Bjorn Lomborg

Climate Cult 46 Comments

Exerpts from an interview with Bjorn Lomborg, author of The Skeptical Environmentalist: Measuring the Real State of the World;

…I think what is happening now is that we are increasingly seeing a tailspin into hysteria over the global warming discussion, where it is almost commonplace to say things are worse than we thought.
It’s at the stage where people are saying its even worse than we thought yesterday, and that it is going to be catastrophic, and chaotic and disruptive – all these kinds of words. This has actually led to one of the lead modellers in the UK to come out and say it’s bizarre that before we had the debate between the climate change skeptics and the scientists, and that now we have the debate between the scientists, who are now becoming the skeptics, and those who are saying it’s all going to end in chaos, when it is going to do nothing of the sort – and this is not what the UN panel is telling us.
Perhaps this is most clear when you look at the movie from Al Gore. Everything he says is technically true. He says for instance that if Greenland melts, sea levels will rise about 20 feet. This is technically true. But of course the very evocative imagery of seeing Holland disappear under the waves – or New York, or Shanghai – leaves the impression that this is all going to happen very soon. Where in fact the UN climate panel says that the sea level rise over the next 100 years is going to be 30 cm – about 20 times less than he talks about. So there is a dramatic difference between what we’re being told and what we’re actually seeing.
[…]
One of the top climate change economists has modelled – and several papers that came out a couple of weeks ago essentially point out – that climate change will probably mean fewer deaths, not more deaths. It is estimated that climate change by about 2050 will mean about 800,000 fewer deaths.
There is a total lack of a sense of proportion about where we are in terms of the environment but also on non-environmental issues, which is of course what I am looking at now with the Copenhagen Consensus, where we try to look at what are the big issues of the world, and where can we do a lot of good, and where can we do a little good. And the bottom line is there are many problems in the world where we can do much more at much lower cost. So presumably, if our goal is to help people, then there are many other things we should do first. If our goal is to help the environment, then there are also many other things we can do first.

46 Replies to “Bjorn Lomborg”

  1. Please keep it up Bjorn, in Denmark and around the world. As our own Patrick Moore, greenspirit.com is doing in Canada and the world. He was sucessful in lifting the rediculous DDT Ban that allowed malaria to kill millions.
    All Hoaxes are eventually exposed. Y2K, Frankenfoods, Alien Crop Circles ………

  2. That the rhetoric has been ratcheted up so high is indicitive of one thing to me. The scam has been exposed. Since there is considerable evidence that we will actually be entering a global cooling period (about every 20,000 years)the architects of the global warming scare(now climate change) have had to change their strategy to stigmatizing those that do not wholeheartedly endorse their protocols.
    Bottom line is, the global warming scare was created to frighten people into supporting a carbon trading scheme that will make the Oil for Food scandal look like a penny ante game. It as all about massive wealth redistribution with the regular players pushing the agenda.
    All this save the planet nonsense is just that. Earth is 4.5 billion years old. We could pollute ourselves right into extinction and the Earth would quietly heal itself over the next few million years. An eyeblink in its existence.
    Man won’t save the Earth nor will he destroy it. We are here for the ride. And when the next global cooling period hits, you can be sure that the same population bomb, oil shortage, ozone hole pimping morons will be at the front of the line with a sky is falling indictment of whomever is in their political sights at that time.
    Speaking of pimps, the media will be happy to afford them all the airtime they need to convince the public.

  3. “A Skeptic’s Guide to Debunking Global Warming Alarmism. Hot & Cold Media Spin Cycle: A Challenge To Journalists who Cover Global Warming.”
    by US Senator James Inhofe (Chairman, Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works)
    tinyurl.com/y4rw6z

  4. Today,Dec 13th,is Kates birthday.If you want to give her a present,do it in the donation site so sda.com can keep going.

  5. Thanks Kate. Always good to get a dissenting voice to indicate that the “broad based scientific consensus” isnt as clear as its proponents would say.
    There are many like Lomberg. Good academics and scientists who rasie important questions, all part of science. The shouting down and unwillingness to engage in debate is an interesting quality of the AGW group, or the Hockey Team as they are otherwise known (for their love of hockey sticks)
    Lets have the debate and questions because we really do not understand why the planetary temperaure flucuates the way it has over the last number of millenia. One alternative is AGW, but it is one amongst a few excellent alternatives such as solar cycle, global wobble and combinations of all three.
    Science was a light in the darkness that prevented humanity from continally ascribing superstitous causes to real effects. AGW is in danger of replacing the supernatural with the superhuman.
    B Hoax, I agree that there are hoaxes and hypes, I think Y2K was a hype, in that the problem was real but overhyped. Solved through the human qualities of ability to plan, analyze and act.
    I remain equally skeptical that this is about some dark conspiracy for world governement or enriching an small group. I think this is a group of politico’s seizing a potential issue, they were on the side of global cooling 35 years ago.

  6. Quotes:
    1. “consensus of 125 leading researchers and forecasters.”
    2. “and the extremely active 2004 and 2005 Atlantic hurricane seasons.” Hurricane seasons predictions for 2006: Busted. Notice the weasel word, “only”, in this:
    “None hit the U.S. Atlantic coast — only the 11th time that has occurred since 1945.”*
    Question: re population… Why do humans live in earthquake zones? On flood plains? On volcanoes?
    Headline below from the UN News website never will be seen/heard in/on MSM.
    Former PM, Brian Mulroney, is pushing the Red-Green party line. MSM is giving Brian a lot of play. Why? It’s Green-Greed time = $$$$$$$$$$
    …- …-
    No firm link yet between
    human-caused
    global warming
    and intensity of cyclones – UN
    12 December 2006 – Despite a recent increase in dangerous typhoons and hurricanes,
    no firm link can yet be drawn between
    human-induced climate change
    and variations in intensity and frequency of tropical cyclones, the United Nations World Meteorological Organization (WMO) has reported, citing a consensus of 125 leading researchers and forecasters.
    The recent increase in loss of life and damages from tropical cyclones has largely been caused by rising concentrations of population and infrastructure in coastal regions, WMO said in a news release summarizing the results of its 6th international workshop on tropical cyclones held in Costa Rica last month. …-
    http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=20952&Cr=weather&Cr1=
    *http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1750556/posts

  10. It is really unbelievable that anyone can fall for the doom and gloom of the enviroweenies. Anyone with an IQ higher than room temperature should be able to see shrill environmental armwaving as nothing more than propaganda. You will virtually never see any articles in the MSM which refer to any positive outcomes from the dreaded “global warming”….just doom and gloom. That is the hallmark of propaganda. A ridiculous and transparent ruse. And to dave m., you might want to find yourself a better source than some wacko environmental rag to quote.

  11. Lomborg is not the issue.
    He used exaggerated “facts” but in doing so he made it clear that the other side also used exaggerated “facts”. The fundamental principle of Lomborg’s writing is that the “climate change” politicos are hyping and exaggerating a problem so they can use it for political gain.
    That seems pretty obvious when you look at news reporting on the climate. Constant reports of no more water(wtf???) in 50 years, end of the world in XX years.
    It was only a few years ago when Bush was constantly accused of using fear (of terrorism to pass his agenda) and now the people who were crying unfair then are using the same technique with the environment now.

  12. Lomberg is RIGHT THE WHOLE GLOBAL WARMING thing is a lie and fruad being used by unscruplious persons to control our lives wreck corprate america and reduce us to a miserble 3rd world existence and thats why the U.S. Senate did not ratifi the junk science KYOTO TREATY

  13. Will this change the french dions plans for his election campaign. Anyone watch Harper’s address to his caucus this a.m. I bet his campaign will be on all the things the liberals objected too, especially accountability, justice reform, senate reform, support for families, lower taxes (useless according to dion) and so many other obstructions. Have cameras ever been allowed into liberal caucus meetings.

  14. If the ice on Greenland melts, Holland, New York, etc. will disappear under the waves.
    Scenerios like this are always presented as a catastrophic result of modern polluting humankind. However overwhelming evidence of ancient (5,000 BC or older) advanced civilizations discovered underwater off the coasts of India, Japan, Malta, etc. etc. would bear witness to what?
    I reckon if we follow Al Gore’s logic, mankind was driving around in monster SUV’s back then, with the resulting green house gases causing coastal civilizations to be buried under the waves.
    Al Gore’s invention of the internet is a far superior concept. He should stick to that.

  17. For some good Canadian commentary on the alleged threat of global warming check out the “Friends of Science” website (www.friendsofscience.org). This site offers critical scientific evidence, including a five-piece video, that challenges the premises of the Kyoto Protocol, and presents alternative causes of global warming. Worth every minute you spend there.

  18. Stephen, ” ..Y2K was Hyped.. ” ?? to say the least !! Remember when some CEOs were on their planes at the stroke of midnight, to show confidence. Media had “reported” some planes MAY fall out of the sky because the computers will go brain dead ?? and that all 88 oldsmobiles will stop dead in their tracks ?? Media could have been sued for $Billions for the fraudulent hype.
    Skeptical that Kyoto is NOT about One World Government ?? Google Maurice Strong.
    Jacques Chirac on the Kyoto Protocol; “the first component of an authentic global governance”. Canadian taxes payable to France ??

  19. Didn’t a convention of public funding research grant whores just tell us that “It’s a Fact! End of argument!” …?????
    Aren’t the junior enviro-weenies running a website “Proving” that all skeptics and critics are on the payroll of “Big Oil”…….???
    How dare anyone challenge them?

  20. Speaking of exaggerating facts on global warming, the Sierra Club of BC has been engaging in some ‘Al Gore’ type hysteria promotion recently. My local Victoria daily carried a story last week on its front page, complete with map showing Victoria flooding ‘IF’ sea levels rise. No kidding. Next week maybe they’ll publish maps showing the ice sheet ‘IF’ global cooling returns.
    Surprisingly, in today’s paper the Sierra Club, in climbing down slightly from its hysteria, acknowledges a prior period of warmer global temperatures.
    More at http://jr2020.blogspot.com/

  21. “Politics is the aquisition of power and privilege without merit” This is why some politicians who lack substance and talent(Al Gore comes to mind) love global warming as an issue. One should always remember. When you politicize science, science is no longer the issue. The issue becomes money and power.

  22. “The Kyoto protocol is a shell game
    that the developing world is bound to lose,” said David Ridenour, vice president of the National Center. “Carbon dioxide emissions are necessary for industrial, medical and technological advancement.
    The EU knows this, which is why it is failing to meet its targets. Once developing nations are brought into the Kyoto compact,
    the EU will continue to use its wealth to purchase more and more emissions credits.
    This will allow Europeans to continue to live the lifestyles to which they are accustomed while condemning the developing world to a future of hardship and poverty.”
    http://www.nationalcenter.org/PRNairobiGlobalWarmingKit1196.html
    Dion’s: Vision: A Virtuous Circle of Three Pillars
    As Tu Thanh Ha wrote in his profile of Mr. Dion, Straight shooter looks to lead, the leadership candidate who entered politics solely for his expertise on
    the national unity file*
    is now accepted as a well-rounded, tier-one candidate. Observers praise his intelligence, his experience in government and his integrity**.
    …
    Stéphane Dion: Through my three-pillar approach, which is bringing together economic vitality, environmental sustainability and social justice. My action plan is to create a virtuous circle between the three pillars. Because I am proposing sound environmental policies, Canada will become more energy efficient and competitive in the new industrial revolution; double column the sustainable economy. Then we will have more capacity to improve social justice in Canada, and because of that Canadians will be more educated, healthier, better equipped and more confident as players in the economy. And in this way, you will have a virtuous circle between the three pillars.
    …-
    slopepail
    *Translation: Chretien-Martin-Librano$.**

  23. The ice caps on both poles have visibly shrunk over the last 40 years.
    Oh, I bet you thought I was talking about the polar ice caps on Earth, huh? I was actually referring to the polar ice caps on Mars.
    And over the last couple of years, Jupiter has acquired a new Red Spot (officially called Oval BA, unofficially called Red Spot Junior). This *new* storm is kind of small compared to Jupiter’s Great Red Spot. It’s only the size of the planet Earth. The creation of this new storm would have required the infusion of lots of energy into Jupiter’s atmosphere.
    So, what is the common thread that connects Earth, Mars, and Jupiter? It isn’t SUVs. The brightness of the sun is the most important factor in the weather systems of all three planets. And shifting a few billion dollars from Canada to Russia isn’t going to stop solar-system-wide warming.

  24. I think we had better treat global warming as a potential possibility because of our activities, rather than, bury our heads in the sand. I am old enough to see that changes have occurred, and that where I live, the climate has become warmer.
    If those who want to deny these facts think that just by denying what we see every year is wrong, you are deluding yourself. What if we are the cause? Maybe the science is not 100% positive of the cause, but if it is what we are doing, how selfish are we to keep going down the same path?
    Does anyone think it is better to err on the side of caution?

  25. The ice caps on both poles have visibly shrunk over the last 40 years.
    Good point Ed and something to look up. What surprises me is that there is almost a total absence of any data regarding changes in solar intensity with time. There are enough sun monitoring satellites up there to provide evidence of small changes, but we don’t hear about this. Evidence of increased solar output would, in a logical society, be considered as good evidence against anthropogenic global warming and lead to appropriate action if warrented. If I have to shell of large sums of money to deal with global warming, I’d much rather spend it on funding a proper space program, increased nuclear power generation and other technologies that would not only deal with global warming, but also get mankind into space so we’re not limited to one fragile planet.
    Don’t expect any rationality from politicians though and I suspect that either the UN will either declare that the US space program is responsible for increased solar output or will pass a resolution demanding that the sun return to its previous level of brightness.

  26. Damn that Global warming
    “SCIENTISTS have recovered the fossil skeleton of a young plesiosaur, a marine reptile that lived some 70 million years ago, in Antarctica.
    “The fossil remains represent one of the most-complete plesiosaur skeletons ever found and is thought to be the best-articulated fossil skeleton ever recovered from Antarctica,” the US National Science Foundation said.”
    Sorry Richard your deluding yourself if you believe global warming is man made. The climate is always changing. Kyoto is a tax grab plain and simple.
    To effect positive change on the enviroment we have to go after pollution we can see. Smoke stacks, dumping raw sewage into the ocean, toxic sites, oil spills, strip mining. The list is endless, so why the emphasis on a gas that plants need to produce oxygen?
    Ask yourself this. How will buying clean air credits from other countries end pollution in Canada? If you can answer that please let me know.

  27. Future projections say fewer deaths, not more due to climate change? Maybe for some areas, but maybe Lomborg should look at China. The water taps are now running dry in Beijing because of the tremendous population increase. By 2010 they estimate a legitmate population of 18 to 20 million in the city (and millions of illegals). Right now 70% of China’s rivers and lakes are now polluted and 90% of the cities have underground water supplies that are contaminated. To me, it looks like a substantial population reduction is coming there due to water shortages, global warming or not.
    Hey Chairman Mao’s Great Leap Forward contributed, along with a drought, to the deaths of some 30 to 40 MILLION Chinese as recently as 1961. That’s why they started buying our grain in the 60s.
    And it has happened in China before. From a peak population around 1200 AD, China’s population fell just about in half by 1400. Almost all populations increase wildly during warm spells like the present one we are in. And almost all suffer losses during the inevitable following cold spells because of crop failures due to the cold weather.

  28. Solar constant does appear to be increasing. Some nice graphs can be seen at:
    http://www.pmodwrc.ch/pmod.php?topic=tsi/composite/SolarConstant
    But this site is very technical and shows problems involved in measuring total solar irradiance. A less technical account of solar constant can be found at:
    http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/sun_output_030320.html
    Isn’t it strange that there is significant evidence that the sun is getting brighter and the media shows no interest. The good news is that we’re now on the downslope of the solar irradiance curve so it should be a bit cooler for the next few years.

  29. Richard,
    You have no idea what you are talking about do you? There is no shame in that … heck, there is even an idiot that named his dog Kyoto.

  31. All the stuff from RACHELA CARSONS book SILENT SPRING was junk science and qustionible data and their using the same junk science to push the KYOTO TREATY. AND ACCORDING TO RELIABLE DATA DDT DID,NT CUASE BIRD AGG SHELLS TO THIN IT WAS CUASED BY OTHER THINGS INCLUDING THE WEATHER FRIGHT AND MANY MORE NATURAL CUASES

  32. Dinosaurs found on an Antartic island this week. Well just think how f…ing warm it must have been then Mr. Maurice Goebbels. What a stupid flock we are becoming when we lose the ability to think and take our marching orders from morons like peter mansbridge/ rick bell/ etc. what a hoax, makes Bre/X look like school kid lunch money.

  33. Hey everyone….yes the earth is getting warmer according to most scientists knowledgeable in the field. You can deny that if you want, but it is just a fact. As to the cause, most of those scientists believe it is our activities here that are causing it. There are people out there, being paid to deliberately confuse the issue, and deny any scientific data that refutes their highly creative beliefs. Many of those naysayers are paid for their opinion by large corporations, which makes them suspect to me. You can put a live frog in a pot of cold water, and then turn up the heat under that pot, the frog will never realize it is being cooked to death. We aren’t that stupid are we?

  34. Richard, if you and the UN are right as to mankinds’ creation of greenhouse gases being the sole reason for global warming, then why did the UN deliberately omit the high temperatures (+3-4 degrees celsius) during the middle ages in their reports?
    And why are they now downgrading the ‘human’ cause to 25%?
    This is a complex situation, which is cyclical and involves the sun (sun spots, flares, etc). Hence, it’s effecting other planets as well.
    This doesn’t mean that we shouldn’t stop polluting. In fact, the opposite is true. We must.
    However, we should not be hoodwinked by the ongoing socialist wealth redistribution program masquarading as Kyoto.

  35. Richard, unfortunately – like so many others – you’ve been duped by the media with all this Anthropogenic Global Warming alarmism they’ve been spewing. If you research the issue thoroughly you’ll discover that there is no scientific consensus that mankind is causing any warming from CO2 (and even if there was consensus, consensus makes for bad science). While most scientists agree that there has been a slight recorded temperature increase since 1880 of 0.6 degrees based on surface measurements, they can’t explain why more accurate satellite measurements show no warming. It’s likely the discrepancy is due to the Urban Heat Island Effect and land use changes. The proponents of AGW can’t explain why the majority of the recorded heating since 1880 happened prior to major industrialisation and why the major period of cooling occurred during the greatest release of CO2. CO2 doesn’t cause warming – but after a period of warming, the oceans do release more CO2 into the atmosphere so that over an appropriate time scale it can appear that there’s a correlation between CO2 and temperature – but its the CO2 that follows temperature increases, not the other way around. For scientists to claim CO2 causes warming is like saying lung cancer causes smoking. The Earth’s climate fluctuates all the time and we just happen to be in a warm phase at the moment which is most likely due to variations in the sun’s output which is incidentally warming up the entire solar system, not just Earth. Approx half the measured temperature increase has been attributed to solar variation. But new studies also show that during active solar periods (such as at present) the sun’s electomagnetic output reduces cosmic rays reaching Earth and this reduces the amount of low cloud formation ie albedo which means less reflection of the sun’s rays and therefore higher temperatures. The trouble is that scientific studies which go against the AGW hysteria get little press coverage and journals like Science and Nature won’t publish findings which go against their established views.
    Don’t be distracted from the truth just because fossil fuel companies make donations to help support some balanced research. The fact is that doing research that supports the AGW theory is very lucrative for scientists who can easily manipulate the data to support their hypothesis. It is a massive money making exercise for the science industry and carbon taxes will be a great way for governments to milk the current hysteria.

  36. Ok guys your saying that NASA and the Union of Concerned Scientists, the International Meterological Society amongst many others are all wrong and you are right? Animals, and even plants have been moving toward the pole in our hemisphere because of the warming trend. Are we causing all of it, I do not know, and maybe the scientists aren’t sure either, 100%, but I still say it is better to err on the side of caution, than to ignore the facts. The highest increase in temperature rise has been over the past 30 years, at about .2 C per decade. The earth is now warmer than it has been in 12,000 years. Without any doubt we go through phases of warming and cooling, but aside from all the debate over warming, just the amount of pollution that city people have to endure is not acceptable. We pollute way too much, and governments and industry just seem to prefer to drag their feet and are slow to change. Maybe that is why foreign car salese are so high, they have responded to a need, North America hasn’t.
    Is Kyoto the best way to address this issue, I do not think so, but we do have to stop relying on fossil fuels as much as we do, the industry is highly subsidized and why not put some of that money into supporting renewable energy?

  37. “The earth is now warmer than it has been in 12,000 years.”
    Sorry Richard you are mistaken.
    AD 1000 to 1500: During this time frame the North Atlantic was virtually ice free. Greenland exported surplus crops. Wine grapes grew in southern England. The overall temperatures were three to eight degrees warmer than they are today. Then it got cold again. But you are right that it is unwise to do nothing. But why go after the oil patch? Why not close down all the dirty coal fired power plants in Ontario first, just to show us stupid rednecks you really mean business. Do that and maybe we can believe that it really is about the enviroment rather than another tax grab. Also Alberta gives Ottawa more than ten billion a year more than we recieve(including subsidies to big bad oil) so be careful not to bite the hand that feeds you.

  39. Hi Greg, never said you where stupid or rednecks, but Dr Kelly is not a climatologist, or an expert on earth sciences. That would be like me asking a dentist about information on complex neurosurgery. From what I have read the earth is warming and what has scientists concerned is that there is no known natural cause. In past warming and cooling periods, there apparently has been some geophysical cause for the change. Many credible organizations are stating that the evidence points to human activities as the primary cause. Not conclusive, but they say it points to man. I am not a tree hugger Greg, although I think it is extremely important to treat with respect the natural resources we have.
    For me go nuclear or hydro.

  40. Richard, yes there has been some (very slight)warming in the northern hemisphere, which is most likely just part of a natural cycle which scientists simply don’t know enough about yet – things like variations in solar output, cosmic rays, the Earth’s wobble, our solar system’s travel through the galaxy etc etc.
    Increased CO2 concentrations have pretty much been debunked as a culprit. Water vapour is by many orders of magnitude a more significant greenhouse gas, yet scientific models which the wild temperature predictions are based upon cannot adequately factor water vapour into their equations.
    I believe CO2 is being focussed on because this is the only culprit that mankind can have any possible influence over. Reducing CO2 output, carbon sequestration, and carbon taxes will have absolutely no effect on reducing temperature – only in making a few people and governments richer at the expense of ordinary citizens.
    The long-suffering debate about climate change and the massive amounts of money required to attempt to “remedy” it is getting us nowhere. Climate change is a natural process and man’s influence in its causation or turnaround is insignificant and futile.
    The scientific research and debate should be about developing alternative, sustainable energies because a) eventually fossil fuels will run out and b) it’s not prudent for the world to be reliant on a single energy source. Surely this is something that everyone can agree on.
    Pretty much all of us these days have an environmental conscience, and it’s easy for us to imagine that through our exploitation of fossil fuels that we are polluting the planet. It’s because it’s so plausible that CO2 could be a pollutant that an entire environmental and scientific religion of AGW has developed. But by sheer accident and dumb luck increased concentrations of CO2 rather than raising temperatures is actually a boon to agriculture and will be a Godsend to feeding the increased populations in years to come.
    What we need to remember is that the Earth’s climate varies constantly and we happen to be living in a period where the climate is ideal for human civilisation. Remember that the Little Ice Age only finished around 1850 and we are still naturally recovering from this cold period. We exist in an interglacial period and need to understand that the Earth spends by far the majority of its time in Ice Ages. We should be far more worried about the possibility of cooling than the possibility of warming such as we did during the Medieval Warm Period. What is ironic is that scientists who are today promoting ways to cool the planet, were 30 years ago suggesting we avert a coming ice age by melting the polar ice caps!

  41. Richard are you trying to say that the little Ice Age did not happen? There are far too many scientists and historians who would disagree with you.
    Scott A. Mandia
    Assoc. Professor – Physical Sciences
    At the time of the compilation of the Domesday Survey in the late eleventh century, vineyards were recorded in 46 places in southern England, from East Anglia through to modern-day Somerset.
    (Bryson, 1977.) Ivar Bardsson, a Norwegian priest who lived in Greenland from 1341 to 1364, wrote: “From Snefelsness in Iceland, to Greenland, the shortest way: two days and three nights. Sailing due west. In…the sea there are reefs called Gunbiernershier. That was the old route, but now the ice is come from the north, so close to the reefs that none can sail by the old route without risking his life.” (Ladurie, 1971.) In 1492, the Pope complained that no bishop had been able to visit Greenland for 80 years on account of the ice”
    Not to mention the viking settlements in Newfoundland.
    Yes the earth is warming, it is part of the natural cycle. Yes we need to clean up pollutants, we have to breath the air.
    No, global warming is not a bad thing. It is a natural thing. You can’t stop it, not even if you shut down every factory, every industry, every smoke stack on earth.
    The climate has always changed. Scientists, even today, do not know why the climate changed in previous eras. They may speculate and give educated guesses, but in the end it is mainly speculation.
    Kyoto is a tax grab by the useless nations, designed to redistribute wealth. It will do nothing to end pollution. And yes, people who do not worship at the feet of the useless nations and their socialist cohorts, are considered to be rednecks, perhaps not by you and I thank you for that, but you know that I am right when I say, we have been called rednecks, Neanderthals and worse, by the moonbat brigade, after all, when logic fails resort to insult.
    BTW trees are your friend so it’s okay not to want to cut them all down, and personally I don’t care for nuclear, I prefer hydro, solar and wind. Buy a small car and turn the lights off when your not in the room.

  42. Hey guys, I am not saying the little ice age did not happen, nor am I denying that the weather changes over millennias. From what I have read, and to be honest it is not a lot, but scientists are alarmed because in most of those warming and cooling periods there was a physical reason why these fluctuations occurred. The scientists could point to a volcanic eruption or some other physical cause. Today they cannot see any phsyical cause for the warmer temperatures and that has many scientists concerned, and some alarmed. You state with such certainty it is not caused by humans, but you do not know. The scientists I have read admit they do not either, but they are concerned why these changes are occurring, without any causitive factor.
    As for useless nations, I did not know there where any. That is a rather callous perception of others, and denys the fact that we in the west do consume far more than others, too much of it ending in landfills. There are many problems we face, but I guess what bothers me is people that have little concern for the future generations. I have read on at least three different websites that Alberta will run out of natural gas in about eight to ten years. What then? Some people think science will provide the answers, but will they? If they do not, who will suffer the most, not me, probably not you either, but your children definitely. As for socialism versus capitalism Greg I see no difference, what I think the problem is, is not the system, as much as the people running the show. Any system will work if the people running it are honest and equitable in their treatment of their citizens, but since when has that ‘ever’ happened? We are more socialistic than the U.S. and I am glad we are. That dog eat dog mentality that exists in the U.S. is destroying it from the inside out, but then that is the nature of the brand of capitalism that appears to be the most popular there. We all look out for ourselves, which is as it should be, but when that greed supercedes common sense, then just look at history, it is the same scenario, repeated over and over.

  43. Micheal Chriton has a book A STATE OF FEAR about a fkaed global warming crisis being perpatrated by radical enviromentalists

  44. richard; google “useless nations”.
    Where is your proof that scientists know what caused previous Ice Ages? What are these books that have provided you this insight into history?
    Throughout this thread you have stated things that are patently false and have proved nothing. Swaying from one argument to the next providing no proof for your assertions. Phrases like “most scientists,” “many scientist are paid by big corporations” “Dr. Kelly is not a climatologist” well lol google David Suzuki and you’ll find that he isn’t one, (a climatologist)either so then I guess we both agree that by your standard he’s disqualified and so is his organization.
    From a previous post you mentioned “The Union of Concerned Scientists” From their website.
    “UCS members are people from all walks of life: parents and businesspeople, biologists and physicists, teachers and students.” According to your standards disqualified.
    I googled International Meterological Society, (I even tried it with the correct spelling International Meteorological Society) and could find no such organization. So disqualified as a source by my standards.
    The only thing I state with certainty is that POLLUTION is bad and KYOTO is a TAX GRAB.
    Do I know that co2 is the cause of global warming? No. I do not and the kyoto hockey stick graph is to say the least, a suspect peice of science.
    “If they do not, who will suffer the most, not me, probably not you either, but your children definitely.”
    Have you become a prophet that you can predict what my children will suffer from? Scaremongering at it’s lowest form! (For God’s Sakes Ethyl think of the children!)
    “As for socialism versus capitalism Greg I see no difference”
    That’s your problem. Socialism is based on the politics of envy. The capitalist creates wealth, the socialist redistributes the wealth by threat of force. Free Capitalism is based on trade between individuals who are free.
    “That dog eat dog mentality that exists in the U.S. is destroying it from the inside out”
    Saying it does not make it so.
    One could easily say that unfettered illegal immigration is what is destroying the US. It would be partially right.
    Americans are far more generous with their charity dollars than Canadians so I don’t quite understand where you are coming from with the the dog eat dog! Did you perhaps mean that stronger company’s prosper while weaker ones fail? That’s the capitalist way! It is also the way of the world. Socialist as well as capitalist. Think Trotsky and Stalin.
    The market place always adjusts. What may be An American Capitalist’ downfall in the USA, may be the boon of a venture capitalist in Tibet.
    Things have a way of working themselves out when it comes to trade between free individuals.
    It is only when the socialist state steps in with a heavy hand do we see the beginnings of rampant corruption as the individual, or corporations, seek to hide earnings, so as to keep a bigger share of their labor.
    Whose greed is greater, the greed of the capitalist who produces, or the greed of the socialist who steals though threat of force?
    By the way I am looking forward to an increase in global temperatures as I will not have to spend as much money heating my house, or warming my car in winter.
    I don’t live in a concrete heat sink, so a longer growing season isn’t so bad either. Canadian Farmers should look to diversify their crop selection as to take advantage of a longer growing season.
    Look out world it’s Canadas turn for warm weather.
    As for the history of the world It is more like: GREEDY DESPOT ARISES SEEKS TO ENSLAVE POPULATION MORAL LEFT CLAIMS RELATIVISM
    Just one more thing Richard, did you notice the socialists in the enviromentally friendly province of Quebec just gave the enviromentally friendly company Alcan, a 400 million dollar interest free loan, for a smelter expansion, plus cheaper rates on it’s electricity use. Anybody out there think smelters are non-polluting? Taxpayers of Canada providing interest free loans to big business. Yummy.

  46. Gregg here are some sites for you to peek at
    http://www.whrc.org/resources/online_publications/warming_earth/culprits.htm
    http://www.ecy.wa.gov/programs/air/globalwarming/Global_Warming_site.html
    http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/science/recentcc.html
    http://www.ucsusa.org/global_warming/science/Fingerprints.html
    http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/globalwarming.html#Q10
    http://www.al.noaa.gov/Greenhouse.html
    All of these are reputable sources, all agree something is happening to the climate, it is very possibly manmade, and the C02 levels are increasing. Never mentioned Suzuki Gregg, wonder why you brought that up? As for the USC you are misleading people Gregg, read who is incharge of the global warming section of their website…they are climatologists, or related to climate science. There is an International Meteorological Society Gregg, I did Goggle it.
    As for your statement that global warming is a natural trend is ludicrous not to mention luddite in your tunnel vision. You do not know, either do I, and most scientists agree the info is too sketchy at this point. There are many scientists though in the above mentioned groups that state it is better to be safe than sorry, by ignoring a possible human connection.
    You comment that the U.S. is very charitable in its giving is true if you look at the total dollars spent on aid, if however, you look at the aid in relation to national income the U.S. is near the bottom of the pack of developed nations.
    Gregg your idea that greed is more acceptable under a capitalist system as opposed to a socialist is very amusing. Did you know the U.S. is missing $3 trillion? They just can’t find it Gregg. lol

Proudly powered by WordPress & Skyrocket Themes

MENU

Navigation