Must see video....

[Sparky speaks]

Info you probably haven't seen from Al Gore.....

 

http://en.sevenload.com/videos/UsTF3KX-The-Great-Global-Warming-Swindle

[Sir Stewart]

Who knows what the hell's true.

[Sparky speaks]

Who knows what the hell's true.

 

 

I don't disagree. I was always one who thought global warming was a result of pollution, CO2, etc. but from what I've been reading the past year or so has me wondering if it is nothing but a scam to tax us to death. Heck, they have even dropped the name Global Warming and replaced it with Climate Change because the earth has not been warming the past 10 years but cooling. This video explains it nicely I think. There have also been a few stories about the emails sent between the leading global warming scientists that have been hacked which exposed the fact that they knew all along that the earth has not been getting warmer and how they could fudge their studies and stats to cover that fact up. The first half hour of this video kind of opened my eyes a bit. I'm all for a clean environment but don't try to scam us to take measures we don't need.

 

Link to article about hacking emails....

 

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jamesdelingpole/100017393/climategate-the-final-nail-in-the-coffin-of-anthropogenic-global-warming/

[cryptique]

There have also been a few stories about the emails sent between the leading global warming scientists that have been hacked which exposed the fact that they knew all along that the earth has not been getting warmer and how they could fudge their studies and stats to cover that fact up.

From what I've read, this is not an accurate representation of what's in those email messages.

 

Yes, there's deceit ... but it's more about finding ways to ignore the FOIA requests of someone who has been badgering them and working to discredit their research.

 

The author of the piece to which you linked is not a scientist and definitely has his own agenda.

[Guest Speed Racer]

I'm pretty sure the party line for scientists, for at least the last 30 years, is that this warming trend will lead to an ice age. That's nothing new at all.

[u2roolz]

[Good Old Neon]

From what I've read, this is not an accurate representation of what's in those email messages.

 

Yes, there's deceit ... but it's more about finding ways to ignore the FOIA requests of someone who has been badgering them and working to discredit their research.

 

The author of the piece to which you linked is not a scientist and definitely has his own agenda.

 

This is what I've read as well. I take his claims about as serious as I take Kirk Cameron’s attacks against evolution.

[Dude]

Even if you believe global warming is bunk, is it still not a good idea to research alternative fuels? At the very least to diminish our dependence on oil-rich yet not very trustworthy (nor historically peace-loving) regimes in the Middle East and countries like Venezuela.

[Sparky speaks]

I'm pretty sure the party line for scientists, for at least the last 30 years, is that this warming trend will lead to an ice age. That's nothing new at all.

 

 

So global warming leads to an ice age? I've never been able to wrap my head around that one. It's getting cold because it is getting warm? I don't think you can have it both ways. The basis of the anti-warming group as I take it, is that there are many other factors that warm and cool the earth that are more important than the tiny fraction of the atmosphere that is made up of man-made CO2. The sun's activity has much more influence. It took me a while to start to consider both sides of this issue and many of the science teachers I work with have long stated the belief that the sun as well as the internal heating of the earth play a much bigger role than most lay people would think. I don't claim to know all the answers on this one but I thought this video was a good thing to share to provide some balance. It doesn't seem to be produced by crack pots and I don't desire to pay carbon taxes for the hell of it.

[Guest Speed Racer]

It's really not that hard to wrap your head around; the increased warming creates more gasses that block the sun's rays, shielding the earth from the warmth, leading to cooling.

[u2roolz]

I wonder what the OP thinks about 2012. I'm not meaning that to sound derogatory. I'm curious how much stock to put into scientists' claims on such events.

 

For me, I tend to go and look at all of the 2012 scenarios. Even the New Age ones. I find them all to be quite fascinating and there's even some hard science to back it up.

 

When it comes to global warming, I can't help but see a few agendas here and there. We're all obviously looking out for our best benefits. But there's way too much going on to say that we can truly change the course of our planet. Let's go for it, but we may not truly see the benefits in our lifetime. We need to believe in our good intentions.

[Ghost of Electricity]

Even if you believe global warming is bunk, is it still not a good idea to research alternative fuels? At the very least to diminish our dependence on oil-rich yet not very trustworthy (nor historically peace-loving) regimes in the Middle East and countries like Venezuela.

if we should avoid depending on countries which are neither trustworthy nor peace-loving, what makes you think we can depend on ourselves?

[Guest Speed Racer]

if we should avoid depending on countries which are neither trustworthy nor peace-loving, what makes you think we can depend on ourselves?

 

That's where hiring foreign professionals comes in.

[ikol]

I'm pretty sure the party line for scientists, for at least the last 30 years, is that this warming trend will lead to an ice age. That's nothing new at all.

 

You're thinking of the plot of The Day After Tomorrow.

 

Even if you believe global warming is bunk, is it still not a good idea to research alternative fuels? At the very least to diminish our dependence on oil-rich yet not very trustworthy (nor historically peace-loving) regimes in the Middle East and countries like Venezuela.

 

Absolutely, but there's a difference between "it would be a good idea to find a way to use cheaper, renewable energy sources" and "OMG, WE'RE FUCKED!!! WE MUST REDUCE OIL USAGE TO ZERO IMMEDIATELY TO PREVENT A GLOBAL CATASTROPHE AND EVEN IF WE DO IT'S ALREADY TOO LATE!!!"

[Ghost of Electricity]

That's where hiring foreign professionals comes in.

How about the Danes? They seem fairly well-adjusted. Let's hire them. Or maybe a Vanuatuan. Don't recall them ever having been in any major global scuffles.

[Dude]

Absolutely, but there's a difference between "it would be a good idea to find a way to use cheaper, renewable energy sources" and "OMG, WE'RE FUCKED!!! WE MUST REDUCE OIL USAGE TO ZERO IMMEDIATELY TO PREVENT A GLOBAL CATASTROPHE AND EVEN IF WE DO IT'S ALREADY TOO LATE!!!"

 

I see, so it's better to not do anything when there is an ample amount of evidence that suggests we should start taking initiatives, and better to wait 50 years until our coastal cities start to flood and every accredited scientist in the world is proven correct?

[u2roolz]

]Some or most of this may seem crazy to some, but I'm going to research it later on. Anyone familiar with this type of energy (the tides not wireless)?

Bear with me. Let me explain that yes this does come from a movie, but it is quite interesting. The concept at least.

OK. This comes from Southland Tales directed by Richard Kelly.

 

"The term fluid karma is used to refer to two things in the movie. First, it refers to an "organic compound" that the Treer company discovered while drilling off the coast of Israel, which exists under the Earth's mantle, and circles the world like a "serpent." Second, fluid karma is the name used by Treer for the "hydroelectric energy field" produced by their Utopia tidal generators. As the movie explains, the compound is being used by the Baron to power his energy plants, hence the energy field produced is named after it."

 

Richard Kelly stated in his interview with EMPIRE Magazine...

 

"The idea of wireless electricity and tides being a source of energy, and there being a potentially world-altering energy source under the ocean, is based on real scientific theory. Many people think wireless electricity is the thing that could rescue us from our dilemma as we reach the end of the petroleum era. Tide power, and the wireless transmission of electricity, are scientific realities. "

 

Ocean Energy Systems

[ikol]

I see, so it's better to not do anything when there is an ample amount of evidence that suggests we should start taking initiatives, and better to wait 50 years until our coastal cities start to flood and every accredited scientist in the world is proven correct?

 

I thought we were assuming that global warming was bunk. There is middle ground between doing nothing and wrecking an already shitty economy by passing laws that try to immediately stop fossil fuel usage.

[Ghost of Electricity]

 

 

"The idea of wireless electricity and tides being a source of energy, and there being a potentially world-altering energy source under the ocean, is based on real scientific theory. Many people think wireless electricity is the thing that could rescue us from our dilemma as we reach the end of the petroleum era. Tide power, and the wireless transmission of electricity, are scientific realities. "

my (admittedly very limited) understanding is that problem with tidal power is how to harness it.

[Guest Speed Racer]

You're thinking of the plot of The Day After Tomorrow.

 

Actually, having just seen the movie (yes, I'll admit), that had to do with cold water fronts.

[jenbobblehead]

This is what i have to say about that: If you're not willing to do anything to make the earth a better place for your kids, then you're a gigantic asshole, regardless of your political beliefs. it has nothing to do with a taxing scam, it has everything to do with changing behaviors--keep more crap out of the landfill, recycle more, drive less, don't use chemicals if you don't have to, get more energy efficient appliances and vehicles, invest in alternative energies that don't poison people, and use less water. Is it really that hard? Is it really that hard to believe? Honestly?

[Good Old Neon]

Putting aside all that pesky evidence in favor of AGW, could someone please explain why pretty much the entire scientific community is perpetrating a hoax, and to what end?

[Guest Speed Racer]

I thought we were assuming that global warming was bunk. There is middle ground between doing nothing and wrecking an already shitty economy by passing laws that try to immediately stop fossil fuel usage.

 

Regardless of whether it's bunk or not, fossil fuels are known to be limited in quantity and harmful. Why not research renewable, less harmful energies? It seems like a no-brainer. As for timelines, I think we're well overdue. If financial incentives for scientific advancement are financed through economic sanctions levied against non-compliant industrial producers, well, I really have few problems with that.

 

Putting aside all that pesky evidence in favor of AGW, could someone please explain why pretty much the entire scientific community is perpetrating a hoax, and to what end?

 

They were only in it for the Oscars.

 

This is what i have to say about that: If you're not willing to do anything to make the earth a better place for your kids, then you're a gigantic asshole, regardless of your political beliefs. it has nothing to do with a taxing scam, it has everything to do with changing behaviors--keep more crap out of the landfill, recycle more, drive less, don't use chemicals if you don't have to, get more energy efficient appliances and vehicles, invest in alternative energies that don't poison people, and use less water. Is it really that hard? Is it really that hard to believe? Honestly?

 

Reason, is that you?

[Dude]

I thought we were assuming that global warming was bunk.

 

The point of my argument is that there are upsides to getting away from oil that have nothing to do with global warming and everything to do with geopolitics, the wars we fight, the countries we invade, the pipelines we try to build and protect, etc.

 

There is middle ground between doing nothing and wrecking an already shitty economy by passing laws that try to immediately stop fossil fuel usage.

 

I don't know about anyone who is calling for a complete halt of oil usage, either. You may be the first - congratulations.

[Winston Legthigh]

I get my climate views from fancypants like Lord Lawson of Blaby.