Need to know????

[Michael Larson]

Originally Posted by Jason1

So we agree it is a global problem that needs to be dealt with, I think you are closer then you imagine to seeing the light, Mikey.

Did you read the whole thing jason1?
It proposes only doing the cheap fixes until a better understanding of the problem and causes is reached. jase ole boy I just don't think you get it.

[Michael Larson]

Originally Posted by Jason1

Right, so in yor eyes it is "cost effective" to find a treatment for Malaria that effects a small percentage of our population, yet something that effects 100% of us is out of the question?

To play to your side, whether man has an effect on it or not, clmate change is happening, and it is effecting ALL of us.

Not very smart math, Mike.

Millions have died since DDT fell into disrepute based on bad science. Many more die each year that it's general used is not resumed. Rachel Carlson did not do the poor any favors for all her ranting.

Simply wrong. I would benefit from any global warming and you would too in the Northland.

[Michael Larson]

The Power of Graphs

"If for some reason you do not believe that the Sun is a significant player in determining the temperature of the Earth (after all, we are told repeatedly that humans are causing most of the observed warming on the Earth), then asked yourself if you believe that Neptune’s temperature is controlled by the Sun. How is it possible that the Earth’s temperature is so highly correlated with brightness variations from Neptune? The news from Neptune comes to us just weeks after an article was published showing that Mars has warmed recently as well." MORE

[Michael Larson]

Global-warming "truths" are not as certain as some claim them to be.
------
The available evidence indicates that it is probable (though not strictly scientifically proven) that human activities have increased global temperatures to date and will likely continue to do so. But in spite of all the table-pounding, nobody can reliably quantify the size of these future impacts, or even bound them sufficiently to guide action. The total impact of global temperatures over the next century could plausibly range from negligible to severe. Long-term climate prediction is in its infancy, and improved forecast reliability is crucial to enable useful guidance for policymakers. Better science could give us what is most need in this debate: more light and less heat.

Read the Rest

[Michael Larson]

"Al Qaeda, Iran, North Korea — and Global Warming" - "Democrats assess the threats to U.S. national security." (Byron York, NRO)

[Jason1]

[Michael Larson]

Thos pesky scientists who don't blame Man for global climate change are at it again.

''What you don't hear, is that the IPCC has reduced its worst-case scenarios. With each successive report, they have reduced their projected impact of global warming and reduced the side-effects. Initially, the IPCC reports said the seas would rise 3, 4 or 5 feet as a result of global warming. The latest report says seas could rise by 13 inches. That's not very catastrophic.''

''I think it is pretty clear that the global warming catastrophe, as predicted by Al Gore and the environmentalists, is unsupported by science,'' says Taylor. ''Essentially, there is no global warming crisis.''

MORE

[Michael Larson]

New findings indicate today's greenhouse gas levels not unusual

"Stopping climate change" may be all the rage with celebrities and environmental lobbyists, but fortunately for the rest of us, the scare's scientific foundation is rapidly disintegrating.
One of the fundamental pillars of the hypothesis that humanity is causing dangerous climate change is the belief that levels of carbon dioxide (CO2), the greenhouse gas of concern in countries such as Canada, have been rising steadily since the start of the industrial revolution. But what if CO2 levels have not increased? How could our emissions of this otherwise benign gas then have anything to do with the past century's modest warming? More Here

[Vern Mitchinson, CMI]

Originally Posted by Jason1

You got my vote!

[Michael Larson]

I'm posting a bit early but this is just for our Canadian Viewers, especially jason1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

New Canadian Poll demonstrates public's unwillingness to pay the cost associated with "fixing" "global warming"

Read All About It

[Michael Larson]

It's almost too late

Well that's if you believe the World Wildlife Fund report.

Only 5 years left to "save the planet" Better hurry.

[Jason1]

Originally Posted by mlarson

I'm posting a bit early but this is just for our Canadian Viewers, especially jason1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

New Canadian Poll demonstrates public's unwillingness to pay the cost associated with "fixing" "global warming"

Read All About It

"Why would the majority of people say they're concerned about the environment and not want anything done? I mean, that doesn't make any sense."

Pretty much sums it up.

Thanks, Mike.

[Michael Larson]

Originally Posted by Jason1

"Why would the majority of people say they're concerned about the environment and not want anything done? I mean, that doesn't make any sense."

Pretty much sums it up.

Thanks, Mike.

If you read it jason1 you would perhaps come to believe that though they are concerned for the environment they want someone else to pay to clean it up. The funny thing is that they themselves will have to pay because there is no one else who can. Your right it doesn't make sense. But logic is not one of the strong points of "true belivers" in the "global warming" crowd.

[George A. H. Luck]

"they are concerned for the environment they want someone else to pay to clean it up"

Typical liberals. They 'know' what social engineering programme is best for you and expect you to pay for it.

[Jason1]

Right, lets do nothing.

Perfect

Hey I know, lets put the money into more pointless wars around the world, now there is money well spent !