Comments on: The Theory of Global Warming

By: William Geo. Cooper

William Geo. Cooper — Tue, 10 Jun 2008 02:52:59 +0000

The Globle Warming Bill defeted yesterday would have cost us 12 trillion dollors( our national debt is 12 trillion). Our government would like to tax everyone and give it to their freind. Do you think you are going to recieve any of this money from us taxpayers? I do not think so, you are going to pay dearly
China is going to spend 3.1 trillion dollors in the next ten years in energy infastructure. Nuclear, Coal, Dams =Hydro, substations and grid work the works . Do you think for a minute China is going to go along with Globlal Warming comard? How about India, they want a beter life too!
No is not an energy policy. No to a LPG tanker port of california over the horizon so we can no see it, well Tokeo harbor has ten. No to water storage or dam =hydro. No to Coal. No to new refinerys. Someone wants to put a solor plant down in the desart and the eveiromental people do not like it because it is on federal land. A 2000 megawatt neuclar planet runs day and night at around 90 percent. Windmill would take 250,000 acras of land to to that. Oh then the birds, scenery, the enviromental people are not going to let that happen. It is just the matter of scale that we need to do. To do this little chat and live our life style. If we got rid of gasoline for our cars. that gas has a BTU of energy, that will have to replaced to do the same amount of work. What will it be? If we don’t build it, they will not come is a fairly tail / night Mare.

By: Samantha

Samantha — Sun, 27 Apr 2008 23:55:08 +0000

okay so you don’t actually think that there’s any evidence to back up that global warming is actually happening ?

have you not seen the movie an inconvenient truth ?
that has enough evidence.

listen and watch that movie closely,
because if you have seen it,
you obviously just slept through it,
because global warming is happening and if we don’t do something about it,
then bye bye planet and bye bye human civilization.

By: SArah

SArah — Thu, 31 May 2007 01:56:51 +0000

Thank you, you think exactly as i do on this subject. Your article also helped me on my paper arguing that Global Warming is not true, I was at a standstill till I read this.

By: jamie callum davis

jamie callum davis — Thu, 24 May 2007 12:47:09 +0000

its all because of the sun!!!!!!!

By: Tyler Reguly

Tyler Reguly — Wed, 02 May 2007 00:17:23 +0000

Kina,

Did you really just use “instant messenger shorthand” and call me a “dumb-dumb”? Do you expect me to take you seriously. Did you look at the link I provided along with that… those statements are from a rather well known presentation given by Michael Crichton. Perhaps you should check your facts before commenting online.

By: Kina

Kina — Wed, 02 May 2007 00:03:31 +0000

ok so, idk a lot about global warming but i would like to tell you that, people who dont smoke, but live with someone or is around someone that does frequently, may not be damaging their lungs willingly, but second hand smoke is harmful b/c those people cough still and, those peoples’ lungs are turning black. look at pictures.so yes i realize that this article is about global warming but, that statement about secondhand smoke and not knowing if it is harmful, think again dumb-dumb b/c if you didnt know that it is you really shouldnt be posting things online. check your facts before you share them please.

By: Jim C

Jim C — Mon, 05 Feb 2007 19:27:28 +0000

Great post

Angela – you are making tired arguments that are counter productive

Trackback here

http://dcssec.blogspot.com/2007/02/global-warming-denier-get-rope.html

By: Tyler Reguly

Tyler Reguly — Sun, 04 Feb 2007 10:31:09 +0000

You’re right… Schlumberger would benefit by creating skepticism… however there are many that benefit by supporting Global Warming… their stats are quite often accepted… You could always take the NOAA data and generate the graph yourself, you would see the same results..

There’s no proof that the current changes to our climate are unexpected… They may be severe and rapid to some (Although, I recall reading in the past that Global Warming was originally defined as a 10 degree change over a decade…something we’ve yet to experience) but the severity and rapidness may be “as designed” in the long term… As you said… these cyclical patterns take time… so we can’t know the true extent of the cycles, but if we do extrapolate based on the Vostok data we see that we’re following a natural progression. As I also stated in my original post.. 10 years ago NASA said we were still recovering from the last ice age… That would mean we would still be experiencing temperature increases… Everything can be explained.. it’s a matter of wanting to see the explanation… to call this “human-induced climate change” is a very prematurely formed opinion and while it may be the opinion of the majority of the scientific community… it takes us back to consensus science… 99% of meteorologists may tell me it’s going to rain tomorrow but they can still be wrong… consensus doesn’t make them right.

I see Global Warming like I see recycling… There are countless pieces of evidence that disprove the concept of recycling and provide information proving that it’s more expensive and uses more energy to recycle a product than it does to reproduce it. A great example of this is lumber… The majority of our lumber comes from nurseries… The trees are grown just to be cut down and harvested… and when a tree is cut down, multiple trees are replanted… yet we still insist that it’s better to recycle paper… This just isn’t true.

Global Warming is like recycling…. Recycling creates jobs and makes people feel like they’re making a difference… Stopping Global Warming is also creating jobs and making people feel like they are making a difference… These same people are going to see that this isn’t Global Warming and that it’s just a natural progression and then they will kick themselves for wasting their time. Global Warming is also being used in attempts to great global unity… to usher in a time of peace… while a noble cause… it doesn’t justify misleading the general public.

By: Angela@desmogblog

Angela@desmogblog — Sun, 04 Feb 2007 09:11:42 +0000

Although you do try to consider material from both believers and non-believers in global warming, you may not have noticed the fine print. If you read the copyright info on the SEED “education development program” you have noted, you will see that it was created by a company called Schlumberger. Schlumberger is not an educational body. Rather, it describes itself as “the world’s leading supplier of technology, project management and information solutions to the oil and gas industry.” This site you have provided a link to is put forth by members of one of the main industries that will benefit from skepticism on climate change: oil.
The reason that climate change has come to the forefront within the scientific community is due to the severity, rapidity and geographically wide-spread nature of the changes. The cyclical patterns you and others frequently reference (ie glaciation) take place over centuries or millennia, not decades. In terms of whether or not global warming is a “theory”, well, you as a computer specialist should know that inductive reasoning is applied to many mathematical questions, and although we cannot manipulate infinite number strands to prove a conclusion follows a pattern without exception, we can use the information at hand to theorize a logical outcome. The logical outcome in this case means that we need to address the rapidity of human-induced climate change.

By: Cal Orey

Cal Orey — Sat, 03 Feb 2007 22:46:50 +0000

Hello,
We are on the same wave length. See my book “The Sky is Falling! Global Warming Survival Guide.” It’s partially told from two beached whales perspective.
Cal