The GOP is now a party of know-nothing flat-earthers

You just now clued into that? The Hate Baggers and Conservitards have been knowledge hating, knuckle dragging, Flat Earthers for the better part of a decade if not longer…

• Link
• Report this comment

CT, What you are referring to is Cap and Trade and it is not science it is a scam.

What the Obama administration has rammed through Congress in the name of saving the environment is not only a hoax of draconian proportions (that Carbon Dioxide is a harmful pollutant, responsible for Global Warming) but also a means to mandating government control over all forms of energy production. By implementing an arbitrary and restrictive cap on the production of Carbon Dioxide (17 percent by 2020, compared to 2005 levels), and then forcing high CO2 producers to buy carbon credits from zero or low CO2 producers this bill will alter and distort the current cost structure of the markets and not actually change the amount of CO2 put into the atmosphere at all. In essence this is a massive wealth transfer scheme from efficient energy producers to inefficient producers, and energy users everywhere will pay for this multi-billion dollar boondoggle.

• Link
• Report this comment

good job rightwing- “hate baggers” “knuckle draggers”- you mind friend are an intellectual small child.

• Link
• Report this comment

Hmm, I guess this must be Cynthia’s week to pimp “climate change”. Guess Bookman will step up to the plate next week.

So Bush understood the critical nature of “climate change” way back in 2007? I do believe that was before a lot of the “scientific” evidence they used to scare people was debunked.

So what’s up next week, CT? Perhaps another fascinating cut and paste job on “birthers”?

• Link
• Report this comment

As “little people” we can do little things to reduce carbon emissions, but we need the “big people” (i.e. big business) to do the big things. Some businesses are taking responsibility on their own and doing these big things. Others are waiting for the government’s carrots and sticks. Bring on the carrots and sticks.

As for the deniers, get real.

• Link
• Report this comment

We should let the ChiComs lead in this area. They are the worst polluters, then followed by the Ruskies.

Energy prices are going to skyrocked anyway, because a billion ChiComs want to have 2 cars each!

• Link
• Report this comment

Uh-oh. Al Man-bear-pig must have talked Cynthia into putting big money in the Chicago Climate Exchange (CCX).

Can anyone give me a link to a scientific model of anthropogenic global warming that has not been discredited by the the warmer-istas own faux-data and exposed subterfuges?

It has been well established that increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide follow global temperature rise, rather than vice versa.

• Link
• Report this comment

The question is not whether there is warming, or if it’s man made, but whether we need to care. Waiting achieves two things: First we don’t knock ourselves backward with new restrictions on everything, thus technology will continue to advance till it finds a much cheaper solution and second, mitigating the effects of warming is much cheaper than trying to prevent what still may very well be a naturally occurring event (and there are still plenty of respected scientists who don’t agree with the man-made model, it’s not being a flat Earther to agree that it’s inconclusive).

The main point is that you are assuming the best answer is to spend ourselves into oblivion trying to prevent global warming. I disagree. Let the Earth warm, fix the symptoms. The planet won’t die, it’s been a lot warmer than this before and done just fine.

• Link
• Report this comment

Joel… what part of NOTE: If you are an anti-science know-nothing, don’t bother to comment did you not comprehend?

• Link
• Report this comment

CTucker: “But there is no dispute in the scientific community about two things: the climate is warming and human activity is causing it.” Ahh, but that’s simply not true. There are plenty of scientists who disagree that human activity is causing it. Stop lying, you can make your point without being dishonest to your readers.

• Link
• Report this comment

granny, the paleo-neo-Carlinist position is; scarcity and deprivation are coming, and they are coming with or without climate change and whether or not climate change is man-made or not. deforestion, overpopulation, contamination of the environment, etc., etc. it’s pointless to warn the “greed is good/Ayn Rand was right” self-interest crowd of such things. I kinda regret I will not be around when the food riots, and “Soylent Green” era comes into play. the anarchy and erosion of society will bring new meaning to the idea of “pull yourself up by your bootstraps” because bootstraps will become the property of those who take by force, not those who hoard and sell them.

• Link
• Report this comment

I almost forgot….

4. Proved that no other time in history was as warm as this. Wrong. (They are admitting now that the medieval period was probably warmer and couldn’t have been man-made.

• Link
• Report this comment

Carlin…you may very well be right. I hope not. I hope that the people of this country can join with others in the world to find a way to stop the march toward your future world. I have serious doubts. Its a battle against false science from the richest exploiters in the world like the Koch Brothers, leading the sheep with their astroturf and fake counter science that follows the prior successful fake science battle–smoking is not bad for your health.

• Link
• Report this comment

A little science from the from the 1996 IPCC (the global warming folks) report.

http://www.atmos.washington.edu/2001Q2/211/groupE/maya_files/image003.jpg

It became a problem and was mostly ignored. It’s making a comeback from some of their own scientists.

It couldn’t have been man-made back then.

• Link
• Report this comment

“no-nothing flat-earthers?!?” and “If you are an anti-science know-nothing, don’t bother to comment?!?”

Anyone else notice how much the shrillness and name-calling from Ms Tucker has intensified over the past couple of weeks? Just another sign of the political apocalypse the liberal crowd has waiting for them in November.

• Link
• Report this comment

Cynthia, “But there is no dispute in the scientific community about two things: the climate is warming and human activity is causing it.” I can possibly agree with part one of your statement, but I cannot agree with part two. Especially knowing that the AGW-crowd claims that it is man-made CO2 that is causing temperatures to go up, but science has shown that CO2 levels don’t rise until AFTER the temp goes up. Of course, we are leaving out the fact that we’re now told the mere act of exhaling is polluting.

Also, you’ve not addressed the key economic issue on this (as conservatives view it): How does taking money from one country and giving it to another lower the global temperature?

• Link
• Report this comment

” (NOTE: If you are an anti-science know-nothing, don’t bother to comment. The clear scientific consensus indicates a warming climate caused by human activity.)”

We would agree that our brainless leftist friends will not tolerate questioning their superior knowledge of the causation of a 0.01 degree possible change in world-wide temperatures. Even though the temperatures have dropped on average for the past 10 years. No doubt, this is the end of the world.

• Link
• Report this comment

I believe in climate change. I have no faith in Washington D.C. to craft cost-effective solutions to the problem.

The “wipe out cities and coastal towns” hyperbole has been debunked, for what it’s worth. Tossing stuff in like that only serves to devalue any arguments in your favor.

• Link
• Report this comment

One quick question – what are the “enlightened” Democrats suggesting China and India do about the problem, and how do they plan to implement any plan they might have?

• Link
• Report this comment

CT,

I cannot believe I wasted the 3 minutes it took to read your commentary. Pure drivel! We may be warming, but no fault of man. I am moving your future commentaries to the “back of the bus.”

• Link
• Report this comment

Joel, please do show me an independent assessment from reliable scientists and not those bought by the likes of Koch and others like the Cato Institute.

Here let me get you started. Try Politifact: First off, we should note that while there are some who disagree about the existence of global warming, the overwhelming consensus among scientists who study the climate is that it does, and that humans are worsening it.

• Link
• Report this comment

Oooops, I meant PROVE IT…

• Link
• Report this comment

Don’t prove it with politcal talking heads, I want the scientific proof….BTW. Because if you actually have the diffinitive link, I will personally write a letter to the Nobel folks on your behalf.

• Link
• Report this comment

I would like to see some of this discredited eveidence. Could someone post a link or something to a scientist that disagrees with the man made global warming theory.

Bubba Bob-
UHmm, did you read the article associated with that link you published. Or did you just find a graph to prove your point without reading the article associated with that graph.

• Link
• Report this comment

“You are going to lose soooooo badly in November.”

It really seems Tucker and the rest of them are getting desperate. They know what’s coming and trying everything they can to stop.

• Link
• Report this comment

Carbon dioxide, a benign, life giving molecule has been miscast by a world wide political movement to be an environmental hazard in what will soon be discovered to be the hoax of the century. This molecule, CO2 is vital to all life on earth. It is exhaled by all living things and even comes from nocturnal emissions by plants. It forms the bubbles in your soda, wine and beer. Standard air has 370 parts per million (PPM) of carbon dioxide of which 93% comes from “natural sources” which are all beyond human control. These sources include decomposition of organic matter, exhaling by living things and volcanic vents, which is by far the greatest atmospheric source. The climate change hoax is based on faulty science from two things. First, hoaxers assume that ice layers give information on temperature like tree rings do with rainfall. Ice cores from Greenland and Antarctica, from thousands of years of deposits, are measured for CO2 content of the air at the time the snow layer was deposited and thickness of the ice layers. The thickness of these snow fall layers is then assumed to be an indication of global temperature. There are numerous errors in this assumption, which have been presented in a more technical analysis, but for now pretend that this evidence is true. The hoaxers then show graphs over time with a near perfect match of CO2 levels and snow thickness and by implication the earth’s temperature. The second bit of “proof” of human caused global warming is the Global Climate Model which is available to all at Wikipedia. By their own admission, this model was developed for SHORT RANGE weather forecasting and we all know how accurate that is. This formula, though not given on this web site, has a hundred parameters each with its own coefficient and exponent. By manipulating these numbers the hoaxers are able to “prove” that an increase of CO2 will raise world temperature.

• Link
• Report this comment

Granny,

You dodged the question.

Yes, I am raising kids.

If we set the example, and China and India refuse to follow suit, we will look back on 10% unemployment as the “good old days”

Now, would you care to answer the question?

• Link
• Report this comment

The ultimate stupidity is that you think you have any control over nature.

The Earth has been warming and cooling cyclically for the better part of it’s 4.5 billion year existance. Seriously, look it up. It’s amazing, the Earth’s tempurature moves up and down, it hasn’t stayed the same ever. The polarities have changed, the core temp is volitile. Pressures change, etc.
What we should discuss is the political ramifications between String theory and E8…Should not e a problem for such a scientific head such as yourself….LOL!

• Link
• Report this comment

Pat… Childish….why dont you prove your claim. And by the way, also prove your scientific credentials.

Here’s something for you to drag your knuckles across….Global Climate Change Indicators
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
National Climatic Data Center

• Link
• Report this comment

And since Nothing but a Bully will whine and demonstrate continued ignorance rather than read, let me add this from NOAA:

How do we know humans are the primary cause of the warming?

A large body of evidence supports the conclusion that human activity is the primary driver of recent warming. This evidence has accumulated over several decades, and from hundreds of studies. The first line of evidence is our basic physical understanding of how greenhouse gases trap heat, how the climate system responds to increases in greenhouse gases, and how other human and natural factors influence climate. The second line of evidence is from indirect estimates of climate changes over the last 1,000 to 2,000 years. These estimates are often obtained from living things and their remains (like tree rings and corals) which provide a natural archive of climate variations. These indicators show that the recent temperature rise is clearly unusual in at least the last 1,000 years. The third line of evidence is based on comparisons of actual climate with computer models of how we expect climate to behave under certain human influences. For example, when climate models are run with historical increases in greenhouse gases, they show gradual warming of the Earth and ocean surface, increases in ocean heat content, a rise in global sea level, and general retreat of sea ice and snow cover. These and other aspects of modeled climate change are in agreement with observations.

• Link
• Report this comment

Sadly the demise of the Great Climate Change Hoax will mean that a lot of art, great and cheesy, will no longer be quite the same. Roland Emmerich’s overblown global warming epic, “The Day After Tomorrow”, which paradoxically depicts a new ice age, will seem even sillier than it did when it first came out. “An Inconvenient Truth” looks more like science fiction every day. One wonders whether the Academy can revoke Al Gore’s Oscar. And the South Park guys are going to have to retire “Manbearpig”, unless Al Gore seizes upon another environmental crisis to stoke for the benefit of his fame and his own pocketbook.

• Link
• Report this comment

CLIMATE CHANGE LUNATICS CONSPIRE TO PLUNDER U.S.

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton announced recently that man-made climate change was responsible for
extreme weather events during the summer of 2010. Hillary joins an increasing number of climate change experts on
President Obama’s staff. All have one trait in common. Their curriculum vitae include little or no knowledge of
atmosphere-ocean dynamics. They have no clue what causes extreme weather events. Their outspoken ignorance
identifies them as climate change loonies.

According to an Associated Press article published in newspapers on August 13, 2010:
“Salvano Briceno, UN specialist on the UN ’s International Strategy for Disaster Reduction,
pointed to aggravating factors in the latest climate catastrophes: China’s failure to stem deforestation,
contributing to its deadly mudslides; Russia’s poor forest management, feeding fires; and the settling of
poor Pakistanis on flood plains and dry river beds in the densely populated country, squatters turf that
suddenly turned into torrents.” Hillary failed to do her homework.

Most extreme weather events are caused by an unusual combination of typical weather systems (cyclones,
anticyclones, fronts, monsoons and thunderstorms). For example, high temperature records set on the East
Coast in July were caused by unusually warm moist air from the Gulf of Mexico and high altitude blow-off
from Hurricane Alex and Tropical Storm Bonnie (See Appendix A1). August saw more of the same oppressive
air from the Gulf of Mexico with warm clear air blow-off from monsoon storms over the Rockies. Record
floods in Iowa resulted from a stable intersection of warm moist tropical air from the Gulf of Mexico with cool
dry air from Canada. Record floods in Tennessee were caused by the remnant of a tropical depression.

Global warming had nothing to do with the record summer heat wave and flooding rains of 2010. Climate
change loonies blame these extreme weather events on burning fossil fuel. They believe that Americans who
drive SUV’s or eat cheeseburgers cause extreme weather events. (Believe it or not, this fearsome rubbish is
included in a public elementary school lesson plan.)

Actually the summer weather of 2010 has been relatively benign for the Continental U.S. No hurricanes
have hit the country through the end of August. There are no extreme droughts anywhere. This is welcome
relief from extreme droughts in California, Texas, Florida and the Southeast during recent years. There is not a
word in the media about this good climate change news.

The AP article by Charles J. Hanley deserves the attention of every American. It describes a conspiracy
sponsored by the United Nations, Britain and the U.S. Government to frighten Americans into supporting
President Obama’s objectives: draconian cuts in fossil-fuel use; cap-and-trade legislation causing skyrocketing
costs of electricity, gasoline, heating oil and natural gas; global governance of fossil fuel reserves and
redistribution of American wealth to foreign countries. Senator Obama made some of these objectives apparent
before the election. President Obama revealed others at the Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen.

The President’s objectives are frighteningly on course to achieve Congresswoman Maxine Waters’ “liberal”
wish to nationalize the oil and gas industries. This is one-step closer to redistributing American wealth and
fundamentally transforming America by continuing to take apart our free market enterprise system.

President Obama’s legislative successes have taken a wrecking-ball to the economy. Referring to this
disaster, Jim Kramer on CNBC’s “Mad Money” said, “The President is at war with the stock market”(August
25, 2010). If the U.S. Senate caves and passes cap-and-trade, it will be the final nail in the coffin of the
economy. That is, if tax increases don’t bury it first.

Hanley titled the article, “Climate Gurus saw cruel weather coming.”

Climate gurus that claim to see “cruel weather coming” are climate change loonies. Climate change
computer models cannot predict the time and location of extreme weather events.

Hanley wrote:
“Worldwide temperature readings… show that this January-June was the hottest first half of a year
since record keeping began in the mid-19th century.”

This is Government propaganda. The example is conveniently crafted to suggest that man’s burning of
fossil fuel is responsible for increasing global average surface temperature since the Industrial Revolution.
Contrasting worldwide temperature readings from the mid-19th century with this year is comparing apples with
elephants. There is no comparison between the quality and density of temperature observations then and now.

Global average surface temperature is an exercise in statistical folly. It averages the normal passage of
weather events into an unnatural mush of homogeneity. By some accounts, global average surface temperature
has increased 1.0-2.0 degrees F. in the past century. There is no conclusive evidence that any of that change is
caused by burning fossil fuel. Even if it were all caused by man it is insignificant to the generation of extreme
weather events.

Seasonal temperature variation can exceed 100 degrees F. over land and 20 degrees F. over oceans.
Assuming surface temperature alone determines number and intensity of extreme weather events, the effect of
global warming is in the noise. For example, hurricanes do not form in winter. Water temperature is too cold
even with global warming. Tropical cyclones form only after the summer sun heats tropical air and waters.
Global warming is insignificant. Predictions of more and stronger storms due to global warming are
preposterous.

“Scientists blame the warming on carbon dioxide and other heat trapping gases pouring into the
atmosphere from power plants, cars and trucks, furnaces and other fossil fuel-burning industrial and
residential sources.”

What scientists? These persons are climate change loonies. They are not atmosphere-ocean scientists.
Blaming man for significant warming of Earth’s surface temperature is sophomoric fear mongering nonsense.
Most scientists, schooled and experienced in atmosphere-ocean dynamics, disagree with this specious argument.

“Carbon dioxide and other heat trapping gases” exert an insignificant influence on surface temperature
compared to weather events that increase solar insolation or release heat from the oceans. NOAA/NASA
satellites validate this in Appendix A. For example, the view from space reveals that the record heat of July
2010 was drawn from Atlantic Ocean Basin waters and reinforced by a high altitude dome of warming clear air,
allowing unimpeded solar radiation to bake the land.

Satellite imagery shows that much of the unusually warm surface air invading the U.S. from the Gulf of
Mexico and Western Atlantic Ocean was influenced by cold air flooding the Tropics at high altitude. Upper
level cold air reduces high cloud cover allowing increased solar heating of tropical oceans. Cold lows (high
altitude cyclones and waves) form in advance of tropical cyclones and suppress hurricane development
(Appendix A2). As this is written, at the end of August 2010, 13 tropical disturbances have formed in the
Atlantic Ocean Basin. With the exception of Hurricane Alex, all have been escorted and suppressed by a cold
low. Hurricane Danielle became a major hurricane as it slipped its cold low by moving under warm air in
advance of a cold front. Huricane Earl became a major hurricane under the warm umbrella of outflow from
Danielle. Both maintained major hurricane status briefly. Tropical Storms Fiona and Gaston fizzled under the
influence of cold lows.

Two tropical cyclones, seriously weakened by cold lows, made landfall this summer at almost the same
location as Hurricane Katrina. If hurricane strength were determined only by water temperature, we would
now be grieving the terrible destruction and loss caused by two major hurricanes, instead of reminiscing over
five years of renewal. Why are climate change loonies not celebrating these fortuitous climate events?

Cold lows on the Equator are now suppressing storms on the Intertropical Convergence Zone and increasing
solar heating of tropical waters. Hurricane winds cool tropical waters. So increased solar insolation and few or
weak hurricanes mean warmer water in the Tropics. Record heat waves in the U.S. are sure to follow. Global
warming cannot be blamed.

Cold lows also initiate extra-tropical storms (Appendix A3), and reinforce fronts and tornado outbreaks
(Appendix A4). In fact, cold lows are a much more powerful regulator of surface temperature than are
greenhouse gases. Climate gurus generally ignore upper levels of the atmosphere. They have no clue what
causes extreme weather events. The view from space reveals the truth. Eyes in the sky don’t lie. (Appendices
A2, A3 and A4 are works in progress.)

“The U. S. remains the only major industrialized nation not to have caps on carbon emissions.”
The U.S. inaction is a key reason global talks have bogged down for a pact to succeed the expiring
Kyoto Protocol, the relatively weak accord on emissions cuts adhered to by all other industrialized
states.”

Here is a reason for the conspiracy. U.S. refusal to knuckle under to climate change loonies is a humiliation
to those countries that were flimflammed with global warming into signing the Kyoto Protocol. They want
fossil-fuel caps and global governance imposed on the U.S. too.

Americans are fortunate that some members of the U.S. Senate prevented the President from giving away
the farm at Copenhagen. But he will try again at the Climate Change Conference in Mexico next year. The
U.N has long had designs on redistributing American wealth to its bureaucrats and to foreign countries. It
promotes fundamentally transforming America to subvert the free-market enterprise system. With Obama as
President of the U.S., the UN sees the opportunity to plunder the U.S. now.

“The experts now see an urgent need for better ways to forecast extreme events like Russia’s heat
wave…” They will discuss such tools in meetings this month and next in Europe and America under
United Nations, U.S. and British sponsorship. There is no time to waste because societies must be
equipped to deal with global warming, says British government Climatologist Peter Stott.”

Peter Stott spilled the beans. He identified global warming as the problem. Why is there an urgent need for
better ways to forecast extreme weather events if global warming is the cause? By definition, global warming is
caused by burning fossil fuels. The only relevant forecast then is how much to cut carbon emissions. How
convenient. That is just what the President proposes. The “experts” are climate change loonies.

The meetings are a ruse. The brutal fact is that climate change computer models cannot now, nor in the
foreseeable future, forecast extreme weather events beyond a few days. So what is the real purpose of the
meetings? The meetings provide forums for climate change loonies to gain widespread publicity agonizing over
the evils of fossil fuels and big carbon corporations.

“United Nations, U.S. and British sponsorship” identifies the conspirators. Their intent is to neutralize
U.S. Senate opposition to President Obama surrendering U.S. sovereignty and dollars at the Climate Change
Conference in Mexico next year.

“No time to waste because societies must be equipped to deal with global warming…” There is no
time to waste because the Climate Change Conference meets in 2011. The sponsors need time to brainwash
Americans with testimonials from climate change loonies blaming extreme weather events on man made global
warming. Sponsors employ the climate change loonies for the purpose of stampeding the public to pressure
their politicians. There can be no opposing viewpoints from the meetings. Left-wing media reports will praise
climate change loonies as experts specially chosen for their brilliant peer reviewed research. Peer reviewed
climate change loonies are like-minded climate change loonies.

“… meetings of climatologists in the coming weeks in Paris, Britain and Colorado will be one step
toward adaptation, seeking ways to forecast extreme events.”

“Adaptation” means to “convert” U.S. inaction into submission at the next climate change conference and
for the U.S. Senate to ratify a treaty signed by President Obama giving the farm away and to pass his cap-and
trade system legislation.

“…seeking ways to forecast extreme events,” is a ruse. Computer climate models cannot “forecast
extreme events.” Instead they falsely assume that man made greenhouse gases cause extreme events.

“The U.N.’s network of climate scientists-the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)-
has long predicted that rising global temperatures would produce more frequent and intense heat waves
and more intense rainfalls. In 2007, the Nobel Peace Prize-winning panel went beyond that. It said
these trends “have already been observed,” in an increase in heat waves since 1950, for example.”

The IPCC is a U.N. political body. The U.N. promotes redistributing U.S. wealth to the pockets of its
bureaucrats and to foreign dictators. The IPCC serves U.N. objectives. It is well known for its involvement in
the Climategate fraud. It is a pack of climate change loonies.

The rise in global temperature attributed to global warming is too minuscule to produce more frequent and
intense heat waves. Since 1950, many heat waves were found to be related to deforestation, bad land
management practices and depletion of water for agriculture and human and domesticated animal consumption.
Massive expansion of heat absorbing asphalt and concrete structures has contributed to surface warming and
heat waves. The heat island effect downwind of cities is well known. The worst heat wave in recent U.S.
history was the ten-year Dustbowl heat wave and drought during the 1930’s. It has been attributed to bad land
management.

Politicians and the media are blaming the record heat wave of July 2010 on global warming. This is
ludicrous. It was caused by heat transported from Atlantic Ocean Basin waters and solar insolation through
clear air (Appendix A1).

“The weather related cataclysms of July and August (feverish heat etc.) fit patterns predicted by
climate scientists, the Geneva based World Meteorological Organization (WMO) says…”

“Climate scientists” cannot predict patterns of weather related cataclysms. Climate change loonies
predict weather related cataclysms simply by blaming global warming. Global warming attributed to fossil-fuel
burning is too insignificant to cause weather related cataclysms. The WMO is a U.N. sponsored body. It
supports U.N. policies and objectives. It too is a cabal of climate change loonies.

“The WMO pointed out that this summer’s events fit the international scientists projections of
“more frequent and more intense extreme weather events due to global warming.”
Global warming of 1.0-2.0 degree F. /century can’t cause “more frequent and more intense extreme
weather events…” These international scientists are climate change loonies.

Taxpayers are going to be on the hook to fund extravagant junkets of climate change loonies to meetings in
Paris, Britain and Colorado (Not your typical family vacation venues). The purpose of the meetings is to make
headlines about how burning fossil-fuels cause extreme weather events that are responsible for high casualties
and damage costs.

Recommendations from the meetings will urge the U.S. Government to pass cap-and-trade legislation and
agree to ratify a treaty calling for draconian cuts in fossil-fuel use, global governance of fossil-fuel reserves, and
redistribution of American wealth to foreign countries. If the U.S. Senate caves and passes cap-and-trade or
ratifies President Obama’s treaty, the U.S. will be plundered.

• Link
• Report this comment

From the “Liberal play book”

1. State: (insert topic here) is proven beyond a doubt / the debate is settled.

2. When confronted with claims to the contrary, rebut: “but the debate is settled” or “it’s proven beyond a doubt.”

3. When all else fails, call the dissenters names and belittle.

CT 1: “The clear scientific consensus indicates a warming climate caused by human activity.”

CT 2: “But there is no dispute in the scientific community about two things: the climate is warming and human activity is causing it.” and “But those two essential elements are not in dispute.’

CT 3: “Many others have simply chosen to be ignorant anti-science flat-earthers.”

Bravo, Cynthia. You ran that play to perfection.

• Link
• Report this comment

The sooner Imam Obama and this democratic Congress are dumped the safer we all will be.

• Link
• Report this comment

I have been environmentally conscious all my life, but don’t make a big deal out of it. You progressives however, want the government to weigh in on this, because heaven forbid you just request every person to be more careful in their use of energy. You know, because it is your type of people involved, they have to be forced to do the right thing by the government or they won’t do it. So I reject your name calling, but will say right back you progressive/liberals love telling everyone else how to live their lives, but while you love all peoples in general, you love and care for nothing and no one in particular. What a snarky bunch you are.

• Link
• Report this comment

Has anyone else noticed that CT conveniently disappears from these forums when the majority of comments are against her “articles?”

Interesting…

• Link
• Report this comment

CT wrote, in part:
One of the greatest crises of our time is climate change, which threatens to create food shortages (as the Russians learned this summer)

Sorry, but the heat wave/food shortages were not caused by climate change. Sine the 30’s Russia has had exactly 5 extremely hot Julys, and exactly 5 extremely cool Julys. Therefore 70 Julys have been “normal”.

from: Earth System Research Laboratory (NOAA)

The Russian Heat Wave of 2010

(snipped)
There is strong evidence that the immediate cause can be placed at the doorstep of an extreme pattern of atmospheric winds—widely referred to as blocking. In the situation of anticyclonic blocking such as developed over western Russia in early July 2010, the normal west-to-east movement of weather systems is inhibited, with the center of a blocking experiencing persistently quiescent weather.

• Link
• Report this comment

I would like to direct all the Chicken Littles to the PBS Nova special (not Fox News) called “Becoming Human”. Transcript of episode 1 available at the pbs website. The evolution of the pre humans in Africa is covered. The fossil record indicates our early ancestors evolved during periods of climate change. What is particularly relevant to climate change of today, is that the fossil record indicates a long period of relative climate stability, a gradual drying of their environment over millions of years. “They survived and thrived as brain size flat-lined for almost 4,000,000 years. But that doesn’t mean nothing changed. There’s evidence that the seeds of our humanity were growing in these ape-like creatures.”

Then Homo Habilis (the first tool makers) appear in the record. Much larger brains. Studies indicate a period of rapid climate change began around this time. Fluctuations between wet and dry in a few hundred years and rapid evolution of the pre-humans appear to have gone hand in hand.

The relevance to today’s discussion is the RAPID fluctuations in climate that the record reveals. Noone denies the climate is changing. But is it changing any more rapidly than it has in the past? And if the earliest of our ancestors were able to adapt to RAPID climate change, surely we will also.

• Link
• Report this comment

Genesis 8:22 While the earth remains, seedtime and harvest, cold and heat, summer and winter, day and night, shall not cease.”

• Link
• Report this comment

GOP PARTY OF LET THE POOR ELDERLY AND THE YOUNG DIE OFF,STARVE TO DEATH,WE DONT CARE!

• Link
• Report this comment

“One of the greatest crises of our time is climate change, which threatens to create food shortages (as the Russians learned this summer)…”

Funny thing about the Russians, they can go out and buy food stuffs with the money they collect from drilling, harvesting and producing THEIR OWN OIL!

• Link
• Report this comment

Guys and gals, please pay no attention to the Cynthia Tuckers of the world. They are unfactual.

Will you help us take America back?

We must keep our eyes on these Russian masturbationists who are dragging our country to the brink of destruction.

You betcha!

• Link
• Report this comment

O’YEAH GOP IS THE PARTY OF LOGCABIN UNDERCOVER GAYS,,PLUS THEY LOVE TO BOMB BABIES AND OLD PEOPLE! BUT NO TO ABORTION,BUT KILL’EM WHEN THEY ARE BORN,THIS IS THE PARTY OF THE REPUBLICANS!

• Link
• Report this comment

Science ain’t about consensus; politics is. How many manufactured crisis can we be duped on? The swine flu and Gulf oil fiasco were not a crisis. Now the economy is the latent crisis yet no viable strategy emerges. Get this guy out!

• Link
• Report this comment

Bubba Bob

Actually, that’s just what we are doing.

The Obama Administration did re-instate the PAYGO rules.

Perhaps you missed that.

• Link
• Report this comment

Has anyone seen “Chicken Little” lately ?

• Link
• Report this comment

Would MIT professor Richard Lindzen, a member of the National Academy of Sciences, be considered a know-nothing flat-earther?

• Link
• Report this comment

“For example, the IPCC’s much-vaunted Fourth Assessment Report claimed in 2007 that Himalayan glaciers were rapidly melting, and would possibly be gone by the year 2035. The claim was actually false — yet the IPCC cited it as proof of man-made global warming.

Then there’s the IPCC’s earlier prediction in 2007 — which it claimed to have “high confidence” in — that global warming could lead to a 50 percent reduction in the rain-fed agricultural capacity of Africa.

Such a dramatic decrease in food production in an already poor continent would be a terrifying prospect, and undoubtedly lead to the starvation of millions. But the InterAcademy Council investigation found that this IPCC claim was also based on weak evidence.

Overall, the IAC slammed the IPCC for reporting “high confidence in some statements for which there is little evidence. Furthermore, by making vague statements that were difficult to refute, authors were able to attach ‘high confidence’ to the statements.” The critics note “many such statements that are not supported sufficiently in the literature, not put into perspective or not expressed clearly. “

• Link
• Report this comment

(NOTE: If you are an anti-science know-nothing, don’t bother to comment. The clear scientific consensus indicates a warming climate caused by human activity.)

You lose your argument before you even start Tucker. Our climate has gone through periods of warming and cooling for billions of years. Man didn’t cause any of that. Definitive proof is your only ace in the hole here, AND THERE IS NONE. “The clear scientific consensus indicates” is opinion from you, not fact. Please continue to post this stuff ma’am. You are so funny!!!!
FYI, this is how far left liberals compromise. What we say is right and if you don’t agree with us you are wrong, or stupid, or racist, or bigots, OR SCIENCE ILLITERATE. You should do stand up comedy Tucker!!!!

• Link
• Report this comment

We’re only a speck of the problem even though us evil Americans use way more than our fair share of the Earth’s energy and resources.

The last I checked, there was oil in Alaska. That means under all that snow and ice was once lush green vegitation. The dinosaurs must have died out from lax smog emissions on their SUV’s. Save us from ourselves Al Gore! (If you make a $1T in the process selling air on paper, that’s OK too. We know you’re not in it for the money, you’re just trying to help.)

• Link
• Report this comment

CT throwing a fit. Boo freakin’ hoo. “Elections have consequences”, remember?

By the way, do you know how you can tell the Idiot Messiah is lying? His teleprompter is on.

• Link
• Report this comment

I am enjoying you exposing how UNCOMPROMISING the far left is and has been for decades. Please keep talking. Lest, let’s try an experiment Tucker. I ask every far left liberal to not speak for one year……minus all that HOT AIR…GLOBAL WARMING CURED!!!!!!

• Link
• Report this comment

Don’t worry, know nothings (i.e. Democrats). There’s still a chance the US could get hit by a hurricane and you’ll get your chance to celebrate this latest “evidence” of global warming.

• Link
• Report this comment

From the US Global Change Research Program reports:

Observations show that warming of the climate is unequivocal. The global warming observed over the past 50 years is due primarily to human-induced emissions of heat-trapping gases. These emissions come mainly from the burning of fossil fuels (coal, oil, and gas), with additional contributions from the clearing of forests and agricultural activities.

Reducing emissions of carbon dioxide would lessen warming over this century and beyond. Sizable early cuts in emissions would significantly reduce the pace and the overall amount of climate change. Earlier cuts in emissions would have a greater effect in reducing climate change than com- parable reductions made later. In addition, reducing emissions of some shorter-lived heat-trapping gases, such as methane, and some types of particles, such as soot, would begin to reduce warming within weeks to decades.

• Link
• Report this comment

CT,

Might I suggest going to Sandals in the Bahamas. Does wonders for getting your groove back. Worked for me.

• Link
• Report this comment

Leg Lamp, the warmists guidelines for climate change evidence gathering is “whatever it takes”.

• Link
• Report this comment

Comments prove CT right on target.

• Link
• Report this comment

Dave….

Give Drudge a rest….

He can turn data to piffle in the blink of an eye…

“in his opening statement at the press conference releasing the IAC report, Shapiro said:

Overall, IPCC’s assessment process has been a success and served society well. The assessments have put IPCC on the world stage, raised public awareness of climate change, and driven policymakers to consider options for responding to climate change….

The report itself confirms the IPCC’s central findings, stating that “Climate change is a long-term challenge that will require every nation to make decisions about how to respond,” and that “The Committee found that the IPCC assessment process has been successful overall….

The Washington Post’s editorial board wrote that the report further shows the right-wing’s critique of climate science has been “overblown”:

Also on Monday, an international review panel from the independent InterAcademy Council released a report on the IPCC’s procedures for producing “assessments” of climate science, which are supposed to provide policymakers with a rigorous guide to the evidence and its interpretation. Though Fox News claimed it “slams” the IPCC, the study doesn’t show that the much-maligned assessment process was rigged or even fundamentally flawed. In fact, much of what the review panel suggests involves enhancing and making more transparent the procedures already in place, and the report’s authors underscore how valuable the IPCC’s work has been.

So the overblown critique of climate science that emerged early this year continues to underwhelm.”

From Media Matters

• Link
• Report this comment

I guess the question is why the Idiot Messiah and the Democrat congress didn’t do anything about this global threat while they had 60 in the Senate. Oops, forgot, some of them don’t buy this crap either.

Idiot Messiah: Do-nothing on global warming.

• Link
• Report this comment

What’s the point of having a really cool socialist health care scheme if all the hospitals are underwater?

• Link
• Report this comment

Once again nothing but fear mongering and name calling.

Pathetic.

• Link
• Report this comment

One more thing about temperatures:

You do realize that many of the monitoring stations were built outside of cities that eventually expanded, but the stations were never moved. I’m guessing some of you here have watched the local news weather and you are familiar with the Atlanta “Heat Dome” effect, as concrete, asphalt, steel, etc. collect heat through the day and slowly bleed it off through the cooler night time hours, thus creating an “artificial” heat dome in the city. It can sometimes be as much as 10 to 15 degrees cooler in the suburbs. Keep that in mind.

• Link
• Report this comment

ok, the President has convinced me, the problem with this country is the rich people(which he is one himself). take their money from them and all will be okay. he’s finally convinced me. oh yeah, he reminded me once again that HE is the President. it seems he has to remind us of that on a weekly basis.

as far as the know nothing GOP, well, i guess that puts them in the same boat as the Democrats. for they know nothing what the people of this country want…

• Link
• Report this comment

Media Matters?… I say “piffle”…

• Link
• Report this comment

You do realize that carbon is a solid and oxygen a gas at room temperatures, right?

• Link
• Report this comment

Evidence of climate change::

LEAVES ARE TURNING BROWN AND FALLING FROM THE TREES!!!!!!!!!

Science believes that man made Carbon dioxide is killing the trees

PLEASE EVERYONE!!! Write Al Gore a check so he can heal the forests!!!!

• Link
• Report this comment

You do realize that the pollution in Atlanta and Los Angeles is not greenhouse gases, right?

Bunch of real Democrat einsteins in here, I tell ya.

• Link
• Report this comment

You leftard science experts probably think sea levels are rising because all the ice up at the North Pole is melting. Idiot know-nothings.

• Link
• Report this comment

And oh yeah CYNTHIA,

Humans have been destroying the planet since the beginning of time. Go read your Bible. Adam and Eve sinned in the Garden, and that brought about the slow destruction of the world. Now, as we near the end, the Earth is naturally falling apart before our eyes. Gods plan is to build a new Earth. So in essence this one must be destroyed eventually to make way for the plan of redemtion. Its all there in the book, just have the scientists go read it. They will find there is no saving this planet, and there is only one way to save their lives.

• Link
• Report this comment

The sea levels may be rising due to all the oil added.

• Link
• Report this comment

Gator Joe

Well said.

From Ecochildsplay, regarding APA report from 2007

Last week, the American Academy of Pediatrics (APA) issued a report declaring that children are especially at risk from the effects of climate change. This news is not startling, as young children are more susceptible to heat, toxins, etc., because their bodies are smaller and their immune systems are under development. Children are more vulnerable than adults, and now the APA is asking doctors to lead the way in modeling sustainable practices, especially in the United States.

The APA report states,

Anticipated direct health consequences of climate change include injury and death from extreme weather events and natural disasters, increases in climate-sensitive infectious diseases, increases in air pollution-related illness, and more heat-related, potentially fatal, illness.

Specifically, the APA identified illnesses caused by mosquitoes, such as malaria, respiratory illnesses, and heat-related deaths will increase for our youngest population. Mass migrations from uninhabitable regions is also likely, which will obviously impact children’s health. Furthermore, the report specifies:

Air pollution does more damage to children’s lungs, causing asthma and respiratory ailments, because their lungs are still developing, they breathe at a higher rate than adults and are outdoors more.

Waterborne infections, such as diarrhea and other gastrointestinal problems, hit children especially hard. These infections rise sharply with more rain, which is expected as the climate warms.

As mosquitoes are able to move to higher ground, the malaria zone is expanding. Kids are especially vulnerable; 75% of malaria deaths occur in children younger than 5.

Climate change is not just an environmental issue, but it is a public health issue. Pediatricians and parents have a responsibility to educate one another and do what they can to lessen their impact on climate change. If the children are our future, and climate change is happening, then we must make sure that children are safe and healthy from its impacts.

• Link
• Report this comment

Dave

Did you miss the part were “Climate Gate” was debunked?

Please keep up.

• Link
• Report this comment

barking frog – How will Cap and Trade lower the global temperature? See, all these liberal tax ideas are nothing but ambition killers. Why would people strive to be successful if you’re going to continually punish them for such success?

• Link
• Report this comment

Good Grief 10:51 Cap and Trade will lower global temps
the same way the bush tax cuts increased revenues.

• Link
• Report this comment

I understand that there will be a meeting later this year of the greatest right wing thinkers and scientists at the Creation Museum in Kentucky.

Their plan is to scientifically trump the theory of AGW with a carton of Marlboros, some duct tape and a signed photograph of Joseph McCarthy…

• Link
• Report this comment

some problems are too big for individuals or the “free market” to solve… one of these problems is global warming. our government must act more aggressively on this issue – some of you relentlessly say you want your “country back” (from what or who i am never quite sure), so why not get on board the we want our “planet back” train … back from who? from polluters/powers that are making millions while killing us all and irresponsibly using natural resources that truly belong to everyone.

• Link
• Report this comment

mmuuwwaaaaHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!

Washington (CNN) – Thirty-one House Democrats, most of whom face tough re-election bids this fall, have signed a letter to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer urging them to extend expiring tax breaks for all income levels, including the wealthy.

• Link
• Report this comment

Conservatives are only prone to agree with any “science” which originates from people owned by the industries most responsible for causing pollution. Even if these paid shills would agree with the concept of climate change caused by manmade activities, conservatives would merely gather on the statehouse steps and conduct massive prayer meetings as the only viable solution.

• Link
• Report this comment

Granny…. this is the same group that believes Obama in not christian, Obama was not born in the US, Acorn and Mickey Mouse stole an election, that birds flying over a DC reflecting pool were a “sign from God”, and so on and so forth….we’ve not even begun to touch on arguments that may have some degree of rationality to them. They have no plans other than say No and throw out everyone and everything. Note that no one has posted any of the legitimate science to contradict any of the real science.

• Link
• Report this comment

hehe.

“Soros insider trading case to be reviewed… “

• Link
• Report this comment

“You remind me of the clerics who put Galileo out of the church because he dared to say the earth revolved around the sun.”

Galileo was a muslim??? Who knew!!! LOL!

• Link
• Report this comment

I’ll bet his contributed to “climate change” in the office.

“Despite porn pledge, scientists accused of studying ‘anatomy’… “

• Link
• Report this comment

Oh, I forgot.

Bush Did It!

• Link
• Report this comment

The Earth revolves around the sun, I need definitive proof…Rush and Hannity said the sun revolved around the Earth and they are always right.

• Link
• Report this comment

leg lamp

you don’t get it either….it’s being reviewed for the possibility
of being OVERTURNED…..

• Link
• Report this comment

Science is the newest religion.

• Link
• Report this comment

Science is the newest religion.

Belief in reality is so inconvenient. Evidence is faith! Better to believe in a 2000 year old fairy tale.

• Link
• Report this comment

granny godzilla
September 16th, 2010
11:08 am

Actually I do get it. You obviously don’t. He stands convicted and it MAY be overturned. Wonder how many billions he’ll dish out to have it overturned.

• Link
• Report this comment

Study of the orbital mechanics of the solar system in the 1970s led Russians to believe the Earth was about to cool and we should prepare quickly because it will be catastrophic. Their arguments were lost in the rush to warming group-think in the 1990s, but the arguments for impending cold are well founded and still believed by many good scientists. As the sun goes even quieter and January, 2008 saw the greatest year to year temperature drop ever (128 years of NASA GISS data) and thru the end of 2008 remains relatively cool, it is clear cooling needs to be considered as a very plausible future. This is highlighted by 2 papers published in March 2008. Scafetta and West showed that up to 69% of observed warming is from the sun and remind us that the sun is projected to cool and Ramanathan and Carmichael show that soot has 60% of the warming power of CO2. Both papers state that these factors are underappreciated by IPCC. The soot may well explain the Arctic melting, as it has recently for Asian glaciers. Many scientists believe the temperature changes are more dependent on the sun than CO2, similar to the relationship in your home with your furnace. With the Sun’s face nearly quiet, the monthly patterns over the last 12 months are most similar to those of 1797 preceding the Dalton Minimum of 1798-1823 during the little ice age (Timo Niroma).

The southern hemisphere has been cooling over the last 10 years, just about as much as the north has been warming. There is no proof within observational data of warming outside of natural variation. When 3 of the highest 5 or 6 years in the temperature record (since 1890) occurred over 70 years ago and 1900 was warmer than recent years in the USA (where the best data are), we are nowhere near statistical proof, nor even evidence of warming. Modelers are still unable to include important variables and no one is able to predict the future. At least Hadley Centre have tried (below). While CO2 continues to rise, the temperature has stabilized at a warm level, but not unusually so. Which way will it go? The world seems to be betting on warming. However, the probability of cooling may be equally valid and we must be prepared for both. Cooling presents the real danger. Things that go up and down only go so high. It has always been this way. Image of current northern sea ice (latest). Check the S. hemisphere sea ice (latest).

Virtually all scientists agree that the Earth has warmed a small amount since the year 1000 or, if you choose, since 1850, when instrumented temperature records became reasonably accurate and distributed in key areas of the world. An alternative view, is that the Earth has been cooling since the 1930s when we had 3 of the 5 warmest years since 1860 in the US, and probably globally if the world environmental data base were cleaned up as is happening in the US. This site will be developed to show the science and the impacts related to global cooling, a very scary event compared to warming. It corresponds in the opposite way to the thousands of global warming sites. An unbiased view is at our sister-site: Climate Change Facts. The Editor started his interest in climate change in the 1970s, charged with helping industry adapt to the certainty of global cooling. Tim Ball has documented the cooling trend and its implications.

• Link
• Report this comment

ctucker
September 16th, 2010
10:12 am
TrueBeliever@10:03, Scientists are now able to clone sheep. You don’t think humans can change the climate? You remind me of the clerics who put Galileo out of the church because he dared to say the earth revolved around the sun.

No I am not saying that humans cannot make changes. I just know that God created this earth by speaking it to be and upholds the universe by the power of His Word. We are not going to change anything He does not allow. Either God is sovereign or He is not. Which do you believe?
And for the record, I have no authority to put anyone out of the church, nor do I desire that authority. It’s beyond my pay grade.

• Link
• Report this comment

Virtually all scientists agree that the Earth has warmed a small amount

And of course, you speak for ‘virtually all scientists’, on some blog no less!

• Link
• Report this comment

Climate change is a given. Rapid climate change has been documented during recent geologic times. Mankind can adapt to the changes. Folks live in all climates on the planet, ranging from the arctic to the deserts. I don’t sweat global warming (pun intended). Chicken Littles need to have something to fret about.

• Link
• Report this comment

CONCLUSIONS

Global warming (i.e, the warming since 1977) is over. The minute increase of anthropogenic CO2 in the atmosphere (0.008%) was not the cause of the warming—it was a continuation of natural cycles that occurred over the past 500 years.

The PDO cool mode has replaced the warm mode in the Pacific Ocean, virtually assuring us of about 30 years of global cooling, perhaps much deeper than the global cooling from about 1945 to 1977. Just how much cooler the global climate will be during this cool cycle is uncertain. Recent solar changes suggest that it could be fairly severe, perhaps more like the 1880 to 1915 cool cycle than the more moderate 1945-1977 cool cycle. A more drastic cooling, similar to that during the Dalton and Maunder minimums, could plunge the Earth into another Little Ice Age, but only time will tell if that is likely.

• Link
• Report this comment

no leg lamp you don’t

but you’re scramble to get it right the second time was cute

• Link
• Report this comment

The minute increase of anthropogenic CO2 in the atmosphere (0.008%) was not the cause of the warming—it was a continuation of natural cycles that occurred over the past 500 years.

Well let’s check you math. 0.008% is 0.00008 * 270 ppm (the commonly agreed upon baseline pre industrial atmospheric carbon dioxide level) is 0.0216 ppm, whereas in reality atmospheric carbon dioxide levels stand at near 390 ppm. Can you please explain to us the discrepancies in your calculations and statements? Thanks!

• Link
• Report this comment

No Dave, not at all.

Fact is your source is wrong. Climate gate was a drummed up scandal du jour. That has since been completely refuted.

Deal with it.

• Link
• Report this comment

barking frog – wonderful answer. You have laid to rest all my fears about cap and tax… er.. trade.

• Link
• Report this comment

Mankind can adapt to the changes.

Well in the future you’ll just have to resort to cannibalism, because plants and animals can’t adapt to this kind of rapid climate change, which is now occurring an order of magnitude faster than any previous climate change short of an asteroid or comet impact. Don’t worry, Soylent Green tastes good!

• Link
• Report this comment

Thomas Lee Elifritz @ 11:30 – don’t be silly. Tea baggers don’t believe in physics. It requires too much thought.

• Link
• Report this comment

The Leg Lamp: “MICHELLE IN ‘HELL’: ‘CAN’T STAND’ FIRST LADY JOB ”
———–

Don’t let the door hit you in that huge Oprah-sized azz of yours on the way out.

• Link
• Report this comment

Thomas Lee Elifritz: plants and animals can’t adapt to this kind of rapid climate change.

Really? Which plants grow FASTER in cooler temps?

In any case, they don’t have to adapt, they just have to move toward the poles.

• Link
• Report this comment

Frogs in fish bowl; water heated gradually; frogs adapt, for a while, but die from over heating; If water heated rapidly, then temperature change would produce and “escape” reposnse to leave fish bowl. So denial is more a product of incrementalism and adjustment; until, of course, the water starts to boil.

• Link
• Report this comment

The conservatives are being proactive in purging themselves of their own who are about power instead of the people. Trust me, at some point the moderate Dems will be forced by the FAR LEFT Dems to do the same thing. Even Rangel and Waters will be held accountable for their actions. True conservative people always lead in this area…..

• Link
• Report this comment

Thomas Lee Elifritz

September 16th, 2010
11:25 am
You pick your beliefs. Reality slaps you in the face.

I prefer beliefs that allow me to predict when reality is going to slap me in the face, and so far scientific methods and evidence works for me, very well, in fact, well enough to post text messages on a world wide broadband network with a supercomputer in my lap. But you have your bible, so you’re good. Good luck with the bible thing.
————————————————————————————————————-
Better pray there’s no power outage.

• Link
• Report this comment

So every Ice Age ended because of man made global warming? Dinosaurs and wolly mammoths had SUVs? Wow, you learn something new every day.

• Link
• Report this comment

CT- I am not a “tea partier”- but do you know what a “tea bagger” is? Can I start using the word puss# on the blog?

• Link
• Report this comment

So every Ice Age ended because of man made global warming?

Can you please post more of your naivete here? We need to recalibrate our stupidity meters, because you have pinned the needle on the low end of the scale and now it’s stuck there.

• Link
• Report this comment

Thomas Lee Elifritz: Which is exactly what the evidence suggests they are doing, if you haven’t noticed.
—————-

Cool! (so to speak). When do the bananas and coconuts get here? I love them, and they’re better when fresh. All that eat local propoganda, dontcha know.

And once again, the plants don’t have to adapt, they just have to move. Nothing says we can’t help. You know, by planting them? Duh.

PS–why are you obsessed with the bible? Freak.

• Link
• Report this comment

Jimmy62
September 16th, 2010
8:56 am

The main point is that you are assuming the best answer is to spend ourselves into oblivion trying to prevent global warming. I disagree. Let the Earth warm, fix the symptoms. The planet won’t die, it’s been a lot warmer than this before and done just fine.

And here in two sentences, we can see precisely what’s wrong with the conservative argument. “It’s been a lot warmer…” How do you know? Science. Were humans around back then? No – and any rational being knows the planet will exist long past humans. But we should “…fix the symptoms.” With more burning of fossil fuels? Why not make the investment in clean fuels NOW, and not worry about the symptoms?

• Link
• Report this comment

The planet won’t die, it’s been a lot warmer than this before and done just fine.

That’s right, seven billions humans will survive the collapse of the agriculture, the collapse of the global and financial system, the resulting chaos, wars, starvation and dieoff just fine.

Civilization, who needs it. Agriculture will do just fine without all that carbon combustion to support it.

• Link
• Report this comment

Bubba
September 16th, 2010
10:12 am

Would MIT professor Richard Lindzen, a member of the National Academy of Sciences, be considered a know-nothing flat-earther?
————–
No, he’d be considered a shill. He’s taken bags of money from the oil companies. He also claimed that smoking didn’t cause cancer long after we knew that it did.

Jerry Mahlman, director of the Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory, did not accept Lindzen’s assessment of the science, and said that Lindzen had “sacrificed his luminosity by taking a stand that most of us feel is scientifically unsound.” (New York Times)

• Link
• Report this comment

Thomas Lee Elifritz:

PS–why are you obsessed with the bible?

Because 40 percent of Americans believe it to be the inerrent word of God
———————

I’m not sure why that’s any of your business.

If you oppose religion, don’t have one.

And remember, elections have consequences.

• Link
• Report this comment

Meh. The Republicans are just saying what they’re paid to say. I doubt any of them would send their kids to some phony creationist college like Regents University.

Don’t worry, they don’t actually believe this stuff. They just use it to rip off climate creationists like “Dave,” above.

• Link
• Report this comment

Hey Elfie, aren’t you pissed that Obama didn’t bother getting his cap-and-trade bill passed when his own party had 60 in the Senate?

Bummer.

• Link
• Report this comment

Does anyone remember: Carbon , Water and Nitrogen cycles?
Consider Carbon cycle — carbon sequestred in earth as oil, coal and NG over Millions of years (and is continuing); then in a few years much of this carbon is then released back into atomosphere through human actiions– automobiles, coal burning for electricity and industrial materials (steel) and lots and lots of other carbon based materials.
So if earth cooled by carbon sqquestration, then what happens when all that cabon is put back?

• Link
• Report this comment

What happens when all these windmills disrupt the normal airflow patterns around the globe?

• Link
• Report this comment

You know-nothing windmill-huggers might want to revisit your second law of thermodynamics and the conservation of energy.

• Link
• Report this comment

CT, No worse than the “Democratic Jackass lunatic Party”
The science that one needs to disseminate in order to come to a “logical” conclusion on this issue is far beyond you and 99.9% of the people writing on this blog.
Not one of you has even the first clue as to what really contributes the most to atmospheric carbons…so pleassse don’t try and act so smart…your not.
No…I don’t have the time or inclination to educate the “lefties” who will come with their S.A. dribble.

• Link
• Report this comment

LBB — interesting question. I am in favor of solar, since collection energy is independent of collectors — or a solar cell does not “disrupt” the incidence energy to other collectors (e.g., plants)

• Link
• Report this comment

LBB, that would be as hard as trying to explain Hyper physics to them and the relation to conservation.
Just let them go on and on showing their complete ignorance of the science.
It is kind of fun to watch…

• Link
• Report this comment

I just read the rest of the blog – my initial opinion has not changed.

• Link
• Report this comment

There you go, Cynthia. Polarizing politics, trying to win folks to the Democratic viewpoint by insulting them.

I’ll repeat it everytime I see it: Why do Democrats believe that they can win hearts and minds by insulting people? You’ galvanize your loyal base and alienate everyone else. That is NOT the prescription for holding on to power.

Because YOU believe in global warming, it is fair to insult everyone else. But then we read stories like the Canada Free Press FIVE HOURS ago that show that the arctic sea ice extent… that stuff that Al Gore said was going to disappear… is higher in both 2009 and 2010 than the average from 1979-2000. But what has the Press reported? Virtually nothing for 2009, and only reported in 2010 when the sea ice extent finally, about two weeks ago, dipped lower than 2009. Yet BOTH are higher than the 1979-2000 average. Of course, they did not mention that, but that it was now less than 2009. The main stream media ONLY reports what they think will indicate global warming… even when it doesn’t. And yet when people see these things and become skeptical of the pile of horse dung reporting and science, the almighty Cynthia Tucker calls them “know nothing flat earthers”.

Way to go, Cynthia. “Insult and alienate” should be your motto of the Democratic party.

• Link
• Report this comment

JM, It is a science and a discipline that requires years of education and we have neither of those in your case to deal with, but thanks for proving my point.

• Link
• Report this comment

Why didn’t Obama pass cap and trade? Hmmm?

• Link
• Report this comment

Azazel
September 16th, 2010
12:05 pm

Consider Carbon cycle — carbon sequestred in earth as oil, coal and NG over Millions of years (and is continuing); then in a few years much of this carbon is then released back into atomosphere through human actiions– automobiles, coal burning for electricity and industrial materials (steel) and lots and lots of other carbon based materials.
So if earth cooled by carbon sqquestration, then what happens when all that cabon is put back?

Yeah that’s it! If we just wait a few months, all that carbon will recycle itself back to coal and oil in the ground. You sure are smart!

• Link
• Report this comment

The biggest threat to the Earth, and Obama stood by and did…nothing.

• Link
• Report this comment

Because YOU believe in global warming, it is fair to insult everyone else. But then we read stories like the Canada Free Press …

BWA-HA-HAAAAAA!!! I think I see your problem.

Pointing out that people who are dumb enough to believe what they read in Canada’s answer to FOX News aren’t very bright isn’t an insult, it’s the truth.

• Link
• Report this comment

Thomas Lee Elifritz,

Wow, you ARE smarter than everyone else here. All hail Tom. Congratulations!!! I bet that attitude changes when you meet your maker. Good luck to you sir…..

• Link
• Report this comment

It is a science and a discipline that requires years of education and we have neither of those in your case to deal with, but thanks for proving my point.

A ten year old script kiddie already hacked your super secret science password and handshake, so we want in on your secret science society.

• Link
• Report this comment

My source is better than your source…. nya nya nya nya……

The childishness in here is starting to get unbearable…. but that’s nothing new…

• Link
• Report this comment

And who had 60 Democrats in the Senate? Hmmm?

… and their positions on Cap and Trade were … what?

The reason you don’t know this very basic stuff is because you’ve been hiding in the pages of the New York Post.

Safer for you that way, I guess.

• Link
• Report this comment

JM,
I’m sorry you missed the “point”, but I guess that happens a lot with you.
The “point” was that you are to ignorant and uneducated to be blindly following anything that CT blurts out. It involves a very complicated set of circumstances that lead to an educated evaluation of the supposed global warming by mankind’s doing.

• Link
• Report this comment

Hell, at least two Republican senators were likely to help pass cap and trade. And then…nothing happened.

Obama: Fail.

• Link
• Report this comment

60 Democrat votes in the Senate, a Democrat majority in the House, and the most serious issue to ever face mankind staring them in the face.

And then there are all those other details you left out. But I guess it’s too complicated for you.

• Link
• Report this comment

WHY IS THE TRUTH BEING TAKEN DOWN CYNT?

• Link
• Report this comment

I’m sorry you missed the “point”, but I guess that happens a lot with you.

You’re right, I did miss it, because you haven’t made any, and you then refuse to let us into your secret science society by failing to provide us a LINK to your point and its evidence.

• Link
• Report this comment

AZ,
Thank you for thinking in the one tenth of one percent.

• Link
• Report this comment

I guess if you want to blame someone for inaction on global warming, the best place to start would be the Democrat-run federal government. They could have passed whatever they liked …

GONG!!!

Basic fact fail.

• Link
• Report this comment

Atlanta rejects Cynthia Tucker, because she’s a nutjob.

• Link
• Report this comment

Here’s the bottom line.

However, it just goes to show you that …

Wait, you admit you don’t know something, then use that ignorance as evidence?

Clearly stupid enough to be a conservative.

• Link
• Report this comment

Atlanta rejects Cynthia Tucker

And of course, LydiasDad speaks for all of Atlanta. LydiasDad isn’t and ‘authoritarian’! No!

• Link
• Report this comment

Meathead — Probably more than a few months. There are several dependcies: surface area of carbon “receptors” like plants, forests, and alge — higher surface area = greater carbon uptake; and, the amount of carbon released in relation to the uptake capacity.
So, as more land area, containing carbon recptors is used for, say commercial terra-forming (like shopping malls, suburbbs, and so on) , and oceanic pollution (which afects alge populations), then carbon uptake capacity is reduced.

• Link
• Report this comment

I know my diety [sic] is different from yours

Clearly.

• Link
• Report this comment

I know my diety is different from yours, I believe in Jesus Christ and the LORD, which is why I said….”YOUR MAKER”

And I presume you provide the bible as the inerrant word of god as evidence of your beliefs.

And of course, you expect rational people to accept that without questions or dissent.

Wow, just wow. America is the bestest and smartest nation in the WHOLE UNIVERSE!

• Link
• Report this comment

All right, JM, you’re not going to respond to the question of why a filibuster-proof Democrat Senate and a Democrat-controlled House couldn’t pass legislation to deal with this most serious issue. I do get that.

Now if you’ll excuse me, I have to catch a flight back to Atlanta, a flight for which I have not offset my carbon footprint.

• Link
• Report this comment

That was actually Elfiritz’s statement that I C&P’d. Check with it.

• Link
• Report this comment

Mike K….unfortunately no matter how you put it out there, if you don’t agree with the liberals on this blog, you are a racist bigot hate filled moron. Period.

And Granny G will no doubt find a website somewhere that will prove that.

It’s sad actually. The liberals preach tolerance. They preach fairness. They preach togetherness. Right up unti lthe moment you disagree with them.

• Link
• Report this comment

and psychic as well.

I guess I’d have to be since the tea baggers both refuse to provide the evidence of the basis of their beliefs, and then refuse even to debate their beliefs. I guess the bible suffices.

• Link
• Report this comment

All right, JM, you’re not going to respond to the question of why a filibuster-proof Democrat Senate …

GONG!!!

Failed again.

• Link
• Report this comment

JM, are you saying all conservatives are stupid??

Absolutely not. But all the stupids I know are conservatives.

• Link
• Report this comment

Mike K….unfortunately no matter how you put it out there, if you don’t agree with the liberals on this blog, you are a racist bigot hate filled moron.

The liberal here refuse to agree with your beliefs, because you decline to provide evidence of your beliefs, you refuse to debate them, and they are contrary to all of the evidence.

And you insist you want a fourth strike at the ball.

• Link
• Report this comment

That’s the difference between conservatives and libs…..I accept whatever you want to believe in

This isn’t about belief. If you disagree with the science because of what you believe, then you are irrational by definition.

Belief is not an entitlement to be stupid.

• Link
• Report this comment

So now I’m irrational because I have a belief different from your.

No, I consider you to be irrational because your beliefs are based upon a 2000 year old book, are contrary to all of the physical evidence, have no basis in reality, and you refuse to debate.

• Link
• Report this comment

And the survey says!

Survey Says: Liberals Stingier, Stupider Than Conservatives

“In a survey released October 14, 2009 the liberal-leaning Pew Research Center ran a “News IQ Quiz.”

It probably didn’t surprise the Pew staff to learn that a “partisan knowledge gap” existed between Democrats and Republicans.

But it surely horrified them to realize that the gap favored… Republicans.

On fully ten of twelve “News IQ Quiz” questions asked, Republicans demonstrated deeper basic knowledge than Democrats, with respondents tied on one question and Democrats leading on only one of the twelve.

In other words, the hard survey data confirms what anyone familiar with socio-economic issues already suspected: if anyone earns the label “elite,” it is actually more conservative Americans.

[snip]

In May 2008, a Gallup poll of 1,200 Americans confirmed once again that those who self-identify as “conservative” or “very conservative” contributed 56% of total charitable donations, despite constituting only 42% of the population. Those who self-identified as “liberal” or “very liberal,” in contrast, constituted 29% of the population but made only 7% of donations. Notably, these results were independent of income level and religious affiliation, as those placing themselves on the right of the political spectrum donated a higher percentage of their income than those on the left.

Distorted stereotypes die hard, but the word is getting out: conservatives are more informed and more charitable. “

• Link
• Report this comment

Ah, Ms. Tucker,

What we see here is the fruit of your polemic rhetoric. Minds will not be changed, no good will come from your fulminations. But this is your playpen you’ve created for all thirty or so that read your commentary. Please remove your shoes before jumping around.

• Link
• Report this comment

i’ve been wondering for some time, exactly who are the Democrats working for? middle class? not, gay/lesbian? not, minorities? not, environmentalist? maybe.. just not sure.. and that’s not saying the GOP is working for those people, just saying that the Dems aren’t..

• Link
• Report this comment

And the survey says!

And surveys are right up there with the bible when it comes to physical evidence and the methods of science!

• Link
• Report this comment

everyday, the Democrats are working for the same folks the Repubs are; special interests.

• Link
• Report this comment

nobody, absolutely nobody, wants to compromise. it’s their way, or the highway..kinda reminds me of my 6 yr old twins.. both sides are the ‘just say no’ party…there’s no denying that…

• Link
• Report this comment

Rick….you are correct sir, but I just can’t help exposing these libs…..good times.

• Link
• Report this comment

Thomas Lee Elifritz

September 16th, 2010
12:39 pm

No, I consider you to be irrational because your beliefs are based upon a 2000 year old book,
—————————————————————————-
How old is the book your beliefs are based on?

• Link
• Report this comment

Dave-

I just took that quiz. There is no way a majority of people would know that stuff…

• Link
• Report this comment

I am the Spin Doctor.

• Link
• Report this comment

you’re right paleo, question now is, do the tea-partiers, or tea-baggers, have any special interests? and if so, who and what are they?? i haven’t seen any. i’m kinda figuring that’s the reason their making some noise. everybody’s tired of the same ol’ same ol’..we made a changer two years ago, and that hasn’t panned out the way we thought, so, let’s make another…

• Link
• Report this comment

On fully ten of twelve “News IQ Quiz” questions asked, Republicans demonstrated deeper basic knowledge than Democrats, with respondents tied on one question and Democrats leading on only one of the twelve.

Quick! Change the subject from science to current events!

But Dave’s cut-and-paste self pwnage only works if you don’t know what MoE means. Take a look at their current one, for instance.

36% of Republicans, 35% of independents and 34% of Democrats know that the government bailout of banks and financial institutions was signed into law by former President Bush. Democrats (46%) are just as likely as Republicans (50%) or independents (44%) to incorrectly say the legislation was enacted after Obama became president.

You could say that Republicans “won” each of those … but Pew doesn’t, because they’re not ignorant of how statistics work.

Once again, Dave digs up a quote, only to show he’s too stupid to know what it means.

Oh, and for the charitable donations, might want to look at the income disparity behind it. Makes more sense that way.

• Link
• Report this comment

CT cites a “scientific consensus” where there is none

See what I mean about ignorant?

• Link
• Report this comment

“You do that, and I’ll continue to expose the workings of the universe with physical evidence and scientific methods”

Hey Professor,

Why don’t you go get Gilligan to help you with that and I’ll go get Mary Ann and Ginger and go have some fun. Let me know how the theoretical world works out for you…

• Link
• Report this comment

i’m sticking with science too…from what i’ve learned, the earth cools, then warms..whose to say it doesn’t start cooling again in the near future..nobody knows. and if they say they do, they’re not telling the truth..

• Link
• Report this comment

How old is the book your beliefs are based on?

I don’t base my beliefs on books, I base them on my observations, which includes multiplying my observations by including the observations of many other people, both alive and dead, and then I make my own conclusions, which in terms of cutting edge science, change daily. Just because general relativity found some fundamental misunderstandings in classical mechanics, that doesn’t mean that I abandon classical engineering best practices.

I find a useful book to be the Los Alamos Arxiv, published nightly.

• Link
• Report this comment

Granny, 12:50……good one!

• Link
• Report this comment

C.T., I’m not convinced the entire GOP community is 100% sure that global warming is a myth. You may recall Sarah Palin stating you were unable to see Russia from Alaska before global warming.

• Link
• Report this comment

Belief is not an entitlement to be stupid.

…Nor are self-perceived witty comebacks. One either has something valid to say that pertains to the topic or one doesn’t . The stupid and ignorant rely on witty comebacks.

• Link
• Report this comment

good’ay everyone.. time to go start drilling..

• Link
• Report this comment

i’m sticking with science too…from what i’ve learned

They you’ve learned absolutely nothing. The natural cycles of warming and cooling have been completely disrupted.

• Link
• Report this comment

GOPers do not care about the future unless they are deomonizing the defecit. Which, of course, they have had nothing to do with.

• Link
• Report this comment

The stupid and ignorant rely on witty comebacks.

This is a self-refuting statement. Wit is not the same thing as stupidity and ignorance. It’s the opposite.

I reserve the right to mock stupid people. It’s all they’re good for.

• Link
• Report this comment

Look!

I got a standing ovation!

Thanks Namejacker.

• Link
• Report this comment

G.R.L. Gowan — Indeed it was, and also taught in 9th grade science in the ATL public school system in the 1960’s, along with concern for the “end of “oil”

• Link
• Report this comment

Thomas Lee Elifritz seems to be one of those guys who is blinded by what I think of as “secular religion”. For some reasons, half of his posts on climate change involve rants about Christianity and the Bible which is completely irrelevant to the issue at hand.

Dude, the science behind the radiative forcing of greenhouse gases is ROCK SOLID, and nothing you say here is going to change that. You can blab on all you want about ’secular religion’, meanwhile, scientists and engineers will continue to engineer devices using classical mechanics, quantum mechanics and general relativity, that allow you to make a complete fool of yourself on the internet.

• Link
• Report this comment

someone explain to me why about five years ago the headlines on yahoo news told about a melting glacier that left a huge forest lying on the ground. they did a carbon test on the trees that revealed they were 7000 years old.that’s all the proof i needed as i read this with my own eyes and was smart enough with my feeble little mind that things run in cycles. why was there a forest there before the glacier came down on it? there were very few people and no fossil fuel used so you can’t blame it on man. this happened in alaska.

• Link
• Report this comment

JM:

I am so depressed. You hurt my feelings.

• Link
• Report this comment

Thanks for admitting that the so-called “science” of global warming could change tomorrow….

The science behind global warming isn’t that debatable, I deal with breakthroughs in condensed matter physics that do change on a daily basis -things that allow scientists and engineers to create devices that continue to allow you to make a complete fool of yourself on the internet, and ever increasing efficiency. Greenhouse gases aren’t in that category.

• Link
• Report this comment

@ctucker
Mark@12:51, As the late great Daniel Patrick Moynihan once said, “You are entitled to your own opinions, but not your own facts.” Among scientists who study climate change, there is consensus. Period.
————————————————————-
The fact that a consensus of experts agree with a position does not make it a fact. A consensus of oil industry experts, no doubt, think that the dangers of offshore oil exploration are overstated. A consensus of coal industry executives think that the economic costs of “green” electricity generation are understated. The fact that a belief is commonly held, even among experts, doesn’t make it a fact.

I remember an occasion when I was part of a team helping a Stanford economist prepare for his deposition in legal case. We brought to his attention that the expert witness for the other side had found several citations that cast his analysis in a critical light. This Stanford economist responded by saying, “Yeah, but they’re all wrong. I don’t care how many citations he produces. He’s still wrong and it doesn’t matter how many people say otherwise. Wrong is wrong.”

The fact that a bunch of scientists (who have an economic interest in proving that human activity causes globabl warming) argue that climate change is anthropogenic does not make it a “fact” with which it is illogical to disagree.

• Link
• Report this comment

someone explain to me why about five years ago the headlines on yahoo

Pillars of science, no doubt.

• Link
• Report this comment

Did you know…

Spam classic was invented in 1937.
Koala bears even enjoy Spam.
Spam helped feed our WWII fighting heros.
Spam has their own Spam Museum.

Yes Spam…a staple of the democratic Americans life.

• Link
• Report this comment

If Al Gore tried to sell those stupid lies back home it wouldn’t fly..the only thing he could sell would be that pretty mouth!

• Link
• Report this comment

granny godzilla:

Uh ………….. sorry granny but “Spam helped feed our Vietnam Veterans ……………

• Link
• Report this comment

“Oft times YOU ARE the entertainment”

Wow, I’m flattered….. but considering this is the most I’ve posted on this blog in probably 3 or 4 months (I usually have better things to do), you must have me confused with someone else.

• Link
• Report this comment

Tucker 12:57,

ABSOLUTE OPINION(which you state is your template) PERIOD!!!!

• Link
• Report this comment

what’s white,sticky and flying across the sky at 1000 miles per hour? The coming of the Lord….

• Link
• Report this comment

BUt I always find it entertaining (and ironic) with all the namecalling that the “tolerant” libs on here engage in most of the time. Not surprised though since it’s right out of their playbook (along with denegrating the source of facts/opinions instead of debating the facts/opinions themselves)

• Link
• Report this comment

I am a cab, sucka.

• Link
• Report this comment

The science is debatable means: How is the phenomena best explained in terms of validity, reliabilty and feasibility so that an accurate model can be produced. It DOES NOT mean that the phenomena IS NOT happening..

• Link
• Report this comment

make that YOU…

• Link
• Report this comment

First it was “global cooling,” then it was “gloabl warming,” now it’s “climate change.” C’mon people, can’t we find a better, more sensitive, politically correct term for this crisis.

• Link
• Report this comment

Crazy Taxi, crazy taxi wooooo whoooo Crazy Taxi crazy taxi…MORE SPAM PLEASE!!

• Link
• Report this comment

401ST

• Link
• Report this comment

As always, there are plenty of ignorant right-wingers who apparently have nothing better to do than to post ill-informed comments whenever climate change is mentioned. They do not represent the majority of Americans: they stopped climate legislation only because the Senate requires a 60-vote supermajority. History will judge them harshly, because future history will be written by people who must live with the environmental devastation they are creating.

• Link
• Report this comment

Seems to me that even a young-Earth creationist should be alarmed at how much cumulative damage has been done in less than 200 years of industrialization. That is not good stewardship, no matter what else you may believe.

• Link
• Report this comment

Cynthia,

You are nothing but a parroting moron. It is you who is the flat-earther. Why don’t you take some time to do your own research instead of repeating statements from “the experts.” Science has become a religion…a dogma. Any who dare question the establishment are called charlatans and nut jobs…only to be banished and ridiculed.

As the old saying goes, Cynthia, those with glass houses should not throw stones…

Enjoy your day in the cattle line, moron.

Slorence

• Link
• Report this comment

The fact that you admit so-called “climate change” is ‘debatable science’ is all I need to know that it IS NOT SCIENCE, but theory. The onus is on you to prove it to people, not me to have to prove that it doesn’t exist. You are losing the debate. I have shown that it is debatable and you have not proven it. I’m done. Thanks for playing Professor Tom, but Mary Ann and Ginger are waiting in the hot tub….gotta go.

• Link
• Report this comment

Cynthia,

In your vast knowledge of science and politics, you must have deduced that no GOPers are scientists and that all scientists are Democrats and only believe in one theory of global warming.

Do you ever go back and read your own material and realize how ignorant you sound? All politics aside, all you’re doing is staging the ignorant vs. the ignorant.

• Link
• Report this comment

The fact that you admit so-called “climate change” is ‘debatable science’ is all I need to know that it IS NOT SCIENCE, but theory.

All science is theory. That really disturbs you doesn’t it? Better to resort to the absolute inerrant word of God as explained by the bible. That way everything will stay the same forever and America will forever enjoy the ‘good old days’.

Neutrinos! Who ever heard of such a thing!

• Link
• Report this comment

I thought most people wait til Friday to get lazy. Man-made Climate Change is a scientific theory and not a fact. The climate of the Earth has clearly changed before and will again. This is not disputed. The impact is. Then you have the non sequitur about giving money to third world countries. If you really believe wastful spending cures global warming be thankful we have Obama.

And for the love of all things holy please please please stop claiming economists agree and scientific consensus where there is none. Doctors once had a consensus that doing autopsies before delivering babies had nothing to do with death rates. They started washing hands and were disproved. There is no control to vet the global warming hypothesis against.

• Link
• Report this comment

Joseph at 1:25 p.m. — excellent point my friend. I suppose to the liberal green maniacs, killing a free market economy and bankrupting millions of people and businesses worldwide — all to save a species of little brown bird in Africa in the year 2718 — is worth it.

• Link
• Report this comment

Man-made Climate Change is a scientific theory and not a fact.

And OJ didn’t kill his wife and her friend! It’s a fact!

The universe is static, dontcha know!

And for the love of all things holy

And if you don’t love the bible, you’re ANTI-AMERICAN!

• Link
• Report this comment

NOTE: If you are an anti-discussion know-nothing, don’t bother to write a blog. The clear human consensus indicates that be condescending and dismissive is caused by weak arguments.

• Link
• Report this comment

Thomas Lee Elifritz

September 16th, 2010
1:18 pm

anyone who understands science knows full well that science doesn’t prove anything

people who acknowledge the usefullness and veracity of scientific methods.
————————————————————————–

beliefs based on unprovable formulations by scientific methods…..o.k.

————————————————————————————————

• Link
• Report this comment

Mike K –

A well-expressed comment on modeling. And I agree, but I’ll also point out that climate science is based on actual science as well. Climatologists aren’t convinced of rapid global warming because they’ve looked at some models. They take measurements, take into account basic physics, and draw conclusions. Most of the people flapping back and forth on this comment stream haven’t the faintest clue about the basic physical process of radiative transfer and CO2/CH4 (and H20 as a feedback). Most simply repeat the talking points they’ve learned from their primary opinion-makers. That’s the great failing of representative democracy: people have to trust representatives. Scientists represent the physical environment, and people in a democracy demand that they predict the future to the best of their ability, because most people don’t have time to learn and do the math.

Unfortunately, we’ve reached the point where taking a side on an issue isn’t based on actually understanding the issue but instead on what serves our interests. If two scientists disagree, we don’t ask for the details and do the math; we instead choose the one who allows us to maintain our world view. That means that learning stops until forced by circumstance.

It would be incredible, in fact, if this comment stream became a debate about the scientific basis of global warming. However, that seems pretty far-fetched, given that most of the people posting seem only to be able to turn a complex situation into a set of simplistic binary opposites (lib/cons, repub/dem, left/right), which I guess is all that is necessary for acting responsibly in the democracy we’ve given ourselves.

And the debate, from a scientific point of view, is all but over. The last year was either tied for the warmest or the warmest on record, depending on which instruments you choose. Global sea ice is rapidly declining. The ocean is acidifying (due to an increasing level of CO2 saturation). Phytoplankton has suffered a 40% decline since 1950. Glaciers are in rapid retreat. The stratosphere is cooling. Sea levels are beginning to creep upward. CO2 levels have been rapidly rising for 120 years. The doubts cast on these findings may be useful to those who need to find doubt, but there are republicans, democrats, leftists, rightists, conservatives, and liberals who have done the math and who know that the earth is experiencing rapid climate change. If you (all) think that climate scientists are willing to bend the truth for the sake of money and power, then surely you must believe that pundits, think tanks, and news programs are capable of doing the same. Who do you trust? Upon what and whom do you base your understanding of climate change?

• Link
• Report this comment

uga_b — it’s because common-sense, non-hype, rational environmental improvements would not line Al Gore’s pockets with tens of millions of dollars, which he would reap because he’s invested a ton in new products and technologies that people would be forced to use if green legislation starts taking effect.

• Link
• Report this comment

granny godzilla :

Nope. I don’t participate in that ever. It’s hard enough to keep up with all of the players.

• Link
• Report this comment

Enter your comments here

• Link
• Report this comment

So when the data shows that the Earth is cooling again (as it inevitably will, you know that whole natural cycle and ice age thing) will the liberals be telling us to go buy SUVs and drive them day and night and to not car pool for the sake of our children’s future?

• Link
• Report this comment

Thomas Lee Elifritz

September 16th, 2010
1:27 pm
Neutrinos! Who ever heard of such a thing!
———————————-
Protons eat Neutrinos for breakfast.

• Link
• Report this comment

GLOBAL WARMING IS A HOAX YOU F___TARDS!

• Link
• Report this comment

Is refusing to believe in science anything like refusing to acknowledge that socialism has been a complete failure every where it’s ever been tried?

Does anybody remember the first Earth Day, back in 1970, when the scientists and intelligentsia told all of us flat earters that man-made activity was COOLING the earth, and we would all likely die in an impending artificial ice-age? LOL at Cynthia and her mouth-breathing followers…

• Link
• Report this comment

John the logic is thus: I believe X; create strawman that all (pick an expert in this field) believe X; Anyone who disagrees with X is dismissed as a know-nothing ad hominem attack; Anyone who does not actively endorse X must not believe any of X; Same attack as above.

Basically the argument is that I am right and anyone who can’t recognize that clearly can’t be trusted to ever be right.

• Link
• Report this comment

Is refusing to believe in science anything like refusing to acknowledge that socialism has been a complete failure every where it’s ever been tried?

Indeed it is. Both or your points are politics, not science.

• Link
• Report this comment

[...] research needs to be better coordinatedThe Guardian (blog)Yorkshire Post -Farming UK -Atlanta Journal Constitution (blog)all 188 news [...]

• Link
• Report this comment

Bubba sez: “Would MIT professor Richard Lindzen, a member of the National Academy of Sciences, be considered a know-nothing flat-earther?”

——————————————————

Doesn’t Lindzen also strongly believe that there is a very weak link between lung cancer and smoking cigarettes?

• Link
• Report this comment

George W

Even you have stated that global warming is at least partially man made…

• Link
• Report this comment

Al Gore invented the internet.

• Link
• Report this comment

I’ve long noticed that is seems just about everything CT writes about is bashing Bush, Republicans, and Conservatives in general. And I thought it might be nice (for a change) if she wrote about the good things Obama, Democratics, and Liberals have done. And I realized that YES, she has writen such an article.

That was about Obama not having taken as many vacation days as George Bush. See, she really is pretty fair minded after all.

• Link
• Report this comment

Man made Climate Change is the largest scam in the history of the United States.

• Link
• Report this comment

There is no doubt that the actions of man have had an affect on our environment. But there is not reason to believe that this is causing the earth to warm. Please dont believe everything you hear.

The earth has climate cycles that have occured long before the arrival of humans. I would be willing to bet you in about 20 years they will worried that the earth is cooling.

• Link
• Report this comment

BillyBob sez: “I know my diety is different from yours, I believe in Jesus Christ and the LORD, which is why I said….”YOUR MAKER”…..I love exposing lib’s who trade on intolerance….wait, that seems to be most these days.”

——————————————————

It does seem as if conservatives spend an awful lot of time worshipping themselves in the mirror.

• Link
• Report this comment

I certainly hope the production of Spam and Spam related items isnt responsible for global warming as Mr Godzilla and I would die from starvation.

Gimme an s…S
Gimme an p…P
Gimme an a…A
Gimma an m…M

Whats that spell? SPAM
Whats that spell!! SPAM SPAM SPAM!!! YEEAAAA!!

• Link
• Report this comment

Kevingoode, we will continue to worship ourselves in the mirror as long as you continue to worship you idol “Mr. Obama”. Bown down Biotch

• Link
• Report this comment

Talk about flat earth, if you belive this I have some ocean front prooperty in Arizona for you.

1 in 7 Americans Now Living in Poverty

What a JOKE….but what do you expect from the LIAR administration?

mmm, mmm, mmm…..

• Link
• Report this comment

Libs are concerned about a mythical ending to life as we know it on this planet.

Some of us are worried about more pressing problems:

From the AJC:

Georgia had 300,000 more people fall into poverty from 2008 to 2009, a 20-percent increase that exceeds the national average, according to U.S. Census Bureau figures released today.

The state ranked second behind Mississippi, according to an annual report called Income, Poverty, and Health Insurance Coverage in the United States: 2009. Last year Georgia trailed six other states.

The figures show Georgia “in the teeth of the recession,” said Harvey Newman, a professor in the Andrew Young School of Public Policy at Georgia State University.

Newman said the single biggest factor for the poverty rate was job loss. He also said the new poor extend beyond the homeless into people who had been working and were middle class. More people are unemployed and have been unemployed for longer periods. On top of that, the state is feeling the effect of the real-estate collapse ripple through other employment sectors, he said.

There were 1.77 million people below the federal poverty line in 2009, according to the census figures. For a two-parent family of four, the national poverty level is $21,756.

Georgia has experienced a statistically significant increase in poverty, said Trudi Renwick, a census statistics worker.

The census estimates are based on a limited state sample of 4,610 Georgians. More detailed statistics are expected in two weeks. To lessen the margin of error, census officials recommended comparing 2006-2007 figures to 2008-2009 to estimate the state’s poverty rate. Over that time, Georgia’s poverty rate jumped from 13.1 percent to 16.9 percent.

The nation’s poverty rate in 2009 was 14.3 percent, up from 13.2 percent in 2008. There were 43.6 million people in poverty in 2009, up from 39.8 million in 2008.

• Link
• Report this comment

Libs are concerned about a mythical ending to life as we know it on this planet.

Some of us are worried about more pressing problems:

When posting nonsense fails, change the subject.

• Link
• Report this comment

It will be such a wonderful day when Imam Obama and his cast of idiots is tossed out of the presidency on their asses. I am so sick and tired of his lies and spin on everything.

• Link
• Report this comment

I read an article showing ice cores from Antartica indicated temperatures 10,000 years ago averaged about 1.5 to 2.0 degrees warmer than our current average global temperature.

And of course you can’t give us a link to that article so we can read it ourselves.

Ice core data and proxies come in many forms and go back hundreds of thousands and even many tens of millions of years. I know how inconvenient that is for young earth creationists like yourself, but you’ll just have to accept that I have read the literature and I can find things that I need to know on my own.

( www dot ) earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Features/Paleoclimatology_IceCores/

This has a nice zoom feature, where you can easily see your statement is false.

• Link
• Report this comment

Thomas Lee Elifritz

500 posts on climate change while our fellow Georgians are worried about eating.

Perhaps the subject should be changed.

• Link
• Report this comment

joe@1:152 – manmade deities (religion) is the biggest scam in history. the fact that environmentalism is becomin a religion is nothing short of ironic,

• Link
• Report this comment

Wow this is getting more and more humorous, debating facts common sense and logic with a lib is like hunting dairy cows with a sniper rifle. Once again Ms Tucker views the world through a mirror seeing everything exactly backwards.

• Link
• Report this comment

We are cleaning up our act. Utilities are using cleaner
fuels and cleaning emissions from all fuels. Cars are
emitting cleaner exhaust. Smog is disappearing.
Cities are greening with trees. Solar power is growing.
Wind farms are being created. The Bloom box is
on the way. We Americans usually do the right
things but sometimes for the wrong reasons. If the
world blows up, duck.

• Link
• Report this comment

Maybe should be moved to a plantation.

• Link
• Report this comment

CORRECTION….Maybe SHE (Michelle) should be moved to a plantation.

• Link
• Report this comment

Carbon Combustion is sometimes called RUST, or oxidation which has nothing to do with agriculture.

I’m pretty sure that’s iron oxide. But don’t believe me, get a second opinion!

• Link
• Report this comment

“Michelle Obama is handed the “keys to the kingdom” and all she can say is “living in the Whitehouse is hell”.”

Not surprising. Michelle has zero class. A friend sent me a photo of Michelle waiting at the bottom of the steps to board AF1. Her pants are so tight you can easily see the outline of her thong underwear. First ladies just don’t dress like that.

• Link
• Report this comment

Thomas Lee Elifritz

That’s correct. Rust is also referred to as Iron Oxide, if it is a result of the oxidation of iron. Of course you also have Aluminum Oxide, calcium oxide and a slew of other compounds resulting from the oxidation of specific elements and compounds.

Are you sure you want to do this? You might do much better with me by just tossing out adolescent insults like you have done to anyone else that questioned your ignorance.

• Link
• Report this comment

@Thomas Lee Elifritz
You have just asserted global warming is caused by human activity. You haven’t attempted to defend the position with evidence.

Well here’s how it works, you open your eyes, look at the screen, locate the search bar, and then type in some keywords. Then you click on a link, and then after a period of miracles and magic, you open your eyes again, look at the screen and read the words.

(www dot) climate.nasa.gov/evidence/

There are literally millions of pages of this stuff. If you have a problem with it, then form your own alternative hypothesis and give it your best attempt. I won’t be waiting around for it.
————————————————————-
That’s actually not how it works. When you make an arugment you don’t say “I shouldn’t have to defend my position because my opponents should simply do the research to know I am correct.”

Second, I appreciate the link – which was a departure from most of your other posts – but it doesn’t say anything about the causes of climate change. If you read my first post, you’ll see I stated that I am also annoyed by people who deny the warming trend. I just don’t think that it has been well-established that it’s anthropogenic and I certainly don’t think that the evidence merits the enormous costs of climate change policy (especially given the uncertainty and extent of the hoped-for benefits).

• Link
• Report this comment

Nathan Deal Acknowledges More Debt But Says He Won’t Release More Financial Data

Poor Nathan. He should come on up to Alaska and help me keep an eye on the Russians. You betcha!

• Link
• Report this comment

“CORRECTION….Maybe SHE (Michelle) should be moved to a plantation”

Yes, good idea, I have a friend who needs the cotton picked

• Link
• Report this comment

What’s with all the name calling? Republicans must be winning the argument because that’s generally what you Democrats do when they lose.

“The clear scientific consensus indicates a warming climate caused by human activity.” Yeah.. when you only ask scientists who believe in human caused global warming. That’s probably what the consensus is going to be.. They should include some of the other scientists in their survey too though.

As a good steward of this earth we should absolutely do everything we can to clean up our act; from litter on the highways to emissions from coal plants. Leave it there and who could argue with you. Dems have to make everything about income redistribution though. So now the only way to save the planet is for the rich nations to give countries on Africa all their money. Big companies have to give little companies money so they can continue to operate.

Wealth envy thing is getting old.

• Link
• Report this comment

NEAL BUSH FOR PREZ IN 2012! SIKE!

• Link
• Report this comment