Isn't convient now that whoever is elected they won't have to deal with so called "climate change"?

Question

turns out, it was all based on bogus information...50,000 scientists are about to tell the world the truth... http://www.dailytech.com/Myth+of+Consensus+Explodes+APS+Opens+Global+Warming+Debate/article12403.htm

Answer 1

Carbon dioxide is necessary for plant growth and it causes climate to become cooler when the levels rise. Overall it doesn't really affect global warming. The earth was cooling in the 60's and 70's. It was warming in the 80's and 90's. It has been stable the last several years. Most of the global warming film and debates you see are dated from the late 90's.

Humans do not have a huge affect on this. Animals and insects have been using up oxygen and creating carbon dioxide since forever. Average global temperatures have always fluxuated and never been stable.....ever. The sun goes through cycles of hotter and colder is most of the reason. After all, the sun is a gigantic ball of nuclear fire not an electronic device with stable output. Of course you know the earth is a big rock that hurtles through space at 27,000 mph and slams in to meteors and comets all day. It is irrational to believe temperatures could maintain long term stability under these conditions.

Yea well there is always weather. Sometimes its hot, sometimes its cold. We had records set here in central Texas for heat. We have always set records for heat because it is so hot here all the time. Heatwaves in January. If there is global warming we will never know the difference. If you look at the last hundred million years you can see that temperatures today are much cooler, not nearly warm enough to support dinosaurs in Antarctica.

So in FACT the earth is in a very cool state. Any RATIONAL person who looked at the mathematics of the situation has to conclude that the earth's living things are currently victimized by COLD temperatures relative to what most living things have been accustomed to living in according to fossil records. People who want to stop global warming are therefore in fact the enemies of our Mother Earth and favor the freezing of living things and droughts.

Global warming is a scam. the world has had volcanoes, earthquakes, ice ages, meteors, and floods for millions of years. No problem. Now some simple carbon dioxide that is essentially just plant food is going to destroy everything? LoL. This has to be one of the biggest communist hoaxes of all time.

I understand that most of the history of the world has seen warmer temperatures and that we are emerging from the mini-ice age following the Krakatoa volcanic eruption 800 years ago. I think that the earth would be warming right now if humans weren't here. I also know that there has been increased solar flare activity in recent years that may be contributing to temperature increases. The last 25 years has seen very slight temperature increases for ALL the other planets in the solar system as well.

Evaportion is good for living things because 2/3 of the earth's surface is water and what goes up must come down. I don't necessarily believe increases in CO2% will increase plant growth directly as some do because this increase is only a very minor amount and of course CO2 is not generally thought of as the limiting factor in plant growth but more often sunlight and to a less consistent degree water which as I've mentioned should increase with higher planetary temperature. Increased rainfall will balance the water factor enough to increase land mass coverage by foliage. When the volcanic dust blocked out sunlight 800 years ago oxygen levels plummeted as photosynthetic organisms collapsed.leading to a new ice age round of large animal extinctions.

Arctic and antarctic circle animal, plant and human tribe extinctions also occored. The mass migrations out of northern Asia and Scandanavia sparked huge unrest and the northern Asian population has barely begun to recover. As the world recovers from yet another ice age humans have become self aware enough to recognize the dynamic nature of the earth's climate but maybe not enough to percieve all factors.

Al Gore says the oceans will rise up to 25 feet! From just the frozen north and south poles? Are you kidding me? He can't really think think the world is dumb enough to believe that obvious lie. If the caps melt the ocean will rise very little. You see I took GEOMETRY in school. The earth is a sphere. A vast majority of the sphere is not covered by ice. Each half has to be far less than 10% ice covered even in the winter, probably less than 5% in the summer. LOL. It switches year round because of alterante seaons in the north south pole. How tall would those ice sheets need to be to raise the sea level noticably of the rest of the earth which is mostly covered in water have to be? Don't forget that ice expands to a much larger size over the same quantity of water, including the portion that is below sea level which will of course itself contract subsatantially as the arctic is all sea with little land. The answer: It would have to be miles high. It is a proven fact that 1000 years ago there were huge vineyards growning in northern Britian. It is far too cold to grow grapes there today. Guess what the sea level was then? You guessed it (whoever has at least and average IQ) the same as it is today according to coastline sediment formations.

Answer 2

There'a a lot more important other c**p that they'll have to deal with.

Answer 3

Prominent and competent scientists have been exploring  other theories of climate change for years.  That hasn't stopped the Gore followers from refusing to look at it from any angle other than their own.

Answer 4

Even so, we should all make an effort to support recycleing efforts and environmental conservation.  Big lots of dirt, nasty food wrappers floating around and high prices based on the demand for the earth natural resources is not my cup of tea.  

But yeah.  It's good to hear that we're not going to see the end of man kind in the next 50 years.

Answer 5

Read your source more carefully. There are not 50,000 scientists expressing disagreement with the IPCC's analysis. Rather, the APS wanted to launch a debate about one aspect of that analysis -- whether human activity is primarily responsible for global warming.

To spark the debate, the journal of the APS published a paper submitted by one of its members questioning whether human activity is a principal cause of global warming. Not 50,000 scientists -- ONE.

The APS went on to say: "Whether or not human produced carbon dioxide is a major cause of impending climate change (as is being debated in the two articles of this issue), the issue of energy “production” by our Earth-bound societies must be faced. Fossil fuel supplies may become unavailable in this century – or the next – but in a finite system, obeying the laws of thermodynamics, non-fossil energy sources will have to become available to mankind, sooner or later (within the foreseeable lifetime of our planet)."

Answer 6

Don't be that upset with them...they're just brainwashed...buying into this "end of the age of abondance", believing that depopulation is a good thing and necessary for the earth, and of ALL the institutions that will improve the situation, the GOVERNMENT!? is the one to do it? They don't care about their own footsoldiers let alone polar bears, it's just control mechanisms

Answer 7

Well, it's about time!