And let's remember the ONLY time there has been a debate between Man Made Global Warming Supporters (Brenda Ekwurzel, Gavin Schmidt, Richard C.J. Somerville) vs the "Deniers" (Michael Crichton, Richard S. Lindzen, Philip Stott) The "Deniers" mopped the floor with the esteemed scientists.

Global Warming Update: The Debate Is Far From Over

By Noel Sheppard (Bio | Archive)
July 25, 2008 - 15:38 ET

The next time some media member says something stupid like "the global warming debate is over," or "the science is settled," consider the firestorm that was set off by a tiny NewsBusters article playfully titled "Clean Air Causes Global Warming, Global Warming Causes Smog."

Although it is now two weeks since this was first published, folks at NewsBusters and RealClimate -- as well as an "esteemed" NASA scientist -- continue to bicker about its contents and meaning.

In fact, as of Thursday evening, NASA's Gavin Schmidt was still battling to make his point:

I have never insinuated that Sheppard didn’t know what photochemical means. I have merely pointed out that he doesn’t understand the differences between ozone and aerosols, or tropospheric and stratospheric ozone. And now you are blaming Reuters for you and Sheppard’s inability to read more than two lines in to an article.

If the "debate was over" and the "science settled," why would one of the world's leading climate alarmists be arguing "the differences between ozone and aerosols, or tropospheric and stratospheric ozone" with strangers, while trying to make the point that someone he's never met or spoken to is unaware of such distinctions due to poor reading comprehension skills?

Considering the hundreds of articles I've written concerning the way anthropogenic global warming is being reported around the world -- including numerous exposés about how the NASA unit Schmidt works for might be involved in manipulating temperature data -- it seems extraordinary that a somewhat satirical, 577-word frolic - with almost half consisting of quotes from cited sources - generated so much discussion and consternation.

After all, it should go without saying that if you can't see the irony in one study claiming cleaner air in Europe is largely responsible for rising temperatures, and another concluding that global warming is increasing smog, you must either be too close to this subject or completely lacking a sense of humor.

That "clean air" and smog might be scientifically unrelated in technical terms is irrelevant. Probably less than five percent of the world's population knows the difference between the two, and likely less than one percent can explain the disparities between photochemical smog and smog.

<link>

Newsbusters, that well-known science website full of objective, informed climatologists?

LOL

Oh, no, that's right....Newsbusters, that right-wing trash site and it's biased editor trying to discredit Al Gore...:)

...and still, it is caused by YOU driving your car and heating/cooling your house...

Love the world. Move into a hut, and ride your bicycle...

You...you...Capitalist Mother Earth hater, you.....

...are really good for our health :rolleyes:

kkkons = fuckin stupid or just damn evil

Thx

Fraylib too scared to reply to a post - too stupid to turn off the computer

I have a different set that don't jive with your right-wing blogger:

Note the many links and sources!

Here is a list of organizations that accept anthropogenic global warming as real and scientifically well-supported:

• NASA's Goddard Institute of Space Studies (GISS): <link>
• National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA): <link>
• Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC): <link>
• National Academy of Sciences (NAS): <link>
• State of the Canadian Cryosphere (SOCC) - <link>
• Environmental Protection Agency (EPA): <link>
• The Royal Society of the UK (RS) - <link>
• American Geophysical Union (AGU): <link>
• American Meteorological Society (AMS): <link>
• American Institute of Physics (AIP): <link>
• National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR): <link>
• American Meteorological Society (AMS): <link>
• Canadian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society (CMOS): <link>

Every major scientific institution dealing with climate, ocean, and/or atmosphere agrees that the climate is warming rapidly and the primary cause is human CO2 emissions. In addition to that list, see also this joint statement (PDF) that specifically and unequivocally endorses the work and conclusions of the IPCC Third Assessment report. The statement was issued by:

• Academia Brasiliera de Ciencias (Brazil)
• Royal Society of Canada
• Chinese Academy of Sciences
• Academie des Sciences (France)
• Deutsche Akademie der Naturforscher Leopoldina (Germany)
• Indian National Science Academy
• Accademia dei Lincei (Italy)
• Science Council of Japan
• Russian Academy of Sciences
• Royal Society (United Kingdom)
• National Academy of Sciences (United States of America)

You can also read this statement [PDF], which includes all the above signatories plus the following:

• Australian Academy of Sciences
• Royal Flemish Academy of Belgium for Sciences and the Arts
• Caribbean Academy of Sciences
• Indonesian Academy of Sciences
• Royal Irish Academy
• Academy of Sciences Malaysia
• Academy Council of the Royal Society of New Zealand
• Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences

But if scientists are too liberal and politicians too unreliable, perhaps you find the opinion of key industry representatives more convincing:

• BP, the largest oil company in the UK and one of the largest in the world, has this opinion:

  There is an increasing consensus that climate change is linked to the consumption of carbon based fuels and that action is required now to avoid further increases in carbon emissions as the global demand for energy increases.

• Shell Oil (yes, as in oil, the fossil fuel) says:

  Shell shares the widespread concern that the emission of greenhouse gases from human activities is leading to changes in the global climate.

• Eighteen CEOs of Canada's largest corporations had this to say in an open letter to the Prime Minister of Canada:

  Our organizations accept that a strong response is required to the strengthening evidence in the scientific assessments of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). We accept the IPCC consensus that climate change raises the risk of severe consequences for human health and security and the environment. We note that Canada is particularly vulnerable to the impacts of climate change.

Have the environazis seized the reigns of industrial power, in addition to infiltrating the U.N., the science academies of every developed nation, and the top research institutes of North America? That just doesn't seem very likely.

Horus:

Newsbusters, that well-known science website full of objective, informed climatologists?

LOL

Oh, no, that's right....Newsbusters, that right-wing trash site and it's biased editor trying to discredit Al Gore...:)

You know Whorass perhaps I have been too hard on you. You are truly sick and in need of long term care. Perhaps you are already on medication and are failing to take it as directed by your doctor. I think you would be a good candidate for insulin shock therapy. It might bring you back to reality. Maybe they could get you a bed right next to Fat Albert, when they bring him back to the real world.

jg

that believe, as you seem to, there is no global warming or that it is impossible for mankind to have contributed to it.

Mmmmmmm let me count the ways

1. Bought Toyota Corolla

2. Expanded recycling to include everything I can possibly recycle without wasting gas to do it.

3. Reduced and consolidated car trips.

4. Purchasing local products.

5. Reusing and repairing old stuff

6. Buying environmentally friendly products.

7. Using captured rain water for lawn beauty.

8. Nice big Veggy garden.

9. Low-flow showerhead

10. Low-flow toilet

11. Using compact fluorescent bulbs

12. Planted more shade trees

13. Reduced junk mail by getting off lists

14. Unplugged unused devices

15. Got the bike out

16. Park in a central locations and walk

17. Buying environmentally safe products

18. No more "Paper or Plastic". I use reuseable bags.

Sheesh, my fingers are getting tired listing all the ways us REAL environmentalists are reacting to "Climate Change".

It saves tons of money and it is good for the Earth God gave us. I'm not religous but it makes good sense.

Now what were you babbling about Zealot?

And yet they couldn't even win a debate.

Those who deny - the list is too long to post

<link>

Like the above poster I have done many things to cut energy consumption. My car gets 32 mpg, have a large vegetable garden which I enrich with grass cuttings and leaves from my trees, have digital thermostats. Make my local trips as many stops as possible to conserve expensive gasoline.

My suggestion would be this, if you truly believe in global warming is anthropogenic and that CO2 is the cause, then you should stop breathing.

jackg

Armando:

And yet they couldn't even win a debate.

Those who deny - the list is too long to post

<link>

<link>

sorry, just too easy!

Get back to us if you EVER have an intelligent or orignal thought, please.

Jesus, are you typing on a Braille computer? What's the screen say?

LOL (shaking head)