Global Warming...New Report...and it ain't happy news

I am going to argue that if you desire to run with the herd that is fine by me but expect others to be more selective in their company. Is it your argument that Global Warming must be true because voters have been swayed ? That has never happened before has it ? Is your approach going to be to keep your head up your behind?

You have cited the weather. It proves nothing unless you also cite the snowfall in Oz in the middle of summer.

VERY VERY selective. What about when the earth had TEN times more CO2 than now ? Care to mention that ?

I doubt he does, Ionus, because it does not support the global warmers bandwagon.

It is amazing (but perhaps not) that this thread has endured for over 800 pages.

This is yet another issue that will never be resolved through discussion rational or rampant.

For the proponents of human induced climate change, it isn't a scientific question, it's an ideological crusade.

Why should a matter of scientific debate be so clearly divided along ideological lines?

Oh yes, I can hear the pat response: "Because right-wingers want to destroy the planet" (paraphrasing plainoldme here).

Superficially, the argument will go that right-wing capitalists are only concerned with profit and don't care about ecological consequences.

Since the left-wing argument can't possibly be based on superficial or political reasons, it must be true.

Oh wait, here I go again pegging people with a political bias. Global Warming zealots can't be classified as Liberals. If anything, they are "moderates."

Michael Crichton, an M.D., wrote a book challenging the GW zealots and was castigated as a right-wing flat-earther. Freeman Dyson, a previously undisputed scientific genius, has called the hyper-concern for global warming, "nonsense," and as a result been branded as a heretic.

It's quite ironic, and sad, that almost 500 years later we have an establishment position that views skeptics of global warming hysteria as, essentially, equivalents of heliocentrist heretics.

They need insults to attack opponents to GW with, and they dont have the imagination to develop new insults so they drag out old tired ones.

And U.S. House Representative John Shimkus (Republican-Illinois), who has opposed cap and trade legislation because he believes God will not allow the earth to be destroyed by global warming, will perhaps become the House Energy and Commerce Committee chairman.

Prove him wrong Walt. it will be a lot easier than proving GW.

re ionus Since god, who is allegedly responsible for everything we see around us, designed an amazing number of ingenious ways to wipe us out en masse into his creation, including but not limited to volcanic eruptions, tsunamis, fires, floods, pestilence, plague, bubonic and pneumonic, recurrent ice ages, the ebola virus, HIV, cholera, typhus, malaria, and genetic disorders, all the way up to comet collisions with the earth, , volcanic winter, and mass extinctions--repeatedly, and considering it is maintained he gleefully wiped us all out except for five people, I see no reason to think he'd have any problem with a little global warming. He's probably excited at the prospect of trying something completely new on us.

Man made global warming is a hoax.

Don't let yourself and others be taken by this global scam.



If you think it's real, tell me what the earths temperature should be.

What it was with 280 ppm of CO2 in the atmosphere, before we started mucking with it.

And if you ever actually looked at the evidence, H2 Oboy, instead of doing your silly little soundbites, you'd realize you denialists are the hoaxers.

What was the exact temperature with 280 ppm of CO2 in the atmosphere?


Sorry Ms. Jack, you are the silly one that buys into the global hoax.

On the contrary, I think it's a very valuable record of the prevailing views - tentative at first, becoming more forceful as the "anthropogenic global warming" scam was gradually exposed - expressed in real time. The only 2 groups who have been strangely silent in this debate are the Chinese, burning the dirtiest coal available, poisoning the oceans with the resulting heavy metals, and the Russians, who figure that if the warming keeps up (as it has since the last glaciation came to an end) they will get to sell prime Norilsk (coordinates N69E88) property to Club Med when the metal in the mines runs out.

No, a visit from Pelosi.

Is Ms Pelosi still hoping to pass "cap and trade"? I actually support having her as new House Minority Leader - we need some laughs

High Seas says:

Not so, HS, China has repeatedly said they recognize anthropogenic global warming as a problem. They are also committed to achieving parity with the West, and the two aims certainly don't fit together easily. However, you will notice that they built the largest (non carbon producing) hydroelectric project in the world, the Three River Gorges Dam, to provide power for a large part of central China's expansion, and of the twenty largest hydro power systems planned or under construction, I believe 18 of the 20 are Chinese (and as I recall, one is Indian and one Russian. None are American or European). China has become the largest producer of solar cells and wind turbines. And while the Western world has nattered about cleaner coal for years, and still doesn't evenhave a pilot project working, China has developed, and is building, a new generation of super ultracritical coal power plants (that's the actual term for them), which burn cleaner and more efficiently, and which they can produce cheaper than the West builds traditional dirty coal power plants. They're not just talking the talk, they are in fact walking the walk.







A

Agreed!

No, H2Oboy, I look at the evidence. I'e never seen anything from you that shows you've ever gone beyond Glenn Beck soundbites.

Ms. Jack, where is the global thermostat?

Who?

BTW, the so-called 'evidence' you are looking at is part of the global hoax.

Is your Kool-Aid blue?