These deniers are oil company plants or Rush Limbaugh DEAD-heads. This topic brings out the trolls. It's absurd to have any debate now, when we have maybe 10 years to avoid horrendous catastrophe in 100 years; if we take action now, it will just be catastrophe, minus the horrendous.

see - www.skirsch.com

Cheney has a vested interest in denying it. He's an oil man, i.e., he's a troglodyte from the carbon era who wants to keep damaging our economy (except the sliver of scandalously enriched big oil plutocrats like himself), damage the health of the people, damage the planet in ways never known before in human history, damange our national security, - how many ways is the reactionary hanging onto the carbon age brining misery and catastrophe to our nation and the planet - you need more than two hands. I don't believe in evil, but in Cheney's case....I wonder...

.

First of all, as a life-long member of the republican party, I cannot beleive that global warming is anything more than a theory, like the evolution. And even though apes aren't causing global warming, it is interesting that in that movie, Planet of the Apes, the apes survived in the world that Gore says is coming. And they learned to talk and make their own theories, which also turned out to be wrong, so I think it's better to ignore all theories in general and just wait for the facts. I also feel safer if I don't believe in the theories and feeling safer is what is country is all about and what our Christian fathers of this country wanted for us after being scared by England. Remember that, liberals.

.

Hey, kiddies, let's ask the Aussies what they think of global climate change:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2006/nov/08/australia.drought

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/australasia/australias-epic-drought-the-situation-is-grim-445450.html

http://www.cosmosmagazine.com/node/1402

Leland R. Erickson

Citizen

First I'd like to stay I believe that global warning is a farce. most of the science of global warming does say that it's not CO2 that's causing anything and that global temperature is actually on a downward trend (science not opinion).
It really is a case where the media and environmental groups are pushing something that really doesn't help anyone. It's surprising how little people look at the big picture. If man made global warming does exist then ethanol and hybrids makes it worse but is pushed by by environmentalists. For them it has become more of an issue of getting money for their own use than saving the planet.

I'm a heretic on this. I don't deny that human impacts are causing warming but to use Gore's metaphore, I believe the earth is round but I don't believe that the orbits must be circles, and instead I believe they are complex elipses influenced by a number of only partially understood reasons and therefor making decisions based on the IPCCs insistence that the path is predictable is why ideologues and passionate believers childishly confuse me and other heretics with being "deniers". Superior intelligence, something much needed in this fourm, would agree that the ability to hold diverse opinions and perspectives is a strenth not a stumbling block...un­less the agenda is simply to the political agenda, which I think is at least partly true in this case, the heretical view should be considered seriously while further and much increased science continues as we address the problems that population, pollution and bad planning are continuing to cause.

If Gore believed AGW were as serious as he says it is, he would be advocating for nuclear power as an interim power source until alternative energy became more viable. The fact is that he does not want to see nuclear power come more into play as this will not bringhim more money. The "science" of a computer model that cannot accurately predict the past, let alone the future, should not be used to create policy. Is the climate changing? Yes. Has it changed in the past? Yes. Just part of the natural cycle. If CO2 alone raises temperatures, why did the temps fall from the 40' to the 70's? There has been no warming since 1998 yet mans CO2 output increases. Our contribution to total CO2 in the atmosphere is around 3-5%, if you take that into account of ALL green house gases it drops to around .28%. So tell me how reducing our CO2 output will change anything as far as climate? Those grant hunters who rely on models to make their claims neglect to factor in water vapor into their model because the results do not jibe with their therory on how to get paid.

Gore is spot on. I just attended a seminar at the Scripps Institute oc Oceanography in San Diego on this subject. No one, not one scientist involved in the field even talks about any doubts on the matter. Most said that the fact that it is man-made was under some doubt in the 1970s, but not in any serious way since then because of overwhelming scientific data that have since become available.

So, Gore is right, the deniers are no better than flat-earthers.

The cult of Obama and Globalphobia uses the same PR firm ...No substance but spew it loud and long enough and the sheeple will follow....­.97% of CO2 is volcanic or other natrually occuring events... so that with humanity maybe responsible for 3 % we would have to basically die off in order to even reduce any significant margin of that 3% and then still nothing would be affected..­..How about a debate with an intelligent scientist with an opposing opinion... then again you learned in 2002 that you could not even debate Pres Bush and yoo all know how stupid he is.

Smoking Out The Warm-Mongers
By INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY | Posted Wednesday, March 05, 2008 4:20 PM PT

Climate Change: The founder of the Weather Channel wants to sue those who sell carbon offsets as scam artists who participate in the "the FRAUD that is global warming."

http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?secid=1501&status=article&id=289612348101645&secure=1&show=1&rss=1

Someone should "sue the people who sell carbon credits," he told the conference this week. "That includes Al Gore. "

Al Gore is bad because he's making money? Last I checked we were a capitalist society. More power to him if he can provide leadership and a new business model for carbon offsets. We have to start somewhere. If making money from global climate change then who's the bigger criminal, Al Gore or Exxon Mobil?

I could accept the headlined statement by Mr. Gore, but I'd also add that believing that enough people will change their lifestyle to make a difference is similarly foolish.

Couple of points: First, it's not just climatologists claiming we are in an unnatural warming trend. Anthropologists, archaeologists, botanists, biologists, pretty much anyone in a field relating to life on Earth is finding evidence of global warming. Insurance companies factor it in their risk-assessment models and landscapers are finding temperate plants harder to cultivate in parts of the country. Even if you don't believe in global warming, those who insure your home and manage your landscape do.

Second, what's the downside to accepting global warming is a problem? CO2 is a human waste product. Lowering our output of CO2 means less human waste in the air we breathe. That's like lowering the amount of urine in our drinking water or feces in our food. Even if you find the level acceptable, why would you be against consuming less waste product?

And what's the downside to consuming less oil? Who likes paying more at the pump or paying more money to OPEC? The price of oil will continue to climb. Finding more ways to get oil doesn't fix the problem. Using alternative energy does.

The only argument against global warming is the cost to do something about it. Well, guess what, the cost of not doing anything is just starting to hit us and it's only going to get worse. And that's without counting the price of the wars for oil or the effects of climate change into the equation.

Gore is just protecting the "carbon credits" business he started with Maurice Strong (the modern equivalent of Papal Indulgences). Stop the Insanity!!! Deep water sensors show the temperatures over the last 8 years have actually declined!!! Yes, declined as CO2 levels have increased.

CO2 emissions are a direct component of global warming. It is basic Physical Chemistry. No way around it.