Scientist changes view on global warming

[Guest]

His study was financed by the Charle Koch charitable trust.

About-face: Former climate change skeptic now says global warming is man-made | The Lookout - Yahoo! News (http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/former-climate-change-skeptic-now-says-global-warming-134617449.html)

[Guest]

His study was financed by the Charle Koch charitable trust.

About-face: Former climate change skeptic now says global warming is man-made | The Lookout - Yahoo! News (http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/former-climate-change-skeptic-now-says-global-warming-134617449.html)

I read that and must say, You Bas%^3$s. Greed for more money would drive some men to destroy the earth to obtain it. What despicable excuse for a human being is that.

[Guest]

does a scientist flip flop or evolve? hmmmm.....

[Guest]

My thought is he felt so guilty that he fessed up. Can we destroy the earth with our pollution, I DOUBT IT. But, we can cause a lot of suffering.

[Guest]

It doesn't appear that even Muller is not convinced that his recent revelation is proof positive. clearly "catastrophe /doomsday prediction are big money makers. I believe peopel pollute our streets, rivers oceans. And I believe smokestacks create problems such as acid rain from Ohio did to the Adironacks but to suggest manmade destruction to the level cited by those who preach global warming appears a bit much but then again its makes money. I mean the local weather man gets it wrong more time than not. Was that post political?

[Guest]

It doesn't appear that even Muller is not convinced that his recent revelation is proof positive. clearly "catastrophe /doomsday prediction are big money makers. I believe peopel pollute our streets, rivers oceans. And I believe smokestacks create problems such as acid rain from Ohio did to the Adironacks but to suggest manmade destruction to the level cited by those who preach global warming appears a bit much but then again its makes money. I mean the local weather man gets it wrong more time than not. Was that post political?

A. The post was NOT political, however I posted it BOTH in political and non-villages discussion IN CASE it went political.

B. I understand why big business spends huge money to fight the perception of global warming, because it is largely their operations and products (autos) that cause it, and to further protect against the problem would cost them big money. What I fail to understand is how people who are not directly benefiting from those operations, but who stand to suffer, along with everyone else, choose to beleive the big money backed dissent. Our grandchildren and great-grandchildren may not be happy that we stood by and didn't do something about this before they had to pay for it.

[Guest]

I think big business wouldn't be nearly as against the whole Climate Change problem if certain countries - namely India and China - were included in the measures to stop it.

I mean, it puts our industries at even MORE of a disadvantage from an even MORE un-level playing field if those two (and the rest of the developing countries) don't play by those rules.

[Guest]

I think big business wouldn't be nearly as against the whole Climate Change problem if certain countries - namely India and China - were included in the measures to stop it.

I mean, it puts our industries at even MORE of a disadvantage from an even MORE un-level playing field if those two (and the rest of the developing countries) don't play by those rules.

:posting: Good post in that I agree, IF, there is a major problem with man made pollution then it does little good for us to go it alone. I'm no expert or even amateur in this area but common sense and observation tells me that we have made great strides in cleaning up our pollution but the rest of the world has done little or nothing. Something is wrong with that picture. :ohdear:

[Guest]

If your arguement against confronting global climate change is that China and India aren't playing by our rules, I am dumbfounded. They don't play by our rules in water pollution, in worker safety, in vacations, in auto safety, in mine safety, in toxic waste disposal, or in hundreds of other areas where our country has shown wisdom and leadership and lead by example. And these programs have protected our citizens, our water, our air, our soil.
Industry argued they couldn't put scrubbers on power plant smoke stacks, they did and continue to be profitable. We need to lead by example and tackle this problem sooner rather than later, as later may be too late. There will be no do-overs if the nay sayers are wrong and we, and others in the world, fail to act.

[Guest]

blueash you took the post right out of my mouth. I'm surprised also by Dips response.