Hey gore & suzuki - get a load of this ya dorks

[fogghorn]

Gore, what a frikkin shill snakeoil salesman you are, this kind of screws up your concensus wouldn't you say

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldne ... rming.html

[x-wind]

How'd you find that clipping? There sure seems to be a lot of evidence in favor of what Al preaches.

[C23flyer]

Hey, where you been? Read the forums a little closer. Posted last Saturday:

The Fraser Institute just released a complimentary copy of Martin Durkin's The Great Global Warming Swindle to many secondary schools in Canada. I'm not a fan of the FI but it is always a good thing to look at both sides of the equation before passing judgement. The premise of the documentary is that CO2 is not driving and has never driven climate change. There is much interesting dialogue with scientists who sat on the IPCC and expressed dissenting opinions about the final recommendations of the panel but were still listed as authors. If you can get your hands on it, it's a thought-provoking piece.

[Wacko]

Yep.... just like there are still doctors out there who get project sponsorships from tobacco companies who claim cigarettes don't cause lung cancer....

Everyone has a price...

[Sheila]

These are from science briefings from the group of scientists who discovered the Antarctic Ozone Hole.

Are changes in the Antarctic ice sheet caused by human activities?
Recent studies have suggested that the observed atmospheric warming on the Antarctic Peninsula is the result of human activities – both greenhouse effect and ozone-loss have a role to play in this. So it is likely that glacier retreat on the Antarctic Peninsula is attributable to human influence.
The thinning of the ASE ice sheet, is not the result of atmospheric warming, but is more likely to be due to changing ocean circulation patterns. Although, these ocean changes have not yet been observed – we have too few repeated measurements – scientists are currently investigating whether these changes could have been caused by human-induced climate change. The jury is still out but this is an active area of research.

Friday (16 September) is International Day for the Preservation of the Ozone Layer. This year scientists at British Antarctic Survey (BAS) commemorate their discovery of the Antarctic ‘ozone hole’ 20 years ago and commend the historic international agreement (the Montreal Protocol 1987) that will lead to its eventual recovery.

Jonathan Shanklin, one of the researchers who made the discovery says,

“The 2005 hole is larger and deeper than the holes that formed when the discovery was made but the situation would be much worse if the Montreal Protocol had not come into force. This agreement shows us that global action by governments to stop the release of ozone depleting chemicals really can help society to successfully mitigate a global environmental problem. We are still experiencing large losses of Antarctic ozone each spring because CFCs and other chemicals live for a long time in our atmosphere. However, the ban ensures that we will see an improvement in the future. We now need to take similar actions to control greenhouse gasses, otherwise we will bequeath future generations a significantly different climate from that of today.

[Rockie]

Gore, what a frikkin shill snakeoil salesman you are, this kind of screws up your concensus wouldn't you say

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldne ... rming.html

This report has 31,000 scientists signatures, but strangely only 9000 of them have PHD's and probably none of them are climatologists. The petition was started by a man named Frederick Seitz who is the poster boy for shill snake oil salesmen. It's amazing what a simple google search can find Fogghorn, here's a little light reading on your hero.

http://www.ecosyn.us/adti/Seitz_Tobacco_Crimes.html

[the_professor]

This report has 31,000 scientists signatures, but strangely only 9000 of them have PHD's and probably none of them are climatologists.

31,000 scientists presumably have the knowledge to judge the flawed reasoning that is used by life-long tree huggers like Suzuki, and $30,000/yr coal-fired, CO2 spewing utility users like Gore. And it doesn't take a PhD to qualify for a dissenting opinion on human-induced climate change.

And speaking of vague references, upon what do you base your speculation that "probably none of them are climatologists" ?

There are many scientists who do not agree with the theories (not facts) that have been proposed behind global warming. And besides, the title of "climatologist" does not automatically make either side right or wrong in this debate.

There are differing opinions, and there are scientific facts to back up the differing opinions, no matter how much that might bother those who think that 'An Inconvenient Truth' is a slam-dunk assessment of what's going on out there.

I pity those of you who are not able to think for yourselves, but instead follow the bandwagon of the day.

[Guido]

31,000 scientists presumably have the knowledge to judge the flawed reasoning that is used by life-long tree huggers like Suzuki, and $30,000/yr coal-fired, CO2 spewing utility users like Gore. And it doesn't take a PhD to qualify for a dissenting opinion on human-induced climate change.

There are many scientists who do not agree with the theories (not facts) that have been proposed behind global warming. And besides, the title of "climatologist" does not automatically make either side right or wrong in this debate.

And I'm pretty sure that the oompah loompahs are responsible for global warming, however, that doesn't make my opinion noteworthy, or groundbreaking.

These "scientists" you're so proud of are merely giving "OPINIONS" (in your own words)... they're not based in fact, only in dollars.

Evolution is only a theory as well, genius... would you like to debate that too? There are lots of people who opine that it is also not true, and completely impossible...

[Wacko]

Evolution is only a theory as well, genius... would you like to debate that too? There are lots of people who opine that it is also not true, and completely impossible...

Evolution is not true. Everyone knows god created us! Darwin my @$$...

[V1 Rotate]

Yup, Fraser Institute. The bastion of Conservative "thought"

[wxguy]

A little birdie told me that Exxon Mobil will give $10 000 to any scientist that will dispute man-made global warming.

[Topspin]

I did a little research into this a little while back as well. For starters, I have to say that nobody will argue that man's polluting ways are bad for the planet. However.....

Articles up for debate......
1) Accuracy of measurement. As aviators you know that no instrument is going to give you 100% accurate results. And studies have shown that the accuracy of temperature measuring instruments is actually = to or greater than the actual net temperature change worldwide. This means that global warming could be non-existent, or more advanced than our worst fears, nobody yet knows for certain.
2) Basis of comparison. Temperature records have only been recorded in the last hundred years or so, meaning, which is a micron in geological terms. There is no basis of comparison for what is standard. The earth is in a constant state of change and nobody yet knows why or how, otherwise we would have accurate weather reports.
3) The fact that CO2 is a notoriously inefficient greenhouse gas, only capable of storing a small percentile of heat energy that even water vapor can.

Those are the top 3 arguments currently in circulation, but this is still very much up for debate.
My own personal opinion is that natural systems tend to follow a bell curve. A small minority at either extreme, but the answer is somewhere in the middle. It is plainly obvious that our polluting ways are bad for the planet and our own well being. However I refuse to believe that this is the crisis that the alarmists are making this out to be.

[Meatloaf]

Just to address the last 2 topics you pointed out.

#2. Temperatures are indirectly calculated from various sources. It's true that they have only been directly recorded since the mid 1800's. However, the ice cores that some people like to criticize give atmospheric gas and particle samples which can be used to determine average temperatures.

#3. CO2 does not store energy. It reflects the heat and light wavelengths back into the lower atmosphere. This is why Venus, which is more than twice as far from the Sun as Mercury, is also twice as hot. It is also indirectly responsible for why you can't see the surface.

[Rockie]

This report has 31,000 scientists signatures, but strangely only 9000 of them have PHD's and probably none of them are climatologists.

31,000 scientists presumably have the knowledge to judge the flawed reasoning that is used by life-long tree huggers like Suzuki, and $30,000/yr coal-fired, CO2 spewing utility users like Gore. And it doesn't take a PhD to qualify for a dissenting opinion on human-induced climate change.

And speaking of vague references, upon what do you base your speculation that "probably none of them are climatologists" ?

There are many scientists who do not agree with the theories (not facts) that have been proposed behind global warming. And besides, the title of "climatologist" does not automatically make either side right or wrong in this debate.

There are differing opinions, and there are scientific facts to back up the differing opinions, no matter how much that might bother those who think that 'An Inconvenient Truth' is a slam-dunk assessment of what's going on out there.

I pity those of you who are not able to think for yourselves, but instead follow the bandwagon of the day.

I've seen a similar report published by another energy industry PHD for hire, and I couldn't find one single climatologist on it. The "scientists" were from disciplines that have nothing to do with climatological study and TV weathermen. I'm sure a professional con artist like Seitz would have no problem getting people to sign something under false pretenses, or simply paying them for their name on piece of paper. He had a long successful career doing just that for the tobacco industry.

I think people like you and Fogghorn derive your opinion on global warming from your dislike of Al Gore and David Suzuki rather than any deep thought on the matter. Suzuki is unimpeachable on the subject, and even Gore has infinitely more credibility than you do.

[LH]

Well, here's some information from someone who isn't a scientist.....just a plain old pilot of 46 years and on some days has a problem finding his ass with two hands and a flashlight. Mr. Suzuki and friends made such a fuss about BC Forest Service having controlled burns to get rid of fuel on the forest floors that they were forced to halt it. They protested vehemently because Mr. Suzuki has no background whatsoever in forestry or anything else associated with it. Their protests were to no avail and they warned of what could happen........and finally it did. The populations of Kelowna and various neighbouring communities were witness to what happened and it cost some of them heavily. While all this was taking place repeated phone calls and other forms of contact were attempted to contact either Mr. Suzuki or anyone in his organization for manpower or help of any kind whatsoever that was needed desparately to save the forests and the homes. What was received was no answers whatsoever and dead silence from Mr. Suzuki and his organization. That situation has not changed to this very day. So much for Mr. Suzuki's concern for the wonderful forests or the citizens who live amongst them. There's a bunch of citizens who owe Mr. Suzuki a plain, old fashioned, punch in the mouth as far as this person is concerned.

I've flown in the Antarctic this year and last and allow me to tell you both from personal experience and what has come from the mouthes of the scientists onsite this year in Antarctica. This last winter has been one of the coldest on record since records have been kept. While all this was taking place, other scientists worldwide was saying that it was the warmest seen in recent memory. My suggestion is that those scientists stating that it is so very warm should come and live in Antarctica first and then make their pontifications from on high. I know of only one Anarctica on this planet, but perhaps there are in fact two. I was at the one south of Chile and the one I studied about all of my years in school. It scares me to think that there might be two nowadays and that I was at the coldest one damnit.

Apologies for being so unscientific folks, but just reporting on my own personal experiences and what I know to be true. Please carry on.

[wxguy]

Global warming doesn't mean that it is going to get warmer all the time everywhere. There are a LOT of natural climatic cycles that come in to play here too, the trick is to figure out to what extent the warming is man-made. So while Antarctica was a bit colder than normal this year, well how's the Arctic doing? The 2007 sea ice extent was 41% smaller than the 1978-2000 average minimum. The Antarctic Ice Sheet did increase, however it was not statistically significant.

I'd suggest that you take every bit of information regarding climate change (either for or against) with some skepticism until you can see the full picture.

As for me, I do believe that global warming is a real thing that we have to deal with. Does that mean that I am handing out Al Gore movies on the street? Heck no, his movie wasn't exactly the best piece of science I've ever seen.

Just try to be open minded about the whole topic. (I'm saying this to myself too)

[LH]

Again, I'm no scientist and I endeavourto look at and take-in all manner of information from sundry experts pro and con this subject. There's a valuable (at least to me) piece of information missing from all the information being made available. I also notice that a small number of scientists are beginning to ask the same questions concerning that piece of information as I. That piece of information I would like to see is this........Where are the records of the climates and the weather in various parts of the world dating some 500 years ago? We have records kept by the few who could write in some areas and we can go back to check the growth rings on various kinds of preserved woods from that range of years, but apparently that isn't scientific enough to satisfy my learned peers around the world. Ergo, how do we know and how can we be certain then that what is happening with our climates is not a cyclical thing? So let's see the records from 500 years ago concerning weather patterns and any climate changes. If memory serves me correctly, it was around that time-frame that certain people were being ridiculed for suggesting the earth was not flat and another was being declared a heretic by the Vatican and sundry other scientists of the day for suggesting that the Earth was not the center of the universe.

What I do not deny and have pictures as proof to back it up is this. I have pictures of the west end of Devon Island in the Canadian Arctic from 1974. At that time the ice cap that covered the end of the island was an estimtaed 1,500' thick and approximately 50 miles long. That ice cap is now completely, 100% GONE and the ground and rocks it rested on are not even wet. Other than myself, the witnesses to that sighting were all emembers of the NASA Space Center in Ames, CA who were establishing their Mars training site on Devon Isalnd and which also exists to this day. Their aerial photos that they were using were instantly useless and were thrown away at that point. So I don't need any convincing that change is taking place, but as a long standing member of Mankind, I will not take the blame for it untill I see or hear more long-standing proof than it is not cyclical. Until that information can be provided, I will not allow anyone to berate me with infomation about climates worldwide hundreds of years ago if they too, don't have any information from time frame either.

[5x5]

I don't know for sure any more than anyone else on Earth. However I like to read both sides of the story. Here's a link that has a bunch more links in it to a series of articles about scientists who are called "Deniers" as a label to discredit them. I still think they are worth reading and are related to various scientists, named and accredited, that I found very interesting. It's a bit of an old link, but still very relevant as background.

It takes some time to read them all, but probably worth it.
http://www.nationalpost.com/news/story. ... 81196a6d71

[Nark]

Frye test.

[LH]

5 x 5 -----I will endeavour to find time to pursue those articles you mention. Lastly and what I forgot to mention in my last post is this. The one item that I find most goring and infuriating is speeches from people such as Al Gore. What he is stating may or may not be proven to be true in the years to come, but when he stands on high, pontiifcates to the rest of humanity and then gets on his private "dirty" personal jet to travel around the US and the world, he looses credibilty with me. I've taken the time to find out some facts concerning his personal jet and it's airborne emissions. I'd suggest that he has also and doesn't care or he hasn't checked and should do so right away because at present it makes him appear to be a hypocrite. Nobody has 'called him on it' yet, but sometime in the near future he better be prepared for it and have a rebuff that doesn't sound like the 'smelly stuff'.

[Topspin]

Global warming is this years Y2K. Albeit a little bit more serious, we could have an issue arising, but it is not the emergency that the politicians are making it out to be.

[KAG]

global warming is only a symptom of a much larger problem -- polution, and abuse of our eco system in general. We truely are making a mess of our backyard.

[Rockie]

Global warming is this years Y2K. Albeit a little bit more serious, we could have an issue arising, but it is not the emergency that the politicians are making it out to be.

This issue has been around a lot longer than a year, and is getting more and more serious as the process accelerates beyond anything the scientists predicted. And it is the scientists who discovered it and are warning the world, not the politicians. The politicians are resisting it as much as possible because they are the ones who have to make the difficult public policy decisions to change the way we humans are treating our planet.

[LH]

Meanwhile.......all of us on this continent have the largest populated nation on the globe just across the Pacific Ocean to the west. They account for something in the order of 1.4 billion of this planet's population. In Shanghai between 10AM-4PM you DO NOT go outside in that city without wearing what we would describe as a 'painter's mask' like is used in autombile body shops in this part of the world to spray-paint vehciles. Add to that the fact the over the next while China has announced that it will be bringing on-line another 250+ cold-fired, electrical generating plants and one begins to understand one thing. That one thing is that there are 4 times more people in that country than there is in ALL of North America. Unless someone can stop the world and make it turn the other way, then we cannot avoid the pollution that China sends us......like it or not........and they refuse to sign-on to any international accepted clean-air program. All they do is point to us and state that it is all our fault because we were industrialized long before them.......therefore it is we who should do the 'cleaning' of out own air first.

So if anyone out there, including our esteeemed Dr. Suzuki, actually believes that a nation of 35 million can have any effect whatsoever on countering the pollution from a now-industrialzed nation of 1.4 billion, then either I need a lobotomy or they do.

[niss]

Unless someone can stop the world and make it turn the other way, then we cannot avoid the pollution that China sends us......like it or not........and they refuse to sign-on to any international accepted clean-air program.

What if we got them all to syncronize their watches and jump off their kitchen counters at the same time?