John Coleman, the founder of the Weather Channel, has filed a class action suit of which 30,000 scientists have signed on against Al Gore and the global warming “scam”.
Coleman’s claim is simple. The charge by the Al Gore army stating so-called global warming is caused by you sinful polluters is a “lie”. Furthermore, it is a “known” lie by Gore which means “Fraud”. The global warming movement has hijacked science making it nothing more than a political ploy for personal gain. Global Warming connected to human pollutants is no more real than 9-11 has to do with Iraq and ‘weapons of mass destruction’. It was a lie then, and it is a lie now.
How convienient it was a big source of income for Gore.
I agree. Credible science dealing with Climate Change has been thoroughly hijacked by the Global Warming Church of Al Gore, and discredited the notion that our planet is undergoing very dramtic changes threat effect all eco-systems.
on an unrelated, not. Were you really raised in hershy? I would love to hear more about that.
Not only is climate change for realz, apparently….
Greenhouse gases will heat up planet ‘forever’
Professor James Hansen, director of NASA’s Goddard Institute of Space Studies, and perhaps the world’s most revered climate scientist, warns that the “long lifetime of carbon dioxide emitted by fossil fuel burning” means that just slowing down emissions is no solution. Instead, he says, some of the fuels must “be left in the ground” for ever, and that the gas must actually be removed from the air.
Home-skillet is the head of Goddard Institute for chrissakes…James Hansen also appeared on 60 Minutes claiming that the George W. Bush administration edited climate-related press releases reported by federal agencies to make global warming seem less threatening. Hansen said he is unable to speak “freely”, without the backlash of other government officials. “In my more than three decades in the government I’ve never witnessed such restrictions on the ability of scientists to communicate with the public,” he said.
That’s one of the most respected scientific minds in the world who believes that climate change is a serious & real threat to our planet…And I’m pretty sure that Hansen isn’t getting rich by speaking out about climate change. If anything, doing so has put his livelihood in jeopardy. And he is just one of many well-respected scientists that are in complete agreement. And the Bush administration has tried to muzzle him…an administration populated with ex (and current) oil cronies…hmmmm.
And some more research being released by NASA scientists and others Thursday at the American Geophysical Union conference in San Francisco show:
More than 2 trillion tons of land ice in Greenland, Antarctica and Alaska have melted since 2003, according to new NASA satellite data that show the latest signs of what scientists say is global warming.
Melting of land ice, unlike sea ice, increases sea levels very slightly. In the 1990s, Greenland didn’t add to world sea level rise; now that island is adding about half a millimeter of sea level rise a year, NASA ice scientist Jay Zwally said in a telephone interview from the conference. “It’s not getting better; it’s continuing to show strong signs of warming and amplification,” Zwally said. “There’s no reversal taking place.”
Two other studies coming out at the conference assess how Arctic thawing is releasing methane _ the second most potent greenhouse gas. One study shows that the loss of sea ice warms the water, which warms the permafrost on nearby land in Alaska, thus producing methane, Stroeve says.
A second study suggests even larger amounts of frozen methane are trapped in lakebeds and sea bottoms around Siberia and they are starting to bubble to the surface in some spots in alarming amounts, said Igor Semiletov, a professor at the University of Alaska in Fairbanks. In late summer, Semiletov found methane bubbling up from parts of the East Siberian Sea and Laptev Sea at levels that were 10 times higher than they were in the mid-1990s, he said based on a study this summer.
The amounts of methane in the region could dramatically increase global warming if they get released, he said.
I’m of two minds about it. I don’t see any harm in dedicating significant resources to energy efficiency and conservation, but I’m also not at all convinced that global climate change is entirely the work of human beings. It wasn’t that long ago—a few hundred years—that the Earth was in the middle of the so-called Mini-Ace-Age, which saw the Thames freeze over each winter. Climate changes and life is adaptable.
That said, I’m for programs that would reduce carbon emissions and other pollution, largely because I like to be able to breathe clean air and drink clean water.
If the conversation is about changing our infrastructure to less polluting mediums, like solar, or whatever (or powering down in general), then yeah, great idea.
but if it is just about Carbon credits and whatever, then I’m highly skeptical. People can cut and paste opposing viewpoints from noted scientists and scholars all day long, and both “sides” will be correct.
Climate change is real.
“Global Warming” is a simplified version that delves into fairy tale.
Yea, carbon credits are a joke, and counterproductive. I think the evidence is overwhelming that mankind is at least contributing to and accelerating climate change. However, as our unpronounceable friend points out, the issue is more complicated than either side of the augment wants to readily acknowledge.
The issue is not “Climate Change”. Of course the climate changes. The issue is the social-political fraud of global warming caused by mankind and the asinine suggestion that there is any measure of a consensus on this issue. The Global warming fraud is slowly being exposed for what it is. Hopefully, saner minds will prevail before liberal fools destroy what is left of our economy
The issue is not “Climate Change”. Of course the climate changes. The issue is the social-political fraud of global warming caused by mankind and the asinine suggestion that there is any measure of a consensus on this issue. The Global warming fraud is slowly being exposed for what it is. Hopefully, saner minds will prevail before liberal fools destroy what is left of our economy
I think it might save our economy, actually. There’s lots of room for “green” innovation. It’s kind of a shame that it’ll happen around a flawed premise, but I’d rather have us gear up to “save the Earth” than to go to war with China, say.
The right wing seems obsessed with the notion that we are not contributing to global warming. I don’t really find it a subject worthy of political bias but then I have a scientific mind more willing to leave it to the experts to argue. The fact is, we can well do with all the alternatives to burning fossil fuels so why not quite the politically motivated debate and get down to the business of cleaning up our environment. There is much evidence that we are being hurt by environmental pollution and competition for ever scarcer resources, what more is needed set us on a path to solving these problems?
The issue is not “Climate Change”. Of course the climate changes. The issue is the social-political fraud of global warming caused by mankind and the asinine suggestion that there is any measure of a consensus on this issue. The Global warming fraud is slowly being exposed for what it is. Hopefully, saner minds will prevail before liberal fools destroy what is left of our economy
The deniers only focus on the easy targets, like Gore, and carbon credits, or silly half-true science like the notion that a cold winter will reverse arctic melting (as if an increase in a thin layer of surface ice is the same as the total layer of ice) so they can remain in their “global-warming-isnt-real dogmatic mindset.
As for “Liberal Fools” destroying our economy—Let me remind you that John McCain embraced “Global Warming”, and i believe sara palin even gave it a begrudging nod. Neither of them really falling too far into the “liberal” dept, although clearly standing deep in “fool” territory.
Also, I dont think “carbon credits”, as foolish as they are, are going to “destroy” our economy in the same way the unregulated banking and sub-prime loan markets have, not to mention two wars we cant pay for, or bailouts for nearly every big industry we can think of. But nice try at being your typical hyper-partisan, divisive, counter-patriotic self, pseudo-Right Winger self. What would a intelligent discussion about politics be without a former left-winger cum pseudo-right-winger throwing out hyper-partisan accusations? Do you think you could perhaps love your country enough to shut that stupidity down and recognize we are all dealing with the same problems, and that your silly partisan game is what will keep people distracted from recognizing that both the democratic party and the republican party do not have the best interests of you and I at heart?
oh, and ps. since you are only typing it, you arent technically “pronouncing” it, 40’s.
What is asinine is to suggest there is no consensus. Politically there is not (no surprise there), but scientifically there is widespread consensus that the current level of human activity effects our environment and climate.
Also, at the current rate of destruction caused by three decades of “conservative” economic ideology there will be no economy left for “liberal fools” to “destroy”.
