouse gases. Particulates in the atmosphere may trap heat near the ground. How much has deforestation and urbanization in the last few hundred years contributed to global warming?

[scorpionkings]

That is being discussed on a smaller plat form, killing the trees that help to lower CO2 in the atmispher are being wiped out by the thousands each day, trees breath in CO2 and exhale oxygen, so fewer trees less oxygen

for us to breath. The ozone is being ripped apart by the massive amount of CO2 thats being released into the

atmosphere everyday, which gives the suns razes an open door to over heat this planet.

[synchroGENized]

more on why they won't evacuate refugees NOW 2) it is GLOBAL warming. Things are going to be affected all over the place. Imagine evacuating all of Bangladesh because of rising sea levels. And mosquito netting all of Florida and California because of malaria etc... that would be a massively recourse draining task. And the US govenrment is getting to be flat broke with all of its excursions into the middle east.

[oneoffmanmental]

New ground rules:

You may post comments related to Lindzen, McKitrick et al. Note, they are commonly referred as denialists. Whether or not you think that is name-calling, that is just a term used as definition.

You may NOT cite general conspiracy theory, as this is not conducive to genuine debate.

[oneoffmanmental]

Right, madanus. You're forbidden from making comments now. You are unable to converse rationally. Sorry. Interpret this how you wish.

[2boomback]

oneoffmanmental... That madanus goes by differnt names and is completely unreasonable. He'll be back and call himself something different. Thank you for providing this video. The corporate interests have been funding the anti-GW fiction and need to be exposed.  Thanks Again!

[oneoffmanmental]

I don't believe in free energy suppression since I'm not a conspiracy theorist, and have enough of a grounding in real physics to understand that free energy is improbable.

I've not watched Gore's film.

Took about thirty seconds to get that information. Like I said before, your research skills need improving.

[madanus]

no you wouldn't believe in it - it's never on tv in-between soap operas.

Just like your lot didn't believe in the earth being flat before the real information was released. Your points of reference do nothing to incriminate my view. You are talking 'what you believe' and what 'you think I've read'.. hmmm... great argument. Taxation anyone?

Why not.

[madanus]

no you wouldn't believe in it - it's never on tv in-between soap operas.

Just like your lot didn't believe in the earth being ROUND (apologies for the mistake) before the real information was released. Your points of reference do nothing to incriminate my view. You are talking 'what you believe' and what 'you think I've read'.. hmmm... great argument. Taxation anyone?

Why not.

[oneoffmanmental]

Who exactly is "your lot"?

I thought belief in flat Earth died out several dozens of generations ago.

Did you know there's a 500 character limit on comments? Tad difficult to go into detail on specific adaptation measures.

[oneoffmanmental]

Why aren't governments evacuating possible refugees?

On what timescales are you working? Ever lived in a refugee camp? Adaptation requires the building of adequate infrastructure which must be paid for. Umm...taxation anyone? Yes, you're right. More should be done rather than concentrating on green taxes.

[madanus]

what time scales ARE YOU WORKING ON SPREADING THIS RUBBISH? ARE YOU NOT SHELVING PEOPLE INTO ACTION? Umm... taxation anyone? You are obviously an elitist. You make me physically sick.

[oneoffmanmental]

No, I'm a liberal. Read an introduction to political philosophy.

[madanus]

amazing.... You actually think there is a such a notion as being liberal or 'left & right'... what's funnier, is that you tried making me look the retard for not playing. THERE IS NO LEFT AND RIGHT. You have a limited existence. Until you grasp the matrix reality - you aren't liberal, YOUR MIND CONTROLLED

[madanus]

'Adaptation requires...which must be paid for...' ***How Political Minded are you? This is why we disagree. You think everything is to be paid for out of the people's wealth. That's why this scam works on you. Tell the gov't to save money on unnecessary defence spending, clean out Neocon puppets & stop blaming your brethren for being manipulated their entire existence. You are looking for leaders to lead you. They want you dead. I suppose you think Vaccines are safe too huh?

[madanus]

oh I see.. you twitter and come up with one answer to all my queries - (after google'ing all afternoon) and think this makes you more a 'free-thinker'?

flmao...

Bugger off Gore fan.

[oneoffmanmental]

PS: You make a mockery of the term "freethinker". You're a slave to your desire to create a "big Other" with which you can create a fictional world of disinformants and elitists that control the world.

[madanus]

oh I see.. you twitter and come up with one answer to all my queries - (after google'ing all afternoon) and think this makes you more a 'free-thinker'?

flmao...

Bugger off Gore fan.

[madanus]

once again people.. notice how Global Warming Pioneers make 'characteristic assaults' on others who don't follow the advice of the so-called leading few. The same few, who've been denying us cures for decades; who have been culling the population; and who keep vital information classified so they can control the masses through submission and ignorance.

[oneoffmanmental]

Have you READ the IPCC SPM AR4 or the Greenfacts material yet and actually have a specific critique? If not, stop posting accusations.

A lot of people here are familiar with the denialist literature which has all been refuted. You have provided no specific critique of the consensus literature.

[madanus]

Denialist literature? So the one the Television backs is 'the correct reading material is it'?

[oneoffmanmental]

Yes, actually. Mainly because it's backed up with peer reviewed evidence - which YOU don't believe in with your misplaced skepticism. Now, can you stop posting please? You clearly can't engage with the rest of the conversation because you don't agree on the ground rules of the debate. This video is not intended for you.

[madanus]

lol.. there is no help for you. go back to Wonderland and think the Gov't is there to help you. What a deluded soul you are. my god...

you think you know about Science, yet you nothing of modern life and how television is manipulated..? You are not credible at all. flmao

end.

[oneoffmanmental]

Then again, climate scientists are all "disinfo agents". If you're unwilling to engage in a rational debate by using conspirative dismissals like that, then go join some crazies elsewhere. Even those who didn't believe the evidence in earlier comments were at least willing to engage in conversation, which clearly you seem unable to do.

BTW, YouTube doesn't allow you to post any hyperlinks.

[oneoffmanmental]

RealClimate:

Claims that global average temperatures during Medieval times were warmer than present-day are based on a number of false premises that a) confuse past evidence of drought/precipitation with temperature evidence, b) fail to disinguish regional from global-scale temperature variations, and c) use the entire "20th century" to describe "modern" conditions , fail to differentiate between relatively cool early 20th century conditions and the anomalously warm late 20th century conditions.

[madanus]

notice how people who spread the official line (like some on here already), resort to 'name-calling' rather than producing real evidence. You will notice this everywhere people...

WAKE UP AND DEMAND TRUTH

[2boomback]

madanus It was YOUR comment that said "fuck off" and called ReduceCO2 a "disinfo agent" or is your memory that short. I HAVE done an extensive amount of research on my own along with following this issue for decades.  Are you afraid of the truth? Why don't you believe the institutional studies. I can send you the names and links if you want. No hype, no BS, just GOOD SCIENCE. There is no CREDIBLE debate in the scientific community.

[madanus]

Seeing as though you are responding to this message and none of my other queries to 'oneoffmanmental', I can only assume that the people posting on this debate, actually know half the story. I also notice that some of my other posts providing more insightful questions and links have failed to appear. youtube is owned by Google. Google is connected to the Elite. Is it just me, or am I too cynical to sit in this pool of cess?

[2boomback]

madanus... Talk around it it you want. YOU posted the vulgar language in response to ReduceCO2's posting who wasn't involved in the debate but only made one posting. I am fully aware of the video's issue. Remain in denial if you choose. Anthropogenic global warming as real and scientifically well-supported. It matters not if YOU believe it.

[oneoffmanmental]

Leave him be. "You have a limited existence. Until you grasp the matrix reality - you aren't liberal, YOUR MIND CONTROLLED". Is any more comment needed?

[madanus]

lol... carry on oneoff...

[madanus]

Sorry for the concise language. I would treat it the same as being called a 'theorist' every waking day, because you are a person who sees through the BS along many others. (Like Me). I wouldn't take it personally if I were you.. I stopped that the day we let Satanists run Western Civilisation...

[madanus]

you are a disinfo agent. Fuck off.

ReduceCO2's post is pure propaganda.

[2boomback]

madjackass Redduce CO2 is RIGHT! EVERY major scientific institution dealing with climate, ocean, and/or atmosphere agrees that the climate is warming rapidly and the primary cause is human CO2 emissions.

USCUSA(dot)org

FocusTheNation(dot)org

[madanus]

fuck you too.. 2boomback is yet another disinfo agent acting solely on the repetition of global elitists.

[madanus]

hence why you can apply absolutely no research of your own - you have done nothing but read the official line and give links and credence to Gore's ultra sick campaign. How dare you insult my login name you disinfo spreading piece of shit.

[synchroGENized]

exactly who are you calling elitists and why are you calling them elitists?

[madanus]

stop trying to scare people with your neocon tactics. I have been researching 'GW' for 6 years. You are not telling me sh*t. I suppose Al Gore is a hero in your eyes? If the answer to this question is 'yes'.. don't write me. You are a disinfo agent. 19,000 to 1,400 REAL PEERS/SCIENTISTS say it's a hoax and there is no proof. Sick of hearing people harp the official line like you. There is more chance of a pole shift due to the incoming magnetism of PLANET X. Stop believing sensationalist claims

[oneoffmanmental]

You're talking to very strange planetary physicists.

Neocon? Exactly how is this a neocon tactic?

Your research is terrible. Please try again once you've read the scientific literature.

[madanus]

my research is terrible? Explain the medieval warming period that had NO emissions? Explain how a society NOT industrialized, had another period of temperature change? Your Science is obviously accredited on the strength of your previous posts. Also, tell everyone about Planet X and Gore's monthly energy bill being $2,000+ - why are Gov'ts doing nothing to help possible refugees, but lots to tax the amount of emissions being spread? What about free energy suppression?

[madanus]

what about HAARP and their ability to change cloud formations (chemtrails), whilst using 'weather' for military use? Explain how they can suppress 'free energy' for decades (Henry Ford wanted to make cars that ran on CANNABIS), but can now feel obliged to blame it on the people for being self-sufficient and industrialized? Who chooses the path we take in life and who benefits from Global Warming? I think you need to do more research personally.

[madanus]

SORRY.. but the majority of Scientists have walked away from the Global Warming Hoax. IT IS NOT MAN MADE. I don't argue the planet is warming, I argue the validity of blaming humans so the Gov'ts can charge a tax for the air we breath. THINK ABOUT IT PEOPLE.

[oneoffmanmental]

No they haven't. Check the letter of complaint sent to UK's OFCOM by one of the scientists who appeared on the Great Global Warming Swindle - he was deliberately misled by the shows lying creators. Scientific consensus still says that global warming is very likely (90%) to be man made. Go read the IPCC Summary for Policy Makers before making broad generalisations like the one you just made.

[madanus]

see my comment below - I don't agree with you. Live with it.. and stop spreading hearsay. The culprit is Gov't. Stop blaming humans. Stop conforming to the Neocons.

[synchroGENized]

And its possible that the IPCC only said 90% because of lobbying by china (who is one of the most rapidly growing CO2 producers)

[oneoffmanmental]

Nah, I doubt it. "Very likely" is still strongly worded enough for those who read it correctly, and is within the confidence intervals for claiming near certainty.

[adam200487]

I love it when people come on Newsnight with no idea about the kind of abuse they're in for from Paxman.

Competitive Enterprise Institute...Jesus, check out the Daily Show's bit on these guys

[rigolissimo]

Peer review, behind which the sneering "scientist" hid, just sounded like herd psychology (don't rock the boat, global warming is so profitable for scientists).

[theinquisitor]

Only by showing some respect for scientists and the scientific method will we make it through this century.

[simonbath]

yet another glimpse into the shabby news creation policies of a dying empire's crusty news service.

[synchroGENized]

it's just too bad that everyone, part of their empire or not will have to breath the same air, confront the same rising ocean, sleep in the same heat wave etc etc whether they like that empire or not

[madanus]

if this was a problem, why are the Gov't's doing nothing to evacuate possible refugees? It's all about Elitism and who benefits. GLOBAL WARMING BEING MAN-MADE IS A HOAX. BELIEVE THIS TRIPE AT YOUR PERIL.

[synchroGENized]

Madanus, tranquilo!(calm down!). The government (and I assume you mean the US government) isn't evacuating refugees for more than one reason. The top three reasons I can think of are:

[synchroGENized]

1) the global climate is a very complex thing and its not exactly clear what areas will become drought stricken, which will become hurricane struck and what other changes will occur. Also there is uncertainty in how fast things will happen as unexpected factors and tipping points contribute their effect. We're talking about 2010, 2060 or 2100 not january 4th 2009

[oneoffmanmental]

Well put. There simply isn't a good tradeoff right now to evacuate whilst there's time to take other adaptation measures. Why leave nice coastal homes for poor refugee camps when disaster hasn't struck yet?

[synchroGENized]

3)rich guys like gore, bush, rice, etc don't need to worry if things get ugly they can go to their chalet in aspen.

[jffryfnt]

By the way, Bjorn Lomborg has been convicted of scientific misconduct.

[robomas87]

by calling it "the skeptical environmentalist" isnt Lomborg already showing bias??? The media always blow things out of proportion but the fact is there is a problem. The CEI's video is ridiculous, so one-sided that its frightening. I recommend you check it out just on their website just for a laugh

[newfrontiers]

There is one COLOSSAL problem with this sort of presentation: all the subtleties and nuances in the debate about climate change are reduced to idiotic talking points, in which it's very easy to demonise one side or the other. For a really good, more balanced view of things, read Bjorn Lomborg's "The Skeptical Environmentalist".

[oneoffmanmental]

Lomberg's "balance" is a fallacy. Andrew Dessler's "The Science and Politics of Global Climate Change" does actually go through both sides of the arguments - and he is qualified to do so as a climate scientist.

[kileran]

when it comes to the CEI, this is really all you can do. They pretent to be scientists, when they really are just a lobbying group. If they made a commercial saying cigarette's really wern't bad, would you still feel the same way?

[MRig13]

What newfrontiers said is true, but I'd like to mention that, though it's the same format as what I'm used to, this is still worlds better than American news television.