We are in an INTERGLACIAL period according to the long term records -- what's warming the other planets/moons? Efficiency is out the window as long as investor-owned power, centrally generated, is the proposed solution -- in any form. Getting rich by trading carbon credits will not actually save one ounce of emitted carbon...
Replacing coal with nuclear makes sense whether not mans c02 emissions are heating the earth up. Most of our coal capacity is over 44 years old. We are going to have to replace theses plants over the next 40 years, we should use nuclear.
@PacificaCircle1 Yer look to put it another way NWO Government corrupt the scientific facts & data to it , while at same time they poison everything, intentionally pollute everything Barium, Ethylyne Di Bromide Chemtrailing,Ratsac Fluoride in Tap Water ,World Nuclear Fallout from japan, Corexit GMO Organisms now killing all oceans from BP Corp Crims, war on drugs when it's an excuss to escalate crime , Depleted Uranium , Illegal Wars >are u getting the idea now to all this HYPOCRACY.
@PacificCircle (How is it tied) Well we debate this cause NWO us it to push the lies about it so they can bullshit us to beleiving their lies as a justification to remove laws & pass new ones so they can remove our rights & freedoms so we can no longer own property, eroding of our civil liberties. It all becomes about Agenda 21 as an excuss to depopulate earth to kull the population.While there are clean alternatives to free zero energy that the government supress cause of greed & hipocracy.
Welcome in entering the BS age of Aquarius of being deceived by so much hype from global world government to take our freedoms away. If a volcano errupted tommorow spewing out more carbon in days than what the world spewes out in a year , do u think they can do anything about it, of course not. Carbon credits are for the scum sucking government leaches to share among themselves, there not for you & me.
Heres the truth bout this BS, we need more carbon , not less. Carbon is currently at 387 parts per Million, in the crustacious period it was at 10,000 pp m, it don't become a problem to us till it hits 8,000 pp m, without carbon, we die this is what we all are based on in our micro organisms of DNA. It extracts & subtracts from the sea depending on hot n cold periods, our ideal carbon density would best be at 2,000 pp m . We can't control carbon limits no more than we can from a celestial r
What Bill has missed is that China has only just built most of it's coal burning plants, the US has been using them for 100 years. The assertion that we need to produce less emission is still correct even if he disagrees with policies that have done the opposite.
This just in! Anti-tobacco activist doctor found guilty of smoking cigarettes. This hypocrisy should be used as evidence against the harmful effects of smoking. Since this doctor smokes, the science he advocated must be false. Smoking should now be considered completely healthy. YAY!
Bill Blythe (Clinton) was successful at furthering David Rockefeller's New World Order agenda. He's brought us a smidgen closer to planetary enslavement.
Who contributed to global warming? Industrial countries.Which countries? Europe and USA contributed most.But sruprising they blamed everything on the 3rd world countries for global warming
@evangore Bill Wattenburg has been emulating his hero(Eastwood) for so long, he thinks he is Clint. Eastwood would have faced Steven Chu head-on (as opposed to Wattenburg's treading softly around the Nobel Prize Winner).
Yes, Mr.Curious, Chu has sipped the alternative energy Kool-Aide. But the question so many of us KGO listeners wonder about (even Bill's die-hard loyalists like yourself) is: Why is Bill not calling out Chu for being the clown you say he is? Where's that old fearless, calls it as he see it , Bill. He's seemed to have evaporated as far as Chu is concerned. Why? Curious. Why?
I have a question. Where's the big bad boisterous Bill Wattenburg now that Chu's in town? Could it be that old "don't speak iLL of feLLow Lawrence Livermore Labbies?" Seems to me that Mr.Chu is'nt advocating nuclear energy much.
Chu is a clown who has drank the Kool Aid. His expertise is not in the practical use of energy. Wattenburg is completely correct. Solar & Wind energy are jokes. We need to build as many Nuclear Power Plants as possible. What do you do at night with Solar? What about the Winter Months when there might be a week or more without any Sun? Where do you get your electricity then. What happens when you have to replace the Solar Collectors every 10 years. You EvanGore know nothing. You are a fool.
After several months now, it is clear to many of Bill's listeners, that Chu is dropping the ball with regard to nuclear energy. Many have called into Bill's program to express their displeasure , only to have their complaints brushed-off . Bill can't seem to confront Chu directly. Why is Dr.Bill treading soflly around Chu? Could he have met his match? Perhaps non-scientist politcians or civilians are more his size.
You may be right Diamondguy, but even idiots hit the target now and then. But even the most die-hard Wattenburg fan must(if they're honest) acknowledge that Dr. Bill is avoiding critcizing Chu directly. Anyone who listens to his programs will find this quite evident.
Dr.Bill is treading softly around Chu. He just can't seem to muster enough nerve to go after the top guy. Perhaps he has a( easy-read) book he can recommend to Chu.
There have been studies on locating the best site to store nuclear waste (the Canadian Shield) The problem with nuclear waste is that they have a half life of millions of years. You need a place where there will be the least geological activity and make sure it deters thieves. You also have to make sure people will know what is there 100 or 1000 years in the future because the stuff is still hazardous then. There is also getting the waste there from the plant. What if there is an auto accident?
I don't know for sure if humans are to be blamed for global warming. Climate is a huge thing and we don't know have enough recorded data to justify the blame. Having said that, I think we should stop worrying about global warming because we are powerless to stop it anyway. Instead focus more on local issues like air and water pollution. If you can change the local environment, the global environment will follow suit.
@Diamondbac People contribute to about roughly 4% of the words co2. 87% of that comes from America and China with their Coal manufactures. The true cause of the change in climate is caused from the sun...Makes sense doesnt it? That the sun would heat up the earth. What type of crazy person would suggest otherwise? Someone who wants to tax you for Co2, in other words wants to tax u to breath.
Neither Coal nor nuclear is the solution. Coal is damningly dirty as pointed out in the video and it's a finite source. Nuclear is a damningly hazardous, a finite source and has even more short comings. You have to dig uranium up from the ground, enrich it so that you can start up a nuclear chain reaction that is dangerous and inefficient. What are you going to do with the waste? Only wind, solar, tidal and geothermal are safe and truly renewable. (I'm sure there are more as well)
You're a gawd damn moron! I can't understand how a dumbass like you can get dressed in the morning much less understand that which you try to convey as truth. Wind, solar, tidal and geothermal.... Research the issue you gawd damn idiot!
No. You'd rather waste your time assuming that your minute objections and further your feeble actions actually make a difference. Your proud guilt disgusts me. You cannot change global climate change by worrying about CO2. You'd be better served to worry about water vapor, you gawd damn buffoon! You need to educate yourself, then never have children, or influence anyone. You're an idiot!
Did you even read what I wrote in my other comment box? I said that climate is a huge issue and we should stop worrying about global warming because we are powerless to stop it. I'm not too concerned about CO2 emission, just the other toxic chemicals that come from burning fossil fuel. We shouldn't be doing it because it's finite and damningly dirty. That's why the other renewable sources of energy are the way to go!
Nuclear power is the way of the future. The byproduct is no problem, just launch it into deep space. No need to bury it here on earth with infinite space to throw it into.
Haha you're joking right? And what if the rocket that is sending it up explodes in mid air? You'll have radiation raining down everywhere. And where does the energy from the rocket come from? It's still going to be fossil fuel.
There are viable solutions to those problems that can't be explained in just 500 characters.
Perhaps a remote location, high strength containers and expensive engeneering to keep the payload as far from explosives as possible. The fuel for the rocket will be more then offset by nuclear power. Regulating it internationally would be tricky and expensive but it is feasible. Many other factors could be delt with by teams of experts, Occam's razor concept, simple in thought, but not in action
Bernie Ward was certainly wrong about a few things, but on this he may have gotten it right: When the time to enlist for battle arrives, the chicken-hawk clings tightly to its' perch (just ask Mr. Oswalt of the California EPA). Is that clucking we hear doc? Or is it the knocking of chicken-hawk knees?
True, it's early, but it will be interesting to see if Dr. Bill steps up his criticism(even if a bit less venomously) when or if Chu fails to tow the nuclear line. Notice ,too, how those he deems as otherwise decent fellows(Arnold), are never evil leftist scoundrels or nincompoops but simply well-intentioned innocents being misled or duped or pressured by the ever-powerful sierra club. Why is it that Al Gore or Nancy Pelosi aren't dupes of second-rate scientists?
The usual vitriol Dr. Bill spews on the likes of the sierra club or Al Gore or Nancy Pelosi seems to be "missing in action" when it comes to the new energy secretary, Steven Chu. As usual, Dr. Bill avoids identifying and targeting any specific scientist, but instead, reserves his vitriol for the non-scientist politician or civilian. When faced with his scientific equal(or in this instance, his superior), our brave doctor loses his nerve. Infact, he becomes down-right cordial and deferential.
2012 is gonna hit 1st no? ehh?? ehh?? this 1 is another one of thoes end of world thing........ yes, ofcause the earth is warming, but us burning fossel fuels is just speeding it up, my opinion, "The Day After Tomorrow" will end up happening, the climate will shift a giant iceshell will fall, storms, and freezing "New Ice Age"... pretty much.... we let thies idiots run our countrys...
i think they do know they are retarded, they knows, they aren't retarded, they know everything, they know this, they "planned" this, they WANT this to happens, ur little voice wont get to their heads unless u go on public TV or something, even bill couldn't get into their heads deep enough to make them change their minds lol.
If you want to hear somebody who really knows what he is talking about in regards to energy policy, check out the amory lovins vidoes. Don't waste your time with this blowhard.
Dr. Bill is spot on regarding his assessment of the inconsistencies of the environmental zealots. The same people screaming about fossil fuels today are the same ones who sabotaged our nuclear power program decades ago.
Sure I can point it out myself, I just don't have the gravitas of one of the best and influential energy policy expert in the world, Mr. Amory Lovins.
Examples I had the misfortune of listening to this blowhard a few days ago. As usual he was talking over and using ad hominem attacks on a caller who was disagreeing with him. Blowhard's comment was that any change in car technology (electric-hybrid) would take at least 6 years. Oil drilling in Anwar or Off coast would take 10 to 20 years.
drtompat, we already have the facilities and pipeline in place in Alaska. It's misinformation like this that keeps us from drilling. Youtube: "Glenn Beck" "CNN" "Shell Oil" and this will be explained to you.
Dr. Bill Wattenburg is about 10X brighter than the fraud Amory Lovins. You are a quantum fool if you think the best energy expert is Amory Lovins. Lovins is an opportunist and nothing more.
nah, they are fraud, they are dumber than bill, but they arnt dumb, if they were dumb butts, they wouldn't be frauds, they would be stupid little officials who get to sit there because of things we called (royal butts) lol
"Estimates were 20,000--40,000 bears worldwide during the 1980s. Current estimates put the global population at between 20,000 and 25,000. There are several reasons for the apparent discordance between past and projected population trends: Estimates from the 1950s and 1960s were based on stories from explorers and hunters rather than on scientific surveys. Second, controls of harvesting were introduced that allowed this previously-overhunted species to recover."
"WASHINGTON -- Interior Secretary Dirk Kempthorne announced Wednesday that the agency will list the polar bear as threatened under the Endangered Species Act, a decision that could cast the bears as the enduring symbol of the effects of global warming."
A recent Canadian report states the opposite. Polar bears populations are on the increase.
Watch The Truth About Global Warming.
Read 10 Myths of Over Population.
You could fit all 6B of us in the state of Texas & allot 1250 sq. ft. person. The density would be more than SF but less than NYC. Do the math: 8T sq. ft. in TX % 6B people.
Special Thanks to Al Gore for inventing the Internet and now a convenient lie.
this is all about worthless the whole fucking solar system is going through a temp change the fucking ice caps on mars are melting we sure as hell didn't cause that....they just want to pass a carbon tax fuck al gore and fuck global warming/climate
Whatever is causing the warming, you cannot deny the pollution - human caused, this can't be good, can it!?We are still polluting the air, the soil and the oceans, which are supposed to be our food sources. For how much longer? PS Why use corn to make fuel when millions of people in 3rd world countries are still starving to death!?We really ought to be working with the mother nature, rather than against it, for our own good. It's gonna outlive us all anyway.
The human induce GW is a sham. The scam artist Al Gore is on the tube right now (ABC). The Earth IS heating up but there is no reason or indication to suspect human pollution is to blame.
Dont tell me your using Gore as a yardstick now rocker? LOL, At first this fuckwit assumed I was a "warmer" and dealt me a string of posts, now tha he realises he fucked up he is posting Gore to ME?? So what are you saying ofyerrocker? That pollution doesnt exist? LOL Go away you mindless gnat, you boor me, your a total retard.
That post wasn't a reply to you, you nescient fool. Your name is not minilemur and you're not the only other person on the Internet.
The Earth IS warmer, there is no disputing that. Do you realize the controversy is over climate change being human induced or not? God Damn, you're an idiot. Just kill yourself.
By Deeception - why do you keep posting stupid raving childish, foaming-at-the-mouth rants?
Just keep to topic and address the science and keep your aggressive foot out of your mouth.
The key point is that CO2 is not a significant driver of climate, therefore it is important we commission more coal and oil fired power stations as well as nuclear ones. The alternative sources of energy just do not work yet reliably enough. Denmark has discovered the danger of wind farms.
well obviously you don't know anything about anything so let me enlighten you. there is no global warming, we could produce more coal plants but coal pollutes 3 times more than nuclear power plants and costs more per unit of production of electricity than nuclear. mining for coal and drilling for oil is also far more dangerous and people have died from doing so, far more than any adverse health effects or deaths from nuclear power plants in the US which is none!
falseph - you're right that coal and oil power stations have a higher cost than nuclear ones. BUt we mustn't lose sight of the key point which is that climate sensitivity to CO2 is logarithmic, so that hysterical alarmism about fossil fuels is absurd.
Americans and the world, let's solve the problem using nuclear. I'm confident that lessons have been learned from nuclear of the past. Even a nuclear poweed car could be made safe; You could drive forever!
America and the world runs on energy, that's all there is too it! If there is such a grave problem as the global warming hypocrites spew...........why not solve the goddamn problem and move the F on! They are content with the chaos they create, and somewhat unamerican in this viewpoint.
As Bjorn Lomborg showed in his excellent book "The Skeptical Environmentalist" there has been a steady downward trend in pollution in developing countries over the last 50 years. No cause for alarm of any sort.
Ok mini, yep your 100% right, pollution doesnt exist and is not even one iota of concern to any of us, acid rain does not eat away ancient artifacts and modern buildings alike and is not a huge problem. There is no smog in London or New York and millions of people dont die every year as a direct result of environmental pollutants. Nuclear power is 100% safe and burning coal is the most efficient means of generating electricity. Like I said mini, your not very smart.
"there has been a steady downward trend..." Whoever wrote that is obviously on LSD Ok so China does not have MASSIVE pollution issues that are increasing daily, nor does Japan, Germany, US, THE PLANET? Your head in the sand approach is laughable, in fact I think the best possible outcome for you would be to be for you or someone close to you to be struck down by an agressive cancer brought on by environmental pollution. Pollution that only affects YOU and no-one else on the planet?
Yes, that's risht, whereas there used to be killer smogs in London till the 1950s there aren't ANY such smogs any more.
Just calling me un-smart is not a valid response to the evidence and arguments I have put forward. But then you eco-sheep never debate the science, only try to discredit individuals.
ByDeception - yes that is correct - millions of people don't die every year as a direct result of environmental pollutants. Who are these millions of dead people and where are their dead bodies?
Oh whoops! You can't find any. End of your hysterical environmental nonsense. In reality all over the planet life expectancy and health is steadily increasing. The major causes of death are eating badly, too much alcohol, smoking and other PERSONAL environmental factors, not pollutants you dolt.
Funny...visions of people walking around cities, in particular in China ,Japan,India wearing masks and taking gasps from O2 vending machines seems strangely familiar to me and would to anyone with 1/2 a brain...but not to you minimind? Millions of people are dying in China & India as a direct result of unregulated industrial pollutants, have you not seen 60 minutes or Discovery Channel?
Your brain is wired all wrong minimind, obvious as everything you say is the exact opposite of the truth and reality, or to put it another way you are totally fucked in the head....quite possibly as a result of something your mother was exposed to or exposed you to (alcohol?) invitro, or something you have been exposed to since you were born. To be so completely wrong about everything however is not my problem, it is yours....good luck with that interesting & rather amusing problem of yours ;o)
ByDeception - you must be very foolish indeed if you think that merely insulting me is supposed to some sort of valid scientific argument in support of your alarmism.
Deception - you need to grow up and get a life - random images you have seen on the Discovery channel may seem "strangely familiar" to you, but in no way constitute a statistical assessment of whether pollution is in general terms rising or falling.
A key thing you fail to understand is that because of the nature of modern media attention, many phenomena that are improved now compared to the past may seem worse if you only rely on mass media reports for your "information".
Deception - your own words reveal you to be (in your own words) a "nutter". An intelligent person reading your posts will see you raving, ranting and throwing gratuitous personal attacks my way in a way redolent of (mild) insanity. Get a grip - keep to topic - answer the scientific arguments - discuss the evidence. Try to understand how science works - not through ad hominem attacks of individuals - that's the eco-fascist way - but rather through hypothesis, observation, experiment etc.
Piss of you insignificant gnat, you dont even read my posts or you would not argue with me about what we agree on? So simply crawl back under your rock and fuck off ——————/´ ¯/) —————--/—-/ —————-/—-/ ———--/´¯/'--'/´¯`·_ ———-/'/--/—-/—--/¨¯\ ——--('(———- ¯~/'--') ———\————-'—--/ ———-'\'————_-·´ ————\———--( ————-\———--\
Deception - so that's your version of scientific debate? Typical warmaholic hot-head.Your graphic is as creative as the so called science you refer to. Perhaps if you took your finger out of your arse and read a few books instead of eco alarmist wank material you wouldn't spout such shit. As it is this is what makes you both tedious and fanatical - absurd fucktard tosser!
No, mini, thats my version of FUCK YOU ;o)You are a complete retard I have consistently disavowed the scam that is Global Warming, infact I have mentioned that sea ice and ice cover in both arctic and antarctic is currently above 30 mean averages. England has just experienced it's coldest easter in 40yrs. Baghdad had snow falls first time in history. Here in Oz we have had coldest summer since the 50's. Snow in Argentina, Chinas coldest winter in 100yrs
- 30yr mean averages - AND the 4 world temp monitoring bodies have all recorded a precipitous drop in world temps in the last 12/12. So what the fuck are you on about?
I am on about pollution not Co2 levels you mindless twat, wake the fuck up to yourself.
Deception - you mindless twat yourself - what pollutants are you on about. All the statistics show that in all developed nations pollution levels have been falling fast. The Thames is cleaner now than it has been for hundreds of years. There is a small localised increase in toxic bullshit where you live. But I think we can handle that through psychiatric help.
And another thing Deception - you must obviously have a really short attention span - as you claim that CO2 isn't the issue. Duh! Haven't you noticed what this video is about?
Deception - your insults are getting ever more feeble - could this be a good sign? Does that mean that instead of mindless raving and ranting you'll address the topic in your posts. I hope so, but I'm pessimistic.
So, back to topic. What evidence do you have that pollution on the planet is getting worse rather than better?
The atmosphere is made up of Nitrogen, Oxygen, Argon and other gasses. 1-2% is greenhouse gasses, a natural event. 95% of greenhouse gasses is water vapor, 3.62% is CO2 and 1.38% is other (methane and such). 96.6% of CO2 is natural, 3.4% is caused by humans. 99% of CO2 producing species are gone from the Earth. 0.28% of Greenhouse effect is from Human contribution, 4.72% is Ocean Biologic Activity, Volcanoes, Decaying Plants, Animals, etc. and 95% is water vapor.
Are you a complete fucken idiot? All the links I posted are about pollution not GW I dont believe in GW and have posted links supporting the fact that GW is a crock. The links were for the benefit of minilemur, who agrees that5 GW is a crock but we dissagree on the extent of envoronmental pollution. Get a grip you knob.
The status of the polar bear populations are as follows:
16% Decreasing
14% Increasing
45% Stable
25% Unknown
Polar bea pop numbers have dramatically increased from 5,000 in the 1950s to 25,000 today, a higher number than ever in the 20th century. Only 2 populations of all distinct populations in the world are decreasing. The rest are stable or increasing.
Do you really think that humans are responsable for changing the climate in the entire solar system? Pluto AND Europa, two balls of ice, are getting smaller. Mars is warming up, Jupitor's climate has been changing as well. The only thing that burning fuels does to the planet is energy and pollution. In 1970, another ice-age was predicted. 1990, they predicted a temp increase of 6C by 2050. In 1995 they predicted a 2C increase by 2100. In 2001, a 3.5C increase by 2100 and 3C in 2007.
Humans contibute less than a quarter of a percent (<0.25%) to geenhouse gasses on Earth. 3.62% of the greenhouse gasses in our atmosphere is CO2 and humans contribute 3.4% to that 3.62%. The other 96.6% is from nature, mostly the oceans which have been heating up due to the same solar radiation that heats up Mars,Europa,Pluto,and intensifies Jupitor's storm. Global Warming cannot be tied to pollution,it's pure theory, a guess.You can turn out your lights but I'm watching basketball and youtube.
According to Dr. Amy Kaleita PhD,professor of agricultural & biosystems engineering at ISU, "There is no conclusive proof of the effects of CO2 on climate change, but proving linkages in climate change is difficult, if not impossible. As a consequence,determining whether or not CO2-emissions reductions are needed is also nearly impossible. Regardless of where or how expenses for carbon-emissions reductions might fall, they would inevitably end up coming out of one place: consumer's wallets"
Here Y'ar minipoopoo this is what I believe...why?... because it is fact, irrefutable fact. Twattenburg doesnt even realise that the warmest year in the last 100yrs was in 1998 as he believes the earth is still warming?? Here look at this>>
dailytech. com/Temperature+Monitors+Report+Worldwide+Global+Cooling/article10866 . htm (remove spaces between dots!!)
If you want more proof that Twattenburg talks out his arse, or more proof that I believe GW is a crock I have terrabytes of the stuff, all scientific irrefutable evidence that everything you hear on the tube or read in the Zionist/Globalist owned Mainstream Media is one big fucking LIE.
So, you think that Wattenburg talks out his ass when he says GW is a fraud? But then you say it's a fraud? Are you okay? Are you saying that you are the only one who should be the authority on GW? I don't get it. Pick a side of the fence and stay on it, troll.
you arent very bright are you rocker? I said that Twattenburg is talking out his arse because he claims the earth is still warming when the FACT is that the warmest year in the last 100 was in 1998. In the last 12/12 global temps have plummetted(see link I posted) If dickheads like you had even 1/2 a brain you would UNDERSTAND ENGLISH
Do you know what statistics are? Take the mean temperature over any given range at any station. Compare them to eachother. The Earth HAS BEEN warming up. That is indisputable, you nincompoop. Here is nasa's temperature data set website, you can look at the data yourself.
data DOT giss DOT nasa DOT gov/gistemp/station_data/
All four major global temperature tracking outlets (Hadley, NASA's GISS, UAH, RSS) have released updated data. All show that over the past year, global temperatures have dropped precipitously.
A compiled list of all the sources can be seen here. The total amount of cooling ranges from 0.65C up to 0.75C -- a value large enough to wipe out most of the warming recorded over the past 100 years.
My point is fuckwit, If we are responsible for GW the why are temps going down while "our emissions" are going up?? Did you notice that your NASA data was included in the link I posted?? Your about as sharp as a bowling ball Bwoy, no wonder you country is going down the shitter if you and Twattenburg are an example of the intelligence available in the US. If Twattenburg wanted to make a point he would mention the precipitous drop in global temps recorded now wouldnt he? (if he actually knew!!)
We aren't responsible for climate change, you idiot! Now quit contradicting yourself.
If you don't believe the Earth is heating up, you don't believe in facts. If you believe humans are doing it, you, again, don't believe in facts. Go get an education, fo fuck's sake.
"We aren't responsible for climate change, you idiot! Now quit contradicting yourself" offyarocker I have just checked back some posts and have counted (8) times where I have said humans arent responsible for climate change and have posted data supporting this? What part of that dont you understand you fucken idiot? What are you on, crack or something?
That's the whole point. The mean over 100 years continues to rise. I can take last years data and compare it to this year's and assume the Earth is cooling (If that is my only data) but if I compile it over the last 100 years, the mean standard temperature grows.
If you don't believe the Earth is heating up, then how did the glaciers recede to where they are now? Explain why we are not under ice? Where did the ice-age go? And, in case you flip-flop again, speaking of glaciers receding, why did they recede when humans weren't present to create CO2 of SO2?
Don't screw with me about the shit you can't prove, By. You're an idiot. The Earth does change temperature and humans aren't responsible for it.
offyerrocker is still in lalaland, I have said how many times that I dont believe humas are responsible for climate change? Still this moron cant accept that I agree with him? You are completely off yer nut pal. The data compiled by the 4 temp monitoring bodies (including NASA) shows a period of rapid cooling in the last 12/12 which negates over 100yrs of warming. Now a year does not a trend make but lets see what the story is this time next year?
On further analyses I have come to the conclusion that ofhisrocker cannot tell the difference between environmental pollution and greenhouse gas emissions. My gripe is the GW lie and the evergrowing poisoning of the biosphere by way of TOXIC WASTE. Greenhouse gasses have fuckall to do with the climate in concentrations even triple current levels (380ppm) BUT! toxic wastes have everything to do with everything. Do you think you can possibly "get it" yet fool?
Twelve-month long drop in world temperatures wipes out a century of warming
Over the past year, anecdotal evidence for a cooling planet has exploded. China has its coldest winter in 100 years. Baghdad sees its first snow in all recorded history. North America has the most snowcover in 50 years, with places like Wisconsin the highest since record-keeping began. Record levels of Antarctic sea ice, record cold...
rickrocker - yes the Earth has been warming up very mildly since about 1850 - which was the end of the "little ice age".
This warming, and records of the retreat of glaciers thus pre-date substantial human CO2 emission rises.
That said, there is very substantial error in the combined surface weather stations record (as was demonstrated last year when NASA GISS was forced to reclassify 1934 as the warmest year of the century in the USA. So the warming is probably over-stated.
Yep, the greenies tend to overexaggerate the warming to feed their agendas.
The oceans emit the most CO2 into the atmosphere when heated. They also emit the most water vapor. I believe the reason CO2 levels are so high is because of increased solar energy. Mars, Europa, and Pluto are all heating up. I think the trend points to solar energy. Khabibullo Abdusamatov's theories seem to be more sound.
I dont want to fight with you anymore poopoo, I think we can better use our joint intelligence by spreading the word that GW is a crock and posting the evidence to support that. As for general pollution I think we can sooner or later come to some sort of agreement on that issue ie: the Thames may be somewhat cleaner but places like China & India are polluting at astronomical levels ( I still wouldnt swim in the Thames mate!!)
GretnaBlast - correection - coal and nuclear are the only major ways to generate electricity reliably and continuously. Which days of the week would you like not to have electricity when the wind doesn't blow and the sun doesn't shine?
ByDeception - it's very ill-mannered of you to call me a moron.
Geo-thermal power is very much more expensive and requires massive and unaffordable investments in infrastructure. If it were affordable it would be more widespread. As it is, it will grow fast but only because it is doing so from a very small base.
Geothermal is cheap pal, no fuel required simple technology such as a hole in the ground a pump to pump water into the hot rocks and a condenser to reclaim the water and repeat the process, or a pipe to harvest naturally occuring steam and a steam turbine connected to a generator, hell I think even you mini could get your head around that? cont>>
New zealand has been powering cities on it for years, as has Norway etc. The bottom line is the fossil fuels/nuclear industry has been keeping a lid on all other forms of energy, especially cheap energy for years, do you believe otherwise mini?
ByDecpetion, yes I believe otherwise. The demonisation of the fossil fuels and nuclear industry is laughable. The other forms of energy have not taken off because they are either too unreliable or because the capital investment costs are currently prohibitive.
ByDeception - on the contrary I have been very interested in geothermal energy. I would like the free power after all, and who wouldn't? However, it is still very expensive to install - typically costing about £14,000. The savings would take 10 years to kick in , and with compound interest on how that money might have been spent, that's more like 20 years before it pays for itself.
You are a complet birk mini, who would even consider a "personal" geothermal plant I'm talking baseload national grid plants where geology permits not household units? Demmonising the nuclear/fossil industry is laughable? It is you that is laughable mini.
Where are the Teslas of today? Tesla was working on a way to transmit eletricity through the ionosphere and as soon as JP Morgan heard of this ambitious plan, he pulled the funding from the project. Imagine what the world would be like today with this technology. No fossil fuels would be needed. Everything would be electric as it should be.
" you could stop the US burning all fossil fuels and it wouldnt make a scrap of difference" That statement alone shows this fuckwit up for what he is. Shut the fuck up wattenburg you are an embarrasment and a moron.
Given that the US is the BIGGEST fossil fuel polluter on the planet, how do you figure that if they stopped it would not make any difference? Apart from the fact that they would set an example to countries like China & India by introducing legislated resrtictions/changes and introducing the clean/cheap energy technology that has been sitting on the Oil companies shelves for decades?
First the US is soon to be overtaken by China and then by India as the largest CO2 emitters. And the growth of developing countries will mean that any reductions by developed countries will be trivial.
Secondly, and more importantly, CO2 is not a pollutant, and climate sensitivity to its greenhouse effect is miniscule, so no need to reduce it.
Thirdly, the mild global re-warming (driven mainly by the sun) is on balance a good thing for plants, animals, & humans.
Correction??"First the US is soon to be overtaken by China and then by India" So that means that at this time the US is WHAT? Correction rejected! I dont suscribe to the global warming fearmongers given that 1998 was the hottest year and in the last year global temperatures have plummeted. And I do not suscribe to pollution in any form as the damage to the planet is suicidal.
co2 is ony 1 gas emitted by the burning of fossil fuels, infact it is the most benign, the other 2000 or so gases and noxios chemicals are of far greater concern. They are some of the chemicals that return to the surface as acid rain. You arent very smart mini, you should stick to watching tv or gaming. I also pointed out that the benefit of the US reducing its POLLUTING THE PLANET would serve to set an example to the likes of India & China. Go away you mindless twat.
ByDeception - how typical of you eco-alarmists - instead of discussing the science you launch rabid personal attacks - acid rain has long been discredited as a baseless eco-scare. No problem.
There is not the slightest evidence that developing countries are using developed countries as an example. Why should they wait for the US when they have had the idiotic EU policies to laugh at.
BTW have you noticed that the EU has increased its CO2 emissions in recent years whilst the US has reduced?
Also take a look at the increase in co2 production in the US while the Clinton/GORE Administration was in office. Why with all this phony concern for the environment you would have though carbon emissions would have decreased. They soared!
Your just an Al Gore lover and nothing he does will change your mind about him. Wattenburg always brings up the fact that Al Gore gave the go ahead to the construction of many of coal fired power plants while squashing any efforts to produce nuclear power. I guess that an invalid argument too. Any argument that makes you look like a fool is invalid, is that how that works?
I know all of what Al Gore is saying. It did not originate from him. He is just a demagogue and I treat him as one. One of his solutions is the so called carbon credits, of which he stands to make money on. The SOB has a 15,000 square foot mansion that sucks down five times the power of the average home for Christ's sake!
The Earth has been warming for the past 14,000 years, back then 98% of Canada was buried under up to 2 km of ice.
HonkIfYouLoveHonking 3 months ago
Bill is mentally unstable.
sciman707 3 months ago
We are in an INTERGLACIAL period according to the long term records -- what's warming the other planets/moons? Efficiency is out the window as long as investor-owned power, centrally generated, is the proposed solution -- in any form. Getting rich by trading carbon credits will not actually save one ounce of emitted carbon...
noponat666 5 months ago
Replacing coal with nuclear makes sense whether not mans c02 emissions are heating the earth up. Most of our coal capacity is over 44 years old. We are going to have to replace theses plants over the next 40 years, we should use nuclear.
bogusnachos 10 months ago
only growing arms is the deniers - all one find on youtube.
PacificCircle1 10 months ago
@PacificaCircle1 Yer look to put it another way NWO Government corrupt the scientific facts & data to it , while at same time they poison everything, intentionally pollute everything Barium, Ethylyne Di Bromide Chemtrailing,Ratsac Fluoride in Tap Water ,World Nuclear Fallout from japan, Corexit GMO Organisms now killing all oceans from BP Corp Crims, war on drugs when it's an excuss to escalate crime , Depleted Uranium , Illegal Wars >are u getting the idea now to all this HYPOCRACY.
robreiken 10 months ago
@PacificCircle (How is it tied) Well we debate this cause NWO us it to push the lies about it so they can bullshit us to beleiving their lies as a justification to remove laws & pass new ones so they can remove our rights & freedoms so we can no longer own property, eroding of our civil liberties. It all becomes about Agenda 21 as an excuss to depopulate earth to kull the population.While there are clean alternatives to free zero energy that the government supress cause of greed & hipocracy.
robreiken 10 months ago
10 billion tons a year of CO2 - millions of cars in CA alone Drive the LA freeways 'tween 3 to 8 pm and see.
PacificCircle1 10 months ago
Welcome in entering the BS age of Aquarius of being deceived by so much hype from global world government to take our freedoms away. If a volcano errupted tommorow spewing out more carbon in days than what the world spewes out in a year , do u think they can do anything about it, of course not. Carbon credits are for the scum sucking government leaches to share among themselves, there not for you & me.
robreiken 1 year ago
@robreiken How is greenhouse gasses tied to 'one world government'. Physical laws are not based on ideology!
PacificCircle1 10 months ago
Heres the truth bout this BS, we need more carbon , not less. Carbon is currently at 387 parts per Million, in the crustacious period it was at 10,000 pp m, it don't become a problem to us till it hits 8,000 pp m, without carbon, we die this is what we all are based on in our micro organisms of DNA. It extracts & subtracts from the sea depending on hot n cold periods, our ideal carbon density would best be at 2,000 pp m . We can't control carbon limits no more than we can from a celestial r
robreiken 1 year ago
What Bill has missed is that China has only just built most of it's coal burning plants, the US has been using them for 100 years. The assertion that we need to produce less emission is still correct even if he disagrees with policies that have done the opposite.
checkyoursources 1 year ago
This just in! Anti-tobacco activist doctor found guilty of smoking cigarettes. This hypocrisy should be used as evidence against the harmful effects of smoking. Since this doctor smokes, the science he advocated must be false. Smoking should now be considered completely healthy. YAY!
Keysteeze 1 year ago
Wouldn't it be funny if we tried soo hard to prevent global warming that we reversed it and another iceage took place? I think I would prefer warmer!
jeffms2 1 year ago
Hey Bill, you said China is building a coal plant every week? They will build a thousand more? I think your on crystal meth pal.
LLH97921 1 year ago
Bill Blythe (Clinton) was successful at furthering David Rockefeller's New World Order agenda. He's brought us a smidgen closer to planetary enslavement.
ScientificalnessUSA 1 year ago
Who contributed to global warming? Industrial countries.Which countries? Europe and USA contributed most.But sruprising they blamed everything on the 3rd world countries for global warming
ali4330 2 years ago
Dr. Wattenburg has been emulating his hero(Eastwood) for so long, he began to believe he was Clint. Until Chu rode into town.
evangore 2 years ago
@evangore Bill Wattenburg has been emulating his hero(Eastwood) for so long, he thinks he is Clint. Eastwood would have faced Steven Chu head-on (as opposed to Wattenburg's treading softly around the Nobel Prize Winner).
evangore 1 year ago
Yes, Mr.Curious, Chu has sipped the alternative energy Kool-Aide. But the question so many of us KGO listeners wonder about (even Bill's die-hard loyalists like yourself) is: Why is Bill not calling out Chu for being the clown you say he is? Where's that old fearless, calls it as he see it , Bill. He's seemed to have evaporated as far as Chu is concerned. Why? Curious. Why?
evangore 2 years ago
Why you ask? Because Big Brave Bill Wattenburg is scared of Chu-Chu. There's no other explanation for his treading ever-so softly around Chu.
evangore 2 years ago
I have a question. Where's the big bad boisterous Bill Wattenburg now that Chu's in town? Could it be that old "don't speak iLL of feLLow Lawrence Livermore Labbies?" Seems to me that Mr.Chu is'nt advocating nuclear energy much.
evangore 2 years ago
Chu is a clown who has drank the Kool Aid. His expertise is not in the practical use of energy. Wattenburg is completely correct. Solar & Wind energy are jokes. We need to build as many Nuclear Power Plants as possible. What do you do at night with Solar? What about the Winter Months when there might be a week or more without any Sun? Where do you get your electricity then. What happens when you have to replace the Solar Collectors every 10 years. You EvanGore know nothing. You are a fool.
juscurious 2 years ago
Comment removed
evangore 2 years ago
After several months now, it is clear to many of Bill's listeners, that Chu is dropping the ball with regard to nuclear energy. Many have called into Bill's program to express their displeasure , only to have their complaints brushed-off . Bill can't seem to confront Chu directly. Why is Dr.Bill treading soflly around Chu? Could he have met his match? Perhaps non-scientist politcians or civilians are more his size.
evangore 2 years ago
You may be right Diamondguy, but even idiots hit the target now and then. But even the most die-hard Wattenburg fan must(if they're honest) acknowledge that Dr. Bill is avoiding critcizing Chu directly. Anyone who listens to his programs will find this quite evident.
evangore 2 years ago
The new energy secretary (Steven Chu) has KGO's Bill Wattenburg running scared. Bill, stop avoiding the elephant in the room!
evangore 2 years ago
Dr.Bill is treading softly around Chu. He just can't seem to muster enough nerve to go after the top guy. Perhaps he has a( easy-read) book he can recommend to Chu.
evangore 2 years ago
There have been studies on locating the best site to store nuclear waste (the Canadian Shield) The problem with nuclear waste is that they have a half life of millions of years. You need a place where there will be the least geological activity and make sure it deters thieves. You also have to make sure people will know what is there 100 or 1000 years in the future because the stuff is still hazardous then. There is also getting the waste there from the plant. What if there is an auto accident?
Diamondbac 2 years ago
I don't know for sure if humans are to be blamed for global warming. Climate is a huge thing and we don't know have enough recorded data to justify the blame. Having said that, I think we should stop worrying about global warming because we are powerless to stop it anyway. Instead focus more on local issues like air and water pollution. If you can change the local environment, the global environment will follow suit.
Diamondbac 2 years ago 5
@Diamondbac People contribute to about roughly 4% of the words co2. 87% of that comes from America and China with their Coal manufactures. The true cause of the change in climate is caused from the sun...Makes sense doesnt it? That the sun would heat up the earth. What type of crazy person would suggest otherwise? Someone who wants to tax you for Co2, in other words wants to tax u to breath.
Fvantagio15 1 month ago
Neither Coal nor nuclear is the solution. Coal is damningly dirty as pointed out in the video and it's a finite source. Nuclear is a damningly hazardous, a finite source and has even more short comings. You have to dig uranium up from the ground, enrich it so that you can start up a nuclear chain reaction that is dangerous and inefficient. What are you going to do with the waste? Only wind, solar, tidal and geothermal are safe and truly renewable. (I'm sure there are more as well)
Diamondbac 2 years ago
You're a gawd damn moron! I can't understand how a dumbass like you can get dressed in the morning much less understand that which you try to convey as truth. Wind, solar, tidal and geothermal.... Research the issue you gawd damn idiot!
dirtyproduction 2 years ago
And I can't understand what your argument is you inbreed turd. What is wrong with wind solar tidal and geothermal? Care to explain fool?
Diamondbac 2 years ago
I am not going to waste my time teaching you. If you want the truth, go out and research the issue. You're not getting a free lunch from me.
dirtyproduction 2 years ago
And I'm not going to waste time to listen to an idiot who doesn't know what he is talking about.
Diamondbac 2 years ago
No. You'd rather waste your time assuming that your minute objections and further your feeble actions actually make a difference. Your proud guilt disgusts me. You cannot change global climate change by worrying about CO2. You'd be better served to worry about water vapor, you gawd damn buffoon! You need to educate yourself, then never have children, or influence anyone. You're an idiot!
dirtyproduction 2 years ago
Did you even read what I wrote in my other comment box? I said that climate is a huge issue and we should stop worrying about global warming because we are powerless to stop it. I'm not too concerned about CO2 emission, just the other toxic chemicals that come from burning fossil fuel. We shouldn't be doing it because it's finite and damningly dirty. That's why the other renewable sources of energy are the way to go!
Diamondbac 2 years ago
Though you're not at all worried about the ramifications of that which you advocate... Have you honestly researched this issue, seriously....
dirtyproduction 2 years ago
Nuclear power is the way of the future. The byproduct is no problem, just launch it into deep space. No need to bury it here on earth with infinite space to throw it into.
Monkor001 2 years ago
Haha you're joking right? And what if the rocket that is sending it up explodes in mid air? You'll have radiation raining down everywhere. And where does the energy from the rocket come from? It's still going to be fossil fuel.
Diamondbac 2 years ago
There are viable solutions to those problems that can't be explained in just 500 characters.
Perhaps a remote location, high strength containers and expensive engeneering to keep the payload as far from explosives as possible. The fuel for the rocket will be more then offset by nuclear power. Regulating it internationally would be tricky and expensive but it is feasible. Many other factors could be delt with by teams of experts, Occam's razor concept, simple in thought, but not in action
Monkor001 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Dr. Bill W. should be the Sec. of common sense with the authority to build nuclear plants across the United States.
signed
sick and tired of the greenies!
wwwerd1 2 years ago
Dr. Bill should be the Sec. of Common Sense with the authority to build nuclear power plants across the United States.
signed
sick and tired of the greenies!
wwwerd1 2 years ago
Bernie Ward was certainly wrong about a few things, but on this he may have gotten it right: When the time to enlist for battle arrives, the chicken-hawk clings tightly to its' perch (just ask Mr. Oswalt of the California EPA). Is that clucking we hear doc? Or is it the knocking of chicken-hawk knees?
evangore 3 years ago
True, it's early, but it will be interesting to see if Dr. Bill steps up his criticism(even if a bit less venomously) when or if Chu fails to tow the nuclear line. Notice ,too, how those he deems as otherwise decent fellows(Arnold), are never evil leftist scoundrels or nincompoops but simply well-intentioned innocents being misled or duped or pressured by the ever-powerful sierra club. Why is it that Al Gore or Nancy Pelosi aren't dupes of second-rate scientists?
evangore 3 years ago
The usual vitriol Dr. Bill spews on the likes of the sierra club or Al Gore or Nancy Pelosi seems to be "missing in action" when it comes to the new energy secretary, Steven Chu. As usual, Dr. Bill avoids identifying and targeting any specific scientist, but instead, reserves his vitriol for the non-scientist politician or civilian. When faced with his scientific equal(or in this instance, his superior), our brave doctor loses his nerve. Infact, he becomes down-right cordial and deferential.
evangore 3 years ago
You are an IDIOT, have you seen the hole in the ozone
tprince23 3 years ago
2012 is gonna hit 1st no? ehh?? ehh?? this 1 is another one of thoes end of world thing........ yes, ofcause the earth is warming, but us burning fossel fuels is just speeding it up, my opinion, "The Day After Tomorrow" will end up happening, the climate will shift a giant iceshell will fall, storms, and freezing "New Ice Age"... pretty much.... we let thies idiots run our countrys...
DXRULERZ 3 years ago
They're not retards, they're con artists.
Byos4902 3 years ago
in this i agree with dr.bill.
xaviSF 3 years ago 2
i think they do know they are retarded, they knows, they aren't retarded, they know everything, they know this, they "planned" this, they WANT this to happens, ur little voice wont get to their heads unless u go on public TV or something, even bill couldn't get into their heads deep enough to make them change their minds lol.
megamanxu 3 years ago
Yah Japan! :D
megamanxu 3 years ago
Thank God for Bill out here in Northern California!
luminouspics 3 years ago 2
If you want to hear somebody who really knows what he is talking about in regards to energy policy, check out the amory lovins vidoes. Don't waste your time with this blowhard.
drtompat 3 years ago
Dr. Bill is spot on regarding his assessment of the inconsistencies of the environmental zealots. The same people screaming about fossil fuels today are the same ones who sabotaged our nuclear power program decades ago.
hinodecho69 3 years ago 5
WOW, drtompat, you are an idiot. How is "this blowhard" wrong?
Can't point it oput yourself? Nope, you have to post a link to a noname's video.
If you can't stand up on your own feet when you call someone a blowhard just shit down..
GotIt123 3 years ago
Sure I can point it out myself, I just don't have the gravitas of one of the best and influential energy policy expert in the world, Mr. Amory Lovins.
Examples I had the misfortune of listening to this blowhard a few days ago. As usual he was talking over and using ad hominem attacks on a caller who was disagreeing with him. Blowhard's comment was that any change in car technology (electric-hybrid) would take at least 6 years. Oil drilling in Anwar or Off coast would take 10 to 20 years.
drtompat 3 years ago
drtompat, we already have the facilities and pipeline in place in Alaska. It's misinformation like this that keeps us from drilling. Youtube: "Glenn Beck" "CNN" "Shell Oil" and this will be explained to you.
boycottmc 3 years ago
Dr. Bill Wattenburg is about 10X brighter than the fraud Amory Lovins. You are a quantum fool if you think the best energy expert is Amory Lovins. Lovins is an opportunist and nothing more.
juscurious 3 years ago
nah, they are fraud, they are dumber than bill, but they arnt dumb, if they were dumb butts, they wouldn't be frauds, they would be stupid little officials who get to sit there because of things we called (royal butts) lol
megamanxu 3 years ago
"Estimates were 20,000--40,000 bears worldwide during the 1980s. Current estimates put the global population at between 20,000 and 25,000. There are several reasons for the apparent discordance between past and projected population trends: Estimates from the 1950s and 1960s were based on stories from explorers and hunters rather than on scientific surveys. Second, controls of harvesting were introduced that allowed this previously-overhunted species to recover."
risingphoenix35 3 years ago
Polar Bear Listed as Threatened Species
ALASKA DAILY NEWS BULLETIN 5-14-2008
"WASHINGTON -- Interior Secretary Dirk Kempthorne announced Wednesday that the agency will list the polar bear as threatened under the Endangered Species Act, a decision that could cast the bears as the enduring symbol of the effects of global warming."
THANK YOU Secretary Kempthorne !!
And thank you Al Gore and Arnold Schwarzenegger.
risingphoenix35 3 years ago
"What nonsense! Does anybody realize that the polar bear population has increased from 5,000 in 1972 to 25,000 today!"
scitech. blogs. cnn. com/2008/05/15/contentious-fact-in-polar-debate-bears-scrutiny/
angryamerican 3 years ago
A recent Canadian report states the opposite. Polar bears populations are on the increase.
Watch The Truth About Global Warming.
Read 10 Myths of Over Population.
You could fit all 6B of us in the state of Texas & allot 1250 sq. ft. person. The density would be more than SF but less than NYC. Do the math: 8T sq. ft. in TX % 6B people.
Special Thanks to Al Gore for inventing the Internet and now a convenient lie.
jdtrickster4 3 years ago
this is all about worthless the whole fucking solar system is going through a temp change the fucking ice caps on mars are melting we sure as hell didn't cause that....they just want to pass a carbon tax fuck al gore and fuck global warming/climate
Knife226 3 years ago
Whatever is causing the warming, you cannot deny the pollution - human caused, this can't be good, can it!?We are still polluting the air, the soil and the oceans, which are supposed to be our food sources. For how much longer? PS Why use corn to make fuel when millions of people in 3rd world countries are still starving to death!?We really ought to be working with the mother nature, rather than against it, for our own good. It's gonna outlive us all anyway.
maleticka 3 years ago
drsnk...are you a faggot
ryanGOAT34 4 years ago
No real comment? Did not think so.
A typical moron's comment by "ryanGOAT34".
GotIt123 3 years ago
rickrocker - your comments are a refreshing breath of fresh air and climate rationality. Thanks, and please keep up the good work.
It's very important to fight the global waring hysteria.
minilemur 4 years ago
The human induce GW is a sham. The scam artist Al Gore is on the tube right now (ABC). The Earth IS heating up but there is no reason or indication to suspect human pollution is to blame.
rickrocker 4 years ago
Dont tell me your using Gore as a yardstick now rocker? LOL, At first this fuckwit assumed I was a "warmer" and dealt me a string of posts, now tha he realises he fucked up he is posting Gore to ME?? So what are you saying ofyerrocker? That pollution doesnt exist? LOL Go away you mindless gnat, you boor me, your a total retard.
ByDeception 4 years ago
That post wasn't a reply to you, you nescient fool. Your name is not minilemur and you're not the only other person on the Internet.
The Earth IS warmer, there is no disputing that. Do you realize the controversy is over climate change being human induced or not? God Damn, you're an idiot. Just kill yourself.
rickrocker 4 years ago
-Electrical Engineering and Physics from UC of Berkeley.
rickrocker 4 years ago
WRONG, Twattenburg worked at Lawrence Livermore as a nuclear physicist primarily devoted to designing nuclear weapons ;o)
ByDeception 4 years ago
ByDeception, will you please shut your ass when you don't know things? It stinks in here.
en DOT wikipedia DOT org/wiki/Bill_Wattenburg
pushback DOT com/Wattenburg/bio/background-education DOT html
intellectualventures DOT com/inventor DOT aspx?id=62879e51-394f-4546-956e-fabd6b042b0c
kgoam810 DOT com/viewentry DOT asp?ID=336822&PT=PERSONALITIES
rickrocker 4 years ago
I don't need a PhD to tell you that the grass grow green in my lawn... after the 3 feet of snow melts
rickrocker 4 years ago
By Deeception - why do you keep posting stupid raving childish, foaming-at-the-mouth rants?
Just keep to topic and address the science and keep your aggressive foot out of your mouth.
The key point is that CO2 is not a significant driver of climate, therefore it is important we commission more coal and oil fired power stations as well as nuclear ones. The alternative sources of energy just do not work yet reliably enough. Denmark has discovered the danger of wind farms.
minilemur 4 years ago
well obviously you don't know anything about anything so let me enlighten you. there is no global warming, we could produce more coal plants but coal pollutes 3 times more than nuclear power plants and costs more per unit of production of electricity than nuclear. mining for coal and drilling for oil is also far more dangerous and people have died from doing so, far more than any adverse health effects or deaths from nuclear power plants in the US which is none!
falseph 4 years ago
falseph - you're right that coal and oil power stations have a higher cost than nuclear ones. BUt we mustn't lose sight of the key point which is that climate sensitivity to CO2 is logarithmic, so that hysterical alarmism about fossil fuels is absurd.
minilemur 4 years ago
Americans and the world, let's solve the problem using nuclear. I'm confident that lessons have been learned from nuclear of the past. Even a nuclear poweed car could be made safe; You could drive forever!
America and the world runs on energy, that's all there is too it! If there is such a grave problem as the global warming hypocrites spew...........why not solve the goddamn problem and move the F on! They are content with the chaos they create, and somewhat unamerican in this viewpoint.
928gto 4 years ago
Bill W. is a Patriot!
928gto 4 years ago
I'm done with you and your ludicrous viewpoint mini, you are nothing short of an insignificant mindless gnat, and most of all you boor me to tears.
hastalavista baby
ByDeception 4 years ago
Things that apply to minimanure
"I used to have a handle on life, but it broke."
"Consciousness: That annoying time between naps."
"Ever stop to think, and forget to start again"
"I smile because I don't know what the hell is going on."
"The gene pool could use some chlorine"
And finally minimanure
Stupidity is not a handicap. Park elsewhere!
ByDeception 4 years ago
ByDeception - how confused you are. Manure is a good thing. It makes plants grow better - just like CO2 which is a vital plant fertiliser.
minilemur 4 years ago
ByDeception - chill your hysterical posts...
As Bjorn Lomborg showed in his excellent book "The Skeptical Environmentalist" there has been a steady downward trend in pollution in developing countries over the last 50 years. No cause for alarm of any sort.
minilemur 4 years ago
Ok mini, yep your 100% right, pollution doesnt exist and is not even one iota of concern to any of us, acid rain does not eat away ancient artifacts and modern buildings alike and is not a huge problem. There is no smog in London or New York and millions of people dont die every year as a direct result of environmental pollutants. Nuclear power is 100% safe and burning coal is the most efficient means of generating electricity. Like I said mini, your not very smart.
ByDeception 4 years ago
"there has been a steady downward trend..." Whoever wrote that is obviously on LSD Ok so China does not have MASSIVE pollution issues that are increasing daily, nor does Japan, Germany, US, THE PLANET? Your head in the sand approach is laughable, in fact I think the best possible outcome for you would be to be for you or someone close to you to be struck down by an agressive cancer brought on by environmental pollution. Pollution that only affects YOU and no-one else on the planet?
ByDeception 4 years ago
ByDeception - your name is so appropriate!
Yes, that's risht, whereas there used to be killer smogs in London till the 1950s there aren't ANY such smogs any more.
Just calling me un-smart is not a valid response to the evidence and arguments I have put forward. But then you eco-sheep never debate the science, only try to discredit individuals.
minilemur 4 years ago
ByDeception - yes that is correct - millions of people don't die every year as a direct result of environmental pollutants. Who are these millions of dead people and where are their dead bodies?
Oh whoops! You can't find any. End of your hysterical environmental nonsense. In reality all over the planet life expectancy and health is steadily increasing. The major causes of death are eating badly, too much alcohol, smoking and other PERSONAL environmental factors, not pollutants you dolt.
minilemur 4 years ago
Funny...visions of people walking around cities, in particular in China ,Japan,India wearing masks and taking gasps from O2 vending machines seems strangely familiar to me and would to anyone with 1/2 a brain...but not to you minimind? Millions of people are dying in China & India as a direct result of unregulated industrial pollutants, have you not seen 60 minutes or Discovery Channel?
ByDeception 4 years ago
Your brain is wired all wrong minimind, obvious as everything you say is the exact opposite of the truth and reality, or to put it another way you are totally fucked in the head....quite possibly as a result of something your mother was exposed to or exposed you to (alcohol?) invitro, or something you have been exposed to since you were born. To be so completely wrong about everything however is not my problem, it is yours....good luck with that interesting & rather amusing problem of yours ;o)
ByDeception 4 years ago
ByDeception - you must be very foolish indeed if you think that merely insulting me is supposed to some sort of valid scientific argument in support of your alarmism.
minilemur 4 years ago
Deception - you need to grow up and get a life - random images you have seen on the Discovery channel may seem "strangely familiar" to you, but in no way constitute a statistical assessment of whether pollution is in general terms rising or falling.
A key thing you fail to understand is that because of the nature of modern media attention, many phenomena that are improved now compared to the past may seem worse if you only rely on mass media reports for your "information".
minilemur 4 years ago
LOL, you need some professional help lemur you are certifiable, a full blown delusional nutter...period.
No doubt you would also defend the safety of DU weapons and their completely benign effects on human tissue, DNA sequences, and the environment?
ByDeception 4 years ago
Deception - your own words reveal you to be (in your own words) a "nutter". An intelligent person reading your posts will see you raving, ranting and throwing gratuitous personal attacks my way in a way redolent of (mild) insanity. Get a grip - keep to topic - answer the scientific arguments - discuss the evidence. Try to understand how science works - not through ad hominem attacks of individuals - that's the eco-fascist way - but rather through hypothesis, observation, experiment etc.
minilemur 4 years ago
ByDeception 4 years ago
Deception - so that's your version of scientific debate? Typical warmaholic hot-head.Your graphic is as creative as the so called science you refer to. Perhaps if you took your finger out of your arse and read a few books instead of eco alarmist wank material you wouldn't spout such shit. As it is this is what makes you both tedious and fanatical - absurd fucktard tosser!
minilemur 4 years ago
No, mini, thats my version of FUCK YOU ;o)You are a complete retard I have consistently disavowed the scam that is Global Warming, infact I have mentioned that sea ice and ice cover in both arctic and antarctic is currently above 30 mean averages. England has just experienced it's coldest easter in 40yrs. Baghdad had snow falls first time in history. Here in Oz we have had coldest summer since the 50's. Snow in Argentina, Chinas coldest winter in 100yrs
ByDeception 4 years ago
- 30yr mean averages - AND the 4 world temp monitoring bodies have all recorded a precipitous drop in world temps in the last 12/12. So what the fuck are you on about?
I am on about pollution not Co2 levels you mindless twat, wake the fuck up to yourself.
ByDeception 4 years ago
Deception - you mindless twat yourself - what pollutants are you on about. All the statistics show that in all developed nations pollution levels have been falling fast. The Thames is cleaner now than it has been for hundreds of years. There is a small localised increase in toxic bullshit where you live. But I think we can handle that through psychiatric help.
minilemur 4 years ago
And another thing Deception - you must obviously have a really short attention span - as you claim that CO2 isn't the issue. Duh! Haven't you noticed what this video is about?
minilemur 4 years ago
BIRK, Whatever is wrong with you cannot be helped by any amount of psychiatric help or medication minitwat, you are beyond help.
ByDeception 4 years ago
Deception - your insults are getting ever more feeble - could this be a good sign? Does that mean that instead of mindless raving and ranting you'll address the topic in your posts. I hope so, but I'm pessimistic.
So, back to topic. What evidence do you have that pollution on the planet is getting worse rather than better?
minilemur 4 years ago
theage. com. au/news/world/china-covers-up-pollution-deaths/2007/07/04/1183351291152. html
Remove the spaces mini
ByDeception 4 years ago
guardian. co. uk/world/2007/oct/26/china. pollution
ByDeception 4 years ago
guardian. co. uk/news/gallery/2007/jul/18/china. pollution?picture=330216024
ByDeception 4 years ago
theage. com. au/news/world/chinas-pollution-warning/2007/07/18/1184559865390. html
ByDeception 4 years ago
Ok, here is research for you:
The atmosphere is made up of Nitrogen, Oxygen, Argon and other gasses. 1-2% is greenhouse gasses, a natural event. 95% of greenhouse gasses is water vapor, 3.62% is CO2 and 1.38% is other (methane and such). 96.6% of CO2 is natural, 3.4% is caused by humans. 99% of CO2 producing species are gone from the Earth. 0.28% of Greenhouse effect is from Human contribution, 4.72% is Ocean Biologic Activity, Volcanoes, Decaying Plants, Animals, etc. and 95% is water vapor.
rickrocker 4 years ago
Are you a complete fucken idiot? All the links I posted are about pollution not GW I dont believe in GW and have posted links supporting the fact that GW is a crock. The links were for the benefit of minilemur, who agrees that5 GW is a crock but we dissagree on the extent of envoronmental pollution. Get a grip you knob.
ByDeception 4 years ago
The status of the polar bear populations are as follows:
16% Decreasing
14% Increasing
45% Stable
25% Unknown
Polar bea pop numbers have dramatically increased from 5,000 in the 1950s to 25,000 today, a higher number than ever in the 20th century. Only 2 populations of all distinct populations in the world are decreasing. The rest are stable or increasing.
rickrocker 4 years ago
If the Earth was ever in an ice-age before, how did it get out of that ice-age? Coal-fired power plants?
rickrocker 4 years ago
Do you really think that humans are responsable for changing the climate in the entire solar system? Pluto AND Europa, two balls of ice, are getting smaller. Mars is warming up, Jupitor's climate has been changing as well. The only thing that burning fuels does to the planet is energy and pollution. In 1970, another ice-age was predicted. 1990, they predicted a temp increase of 6C by 2050. In 1995 they predicted a 2C increase by 2100. In 2001, a 3.5C increase by 2100 and 3C in 2007.
rickrocker 4 years ago
Humans contibute less than a quarter of a percent (<0.25%) to geenhouse gasses on Earth. 3.62% of the greenhouse gasses in our atmosphere is CO2 and humans contribute 3.4% to that 3.62%. The other 96.6% is from nature, mostly the oceans which have been heating up due to the same solar radiation that heats up Mars,Europa,Pluto,and intensifies Jupitor's storm. Global Warming cannot be tied to pollution,it's pure theory, a guess.You can turn out your lights but I'm watching basketball and youtube.
rickrocker 4 years ago
According to Dr. Amy Kaleita PhD,professor of agricultural & biosystems engineering at ISU, "There is no conclusive proof of the effects of CO2 on climate change, but proving linkages in climate change is difficult, if not impossible. As a consequence,determining whether or not CO2-emissions reductions are needed is also nearly impossible. Regardless of where or how expenses for carbon-emissions reductions might fall, they would inevitably end up coming out of one place: consumer's wallets"
rickrocker 4 years ago
ace. mmu. ac. uk/eae/Acid_Rain/Older/UK_Acid_Rain. html
ByDeception 4 years ago
Re India>>
gits4u. com/envo/envo4. htm
ByDeception 4 years ago
UK Air Pollution (name your contaminant)>>
apis. ac. uk/
ByDeception 4 years ago
All of ByDeception's websites are from profitable and bias organizations. It seems that ByDeception is trying to change your mind... by deception!
rickrocker 4 years ago
Here dumbass, if only you could understand what you are reading you wouldnt upset people by spouting shit.
dailytech. com/Temperature%2BMonitors%2BReport%2BWorldwide%2BGlobal%2BCooling/article10866. htm (remove the spaces)
ByDeception 4 years ago
None of the sites I posted have anything to do with GW ALL were devoted to environmental pollution AS IN TOXIC WASTES!
ByDeception 4 years ago
Here Y'ar minipoopoo this is what I believe...why?... because it is fact, irrefutable fact. Twattenburg doesnt even realise that the warmest year in the last 100yrs was in 1998 as he believes the earth is still warming?? Here look at this>>
dailytech. com/Temperature+Monitors+Report+Worldwide+Global+Cooling/article10866 . htm (remove spaces between dots!!)
ByDeception 4 years ago
If you want more proof that Twattenburg talks out his arse, or more proof that I believe GW is a crock I have terrabytes of the stuff, all scientific irrefutable evidence that everything you hear on the tube or read in the Zionist/Globalist owned Mainstream Media is one big fucking LIE.
ByDeception 4 years ago
So, you think that Wattenburg talks out his ass when he says GW is a fraud? But then you say it's a fraud? Are you okay? Are you saying that you are the only one who should be the authority on GW? I don't get it. Pick a side of the fence and stay on it, troll.
rickrocker 4 years ago
you arent very bright are you rocker? I said that Twattenburg is talking out his arse because he claims the earth is still warming when the FACT is that the warmest year in the last 100 was in 1998. In the last 12/12 global temps have plummetted(see link I posted) If dickheads like you had even 1/2 a brain you would UNDERSTAND ENGLISH
ByDeception 4 years ago
Do you know what statistics are? Take the mean temperature over any given range at any station. Compare them to eachother. The Earth HAS BEEN warming up. That is indisputable, you nincompoop. Here is nasa's temperature data set website, you can look at the data yourself.
data DOT giss DOT nasa DOT gov/gistemp/station_data/
Dumbass
rickrocker 4 years ago
All four major global temperature tracking outlets (Hadley, NASA's GISS, UAH, RSS) have released updated data. All show that over the past year, global temperatures have dropped precipitously.
A compiled list of all the sources can be seen here. The total amount of cooling ranges from 0.65C up to 0.75C -- a value large enough to wipe out most of the warming recorded over the past 100 years.
ByDeception 4 years ago
My point is fuckwit, If we are responsible for GW the why are temps going down while "our emissions" are going up?? Did you notice that your NASA data was included in the link I posted?? Your about as sharp as a bowling ball Bwoy, no wonder you country is going down the shitter if you and Twattenburg are an example of the intelligence available in the US. If Twattenburg wanted to make a point he would mention the precipitous drop in global temps recorded now wouldnt he? (if he actually knew!!)
ByDeception 4 years ago
We aren't responsible for climate change, you idiot! Now quit contradicting yourself.
If you don't believe the Earth is heating up, you don't believe in facts. If you believe humans are doing it, you, again, don't believe in facts. Go get an education, fo fuck's sake.
rickrocker 4 years ago
"We aren't responsible for climate change, you idiot! Now quit contradicting yourself" offyarocker I have just checked back some posts and have counted (8) times where I have said humans arent responsible for climate change and have posted data supporting this? What part of that dont you understand you fucken idiot? What are you on, crack or something?
ByDeception 4 years ago
That's the whole point. The mean over 100 years continues to rise. I can take last years data and compare it to this year's and assume the Earth is cooling (If that is my only data) but if I compile it over the last 100 years, the mean standard temperature grows.
rickrocker 4 years ago
If you don't believe the Earth is heating up, then how did the glaciers recede to where they are now? Explain why we are not under ice? Where did the ice-age go? And, in case you flip-flop again, speaking of glaciers receding, why did they recede when humans weren't present to create CO2 of SO2?
Don't screw with me about the shit you can't prove, By. You're an idiot. The Earth does change temperature and humans aren't responsible for it.
rickrocker 4 years ago
offyerrocker is still in lalaland, I have said how many times that I dont believe humas are responsible for climate change? Still this moron cant accept that I agree with him? You are completely off yer nut pal. The data compiled by the 4 temp monitoring bodies (including NASA) shows a period of rapid cooling in the last 12/12 which negates over 100yrs of warming. Now a year does not a trend make but lets see what the story is this time next year?
ByDeception 4 years ago
It's the SUN STUPID!!
ByDeception 4 years ago
Do you like being wrong?
rickrocker 4 years ago
On further analyses I have come to the conclusion that ofhisrocker cannot tell the difference between environmental pollution and greenhouse gas emissions. My gripe is the GW lie and the evergrowing poisoning of the biosphere by way of TOXIC WASTE. Greenhouse gasses have fuckall to do with the climate in concentrations even triple current levels (380ppm) BUT! toxic wastes have everything to do with everything. Do you think you can possibly "get it" yet fool?
ByDeception 4 years ago
"If you don't believe the Earth is heating up..."
Twelve-month long drop in world temperatures wipes out a century of warming
Over the past year, anecdotal evidence for a cooling planet has exploded. China has its coldest winter in 100 years. Baghdad sees its first snow in all recorded history. North America has the most snowcover in 50 years, with places like Wisconsin the highest since record-keeping began. Record levels of Antarctic sea ice, record cold...
Warming up you say LOL!!
ByDeception 4 years ago
rickrocker - yes the Earth has been warming up very mildly since about 1850 - which was the end of the "little ice age".
This warming, and records of the retreat of glaciers thus pre-date substantial human CO2 emission rises.
That said, there is very substantial error in the combined surface weather stations record (as was demonstrated last year when NASA GISS was forced to reclassify 1934 as the warmest year of the century in the USA. So the warming is probably over-stated.
minilemur 4 years ago
Yep, the greenies tend to overexaggerate the warming to feed their agendas.
The oceans emit the most CO2 into the atmosphere when heated. They also emit the most water vapor. I believe the reason CO2 levels are so high is because of increased solar energy. Mars, Europa, and Pluto are all heating up. I think the trend points to solar energy. Khabibullo Abdusamatov's theories seem to be more sound.
rickrocker 4 years ago
I dont want to fight with you anymore poopoo, I think we can better use our joint intelligence by spreading the word that GW is a crock and posting the evidence to support that. As for general pollution I think we can sooner or later come to some sort of agreement on that issue ie: the Thames may be somewhat cleaner but places like China & India are polluting at astronomical levels ( I still wouldnt swim in the Thames mate!!)
ByDeception 4 years ago
Yes, they are hypocrites.
They are all tax, spend and fraud.
TroyaE117 4 years ago
coal and nuclear are not the only way to generate energy, is this guy serious?
GretnaBlast 4 years ago
GretnaBlast - correection - coal and nuclear are the only major ways to generate electricity reliably and continuously. Which days of the week would you like not to have electricity when the wind doesn't blow and the sun doesn't shine?
minilemur 4 years ago
Ever heard of Geothermal minilemur MORON?? GOOGLE IT and see how many countries use it for baseload power.
ByDeception 4 years ago
ByDeception - it's very ill-mannered of you to call me a moron.
Geo-thermal power is very much more expensive and requires massive and unaffordable investments in infrastructure. If it were affordable it would be more widespread. As it is, it will grow fast but only because it is doing so from a very small base.
minilemur 4 years ago
Geothermal is cheap pal, no fuel required simple technology such as a hole in the ground a pump to pump water into the hot rocks and a condenser to reclaim the water and repeat the process, or a pipe to harvest naturally occuring steam and a steam turbine connected to a generator, hell I think even you mini could get your head around that? cont>>
ByDeception 4 years ago
New zealand has been powering cities on it for years, as has Norway etc. The bottom line is the fossil fuels/nuclear industry has been keeping a lid on all other forms of energy, especially cheap energy for years, do you believe otherwise mini?
ByDeception 4 years ago
ByDecpetion, yes I believe otherwise. The demonisation of the fossil fuels and nuclear industry is laughable. The other forms of energy have not taken off because they are either too unreliable or because the capital investment costs are currently prohibitive.
minilemur 4 years ago
ByDeception - on the contrary I have been very interested in geothermal energy. I would like the free power after all, and who wouldn't? However, it is still very expensive to install - typically costing about £14,000. The savings would take 10 years to kick in , and with compound interest on how that money might have been spent, that's more like 20 years before it pays for itself.
minilemur 4 years ago
You are a complet birk mini, who would even consider a "personal" geothermal plant I'm talking baseload national grid plants where geology permits not household units? Demmonising the nuclear/fossil industry is laughable? It is you that is laughable mini.
ByDeception 4 years ago
Where are the Teslas of today? Tesla was working on a way to transmit eletricity through the ionosphere and as soon as JP Morgan heard of this ambitious plan, he pulled the funding from the project. Imagine what the world would be like today with this technology. No fossil fuels would be needed. Everything would be electric as it should be.
drsnk 4 years ago
" you could stop the US burning all fossil fuels and it wouldnt make a scrap of difference" That statement alone shows this fuckwit up for what he is. Shut the fuck up wattenburg you are an embarrasment and a moron.
ByDeception 4 years ago
ByDeception - as your name suggests - it is you who are posting moronic statements.
Aren't you embarrassed to be so ignorant and yet aggressive?
It wouldn't make a scrap of difference to stop the US burning all fossil fuels.
minilemur 4 years ago
Given that the US is the BIGGEST fossil fuel polluter on the planet, how do you figure that if they stopped it would not make any difference? Apart from the fact that they would set an example to countries like China & India by introducing legislated resrtictions/changes and introducing the clean/cheap energy technology that has been sitting on the Oil companies shelves for decades?
ByDeception 4 years ago
ByDeception - corrections.
First the US is soon to be overtaken by China and then by India as the largest CO2 emitters. And the growth of developing countries will mean that any reductions by developed countries will be trivial.
Secondly, and more importantly, CO2 is not a pollutant, and climate sensitivity to its greenhouse effect is miniscule, so no need to reduce it.
Thirdly, the mild global re-warming (driven mainly by the sun) is on balance a good thing for plants, animals, & humans.
minilemur 4 years ago
Correction??"First the US is soon to be overtaken by China and then by India" So that means that at this time the US is WHAT? Correction rejected! I dont suscribe to the global warming fearmongers given that 1998 was the hottest year and in the last year global temperatures have plummeted. And I do not suscribe to pollution in any form as the damage to the planet is suicidal.
ByDeception 4 years ago
co2 is ony 1 gas emitted by the burning of fossil fuels, infact it is the most benign, the other 2000 or so gases and noxios chemicals are of far greater concern. They are some of the chemicals that return to the surface as acid rain. You arent very smart mini, you should stick to watching tv or gaming. I also pointed out that the benefit of the US reducing its POLLUTING THE PLANET would serve to set an example to the likes of India & China. Go away you mindless twat.
ByDeception 4 years ago
ByDeception - how typical of you eco-alarmists - instead of discussing the science you launch rabid personal attacks - acid rain has long been discredited as a baseless eco-scare. No problem.
There is not the slightest evidence that developing countries are using developed countries as an example. Why should they wait for the US when they have had the idiotic EU policies to laugh at.
BTW have you noticed that the EU has increased its CO2 emissions in recent years whilst the US has reduced?
minilemur 4 years ago
i feel that the global warming gurus are loaded with communist anti american influences!
richyrollins 4 years ago
Looks like someone got their panties in bunch.
drsnk 4 years ago
Also take a look at the increase in co2 production in the US while the Clinton/GORE Administration was in office. Why with all this phony concern for the environment you would have though carbon emissions would have decreased. They soared!
drsnk 4 years ago
Your just an Al Gore lover and nothing he does will change your mind about him. Wattenburg always brings up the fact that Al Gore gave the go ahead to the construction of many of coal fired power plants while squashing any efforts to produce nuclear power. I guess that an invalid argument too. Any argument that makes you look like a fool is invalid, is that how that works?
drsnk 4 years ago
I know all of what Al Gore is saying. It did not originate from him. He is just a demagogue and I treat him as one. One of his solutions is the so called carbon credits, of which he stands to make money on. The SOB has a 15,000 square foot mansion that sucks down five times the power of the average home for Christ's sake!
drsnk 4 years ago
Al Gore is a liar and deserves to be ridiculed.
drsnk 4 years ago
coal can be very clean to and plus its a big part of our economy, its like 60% of our energy now so we need coal.LOTS of jobs.
ChawkyPower 4 years ago
The earth's been warming up since the last ice age - long before humans arrived.
ttonyat 4 years ago