I'm sitting here in Pheonix Sky Harbor waiting for my flight back to Salt Lake after a visit to my sister. sigh She is very born again and thinks this whole GW thing is silly. How can man have any effect on the planet, "we did not create it we cannot change it." This from a 35 year retired school teacher. Sometimes finding god does strange things to what you know to be true. I feel that folks like her who happen to be in congress believe its gods will and there is nothing man can do about it. Its all part of the plan.

Just a question... were you more interested in discussing Global Climate Change, or were you more interested in discussing the point of man causing Global Climate Change? I am quite religious and have absolutely no doubt that Global Climate Change is happening now, and at a frightening rate; whether we caused all, some, or none of it seems like a very ancillary issue to me.

We're so wrapped up in our teaching of fault, blame, and guilt; that we spend scant breath even mentioning, "what can we do to make the future slightly less horrendous, and how can we best prepare ourselves to survive in what the world will become."

Hmmmm. Fault, blame, and guilt are very religious concepts.

I prefer the word consequences.

Are you unsure whether the hundreds of billions of tons of CO2 we've dumped into the atmosphere since the industrial revolution have had an effect (over 30 billion just last year)? Does your faith tell you that God zaps away every negative consequence of our actions?

Do you think every established scientific body in the world is wrong on this?

Do you think the consensus of nearly 100% of published climatologists on this is bunkum?

It matters what you think, because if you think that there is no problem with continuing to emit massive quantities of greenhouse gases, you are unlikely to change your own behavior or to support larger initiatives to lower emissions.

Your position is essentially that of someone stabbing their grandmother all the while saying, "It doesn't matter what position one has on whether stabbing is a lethal activity. We just have to start focusing on what we are going to do once gramma's gone."

Except in this case, when gramma expires, we all go with her.

If there is in fact an overwhelming scientific consensus that AGW is a real and present danger as one is led to believe, and yet denialists continue to persist in their efforts, what does it tell you of the calibre of person you are dealing with and the attendant danger?

That danger then lies in the confusion being formented in the minds of tomorrow's generation by an extremely unscrupulous lobby group of narrow interests with no other agenda other than profit. And the likelihood of comprehensively attending to that rising AGW within that contrived confusion......zero.

Nope. Gramma's toast already, and has been for while.
This is more a discussion about which funeral home to use, and whether or not to cremate her.

The biggest problem is this; whoever or whatever you want to choose to lay the blame on, (and I'm honestly content with the notion that its 100% human fault), humans have absolutely no ability to stop it now; and the only courses of action that would result in even a modest downward deflection in the curve are WAY outside the realm of political reality.

In the end... there are a few billion people who haven't had their crack at the ICE, air conditioner, and refrigerator lifestyle. They intend to take their turns, and their governments are going to do absolutely nothing to stop them.

Even the US, with its full asserted greenish party in control is contemplating a "radical" bill that will at best, move some emissions around a bit, and maybe nibble at the edge of emissions that our consumers are responsible for.

You want to talk serious for cutting US emissions? $5/gallon tax on all fuel oils. $.50 tax per every kilowatt hour used. I'd vote yes.

Won't effect GCC, but it'd be a good thing to do anyway.

Another one of Tom Fuller’s articles on examiner.com exemplifies the delayists position. A reading of the comments is rather interesting as well.



On the other hand he writes:



http://www.examiner.com/x-9111-SF-Envir ... lukewarmer

Let’s just keep talking about it.., right Tom?

Hey, can I join your "earth worship" party? I heard it's the new "one world religion" in the making!
Whoa and behold anyone who does not fall in line and is a "denier" of the light.

So you have your cap 'n tax system run by the bankers now, what else should we do to alleviate the problem of not taking on enough guilt for our sins, not paying enough taxes to bankers, not respecting the "scientific" opinions of politicians like Al Gore?

It's a very old trick used throughout time to fund radical revolutionaries, you "environmentalist types" might be very suprised to find out where all that funding comes from. When you wake up it's too late, the damage has been done and written into law. Problem, Reaction, Solution is the game you are playing. Good luck with that!

Banksters Love Cap-and-Trade
http://www.corbettreport.com/articles/2 ... _trade.htm

Planetary Temperature and Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide (CO2)
http://www.junkscience.com/MSU_Temps/historical_CO2.htm

Twelve-month long drop in world temperatures wipes out a century of warming
http://www.dailytech.com/Temperature+Mo ... e10866.htm

Global ocean temperatures drop to coldest in 6 1/2 years
http://exposingtheleft.blogspot.com/200 ... op-to.html

IPCC Scientists Caught Producing False Data To Push Global Warming
http://www.prisonplanet.com/ipcc-scient ... rming.html

Recent cold snap helping Arctic sea ice, scientists find
http://www.cbc.ca/technology/story/2008 ... c-ice.html

Rise of sea levels is 'the greatest lie ever told'
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/colu ... -told.html

Now that is funny!




http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/graphs/

Pretty much everything that pab puts out seems to be distortions and lies. I've stopped feeding that troll.

It is hard to decide which one one of the links is the most meaningless. Is it the Alex Jones link, the right wing nut link or the weather report from Feb 2008.

Climate Change Risk Communication: The Problem of Psychological Denial

Cognitive and Behavioral Challenges in Responding to Climate Change

It is an interesting topic you quote!

The EPA Silences a Climate Skeptic
http://www.climatechangefraud.com/edito ... te-skeptic



When your government declares that the element of Carbon is a pollutant it should snap most people back to a grade school reality?

I suppose the people are "sufficiently socially and politically engaged", perhaps they have replaced chemistry with being socially and politically correct?


Weather reports are good, so is anything outside the box created for your brain. If practised long enough you will eventually be able to apply some critical thought to everything in your life and decide for yourself with your own brain on matters that so often seem predigested and predecided.

It really doesn't matter what you or I or anyone on this forum think about climate change since decisions have already been made and are about to be written into law, carbon is now a pollutant. I hope this can highlight the absurdity of it all. It is an unprovable science, it cannot be recreated in a lab and in fact the exact opposite CAN be proven in a lab.

We live in a corrupt monetary system. I suspect some of you might be a bit too young to fully experience the concept but when something like "climate change" comes out of the blue coincidentally when world oil supplies seem to be peaking and the element of carbon needs some serious taxing you should take it all with a very large grain of salt. The CIA was aware of peak oil back in the 70's for obvious reasons so Ill just leave you with this - and ask yourself why we don't hear about peak oil in the media? I fear you are being "used". It sucks to be "used" as everyone finds out sooner or later in life

"The Central Intelligence Agency owns everyone of any significance in the major media."
William Colby (1920-1996) former Director of the CIA

You are a total idiot.

Sorry, tried to edit it but it wouldn't let me. From the preceding articles I should recognize that since the reality had shown your politics to be nonsense, you are experiencing cognitive dissonance(psychological pain) that you avoid by entering a fantasy world where that reality doesn't exist.

I'm not in the mood right now to be understanding and respect your psychological pain as the reason for your nonsense.

Suck it up.

The biosphere cannot afford it.

At this stage, I don't think converting denialists makes any great difference anymore. In a few years, peak oil will cause a permanent global collapse in industry, traffic and individual energy consumption, a collapse that will supercede any anti-emission action that we could realistically hope if everyone suddenly saw the light.

Nevertheless, the climate will keep warming for the following decades because of past CO2 emissions and Arctic methane (and to a lesser degree, increasing use of coal). I expect global food production to suffer massively from climate change well before 2020. This could in turn lead to full-scale wars, possibly creating a nuclear winter.

It's mind-boggling how all the varieties of doom could happen almost simultaneously just a few years from now...

It's unclear what the motive would be in an all out nuclear war when everyone would be, so to speak, in the same leaky boat. More likely the use of conventional warfare will be practiced on a broader scale, mostly in a defensive posture.

As long as the world's population continues to grow, more CO2 will be output than can be naturally absorbed by the already failing systems of natural sequestration. Global warming will be enforced by the release of other more potent GHGs.

As infrastructure fails, the use of dirtier carbon producing methods will, for a while at least, makeup for the short fall in overall liquid fossil fuel use.

Your probably right on that count, after all the "debate" is over when it is just a matter of converting the denialists but you might want to ask yourself one question since you are on this particular forum.

Would you apply the same rhetoric to someone who is skeptical about peak oil?

Looks like you found a new religion! Good luck with that!

Life Is Convenient When You Define 'Truth'
http://www.businessandmedia.org/comment ... 51102.aspx



Just give me a heads up before the crusade so I can slip into the rank and file, together we will convert those dirty, filthy heathens and purge the world of denialists in the name of mother earth!

Excellent logic, there will be large scale defensive wars. Can we count on America to ensure this?

I sure hope the great nuclear treshold won't be crossed at least on the global level. Maybe it could work as a trilateral MAD if the US, Russia and China made it clear that any nuke exploding on their territory would result in the complete destruction of the attacking nation. But does China have the capacity to effectively ruin the US if attacked?



I see your point, but since

1) the world's population growth will probably turn to a steep decrease during the next decade,
2) living standards and energy use will plummet everywhere (Matt Simmons says we'll be "lucky to produce 50% of current oil in 2015") and
3) coal cannot replace declining oil supply very fast in the huge quantities required,

I'm not so sure emission levels will stay anywhere near current levels.

Thank you for that info Cid Yama. I had a feeling about how indenial people felt about GW but never could put my thoughts together. This link explains alot. thanks

Well stated Pab. THATS the truth, and you all can either like it or lump it.

Gasmon