A Must read on global warming

[bobblehead]

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/htm...01_warm21.html

I love this article, it epitomizes everything I believe in one article. I know most of you don't want to read a lengthy news article but this is beautiful.

It involves:

*Peeople dismissing a guy due to his education even though their own computer models back him up.

*A private sector guy solving a problem the gov't can't/hasn't (for a micron of the price)

*A guy who basically says that CO2 isn't causing our planet to overheat and then backing it up with science and THEIR OWN computer models only to be mocked by the so called gov't experts.

*A guy who is offering a solution that won't cripple the economy and will cost potentially UNDER a billion a year AND IS BACKED BY THE EXPERTS COMPUTER MODELS. This of course pisses off all the "experts and politicians" because they can't get rich and powerful off controlling the world through a faux manmade global warming crisis.

One of the best reads I've encountered in a long time.

[Partial]

Good read. Though it says it could cost billions.

[digitaldean]

Fantastic article. Just posted the link on Twitter.

Initially sounds kind of bizarre, but with the amt. of evidence presented I think it will work. Sure beats the NASA idea of orbiting mirrors to deflect sunlight or foaming the ocean surface.

I know it could cost billions, but the other ideas would run in the trillions.

I do know this much, we have only measured the earth's temperature since the mid to late 1800s. And even the beginning temperatures were wildly inaccurate. I do not think we in a time of dire emergency, but we do have to take steps to be better stewards of our planet. Plans like this, controlling how we take renewable resources from the planet (as well as non-renewable) can only help us as a society.

Heck, I'd rather have some other way to power our vehicles just so we don't have to be at the mercy of the Saudis, Chavez and the rest of the OPEC cabal.

[bobblehead]

Good read. Though it says it could cost billions.

Actually it says it could will cost millions POSSIBLy into the billions. Consider the alternatives and the fact our gov't has 59 TRILLION in unfunded liabilities and really thats a pittence.

[texaspackerbacker]

Chad Myers, the number two meteorologist at CNN, has come out and stated that manmade global warming is a ridiculous idea too. It will be interesting to see how long he lasts at that bastion of liberal thinking.

This philosophy--manmade global warming--has become something akin to a religion for its environmentalist wacko followers. The question is, how many are really naively taken in by the pseudo-science of it? And how many are on board because of a more sinister agenda--bringing down free enterprise capitalism and American and other western culture and prosperity?

Unfortunately. the other question is, how bad a hit is our way of life gonna take when the wackos do their thing? They have a damn near unstoppable majority now.

[digitaldean]

I even hate to watch the Weather Channel anymore. One of their lead meteorologists talks incessantly about global warming and the poor polar bears.

[Fosco33]

Should we bail out Detroit, the financial markets or the Earth?

Billions should be already be invested in understanding the potential problem - if not backing actual science.

[digitaldean]

Should we bail out Detroit, the financial markets or the Earth?

Billions should be already be invested in understanding the potential problem - if not backing actual science.

Though I find some of the scientific data dubious, investing in alternative energy and cutting back on fossil fuel consumption would be money better spent than throwing it at AIG for another spa retreat or to CITI, etc. or clueless companies like GM.

[texaspackerbacker]

Should we bail out Detroit, the financial markets or the Earth?

Billions should be already be invested in understanding the potential problem - if not backing actual science.

Though I find some of the scientific data dubious, investing in alternative energy and cutting back on fossil fuel consumption would be money better spent than throwing it at AIG for another spa retreat or to CITI, etc. or clueless companies like GM.

It came out today that media darling, Toyota, is losing billions too. This is more than just a case of incompetent leadership by American companies.

It is idiotic environmental and safety standards inflicted on the companies, and it is the pushers of bullshit about economic crisis that are convincing enough people not to buy that their panicky crap is coming true.

[wist43]

Of course man-made global warming is demonstrably laughable, but that doesn't stop this nonsense from being propagated.

The scientific community is begrudgingly admitting their folly, although it won't get any media traction, as the media is still hugely invested in politically correct views... and anything green is about as politically correct as you can get.

Obviously this crackpot got a grant to conduct his "research"... your tax dollars at work. While laughable, the joke is obviously on us.

[Kiwon]

ANOTHER MUST READ!

Are you ready for a little COMMON SENSE?

I'll just post the link but this article is well worth the few minutes it takes to read it.

Maybe, finally, we can get a little sanity restored.

.................................................. ............................

2008 was the year man-made global warming was disproved

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/c...disproved.html

[digitaldean]

Maybe, finally, we can get a little sanity restored.
.................................................. ............................

2008 was the year man-made global warming was disproved

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/c...disproved.html

________


Thanks for the link. As I previously posted, though I think the evidence on global warming, er, climate change.... whatever, was not sound it still is a good nat'l security stance to find alternative sources so we don't have to import as much foreign oil.

And maybe drill a little more ON OUR OWN CONTINENTAL SHELF. Especially since Cuba announced it would expand its leasing of oil and natural gas for Chinese drilling within 50 miles of the Florida Keys!!

[bobblehead]

Maybe, finally, we can get a little sanity restored.
.................................................. ............................

2008 was the year man-made global warming was disproved

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/c...disproved.html

________


Thanks for the link. As I previously posted, though I think the evidence on global warming, er, climate change.... whatever, was not sound it still is a good nat'l security stance to find alternative sources so we don't have to import as much foreign oil.

And maybe drill a little more ON OUR OWN CONTINENTAL SHELF. Especially since Cuba announced it would expand its leasing of oil and natural gas for Chinese drilling within 50 miles of the Florida Keys!!

No one argues this, but the libs want to pass draconian regulations on our businesses and handicap them against the world.

[bobblehead]

PS...I've said this 100 times. You can not regulate technology. If you could I would simply regulate that scientists cure cancer. That is far more valuable then regulating gas mileage or solar panel efficiency.

[arcilite]

Some people here would call me a 'liberal' because I voted for Obama, but here is my take on global warming/climate change:


I am a skeptic... I don't buy into all the hoo-rah that Al Gore brought to the table. I think the Earth goes through climate changes of its own and we have nothing to deal with them.

With that said.

I don't see what is wrong with regulations to limit pollution. I prefer the cap and trade system, as it seems most efficient.

But even if we have nothing to deal with global warming or climate change.... what is wrong with wanting to limit pollution and take better care of Earth?

[wist43]

Some people here would call me a 'liberal' because I voted for Obama, but here is my take on global warming/climate change:


I am a skeptic... I don't buy into all the hoo-rah that Al Gore brought to the table. I think the Earth goes through climate changes of its own and we have nothing to deal with them.

With that said.

I don't see what is wrong with regulations to limit pollution. I prefer the cap and trade system, as it seems most efficient.

But even if we have nothing to deal with global warming or climate change.... what is wrong with wanting to limit pollution and take better care of Earth?

So you say you're a "man-made" global warming skeptic... and that is the debate, man-made, but then say it is okay to enact governmental regulations based on some what??? That CO2 is a pollutant???

And then "cap and trade" what???

What your talking about is building a political and governmental boondoggle... layers of bureaucracy greased with corruption... very naive.

The radical left wants governemental control of everything... "global warming" has been a wonderful vehicle to transport them closer to that over riding goal.

At least two generations of kids have been exposed to the lies and propaganda of the global warming crowd; despite having been lied to, however, it is still somehow okay to build the institutions and governemental frame work the leftists who were lying to us in the first place are calling for???

What the hell sense does that make???

[MJZiggy]

Man made or not, I hope you don't like seafood....

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...l?hpid=topnews

If you ignore the effects of pollution, stuff dies.

[digitaldean]

Regardless of all of this, we do need to find alternative energy sources that are truly viable.

[MJZiggy]

Amen.

[wist43]

Man made or not, I hope you don't like seafood....

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...l?hpid=topnews

If you ignore the effects of pollution, stuff dies.

Hang on a sec...

You're trying to link standing up for telling the truth about global warming, with environmental irresponsibility??? Can't do that. Smacks of McCarthyism... even though I detest the term itself.

Didn't say the first thing about what to do about pollution... and no, CO2 is not a pollutant. It is a naturally occuring molecule... rising and falling with temperature fluctuations, not the other way around.

The truth is that there is no correlation in the scientific data that an increase in CO2 raises the temp. Beyond that, there is quite a bit of data that shows that CO2 levels tend to follow temp, and global temp fluctuations follow sunspot activity and cosmic dust ratios more than anything else.

Too bad, that back in the middle ages - when it was considerably warmer than it is today - too bad they didn't have the ability to legislate the weather, like we do today.

We're so enlightened... government regulation can solve all our problems - those stupid saps back in the middle ages, all they had to do was pass a law raising fuel efficiency standards