Revolutionary Politics

There are two major issues at stake in this conversation: 1) do the current mathematical models of climate change predict the future? 2) is man the prime driver of climate change? Questions of whether or not we should all be mindful of our energy footprint obfuscate the first two issues. Of course the answer is to number 1, no. The present models are not sufficiently inclusive of relevant data (sun's energy output & cloud impact at various altitudes upon climate) nor have these models foretold recent conflicting events, to allow even reasonable predictions of future climates. Future catastrophic events may or may not happen, it is just that using the current crop of mathematical models is not scientific as they are fatally flawed. The other issue, does man contribute to present or future climate change has become entangled with issues of using carbon based energy and altering natural sinks for atmospheric carbon. Again, speculative. What strikes me, environmentalists do not want to concede a middle course of action including nuclear fuel. Environmentalists want to cease all carbon based fuels which would prohibit developing nations from emerging. Developing nations need electricity to become self-sustaining and to benefit their populations. The environmentalist agenda is just not realistic, nor does it extend consideration to other's needs, hopes or aspirations. It appears that a "full court press" is implemented to trash opposing ideas as the time is "now" to get meaningful resource utilization change. I disagree. Meaningful and sustained change occurs in increments and to take a "winner take all" position ensures a "looser" and I am afraid that the incessant drum beat from a cadre of scientists and accommodating news media will only reinforce the glare when there are inevitable errors in predictions. When you have the world jury focused upon one thing to make your case, in this case rising CO2 levels matching rising world temperatures, and low and behold the CO2 continues to rise and the world's temperatures do no follow, the disconnect becomes obvious and the credibility of its proponents are diminished. There should be a Plan B. If not, there will be mounting opposition from many quarters, which will carry the day. I don't want to see that, but, that is what I see coming.

By RiHo08 on Jul 11, 2009

Yes, there is climate change and global warming. But the answers are found in paleo=archaeology and geology, not recent, i.e. post medieval observations of the local climate (European local). Facts are: we are in an inter glacial period, i.e., between the last Ice Age and the next. In addition, there was a little Ice Age in the 1300's and we have been emerging from each since that date. We will get much hotter and lose great expanses of arable land through drought.. We now have too many people to sustain nutrituinal liife for mammals and many will die as we move toward the sun in a periodic "short orbit" before we begin to move outward toward the next Ice Age. The last time this happened we were forced out of northern Africa. These days of great population and national boundaries, we cannot move except by WAR. If we don't reduce population voluntarily or decree, we will war tille we kill enough to sustain life. We have no data to relate the temperatures of today to 50,000 BCE or the arable land. No one then was keeping track of it. Good Luck!

By Pam on Jul 9, 2009

[youtube eScDfYzMEEw http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eScDfYzMEEw youtube]

By revpolitics on Jul 9, 2009

Guys, we could argue over the issue to infinity. One thing that is clear that is the real issue and no one may argue over is that, we humans are abusing mother earth and her natural resources, we are polluting the atmosphere, oceans and soil for future generations and that has a definite negative effect. If you check your stats, it is estimated that at the current global usage of oil, we will deplete the world natural reserves by 2025, which is not so far away. But don't fret, I am about to launch a new technology that will save the world from asphyxiating itself. Handled, now yu can all get back to work and stop stressing yourself over this.

By Roger on Jul 9, 2009

Can it be easier? Three clicks did it for me:

Weather Channel owned by: NBC

NBC Universal owned by/created by: General Electrics.
And it stops there, doesn't it?

In 2009, Forbes ranked General Electric (a multinational American technology and services conglomerate) as the world's largest company.
source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Electric

So … if the guys making most money in the world, supposedly, by selling us fossil fuels and the products of the transport, electricity production, … are basically saying: "it doesn't exist, don't worry, keep on doing it" who am I to question and disbelief?

Shucks, and it was going so well;)

By A-Lo on Jul 9, 2009

The joke's on you and the rest of the climate change denying crackpots. The theory that global warming is due to solar activity is invalid. See http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn11650-clima... and stop regurgitating warming skeptic idiocy.

By Edward Virtually on Jul 8, 2009

The joke's on you my friend. Unfortunately your unwillingness to educate yourself on the issue affects the debate for the rest of us. If you don't know the facts then please stop misrepresenting them to others who may not be fully informed either.

Many news stories have come out lately pointing out that the SUN (which is a STAR) is the primary driving force of climate change. All planets in our solar system have been affected by the sun's behavior of late. Those planets do not have humans, cows or lawnmowers, so they are not being warmed by carbon usage.

NASA even came out with a report on it last week. Why aren't you reading these reports and educating yourself instead of pimping the biggest scam in modern history? Please turn off the TV.

By Rick G on Jul 8, 2009

Actually, this statement: "the rising temperatures (as seen in available measurements, ice cores, and sediments), melting glaciers/retreating ice (worst on record now). " appears to be false based upon current data. I suggest the author of that erroneous assertion go out and check some of the experimental/observational data not coming from Al 'Mr Carbon Tax' Gore and his Global Elite associates.

By medicis on Jul 8, 2009

Hahahahahaahhahahahahaha. Ok good one, a joke right?

These clowns have no eveidence to presesnt, what would the debate be then? One side with evidence, the other side breathing out and saying look, "no big deal".

These people are not worth listening to, or worth giving a platform to, unless they have an alternate scientific theory for explaining the rising temperatures (as seen in available measurements, ice cores, and sediments), melting glaciers/retreating ice (worst on record now).

And come on, Frank Batton has no scientific degree and you know it's a bunch of hogwash if "only fox will put us on the air"

By Naoks on Jul 8, 2009

I wonder when people will realize that this is not normal government activities . These actions are total criminal from a government that in it self is criminal in nature today . An because of this no normal legal action will work .

By Joe on Jul 8, 2009

“It’s powerful hot in here, is this Dallas?” – Yosemite Sam upon visiting hell.

By Bob on Jul 8, 2009

The time for debate is over.
The time for thinking is over.
Stop thinking and start doing what I tell you.

By John on Jul 8, 2009