The Truth About Denial

Deniers are the worst! I can't believe they are so dumb. Seriously. The best way to find out the trust is to just look at what everyone else thinks. Deniers are like those people that deny the holocaust. I think that's even why they are called deniers. I bet that if the people in Germany had just listened to their most peer reviewed scientists about different races the holocaust wouldn't have even happened.

The industries that are financing the "global warming denial campaign" share the same unethical "profit at all costs" philosophy that has dominated the decision-making process of the tobacco industry as it repeatedly denied any health-related consequences of using their products.

Economic impact cannot be the sole factor in every regulatory policy of the U.S. government. Those that do not learn from their mistakes are doomed to repeat them. We can no longer afford to be so short-sighted when the long-term consequences of our inaction are so great.

asdf

Global Warming Skeptics have budgets in the millions, funded largely by private donations; Global Warming Supporters have budgets in the billions, funded largely by government. Al Gore, alone, has a $300 million fund to promote his views during the next few years. Who has the money?

Reading the posts regarding this article convinces me that America is doomed! In the immortal words of Homer Simpson, "Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large numbers."

When Europe was impossible to live in people left or were pushed out and so began the colonial and settlers' era, and now with a large continent to live in and the world's resources to take for snatching, the descendants of those settlers have forgotten that world is not all about take what you can, there can be repercussions. Only, this time it is all of earth connected together far more intimately and the polar caps are melting fast - have you missed that information on your channels? Did you not notice the tsunami or the subsequent disaster in Lousiana? Anyway, if you are not going to wake up until it is your tiney neighbourhood it is unlikely you care for anyone's children very much, including your own blood - they are going to have to live with the mess you are creating. And there isn't an option to this planet, or do you have another thouoght on that too? This whole debate is not about who has money, it is about the denial of reality by industries in order to make money at expense of your halth and your life and that of your childrens'.

yawn as an Exxon mobile shareholder I would like to pass on the following useful bit of information. Exxon no longer funds anti global warming research.

Greenhouse gasses are so insignificant on the climate that the research is no longer warranted.

Atleast Companies fund their own defense unlike Environmentalists who use state money to push their agenda.

If it makes you feel better recycle your pizza boxes.

A BIG carbon footprint article here!!! How come those who insist the warming on a planet that has been warming and cooling for millions of years are not funded?The money used on THAT science is not money? Is it we're using Liberal Lexicon here?
Funding on research to confirm other research is an unspeakable evil? What an occultic notion!

Our environmental problems, climatic changes and global warming will endanger many wildlife species. Ironically, to saving those species we must destroy and some other the domesticated species we currently have in abundance -- our pets. Except those who are acting, guiding the blinds, guarding, termites and police detection, herding, hunting, catching rodents or other benefitial tasks. Pets, especially dogs in excess have contributed to some of our most serious environmental problems. Todays their wastes especially feces are piling up at our landfills even if they flushed into th toilet will create extra burden for water treatment plants. Waste before being disposed of are stinking up our air and atmosphere. Some of those gaseous waste such as mathane, CO and CO2 are greenhouse gases which will create global warming and climatic changes. Pet droppings on our roads have created driving harzards and polluting our water sheds. Those droppings will also spread diseases such bird flu or other diseases. Road kills may result in Mad Cow Diseases or making street unpleasant for walking. Pets will bite men sometime resulted in rabies. Regardless of whether there are bites, attacks by dogs will create traumas which will require medical or psychological treatment especially to small children. Again, they will deterred pedestrain from travelling on the road in favor of driving which will cause pollution and consumption of gasoline. Pet hit by cars will result in collison damages requiring more resources to build or repair new cars. Harvesting from natural and domesticated food supplies to feed our pet will creat food shortage for men and wildlife. Again, pollution will be their results. Agricultural supplies for pets will resulting in clearing of wilderness for plantation land. Pet at home usually require more space and more resouces to build bigger house. Wandering cat and dogs will kill wildlife. I hope many of you will find my discussion make sense.

Global warming and its man made catalyst have never been called absolute fact by anyone. It is a valid theory with much more evidence than sceptics care to admit. One can include all the volcanoes and cow farts they want to but the earths ability to absorb CO2 is finite and 100 years fossil fuel dependancy along with rapid population growth cannot have done anything except make a mountain out of a mole hill. I may be a big guy but if i eat 3000 calories a day I will be a really big guy; I didn't change my body chemistry; I just gave it more in a shorter time than it could adapt to. Ignorance may suggest that I believe those who make a lot of money off that lapse in judgment but most sane people prefer to have 2+2=4 always, not just when oil companies say it should or shouldn't.

Global warming is not a scientific fact.
Lets keep buying SUV's and pick up trucks. Lets be extravagant in our life.
But before we do that.. A little bit of common sense.
Fact 1. We burnt more than a million gallons of gasoline every day for the past 100 years.
Fact 2. We burnt millions of tonnes of coal every day for the past 100 years.
Fact 3. This directly converts to billions of gallons of CO2 per day.
Fact 4. This carbon had been underground for millions of years.
Fact 5. Meanwhile for the past 100 years we have been cutting down forests.

Do u think this CO2 in the atmosphere, which has not been in the atmosphere for millions of years have an effect on the climate? I don't know. But I believe in cause and effect. What could be the effect fo this MAN made CO2 in the atmosphere?

I guess that I am one of the deniers, and this probably disqualifies me to the enlightened ones that want to tell the rest of us how to live. Maybe Mr. Gore should lead by example by getting rid of his mansion(s) and showing the rest of us how it is done. Maybe those who would wreck our economy by instituting draconian cuts should be forced to live the life style that this would cause. Maybe someone that thinks that Kyoto was such a great idea should check out how many countries have dropped out of the protocols, and how many others have failed to abide by it. Remember that when the treaty was first negotiated, the U.S. Senate voted UNANIMOUSLY to reject it.
I have no problem with living a simpler life and I do try to reduce my use of energy, but my primary reason is that I have to pay my own bills, and energy is expensive. Maybe we should try making everyone pay for what they use. I had Greenpeace come to my door to try to convince me that the local power company could more to reduce emissions. After a little give and take, I asked them if they really wanted to help reduce emissions. Of course, both of them readily agreed. I told them to go home, open their main breaker and shut off their gas. They were not so enthused about that solution.

Here in Sweden we get to hear about how the US is the main leg-dragger for a global consensus on man-made global warming (MMGW). Gore was treated like a demi-god during his visit here to pick up the Peace prize (which seems to no longer be given to people who have worked for peace, but for those who create conflict - ???...to the person who shall have done the most or the best work for fraternity between the nations, for the abolition or reduction of standing armies and for the holding and promotion of peace congresses???) and there were yards of full-page "People=Cars=CO2 =MMGW" stuff in the papers for weeks. But nowhere were there voices questioning all this information except for the rare ???reader send-ins???.

Unfortunately, Sweden does not have as open of a climate for criticism of "known facts" as the states do, therefore the media continues to pump out these MMGW ???truths??? and the schools swallow them since there's never been a public factual challenge to Gore's movie like in England.

For example, my girlfriend's daughter (15) is preparing to write a report about man-made global warming and I've been introducing, what Sharon Begley calls ???...a paralyzing fog of doubt ???, where I suggest that ???MMGW??? is more of a prideful exaggeration of our very limited power to really effect a global climate change. For an example we get a 145-255 million ton CO2/Methane injection each year from volcano eruptions. This ???volcanic injection??? into our atmosphere (along with other cyclic ???warming??? activities like our sun), provide, in my opinion, a much heavier GW load than anything that we have produced since we started making fires outside of our caves (unless we unleash all of the world's nuclear warheads of course).

Because of my ???paralyzing fog of doubt??? she was interested in learning more, so I gave her some links to check out which may help her to separate the husk from the corn and encourage her to think (and write) critically about today's political and scientific ???facts???.

http://www.solarnavigator.net/volcanoes.htm
http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2007-04/rtsu-slv042507.php
http://www.inteliorg.com/co2_climate_change.html

Boy did my post look terrible! Looks like this website can't swallow UTF8 ;-)... I'll try again!

Here in Sweden we get to hear about how the US is the main leg-dragger for a global consensus on man-made global warming (MMGW). Gore was treated like a demi-god during his visit here to pick up the Peace prize (which seems to no longer be given to people who have worked for peace, but for those who create conflict - ???...to the person who shall have done the most or the best work for fraternity between the nations, for the abolition or reduction of standing armies and for the holding and promotion of peace congresses???) and there were yards of full-page "People=Cars=CO2 =MMGW" stuff in the papers for weeks. But nowhere were there voices questioning all this information except for the rare ???reader send-ins???.

Unfortunately, Sweden does not have as open of a climate for criticism of "known facts" as the states do, therefore the media continues to pump out these MMGW ???truths??? and the schools swallow them since there's never been an open public challenge to Gore's movie like in England.

But there is hope for all. My girlfriend's daughter (15) is preparing to write a report about man-made global warming and I introduced what Sharon Begley calls ???...a paralyzing fog of doubt ???, when I suggested that ???man-made GW??? is more like a prideful exaggeration of our very limited power to really effect a global-wide climate change. I gave her an example: We get a 145-255 million ton CO2/Methane injection each year from volcano eruptions. This ???volcanic injection??? into our atmosphere (along with other cyclic ???warming??? activities like our sun and oceans) provide, in my observations, a much heavier GW load than anything that we have produced since we started making fires outside of our caves (unless we unleash all of the world's nuclear warheads of course).

Because of my ???paralyzing fog of doubt??? she was interested in learning more, so I gave her some links to check out which may help her to separate the husk from the corn and encourage her to think (and write) critically about today's political and scientific ???facts??? and come to her own conclusions.

http://www.solarnavigator.net/volcanoes.htm
http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2007-04/rtsu-slv042507.php
http://www.inteliorg.com/co2_climate_change.html

SInce as Newsweeks bio on states "Sharon Begley, widely known throughout the industry for her ability to break down complex scientific theories", let's break this down a little further with some facts:

Recently, 400 prominent scientist who were Global Warming alarmist and friends of Al Gores further reviewed the scientific data and concluded in 2007 that have many objections to AGW theory and all become skeptics.

More simple facts that aren't being told:
- Based on the ice core samples, CO2 has been proven without question to follow, not lead temperature rises and falls for the past 400,000+ years.
- The Antarctic ice sheet is actuallg growing and temperatures have been cooling the past decades.
- The Greenland Ice sheet is also growing at rate of 2" per year in thickness. It's not melting away.
- 1934 is now reported as the hottest year, not 1998. James Hansen made a significant error with the temperature coorelations causing the switch. In fact, 5 of the past 10 hottest years recorded all occured before 1940.
- The infamoue MANN Hockey stick, so profiled by the alarmist has been proven without question a fraud. The intent by MANN was to eliminate the Medevil Warm Period and the Little Ice Age. Surrprisingly his paper was not peer reviewed but the IPCC without hesitation published it in 2001. With out much comment, it did not appear in the 2007 report. Turns out the MWP was hotter than today's climate and it was a global phenominum from 1000 - 1200.
- Plants thrive in CO2 rich environments and CO2 has no ill effects on animal life, even in doses exceeding 1000 ppm. (about 3X today's level).

Other facts of note:
- 100 top scientist wrote the UN Secretary General a memo on 12/13/2007 stating that man cannot control the climate and all recently observed climate change is within natural bounds.

- The IPCC is not a scientific entity. It is a polical entity funded by the UN. It's members are all appointed by their respective governments. If you review their backgrounds, they are all pro-global warming fans. There are not any skeptics on any of their committees. You don't think they are biased do you? What a joke!

Lastly, the debate is not over. AGW is by no means a settled science. Us skeptics need to continue the fight against AGW alarmism and activists - as their cause is political in nature.

Sorry guys-you are whacked. We're in big trouble here, and where is denial going to get you- and more importantly, your kids and grandkids?