Comments on: If AGW Is Real, Why Do They Have To Lie?

By: bernie

bernie — Tue, 18 Nov 2008 03:51:11 +0000

Just FYI, I linked to your post from my article where I reveal the true causes of global warming: hot bodies and Muslims.

By: Planck's Constant

Planck's Constant — Tue, 18 Nov 2008 03:34:33 +0000

It is getting warmer – I mean colder – I mean warmer, no colder…

If you are a Liberal you want to believe in global warming precisely because the US won’t join the Kyoto Protocol or because George Bush is opposed to the US signing the treaty. Liberals ignore what even I learned in school years ago, that the Sun goe…

By: William Teach

William Teach — Mon, 17 Nov 2008 23:44:46 +0000

Charlie, I think you hit a big point: warming for 150 years. Which started right at the end of the Little Ice Age. It has been going on, and one year does not a trend make.

However, those who believe in anthropogenic global warming will take any minor uptick in the temperature as a trend. And, as far as NASA goes, yes, they have done some great work. Yet, now they are being led by a wacko AGW nut, and have become too politicized themselves.

By: charlie

charlie — Mon, 17 Nov 2008 22:53:37 +0000

The lack of science education here is enormous. I did research in tree ring/climate relationships. Climate can be reconstructed from tree ring data with good reliability. Variability in climate is similar to ‘white noise’ in electronics and it is the Signal we use to carry information for phones, tv, radio. the Signal to noise ratio is what people here seem most ignorant about. Any one year or location on the globe may be in variance to the trend, but the trend over the last 150 years is radically increasing global temperature. NASA’s earth satellite research has made great progress in our understanding of geology, earth chemistry, archeology, etc. The Phoenix mission was a fantastic success (I live near U of A Tucson, AZ ). Let’s not throw that potential out for political sniping!

By: Don Fletcher

Don Fletcher — Mon, 17 Nov 2008 22:22:25 +0000

I am writing my representatives in Washington to cut NASA’s funding. There is nothing worthwhile in NASA’s present or future projects worth the costs (except for putting satellites in earth’s orbit).
I suggest you do the same.

By: Matthew Anderson

Matthew Anderson — Mon, 17 Nov 2008 19:53:47 +0000

The problem here is:

People Will Believe Anything Because They Are Afraid It Might Be True.

This is the answer to religion, marketing, politics, mass media, and global warming.
When you add free speech into the equation and venues of speech such as the internet where anyone can add their opinion, then it becomes impossible to actually know the truth unless your the one out there making all the measurements for one hundred years running. Data can be rounded, generalized, and edited to suit one’s purpose. Doctrine can be twisted with the addition of perspective. I personally believe in global warming because as an American I like to believe there is a strong motive for it’s publicity in our news stations. The repercussions of our actions to thwart it will either prevent the continuance of global warming, or help our economy become energy dependent.

By: Joe Johnson

Joe Johnson — Mon, 17 Nov 2008 18:23:19 +0000

I believe this is all ridiculous. Avid, conscious, and responsible concern for our environment is one thing — judging whether or not we’re in the midst of a global warming phenomenon caused by man’s industrialized actions is of little use when comparing to climate trends. The fact is that we have maybe 150 years of “reliable” climate data on which to predict lasting global climate changes. We simply don’t have enough data. The Earth is always adjusting its climate over thousands (and millions) of years. Our entire species has been here for just a fraction of Earth’s lifetime. We need to consider the “whole” timeframe — not just our lifetimes. Intelligence and rational, cautious decision making is needed not these pathetically, emotionally-driven assertions.

By: Chuck

Chuck — Mon, 17 Nov 2008 18:20:42 +0000

This looks like an honest mistake, especially given the long term temperature trends. You can’t tell me the weather in Wisconsin hasn’t been changing. The odds are that the world will study the problem to death while oceans rise and crop yields diminish. I’m betting on an engineered solution to the problem that frames the solution as a paid service, rather than one involving self-sacrifice. We’ll either alter the atmosphere’s reflectivity or the oceans ability to metabolise CO2 via plankton.

By: DMorrisPE

DMorrisPE — Mon, 17 Nov 2008 18:18:32 +0000

The one question I always ask, but nobody can answer: Just exactly what IS the “correct” temperature supposed to be?

All we have to work with is historical data that indicates trends, but we have no really long-term (over 5,000 years) of accurate information that would begin to show the earth’s naturally cyclic temperature swings. It would be fascinating to have such data and then try various correlations to other phenomenon (sunspots, volcanoes, plate tectonics, nerby supernovae, etc.)

And what about geothermal possibilities? Could the earth’s crust be thinning slightly in random spots to allow some of the heat from our molten core to radiate to the surface? And what causes the magnetic poles to periodically “flip”, as magnetic deposits in rock strata indicate?

My point is this: We worry too much about things that we don’t fully understand and probably can’t change.

Examples: Atmospheric Pollution? – a rash of volcanic eruptions could do more harm in a few days than mankind has done in centuries! Meteor strikes? – sizable hits would trigger changes that could even destroy the atmosphere as we know it!

By: Jon Brooks

Jon Brooks — Mon, 17 Nov 2008 16:32:57 +0000

To Katie…over the last 1.8 million years or so there have been 14 ice ages, with many many mini ice ages coming and going in one or two hundred years. The 1500’s and the North Sea freezing over for example. Somethings gotta melt all that ice don’t ya think? Whether we delay one or more ice ages by a hundred?, a thousand years? or not by our actions its still going to happen naturally. In fact if we launch an all out attack on all our enemies with thermo nukes we could save the earth too, by increasing the albedo from all the duct kicked up and smoke from burning cities such as
Mecca etc. etc. So that is also another solution and one we can accomplish in an hour or two. In fact given Israel and iran..we might just see a global warming solution in our lifetime:)