[RichieLion]

Originally Posted by scrapple

Thank you!

belief is not science

[iandwk]

I posted on this thread yesterday and it was removed by the administrator. In thinking back to what I said, I agree with the decision to remove it. I will rephrase it a bit and try not to be offensive to those in the Middle East who are not terrorists.

I am not worried about global warming. If it is indeed happening and mankind is the cause, I don't think it will doom us to extinction. I happen to believe what the Bible teaches about the end of mankind on the earth and the end of the earth, but I won't get into that here.

Man has been stumbling along on the planet for several thousand years, making mistakes and correcting them, yet somehow always advancing. I have no reason to believe that it won't continue. I refuse to apologize for the past and for being human. I think all of us today are beneficiaries of those who have shaped the past and gotten us to this point.

I do believe there is a force in the world today that can change a lot of the good mankind has accomplished, if not completely destroy it. I am more worried about that than I am anything that our lifestyle can do to make the future worse for mankind. Our government is bowing to the pressure of interest groups that is changing a lot of the things we have always held as core beliefs. The media for the most part has joined in on this. There are a lot of things that we used to think were wrong that have been made to seem right by the media, portraying these beliefs as funny and poking fun at those who disagree with that stance. Now we find a lot of these things to be not only acceptable to the general public, but becoming law in a lot of cases.

Just one small example, the thought that marriage is outdated and obsolete. Anyone who thinks that a child raised by a single parent is as well adjusted as one raised in a nuclear family has fallen prey to the media's and our governments portrayal of this as normal. Anyone who says otherwise is ostracized by the media. They portray us as buffoons who are uneducated and out of touch with reality.

I firmly believe in freedom of religion. I think that is one of the things that has allowed America to be the great nation it is. I think we may have gotten a bit too tolerant about it, though. We can't allow people to break our laws and generally defy what has made us what we are in the name of religion. I find that to be intolerable. Worship the way you desire, but obey the laws of the land. If you can't tolerate these laws, there are other places in the world that will accept you.

This kind of stuff scares me much more than the threat of global warming.

[Taj44]

I find it interesting to read media from other parts of the world. It gives a fresh perspective, and often offers information that the media here seeks to ignore or is unaware of. Everything I've read indicates that about 97% of actively publishing climate scientists agree with the concept of man-made climate change i.e. global warming. This link to a UK media source also points out some interesting information http://www.wessexscene.co.uk/science...ameless-liars/ And interestingly, many of the industries that contribute to climate change, like the oil companies, have lavishly funded studies and institutes to question the science and produce anti-warming propoganda. You don't have to be a brain surgeon to see what is going on. The corporations that are causing climate change, are funding a propoganda campaign to get people to question the science of climate change, so the companies can ultimately continue with their non-environmentally friendlly processes and protect their financial interests.

[bkcunningham1]

I'm just curious if anyone knows how much we as taxpayers have spent on finding, studying, researching etc. the development of, as Jimmy Carter put it in 1977, "permanent and reliable new energy sources. The most promising, of course, is solar energy, for which most of the technology is already available."

Today, 2 percent of energy is produced by green sources like wind, solar and biomass like plant and animal materials.

[Hoosierb4]

It always appeared to me that when the oil industry added something to the global warming discussion, it was usually intended to delay any significant actions by saying there's still some doubt about the science. Other industries generally participated by supplying data and results of studies that helped quantify what's happening, or supported less onerous actions than those that were favored by more activist groups. The intent was to make sure that any regulations were based on good data and not so severe as to do more harm than good. I generalize here...there's some grey between the black and white. Incidentally, the discussions within the technical groups were much more civil than some statements made in the media.

[bkcunningham1]

Hoosierb4, were you associated with the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change or associated with the independent panel, The InterAcademy Council, the group who took issue with the IPCC's findings?

For those who don't know, the IPCC, the climate science arm of the UN, is the group who forecast the imminent melting of Himalayan glaciers, the rate of melt of polar ice caps and dwindling Amazon rainforests.

[Hoosierb4]

BK....I had a relatively minor role in the IPCC as one of the many authors of a couple of the supporting reports. The IAC actually didn't criticize the findings of the IPCC. They were asked (by the IPCC chair and the Secretary General of the UN) to review the processes and procedures of the IPCC. In their report they had several valid recommendations to improve the management structure and processes of the IPCC, but did not comment on the validity of the conclusion that global warming is occurring and is increased due to human activity. Those conclusions are accepted as valid by an overwhelming majority of the scientists who have knowledge in this area.

[RichieLion]

AN INCONVENIENT TRUTH

They're trying to hold a global warming summit in Cancun, Mexico at the moment and Cancun is experiencing it's COLDEST TEMPERATURES in about a 100 years.

Sometimes it doesn't pay for an "environmentalist" to get out of bed

I wonder how the pina coladas are?

http://theweek.com/article/index/210...warming-summit

[iandwk]

Originally Posted by Hoosierb4

BK....I had a relatively minor role in the IPCC as one of the many authors of a couple of the supporting reports. The IAC actually didn't criticize the findings of the IPCC. They were asked (by the IPCC chair and the Secretary General of the UN) to review the processes and procedures of the IPCC. In their report they had several valid recommendations to improve the management structure and processes of the IPCC, but did not comment on the validity of the conclusion that global warming is occurring and is increased due to human activity. Those conclusions are accepted as valid by an overwhelming majority of the scientists who have knowledge in this area.

Hoosierb4, I respect your observations, but I think all of us have to understand that the majority of scientists have been wrong about a number of things. I can remember when they had a big ruckus over accepting the big bang theory. It sounded too much like creationism and it scared/angered them to think they may have been wrong all along. Medical science is often wrong. They can be wrong about this, also. Their case sure wasn't helped by the fraud that turned up a few months ago.

Unfortunately, there are theories that you either espouse or you get blackballed. Scientists who believe in God and divine creation are considered charlatans. Scientists who disagree with global warming are being blackballed, also.

[Russ_Boston]

Originally Posted by iandwk

Scientists who believe in God and divine creation are considered charlatans. Scientists who disagree with global warming are being blackballed, also.

I would venture a guess that FAR more scientists disagree with current global warming theories than those that believe in creationism. But they may all be correct, who knows?

[Hoosierb4]

iandwk...It's true that sometimes the scientists can be wrong. But, in this case the predictions, made with mathematical models, clearly point to warming and measurements are supporting the predictions. The nature of global warming substances is that they allow the radiation from the sun to pass through to the ground, but absorb much of the longer wavelength radiation from the ground before it escapes to space. It's fairly straightforward when you look at a simplified model. It's sort of the opposite of what clouds do. The really complicated part of it is when you look at a a 3-d model of the entire atmosphere and the earth's surface.

What is true is that natural effects like solar activity can overwhelm the effects of what we do by putting more CO2 in the atmosphere. But, the "global warming" that we are concerned with is superimposed on top of the natural cycles.

[iandwk]

Originally Posted by Hoosierb4

iandwk...It's true that sometimes the scientists can be wrong. But, in this case the predictions, made with mathematical models, clearly point to warming and measurements are supporting the predictions. The nature of global warming substances is that they allow the radiation from the sun to pass through to the ground, but absorb much of the longer wavelength radiation from the ground before it escapes to space. It's fairly straightforward when you look at a simplified model. It's sort of the opposite of what clouds do. The really complicated part of it is when you look at a a 3-d model of the entire atmosphere and the earth's surface.

What is true is that natural effects like solar activity can overwhelm the effects of what we do by putting more CO2 in the atmosphere. But, the "global warming" that we are concerned with is superimposed on top of the natural cycles.

I think my main gripe is the fact that they blame it on our activities, if it is indeed happening. If it is happening and if we are causing it, I wish the politicians would stay out of it and quit using it to promote their agendas, such as cap and trade and numerous others. They try to guilt us into buying into their agendas. Then it becomes rep vs. dem and there goes the price of all of our commodities. Then they try to start raising taxes to take even more, all in the name of whatever their current agenda happens to be.

[thomas borst]

sorry to say, but i have seen it for my self, living here in lake county for the past 26 yrs, seeing only the villages / orange blossom gardens, after the trailor park was compleated, and then started bulding on the west sid of 441 i seen noting but trees getting ripped out of the ground and burned in massive piles. what a wast, the county/contractors/ builders, should of reprosesed the trees and used properly for building materials rather than paluting the air and the only reson thay burned the trees were that they didn't want to lose any more time holding up their construction, and thay are still burnning trees on the southside of 466A and thay are so far back in the woods so we cannot see all the trees getting burned, it saddens me that the county will awiow this to happen, ho gives the county the rights to let them polute our air, and im not putting the blam on the residents, but we must make sure that the trees are use for the best for mankind, and the air that we breath,

[The Great Fumar]

Frankly I take this Global Warming very seriously ......thats why I went out yesterday and bought a winter coat.....
Even the very liberal University of Michigan says it mostly BUNK !!!!

Would someone please turn up the heat !!!

frigid fumar .........

[iandwk]

Originally Posted by thomas borst

sorry to say, but i have seen it for my self, living here in lake county for the past 26 yrs, seeing only the villages / orange blossom gardens, after the trailor park was compleated, and then started bulding on the west sid of 441 i seen noting but trees getting ripped out of the ground and burned in massive piles. what a wast, the county/contractors/ builders, should of reprosesed the trees and used properly for building materials rather than paluting the air and the only reson thay burned the trees were that they didn't want to lose any more time holding up their construction, and thay are still burnning trees on the southside of 466A and thay are so far back in the woods so we cannot see all the trees getting burned, it saddens me that the county will awiow this to happen, ho gives the county the rights to let them polute our air, and im not putting the blam on the residents, but we must make sure that the trees are use for the best for mankind, and the air that we breath,

I don't know about what you mention here. I do know that it is common practice to burn debris from the trees on a construction site. From my observation, they harvest the trees for lumber and burn the limbs and root left behind. If they bury the rubble, it attracts termites and creates hollows in the ground that eventually cave in. I don't know if that is what they are doing in TV. I'm not defending their practices, but maybe what you are seeing is what I've described here.