"Man's contribution to..greenhouse gases was so small we couldn't change the climate if we tried...carbon dioxide as a result of man's activities was only...0.12 per cent of the greenhouse gases in total..."

Like anything else, just follow the money. Those who say the sky is falling are usually the ones to profit from the scamming of sheeple.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/timaruherald/4064691a6571.html

Yeah, leave it to a New Zealand meteorologist to prove hundreds of the world's leading scientists wrong!!! Thanks Herb, needed a good laugh!

Andrew

You get bonus points for sheeple Herb.

My own personal feeling on global warming is as follows:

Global Warming is a myth and/or misinterpreted as cyclical climate change.

/Don't get me started on the whole humanity has risen and fallen to near oblivion at least twice in the history of this planet!

http://www.cnn.com/2007/TECH/science/05/17/climate.ocean.reut/index.html

"You get bonus points for sheeple Herb."

Hey! Leave Montana out of this!

The only sheeple are easily-swayed masses who have been lied to whilst being told the sky is falling.

Don't give me that sheeple bologna. I'm contrarian on the joke called global warming and am the rare free thinker on this one.

Herb

There are believers and non-believers of climate change. I am glad we are having this kind of global conversation because it is bringing to light information that for many years was under the radar.

My wife and I were at the Greener Homes and Garden Expo yesterday at the Expo Center learning about all sorts of "green" living. The technology in alternative fuels and self-sustainability is impressive.

"Like anything else, just follow the money. Those who say the sky is falling are usually the ones to profit from the scamming of sheeple."

Totally true. Totally.

So who, exactly, stands to gain SO much profit for lying to the globe?

Ahh... the answer to that one is ugly.

(left as exercise to readers)

Author: Chickenjuggler
Sunday, May 20, 2007 - 9:20 am

"So who, exactly, stands to gain SO much profit for lying to the globe?"

The dude or dudette selling Air Conditioners to Eskimo's and Polar Bears!

Some don't believe that climate change is real.

Some don't believe that the Earth is round, and some believe there was no Holocaust.

People with those views don't hold valid alternate views; they're JUST WRONG.

I've also heard some people say that climate change is real, but it's not man-made. Well, if it's a problem ... look around. You see any OTHER species you want working on that problem? It's up to us to figure out a solution.

I would prefer tech-based market-driven solutions, but we need to consider any vaild solutions.

BTW, alternate fuels to power our society would wean us off Middle Eastern gasoline, AKA "Terrorist Juice."

Hey, I can do that too.

Some people dont believe Saddam was a threat to US interests, and some some don't think unborn babies have rights.

People with those views dont hold valid alternate views, their just wrong!

Well admitting it is half the battle. So thanks.

Apology accepted, Nwokie.

Herb writes:
The only sheeple are easily-swayed masses who have been lied to whilst being told the sky is falling.

You mean like "a smoking gun in the shape of a mushroom cloud?"

Andrew

Is there global warming, there is really not enough data, to prove that.

However, we do need to reduce our use of oil, and we need to reduce pollution for other reasons.

I think we should immediatly start building at least 1 nuclear power plant in each state. Increase (by 200%) the road tax on vehicles over 10 years. Add a import tax of 50% on any goods from countries that dont have pollution standards equal to our own. And add a $1.00 tax to gasoline, with the money going equally into the social security trust fund and investment in new energy sources.

"...we need to reduce pollution for other reasons."

Name a couple.

General health and aestetics.

Fine. If that's what it takes to get a change out of someone - great. It's not for global warming - it's just for the best.

Fine. No problem.

I like your thoughts on nuclear power plants, Nwokie.

France derives 75% of its electricity from nuclear energy. Since the French have plenty of 'em, so they must be OK...especially to the left!

http://www.uic.com.au/nip28.htm

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/reaction/readings/french.html

Herb

Lets say, for argument purposes, there is global warming, and we jump in, and stop it, actually reverse it, then hundreds of thousands in Africa and South America start starving, because land that could have crops grown, cant because its too cold.

What is the best temperature for the world? Anybody got a clue?

Which part of the world?

In general, global warming claims the whole world is warming. So what is just right?

What is just right is whatever temperature that doesn't cause adverse effects that could effect life to the degree that we are talking about here.

I'd say that " just right " is whatever temperature that doesn't melt all the ice on the planet. That's one " just right."

How about if we make it too cold, and theres too much ice?


What your saying, is that the entire planet should be 32 degrees F, or colder?

No Nwokie - that's why I asked you which part of the Earth. Don't play dumb. You want to know what " just right " is? Do you want me to name each continent and their respective climates and make adjustments for each of them? Is that what you need?

The man-made pollution is warming the Earth. At the rate it is warming the Earth - coupled with the side-effects of what the pollution is doing, it looks to be heading towards a need to fucking fix it.

Look, I hope you are right and it's all just going to be a punchline in 5 years. But I don't believe that to be the case. You do?

And chew on this for a moment. Every time someone says " The Earth has gone through cycles of warming and cooling before. It's natural " remember this - it's true.

Do you know what happened to life during that " natural " cycle? Life was adversely effected. Now, I could cite scientific proof of that - but you don't believe any science that supports that. So when you tell me it would make a difference, I'll show it to you.

This is happening faster than any other time in history. The substances found that are contributing to it are specifically MAN MADE and those man made pollutants are causing things to happen that can and should be reversed.

But you are so worried about getting personally blamed that you deny it. Jesus. Wake up. DO something.

And your arrogant enough, to think man is smart enough to do that?

And some life was adversly affected by temperature swings, other life thrived under it.

More peole tend to die in cooling periods, rather than warming ones.

If we were arrogant enough to start it - maybe we are arrogant enough to fix it. Yes. I am that arrogant. Sue me. It only makes things better.

Nwokie, name your top 3 concerns about how a global attack on warming would effect you. Specifically. Is it all about your pocketbook? What? Is it ego? Pride? What?

" I will make it hard to fight global warming effectively because it will _________ ."

Three.

My cousin is a geology professor for Portland State U. His politics lean moderately to the right, but he agrees with much of what Gore presents and what other scientists are saying.

We have the ability to gather data with today's technology like never before. With some scientists disagreeing on some of the data tells me we are still trying to understand what that data means.

The man-made pollution is warming the Earth.

Don't forget the exponentially-increasing amount of CO2 from human beings and the livestock being raised to feed them all (plus all the trees being killed to build houses = less CO2 removed from the atmosphere). It's completely irrefutable that the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere has been increasing steadily since we started measuring it. Global warming deniers must simply believe that the extra amount of CO2 in the atmosphere is having no extra effect on the earth's temperature, but that seems pretty obvious.

I personally believe that the only way to stop global warming is to pop world population growth. Just cutting down on fossil fuel pollution doesn't stop the exponential increase in CO2 coming from man and animals.

Andrew

"Do you know what happened to life during that " natural " cycle? Life was adversely effected."

Since many who promote the whole global warming hoax are evolutionists, no worries. The earth was formed over millions of years, right? And those cycles were over many thousands of years. The odds are greater of being blown to bits by a terrorist bomb than the speculation of global warming.

Herb

Sounds to me like you have no clue what the true concerns of global warming are, Herb. Perhaps it's pointless to argue with someone who doesn't believe in science?

Andrew

Naw, I just don't fall for junk science like many lemmings.

If you were truly into science, you wouldn't buy such a spurious line as global warming until more facts are known and would support nuclear energy more.

Herb

Nuclear doesn't make any real sense until we can deal better with the waste.

Herb, I really need an explanation from your point of view, because your position is confusing to me.

You believe with all your heart in God. You have no empirical evidence of his existence. Well, unless you count nature, which of course, would include yourself, and all of us. Even then, with the splendor of this planet, and the miracles of creation, connecting the dots for all believers still requires a leap of faith. It also requires an investment of trust in the unknown and undefined.

Science is all about evidence. Collecting it, analyzing it, testing theorems, forming hypothesis, and carefully examining the facts. That is what scientific study is all about. Science also requires a leap of faith. It requires that you be able to grasp concepts while they are still undefined, but have been discovered. It also requires that you recognize the laws of nature.

If this planet is indeed the last remnants of Eden, why would believers defile it? Why would they question climate change, rather than be appalled by it? How could one believe in creationism, and hold it sacred, while at the same time ignoring those who exploit every square inch of those creations? If you were God, how would you improve a stand of timber, or a waterfall? If it is designed by an all-knowing higher hand, how could one advocate GMO, or atomic energy, or cloning, or anything that plays with genes?

Honestly, I just do not understand your point of view. I was taught a great deal about God growing up, and the natural world was a really big part of what made him powerful. I am sure the Bible wouldn't have started with that story if it wasn't going to draw in the readers. What do you think?

Get with the program Littlesongs.
That's yesterdays News.

Today's Jesus is all about the 3 F's

Fetuses
Fags &
Firearms

"Naw, I just don't fall for junk science like many lemmings."

Then under what category do you put your link you posted at the top? Editorial?

My ancestors include Swiss Mennonites, so yes, I guess I could be considered a throwback. Some old time religion is good enough for me. :o)

Fair question, Littlesongs.

Just as a skyscraper reveals a designer, so too does our infinitely more complex universe.

It takes far more faith to buy into evolution.

Besides, non-creationist models betray scientific laws, like entropy, to believe that nothing rebelled and became something in the creation of the first atom.

Herb

My question was simple. How do you reconcile your faith with an evolutionary view of the planet? If you think that these are simply cycles, and you accept it, that is in direct conflict with your faith, is it not?

Viewing our impact as people as minute also smacks of folly. As one who follows the teachings of a man born over 2000 years ago, how can one assume that people do not leave a trace when history has shown that we do?

It is also counter to other statements you have made concerning the sanctity of life. How can you shrug off global warming, as if it will not effect the unborn? Do you understand the delicate balance that allows all living things to live?

I guess there must be a heaven that has pollution, clear cuts and rock quarries full of shotgun shells. Nobody dies, but everyone is disfigured by disease and mutation. Nature is all produced by the same handful of genetic engineering labs, and God is reduced to a corporate logo.

LS-
I believe God created the heavens and the earth. I also believe evolution and other sciences help explain it. Possibly over simplistic but it works for me.

LOL @ Amus.

The new 3G's is 3F's! Freaking hilarious.

"How do you reconcile your faith with an evolutionary view of the planet? If you think that these are simply cycles, and you accept it, that is in direct conflict with your faith, is it not?"

Fair questions. I don't buy evolution. Evolutionary THEORY cannot address creation. Where did the first cell come from? We hear about the primordial soup. Fine. But those first elements came from somewhere. Nothing became something? Talk about a stretch.

As far as cycles are concerned, sunspots, el Nino, planetary rotations and other cyclical patterns hardly point against a Supreme Being. It rather supports His handiwork.

I recall a university-level chemistry class where the lecturer spoke about a scientist who deduced that based on the spectacular order of the Periodic Table, he reasoned there must be an element with a specific configuration that hadn't been discovered yet. Dogged research proved him right. That's design.

And how about that Second LAW of Thermodynamics. It tells us that when it comes to energy, not only can we never get ahead...we can't break even.

Evolutionists want it both ways and it's intellectually dishonest.

Herb

My concerns about fighting global warming.

1. Humans arent as smart as they think they are, and without knowing the desired result, IE what should the proper temperature be? etc , we shouldnt mwss with mother nature.


I have no problem trying to reduce carbon emissions, however, it should be done in an orderly, reasonable fashion.

The only problem is that we are already messing with Mother Nature, giving her some nasty hot flashes.

And, yes, the only way to deal with someone with hot flashes is to be orderly and reasonable.

And immediately respond to whatever they need.

Cooly and pleasantly.

(Voice of experience, here.)

Everyone should conserve.
Everyone should be as ecologically friendly as possible.
Everyone should be good stewards of the earth.

But in order to do those things, one need not essentially worship the created, instead of the Creator.

Herb

Nwokie writes:
Humans arent as smart as they think they are, and without knowing the desired result, IE what should the proper temperature be? etc , we shouldnt mwss with mother nature.

Where is this paranoia coming from? No one to my knowledge is proposing anything beyond cutting emissions and curtailing human behavior that is causing global warming. I haven't heard anyone suggest we should try to "fix" the world's temperatures.

Andrew

Again, what is too warm, does anyone know that its not good for the planet to be a few degrees warmer?

Just think, a few degrees warmer, and we will have a north west passage, northern US, canada and Russia will have longer growing sessions.

there's only "x" amount of "energy" in the universe. all we're doing is transfering heat from one place to another -- a place colder than the heat source. once there is no more heat to transfer, we'll have what is known as "heat death."

Is this part of God's plan or did He throw this in to "test" our faith?

"Just think, a few degrees warmer, and we will have a north west passage, northern US, canada and Russia will have longer growing sessions."

On "Ring of Fire" Saturday, Mike Papantonio said that now that many Conservatives are finally resigned to the fact of global warming and man's contribution to it, the talking point that will be pushed now will be:

"So what? Warmer is good"

Nwokie is doing his part as a faithful member of the echo chamber.

And BTW.. This is part of why it matters:

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi-0705010817may02,1,7033000.sto ry

As the article says, "Scientists believe", they don't know, are only guessing.

And even if it is so, weather conditions change all the time, rivers' get bigger and smaller, even move.

Just because the environment in one area get's worse, doesn't mean its not getting better somewhere else.

You know what Nwokie?

I think you've turned me around on this one...

So what if some poor schmuck in Bangaladesh has to up and leave their home?

As long as that means I get to keep driving my SUV...

F**k 'em.

Nwokie said ( and it's worth quoting the whole post ) " My concerns about fighting global warming.

1. Humans arent as smart as they think they are, and without knowing the desired result, IE what should the proper temperature be? etc , we shouldnt mwss with mother nature.


I have no problem trying to reduce carbon emissions, however, it should be done in an orderly, reasonable fashion."

Nwokie. What the fuck are you talking about? You list as your only fear that we, as humans, should not mess with mother nature without knowing what the consequences will be?

But then you say " But I have no problem reducing emissions."

Nwokie, do you think that there is some kind of Superhero plan to change the temperature of the planet overnight?

If you are for reducing emissions, what is it exactly that you are against?

And " messing " with mother nature is exactly what we are trying to STOP doing.

You make ZERO sense on this issue. None.

Our current climate in the Portland area is moving from mild to Mediterranean or more like Santa Barbara CA. This comes from growers around the Portland area.

Since my wife began doing edible landscaping just a few years ago she is finding plants and food crops that normally do well in our mild climate are not doing as good. Conversely the more warmer climate vegetation is beginning to do quite well.

No what i am saying, is you should know your goal, before attempting something.
A clear , verifiable goal to reduce pollution and decrease petroleum consumption for economic and health reasons is doable. You decide that these are worthy goals, and any side affects are less important.

A goal to reduce global warming, when science cant prove it exists, (doesnt matter if it is man made or not) or that it is good or bad, is an unatainable goal.

"when science cant prove it exists"

Heh. Lets do absolutlely nothing until we're dead certain it exists -- DEAD being the key word here.

(Hopefully for the sake of the planet, your kind is DEAD before the planet dies so those still left can once again undo the damage of short-focus thinking before its too late.)

I was gonna wait until "The Day After Tomorrow" before I make any decision on this!

Assume it exists, and as I said, doesnt matter if man made or not.

Is it good or bad? How much do we want to stop it? Do we want to roll it back? What are the pluses and minuses of doing each step?

Well, we know what the consequences of waiting for the "minuses" of a toxic (lead) in gasoline became conclusive before we did something about it.

Something is up and it isn't good. One thing seems clear -- what we're doing to the planet isn't positive. Instead of gradual natural changes, we've speeded up the process. If you can wait for more compelling evidence, I guess you can. But as far as the planet is concerned, its survival of the fittest, so I'm gonna do all I can to make sure anti-planet people don't survive so the planet has a chance to survive.

Folks, stop saying global warming, that is just a neocon abuse to obfuscate the issue.

It is global climate change. Some areas are getting warmer and some colder.

Global warming, a myth perpetrated by liberal, socialists to effect a transfer of wealth from rich countries to poor countries.

Wow.

"The Earth is not flat" - another myth perpetuated by science-loving liberals, apparently...

Andrew

"Global warming, a myth perpetrated by liberal, socialists to effect a transfer of wealth from rich countries to poor countries."

There are a lot of very wealthy people, spending a lot of money to make sure you continue to believe that.

Tool (noun)

6. A person used to carry out the designs of another; a dupe.

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/tool

"Global warming, a myth perpetrated by liberal, socialists to effect a transfer of wealth from rich countries to poor countries."

As usual, very well stated. Spot on and to which I would only add: "...whilst replacing God with worship of a paganesque 'mother earth' in the process.

Heck, go for the trifecta and incorporate abortion.

DANG IT! You've foiled our plan once again Batman!

Actually, you are prescient, Chickenjuggler.

For under the guise of 'population control' the evil doers will indeed incorporate not only abortion, but 'mercy killing' as well. A slippery slope, indeed.

For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places. Ephesians 6:12

Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour. 1 Peter 5:8

Herb

"Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour." 1 Peter 5:8

Ol' Pete could very well be talking about anything bad that is denied by the masses. Be it a corrupt government, or corporate greed, or spiritual obfuscation, or say, global climate change, now couldn't he? Seems like a fancy way of telling us to keep an eye on the elephant in the room. Good advice.

It is time for the obvious to be stated here....Putting aside the question of how much humans affect climate change, virtually everyone wants clean air and water. It is pretty obvious to everyone that the way to keep the air and water clean is to not pollute. This is where the problem happens. The inevitable question is, what must be done in order for there to be less pollution. The unwelcome answer is that we have to give up, to some extent, some of the creature comforts of our lives, such as driving, using disposable products, etc. This is uncomfortable, so many people choose to whine and point fingers at people who they think might be bigger polluters than actually taking charge and doing anything; or, they just shoot the messengers by assuming that their real intent is to dupe people into worshipping pagan idols and deities.

Alfredo nicely said. In more simplier terms....common sense.

Herb- It seems global warming, or actually the accurate phrase is "Climate Change" as previously stated, has become a moral issue to many religious leaders including the head of the National Association of Evangelicals.

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Christian, Jewish and Muslim leaders are urging President George W. Bush and Congress to take action against global warming, declaring that the changing climate is a "moral and spiritual issue."

In an open letter to be published on Tuesday, more than 20 religious groups urged U.S. leaders to limit greenhouse gas emissions and invest in renewable energy sources.

"Global warming is real, it is human-induced and we have the responsibility to act," says the letter, which will run in Roll Call and the Politico, two Capitol Hill newspapers.

"We are mobilizing a religious force that will persuade our legislators to take immediate action to curb greenhouse gases," it says.

The letter is signed by top officials of the National Council of Churches, the Islamic Society of North America and the political arm of the Reform branch of Judaism.

Top officials from several mainline Christian denominations, including the Episcopal Church, United Methodist Church, Presbyterian Church, African Methodist Episcopal Church and Alliance of Baptists also signed the letter, along with leaders of regional organizations and individual churches.

Rev. Joel Hunter, a board member of the National Association of Evangelicals, also signed the letter, though that group has not officially taken a stance on global warming due to opposition from some of its more conservative members.

Chris-you're not helping your case by quoting any statments from the National Council of Churches. These radicalized groups are leftist shills, many whom deny long-recognized doctrines of the Christian faith.

http://reformed-theology.org/html/issue07/apostasy.htm

http://www.brfwitness.org/Articles/1967v2n1.htm

Herb

Herb writes:
These radicalized groups are leftist shills

You mean, Jesus favors the rightiest shills? LOL!!!

Andrew

ENOUGH ALREADY!

I have found proof positive that Global warming is for real and I for one say I can't wait for what the future will bring! Please see the link below for why I feel this way:
http://www.global-warming-info.com/Global-Warming-Proof-Graphic.jpg

Herb-

I wasn't in any way endorsing any of the organizations in the article but just merely sharing a news story that crossed religious lines.

OK....OK...
Proof Positive of global warming!

The forecast for the portland Rose Festival is warm, clear, and dry! Now if that is not proof positive then I don't know what is!

Yeah, it's not like that happens all the time.

Not going this year though...

Maybe I have a morbid desire for the rain.