while every other responsible individual worries about the impact of climate change on the future of the next generation, you people use junk science as the duct tape to keep the exhaust pipe stuck to your bullshit machine.

An intersting line from 'http://www.museum.state.il.us/exhibits/ice_ages/when_ice_ages.html'

"If "ice age" is used to refer to long, generally cool, intervals during which glaciers advance and retreat, we are still in one today. Our modern climate represents a very short, warm period between glacial advances."

Interesting. I mean, the tree huggers talk about glacial decline. If I remember correctly, those things have been melting since they were discovered.

"Polar Bears are drowning!" OK, let's think about that for a few seconds. PB's swim like fish. They have an incredbily thick, oily coat that prevents them from freezing while in waters that would kill the average human in a very short time.

So, what happens? They're in the middle of 50 square miles of ice and 'POOF!' - it all melts? That's some seriously localized 'Global Warming'.

As Rachel Marsden said the other day in the TO Sun; cow farts are the real problem.

Jeff - would you like me to send a volunteer down there to teach you how to click links?

I am very much a doubter of the climate change hypothesis. I have worked with the climate change modellers, and they admit their models do not fit past, let alone future trends of climate change.

However, I am acutaely aware that large economies in Europe, Asian and North America currently do not produce enough energy to sruvive, let alone thrive. Today our economimies and societies are critically vulnerable to energy supplies from unstable states or states that activitly promote hostilility towards western nations.

With or without climate change, I firmly believe we need to move towards greater energy secutiry in western nations.

If this movement also contributes to the reduction of greenhousew gas emissions, great!

I am very much a doubter of the climate change hypothesis. I have worked with the climate change modellers, and they admit their models do not fit past, let alone future trends of climate change.

However, I am acutaely aware that large economies in Europe, Asian and North America currently do not produce enough energy to sruvive, let alone thrive. Today our economimies and societies are critically vulnerable to energy supplies from unstable states or states that activitly promote hostilility towards western nations.

With or without climate change, I firmly believe we need to move towards greater energy secutiry in western nations.

If this movement also contributes to the reduction of greenhousew gas emissions, great!

As I've said before...
As more of the truth about climate change comes out ...the screaming from the liars, gets louder and louder...!

kate: if i needed such help, i wouldn't hesitate to ask you. you are, afterall, the undisputed queen.

i figured your peeps could figure out what responsible meant w/o a link though. i'm pretty good with the whole html thang actually. jeff davidson photography.ca

So jeff, tell us all about how you, a photographer, developed your strongly held and obviously expert opinion on climate change, was it Al Gore's movie?

Also let us know how you think the politicians you favour intend to alter global weather patterns to change your anticipated "impact of climate change on the future of the next generation".

dear anon, i figure my opinions on climate change are as valid as kate's. why trust a dog trainer/goalie mask painter over a photographer?

The media loves to publish the most disastrous scenarios predicted and scare the shit out of the masses. Maybe if they were a little more responsible with their reporting, we wouldn't be in this mess of exaggerating the threats of climate change. I guess some people just think that distorting the truth is okay if it scares people into action. Oh well, that's their opinion.

"while every other responsible individual worries about the impact of climate change on the future of the next generation, you people use junk science as the duct tape to keep the exhaust pipe stuck to your bullshit machine."

Jeff: is that supposed to be debate? Kate presents some serious sober second thought ... not her own ideas, but those of well placed people, and the best you can do is come up with verbal vomit... you lost your case after your first post... personal attacks on "you people" places you in the "bigot" class ... Merry Christams!

William: Nice call. It apparently took less than a minute for the frantic screaming from Toronto to happen.

I visited the Tyrell Musuem in Drumheller this summer, and at the end of the last exhibit there is a sign on the wall that reads "Species come and species go. The only constant in life on earth is change". Deal with it.

Overall, the scientific endevor might be wearing a huge black eye if researchers do not tone down the "climate change" hysteria and come clean with the doubts in the science. The AGW proposers can not continue to ignore the data that doesn't fit their hypothesis, and declare the matter closed "due to scientific consensus". Science has never been about consensus. In God we trust, all others bring data. And, no...you do not get to ignore the bits that undermine your pet theory.

More worrysome, we are living in a highly technological age when few people understand how science actually works.

If the public starts viewing all scientists as whores for research money, we will all be in deep trouble when a real threat happens.

I truly wish that co2 was even 1/10th as much of a driver of climate warming as the hysterics claimed. I would really appreciate a Miocene climate right about now.

Al Gore, heh, he invented the internet, ha,ha,ha,ha,ha,ha,ha! I nominate him for the tool of the decade award, although there are so many on the left that are just as deserving.

Ultimately this is about the credibility of science. As many have pointed out environmentalism has become the new dominant religion of the west complete with apocalyptic visions for the future. Many of this religion’s biggest adherents are scientists such as David Suzuki and friends.

If like Y2K the predictions of significant global warming and rising sea levels do not happen then the credibility of all science will suffer. I think many scientists are starting to realize this and becoming concerned.

Well it's good to see the differences.On this thread I've heard from dipshits to debutaunts.

Let it snow!!! Somebody is gonna have some "splainin" to do.

Syncro

I'm still waiting for the MSM to write about the effects that the current El Niño is having world-wide. We see the effects in Vancouver with the high winds and in eastern Canada with the balmy weather. This is not climate change. This is a climate phase that we have known about for centuries.

“If you repeat a lie long enough then it becomes a truth” was a PROPOGANDA ploy used by the NAZIS. Seems like the doomsayers have adopted it as their strategy.

From climate cooling in the 80's to climate warming in the 90’s and into the 2000's with climate change. Their only constant is climate and the last variable - change - is a given since the only thing constant in nature is change. At least they got that right.

Have all the research moneys been allotted yet? Follow the money to get to the truth.

The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary. - H L Mencken

"Sophomore slump" my a$$ ...

A few scientists did about 1/10 of a real science experiment, got bored with all of the long, tedious measurements, calculations, publishing, criticism, re-testing, etc. that they're allegedly trained to do, so they wrote a computer program in such a way to very quickly "confirm" their hypothesis, and ran out of their labs and straight down to the local newspaper screaming, "Eureka!"

You wouldn't believe the bullcrap that the idiot teachers at my kids' school are dishing out. Every single day, it's another hysterical warning about global warming. "In a few years, Great Britain is going to disappear under the sea." My favorite, "Everyone in North America is going to have to move to the center of the continent". Before the Christmas Break: "You better save all your wrapping paper and use it for wrapping presents next year!" And the corker: "But if we go to Hawaii what about all the tsunamis that will happen there!!!"

So I'm showing my oldest one the real science, the physics of the greenhouse effect and the various real-world calculations (as opposed to the speculative and probably non-existent positive feedback mechanisms with which non-scientists like Al Gore and David "Experimented with Fruit Flies 25 Years Ago" Suzuki are so infatuated). And I can't make any impression, because they teach so little real science in school, presumably because it cuts into the time they need in order to show "An Inconvenient Truth" and tell them how great it is to drive a Smart Car or a hybrid car (which none of the teachers drives, of course).

while every other responsible individual worries about the impact of climate change on the future of the next generation, you people use junk science as the duct tape to keep the exhaust pipe stuck to your bullshit machine.

As a responsible individual and a parent, I'm mildly interested in what the weather might be like tomorrow, next week, or next year. But I'm not too worried. If it's a couple of degrees warmer or cooler I know we'll get by no problemo. I'll either add or subtract a few inches of mulch on my plants, and the outdoor skating season will be longer or shorter by a couple of weeks. And so on for everyone else in the world. Some will move to a different location to take advantage of new opportunities, and some will invent new ways to make do with what they've got. That is, if their governments allow them. What really worries me is what will happen if we give even more money and more power to would-be commie central planners who think that no one could ever build a house or plant a crop unless a gigantic, multi-tiered bureaucracy is in place to tell them how to do it, and a huge and invasive police force makes sure that they "do it right". In that case, the forecast is terror, repression, famine, war and genocide.

When first discovered by the Norse, Newfoundland was named Vineland because of the flora and fauna they found there. It is thought that they sailed to Greenland, where they grew crops and raised cattle, in Feburary when they had prevailing winds. Try that today!
The global warming and climate change story is the paradigm of the Chicken Little fable. Very useful in a political campaign. THEY don't care that the world is going to explode and we're all going to die. RUN for that SAFE Liberal cave in the hills!

Global warming caused by humans is - in short bullshit. It's all about the money.

It all comes down to what a previous poster said here is that when something real does come down the pipe and "scientists" are jumping up and down to get our attention - will we listen?

I found this the other day. It sure helped me put this whole global warming thing into perspective.

http://epw.senate.gov/repwhitepapers/6345050%20Hot%20&%20Cold%20Media.pdf

Courtesy of http://mypetjawa.mu.nu/archives/185656.php

I found this the other day. It sure helped me put this whole global warming thing into perspective.

http://epw.senate.gov/repwhitepapers/6345050%20Hot%20&%20Cold%20Media.pdf

Courtesy of http://mypetjawa.mu.nu/archives/185656.php

I found this the other day. It sure helped me put this whole global warming thing into perspective.

http://epw.senate.gov/repwhitepapers/6345050%20Hot%20&%20Cold%20Media.pdf

Courtesy of http://mypetjawa.mu.nu/archives/185656.php

Catastrophic global warming caused by man-made greenhouse gasses brought to you by the same folks that brought you Y2K. I could use a little here in "Winterpeg".

Justzumgai, thank you for injecting a little common sense into the debate.

If you google "mass of the solar system," you will learn that something like 98.8% of the mass of everything within it ( small planets, gas giants, asteroid belt, gasses and comets and meteorites and clouds ) is contained within...

...the Sun.

Venus is getting warmer, and the Martian ice caps are melting.

What does that tell you?

The Sun is the master controller of weather, here, and elsewhere.

And unless you can find the thermostat on the Sun and turn it down, there's not a dam thing anyone on Earth can do about it.

And then there's Maude, I mean jeff, trolling for attention for his blog.
Here's a science question for him. If a blog exists on the internet totally unread, does it make an impact?

Arrrrgggghhhh! JEFFIE! You underestimate Ms McMillan, big time. As I am a biologist for some 36 years (and something of a real photographer), climate change science is charlatan science, mostly snake oil, some science, mostly politics. You're not even a very good photographer, mostly just a snapshooter. Mostly, you're just ignorant.

Strange how everyone just skips over the last atmospheric crisis the hole in the Ozone layer that we averted from growing too much larger with the CFC ban when talking about past crisises. Pretty odd considering how people will bring up everything from DDT to Y2K but dance around the most relevant example because it doesn't support their thinking.

As has been observed and reported may times here and elsewhere, climate science is new, inprecise and nebulous and hardly a science where firm communal agreements take place. There is much argument and diversity of thesis in new sciences, this one is no different.

Climate change is a fact of life on this planet. The geologic record attests to this fact of heating and cooling cycles...what is dubious are therories that man can change the natural climate cycles either for worse or better in any significant way.

One thing that got science in credibility trouble was a small faction of alarmists selling their credibility to a crass political cabal who wish to place a common inert, heat reflecting gas (CO2) as a doomsday pollutant and allow bureaucrats to tax it and profiteers to tade it for cash credits.

This in retrospect was the greatest fraud of the past century and it will take science a long time to recover the credibility lost to the tiny materialist/alarmist faction who fear mongered peak oil, ozone doom, global cooling and CO2 doomsdays so their corporate sponsors could reap short term windfall profits throug trading credit and investments in CO2 regulatory exempt nations.

To science: Please don't come running to me telling me the sky is falling and expect me to become concerned unless you have a piece of it in your hand to prove it....and no fair painting meteorites blue and passing them off as sky chunks. :) The public has been scammed by the best politics gave to offer, a little reason and fact from science is welcome.

Science is factual, methodical and seeks the truth. Politics is the art of attaining credibility where none is due and twisting the truth...the two disciplines are mutually exclusive...let's not mix them in the climate change debate.

The biggists amout of climate change comes from AL GORE and his insane ranting i mean the whole idea of global warming is rediculous and gore should be sent to the nut house he is truly out of his mind

Jose: Perhaps the reason that not many people are not bringing up the CFC / ozone hole link is that not many people here disbelieve the science supporting it? We're not necessarily idiots, Jose, just because we don't believe the psuedo-science being foisted on us regarding climate change.

In your philosophy, is the populace supposed to believe everything and anything that "concerned scientists" or "the government" tells them? Shouldn't the populace be permitted to think for themselves, or is this not permitted in your philosophy?

We are asking some basic questions of the claims of the climate alarmists and they are not being answered. The alarmists simply yell louder that we're paid off by the oil companies...well, if that's true, maybe they can help find my cheque, it must be missing.

People who don't answer questions usually don't have the answers...therefore we are justified in doubting their claims.

You can go back to previous threads on climate change and find the posting about valid questions on climate change that we'd like to have answered. If you are so certain of the science, find someone that can answer them for us...or perhaps, someone could be so kind as to re-post them here for you.

Of course, this is a rhetorical question, because I don't think that you'll answer the questions for us.

Yo Brian! Have you ever noticed that most (make that 99%) of the messages on this site only appear ONCE? That's because after they hit "post", they wait till their screen resets and, voila, their message is "posted". You have to be patient!

Jeff said:"while every other responsible individual worries about the impact of climate change on the future of the next generation, you people use junk science as the duct tape to keep the exhaust pipe stuck to your bullshit machine."

I'll bet:
A) You don't walk to work
B) Your home is comfy warm
C) You tend to jump when you hear a loud noise
D) You confuse "worry" with responsibility

Don't be to hard on the leftovers, they do serve a purpose, mostly as useful idiots leading the way to the wrong door in life. They have served me well by always pointing out the wrong way. The louder they yell and indignantly scream displeasure the more you can be assured you are right by taking an opposing tack. I treat their views like most of the successful farmers on the prairies treated government advice on which crops to plant, do exactly the opposite and you will be just fine. It has served me well.

One must remember that most of the leftovers are government employees of form or another. They are followers not leaders so you really can’t expect useful and/or realistic advice from them.
They survive in the womb of mother government all their lives so put anything they say in it’s proper perspective, protect what I have at all costs and create whatever you must, untruthful or not, to protect my way of life. Be it government, unionist or "climate change" they are but one.

Jose,

I agree with you that it is a good example. And as the other poster indicated it was backed by strong science, which generated some alternatives and people took action...no movies, no former VP's preaching (his lost calling)and it appears to have done the trick.

Oh sorry one problem this year, the hole got bigger....why? because the upper atmosphere was significantly COOLER. But long term predictions are that we should be back to normal in about 25 years.

Jeff, I havent seen any proof offered up of AGW...some proof of warming, but it has been warmer, the medieval warm period...which oddly corresponded to the Maunder minimum, i.e. no sun spots for a full cycle.

And the as for it getting warmer, well the sunspot cycle has been abnormally high for the past 30 years, hmmm looks like there might be a correlation, maybe a better correlation than C02 and temperature....now correlation doesnt mean causality so you better go back to more theory and then test that theory in other circumstances to see if the causality holds true in other crcumstances....Not syaing C02 has nothing to do with anything just that I really question it as the primary driver.

Now if your concern is pollution, then I am with you 100% and so would lots of others including our athsmatic Prime Minister.

It's so frustrating to see the USA being bashed by those liberal-pinkos. Here's a country that knows how to get things done! It knows how to solve problems even if it means getting a little bit of blood on your hands.

So what if a few innocent folks get tortured ... boo hoo ... the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few bleeding hearts. You can't stand up to terror without hurting a few feelings. If you are arrested then you have obviously done something to put you under suspicion. A little torture will get the info out of you and clear you if you've done nothing wrong.

And that's what the USA has done to protect the free world. It has stood up to terror. Supporting friendly dictators sometimes needs to be done in order to protect the big picture. Saddam Hussein was the right guy in the right place at the right time. He should have known his place. Same with Noriega.

Ignoring the Geneva Conventions needs to be done - who follows rules in war?! And that takes guts because you know you put your own soldiers at risk when you do that. But again, the needs of the many. The bleeding heart Red Cross volunteers shouldn't be there in the first place. Those women and kids they are there to help would likely die anyway so stop wasting money.

Invading countries needs to be done too if it means protecting the big picture. Invading Iraq and Afghanistan has solved problems. The threat of terrorism is diminished significantly. Those who say that Saddam and al-Qaeda were not connected don't know what they are talking about. That's like saying Hitler and Stalin were not connected and working together.

Protecting democracy is not easy and it needs to be done. Some will criticize as found at http://www.neravt.com/left/invade.htm but they shouldn't let the facts get in the way of appreciating that the needs of the many outweigh the needs of a few banana republics.

Strange how everyone just skips over the last atmospheric crisis the hole in the Ozone layer that we averted from growing too much larger with the CFC ban when talking about past crisises. Pretty odd considering how people will bring up everything from DDT to Y2K but dance around the most relevant example because it doesn't support their thinking.

Whatever happened to acid rain?

Jeff and Jose:

Do you guys cover yer badass selves in leetches when you get a cold? Probably not being how that bit of "science" has evolved.

If you bother to educate yourselves rather than spew dogma from the church of climate change you might discover that some competing theories include solar cycles and even one that suggests the current warming cycle goes beyond our solar system and has more to do with a bombardment of neutrinos throughout this galaxy.

Mind you I've yet to see these theories postulated on the Nature of Things.... so I guess if the high priest of bullshit isn't preachin it it must not be valid.

I suggest you two put your panties back on, go to the nearest Starbucks and have a double de-caf, soy,low sodium, latee, frappe seven dollar cup of piss.

Me... I'm gonna have another coffee a smoke and go to work.

Syncro

Er.. Dieter
Not to be offensive or anything, but what the heck does that have to do with the subject at hand?

Questions that the Proponents of the Kyoto Accord do not like to answer, or cannot give rational answers to..

Is the world’s climate continually evolving? Answer- YES

What brought about the end of every ice age to date? Answer- Global warming.

Is it true that if global warming had not occurred in the past that our lands would be covered with a thousand + feet of ice? A- Yes, absolutely.

Did humans cause the global warming that brought about the end of the previous ice ages? A- NO, as for the most part there were no humans inhabiting the planet at the time.

To what extent are we able to effect the world’s climate? A- we do not know with any degree of certainty We have no prior experience in attempting, let alone succeeding in making changes to global climatic conditions.

Would compliance by all of the signature countries to the Kyoto Agreement reduce global warming? A- YES it would, however it is most doubtful that it could reverse global warming, only slow down the rate of increase to some small and unknown amount. In any case to stop global warming would most likely be to advance the next ice age.

Is it true that recent discoveries by some British scientific researchers regarding the changes which may be occurring in the ocean currents, in the Atlantic Ocean in particular, are caused by water temperature changes occurring? A-Yes it is true. These scientific researchers installed temperature and ocean current measurement devices across the Atlantic, from early data, they believe that it may be, that such ocean current changes, EG ‘the Gulf Stream’, may in time cause and may have in past history, been the cause of Europe’s ice ages. This suggests that it may just be too early for the world to be jumping on the Kyoto band wagon and that we as a world society should do more due-diligence (scientific study) before renegotiating then implementing this extremely out of balanced agreement on world action against climate change.

Is it true that the Liberals plan for Canada to comply with the Kyoto targets involved the purchase of perhaps several billion dollars worth of “carbon credits” from some under developed Asian and European countries?- Yes it is true, EG Russia.

If Canada were to purchase “carbon credits”, would it result in lower emissions of green house gases or pollutants in Canada? Absolutely NOT.
Would it result in a reduction of global green house gas or pollution? Absolutely NOT

Would the purchase of “carbon credits” have an impact on Canada’s economy? YES, the effects would be very negative.

Is it true that many third world countries will profit financially from the Kyoto agreement whether or not there are any positive effects on climate change? A- YES it is true.

Has the IPCC considered the suggestion (hypothesis) that an accelerated melting of the Greenland ice cap could put a cover of fresh low density water over the adjacent northern ocean thereby shutting down the gulf stream, as the present salty dense cold water would not be able to drop down to bottom of the ocean, which presently allows the warm gulf to extend to the north? A- it appears not as if it is true, then global warming could shut down the N. Atlantic circulation and precipitate the next ice age. Of course then Europe might just be wanting global warming. But this is only one of many hypotheses out there.

Has the IPCC considered the evidence that there is some correlation of global temperatures to sun spot activity? No they have not, in fact they, including the likes of CBC’s Fifth Estate and Dr. Andrew Weaver from U Vic, have gone out of their way in attempting to discredit those who have studied the sun spots or every other possible rational for climate change. ”If the “science is sound” as they attempt to claim, then they should be happy to put it up to all scrutiny.
As an example some of them charged that Dr. Ball and others from the “Friends of Science,” have been funded by oil companies. Dr. Ball categorically refutes this charge as being a blatant lie.

Is it true that the only scientific group to study and track climate change for more than recent history is the geological community? A-YES

Do geologists agree with the Kyoto protocol? A-NO, most say that it is premature to take such action when the start of another ice age may be just around the corner

The vast majority of so called “climatologists’, do they have a BSc in “climatology”? No they do not, they are a mish-mash of mostly well meaning engineers, mathematicians, geneticists (like D. Suzuki), horticulturists, biologists, environmentalists, meteorologists and countless other ‘ists’. Very few are truly qualified to the extent that they should be considered experts on climate change, including David Suzuki, Al Gore, Arnold Shwartzeneger, David Anderson, Jean Cretien, Paul Martin, Jack Layton, Stephan Dion, Garth Turner and many others who talk a lot about it.
Is there a university in the world that has a graduate program leading to a BSc in “Climatology”?- Yes The first, and I believe still the only university in the world to offer a degree in climatology is the University of South Queensland in Australia.

Is Australia a member of the Kyoto Agreement? A- NO

How many of the Kyoto fear mongers were also in panic mode with the Y2K bug? Likely most of them.

How many Kyoto advocates can truly answer these questions, and how many can refute them with plausible , rational answers?

A fine question Gerry regarding relevance of the post. It's all big picture. Democracy and the free market need to be protected from outside threats. Things need to be done to protect them. The exploitation of resources and the growth of industry also need to be protected and unrestricted. The environment is part of that big picture of course. What else is the earth here for if not for us to do what we want?

I alternate between periods of bemused fatalism and manic fanaticism. No, no...not about climate catastrophism, but about the general unwillingness of people to think! As a social factor, the ability to reason logically is near-extinct. This, combined with increasing specialization – very few today are broadly educated – means that even many scientists do not understand the limits to, and the context of, their work. To this, add consumerism and politics (Mencken saw it clearly), ego, etc. and we get our current fiasco without recourse to conspiracy theories.

I’ve spent 20 years doing eng/sci as “hard” as it gets, often in areas of complex systems (a specific field of study that looks at how systems become richer in behaviour when you combine subsystems). I am appalled by the work produced by the bulk of the climate modelling community.

A broad stream of science (NOT!), particularly the environmental, has been infected with a new paradigm – the precautionary principle. Simply put, if a negative effect can be conceived, it must be accorded equal weight with all other factors. This sounds reasonable – even scientific – when put this way, but the problem is in the application. There is an utter disregard for how uncertainties (“risk” for the economists) are treated.

The treatment of uncertainty lies at the heart of the scientific approach. Simplified, all data have two values – an upperbound and a lowerbound (best “guess” is the average). The argument in the climate change community is about the data. Many climate researchers bias the dataset by cherry-picking quantities that support their beliefs, thus undercutting the very foundations of scientific analysis. This is immoral. Many frankly agree with this assessment, but argue that their behaviour is necessary in light of the seriousness of the situation. There you have it: the end justifies the means.

Apologies for the length of the post. I’m avoiding marking exams...

No one has yet told me what is wrong with warmer weather? I notice all the golf courses are still closed til April or May.

Erwin - some people do pay attention and think. Nicely said.

"i figure my opinions on climate change are as valid as kate's. why trust a dog trainer/goalie mask painter over a photographer?" - Jeff, the photographer?

I have work in the permanent collection of the Royal Ontario Museum, in the Canadian Graphic Design History Project, in University textbooks throughout North America, have judged major awards shows throughout the world and have garnered a lot of press and awards.

Jeff,

Qualified to speak as an expert - and having visited your site - what you call photography would not earn you a passing grade in high school. In fact, the only thing that sucks worse than your 'photography' is your continued failure to access what could be loosely referred to as your brain. Obviously one effects the other.

Given the general level of intelligent dialogue that goes on here, you should be grateful that Kate allows you to speak at all. You might show your thanks by attempting to be rational, if not respectful.

Jeff and Jose think they can defeat global warming by wearing fuschia ribbons.

Thanks for that, Erwin!

Jose, I think others have said it well...yes, the climate is changing, as it always changing. The question is...is it the result of man's actions completely, mostly, in part or not at all? Not having reviewed the science in depth, I would guess "in part" or "not at all".

Pollution? Absolutely, we should strive to reduce it as quickly as is economically feasible.

Kyoto Accord and buying carbon credits...utterly foolish and non-sensical.

Reducing CO2...only if someone can prove that it is "pollution". To me, it's as much pollution as nitrogen is.

Kyoto is over in 2012. Are all the envirowackos aware of that fact. As nothing has been done by the liberals to implement it, how could 4 years solve any problems. When this farce was written, what did the authors plan for 2013. Everything would be solved, the treasury would be depleted buying credits from china etc,(thru Strong and friends) and Canadas economy would be reduced to that of Afganistan. Dion better come up with a better plan, for the next election as global warming will not work. With the death of the only unelected US president, (sorry, it isn't Bush) lots is being written about his term in office. How many are aware that Pres. Ford is the main reason Canada is a member of the G8. He fought for us long and hard, against great opposition to our being a member from France. Why is dions country always against Canada. Does that mean dion is also against Canada. Very happy to see the results of the Angus Reid poll showing the majority of cdns do not think dion will be our next PM. Wonder why the cbc isn't mentioning that over and over.

Whether global warming is happening or its just a convenient excuse to justify funding for research is a debate that can rage on for years.

However, the one debate that needs to come front and center is whether the UN plan for creating a global currency and regulating it has a great many pitfalls and dangers.

Most notably is that of who is deciding how many "credits" get issued. What prevents the issuer from using insider info to falsely inflate or deflate the value of the "so-called" credits to manipulate the profits?
Lets say the issuer is the same one that complies and releases the reports that indicate if the so-called emitters knows in advance that they won't meet their targets, won't that increase the "market" demand? We saw what happens with companies like Worldcom and Nortel when insider info does not benefit the shareholders.

Thats the problem with an emmission trading market. It doesn't actually encourage the reduction (hence the devaluation of the credits) it encourages the trading.
Without the value (unreachable targets) the so-called credits have no value.

Would that be the real reason everyone of the Kyoto boosters was po'd at Ambrose? Her statements basically created a depression in the carbon trading market.

Follow the money.

isnt this cycle hauntingly familiar.

http://earthguide.ucsd.edu/virtualmuseum/climatechange2/03_3.shtml

a little "dryas" and the likes of suzuki and gore would be tarred and feathered. crop failures are mitigated by cheap transportation in the short term, the 20th century being the first time mass cheap transportation was capable of sustaining a population anywhere. a 10 or 20 year dryas and the whole structure breaks down. you would have a 21century much worse than the "calamitous 14th century" described in "A distant mirror" almost all based on poor agricultural performance and cooler , not cold weather.

The real question is how many scientists and politicians will believe in global warming when gasoline is ten dollars a gallon.

Citoyen Dion: Don't worry; Kyoto won't bite you.
...-

Liberal crisis junkies

Toronto Sun
Wednesday, December 27, 2006

By LORRIE GOLDSTEIN

I always look forward to having the Liberal Party of Canada tell me what this year's big crisis is.

This year, Liberal Leader Stephane Dion tells me it's global warming.

Last year, then Liberal PM Paul Martin told me it was medical wait times.

More on that in a bit, but first, back to global warming.

While the Tory government is doing nothing about it now, the Liberals did, uh, nothing, about it for 12 years.

But I know global warming is important because Dion named his dog "Kyoto" ...-
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1759019/posts

Harper on the record:

In a year-end interview with CBC Newsworld's Don Newman, Harper was asked yesterday whether his environmental views had evolved – specifically, whether he has ceased having doubts about the scientific evidence for global warming.

"I don't think that fairly represents my criticism," Harper told Newman. "I think my criticism was principally that the (Kyoto climate-change accord) targets were unreachable, Canada had taken on the most onerous targets in the world; I saw no evidence that there was a plan to meet them. ... If anything in the last four or five years, the evidence has strengthened that we have to take real and substantive action."

www.thestar.com/News/article/163817

Strange how everyone just skips over the last atmospheric crisis the hole in the Ozone layer that we averted from growing too much larger with the CFC ban when talking about past crisises.
Odd. I understood CFC molecules were about 5 times heavier than air- just how did they get way up there?

One major burning question that no climate change "chicken little" can ever answer for me:

How is it that I live in Saskatchewan, where millions of years ago Dinosaurs played around with palm trees and tropical plants that grew like weeds, and later on there was a mile thick layer of ice that covered it all, and then it melted, all while no human was there to cause it?

Jeff - what's your address - I'd like to take my bullshit machine for a rip past your house.

The uninformed climate change morons forget the basic lessons we all learned in elementary school. First there were dinosaurs and tropical weather. Then there was ice. Then it melted.

THEN came the internal combustion engine, coal fired electricity generators, and all other evils that the lefties hate so much.

Lefties make me want to puke. Propaganda and hyperbole gets tiresome after so many years...

Goldstein is not exactly accurate when he says that the Conservatives have done nothing.
It seems to me there has been much activity, - for example, many, many consultations, three (at least) major conferences, the dangerous chemical policy, Ethanol policy, Transit policy, Clean air act.
This in the space of 10 short months.
Not exactly nothing.
Oh, Ya, and they saved us fron Kyoto.

Re Triple post: too much egg nog imbedded in my posting finger.

Jose said "Strange how everyone just skips over the last atmospheric crisis the hole in the Ozone layer that we averted..."

did we avert it, Jose?

http://www.nasa.gov/home/hqnews/2006/oct/HQ_06338_Fianl_Ozone_2006.html

For those that are still unsure what to believe about global warming, please read this:

http://pubs.acs.org/subscribe/journals/ci/31/i11/html/11vp.html

this one pretty good at cycles as well. Al Gore should read it.

http://www.clearlight.com/~mhieb/WVFossils/ice_ages.html

also shows that drought would be a result of global cooling. expanding glaciers badder than George Bush. badder than James Brown with a gun.
badder than anything whitey does around Al Sharpton.

Kate, meet me in the bathroom, I gotta tell you something.

Ready?

OK: I think Jeff likes you.

Its rather easy forAL GORE to urge us all to live a more eco-frendly life while he lives in the lap of luxery i mean i,ll bet he dont have a hybrid and his planes dont work on rubberbands i mean AL GORE is a big time hypotcrit

Metrosexual Jeff sed:

i'm pretty good with the whole html thang actually.

Good. 'Cause it looks like your blog has been hijacked.

I've said my peace about most of the Kyoto B.S. before, however despite innumerable posts asking this question, I've yet to get an answer from the Kyoto fans. It's a simple scientific question, can be answered yes or no so here goes. According to the IPCC reports which are the basis of the Kyoto treaty, did the "little ice age" occur or not occur? I continue to await this most illuminating answer.

I saw a list somewhere over the last week that listed Al Gore's movie An Inconvenient Truth as the "Scariest Movie" of 2006!

The scary thing is that Theresa Hines' wind up dildo could make a movie that anybody would watch!

Too funny......a pseudo-photographer lecturing everyone on the "science" of "global warming" or "climate change" or whatever the hell the high priests of UN bafflegab are calling it these days. And Jose, you'd better get up to speed on your ozone hole theory....that's another one that's in the toilet. What a joke you clowns are.

That's what I love about this place. Put a post up, drive to Regina and back to pick up a dog, and nobody notices I'm even gone....

Jeff,
Qualified to speak as an expert - and having visited your site - what you call photography would not earn you a passing grade in high school. In fact, the only thing that sucks worse than your 'photography' is your continued failure to access what could be loosely referred to as your brain. Obviously one effects the other.

dearest irwin daisy,

thank you for taking the time to visit my website. how disappointing to learn that you did not find my images compelling.however, i am so moved by the craft that i must continue regardless of how much it may suck.

i would be very interested in seeing some of your work. perhaps there is some record of it online somewhere? will you let down your cloak of anonymity for only a moment?

i live in toronto and my family maintains a membership at the ROM where some of your work is displayed. i would love to view it next time we visit.

once again, thanks for your interest in my work. i look forward to learning more about yours.sincerely - jeff davidson

Jeff and Jose started it......I know,iknow...go to my room and no gameboy.....*sigh*

Syncro

thanks missauga matt, problem solved. feel free to visit me at where'd that bug go?

Now I know where all the dumb kids hangout.

LMAO Kate
But you have to admit thats not much of a drive.

Jeff

Yer in TO? Now i never wood have figered dat.

Syncro

The biggest joke about Jeff is that he links his blog to his business site. Learn about the scary guy you were thinking about hiring.

Say Jeff, "Mr. Responsible", how about responding to.....

ltr@11:21pm
"I have worked with the climate change modellers, and they admit their models do not fit past, let alone future trends of climate change."

Backhoe@5:01am
"The Sun is the master controller of weather, here, and elsewhere.

And unless you can find the thermostat on the Sun and turn it down, there's not a dam thing anyone on Earth can do about it."

Jeff, et al - this is venturing off topic. Take it private.

Jeff: "dear anon, i figure my opinions on climate change are as valid as kate's. why trust a dog trainer/goalie mask painter over a photographer?"

By that reasoning then, here's my two bits worth. I too am a photographer, a member of the Professional Photographers of Canada (why haven't you joined, btw?), a Master of Photographic Arts, a Fellow of the Professional Photographers of B.C. and an Honourable Life Member of PPOC.

I guess then, that my opinion should trump Jeffs.

Nonetheless, I am highly skeptical of the whole 'global warming' thing, which due to it's unproveable nature has morphed into 'climate change'. Climate change is of course, a fact - the climate is in a constant state of change. Always has been, always will.

In the 60's it was Silent Spring and pollutants. In the 70's it was global cooling and the New Ice Age. Also in the 70's, it was overpopulation and our inability to feed ourselves. In the 80's, acid rain and the ozone layer. Now of course, it's 'global warming' due to emissions.

All of these things to a degree (no pun intended) revolve around socialist principles, the redistribution of wealth and a means of reining in capitalism. My bet is that in another decade, 'global warming' will prove to be yet another 'false god' of the left and they'll be back to nuclear proliferation (insisting the U.S. disarm first) or some such flavour of the day.

Well said Randy. I rember the "Population Bomb" scare of the seventies. Crisis is the fundamental (OOPS starting to sound like PMPM) tool of socialists.

Non-denominational diety forbid we should fend for ourselves.

Syncro

jeff" the emulsion burner and polluter of waterways with silver " davidsons blogspot.

http://wheredthatbuggo.blogspot.com/

take it here. he could use the postings.

Randy at 4:19...You said it!

Very interesting posts and so much food for thought.I gotta agree that Kyoto's a scam along with all the other interchangable handles climate change has been given since its immaculate conception.
Lets see now there's global warming (naw that one won't do) ...it has a finite time frame about it...yaaa we need something that's not constrainted...no time frame ...can grow with the the hypothesis...Hey what about global warming...hmmm that's not bad but we need more marketing impact ...something that strike a chord of fear in those dumbf**ks hearts and makes them hand over their $$.Well what about Climate Rape?

Y'know I think we're onto something now!

AFY Jeff

You got broadsided and good for having the gall to venture onto this site with your ego in your hand and your brain stuffed up your a*s.

An appology to Kate is in order and try to be a little more accomodating next time and you just might have a more pleasurable time here.

After all the company's good !

In a hundred years from now, they will think this was all Millennial hysteria. Based not on traditional Religion. But the many variants of new age thought. It cults dictated &, infused with nature worship.

I just say to eviroloons. Y2K. Where did the billions go? Than ask yourself where they would then go if we where insane enough to go along with this madness.

To foreign powers where barely on speaking terms with, if not at war, while destroying our industry. Meanwhile giving them a free pass to pollute to their hearts satisfaction. We pay though the nose for their malfeasance. Another leftie cultural suicide ideology of absurdity. A world form of transfer payments with no accountability to totalitarians. Only a leftie could be so blind. These leeches would even stop the production of native recourses here. Including independent energy. Oh how they love monopoly, yet revile the successful ones who are individuals, not collectives.

Why are we allowing enemies to decide domestic policy? I thought in a democracy it was its citizens? Not unelected Judges, scientists or other groups with their political or military agendas. Particularly outside powers.

Global warming has nothing to do with humans. It never has , so why now. Funds, research funds, for scientists locked out of the ever dwindling gravy train, of tax monies. Is the final answer. Eventually there will be an end to this’d ice age where still in Naturally. So why cry chicken little now?

Harper is right. We need to face real environmental problems like our water tables. Air pollution in Urban areas. Chemical seepage into our animals & water ways. These we can remedy. Lets work on actuality, not a scientific, media wet dream computer program.

I agree with one poster here that said we need alternate sources. Not only because where paying for our own execution from those people we have been buying from. Than them using those funds to undermine our civilization.. They are insufficient for our technological needs as well. We need growing room outside the Earth. With today’s energy , its too expensive for a real payback in materials.

Besides if we find cheaper energy means it benefits the world much more than our economic collapse would. Trying to carry out a plan that would in effect, if all went perfect, 1% of the greenhouse supposed gases would go!!! Nutty as a fruitcake in my opinion.

This is hysteria of the worst kind propagated by scoundrels & wastrels like David Suzuki & his other co-religionists of the Church of the Mother Goddess. Hard science, indulging in fornication with the CBC for leftist liberal consumption. To promote the latest fad of the year. Its shameful & frankly if the UN is involved probably immoral. I wonder how many ad agencies are poised for the Climate game?

Lets concentrate on problems that exist now. Not in a computer simulation !!!

I think the term Climate Porn is right on the money!

The Leftstream Media is pandering to the stupid and uninformed on matters across the entire spectrum of public interest and fools like Jeff and Jose are sucking it up like empty sponges ...give your head a squeeze somewhere else little boys..

This thread is stretched almost to its limit, but I want to get my 2 bits worth onto it.

I practiced one of the hard sciences (geology) for 35 years so, like most of the folks posting here, I'm well aware of the randomness of climate change and everthing else associated with earth science. However, I'd like to draw attention to some evidence of very recent (i.e. in historic time) climate change that I saw with my own eyes in Morocco and Yemen.

I examined two ancient mine workings where there had oviously been timber for smelting (slag heaps still there) and enough water to do some primative concentrating (tailings still there).Obviously, the climate was temperate but, both sites are now surrounded by desert.

The mines were active in the early Islamic period - probably sometime between 800 and 1200 AD. What could have caused such a radical climate change in about a millenium? The population of the entire earth when the mines were worked wouldn't have exceeded 300 million, so how did they generate the requisite CO2 to drive the climate change? Campfires? Camel farts?

Food for thought.

Globe and Mail has a new poll up:

If the unusual weather patterns observed in much of Canada this fall and winter are a byproduct of global warming, do you believe the change is caused mainly by natural events or human activity?

Natural events

376 votes (35%) 376 votes

Human activity

690 votes (65%) 690 votes

Total votes: 1066

climate change is a prerequisite. otherwise it would be just called temperature

all over the earth are abandoned cities are lying in the middle of deserts or in the middle of jungles. cities like Brugges fell into decline as the river course moved. The Thames was once a tributary to the Rhine until the English channel was cut by glaciers.

all of this predates the "modern era"

Zog

My uneducated guess is....camel farts.

Syncro

Derek from Saskatchewan:
I couldn't agree more! I too can not get an answer as to what caused the globe to warm and cool in a major way three times in the last 900 million years. Unfortunately some of the dinasours that were roaming around Canada in the last tropical period suffered extinction except in Ottawa where several survive today.

We are leaving the last ice age and are entering a period of warming again. Can we slow these cycles down? Probably, by about one week!!

In several million years you will again be able to grow bananas in Saskatchewan.

The science behind climate change is questionable and the rhetoric is BS.

The concept of peak oil is as faulty as when the idea was first raised in the mid 1970's that the world would be out of oil by 1999.

I am however still convince that we do have to reduce our reliance on imported petrolem energy in western nations. This dependence drains our economies of money and sends it to rogue regimes around the world.

I doubt very many people will dispute the fact that most of the muslim terrists have been financed from oil money. I want to see their shouts of death to America, death to Britain, death to Canada silenced through economic measures.

Please continue to question the morals of scientist who use the climate change agenda as a light cover for their efforts to increase funding to their operations.

I do however hope that we do not lose sight of the real threat to society. It is not global warming, it is energy security.

"did we avert it, Jose?

http://www.nasa.gov/home/hqnews/2006/oct/HQ_06338_Fianl_Ozone_2006.html"

Yes we did by enacting the global CFC ban. The article at that link confirms as much.

John Luft "And Jose, you'd better get up to speed on your ozone hole theory....that's another one that's in the toilet."

Really? Please tell us how you came to that brilliant conclusion.

The quote from Maurice Strong is his plan for the destruction of Western civilization; your destruction.

The evil genius of Maurice Strong; incredible, but, true.

Maurice Strong's evil drove Bill Rodgers to suicide. "Two weeks after his arrest, he put a plastic bag over his head and suffocated himself." In his own words, he returned to Earth.

Maurice Strong has a plan for you; your extinction, aka your murder.

Maurice Strong is a murderer.

Quote:

Isn't the only hope for the planet that the industrialized civilizations collapse? Isn't it our responsibility to bring about?
Maurice Strong

The Onion

Green Rage

excerpt:

"the rape of the planet.

Consider the story of Bill Rodgers. He was forty at the time of his arrest, making him the oldest of those indicted in the Operation Backfire investigation. Authorities describe him as a ringleader in the group of arsonists—they say he served as a sort of mentor to Gerlach, for one. Police arrested him last December at the modest bookstore and community center he ran in Prescott, Arizona. Two weeks after his arrest, he put a plastic bag over his head and suffocated himself.

In a farewell letter, he wrote, "Certain human cultures have been waging war against the Earth for millennia. I chose to fight on the side of bears, mountain lions, skunks, bats, saguaros, cliff rose and all things wild. I am just the most recent casualty in that war. But tonight I have made a jail break—I am returning home, to the Earth, to the place of my origins."

Here's what activists like Rodgers believe: They believe we face a crisis of mass extinction, caused by civilization. They believe the atmosphere is being spoiled, the climate pitching on the verge of ruinous change, because of civilization. They believe our bodies are being poisoned and so are our spirits, by civilization.

They've considered the state of the planet and they've decided against some hopeful half-critique. They've looked all the way down into the pit and, rightly or wrongly, come to the conclusion that the whole damn thing is undeniably, irretrievably messed up. The government is wrong, mainstream culture is wrong, the tokenist sellout environmental community is wrong, civilization itself is wrong.

The green anarchists are historical determinists, as are Marxists and Christian fundamentalists. Their worldview is based on more, though, than extrapolations of weighty political treatises or divinations of holy texts. It is based on the work of scientists such as E. O. Wilson and Jared Diamond and respected, peer-reviewed biologists and climatologists and ecologists the world over whose work suggests that human activity is having a calamitous effect on the Earth's natural systems.

Globalization. Capitalism. Greed. Civilization. Call it what you will. It will end, the green anarchists insist, whether by means of environmental collapse, violent revolution, or the collective enlightening of human consciousness.

"We are now witnessing the final days of Western Civilization," declared a recent posting on the Portland Independent Media Center website. "As this civilization decays around us—as the wars spread and the natural disasters increase in frequency—and as those trapped by western culture slowly break from their cognitive dissonance and open their hearts and minds, a new reality will begin to reveal itself. Our task is to let this transformation take its course, and to speed it along where we can."

History is littered with historical determinists who were convinced the revolution was just around the corner. A few were right, most were wrong. And history is full of social upheavals in which true believers decided the cause was so great that they would step beyond the boundaries of law. Some have been vindicated by history, some scorned.

When I consider the ELF arsonists, I find myself thinking of the militant nineteenth-century abolitionist John Brown. So appalled was Brown by the institution of slavery that he tried to spark a revolution. He thought all that was needed was a firm nudge and the whole South would erupt in a slave rebellion. He was wrong, and was caught. His actions enraged the southern populace, and the system against which he struggled prosecuted him, convicted him, and hanged him.

At the time he was viewed as a crazed visionary whose quixotic strivings had changed nothing. But as the forces of abolition gained strength—as the real revolution unfolded—he became something much more potent. He became a symbol. Over the course of decades, what was first considered lunacy and extremism came to be regarded as courage and righteousness.

Years from now, when we have a clearer understanding of the full damage we have done to the Earth, is it possible the ELF arsonists will be remembered in similar fashion?"
...-
http://www.orionmagazine.org/pages/om/07-1om/Rasmussen.html

Difficult to get all heated up over global warming when the threat of global nuclear poisoning is far more likely and can end things in mere months.

Besides, why didn*t somebody bolt down Mount St. Helens before it blew?

Speaking of the power of Giants. . .

There are endless facets to the war between enterprise and environment.

If you built an electric car and powered it with NiMH
batteries, Chevron would promptly sue you for patent violations. They bought patent rights for large format NiMH from Texaco who bought original rights from developers Ovonics.

You are forced to use *small format* D cells if you wish to use NiMH battery power.

Big Oil, Big Auto and government are dragging heels on the [EV] electric vehicle.

Understandable when you consider the employment disruption that follows. No motors, mufflers, manifolds, or millions of mechanical miscelleania. Not to mention oil, gas, filters, rubber hoses, anti-freeze, radiators, catalytic converters etc. see [EV] at:

TonyGuitar.Blogspot.com

I think this is an ideal time to deflate the steam in ME and South American oil wars, don*t you? = TG

PS, I*m not very popular with so many people including Belinda auto-parts. = TG

Another inconvenient truth that Al Gore, et al conveniently won't acknowledge:

The pole, which, unlike the geographic North Pole, is in constant movement, has been within modern Canadian borders since at least the 1600s -- the time of Shakespeare and Sir Isaac Newton.

In 1904 it was measured just off the northern tip of Nunavut's King William Island by Norwegian explorer Roald Amundsen, and since then has moved in a north to northwesterly direction at a stately 10 kilometres per year.

But in 2001, scientists discovered that it was picking up the pace, suddenly charging ahead -- and toward the edge of Canadian territory -- at more than 40 kilometres per year.

This year, bad weather prevented Newitt from reaching the actual location of the pole, and he hasn't completed the analysis of his observations. But he got close enough to make two measurements, and says it appears the pole is farther away than expected, and moving even faster than before.

"We landed at two places at around 83 North, and it certainly appears the pole is probably closer to 84 North," he said. "That means that the pole is still continuing to accelerate."

If the pole continues its current course, it will shoot across the top of Earth and end up in Siberia by mid-century.

But the pole's movements are difficult to forecast, since its location depends on a terrestrial magnetic field that is produced by extremely complex forces deep inside Earth. Those forces, at their simplest, drive a churning mass of molten iron that rises and falls on convective currents more than 3,000 kilometres below the planet's surface. The movement of that iron conducts and produces the magnetic field, whose poles are located fairly close, although still often thousands of kilometres away from, the geographic poles.

Curiously, the speed with which the pole moves could be related to dramatic events like the massive earthquake that caused last December's devastating tsunami. That quake was big enough to alter the shape of Earth and jar the planet into a slightly different axis of rotation. It also had enough power to jolt the molten iron that powers the magnetic field, and could be partly responsible for magnetic "jerks" that are propelling the magnetic North Pole, Newitt said.

Scientists have also been intrigued by a weakening in the pole's intensity: It has lost 10 per cent of its force in the past few centuries. That could be a sign that the poles are preparing to reverse, a phenomenon that has occurred many times in Earth's distant history, said University of Alberta geophysics professor Moritz Heimpel.

Or, perhaps, this is what Al Gore means when he said that we are disrupting the balance of the Universe.

Jose, I'm not going to do your research for you. If you would look a bit deeper into opinions other than your own, you would easily be able to find out about your "glorious victory" over the hole in the ozone.

well obviously the solution here for Mr.Gore is to tax the magnetic pole. that's right, you read it here first, we Canadians, should TAX THE MAGNETIC POLE. in this way, we can preserve its "canadian-ness".

ok, I'm finished, I'm just working up to the top 10 lists that all the msm dishes us at the end of the year as the journalists haven't been working since 15.december... (of this year?)

on a serious note, thanks to irwin daisy for this. and I want to know maz2, why doesn't Mr.Mo.Strong go first, and lead by example?

I keep hearing David Suzuki being called a scientist, but as far as I know he hasn't been involved in science for a few decades. Back in the 70's he was a biology prof at UBC doing research in fruit fly genetics. Since that time he has been a media personality and advocate for left wing viewpoints.

I do not under stand what is wrong with climate change. If it happens to be a little bit warmer whats the problem. The Vikings did not like climate change it was colder,not good. But people are still living there with no problem. The temperature went down yes,But they still have a good life ask them. Some people say we are going up in temperature by 7 C. There is so many people in this Global Warming Crap that are getting big money for fiddleing with figures. But to use figures with no actual thought,or to the reality of to serve their personal money bank is not good ,for the real Science people.