Quantcast
 
 
 
Top Story
Review: Palin is a Natural Taking On Obama
My Journey to the Top
 
 
Latest News
David Spade is the father of Playboy pinup's baby
 
 
expand
FUTURE OF ENERGY

Foot-Dragger? No, a Fighter.

The scientist who shared the Nobel with Al Gore says the tide is turning on global warming.

By Fareed Zakaria | NEWSWEEK
From the magazine issue dated Oct 29, 2007

« Return to Article

 
Discuss
 
Member Comments
  • Posted By: catzenjammer@earthlink.net @ 10/27/2007 8:58:50 PM

    Comment: For those people who refuse to believe the average temperatures are rising, take a look at pictures of glaciers and polar ice formations. Compare pictures taken 50 or more years ago with pictures of the same view now. All that ice went somewhere and I don't think it went into the drinks of the coastal liberals. If global warming is not being caused by humans, then we are really in trouble. Because that means that even if there is a global effort to reduce emitted gases and pollution, world culture as we know it is still in for some major, and probably not very pleasant, changes.

  • Posted By: Navysnipe @ 10/27/2007 1:47:20 PM

    Comment: It's amusing that these people think that humans could have such an effect. How presumptuous. This planet was here billions of years before us and will be here billions of years after.

    • Posted By: A Watchmaker @ 10/29/2007 12:43:26

      Comment: True enough, nothing short of a supernova/planatary collision could remove a mass the size of Terra from our system, it has existed for billions of years in various states, ranging from a volcanic raging desert to frozen glaciers and tunra. Were at a stable point at the minute, incredibly condusive to human life, why, if it can be avoided should we want that to change. If we can, by changing small things now prevent having to make radical adaptations in the future, surely its common sense.

  • Posted By: useless @ 10/27/2007 5:23:05 AM

    Comment: @jamone
    LOL guy. Earths wobble has little to do with earths temperature. Please do some reading (atleast to high school level) so that u can do the math. Infact, earths orbit is oblong, (that is at one time it is closer to the sun than other), but contrary to what u expect, earth is actually warmer when it is away from the sun. Now this is not another tree hugging theory, but a fact. When the earth is farthest from the sun, the northern half is tilted towards the sun, Northern hemisphere (that includes US, I believe) experiences summer. As to why it is hotter than when Southern hemisphere (which includes Australia) experiences summer is becuz most of earths landmass is in northern hemisphere and land warms up faster than water in the oceans.

    So pull out ur ostrich head from sand or whever uve showed it in and throw the GOP out next election day.

  • Posted By: Unity @ 10/26/2007 2:11:29 PM

    Comment: Fatjoey,
    Take a look at graphs of CO2 levels vs. average temperature and see what you think.
    EdyPegasus,
    Read the article all the way through and you might see what they are talking about. they are saying that warming will place pressures on the world that will cause wars. Preventing the warming will remove the pressures, hence peace.

  • Posted By: FATJOEY @ 10/26/2007 12:44:20 PM

    Comment: the earth has been getting warmer before man even stood erect,it always has and always will get warmer,accept it!! ITS NOT MAN'S FAULT!!!

  • Posted By: advocate @ 10/25/2007 2:47:55 PM

    Comment: I've watched the documentary Inconvenient Truth and I almost wept seeing Gore as very articulate and visionary and yet the country elected a buffon.

  • Posted By: EdyPegasus @ 10/22/2007 10:03:39 PM

    Comment: I have a few questons: What does the Nobel Peace Prize really stand for? What does the pointing out of the fact that the world is warming have to do with peace on this planet? To me the Nobel Peace Prize should only honor those who promoted peace or it need a complete name overhaul.

  • Posted By: mohammad_allam @ 10/22/2007 4:44:58 AM

    Comment: let first understand that global warming is not an issue having different meaning for different nations but,a single issue relates to all,bigor small,rich or poor,developed or developing.once this thinking will be develope every issue related to the global warming will solved.otherwise we will accuse each other and time will run out.

  • Posted By: cs4455 @ 10/22/2007 1:13:04 AM

    Comment: Ignorant people mix right wing politics and deny the research. But then again, there have always been ignorant people in the world. Ignore them, move on, do what must be done.

  • Posted By: jamone79 @ 10/22/2007 12:52:23 AM

    Comment: Oh and by the way I am independent NAD have voted for both republicans AND democrats but some of these communist creeps scare the hell out of this veteran!!

  • Posted By: jamone79 @ 10/22/2007 12:44:06 AM

    Comment: It really strikes me as funny that the same supposed scientist who are touting "global warming " are the same ones who in the 70's wanted to cover the poles with ash because of global cooling. To say that their science sucks is an understatement. Whether or not they want to admit it, which they don't, this is the same type of cyclical cycle that has been going on for years. The earth rotates on its axis but it also wobbles on it also. This means that depending on where the wobble is we are either closer or farther away from the sun. Not for a season or so but for a hundred or a thousand or 10 thousand years. Global warming isn't caused by man. We add a little to the situation but to say that we can effect that much power is a farce. Al Gore little fantasy film has been taken point by point and a COURT found that not only where there misrepresentations but out right lies and falsehoods that any 7 year old could see. Show me quanitive empirical proof and then I'll believe it but not until all of the politics and hogwash is taken out of it. Until then it is just so much pie in the sky for the tree hugging liberal, I need a cause or I don't have an identity crowd.

    • Posted By: dredpir8rbts @ 10/22/2007 02:06:24

      Comment: Mercury is closer to the sun than Venus is, but Venus is much hotter despite the fact that Mercury's day lasts for months. The distance to the sun is a miniscule factor in comparison to the composition of a planet's atmosphere. At the height of summer in the northern hemisphere, the sun and earth are at apogee, whereas during the winter months, the earth is actually closer to the sun because of the irregularity of the orbit.

  • Posted By: ron swaren. @ 10/21/2007 9:39:08 PM

    Comment: Promoting clean energy could reduce military security risks, also. Why? Many developing countries want to use uranium for electrical power generation because it is both a cheap and proven technology. Obviously this is turning into a security nightmare, as with Itan, North Korea, etc. Iran would like to help some of its friends develop nuclear power, too. If wind and solar were cheap, however, that would be an alternative to uranium. I think a bilateral project between the US and Canada to develop windpower in the Great Lakes would be prudent. It is a huge market, has the intrastructure for engineering research, has excellent natural resources, and such a project would bring needed economic revitalization. With a large cooperative project the costs should decline further, making it affordable to developing nations. China might have a security issue with windpower because the best wind resources are in the Formosa Strait. Iran does not have much wind potential, but does have solar potential, as do so many other Arab countries. All that is needed is to make these technologies affordable and add some pressure from the developed world.

  • Posted By: MEisenman @ 10/21/2007 9:32:08 PM

    Comment: Enter Your Comment

  • Posted By: ron swaren. @ 10/21/2007 9:29:51 PM

    Comment: Enter Your Comment

  • Posted By: GlobalWarmingHoax @ 10/21/2007 9:17:54 PM

    Comment: Several studies have shown the rise of CO2 trails warming, it doesn't cause it. We are coming out of a mini ice age and are thus warming, this is causing much of the rise in CO2. Its also disingenuous to blame the US for doing nothing to halt increases of CO2 emissions. In the period 2000-2004 EU countries have increased CO2 emissions at a rate 300% of that of the US. See http://www.GlobalWarmingHoax.com

  • Posted By: GlobalWarmingHoax @ 10/21/2007 9:15:46 PM

    Comment: Several studies have shown the rise of CO2 trails warming, it doesn't cause it. We are coming out of a mini ice age and are thus warming, this is causing much of the rise in CO2. Its also disingenuous to blame the US for doing nothing to halt increases of CO2 emissions. In the period 2000-2004 EU countries have increased CO2 emissions at a rate 300% of that of the US. See http://www.GlobalWarmingHoax.com

  • Posted By: Layla D @ 10/21/2007 6:50:34 PM

    Comment: 2000 scientists in 150 countries have agreed that the warming of the earth right now is being made worse by the abuses of man. Yes, the earth changes, but we don't have to make the situation worse by being glutonous pigs. Th point of combatting global warming is to keep the earth inhabitable. We don't have to live for the almighty dollar in exchange for the existance of the human race.

  • Posted By: speedman @ 10/21/2007 3:53:31 PM

    Comment: The theory of manmade global warming is by no means accepted as fact by the entire scientific community. In fact, many scientists reject it outright. Cyclical changes in climate have occurred since the earth has existed. Remember the "Ice Age?" But the money to be made by advancing the theory and attacking anyone who disagrees cannot be underestimated.

  • Posted By: speedman @ 10/21/2007 3:48:41 PM

    Comment: Enter Your Comment

  • Posted By: azmaqq @ 10/21/2007 3:08:06 PM

    Comment: Both Newsweek and Fareed completely ignore the darker history of their hero, Rajendra. And it shows what b.s. there is behind this flag-waving corporate led Republican Adminsistration and the Republican party. party Was he a foot dragger? You bet your ass he was. As a native of India, his sole purpose initially was to cloud the air (even more) over who was the bigger polluter, claiming his poor India and China were being blamed for what America had done. He spewed anti- American sentiments repeatedly and called for a boycott of American products threatening his audiences with claims that it would only serve to 'increase America polluting the world even more'.
    So why would Bush hire this seditious person?
    For the same reason Pat Robertson supported pro-choice Arnold for California's Governor. For money and power. But there is little doubt Pachuari
    likely comprmised some of his beliefs to get such a 'prestigious' job.

    I seriously believe Pachuari and Bush made a secret deal - Bush lay's off India, if Pachuari keeps playing the smoke and mirrors game to stop any serious world discussions.
    Sure enough, it's China in the spotlight, and not India. Even though China is working to decrease emissions, while India is -concerned.


    But then came Al Gore. Zakaria's friend would still be just another Bush crony if Gore hadn't stepped in.
    Pachuari won part of the prize by default.
    And Bush, again, is the real loser.

    (Should Fareed's friend today try spewing the same anti-Americanisms, under the new 'rules' his butt would be in Guantanamo.
    Hmmm, I wonder if the Right would want his habeas rights restored? )
    bblamed

  • Posted By: azmaqq @ 10/21/2007 2:44:11 PM

    Comment: Newsweek and Fareed completely ignore their hero's past dark and recent history -which include inciting anti -Americanism, calling for a boycott of American goods, and blaming America for the world's pollution.
    Pachuari, a native of India, claims his poor little India and China have very little to do with global warming. But this patriotic flag-waving anti-foreign Republican Administration embraced this guy. Why? I seriously believe Pachuari and Bush made a secret deal - Bush lay's off India, if Pachuari keeps playing the smoke and mirrors game to stop any serious world discussions.
    But then came Al Gore. Zakaria's friend would still be just another Bush crony if Gore hadn't stepped in.
    Pachuari won part of the prize by default.
    And Bush, again, is the real loser.

    (Should Fareed's friend today try spewing the same anti-Americanisms, under the new 'rules' his butt would be in Guantanamo.
    Hmmm, I wonder if the Right would want his habeas rights restored? )

    beliePachuari

  • Posted By: deananash @ 10/21/2007 2:43:19 PM

    Comment: And I remember when the media was going bonkers over what some scientists insisted was a coming catastrophe because of our exploding population - mass starvation, drought, etc... As far as I'm concerned, the mass media is like the little boy who cried wolf, only this time, they really mean it. If it wasn't an impending disaster, nobody would want to read about it, so their interests are definitely not pure. One other thing, as has been generally noted, the Earth has been getting warmer since the last ice age. That's just the way it works. And finally, yes, by all means, let's still get to work and stop polluting. I don't need an excuse such as global warming to do what I know to be right.

  • Posted By: jmklein @ 10/21/2007 2:17:54 PM

    Comment: Wolf!!!!!

  • Posted By: jmklein @ 10/21/2007 2:14:04 PM

    Comment: Tide is turning?

    I thought the debate was over, that there was no more discussion, that we were going to crush manbearpig without further analysis:P-

  • Posted By: science journalist @ 10/21/2007 1:45:58 PM

    Comment: Completely unaddressed in this interview is the question of whether observed global temperature changes are to any extent the result of human-induced increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide levels. The supporting evidence here is scanty at best. A much stronger case can be made that a) Earth's temperature is very much a function of global cloud cover; b) the extent of global cloud cover is very much a function of cloud "seeding" by cosmic rays penetrating the lower atmosphere (exactly like the "cloud chambers" physicists use to visualize the ionic trails left by fast-moving subatomic particles or radiation); and c) the extent of cosmic-ray penetration is very much a function of the strength of the sun's variable magnetic field, which at its cyclical height extends to three times the orbit of Pluto -- the greater its strength, the more the deflection, meaning fewer cosmic rays, less Earthly cloud cover, and higher temperatures. Astronomical and paleontological record, going back hundreds of millions of years, support this hypothesis, as do recent well-kept geophysical and astrophysical data. Carbon dioxide probably has little or nothing to do with it, and may be as much a result as a cause of higher temperatures. The computer models predicting temperature changes as a function of carbon dioxide levels flunk the primary test: being able to predict the PAST!

  • Posted By: science journalist @ 10/21/2007 1:38:09 PM

    Comment: Completely undaddressed in this interview is the question of whether observed global temperature changes are to any degree the result of humn-induced increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide levels. In this connection, the evidence is scanty at best, and there is a strong case to be made that global temperature is determined in large part by cloud cover, which is in turn hugely influenced by the extent of cloud "seeding" by cosmic radiation. The varying size of the solar magnetic field (which extends out at times to three times the distance of Pluto's orbit) by differentially deflecting cosmic radiation, is the master rheostat for terrestrial cloud cover. Carbon dioxide has little or nothing to do with it.

  • Posted By: Mark in New Orleans @ 10/21/2007 1:23:20 PM

    Comment: I never fail to be amused at the arrogance of the human race. We can control the planet's evolution? Oh, that's a good one! Horse-hockey!! This planet will warm and cool in a pattern of its own design. Since when did we get to determine what is the optimal temperature of the planet? Snake oil salesmen like Gore should just admit that they are guessing but that would be tantamount to asking Johnny Rotten to sing for Journey; it'll never happen. Yes, we should be good stewards of the environment but this planet is quite durable. It'll outlast us.

  • Posted By: kagai @ 10/21/2007 1:13:56 PM

    Comment: Global warming is a natural, planetary process that has recurred throughout history. It is not mad-made and therefore cannot be "fixed"; however, that doesn't mean that we can't/shouldn't look for good solutions to make ourselves more environmentally friendly and less dependent on fossil fuels, but, at the same time, we shouldn't be forced to bankrupt ourselves in the process.

  • Posted By: kagai @ 10/21/2007 1:13:35 PM

    Comment: Global warming is a natural, planetary process that has recurred throughout history. It is not mad-made and therefore cannot be "fixed"; however, that doesn't mean that we can't/shouldn't look for good solutions to make ourselves more environmentally friendly and less dependent on fossil fuels, but, at the same time, we shouldn't be forced to bankrupt ourselves in the process.

  • Posted By: kagai @ 10/21/2007 1:12:54 PM

    Comment: Global warming is a natural, planetary process that has recurred throughout history. It is not mad-made and therefore cannot be "fixed"; however, that doesn't mean that we can't/shouldn't look for good solutions to make ourselves more environmentally friendly and less dependent on fossil fuels, but, at the same time, we shouldn't be forced to bankrupt ourselves in the process.

  • Posted By: kagai @ 10/21/2007 1:12:31 PM

    Comment: Global warming is a natural, planetary process that has recurred throughout history. It is not mad-made and therefore cannot be "fixed"; however, that doesn't mean that we can't/shouldn't look for good solutions to make ourselves more environmentally friendly and less dependent on fossil fuels, but, at the same time, we shouldn't be forced to bankrupt ourselves in the process.

  • Posted By: archercrosley @ 10/21/2007 12:46:40 PM

    Comment: From what I can determine, Rajendra Pachauri has a degree in industrial engineering. I would have been more impressed had he a more hard-core background in geology or earth-science. it seems a lot of his time has beeen spent in policial and administrative lines of work. I think this has to be considered when he speaks. Mr. Gore has always come off to me as a pop-biologist, pop-geologist. Perhaps Rajendra Pachauri is also.

  • Posted By: NotMyGOP @ 10/21/2007 12:30:17 PM

    Comment: Hey, let's just stop trying to assign blame to Bush, the coal industry, China, India, the tooth fairy or whoever and just fix the problem. We have the capability to do it. What we lack is the political will. Not only here, but world wide. The naysayers can scream all they want. The science is pretty solid. We need to start taking the science and apply it to long term solutions. What's it going to take? Florida under water?

  • Posted By: dan-51 @ 10/21/2007 12:27:34 PM

    Comment: Here is another simple calculation a high school kid could do. If we stop burning fossil fuels to generate electricity we will reduce green house emissions by 30 to 40%. Replace ALL of our coal and gas fired plants with nuclear powered ones and we will almost halt the increase in CO2 emissions in our atmosphere ( the oceans and soil already sequester almost half of CO2 emissions every year). All we need to do is build 1000 to 1500 nuclear plants (we already have 500 in the world) globally to accomplish this goal.
    I don't like the solution either environmentalists but it is the only one we have. Right now we are getting the worst of both worlds. The Co2 emissions from coal plants and the nuclear waste from nuclear powered plants. I'd rather just have the nuclear waste problem

  • Posted By: Savitar @ 10/21/2007 11:54:04 AM

    Comment: The United States should be very cautious before buying in to these "internationalist" approached to global warming. There is a decidedly anti-US bias that is confirmed in the above interview. First, and foremost, it is important to decode the "financial and totality transfers from north to south" statement; basically it means the US will have to pay A LOT of money to the "Third World". Secondly, why is the US obligated to pay to reduce CO2 emissions in China? Seems as if they could skim a billion or three off of their efforts to become the world's dominant industrial power to avoid choking in their own effluent. Third, now that China has become the world's biggest CO2 polluter, all of a sudden the "per capita" figure is important. If one is concerned with CO2 as a pollutant, absolute tonnage matters, not how you divide it up - Unless one is determined to make the entire problem the fault of the United States and George Bush and demand reparations.

  • Posted By: alvdh1 @ 10/21/2007 11:42:34 AM

    Comment: Mr. Pachauri is dead wrong about thinking clean coal is a partial solution to global warming. Here in the United States, the coal lobby wo do everything to convince us that we can have it both ways. Everyday, the Earth receives enough solar radition to eqaul all of our fossil fuel reserves. Yet we we still want to boil water to produce steam to generate electricity. Stop trying to put bandaides on a sore that wont heal. Wind, solar, tidal and wave energy coupled to a society that uses energy efficiently by insulating and designing green buildings using LED light technology solves almost the entire warming problem. Add the emerging lithium ion battery technology that is less than two years away to power a car 350 miles on a single charge with a 10 minute recharging time and the whole problem is solved.

    Alvin
    St. Louis, Mo

  • Posted By: Aloha @ 10/21/2007 8:49:34 AM

    Comment: If the calculations are so simple that a high school kid could do them, then it is obvious why the current president of the Unted States can't do them. Maybe he should hire some high school kids.

  • Posted By: Aloha @ 10/21/2007 8:45:16 AM

    Comment: Enter Your Comment

  • Posted By: jabailo @ 10/21/2007 2:36:11 AM

    Comment: "Well, the calculations are so simple that even a high school kid can do them."

    Does that kid charge as much as the IPCC Eurocrats?

 
 
Reply
Cancel
 
 
Report Abuse

Enter comments if any for reporting abuse

Cancel
 
The Peek
 
 
PROJECT GREEN
Karen Breslau

Passing the 'fossil fools' in a CNG-powered car

Sponsored by
 
 
 
 
PAKISTAN
Mark Hosenball
Sponsored by
 
 
 
loadingLoading Menu