Not evil, just wrong

[carmenkel]

Wow; there is snow, so there is no climate change?

That these two clowns find credibility only within the tea party movement is the perfect justice.

[StunnedByStupidity]

Stunningly unpleasant people. And I would spend some time looking into DDT (BTW appallingly dishonest argument - CLIMATOLOGISTS in no what what so ever made the policies on DDT - if you have to stoop this low to win an argument - BTW cold some places in the winter - now 2010 we have just have the warmest decade, year and 3 months in thermometer record - and arguably the warmest decade for 100,000 years).

These people will kill and displace BILLIONS with their evil bigotry.

[nighthawk006phoenix]

Fat bastard Gore has just purchased an $US8,000,000 mansion to add to his others.

But don't worry - he's not making any money from the GW hysteria.

[Voodio]

Holy fucking shit, I didn't think there were this many uninformed people out there. Maybe they are all watching this video or something.  I guess we will find out in 20 years when the water level is 5 ft higher and the temperature is a few degrees higher. I guess you should read the science, cause its all there in alarming numbers. Anyway, keep ur head in the sand and keep saying we are fine and maybe we will be by pure ignorance and dismissal lolololol.

[MulligansValley]

"...read the science" Where can I get a copy of this "science"? Should I expect to find information in this "science" that seem to render opposite results, or should I ignore information and consider it non-science if it doesn't support a consensus?

[Voodio]

First step, google global warning. Next, read the 'science' that scientists provide. Now, I'm sure you are going to read what you want, (skipping over the vast majority of reports stating global warming as a fact) and start reading the very few(if you can find one) columns about how global warming is a scheme or just a way to keep Al Gore in business. And what, may I ask is YOUR science? Do you have any or do you fancy yourself a crusader in the fight for stupidity?

[MMGWsceptic]

No temperature rise for 10 years despite CO2 increase. Antartic sea ice at a record high. Arctic sea ice increasing for the last 3 years. Sea level constant since 2005 according to ARGO. The Sun entering a spotless phase similar to that which occured during the Little Ice Age.

What's gonna cause your 5ft sea rise? The bubbles from your 7up?

[Bicyclist1]

Keep speaking, because you are hanging yourself with your own words. Being conscious of what you are doing to the biosphere, and supporting green choices like organic agriculture does not mean you are not part of a 'working family'. The way use 'working family' says that working families care about nothing except themselves.

[oreolvrsshane1987]

your better off watching zeitgeist addendum here on youtube rather than this political drivel

[brainlife]

Al Gore is doing one thing: Getting filthy rich off his scam.

Kill humnas but save bugs.

WTF

[farmerne]

It would be easy to pass-off the GW people as the latest in a long line of "Chicken Littles", except for the drastic social and economic changes they advocate to deal with the "problem". To the GW people, earth is some sort of goddess, and humans are the "snake in the garden". They want to take mankind back to a 17th century existence of candlelight and mule power. I've talked to some of them and they are actually "anti-human". I think some of them would like to humanity eliminated.

[oldmunger]

Yeah! You tell 'em my fellow teebaggers! Tell 'em bout the Nazi deth panels! We teebeggers are smart them scientis are dumb! No evolution, no globil warmin, no stem cellin, the bible is the truth! Go teebeggers and 9/12 Glen beck is smart!

[gtrman2002]

I find it rather telling that certain leftists, while not being able to form a complex thought, much less debate on actual substance are the ones proclaiming themselves as educated. If someone disagrees with them, the knee-jerk reaction is to discredit the messenger rather than address the issue point-by-point. That is because in most cases, they have no counter argument.

Often times, they don't even listen to the message. Its much easier to hurl insults than to form a cogent argument.

[budda10000]

I find both left wing and right wing dogmatic types to be what you say "special". The logic that allows people to vote on party platforms is the same logic followed by a ideologue with limited critical thinking skills. How about for once people just side with whatever the most likely truth is?

[ciaramckeagney]

I agree its a cycle of life. The Earth can and will look after its self.

[bj3peters]

I'd prefer to follow scientists that have dedicated their lives to finding solutions than people who have 'spirit' that opened a few history books.

[Samsgarden]

I follow anyone with logic and steer clear of hysteria.

Mind you; scientists and 'novices' can represent both.

[AidenPryde3025]

More and more scientists are coming out and saying that the numbers aren't adding up. That "global warming" may in fact be a normal thing. Up until the 70s the alarmists were saying we were entering a new ice age (wheres the ice?), now its global warming. I'm willing to bet that in 20 years time the enviros will be harping on some other phenomenon and how its doomed the world. Oh studies have found that mice eating DDT did not have any bad side effects. 50mil and counting cuz it was banned.

[budda10000]

There has always been some scientists but there are more on the side of AGP than against... Al Gore's usage of the "scientific consensus" was dishonest and misleading..... But really if you take the time to read the scientific journals most of the published research is coming out in favor of human caused climate change... Thus far most of the "debunking" have been leveled by people with no scientific background and an obvious political agenda.

[MMGWsceptic]

Of course most scientists support AGW: Their jobs depend on it. Politicians will only pay for pro-AGW climate research because they want an excuse to increase tax and extend their control. The IPCC have distorted the data and supressed dissenting voices - as proved by the ClimateGate emails. And suckers like you think they're doing it to 'save the plant'. It's a scam. It's been cooling for 10 years while CO2 has increased. How gullible can you be?

[budda10000]

im going to take a wild guess here and assume you haven't taken first year calculus yet.... either that or you failed to grasp the concept of local min/max vs absolute min/max. Climatologists use calculus based models.. Those graphs will have local dips and spikes but the macro trend will be upward sloping. taking just one segment (in this case a decade) of data out of a 1000 or even 100 yrs of data does not yield an accurate conclusion at all. Long term thinking is required in most science.

[MMGWsceptic]

OK - if you want to look at a longer period - take the medieval warm and Roman warm periods - both warmer than now - and both periods of great prosperity and growth.

For an even longer range look try googling 'Hockey Stick vs. Ice Core Data'. It's a video of the Antarctic ice core temperature record. Gee, I wonder what caused all those peaks and troughs. Guess the cavemen must have been driving SUVs.

[bj3peters]

Name ten respected, practicing scientists who believe global warming doesn't exist.

Good luck with that.

[polyhydrant]

@bj3peters

thats because "practicing" means they got funding

[Argonaut22j]

Wow, the title of their film describes the makers of it just right. Talk about ironic.

[magnusea]

Is life wrong?

[Argonaut22j]

Where did that question come from?

[magnusea]

These folks promotes life, with DDT against malaria and abundent energy for development, instead of corrupted scince and an overall agenda to reduce harmless CO2 80% and control economy (= socialism, recession and depression).

[Argonaut22j]

First of all, DDT and CO2 are two separate issues. Whether or not you want to regulate one has nothing to do with regulating the other.

Secondly, the "agenda" to reduce co2 isn't to eliminate co2, its just that, to reduce it. If you have a buildup of it it will be disastrous. If you don't believe me you should read the actual science again, if you haven't already. By the way which peer reviewed articles have you read on the subject?

[magnusea]

"First ... DDT and CO2 are two separate issues".

Yes. But an argument used against non-fraud real science defenders in the AGW issue is often that they're also DDT denialists. Also both the anti-DDT fundamentalism, just as anti-CO2 ditto, come from the same environmentalism movement. I also mention DDT because these life promoting film makers do (by the mentioned reason).

[magnusea]

Argonaut22j: "Secondly, the "agenda" to reduce co2 isn't to eliminate co2"

Isn't relevant because I didnt said that. (Your notion stupid also because you think you make a distinct definition; you dont.)

Argonaut22j: "a buildup of it it will be disastrous."

Due to Bern Carbon cycle (AR4 ch10) sea and biosphere absorbs 20% of released CO2 in >40 years. NOAA (Sabine) says the oceans have absorbed 50%. Soil and plants absorbed more. Increase is half the emissions, partly due to warmth.

[magnusea]

which peer reviewed articles have you read on the subject?

In subject related to climate science Ive read I guess about 100 peer reviewed articles. A few concerned the carbon cycle.

[dannidandannikins]

I just want to salute an excellent demonstration of debating technique, from the 'is life wrong?' start-up to the 100peer reviewed articles coup de grace, complete pwnage of this collectivist douche-bag. Nice work.

[apollo1268]

dannidandannikins

My thoughts exactly. This clown claims that DDT and CO2 are seperate issues, but he's missing the point entirely, or intentionally. He tells Mangusa that if you have a buildup of CO2, it will be disastrous. He continues by stating that you should read the actual science and then asks Mangusa which peer reviewed articles he has read without mention of his own peer reviewed source on his "actual science". Argonaut is an example of the "usefull idiots" the propagandists need.

[burtonsnowbrder890]

Oh come on! Co2 was at 6000 ppm back during the dinosaurs and your trying to tell me, a meteorologist, that 400 ppm is a dangerours level? Are you plain stupid or just that ignorant? Which one? Pick one! If Co2 at a extremely high level dangerous? Yes... as is ANY gas including water vapor but its not pollution and we certainly arent ANYWHERE near a dangerous level for co2. Go to school for 5 years for meteorology and then try to tell me what is going on. Good luck with Calc 4!

[Nicholbags25]

This was a fantastic interview.

[magnusea]

Good points, and te only thing we have to adopt to is natural climate change.