Added: 3 years ago
From: TheYoungTurks
Views: 28,935
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:
see all

All Comments (929)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • Man made Global warming is a hoax, unless you take money from liberals to study it then its real.

  • "Overwhelming consensus" what a joke. This just goes to show that you only listen to the global warming apologists, there is NO consensus.

    Consensus is not something arrived at in a few years in science even though a lot of people would prefer it to be.

    The simple fact you talk of consensus shows you don't even know the amount of scientists who disagree.

    Anyone who thinks the sun is not the main cause of the earth's temperature is just to stupid to communicate with anyway... have fun

  • Rationale thought is not their forte!

    Awesome!!!!!!!

  • Oh god, not only will she ruin the economy but also the environment..!

  • Man-made global warming is a joke. Those who promote it are wilful idiots or con artists.

    CO2 emission is a consequence of heat rise, not the other way round. The main effector of heat change on earth is the SUN (duuuu!).

    People who buy this crap seem to be rather ignorant of history. Read up on the medieval warm period, heat rise in no way means an end of the world as Al Gore would like you to think. Plants and wildlife love it.

    Get used to it and fuck the global carbon tax.

  • @1famekouby

    CO2 emissions and heat rise positively reinforce one another. Rising temperatures cause the oceans to release sequestered CO2, which increases temperatures.

    In the past, the sun has been responsible for the initial warming, but we know that CO2 can be just as effective an initial cause as the sun. It's the same process we've seen in the past, except that we've added another massive source of CO2 emissions.

  • @1famekouby That sure sounds good on paper. Now let's see it in SCIENCE. History is not the issue. Wrong subject.

  • @baigandine Oh yeah, historical precedent has no meaning to science... Pull the other one mate. Go read up on the scientific method and the importance of precedent and DATA. When you have a governing body who is capable of "forgetting" the medieval warm period just to further an agenda, you don't only have a big political problem, you have what is called a mindless mass of following zombies.

    In what way would exporting your industry to China save the planet, pray? Please enlighten me here.

  • @1famekouby Historical evidence has relevance, but too often it's all people on your side bring. No. It usually comes with insane conspiracy theories. I'd like to see scientific data refuted with science. That's all. What you take this medieval warming period as proof as? That something else could cause global warming besides man? That doesn't really speak to the validity of manmade global warming. Obviously an effect can have more than one cause.

  • @baigandine "insane conspiracy theories", you mean along the lines of "the sun has little influence on climate change, the main responsible agent is a gas which composes 0,04% of the atmosphere and is one of the 4 building blocks of the life form known as humans"? Or other "insane conspiracy theories" like "exporting industry to the third world and taxing the first world will help against global warming".

    Because when you strip down the arguments to the core principals, that is what they say.

  • @1famekouby Overwhelming consensus of scientists outweighs the fact that something may seem intuitively inaccurate. Many things which seem absurd are nevertheless scientifically true. "Truth is stranger than fiction" as they say. As for your policy argument, that's a whole other issue, and I can't say I necessarily disagree with you there. But that's no reason to doubt the science.

  • @baigandine Science? Riddle me this, how did my SUV cause the planet to warm after the ice age and little ice age? Thought so

  • The glaciers on mars are melting because of our SUVs here! We've got to tax the world quickly otherwise we won't be able to save mother earth and mister gore won't be able to work his pyramid scheme! Quick quick tax us more please!

  • @1famekouby Actually the liberals want to tax YOU less, go cry to the party that IS taking all your money. The republicans and libertarians. How you guys can't see trough their bullshit is amazing. Bush cries terrorist and every republican voter are happily reaching for their wallet. Bush cried poor wall street is in trouble and what did you guys do, again happily gave him 700 billion$ so that he could give the money to his buddies.

    You're getting screwed in the ass and you're begging for more.

  • @baldurus1 Nah.

  • @baldurus1 True. Bush was the first GOP president to wage war and not raise taxes to pay for military actions. He increased the size of the government more than any other Republican president prior.

  • Michele Bachmann was RIGHT and YOU were WRONG you ignoramus!!

  • You made this Video in 2008, but in 2010 You and many other Global Warming Alarmists were proven wrong and caught with your pants down ALTERING the DATA in YOUR FAVOR......Whattya got to say now you Bozo?

  • This guy is a moron.

    Global warming? Bla hahahahahahahahahaha!

    What a douche.

  • No one supports polluting, and we should try to reduce waste. But carbon tax is not the answer and won't help reduce CO2 one bit. Do your research folks and don't listen to these smug tv brats. Peace.

  • All I know is that CO2 tax is a scam and not one single document you can produce says CO2 is an imminent threat, because its not. Plastic in the ocean, sure, nuclear waste in the ocean, but not CO2. They have been trying to brainwash people into it to accept the proposed tax. I ask again how will cap and trade help the world as it seems that is what you support. Just answer the question.

  • @TheKickerboy99 Really? Alright I will produce several, if you want more I can give you more.

    I will state upfront I obviously haven't had time to real all these but I have skimmed a few. Unlike your source these are both articles that support AGW and "skeptical" as well for ballence sake which you don't seem to think matter. Though it appears they had just as much trouble find decent sources as you did.

    I would suggest you start with "CO2 effect is weak" 35 support AGW 3 against.

  • @Kingucktoad It is obvious you don't read them either, but I think anyone could tell the premise each is based on. It is not CO2, but the actual drivers of climate. Of course the climate changes, and of course the Earth is nearing the end of a long warming trend. No one has proven it is any different than any in the past, in fact the IPCC's own data shows it is at the same rate as past warming trends. If it can be shown that human produced CO2 is causing dangerous warming then I'm with you.

  • @TheKickerboy99

    As a matter of fact I've read the first three. I even went as far as searching for scientific responses to the first one. But I stopped once I realized where you actually got them and that they didn't say what you thought they did so it was a waste of my time.

    The reality is no scientist ANYWHERE from ANY discipline (and you can check this if you want) can account for the resent rise in temperatures without taking co2 into account they have just been too sharp too fast.

  • @Kingucktoad As I have tried to point out to you, but you seem oblivious to it, there has been no abnormal warming. In the last ten years warming has slowed, these cycles happen because of our travel through space, and cosmic rays vary our cloud cover. To say that raising a trace gas like CO2 from 365 ppm to 380ppm in 150 yrs has had any measurable change from normal is just not true.(measured data contradicts it) As I also said before, 10k years ago there was a mile of ice where I am now.

  • @TheKickerboy99 I love how science deniers like you love to create bizarro versions of scientific theories, and then vigorously attack these strawman positions that only exist in your own minds. If global warming speeds or slows...then science is wrong! If there was an ice age in the past...then science is wrong! WTF?!

    I have never heard of any scientific theory on global warming that would be falsified by ice ages or fluctuations in warming. Maybe youre a renaissance man? Submit your paper!

  • @SammyHales Ok CO2 should and does cause some warming....you happy now? LOL I guess you guys keep missing my main point which is this. Taxing CO2 is a scam, it will not decrease its output, and will make zero difference in the world at all. Unless of course you support killing off most of the Earths population, CO2 will be produced in ever larger quantities. Changing to different energy sources will help lessen the production of CO2, but thats it, taxing it just makes AL Gore money.

  • @SammyHales Further, I guess the part that pisses me off about the whole AGW movement is the lies and deceit employed to gain this world wide tax. The whole idea was invented by Maurice Strong, hes a scam artist the likes of which the world has never seen. CO2 is not an imminent threat, it is a life gas on this planet. All of the information I have seen says that our global temps are more so controlled by the sun and cosmic rays forming clouds, sorry if that offends you.

  • @TheKickerboy99 In Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States, a paper reached the following conclusions: 97–98% of the climate researchers most actively publishing in the field support the tenets of ACC (Anthropogenic Climate Change) outlined by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, and the relative climate expertise and scientific prominence of the researchers unconvinced of ACC are substantially below that of the convinced researchers.

  • @TheKickerboy99 The number of nationally and internationally recognized scientific organizations that support the IPCC view on global warming is too long to list here. It would take pages to do that. Conversely, do you want to take a guess at how many of them dissent from that view? Come close so I can whisper in your ear...the answer is zero, not one, nada. You simply can't pretend that your uninformed view of CO2 is supported by a scientific concensus.

  • @SammyHales So you are quite convinced of what? What is your opinion of what we need to do about this imminent threat that will destroy the world? Dying to hear....

  • @TheKickerboy99 Your question is fallacious in at least two ways: First, I must accept a premise I haven't agreed to in order to answer it. Second, you have offered a strawman position of climate science that doesn't actually exist in the mainstream of scientific literature.

    Be that as it may, I believe in answering challenges, sometimes even when they are offered in profoundly dishonest ways, as is the case here. (continued in next post)

  • @TheKickerboy99 I believe the best course of action is for us to start with the rational position that the scientific method works, and that it is not helpful to demonize scientists for merely publishing the results of climate change research. Economics has proven itself to be an essential component of any plan to protect the environment, so remedial action cannot place an excessive burden upon the economy of those nations that are able to respond to climate change pressures.

  • @TheKickerboy99 Finally, further research should be done to find the best answer for the best way to alleviate the possible negative effects of Co2 emissions and other human activity, and to more precisely assess the threat that these activities present to us. In short, a very careful, sober, and responsible approach is needed here, and making unwarranted attacks on science is definitely not the way to go about that.

  • @SammyHales Well I'm glad you got that off your chest. In short you don't know, thats fine. I agree with most of what you have said. I find its not the science that has been demonized, but the political movement exaggerating the problem to force a global CO2 tax. The science is what it is, it does not support taxing CO2, yet it continues to be pushed by politicians as the only solution. I bring up Henrik Svensmark as his view of our climate system is the most complete and honest.

  • @SammyHales One last thing, the position I have comes from scientific papers, not a political movement.

  • @TheKickerboy99 You speak as an uninformed layman. If you had read a single scholarly article on the subject of climate change, which I hightly doubt, it is obvious you gleaned no insight from it. But in another discussion, I did some research on the subject, so allow me to quote from an ACTUAL article from a peer-reviewed journal. (continued)

  • @TheKickerboy99

    What you don't seem to realize there's a big difference between the questions of "Are Human effecting the climate?" and "Should we implement a carbon tax". I don't care about what the government decides to do about it, I care about the facts and the science.

    You would would rather tell comfortable lies rather then accept where the evidence leads. It wouldn't matter to you if i could hand you a letter from god himself you will never change your mind because you don't want to.

  • @Kingucktoad You miss the point again, it is ALL about taxing carbon, Maurice Strong told the world that 30 yrs ago. There is a long history behind this agenda, it started with him. The propaganda machine, directed funding, intimidation, coercion, manipulation, all of the wonderful things exposed by climategate, and many other IPCC blunders in press releases, show the corruption of the scientific process.

  • @TheKickerboy99

    The evidence speaks for itself, I know you want to make this about taxes because taxes you understand but

    the scientific method prevents corruption. I would tell you to read the scientific articles on the "climategate" farce in the peer reviewed articles i linked but I know your not going to so watch potholder54's video. "6. Climate Change -- Those hacked e-mails" and if you really are open to the truth then you'll have no problem watching his series on the SCIENCE behind it

  • @TheKickerboy99

    What I love about this is the more I disprove your positions the harder and more desperately you seem to assert they are true. This is a classic dogmatic world view when you cannot handle the possibility that you may be wrong so you choose to place absolute faith in the evidence which supports your position while providing almost no weight in the evidence which refute it. This is not the proper way to evaluate evidence and that's why you keep tripping over you're own sources

  • @Kingucktoad So the IPCC says a doubling of CO2 will maybe raise temps 3-4* THATS A DOUBLING, (we have raised it less than 4% in 150 yrs) How long do you think a doubling will take? LOL you guys crack me up, simple math discounts CO2 as a threat, but far beyond your thought process apparently.

  • @TheKickerboy99

    Do you ever get tired of being wrong? Antarctic cores and indicate that atmospheric CO2 levels were about 260–280 ppmv immediately before industrial emissions began as of 2010 they were recorded at 390 ppm. That's a little more then 4 percent assuming my math is correct.

    The numbers your referring to don't take natural re-absorptions process like the ocean and photosynthesis stop getting your information from these think tanks they know nothing!

  • Comment removed

  • @TheKickerboy99

    The IPCC says no such thing check your sources.

    "The global atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide has increased from a pre-industrial value of about 280 ppm to 379 ppm in 2005. The atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide in 2005 exceeds by far the natural range over the last 650,000 years (180 to 300 ppm) as determined from ice cores."

    This is a quote from an official IPCC report.

    w w w ipcc(dot)ch/pdf/assessment-rep­ort/ar4/wg1/ar4-wg1-spm(dot)pd­f

  • @TheKickerboy99

    The atmosphere doesn't care how much taxes you pay!

    I am absolutely astonished you think the two are connected. The fact that Co2 is a greenhouse and it and others like it are responsible for maintaining a balanced global temperature they are not affected by your tax return.

    The science says humans are effecting the climate in a statistically significant way, the fact that you don't like paying taxes does not change the way Co2 molecules trap solar radiation. That's absurd.

  • @Kingucktoad CO2's effect is not a threat, in fact it is barely measurable, you SHOULD know that. Taxing it will change that how? Oh right it won't it will just make a chosen few richer, halt development of the third world killing millions, and break economies globally already on the brink of collapse. So what's your hope here?

  • @TheKickerboy99

    Co2 is barley measurable? Huh that odd considering NASA seems to think humans are dumping 7 billion tons of Co2 into the atmosphere every year a number backed up at least by NAS and AAAS. In fact, those silly scientists seem to think the number are so good you can even calculate your own personal Co2 contribution using them. But I guess that all part of the great conspiracy of UNPAID IPCC scientists to instill some sort of Illuminati NWO world government right? RIGHT?!

  • Vague uncheckable rumors tells about WMD in an oil rich country - Desition: INVADE!

    Hundreds of sientists claim that oil is destroying our climate - Desition: DON'T DO A DAMN THING.

    Isn't it obvious who is running America?

  • @Pill88Dickle you also must not have read all my comments yet. I cite that as my reason for not believing that my government spends money doing things that are beneficial to the majority.

  • @verd12w But my comments vary greatly. If you read through the comments (you will notice that I have made quite a few on this video, only because it looked to be a battlefield of conflicting views) You will notice that I have only made 2 references to the MPAA

  • @Pill88Dickle Has nothing to do with religion

  • @Pill88Dickle and the MPAA owns both parties, the parties just take turns saying the other is violating everyone's rights, and the middle does what it does best. Watches and says that it would never do that. They are right, they will never get a chance, but if they were given a chance, I'm sure that they would just do the same as the major parties.

  • watch?v=FOLkze-9GcI

  • Hey to the YT koolaid drinking Fucks you fucking radical Liberal piece of shit! Bachmann is smarter than your anus and your whore sidekick shit for brains put together

  • @firthoffifthtom Whore...really? Do you have to resort to that? Radical? Do you know what radical means?

    "Bachmann is smarter than you anus..."

    A rat is smarter than even the most intelligent human's anus. Sorry, but that does not prove anything.

    At least Pink77W1 and Neosaigo don't spout complete nonsense when they argue.

  • He said "These people rational thought is not there forte" if you have watched the young turks you know it is true of tyt also. As well as a high percent of the politicians in washington and the national media. We need real CHANGE in the country but we always get the same old nonsense.

  • @loyalpatriot100 CHANGE = Liberalism, it is all about direction. If you want change, but you don't like the type of change that Obama is going for, then you need to call for a different direction, not denouncing liberalism completely.(Which you didn't actually do) Also, don't go to opinionated media outlets, including this one, until you have your own opinion, and can share it with the masses. Otherwise you are just a vestigial structure on an endlessly complex, constantly changing organism

  • @verd12w that is in an equally complex population of its own species, in an ecosystem with vastly different populations of different species, in a biome filled with complex ecosystems, on a planet that sustains complex life, that is alone in its solar system(as far as life goes), that is in a galaxy that most likely has at least one other planet with life( how arrogant we must be to call ourselves unique), that is in a universe that contains many galaxies (increasing the chances of more life)

  • @verd12w and for all we know, what we think of as a universe, might not be universe at all, but one of many, or it could be endless. And on what we call Earth, here we are, smaller than atomic particles when compared to everything (or if endless, we are infinitely small), and yet we are here, and we all play a role in our governments, and therefore, our societies, and the global society of humanity, and we must all do our part to ensure that our planet can sustain, not just our population, but

  • @verd12w all of the populations of the world, and someday, maybe even the universe. Mass extinction has taken place before from temperature change, and until science shows that we are not affecting anything, we should do what we can to ensure that our planet can be a good environment for every organism's descendants. Just don't take it too seriously, more greenhouse gases are released naturally than from us. Just do your part. Everything counts. Every organism has a role to play, including us.

  • @verd12w That is probably the most comments I've ever made at one time. Take your time, and take what you want from it.

    the tl;dr version: Everyone has a role to play. Even your opponents.

  • I do have my own opinion didn't you read and comment back.

  • I am a muslim and I like to blow things up

    Whatever Al qada

  • nancy pelosi is so worried about global warming she flys a private size jet home every week end or so. or she use to.. burning tons and tons of extra fuel. And lets not forget obama. burning 8000 gallons of fuel on earth day to fly to iowa to give a speech. if g bush did that it would b hell to pay. but of course obama is worried about AGW. such a joke

  • @PInk77W1 You really want to use something like that as argument? Republicans and some democrats have been pushing back clean energy , which means even if someone want to use greener ways to travel, they can't if the oil companies are dictating the policies.

    Let me ask you how are you suppose to travel green if green technology doesn't exist yet due to blockade from corporate interests? So far, I can only think of the hybrid, which doesn't fly.

  • @Neosaigo i like how u didnt disagree with my FACTS. Here are some more facts. I am 50yrs old. I dont own a car. i own three bicycles. Today i rode my bicycle 120miles. Keep on playing the victim, u r playing right into obamas hands... ps there are buses and u can car pool. Not to mention move closer to work.

  • @PInk77W1 Nice points, I will never drive. You can get anywhere you would need to go punctually, you just need to start at the appropriate time. Bikes and feet ftw!!!

  • @Neosaigo They have been developing solar powered planes. If they can increase their size to about passenger plane size, and work out some kinks, it may even be viable. Pink is right about the buses, car pooling, and bike riding, there is more than one way to travel green. See my replies to loyalpatriot, do what you can when you are able, but don't go out of your way, you will just make things harder on yourself, something that someone who does their part, doesn't deserve.

  • @PInk77W1 I'm not even going to look to see if you're telling the truth, I wouldn't be surprised.

  • @verd12w Al Gores house uses 20x the energy as the ave. american house.!!! Gov. Arnold buys the first private HUM V and he wants to be the GREEN Gov.... these people are CRAZY

  • Those who would compare LaToya, and the other Jacksons, to a pen of mangy, lice-plagued gibbons could never be acceptable guests at festivals that honor monkeys.

  • They should be called the young fags. I haven't seen one of these that has any viable information or credibility for that matter.

  • @1991BRabbit2010 Fags? In what context are you calling them this? Would that be a derogatory term referring to a homosexual, a cigarette, a bundle of wood, or an annoying, inconsiderate Harley rider. They don't look like cigarettes, bundles of wood, or Harley riders so I can only assume that you are using the first one. What makes you think that they are homosexuals, and what gives you the right to use derogatory terminology in reference to people you disagree with.

  • @1991BRabbit2010 and why do you think fags do not provide viable information or credibility? Are you confused? Homosexuality has nothing to do with incredibility. If it did, I think I would have to call you one, for you did not bring any viable information either.

  • "Jesus Saved the Planet 2000 years ago"

    Well Jururselum and on the people there by saying "forgive them for they don't know what they do"

    Of course not to many people would think anything of the "Sky Darkening" after Jesus Screamed for the Elohim(mistranslated as "Father") but "10,000 angels" were about to Charge and slaughter everybody to rescue him

    In some versions of the Story the Solders and people are asking "Eloihim?Why is he calling for Elohim?" with them gasping as Elohim ship came

  • Man made Global Warming is a fraud. Exposed.

  • @matt75hooper Proof or gtfo

  • Well I see that he has twenty five thousand views on here. Now that he's moved over to MSNBC, look for his numbers to drop precipitously!

  • @Sundogjeep I didn't see any apocalypse or Nazi necromancy in the quote. I think we should refer to Godwin's Law for this. Are you admitting defeat?

  • Comment removed

  • Climate change news..

    .

    What climate deal may be agreed in Cancun?

    .

    Countries in talks at Mexico's Cancun beach resort are split over how to toughen existing pledges to cut carbon emissions, made at last year's Copenhagen summit which ended in a brief, non-binding agreement.

    .

    Reuters

    7 December 2010

  • Yeah, yeah... just carbon tax us already. Europe is steeped in it already, we're next. Just like cigarette taxes keep people from smoking... LOL. Money... plain and simple! Unless you're going to trade your car and house for a bicycle and hut don't bother replying. No matter how efficient energy can be made there is still a carbon footprint. Now you can continue to blah, blah.

  • @UnitedCorpOfAmerica bullshit, hydrogen fuel releases no carbon emissions, and nuclear power also releases no carbon emissions. The term carbon footprint only refers to what we contribute, not what comes out from the ground naturally

  • @UnitedCorpOfAmerica Oh and btw, you don't have to capitalize lol, it has become like scuba. It stands for something, but needs no translation because it has received the collective definition of its parts. Who actually thinks laugh out loud when they see lol. I just assume they are fake laughing.

  • HHMMM... HOW WOULD I USE "TOYOTA TECHNOLOGY"... ??!!!! ...

    I WOULD PROB@BLY USE IT TO ANNIHILATE [MORTAL-KOMBAT-STYLE]... ALL O' YOU OMNIPRESENT, OVER-ZEALOUS, TIME-WASTING, "YOU-TUBE ADVERTISING MADDA-SACKKAZZ" !!!

    [ AND, TO DA SPAMMERZ ... UNTIL I COME 4 Y'ALL ... DONT CHU'ALL GO NOWHERE !!! ]

    ___________________________

  • @eklctc1Kng1arrw Caps Lock? Seriously? When I just see caps, I assume that the person's opinion is not worth reviewing. You're lucky I am in a good mood today, or I might have just passed on this comment, and you wouldn't have learned a valuable internet lesson.

    A aaa aaaa a aaaa, I bbbbb bbb bbbb. = Formal, probably worth reading

    a aaa aaaa a aaaa, I bbbbb bbb bbbb = Informal (people often capitalize I even when not capitalizing anything else they should have) Probably still worth ready

  • @verd12w A AAA AAAA A AAAA, I BBBBB BBB BBBB = Definitely not worth reading

  • @verd12w that should be an -ing not a -y

  • @verd12w

    Lol ;--)

    If i were you, i'd rather worry more about "coherence."

    Because--> Even though you make a strong case with your argument (& i perfectly understand you).. I can't help but politely ask that you re-read your paragraphs (especially the last one) & ask yourself if it is "coherent."

    For instance, your last word ("ready").. really should be "reading."

    Anyway, i'm glad that you're having a great day.. & may you continue to be blessed !

    ;---)

  • Actually the lunatics are those who just take this GW BS at face value. CHeck the science and you will find co2 is caused by oceans which are heated by solar activity and it happened long before humans were on the planert and it will happen many times after we like the dinosaurs are gone, caused by "natural" forces, not by human created global warming. BTW global warming is happening on all the other planets in the solar system where there are no humans. DUHHHH

  • @jagg1951 actually, we have no thermometers on the other planets, so they could be getting 300 degrees cooler everyday for all we know.

  • @verd12w

    So we have absolutely no idea what the temperture of Uranus is unless we go there and stick a thermometer in Uranus?

  • Also, all we need to do is get 50% of Minnesota's 6th district plus 1 human being and its over. 50% plus 1 human being and bat shit insane lady is out of there.

    We should focus a lot of effort to change minds there.

  • @2edsajdmsa I agree, her mindset is similar to a fusion of any one person in a mental institution and a McCarthyism style mindset. Dangerous combination if you ask me

  • Cmon man! Its like a fucking sitcom. Only its not a sitcom, these are your politicians. I'm so embarrassed for America bro, and in a good way. Lets turn this train wreck around and put the USA back to the top.

  • @2edsajdmsa It is a sitcom in a way.

  • Impacts of climate change in the news...

    .

    Dust blows in from the ends of the Earth, even beyond

    .

    Dust. It's not just the bane of anyone trying to keep a tidy home. It can support life, or smother it. It can change continents

    .

    Washington Post

    Opinion

    14 September 2010

  • Cenk,

    Michele Bachman will be voted out of office,

    only after Nancy Pelosi stops injecting her fat face with botox.

    Until then,

    fuck Al Gore and his "global warming" lies, and

    address climate change for what it is. Climate change, nothing more, and nothing less.

  • @bobbytiger I agree that she probably injects botox every other day. Disagree with using appearance in an argument of this form.

  • Here is a note to all of you naysayers about global warming.. I dont know whether it is happening or not due to humans.. but #1) wouldn't you rather be safe than sorry? and #2) Oil and natural resources are running out and we will reach peak oil in the next 15 years and we had better start transitioning towards a green economy or else we will be fucked!

  • @jamspooge86 i don't have a problem with global warming as a theory. but the U.S. administration has lost all credibility to be trusted in setting up any programs or policies surrounding anything. the very reason they're pushing it so desperately is the very reason we shouldn't go along with it.

  • @grav04330 Agree that they have no credibility. They are the MPAA's bitches.

  • @jamspooge86 I agree. That is the most compelling reason to switch over to sustainable fuels

  • Climate Change happens, there is no evident that directly links humans to it. There is more evidence that temperature affects CO2, not the other way around. Also, we produce less than 5% of world CO2 levels, and then there's the fact that CO2 is less than 1% of the atmosphere and about the same amount of greenhouse gases. Most of it is water vapor. So agreed, its a just another attempt to gain power.

  • @furlybq that is how our government works. Fuck the issues, we want power.

  • This guy is an f-ing moron.

  • AL GORE RAPE SOME AGANE???????????????/

  • In what danger was the planet 2000 years ago???!!!...

  • @grozde Ask someone at a church because I have no idea.

  • Argue with what - your numbers? A better question to ask would be, wheres your proof of causation? You have none. There is no real science, there is no consensus. At best, all you have is bastardized data. You bought in to the biggest hoax in the history of the modern world. A hoax that unravels more and more every day. Youre a gullible fool. If you cant understand real science or scientific method, then just "follow the money" or look at the rest of the kooks who promote this nonsense.

  • Anyone who thinks that "Jesus saved the planet 2000 years ago" is someone who might close all the hospitals because Jesus healed the sick 2000 years ago! What a loon!

  • This dude is so freaking stupid and has completely embellished and taken the quote out of context...what a moron.

  • @roverguy715 No, "this dude" is right on! michele bachmann is a right wing irrational nut job, or maybe she just lies for here sponsors. If you didn't know this or understand it you must not be paying attention. Maybe michele and palin need to get a room and share their idiocy.

  • Impacts of climate change in the news…

    Small mammals at risk as world warms

    The biodiversity of small mammals in North America may already be close to a "tipping point" causing impacts "up and down the food chain" according to a new study by U.S. scientists. CNN

    May 26. 2010

  • Roll on the Ice Age and get rid of the parasites in the world....

    Clara Massa 1st casualty...Maybe.

  • @Spitfiremacx

    go to bed asshole

  • @Nightversionn

    Nice Stalk you demented Nutbag...peace be with your tortured being...hope your day goes well and the Dt's do not cause you grief.

  • @Spitfiremacx

    have you gone to bed?

    THANK you

  • Impacts of climate change in the news

    CLIMATE CHANGE BLAMED AS COASTAL WHALE MIGRATION DWINDLES

    Fluctuations in the gray whale population are to be expected. But a three-year trend of fewer calves being born could be attributed to climate change and hints at the challenges that may lie ahead.

    By Zeke Barlow

    VENTURA COUNTY STAR

    CALIFORNIA

    Posted April 13, 2010 at 8:30 p.m.

  • everyone knows global warming is a scam,dreamt up by the rothschilds twenty or so years ago. the ice caps have now more ice on them than past years. it hasn't warmed warmed for the past 10 years. fact! So the con ends ! wake up people do your own research the science is there.

  • @stvb2142

    lol, most of you mindless idiots have random numbers in the nicknames

  • @aerobique And random numbers make up their "facts"...

  • Breaking climate news

    Man-made climate change blamed for 'significant' rise in ocean temperature

    The world's oceans are warming up and the rise is both significant and real, according to one of the most comprehensive studies into marine temperature data gathered over the past two decades.

    LONDON INDEPENDENT

    UNITED KINGDOM

    May 20, 2010

  • 98% of greenhouse gas effect consist of water. now go figure about the global warming urself

  • Climate change in the news..

    ALMOST ALL AUSTRIAN GLACIERS SHRANK IN 2009: REPORT

    Almost 90 percent of Austrian glaciers shrank in 2009, some by as much as 46 metres (150 feet), the Austrian Alpine Association said Friday.

    AGENCE FRANCE-PRESS

    April 11, 2010

  • Impacts of climate change in the news

    Fight over beetle-kill burns as bugs move to Front Range

    Debate about what to do with the millions of acres of pine trees in the West that have been destroyed by the mountain pine beetle is bleeding over into a battle about how to best protect Colorados roadless areas.

    BOULDER WEEKLY

    COLORADO

    May 3, 2010

  • More impacts of climate change in the news:

    Carbon in warming soil could accelerate climate change.

    Warming soils in Canada's north are releasing a vast store of carbon that has been inert for millennia, which could further accelerate the rate of climate change, according to the author of a new study published in the journal Nature

    VANCOUVER SUN

    BRITISH COLUMBIA

    April 14, 2010

  • @Nightversionn

    Actually, the grain output problem in india is far more systemic than that. In the 50's, when US & UK Ag folks convinced many parts of India to convert from dry farming to water farming. The problem in that region, is that their farms not only have dependence on water in normally dryer regions, but their farmlands have been steadily sinking & eroding away since the 1960's.

  • @scbluesman13

    Thanks, sorry for the late reply. That's really interesting. It's not hard to believe that practices were introduced that didn't take into account the best ways to do things for those particular regions. It's too bad.

  • @Niightversionn Quit impersonating me all over youtube, Spitfiremacx AKA N ii ghtversionn Nigh tt versionn Knigh tt vision Nigtversionn Nightver ss ion, Nigh ttt versionn Nightversio m Nightverslon, Nightversio nnn, qooq2k etc.. Stalker, impersonator, global warming denier. What an imbecile
  • @Nightversionn

    for real - the guy set up those accounts just to pretend to be you? lmao

  • @cthulhu11111111

    Hi, yeah for real.  The global warming deniers like to impersonate people. They like my name I guess, and I don't care, it's just a name, so I'm going to make some more channels and just continue posting my commentary/articles on yotube for a while.

    There is no end to their lying and fraudulent behavior.

    I mean, yeah, they clone everyone, but they made a lot of my name.

  • WHEW! What a relief to know that an invisible cloud wizard is on the Job!

  • This host is the lamest person ever...blinded by Liberal lies, hate, and emotion.  "Force a Liberal to debate the facts, not emotion and it leaves any Liberal with the loudest microphone in the loneliest port-a-potty."

  • Conservatives = FAIL = universe's biggest hypocrites. They actively DEFEND unlimited CEO salaries and corporate welfare for oil, gas, nuclear, meat and many other destructive industries.

    But, when taxes might need to be raised an insignificant fraction in order to force these conservatives to clean up their messes and to be held responsible for their actions - to actually do the TINIEST good - they whine and bitch and complain.

  • If governments REALLY believe this Glo-Bull Warming bullshit then they have a duty to:

    MAKE IT ILLEGAL FOR ANY BANK, CORPORATION OR INDIVIDUAL TO PROFIT FROM "SAVING THE PLANET"

    These guys wont even refrain from eating meat which cause more CO2 than all the cars, planes and transpiration combined. Why?

    BECAUSE IT'S A SCAM. They want profits, they want to eat meat and they want the tax payer to pay for it all.

  • Professor Phil Jones at the University of East Anglia's Climate Research Unit admitted

    •Data for vital 'hockey stick graph' has gone missing

    •There has been no global warming since 1995

    •Warming periods have happened before - but NOT due to man-made changes

    dailymail UK

  • Global Warming is FRAUD. Search Climategate.

    youarebeingdeceived-dotcom

  • You are being deceived. When you trace the research back to its origins the FRAUD claims fall apart.

    Try the potholer54 channel for some really good videos.

  • Global Warming is real, there is a University degree on Climate Change, and my brother's friend studies it. The world has increased by 1.6 degrees and the point of no return is at 2 degrees. CO2 increases the temperature, and there is 390 PPM (increasing 3-4 each year) of CO2 right now (More then the 200 ppm it should be at), the red zone is at 450 ppm and unfortunately that's coming soon. How can u argue with that.

  • @TheLeporad How about you make alot of assumptions.

    Who say's the point of no return is 2 degree's?

    The earth has been alot warmer than that, and look, it returned!

    How do you know the earth is supposed to be at 200 ppm? it's been well over 4000ppm and look, it returned!

    Who said the red zone is 450ppm? Are you saying man cannot adapt to a 2-4ppm increase per year? Nothing you have stated is supported by science.

    Just saying.

  • The world has increased by 1.6 degrees?

    No, the Northern Hemisphere average of 40 weather stations in the IPCC report is +1.6

    If you take the total amount of Northern hemisphere stations you get +7 at the Poles,which means little considering you are still freezing your ass off at 45f instead of 38f in the Summer,the Sub Polar is +5 on Average and the Upper temperate is +4

    Actually look at mid temperate and it is -4, Lower Temperate and Subtropics is -5 and Tropics is -7 (oops)

    True AGT is 15c

  • p.s. True AGT is 15c and has been that way for 10,000 years with the AGT switching from 13c to 14c 50,000 years ago and the word switching from 12c(Ice Age) to 13c 100,000 years ago

    The Average Interglacial Peak is 18c which is long overdue(the 15c for 10,000 is the fluke in a otherwise unstable world/environment,not the norm) with the Highest peak ever being 22c(guess when)

    For all their jargon and cherry picking the Earth is still 15c, they are hyping Climate zone temperature variability

  • @TheLeporad Old but dude, you made the worst argument for global warming. There is a college degree on it. Here you assume the most asinine thing you could: That people in college are smart or know what they are talking about. But again, warming doesn't mean we caused it, changing happens.

  • @furlybq Depends on the college

  • @TheLeporad Umm well. CO2 doesn't increase the temperature, and climate change is that natural order of things. It happens. It's not reversible and is not man made. Now I believe In renewable energy because Fossil fuels won't last forever. Climate fluctuates an Ice Age here a drought there yada yada yada.

  • @EdwardMarshall1982 You're wrong. CO2 DOES increase the greenhose effect.Science 101 pal. Look it up.

  • @mrbrianmccarthy as it is a greenhouse gas, you are 100% correct

  • @TheLeporad yeah, thats why we are having record cold temps. oh yeah, global warming is on hold for ten years, then its coming back. Thats what the people that gave you your info, stated as fact, on hold for ten years....FAIL. The figures you are talking about are wrong, the "scientists" that were gathering that info were caught red handed keepings inaccurate records and "hiding the decline" where have you been? so how can YOU argue with THAT? LALALALALA cant hear you, just kidding, go ahead...

  • @elrugged1 disregarding the GLOBAL in global warming.

  • @TheLeporad oh, and i dont care that you made that statement seven months ago, i still wanna argue with you LOL

  • @TheLeporad while i belive global warming exsist i dont belive MAN made global warming does! FUCKING volcanoes make more CO2 then all our factories cars and factories and cars and cars put together!! FuCKING! ROTTING PLANTS! makes more then our cars and our childrens cars !! INFACT!!! MAN MADEEE CO2 contributes to less then a percent DUMB FUCKKKKKKKK>>>ITS THE SUN

  • @mesa134 have to agree with you on the points that more CO2 is naturally emitted than could possibly come from humans. Other than that, the extra caps and misspelled words show that you fail at thinking.

  • @verd12w me failing at thinking does not make man made global warming any more real...and english is not my first language