I do not usually like to state things as fact that have not happened, because no matter how sure you are of anything, there is the possibility that it will not happen. If it has not happened, try not to state it as fact. You say his facts are false, give me an example, I do not have your source for this information. It is, but what reason does he have to scare people? You have said that he is making a lot of money out of this, but do you know if that is his true intention with this? I mentioned the invasion of Iraq, because the U.S. spends a million a day (about 100 billion dollars U.S. at this point), and yet they cannot spare more money for research. Thats good that they double the amount spent on fuel resource research, I hadnt heard of this, though Im sure they could be doing much more. As well, the meeting you speak of was the Bali Roadmap. It is the predecessor of the Kyoto Protocol, The U.S. (Lol, backed by Canada and Japan) was very adamant about lowering emissions. The result was that it didnt accomplish as much as some wanted, especially climatologists who had urged them to have a greater outcome since by 2020 the temperature will have gone up by 2 degrees (Celsius). Some people are just pleased it got accepted by everyone, because it opens the doors for further discussion. In my Global Warming issue of Scientific American, it actually talks quite a bit about alternate resources that are possible, whether or not the engineering is of American design, I am not sure, as to the next fuel sources for cars, the two I have heard of most frequently are Fuel Cell and Ethanol. I know that the U.S. has been working on making Fuel Cell cars, but they are having trouble with the size of the engines and the price of making Hydrogen. I have an Article on Ethanol that I haven't read yet. It is not that I missed that opposing side of the documentary, it is that the information is 8 years old and further research has been done, it is very out of date, I set up a link for the ice measurements. That aside, in the Global Dimming episode, it deems Global Warming as fact which is a more recent episode. Indeed, but they would not deem it as fact if there was not enough proof behind to call it so. I'd rather you didnt tell me what I am going to do and not do, now, I do not exactly accept things without quite a bit of proof and I do have a lot of faith in Scientific American and Nova and do take their opinions to heart, this is because they publish the latest in scientific news and it seems that there are many more sources saying the same things, and if you have not heard all the facts I have stated in my last argument, then perhaps you will reconsider that I believe it simply because they stated it as true. Ah, so your saying that majority of the scientific community are a bunch of crackpots? I dont get what your trying to point out with your last statement.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_opinion_on_climate_change
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Temperature_record_of_the_past_1000_years

So as to prevent using too much space on this page, I will refrain from hitting reply and just assume we all know what I am replying to. You make valid points for someone who truly believes global warming is a global disaster waiting to happen, but the thing that strikes me is the frequency at which you use the word "if" in your beginning arguements. Were this some impending disaster, as alarmists would have us all believe, would it not be "when" as opposed to "if"? My second point is that I am well aware that Al Gore did not pen the theory of global warming, but instead made it available to the ignorant masses. Most people only heard few mentions of global warming, but never made a deal of it until Al Gore came along and made a movie. But much of the "facts" he presented were unproven or outright false. But scaring people into belief is the best way to manipulate them. Also, it really seems as if this is more of an Anti-American agenda more than any other. We are talking about money wasted on global warming and somehow you mention the Iraq war? As if we are supposed to associate one (what many view as) mistake and automatically coorelate that to any and all future decisions by America? How about at the end of my post, I'll put some quotes from our 2008 State of the Union address in which there are talks of doubling money spent on alternative fuel technologies, a worldwide agreement to eliminate greenhouse gases, and assistance to other countries in lowering their energy consumption along with our own? I doubt that would work, when someone is convinced a country is always up to no good there's nothing you can do to change their mind. Call it American egotism if you want, but you bet your ass, in the future, when the world is driving vehicles powered by something other than than fossil fuels, it will have been developed in the USA.

That aside, again do be careful where you get your facts. Sure Nova and Scientific America are reliable sources for information, don't take everything said as absolute fact. You may have only viewed the one program that supports global warming, but missed the show 2 hours later that refutes it. Most everything seen on these channels or websites are theories. Theories are not facts and still require study. The problem is, when someone views one of these programs that coincides with their own beliefs, they immediately call them fact to justify that. You already strongly believe in global warming, so anything labeled as true by any facet of the scientific community, you will automatically believe as gospel. Anything labeled as scientific that refutes your belief, will immediately be discredited. You hear what you want to hear.

Again, I encourage a middle ground. Yes money should be spent on research for alternative fuels. Yes, research should be done to see if humans have indeed caused any kind of global climate change. But the operative word here is research. Crackpots on both sides try to convince the public at large they are right, but as long as that divide remains how can we honestly throw large amounts of cash at a problem that may or may not exist? Besides, as an American I can say this... we're damned if we do, we're damned if we don't. No matter what we do, no matter what we say, we're always wrong.

Quote: My arguement was simply to question this mans poor methodology. I am not trying to advocate killing of people, but were that to be the case, his way of presenting viable options for action is the one I'd use. And you say spending money to curb a disaster as if that's such a simple thing. A collapsing worldwide economy due to action on an unproven hysteria would not cause death? You don't think the funneling of money into accounts of companies and individuals tasked with the combating of global warming won't cause the deaths of those nearing or already in poverty? You make it sound as if money has no value in relation to human lives. As for your stated "facts" be careful what you take as factual. What you read is no more than theory. One of which is the strengthening of hurricanes. I'd like to point directly at the 2007 season, which according to global warming alarmists should have been horrible. Yet it remained relatively tame. If we go by the "logic" that the planet is gradually warming, then every hurricane season should be worse than its predecesor without exception. Yet an anomoly like last year isn't taken into account and considered by alarmists.

It's simple really, the best way to control people is by fear. The best way to line your pockets is with fear. Al Gore has been challenged by the scientific community for his "facts" presented in his movie, and was even written off as garbage by a high court in England. But because he scared people into belief, he gained money and recognition. But given how much you believe in your "facts" I challenge you to something. There is a site that I will post here. If you can provide facts that can prove global warming, they will give you $150,000 dollars. This is open to regular old people and world renowned scientists. Prove it and you get paid, and I will truly admit defeat.

As I said, I don't know that global warming exists. Maybe it does, maybe it doesn't. Research is what is necessary, not action. We don't put money and resources into something that may or may not be true. Don't be so quick to accept everything as told to you by Fox News or so-called experts. The truth will be discovered one day, and that truth is what we need before we make drastic changes.

http://junkscience.com/videos.html

I was not saying that we should spend our way into a depression, that would illogical. I am saying that we should be doing more than we are now and perhaps put more funds into research such as fuel cell cars, and build more wind farms. If the U.S. government can afford to pay a million dollars a day on the war in Iraq Im sure this shouldnt be a problem. Since they are the worst country for emitting greenhouse gases (about 25% of the worlds yearly emissions, and only contains 5% of the worlds people), they should be doing the most to change their ways. Unfortunately, they seem to be the least willing to do anything, as they fought in the Bali Roadmap agreement for less change (less money to spend, in my opinion) so there is even less change than the Kyoto protocol agreement. As well, this "hysteria" will cause death if nothing is done soon. The oceans will rise when the ice caps melt, if the eastern part of Antarctica melts, which will submerge places like Florida, which would be completely underwater. That would not be the end of it either, that is only a region of Antarctica (the largest, but the oceans would still rise quite a bit never the less with the other). If we leave it too long, there will be no remedy. The emissions take a long time to reach the atmosphere, about 50 years, which is why it took so long for it to start taking effect. It is not just the strengthening of hurricanes, it is that we have been breaking heat records since the 1980's and they seem to be breaking them year after year. Unfortunately, meteorology isnt that predictable and are not going to know what will happen each year. Weather is not a definite thing, and because we had one good year does not account for the record breaking temperatures. That is very true, but I dont think you have your facts straight. The theory of global warming was not produced by Al Gore, so it was not a challenge to the scientific community, perhaps you are referring to his predictions that made it more alarming, such as the melting of Greenland to produce a new ice age. It is now actually, accepted by most scientists that global warming is fact, scientists do not exactly accept something without proof. Id say that lots of the facts I listed in my last post and more may have had something to do with their decision. I get my facts from Nova and Scientific American. Nova is an educational program that presents recent scientific findings to its viewer, via the scientists who worked on/discovered, or produced the theory or event. One of their recent episodes was very interesting as they talked to the scientists who were studying materials at very low temperatures (almost absolute zero). Apparently, liquid helium becomes superfluous when it becomes a liquid and has the ability to flow out of its container, quite a spectacular site. This episode is free for viewing online, ill give you the link after I'm finished. Scientific American is also a reliable source, as they present the most recent scientific evidence. In its September 2006 Issue, it addresses global warming and holds the stance that it is reality, and that at the moment, the atmosphere is nearing carbon dioxide levels of 400 parts per million, which is higher than its ever been in 650,000 years. They also say that by 2050 it will reach 500 parts per million and no climatologist would ever want to test what would happen should it reach that temperature. I'm not sure you realise that this is a kid who has obviously made this video, and is most likely just making a bluff because he thinks there is no proof and should never have to pay out any money. If it is true however, Im sure you could let the people down at vostok station, or any climatologist make an easy 150,000 dollars. The facts are all over, I dont see how people can still deny it. The ice caps are melting, hurricanes are more frequent, coral reefs are dying because of the heated oceans, we're having recording breaking temperatures yearly, huge glaciers are disappearing, A piece of Antarctica the size of Texas melted within a month, when the planes that produce global dimming (not intentionally) stopped flying after 9/11 the temperature rose almost a full degree, shipping companies are very pleased that they can finally go through the Arctic since the ice is thin enough these days (the long sought north west passage). Greenhouse gases keep the planet warm (fact), we have been producing huge amounts of greenhouse gases over the past couple of centuries (fact). By the way, I made a mistake in how they measure the temperature at these Antarctic stations. Apparently they measure the amount of isotopes of Oxygen as well as Hydrogen. Lol, it was made in 2000 so its been quite a while since Ive seen it.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/warming/stories/ : this one is 8 years old
http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?articleID=000DA7C0-FBE9-1239-BBE983414B7F0000
http://www.aip.org/history/climate/cycles.htm#Vostok
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/programs/ : Nova episodes you can watch online
http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=special-report-climate-change

Quote by marfish14Im sorry, but Im afraid I must disagree with you. I never really cared for the video because I have seen others that actually present proof , and it is no real surprise as to what would happen if the temperature does reach such a hight as to start killing crops in regions. I do not at all like your example as to Muslims and Americans, it is very stereotypical to say that just because someone is of a certain religion that they are going to want to kill Americans. This false situation does not relate to this man's argument because we are not talking about killing people, but spending money to curb a disaster (Life vs Money, Life vs Life). The reason Global Warming has been kept a myth is because the government is not interested in spending money to make change, at least that is what I think, its sad as well that the new Bali Roadmap is even less effective than the Kyoto Protocol, at the request of the American Government, Canada wasnt much better really, thanks to our Conservative Government. I have seen several documentaries on global warming actually, the way the idea of such a theory came about, was when scientists in Antarctica found that the yearly temperature had risen in the last century. The way they track temperature back, is by measuring the Oxygen bubbles in the ice, the size of the bubbles indicate the temperature at that time, and since yearly snow falls compact into neat distinguishable layers, it can be traced back even farther as older layers compact into centuries and even farther. This is how we can see that is new temperature is abnormal in the earth's temperature cycle. As well, there a hurricanes that are the highest ever recorded, which can be traced the warming oceans along with other odd weather patterns, as well as the dying coral reefs, Glaciers are melting at alarming rates to the point of non-existence, a huge chunks of the Antarctic roughly the size of Texas melted within a month (There are factors involved, all brought on by the heating temperature), and thanks to Global Dimming we have found out that the Global Temperature is rising almost two times faster than expected, with it reaching 10 degrees (Celsius) higher than normal by 2100, possibly even higher if the frozen methane at the bottom of the ocean melts (approximately +13 if it all melts). You may ask for sources if you like. Ill display them at your request.

My arguement was simply to question this mans poor methodology. I am not trying to advocate killing of people, but were that to be the case, his way of presenting viable options for action is the one I'd use. And you say spending money to curb a disaster as if that's such a simple thing. A collapsing worldwide economy due to action on an unproven hysteria would not cause death? You don't think the funneling of money into accounts of companies and individuals tasked with the combating of global warming won't cause the deaths of those nearing or already in poverty? You make it sound as if money has no value in relation to human lives. As for your stated "facts" be careful what you take as factual. What you read is no more than theory. One of which is the strengthening of hurricanes. I'd like to point directly at the 2007 season, which according to global warming alarmists should have been horrible. Yet it remained relatively tame. If we go by the "logic" that the planet is gradually warming, then every hurricane season should be worse than its predecesor without exception. Yet an anomoly like last year isn't taken into account and considered by alarmists.

It's simple really, the best way to control people is by fear. The best way to line your pockets is with fear. Al Gore has been challenged by the scientific community for his "facts" presented in his movie, and was even written off as garbage by a high court in England. But because he scared people into belief, he gained money and recognition. But given how much you believe in your "facts" I challenge you to something. There is a site that I will post here. If you can provide facts that can prove global warming, they will give you $150,000 dollars. This is open to regular old people and world renowned scientists. Prove it and you get paid, and I will truly admit defeat.

As I said, I don't know that global warming exists. Maybe it does, maybe it doesn't. Research is what is necessary, not action. We don't put money and resources into something that may or may not be true. Don't be so quick to accept everything as told to you by Fox News or so-called experts. The truth will be discovered one day, and that truth is what we need before we make drastic changes.

http://junkscience.com/videos.html

Im sorry, but Im afraid I must disagree with you. I never really cared for the video because I have seen others that actually present proof , and it is no real surprise as to what would happen if the temperature does reach such a hight as to start killing crops in regions. I do not at all like your example as to Muslims and Americans, it is very stereotypical to say that just because someone is of a certain religion that they are going to want to kill Americans. This false situation does not relate to this man's argument because we are not talking about killing people, but spending money to curb a disaster (Life vs Money, Life vs Life). The reason Global Warming has been kept a myth is because the government is not interested in spending money to make change, at least that is what I think, its sad as well that the new Bali Roadmap is even less effective than the Kyoto Protocol, at the request of the American Government, Canada wasnt much better really, thanks to our Conservative Government. I have seen several documentaries on global warming actually, the way the idea of such a theory came about, was when scientists in Antarctica found that the yearly temperature had risen in the last century. The way they track temperature back, is by measuring the Oxygen bubbles in the ice, the size of the bubbles indicate the temperature at that time, and since yearly snow falls compact into neat distinguishable layers, it can be traced back even farther as older layers compact into centuries and even farther. This is how we can see that is new temperature is abnormal in the earth's temperature cycle. As well, there a hurricanes that are the highest ever recorded, which can be traced the warming oceans along with other odd weather patterns, as well as the dying coral reefs, Glaciers are melting at alarming rates to the point of non-existence, a huge chunks of the Antarctic roughly the size of Texas melted within a month (There are factors involved, all brought on by the heating temperature), and thanks to Global Dimming we have found out that the Global Temperature is rising almost two times faster than expected, with it reaching 10 degrees (Celsius) higher than normal by 2100, possibly even higher if the frozen methane at the bottom of the ocean melts (approximately +13 if it all melts). You may ask for sources if you like. Ill display them at your request.

'ello guys, long time no drop in!

merged: 01-25-2008 ~ 12:52pm

Quote by shoujoboyI feel it necessary to post something in your guestbook although I am not a member. To preface, I only visited your group's page via one of your administrators member page, SunSpots. We admin another group and I hadn't seen that name in a while, so I figured I'd see what else he'd been up to. But I digress. I must comment on this video you have posted titled "THE MOST TERRIFYING VIDEO YOU WILL EVER SEE". While I find your group's purpose admirable enough, this type of video does nothing but destroy your cause. Every individual doing their part to stay eco friendly is fine and good, but to take governmental, economical and politcal action on something as unproven as global warming is not only reckless but ignorant. I have posted all of my thoughts on his video on my MySpace blog and I would like any members interested to read it and feel free to contact me. I am always open to debate and discussion as I think critical subject matter such as this needs discussion. I do not want to come off as preachy and I do hope this is not a bother to any of your members. Thank you.

http://blog.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.view&friendID=147111666&blogID=345862113

Yes my friend, you are right. You are right in every sense of your argument. amen. I dont believe in global warming, i think its the height of the human ego to believe that we have the power to change an entire planet's climate. sure, this temp change maybe real, but its natural. sure, we need to clean up the planet a little, but its not like we are all going to die if we dont. well, i too am now infuriated by this stuff, how the hell did al gore win a peace prize and an acadamey award for a power point presentation?! well, im going to remove it.

I feel it necessary to post something in your guestbook although I am not a member. To preface, I only visited your group's page via one of your administrators member page, SunSpots. We admin another group and I hadn't seen that name in a while, so I figured I'd see what else he'd been up to. But I digress. I must comment on this video you have posted titled "THE MOST TERRIFYING VIDEO YOU WILL EVER SEE". While I find your group's purpose admirable enough, this type of video does nothing but destroy your cause. Every individual doing their part to stay eco friendly is fine and good, but to take governmental, economical and politcal action on something as unproven as global warming is not only reckless but ignorant. I have posted all of my thoughts on his video on my MySpace blog and I would like any members interested to read it and feel free to contact me. I am always open to debate and discussion as I think critical subject matter such as this needs discussion. I do not want to come off as preachy and I do hope this is not a bother to any of your members. Thank you.

http://blog.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.view&friendID=147111666&blogID=345862113

Wow, quiet. Does anyone even check this page anymore?