Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (643)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • i have been told weather is not climate mate and these military idiots only listened to corruptible scientists who are on the great global warming band wagon grave train

  • @vmgqie

    traitors and communists, all of them.

  • @greenman3610 just swept along with all the other people by this alarmist global warming propaganda machine it just stinks from top to bottom

  • @vmgqie

    I see. So you have nothing to cite, no argument to make, no information to share, no reasoning or evidence - just total certainty that you are right.

    we respect reasoning and evidence here. check it out sometime.

  • @greenman3610 Is it frighting to think, that the average joe six pack thinks and has the same mentality as me. I am your average man made global warming denier. It seems to me you have a emountable task ahead of you if your trying to convince people of your false and misleading beliefs on climate. In other words your fucked.

  • @vmgqie

    don't kid yourself. you're way below average.

  • @greenman3610 and so are your crappy video's 24155 hits that's a drop in the bucket .You have lost nobody believes this shit and they are the voting public

  • @vmgqie welllll how to put this

    1. The "average joe six pack" doesn't really like to think (no offence)

    2. Please explain to me how exactly convincing people to stop polluting the atmosphere can lead to communists overthrowing the government (or sth along these lines)

    3. He clearly doesn't present "beliefs" but facts and the conclusions that actual scientists draw from them. Can you actually refute any of them?

    oh, and please keep it civil

  • @bigolol Scientists are corrupt they are on the global warming band wagon, while any scientist who has a different view, gets sacked or hushed up. There's plenty of scientific papers peered reviewed that refute global warming, but little or no attention is given to them they certainly don't make the news. After climate gate and the lack of serious debate< you have lost the man in the street The average joe six pack can see this shit is going to cost a shit load of money. Get it shit for brains

  • @vmgqie

    yeah, and while you're at it, shit for brains, pray to jesus.

    'you've lost joe sixpack"

    google

    More Americans believe world is warming: Reuters/Ipsos

  • @greenman3610 Americans are dumb but come on believe in global warming you have to have a hidden agender or a complete brain dead idiot to believe in that complete pile of crap

  • @vmgqie no seriously, this really intrigues me...you wouldn't happen to be able to provide any links to said peer reviewed papers?

    And why did you have to insult me? It doesn't make me angry, it just makes you seem like a rather rude person. I mean, if you're the average joe six pack wouldn't you want to make said person appear to look good? I mean of course it is the internet so acting like a complete douchebag won't get you into any trouble, but it also won't help your argument.

  • @bigolol Look up on Google 500scientists refute global warming for a starter I"am sorry for offending you, but when your called alsorts of things just for not believing man made global warming you tend to hit back. But seriously do you really believe that crap and the solutions which are rubbish, do you know we have no replacement for burning fossil fuel wind and solar wont do it and a carbon tax or carbon credits just make people like al gore richer and people like us poorer do you realise that

  • @vmgqie If you seriously believe in man made global warming you have got shit for brains that's the fact jack,come on think about it, we have no tech to replace burning fossil fuel and these green alarmist nazi monkey's think solar and wind turbines are going to save the earth from disaster and a tax or carbon credits which they make money from, I'm not talking about millions of dollars try 60billion will make it alright. talk about naive and gullible, are you all that stupid.

  • Exxon, bp, chevron stand to lose billions if people learn the truth about climate change.

  • Pay more taxes to stop climate change. Turn down your heat, don't use your a/c. Turn off your car instead of letting it idle. Don't have kids. Have abortions. Al Gore says all this will save the world, while flying all over the world to spread his religion that the oceans will rise and flood the coast, and then he returns home to his mansion on the coast. Yeah.

  • "Two prominent advisers to the Joint Chiefs of Staff think adopting social and environmental change is the best path to maintaining America's global hegemony. "

    But you know of course military experts are communists... wake up USA, it's burning BECAUSE of us.

  • "we just looked at the trends"

    Garbage in - Garbage out

  • Deniers, will you listen to yourselves.

    You always start with the supposition that all climate scientists swing to the left.

    An interesting demograph considering that the top ten % of the intelligentsia  come from 'well-heeled' (conservative) backgrounds (irrespective of how much you think your nation of birth is 'classless.'

    Has it ever occured to you that a scientist's driving aim is his work and not some cheap political objective?

    Get over it.

  • @TheElasticJesus

    "Has it ever occured to you that a scientist's driving aim is his work and not some cheap political objective?" That's true... to a degree. But in modern science, especially that which can have huge global economic and political impact, the scientific consensus is based primarily on the biggest mouth and not the biggest brain. Where do you think the grant money for research comes from? This is not "cheap" and those who control the money flow, in the end control the research.

  • @Spetsop

    Interesting point. In that case perhaps you'd like to remind us who funds Roy Spencer, Patrick Michaels, Richard Lindzen, Sallie Balluinas, John Christy...

    I know for a FACT that NONE of Ben Santer's funding comes from the International Marxist Communist Socialist Taxist Gorist Greenist Meanest Moustache Party

    And every name mentioned at the top HAS RECEIVED funds from BIG OIL.

  • @TheElasticJesus "International Marxist Communist Socialist Taxist Gorist Greenist Meanest Moustache Party"

    Mind if I use that to run in the next Canadian federal election? :-D

  • Key sentence in this video: "We are not real scientists, so we just looked at the trends.." OHHH must be true then..

  • @koooo34

    It's also true that military people have to look at real science, and are usually on the cutting edge of science and technology. Admiral Titley is the Navy's lead Oceanographer. So, yeah, it is very credible.

  • @koooo34 Key sentence in kooo34's reply: "OHHH"

  • @koooo34 Climate denial cannot be correct unless climate science is rotten with corruption. These military leaders have no interest in the grant money that is supposedly corrupting the scientists.

  • @Rovinpiper

    someday I'll film a skit about the career counselor from Hell.

    "Orthodonitia? tish tosh. Law? Chump change. MBA? No Way.

    Son, go where the real money is.

    Climate modeling."

  • @greenman3610 Haha yeah climate scientists are rolling in the money! Look at them lording it over all those oil executives!

  • [Sarcasm Alert] Oh, listen to all those Lefties-from the Pentagon & the CIA-pushing a pro-AGW position. [Sarcasm Ended] Seriously, these guys can hardly be called Pinko Environmentalists-so if THEY'RE scared, then I reckon we all ought to be too. I also had to laugh about that response of , effectively "oh, we'll reduce dependence on oil to protect us from terrorism, but not if it means admitting global warming is real" ;)

  • GLOBAL WARMING IS NOT CAUSED NOR CAN BE HELPED BY US........IT'S A SCAM MORONS !

  • @WONDOCTORJ

    AND IF I WRITE IT IN CAPS IT MUST BE TRUE AND WITHOUT

    ANY NEED TO PRESENT EVIDENCE OR ARGUMENT.

  • @greenman3610 There is no EVIDENCE that proves global warmin, LOTS that proves it is not caused by CO2

  • @koooo34 I want you to read what you wrote very slowly out loud. Do this several times and think carefully as you do. Do it now before reading on.........Go on.........Okay. Did you pick up the fact that in just 17 words you managed to make a statement and then contradict yourself? No? Then you really are as stupid as you appear.

  • koooo34 You haven't presented any evidence at all that AGW is false.

  • @greenman3610

    Obviously, resort to make jokes since everyone in the world has nothing better to do all day but troll the internet to cherry pick "evidence" that appears to support your point of view that sustains your carrier of choice (Hint: check the "About me" description of his channel, self-righteous edification publicity/paid ad BS), like you are so obviously doing... Ho wait, we CAN'T since we have what are called JOBS!

    Yes, I went there, I used all CAPS for a word, deal with it.

  • @toulouse666

    Glenn Beck makes it easy. he tells you what to think.

    thinking is hard, reading is hard, and takes time.

    Better to catch up on your sleep.

  • @toulouse666 I didn't realize having a "JOB" means you can being a moronic asshole

  • To those who voted down this video, a question: What the fuck is your problem?

  • I have doubts regarding some of their conclusions. They are basing their views upon trents seen in the weather system/climate, the problem with this is that weather is a chatoitc system, it is hard to predict tomorrows from results of yesterday as weather/climate - it is not readily predictable.

    Please note tthat within the last 2-3 thousands years we have had periods (of 600 yrs) when the climate was 2C warmer than today, and world did not come to an end!

  • @AndrewT1974

    there is no evidence for your claim of 2c warmer temps in the last 2-3 thousand years, outside of the fever swamps of the internet denialosphere.

    viewers who wish to know more can google

    nasa climate

    for credible climate info from NASA.

  • @greenman3610

    Please use common sense and don't rely on govenment corporations to tell you what you should believe.

    During the Roman period of occupation of Britain the most common tree was the Lime tree and grapes were grown.  Both these things require warm temperatures

    Grapes were also grown during the medeival warm period .

    6000 years ago sea levels where significanly higher and created chesil beach.

    You will note I am citing proveable examples you seem to have to resort to abuse!

  • @AndrewT1974

    you don't seem to understand the word 'cite".

    when you "cite" something, you point to an outside, checkable, credible resource, as I do in my video series.

    merely repeating stuff you saw on the internet, or heard at the bar, out of context, is not really what I"m looking for here.

  • @greenman3610

    type into multimap 'vine street' and you will see there are many old roads in england that have this name, you will also note that there are no street by this name in scotland.

    Chaucer's book canterbury tales makes reference to the growing of wine in England.

    There is a plaque on Chesil Beech which describes how the beeched was formed and mentions sea levels that were at least 12 ft higher than today.

  • Further Greenland was inhabited by the Vikings until the little ice age. Vikings were very good farmers, they would not survive soley on fish. Don't take my word for it there was a BBC Horizon documentary made about 15 years ago which discusses the vikings of greenland and their departure.

    There 4 native tree types in britain which could not be explained unless the climate use to be warmer these are : the small leaf lime, the large leaf lime, the chequers tree and the true service tree!

  • @AndrewT1974

    google

    chesil beach isostatic sea level rise

  • @AndrewT1974 we're not very good at predicting (local, short-term) weather, but (global, long-term) climate is a different issue. Compare it with the stock market: nobody knows what's going to happen tomorrow, but we can make very decent predictions about long-term trends.

  • @w00tehpwn

    my understanding is this that there has been a 0.7C warming with a 40% increasing in CO2. Some of this warming is the aggregate effect of sunspot activity over the last 100-200 years some astrophysics think temperatures will be colder during this century

  • @AndrewT1974

    there is no evidence for the sunspot theory.

    see

    watch?v=boj9ccV9htk

    The sun is at its quietest sunspot activity in 100 years, and we have had

    the hottest decade on the record, with 2009 and 1010 two of the hottest years - 2010 may break the record.

    Need to rethink the sunspot thing.

    watch?v=LMA9D-ZWwrg

  • @AndrewT1974 Sunspot activity reached its zenith around the middle of the last century. Between 1950 & 1980, sunspot numbers were essentially stable, & have actually been declining slightly between 1980 & 2010.

  • We have the science of where we're heading and what we're currently doing but let's face it, we'll die out. Our corrupt "leadership" has too much money...I mean power...to get what they further want - more money. Civilization will fall - we'll cannibalize each other - we'll slowly die out - our planet will go to rehab.

    It's not like those in control want their kind to die out, they are just blinded by money.

    Though, it would be nice to see us expand in space and surive as a race, tough break

  • Crap, the Mexicans are going to start migrating to the US because of global warming.

  • @PissedFechtmeister

    If you think immigration is a problem now, just wait.

    Canadians may be wondering the same thing about their southern neighbor, too.

  • @greenman3610 the only reason why immigration is about to be a massive problem (not that it isn't one already) for the US is bc Obama wants to pass the DREAM Act which will allow tens of millions of mexicans to become US citizens if they go to certain colleges or enlist in the military.

    Canada relies on immigration to keep its population from decreasing...we just don't want Americans, lol.

  • Perhaps the reducing number of Climate Skeptics from around the world should get together with members of the Flat Earth Society to reassure each other that the rest of the world is merely conspiring to poop their party. This way they could save carbon by meeting in the same room.

  • @bittusahgal

    Don't forget the creationists.

    You'll need a big room, unfortunately.

  • I have a feeling that our descendants will be praying for global warming to occur when the present interglacial comes to an end very soon on a geological time-scale,we are still deep in the middle of the Quaternary ice age , presently we are at the tail end of a warm interlude. A characteristic of the end of warm interglacial periods is wildly fluctuating climate and the variations of the last thousand years are in line with previous interglacial s.

  • @desmith1956

    major need for education here.

    in the absence of human effects, a new glaciation would be at least 8 to 10,000 years off, maybe 20 or 30 thousand.

    google milankovitch, and do a little reading.

    ignorance hurts, I'm here to help.

  • @greenman3610 Yes ,you do need major education in comprehending the English language,note the words" geological time scale".If you wish to know the meaning of this term ,Google will help.Don`t be too hard on yourself ,you are not all that ignorant,just misguided.

  • @desmith1956

    since you refuse to make any actual points, or cite any resource for anyone to learn anything, I can only assume you are merely another troll, frustrated by your inability to answer factual presentations.

  • TO ALL: OurGaia believes that LESS energy leads to MORE energy.

    Let me quote him:

    "No warming comes from Sun and Nasa says UV has dropped 6% at extreme UV wavelengths since the solar minimum of 1996. google "April 1, 2009: The sunspot cycle is behaving a little like the stock market. Just when you think it has hit bottom, it goes even lower."

  • In the last days the earth shall melt with fervent heat. I read this in the scriptures, years ago and now say, so the earth is warming, tell me something I do not already know.

  • They could see effect of warming but wrong about the source. Recent global warming is not caused by carbon increase, it caused by greatest level of solar sunspot activity recorded in 10,000 years. Now sunspot activity has practically stopped and guess what pole ice is dramatically increasing. They now talking mini ice age.

  • @0urGaia " greatest level of solar sunspot activity recorded in 10,000 years"

    Where did you get this info? It's just plain wrong. Sunspot levels have been very low for quite a few years, but it just kept getting warmer.

  • @cdunford, oceans buffer temperature changes so cannot expect direct yearly correlation between sunspot activity and global temperature Google Sami Solanki Max Planck Institute Germany sunspot activity 11,400 years. Another study.. google "Long-term Variations in Solar Activity

    and their Apparent Effect on the Earth's Climate" by Danish Meteorological Institute.

  • @0urGaia No. See this chart:

    bit[dot]ly/ZOsAq

    Solar variations have been strictly cyclical and very minor. They have been cycling within a very small range (~1w/km^2) since at least 1950. They cannot possibly account for the warming we've seen since ~1985.

    The "strong correlation" Lassen observed between solar activity and climate breaks down completely after about 1985.

  • @cdunford, the acrim data has been analyzed by Dr. Richard Willson of Columbia University..... The accurate long-term dataset therefore shows a significant positive trend (.05 percent per decade) in TSI between the solar minima of solar cycles 21 to 23 (1978 to present).” Such as an increase is sufficient to explain most of the observed warming.

  • @0urGaia

    utter nonsense.

    A -05 difference is less than the difference between the peak and trough of one 11 year cycle. The data is difficult enough to interpret that it is not even clear if it is increasing or decreasing.

    see

    lean and rind 2008

  • @greenman3610, that doesn't seem reflect the same solar output from NASA's ACRIMSAT/ACRIM3. The acrim dot com site explains that sun output can fluctuate highly on a daily basis so their averages look very accurate to my untrained eye. If solar variance does increase C02/methane from sea's/swamps it be easy understand why science community has incorrectly seen the C02 increases as unnatural instead of natural cause. BTW. feel free delete my comments did not mean clog your video so many,sorry

  • @0urGaia "science community has incorrectly seen the C02 increases as unnatural instead of natural cause"

    The problem with this is that the isotopic signature of the added CO2 matches what you get when you burn fossil fuels. It doesn't match natural CO2 from metling permafrost etc.

    Scientists aren't simply assuming that the added CO2 isn't natural--they've essentially proved that it isn't.

  • @cdunford, warming oceans can be attributed to increase in man made C02 simply because they absorb less our pollution.

  • @cdunford, if you also think ice melting checkout "Another IPCC Error: Antarctic Sea Ice Increase Underestimated by 50%". Also google "Increase in Arctic ice confounds doomsayers - but does not spell the end of global warming, scientists warn"

  • @0urGaia Arctic ice is currently at a historic low. Antarctic sea ice is well within IPCC estimates. If you're going to argue with science, use actual science and not tabloid newspapers (The Daily Mail) and libertarian think tank blogs (World Climate Report).

  • @cdunford, you like US National Snow and Ice Data Center any better? ...2010 report..... Arctic summer sea ice has increased by 409,000 square miles, or 26%, since 2007..increased..not decreased

  • @0urGaia 2007 was the all-time record breaker. "Increased since 2007" is faint praise indeed, especially since 2010 has been below 2007 for much of the year and is now only very slightly above it.

    Your numbers are wrong. As of the latest NSIDC report, 2010 was 139,000 square miles or 4.4% above 2007 (not 409,000 and 26%).

    To put 139,000 square miles in context, Arctic ice was melting at the rate of 23,500 square miles a day, making 139,000 square miles nothing more than loose change.

  • @cdunford, yes you right. Yours is newer report reflecting winter I think, mine is oct 2009 report from NSIDC reflecting summer sorry "Arctic sea ice extent remains low; 2009 sees third-lowest mark ". I not care what norm is as that's a 1970 line that may be abnormal over much longer periods. I only care ice returns or at least stops shrinking.

  • @0urGaia No worries, we all make mistakes.

    I'm not sure what you mean by "I not care what norm is as that's a 1970 line". The comparison line in the NSIDC charts isn't 1970, it's the 1979-2000 average. We're well below that.

    If you "only care ice returns or at least stops shrinking", you should look at NSIDC's chart of the longer term trend. It will not make you happy: bit[dot]ly/HzRWs

  • @cdunford, there is more C02 in air than in 2007 and more ice in arctic than in 2007 so if there is direct correlation between global warming and CO2 it just didn't happen in arctic did it. Mojib Latif said 2008 that he now projects a 30 year cooling off period before another warming period, guess we all have wait see what happens.

  • @0urGaia "Mojib Latif said 2008 that he now projects a 30 year cooling off period "

    No, that is NOT what he said. He's repeatedly tried to correct that misinterpretation of his comments. What he said was that internal variability will inevitably result in periods of no warming, some of them probably lasting a decade or more. His only predictions were very short term. The first of them (2000-2010) is already way wrong, and the second isn't looking too good.

  • @cdunford, Isn't that in the charts he released. Think he was criticizing media that said he had turned camp which I agree is misinterpreting his position.

  • @0urGaia The chart wasn't a prediction. He took a smoothly increasing temp curve and superimposed 20th century variability on it to show that longish periods of nonwarming would occur even though the overall trend was strongly up. It was a demonstration, not a prediction. Watch greenman's video, you'll understand.

  • @cdunford, I already watched greenmans video, read Mojib Latif predictions. Some that look long term temperature cycles also predict cooling period until 2030 "Global Temperature Trends From 2500 B.C. To 2040 A.D". Dr Wheeler also points out that ice ages recur every ~11,500 years and last ice age was 11,500 years ago. That may be why sunspot activity been bit strange lately. We ignore long term cycles because our human lifespan so short.

  • @0urGaia

    Again, the clueless bar is set higher.

    You really need to do some research - I've even made it easy by doing a whole

    vid on this topic.

    watch?v=khikoh3sJg8

    You're welcome.

  • @greenman3610, Think you both read too much my comment. I not like media that try represent his work. I read his charts so understand his position.

  • also recent studies have found that CO2 concentrations in last 500 million years (Phanerozoic Carbon Dioxide) may have been as high as 6000ppm compared to 391 today. I don't remember seeing that in that chart presented in an Inconvenient Truth (might have watch again refresh my memory). But guessing using a lift to go 20 times higher before reaching the 21 century would have been far less dramatic.

  • @0urGaia : do you have the SOURCE and EXACT QUOTE from Mojib Latif?

    In an call with J.R., Latif said about the journalists from which you have probably your source "I don't know what to do, they just make these things up".

    Latif solely sees a natural cooling trend from the 2000-2010 to 2005-2015 offset the anthropogenic warming over a short period of time.

    As he states to make it clear "if my name was not Mojib Latif, my name would be Global Warming".

  • @nigelelsass, yes I agree with Latif on that point he is being represented by journalist. But I fail understand your point. Care to explain further?

  • @0urGaia : You meant "misrepresented". This is what I meant that the "30 years cooling" you quote has never been his word but a journalistic distortion.

  • @nigelelsass, yes misrepresented thank you. He does project a cooling period between 2010 and 2030/40 but had little choice because earth is cooling. Download his projections and examine them yourself. His issue is that some have claimed he is no longer projecting global warming . That's wrong, he is still the carbon tax man.

  • @0urGaia : No the earth isn't cooling. I downloaded his projection (google: journal/v453/n7191/full/nature­06921.html)

    PS: I asked YOU to give the source for your statement.

    PS2: Your last statement is misleading (strongly)... he is NOT a policy maker

    PS3: Saving the climate costs only a fraction of the :

    "US-engineer-real-estate-bubbl­e-tax-on-the-world", or the

    "US-lie-about-iraq-and-whine-t­o-allies-for support-tax". (hint: if I were American I would rather remain silent).

  • @nigelelsass, the cooling trend was in a presentation he gave at world climate conference. Google "1 September 2009 Time: 10:30 - 12:00 Location: Room 1". Find his pdf at bottom page. Page 3, chart in which is written "Cooling Period".

    PS2 agreed;

    PS3 The UN estimates carbon tax will cost 1 trillion annually and 45 trillion by year 2050. google "Leaked UN Documents Reveal Plan For “Green World Order” By 2012" look the leaked UN document.

  • @0urGaia :

    PS1: And this cooling is linked to natural cycles which are enough to barely offset man-made warming for roughly 20 years before warming reaches 4°C at the end of the century. So what is your point? That you do not care what happens afterwards?

    PS3: SOURCE: FOX NEWS REPORTED BY PRISON PLANET (a site of conspiracy theorists) - dare to give better sources? It is based on flawed reports such as the one arguing renewable energies killing jobs in Spain (one of the most flawed studies)

  • @nigelelsass,

    PS1....No warming comes from Sun and Nasa says UV has dropped 6% at extreme UV wavelengths since the solar minimum of 1996. google "April 1, 2009: The sunspot cycle is behaving a little like the stock market. Just when you think it has hit bottom, it goes even lower."

    PS2...not like jones as well, google "Socialists Demand Trillions in “Climate Debt”

  • @0urGaia : Read again what you wrote... it is self-contradicting. You really have no clue about what you write, don't you?

    Or else tell me how a DECREASE in UV (you mention) would WARM....

  • @nigelelsass, Whatever the costs the bottom line is west is facing financial collapse. It can no longer afford maintain its infrastructure much less replace it. Tax payers have no money left. We risking entering dark age and yet they still pushing new bubbles to try keep titanic afloat. The world is in danger, not from CO2, but those that push it as a death threat. Pay up or die!

  • @0urGaia : I am going to kick your butt of the butt of your children in case of unmitigate GW, this is promise, they will be strong retaliations. You are facing a choice. I am ok to bear the cost of GW as long as I can retaliate without limit on the uneducated US people like you OR their children (in case you already died).

  • @nigelelsass, that is fine, I am prepared for butt kicking but my butt is safe.

    Are you sure 2010 hottest year!

    2008 China battles "coldest winter in 100 years

    In January 2010, the northern half of Europe experienced one of its coldest winters since 1981–1982

    2010 Australians shiver through coldest winter morning in 30 years

    2009/2010 Antarctic Sea Ice Increase

    2010 Figures show Arctic ice dramatically increased during winter

  • 2010...Britain facing one of the coldest winters in 100 years, experts predict

    2010...Russia's top weatherman today announced that the winter now drawing to a close in Siberia may turn out to be the coldest on record. 'The winter of 2009-10 was one of the most severe in European part of Russia for more than 30 years,

    Exactly where is the heat!!!!

  • @0urGaia : CHERRY PICKING ALERT!!!

    I am going to harvest selected data to hide the larger picture... how nice. Well nice try but you're not fooling anybody beside the uneducated masses who share the same passport as you.

  • @nigelelsass. Unfortunately the internet is not your friend because people can find evidence of cherry picked everywhere "Russian IEA claims CRU tampered with climate data" to support the carbon tax swindle. You people not support science, you support tyrants trying steal money from the poor. I not want talk you anymore.

  • That is fine... you are anyway just a conspiracy theorist from what is by far not the brightest nation on earth. Enjoy.

  • @0urGaia : Believe it or not, people outside the US know the difference between point, average, and median!!!! who would have thought that?

  • @0urGaia : You don't like global data.... I see you are a CHERRY PICKER of data

  • @0urGaia : PS: there is no "west" whatsoever with people who abandon the guiding principles of western science. You are not westerners.

  • @nigelelsass, I just term asia east, remainder west, I know I wrong that.

  • @nigelelsass, the sun just might be approaching another maunder minimum like that of 1645-1715 which triggered the little ice age of the 1650's. The suns highly variable output of ultraviolet light controls our weather, not CO2.

  • @0urGaia :; Ok this is just ignorant.... you can't have a sun-driven warming without increase in day-night temperature differential. We are at a solar low activity period and 2010 is already a record year for temperatures... you are not making any sense.

  • Only the blind and ignorant don't believe climate change is in full effect.

  • @socialgarbage2 Add "Libertarian" to your list. ;-)

  • I love Greenmans videos, but I wonder if he's really making a difference. Anyone know if anybody has changed their minds about climate change because of him?

  • @jimjamerman

    If I can believe what people are writing to me week after week, it makes a difference.

  • @greenman3610 I've not changed my mind, but greenman's videos are helping me understand the problem of climate change more fully.

  • @ConservatoryTV

    what's piece is missing for you?

  • @greenman3610 No piece missing. I do not claim to understand the science, but after spending months weighing up the arguments for both sides it is clear to me we should believe what the scientists are saying. I'm working on an infographic as we speak which compares the consensus, with the amount of time allocated in the media to skeptics, and then the affect this has on public opinion. If you are interested I could send you my first draft for your input.

  • @ConservatoryTV

    google

    Journalistic Balance as Global Warming Bias

    When 97+ percent of working, publishing scientists agree there's a problem - how is it "balanced" to pull some non-scientist from a think tank in to give "the other side"?

    You can find some epidemiologists out there, who don't believe HIV causes AIDS.

    How often have you seen that "other side" presented as part of an AIDS story?

    You don't because the consensus is so overwhelming, and the critics are cranks.

  • @greenman3610 Thanks. I'll include these findings in my infographic. I've had a few scrapes with the cranks on my humble blog. Google 'Renegade Conservatory Guy Climate Change'. I've had people email me telling me I'm 'evil' and so on. But all its done is make me research the topic further. My hope is the infographic will demonstrate to ordinary folk the overwhelming consensus in simple graphics, whilst highlighting the danger of listening to skeptics. Thanks.

  • World simmers in hottest year so far

    WASHINGTON (Reuters) – The world is enduring the hottest year on record, according to a U.S. national weather analysis, causing droughts worldwide and a concern for U.S. farmers counting on another bumper year. For the first six months of the year, 2010 has been warmer than the first half of 1998, the previous record holder, by 0.03 degree Fahrenheit"

    google "world simmers in hottest year so far"

  • people i'm also worried cause sara is leading in the polls, only because we're so broke, her ethics charges came back guilty and her energy plan is SHIT..she just bats her eyes and everyone buys her crap, very insulting! media cant even keep up with her lies! she has no experience, like obama, see how that is going? someone email her this video!

  • being realistic, even if we invested everything on green energy we could only make enough for 1940's needs. alternatives are just not energy dense enough, as well as being oil derivatives anyway.

    we have a catch 22 situation. we have to ween our self off fossils - they are running out fast. we cannot support 7 billion ppl on alternatives. however, can hyper sophisticated energy systems really be supported by a small population ? looks like we are doomed either way. worth a try though

  • I really like the video... but I fear the title is a bit misleading for this one: there's no debunking!

  • @TheWindClaw

    my weak rationalization is that the guy at the beginning says he was a skeptic.

    I should have put a Hannity clip or something right up front, I suppose, but I liked the

    Gravitas of the old general starting right out.

  • @TheWindClaw nope, chris horner is still at it, for exxon, plus it really pisses me off cause look at all the patriotic groups he supports on sourcewatch, just like newt gingrich and his bullshit koch coal front, jp morgan, man the amount of bullshit is really swelling..you think we've tipped from the corexit in the gulf and they're just too afraid to tell us??

  • @akropiss Um, bullshit. They've been building dikes for centuries. Are you telling me they don't have the technology to heap some more earth up? The sea rose 1 foot last century, not a problem. Why is 1.5 going to be a problem?

  • @OutlawTomFantastic The 0.5m rise in sea level is not the issue. The issue is for the accelerating rise that will result in a 6m rise by the end of the century.

    .

    The lower estimates of the 2007 IPCC AR4 are due only to thermal expansion of the oceans. They didn't include ice mass loss from Greenland or Antarctica because those figures had not yet been adequately quantified. Current estimates put us at 6m. That will result in a major displacement of humanity around the world. This century.

  • //You just need the government to get the hell out of the way. //

    Who is John Galt?

  • @Martintfre

    "Who is John Galt?"

    He is Kilroy's, from WWII, second cousin twice removed. Listen closely, Martinfre, the forces of Nature care little for your silly mytho-poetic heroes.

    As for Government getting out of the way, it's more like it's going to be blown out of the way, right along with your degenerate "Free Markets".

    It is our monkey-like, genetic predisposition towards Dominance/Submission that will get us destroyed. Sub-Humanity simply doesn't have what it takes to adapt.

  • @1VILLABOLO

    I have a nice banana for you...come here..just a little closer..

  • David Hume, arguably the greatest of British philosophers, would have called the proposal that global warming is man made as an 'inductive proposal'- meaning that it is speculative and without clear basis of categorical evidence which would require quite a bit of Faith. Now, science likes to distinguish itself from religion, indeed Hume saw science as laying no great stock by induction, merely using it as a means to further examine and explore, and yet science has become very religious.

  • @OutlawTscience Fantastic

    ". . . science has become very religious."

    Smell thy Theology. I hope that you are young enough to see the that Nature cares little for your ideology.

  • @1VILLABOLO I'm atheist. And that includes the AGW religion.

  • Comment removed

  • @OutlawTomFantastic

    I'm Atheistic as well, although my sensibilities are Pantheistic. That has no relevance to the forces of Nature and how they are being affected by Man.

  • If it gets bad, won't we just spend the 50 billion dollars the 'sulfur gun' would take to lower sunlight and shield the earth? I'd love you to do a Crock on the cheapest of the emergency mitigation schemes. the sulfur gun.

    Some say it might shut down the Indian monsoon, so I guess the risk of the sulfur gun is that it is SO cheap that even smaller nations could do it unilaterally. EG: There's some debate in Australia about saving 50 billion a year by abolishing state governments!

  • @EclipseNowBlog

    Message from Australia:

    - We are not a 'small' nation

    - Our state governments are what keep our educational standards better than the Americans...they arnt going anywhere.

  • @types10000:

    * we are only 21 mil, and California has 36 million in the one State. At that population ratio, do we really need 14 times the government of Californians? Do we really want to pay 14 parliaments?

    * Your argument that more States = better education would see America trouncing Australia in education, they have 50 states!

    * When Bob Hawke and John Howard both agree we should have a 2 tier government system, you can see something is wrong. See beyondfederation org au

  • @EclipseNowBlog

    you can play with the figures all you want but the fact is the level of state control over the educational system that Australia has, yields the best results. the level of control you idiots give to the local communities is FUCKING CRAZY and leads to unscientific nonsense like creationism being taught in your classrooms.

    my argument isnt about 'more states=good' it's about the funding and level of control you designate to the control of the state.

  • @types10000:

    Dude, relax, I'm an Australian. I get the sense from talking with my mates that they would LOVE to see the State governments rolled over into a National government scheme. 2 simple tiers of government: National / Local. Local govts aren't even in our constitution!

    According to Dr Mark Drummond we'd save 50 billion a year. Google Beyond Federation: the only way to save the Murray Darling system and fight climate change is moving Australia Beyond Federation!

  • @types10000:

    Aha! So it's *standards* that make education great, not necessarily the type of government enforcing it. If we abolish the States and have National / Local government system, the National government can set the standards. (At a high NSW level requiring a degree to teach, unlike the 6 week course they can do in Queensland!)

    And we'd save $50 billion a year, every year. That's Kevin Rudd's stimulus EVERY YEAR!

  • Excellent video. Encouraging to see people with no ace to grind coming to the right conclusion.

  • quit whining and pay your carbon tax to your global masters goldman sachs (who own much of british petroleum) for their carbon exchange ponzi scheme set up by ken lay (Enron) and al gore (man bird pig) who will absolve you of your carbon sins, join me in drinking the climate cult kool aid and pay carbon taxes to BP, wake up so called "environmentalists" follow the money. The best way to fight an opposition is to lead it and the global masters know it.

  • "Hell Mr. Sec. if 7 out of 9 of your proposals helps us put the terrorists on ice then sign me up." LMAO!!

  • I didn't realise that not all warmists believe in the Hockey Stick until today. There is some hope for you all!

  • More global warming globaloney. Thankfully people are rejecting this bogus hypothesis. As faith in manmade GW declines you will see an increase in propaganda for VATs. Anything to get wealth transfered from poor people in rich countries to rich people in poor countries. More politics and corruption. Shame on men who take foolish advantage of natural slight warming trends for greed and profit. Shame on you.

  • @FaganRoberts Have you honestly looked at the science behind climate change beyond Glenn Beck? I'm guessing you haven't. Our planet is heating up at a faster rate than it ever has as far back as we can tell - and we can look back hundreds of thousands of years, through multiple ice ages. Look at the science - seriously!

  • @livininspokane Seriously, I've check into the science. I've found nothing but controversy, junk science, politics, etc. Seriously, have you checked that stuff out? How can you possibly deny natural global warming? That is, unless you have the faith of a saint and are credulous beyond any independent reason? I mean, it's not like the theory of evolution, where virtually all scientists are in general agreement. Check into it, seriously! (And leave your faith at the door)

  • @livininspokane You need to expand your horizons beyond Al Gore - Seriously!

  • @FaganRoberts I don't give a damn about Al Gore, he's a hyprocite

  • @FaganRoberts You need to expand your horizons to include SCIENCE!

  • @livininspokane Did the IPCC tell you that?

  • @ifudge9 Did the IPCC tell me what?

  • @ifudge9 That 98% of climate scientists believe in global warming? Look it up yourself, you have the power! Even oil company scientists are concurring on the global warming science.

  • @livininspokane CAN'T REASON WITH THE BRAINWASHED.

  • @ifudge9 If you call science brainwashing, I call you a fool. 

  • @livininspokane Anyway, of course global warming exists.......I don't think any scientist alive denies that the planet warms and cools. What a stupid statement to make, and really shows the extent of the brainwashing.

  • @ifudge9 Yes climate change exists, but it's happening at a faster rate than it ever has in the past few hundred thousand years. Do you really think it's worth taking the slight chance that all the CO2 we're pumping out into the atmosphere, combined with the ammount of trees (co2 absorbers) we're chopping down. Man made global warming is happening whether you believe in it or not.

  • @livininspokane NO we have warmed just as fast before many times before in the past, this time is nothing unusual. Check Professor Rob Carter.

  • @ifudge9 I have previously already. Now I challenge YOU to look at one of the other 98%

  • @livininspokane But the rate of warming is nothing unusual, just look at a chart without the words 'hockey stick' or 'Mann' on it and you might get a clue.

  • @ifudge9 Hockey stick has been debunked - sorry!