The massive propaganda assult continues. It would cost billions of dollars for a movie to get this much hype.
So what is the point of Kyoto?
Man accounts for 0.28% of greenhouse gases.
But note: it really might be true that greenhouse gases are increasing, and that the increases are dominated by human activities. That doesn't mean that the low uptick we are currently on has anything whatever to do with greenhouse gases
"And in other news, international scientists threw a big party at news that their predictions that a massive meteorite will strike the Earth and kill everyone in fact is correct."
"no matter how much humans control their pollution"
So why bother spending massive amounts of money to reduce Co2 amounts?
This group, the UN's IPCC doesn't even conduct it's own studies. They review papers published by others.
The Chair of the IPCC is a documented Exxon-hater, Rajendra K. Pachauri. He advocated a boycott of Exxon based on their climate views, and because it would hurt the US economically.
The 3 vice chairs are also questionable as 'objective' opinions.
One of these vice chairs, Yuri Izrael, was the head of the Russian agency that hid radiologicval data about Chernobyl from the public. Yeah, he's reliable.
Another, Richard Odingo once wrote an Op-Ed piece with the title:
We can't solve poverty until we stop climate change
There is no point in giving sacks of food every time drought wipes out crops - that's just not sustainable
The 3rd vice chair is the progenator of Sustainomics - Mohan Munasinghe. He is less controversial than the above IMO, but has a vested interest in being a global warming alarmist.
There is not an objective viewpoint in the upper heirarchy of this group.
The Republicans in the congress should draft the following legislation:
All thermostats in Federal buildings-Including the Capitol (every post office etc) should be set at 64 degrees in the winter. And the air condition systems should be shut off and disconnected in the summer-there is no reason to have the Capitol or post offices air conditioned-air conditioning is a luxury that is contributing to the global warming hysteria.
I have been in the field of science for some time now and I have not been aware of the term "very likely" translating to "more than 90% certainty."
The global atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide (CO2) stood at 379 parts per million in 2005, up from about 280 ppm in 1750, before the industrial revolution, the report said. Concentrations of CO2, and methane, another greenhouse gas, exceed ``by far'' the highest in an Antarctic ice-core record stretching back 650,000 years. Those increases are primarily attributable to fossil fuel use and land-use change, Susan Solomon, who chaired talks this week, said at a Paris news conference.
Here's the main source of data: http://cdiac.ornl.gov/ftp/trends/co2/vostok.icecore.co2
Notice the readings thousands of years apart, how can those be compared to the current 150 year blip today? Obviously a blip like today's would be lost since each measurement represents centuries of average CO2 levels compressed into one measurement.
All Hail The Report!
After being bombarded by this BS 24/7, I no longer doubt that we are being brow beaten to buy into this big lie for political reasons. A man made lie.
abc=Anti-American Bull$hit Corporation
LLS
International scientists and officials hailed a report Friday saying that global warming is "very likely" caused by man, and that hotter temperatures and rises in sea level "would continue for centuries" no matter how much humans control their pollution.
This statement says it all. If we are powerless to stop it, then how in the heck did we have the power to start it?????
If you're a left wing activist lurker amazed at the density of the right, I'm now making myself available to you.
I'm a professional economist with nearly 20 years experience working in statistics, and have devoted my entire career to determining the cause and effect on non linear systems like the stock market or weather patters. If you point me at the data, I'm going to spend the time and analyze it with a completely open mind.
If it's as clear cut as you all (continually) say, then it should be apparent to someone with my training and experience, and I will say so loudly and often here on FreeRepublic, and by doing so, help to silence some of your most vocal critics.
Even if I am convinced that global warming is occurring and that it's cause is human industrial output, I will probably continue to disagree about what to do about it. But at least you will have engaged the hard right in some small way and made it a discussion of policy instead of theology.
Mind you, I'm not interested in the analysis of some expert, I want access to the data upon which they base their conclusions. In our view on FR (the consensus view of the right) the "experts" advocating a government led global warming solution have lost all credibility because of past hyperbolic statements about the coming ice age, and the 30 million women and children they killed by irresponsibly banning DDT.
I'm not interested in their analysis, but I'll take their data and invest the time and energy necessary to come to understand it. And once I do, regardless of my conclusions, I'll tell everyone on FR what I think.
It's a chance for you to win a small battle in the war of ideas.
I accept full responsibility! It's my love of beans. The emissions cannot be avoided. Not surprised they are melting icebergs. Have witnessed the emissions move vast numbers of people rather quickly, so the melting icebergs, glaciers and polar caps is believable too. So sorry!
International scientists and officials who advocate global warming are "very likely" eff'ing idiots
So these idiots are going to meet in France and try to blame nature on man? If man doesn't believe man caused nature then man is in the clear. I guess the lawyers are becoming nervous. It will be difficult to serve a summons on God.
John MaCain: "The debate on climate change is over"