Oh Really? From the same WSJ article:

"Lindzen does acknowledge that thousands of scientists from 120 countries have agreed, through the extraordinarily rigorous International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) process, that human activity is driving global warming. He also acknowledges that this consensus was recently confirmed by a report prepared for Congress by the National Academy of Scientists."

"but don't try to tell me that we're all gonna die because of global warming."

I sure ain't sayin' that Mark. Just if you live on the Atlantic coast you may want to seek a new abode seriously inland.

The problem with the global warming hypothesis is not the science. It's that it has been kidnaped by political ideologues. It's a bit like the situation in the Soviet Union when Stalin embraced Lysinko's biological theories. Bad science and bad politics thrived. Al Gore is doing science a favor by grossly overstating his case. It opens his claims to a more critical examination. That's exactly the kind of environment in which science thrives. Scientists like Professor Lindzen have expanded our knowledge of climate tremdously in the last three or four decades. There is much more to learn. Debunking the likes of Gore will only help.

Ash:

Isn't it startling how Republican/pro-Bush types can deny facts so easily...

Wade

"Most of the climate community has agreed since 1988 that global mean temperatures have increased on the order of one degree Fahrenheit over the past century, having risen significantly from about 1919 to 1940, decreased between 1940 and the early '70s, increased again until the '90s, and remaining essentially flat since 1998."

Two more years of flat line and it will have been a decade since the temperatures stopped rising. Not esactly a great argument for alarm, expecially considering the increased use of oil by China and India, which is driving oil prices up.

Two thoughts on this:
1: If there is such a thing as global warming and all the dire predictions are accurate, who says we cannot adapt?
2: The "settled science" claim reminds me of the abortion "settled law" claim. Hogwash

I especially liked the photo that accompanied this post about Lindzen's op-ed.

Just if you live on the Atlantic coast you may want to seek a new abode seriously inland.

Ash, I'll bet you actually believe that. Sad and funny at the same time.

Simple experiment:

Lets say you have 100 experts in a particular subject area give you their best opinion on something in that area of expertise. And lets say there are also 2 widely acknowledged experts on the other side of the fence who give the opposite opinion. Now lets add that the dissenting minority opinion just coincidentally happens to be one that favors a multi-trillion dollar industry, with all of the corporate leverage that implies (read: bribery).

If you had to make policy decisions on a matter of potentially grave consequence, would you be more inclined err in favor of the 100 ...or the 2?

Again, it is interesting how the right tries desperately (why?) to deny the existence of a majority opinion on the issue of the origins of global warming, while out the other end of their mouths they repeatedly fibbed that there was a "consensus" in the intelligence community that Iraq had WMD's. We now know that the so-called consensus in the CIA over wmd was largely manufactured by the administration.

It is also interesting that in the case of Iraq, the Right said we needed to act immediately because we could not risk waiting for a threat to materialize ("We don't want the evidence to come in the form of a mushroom cloud!!"). Yet in the case of global warming, they want to be "skeptics" who take a wait and see attitude in the face of mounting evidence. They counsel not to take any actions to curb green house gasses until the evidence for the human cause of global warming is absolutely incontrovertible. I doubt, however, that the Right would accept any amount of evidence, no matter how voluminous and compelling, linking global warming with human activities - no amount of smoking guns will ever satisfy them, because at heart their "ideology" amounts to nothing more than shilling for corporate interests.

Lindzen's quote, "...there is a clear attempt to establish truth not by scientific methods but by perpetual repetition" describes exactly the modus operandi of the Bush adminsitration. Cheney and Condi went on all the Sunday talk shows for months trumpeting the same unsubstantiated claims of Iraqi WMD, while Fox News dutifully repeated them ad nauseum. "Truth" via loud repitition, indeed.

And you don't, Spook? Where do you think the melting water from the glaciers in the Arctic is going to go? I believe it as most people do!

PS I think Kimberly may have some coastal land to sell you.

If there is such a thing as global warming and all the dire predictions are accurate, who says we cannot adapt?

If you accept some of the dire predictions, PJ, one of the things we would have to adapt to is 100 million displaced people in the Indian Ocean area. Tens of millions of displaced Americans. And you thought Katrina was tough?

Porter,

We can "adapt" to global warming? Adaptation implies evolution, and we all know THAT doesn't happen. Maybe God can "intelligently design" future generations to handle the effects of global warming. (You know, like Kevin Costner in Waterworld, we can all have gills for breathing underwater! Thanks, God!)

Seriously, though, as self-aware beings, mankind's most likely adaptation would be behavioral, meaning that we would consciously do things to better prepare ourselves for the effects of global warming, maybe even to mitigate or prevent the effects. This is, of course, the great gift that God has given us: the ability to think rationally and shape our own lives and our own destiny based on limited information.

Mark -

"...One of the things I've found in the debate over global warming, is that I've never come across an actual climate scientists - someone like Professor Lindzen, eg - who holds to the alarmist views the political advocates on global warming are pushing. I've seen non-scientists (like Al Gore) hold forth on the matter, and I've seen non-climate scientists hold forth ditto..."

You must not have been looking very hard. Hundreds of climate scientists signed onto the IPCC which specifically endorsed the anthropogenic origin of global warming. In addition, there are literally hundreds of journal articles by climate scientists which support the same view (while there are precisely zero published journal articles that provide evidence contradicting the human origins of climate change - not even from Prof Lindzen, who instead prefers to peddle his opinions in the Wall St Journal)

If you are truly looking for answers from experts, I would suggest you visit Real Climate a website run by climate scientists. In fact, the site is subtitled "Climate Science from Climate Scientists". It is done in a blog style where you can search articles, and post questions (or doubts!) and have them answered by real climate scientists.

For instance, many wingers here responded to the global warming debate by repeating something they'd read over on Powerline and Instapundit about Mars also undergoing global warming, where obvisouly there is no human activity. The Real Climate website answers all your questions about this observed climate change on Mars here.

Alas, I am sure you will poo poo actually getting real answers from real climate scientists. Instead, you all will probably prefer to comfort yourselves with Powerline and the WSJ. Oh well, you can lead a horse to water...

Well said Aarontime but your well reasoned discourses rolls off Mark's blockhead like water on a duck's back. Mark, like most Republican naysayers, has his head stuck up his arsehole and he just does not see the light.

The sky is falling, the sky is falling! Where have all these climate kooks come from?

I'll never forget the map my 5th grade teacher pulled down showing that the only places in the United States that would be inhabitable were southern Florida and a bit of Texas. The rest of the country would be covered with glaciers.

I'm curious if any of the climate kooks who were tauting the next ice age are now tauting global warming?

CJ,

When school starts this year I'd have a parent speak with that teacher about where the facts were coming from...kooks teaching 5th graders….what is happening to this country??
Congrats on getting through 5th grade...6th should be lots of fun....

What about the CONSENSUS of a group of Japanese SCIENTISTS that we are facing a mini Ice Age within the next decade or two, because of changes in solar activity?

I would have a little more faith in the objectivity of the sky-is-falling crowd if they would bother to mention the downside to many of their "solutions". Electricity from solar energy? Hybrid and/or electric cars? I haven't seen one PE (psuedo-environmentalist) address the problem of batteries. You know, how to get them made, how to pay for them, and how to dispose of them. Replace every car in America with an electric car and figure out how many batteries every year will have to be bought and then disposed of. Get rid of coal burning electric plants in favor of solar, and do the same math for those batteries, at least if it is done on an individual basis, as it is now.

One of the problems with the PEs is that they want to change the way OTHER PEOPLE live. Babs Striesand can, and does, pontificate to the masses about how we should use clotheslines to dry our clothes, blah blah blah---yet she and hubby live in a huge mansion, alone except for 'stahff' and are adding on. She has an 8000-square foot air conditioned barn, and flies in private jets. Laurie David is no better. And this list is endless.

And NO ONE will admit to the elephant in the room, which is nuclear energy. It is clean, it does not contribute to greenhouse gases, it is safe---but it is also a bugaboo of the Left. So they can only preach to us that we give up things (that they clearly have no interest in giving up, themselves) without offering any real alternatives to our current energy sources.

In the meantime, my part of the world has been getting steadily colder for the past ten years or so. Go figure........

And Canuck guy---thanks for yet another illustration of what seems to pass for intellectual political debate on the far far far left. You kiss you momma wif dat mouf?

Aarontime,

I only had a chance for a brief look at the site because I am at work...seems about a dozen contributors, only two of whom are actual climate scientists, neither of which have the credentials of Lindzen. How much you want to bet when I research te site fully that most of the articles are written by the non-climate sciensts who go around claiming to be climate scientists writing about the climate?

I think it shows their colors when these trolls start name calling and ridicule people when we call them on their "science".

Evidently opie can't count very well. Bwahahahahahaha!!!!

Another simple experiment:

Let's compare between a current issue(terrorism) which might kill hundreds of people everyday today and for the last century or so and a natural catasthrophe that in theory would take millions of years for something to actually happen.

I mean no disrespect but I'm just curious,however, how come when Bush talks about terrorist threats the left calls it "fear mongering speech" to "keep the masses in check", yet Al Gore and other celebrities(i.e. attention whores) can use the same «scare tactics» by making claims such as "zOmg, if you though Katrina was bad!", but as Al Gore puts it: "in moral terms"?

Just a little something to chew on...

So they can only preach to us that we give up things (that they clearly have no interest in giving up, themselves) without offering any real alternatives to our current energy sources.

Almiranta, that is a point that just cannot be emphasized too much. Go back and look at the comments by the Libs on this thread and other global warming threads. The whole thrust of their comments, for the most part, is not on real world solutions, but on how many "scientists" believe the cause and catastrophic nature of the problem and what we must give up and how we must lower our standard of living, while kooks like Algore are saying we've got 10 years to do something or we're all DOOMED! It's hard to get serious about an issue when one of the main spokesmen for the alarmist side (Algore) makes Chicken-Little-like statements like that about a planet that is 4-1/2 billion years old, and has survived events worse than anything man could possibly throw at it.

You are right Wade. They never let the facts get in the way of their conservative agenda.

"And NO ONE will admit to the elephant in the room, which is nuclear energy. It is clean, it does not contribute to greenhouse gases, it is safe"

Unfortunately this statement is WRONG! Nuclear energy depends on uranium which of course is in the ground. A great deal of fossil fuels are needed to extract the uranium, process it and we're back where we started: using fossil fuels. SAFE? Ask those that lived near Chernobyl. And there is no safe way to store the radioactive byproducts.

So right now this is not a viable alternative.

"a planet that is 4-1/2 billion years old, and has survived events worse than anything man could possibly throw at it."

I think this may just show how uninformed you are Spooky. Do a little research and try again later.

Almiranta:
--Sometimes crudeness is the only sensible response one can make for the Republican drivel on this site. Reason and facts don't work.
--I also like to keep it short and to the point. Aarontime said enough and he said it well. No use adding a long winded comment on long winded idiotic Republican mad rants. This is especially true on some of the other postings. I will say that sometimes I actually agree with some of the stances taken by right wing Republicans. I think there are good ideas from both the left and moderates and the right and I cherry pick the best that each has to offer. Just because I call some on this site raving right wing lunatics, that does not make me one of your scorned and hated pinko commie lefties.
--As for all the batteries you are worried about, ever hear of recycling, that what they do with batteries.

I think this may just show how uninformed you are Spooky. Do a little research and try again later.

I didn't mention any specific events that eclipse any possible attempts by man to destroy the earth, so I assume you're referring to my statement about the age of the earth. I wouldn't pull a Lib and just make up something like that.

Speaking of the earth, for all you Libs who think man, through normal day to day activities, has the capacity to destroy this planet, I think this this humorous piece kind of puts things in perspective, heh.

And there is no safe way to store the radioactive byproducts.

Talk about demonstrating how uninformed one is. Let me do a little research for you, Ash. Your ignorance is underwhelming.

Almiranta and Spook, it is so hard to stay serious when the libs decide to start getting mean and foolish. I try to be reasonable about my energy use, but that is for economic reasons, and maybe that is how this should be approached.

We don't hear much about them, but there are incidents almost daily that could become catastrophic: http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/event-status/

Here is a discussion of the "safety" of nuclear reactors:

The government/industry's plan is to contain all that nasty, deadly fission by building a huge box around it. The boxes, the reactor vessels, are made of thick carbon steel, lined with stainless steel. "That oughta keep 'er," some engineer figured. After decades of operation, though, it doesn't. The lesson happened in 2002 when the Davis-Besse nuclear plant's reactor head was found to have been worn away -- from a two-feet-thick exterior to a 3/8-inch layer of stainless steel. Even that last bit had bubbled outwards from the pressure of keeping radioactive action on the inside. The plant, near Toledo, Ohio, had a hole in its reactor head wide enough and deep enough to put a fist into, according to former Nuclear Regulatory Commission member Victor Gilinsky. Corrosion on that part reduced the head by 70 pounds of steel. Workers found the problem inadvertantly, leaving the reactor perilously close to unleashing a jet of radioactive steam from the pressurized vessel.

http://www.alternet.org/envirohealth/38261/

Why take a chance?

Mean? I don't think it is mean to step back and say-hey, we are spoiling our nest. That is something no other animal does.

Spook:

There is a web site that exposes almost daily safety breaches at our countries nuclear plants.

http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/event-status/

A plent billions of years old and we are running around like chicken little because of weather data that is 100 years old (and even that 100 year old data fluctuates between warming and cooling trends).

Its amazing how absolutely gullible liberal hacks are.

I come here daily just to read their crap. And to think, we could act like these a-holes and become France or Canada. Good Lord.

Almiranta and Spook,

Both well said. I live in a state that uses nuclear power, and we have never had a problem with it. I use e10 gas cause my older car cant take e85, and because it costs less. I also vote republican because I know that the libs would make life more difficult with all of the environmental silliness of the likes of Al Gore.

A planet billions of years old and we are running around like chicken little because of weather data that is 100 years old (and even that 100 year old data fluctuates between warming and cooling trends).

Its amazing how absolutely gullible liberal hacks are.

I come here daily just to read their crap. And to think, we could act like these a-holes and become France or Canada. Good Lord.

"I try to be reasonable about my energy use, but that is for economic reasons, and maybe that is how this should be approached."

Actually kjs this is probably the worst reason for deciding energy policy. Because business will always use the bottom line as a deciding factor in their policy. Usually a short term factor as well. But in the big picture we may be in fact working against our best interest and the best interest of our children and the world they will inherit.

So they can only preach to us that we give up things (that they clearly have no interest in giving up, themselves) without offering any real alternatives to our current energy sources

is not on real world solutions,

Okay boys, here's a real world solution: Mandate that all cars produced after 2007 will get 45 miles per gallon. That is approximately the standard China has. That is behind European countries.

The only reason this isn't a "real world" solution is that our pitiful auto industry can't manufacture quality cars. Or is it that the oil industry would throw the mother of all hissy fits?

kjstrouble, people like Ash will never be satisfied with everyone just being the best steward of the environment they can be. They want everyone to sacrifice, share the misery as it were (not sure if it's for the good of the planet or the children -- it's usually one or the other). The problem, as has been noted in several previous comments, is that so many of their celebrity spokespersons are such frickin' hypocrites, like John I-don't-own-an-SUV-it-belongs-to-my-family Kerry an Al leavin'-on-a-private-jet-plane Gore.

I think Colorado State University's Bill Gray, one of the world's foremost hurricane experts, in a recent Denver Post article probably described best how most Conservatives think the global warming controversary will play out:

"They've been brainwashing us for 20 years," Gray says. "Starting with the nuclear winter and now with the global warming. This scare will also run its course. In 15-20 years, we'll look back and see what a hoax this was."

And Ash, if you honestly believe that the east coast will be under water in the foreseeable future, I'll bet you could get a reeeeeeealy good deal on the Brooklyn Bridge.

Okay boys, here's a real world solution: Mandate that all cars produced after 2007 will get 45 miles per gallon.

Actually, if they could make the vehicle I have now (2005 Toyota Highlander which I absolutely love) get 45 mpg, I'd agree. If it means driving a motorized skateboard, then I'll pass. We COULD just all drive Honda Civics, but I'm having trouble laying my finger on that part of the Constitution that says government can dictate the level of efficiency a manufacturer must achieve in its products, and the type of product a consumer must buy.

Your other option, Ash, is you could move to China. As far as I'm concerned, that would be a twofer.

Ash

For the most part, I agee with you here. If we increase the fuel efficiency of new vehicles along with tapping into our own resources, such as those in ANWR, this will decrease our need to import foreign oil. This will not solve all of our issues but it would be a good place to start. Unfortunately it seems the Republicans are blocking fuel efficiency increases and the Democrats are blocking drilling in ANWR. Its time to lobby some politicians to look out more for our interests. With the new and improved techniques for oil drilling that we have we should be able to keep the risks to the environment at a minimum and we lessen our energy dependence. I'm skeptical that this will help the global warming issue much, but the reduction in green house gases certainly would not hurt.

What I find amusing is the unwillingness of any of the global warming alarmists to even entertain the possibility they are wrong...They Have Spoken!!!! All KNEEL BEFORE THE GORON!!!

And we conservatives are the closed-mind people?

Mark -

"...seems about a dozen contributors, only two of whom are actual climate scientists."

I think you misunderstand what climate science is, and what climate scientists get their degrees in. Climate science is an interdisciplinary field - there are few university programs to get a PhD in something called "Climate Science". Climate science is often described as a sub-field of Atmosperic Science (which includes meterology and climatology), but "Climate Scientists" are those scientists who specialize in Climate within their main discipline. Frequently, Climate Scientists get their degrees in Geophysics. They also come from the fields of Atmospheric Physics, Atmospheric Chemistry, Oceanography, Physics, and Applied Mathematics (especially those who specialize in climate modeling). Indeed, Richard Lindzen got his Bachelor's degree in 1960 in Physics, and his PhD in 1964 in Applied Mathematics.

It is ludicrous for you to say that only 2 of the 12 main contributors on Real Climate are actual climate scientists merely because their degree is not in something specifically called "Climate science". All 12 specialize in climate from the fields listed above.

"Only 2" are climate scientists huh?:

- "Gavin Schmidt is a climate modeller at the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies in New York and is interested in modeling past, present and future climate. He works on developing and improving coupled climate models... He received a BA (Hons) in Mathematics from Oxford University, a PhD in Applied Mathematics from University College London and was a NOAA Postdoctoral Fellow in Climate and Global Change Research..."

- "Dr. Michael E. Mann is a member of the Penn State University faculty, holding joint positions in the Departments of Meteorology and Geosciences, and the Earth and Environmental Systems Institute (ESSI)...Dr. Mann received his undergraduate degrees in Physics and Applied Math from the University of California at Berkeley, an M.S. degree in Physics from Yale University, and a Ph.D. in Geology & Geophysics from Yale University. His research focuses on the application of statistical techniques to understanding climate variability...

- "Caspar Ammann is a climate scientist working at the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR). Dr. Ammann is interested in the reconstruction of natural climate forcings, natural climate variability, coupled modeling of natural and anthropogenic climate change, and data/model intercomparison. Dr. Ammann got his B.S. from Gymnasium Koeniz (Switzerland), his M.S. from the University of Bern (Switzerland), and a Ph.D. from the Department of Geosciences at the University of Massachusetts."

- "Ray Bradley is Director of the Climate System Research Center (www.paleoclimate.org) at the University of Massachusetts, Amherst and a University Distinguished Professor in the Department of Geosciences. His interests are in climate variability and why climate changes, over a wide range of timescales..."

- "Eric Steig is an isotope geochemist at the University of Washington in Seattle. His primary research interest is use of ice core records to document climate variability in the past. He also works on the geological history of ice sheets, on ice sheet dynamics, on statistical climate analysis, and on atmospheric chemistry..."(note - Richard Lindzen was a professor UW Seattle in the Dept of Geophysics)

- "Dr. Thibault de Garidel-Thoron is currently a post-doctoral associate at the Institute of Marine and Coastal Sciences at Rutgers University. His main scientific interest is to reconstruct past tropical climate changes using micropaleontological and geochemical proxies from oceanic sediment records... received his Bachelor’s degree in Earth Sciences from the Université Lyon I, France, completed a Master in the Université Bordeaux I, France and a Ph.D. in Geosciences at CEREGE, Université Paul Cézanne"

- "Raymond Pierrehumbert is the Louis Block Professor in Geophysical Sciences at the University of Chicago, having earlier served on the atmospheric science faculties of MIT and Princeton. He is principally interested in the formulation of idealized models which can be brought to bear on fundamental phenomena governing present and past climates of the Earth and other planets...He received an A.B. degree in Physics from Harvard, was then a Knox Fellow in the Department of Applied Mathematics and Theoretical Physics at Cambridge University, and completed his PhD on hydrodynamic stability theory at MIT, in the Department of Aeronautics and Astronautics."

and yadda yadda - to say these aren't climate scientists is ridiculous.

Ash,

I will gladly use E85 fuel on a more fuel effecient car, but all of the government regulation of car manufacturing is helping to increase the cost of buying the hypothetical car.

I remember a statement I once read in a Robert Heinlein book, don't know who originated it; "An elephant is a mouse built to government specifications." Of course, he also used the phrase "There ain't no such thing as a free lunch."

"Actually, if they could make the vehicle I have now (2005 Toyota Highlander which I absolutely love) get 45 mpg, I'd agree."

And they can. So we agree.'cept I ain't moving to China. Maybe The Netherlands, however.

Ash, it's been about 3 hours since you so arogantly suggested how uninformed I am. Care to share what it is that I'm so uninformed about?

What I find amusing is the unwillingness of any of the global warming alarmists to even entertain the possibility they are wrong...They Have Spoken!!!! All KNEEL BEFORE THE GORON!!!

Is this your way of waving the white flag and admitting we're right?

Maybe The Netherlands, however.

Same difference. In China they abort female babies. In the Netherlands they don't engage in sexual discrimination; they abort slightly defective babies of either sex. You'd be a good fit in either country.

Ash...I'm fine with 45 MPG...so are many other people. But it has to be able to do the other things I use my vehicle for as well.

By the way, when you say the oil industry will have a hissy fit...you do realize the "oil industry" encompasses the entire world. With oil the price it is right now, it doesn't help the oil industry at all long term.

People get ticked and develop other ways of utilizing energy. The oil companies would love to have oil back to the $30's and $40's a gallon...trust me.

But your implications are that the oil industry is some kind of USA cabal which it is not. British Petroleum (please note BRITISH), Royal Dutch Shell, Russian Oil, etc, etc...there are huge oil companies outside of the USA that you somehow seem to ignore.

Now, as far as our automtive industry sucking ass...why do you think that is the case? How much does it cost us to build a car with all those union wages and union health benefits vs what it costs Japan to build a quality car? Our costs per car for things that have nothing to do with the car (Pension, wages, benefits) is passed on to the consumer. So we have a $30,000 piece of crap vs a $30,000 foreign car which is quite good...the foreign competition doesn't have to sink nearly the costs we do in things OUTSIDE OF THE COST OF THE CAR.

So let's improve those CAFE standards as you have implied. I'm on board, and while we're at it let's bust the UAW and maybe we can actually build a quality car here without paying ridiculous labor costs.

I don't mean to be arrogant. Passionate maybe. If you missed the post I left almost immediately, I have clipped and pasted it here. Basically it leads you to a site that documents reported accidents at nuclear facilities. It details a fault in one of the storage containers. I know, I know it is only one. But one is all it takes.

Also sorry if your are so addicted to personal comfort that you can't sacrifice a little for you childrens children. I am 6'5" weigh more than I'm willing to admit (250lbs) and I still drive a Honda Civic Hybrid.

We don't hear much about them, but there are incidents almost daily that could become catastrophic: http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/event-status/

Here is a discussion of the "safety" of nuclear reactors:

The government/industry's plan is to contain all that nasty, deadly fission by building a huge box around it. The boxes, the reactor vessels, are made of thick carbon steel, lined with stainless steel. "That oughta keep 'er," some engineer figured. After decades of operation, though, it doesn't. The lesson happened in 2002 when the Davis-Besse nuclear plant's reactor head was found to have been worn away -- from a two-feet-thick exterior to a 3/8-inch layer of stainless steel. Even that last bit had bubbled outwards from the pressure of keeping radioactive action on the inside. The plant, near Toledo, Ohio, had a hole in its reactor head wide enough and deep enough to put a fist into, according to former Nuclear Regulatory Commission member Victor Gilinsky. Corrosion on that part reduced the head by 70 pounds of steel. Workers found the problem inadvertantly, leaving the reactor perilously close to unleashing a jet of radioactive steam from the pressurized vessel.

http://www.alternet.org/envirohealth/38261/

Why take a chance?

Aarontime, it was only a few short weeks ago that you said it was an ABSOLUTE...that everyone agreed what was causing Global Warming and yada yada yada.

You were wrong. There is no consensus on any of these issues and someday you might actually admit you were wrong.

I, personally, believe warming and cooling exist on this planet. The data right now shows two different things. Some claim that since 1998 it has cooled on the planet. Others say it has warmed.

Well, if the data cannot even be trusted how in the hell can there be "consensus"? There simply cannon be!

Now, as far as our automtive industry sucking ass...why do you think that is the case?

Every car produced has $1,000 attached to it to cover health care for it's workers. Let's provide universal health care and drop car prices by a grand. If you eliminate unions, what do you think would happen to the quality of workers, when they are attracted for $10 an hour. The companies would squeeze the employees first. Then worried about quality, eh?

You must not have been looking very hard. Hundreds of climate scientists signed onto the IPCC which specifically endorsed the anthropogenic origin of global warming. In addition, there are literally hundreds of journal articles by climate scientists which support the same view (while there are precisely zero published journal articles that provide evidence contradicting the human origins of climate change - not even from Prof Lindzen, who instead prefers to peddle his opinions in the Wall St Journal)

I suggest you take a moment and....hey....here's a novel idea....RTFA!!!

You might find that your precious IPCC report(s) are mentioned. The problem for you is the reports themselves don't support your consensus on the causes of global warming. The summary to policy makers comes to conclusions that are NOT supported in the actual report.

If you want to argue with Dr. Lindzen and his conclusion, I'd bet you can track down his email address from MIT's website. I for one would love to see you and the rest of you armchair climatologists challenge his opinions and research directly, and avoid all your blustering here.

Why do I feel like polite discourse isn't available anywhere anymore?

Ash, the days of unions are over. They are nothing but a shake down for policitians.

Warrior -

"Aarontime, it was only a few short weeks ago that you said it was an ABSOLUTE...that everyone agreed what was causing Global Warming and yada yada yada."

Nope, I never said anything about any "absolutes" and I never claimed that ALL scientists accepted the anthropogenic causes of global warming (just as not ALL biologists accept the Evolution - just 98% of them do!). What I said unequivocally is that there is a consensus surrounding the human causes of global warming in that this is the opinion of the vast majority of climate scientists worldwide.

The fact that you can point to two or three or four reputable climate scientists who deny the human origin of climate change does not change the fact that a clear majority of scientists say the opposite.

Dr Lindzen is indeed a reputable climate scientist. But, he's in the extreme minority on the causes of climate change. If you are comfortable with banking on the minority opinion, fine. You should also bear in mind that the oil and gas industry pays Dr Lindzen $2,500 per speaking engagement...

Oh Really? From the same WSJ article:

"Lindzen does acknowledge that thousands of scientists from 120 countries have agreed, through the extraordinarily rigorous International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) process, that human activity is driving global warming. He also acknowledges that this consensus was recently confirmed by a report prepared for Congress by the National Academy of Scientists."

Wait....Dr. Lindzen speaks in the third person?

{insert rolls eyes smiley here}

Again....RTFA!

A Highlander that gets 43 mpg? Down hill? That’s a full sized SUV! Two of my children have 06’s and get an average of 28.
So, Ash is on the horse to save the world and as they tell us we are all killing the world and it’s only our fault, they are on a computer, I’m sure in an A/C room , burning lights and driving an SUV. What am I missing in this dog fight?

burr, better reading skills is a bonus on this site. I said they can make a Highlander that gets 40+ miles to the gallon. My point was they didn't. Nah I can't use any of the power sources you mentioned to average out what your offspring guzzles.

tl, what is rtfa? I wasn't quoting Mr Lindzen. I was reprinting a commentary about him. I verified he said it before I pasted the pull quote.

Ash.
Not my reading skill's, I think they are just fine yet, it's the crossed eyes I get when I read your posts.
It's simple to me.When I was young, we were all going to die from the 'big one', then as CJ said, we were all going to freeze,now I'm going to die of heat, and according to you, burn in hell.

tl, what is rtfa?

Seriously? You post messages on the internet daily and you have no idea what the acronym RFTA means?

Let's just say that it was an instruction to click Mark's link and read what you find there...

I wasn't quoting Mr Lindzen. I was reprinting a commentary about him. I verified he said it before I pasted the pull quote.

Really? Then why did you post this before the "commentary":

Oh Really? From the same WSJ article:

Same? You implied it was in the SAME article that Mark linked to, which it is not. In fact, you haven't provided any link to this "commentary" whatsoever.

If you had bothered to read the article Mark linked to, you'd see how half your posts on this thread were debunked by Dr. Lindzen even before you posted it...

I for one would love to see you and the rest of you armchair climatologists challenge his opinions and research directly, and avoid all your blustering here.

Todd, YEEEESSSS!! I second the motion.

burr, the Highlander is the next to the smallest SUV Toyota makes. Your kids must have 4 cylinder, 2WD and drive only downhill or else they have the hybrid version which came out about 90 days after I got mine last year. I have a V6 AWD and average a little over 20, which considering the EPA rating is 18 city/22 highway, I'm not complaining. My neighbor (based on my recommendation) just got an '06 Highlander Hybrid and averages about 29, but does mostly in-town driving (The Hybrid actually does substantially better in the city than on the highway -- just the opposite of a gas only engine). I drive about 50/50 city/highway. I saw the results of a test drive of the Highlander Hybrid in one of the automotive mags a while back, and they averaged about 26. Based on that and $2.50/gallon gas, my payback on the $7,000 more the Hybrid costs would be about 16 years, and then at between 80,000 and 100,000 miles I'd be looking at around $4,500 to replace the batteries. Helluva a deal. To quote one of the Libs from a recent thread -- there's got to be a better way.

I don't know what it is about you global war-mons!

Listen up!

Jesus calms the storm on the lake!

The he got into the boat and his disciples followed him. Without warning, a furious storm came up on the lake. so that the waves swept over the boat. But Jesus was sleeping. The disciples went and woke him, saying, "Lord, save us! We're going to drown!" He replied, "Oh You of little faith, why are you so afraid?" Then he got up and rebuked the winds and the waves, and it was completely calm. The men were amazed and asked, "What kind of man is this? Even the winds and the waves obey him!"

You see! folks, There's no need in worrying about this broke arce about global warming, because God is in control of the situation!

Now! If the people of this world continue in the path of not acknowledging and giving God the thanks and praise for what He is done for them, then yes! He will send his wrath upon them, and in particular this nation of America!

America is a far cry from what it was a hundred years ago, Now you see sin everywhere, you see the reprobate mind everywhere particularly in the intellectually impaired liberal left kook pots!

It's only a matter of time now before God is going to put a stop to these blasphemous mad atheist just like He did with Sodom & Gomorrah!

God help America!

Let's talk about Jesus, more and more!!!!!

Then things will be alright!

Jeremiah

happy birthday USA!
DO NOT FORGET I NEED YOU,FREEDOM NEED YOU.CHINA NEED YOU!

Here are a few climate scientists on global warming:

Here NASA’s top climate scientist speaks out on global warming and also about efforts to silence him:
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/29/science/earth/29climate.html?ei=5088&en=28e236da0977ee7f&ex=1296190800&pagewanted=all

Here Britain’s top climate scientist backs global warming claims:
http://www.iop.org/News/Community_News_Archive/2005/news_5819.html

Here renowned climate scientist Jerry Mahlman talks on climate change:
http://www.energybulletin.net/15290.html

Aarontime,

The first clue that you've got something other than an MIT climatologist is that two of the contributors are "climate modellers"...in other words, BS artists. There is nothing quite as bogus as climate models - there isn't sufficient data on global climate to even make so much as a "swag" about it (ten points if you know what "swag" means in science).

The others are clearly very bright people who know a lot - but none of them bring Lindzen's expertise in actual climate science to the table. A climate scientist is someone who studies the climate - not someone who makes up computer models, or is only interested in why climate changes, as opposed to understanding why the climate is as it is.

You see! folks, There's no need in worring about this broken acre about global warming, because God is in control of the situation!

Dude, you can't be serious, right?
btw: if God's in control of the weather, then don't you hink He could have stopped Katrina?

Now! If the people of this world continue the path of not acknolwedging and giving God the thanks and praise for what He has done for them, then yes! He will send his wrath upon them and in paticular this nation of America!

You know, Bill Maher was right about what he said about you ultra-religious nutjobs:
"If you guys are going to be this paranoid all the time, why don't you just get high?"

Teenie,

Yes! God could have stopped Katrina, but He didn't want to, He created mighty Katrina, and He done it for a purpose, You know why?

Well, you think about it, if I recall correctly they were about to have one of those queer parades, Well, that's one thing God cannot stand is sodomy, I know I can't stand a fagget, I wish God would destroy every last one of them, maybe then straight people could relax!, and they also have what's called the mardi gras parades you know where people get drunk and dope and puke their life away, you know! some of the most retarded people in the world!!

Let me tell you, those people are messing with the wrong one when they go to messing with God!!

God could destroy New Orleans and all the people there if He wanted to, So they bettered be taking a hint from Katrina, and straighten their act up, or else it just MAY BE too late!

Jeremiah

Jeremiah, you are one sick and vile human being.
So it it your wish that God would commit an act of genocide on the gay community?
And you still consider yourself to be a man of Christ?
You're nothing but a demented fraud hiding behind the Cross, my friend. You know it, and I know it;
in fact, you're no better than the Islamo-Fascists you canservative hate freaks love to discuss.

And fyi: God doesn't reward intolerant, hateful men like you. He burns them.

Mark -

"The first clue that you've got something other than an MIT climatologist is that two of the contributors are "climate modellers"...in other words, BS artists. There is nothing quite as bogus as climate models - "

So you cast aside the lot because 2 of the 12 main contributors list climate modeling as a primary area of interest? LOL! And then you go on to say (drawing on your scientific expertise, no doubt) that climate modeling is pure BS. Well that would be news to Prof Lindzen, who got his PhD in Applied Mathematics and who does a lot of climate modeling himself. To quote from Dr Lindzen's own faculty page at MIT:

"He has developed models for the Earth's climate with specific concern for the stability of the ice caps, the sensitivity to increases in CO2, the origin of the 100,000 year cycle in glaciation."

Truth is, just about all climate scientists are involved with modeling to some degree, including Prof Lindzen.

By the way, Mark, one of the two scientists on Real Climate who you dismiss, Gavin Schmidt, does climate modeling at NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center. hmmmmmmm, guess who else does climate modeling at NASA's Goddard Center? Could it be...? why yes! Quoting again from Prof Lindzen's MIT faculty page:

"[Lindzen] is a consultant to the Global Modeling and Simulation Group at NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center."

So... since Lindzen got his PhD in Mathematics does climate modeling, I guess that means he's not a real climate scientist - right Mark? LOL!

teenie.

ONLY GOD CAN STEM THE TIDE!!

OK!!

SO BE QUIET ALREADY!!

Jeremiah

teenie.

ONLY GOD CAN STEM THE TIDE!!

OK!!

SO BE QUIET ALREADY!!

Jeremiah

Aarontime,

Difference - someone who makes models as part of a genuine scientific effort/someone who makes models in order to alarm people...the global warming alarmists are the latter.

Attention Jeremiah:
The Teenage Liberal hit it so on the nose in describing you especially when he says you are in the same league as Islamo-Fascists. So true. I would just like to add that you are a raving idiotic lunatic. You belong back in the Middle Ages where I am sure you would be burning witches.

Listen guys,

Mark has probably hired Jeremiah, just to add an additional annoyance factor to the blog and perhaps even to make the other right-wing contributors look bright in comparsion.

If Jeremiah were the person he claims to be, he would be unable to use a computer. So relax, he's not real.

Canoe face :) Quote--

"Attention Jeremiah:
The Teenage Liberal hit it so on the nose in describing you especially when he says you are in the same league as Islamo-Fascists. So true. I would just like to add that you are a raving idiotic lunatic. You belong back in the Middle Ages where I am sure you would be burning witches."
__________________________________________________
Attention Canoe face,

Look, We the true American's of society(meaning the christian's) have been so tolerant, or should I say TOO TOLERANT of you people's sick ideologies!

We have to draw the line somewhere! because if we don't then you will continually push your sin sick ways to the point that America will be so out of whack that this BLESSED PLACE will no longer be acceptable! under the term AMERICA!

More like the land of SIN! or the old testament name SODOM!

I don't want to see this happen because our younger generation will be TOTALLY AND FOREVER LOST if we do in fact let you shove your retarded rhetoric down our throats!

Yes, I will only tolerate so much and then I have to stand up and say, NO MORE OF YOUR NON-SENSE, you can't go any further!

Because this is still America! until you have succeeded in proving me otherwise which is 100% unlikely......

and you are not about to run over top of me and throw me around like some rag, because my daddy taught me better he taught me to stand up show people like you where I stand! and to defend myself against thugs like you, and that's exactly what I mean to do! OK!!

So, You can just take your big canoe of crock BACK to where ever it is you came from!

So again, I hope you understand that I am not about to let you treat US the way you see in your deranged ways fit!

Jeremiah

I'm convinced that Jeremiah is really Jerry Falwell.............I mean, who could be a bigger homophobe and and a bigger demagouge?

I think teenie weenie is the son of Hitler, I mean who could be more un-american and hate christian's more?!!

Jeremiah

LMAO Jeremiah.....................you're pathetic.

What's wrong Jeremiah, pissed of that i've exposed you as a total whack-job?

Abd fyi: I don't hate christians, but I don't like hatemongores like you who use the Bible to spew hate and intolerance, when Jesus taught peace, love and tolerance.

Get some help. I'm serious, you're insane.

Teenie quote--

"What's wrong Jeremiah, pissed of that i've exposed you as a total whack-job?"
__________________________________________________

No, of course not, I was just trying to show you how stupid you sound when you go to saying stuff out of your head the way you do!!

and fyi: Jesus does not expect me to set here and be crucified the way he was!!

Just wait your words will come back to you ten times harder!!

you'll reap all that you sow, How much is that?

PLENTY!!, You'll get all you need and then some, believe me!!

Jeremiah

and teenie,

If you need a counselor I'll be more than glad to help find you one!!

:) You've got to start smiling teenie!!
Lookie for once on the bright side, for the psychic sake!

Jeremiah

teen-lib

Guess we had better tread lightly here....When the apocolypse happens, jeremiah's saviour is taking him to heaven and we're going to be left behind here on earth. He could shoot spitballs at us from heaven!

Ash,

buddy, you won't have to worry about me when the end time comes, because I will be totally separated from where you are at!!

But I'll sure pray that you change your ways, before that time does come!

Jeremiah

Jermiah's belief system is no more radical than Ash's or Teenie's. It's not a matter of degree, just direction.

My brother has a Jetta diesel, gets more than 40 mpg, has gotten as much as 49. It's still heavy enough to be strong, carries four adults or two adults and three children, has a pretty big trunk, and is overall a very nice ride. The Passat is a little bigger but similar regarding fuel economy.

One of my vehicles is an Excursion diesel, but it's not a car or an SUV, it's a truck. I pull trailers with it, carry feed and supplies, and can haul seven people as well. It is really a 3/4 ton pickup, just enclosed in the back. When I am at a lower altitude and keep my foot out of it, set it on cruise control, I can drive 70 mph and get about 22 MPG. For a work vehicle, that's not bad.

Ford is retooling some plants to produce highly developed and superior diesels for cars and light trucks. I doubt that they are alone in this.

Factor in biodiesel, with reduced and less toxic emissions and longer engine life due to increased lubrication, and you have one approach to increasing resource management and reducing pollution.

Of course, this is part of a complex and comprehensive approach, not just a utopian and unattainable one-shot simplistic "solution" the Left could approve.

Ash decries economics as a legitimate reason to make changes---typical of one who makes motive more important than outcome. But economics is an excellent spur for development of all sorts of improvements, and they are valid and valuable even if someone (gasp!!) makes money off them. Let Ford make a bundle, if they also improve transportation and reduce emissions and dependence on foreign oil. I'm investing in biodiesel---a decent return on my investment does not negate the contribution it will make to both the economy and the environment.

What I see is the tendency of the evangelical Left to present all their decisions as morally motivated and therefore proof of superiority. Ash didn't just move to a pretty state with lots of recreational opportunities: he is morally superior because he traded his old life for this one, eats a lot of apples now and hikes a lot. It's not enough to like, and be able to afford (even by making tradeoffs) mountain views and clean air and lots of fun things to do---the Left has to attach some morally superior element. So to them, it doesn't count if you buy a Jetta to save money---no, you have to have the MOTIVE, which has to fit into their rigid dogmatic framework, to count.

Well Jermiah is a truly crazed wingnut. Just as crazed as Muslim sucide bombers and hijackers. He is possessed of a witch burning mentality, no doubt about it. He is hilarious, I love reading his insane rants. Makes my day. God, I got to get a life.

Let me say something to the lunatics that have been raveing on about how my brother is some fake who has been hired by staff here. That's a lot of garbage. And as far as he being some lunatic who belongs in the dark ages, that's false too.

Let me tell you a few things...if you'd ever have a chance to meet him in real life, you'd find a shy, very quiet person who is extremely easy to get along with. As far as him being a bit wired while on here, it's because he sees the demented, demonic possession that most of you liberal's on this site are possessed with. It upsets him a great deal, and he becomes very angry to see moron's such as yourself try to degrade America, the President, and life itself.

While I know that I don't post much, it makes me very angry to see people like you say things like this about him. You don't know him, and while I realize that the only opinion you can formulate on him is based on what he posts here, that does not give you grounds to assume and spew things like you have about him. So remember, it's not nice to assume, b/c you know what assume makes don't you? An ass out of "u and me".

Keep the debate where it belongs, on the issue at hand, and not on other people's personal lives, b/c you'll end up makeing a lot of people upset.

I hope to start posting more, but Jeremiah keeps the PC tied up a lot, ha ha.

Lucas

Let me say something to the lunatics that have been raveing on about how my brother is some fake who has been hired by staff here. That's a lot of garbage. And as far as he being some lunatic who belongs in the dark ages, that's false too.

Let me tell you a few things...if you'd ever have a chance to meet him in real life, you'd find a shy, very quiet person who is extremely easy to get along with. As far as him being a bit wired while on here, it's because he sees the demented, demonic possession that most of you liberal's on this site are possessed with. It upsets him a great deal, and he becomes very angry to see moron's such as yourself try to degrade America, the President, and life itself.

While I know that I don't post much, it makes me very angry to see people like you say things like this about him. You don't know him, and while I realize that the only opinion you can formulate on him is based on what he posts here, that does not give you grounds to assume and spew things like you have about him. So remember, it's not nice to assume, b/c you know what assume makes don't you? An ass out of "u and me".

Keep the debate where it belongs, on the issue at hand, and not on other people's personal lives, b/c you'll end up makeing a lot of people upset.

And yes Canuck, you do need to get a life, you are truly pathetic.

I hope to start posting more, but Jeremiah keeps the PC tied up a lot, ha ha.

Lucas

Let me tell you morons something real quick. You've been spewing a lot of false garbage about Jeremiah. If you'd ever have met him in real life, you would find a very quiet and shy person. He doesn't have much to say, and is extremely easy to get along with. I've known him for a lot of years, and he's not only my brother, he's my best friend. To hear you people spew this false garbage about him ANGERS me, greatly.

He hasn't been hired by anyone, and he doesn't come here to try to trump everyone else. He's a really good guy, but when he sees Demon possessed people such as yourself come on here, and try to degrade the President, America, and life in general, it upsets him. And rightly so. The evil intentions that lurk in the hearts of liberal's is very sickening.

While I realize that the only opinion you can formulate on Jeremiah is based on what he posts here, that doesn't give you a right to make false assumptions about him. Remember what assume makes "an ass out of you and me." And you've done a successful job of doing that

And yes Canuck, you do need to get a life, you're really pathetic...

At any rate ... Global Warming is something I believe is there, but I don't lose sleep over it at night. God is in control, and if he decides to send an atomic fire wave through the holes in the ozone layer, then he'll do it. Holes or not, nothing can stand in the way of His will. He created this Universe, piece by piece, in 6 days. He knows it like we know our bodies, better actually.

So, to the Christian person these follies about Global Warming are all just water under the bridge. We have a hope and a security in Jesus Christ, that's the reason we don't go into mass-panic about it.

I have much more to say about the issue, and hope to post about it when I have a little more time, but right now lunch beckons.

Lucas.

Let me tell you morons something real quick. You've been spewing a lot of false garbage about Jeremiah. If you'd ever have met him in real life, you would find a very quiet and shy person. He doesn't have much to say, and is extremely easy to get along with. I've known him for a lot of years, and he's not only my brother, he's my best friend. To hear you people spew this false garbage about him ANGERS me, greatly.

He hasn't been hired by anyone, and he doesn't come here to try to trump everyone else. He's a really good guy, but when he sees Demon possessed people such as yourself come on here, and try to degrade the President, America, and life in general, it upsets him. And rightly so. The evil intentions that lurk in the hearts of liberal's is very sickening.

While I realize that the only opinion you can formulate on Jeremiah is based on what he posts here, that doesn't give you a right to make false assumptions about him. Remember what assume makes "an ass out of you and me." And you've done a successful job of doing that

And yes Canuck, you do need to get a life, you're really pathetic...

At any rate ... Global Warming is something I believe is there, but I don't lose sleep over it at night. God is in control, and if he decides to send an atomic fire wave through the holes in the ozone layer, then he'll do it. Holes or not, nothing can stand in the way of His will. He created this Universe, piece by piece, in 6 days. He knows it like we know our bodies, better actually.

So, to the Christian person these follies about Global Warming are all just water under the bridge. We have a hope and a security in Jesus Christ, that's the reason we don't go into mass-panic about it.

I have much more to say about the issue, and hope to post about it when I have a little more time, but right now lunch beckons.

Lucas.

I apologize many times over for the ... numerous posts *winces.* I was haveing lots of problems and these server errors kept popping up. Is their any way for me to delete all of these? I'm really sorry, I hope you'll forgive me.

Jeremiah told me the staff can delete them...I would be very grateful if you would do so for me...this is quite embarrasing on my part.

Again, I do apologize.

Lucas

Well Almiranta I am truly flattered that you have kept such close tabs on my posts. Maybe someday I will hire you as my biographer.

Don't we all proselytize a bit on this forum? Don't we all have some ulterior motive? I am sorry if you think I consider myself morally superior. I have just found what I consider to be a good life. Yes I eat granola and have lowered my cholesterol and blood pressure by lifestyle changes. Yes I want to share my experiences.

And yes I want to condemn those who lack a long range vision that want to strip mine or clear cut my Nirvana. Don't we all want to protect what we value?