I propose to solve this with a White Shift program. We will tax road salt in the east, and distribute the proceeds to the oil producers in the west, hoping that they will use the funds to release sequestered CO2, cut down more trees to make paper for the Toronto Star, and feed beans to their cows.

Clinical

I'm getting to the point of where I don't think that any of these facts or research even matter anymore.

Environmentalism is now firmly a religion, global warming disaster is their judgement day, and "green living" is the way to their rapture.

When a religious nut tells you that the world will end on a certain day and it doesn't come to pass, they don't admit that they were wrong. They just change the date and get back out there preaching their gospel.

The fact that the world has been cooling over the past 10 years (even as CO2 levels continue to rise) and the fact that 2006 and 2007 did not produce the disastrous weather that their priests predicted should have been enough to give these people a moment of pause - if it were really a science/public policy issue.

Now that we have seen it hasn't - we can be sure it is religion and that a clash of the religious vanities is on the way.

Don't worry .... the freaks will soon be blaming the cooling on the fact that we burn hydrocarbons.
They also will continue to insist that we provide money to their pat causes ..... because that will FIX the problem.

Al Gore will remain rich after filling his pockets with the money of idiots .... BTW any news on how that pledge of his to spend 300million on promoting climate change belief is going?

David Suzuki will just jump on the new bandwagon (returning to the old one) and say "Look I was right! And politicians who disagree should be charged with the crime of disagreeing with me."

The good thing is that a small number of the gullible fools who have helped give impetus to the AGW / Climate change hysteria will be a bit smarter. Although, most will remain as deluded and uninformed as they were from birth.

Just to show you how much the environment actually matters to environmentalists and the MSM.

Alberta announces 4 frickin billion dollars in environmental programs, including carbon capture and public transit and do you think we can read anything about it? National Newswatch doesn't even mention it but they do have an Alberta story posted... our war against the Wild Boar.

Thanks, shaken, for that link. It joins this one* and this**.

Citoyen Dion + Kevin Rudd = Case studies of "climate change delusion" & "the mental disorder of liberalism".

"PSYCHIATRISTS have detected the first case of "climate change delusion" - and they haven't even yet got to Kevin Rudd and his global warming guru." (quote from heraldsun)
...-

*Michael Savage diagnoses "the mental disorder of liberalism" -- and offers a comprehensive cure-all
Liberalism Is a Mental Disorder
by Michael Savage""
http://preview.tinyurl.com/6rec8v

**"Dion draws carbon plan inspiration from Australia"
"Dion acknowledges his risky decision to make a carbon tax the cornerstone of the upcoming Liberal platform was influenced, at least in part, by the example of Kevin Rudd." (ctv)

Don't question the narrative, just shut up and drink your Kool Aid.

If prolonged Global Cooling does occur, and there are many signs that it will/is, it will be no fun at all. Far more scary than warming, especially for Canadians.

Europeans suffered greatly during the Little Ice Age.

And, as The Hudson Bay Company's weather records show, the Earth's climate can change dramatically in a span of just a few years - without mankind's help.

Dr Tim Ball pointed this out years ago but Suzuki, with the CBC's help, tried to silence him with personal attacks.

The Media's 'Dumbing-Down' of the news is a huge, huge problem - brings on many, many unneccessary hardships to mankind. Has lead us down many garden-paths.

I agree with bryceman, this enviro/eco/greeno/global crap has become a religion. Kind of like adding "light" to a product label, you make it sound green and the leftoid idiots will flock to it in numbers no matter how eco whatever it is or isn't. Forget old Joe Sixpack who has always returned his empties (worth money, eh) and added insulation in the attic to keep warmer in winter, you have to have the designer Eco-Green label attached or it doesn't count.

I see flypaperboy is trying the "my experts can whup your experts" routine. USING CAP LOCK is so impressive too. /sarc

We actually owe flyboy a vote of thanks for bringing forward this statement of the AGU. What makes it particularly interesting is the combination of cherrypicking of numbers and contradictions by current observational fact.

"Global average surface temperatures increased on average by about 0.6 C over the period 1956-2006."

Indeed, but temperatures have been rising at this rate since the early 19th century. It might have been interesting if the rate had greatly accelerated, but the AGU doesn't dare go there.

"As of 2006, ELEVEN OF THE PREVIOUS TWELVE YEARS WERE WARMER THAN ANY OTHERS SINCE 1850 [caps lock be my doing once more!!]. "

Even more amusing. The data base on which the AGU is basing its claim has famously revealed that the warmest decade was the 1930s, not the 1990s and that 1934 not 1998. Of course if flyboy is suggesting that the AGU is calling James Hansen a liar about his own database they are welcome to do so. Flyboy, do stay off the caps lock; you're simply advertising the absence of necessary meds.

"The observed rapid retreat of Arctic sea ice is expected to continue and lead to the disappearance of summertime ice within this century."

It gets better. Of course there's the small inconvenient truth that Antarctic ice is at a greater extent at this time than in decades and Arctic ice is having one of the smallest summer melts in the past half century. But then, given that flyboy simply quoted the AGU without having the slightest understanding of the topic, the statement of any scientific organization is utterly worthless when flatly contradicted by observable fact. Kindly note the date the AGU drafted their statement. I await with anticipation how they plan to reconcile their absurdity with the ice records of both North and South in 2008. In fact, the AGU's statement is so absurd one wonders whether any of its members actually saw it.

Bryceman, you are only getting to the point where you think facts don't matter to lefties???

This has been ongoing for years. Once the left realised that an environmental catastrophe was the perfect vehicle for enforcing global wealth transfer they created the perfect bogeyman.

AGW has never been about science !!

From the big players like Gore, Hansen, Mann and the little guys like John Cross -science is just something to be perverted to their "view" on things.

The trouble for lefties is that science does have a nasty trait of being self-correcting!!

Try as they might, Suzuki just can't convince me that 2+2 =5, that dog just don't hunt. Which is why they are so adamant to shut down debate!

I have been saying for a couple of years now, the climate change spin isn't about climate it's about taxation. Got that?

We need all new politicians. The ones we have presently are nothing but a pack of con artists.

Oops, I just been thinking, that's pretty much what they always have been and always will be until they become outright totalitarian dictators. Then they can drop the con games and just put the gun to our heads.

No Frenchie:

I'm not just getting to the point of where I understand that the facts don't matter to the lefties. The true, power-hungry leftards have never been interested in facts...only in coming up with "emergencies" that they can then use to introduce themselves as the saviors (and it's a power grab). That I know and understand well.

What I meant was that I'm getting to the point of where I don't even think that the facts can be used to sway those people who were originally on the fence. The masses of people who have better things to do with their day that get all heated up over crap like this. I think that the hysteria is to the point of where it is the religious culture of the nation(s).

Everytime I hear/see a commercial where some business or group is talking about how proud they are to be "green", I take it as evidence that we now live in a world where, even if the majority don't buy it, they are afraid of saying so for fear of being ostracized.

Just as, I'm sure, people in Galileo's time must have felt. They all knew the guy was right...but to side with him publicly (even with all of the nose-on-your-face evidence), would have meant certain doom.

That's the point I think we're at now. Thus, evidence like this doesn't matter.

Sorry flyboy, but what meaning can be ascribed to terms such as "The Earth's climate is now clearly out of balance and is warming."? That's just flim flam. When exactly was the climate in "balance". What exactly is "balance". The climate is not a lever and fulcrum or teeter totter. The climate has always been changing and, as admitted by the head of the IPCC in February of this year, has been cooling since 1998. Oh dear, does that mean that the head of the IPCC is at odds with the AGU? Does that make the head of the IPCC a "denier"? Some "settled" science.
Since the climate has changed from periods of vast glaciation to widespread tropical conditions without discernable human input, it is absurd to simplistically dump change on human activity. The earth scientists I speak to feel the global warming nonsense is just that -- nonsense. The fact that a small group at the AGU has been able to coopt the name of the AGU to spew their opinion paralells statements by numerous organizations, including the CMA of which I am a member, put out by a small group with virtually no input from the rank and file members. Authority is contradicted by the facts. Were you a scientist you'd put more stock in the facts and less in the puffery.

Oh, and by the way flyboy, the statement is simply a rubber stamp repeat in Dec 2007 of the same statement from 2003 put out by the governing body of the AGU, not the 50,000 scientists who make up the AGU. Seen it all before. The politics of science, like politics everywhere, really sucks.

It is clear now that the burning of fossils is affecting the sun. So stop it.

On top of that, Dion should get the act going of collecting more tax to get the sunspots going.

The Global Climate Meisters are getting nervous.

Why do I say that?

The Sun is quiet and the plane tis cooling. They have no theories and are running out of excuses for spinning the numbers. At some point, either the Sun gets active again or they must do more adjusting of historical numbers.

OMMAG @ 12:23 No, anyone who has "invested" in the AGW scam cannot sell. The only out they have is to increase hysteria to raise the price, then they can sell.

I know you understand this, OMMAG, the AGW lie is just that, a lie, to extract money and obeisance from the populace.

Not only will a recurrence of Maunder's minimum cool the planet for a decade or so, it should also act as an impetus for us to throw science hysterics/hucksters to the lions once and for all.

Perhaps cooler climate will usher in a new age of critical thinking in the public.

I see a common thread here, the fault is a 'secular religious impulse', 'intellecutal laziness of the voting public', and the usual suspects-'evil politicians'.

Get real people! Obviously, medical science has debased the genome.

Purge the insanity! Who can guarantee the wise won't starve as well as the foolish?

"Should be 100, turns out zero."

Hey, it was only off by one (we all know zeroes count for nothing).

Why are we seeing Rhythm within a rhythm? Is that odd or Normal? Hey! that might be the music for Hockey Night In Canada.

To be honest, I don't know of any mainstream skeptics, the ones who have read the IPCC's reports, and who keep up with the papers as they come out, and who have some scientific training, who doubt that CO2 has "any" effect on climate. The argument has always been how much. You can cherry pick the dates and come up with twenty years of cooling right now. And the AGU's journal carries many papers, some of which cast considerable doubt on the warm years in the last decade claim, and which have not been answered, to my knowledge.

For instance your fellow Canadian scientist Ross McKitrick has shown in a peer reviewed paper in the AGU journal that the warming the AGU cites corresponds geographically with human settlement, which does not occur on 3/4 of the globe, for you liberals. He has shown that the temperature rise is more likely half of what has been claimed by Hansen.

Also, the sunspot free time we are in now coincides with a notable cooling trend globally. This could be a coincidence, however, it has been predicted by actual scientists working with actual universities in actual peer reviewd papers.

Before the lefties took over so many institutions, their mantra was "question authority", now the lefties' mantra is "don't question authority" Well sorry, if you are goint to make me pay ten dollars a gallon for heating oil, you better have your ducks in a row scientifically.