So basically, the City of the Consumption is ruled by Satan, the prince of this world. He and all who pay homage to his city will suffer eternal punishment. Heard that before. Oh yeah, I remember now. The Catholic Church ruled the Western world over 1000 years with that rhetoric.
if americans stop rampant wastage of fuels, probably most of this crisis will reduce. and americans please switch your computers and lights when not in use. there r others on this earth too. please care about us. thank you
hey i have an idea fuuuuuuuuuuuuck you you stupid ass. china has 20 of the thirty most highly polluted city in the world. india is getting up there to.
I think the baby boomers generation have lived through the party time period and now it's clean up time or contamination. I doubt if there will be another party time as the costs are far too high. But there can be a wisdom time if we all dig deep and let it free...:o))
"Gore says terrible tragedies are occurring in the southern Sahara because of drought which he blames on "global warming." There is no drought caused by "global warming." In 2007 there were record rains across the whole of the southern Sahara. In the past 25 years the Sahara has shrunk by some 300,000 square kilometers because of additional rainfall."
global warming hysteria is being pushed by governments that have been caught lying to the public on a regular basis, along with elitists whose stated goal is to push fearmongering as a means of increasing taxation and control over our lives, emphasizes the reality that, allied to the its phony scientific foundation, global warming is just the latest hobby-horse on which control freaks have piggy-backed their agenda to dominate and rule.
Which is more likely: A Socialist scheme that has subverted modern science in an attempt to take over the world or Science has discovered a side effect to putting millions upon millions of tons of heat trapping gas in to the atmosphere? Not taking action on climate change is actually a greater threat to your economic well-being, and to your political and social liberties, than is taking action.
I agree. People want to take no action and say global warming is phony facts... I find this odd. They should look at pictures of the Artic and Anartica where animals are just dying because of no ice.. It is not a nice sight. But when things are not pleasant people take denial for reasoning like there is no global warming. They do not care for they will not be present on this wasteland in 50 years.
What causes global warming then? The sun is dying. 1 point. The ice in the artic is going as its warming, we cant do with out this. Look at the floods happening. Also the Anartica is a mess. Once these two are messed up it changes things. We can just say its a fable but there is proof. What will happen to the nxt generation. We wont be there then.
what a junk video. There's no discussion any kind of scientific evidence in here. What has increasing consumption got to do with global warming - nothing: it is driven by solar activity and internal climate variability.
This whole thing reeks of political power and big research dollars! Mankind is a very low emitter of CO2 (including breathing) compared to volcanos, animals, decaying plants and especially oceans. This naturally occurring gas is constantly dealt with by the atmosphere and is only .054% of the atmosphere. Al Gore doesn't even believe it- look at his carbon footprint! They're all just riding the gravy train and they get the radical knee-jerkers to create the frenzy.
Which is more likely: A Socialist scheme that has subverted modern science in an attempt to take over the world or Science has discovered a side effect to putting millions upon millions of tons of heat trapping gas in to the atmosphere? Not taking action on climate change is actually a greater threat to your economic well-being, and to your political and social liberties, than is taking action.
Million upon millions of tons of CO2 in the atmosphere is still spit in the ocean. This is a natural gas that is emitted by volcanoes more than man, by animals more than volcanoes, by decaying plants more than animals and by the ocean more than by plants.
The quick research dollars are in proving man made GW not disproving it.
Why take action against spitting in the ocean. You can't even get Al Gore to stop spitting!
The US Senate Committe on Environment and Public Works has just issued a report in which 400 prominant international scientists say that AGW is a hoax.
Scientists have assumed that C02 causes heat in the atmosphere because of correlation btwn C02 and heat levels. But heat causes water to evaporate and the C02 in the oceans is released. That causes the correlation. And the heat that warms the oceans is from geothermal source(ask a geologist)
"Scientists have assumed that C02 causes heat in the atmosphere because of correlation btwn C02 and heat levels."
Ice core samples show that the temperature rises between 200 and 800 years before the CO2 level follows. Recent studies have shown that deep sea water can have a rise in temperature by as much as 1300 years before there is a rise in CO2.
Why should the rest of us give up our way of life and hobbies to curve GW. While rich people like Gore, fly around in their private jets and live in 15000 square foot houses and drive gas gusslers. I agree we need to cut down on pollution, but this do as I say and not as I do is bullshit...
How do you explain the FACT that 95% of nations in the world signed Kyoto?
All of these nations have more than enough resources to confirm what the Kyoto scientists concluded.
Many countries said that the Kyoto agreement would hurt thier economies yet they still signed. In fact its the reason Bush pulled us out of Kyoto and we know how good of a pres he is.
i will not dodge, no, 95% did not, you are wrong,and Kyoto only benefits rich small nations with no natural habitat, we wanted co2 credit from all of out trees and greenery and so did Brazil so that is why Brazil and America left, ,,, im sorry you destroyed your environment a long time ago, here in the states we have forests larger than your country, anyways the UN is to corrupt to sign anything with
There is 0.00037% CO2 max in the air: It cycles with season and location. People tel lyou percentage change in CO2, which is meaninglyless! There was 0.0004% in the time of the dinosaurs.
The capitalist pigs who operate pretty much with impunity are trashing the environment daily while even more capitalists are chopping down the rain forests that give us much of our oxygen... to think that this kind of careless, selfish behavior isn't taking its toll is just stupid. So, naturally, the conservatives are going to jump on the anti-global warming bandwagon. They like easy ways out of the problems they create and/or support.
No. I didn't even read your remarks so am not quite sure what your stance is. The fact is that the people polluting this world are capitalists run amok and they get away with it because of support from conservatives who think we have God-Given 'dominion' over the world. It is short sighted and stupid.
you ignorant! you jumpn on the socialist bandwagon and your kids and grandkids are gunna laugh at you for believing this "man made global warming hoax" anyone who took 4th grade earth science would know that high temp cause high CO2, not the other way around. Dont hate on the conservatives who are defending your ass from terrorist, so that you can open your dumb ass mouth.
Do you honestly understand all the factors behind climate change or have you just put all your faith in al gore? Funny isn't it that al gore lives in a 10,000 square foot house and uses more energy in a month than the average American citizen uses in a year and then calls him self and environmentalist.
Yes the environment is important, and yes we need to reduce our ecological footprint but al gore is doing this all wrong. The greenhouse effect that al gore explained left out one important part, it's not co2 that is the main cause of the greenhouse effect, water vapor is responsible for as much as 90% of the greenhouse effect. That other 10 percent is were you find methane, various other gases and your notorious co2. The co2 "that's destroying our world" makes up only 5%.
Next climate change is effected by many things we simply can't help: interstellar dust, solar output, earth/ sun geometry, volcanic emissions, mountain building, continental drift and atmosphere/ surface heat exchange. And let me guess you being so mature fully understand all of these factors? How can scientists predict what the temperature will be outside in 50 years when they can't predict next week's weather?
For one thing the levels do chance over the summer, but not relating that strongly to summer and winter, because summer in the northern hemishpere is winter in the southern..
I don't know if you're trying to say global warming's a lie, but if so, clearly you haven't looked at the science in anywhere near as much detail as the experts
icecaps have nothing to do with sea level respectively... its all about thermo expansion with h2o,,, icecaps and their thickness calculated over the surface hardly does any difference,,, wana find out, get the surface area of the earth and the area of icecaps, calculate the thickness,, you will find out
Have you noticed the opposition to Global Warming? Have you posted comments on youtube stating that you agree with Global Warming, only to find your post "shot down" within minutes? Almost as if there are people monitoring what is being posted so that they can quickly dispute your comments in an attempt to sway public consensus. Exxon is going to great lengths to try combat perception. Tactics include videos as well as paying people to post statements on youtube that dispute Global warming.
global warming is a political move used in order to benefit the federal banks, who are also getting funded in Iraq with companies such as Blackwater and Halliburton, 5000 million increase since 2003 and legalizing income taxes which are unconstitutional.
That is a very selfish way to treat the next generation, and the following generation... "Well-being and happiness never appeared to me as an absolute aim. I am even inclined to compare such moral aims to the ambitions of a pig." Albert Einstein
I honestly believe that we just have 5 years left on earth. Several different theories and theologies point towards this date. This doesn't worry me, because I have made my peace with earth and welcome the change of scenery. Amen
If it was supose to end in 2012 then more then one calendar would end. Just becasue some Mexican civilization's calendar end then doesn't mean crap. It's the end of an age anywho. That means stuff will change at the most.
Guess we will wait and see. Read about the magnetic polar shift and what it does to the human brain and nervous system. Other theologies point towards 2012 also, give or take a few years.
Yea I know about the polar shift. I'm getting a telescope just to see the aura lights in NY. I just think that at the worst we will have increases in skin cancer, high temps, and a few massive electric shut downs. Yes, I know, if electricity failes then civilization ends. But I think we will pull through.
Hey, I had a dream a civil war in America would brake out in 2010. If that happens, we'll be to busy fighting to be bothered with 2012.
People who do not know how to survive without it will become a BURDEN. If people are incapable of building a fire, hunting their food and finding water they will perish. But "the country boy will survive". If the magnetic poles do flip, humans will not be able to function. During a full moon, a magnetic bubble forms and people behave strangely. It doesn't take much to throw off the normality of our conscious being.
This global warming scare was fabricated by the "enlightened elites". A global crisis needing a global solution. The UN will be given authority over the laws of all countries. Like Al Gore, these globalists have sold their souls and betrayed humanity. "A New World Order" is being prepared incrementally. They will succeed since people are thoroughly brainwashed by the media. The goal of these elite is to enslave the world thru total control of the finances of a micro-chipped population.
TOTALLY AGREE! This was cooked up to have a "global" crisis which needed a "global" solution as a building block for "global" authority. this is more sinister than anyone realizes.
wow, easy does it with the conspiracy theories. you don't also believe 9/11 was an inside job as well, do you? the UN becoming a NWO, enslave the world through micro-chips? you give people too much credit, its about money and idiots, its always about money and idiots.
The global warming theory is just classic bureaucratic group think--people in government supported organizations believe in global warming because this expressed belief is good for their careers and their department budgets. I've never seen a better example of mass stupidity by smart people than the "consensus" that global warming is actually happening and it is caused by increasing CO2 levels.
Mars is 90% CO2, and its maximum temperature of 68° F and a minimum of -220° F. I would think so much CO2 would cause it to be at least as hot as Earth today because of its further from Earth but it is actually very cold. You know, just something to ponder over why this is when they say high Carbon numbers here on Earth should make it hot. Interesting.
the reason the co2 doesn't have much affect on the climate is that mars' atmosphere is very thin (1% of earth) because it has no magnetosphere (or its very weak). this causes solar wind to strip away the atmosphere.
True, but seeing as how the current argument is that .03% of CO2 is supose to be the primary factor, I would think, even in light atmosphere, it would super heat Mars. Thin or not, there is still a ton of more CO2 on Mars then Earth, and it does nothing.
wait are you trying to argue that CO2 isn't a greenhouse gas? CO2 is a proven greenhouse gas, although its effects are diminished when the atmosphere is as thin as it is on mars it can't properly trap in the heat. A better argument would be "how much co2 in the atmosphere is required for a severe greenhouse effect to take place"
in which case the amount of co2 in the atmosphere to cause such a greenhouse effect might be more than the amount it takes for co2 to reach toxic levels which is 5%.
I agree with you, in that this current global warming argument is flawed, however your mars atmosphere question is a poor argument against it. sorry if I seemed pompous, I wanted to answer it before a hippie could use it to strengthen his case.
There is no doubt that there is global warming. I'm just saying that when 1% of the atmosphere is green house gasses, I can't see it to ever effect us. In order to have 5% Green house gasses, then the total ammount of animal life in general along with pretty much all CO2 producing objects, would need to be be 5x greater then that of today. I'm sorry, I just don't see any CO2 producing object going up that ammount.
thats exactly right, the question is how much co2 is required to make a change or cause for concern. co2 is currently 0.038% of the atmosphere. co2 contributes only 12% of the total greenhouse effect. its increased only .007% or so in the last 100 years. we have a long way to go.
greenhouse effect causes earth to warm by 33 degrees celsius
co2 is 12% of the greenhouse or 3% = 1 degree celsius
co2 has risen from 10% to 12% so +0.666 degrees celsius
run away greenhouse occurs when global temps increase around 5 degrees. lets say 10% more co2 for safe measure. the amount of co2 in the air after another 10% increase would mean the total co2 would have to double. or 0.073%
The only way for CO2 to rise and stay at a high amount would require an incredible death to most plant life. Not just rain forest, every plan from weed to tree. Plants find their way everywhere, From a sidewalk crack to the great plains. Besides, such a mass extinction would kill us first. Plants are here to stay until the supernova, and then some. Even in the air are O2 producing microbes.
not necessarily, right now we have put up 70 ppm co2 in under 50 years, that is an increase that the plants couldn't keep up, not to mention the deforestation makes it even harder for plants to keep up.
plants are usually the first to die, then the animals that eat them, then the animals that eat the other animals then finally scavengers.
im referring to a circumstance where mass extinctions occur. but yeah plants are resilient and will find a way to come back even if we don't.
my whole point was that if the co2 level stays the same right now we will be fine, but if it continues to increase and every 75 years the temperature raises 1 degree.. then what?
I can give you three scenario. One WILL happen, and any way you look at it, CO2 is going down
A) WW3- With Russia and China on the rise and the collapsing European integrity combined with the rise of Iran and the obvious soon-to-be-extinct Iraq, you can be sure people will be to busy trying to staying alive then drive around and build factories.
B) Mass Virus- Obviously with the pathetic security of international travel, something WILL be bound to kill of a billion or so people
C) Space, the final frontier, will emptying the human population on Earth for colonizing. Most of our green house gases could be very useful over on Mars to warm it up, and Factories could simply be moved their.
D) With the core cooling down, the moon moving an inch away every year, and the Sun's increasing activity, Earth is screwed anyway you look at it in the next 400 years.
Also, why don't we just genetically engineer a tree that grows 10x faster and produces perfect wood, then just create farms of it. That will stop logging problems.
I like the way you think. A and B are very possible.
C - we are a long way away, not that we couldn't but politically everyone's worried about pointless shit to even consider space, when it fact its more important than most realize. afterall its space where the #1 threat is and thats asteroids.
D is the only one I disagree with, while both what you said about the moon and sun are true, their changes won't be noticeable in 400 years or even 40,000 years. however they will inevitably occur. scientists have found out a way to back up orbits, by hurling asteroids and causing near misses. but this process is hardly possible with our technology today and is likely suicidal.
The Earth's core is still slowing down. We will soon join the dying masses of our celestial friends like Mars, who's dead core froze it over and destroyed its possible life. I predict WW3 to come along in 2010ish and to exterminate a few billion, probably me too. If not, I'm considering a life in politics, and if by chance I become prez one day, although a far off dream, I will build big dumsters of green house gasses, put them in space ships, and launch them at Mars.
Not so fast. Objects set in motion will stay in motion until stopped. the Crust moves slower, creating friction and slowing down the core. Space dust is slowing our orbit. And many objects are slowing us down. (we are in fact dragging the moon along, slowing us down.) Nothing lasts for ever exept the human spirit and matter. Earth is slowly dieing.
A-Z The earths rotation has a wobble. If a volcano, or a country becomes very heavy, the earth orbit will correct itself to center the weight. Like a lop-sided ball. Bringing the weight to the equator.
Hi everyone. I wanna make a difference in this world and the environment and I wanna build a recycling plant. If you can, I would very much appreciate any help I could get.
I don't know if this global warming thing is true or fals but I know that I am saveing alot on gas due to capsuls that happen to reduce emissions an reduce my visits to the pump! it's a win win for us on the fence! you can see for yourself at planetdefenders .myffi.
who said I find polluters admirable? Now you try and put words on my mouth? When have I said that? You really are grasping, I don't know whether to laugh or to stop responding to you because now you sound more liberal than ever.
I don't care if you stop responding, you haven't produced a valid argument yet. You keep quoting the IPCC, if you read their 2007 report it doesn't tend to support anything you've said. Temperature increases will increase indefinately, temperatures could rise 11 degrees this century and sea levels could rise 23 inches, that's 2 feet buddy. I truly hope your house isn't build on the permafrost in Alaska or the islands of Micronesia.
What? I think you have your numbers wrong because that is not what the report says. The report says temps will go up (if we don't change) just under 2 degrees Celsius by the year 2100. And the sea level will rise 7 to 15 inches. Well below your catastrophic predictions. The report does not take into account what would happen if things started changing in the next few years, where are the calculations? There are none.
For any interested observers who are interested in which one of us is telling the truth, please research the International Panel of Climate Change, the only sceintific evidenve netcisco has presented yet. Even his own evidence points to global warming, my assumption is he read the skewed, filtered version of the report presented by Fox news or Limbaugh, Coulter, Hannity, or some other talking head.
Philip, you are proving yourself to be a flaming greenie lib. I don't listen to Rush, Hannity or Ann Coulter. You seem to be grasping at everything you can to make a point, even making stuff up. The posts I presented regarding nuclear was a rebuttal against your ignorance as to why we don't have more nuclear plants today. But you don't seem to get it.
I'm bored toying with you. The largest polluters have paid a lot of money to manufacture consent for all the vile things they do, and with you they really got their money's worth. Like I said, my numbers are what could happen, your numbers you claim are predicted are the bare minimum the GW skeptics came up with, everyone, please read the report, I don't think it's a winning card for you to be playing.
LOL, you are bored because you know I am right, this is the typical liberal "cut and run" response when you know I have given valid points. Have a good one then.
Philip, I am curious why all the tree hugging libs on the east and west coast aren't out to sell their ocean front properties if they believe it will all be under water in the next several years.
If you go to wikipedia and look up global warming skeptics, Richard Lindzen is one of only around 25 scientists who either don't believe in global warming, or aren't convinced it's manmade. Those 30 represent a fraction of 1% of the scientific community. I'll take my chances with the above 99% of scientists.
phillip, there are more than 30 my good friend. Are you telling me that wikipedia went out and interviewed every singe scientist in the world and only found 30 that disagreed with AGW? I think you are grasping now.
Prove me wrong, show us an article or link with any more than that. My guess is you'll fail to just like you failed to prove to us that Bush is a tree-hugger.
philip, I never said Bush is or was a tree hugger. Why don't you download a copy of the budget to see how much is spent on AGW study. They lump it in with climate study but it gets dumped into the pockets of agencies that are out to prove AGW. I won't do your research for you if you aren't willing to look information up yourself. I am sure if a dem was pres then we would all be mandated to drive a hybrid, is that why you are so pissed off at Bush?
What if the CFC/ozone hole issue was a hoax and the CFC ban is a conspiratorial ruse to unnecessarily extort over $40 billion from the American public over the next couple of years? What if the whole CFC ban was because DuPont was about to lose its patent rights to Freon and wanted to retool and redesign and retrofit the entire refrigeration industry to accommodate its new refrigerant HFC-134a?
Ren, I am not much of a conspiracy theorist, and I don't know how much big business was a part of the CFC ban. But I do know that the hole over New Zealand is almost gone and the greenies along with the libs in the world all say it is because of the ban. The funny thing is there is not one ounce of hard evidence that the ban on CFC's made the ozone hole shrink.
NEWS!!!!! Google this: "Head of NASA downplays global warming". The NASA chief says it's "rather arrogant" for people to take the position that today's climate is the optimal one.
No doubt the green movement and the libs will try and sling mud against this scientist for his opposition.
errr.... Are you sitting down? Bush jumped on the GW bandwagon over a year ago, he dumps billions into research. It is political suicide to disagree with AGW right now, the ones that are doing it at least have the nads to stand up and speak their opinion on the subject.
No he hasn't, he rejected Kyoto just a few weeks ago. He's not any more worried about the environment now than when he was as govenor of Texas where his policies caused Houston to surpass LA as the dirtiest city in America.
phil, the US signed Kyoto back in the late 90's, we have not ratified it because it would kill our economy. He HAS jumped on the GW bandwagon, he talks about GW all the freakn time, are you deaf? He approves billions in government subsidies and entitlements for businesses to move toward cleaner air. You use rhetoric and word twisting in your post, if you want to debate the issue lets talk about the real issue, not lame rhetoric.
I think you're confusing me with Bush, he's the one who pays lip service to global warming but has rejected Kyoto, rolled back the Clean Air Act, and was descriped as the "Worst Environmental President of all time" by the person he himself once appointed to the EPA. Are you blind, deaf, and dumb? You tell me what has Bush done for the environment? The 'Friendly Skies' innitiative actually increased the allowable amount of pollution.
philip, Again, you don't get it. Why are BILLIONS of dollars dumped into the study of GW then? If Bush didn't believe it then why spend the money? The only reason those were rolled back is because it would hurt the US economy. I am all for clean air, but there is no way we can do it in lightning speed, it has to be done in steps so that the economy does not suffer. You think GW is bad, if we followed Kyoto the US economy would die. Use some common sense.
I don't know what the hell your talking about. Bush has consistantly shown his contempt for the environment in everything he's done. If you want to e-mail me a link proving me wrong go for it. The US economy wouldn't die, all the EU countries, Japan, and all the other industrialized countries haven't died. How great is your precious economy going to be once ocean levels rise and there are 30 million refugees in the US alone. You need to demonstrate common sense before you try to dictate it.
phil, Another lie that you conveniently blow out of proportion. Even the IPCC reports says the oceans will only rise a few inches. Al Gore is the one that said they will rise a few feet. Have you read any of the report? I have, and even some of the numbers in it are inconsistent. I don't need to give you proof, even if I did you wouldn't believe it. Cont...
I think if you were living in New Orleans in late August '05 you got a taste of what I'm talking about. Was Katrina a lie of mine? A figment of my imagination? You're trying to debate science with scientists. I wish Steven Hawking were here so you could debate him in theoretical physics.
philip, Even the IPCC scientists said that GW does not cause hurricanes. They also question if GW is causing them to get stronger, then there is even the question if it is really all our fault. You are trying to play on my emotions to believe in AGW, sorry but I can see through that.
phil.. cont.. Japan and the European countries don't have the green movement that has blocked nuclear and other clean sources of energy. Even liberal Ted Kennedy has blocked wind power in his district. We have libs that have blocked all of it, we would be as clean as France right now if it was not for the green movement. These other countries started decades before us and you want the US to change overnight, get real.
It's not just the green movement, the government hasn't approved the developepment of any additional nuclear power plants since 1986, a large part due to national security reasons. See below, I support nuclear power. Some of the biggest polluters in the country have had major media camapaigns to discredit nuclear power. Ever see the commercials on tv about how clean coal is? Laughable.
phillip, The green movement scared the shit out of people in the US regarding nuclear. At least Bush (one good thing he is doing anyway) is actually proposing 4 designs that we can build. cont...
Cont... The green movement has lobbyists that have talked our legislators out of building nuclear plants, it was political suicide in the 80's and 90's to even bring it up... the reason? The green movements scare tactics in the 70's and 80's. Don't believe me? Look up what the green movement did after 3 mile island and Chernobyl.
By the way, do some research on clean burning coal, the technology has come a long way, and it is one of the best solutions we have at this point. Do we have plasma reactors for nuclear fission? No. Do we have the ability to use perpetual motion devices? No, not yet. Why not use the technology we have? It is better than staying the course don't you agree?
I agree with you about nuclear power, and after I agreed you with you you left about 25 posts to prove your point to me. Other than that, it's mostly regurgitated Rush Limbaugh. I've called BS on you twice and you've failed twice to prove me wrong.
Philip, sorry to break it to you but the numbers I gave you came directly from the report. Your numbers you quoted are in there, but they are the "catastrophic" worst case scenario numbers, the numbers I gave are the ones they came up with base on all the information they have available. Looks to be a fault on your part. What have you called BS on? I believe I answered every question, you are grasping now.
If you are so hell bent on getting this CO2 problem fixed then let's use the technology we have right now to fix it. That is what makes the most sense to me.
phil, lastly, you have to remember that if the greenies didn't get their panties in a wad about nuclear then the US would have cleaner air right now! It is the greenies that have forced the US to continue to depend on foreign oil and the use of coal. So why are you so upset? It is the green movements fault that we are still where we are today when it comes to CO2 and clean air. It's the hypocrisy in this whole issue.
but why do most "answers" proposed involve bigger, pushier, nosier government? aren't there some tech solutions to reduce heat by increasing reflective cloud cover? and why do most proposed solutions seem to be so anti-business? AGW may not be political, but one's political bias does influence the type of solutions we choose to invest in.
"We may see CO2 is responsible for much less warming than we thought and if this is the case the predictions of warming due to human activity will need to be adjusted."
Henrik Svensmark, Director for Center for Sun-Climate Research, Danish National Space Center
yeah, i'm going to start a petition to have all central air and heating shut down in all federal buildings. the more "do-nothing" our govt. is, the more energy saved!
good point: at estonia, end of may, usually is around 20-25 degrees. but at this year already was 35 degrees. and very big thunderstorms. i am very worried :(
As human-induced greenhouse gases rise, global-averaged upper-level atmospheric water vapour and thin cirrus should be expected to decrease not increase.
Water vapour and cirrus cloudiness should be thought of as a negative rather than a positive feedback to human-induced - or anthropogenic greenhouse gas increases.
Discussions on GW & AGW can be confusing since there is some difference among AGW theory supporters on the degree of catastrophe if nothing is done, and whether or not it is already to late to prevent major catastrophes between now and 2100. There seems to be a wide range of opinion on these concerns.
So basically, the City of the Consumption is ruled by Satan, the prince of this world. He and all who pay homage to his city will suffer eternal punishment. Heard that before. Oh yeah, I remember now. The Catholic Church ruled the Western world over 1000 years with that rhetoric.
isocrate27 5 months ago
Global warming is a joke, and any actions could not be taken because job security are more important than this fallacy idea like Communism.
Buarawng 3 years ago 3
global warming is bullshit. It reminds me of the book 1984, peoples apartments were kept cold to "help the economy" by saving fuel.
RandomRandy420 3 years ago
uhm do u want to have ur home flooded? i think not... global arming is rlly important if u want to live till you gorw old thank u very much
lilzaquizle 2 years ago
lol you said global arming is important to live long.
You'll be sure to know what I mean when you get taxed for your impact on the environment, which is what I believe is coming.
RandomRandy420 2 years ago
i meant global warming is very bad and the environment is very important to your health. and evryone elses future,
lilzaquizle 2 years ago
I agree the environment is important, but I disagree that global warming is the biggest threat to the environment.
Also I was just pointing out that the oxymoronic typo you made was funny.
RandomRandy420 2 years ago
if americans stop rampant wastage of fuels, probably most of this crisis will reduce. and americans please switch your computers and lights when not in use. there r others on this earth too. please care about us. thank you
punecityguy 3 years ago
hey i have an idea fuuuuuuuuuuuuck you you stupid ass. china has 20 of the thirty most highly polluted city in the world. india is getting up there to.
tylerrrr9483 3 years ago
I think the baby boomers generation have lived through the party time period and now it's clean up time or contamination. I doubt if there will be another party time as the costs are far too high. But there can be a wisdom time if we all dig deep and let it free...:o))
PeaceInSongs 3 years ago
this is a little scary
is this the end of mankind?
or mankind will find a way to survive
i suggest man should stop using fossil fuels
it would help alot scientists believes we have atleast ten years untill global warming becomes irreversible
mankinds last years... . how sad. .
joe4angie 3 years ago
this is a little scary
is this the end of mankind?
or mankind will find a way to survive
i suggest man should stop using fossil fuels
it would help alot scientists believes we have atleast ten years untill global warming becomes irreversible
mankinds last years... . how sad. .
joe4angie 3 years ago
i read this and wasnt sure why it was blocked out
This is a typical post from a AGW theorist:
"As people die off, the cause of the problem will correct itself. Not everyone will survive, but that's the price we pay for being human.
The only cure for all the world's problems is to get rid of the human race. But of course we humans are the most stubborn of all species. "
This is ultimately what leftwing nuts think and they want to use this issue to force, human population control
wkwickham 3 years ago 3
This has been flagged as spam show
"Gore says terrible tragedies are occurring in the southern Sahara because of drought which he blames on "global warming." There is no drought caused by "global warming." In 2007 there were record rains across the whole of the southern Sahara. In the past 25 years the Sahara has shrunk by some 300,000 square kilometers because of additional rainfall."
--Lord Christopher Walter
-Third Viscount Monckton of Brenchley
MagentaTrue 3 years ago
global warming hysteria is being pushed by governments that have been caught lying to the public on a regular basis, along with elitists whose stated goal is to push fearmongering as a means of increasing taxation and control over our lives, emphasizes the reality that, allied to the its phony scientific foundation, global warming is just the latest hobby-horse on which control freaks have piggy-backed their agenda to dominate and rule.
imunplugged 3 years ago
Which is more likely: A Socialist scheme that has subverted modern science in an attempt to take over the world or Science has discovered a side effect to putting millions upon millions of tons of heat trapping gas in to the atmosphere? Not taking action on climate change is actually a greater threat to your economic well-being, and to your political and social liberties, than is taking action.
iiopen 3 years ago
iiopen-
Please do your own research, as I see you have told others to do. Thanks.
imunplugged 3 years ago
hi, plugged, can I ask where are your facts from?
cincin3 3 years ago
I agree. People want to take no action and say global warming is phony facts... I find this odd. They should look at pictures of the Artic and Anartica where animals are just dying because of no ice.. It is not a nice sight. But when things are not pleasant people take denial for reasoning like there is no global warming. They do not care for they will not be present on this wasteland in 50 years.
cincin3 3 years ago
ooops , except the science has shown that there has been some cooling since 2005
ummmm - now what do we call it
oh yea--- climate change - you have to start using the buzz word climate change since we havent seen any warming for years
wkwickham 3 years ago 2
What causes global warming then? The sun is dying. 1 point. The ice in the artic is going as its warming, we cant do with out this. Look at the floods happening. Also the Anartica is a mess. Once these two are messed up it changes things. We can just say its a fable but there is proof. What will happen to the nxt generation. We wont be there then.
cincin3 3 years ago
have you ever put ice in a glass? the Arctic melting will not cause floods.
tylerrrr9483 3 years ago
what a junk video. There's no discussion any kind of scientific evidence in here. What has increasing consumption got to do with global warming - nothing: it is driven by solar activity and internal climate variability.
minilemur 4 years ago 2
This whole thing reeks of political power and big research dollars! Mankind is a very low emitter of CO2 (including breathing) compared to volcanos, animals, decaying plants and especially oceans. This naturally occurring gas is constantly dealt with by the atmosphere and is only .054% of the atmosphere. Al Gore doesn't even believe it- look at his carbon footprint! They're all just riding the gravy train and they get the radical knee-jerkers to create the frenzy.
DoNotBeFooled 4 years ago
Which is more likely: A Socialist scheme that has subverted modern science in an attempt to take over the world or Science has discovered a side effect to putting millions upon millions of tons of heat trapping gas in to the atmosphere? Not taking action on climate change is actually a greater threat to your economic well-being, and to your political and social liberties, than is taking action.
iiopen 4 years ago
Million upon millions of tons of CO2 in the atmosphere is still spit in the ocean. This is a natural gas that is emitted by volcanoes more than man, by animals more than volcanoes, by decaying plants more than animals and by the ocean more than by plants.
The quick research dollars are in proving man made GW not disproving it.
Why take action against spitting in the ocean. You can't even get Al Gore to stop spitting!
DoNotBeFooled 4 years ago
Ok - so you obviously don't understand the science. I'd suggest looking into it instead of making these false statements.
iiopen 4 years ago
iiopen- i know you dont understand politics, or science.
densefawg 4 years ago
The US Senate Committe on Environment and Public Works has just issued a report in which 400 prominant international scientists say that AGW is a hoax.
Google these words and read it for yourself.
"Senate 400 Morano Dempsey"
vsaluki 4 years ago
Scientists have assumed that C02 causes heat in the atmosphere because of correlation btwn C02 and heat levels. But heat causes water to evaporate and the C02 in the oceans is released. That causes the correlation. And the heat that warms the oceans is from geothermal source(ask a geologist)
jackmemorkel 4 years ago
"Scientists have assumed that C02 causes heat in the atmosphere because of correlation btwn C02 and heat levels."
Ice core samples show that the temperature rises between 200 and 800 years before the CO2 level follows. Recent studies have shown that deep sea water can have a rise in temperature by as much as 1300 years before there is a rise in CO2.
vsaluki 4 years ago
microbial bacteria thrive in warmer waters producing co2, also making it harder for other marine life to live (dead zones)
densefawg 4 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Why should the rest of us give up our way of life and hobbies to curve GW. While rich people like Gore, fly around in their private jets and live in 15000 square foot houses and drive gas gusslers. I agree we need to cut down on pollution, but this do as I say and not as I do is bullshit...
avionicswirenut 4 years ago
see> ENDGAME - Blueprint For Global Enslavement (part 13 of 14)
louis12346 4 years ago
Mostly? that one belong with "most likely) "could be" "almost certain" "might be"
And the reason why the oil would pay is what again?
wilbert1755 4 years ago
Greece fails on Kyoto targets (Kathimerini, Greece)
Italy breaks EU ranks on Kyoto (Thep arliament)
- Japan's Greenhouse Gas Emissions Rise 6.4% From 1990 Levels (Bloomberg)
Lithuania decides to take EU to court over CO2 cut (Reuters)
New Zealand - NZ to bring in carbon trading, but still lag Kyoto (Reuters)
Spain Lags Behind in Kyoto Protocol Compliance (Tierramerica)
Turkey rejects Kyoto (Today's Zaman, Turkey)
UK public rejects Kyoto Protocol (International Policy Network)
wilbert1755 4 years ago
Hey GW deniers,
How do you explain the FACT that 95% of nations in the world signed Kyoto?
All of these nations have more than enough resources to confirm what the Kyoto scientists concluded.
Many countries said that the Kyoto agreement would hurt thier economies yet they still signed. In fact its the reason Bush pulled us out of Kyoto and we know how good of a pres he is.
Prediction: The deniers will dodge my question.
Jason84575 4 years ago
i will not dodge, no, 95% did not, you are wrong,and Kyoto only benefits rich small nations with no natural habitat, we wanted co2 credit from all of out trees and greenery and so did Brazil so that is why Brazil and America left, ,,, im sorry you destroyed your environment a long time ago, here in the states we have forests larger than your country, anyways the UN is to corrupt to sign anything with
jwiska 4 years ago
"UN is to corrupt to sign anything with"
If you feel the UN is corrupt fine but what about all these organizations.
NASA, National Research Council, AAAS, NOVA/PBS, WorldWIldlifeFund, Geological Society of America, National Geographic
American Meteorological Society, American Geophysical Union, American Institute of Physics,
That means they are ALL corrupt aswel.
Jason84575 4 years ago
Not only that I cant find ONE scientific organzations that disagrees with these orgs.
Also look at the Nations that didnt ratify Kyoto.
Jason84575 4 years ago
Afghanistan, Chad, Comoros, Iraq, Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic, Saint Kitts, Nevis, San Marino, Tajikistan, Timor-Leste, Tonga, Turkey, Zimbabwe and USA (under Bush).
If you believe GW is a Hoax or not casued by humans.. than these countries are the non-corruptable level-headed good guys.
Jason84575 4 years ago
federal funding possibly
densefawg 4 years ago
Look at 'JonThm' for real science - nto PR fro the nuclear industry! Whic hyou are. Do they payh you, or are you just not inforemd?
JonThm 4 years ago
I did not mention the nuclear industry.
You did.. why are you trying to smear me?
Hey why not try responding to my last comment...
Jason84575 4 years ago
The people who contributed to making this video used mostly oil products defeating their message of consumer overuse of oil products.
ytmas339 4 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Every time you drive your SUV, Bush makes another million and Cheney sh0ots a penquin in the face.
Stop burning oil for fuel, and start burning trees!!!
BigRichardMan 4 years ago
This movie is pretty gay, I like the information though.
Bustersword07 4 years ago
There is 0.00037% CO2 max in the air: It cycles with season and location. People tel lyou percentage change in CO2, which is meaninglyless! There was 0.0004% in the time of the dinosaurs.
JonThm 4 years ago
yes, people are fools,,,, Y2k!!!!!!!!!!
jwiska 4 years ago
See JonThm for climate truth!
JonThm 4 years ago
global warming is as real as california on fire
MarinaS4u 4 years ago
you mean the fires that have happened for hundreds of years? Those fires?
johnh926 4 years ago
The capitalist pigs who operate pretty much with impunity are trashing the environment daily while even more capitalists are chopping down the rain forests that give us much of our oxygen... to think that this kind of careless, selfish behavior isn't taking its toll is just stupid. So, naturally, the conservatives are going to jump on the anti-global warming bandwagon. They like easy ways out of the problems they create and/or support.
JoshuaSkye 4 years ago
i suppose your comment is directed to me?
Xantoes 4 years ago
No. I didn't even read your remarks so am not quite sure what your stance is. The fact is that the people polluting this world are capitalists run amok and they get away with it because of support from conservatives who think we have God-Given 'dominion' over the world. It is short sighted and stupid.
JoshuaSkye 4 years ago
you ignorant! you jumpn on the socialist bandwagon and your kids and grandkids are gunna laugh at you for believing this "man made global warming hoax" anyone who took 4th grade earth science would know that high temp cause high CO2, not the other way around. Dont hate on the conservatives who are defending your ass from terrorist, so that you can open your dumb ass mouth.
BigRichardMan 4 years ago
GLOBAL WARMING IS SERIOUS!!!
Richprincess307 4 years ago
OH NO WERE ALL GOING TO DIE!!!!
lol
Xantoes 4 years ago
just push off if you are not mature enough to understasnd how important it is!!!!!!
Richprincess307 4 years ago
Do you honestly understand all the factors behind climate change or have you just put all your faith in al gore? Funny isn't it that al gore lives in a 10,000 square foot house and uses more energy in a month than the average American citizen uses in a year and then calls him self and environmentalist.
Xantoes 4 years ago
Yes the environment is important, and yes we need to reduce our ecological footprint but al gore is doing this all wrong. The greenhouse effect that al gore explained left out one important part, it's not co2 that is the main cause of the greenhouse effect, water vapor is responsible for as much as 90% of the greenhouse effect. That other 10 percent is were you find methane, various other gases and your notorious co2. The co2 "that's destroying our world" makes up only 5%.
Xantoes 4 years ago
Next climate change is effected by many things we simply can't help: interstellar dust, solar output, earth/ sun geometry, volcanic emissions, mountain building, continental drift and atmosphere/ surface heat exchange. And let me guess you being so mature fully understand all of these factors? How can scientists predict what the temperature will be outside in 50 years when they can't predict next week's weather?
Xantoes 4 years ago
EXACTLY YOU ARE ALL RIGHT COOL!!(geddit?)
Richprincess307 4 years ago
got one question for ya-
If melting ice caps cause the ocean levels to rise, then how come the oceans don't rise every summer?
BigRichardMan 4 years ago
For one thing the levels do chance over the summer, but not relating that strongly to summer and winter, because summer in the northern hemishpere is winter in the southern..
I don't know if you're trying to say global warming's a lie, but if so, clearly you haven't looked at the science in anywhere near as much detail as the experts
fleurn0 4 years ago
So the only scientists who are right are the ones who agree with you? Oh and there is much more ice in Antrartica, should be a rise in N.hem winter
BigRichardMan 4 years ago
icecaps have nothing to do with sea level respectively... its all about thermo expansion with h2o,,, icecaps and their thickness calculated over the surface hardly does any difference,,, wana find out, get the surface area of the earth and the area of icecaps, calculate the thickness,, you will find out
jwiska 4 years ago
Have you noticed the opposition to Global Warming? Have you posted comments on youtube stating that you agree with Global Warming, only to find your post "shot down" within minutes? Almost as if there are people monitoring what is being posted so that they can quickly dispute your comments in an attempt to sway public consensus. Exxon is going to great lengths to try combat perception. Tactics include videos as well as paying people to post statements on youtube that dispute Global warming.
Lawtek712 4 years ago
global warming is a political move used in order to benefit the federal banks, who are also getting funded in Iraq with companies such as Blackwater and Halliburton, 5000 million increase since 2003 and legalizing income taxes which are unconstitutional.
orthon360 4 years ago
who gives a toss, live life for today not tommorow, party get wrecked and have sex!!!!!(safe sex tho lol)
felzy220 4 years ago
That is a very selfish way to treat the next generation, and the following generation... "Well-being and happiness never appeared to me as an absolute aim. I am even inclined to compare such moral aims to the ambitions of a pig." Albert Einstein
ssssss7 4 years ago
I honestly believe that we just have 5 years left on earth. Several different theories and theologies point towards this date. This doesn't worry me, because I have made my peace with earth and welcome the change of scenery. Amen
rikijuntzu 4 years ago
If it was supose to end in 2012 then more then one calendar would end. Just becasue some Mexican civilization's calendar end then doesn't mean crap. It's the end of an age anywho. That means stuff will change at the most.
Empires91 4 years ago
Guess we will wait and see. Read about the magnetic polar shift and what it does to the human brain and nervous system. Other theologies point towards 2012 also, give or take a few years.
rikijuntzu 4 years ago
Yea I know about the polar shift. I'm getting a telescope just to see the aura lights in NY. I just think that at the worst we will have increases in skin cancer, high temps, and a few massive electric shut downs. Yes, I know, if electricity failes then civilization ends. But I think we will pull through.
Hey, I had a dream a civil war in America would brake out in 2010. If that happens, we'll be to busy fighting to be bothered with 2012.
Empires91 4 years ago
People who do not know how to survive without it will become a BURDEN. If people are incapable of building a fire, hunting their food and finding water they will perish. But "the country boy will survive". If the magnetic poles do flip, humans will not be able to function. During a full moon, a magnetic bubble forms and people behave strangely. It doesn't take much to throw off the normality of our conscious being.
rikijuntzu 4 years ago
Well then, as they say, I'm Fukked
Empires91 4 years ago
The earth is experiencing a polar shift and maybe a polar reversal. By 2012 we will all be toast so why worry, be happy.
rikijuntzu 4 years ago
This global warming scare was fabricated by the "enlightened elites". A global crisis needing a global solution. The UN will be given authority over the laws of all countries. Like Al Gore, these globalists have sold their souls and betrayed humanity. "A New World Order" is being prepared incrementally. They will succeed since people are thoroughly brainwashed by the media. The goal of these elite is to enslave the world thru total control of the finances of a micro-chipped population.
LenGarc 4 years ago
TOTALLY AGREE! This was cooked up to have a "global" crisis which needed a "global" solution as a building block for "global" authority. this is more sinister than anyone realizes.
johnh926 4 years ago
wow, easy does it with the conspiracy theories. you don't also believe 9/11 was an inside job as well, do you? the UN becoming a NWO, enslave the world through micro-chips? you give people too much credit, its about money and idiots, its always about money and idiots.
shabocentury 4 years ago
The global warming theory is just classic bureaucratic group think--people in government supported organizations believe in global warming because this expressed belief is good for their careers and their department budgets. I've never seen a better example of mass stupidity by smart people than the "consensus" that global warming is actually happening and it is caused by increasing CO2 levels.
russellcalkins 4 years ago
Mars is 90% CO2, and its maximum temperature of 68° F and a minimum of -220° F. I would think so much CO2 would cause it to be at least as hot as Earth today because of its further from Earth but it is actually very cold. You know, just something to ponder over why this is when they say high Carbon numbers here on Earth should make it hot. Interesting.
Empires91 4 years ago
mars being further from the sun makes it colder.
the reason the co2 doesn't have much affect on the climate is that mars' atmosphere is very thin (1% of earth) because it has no magnetosphere (or its very weak). this causes solar wind to strip away the atmosphere.
shabocentury 4 years ago
True, but seeing as how the current argument is that .03% of CO2 is supose to be the primary factor, I would think, even in light atmosphere, it would super heat Mars. Thin or not, there is still a ton of more CO2 on Mars then Earth, and it does nothing.
Empires91 4 years ago
wait are you trying to argue that CO2 isn't a greenhouse gas? CO2 is a proven greenhouse gas, although its effects are diminished when the atmosphere is as thin as it is on mars it can't properly trap in the heat. A better argument would be "how much co2 in the atmosphere is required for a severe greenhouse effect to take place"
shabocentury 4 years ago
in which case the amount of co2 in the atmosphere to cause such a greenhouse effect might be more than the amount it takes for co2 to reach toxic levels which is 5%.
shabocentury 4 years ago
I agree with you, in that this current global warming argument is flawed, however your mars atmosphere question is a poor argument against it. sorry if I seemed pompous, I wanted to answer it before a hippie could use it to strengthen his case.
shabocentury 4 years ago
There is no doubt that there is global warming. I'm just saying that when 1% of the atmosphere is green house gasses, I can't see it to ever effect us. In order to have 5% Green house gasses, then the total ammount of animal life in general along with pretty much all CO2 producing objects, would need to be be 5x greater then that of today. I'm sorry, I just don't see any CO2 producing object going up that ammount.
Empires91 4 years ago
thats exactly right, the question is how much co2 is required to make a change or cause for concern. co2 is currently 0.038% of the atmosphere. co2 contributes only 12% of the total greenhouse effect. its increased only .007% or so in the last 100 years. we have a long way to go.
shabocentury 4 years ago
i made a typo: its .007% in 50 years, (I was trying to remember a bunch of numbers and confused my self)
shabocentury 4 years ago
clarify: 5% any time or 8 hour exposure of 0.5% co2 is toxic (according to wikipedia)
shabocentury 4 years ago
ok I feel like a spammer but I did some math
greenhouse effect causes earth to warm by 33 degrees celsius
co2 is 12% of the greenhouse or 3% = 1 degree celsius
co2 has risen from 10% to 12% so +0.666 degrees celsius
run away greenhouse occurs when global temps increase around 5 degrees. lets say 10% more co2 for safe measure. the amount of co2 in the air after another 10% increase would mean the total co2 would have to double. or 0.073%
shabocentury 4 years ago
The only way for CO2 to rise and stay at a high amount would require an incredible death to most plant life. Not just rain forest, every plan from weed to tree. Plants find their way everywhere, From a sidewalk crack to the great plains. Besides, such a mass extinction would kill us first. Plants are here to stay until the supernova, and then some. Even in the air are O2 producing microbes.
Empires91 4 years ago
not necessarily, right now we have put up 70 ppm co2 in under 50 years, that is an increase that the plants couldn't keep up, not to mention the deforestation makes it even harder for plants to keep up.
plants are usually the first to die, then the animals that eat them, then the animals that eat the other animals then finally scavengers.
shabocentury 4 years ago
im referring to a circumstance where mass extinctions occur. but yeah plants are resilient and will find a way to come back even if we don't.
my whole point was that if the co2 level stays the same right now we will be fine, but if it continues to increase and every 75 years the temperature raises 1 degree.. then what?
shabocentury 4 years ago
I can give you three scenario. One WILL happen, and any way you look at it, CO2 is going down
A) WW3- With Russia and China on the rise and the collapsing European integrity combined with the rise of Iran and the obvious soon-to-be-extinct Iraq, you can be sure people will be to busy trying to staying alive then drive around and build factories.
B) Mass Virus- Obviously with the pathetic security of international travel, something WILL be bound to kill of a billion or so people
Empires91 4 years ago
C) Space, the final frontier, will emptying the human population on Earth for colonizing. Most of our green house gases could be very useful over on Mars to warm it up, and Factories could simply be moved their.
D) With the core cooling down, the moon moving an inch away every year, and the Sun's increasing activity, Earth is screwed anyway you look at it in the next 400 years.
Empires91 4 years ago
Also, why don't we just genetically engineer a tree that grows 10x faster and produces perfect wood, then just create farms of it. That will stop logging problems.
Empires91 4 years ago
I like the way you think. A and B are very possible.
C - we are a long way away, not that we couldn't but politically everyone's worried about pointless shit to even consider space, when it fact its more important than most realize. afterall its space where the #1 threat is and thats asteroids.
shabocentury 4 years ago
D is the only one I disagree with, while both what you said about the moon and sun are true, their changes won't be noticeable in 400 years or even 40,000 years. however they will inevitably occur. scientists have found out a way to back up orbits, by hurling asteroids and causing near misses. but this process is hardly possible with our technology today and is likely suicidal.
shabocentury 4 years ago
The Earth's core is still slowing down. We will soon join the dying masses of our celestial friends like Mars, who's dead core froze it over and destroyed its possible life. I predict WW3 to come along in 2010ish and to exterminate a few billion, probably me too. If not, I'm considering a life in politics, and if by chance I become prez one day, although a far off dream, I will build big dumsters of green house gasses, put them in space ships, and launch them at Mars.
Empires91 4 years ago
Empires91 is full of hog wash.
rikijuntzu 4 years ago
Not so fast. Objects set in motion will stay in motion until stopped. the Crust moves slower, creating friction and slowing down the core. Space dust is slowing our orbit. And many objects are slowing us down. (we are in fact dragging the moon along, slowing us down.) Nothing lasts for ever exept the human spirit and matter. Earth is slowly dieing.
Empires91 4 years ago
Sounds like a David Bowie lyric. Check out "Five Years" by David Bowie on youtube
rikijuntzu 4 years ago
watever. Earth is going down one way or another. I'm saving up for a one way ticket to Mars.
Empires91 4 years ago
lol, i'm coming with
omfganyname 4 years ago
A-Z The earths rotation has a wobble. If a volcano, or a country becomes very heavy, the earth orbit will correct itself to center the weight. Like a lop-sided ball. Bringing the weight to the equator.
rikijuntzu 4 years ago
no offense but this video just annoyed me lol sry the i had to mute it cuase the music was making me spazz lol good video ... dont hate me
frostzglue 4 years ago
oh, scary.
rustyroother 4 years ago
What are scientists really saying about global warming? Check out my new video "Global Warming - Sun" to find out.
iloveemo1984 4 years ago
Hi everyone. I wanna make a difference in this world and the environment and I wanna build a recycling plant. If you can, I would very much appreciate any help I could get.
Go to the ebay site and search for
"Fund Raising - Building a Recycling Plant"
Thank you
enoeth 4 years ago
i ttly agree with you philip
opinionatedgrl2 4 years ago
I don't know if this global warming thing is true or fals but I know that I am saveing alot on gas due to capsuls that happen to reduce emissions an reduce my visits to the pump! it's a win win for us on the fence! you can see for yourself at planetdefenders .myffi.
biz
mrsir23 4 years ago
hey, i could walk a few blocks from here and buy an hour's worth of greater "sincerity" than we get from those two.
ExtraGarlicNow 4 years ago
Where are the credible global warming policy leaders who actually believe so sincerely in AGW that they swear off fossil fuels?
ExtraGarlicNow 4 years ago
reduce, I had a feeling you were a poster boy for moveon, and now you just proved it to me.
netcisco 4 years ago
What is it about the largest polluters in the country that you find so admirable and what it is it about Mother Nature that you find so offensive?
philipmontag 4 years ago
who said I find polluters admirable? Now you try and put words on my mouth? When have I said that? You really are grasping, I don't know whether to laugh or to stop responding to you because now you sound more liberal than ever.
netcisco 4 years ago
I don't care if you stop responding, you haven't produced a valid argument yet. You keep quoting the IPCC, if you read their 2007 report it doesn't tend to support anything you've said. Temperature increases will increase indefinately, temperatures could rise 11 degrees this century and sea levels could rise 23 inches, that's 2 feet buddy. I truly hope your house isn't build on the permafrost in Alaska or the islands of Micronesia.
philipmontag 4 years ago
What? I think you have your numbers wrong because that is not what the report says. The report says temps will go up (if we don't change) just under 2 degrees Celsius by the year 2100. And the sea level will rise 7 to 15 inches. Well below your catastrophic predictions. The report does not take into account what would happen if things started changing in the next few years, where are the calculations? There are none.
netcisco 4 years ago
For any interested observers who are interested in which one of us is telling the truth, please research the International Panel of Climate Change, the only sceintific evidenve netcisco has presented yet. Even his own evidence points to global warming, my assumption is he read the skewed, filtered version of the report presented by Fox news or Limbaugh, Coulter, Hannity, or some other talking head.
philipmontag 4 years ago
Philip, you are proving yourself to be a flaming greenie lib. I don't listen to Rush, Hannity or Ann Coulter. You seem to be grasping at everything you can to make a point, even making stuff up. The posts I presented regarding nuclear was a rebuttal against your ignorance as to why we don't have more nuclear plants today. But you don't seem to get it.
netcisco 4 years ago
I'm bored toying with you. The largest polluters have paid a lot of money to manufacture consent for all the vile things they do, and with you they really got their money's worth. Like I said, my numbers are what could happen, your numbers you claim are predicted are the bare minimum the GW skeptics came up with, everyone, please read the report, I don't think it's a winning card for you to be playing.
philipmontag 4 years ago
LOL, you are bored because you know I am right, this is the typical liberal "cut and run" response when you know I have given valid points. Have a good one then.
netcisco 4 years ago
Philip, I am curious why all the tree hugging libs on the east and west coast aren't out to sell their ocean front properties if they believe it will all be under water in the next several years.
netcisco 4 years ago
"Much of the alarm over climate change is based on ignorance of what is normal for weather and climate."
Richard Lindzen, atmospheric physicist and the Alfred P. Sloan Professor of Meteorology at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology
iloveemo1984 4 years ago
If you go to wikipedia and look up global warming skeptics, Richard Lindzen is one of only around 25 scientists who either don't believe in global warming, or aren't convinced it's manmade. Those 30 represent a fraction of 1% of the scientific community. I'll take my chances with the above 99% of scientists.
philipmontag 4 years ago
phillip, there are more than 30 my good friend. Are you telling me that wikipedia went out and interviewed every singe scientist in the world and only found 30 that disagreed with AGW? I think you are grasping now.
netcisco 4 years ago
Prove me wrong, show us an article or link with any more than that. My guess is you'll fail to just like you failed to prove to us that Bush is a tree-hugger.
philipmontag 4 years ago
philip, I never said Bush is or was a tree hugger. Why don't you download a copy of the budget to see how much is spent on AGW study. They lump it in with climate study but it gets dumped into the pockets of agencies that are out to prove AGW. I won't do your research for you if you aren't willing to look information up yourself. I am sure if a dem was pres then we would all be mandated to drive a hybrid, is that why you are so pissed off at Bush?
netcisco 4 years ago
website link in the video is no good..
xapplimatic 4 years ago
What if the CFC/ozone hole issue was a hoax and the CFC ban is a conspiratorial ruse to unnecessarily extort over $40 billion from the American public over the next couple of years? What if the whole CFC ban was because DuPont was about to lose its patent rights to Freon and wanted to retool and redesign and retrofit the entire refrigeration industry to accommodate its new refrigerant HFC-134a?
ren0gade 4 years ago
Ren, I am not much of a conspiracy theorist, and I don't know how much big business was a part of the CFC ban. But I do know that the hole over New Zealand is almost gone and the greenies along with the libs in the world all say it is because of the ban. The funny thing is there is not one ounce of hard evidence that the ban on CFC's made the ozone hole shrink.
netcisco 4 years ago
NEWS!!!!! Google this: "Head of NASA downplays global warming". The NASA chief says it's "rather arrogant" for people to take the position that today's climate is the optimal one.
No doubt the green movement and the libs will try and sling mud against this scientist for his opposition.
netcisco 4 years ago
In the Bush administration there is no glass-cieling for someone who towes the party line.
philipmontag 4 years ago
errr.... Are you sitting down? Bush jumped on the GW bandwagon over a year ago, he dumps billions into research. It is political suicide to disagree with AGW right now, the ones that are doing it at least have the nads to stand up and speak their opinion on the subject.
netcisco 4 years ago
No he hasn't, he rejected Kyoto just a few weeks ago. He's not any more worried about the environment now than when he was as govenor of Texas where his policies caused Houston to surpass LA as the dirtiest city in America.
philipmontag 4 years ago
phil, the US signed Kyoto back in the late 90's, we have not ratified it because it would kill our economy. He HAS jumped on the GW bandwagon, he talks about GW all the freakn time, are you deaf? He approves billions in government subsidies and entitlements for businesses to move toward cleaner air. You use rhetoric and word twisting in your post, if you want to debate the issue lets talk about the real issue, not lame rhetoric.
netcisco 4 years ago
I think you're confusing me with Bush, he's the one who pays lip service to global warming but has rejected Kyoto, rolled back the Clean Air Act, and was descriped as the "Worst Environmental President of all time" by the person he himself once appointed to the EPA. Are you blind, deaf, and dumb? You tell me what has Bush done for the environment? The 'Friendly Skies' innitiative actually increased the allowable amount of pollution.
philipmontag 4 years ago
philip, Again, you don't get it. Why are BILLIONS of dollars dumped into the study of GW then? If Bush didn't believe it then why spend the money? The only reason those were rolled back is because it would hurt the US economy. I am all for clean air, but there is no way we can do it in lightning speed, it has to be done in steps so that the economy does not suffer. You think GW is bad, if we followed Kyoto the US economy would die. Use some common sense.
netcisco 4 years ago
I don't know what the hell your talking about. Bush has consistantly shown his contempt for the environment in everything he's done. If you want to e-mail me a link proving me wrong go for it. The US economy wouldn't die, all the EU countries, Japan, and all the other industrialized countries haven't died. How great is your precious economy going to be once ocean levels rise and there are 30 million refugees in the US alone. You need to demonstrate common sense before you try to dictate it.
philipmontag 4 years ago
phil, Another lie that you conveniently blow out of proportion. Even the IPCC reports says the oceans will only rise a few inches. Al Gore is the one that said they will rise a few feet. Have you read any of the report? I have, and even some of the numbers in it are inconsistent. I don't need to give you proof, even if I did you wouldn't believe it. Cont...
netcisco 4 years ago
I think if you were living in New Orleans in late August '05 you got a taste of what I'm talking about. Was Katrina a lie of mine? A figment of my imagination? You're trying to debate science with scientists. I wish Steven Hawking were here so you could debate him in theoretical physics.
philipmontag 4 years ago
philip, Even the IPCC scientists said that GW does not cause hurricanes. They also question if GW is causing them to get stronger, then there is even the question if it is really all our fault. You are trying to play on my emotions to believe in AGW, sorry but I can see through that.
netcisco 4 years ago
phil.. cont.. Japan and the European countries don't have the green movement that has blocked nuclear and other clean sources of energy. Even liberal Ted Kennedy has blocked wind power in his district. We have libs that have blocked all of it, we would be as clean as France right now if it was not for the green movement. These other countries started decades before us and you want the US to change overnight, get real.
netcisco 4 years ago
It's not just the green movement, the government hasn't approved the developepment of any additional nuclear power plants since 1986, a large part due to national security reasons. See below, I support nuclear power. Some of the biggest polluters in the country have had major media camapaigns to discredit nuclear power. Ever see the commercials on tv about how clean coal is? Laughable.
philipmontag 4 years ago
phillip, The green movement scared the shit out of people in the US regarding nuclear. At least Bush (one good thing he is doing anyway) is actually proposing 4 designs that we can build. cont...
netcisco 4 years ago
Cont... The green movement has lobbyists that have talked our legislators out of building nuclear plants, it was political suicide in the 80's and 90's to even bring it up... the reason? The green movements scare tactics in the 70's and 80's. Don't believe me? Look up what the green movement did after 3 mile island and Chernobyl.
netcisco 4 years ago
By the way, do some research on clean burning coal, the technology has come a long way, and it is one of the best solutions we have at this point. Do we have plasma reactors for nuclear fission? No. Do we have the ability to use perpetual motion devices? No, not yet. Why not use the technology we have? It is better than staying the course don't you agree?
netcisco 4 years ago
I'm up for trying anything. You're right, we can't go on the way we have.
philipmontag 4 years ago
So I have made no valid points?
netcisco 4 years ago
I agree with you about nuclear power, and after I agreed you with you you left about 25 posts to prove your point to me. Other than that, it's mostly regurgitated Rush Limbaugh. I've called BS on you twice and you've failed twice to prove me wrong.
philipmontag 4 years ago
Philip, sorry to break it to you but the numbers I gave you came directly from the report. Your numbers you quoted are in there, but they are the "catastrophic" worst case scenario numbers, the numbers I gave are the ones they came up with base on all the information they have available. Looks to be a fault on your part. What have you called BS on? I believe I answered every question, you are grasping now.
netcisco 4 years ago
BS #1 Bush is an environmentalist.
BS #2 More than 1% of climatologists are GW skeptics.
I'm getting really bored toying with you. I'm not responding to you anymore until you backup your BS claims.
philipmontag 4 years ago
If you are so hell bent on getting this CO2 problem fixed then let's use the technology we have right now to fix it. That is what makes the most sense to me.
netcisco 4 years ago
phil, lastly, you have to remember that if the greenies didn't get their panties in a wad about nuclear then the US would have cleaner air right now! It is the greenies that have forced the US to continue to depend on foreign oil and the use of coal. So why are you so upset? It is the green movements fault that we are still where we are today when it comes to CO2 and clean air. It's the hypocrisy in this whole issue.
netcisco 4 years ago
I'm not going to argue with you, nuclear power is clean and efficient, I'm not against it.
philipmontag 4 years ago
Still haven't seen any evidence of your claims.
philipmontag 4 years ago
i'm so happy there are so many people who care about this problem. this vidio rocked just because of the message!
FlurryOfDestiny 4 years ago
way too many resources were used to make this video
fktcrp 4 years ago
Excellent
arryhuk 4 years ago
regardless of all the distractions,stay focused
arryhuk 4 years ago
i may not like big oil, but my car sure does -- and i love my car. the govt. makes more off oil in taxes than oil companies make in profits.
ExtraGarlicNow 4 years ago
but why do most "answers" proposed involve bigger, pushier, nosier government? aren't there some tech solutions to reduce heat by increasing reflective cloud cover? and why do most proposed solutions seem to be so anti-business? AGW may not be political, but one's political bias does influence the type of solutions we choose to invest in.
ExtraGarlicNow 4 years ago
"We may see CO2 is responsible for much less warming than we thought and if this is the case the predictions of warming due to human activity will need to be adjusted."
Henrik Svensmark, Director for Center for Sun-Climate Research, Danish National Space Center
iloveemo1984 4 years ago
the soulutions don't have to be "anti-business". are you doing your part?
FlurryOfDestiny 4 years ago
yeah, i'm going to start a petition to have all central air and heating shut down in all federal buildings. the more "do-nothing" our govt. is, the more energy saved!
ExtraGarlicNow 4 years ago
Penetrating video,great music,message even better
arryhuk 4 years ago
good point: at estonia, end of may, usually is around 20-25 degrees. but at this year already was 35 degrees. and very big thunderstorms. i am very worried :(
kartulikott 4 years ago
As human-induced greenhouse gases rise, global-averaged upper-level atmospheric water vapour and thin cirrus should be expected to decrease not increase.
Water vapour and cirrus cloudiness should be thought of as a negative rather than a positive feedback to human-induced - or anthropogenic greenhouse gas increases.
alanroderick 4 years ago
Discussions on GW & AGW can be confusing since there is some difference among AGW theory supporters on the degree of catastrophe if nothing is done, and whether or not it is already to late to prevent major catastrophes between now and 2100. There seems to be a wide range of opinion on these concerns.
jerrymitchner 4 years ago
WE ARE ALL GOIG TO DIE
alphabrat 4 years ago
goig?
jerrymitchner 4 years ago
Yes goig,it's an old Anglo Saxon term meaning Destined
arryhuk 4 years ago