If scientists discover that we have entered a mini-ice age ?

Question

Isn’t our job as responsible citizens to demand from our elected politicians, to remove all restrictions on CO2, so we start to warm the planet to save mankind ?

Answer 1

Well, it certainly would prove that every thermometer on the planet has been wrong for more than a hundred years.

Answer 2

Do you think that a mini ice age debunks global warming?? Well news flash, the earth isnt going to become a giant ice ball, or a giant ball of fire, the climates will change, and that may cause an ice age in one part of the world and a drought in another. People have got to start doing research before asking questions.

Answer 3

What most people don't realize is that not only is global warming entirely man made, but that it started 26,000 years ago.  It was a conspiracy born out of a meeting in a cave in southern France, which at the time had a climate more like southern Greenland of today.

These far seeing cave men were tired of freezing their tail off.  They had noticed that ice melted around their fires and theorized that if they could heat up the earth from their fires they would have more room to hunt.  Of course they had no idea of the size of their challenge.

They built huge fires, burning whatever they could.  For a long time it had no effect, but they persisted.  The earliest effect was to deposit a lot of soot on the ice, which absorbed sunlight and began the melt process.   As their idea spread more fires were lit all over Europe and Asia, the resulting CO2 rise combined with the soot began pushing back the ice.

At some point cavemen environmentalists got freaked out by rising seas and ordered a halt to the work.  A cave painting movie was made, called Oog-Ug.  And the fires were put out.  This lead to a cooling, which scientists call the Younger Drayas.

Eventually sense returned and they started with the fires.  Their courageous efforts drove most of the glaciers out of Europe, Asia, and North America.  Their work continues today, we've got Greenland and Antarctica to go.  But we keep working on it.

Answer 4

I understand where you're coming from....

They didn't say to use more gas during the "global cooling" period between the 40's and 70's to warm the planet, so why are they telling us to use less to cool it back down?

The articles from the 1970's all said the same thing: The planet is going to be completely frozen by the year 2000. Guess I missed that ice age.

Truth is that the earth fluctuates regardless of what we do.  All scientists know this.  The ones paid off to lie are the ones who say humans cause climate change.  When you think about it logically, it makes no sense.

What happened was that the environmental movement became the new home for displaced communists after the cold war.  They don't really need facts, and like to use scare tactics to get restrictions put on industry and people.  It's the best way they know to destroy capitalism and economic progress.  I really don't know why they hate progress, they just do.

I saw a special where they went to a remote primitive place where the people wanted to advance, but these "environmentalists" worked overtime stopping their progress because they thought the way they lived was "quaint."   So they want to keep people in poverty for their own amusement.  That's appalling.

I agree that we should conserve energy, but that alone won't help us grow.  We need more power plants, nuclear, coal(there are clean methods now) and other sources.  And we need to continue to drill for oil and distill gasoline instead of import it from enemies.

If the "climate change" n***s have their way we'll be a third world country before long.  We need to wake up to their tactics and resist the propaganda.

If you ever wonder if the believers in AGW are sincere, look at what they do.  For example, Gore is using 22 times more energy than the average person.  If he believed we were in real danger he'd ride a bike to work.

So if "believers" don't really believe we're in danger, why should we?

Answer 5

no the scientist will just change the name of the problem from global warming to climate change or global cooling

http://www.moonbattery.com/archives/2007...

oh right they have done that before.

Answer 6

Oh my god your so funny and witty I cant stop laughing!

Answer 7

We can try but we have already tried to ask information about UFO's and Aliens, and they haven't given us a desirable answer, odds are they won't do anything about it because they will try to say that it will mess up the steady society that we live in.

Answer 8

The one degree drop in average celsius temperature that occurred worldwide this past year has offset any negative effects that we may or may not have caused, but either way this one degree drop in one year has reversed any harm done that occurred in the last 100.

Al Gore is a fraud. There's actually a well respected journalist suing him for being such as we speak.

All these politicians think they can buy carbon credits while the rest of us have to save up for more expensive cars, I hope Gore in particular gets reamed for his BS global warming campaigns.

Answer 9

How does the opposite have to be true. That makes no logical sense whatsoever. You are in what is known as denial (a psychological defense mechanism in which confrontation with a personal problem or with reality is avoided by denying the existence of the problem or reality)

BTW super genius, AGW is not Al Gore's theory, nor has he ever said it was. He is a messenger and nothing more. That's why you deniers attack him. A classic attack the messenger, because you can't attack the message. AGW is a scientific theory that has been around for about 100 years.

Answer 10

Honestly I reckon that our current global warming is just a spike in temperature before we drop into our next ice age.  

And when that happens (if I'm still around) I won't expect politicians to do anything useful for anyone but themselves.

Answer 11

Perhaps if we laid off the CO2 production and let the Earth handle things.

It seems pretty well set on its own, and doesn't need us f*cking things up either way.  Maybe we should try to limit our own effect on it, and let the Earth do what it was designed to do.

Add-on:

I agree that if one is true, the other is true as well.  Which is why I am advocating pulling ourselves out of it as much as possible.  Let the Earth, which is designed for it, handle the complex equilibrium of weather and climate change.

Answer 12

I'm glad to see that you agree.  Human activity can indeed cause both a global cooling and a global warming of the average global temperature.

If humans emissions of aerosols increased dramatically and the global average temperature started to drop a statistically significant amount, I'd be glad to have the government impose limitations on those emissions.  But increasing the output of CO2 to counter the effect of aerosols would be a scientifically naive approach.  The CO2 remains in the atmosphere for over a century, while the aerosols life-span in the atmosphere can be measured by weeks or months.