Inconvienient Truth

[crazy8]

I don't know how many of you have seen this movie but I highly recommend it. As a sportsman, it is flat out scary to see what is happening because of global warming. Do you think people across the globe are concered and doing anything about it, or is the general attitude "it doesn't affect me now" the majority? What do you think? Are any of you changing your habits?? I'm not a guru, i'm just interested to see the response.

crazy8

[Jimmy Jig]

I do what I have always done.

[Fish_on]

Oh Boy here we go again! Run for cover.

[No Fear]

Fear is used by many to push agendas, political or otherwise.
When I was young we were entering a "new ice age" as an explanation
of why we had so much cold and snow. I have little faith in people
that claim to be experts. Their credibility is shot with me.
Fear is the greatest marketing / persuasion tool ever discovered.
Live your life without fear, you will be happier.

[John in Mn]

http://www.americanpolicy.org/un/thereisnoglobal.htm

There is No Global Warming
There is no global warming. Period.

You can't find a real scientist anywhere in the world who can look you in the eye and, without hesitation, without clarification, without saying, kinda, mighta, sorta, if, and or but...say "yes, global warming is with us."

There is no evidence whatsoever to support such claims. Anyone who tells you that scientific research shows warming trends - be they teachers, news casters, Congressmen, Senators, Vice Presidents or Presidents - is wrong. There is no global warming.

Scientific research through U.S. Government satellite and balloon measurements shows that the temperature is actually cooling - very slightly - .037 degrees Celsius.

A little research into modern-day temperature trends bears this out. For example, in 1936 the Midwest of the United States experienced 49 consecutive days of temperatures over 90 degrees. There were another 49 consecutive days in 1955. But in 1992 there was only one day over 90 degrees and in 1997 only 5 days.

Because of modern science and improved equipment, this "cooling" trend has been most accurately documented over the past 18 years. Ironically, that's the same period of time the hysteria has grown over dire warnings of "warming."

Changes in global temperatures are natural. There is no proof that temperature is affected by anything that man has done.

In fact, recent severe weather has been directly attributed to a natural phenomenon that occurs every so often called El Nino. It causes ocean temperatures to rise as tropical trade winds actually reverse for a time.

The resulting temperature changes cause severe storms, flooding and even draught on every continent on earth.

It's completely natural. El Nino has been wreaking its havoc across the globe since long before man appeared.

How about the reports that the polar ice cap is melting?

Well, yes it is. In fact, it has been for about a million years or so. We are at the end of the ice age in which ice covered most of North American and Northern Europe.

There's at least one environmentalist, named Al Gore, who is panicking over the possibility that we may soon lose Glacier National Park in Montana because the ice is melting.

One hates to tell him that we've already lost the glacier that used to cover the whole country.

Perhaps he'll want to start working for new regulations from the Interior Department to begin immediately restoring this lost historical environmental treasure. Re-establishing a sheet of ice covering the entire continent would certainly serve to stop mining, timber cutting and urban sprawl.

The truth is, someday humans may be able to take tropical vacations at the North Pole - and it will be perfectly natural.

Yet our world is being flooded with the dire predictions of Global Warming.

We are being warned of killer heat waves, vast flooding and the spread of tropical diseases. Ocean levels are rising, they say. America's coast lines are doomed, they tell us. Hurricanes and tornadoes have already become more violent, we are warned. Floods and droughts have begun to ravage the nation, they cry.

Any change in temperatures, or an excessive storm or extended flooding is looked upon as a sure sign that environmental Armageddon is upon us. Diabolical environmentalists are using the natural El Nino phenomenon to whip people into a Global Warming hysteria.

TWO KINDS OF SCIENTISTS

We are assured by the White House that scientists everywhere are sounding these warmings and that we may only have one chance to stop it.

Well, as the debate rages, we find that there really are two kinds of "scientists."

There are those who look at facts and make their judgements based on what they know.

Their findings can be matched by any other scientist, using the same data and set of circumstances to reach the same conclusions. It's a age-old practice called peer reviewing. It's the only true science.

And then there are those who yearn for a certain outcome and set about creating the needed data to make it so. Usually you will find this group of scientists greatly dependent on grants supplied by those with a specific political agenda who demand desired outcomes for their money.

Let's just take NASA, for example - the most trusted name in American science.

A lot of NASA scientists have fallen into this trap. Environmental science has become the life-blood of the space program as the nation has lost interest in space travel. To keep the bucks coming, NASA has justified shuttle trips through the use of earth-directed environmental research. And the budgets keep coming.

At the same time, many of NASA's scientists come with a political agenda in great harmony with those who advocate the green agenda. And they're not above using their position to aid that agenda whenever the chance is available.

This was never more clearly demonstrated than in 1992 when a team of three NASA scientists were monitoring conditions over North America to determine if the Ozone layer was in danger.

Inconclusive data indicated that conditions might be right for ozone damage over North America, if certain things happened.

True scientists are a careful lot. They study, they wait and, many times they test again before drawing conclusions.

Not so, the green zealot. Of this three-member NASA team, two could not be sure of what they had found and wanted to do more research.

But one took the data and rushed to the microphones, with all of the drama of a Hollywood movie, announced in hushed tones that NASA had discovered an Ozone hole over North America.

Then Senator Al Gore rushed to the floor of the Senate with the news and drove a stampede to immediately ban freon - five years before Congress had intended - and without a suitable substitute. He then bullied President George Bush to sign the legislation by saying the Ozone hole was over Kennebunkport - Bush's vacation home.

Two months later NASA announced, on the back pages of the newspapers, that further research had shown that there was no such damage. But it was too late. Remember that when you have to buy a new air conditioner or refrigerator for no reason other than your freon has run out of the old one.

FLAWED COMPUTER MODELS

Then there are those computer models. Night after night Americans watch the local news as the weatherman predicts what kind of a day tomorrow will be. These meteorologists, using the most up-to-date equipment available, boldly give you the five-day forecast.

But it's well known that, even with all of their research and expensive equipment, it really is just a "best guess." There are just too many variables. If the wind picks up here it could blow in a storm, if the temperature drops here it could start to snow. The earth is a vast and wondrous place. Weather does what it wants.

Yet those who are promoting the global-warming theory have the audacity to tell you they can forecast changes in the global climate decades into the future.

The truth is computer models are able to include only two out of 14 components that make up the climate system. To include the third component would take a computer a thousand times faster than we now have. To go beyond the third component requires an increase in computer power that is so large only mathematicians can comprehend the numbers.

Moreover, even if the computer power existed, scientists do not understand all the factors and the relationships between them that determine the global climate.

So it's an outrage for Al Gore, Bill Clinton and the Sierra Club to tell you that Global Warming is a fact and that we Americans must now suffer dire changes in our lifestyle to stop it.

SCIENTISTS ARE NOT ON AL'S BAND WAGON

And so too is it an outrage for Al Gore to tell you that most true scientists now agree that global warming is a fact.

What he doesn't tell you is that almost 500 scientists from around the world signed the Heidleburg Appeal in 1992 just prior to the Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro, expressing their doubts and begging the delegates not to bind the world to any dire treaties based on global warming. Today that figure has grown to over 4000.

He also doesn't tell you that recently a Gallup Poll of eminent North American climatologists showed that 83 percent of them debunked the global warming theory.

And the deceit knows no bounds. The United Nations released a report at the end of 1996 saying Global Warming was a fact, yet before releasing the report two key paragraphs were deleted from the final draft.

Those two paragraphs, written by the scientists who did the actual scientific analysis said:

1. "none of the studies cited above has shown clear evidence that we can attribute the observed climate changes to increases in greenhouse gases."

2. "no study to date has positively attributed all or part of the climate change to ...man-made causes."

Global warming is the greatest hoax ever perpetrated on the people of the world - bar none.

THE CLIMATE CHANGE PROTOCOL

Those who have been fighting against the green agenda have been warning that modern-day environmentalism has nothing whatsoever to do with protecting the environment.

Rather it is a political movement led by those who seek to control the world economies, dictate development and redistribute the world's wealth.

They use the philosophical base of Karl Marx, the tactics of Adolph Hitler and the rhetoric of the Sierra Club.

The American people have been assaulted from all directions by rabid environmentalists.

School children have been told that recycling is a matter of life and death.

Businesses have been shut down. Valuable products like freon have been removed from the market. Chemicals and pesticides that helped to make this nation the safest and healthiest in the world are targeted for extinction.

Our entire nation is being restructured to fit the proper green mold. All of it for a lie about something that doesn't exist.

But the lie is about to grow to massive proportions --- and the game is about to get very serious indeed.

In December of this year Bill Clinton will travel to Kyoto, Japan to sign a legally-binding United Nations treaty called the Climate Change Protocol.

The sole argument for this treaty is that Global Warming is a fact and we must take severe action to stop it.

Right now the Clinton Administration is bombarding the airwaves with the sales pitch. Conferences are being held in cities across the country. Special reports, magazine articles and documentaries are all being used to pound home the message - global warming is here - we must stop it.

But the most offensive assault on the expression of free thought by the American people, as the Administration drives to sell you this snake oil, was committed by Interior Secretary Bruce Babbitt. Babbitt said that anyone opposed to the fight to stop Global Warming was "unAmerican."

He accused those opposed to the Climate Change Treaty of engaging in a "conspiracy to hire pseudo scientists to deny the facts." So now, according to Babbitt, to disagree with the Clinton Administration is tantamount to treason.

In fact the Climate Change Protocol is a legally binding international treaty through which signing nations agree to cut back their energy emissions to 15 percent below 1990 levels. And the treaty says this goal is to be accomplished by as early as the year 2010.

That means that all of the energy growth since 1990 would be rolled back, plus 15 percent more in just twelve years.

Yes, there are negotiations, debates and arguments taking place over the exact terms of the treaty as we speak. Perhaps the final version won't be so severe.

But it doesn't matter. Such a massive disruption in the American economy, particularly since it has nothing to do with protecting the environment, will devastate this nation.

To meet such drastically-reduced energy standards will, in the short run, cost the United States over one million jobs. Some estimate it will cost over seven million jobs in 14 years. If the treaty sends the economy into a tailspin, as many predict, it will cost even more jobs.

It will cost the average family $1,000 to $4,000 dollars per year in increased energy costs. The cost of food will skyrocket.

It has been estimated that in order for the United States to meet such a goal the U.S. gross domestic product will be reduced by $200 billion - annually.

To force down energy use the Federal government will have to enforce a massive energy tax that will drive up the cost of heating your home by as much as 30 to 40 percent.

In all likelihood there will be a tax on gasoline - as high as 60 cents per gallon.

There will be consumption taxes and carbon taxes.

The purpose of these punitive costs is to drive up the cost of modern living in order to force you to drastically change your lifestyle. That is the diabolical plan behind this restructuring scheme.

Every single product that is produced with the use of energy will increase in price. Including items like aspirin, contact lenses and tooth paste.

Yet just recently Bill Clinton said that compliance with the treaty would not hurt the economy. He said he can "grow the economy and do right by the environment."

The truth is, to date, the Clinton administration has refused to release an economic impact analysis of the effects of the treaty.

But a leaked study by the Department of Energy's Argonne Laboratory finds that the treaty will cripple six U.S. industries including paper, steel, petroleum refining, chemical manufacturing, aluminum and cement. That about sums up the economy.

When Clinton is through complying with the treaty you may find yourself sitting in a dark house after lights have been ordered off early in the evening, unable to drive your car because of gas shortages, unable to walk to the shopping mall because stores will be ordered closed after dark, even if you have a job and money to spend.

GLOBAL RAID ON AMERICAN WEALTH

But perhaps you still are not convinced. Maybe you still cling to the idea that such drastic action is necessary - that our president and the UN delegates are really in a panic over global warming and are trying to find a solution.

Then ask yourselves why the treaty will only bind developed nations to its draconian emission levels.

You see, only developed industrial nations will be bound by the treaty.

Undeveloped Third-World nations will be free to produce whatever they want. These will include China, India, Brazil and Mexico. And guess what? 82% of the projected emissions growth in coming years is from these countries.

Now ask yourself, if the Climate Change Protocol is all about protecting the environment - then how come it doesn't cover everybody? The truth, of course, is that the treaty is really about redistribution of the wealth.

The wealth of the United States is and has always been the target. The new scheme to grab the loot is through environmental scare tactics.

If, today, you were to attend a UN session on the Climate Change Protocol you would find yourself in a discussion with excited delegates from Third-World countries. They would make comments to you like, "when the technology transfer takes place my country will begin producing this or that item."

Translation - when the United States is stupid enough to fall for this scheme, the third world will take up the slack and get rich.

And international corporations, who owe allegiance to no nation, will bolt America and move their factories, lock, stock and computer chip, to those Third-World countries where they will be free to carry on production.

But that means the same emissions will be coming out of the jungles of South America instead of Chicago.

So where is the protection of the environment? You see it's not about that - is it?

Still not convinced? One more thing. Hidden in the small print of the treaty is a provision that calls for the "harmonizing of patent laws."

Now, robbing a nation of its patent protection is an interesting tactic for protecting the environment, don't you think?

CAN IT BE STOPPED?

Bill Clinton, pushed by Al Gore and the massive green lobby, is determined to sign that treaty. The war has been engaged.

Industry is finally beginning to wake up to the terrifying threat of the green monster that it helped to create. For the past three decades industry has given into every outrageous green demand. And it has fueled the monster by filling green coffers with massive tax-deductible donations. Now industry finds itself trapped.

But more frightening is the fact that many prominent proponents of property rights and limited government still fail to see the danger in the treaty. Many say the Senate will never ratify such a treaty.

They point out that, in a vote of 95-0, the U.S. Senate rejected in a "non-binding" resolution the Climate Change Protocol. That overwhelming vote, they say, will stop Clinton in his tracks.

That resolution was presented by Senator Robert Byrd of West Virginia. He, along with Congressman John Dingle of Michigan have led the opposition against the treaty. Republican leadership, so far, has been silent.

It is, of course, commendable that Senator Byrd and Congressman Dingle have taken the lead to do "something" to protect American interests. But both of them are established liberal Democrats, who have based their opposition solely on the fact that only industrial nations are tied to the treaty.

That's not fair, they say, and so they oppose the treaty - "as now written." Apparently they are taking the stand that if America must be enslaved, then it's only fair that the rest of the world share our misery.

Not once have they said the whole concept is wrong. Not once have they challenged the validity of the science that is based on the supposed fact of global warming.

Is this then the wall of defense that we are to hide behind? Are we now to entrust the very future of our Republic onto the shoulders of Senator Byrd and Congressman Dingle? That appears to be the current wisdom of our leaders on Capitol Hill.

Wary Americans, of course, know what will happen next. The story is all too familiar. Very soon Clinton will summon Byrd and Dingle to the White House and offer them a compromise. Then everyone will smile for the cameras and the Republicans, in the spirit of bipartisanship, will give away the store. In fact, that process has already begun.

So Bill Clinton is moving full-speed-ahead with his plan to travel to Kyoto, Japan this December to sign the Climate Change Protocol. When he does, and after the Senate has ratified it, the final blow will have been struck.

The United States of America will begin a long, agonizing decent - strangled by its own hand.

The question now is; can it be stopped? And more importantly, will we even try.$ e target. The new scheme to grab the loot is through environmental scare tactics.




© 2006 American Policy Center

[No Fear2]

I agree. Especially coming from Al Gore...I mean afterall, isn't he the guy that invented the internet?? :rotflmao After that great invention,he should be able to solve the global warming issue with ease.

[junkpost]

that just sounds like someone blowing some steam.

[Interesting]

What do you really think, John?

;);)

[John in Mn]

There is some good reading on the topic if you dig in. There are some well respected scientists that argue global warming is being perpetuated by the clean air movement. In other words, as the air becomes cleaner, more of the suns energy is warming up the atmosphere. All we need is a couple good volcano explosions, or a decent sized meteor to hit the earth… That would cause so much “pollution” the earth would cool off for a good 10,000 or so years.

[dave10]

I guess I'll take the bait. It's 15 degrees outside and we still can't ice fish - might as well chat.

I have not yet seen the movie. However, it's my understanding from various bipartisan sources that the science community now generally agrees that the earth is warming relatively rapidly, and that one of the contributors is the significant increase in greenhouse gasses. However, it is also my understanding that even if we put in place all of the known steps to limit the discharge of harmful substances which contribute to this phenomenon, we are unlikely to be able to reverse these effects, given the world's population and the explosive emergence of high-energy users such as India and China.

Notwithstanding all this, like most sportsmen, I do what I can to be "green". Will I give up my Lund? No, but I do run a 4 stroke, walk instead of drive when I can, and I recycle. Guess that helps me clear my conscience, at least a bit . . .

Dave

[EyeSlayer]

"Fear is used by many to push agendas, political or otherwise."

So very true, but it's not all limited to the topic of global warming.;)
Unfortunately, fear continues to be an effective way of pushing those agendas.

[capnlee]

OK, I'll take the bait too. It is a very slow day after all. My first suggestion is to do a Google search for "Michael Chrichton on Global Warming" for some of the best reading on the topic.

I often wonder what ever happened to that hole in the ozone layer that was growing at such a deadly pace? Remember when we were in terrible danger, and were going to be fried by radiation without the good ol' ozone to protect us? Yep, ozone was all the buzz and it was mortally imperative to outlaw aerosols and freon to prevent the earth from becoming a microwave oven. Then it was discovered that the hole in the ozone layer expands and contracts as it wishes, and hairspray doesn't really bother it all that much. We don't hear much about the good ol' ozone layer these days. Global Warming is the new and trendy deadly threat, and now they are going to outlaw some more stuff--including bovine flatulence---I'm not sure how they will enforce it, I just know it will be outlawed!

Honestly, I do my best to help the planet and affect changes I can see. I don't litter. I try to leave my fishing/camping spots in as good or better shape than I find them. I do my best to conserve water, fuel and power (though that is a bit self serving 'cause it saves me money too).

I'd be willing to wager that my "carbon footprint" is much smaller than Al Gore's.

[ArtCo-unlogged]

Our planet is in a state of constant change. Where does oil come from? Ancient foilage that was destroyed by climate change caused by whom? Lucy the ape from a million years ago...A little change in the earths axis will cause far more damage than us Americans will. Now the Chinese, thats a different story
By the way, if you think the sky is falling, put a helmet on..LOL

Art

[Fromthedeep]

Let er melt, just an excuse to go buy a bigger boat, one for the whole family to live on, life's supply of tackle and eating 3 squares of walleye daily. Just need to figure out how to brew beer now.... life is good.

[karpbuster]

An inconvienient truth or a convienient lie, or neither which is it you tell me.

There is a hole in the ozone over New Zealand it grows and shrinks, has been since they noticed it and started measuring it. Is that the famous hole? You have to wear more sunscreen playing golf on the days when it is bigger, it hangs over Antarctica mostly but a bit of it is over New Zealand, those people aren't dead yet...pretty lively actually.

It probably is a necessary thing for life on earth. LOL

karpbuster

[ScottL]

My answer to the global warming theory is.
Q: The world is how old?
a: Geologists now think the Earth is about four and a half billion years old.

Q:Man has been here how many years?
A:According to the Bible 6,442 years. Adam (the first man) was on earth 4,416 B.C. 4,416 + 2,006 = 6,422 years

Q: We've been able to accurately measure temperature for how many years?
A: 413 years. The first thermometer was a thermoscope. The first to put a numerical scale on the thermoscopes was the Italian inventor Santorio Santorio. In 1593

Hmm, 413 years out of 4,500,000,000. That is not even a measurable percentage. I don't see how a global weather model,pattern or cycle can even be developed wiyh such limited data.

Regards,

Scott Lee

Since there is six times as much water as dry land on earth, any fool
can plainly see the good Lord meant for man to fish six times as much as he works.

[rebelrn2001]

I believe that the earth is warming. Maybe some from man, maybe some from 'natural' causes. Man has the power to change things for the good and bad. No other animal has the cognition to understand they are changing something. Our world is very small and every day it gets smaller.

Am I changing my habits? Well, I do try to conserve but I drive a gas guzzler. I keep my heat in the house at 65 during the day and 55 at night and when we are not home...admittedly mostly due to the cost of heat. I will walk outside to put an 1/8 of a pc of paper in the recycling bin. I feel bad if I throw out my used up eye contact out the window of my vehicle.

One thing for sure, the world is changing. No one can dispute that. Can we afford to muck it up so bad future generations suffer tremendously due to our lack of common sense? Small changes by all will at least slow the degeneration of this little piece of rock in the sky.

[BIG mike]

Have you watched the documentary? It's a shame some people will comment without looking at facts or even what is going on all around them. They always have excuses. They always have closed minds. Heck the world is flat. Anyone can write things down or make webpages. I know I do. But to publish something for the whole world to see, you better prepare with your facts and be able to take critisism even when it is wrong.
It's even easier just to copy what someone else has written and post it. This will affect our sport of fishing. It will affect our lives and children's lives. Please watch the DVD. I have shared it with dozens of people so far and except for one person, they believe. Most of the world believes.

[Mike Warda]

Interesting that so many believe what "facts" they can find to suit themselves. yes there is a lot of misinformation on the subject. When you look deeper there is often an agenda behind the claims. In this case I beleve that global warming does definitely exist. We CAN tell the temps back for tens of millions of years.
A few years ago there was a "scientist" named Borgstrom that fabricated a lot of misleading statistics in a book called The Skeptical Environmentalist. (He was not a scientist in any related climate science.) He book has been totally picked apart numerous times by scientists that deal in the field. His target was to sell books mainly to industry and by far that who purchased his book and sent them to every politician large and small around the globe. He made a lot of money. A number of professors at his university chimed in that he was very untrustworthy in his personal life and dealings. Some people still try to quote from it. Interesting too that now he also says that believes in global warming.
I find that its also interesting that guys take sides because,....well,..they don't like the OTHER side. They don't want to side with the great unwashed (some of the more hippy type environmentalists) so they try very hard to take an opposing stand. I don't really understand that type of thinking. We sports people should be more informed.
Or they don't like Al Gore (I'm among that group) but I don't discount every thing he might say because I don't care for HIM. I hear guys saying "I WON'T GIVE HIM ANY OF MY MONEY" (relax,..he doesn't receive any of your money when you see it.)
Well I wasn't afraid of seeing the movie and I did. I think most of it was well done. Yea you do have to endure a bit (maybe 5 minutes ) of politics that you may or may not agree, but hey, if you're a big big you can figure out what to accept of not.

[JLucPicard]

>I have shared it with dozens of people so far and except for
>one person, they believe. Most of the world believes.

Someone published a book called "The Davinci Code" for the world to see. A lot of people that read that book believe that what he wrote was true (kind of sad, actually). That doesn't make it true. There is still an argument in the scientific community over the warming issue, so those that should be able to tell us can't agree on what is true and what isn't. I have not seen the movie, but the fact that someone made a movie doesn't tell me that the movie is reporting fact.

I, too, was brought up to take care of the world around me - police your trash at the cabin or campsite, don't litter the roads, etc. I am certainly not living a knee-jerk reaction to some "sky is falling" philosophy.

I may or may not see this movie. But my view on whether there is a global warming problem, or this Earth will be just fine for a WHOLE lot longer than I - or my descendants - will live on it, will not be formed by a documentary. There will need to be a lot more agreement in the community of those who know this stuff before I buy into it.


God Bless America, and America - Bless God!

[Apple Guy]

Gore's movie is a HYPOTHESIS The scientist's findings he quotes are their HYPOTHESIS. That is all it is. There are many " high end" scientist's that do not believe in extreme man made global warming.

I believe in the scientist's hypothesis that believe in the 1,500 year heat and cool cycle. Gore's movie is full of BS! They just have millionaires, extremists AKA..... news media millionaires and extremists that pray the party line of extreme man-made global warming at nauseaum.

[James C.]

John, John,..there is so much tripe in that post from the "American Policy center" I don't know where to start. In fact, I won't. You are going to believe what you want to believe. I'll just take on the first two paragraphs, totally ludicrous to make those statements. I'm a scientist, in a somewhat related field and I have a number of friends that are really in the fields that deal with climatology. It is almost impossible to find any scientist in that field that doesn't believe in global Warming.
There are so many other errors in that post that I don't even want to take them on one at a time, at this time of night, after a busy day, I just don't have the energy to try. No offense, but scientist that work in another area in science, that is way out of my field, wouldn't talk to me in depth about what they know. Not that they are being mean, or uppity but they know it would be a waste of their time because they don't have the time to teach me (their field from 101 etc) to get me to a point that I would understand more complex concepts. I wouldn't be able to do the same in my field. Its not a put down, we all have our areas of knowledge. There is a saying, "don't ever give a monkey a Stradivarius". We don't that that personally.

[Apple Guy]

Big Mike, " facts" Who's facts?? There are just as many scientists that believe that Gore and his scientists are spouting " junk science" You and others just hear their side all day and all night and you believe every word. Who's facts?? Who scientists??

[hollis ULed]

Good points John,
As soon as I saw this I wondered how many people are going to use the old saw "the sky is falling" . They usually do and laugh about those who give out warnings. Well as far as I'm concerned, where I live, the sky HAS fallen.
We get in the east a lot of your pollution from the mid west that has put so much acid rain in my favorite lakes that I can't fish there anymore. Same with mercury, Delidrin, Mirix, PCB's etc. (Oh we contribute to it too)
I used to see fisherman all over early in the season, parked by the sides of streams fishing. Now its a RARE event to see one in the 1 1/2 hour commute that go by two once famous trout streams.
I hear you guys talk about crowded book ramps, fishing spots etc. I don't have to think much about boat rules regarding others. I rarely see many.
I can't remember the last time I saw a kid with a fishing pole in their hand! When I was a boy I remember my father and my brother would go to one of several cheap sportsmen motels and we would get up at the crack of dawn and have breakfast at the associated dinner there. Loaded with fishermen, they had a number of bait shops, several boat rental places,...none now exist except for a tiny bait shop manned by a very old fellow. He doesn't get much business.
You think it can't happen in your pristine Midwest? It make take longer but this has all happened in my lifetime.
Yeah,..the sky was falling and we didn't notice it or believe it.

[Mike Warda]

Apple,...just as many scientists!? No, no, not even close, I doubt its 1% that do not believe in global warning! Most of those that take that position HAVE positions working in industries. You a very few scientist that believe there is no harm in smoking too. They work for tobacco companies and other related areas that have reason to "think" that way. Yea, some scientists can be brought.

[vetspet.ind]

yu need to study both sides of the arguement and not just listen to the green party candidates...read bjorn lomborgs book, the skeptical environmentalist....dont listen to the anti-bjorn groupies...just read the book and then ask this question

[vetspet.ind]

for once somebody here agrees with me...they all ganged up on me several yrs ago...i whooped em all with my hands tied behind my back...they misquoted every single point i made...i'd quote them directly from texts and they'd still misquote me and claim just the opposite when i'd literally write the textbook quotes verbatim... i finally got tired of debatin the green crowd...steve

[SUPERTROLLER]

The inconvient truth is that the planet has been heating and cooling forever. As John in Mn said, as soon as a major volcano blasts it's top off and fills the upper atmosphere with dust again, we'll be hearing about the cooling effects it will have for the next X number of years. There are scientists that also state we are in an extremely long spell without major volcanic activity. They know for a fact that this is contributing to our heat gains. It's a normal change in patterns and ill continue whether we do much or not. Also as stated, the glaciers have been retreating since the end of the last Ice Age. Were the cavemen to blame? Were they building their bonfires too big? Was it Mastdon flatulence that led us out of the last Ice Age? I'm not saying we shouldn't watch what we do and do some things to help but why should we roll back the clock to the 90's for our discharge limitations and cripple our economy only to watch China and others crank up their industry and spew forth exactly what we just cut back and then watch them continue to run right on by with no recourse to tell them what they can and can't discharge after they get going. That whole Kyoto treaty was a fiasco. There is no provision for expansion or controlled growth. Only cutbacks. Mostly for us, the U.S.

[John in Mn]

"John, John,..there is so much tripe in that post from the "American Policy center" I don't know where to start. In fact, I won't......"

I don't buy into the whole thing either. It was more of a anecdotal response to a comical movie.

Humans will end up blowing up the planet before global warming kills everyone. All in the name of GOD.

[Texeye]

:cheers:

Have a good one.
Texeye

[vetspet.ind]

yep, so the number of "scientists" who state something they believe is true is the case here?...let me see, most scientists believe we all evolved from a protoplasmic mass or pea soup primordial solution in the early days of the earth in an anaeobic environment....these "scientists" sure have a lot of facts they spout off about.... i have taken four anthropology courses in my 8 yrs of college, i have read over 20 books that scientifically argue evolution "just aint so"...the truth is evolution is a religion...a philosophy...yet the scientific community would have all our children believe quite the opposite...scientific evidence requires falsafiability...in other words you must be able to prove via repeatable scientific experimentation that something truly is provable....well, they cant do that and if you ever saw what lamebrained evidences they all accept as scientific proof that we are all related to our monkey friends, you'd croak with laughter and wonder about our scientific community...yep, they blew it on that one...and i believe they have blown it on global warming too... but most people would rather just hide their heads in the sand, repeat stuff they just heard from the likes of gore and his scientific buddies...steve

[vetspet.ind]

james, read my post on scientific evidences of evolution...they all believe we evolved too....tell me just one thing...how in the heck can dna exist without a cell wall, so how did the cell wall form w/o dna...the amount of information located in a dna strand exceeds the total information in an encyclopedia times many factors more...do you think you could expect a monkey just plinking on a typewriter to make a coherent paragraph via randomly hitting keys?....how about that monkey making the britanica encyclopedia....nope...not even one sentence would that monkey be able to make via plinking randomly on a keyboard, yet you scientists believe that dna can just form , randomly by itself...i just cant get over how you think dna can just form, yet you realize the total impossibility of monkeys, typing for millions of yrs making a coherent encyclopedia...or of a boeing 707 forming just via random chemical/physical reactions....we all know if we find a book...some intelligent being ..not a monkey made it....if we find a boeing somehow in the depths of the earth, we realize somehow, an intelligent being designed it....why do we accept that the totally more complex dna molecule can just form when it is sooooo obviously designed by an intelligent being.....because our scientists all say so...yep...and some of yous guys readin this believe them there scientists...yep...yesiree...yep

[G. Potter]

"yu need to study both sides of the arguement and not just listen to the green party candidates".

OK,..So,....what other books HAVE you read other than the Lomborg book? BTW I have read his book. I don't believe most of what he says, Billionare Sir Richard Branson was once an pretty strong antienvironmentalist which he said came from reading The Skeptical Environmentalist. He held that position for a while until (he said) he began to study the matter in depth and found out how wrong Lomborg was. He now champions environmental causes and has donated billions to that end.

[RANGER]

:exactly:

You don't get the fire extinguisher (government funding/grants) unless you can "prove" the fire (a "NEED" to be studied)!

Now, if I can "hype" MY end of the arguement, I GET THE MONEY - I WIN!! Name of the "Game"!

i.e. - butter is bad/butter is good! alcohol is bad/alcohol is good! aspirin is bad/aspirin is good! You get the point!

When I was in High School, "we" (the WORLD) were worried about a Global Freeze heading our way, now, We're all going to "FRY"!

As a result of "Global Warming" the hurricanes of last year were to DOUBLE this year! n/m!!!!!!

Ladies and Gentlemen! Use LOGIC to guide you - logic! Not emotions or hype!! And in order to obtain the necessary "Logic" you have to become well aquainted/educated on the subject by reviewing BOTH sides of the arguements and finding the "Facts" (provable) not something that is elusive in the hand!

[abuv5440]

Dave, finally a learned voice in the wilds of ignorance. Thank you!

[RANGER]

An addendum to the above...............!!!!!!!!!!!!

One day a group of scientists got together and decided that man had
come a long way and no longer needed God. So they picked one
scientist to go and tell Him that they were done with Him.

The scientist walked up to God and said, "God, we've decided that we
no longer need you. We're to the point that we can clone people and
do many miraculous things, so why don't you just go on and get lost."

God listened very patiently and kindly to the man and after the
scientist was done talking, God said, "Very well, how about this,
let's say we have a man making contest." To which the scientist
replied, "OK, great!"

But God added, "Now, we're going to do this just like I did back in
the old days with Adam."

The scientist said, "Sure, no problem" and bent down and grabbed
himself a handful of dirt.

God just looked at him and said, "No, no, no. You go get your own
dirt!"

;-)

[abuv5440]

vestpet, your one scary dude. i really hope your legacy plays out like you have hypothesized, especially for your kids kids sake.

[Apple Guy]

Oh, there is global warming, and some based on man. But not the cataclysmic outcome that these radicals preach. Did you know that about 1-2 years ago " they" found out they were using faulty "sun" computer model data that makes the Gore scientist models wrong. All scientist were using this faulty data. The sun is putting more heat out then they were putting into their models. So ALL and I mean all their data is wrong. More of our heat is because of the sun output and not all because of man. They don't want to tell you about this because of the global warming community is making hundreds of millions of dollars preaching this false data.

[Apple Guy]

Oh, there is global warming, and some based on man. But not
the cataclysmic outcome that these radicals preach. Did you
know that about 1-2 years ago " they" found out
they were using faulty "sun" computer model data
that makes the Gore scientist models wrong. All scientist
were using this faulty data. The sun is putting more heat out
then they were putting into their models. So ALL and I mean
all their data is wrong. More of our heat is because of the
sun output and not all because of man. They don't want to
tell you about this because of the global warming community
is making hundreds of millions of dollars preaching this
false data.

[Vex]

There have been climate shifts since the get go. I think the basic question is just how much these climate shifts can be altered by human activity. Time will tell.

So far as the evolution thing goes, I think we can all agree that something cannot come from nothing. The "big bang" theory claims that all matter originated from a super dense, sub-atomic particle that exploded/expanded and is the origin of all the mass/matter in the universe. If that's the case, where did that super dense, sub-atomic particle come from? And the space that surrounded it? Evolution isn't even the basic question. One either has to believe that all, of it's on accord, somehow originated from nothing, or an eternal, omnipresent, (everywhere at the same time all the time, not bound by the time/space dimensions), infinite, intellect/power willed all mass/matter, space, time, as well as the rest of the dimensions, into existence.
Don't like the choices? That's all there is, and one choice is clearly impossible.

[Apple Guy]

Here is an interesting article.

http://epw.senate.gov/repwhitepapers/6341044%20Hot%20&%20Cold%20Media.pdf

[bellbuoy]

Gore isn't as green as he or the media have portrayed him:

By Peter Schweizer
Correction: In this column that appeared Aug. 10 on the Forum Page, writer Peter Schweizer inaccurately stated that former vice president Al Gore receives royalties from a zinc mine on his property in Tennessee despite his environmental advocacy. He no longer does, as the mine was closed in 2003.
Al Gore has spoken: The world must embrace a "carbon-neutral lifestyle." To do otherwise, he says, will result in a cataclysmic catastrophe. "Humanity is sitting on a ticking time bomb," warns the website for his film, An Inconvenient Truth. "We have just 10 years to avert a major catastrophe that could send our entire planet into a tailspin."

ON DEADLINE: Your thoughts?

"Graciously, Gore tells consumers how to change their lives to curb their carbon-gobbling ways: Switch to compact fluorescent light bulbs, use a clothesline, drive a hybrid, use renewable energy, dramatically cut back on consumption. Better still, responsible global citizens can follow Gore's example, because, as he readily points out in his speeches, he lives a "carbon-neutral lifestyle." But if Al Gore is the world's role model for ecology, the planet is doomed.

For someone who says the sky is falling, he does very little. He says he recycles and drives a hybrid. And he claims he uses renewable energy credits to offset the pollution he produces when using a private jet to promote his film. (In reality, Paramount Classics, the film's distributor, pays this.)

Public records reveal that as Gore lectures Americans on excessive consumption, he and his wife Tipper live in two properties: a 10,000-square-foot, 20-room, eight-bathroom home in Nashville, and a 4,000-square-foot home in Arlington, Va. (He also has a third home in Carthage, Tenn.) For someone rallying the planet to pursue a path of extreme personal sacrifice, Gore requires little from himself.

Then there is the troubling matter of his energy use. In the Washington, D.C., area, utility companies offer wind energy as an alternative to traditional energy. In Nashville, similar programs exist. Utility customers must simply pay a few extra pennies per kilowatt hour, and they can continue living their carbon-neutral lifestyles knowing that they are supporting wind energy. Plenty of businesses and institutions have signed up. Even the Bush administration is using green energy for some federal office buildings, as are thousands of area residents.

But according to public records, there is no evidence that Gore has signed up to use green energy in either of his large residences. When contacted Wednesday, Gore's office confirmed as much but said the Gores were looking into making the switch at both homes. Talk about inconvenient truths.

Gore is not alone. Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean has said, "Global warming is happening, and it threatens our very existence." The DNC website applauds the fact that Gore has "tried to move people to act." Yet, astoundingly, Gore's persuasive powers have failed to convince his own party: The DNC has not signed up to pay an additional two pennies a kilowatt hour to go green. For that matter, neither has the Republican National Committee.

Maybe our very existence isn't threatened.

Gore has held these apocalyptic views about the environment for some time. So why, then, didn't Gore dump his family's large stock holdings in Occidental (Oxy) Petroleum? As executor of his family's trust, over the years Gore has controlled hundreds of thousands of dollars in Oxy stock. Oxy has been mired in controversy over oil drilling in ecologically sensitive areas.

Living carbon-neutral apparently doesn't mean living oil-stock free. Nor does it necessarily mean giving up a mining royalty either.

Humanity might be "sitting on a ticking time bomb," but Gore's home in Carthage is sitting on a zinc mine. Gore receives $20,000 a year in royalties from Pasminco Zinc, which operates a zinc concession on his property. Tennessee has cited the company for adding large quantities of barium, iron and zinc to the nearby Caney Fork River.

The issue here is not simply Gore's hypocrisy; it's a question of credibility. If he genuinely believes the apocalyptic vision he has put forth and calls for radical changes in the way other people live, why hasn't he made any radical change in his life? Giving up the zinc mine or one of his homes is not asking much, given that he wants the rest of us to radically change our lives."

What a hypocrite!

Bellbuoy

[Dwayne Crossman]

OK , you DO know that James Inhofe is in a position to benefit greatly for "proving" there is no global warming. (in response to everyone saying that the global warming people are making a lot of money on there stance)
Now this is where all the people here will "turn off" stop reading because they really don't want to be influenced in anyway way that they are entrenched in. Kinda like our feelings of relig. and Polit.
Anyway I read all his (Inhofe's) arguments, One could argue that so many are either flawed or based on biased data or embelished. Anyway thats exactly what everyone here seems to be arguing on both sides but SO WHAT.
Anyone here study the Atlantic pump and its effect and possible effect on climate? There is good evidence of this and the fact in history it has changed and made huge differences in in climate (there are many other things but this is one of the bigger ones)

So,..if we error on the side of the people that say there IS global warming and we should be working on it and they are mistaken what happens? We develop alternatives to fossil fuels that we definitely have a limited amount of OR if we have enough for a while, its going to be a lot more expensive. So we do this and some industries may suffer a bit but don't worry, we will pay for their upgrades. The business community (and believe me they analyze this up and down.)say at first it will cost the consumer , a few hundred dollars per US family. We pay a lot more in taxes for less. On the other hand global warming fixes in a short while it creates a lot of US jobs. US JOBS. and we are not shipping 100 billion a year to some countries that don't really like us. Economically the US does very well in trying to fix global warming. (from recently past great economist Milton Freedman and most others)

So yes, a volcano can cool us, sun activity,belching cows and swamps,etc,etc can over warm us etc,etc,. again, so what? Yes a couple of scientist did say using pretty crude data before computer use that they thought the earth was cooling,even then most scientist in in the related field didn't believe that would happen but a few news magazines picked it up and some still use that as an example of how scientists don't know what they are talking about. We add what humans do to any equation and it just adds to the boat rocking. I DO believe its a fragile balance. We burn per minute bout the same amount of oil that water goes over the Niagara Falls each minute for 9 months. The air on the planet is so thin that when you air in a commercial airline you generally flying above 98% of it. I don't see how all that CO2 cannot effect the planet. But computer models have been right on accurate of just how much it has effected us so far. So what if they are all wrong, we still do better with jobs, money recycled in the United States, fossil fuels that we need much more than gas and oil for our cars, and maybe our grandchildren have cleaner air and do better in general.

So what if all those scientists are right? Well it sure looks to me that the Greenland ice caps have greatly melted some very old tens of thousand year old ice since the short time there has been satellite photos. Lot of other evidence (yes we can tell what the temps were before thermometers and people around to measure them) but just in my lifetime. I look at the climate weather and there has been some big changes. I go to Alaska every few years and mainly the old people will tell you that things have greatly changed in their life time. (yea I hear the argument that fluctuations have "always" happened,) but the "quick ones" in the past took thousands of years, not a few decades. I personally believe they are right, but whatever you believe, whats really at stake here? For now I'll side with the scientists that say its happening and we need to do something about it.

,

[greener]

If gore does it.... will YOU??

[vetspet.ind]

and things like volcanic eruptions causing exponentially larger defects to the ozone layer than anything our freon ever did...yet the holes seem to patch themselves up after such drastic eruptions caused such larger gaps in the ozone layer...my guess, the duponts of the world fabricated much of the freon/ozone myths to market their newer, kinder freon substitutes...which by the way are much harder on a/c units causing earlier breakdown of components...so they not only sell more of the friendlier freon, they sell more a/c units as well....all the duponts have to to is get one movie star or politician to be convinced their phoney science is true and a new hysteria is created...

[vetspet.ind]

have no fears about that one...mother earth is much more resilient than most of the greenies would have you believe...just look at lake erie...all but dead in the 50's...even caught fire!..yikes...every predictor i heard back then literally said erie was a dead lake....now its considered the greatest walleye fishery in the world...the doom and gloomers likewise had so many yarns about acid rain and the effects it would have by the yr 2000 on our lakes..yep...gimmeabrake

[DP]

Sooner or later, like George Carlin said, this old earth is just gonna shake us all off like a dog with a bad case of fleas. Why worry about it.

[M.Beck]

Yeah call them greenies. Them again you. Its a war isn't it. Apparently you don't travel much to the north east. Your midwest smokestacks sending up pollution past your area has made a lot of our lakes sterile.
Yes good ole "Mother" earth is so tough that we can't hurt her. BTW all the sportsmen that like to pat themselves on the back on how THEY cleaned up lake Eire, well I can tell you that it was 10% of we sportsmen and 90% action of those "greenies" as you call them that did that.

[Texeye UL]

Thanks, a good read.

Have a warm day.:)
Texeye

[mudpuppy]

I don't see how anybody could possibly doubt politician Gore's credibility or motives. I mean, the guy was on Oprah for crying out loud. That's good enough for me! Now where's that sarcastic smilie....

[Opti-Mist]

Deep bore core samples seem to support the 1500 year cycle, with the last cold period peaking around 1850 (the last little ice age). That was the "year without summer" with snow fall throughout the summr. Small wonder we seem to be returning to the "warm" period like that of the middle ages.

[D.C.]

Huh? I think the "little ice age" happened between 1300 and aprox 1850. These things took time, not the few decades of big changes that we are seeing now.
The "year without a summer" was actually in 1816, and that big change was from the volcano Tambora. Lasted about a year.
What people here seem to miss is as shown when every time we have a cold snap the someone here will say "well so much for global warming,ha ha " is that in most of the US, because of the dynamics of ocean currents, we are likely to be much colder esp if the lose the Atlantic pump which looks like has happened in the past. That can cause a RAPID, (within a year or two) change.

[TL]

I know last year when we had all those hurricanes it was blamed on global warming and would only get worse. What happened this hurricane season?

[Sportdog]

Seeing as how this subject has been beat to death on this site, how many of you have changed your way of thinking or your opinion by the information provided on this site or references stated here? Maybe this is a topic that just has to be rehashed every so often but it seems like a total excercise in futility to me. There are many good and thoughtful responses but I have read nothing to change the way I feel and have previously stated. I just wonder if the debate has any real value here on WC. I guess that it can't hurt as long as it doesn't get out of hand. Just some thoughts.:banghead:

[Terroreyes]

Everyone can believe what they want. I've looked at alot of evidence and listened to it debated with some VERY educated people and the best anti argument anyone can make is that there isn't enough long term data. Is it just part of a natural cycle? No doubt something is going on now though.

Bottom line is that if everyone is debating it, then it's best to do something, ANYTHING, to err on the side of our future generations existence. If we find out 100 years from now that is was all for nothing, then what's the big deal? So our air is cleaner. Get over it! :)


Visit DOWNRIVER TACKLE in the Walleye Central Directory
http://www.walleyecentral.com/wcdirectory/yellowresult.php?goal=Detail&ckey=47&primaryField=description&category=Bait+%26+Tackle%3A+Manufacturers&textToFind=

[WAeyes unlogged]

:stirthepot: :stirthepot: :stirthepot:

[hollis ULed]

Good points Terroreyes, Sportdog, I'm afraid its more of an emotional stance than a thought out one. People love to take sides and have a hard time really listening and will find a way to discount anything that what they think is the opposition will say. My parents owned a tavern, I heard a million of "debates" that got nowhere. Like religion and politics it takes a lot for someone to really change their minds. I doubt you'll find anyone that has, OR moreover, will admit it.

As far as the hurricanes and the missed prognostication, well if you remember about 1/3 way through the season they did amend that. this is about weather and not climate. Those changes happen much,much faster and despite the most powerful computers no one is saying that those forecasts can be any more than guides. Again you can blame the news media with over reporting the forecasts from the national hurricane center. The big thing this year was a strange upper jet stream in effect cut off the tops of most of the storms that were forming. There was a lot of energy in the Atlantic to form hurricanes, but the other forces dissipated much of the energy.

As far as weather, there was a fascinating PBS show that talked about how the flapping of a butterflies wings in South America (in theory) could change the weather, the point they were trying to make is that extremely tiny things can effect other things and magnify a change in your local weather. Its so complicated that there will never be a perfect system of predicting weather in any long distance forecasts.

[Das Boot 3]

Just so we all know thw source of this "evidence"
APC is "dedicated to the promotion of free enterprise and limited government regulations over commerce and individuals."
A far right organization, APC particularly focuses on the issues of "environmental policy and its effect on private property rights; national federal computer data banks and their effect on individual privacy rights; the United Nations and its effect on American national sovereignty; and federal education policy and its effect on local schools and parental rights." APC is concerned with global warming, both as a treaty viewed as threatening national sovereignty and as laws with economic impacts. Among other anti-climate science writings, APC has published an article by Fred Singer arguing that the earth is cooling, not warming and an article accusing Al Gore and his "theory of global warming" of genocide.

Can't wait to see this whole mess get the "political posting" dusting it so richly deserves
:rant:

DB3...........Never back anything into a corner that is meaner than you are

[Apple Guy]

Global warming is about religion and politics. It is a religion for some and politics for others. I have listen to the facts and the 1500 year cycle seems like the most plausible hypothesis to me.

[Terroreyes]

<I have listen to the facts and the 1500 year cycle seems like the most plausible hypothesis to me.>

.....And what if it's wrong? Isn't just a tiny bit of effort, right or not, worth the potential risks? I'm baffled by people here. They'll fight, argue, and get all worked up over someone keeping a 30" walleye and the VERY debatable damage to their fishery. But you mention global warming, pollution, or anything that might just infringe on their lifestyle and you'd swear "the sky is falling" on them when they love to toss that phrase around bashing people who actually care.



Visit DOWNRIVER TACKLE in the Walleye Central Directory
http://www.walleyecentral.com/wcdirectory/yellowresult.php?goal=Detail&ckey=47&primaryField=description&category=Bait+%26+Tackle%3A+Manufacturers&textToFind=