Discussion Board

I'd really like to get some opinions on these, thanks!

John Coleman slams global warming
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lk8SSqc7 ... re=related

Lies of global warming
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-zeGY8zb ... re=related

Al Gore sued by over 30,000 Scientists for fraud
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FfHW7KR3 ... re=related

My opinion is that this is like the debates over food and pharmaceuticals. There may be folks on both sides of the issue more interested in stirring the pot and muddying the waters than in figuring out what needs to be done.

I work at Oak Ridge National Laboratory where computer simulations are used to study possible climate projections for the future. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) mentioned in the third video used computers at ORNL to generate a lot of the data for which they won the Nobel prize jointly with Al Gore in 2007. As I understand it, the Nobel prize is only awarded to scientists who have done work the scientific community as a whole recognizes as valuable.

Who are the 30,000 scientists John Coleman claims are on his side? I didn't hear anywhere in the video a website where I could go see a list of them (but I also didn't listen to the whole thing). As long as I don't have to provide evidence, I could claim that 60,000 doctors agree with me about the best way to eat.

Here is a thread on a forum for weather students and experts. It seems that most of that group believes that global warming is "mostly a naturally occuring anomaly with some enhancements by humans."

I appreciate the point of one of the posters on stormtrack.org who pointed out that the issue really doesn't have to be whether humans are contributing to global warming or not, but what policy and personal decisions and lifestyle adjustments need to be made to give ourselves and our children the best hope of survival for the future. Whether global warming claims are true or not, air pollution and environmental destruction hurts us. What can we do about it?

Everyone will have to decide what to think for themselves.

The part of the video I watched does not seem credible to me. So that's my opinion.

For an idea to work when applied to reality, the idea must be objective. That means the idea must be drawn logically from observable facts of reality.

I am a layman -- in every scientific subject. That does not mean I can't tentatively form conclusions about scientific subjects as political activists claim to use them. Using dialectics -- a set of skills in questioning -- anyone can gather information about any specialist's claims. For example, if, under questioning, a specialist contradicts himself or makes statements that his listeners can see aren't true, then the listeners are right to reject the specialist's claims.

Take an example, the notion of ICACC, Imminent Catastrophically Anthropogenic Climate Change. This, as I have heard it in face-to-face conversations, is the belief that we are all going to be incinerated or we are going to drown or starve in less than one generation and its all the fault of wicked humans who act like humans.

I have never heard any credible argument in favor of it. But, then again, I am a layman.

What I can evaluate are political proposals. Those are open to examination and evaluation by every sane adult. When I hear advocates of ICACC almost without exception advocate massive governmental oppression and exploitation as the "solution" to the alleged problem of "climate change" (formerly known as "global warming"), then I object and reject.

P. S. -- I avoid videos. I want to see claims and proof made in writing. If someone is claiming that thousands of scientists are suing Mr. Gore, then let's see the proof.

Excellent post, Eileen! And the videos are so interesting and informative - with facts!! I really think everyone should watch these and beware of all media hype. Thanks!

I would advise a fairly unbiased source of discussion about many elements of science.

It is written by a University of California professor who teaches the most popular science course at that prestigious university...

Physics for Future Presidents: The Science Behind the Headlines

http://www.amazon.com/Physics-Future-Pr ... 450&sr=8-1

Everyone would do well to stop drinking down everything Al Gore and his buddies put out, as well as the above statement by 30,000 scientists.

I'll tell you this. If this professor was a biased sham, he would be outed at a place like UC Berkeley. Yet his course is the most popular science course year after year.
That at a university that is the embodiment of radical environmentalism.

Find it a the library or buy it. It will give you a dose of reality that you won't hear in the press. Real science.

From one Amazon review..
"With subjects ranging from nukes to space exploration to alternate energy sources Dr. Mullar separates the wheat from the chaff by addressing things that people believe that just ain't so."

Funny how AL Gore and the other so called Greenies stand to profit the most. Gobal carbon taxes that are going rob the 3rd world and everyone but the elite in first world

I received this notice in a newsletter today regarding further interviews to be broadcast Tonight, Friday, 10/30 on the Glenn Beck TV show:

Tonight on TV: Are we moving towards global governing? Glenn talks with Lord Monckton and Ambassador Bolton about Global Warming laws and the doors they will open. Tonight at 5pm Eastern only on the Fox News Channel (FNC)!

Well, if he can fix the planet, more power to him. I'll send him a few bucks myself. I don't see anyone condemning Standard Oil et. al. for making a profit. Look at the mess they made.

This assertion is based on?

http://www.iitap.iastate.edu/gcp/studen ... kberg.html

I think you are confusing the problem with the political shenannigans going on claiming to address the problem.

Hi all.
Yes, global warming is the burning topic of today's responsible persons of the earth.In all over the world we are facing the worse effect and that is the climate change. Many countries are facing exactly opposite type of climates. Like for example. In India, one state is called 'Cherapunji" and is known to have highest rain in the country. But in 2007 in faced the threatening drought. Just think of it. Exactly opposite had happened to another state of India called 'Rajasthan' where one of the world's largest desert is there. At the same year they faced highest rain of last 60 years. Is these cases are dangerous to the lives on the earth ?

Quite an impressive batch of teabagging crazies.

Got any more? I can always use a good chuckle.

Then don't watch. This "debate" is stupid. It's going to happen or it won't. Of course Al Gore is responsible for everything that is wrong with the world.

Credible science says that it is more likely than not a problem. Whether cap and trade is a valid solution (which I rather doubt) is an entirely different issue.
But the potential consequenses of doing nothing far outweigh the consequenses of experimenting.

And Thomas Sowell can be counted on for toeing the ideological party line.

Lord Monckton is doing a good job at exposing the fraud. He was on Alex jones today