How come?

[Kevin A]

Some perspective on Global Cooling:

http://tinyurl.com/yxceur


And we also have a right wing think tank offering a $10,000 for scientists to refute the IPCC report:

http://tinyurl.com/ywjrgh

One has to wonder what element of society is funding the global warming research, you can bet that the number of dollars far exceeds $10,000.

[halfdome, Danny]

If the internal combustion engine was never invented and we were commuting by horse back would global warming be an issue? Think of all the horse droppings polluting the planet. Do all who preach doom & gloom drive to where they do their preaching? I'm tired of the media placing the blame on society for another cause. Go after the leaders I say. Danny

[Miriam C.]

check it out http://www.geocities.com/mjloundy/ Doug

[Nitetimes]

check it out http://www.geocities.com/mjloundy/ especially the little tag line after the end....Doug

(If you're wondering why this page is in CapeCanaveral,
just consider it to be a lesson about atmospheric dynamics
and speculative meteorology)

[PaulC]

So, our records go back 200 years. In other countries probably longer. Can anyone, with accuracy, tell me what Mother Earth was going through
1000 years ago, 10,000years ago, 100,000 years ago etc, etc, etc.
We have proof that our major rivers ran dry in the early 1900's but today is much worse because the flows are the lowest in recorded history.
I'm not saying that Global warming is not with us, what I am saying is that popular opinion is alive and well the world over.
Cheers
Paul

[angib]

Why would you believe anything that comes outa there? The whole organization is out in left field.

Yup. As is the whole of the rest of the world.

I don't know of any country whose government doesn't think that global warming is a major problem....... except for the US.

Denying global warming is a political, not a scientific, activity.

Andrew

[doug hodder]

Andrew...how about China...they may talk the talk, but do they walk the walk? I'm willing to bet they are going to roar ahead with whatever they want and build their industries/ economy, while the rest of the world is saddled with environmental controls that they would actually adhear to...and we have seen what protests in China can result in...Doug

[Miriam C.]

Why would you believe anything that comes outa there? The whole organization is out in left field.

Yup. As is the whole of the rest of the world.

I don't know of any country whose government doesn't think that global warming is a major problem....... except for the US.

Denying global warming is a political, not a scientific, activity.

Andrew

Gosh Andrew I thought we were leading the pack as far as screaming about reducing green house gasses. However why should we join a treaty (the Kyoto) that promises to kill what is left of our industries and assures monitary fines while the world pays China and other developing countries to kill their air at will.

If it is good for us it is good for the whole world at the same time. Surly as we spend money to clean our air the same should be done for the developing world. Perhaps we could advocate for clean air from the beginning.

Course how will all those Industrialist manage to make record profits. And yes I mean the Americans too.

Heck if they manipulate it right the former industrialized world will pay for the factory upgrades in China.

[Miriam C.]

I am bored so I looked up the new IPCC members and the mandate you might find it interesting.

http://www.ipcc.ch/about/faq/IPCC%20Who%20is%20who.pdf

What I find most interesting is the meeting takes place once a year to decide if a new report will come out. And who they are.

A little research goes a long way in this area...

Hundreds of experts from all over the world are
contributing to the preparation of IPCC reports
as authors, contributors and reviewers. They
are selected by the Working Group Bureaux
from nominations received from governments
and participating organisations or identified
directly because of their special expertise
reflected in their publications and works. The
composition of lead author teams for chapters
of IPCC reports shall reflect a range of views,
expertise and geographical representation.

[Ira]

I sure as hell believe in it--but even if you don't, how can anyone gamble that it doesn't exist?

We all know that carbon-based fossil fuels--and I don't know if I'm describing that right but you know what I mean--we all know they pollute and keep us dependent on foreign oil. So why the heck would we would NOT want to get away from this stuff in the first place?

I don't know how familiar the Yurps are with what Los Angeles used to be like in the 70s--and Chattanooga, Tennessee.

This stuff is NOT good for us.

[Miriam C.]

I sure as hell believe in it--but even if you don't, how can anyone gamble that it doesn't exist?

We all know that carbon-based fossil fuels--and I don't know if I'm describing that right but you know what I mean--we all know they pollute and keep us dependent on foreign oil. So why the heck would we would NOT want to get away from this stuff in the first place?

I don't know how familiar the Yurps are with what Los Angeles used to be like in the 70s--and Chattanooga, Tennessee.

This stuff is NOT good for us.

Ira, it isn't that most of us don't know fossil fuels are bad for us. It is that we disagree that the "eggsperts" have our best interest at heart. We can clean up the air. Should clean up the air. So should the developing world. The International industrialists should not be allow to go to a developing country and do to them what they have done here. The Kyoto Treaty allows for that.

Clean air standards should be required for all. China---where our factories went---would in fact be allowed to emit all the green house gasses they want so they can climb out of they're 3rd world status. Why can't they build factories that don't pollute from the beginning. And why do I have to pay for those factories to be built while my country slides into poverty.

If you check out the IPCC they are appointed and paid to accumulate information that agrees with their mandate. They spend money from us to gather up information and make a report. That is all they do. Should we not spend that money on other things. I don't need a beauracracy to tell me how to measure cow farts... I don't need them to tell me to pay a tax because the animals in my country emit methane and that pollutes our ozone. HELLO. They even have a formula for guestimating the number of animals in countries where the information is non-existant.

Oh, but third world countries (vegitarians anyway) are exempt from the need to pay to control all that. Someday your steak will cost 3 times what it does because some farmer, in the US, not S. America, has to put some kind of filtering device in the wilderness or his barn. (hopefully not invented yet)

If you think being dependent on foreign oil is bad wait till your food is held hostage and you can't grow any because the UN said you pollute...BTW we are dependent on foreign oil because it ties them to us and capitalism. Where would "they be if we didn't consume.

Spend some time reading about these "experts". Not just from this group but from all the others. They exist because someone has an agenda and is willing to do the work to get your money to support themselves and promote their agenda.

Well Chicken Little, who will show us a short cut. Or should we do it right the first time.

[Ira]

So after all of that supporting dialogue, explain it to me again:

So exactly why shouldn't we reduce the amount of greenhouse emissions, use of fossil fuels, and carbon-based exhaust?

Because some don't like the people who are recommending we do that, they way they're telling us to do that, or because the U.S. is going to be unfairly singled out and the economic cost is going to be disastrous?

When Americans are the ones who put 100 times more of this crap in the air than anyone earth, and produce 1,000 times more of the garbage per capita? And we can't even institute practical Ethanol use? After Brazil is 100% ethanol? And we grow a million times more corn than ANYONE?

No wonder the world hates our guts sometimes. We act as if we actually DO think we own the whole damn planet.

[siwillems]

So after all of that supporting dialogue, explain it to me again:

So exactly why shouldn't we reduce the amount of greenhouse emissions, use of fossil fuels, and carbon-based exhaust?

Because some don't like the people who are recommending we do that, they way they're telling us to do that, or because the U.S. is going to be unfairly singled out and the economic cost is going to be disastrous?

When Americans are the ones who put 100 times more of this crap in the air than anyone earth, and produce 1,000 times more of the garbage per capita? And we can't even institute practical Ethanol use? After Brazil is 100% ethanol? And we grow a million times more corn than ANYONE?

No wonder the world hates our guts sometimes. We act as if we actually DO think we own the whole damn planet.

[Miriam C.]

So after all of that supporting dialogue, explain it to me again:

So exactly why shouldn't we reduce the amount of greenhouse emissions, use of fossil fuels, and carbon-based exhaust?

Because some don't like the people who are recommending we do that, they way they're telling us to do that, or because the U.S. is going to be unfairly singled out and the economic cost is going to be disastrous?

When Americans are the ones who put 100 times more of this crap in the air than anyone earth, and produce 1,000 times more of the garbage per capita? And we can't even institute practical Ethanol use? After Brazil is 100% ethanol? And we grow a million times more corn than ANYONE?

No wonder the world hates our guts sometimes. We act as if we actually DO think we own the whole damn planet.

Ira,
No one is saying we shouldn't reduce our "Global Footprint"/ I personally think we need the take the fine money and put it in our own factories and cars(made in Japan) and clean our mess first. I don't think I need to take what little money I have and pay ultra-rich industrialist to clean up the mess they plan on making else where.

My house gets messed I clean it. Doesn't matter who made the mess.


PS---That is what I really believe but I am trying to speak in a way people who don't read what I write can understand.
It's not really all our fault. If you take any other country and make it as big as the US and multiply their numbers we dont' look so bad.

[angib]

Andrew...how about China...they may talk the talk, but do they walk the walk?

I think you should watch China closely on this subject over the next few years. Up till now they have been a very dirty country - though that means they have been behaving like we did until only 20-30 years ago.

But they are an undemocratic command economy - which means they can change further and faster than any other type of government, if they want to - none of that pesky 'voter resistance' or 'market forces'. They have now got exactly the sort of city pollution that made the US act in the 70s and they've started controlling it already. For example, the speed with which two-stroke scooters are being banned would not be tolerated in any western country - it's not just future two-strokes being banned, but existing ones too. Just look at the photos of scooter dumps in the cities.

The government has already said that it wants to achieve 'green development' where they not only expand, but pollute less at the same time - and they have seen that this is a technology that they can pioneer. When we are buying our integrated house heating systems in the future, they may not only be built in China, but designed in China too, using Chinese-developed technology.

Of course, this may not happen - but at least it's interesting to see they're thinking about it.

Andrew