Climate Change

[halva]

I suppose there is one advantage to a state of anarchy.

When there are intelligent and englightened moderators, people of the Reynolds type (and more particularly hangers-on) expend half their energy inventing Jesuitical, pharisaical and perverse ways to interpret the written regulations so as to justify whatever they happen to want to do.

The comatose "moderating" at this forum spares them of any need to divert energy in that direction.

[Boomer Chick]

OK, let's just accept and realize that indeed the whole planet's climate patterns are changing. This we can agree upon? It is scientifically a fact that patterns are in a state of flux and change? Yes? Jay, yes? OB, yes? WMM, yes? halva, yes? David, yes? FS, yes? It has to be yes because compared to the past three decades possibly more, there is change. Now that should be safe enough to say. Whether it's warmer in some parts, warmer in some oceans, and cooler in some parts and cooler in some oceans, the climate pattern and weather patterns have changed. We've learned this much.

Some news today: Canada will not fund their Climate Change department:

http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/apr2006/2006-04-04-01.asp

Our latest gov. funded research and partnerships:

http://www.usgcrp.gov/usgcrp/Library/ocp2006/default.htm

Main page:

http://www.climatescience.gov/

UK climate change adaptation programs: Tyndall Center

http://www.tyndall.ac.uk/research/theme3/theme3.shtml

Papers published by Tyndall Center:
http://www.tyndall.ac.uk/publications/working_papers/working_papers.shtml

International Journal of Climatology:

http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/jhome/4735?CRETRY=1&SRETRY=0

David Suzuki Foundation:

http://www.davidsuzuki.org/Climate_Change/

Green business leaders and cities: (Cananda is featured) :

http://www.davidsuzuki.org/Climate_Change/Solutions/Green_Leaders.asp

UNFCCC: United Nation Framework Convention on Climate Change:

http://unfccc.int/2860.php

***

So as you can see, there are changes in climate and weather and the whole world is onboard with research, agreements to change and educate, industrial adaptations, governmental legislative funding for change adaptation, research, education, and a whole new generation of business is being generated as well. How can we lose with this adaptive approach?

You do realize that with one or two major volcanoes the whole warming situation could change in a matter of hours, don't you? Volcanoes add particulates and gases into the upper atmosphere that behave like Carl Sagan's "nuclear winter" so remember that as we go on into the future. Climate responds to many variables and its fluidity cannot be denied. Nonetheless, restricting greenhouse gases as we transition into alternative clean and renewable energies is simply a reality and in some cases may actually stimulate warming and in other places stimulate cooling..... as we adapt, the climate will probably present more challenges, ones we can't imagine as yet, even. Give us a couple of gigantic volcanic eruptions and the whole planet could change abruptly in opposing temperature directions. It's all quite fun, don't you think?

[OBPelican]

OK, let's just accept and realize that indeed the whole planet's climate patterns are changing. This we can agree upon? It is scientifically a fact that patterns are in a state of flux and change? Yes? Jay, yes? OB, yes?-------Yes Mam.

Golly, I forgot about the volcanoes you brought up, just when I was getting used to all the other calamities. But then as someone who lives on top of constant plate tectonic movements, I should remember that all that's sliding around on the same stuff that comes out of volcanoes.

As Gilda Radner used to say, "It's Always Something."

[Boomer Chick]

Yes Mam.

Golly, I forgot about the volcanoes you brought up, just when I was getting used to all the other calamities. But then as someone who lives on top of constant plate tectonic movements, I should remember that all that's sliding around on the same stuff that comes out of volcanoes.

As Gilda Radner used to say, "It's Always Something."

ROFLMBO!!!! "Golly! " Besheeepers!!! And often quote the great GR~!! Often!

Well I'm just surprised that this little blue planet on an outer arm of the Milky Way Galaxy has lasted as long as it has when you consider all the astroids, comets, and other space debris not to mention various solar behaviors! For God's sake, someone or something must be looking out for us! Hehehehe!

Remember, you just pop out of your body and go to another dimension upon death, anyway, so once you get a handle on the fact that we're all immortal .....you can relax a bit!

Now check out my links when you get a chance. I looked at each one of them before I posted!

Peace, my siblings! Peace!

[Boomer Chick]

Google Alert for: global warming





Warming Shots (http://www.claremont.org/weblog/004788.html)
Local Liberty Blog - Claremont,CA,USA
The problem with global warming is not that we know so much, but rather that we know so little. Scientists who study the climate ...
See all stories on this topic (http://news.google.com/news?ie=utf8&oe=utf8&persist=1&hl=en&client=google&ncl=http://www.claremont.org/weblog/004788.html)

Congress begins to feel heat from global warming danger (http://www.insidebayarea.com/argus/localnews/ci_3670601)
The Argus - Fremont,CA,USA
... Pete Domenici said he wanted to know if global warming was real. He turned for answers to a federal lab that he had gazed on admiringly since he was a boy. ...
See all stories on this topic (http://news.google.com/news?ie=utf8&oe=utf8&persist=1&hl=en&client=google&ncl=http://www.insidebayarea.com/argus/localnews/ci_3670601)

Global Warming Legislation Should Take Economic Approach; NCPA ... (http://www.tmcnet.com/usubmit/-global-warming-legislation-should-take-economic-approach-ncpa-/2006/04/04/1536829.htm)
TMCnet - USA
(Comtex Energy Via Thomson Dialog NewsEdge)DALLAS, Apr 4, 2006 (US Newswire via COMTEX) --On the day of Senate hearings into global warming legislation that ...
See all stories on this topic (http://news.google.com/news?ie=utf8&oe=utf8&persist=1&hl=en&client=google&ncl=http://www.tmcnet.com/usubmit/-global-warming-legislation-should-take-economic-approach-ncpa-/2006/04/04/1536829.htm)

Foes in 'Global Warming' Debate Fuss Over Witness List (http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewCulture.asp?Page=/Culture/archive/200604/CUL20060404a.html)
CNSNews.com - Alexandria,VA,USA
By Marc Morano. (CNSNews.com) - Neither side in the "global warming" debate is happy over the witness list compiled by the Senate Energy and Natural Resources ...


Americans Gearing up to Fight Global Warming (http://science.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/04/04/1154214)
Slashdot - USA
TechnoGuyRob writes "Global warming has been one of the most controversial and debated issues in the political and scientific sphere. ...
See all stories on this topic (http://news.google.com/news?ie=utf8&oe=utf8&persist=1&hl=en&client=google&ncl=http://science.slashdot.org/article.pl%3Fsid%3D06/04/04/1154214)

Proposal targets global warming (http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/news/breaking_news/14258555.htm)
San Jose Mercury News - CA, USA
... is poised to become the first state in the nation to enforce a comprehensive limit on the air pollution that causes global warming, under legislation announced ...
See all stories on this topic (http://news.google.com/news?ie=utf8&oe=utf8&persist=1&hl=en&client=google&ncl=http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/news/breaking_news/14258555.htm)

Former EPA chief will discuss global warming on April 11 (http://news-service.stanford.edu/news/2006/april5/browner-040506.html)
Stanford Report - USA
The lecture, "Global Warming: Coming Soon to a City Near You," is free and open to the Stanford community, but seating is limited. A reception will follow. ...


CBS News Text Videos The Web (http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2006/04/04/publiceye/entry1468234.shtml)
CBS News - USA
... So the weather report would be a fitting, if not exclusive, place to inform the global warming discussion. I'm not sure I understand the logic here. ...
See all stories on this topic (http://news.google.com/news?ie=utf8&oe=utf8&persist=1&hl=en&client=google&ncl=http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2006/04/04/publiceye/entry1468234.shtml)

Social Venture Network Offsets Global Warming Pollution (http://www.socialfunds.com/news/release.cgi/5339.html)
SocialFunds.com - USA
... a just and sustainable world, plans to make its annual member gathering carbon neutral with Carbonfund.org, as a practical step to combat global warming. ...
Global Warming Hysteria Has Arrived (http://www.tcsdaily.com/article.aspx?id=040406C)
TCS Daily - Washington,DC,USA
... The majority of panelists that will provide testimony in the hearing are for a cap-and-trade program, suggesting the Committee views global warming to be a ...
See all stories on this topic (http://news.google.com/news?ie=utf8&oe=utf8&persist=1&hl=en&client=google&ncl=http://www.tcsdaily.com/article.aspx%3Fid%3D040406C)

[jayreynolds]

http://today.reuters.co.uk/news/newsArticle.aspx?type=scienceNews&storyID=2006-04-05T184211Z_01_L05517806_RTRIDST_0_SCIENCE-ENVIRONMENT-CLIMATE-DC.XML
"Scientists in dispute over carbon curbs - magazine
Wed Apr 5, 2006 7:41 PM BST
Printer Friendly | Email Article | RSS

LONDON (Reuters) - A row has broken out between scientists seeking a way to bring more nations into the carbon curbing fold after the first phase of the Kyoto Treaty expires in 2012, New Scientist magazine said on Wednesday.

On one side is a plan that would in effect set a global target for each nation's per capita carbon output, on the other is one that rates a country's carbon output against its biocapacity or geophysical ability to absorb it.

The latter, by Geoff Hammond at the University of Bath, would remove the United States from pole position as the world's worst polluter but bring up Bangladesh with a very small carbon footprint but equally little absorption capacity for the gases, including carbon dioxide and methane.

The United States, which has rejected Kyoto as economic suicide, only produces slightly more carbon than it can absorb.

Japan, by contrast, has a per capita carbon footprint half that of the United States but overshoots its absorption capacity by seven times.

Aubrey Meyer, of the British-based Global Commons Institute, who formulated the per capita carbon plan, dismisses Hammond's proposal as naive and dangerous, according to the magazine.

"While appearing to be helpful and reasonable, it would be another means for the rich to bully the poor," it quoted him as saying.

For his part Hammond rejected Mayer's plan as utopian, "given the reluctance of the United States to take even modest steps to reduce emissions," the magazine said.

"Living within national biocapacities might be something the U.S. could eventually accept," it quoted him as saying.

Signatories to Kyoto, which only came into force in February last year, commits nations to cut carbon emissions which are blamed for causing global warming.

But it only runs until 2012, does not include the United States or Australia, and is not binding on major developing nations such as China and India.

With the world already facing potentially catastrophic climate change, the search is on to find some mechanism to take Kyoto beyond its expiry date and make it both more inclusive and effective."

[Boomer Chick]

Thanks, Jay, and here's one for you:

http://www.tcsdaily.com/article.aspx?id=040406C

On April 4, the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee will hold a hearing to discuss a white paper that Senators Jeff Bingaman (D-NM) and Pete Domenici (R-NM) released on a mandatory cap and trade program for carbon dioxide emissions. The majority of panelists that will provide testimony in the hearing are for a cap-and-trade program, suggesting the Committee views global warming to be a serious problem and that a cap-and-trade approach is the preferred mechanism for fighting it.



The hearing's timing couldn't be better, as it coincides with an intense global warming propaganda campaign by the media that is currently underway. The latest issue of Time magazine has a cover story on global warming entitled "Be Afraid, Be Very Afraid". (I wonder if this is meant to provide some balance for stories about the coming ice age that Time published as recently as 1994?)



One of the new Public Service Commission's TV ads uses a freight train about to hit a little girl as a metaphor for the horrible impact of global warming on our children's future in just thirty years. (Even if the recent warming trend, since the 1970's, continues for another thirty years, global temperatures will only rise another 1 degree F.)



For those of us who are visual learners, Al Gore has a new global warming movie coming out in May entitled "An Inconvenient Truth" which no doubt will be met by critical acclaim, Oscar nominations (probably not for best actor, though), and a possible Nobel Prize.



Science magazine recently stuffed as many articles as it could find on the world's melting ice sheets, even though the bulk of the published temperature evidence shows no warming over Greenland or most of Antarctica in recent decades.



One wonders, what in the world is going on here?



It seems an undercurrent of anti-technology, anti-progress, anti-humanity sentiment is beginning to grip our culture. Al Gore has been giving very effective, impassioned speeches on the ecological destruction that mankind is unleashing upon Mother Earth. With a mixture of science half-truths and religious zeal, Gore is very successfully rallying thousands of people to his cause.



In an age where many of us believe that science has all the answers, while others believe that religion has all the answers, a clever mixture of science and religion can be very powerful. Even some of our scientists are joining in the chorus: NASA's Jim Hansen thinks we might have only ten years left before irreversible harm is done.



For any of these fears to have an objective basis in fact, one has to believe that the climate system is very sensitive to the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. I have read recent statements, even from the World Meteorological Organization, that CO2 is the "most important greenhouse gas in the atmosphere," which is blatantly false. The warming effect of Earth's most abundant greenhouse gas, water vapor, is about ten times that of carbon dioxide. Water vapor amounts, even globally averaged, go through large fluctuations, with particularly large upward excursions during warm El Niño events. Yet, the climate system never spins out of control. Why is this?



The answer might reside in the fact that about 75 percent of the warming potential of greenhouse gases is never allowed to occur. Weather processes, in the form of clouds and precipitation, cool the climate to temperatures well below what they would otherwise be from Earth's natural greenhouse effect. To believe in catastrophic warming, one would need good knowledge of how clouds, and especially precipitation processes (which is how water vapor is continuously removed from the atmosphere), change with warming. I do not believe we yet have this knowledge.



Yet, the feeling persists that "we need to do something," even if the science isn't settled yet (indeed, the science might never be 'settled'). I would agree whole-heartedly with the sentiment if it were easy to reduce carbon dioxide emissions. It is not. Until major technological advances are made, or people start embracing nuclear power again, carbon dioxide emissions will continue to rise, especially in India and China.



The Bingaman and Domenici hearing on April 4 is a distraction from the real debate this country (indeed, the world) needs to have about how to (or whether it is even advisable to) reduce carbon dioxide emissions now.



And more scientists who don't believe in predictions of climate catastrophe need to rise above their fears of losing funding and speak out. Otherwise, this growing storm of global warming hysteria could do some real damage.



Dr. Roy Spencer is a principal research scientist for the University of Alabama in Huntsville and the U.S. Science Team Leader for the Advanced Microwave Scanning Radiometer (AMSR-E) on NASA's Aqua satellite. He is also a member of the TCS Science Roundtable. (http://www.tcsdaily.com/sections/science_roundtable.aspx)


Click here for more TCS Daily special coverage of this issue. (http://www.tcsdaily.com/sections/science_roundtable.aspx)


BC

[jayreynolds]

Breaking News: "Warmer is Better": Canada Reverses Stand on Global Warming

"Warmer is Better": Canada Reverses Global Warming Stand
Popular summer sports like ice diving could end under a new Canadian policy of encouraging large increases in greenhouse gas emissions.



(Ottawa, Ontario) Canada's new conservative leadership has decided to not only ignore its carbon dioxide emission limits imposed by the Kyoto treaty it agreed to, but is now advocating greatly increased emissions.

"Let's be honest", said Natural Resources Minister Larry Gunn, "Canadians are tired of freezing to death eleven months out of the year and having to drive to Florida just to thaw out. We use a huge amount of energy for heating, and the warmer we can make the climate, the better off Canada will be. Just look where we all live…98 percent of us are on the border of our country, where it is warmer. It is time to face the truth - warmer is better."

The change in position brought swift condemnation from environmental groups. Enjoying a well-deserved rest in Cozumel, Mexico, a tanned Greenpolice spokeswoman Rainbow Treetower chided, "Canada will regret this decision. We are already mobilizing our workers to march on Ottawa. As soon as the St. Lawrence River is ice free later this summer, we will be sailing to Ottawa to organize widespread demonstrations."

In a curious twist, the recently cancelled "One Tonne Challenge" program, which encouraged Canadians to reduce their carbon emissions by one tonne, is being reinstated with a goal of increasing emissions by one tonne instead. "We are encouraging Canadians to do their part to improve Canada's frigid climate by increasing their energy use as much as possible. As the interior of our country thaws out, we expect a gradual spreading of people and commerce inland. We will be able to safely inhabit places where only the bravest of us have been willing to venture to up until now."

There are still some Canadians that are skeptical of the new plan, however. An employee of 'Mikes Ice Diving Rentals' in Toronto expressed concern that their wetsuit rental business will be hurt if summer water temperatures were allowed to warm up too much. "It will be economic disaster for us if it ever reaches the point where people only need to put on a swimsuit to go in the water", he lamented.

[halva]

http://www.heatisonline.org/contentserver/objecthandlers/index.cfm?ID=5902&Method=Full&PageCall=&Title=Canada%27s%20Harper%20Attacked%20By%20Swarm% 20of%20Skeptics%20&Cache=False

Canada's Harper Attacked By Swarm of Skeptics
Sixty scientists call on Harper to revisit the science of global warming

Special to the Financial Post, April 6, 2006

An open letter to Prime Minister Stephen Harper:

Dear Prime Minister:

As accredited experts in climate and related scientific disciplines, we are writing to propose that balanced, comprehensive public-consultation sessions be held so as to examine the scientific foundation of the federal government's climate-change plans. This would be entirely consistent with your recent commitment to conduct a review of the Kyoto Protocol. Although many of us made the same suggestion to then-prime ministers Martin and Chretien, neither responded, and, to date, no formal, independent climate-science review has been conducted in Canada. Much of the billions of dollars earmarked for implementation of the protocol in Canada will be
squandered without a proper assessment of recent developments in climate science.

Observational evidence does not support today's computer climate models, so there is little reason to trust model predictions of the future. Yet this is precisely what the United Nations did in creating and promoting Kyoto and still does in the alarmist forecasts on which Canada's climate policies are based. Even if the climate models were realistic, the environmental impact of Canada delaying implementation of Kyoto or other greenhouse-gas reduction schemes, pending completion of consultations, would be insignificant. Directing your government to convene balanced, open hearings as soon as possible would be a most prudent and responsible course of action.

While the confident pronouncements of scientifically unqualified environmental groups may provide for sensational headlines, they are no basis for mature policy formulation. The study of global climate change is, as you have said, an "emerging science," one that is perhaps the most complex ever tackled. It may be many years yet before we properly understand the Earth's climate system. Nevertheless, significant advances have been made since the protocol was created, many of which are taking us away from a concern about increasing greenhouse gases. If, back in the mid-1990s, we knew what we know today about climate, Kyoto would almost certainly not exist, because we would have concluded it was not necessary.

We appreciate the difficulty any government has formulating sensible science-based policy when the loudest voices always seem to be pushing in the opposite direction. However, by convening open, unbiased consultations, Canadians will be permitted to hear from experts on both sides of the debate in the climate-science community.

When the public comes to understand that there is no "consensus" among climate scientists about the relative importance of the various causes of global climate change, the government will be in a far better position to develop plans that reflect reality and so benefit both the environment and the economy.

"Climate change is real" is a meaningless phrase used repeatedly by activists to convince the public that a climate catastrophe is looming and humanity is the cause. Neither of these fears is justified. Global climate changes all the time due to natural causes and the human impact still remains impossible to distinguish from this natural "noise." The new Canadian government's commitment to reducing air, land and water pollution is commendable, but allocating funds to "stopping climate change" would be irrational. We need to continue intensive research into the real causes of climate change and help our most vulnerable citizens adapt to whatever nature throws at us next.

We believe the Canadian public and government decision-makers need and deserve to hear the whole story concerning this very complex issue. It was only 30 years ago that many of today's global-warming alarmists were telling us that the world was in the midst of a global-cooling catastrophe. But the science continued to evolve, and still does, even though so many choose to ignore it when it does not fit with predetermined political agendas.

We hope that you will examine our proposal carefully and we stand willing and able to furnish you with more information on this crucially important topic.

CC: The Honourable Rona Ambrose, Minister of the Environment, and the Honourable Gary Lunn, Minister of Natural Resources

[halva]

Sincerely,

Dr. Ian D. Clark, professor, isotope hydrogeology and paleoclimatology, Dept. of Earth Sciences, University of Ottawa

Dr. Tad Murty, former senior research scientist, Dept. of Fisheries and Oceans, former director of Australia's National Tidal Facility and professor of earth sciences, Flinders University, Adelaide; currently adjunct professor, Departments of Civil Engineering and Earth Sciences, University of Ottawa

Dr. R. Timothy Patterson, professor, Dept. of Earth Sciences (paleoclimatology), Carleton University, Ottawa

Dr. Fred Michel, director, Institute of Environmental Science and associate professor, Dept. of Earth Sciences, Carleton University, Ottawa

Dr. Madhav Khandekar, former research scientist, Environment Canada. Member of editorial board of Climate Research and Natural Hazards

Dr. Paul Copper, FRSC, professor emeritus, Dept. of Earth Sciences, Laurentian University, Sudbury, Ont.

Dr. Ross McKitrick, associate professor, Dept. of Economics, University of Guelph, Ont.

Dr. Tim Ball, former professor of climatology, University of Winnipeg; environmental consultant

Dr. Andreas Prokocon, adjunct professor of earth sciences, University of Ottawa; consultant in statistics and geology

Mr. David Nowell, M.Sc. (Meteorology), fellow of the Royal Meteorological Society, Canadian member and past chairman of the NATO Meteorological Group, Ottawa

Dr. Christopher Essex, professor of applied mathematics and associate director of the Program in Theoretical Physics, University of Western Ontario, London, Ont.

Dr. Gordon E. Swaters, professor of applied mathematics, Dept. of Mathematical Sciences, and member, Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Research Group, University of Alberta

Dr. L. Graham Smith, associate professor, Dept. of Geography, University of Western Ontario, London, Ont.

Dr. G. Cornelis van Kooten, professor and Canada Research Chair in environmental studies and climate change, Dept. of Economics, University of Victoria

Dr. Petr Chylek, adjunct professor, Dept. of Physics and Atmospheric Science, Dalhousie University, Halifax

Dr./Cdr. M. R. Morgan, FRMS, climate consultant, former meteorology advisor to the World Meteorological Organization. Previously research scientist in climatology at University of Exeter, U.K.

Dr. Keith D. Hage, climate consultant and professor emeritus of Meteorology, University of Alberta

Dr. David E. Wojick, P.Eng., energy consultant, Star Tannery, Va., and Sioux Lookout, Ont.

Rob Scagel, M.Sc., forest microclimate specialist, principal consultant, Pacific Phytometric Consultants, Surrey, B.C.

Dr. Douglas Leahey, meteorologist and air-quality consultant, Calgary

Paavo Siitam, M.Sc., agronomist, chemist, Cobourg, Ont.

Dr. Chris de Freitas, climate scientist, associate professor, The University of Auckland, N.Z.

Dr. Richard S. Lindzen, Alfred P. Sloan professor of meteorology, Dept. of Earth, Atmospheric and Planetary Sciences, Massachusetts Institute of Technology

Dr. Freeman J. Dyson, emeritus professor of physics, Institute for Advanced Studies, Princeton, N.J.

Mr. George Taylor, Dept. of Meteorology, Oregon State University; Oregon State climatologist; past president, American Association of State Climatologists

Dr. Ian Plimer, professor of geology, School of Earth and Environmental Sciences, University of Adelaide; emeritus professor of earth sciences, University of Melbourne, Australia

Dr. R.M. Carter, professor, Marine Geophysical Laboratory, James Cook University, Townsville, Australia

Mr. William Kininmonth, Australasian Climate Research, former Head National Climate Centre, Australian Bureau of Meteorology; former Australian delegate to World Meteorological Organization Commission for Climatology, Scientific and Technical Review

Dr. Hendrik Tennekes, former director of research, Royal Netherlands Meteorological Institute

Dr. Gerrit J. van der Lingen, geologist/paleoclimatologist, Climate Change Consultant, Geoscience Research and Investigations, New Zealand

Dr. Patrick J. Michaels, professor of environmental sciences, University of Virginia

Dr. Nils-Axel Morner, emeritus professor of paleogeophysics & geodynamics, Stockholm University, Stockholm, Sweden

Dr. Gary D. Sharp, Center for Climate/Ocean Resources Study, Salinas, Calif.

Dr. Roy W. Spencer, principal research scientist, Earth System Science Center, The University of Alabama, Huntsville

Dr. Al Pekarek, associate professor of geology, Earth and Atmospheric Sciences Dept., St. Cloud State University, St. Cloud, Minn.

Dr. Marcel Leroux, professor emeritus of climatology, University of Lyon, France; former director of Laboratory of Climatology, Risks and Environment, CNRS

Dr. Paul Reiter, professor, Institut Pasteur, Unit of Insects and Infectious Diseases, Paris, France. Expert reviewer, IPCC Working group II, chapter 8 (human health)

Dr. Zbigniew Jaworowski, physicist and chairman, Scientific Council of Central Laboratory for Radiological Protection, Warsaw, Poland

Dr. Sonja Boehmer-Christiansen, reader, Dept. of Geography, University of Hull, U.K.; editor, Energy & Environment

Dr. Hans H.J. Labohm, former advisor to the executive board, Clingendael Institute (The Netherlands Institute of International Relations) and an economist who has focused on climate change

Dr. Lee C. Gerhard, senior scientist emeritus, University of Kansas, past director and state geologist, Kansas Geological Survey

Dr. Asmunn Moene, past head of the Forecasting Centre, Meteorological Institute, Norway

Dr. August H. Auer, past professor of atmospheric science, University of Wyoming; previously chief meteorologist, Meteorological Service (MetService) of New Zealand

Dr. Vincent Gray, expert reviewer for the IPCC and author of The Greenhouse Delusion: A Critique of 'Climate Change 2001,' Wellington, N.Z.

Dr. Howard Hayden, emeritus professor of physics, University of Connecticut

Dr Benny Peiser, professor of social anthropology, Faculty of Science, Liverpool John Moores University, U.K.

Dr. Jack Barrett, chemist and spectroscopist, formerly with Imperial College London, U.K.

Dr. William J.R. Alexander, professor emeritus, Dept. of Civil and Biosystems Engineering, University of Pretoria, South Africa. Member, United Nations Scientific and Technical Committee on Natural Disasters, 1994-2000

Dr. S. Fred Singer, professor emeritus of environmental sciences, University of Virginia; former director, U.S. Weather Satellite Service

Dr. Harry N.A. Priem, emeritus professor of planetary geology and isotope geophysics, Utrecht University; former director of the Netherlands Institute for Isotope Geosciences; past president of the Royal Netherlands Geological & Mining Society

Dr. Robert H. Essenhigh, E.G. Bailey professor of energy conversion, Dept. of Mechanical Engineering, The Ohio State University

Dr. Sallie Baliunas, astrophysicist and climate researcher, Boston, Mass.

Douglas Hoyt, senior scientist at Raytheon (retired) and co-author of the book The Role of the Sun in Climate Change; previously with NCAR, NOAA, and the World Radiation Center, Davos, Switzerland

Dipl.-Ing. Peter Dietze, independent energy advisor and scientific climate and carbon modeller, official IPCC reviewer, Bavaria, Germany

Dr. Boris Winterhalter, senior marine researcher (retired), Geological Survey of Finland, former professor in marine geology, University of Helsinki, Finland

Dr. Wibjorn Karlen, emeritus professor, Dept. of Physical Geography and Quaternary Geology, Stockholm University, Sweden

Dr. Hugh W. Ellsaesser, physicist/meteorologist, previously with the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Calif.; atmospheric consultant.

Dr. Art Robinson, founder, Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine, Cave Junction, Ore.

Dr. Arthur Rorsch, emeritus professor of molecular genetics, Leiden University, The Netherlands; past board member, Netherlands organization for applied research (TNO) in environmental, food and public health

Dr. Alister McFarquhar, Downing College, Cambridge, U.K.; international economist

Dr. Richard S. Courtney, climate and atmospheric science consultant, IPCC expert reviewer, U.K.

(C) National Post 2006

[jayreynolds]

Novelist scientist silenced as Harper Tories quietly axe 15 Kyoto programs
Bruce Cheadle, Canadian Press
Published: Thursday, April 13, 2006
OTTAWA (CP) - A scientist with Environment Canada was ordered not to launch his global warming-themed novel Thursday at the same time the Conservative government was quietly axing a number of Kyoto programs.

The bizarre sequence of events on the eve of the Easter long weekend provided an ironic end-note to the week in which Prime Minister Stephen Harper introduced his first piece of legislation - aimed at improving accountability and transparency in government.

The day began with what was supposed to be the low-key launch of an aptly titled novel, Hotter than Hell.

Publisher Elizabeth Margaris said that Mark Tushingham, whose day job is as an Environment Canada scientist, was ordered not to appear at the National Press Club to give a speech discussing his science fiction story about global warming in the not-too-distant future.

"He got a directive from the department, cautioning him not to come to this meeting today," said Margaris of DreamCatcher Publishers.

"So I guess we're being stifled. This is incredible, I've never heard of such a thing," she said.

Margaris had driven to Ottawa from New Brunswick to attend the speech, where Tushingham was expected to talk about his novel and the science he based it on.

The novel imagines a world where global warming has made parts of the world too hot to live in, prompting a war between Canada and the U.S. over water resources.

"Due process for this event was not followed and that's why it was cancelled," said Ryan Sparrow, a spokesman for Environment Minister Rona Ambrose .

Publicity for the planned book launch identified Tushingham as an Evironment Canada scientist, Sparrow said, "and it was assumed that he would be representing the position of the department.

"We would not have objected to Mr. Tushingham's appreance if he had been referred to as a private citizen."

Harper says he was not aware of the details, but his government was elected on a platform that included developing a new plan to deal with climate change.

"I obviously not only hope, but expect, that all elements of the bureaucracy will be working with us to achieve our objectives," Harper said at an appearance in Wainright, Alta., Thursday.

The prime minister's comments might be seen as a clear warning to public servants thinking of straying from government orthodoxy.

Harper has been criticized for the tight control he wants to exercise on what cabinet ministers and civil servants say in public. He also opposes the Kyoto protocol, which many scientist believe could help slow global warming.

The scientific, or literary, muzzle was put on Tushingham just as the Tory government was preparing to quietly confirm it is killing off over a dozen research programs related to the Kyoto protocol.

Late Thursday afternoon, on the eve of a long weekend when governments traditionally dump bad news for the least possible public exposure, Natural Resources Minister Gary Lunn issued a news release saying 15 programs were being eliminated.

Lunn said the programs had run their course.

"The new government under Prime Minister Stephen Harper is committed to putting an end to the massive increase in (greenhouse gas) emissions that Canada has seen over the past decade," said a release.

"To do that, we need a new approach to addressing climate change that is effective and realistic for Canada."

Harper said the Conservative governing platform "will include measures we're going to develop over the next year or so to deal with both pollution and greenhouse gases."

But cabinet documents obtained by the Globe and Mail suggest the cuts won't stop at 15 programs.

The newspaper reported Thursday that the Conservatives will cut 80 per cent of programs aimed at curbing global warming at Environment Canada.

Budgets in other government departments aimed at climate change will be slashed by 40 per cent, the newspaper reported.

Liberal MP Scott Brison was crying foul Thursday.

"It is clear the Conservative government has no plans to listen to expert advice from their own department and is willing to sacrifice sound environmental policy to partisan ideology," said Brison.

Under the Kyoto treaty, Canada is committed to a six per cent cut in emissions from 1990 levels by 2012. Yet emissions have risen by 30 per cent. Harper has said the target is impossible to meet.

Leading environmentalists from across Canada say the opposition parties should defeat the government if it abandons the effort to meet Canada's Kyoto commitments.

Canada can meet its emissions-cutting target under the Kyoto Protocol despite government claims to the contrary, activists from eight environmental groups told a news conference Wednesday.

© The Canadian Press 2006
http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/news/story.html?id=9243fc6e-580b-4f79-9f5a-ee0ba30e7658&k=19161

[OBPelican]

Here's the thread for all discussion on climate change, what causes it, and what remedies various groups and factions recommend to mitigate it. BC, the truth is, forget about scientists ever knowing anything for sure.

Last night I watched Nova on the 70 year quest to understand neutrinos because there were too many fission and fusion reactions that failed the conservation of energy test. One poor guy had most of his life wiped out even though he was right and was called an idiot for 40 years, until they gave him the Nobel Prize. But by then he was in his Nanni Nanni Nanni twilight years and could barely figure out that he was in Stockholm, but at least his family had a great week and are enjoying their inheritance.

So now we think we think we know there are 3 types/flavors/whatchamacallits, that they have mass and can no longer go at the speed of light, or not, or whatever.

There is a moral to this somewhere, but I'm still trying to figure out what it is, stay tuned.

So discussions about mankind's impact on Global Warming will only be useful to keep armies of scientists arguing until our descendants choke to death on the smog, run out of ice cubes, or drown.

[halva]

I suggested one thing that one could TRY to do about it, OBPelican, to clean up at least one tiny corner of the universe and set an example.

[halva]

OBPelican, you wrote in a private message to me:

"It's worth the effort trying to improve and increase citizen communications via this new internet tool we have available. The ballot box isn't working lately, so we really need a better way to increase participation for protecting and preserving the Democratic process, no matter how crude things get in the infant years."

[halva]

“CEASE AND DESIST PROMOTING THE CHEMTRAILS HOAX. I will personally do my best to encourage state and Federal prosecution for as many “chemtrail” promoters as I can. I will recommend they be tried under federal RICO and state criminal syndicalism laws if US citizens and as enemy combatants if non-US.”

[halva]

Of course Reynolds will do these things only if someone (who?) shoots down a non-existent "chemtrails" spraying aircraft with a missile.

[OBPelican]

OBPelican, you wrote in a private message to me:
"It's worth the effort trying to improve and increase citizen communications via this new internet tool we have available. The ballot box isn't working lately, so we really need a better way to increase participation for protecting and preserving the Democratic process, no matter how crude things get in the infant years."Yup, I said that, but after what the Pope prayed over the Easter weekend, I have now adopted the message I express in my new Signature:

“Peace On Earth and Goodwill Toward All Men” Shall Never Happen As Long As We Allow

The “Cult of Satan,” “Corruption and Violence” To Continue To Rule Humanity.

[halva]

OBPelican I made a very simple proposal to the moderators of this forum: namely that Jay Reynolds should be prevented from turning the Science in the News section of the forum into a gladiatorial arena.

Others have been totally excluded from this forum (or its predecessor) for sins which pale by comparison with Reynolds'.

If you don't like what your government has in mind e.g. for Iran, it is no different in spirit from what Reynolds has in mind for us. He thinks that we are Iranians. Is that a status you enjoy?

Not that these distinctions between friend and enemy have so much meaning in the era of the depleted-uranium battlefield anyway. Everyone is the enemy.

Already sections of the leadership of your country's military are in revolt. How long does it take before people at this forum get off their knees also?

[OBPelican]

OBPelican -----How long does it take before people at this forum get off their knees also?Very good question halva, and I keep asking it in similar ways myself.

My best answer is that until scientists discover a way to replace oil, we are all screwed no matter what We The People do.

Because even our greatest religious leader, The Pope doesn't even take action on his own prayers by driving out the "Cult of Satan" that Cardinal Law created in Boston to set an example himself. So our politicians will never really stop their own corruption and violence either.

Sorry about that halva, but failure appears to be the destiny of Humanity as long as we have no solutions to solve our energy problems.

[halva]

Very good question halva, and I keep asking it in similar ways myself.


Very well, don't just ask it but answer it by PMing Lib and Mike and telling them that you support the idea of Reynolds being restricted to other sections of the forum and not being allowed to disrupt discussions in the Science in the News section.

Once you do that, if we persuade the moderators, you might see some people coming back here from whom it is possible to learn something more than the endurance potential of one's own nerves.

[OBPelican]

Very well, don't just ask it but answer it by PMing Lib and Mike and telling them that you support the idea of Reynolds being restricted to other sections of the forum and not being allowed to disrupt discussions in the Science in the News section.
Once you do that, if we persuade the moderators, you might see some people coming back here from whom it is possible to learn something more than the endurance potential of one's own nerves.Maybe the answer was suggested in your previous post by your "knees" metaphor.

It occurred to me that the people of Greece were driven to their knees long before we were, so maybe that's the ultimate destiny of Democracy, and these forums are just a bellwether of American Democracy.

I really can't recommend anything other than clean up our language, e.g., to exclude Cheney's favorite "F" word that far too many use to command peoples attention.

[halva]

Things seem to be worse for you in the States than they are for us.

[OBPelican]

Things seem to be worse for you in the States than they are for us.I sure can't argue with that.

I guess since American science, politics and religion have failed us, we'll need to start praying that European and Asian scientists start solving the world's energy problems while we continue our Decline and Fall of American Democracy phase.

[Boomer Chick]

BC, the truth is, forget about scientists ever knowing anything for sure.

Last night I watched Nova on the 70 year quest to understand neutrinos because there were too many fission and fusion reactions that failed the conservation of energy test. One poor guy had most of his life wiped out even though he was right and was called an idiot for 40 years, until they gave him the Nobel Prize. But by then he was in his Nanni Nanni Nanni twilight years and could barely figure out that he was in Stockholm, but at least his family had a great week and are enjoying their inheritance.

So now we think we think we know there are 3 types/flavors/whatchamacallits, that they have mass and can no longer go at the speed of light, or not, or whatever.

There is a moral to this somewhere, but I'm still trying to figure out what it is, stay tuned.

So discussions about mankind's impact on Global Warming will only be useful to keep armies of scientists arguing until our descendants choke to death on the smog, run out of ice cubes, or drown.

You've written much truth in these lines which also tickle my humor response! *smiles!* Yes, to maintain that balance of humor, wit, and truth while we all choke into this 21st Century, "run out of ice cubes," drown, fry in the ozone, or be forced to live underground................. at least we can gripe about it and apologize on our collective gravestones! Problem might be, too, that mass graves might be the norm and therefore they'll be no time for eulogies or apologies!

Sick, ain't it? But somehow it all strikes me as funny this morning. Guess my overriding optimism still runs the show in my mind.

I had a dream last night that my hubby and I stayed in a downtown urban Chinese hotel that we had never heard of and ate the most delectable of dinners prepared with skill and artistry and totally unexpected and unknown to us before. It was like finding a treasure in an unexpected place. An old childhood girlfriend of mine joined us and the Asian women serving us and setting and clearing the tables were fun, happy, and gracious. They set the table up with flowers, cloth napkins and table cover and served the meal right in the hotel room. The food itself was other-worldly, unknown, but delectable..... beyond description. Our room was located right on the street where you could look out and see the people walking by. It was a strange and enchanting dream and if dreams are any indication of the future....we'll all do fine with the Asians in charge.

Whatever..... all politics is local.

The future is ours to build.

[Boomer Chick]

Notice that the issue of "global warming," an actual misnomer, stimulates climate discussion, stimulates scientific climate observation and data-collecting, stimulates economic development and the quest for alternative energies and adaptations. The oil people cannot accept the reality of "peak oil," and the opposing forces support the growth of alternative energies and continue to push their "warming" agenda in order to push the oil moguls off their thrones. I find the push for alternative energies the more noble of the two sides and whether the push is frought with false assumptions and scare tactics....it doesn't matter....what matters is the stimulation of adaptive technologies and accompanying economic independence from the choking oil/energy kings. And I hope the climate changes ruin the heroine crops around the world! It's time to collapse the whole system based on death, imprisonment, and pollution. The transition to the post-oil age could progress quickly and suddenly out of need and collapse or it could progress slowly and smoothly.

So yes, it seems as if Satan itself has a chokehold on the oil barons themselves and all who ride on their greasy coattails.

Google Alert for: global warming




Resolution would support efforts to curb global warming (http://www.tacomadailyindex.com/portals-code/list.cgi?paper=88&cat=23&id=629705&more=)
Tacoma Daily News - Tacoma,WA,USA
... Council are scheduled to consider a resolution April 18 that would affirm the City’s efforts to reduce greenhouse gases and curb global warming in accordance ...


Earth Day teach-in to focus on global warming threats (http://www.news.wisc.edu/12435.html)
University of Wisconsin-Madison University Communications - Madison,WI,USA
... of Wisconsin-Madison will host an Earth Day Teach-In on Saturday, April 22, to inform the public about the current and future impacts of global warming. ...


Global Warming Is A Moral Issue (http://www.evworld.com/view.cfm?section=communique&newsid=11645)
EV World - Papillion,Nebraska,USA
... The loss of hundreds if not thousands of species as habitats are totally changed with the three degrees of warming that will occur by 2040. ...


The perils of global warming (http://www.manilatimes.net/national/2006/apr/18/yehey/opinion/20060418opi5.html)
Manila Times - Philippines
A MENACE far more devastating than terrorism or any weapon of mass destruction is upon us: global warming. Glaciers are melting, sea ...


Global warming sparks a scramble for black gold under retreating ... (http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,,1755765,00.html)
Guardian Unlimited - UK
But as global warming thaws the ocean's icy layer, oil giants, shipping companies and even the odd enterprising tourist operator are casting their eyes towards ...
See all stories on this topic (http://news.google.com/news?ie=utf8&oe=utf8&persist=1&hl=en&client=google&ncl=http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,,1755765,00.html)

Global warming science expert to speak (http://www.oregonnews.com/article/20060416/NEWS/104170025)
News-Review - Roseburg,OR,USA
Global warming expert and Oregon State University professor Jane Lubchenco will present the latest information on global warming and its effects on the ...


Climb the CN Tower and fight global warming (http://www.newswire.ca/en/releases/archive/April2006/17/c8715.html)
Canada NewsWire (press release) - Canada
The 1,776 step challenge takes place from 6:00 am to 11:00 am and this year money raised will help fight global warming - the biggest environmental threat to ...


Global warming: Are media creating undue panic? (http://www.charlotte.com/mld/observer/news/opinion/14359049.htm)
Charlotte Observer - Charlotte,NC,USA
... yawning gap between science and alarmism better illustrated these days than in the rancorous debate over the extent of human contribution to global warming. ...
See all stories on this topic (http://news.google.com/news?ie=utf8&oe=utf8&persist=1&hl=en&client=google&ncl=http://www.charlotte.com/mld/observer/news/opinion/14359049.htm)

Global warming fears (http://www.edmontonsun.com/News/Canada/2006/04/17/1537348-sun.html)
Edmonton Sun - Alberta, Canada
By CP. MONTREAL -- About one-quarter of Canadians believe global warming will lead to the destruction of the planet, a new opinion poll suggests. ...
See all stories on this topic (http://news.google.com/news?ie=utf8&oe=utf8&persist=1&hl=en&client=google&ncl=http://www.edmontonsun.com/News/Canada/2006/04/17/1537348-sun.html)

Media Darling on 'Global Warming' Assailed by Colleagues (http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewFlash.asp?Page=/ThisHour/Archive/NTH20060417o.html)
CNSNews.com - Alexandria,VA,USA
... by the New York Times, "60 Minutes" and other media titans as a renowned scientist with unassailable credibility on the issue of "global warming" and a victim ...
An increasingly dim view of global warming (http://www.dailynews.com/entertainment/ci_3720669)
Los Angeles Daily News - Los Angeles,CA,USA
... We've all heard about global warming, which suggests that greenhouse gases have made the planet about a degree warmer than it was a century ago. ...

[Boomer Chick]

By Susan Jones
CNSNews.com Senior Editor
April 17, 2006
10:16 am




Media Darling on 'Global Warming' Assailed by Colleagues

(CNSNews.com) - NASA scientist James Hansen, profiled by the New York Times, "60 Minutes" and other media titans as a renowned scientist with unassailable credibility on the issue of "global warming" and a victim of White House censorship, is actually a loose cannon at NASA who lied about the alleged censorship, according to one of Hansen's former colleagues as well as a current co-worker. George Deutsch, a former NASA public relations employee who resigned his job in February, told Cybercast News Service that he was warned about Hansen shortly after joining the space agency. "The only thing I was ever told -- more so from civil servants and non political people -- is, 'You gotta watch that guy. He is a loose cannon; he is kind of crazy. He is difficult to work with; he is an alarmist; he exaggerates,'" Deutsch said. Full Story (http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewSpecialReports.asp?Page=/SpecialReports/archive/200604/SPE20060417a.html)



***

Hmmm. Character assassination or truth?

[Yaak]

I find the push for alternative energies the more noble of the two sides and whether the push is frought with false assumptions and scare tactics....it doesn't matter....what matters is the stimulation of adaptive technologies and accompanying economic independence from the choking oil/energy kings.

Hi Boomer,

I’ve been looking over the recent posts on this thread.

Please tell me the above quoted words are not yours. Yes, it does matter. It is a matter of integrity.

Lying, inaccuracies and crying “Wolf'“ turn people away, they turn people off. Since they are negative actions, they produce negative results and do nothing to further a cause.

[jayreynolds]

If you don't like what your government has in mind e.g. for Iran, it is no different in spirit from what Reynolds has in mind for us. He thinks that we are Iranians.

Already sections of the leadership of your country's military are in revolt.

Wayne, show us where I said your people were Iranians.
You can't, because I didn't ever say that.
Why lie, Wayne?
Are you so weak you have to make stuff up?

Secondly, retired military people are no longer leaders, just ordinary people.
Everybody knows the US military cannot revolt against itself.
Why lie about us, Wayne Hall?
Do you hate the success of Americans so much that you have to invent false claims about us?

[halva]

I wonder what Reynolds is saying.

[OBPelican]

You've written much truth in these lines which also tickle my humor response! *smiles!* Yes, to maintain that balance of humor, wit, and truth while we all choke into this 21st Century, "run out of ice cubes," drown, fry in the ozone, or be forced to live underground................. at least we can gripe about it and apologize on our collective gravestones! Problem might be, too, that mass graves might be the norm and therefore they'll be no time for eulogies or apologies!
Sick, ain't it? But somehow it all strikes me as funny this morning. Guess my overriding optimism still runs the show in my mind.
I had a dream last night that my hubby and I stayed in a downtown urban Chinese hotel that we had never heard of and ate the most delectable of dinners prepared with skill and artistry and totally unexpected and unknown to us before. It was like finding a treasure in an unexpected place. An old childhood girlfriend of mine joined us and the Asian women serving us and setting and clearing the tables were fun, happy, and gracious. They set the table up with flowers, cloth napkins and table cover and served the meal right in the hotel room. The food itself was other-worldly, unknown, but delectable..... beyond description. Our room was located right on the street where you could look out and see the people walking by. It was a strange and enchanting dream and if dreams are any indication of the future....we'll all do fine with the Asians in charge.
Whatever..... all politics is local.
The future is ours to build.Thanks for sharing your thoughts BC.

First, I pray your dreams come true, at this point in our history, anything is still possible.

But second, a caveat from my wife who was born in Nanking, never trust a Chinese leader regardless of their politics, Chiang and Mao were both murdering bastards. Only Sun Yat-sen appears to have withstood the test of time and history as still being a revered unifier in both China and Taiwan, but he was the last of his kind and died in 1925, actually very similar as a revolutionary overthrowing Imperial China like Washington overthrew Imperial Britain.

And since my wife got a much better grade in PoliSci 120A: International Relations at Cal than I did (I are an engineer and never had a chance to even finish reading the reading list itself), I believe her for that and many other reasons.

So keep your women's intuition and skepticism highly tuned. And always try to keep smiling.

[Boomer Chick]

Hi Boomer,

I’ve been looking over the recent posts on this thread.

Please tell me the above quoted words are not yours. Yes, it does matter. It is a matter of integrity.

Lying, inaccuracies and crying “Wolf'“ turn people away, they turn people off. Since they are negative actions, they produce negative results and do nothing to further a cause.

Hello, Yaak.

"[T]urn people away from what? [T]urn people off?" Turn them off from what? I have as yet to see "negative results" regarding articles and the various rhetoric regarding global warming or however the climate change debate has evolved.

Think about it.

WHAT have been the negative consequences of it? Various websites devoted to watching the climate? Various foundations with private donations watching the climate and discussing ways of adapting? The UK and Euro carbon sequestration plans and trading? School curriculums addressing it? Climate scientists studying it? TV specials and documentaries talking about it?

Come on.....use your mind and realize that no matter what the rhetoric, the gloom and doom at one end and the adaptation/economic stimulus on the other............it all serves to stimulate awareness, adaptation, business, oil independence, and resulting in a cleaner atmosphere.

If someone can list the "negatives" in the global warming or climate change inaccuracies, please list them.

Sorry Yaak, I cannot agree with you nor find any academic or sound reasoning in your approach to criticizing as somehow alarmingly dangerous, the CLIMATE-CHANGE-IS-REAL side of the debate.

As I also mentioned previously, the changes we see now could alter at a moment's notice in regard to volcanic activity.

My view, personally, is that the planet is in a flux period of climate change and that has been my position for quite awhile. Change itself may not warrant adaptation to alternative energies in your mind, but of course I couple my concept and observation with the notion of Peak Oil. There is absolutely nothing wrong with getting off of oil as our major source of transportation fuel....nothing at all.....and as I've often said before.....the alternatives will allow more freedom in customizing water transportation and refinement, food transportation, and agriculture, in the future so all the stimulus regarding alternative energy development is necessary for our very human survival on the planet.

If you haven't been able to see that yet, Yaak, I'm sorry you feel compelled to defend and maintain a "no change" ethic regarding energies and fuels.

It is a positive vision of the future and one of needed adaptation. I have presented all sides of the weather-change debate and the carbon/verses water debate and whether the earth as a whole has heated up due to man's emissions or more natural causes.....like I said....it doesn't matter the reasons why so much as the adaptation we seek in eliminating our man-made contributions to the oceans, soils, and atmosphere. In that elimination rests the development of clean, renewable fuels and energies.

And in the adaptation and innovation lies our future ability to feed and fuel a future healthy and habitable world.

[Boomer Chick]

Thanks for sharing your thoughts BC.

First, I pray your dreams come true, at this point in our history, anything is still possible.

But second, a caveat from my wife who was born in Nanking, never trust a Chinese leader regardless of their politics, Chiang and Mao were both murdering bastards. Only Sun Yat-sen appears to have withstood the test of time and history as still being a revered unifier in both China and Taiwan, but he was the last of his kind and died in 1925, actually very similar as a revolutionary overthrowing Imperial China like Washington overthrew Imperial Britain.

And since my wife got a much better grade in PoliSci 120A: International Relations at Cal than I did (I are an engineer and never had a chance to even finish reading the reading list itself), I believe her for that and many other reasons.

So keep your women's intuition and skepticism highly tuned. And always try to keep smiling.

It might just be that in the future there will not be any huge imperialistic nations, just corporations owning this and that along with regions and areas belonging to "the people." I see China and other Asian nations now as innovative, adaptive, and curious about the whole globe and therefore quite able and willing to be a part of every country on the world map. Chances are, with China's future innovations and economic development...they and other Asian peoples will play a large role in all arenas of our future world.

It might be rather narrow to think of the future in terms of Imperialistic countries and leaders. It might indeed be a far brighter and more equitable place than what we imagine at this point.

Dreams may or may not be truly intuitive. I wish I knew.

Love and peace,

BC

[OBPelican]

It might just be that in the future there will not be any huge imperialistic nations, just corporations owning this and that along with regions and areas belonging to "the people." I see China and other Asian nations now as innovative, adaptive, and curious about the whole globe and therefore quite able and willing to be a part of every country on the world map. Chances are, with China's future innovations and economic development...they and other Asian peoples will play a large role in all arenas of our future world.
It might be rather narrow to think of the future in terms of Imperialistic countries and leaders. It might indeed be a far brighter and more equitable place than what we imagine at this point.
Dreams may or may not be truly intuitive. I wish I knew.
Love and peace,
BCYou always make great points BC. We just can't hang labels on states as democratic, communist, whatever anymore and assume those are self defining terms from the cold war era at all. It appears that the Chinese "communism" in 2006 is not the communism of Mao at all, except that a large majority of Chinese are still, as always, in great poverty and marginalized, but the distribution of wealth is very possible to improve greatly within the next 50 years.

One thing I know beyond all doubt from decades of personal experience is that engineers living in Asia (Taiwan, China, India, Pakistan, etc.) that we compete with today are as smart and competent as any in America. I know this because I went to school with a lot of them, I participated on international engineering and scientific committees with a lot of them, and when your eyes are shut you frequently do not know the country they live in. One incredible fact is that since about the year 2000, the world of electrical engineering is a whole new world.

But I must respect the subject of this thread and state that "Climate Change" is still a major unknown in China, especially how China is going to deal with it's current states of out of control smog, desert sand intrusion into urban areas, crop failures and famines, floods, etc., but I do believe that they are trying harder than ever before, they have no choice but to try a lot harder.

An Interesting historical fact is that Japan created an economic revolution concurrent with their 1964 Tokyo Olympics, and maybe China has the same thing in mind for their 2008 Beijing Olympic games. One thing is for sure, both Chinas are dominating worldwide semiconductor production, and that's about as modern as you can get. I don't know what they are doing in molecular biology today, but I wouldn't be surprised at anything they are capable of accomplishing there either.

Actually, I hope they are accomplishing something in fusion generation, because the world needs discoveries with a sense of urgency like never before now that we are involved in the Middle East, and their needs are just as imperative as ours.

[Yaak]

Hello, Yaak.

"[T]urn people away from what? [T]urn people off?" Turn them off from what? I have as yet to see "negative results" regarding articles and the various rhetoric regarding global warming or however the climate change debate has evolved.

Think about it.

WHAT have been the negative consequences of it? Various websites devoted to watching the climate? Various foundations with private donations watching the climate and discussing ways of adapting? The UK and Euro carbon sequestration plans and trading? School curriculums addressing it? Climate scientists studying it? TV specials and documentaries talking about it?

Come on.....use your mind and realize that no matter what the rhetoric, the gloom and doom at one end and the adaptation/economic stimulus on the other............it all serves to stimulate awareness, adaptation, business, oil independence, and resulting in a cleaner atmosphere.

If someone can list the "negatives" in the global warming or climate change inaccuracies, please list them.

Sorry Yaak, I cannot agree with you nor find any academic or sound reasoning in your approach to criticizing as somehow alarmingly dangerous, the CLIMATE-CHANGE-IS-REAL side of the debate.

As I also mentioned previously, the changes we see now could alter at a moment's notice in regard to volcanic activity.

My view, personally, is that the planet is in a flux period of climate change and that has been my position for quite awhile. Change itself may not warrant adaptation to alternative energies in your mind, but of course I couple my concept and observation with the notion of Peak Oil. There is absolutely nothing wrong with getting off of oil as our major source of transportation fuel....nothing at all.....and as I've often said before.....the alternatives will allow more freedom in customizing water transportation and refinement, food transportation, and agriculture, in the future so all the stimulus regarding alternative energy development is necessary for our very human survival on the planet.

If you haven't been able to see that yet, Yaak, I'm sorry you feel compelled to defend and maintain a "no change" ethic regarding energies and fuels.

It is a positive vision of the future and one of needed adaptation. I have presented all sides of the weather-change debate and the carbon/verses water debate and whether the earth as a whole has heated up due to man's emissions or more natural causes.....like I said....it doesn't matter the reasons why so much as the adaptation we seek in eliminating our man-made contributions to the oceans, soils, and atmosphere. In that elimination rests the development of clean, renewable fuels and energies.

And in the adaptation and innovation lies our future ability to feed and fuel a future healthy and habitable world.

I appear not to have expressed myself very well, Boomer. I do believe you completely misunderstood me. My original inquiry was regarding whether or not I understood you.

Let's start over.

I will try to simplify.

When you stated, "….whether the push is frought with false assumptions and scare tactics....it doesn't matter...."
you gave me the impression that you believe it is unimportant when people lie or are deceptive as long as it helps them to accomplish their goal(s).

Dishonesty is wrong, immoral and generally leads to failure (unless you are a lawyer or politician:)).

[halva]

Finally neither Reynolds nor I can change this forum from the goofy kind of place it essentially is.

Will we ever learn why Arianna beat her retreat?

[Yaak]

Finally neither Reynolds nor I can change this forum from the goofy kind of place it essentially is.


Sure you can, Wayne. Just leave!:)

[halva]

What is Yaak saying, I wonder.

[Yaak]

What is Yaak saying, I wonder.

HA! Halva's mother wears combat boots.

[Boomer Chick]

You always make great points BC. We just can't hang labels on states as democratic, communist, whatever anymore and assume those are self defining terms from the cold war era at all. It appears that the Chinese "communism" in 2006 is not the communism of Mao at all, except that a large majority of Chinese are still, as always, in great poverty and marginalized, but the distribution of wealth is very possible to improve greatly within the next 50 years.

One thing I know beyond all doubt from decades of personal experience is that engineers living in Asia (Taiwan, China, India, Pakistan, etc.) that we compete with today are as smart and competent as any in America. I know this because I went to school with a lot of them, I participated on international engineering and scientific committees with a lot of them, and when your eyes are shut you frequently do not know the country they live in. One incredible fact is that since about the year 2000, the world of electrical engineering is a whole new world.

But I must respect the subject of this thread and state that "Climate Change" is still a major unknown in China, especially how China is going to deal with it's current states of out of control smog, desert sand intrusion into urban areas, crop failures and famines, floods, etc., but I do believe that they are trying harder than ever before, they have no choice but to try a lot harder.

An Interesting historical fact is that Japan created an economic revolution concurrent with their 1964 Tokyo Olympics, and maybe China has the same thing in mind for their 2008 Beijing Olympic games. One thing is for sure, both Chinas are dominating worldwide semiconductor production, and that's about as modern as you can get. I don't know what they are doing in molecular biology today, but I wouldn't be surprised at anything they are capable of accomplishing there either.

Actually, I hope they are accomplishing something in fusion generation, because the world needs discoveries with a sense of urgency like never before now that we are involved in the Middle East, and their needs are just as imperative as ours.

Ah ho ! LOL! Although the Chinese government shows little respect for human rights even at this time, it is the PEOPLE of whom I mainly speak. I find them, when educated, as quite intelligent, innovative, hard working...............

Climate change in China? What a fascinating subject! Let's see if I can find anything!

Whoa!

http://ncclcs.cma.gov.cn/Website/index.php?ChannelID=107

Ocean and climate studies, US Antarctic Program, 1998-1999 (http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/1998/nsf98155/chp7.htm) There will be a mutual sharing between the US and Chinese investigators of all ... We will study the effects of antarctic sea ice in the global climate ...
www.nsf.gov/pubs/1998/nsf98155/chp7.htm (http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/1998/nsf98155/chp7.htm)

Looks as though they were studying it way back in the nineties! (http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&q=related:www.nsf.gov/pubs/1998/nsf98155/chp7.htm)
CSP Interim Report - China (http://www.gcrio.org/CSP/IR/IRchina.html) On the study of Climate Change on hydrology and water resources in China. In press. Xu Deying. 1994. A Preliminary Study of the Impact of Climate Change on ...
www.gcrio.org/CSP/IR/IRchina.html

Study shows effects of rapid urbanization in China (http://gtresearchnews.gatech.edu/newsrelease/china-climate.htm) "In this study, we focused on the climate effect of urbanization in China because it is a good case study at the maximum end of the UHI spectrum," says Zhou ...
gtresearchnews.gatech.edu/newsrelease/china-climate.htm

Studies on climate change problems and response measures in China (http://www.uneprisoe.org/CopenhagenConf/yeruqiu.htm) Wang Shaowu and Zhao Zongci, A Preliminary Study on the Prediction of Climate Change in China in the Future 50 Years, Applied Meteorology (to be Published). ...
www.uneprisoe.org/CopenhagenConf/yeruqiu.htm


European Institute for Asian Studies - Amartya Sen Lecture Series ... (http://www.eias.org/sen/2006/stern/photos.html) Sustainable Development, Climate Change and International Action by Sir Nicholas Stern Photo Gallery Page 1 > Page 2 ...
www.eias.org/sen/2006/stern/photos.html (http://www.eias.org/sen/2006/stern/photos.html)Air and Climate Programs in China | Program Descriptions by Region ... (http://www.epa.gov/oia/airandclimate/byregion/chinaair.html) EPA and SEPA have completed a feasibility study (English, Chinese) that ... For additional information on EPA's air and climate projects in China, contact: ...
www.epa.gov/oia/airandclimate/byregion/chinaair.html (http://www.epa.gov/oia/airandclimate/byregion/chinaair.html)

[Boomer Chick]

East-West Center: Research Projects: Energy, Climate and ... (http://www.eastwestcenter.org/res-pr-detail.asp?resproj_ID=123) Energy, Climate and Environmental Policy in China, the EU, Japan and the US ... Policy relevance: the study of this kind is of high value to the Chinese ...
www.eastwestcenter.org/res-pr-detail.asp?resproj_ID=123 (http://www.eastwestcenter.org/res-pr-detail.asp?resproj_ID=123)

[PDF] Climate Change Mitigation: Case Studies from China (http://www.pnl.gov/aisu/pubs/noregchn.pdf) File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat - View as HTML (http://72.14.203.104/search?q=cache:KU7CRWVLp8IJ:www.pnl.gov/aisu/pubs/noregchn.pdf+Chinese+climate+studies&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=16)
energy conservation mechanisms into China. Many studies and analyses of climate change have also been carried out by Chinese. institutions or in cooperation ...
www.pnl.gov/aisu/pubs/noregchn.pdf



European Institute for Asian Studies - Amartya Sen Lecture Series ... (http://www.eias.org/sen/2006/feedback.html) Sustainable Development, Climate Change and International Action by Sir Nicholas Stern 18:00 hrs Thursday March 16, 2006 ...
www.eias.org/sen/2006/feedback.html (http://www.eias.org/sen/2006/feedback.html)


European Institute for Asian Studies - Amartya Sen Lecture Series ... (http://www.eias.org/sen/2006/stern/stern.html) Sustainable Development, Climate Change and International Action ... Sir Nicholas Stern leads a major review of the Economics of Climate Change. ...
www.eias.org/sen/2006/stern/stern.html

Use of Radiosonde Temperature Data in Climate Studies (http://ams.allenpress.com/amsonline/?request=get-abstract&doi=10.1175%2F1520-0442(1998)011%3C1002:UORTDI%3E2.0.CO%3B2) ... evaluated concerning potential use of their temperature data for climate studies. The VIZ; Space Data Corp.; Chinese GZZ; Japanese RS2-80; Russian RKZ, ...
ams.allenpress.com/.../?request=get-abstract& doi=10.1175%2F1520-0442(1998)011%3C1002:UORTDI%3E2.0.CO%3B2

Recent Progress in the Joint Agreements on "Global and Regional ... (http://ams.allenpress.com/amsonline/?request=get-abstract&doi=10.1175%2F1520-0477(2000)081%3C0491:RPITJA%3E2.3.CO%3B2) Recent Progress in the Joint Agreements on "Global and Regional Climate Change" Studies between the United States and the People's Republic of China ...
ams.allenpress.com/.../?request=get-abstract& doi=10.1175%2F1520-0477(2000)081%3C0491:RPITJA%3E2.3.CO%3B2

US Antarctic Program, 2000-2001 -- Ocean and Climate Studies (http://www.nsf.gov/od/opp/antarct/treaty/projsum01/html/oceanclim.html) 2000-2001 ocean and climate studies projects, US Anatarctic Program. ... All samples and data will be shared between the US and Chinese investigators, ...
www.nsf.gov/od/opp/antarct/ treaty/projsum01/html/oceanclim.html

Earthscan - The World's Leading Publisher on Environmentally ... (http://www.earthscan.co.uk/default.asp?sp=332159698599342415282&v=1) Climate & Energy | Natural Resource Management | Cities & Built Environment | Business & Economics ... China’s renewables law - Published in REW ...
www.earthscan.co.uk/default. asp?sp=332159698599342415282&v=1

[PDF] Response for Climate Change: Perspective of China (http://developmentfirst.org/Studies/ChinaCountryStudy.pdf) File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat
The Development and Climate. Country Study: China. Kejun JIANG, Zhou Dadajie,di. Energy Research Institute, China. B-1518, Jia No.11, Muxidibeili, ...
developmentfirst.org/Studies/ChinaCountryStudy.pdf

PDF] Invitation for Participation Climate Change Mitigation and ... (http://www.iwep.org.cn/english/meeting/international%20workshop%20on%20climate%20change%2 0mitig.pdf) File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat - View as HTML (http://72.14.203.104/search?q=cache:GgFqZQGoZ-IJ:www.iwep.org.cn/english/meeting/international%2520workshop%2520on%2520climate%2520 change%2520mitig.pdf+Chinese+climate+studies&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=28)
studies on the options and possible economic impacts on the Chinese economy, ... of climate change mitigation. It would be of great help to the Chinese ...
www.iwep.org.cn/english/meeting/ international%20workshop%20on%20climate%20change%2 0mitig.pdf


Impacts of Climate Change on Chinese Agriculture (http://www.ccchina.gov.cn/english/source/ea/ea2002121301.htm) To undertake detailed case studies of the impacts of climate change on agriculture, for selected regions (egN China & NW China) that consider the ...
www.ccchina.gov.cn/english/source/ea/ea2002121301.htm (http://www.ccchina.gov.cn/english/source/ea/ea2002121301.htm)


***

OK....this is a start on determining whether China concerns itself with climate studies and related pollution problems.

PEACE,

BC

[Boomer Chick]

ENVIRONMENT -- HEALTH ORGANIZATIONS REJECT EPA'S LAX AIR QUALITY RULES: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is updating air-quality rules for both coarse and fine particulate matter. "Fine particulates" -- dust, dirt, soot, smoke, and liquid droplet particles found in the air -- are the "nation's deadliest pollutant (http://www.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?key=109540872&url_num=49&url=http://www.thehill.com/thehill/export/TheHill/Business/041906_epa.html)," according to the American Lung Association. Exposure to fine particulates is tied to premature death, lung disease, asthma attacks, heart attacks (http://www.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?key=109540872&url_num=50&url=http://www.epa.gov/pmdesignations/faq.htm%230), and other health effects. Business associations are urging the EPA to reject stricter regulations, while environmental groups are criticizing the administration's attempts to provide exemptions for agriculture and mining sources of particulate matter (http://www.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?key=109540872&url_num=51&url=http://www.thehill.com/thehill/export/TheHill/Business/041906_epa.html). But one important group that was silent last time the EPA updated the air quality rules in 1997 is now weighing in: the American Medical Association (AMA). Clean Air Watch notes that a number of AMA lobbyists are close to the Bush administration (http://www.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?key=109540872&url_num=52&url=http://blogforcleanair.blogspot.com/2006/04/ama-pans-bush-soot-plan.html). But the physicians' organization has spoken out against the EPA, calling particulates a "national public-health problem (http://www.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?key=109540872&url_num=53&url=http://www.thehill.com/thehill/export/TheHill/Business/041906_epa.html)" and urging the agency "to adopt tougher standards than proposed."

****
35%: President Bush's approval rating, which "slipped for the third consecutive month and remains near the lowest mark of his presidency (http://www.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?key=109540872&url_num=66&url=http://online.wsj.com/public/article/SB114537392626128763-DWLEIOBO0oYrbZxYVO0OLVi1M_A_20070418.html?mod=blog s), according to a new Harris Interactive poll."

***
And finally: 欢迎访问星巴克中国网站 (Or, if you prefer, "Welcome to Starbucks (http://www.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?key=109540872&url_num=74&url=http://starbucks.cn/)."): "If I were not serving in this office, I would certainly prefer to go into one of the coffee shops run by Starbucks (http://www.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?key=109540872&url_num=75&url=http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060419/od_uk_nm/oukoe_uk_china_usa_starbucks)," said Chinese President Hu Jintao yesterday during his visit in Seattle.

[Boomer Chick]

I appear not to have expressed myself very well, Boomer. I do believe you completely misunderstood me. My original inquiry was regarding whether or not I understood you.

Let's start over.

I will try to simplify.

When you stated, "….whether the push is frought with false assumptions and scare tactics....it doesn't matter...."
you gave me the impression that you believe it is unimportant when people lie or are deceptive as long as it helps them to accomplish their goal(s).

Dishonesty is wrong, immoral and generally leads to failure (unless you are a lawyer or politician:)).

You will try to "simplify" as if I could not comprehend your complicated and profound utterance? ??? Please. (spitting out my coffee!)

This is a climate change thread. The sources we use are multinational, often government-funded, and for the most part, peer-reviewed and scientific. I asked you for examples regarding your statement and you ignored me. I find your attitude not only stubborn, but unable to respond to my questions, my logic, nor my complete rationale for stating what I did. You simply ignored my response to you.

My attitude toward articles discussing CLIMATE CHANGE remains exactly what I said and exactly what I meant. The outcome was never negative regarding the world-wide debate on CLIMATE CHANGE and I challenged you on your use of your words and you did not defend yourself. Again, you ignored me.

You cannot prove your initial response and opinion and you have as yet to prove that any exagerrations or "scare mongering" is based in actual lies. If a non-scientific entity proclaims that climate change will be the number one challenge of all nations in the near future...........is that a lie? Is that a falsehood? Is that a known misleading statement? NO. It is merely a projection into the future. (THINK.....projection into the future based on trends, based on imagination, based on fluff, based on science, based on..........whatever.) The internet and even scientific publications are full of them. Crystal balling as in meteorologic climate prediction, as in climate modelling is all based on the desire to know the future and prepare for it. If people reading the net and reading the publications cannot tell the difference between human trend analysis as in Toffler's "Future Shock" and other genres of scientific fiction as opposed to actual computer-based modelling and scientific projections into the future (not regarded as solely reliable either) regarding climate, then they're just prone to imaginative impressionsm, aren't they?

Need I remind you that even the UN (United Nations) and the Pentagon issued projective statements in this vein as well? (Look it up.)

You have failed, Yaak, to defend your original response to me and you continue to fail as well. As I said, all projections, all emotionalism from doom and gloom to projects limitiing GHG's................... all serve to clean up our planetary biosphere. You have a problem with that?

Your original response:

Lying, inaccuracies and crying “Wolf'“ turn people away, they turn people off. Since they are negative actions, they produce negative results and do nothing to further a cause.

I asked you to answer to these assumptions and you did not. It is not a matter of my interpretation, it is a matter of your interpretation. You failed to clarify and basically you claim that some authors or entities are "lying" and I asked you to list the "negative results". You take no responsibility for your inserted commentary.

You hold two assumptions:

1. Some climate change scientists lie. Who? Why?

2. Some people purposefully "cry wolf." Who? Why?

Because you assume that your assumptions are correct in your assessment of certain climate change articles, you assume I condone "lies." I do not see projections into the future as lies. Period. Projections cannot be defined as true or false. Do you get that, mister obtuse? Gloom and doom projections are part of the human reality of future prediction and that is just a reality that in itself is harmless and always has been. If SCIENTISTS, lie, however, and purposefully change data, now that is a travesty. I have not seen that, yet, have you?

We have read the IPCC reports, the NOAA and NASA reports, the various gov.-funded university reports and studies, the satellite information like CALIPSO (21st launching), AURA......the Pentagon, the UN, Euro scientists, and a continuing host and list of meteorologists, climatologists, and geo-engineers around the world and in our nation and somehow you assume a major portion of these folk are LYING? SCREWING with facts and statistics? Practicing unsound science?

On this thread I find your commentary inappropriate and odd.

As I do not condone lying in politics as the Bush admiistration has repeatedly demonstrated I have never condoned lying and falsehoods in the realm of climate studies or science.

Your commentary toward me was unnecessary and a very low form of communication. You know darn well I have never condoned lying as a form of scientific data.

I will chalk this up to a Neanderthal moment in your brain and a desperate attempt to gain attention. Don't bother responding, Yaak, it will only serve to entrench your ego and defend it due to your mistake.

The ends never justify the means, but the scale of such must be taken into consideration. A few panicky environmentalists projecting into the future does not a murdering, country-invading, lying, war-mongering, fascist, bomb-dropping, oil-burning, polluting, maiming, group of sinister terrorists MAKE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Yes, I compared the Bush administration to some harmless articles on the net and in various publications related to climate change which is often termed "global warming."

Jay and I have intellectual discussions on the scientific debate regarding this period of change in our climate. This is an open place regardless of how halva interpets it and you are free to post any article, any scientist, or any piece that strikes you as fraudulent or based on inaccurate science. But don't come on this board and personally attack me as though I need some kind of moral reprimand.

I hope I made myself clear.

BC

[OBPelican]

Ah ho ! LOL! Although the Chinese government shows little respect for human rights even at this time, it is the PEOPLE of whom I mainly speak. I find them, when educated, as quite intelligent, innovative, hard working...............
Climate change in China? What a fascinating subject! Let's see if I can find anything!
Whoa!

http://ncclcs.cma.gov.cn/Website/index.php?ChannelID=107
--------------------As usual you are right BC, especially the Human Rights oppression by their leaders.

Bush considers more and more countries with leaders like China to be his "best friends" all the time. Afghanistan's culture of death to Christians is a most recent case in point, and Bush enabled that to continue after we "freed" Afghanistan and made them a "Democracy".

So as long as Washington DC sells out Human Rights for blood money profits, there is no hope. And that's not even including the Human Rights atrocities by the world's two largest religions, like slaughtering children of other sects, pedophilia, etc.

As long as we let our religious leaders destroy children with impunity, there is no hope for Human Rights to become a top priority of our political leaders. Even American Rights are threatened today more than ever before since the Revolutionary War.

As for the people of the world, I think it is human nature to want to raise a healthy, happy family for almost everyone on earth. But we keep picking the wrong leaders who we allow to keep creating Hell On Earth, which also gets us back to "Climate Change".

Thanks for the reading assignment, I keep telling myself to take a speed reading course, but it takes so long for me to read all the stuff I have to master now, I don't have time enough to take a speed reading course.

[OBPelican]

P.S. - National Geographic's latest May issue has a very interesting summary of global warming conventional wisdom in a "SCIENCE" column by Joel Achenbach, which sorts out "When Science and Politics Clash", and the best summary distinction is:
Science deals with tentative conclusions, and politics with absolutes. Science is invariably an enterprise built on uncertainty, and people who make policy decisions see uncertainty as a reason to do nothing at all (or to demand more studies). So, the reality is that we can only expect "more studies" until something(s) really go so badly wrong that we reach the Ah Shit!, We Blew It! scientific level of certainty at last where someone gets a Nobel Prize after decades of ridicule by his idiot colleagues at about the same time that the human race dies and evolution starts all over with the next set of things on earth, or not.

As long as religion and science continue to fail Humanity, politics shall rule and it's everyone for themselves. And the ultimate fate of Humanity will depend entirely on how well the United Nations does it's job.

[halva]

P.S. - National Geographic's latest May issue has a very interesting summary of global warming conventional wisdom in a "SCIENCE" column by Joel Achenbach, which sorts out "When Science and Politics Clash", and the best summary distinction is:So, the reality is that we can only expect "more studies" until something(s) really go so badly wrong that we reach the Ah Shit!, We Blew It! scientific level of certainty at last where someone gets a Nobel Prize after decades of ridicule by his idiot colleagues at about the same time that the human race dies and evolution starts all over with the next set of things on earth, or not.

As long as religion and science continue to fail Humanity, politics shall rule and it's everyone for themselves. And the ultimate fate of Humanity will depend entirely on how well the United Nations does it's job.

It is for this reason among others that some of us are arguing that activists on climate change must stop pretending that massive-scale global operations corresponding in appearance to what has been recommended in American Academy of Sciences and IPCC studies of climate change as possible techniques for CLIMATE CHANGE MITIGATION are not already under way (for at least eight or nine years now). The credibility of climate change sceptics is contingent on denial that these operations are occurring. Is it conceivable that such vast-scale activity should be initiated to deal with a non-existent or non-recognized problem?

Climate change activists and scientists presumably fall into line with the denial because the operations in question have not been legalized (i.e. are illegal), meaning that whoever is responsible for them could be charged with crime. This of course leaves open magnificent opportunities for blackmail, including blackmail by "climate change sceptics". Our friend Reynolds himself has said that if he believed these "chemtrails" operations were actually happening he would be the first to press for prosecution of whoever is engaged in them.

Are you beginning to understand the modalities of the game that is being played?

Climate change activists are caught in a double bind: they must fall into line with the denial if the 'sceptics" are not to give them even more trouble than they are already doing.

But the sceptics themselves could be put in the bind if climate change activists insisted on public debate of the question of whether CLIMATE CHANGE MITIGATION SHOULD BE LEGALIZED OR BANNED.

If "sceptics" are FORCED to take a position on that, they immediately lose their ability to threaten and blackmail. If they say clmate change mitigation should be legalized they lose the ability to claim that climate change is not a problem. If they say climate change mitigation should be banned they can be invited to prove that it is not already occurring.

The starting point for engagement with this issue is insistence that the high-visibility public debate on climate change is mostly a DIVERSION from what should be a debate on CLIMATE CHANGE MITIGATION. You yourself have made the point that the ongoing climate change debate in its present form is a joke.

But of course to get serious about issues like this means really being SERIOUS. The first prerequisite is to confront and defeat terrorists such as Reynolds. Which does not necessarily mean playing the game the way he wants to play it.

Already Reynolds and his ilk would not have a platform in public discussions where climate change activists are setting the terms for debate. This de facto impediment to the sceptics' "right of free speech" has to be applied more consciously and systematically.

The European Union does not recognize the right of free speech to "holocaust deniers". This sets a precedent which can be extended to "climate change deniers", no? And then Americans can start adopting some of these European habits.

[halva]

A possible alternative, of course, would be to do the opposite and abolish the ban, and stigma, on both kinds of free speech.

[jayreynolds]

It is for this reason among others that some of us are arguing that activists on climate change must stop pretending that massive-scale global operations corresponding in appearance to what has been recommended in American Academy of Sciences and IPCC studies of climate change as possible techniques for CLIMATE CHANGE MITIGATION[/u] are not already under way (for at least eight or nine years now). The credibility of climate change sceptics is contingent on denial that these operations are occurring. Is it conceivable that such vast-scale activity should be initiated to deal with a non-existent or non-recognized problem?

Sorry, Wayne. Even your best buddy 'footsoldier', disagrees with your "'Chemtrails' are geoengineering" hoax.
Here is what she said:

Dr. Cornell's point here is that 'laying jet contrails' (in the upper troposphere) as a methodology to achieve a net planetary cooling effect simply will not work as it has now been conclusively determined that aviation contrails and resulting persistent contrail cirrus actually exert a net WARMING effect on the atmosphere.

Note that she is not referencing the loading of the STRATOSPHERE with particulate emissions, which is an ENTIRELY different matter.

One thing I can say here, and I think it's important to keep this in mind, is that what we are seeing is taking place in the upper troposphere - NOT in the stratosphere where the by now familiar-to-us-all Tellerian aerosol climate mitigation proposals are specifically designed to be deployed.


Drives you crazy, I know, Wayne, but it's true. The rest of the world all knows, but you have repeated the lie so long you can't stop now, can you?


Climate change activists and scientists presumably fall into line with the denial because the operations in question have not been legalized (i.e. are illegal), meaning that whoever is responsible for them could be charged with crime. This of course leaves open magnificent opportunities for blackmail, including blackmail by "climate change sceptics". Our friend Reynolds himself has said that if he believed these "chemtrails" operations were actually happening he would be the first to press for prosecution of whoever is engaged in them.

Are you beginning to understand the modalities of the game that is being played?

Climate change activists are caught in a double bind: they must fall into line with the denial if the 'sceptics" are not to give them even more trouble than they are already doing.

Wayne, nobody must "FALL INTO LINE" about anything. You are living proof that they don't. You are just as free to tell lies as I am to tell the truth.

How can you blackmail someone who isn't guilty?

It cannot be done, buddy.
No matter how much rhetoric you put in front of it, this failed premise of yours is too ridiculous for any sane person to buy into it.

No wonder you are frusterated, old bean.


But the sceptics themselves could be put in the bind if climate change activists insisted on public debate of the question of whether CLIMATE CHANGE MITIGATION SHOULD BE LEGALIZED OR BANNED.

If "sceptics" are FORCED to take a position on that, they immediately lose their ability to threaten and blackmail. If they say clmate change mitigation should be legalized they lose the ability to claim that climate change is not a problem. If they say climate change mitigation should be banned they can be invited to prove that it is not already occurring.

Wayne, I've taken a position, and it didn't hurt me at all. The big problem is that no one actually knows if it would work, so why worry to ban it? secondly, it isn't up to anyone but yourself to prove your proposition that it "is already occurring".

That said, I've already disproved the whole 'geoengineering is taking place' premise since it was easy enough to do. Until you disprove my contentions, you'll have to eat crow.

Want to have a go?
Here it is:
http://www.debatebothsides.com/showthread.php?t=35721&page=1

[halva]

I have Reynolds ignore-listed and so am not debating with him. Therefore it is up to others if there is to be input into this thread.

Others are free to argue with him, or argue with me on the basis of what he says, if they wish.

[Boomer Chick]

Sorry, Wayne. Even your best buddy 'footsoldier', disagrees with your "'Chemtrails' are geoengineering" hoax.
Here is what she said:


Drives you crazy, I know, Wayne, but it's true. The rest of the world all knows, but you have repeated the lie so long you can't stop now, can you?



Wayne, nobody must "FALL INTO LINE" about anything. You are living proof that they don't. You are just as free to tell lies as I am to tell the truth.

How can you blackmail someone who isn't guilty?

It cannot be done, buddy.
No matter how much rhetoric you put in front of it, this failed premise of yours is too ridiculous for any sane person to buy into it.

No wonder you are frusterated, old bean.



Wayne, I've taken a position, and it didn't hurt me at all. The big problem is that no one actually knows if it would work, so why worry to ban it? secondly, it isn't up to anyone but yourself to prove your proposition that it "is already occurring".

That said, I've already disproved the whole 'geoengineering is taking place' premise since it was easy enough to do. Until you disprove my contentions, you'll have to eat crow.

Want to have a go?
Here it is:
http://www.debatebothsides.com/showthread.php?t=35721&page=1

As I've always said, Wayne, you have always been and still are capable of proving your thesis that it is "already occurring." So far you haven't been able to prove it. I have tried and failed myself. Others have tried and failed. You would think on some website on some scientific forum either in the US or in Europe that the projects would be addressed and the accompanying scientific papers and studies discussed. But there is NOTHING, NOTHING that points to your thesis as real.

Yes, we can tell that often contrails linger and create cirrus, but this isn't enough evidence and never was. One must PROVE his or her thesis; one must PROVE that indeed a project is ongoing and taking place. As far as weather manipulation, do you honestly think that with that ability the PTB would allow droughts in the US? Floods? Tornados? The universities connected to weather projects, the various military arms involved, the EPA, the DOE, NASA, NOAA, Woods Hole, and a myriad of international organizations and scientists could not POSSIBLY conspire on such a VAST project without commentary, evidence, and a SUPPORTING SCIENTIFIC RATIONALE. If we can manipulate the weather why aren't various countries including ours using this technology for the benefit of agriculture? It simply has not developed to the point that armchair amateurs assume.

As far as local military field cloud dispersion, hole punching, and cloud creation experiments, I have found evidence on military sites to support that. But a gigantic Teller-like project is simply not in existence .....nothing to support it when examining cloud cover, cloud behavior, and planetary cloud maps. Sorry.....ain't happening.

I still look askance at Scott Stevens as well. Even his so-called proof lacks validity.

I remain open, however, for you and others and those "on the trail" to prove their suspicians and theories RIGHT. So far........... it hasn't happened.

And, yes, Wayne, you spout rhetoric and that's about it.

BTW, you do have a great writing skill, but you allow ASSUMPTION to guide you.

Sincerely,

BC

[OBPelican]

A possible alternative, of course, would be to do the opposite and abolish the ban, and stigma, on both kinds of free speech.You bring up a most excellent point halva, the suppression of free speech is most certainly a root cause of all Humanities problems today, whether political, religious, scientific, social or economic.

When people are not free, and many cannot recognize that we are not as free in America today as the Framers of our Constitution intended, or even as free as Christ intended for that matter.

The truth is that American scientists are most certainly prohibited by their federal welfare state from ever achieving the state of freedom of science that the discoverers of quantum mechanics enjoyed, before the Nazis took over that is, which is another interesting history lesson.

Citizens of Greece most certainly have a much better understanding of what America is undergoing today, you've most certainly "been there, done that," and you can see exactly where we are headed.

[Boomer Chick]

Thanks, OB, for your commentary. You speak the truth and quite eloquently at that. Of course you need not read all the links I post for you. They only serve to exemplify to you that at least a couple of Chinese science organizations profess interest in climate studies and partner with Euro and American scientists on awareness and scientific studies related to climate. They realize, of course, that climate affects their agriculture of which they highly value. They realize as well, that their pollution contributes to the world's pollution and if there is money to be made and factories to be built with pollution guards and new clean energy techology to develop, I wouldn't doubt they would be motivated to be leaders in the clean energy and clean environment movement if there's money to be made.


And of course human rights remain a huge issue in our country as well.

peace............bc

[halva]

OBP I have both Reynolds and Boomer Chick ignore-listed. If you think that either of them is saying anything that should be brought to my attention please mention it.

I have resorted to this ignore-listing strategy for the simple reason that I don't wish to waste my time arguing with people who I judge to be either insincere or dupes of the insincere (i.e. engaging in debate on a basis which I reject)..

If I make mistakes as a result of economising in this way in my use of my time I hope that well-disposed and impartial newcomers such as yourself can bring to my attention any important arguments (e.g. in the postings of Reynolds and BC) that I may be overlooking.

[Boomer Chick]

Yawn=halva


Google Alert for: global warming




British flowers affected by global warming (http://science.monstersandcritics.com/news/article_1157968.php/British_flowers_affected_by_global_warming)
Monsters and Critics.com - Glasgow,UK
LONDON, England (UPI) -- A survey by the Botanical Society of the British Isles suggests global warming is affecting the numbers and range of Britain`s wild ...
See all stories on this topic (http://news.google.com/news?ie=utf8&oe=utf8&persist=1&hl=en&client=google&ncl=http://science.monstersandcritics.com/news/article_1157968.php/British_flowers_affected_by_global_warming)

International Earth Day 2006: Stop Global Warming! (http://www.thenewstoday.info/2006/04/24/international.earth.day.2006.stop.global.warning.h tml)
News Today Online - Iloilo City,Iloilo,Philippines
... This year, we have “STOP GLOBAL WARMING" as the theme. It denotes issues concerning global warming. What is global warming by the way? ...
See all stories on this topic (http://news.google.com/news?ie=utf8&oe=utf8&persist=1&hl=en&client=google&ncl=http://www.thenewstoday.info/2006/04/24/international.earth.day.2006.stop.global.warning.h tml)

Global warming expert to speak at UCSC on Wednesday, May 10 (http://www.ucsc.edu/news_events/press_releases/text.asp?pid=859)
UC Santa Cruz - Santa Cruz,CA,USA
... has been central to establishing the growing human influence on climate and, as a result, has been the target of criticism from skeptics of global warming. ...


Global warming consensus (http://gristmill.grist.org/story/2006/4/24/125821/375)
Grist Magazine - Seattle,WA,USA
I'm seeing more and more stories like this Bloomberg piece, about the growing consensus around global warming -- and by "growing consensus," I mean ...


Scientists, Politicians Embrace Deceit Over Global Warming (http://www.thetrumpet.com/index.php?page=article&id=2159)
theTrumpet.com - Edmond,OK,USA
At the same time, a host of scientists and politicians on the other side of the spectrum vehemently argue that the link between global warming and its supposed ...


MTV US’ new campaign against global warming seeks to ‘Break ... (http://www.indiantelevision.com/mam/headlines/y2k6/apr/aprmam78.htm)
Indiantelevision.com - Andheri,Mumbai,India
... long campaign to engage, educate and empower young people to take simple, daily actions that can have a measurable impact in the fight against global warming. ...


Global warming an issue for US, world (http://www.lsureveille.com/vnews/display.v/ART/2006/04/24/444c52358ed1f)
LSU The Reveille - Baton Rouge,Louisiana,USA
... A recent issue of TIME featured a special report on global warming, which, if you can forgive the pun, seems to be this year’s hot topic. ...


Global Warming: The Times' Two Views Of Beauty (http://pat-cleary.redstate.com/story/2006/4/23/223932/214)
RedState - Mclean,VA,USA
Interesting article in Sunday's NY Times by Andrew Revkin, ostensibly looking at both sides of the global warming debate but in the end, not really. ...


Face Off: Global Warming (http://www.thepenn.org/vnews/display.v/ART/2006/04/24/444d1c5880e37)
Indiana University The Penn Online - PA, United States
It’s doubtful there’sa single American citizen who has not, in some facet, heard of global warming. ... Global warming is taking place. ...
FEATURE - Global Warming Hits Canada's Remotest Arctic Lands (http://www.planetark.com/dailynewsstory.cfm/newsid/36098/story.htm)
Planet Ark - New York,NY,USA
... BAY, Nunavut - Even in one of the remotest, coldest and most inhospitable parts of Canada's High Arctic, you cannot escape the signs of global warming. ...


Google Alert for: global warming





New Gallup Poll Finds 70% of Americans Believe Global Warming Is A ... (http://www.citydebate.com/florida/miamibeach/template.php?url=0104230610.htm)
City Debate - Miami,FL,USA
do something about it? A recent Gallup Poll finds that 70% of Americans now believe the threat of global warming is real. While ...


Global warming's PR problem (http://www.iht.com/articles/2006/04/23/news/warm.php)
International Herald Tribune - France
... Or has global warming been spun into an "alarmist gale," as Richard Lindzen, a climatologist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology wrote in a recent ...


Global Warming And The Future of Wine (http://www.luxist.com/2006/04/23/global-warming-and-the-future-of-wine/)
Luxist - Santa Monica,CA,USA
One thing I hadn't seen discussed until I read this Observer article is the effect of global warming on wine. A recent conference ...


Global Warming Real for Two-Thirds of Americans (http://www.angus-reid.com/polls/index.cfm/fuseaction/viewItem/itemID/11653)
Angus Reid Global Scan - Vancouver,BC,Canada
... completely or probably true. The term global warming refers to an increase of the Earth’s average temperature. Some theories say that ...
See all stories on this topic (http://news.google.com/news?ie=utf8&oe=utf8&persist=1&hl=en&client=google&ncl=http://www.angus-reid.com/polls/index.cfm/fuseaction/viewItem/itemID/11653)

Not every scientific theory as hot as global warming (http://www.poughkeepsiejournal.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060423/COLUMNISTS07/604230349/1006/NEWS01)
Poughkeepsie Journal - Poughkeepsie,NY,USA
... "As you follow the global warming story, it's important to remember," Revkin said, "that the Nuclear Winter story stayed in the press — for about a year.". ...


University panel gives global warming warning at weekend ... (http://www.kesq.com/Global/story.asp?S=4805944&nav=9qrx)
KESQ - Palm Desert,CA,USA
BERKELEY, Calif. Global warming could cause increasingly unpredictable weather patterns and make sea levels rise dramatically in the coming years. ...
See all stories on this topic (http://news.google.com/news?ie=utf8&oe=utf8&persist=1&hl=en&client=google&ncl=http://www.kesq.com/Global/story.asp%3FS%3D4805944%26nav%3D9qrx)

Spectacular orchids double due to global warming (http://news.independent.co.uk/environment/article359768.ece)
Independent - London,England,UK
... the icefields and glaciers of the Arctic, visited in a blaze of publicity last week by the Tory leader David Cameron, that the signs of global warming can be ...


Global warming a real threat to all living things (http://www.timesunion.com/AspStories/story.asp?storyID=474293&category=OPINION&newsdate=4/23/2006)
Albany Times Union - Albany,NY,USA
... In fact, due to global warming, spring across the Northern Hemisphere arrives a week or more earlier than it did 30 years ago, a phenomenon starting to be ...


Global warming hitting home -- and the future looks warmer yet (http://www.mlive.com/news/muchronicle/index.ssf?/base/news-9/1145787337126130.xml&coll=8)
Muskegon Chronicle - Muskegon,MI,USA
... Global warming is changing Michigan's environment and the plants, animals and insects it supports. Less ice cover on lakes in the ...


Teens tackle global warming (http://www.adn.com/news/alaska/story/7656485p-7568038c.html)
Anchorage Daily News - Anchorage,AK,USA
Six Alaska teenagers will descend on the nation's capital this week with a message to Congress: Do something to combat the effects of global warming in the ...
A fate worse than global warming? (http://www.nashuatelegraph.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060423/OPINION04/104230184/-1/OPINION02)
Nashua Telegraph (subscription) - Nashua,NH,USA
While we temporize about global warming – some would say dither – its long-term dangers may be overtaken by a related, but more acute, crisis: The ...

***

BC

[halva]

Footsoldier's theoretical error, which she may have inherited from Sore Throat, is not to have completely shaken off the hope that a debate on Climate Change may be able to substitute for a debate on climate modification.

[foot_soldier]

Footsoldier's theoretical error, which she may have inherited from Sore Throat, is not to have completely shaken off the hope that a debate on Climate Change may be able to substitute for a debate on climate modification.
I've never advocated the substituting of one "debate" for the other.

In fact, what I've suggested all along is that both issues be looked at in tandem as I (still) think they are intimately related.

[jayreynolds]

I've never advocated the substituting of one "debate" for the other.

In fact, what I've suggested all along is that both issues be looked at in tandem as I (still) think they are intimately related.

Wayne is correct.
Ex-chemmies like 'Sore-throatee' and 'Footsoldier'(where do they come up with these names?) have tried to divorce themselves from over-the-top chemmies like Wayne for several years now.
They are devious, trying to live double lives, on the one hand trying to be seen as holding their noses amongst the chemmie lies, and on the other posing as "activists" in more respectable circles.

It doesn't work.
Sonner or later the former sees an 'inactive' activism, and the latter sees a nutcase two-faced crackpot. You just can't coexist in a world of fantasy and expect to be taken rationally in the real world.

Take this conversation:

Colleague: All I can say at this point is that in my opinion Dr. Cornell's[a real scientist-JR] communication was straightforward, accurate and honest.

W.H: I think it would have been good if you had been able to present this conclusion to her as part of a documented critique of what she sent to us. This would show Dr. Cornell and her colleagues at the Tyndall Centre that there is an overlap between their concerns and ours and that we should be participants in the same framework of discussion.

Colleague: Too bad the issues involved have become so hopelessly politicized.
W.H: This is a formulation that you seem to share with Dr. Sarah Cornell, who says: 'We, as scientists, can comment on some aspects of these questions… There is a great deal else in your debate that is speculation, or a matter of opinion and political choice.' As far as I am concerned the difference between the stance of a person who wants to tell the truth and a person who for allegedly political reasons judges that it is better not to do so, does not deserve to be called a 'political difference' or a matter of 'political choice'. If a scientist, in the explanation he offers for a situation, rather than outlining what 'political choice' leads politicians to do, does the same thing himself/herself, he/she ceases to be a scientist (or rather ceases to deserve the respect claimed by science) and becomes a politician.

It's pretty clear that Wayne long ago considered 'Footsoldier' to not be interested in his stinky little hoax, she wants to keep her nose above the stench as real scientsist do.

She knows, Wayne, and the best thing you can do is forget about her ever following you down the rabbit hole where you come from.

[halva]

I unignore-listed you to see what you are saying, Footsoldier, but the comment I made above was mainly addressed to BC.

On past record it hasn't seemed possible for you and Reynolds to coexist on the same thread without things getting out of control and becoming absolutely disgusting and offensive. Given that I don't have the power to moderate anything I am uneasy about anything like dialogue starting up again here.

You deserve to be treated as a resource person and consultant. Reynolds won't allow anything like that: it is his mission to humiliate you.

And to play us off against each other in every way possible.

Do we have to keep giving him this opportunity? There are so many other places to go.

[Boomer Chick]

I've never advocated the substituting of one "debate" for the other.

In fact, what I've suggested all along is that both issues be looked at in tandem as I (still) think they are intimately related.

Well, the WAYS in which these subjects are "intimately related" could be more defined. It seems Reynolds needs clarification. I don't need clarification because I've always viewed the two: Climate Change and Weather Manipulation, as related in terms of all studies involving weather systems: clouds, greenhouse gases, pollutants, temperature, winds, evaporation, urban heat sinks, carbon sinks, molecular atmospheric studies.......all relate to understanding the dynamics of weather and ultimately if it is at all possible the same studies could eventually aid in manipulating the weather.

We wonder if the manipulation would and could be used for the benefit of all mankind. We all wonder and hope that benefitting all mankind will be the purpose and intent.

As we all realize, and Reynolds realizes as well, sometimes techologies are used to hurt other humans on the planet. For example, it is documented that rainfall was increased on purpose during the Vietnam conflict by the US to prevent troop movement by the Viet Cong. It is documented. Thus it was used in a military setting in an unnecessary conflict sacrificing many US citizens. It was a mistake as all conflicts since other than Bosnia have been mistakes and displays of power.

FS, you and I agree that we must be vigilent in the use of such technologies such as true and real weather manipulation. I would hope that once this technology is mastered, that the agricultural production of our own crops will be enhanced and that the technology will be shared with countries that may be experiencing drought where once they experienced adequate rainfall.

Just as nuclear energy can be used for peaceful pursuits, so it can be used for killing.

Weather technology may usher in a new world of human experimentation on its moral usage. It upsets me to think we're so spiritually stunted at this point in human history that we would even HAVE to worry about such things. I'm ashamed of my kind.

It's time for all humanity to come together and solve our mutual problems regarding food, water, energy, and weather with peace and love and cooperation. It is a myth that we haven't enough food for all people in the world....a myth. We can control our populations, keep them well and healthy, keep them fed, and enjoy a world of peace and cooperative living in harmony with our natural world and caring for the natural world as well. There is no reason why not....if the concepts reside in the human heart, it can become a reality quite easily.

I know you agree with this, FS.

Reynolds tends to wade out in the deep water a little too much so....let it go.

[halva]

http://www.gnn.tv/articles/2242/While_Washington_Slept

[erich]

Beautifully said BC,

We now use these weather machines but don't call them that, to achieve:

Global Dimming:
Particulate Emission, Jet travel ,

Global Warming:
Agriculture, A host of gas emissions,

We either reconfigure or recalibrate these weather machines or ,if we have to, design new weather machines to adjust the system.

My best , cost effective,candidates are:

Eastlund Scientific Enterprises Corporation http://www.eastlundscience.com/index.html

Alternative energy | The power of spin | Economist.com
http://www.economist.com/science/displayStory.cfm?story_id=4455446

http://dsc.discovery.com/news/briefs/20051107/tornado_tec.html


And maybe Ocean fertilization for Co2 sequestration, however It's debatable that the 1 Lb Iron to 100,000 Lb of Co2 ratio that I've read of is correct.

[halva]

We now use these weather machines but don't call them that, to achieve:

Global Dimming:
Particulate Emission, Jet travel ,


To be true to his perverted calling, Reynolds should challenge you on this assertion. If he does not, this will be evidence that we are facing him down.

[Boomer Chick]

Beautifully said BC,

We now use these weather machines but don't call them that, to achieve:

Global Dimming:
Particulate Emission, Jet travel ,

Global Warming:
Agriculture, A host of gas emissions,

We either reconfigure or recalibrate these weather machines or ,if we have to, design new weather machines to adjust the system.

My best , cost effective,candidates are:

Eastlund Scientific Enterprises Corporation http://www.eastlundscience.com/index.html

Alternative energy | The power of spin | Economist.com
http://www.economist.com/science/displayStory.cfm?story_id=4455446

http://dsc.discovery.com/news/briefs/20051107/tornado_tec.html


And maybe Ocean fertilization for Co2 sequestration, however It's debatable that the 1 Lb Iron to 100,000 Lb of Co2 ratio that I've read of is correct.

Thanks, Erich.

We discovered Eastland quite a few years ago and connected him to inventions gleaned from Tesla and maybe Teller, too. Where were you for our Weather Manipulation thread?

Your two articles on harnessing the power of tornados is quite the opposite of controlling them or steering them, but I suppose if they are into harnessing the energy itself they may figure a way to rope them or lasso them like good old Pecos Bill did! LOL! Interesting.

Keep sharing! If you find evidence of actual weather control, post it!

Have you investigated HAARP yet in relation to possible weather manipulation?

[erich]

On tornados: The idea would be to generate them in front, to steer storms and or suck off their energy.

I've had some replies Dr. Eastlund , after posting him science news pertinent to his interest.

Atmospheric plasmas are way under studied. We need to know what lightning is , and Ball lightning, what sprites are., and elves , blue sprites , auroras in all there forms.

No............. it is not weather control,...............,,,,,,,,,, It has the potential, like the Wright Flyer had the potential to be a 747.

[Boomer Chick]

Google Alert for: global warming





Poll shows hunters, anglers worried about warming (http://www.duluthsuperior.com/mld/duluthsuperior/14610595.htm)
Duluth News Tribune - Duluth,MN,USA
... said they were very or somewhat concerned that many fish and wildlife populations will decrease in the next 10 years, and most agreed that global warming is a ...
See all stories on this topic (http://news.google.com/news?ie=utf8&oe=utf8&persist=1&hl=en&client=google&ncl=http://www.duluthsuperior.com/mld/duluthsuperior/14610595.htm)

Counter-global warming campaign launching (http://www.adjab.com/2006/05/18/counter-global-warming-campaign-launching/)
AdJab - Santa Monica,CA,USA
... is about to launch a campaign including two 60-second spots to try and counter claims that the planet is nearing a crisis point because of global warming. ...
See all stories on this topic (http://news.google.com/news?ie=utf8&oe=utf8&persist=1&hl=en&client=google&ncl=http://www.adjab.com/2006/05/18/counter-global-warming-campaign-launching/)

TV Ads Seek to Upstage Gore 'Global Warming' Movie (http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewNation.asp?Page=/Nation/archive/200605/NAT20060518a.html)
CNSNews.com - Alexandria,VA,USA
By Monisha Bansal. (CNSNews.com) - The latest chapter in the "global warming" debate involves a movie based on the climate change warnings of former Vice ...
See all stories on this topic (http://news.google.com/news?ie=utf8&oe=utf8&persist=1&hl=en&client=google&ncl=http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewNation.asp%3FPage%3D/Nation/archive/200605/NAT20060518a.html)

GLOBAL WARMING (http://www.theadvertiser.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5936,19183755%255E912,00.html)
Advertiser Adelaide - Adelaide,South Australia,Australia
... Angeles screening. Mr Gore had toured the country giving a slideshow presentation of pictures on the effects of global warming.
See all stories on this topic (http://news.google.com/news?ie=utf8&oe=utf8&persist=1&hl=en&client=google&ncl=http://www.theadvertiser.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5936,19183755%25255E912,00.html)

Fire and Ice: 110 Years of Global Warming/Cool Bias (http://www.humaneventsonline.com/blog-detail.php?id=14967)
Human Events - USA
... a bias when it comes to "climate change" that's friendly to environmentalists who blame human activity, essentially modern economic growth, for global warming. ...


FOX News Wants To Make Global Warming About Al Gore (http://www.newshounds.us/2006/05/18/fox_news_wants_to_make_global_warming_about_al_gor e.php)
News Hounds - Newport Beach,CA,USA
As he gets set to launch a new documentary movie about global warming, An Inconvenient Truth, Hannity & Colmes has launched a new series about the movie. ...


Livermore lab's 'nanotube' work could help curb global warming (http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/news/breaking_news/14612073.htm)
San Jose Mercury News - CA, USA
... could provide a cheaper way to remove salt from sea water and to separate carbon dioxide from power plant emissions, one step toward curbing global warming. ...


'Transport a black spot for global warming ' (http://www.iol.co.za/index.php?set_id=1&click_id=22&art_id=qw1147955941285B251)
Independent Online - Cape Town,South Africa
... Climate Secretariat in Bonn, told Reuters. He was speaking at a 163-nation, May 15-26 conference on ways to combat global warming. ...


US states, investors attack Exxon on global warming (http://today.reuters.com/news/newsArticle.aspx?type=scienceNews&storyID=2006-05-18T201616Z_01_N18242557_RTRUKOC_0_US-ENERGY-EXXON-ENVIRONMENT.xml)
Reuters - USA
... Mobil Corp. of failing to act on global warming concerns and demanded a meeting with the company's board over the issue. Exxon Mobil ...
See all stories on this topic (http://news.google.com/news?ie=utf8&oe=utf8&persist=1&hl=en&client=google&ncl=http://today.reuters.com/news/newsArticle.aspx%3Ftype%3DscienceNews%26storyID%3D 2006-05-18T201616Z_01_N18242557_RTRUKOC_0_US-ENERGY-EXXON-ENVIRONMENT.xml)

'Fire and Ice': Global Warming Cooling Warming (http://blog.nam.org/archives/2006/05/fire_and_ice_gl_1.php)
Manufacturers' Blog - Washington,DC,USA
... regularity. The fact that they are currently stuck on global warming seems to have captivated the media at the moment. Study author ...
See all stories on this topic (http://news.google.com/news?ie=utf8&oe=utf8&persist=1&hl=en&client=google&ncl=http://blog.nam.org/archives/2006/05/fire_and_ice_gl_1.php) Pick Your Poison: Smog or Global Warming? (http://dsc.discovery.com/news/briefs/20060515/smog_pla.html)
Discovery Channel - USA
... study of the strange climate changes in the Indian Ocean has uncovered a frightening climatic dilemma: By cleaning up smog, we could accelerate global warming. ...

[Boomer Chick]

On tornados: The idea would be to generate them in front, to steer storms and or suck off their energy.

I've had some replies Dr. Eastlund , after posting him science news pertinent to his interest.

Atmospheric plasmas are way under studied. We need to know what lightning is , and Ball lightning, what sprites are., and elves , blue sprites , auroras in all there forms.

No............. it is not weather control,...............,,,,,,,,,, It has the potential, like the Wright Flyer had the potential to be a 747.

Good points! The plasma sciences are flourishing at various universities...just do a search on the science databases. Lidar and plasma physics related to weather and space are being researched and you can bet all of the electric/magnetic anamolies and weather constructs are not only being studied, but probably in the process of being controlled if not re-created. I know that auroras can be formed from certain ionic stimulation waves. The thing is, I wouldn't want them to experiment, unknowingly, with certain stability aspects of our atmosphere and electro-magnetic systems......that would destabilize our natural systems and once one aspect of a balancing system is affected, the rest of the system has to compensate and in what form that would take.......who knows?

And yes, even just fooling around with attempting to harness tornadic energy could indeed lead to other mechanisms of control or even creation.....oooh...wouldn't that be freaky? Just do this and do that and you've got yourself an F 6 tornado! OH BOY!!!! Hope they figure out how to tame it, kill it, or steer it, before they figure out how to create it!!!!

BC

[halva]

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/climatechangepolitics/message/1580

[jayreynolds]

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/climatechangepolitics/message/1580
Your leader is being polite and tolerant with you, Wayne, but he isn't buying into your premise..........

While I remain unconvinced that any kind of co-ordinated planetary
engineering is, in fact, taking place (see below) I would regard
experiments to determine if such a thing could have the planned effect
as a necessary precaution against future climate change. Therefore I
must say that no prohibition is desireable or necessary. (And since it
is not currently illegal, afaik, it does not need to be legalised.)

Is it happening?

When faced with a choice between a conspiracy theory and human
ignorance/stupidity/incompetence, I always apply Occam's Razor and
assume that the latter is the case. Stratospheric air travel is
contributing to global dimming, but there is no reason to suspect that
global development policies are promoting this as a solution to global
warming, especially as an effort to eliminate sulphates from aviation
fuel contradicts the idea.
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/climatechangepolitics/message/1561

[Boomer Chick]

Google Alert for: global warming





Study: Ring ouzel is global warming victim (http://science.monstersandcritics.com/news/article_1167029.php/Study_Ring_ouzel_is_global_warming_victim)
Monsters and Critics.com - Glasgow,UK
ABERDEEN, Scotland (UPI) -- Scottish scientists say global warming`s first major British wildlife victim is the ring ouzel -- a close relative of the blackbird ...
See all stories on this topic (http://news.google.com/news?ie=utf8&oe=utf8&persist=1&hl=en&client=google&ncl=http://science.monstersandcritics.com/news/article_1167029.php/Study_Ring_ouzel_is_global_warming_victim)

Report: 5 NJ coastal landmarks at risk from global warming (http://www.newsday.com/news/local/wire/newjersey/ny-bc-nj--globalwarming-nj0525may25,0,1015368.story?coll=ny-region-apnewjersey)
Newsday - Long Island,NY,USA
... Citing the report, NJPIRG called on Gov. Jon S. Corzine and the Legislature to enact policy measures to curb the state's global warming emissions. ...


Gore documentary shrugs off politics of global warming (http://www.duluthsuperior.com/mld/duluthsuperior/entertainment/14658510.htm)
Duluth News Tribune - Duluth,MN,USA
... political film. Al Gore's "An Inconvenient Truth" tries to move outside politics and focus on the facts of global warming. Gore says ...
See all stories on this topic (http://news.google.com/news?ie=utf8&oe=utf8&persist=1&hl=en&client=google&ncl=http://www.duluthsuperior.com/mld/duluthsuperior/entertainment/14658510.htm)

Bush enters global warming debate (http://www.abc.net.au/worldtoday/content/2006/s1647310.htm)
ABC Online - Australia
ELEANOR HALL: In the United States, President George W. Bush has jumped into the debate about global warming. But he's done so mainly ...
See all stories on this topic (http://news.google.com/news?ie=utf8&oe=utf8&persist=1&hl=en&client=google&ncl=http://www.abc.net.au/worldtoday/content/2006/s1647310.htm)

Global Warming Skeptic Claims Environmental Conversion (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,197070,00.html)
FOX News - USA
By Steven Milloy. Al Gore’s new global warming movie is apparently causing some to think that a major turning point in the debate is at hand. ...
See all stories on this topic (http://news.google.com/news?ie=utf8&oe=utf8&persist=1&hl=en&client=google&ncl=http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,197070,00.html)

Gore: America in "Category 5" Denial on Global Warming (http://www.truthdig.com/eartotheground/item/20060525_gore_global_warming/)
Truthdig - United States
Al Gore, in an interview with The Nation, says that no meaningful change will happen on the global warming front until the public starts demanding it of their ...
See all stories on this topic (http://news.google.com/news?ie=utf8&oe=utf8&persist=1&hl=en&client=google&ncl=http://www.truthdig.com/eartotheground/item/20060525_gore_global_warming/)

Texas warned of global warming (http://www.heralddemocrat.com/articles/2006/05/25/texas_news/state08.txt)
Sherman Denison Herald Democrat - Sherman/Denison,TX,USA
By Steve Quinn. DALLAS — An environmental advocacy group says it wants Texas lawmakers to begin taking global warming seriously. ...
See all stories on this topic (http://news.google.com/news?ie=utf8&oe=utf8&persist=1&hl=en&client=google&ncl=http://www.heralddemocrat.com/articles/2006/05/25/texas_news/state08.txt)

Global warming crisis heats up (http://science.monstersandcritics.com/news/article_1166634.php/Global_warming_crisis_heats_up)
Monsters and Critics.com - Glasgow,UK
WASHINGTON, DC, United States (UPI) -- As a new US hurricane season looms, the threat posed by global warming has taken center-stage again in the Washington ...
See all stories on this topic (http://news.google.com/news?ie=utf8&oe=utf8&persist=1&hl=en&client=google&ncl=http://science.monstersandcritics.com/news/article_1166634.php/Global_warming_crisis_heats_up)

Extreme global warming likely by end of century (http://news.mongabay.com/2006/0524-ucb.html)
Mongabay.com - USA
... Global warming may be worse than predictedClimate change estimates for the next century may have substantially underestimated the potential magnitude of global ...
See all stories on this topic (http://news.google.com/news?ie=utf8&oe=utf8&persist=1&hl=en&client=google&ncl=http://news.mongabay.com/2006/0524-ucb.html)

US, Chinese scientists express concern about global warming (http://english.people.com.cn/200605/25/eng20060525_268451.html)
People's Daily Online - Beijing,China
Global warming will become irreversible if countries are still reluctant to take action now, some high-profile scientists told the China-US Climate Change ...
See all stories on this topic (http://news.google.com/news?ie=utf8&oe=utf8&persist=1&hl=en&client=google&ncl=http://english.people.com.cn/200605/25/eng20060525_268451.html) New nuclear power may end global warming (http://www.unison.ie/worldnews/stories.php3?ca=27&si=1619743)
Unison.ie - Bray,Ireland
... It would also have a very low impact on the environment, because it emits no greenhouse gases, such as carbon dioxide, which are blamed for global warming. ...

***

Yes, we produce greenhouse gases, but the warming IMHO is cyclic on a huge scale involving solar as well as galactic influences as all the planets in our system heat up. Yes, transition to alternative energies, reduce our greenhouse gases, and adapt to climate changes.

[Boomer Chick]

http://www.truthout.org/issues_06/050306EA.shtml

Federal Study Finds Accord on Warming
By Andrew C. Revkin
The New York Times


Wednesday 03 May 2006

A scientific study commissioned by the Bush administration concluded yesterday that the lower atmosphere was indeed growing warmer and that there was "clear evidence of human influences on the climate system."

The finding eliminates a significant area of uncertainty in the debate over global warming, one that the administration has long cited as a rationale for proceeding cautiously on what it says would be costly limits on emissions of heat-trapping gases.

But White House officials noted that this was just the first of 21 assessments planned by the federal Climate Change Science Program, which was created by the administration in 2002 to address what it called unresolved questions. The officials said that while the new finding was important, the administration's policy remained focused on studying the remaining questions and using voluntary means to slow the growth in emissions of heat-trapping gases like carbon dioxide.

The focus of the new federal study was conflicting records of atmospheric temperature trends.

For more than a decade, scientists using different methods had come up with differing rates of warming at Earth's surface and in the midsection of the atmosphere, called the troposphere. These disparities had been cited by a small group of scientists, and by the administration and its allies, to question a growing consensus among climatologists that warming from heat-trapping gases could dangerously heat Earth.

The new study found that "there is no longer a discrepancy in the rate of global average temperature increase for the surface compared with higher levels in the atmosphere," in the words of a news release issued by the Commerce Department and approved by the White House. The report was published yesterday online at climatescience.gov.

The report's authors all agreed that their review of the data showed that the atmosphere was, in fact, warming in ways that generally meshed with computer simulations. The study said that the only factor that could explain the measured warming of Earth's average temperature over the last 50 years was the buildup heat-trapping gases, which are mainly emitted by burning coal and oil.

All other industrial powers except Australia have accepted mandatory restrictions on such gases under the Kyoto Protocol, but efforts to extend and expand that treaty face hurdles.

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, a United Nations body that conducts an exhaustive periodic review of causes and impacts of warming, has just finished reviewing drafts of its next assessment, to be published next year.

Scientists involved in that effort, while refusing to comment on specific findings, said that research since the last assessment, in 2001, had generated much greater certainty that humans are the main force behind recent warming, and that much more warming is in store unless emissions are curtailed.

Michele St. Martin, a spokeswoman for the White House Council on Environmental Quality, said, "We welcome today's report" and added that it showed that President Bush's decision to focus nearly $2 billion a year on climate monitoring and research was "working."

Thomas Karl, the director of the National Climatic Data Center in the Commerce Department and the lead editor of the report, said it was not simply a review of existing work but also, by forcing scientists with differing views to meet repeatedly, resulted in breakthroughs.

"The evidence continues to support a substantial human impact on global temperature increases," Dr. Karl said.

John R. Christy, an author of the new report whose analysis of satellite temperature records long showed little warming above Earth's surface, said he endorsed the conclusion that "part of what has happened over the last 50 years has clearly been caused by humans."

But Dr. Christy, who teaches at the University of Alabama, Huntsville, said the report also noted that computer simulations of the climate system, while good at replicating the globally averaged temperature changes, still strayed in projecting details, particularly in the tropics.

This implied that the models remained laden with uncertainties when used to study future trends, he said. Dr. Christy also said that even given what the models projected, it would be impossible to slow warming noticeably in the coming decades. Countries would be wise to seek ways to adapt to warming, he added, even as they seek new sources of energy that do not emit heat-trapping gases.

[Boomer Chick]

Report: Jet Stream Shift Is Expanding the Earth's Tropics and Deserts
By Andrew Bridges
The Associated Press




A villager plants trees to try and keep the sand from shifting to other areas of the Hobq Desert earlier this month in northern China.
(Photo: Getty Images / China Photos) Thursday 25 May 2006

Washington - Deserts in the American Southwest and around the globe are creeping toward heavily populated areas as the jet streams shift, scientists reported Thursday.

The result: Areas already stressed by drought may get even drier.

Satellite measurements made from 1979 to 2005 show that the atmosphere in the subtropical regions both north and south of the equator is heating up. As the atmosphere warms, it bulges out at the altitudes where the northern and southern jet streams slip past like swift and massive rivers of air. That bulging has pushed both jet streams about 70 miles closer to the Earth's poles.

Since the jet streams mark the edge of the tropics, in essence framing the hot zone that hugs the equator, their outward movement has allowed the tropics to grow wider by about 140 miles. That means the relatively drier subtropics move as well, pushing closer to places like Salt Lake City, where Thomas Reichler, co-author of the new study, teaches meteorology.

"One of the immediate consequences one can think of is those deserts and dry areas are moving poleward," said Reichler, of the University of Utah. Details appear in Thursday's Science Express, the online edition of the journal Science.

The movement has allowed the subtropics to edge toward populated areas, including the American Southwest, southern Australia and the Mediterranean basin. In those places, the lack of precipitation already is a worry.

"The Mediterranean is one region that models consistently show drying in the future. That could be very much related to this pattern that we are seeing in the atmosphere," said Isaac Held, a senior research scientist with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. He is not connected with the research.

A shift in where subtropical dry zones lie could make climate change locally noticeable for more people, said Karen Rosenlof, a NOAA research meteorologist also unconnected to the study.

"It is a plausible thing that could be happening, and the people who are going to see its effects earliest are the ones who live closer to the tropics, like southern Australia," said Rosenlof. Her own work suggests the tropics have actually compressed since 2000, after growing wider over the previous 20 years.

Reichler suspects global warming is the root cause of the shift, but said he can't be certain. Other possibilities include variability and destruction of the ozone layer. However, he and his colleagues have noted similar behavior in climate models that suggest global warming plays a role.

Moving the jet streams farther from the equator could disrupt storm patterns, as well as intensify individual storms on the poleward side of the jet streams, said lead author Qiang Fu, a University of Washington atmospheric scientist.

In Europe, for example, that shift could mean less snow falling on the Alps in winter. That would be bad news for skiers, as well as for farmers and others who rely on rivers fed by snowmelt. "This definitely favors or enhances the frequency of droughts," Fu said of such a shift.

http://www.truthout.org/issues_06/052606EC.shtml

[Boomer Chick]

Mysterious Glowing Clouds Targeted by NASA
By Maggie McKee
NewScientist.com




High-altitude noctilucent clouds have been mysteriously spreading around the world in recent years.
(Photo: NASA / JSC / ES / IA) Friday 26 May 2006

The Aeronomy of Ice in the Mesosphere (AIM) mission will be the first satellite dedicated to studying this enigmatic phenomenon. Due to launch in late 2006, it should reveal whether the clouds are caused by global warming, as many scientists believe.

"Noctilucent" clouds, which glow at night, form in the upper atmosphere, at an altitude of about 80 kilometres, and their glow can be seen just after sunset or just before sunrise.

"Even though the Sun's gone down and you're in darkness, the clouds are so high up, the Sun is still illuminating them," explains AIM principal investigator James Russell at Hampton University in Virginia, US. Russell described the mission on Thursday at a meeting of the American Geophysical Union in Baltimore, Maryland, US.

Bigger and Brighter

The clouds were first observed above polar regions in 1885 - suggesting they may have been caused by the eruption of Krakatoa two years before. But they have spread to latitudes as low as 40° in recent years. "They're also getting brighter, and each year there are more of them than in the previous year," Russell told New Scientist.

Many researchers believe this proliferation is down to human activities. "You need three things for clouds to form: particles that water can condense onto; water; and cold temperatures," says Russell. He says pollution and global warming are thought to be responsible for two of those factors.

Atmospheric water may be boosted by livestock farming and the burning of fossil fuels, which spew methane into the atmosphere: sunlight breaks down the methane, releasing hydrogen that can bond with oxygen to form water.

And greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide actually help to cool the upper atmosphere, where the clouds form. That is because the atmospheric density is so low at that altitude that the gases cannot trap heat as they do closer to the Earth's surface, and the heat is simply radiated into space.

Alien Ice

As yet, it is not clear what the source of the particles that "seed" the clouds is. The clouds form during the local summer months, when the pole is bathed in perpetual sunlight. So one possibility is that warm air rising above the pole could carry dust upwards from lower atmospheric altitudes, onto which water can condense.

But the dust could also have a cosmic source, dropping into the atmosphere from space. "It may be there's a constant supply of particles but a changing temperature and water environment makes the conditions right to grow ice particles," says Russell.

AIM will use three instruments to study the clouds. One is a suite of four cameras that will provide panoramic views of the poles and clouds. Another, called the Solar Occultation for Ice Experiment (SOFIE), will study the chemistry of the ice particles and clouds - measuring molecules such as methane. It will also observe the Sun through the atmosphere to measure how much sunlight is dimmed by dust in the atmosphere.

The third instrument, called the Cosmic Dust Experiment, is a plastic film that sits on top of the spacecraft. It will record every "hit" from a dust particle that rains down on it from space.

Cloud Umbrella

"We want to know why the clouds form and why they vary," says Russell. "If there is a human connection, it'll tell us that we're doing something to the atmosphere and that we need to determine what the long-term consequences are."

Some scientists speculate that the clouds might actually help mitigate global warming, says Russell. "If these clouds were to continue to grow and cover broad areas of Earth, they would form something like a thin, semi-transparent umbrella," he told New Scientist. "They would reduce the amount of solar rays making it to the ground, so they could actually reduce the effects of global warming." The AIM satellite will launch into a polar orbit from California's Vandenburg Air Force Base. Russell says it may lift off in December, but its exact launch date has not been set because mission planners are still working to minimise vibration forces on the spacecraft due to its Pegasus XL launch rocket.

-------

http://www.truthout.org/issues_06/053006EC.shtml

[jayreynolds]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/05/23/AR2006052301305_pf.html

[erich]

Noctilucent Cloud: Observers' Homepage

http://www.nlcnet.co.uk/

[Boomer Chick]

Google Alert for: global warming





Global warming threat rises for beaches (http://www.insidebayarea.com/argus/news/ci_3958258)
The Argus - Fremont,CA,USA
... When scientists consider the effects of global warming, there is a lot they don't know. But one thing's for sure: Sea levels will rise. ...
See all stories on this topic (http://news.google.com/news?ie=utf8&oe=utf8&persist=1&hl=en&client=google&ncl=http://www.insidebayarea.com/argus/news/ci_3958258)

Study: State's Global Warming Pollution Up 85 Percent (http://www.nbc4.tv/news/9401158/detail.html)
NBC4.TV - Los Angeles,CA,USA
SANTA MONICA, Calif. -- Global warming pollution increased 85 percent in the state over the past 40 years, members of an environmental group said Tuesday as ...
See all stories on this topic (http://news.google.com/news?ie=utf8&oe=utf8&persist=1&hl=en&client=google&ncl=http://www.nbc4.tv/news/9401158/detail.html)

Legalizing porn in state could curb global warming (http://www.oudaily.com/vnews/display.v/ART/2006/06/20/44988eedbea61)
Oklahoma Daily - Norman,OK,USA
... One of the hottest topics on the planet is related to the planet’s hotness: Global warming. I don’t really know what to believe ...


Report: Global Warming Emissions Jump 292 Percent in Rocky ... (http://www.newwest.net/index.php/city/article/9396/C8/L8/)
New West - Missoula,MT,USA
... In the Rocky Mountain West, where as Todd Wilkinson reported last week on New West, global warming is heating up, the PIRG report shows coal burning accounted ...


Public interest group released report on global warming (http://www.boston.com/news/local/new_hampshire/articles/2006/06/20/public_interest_group_released_report_on_global_wa rming)
Boston Globe - United States
CONCORD, NH --A new report by a state environmental group says pollution contributing to global warming is more than one-and-a-half times worse in New ...
See all stories on this topic (http://news.google.com/news?ie=utf8&oe=utf8&persist=1&hl=en&client=google&ncl=http://www.boston.com/news/local/new_hampshire/articles/2006/06/20/public_interest_group_released_report_on_global_wa rming)

Global warming pollutants rapidly growing in CA (http://publicbroadcasting.net/kpbs/news.newsmain?action=article&ARTICLE_ID=930858&sectionID=1)
KPBS - San Diego,CA,USA
KPBS SAN DIEGO (2006-06-20) A new report by the non-profit group Environment California finds the pollution that causes global warming is a rapidly growing ...


Report: CA Global Warming Skyrockets (http://abclocal.go.com/kgo/story?section=politics&id=4290287)
abc7news.com - San Francisco,CA,USA
June 20 - KGO - There is an effort in Sacramento to slow pollution linked to global warming. Backers of a measure to restrict emissions ...


The Baby Shiloh: Chosen By God To Stop Global Warming (http://www.theconservativevoice.com/article/15492.html)
The Conservative Voice - Kernersville,NC,USA
In it, he makes the case that humans have but ten years to reverse course and stave off the horrors of global warming. Assuming ...
See all stories on this topic (http://news.google.com/news?ie=utf8&oe=utf8&persist=1&hl=en&client=google&ncl=http://www.theconservativevoice.com/article/15492.html)

Thaw in Siberia could speed up global warming (http://www.alligator.org/pt2/060620permafrost.php)
Independent Florida Alligator - Gainesville,FL,USA
... The thawing permafrost could release its reservoir of carbon into the atmosphere, which would result in a faster rate of global warming, or the increase of ...
See all stories on this topic (http://news.google.com/news?ie=utf8&oe=utf8&persist=1&hl=en&client=google&ncl=http://www.alligator.org/pt2/060620permafrost.php)

'Inconvenient' documentary turns up the heat on global warming (http://www.statehornet.com/vnews/display.v/ART/2006/06/19/44977f65970bc)
StateHornet.com - Sacramento,CA,USA
The documentary about global warming premiered at the 2006 Sundance Film Festival to rave reviews. It features former Vice President ...
See all stories on this topic (http://news.google.com/news?ie=utf8&oe=utf8&persist=1&hl=en&client=google&ncl=http://www.statehornet.com/vnews/display.v/ART/2006/06/19/44977f65970bc) Global warming affects bird migration (http://www.theage.com.au/news/National/Global-warming-affects-bird-migration/2006/06/20/1150701529282.html)
The Age - Melbourne,Victoria,Australia
Australia's migratory birds are arriving earlier and leaving later - most likely due to global warming, a new study has found. Macquarie ...
See all stories on this topic (http://news.google.com/news?ie=utf8&oe=utf8&persist=1&hl=en&client=google&ncl=http://www.theage.com.au/news/National/Global-warming-affects-bird-migration/2006/06/20/1150701529282.html)

[erich]

I thought, I first read about these soils in " Botany of Desire " by Michael Pollen, or Dr. Jared Diamond's "Guns Germs &Steel" but I could not find reference to them. Wherever, I did not realize their potential.

'Terra Preta' soils I feel has great possibilities to revolutionize sustainable agriculture into a major CO2 sequestration strategy. There is an ecology going on in these soils that is not completely understood, and if replicated and applied at scale would have multiple benefits for farmers and environmentalist. Basically we could have Bio-fuels and non oil dependent soil fertility too.

Here's the Cornell page for an over view:

http://www.css.cornell.edu/faculty/lehmann/biochar/Biochar_home.htm

This Science Forum thread on thes soil contains further links:

http://forums.hypography.com/earth-science/3451-terra-preta-9.html

The Georgia Inst. of Technology page:

http://www.energy.gatech.edu/presentations/dday.pdf

As you will see the Japanese work with these soils is impressive, Especially with trees.

After seeing this article by J. Rifkin:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/03/AR2006070300922.html

I felt MAS could be the key to the large scale development of Terra Preta agriculture.

I've sent it to the researchers at M-Roots, who make Mycorisal fungus inoculations for acceleration of the reestablishment of the symbiotic fungal / root relationship. Here's the M-Roots site: http://www.rootsinc.com/

I also sent it to Dr. Jared Diamond, if he replies, I will probably have an orgasm!

If pre Columbian Indians could produce these soils up to 6 feet deep over 20% of the Amazon basin it seems that our energy and agricultural industries could also product them at scale.

Harnessing the work of this vast number of microbes and fungi changes the whole equation of EROEI for food and Bio fuels. I see this as the only sustainable agricultural strategy if we no longer have cheap oil for fertilizer.

I believe, to have fast results, an M-Roots type fungus inoculent and local compost would get this super community of wee beasties populated into their proper Soil horizon Carbon Condos.

Regards, Erich J. Knight

[Boomer Chick]

Thank you Erich J. Knight. I will peruse and think about this new soil natural technology. Promising on its face.

Google Alert for: global warming




Let's help save our Earth from global warming (http://www.elpasotimes.com/living/ci_4028692)
El Paso Times - El Paso,TX,USA
... t feel powerless. I know there are things we all can do to stop global warming and give our poor planet a chance to heal itself. ...


Letter: Mind-boggling truth in global warming film (http://www.billingsgazette.net/articles/2006/07/09/opinion/letters/85-warming.txt)
Billings Gazette - MT, USA
... In any event, this is Al Gore's film about global warming, and while the set-up is sort of like a lecture, it is the most important, riveting film I have seen ...


Climate change warming the bench (http://www.washtimes.com/commentary/20060708-084100-5077r.htm)
Washington Times - Washington,DC,USA
Last week, as Washington floated away in a summer torrent that reporters glibly blamed on global warming, the Supreme Court agreed to hear Massachusetts v. ...
See all stories on this topic (http://news.google.com/news?ie=utf8&oe=utf8&persist=1&hl=en&client=google&ncl=http://www.washtimes.com/commentary/20060708-084100-5077r.htm)

Samuelson's Wishful Thinking on Global Warming (http://blog.sciam.com/index.php?title=samuelson_s_wishful_thinking_on_gl obal_w&more=1&c=1&tb=1&pb=1)
Scientific American - USA
This past Wednesday, Robert J. Samuelson, contributing editor to Newsweek and columnist for the Washington Post, published "Global Warming's Real Inconvenient ...
See all stories on this topic (http://news.google.com/news?ie=utf8&oe=utf8&persist=1&hl=en&client=google&ncl=http://blog.sciam.com/index.php%3Ftitle%3Dsamuelson_s_wishful_thinking_o n_global_w%26more%3D1%26c%3D1%26tb%3D1%26pb%3D1) GLOBAL WARMING: WHAT, ME WORRY? (http://www.cantonrep.com/index.php?ID=295795&Category=14)
Canton Repository (subscription) - Canton,OH,USA
... Yet our government will spend billions of dollars this year to prevent global terrorism and essentially nothing to prevent global warming. ...

[Boomer Chick]

Google Alert for: global warming





Scientists link fires to global warming (http://www.thestate.com/mld/thestate/news/nation/15097329.htm)
The State - Columbia,SC,USA
... and Australia, researchers find growing evidence tying an upsurge in wildfires to climate change, an impact long predicted by global-warming forecasters. ...


Global warming is no fantasy (http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/opinions/articles/0722satlets1-222.html)
Arizona Republic - Phoenix,AZ,USA
All other problems we face take a back seat to the growing problem of global warming. It is frustrating to hear uninformed people ...
See all stories on this topic (http://news.google.com/news?ie=utf8&oe=utf8&persist=1&hl=en&client=google&ncl=http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/opinions/articles/0722satlets1-222.html)

Al Gore's Presentations on Global Warming Believed to be ... (http://www.shortnews.com/start.cfm?id=55840&rubrik1=Science&rubrik2=Natural%20Sciences&rubrik3=Environment&sort=1&start=1)
ShortNews.com - Regensburg,Germany
Scientists who are experts in the phenomenon of global warming have stated that former US Vice-President Al Gore's presentations on the topic are essentially ...
See all stories on this topic (http://news.google.com/news?ie=utf8&oe=utf8&persist=1&hl=en&client=google&ncl=http://www.shortnews.com/start.cfm%3Fid%3D55840%26rubrik1%3DScience%26rubri k2%3DNatural%2520Sciences%26rubrik3%3DEnvironment% 26sort%3D1%26start%3D1) The bossa nova? Nah, blame it on global warming (http://fredericksburg.com/News/FLS/2006/072006/07222006/207659)
The Free Lance-Star - Fredericksburg,VA,USA
Well, now it's global warming. Global warming pretty much seems to be responsible for everything that we can't blame on George Bush. ...
See all stories on this topic (http://news.google.com/news?ie=utf8&oe=utf8&persist=1&hl=en&client=google&ncl=http://fredericksburg.com/News/FLS/2006/072006/07222006/207659)

[Boomer Chick]

NASA decides there’s no place like home. And home is no place. (http://www.badastronomy.com/bablog/2006/07/22/nasa-decides-theres-no-place-like-home-and-home-is-no-place/)



Reader Luke Skywalkthisway (I’m guessing that’s a pseudonym) sent along this tidbit from the New York Times. I wasn’t aware of this, but NASA has changed its official mission statement (http://www.nytimes.com/2006/07/22/science/22nasa.html). While that’s maybe only a little interesting in general, it’s what they changed that’s worth noting:


From 2002 until this year, NASA’s mission statement, prominently featured in its budget and planning documents, read: “To understand and protect our home planet; to explore the universe and search for life; to inspire the next generation of explorers … as only NASA can.”

In early February, the statement was quietly altered, with the phrase “to understand and protect our home planet” deleted. In this year’s budget and planning documents, the agency’s mission is “to pioneer the future in space exploration, scientific discovery and aeronautics research.”

The article says that NASA scientists are upset by this. I’m not surprised: if I were an Earth scientist at NASA (someone who studies climate, or atmospherics, or oceans, and all that) I’d be pretty unhappy if NASA suddenly excised what I study out of its "vision".

But it’s more than that. Earth science has been getting hit pretty badly by budget cuts at NASA, so this is not happening in a vacuum. Worse, missions have been canceled left and right by NASA, and in some cases the scientists on the missions were not involved with the decision (like with the Dawn asteroid mission (http://www.badastronomy.com/bablog/2006/03/02/dawn-canceled/), later reinstated (http://www.badastronomy.com/bablog/2006/03/27/a-new-day-for-dawn/)).

Many scientists are already working under a cloud, so to speak, wondering if their mission is about to be axed, and feeling somewhat powerless with decisions being made higher up.

Then NASA edits Earth science out of its vision statement. Now do you see why this is causing a problem?

It’s not totally clear why this change was made, though it’s obvious enough that it reflects the shift in NASA policy toward going back to the Moon, and on to Mars. But why not add that to the statement, instead of removing references to Earth science? I don’t know, but it’s impossible not to wonder about this in light of the shift away from Earth science.

If you go through my blog entries categorized under "NASA" (http://www.badastronomy.com/bablog/category/nasa/), you’ll see I’ve been vocal about some of the policies that have come from NASA admin lately. But even with all that, it’s hard for me to ascribe a more deeply nefarious purpose to this vision change without more data. It’s possible, but without any real evidence I would not venture to make any firm statements about motivations.

But others have been speculating. The NYT article goes on to quote James Hansen, the climate scientist who has been in the news so much lately due to the way his conclusions about global warming had been muzzled by a political appointee in NASA (http://www.badastronomy.com/bablog/2006/06/11/nasa-admits-deutsch-muzzled-scientist/):


Dr. Hansen said the change might reflect White House eagerness to shift the spotlight away from global warming.

“They’re making it clear that they have the authority to make this change, that the president sets the objectives for NASA, and that they prefer that NASA work on something that’s not causing them a problem,” he said.

I’d love to see the context of that quotation. Andrew Revkin, the article’s author, is a good reporter (he broke the story about Hansen’s suppression) so I have little doubt the quotation is accurate. But that’s a pretty strong statement to make given what little we know about the reasons behind the vision change.

I’ll note that this change was made months ago, but it’s just now starting to get noticed– it’s not the kind of thing that really jumps out at you, so it’s understandable to me that this has taken a while to percolate up. Still, at the moment, we can certainly add this to the (growing) list of things NASA does that makes you go, "say what?"

[foot_soldier]

Re: Modification of NASA's Mission Statement:

.....Still, at the moment, we can certainly add this to the (growing) list of things NASA does that makes you go, "say what?".....
NASA is just _following orders_ no doubt.

I think it must be very difficult for committed scientists to work under the conditions being mandated by the current administration.

That's an understatement.

Thank you for the heads-up on the Mission Statement, Boomer Chick. I was aware that NASA was being "restructured" but had no idea that their Mission Statement had been changed.

NASA MIssion Statement
http://naccenter.arc.nasa.gov/NASAMission.html

[erich]

Hi All:

Jim Titus is an old high school friend, Since college he has been our man on ocean level rise at EPA. It seems NASA is not the only victim.
Here's his reply when I posted him about " Terra Preta Soils" :

Erich J. Knight


-----------------
Forwarded Message:
Subj: Re: Check out New Scientist News -

Erich,
This might amuse as well--my first "no comment" ever. Jim

http://www.climatesciencewatch.org/index.php/csw/details/epa-titus/

[halva]

This is George Gonzales's comment on the change in NASA's mssion statement:

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2006/06/geo-engineering-in-vogue/

(Posting two hundred and forty-eight)

A contribution to the Real Climate debate on geoengineering. George Gonzales and a few other participants seem to be trying to turn the discussion into a nuclear energy vs geoengineering pseudo-debate.

"In the NYT tomorrow there is a story on NASA that reports that: From 2002 until this year, NASA's mission statement, prominently featured in its budget and planning documents, read: "To understand and protect our home planet; to explore the universe and search for life; to inspire the next generation of explorers ... as only NASA can." The phrase "to understand and protect the home planet" is now being removed by the Bush White House from the NASA mission statement. The deletion of this phrase could solely mean that that the Administration does not want to concede that the planet is in danger from global warming. But it could also be an indication that the Administration is not seriously considering geoengineering as a response to climate change.

Comment by George A. Gonzalez — 21 Jul 2006 @ 11:22 pm"

[Boomer Chick]

Google Alert for: global warming





WashPost Highlights Argument That Heat Wave 'Linked to Global ... (http://newsbusters.org/node/6745)
NewsBusters - USA
Washington Post reporter Juliet Eilperin puts the pedal to the metal in her Friday story, "More Frequent Heat Waves Linked to Global Warming." We're told ...
See all stories on this topic (http://news.google.com/news?ie=utf8&oe=utf8&persist=1&hl=en&client=google&ncl=http://newsbusters.org/node/6745)

Global warming: No room for failure (http://www.sbsun.com/news/ci_4134082)
San Bernardino Sun - San Bernardino,CA,USA
... To publicize the report and seek additional support for the governor's ambitious global-warming agenda, top state and local officials held a news conference ...
See all stories on this topic (http://news.google.com/news?ie=utf8&oe=utf8&persist=1&hl=en&client=google&ncl=http://www.sbsun.com/news/ci_4134082)

When warming's 'hockey stick' breaks (http://www.washtimes.com/commentary/20060803-084701-1282r.htm)
Washington Times - Washington,DC,USA
By H. Sterling Burnett. When is a story on global warming not worth reporting accurately, or maybe not worth covering at all? Evidently ...
See all stories on this topic (http://news.google.com/news?ie=utf8&oe=utf8&persist=1&hl=en&client=google&ncl=http://www.washtimes.com/commentary/20060803-084701-1282r.htm)

Robertson A Global Warming Convert (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/08/04/national/main1864868.shtml)
CBS News - USA
(CBS/AP) Religious broadcaster Pat Robertson said Thursday that he hasn't been a believer in global warming in the past, but this summer's record-breaking heat ...
See all stories on this topic (http://news.google.com/news?ie=utf8&oe=utf8&persist=1&hl=en&client=google&ncl=http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/08/04/national/main1864868.shtml)

More Frequent Heat Waves Linked to Global Warming (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/08/03/AR2006080301489.html)
Washington Post - United States
Heat waves like those that have scorched Europe and the United States in recent weeks are becoming more frequent because of global warming, say scientists who ...


Report Paints Bleak Global Warming Future (http://www.ktvu.com/news/9623156/detail.html)
KTVU.com - San Francisco,CA,USA
... The center's study predicts what could be a hellish time ahead -- warming each decade with inland valleys roasting at over 95 degrees. ...


Hurricane's Blog: More Heat Waves And Global Warming To Come? (http://www.nbc10.com/news/9624321/detail.html)
NBC 10.com - Philadelphia,PA,USA
... Global warming skeptics (and there are fewer of them each year) minimize the threat, saying that the earth's temperature has only risen one degree in the past ...


Global-warming query: Was Erik a mousse man? (http://fredericksburg.com/News/FLS/2006/082006/08042006/209945)
The Free Lance-Star - Fredericksburg,VA,USA
... is being duped by environmentalist charlatans, or he is cynically trying to parlay the environment into political power--or all of the above ["Global warming? ...
See all stories on this topic (http://news.google.com/news?ie=utf8&oe=utf8&persist=1&hl=en&client=google&ncl=http://fredericksburg.com/News/FLS/2006/082006/08042006/209945) Aspen Global Warming Study Suggests Grim Future (http://www.telluridewatch.com/080406/global_warm.htm)
Telluride Watch - Telluride,CO,USA
... study may be the first time that broad, continent- and region-wide computer models have been used to deduce with precision the impacts of global warming in a ...

[Boomer Chick]

Google Alert for: global warming





Global Warming: The nutty professor (http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/opinion/archive/s_464778.html)
Pittsburgh Tribune-Review - Pittsburgh,PA,USA
Mr. Crutzen has dreamed up an "escape route" from global warming that only Al Gore could love. Crutzen, a researcher at the Max ...


Stopping Global Warming Starts Here (http://masspirg.org/MA.asp?id2=9085&id3=MA)
MASSPIRG - Boston,MA,USA
Please email your senator and ask him or her to support the Global Warming Bill, SB 2475 by adding his/her name to the list of supporters in Senator Resor’s ...


Most Americans Worried About Global Warming (http://www.angus-reid.com/polls/index.cfm/fuseaction/viewItem/itemID/12767)
Angus Reid Global Scan - Vancouver,BC,Canada
... Los Angeles Times. 74 per cent of respondents describe global warming as a very or somewhat serious problem. The term global warming ...
See all stories on this topic (http://news.google.com/news?ie=utf8&oe=utf8&persist=1&hl=en&client=google&ncl=http://www.angus-reid.com/polls/index.cfm/fuseaction/viewItem/itemID/12767)

What is causing global warming? (http://www.dailybruin.ucla.edu/news/articles.asp?id=37851)
The UCLA Daily Bruin - Los Angeles,CA,USA
... No matter the cause, global warming is occurring, he said, and the polar ice caps are already melting. In the near future "the ocean could rise ... ...


Christians Warned Not to Jump on Global Warming Bandwagon (http://headlines.agapepress.org/archive/8/72006f.asp)
Agape Press - Tupelo,MS,USA
... A conservative columnist says an attempt to align the evangelical movement with the environmental movement on the issue of global warming is "nothing new under ...


Scientists Say Melting Permafrost Could Amplify Global Warming (http://www.voanews.com/english/2006-08-07-voa72.cfm)
Voice of America - USA
New research shows that global warming might be worse than expected because of melting permafrost, permanently frozen soil, which can release the "greenhouse ...
See all stories on this topic (http://news.google.com/news?ie=utf8&oe=utf8&persist=1&hl=en&client=google&ncl=http://www.voanews.com/english/2006-08-07-voa72.cfm)

Global Warming Is in Our Hands (4 Letters) (http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/07/opinion/l07herbert.html)
New York Times - United States
... Bob Herbert says the best way to learn about global warming is to see Al Gore’s documentary, “An Inconvenient Truth.” Unfortunately, many Republicans are ...
See all stories on this topic (http://news.google.com/news?ie=utf8&oe=utf8&persist=1&hl=en&client=google&ncl=http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/07/opinion/l07herbert.html)

Global warming could help some Michigan farmers, hurt others (http://www.centredaily.com/mld/centredaily/business/15218679.htm)
Centre Daily Times - Centre County,PA,USA
MOUNT PLEASANT, Mich. - If global warming increases the amount of heat and the length of hot days in Michigan, the change likely would help some farmers but ...
See all stories on this topic (http://news.google.com/news?ie=utf8&oe=utf8&persist=1&hl=en&client=google&ncl=http://www.centredaily.com/mld/centredaily/business/15218679.htm)

Editorial | The War on Global Warming (http://www.philly.com/mld/inquirer/news/editorial/15214506.htm)
Philadelphia Inquirer - Philadelphia,PA,USA
All those plagues could ensue, predicts a new report from the state's Climate Change Center, if global warming continues unabated. ...
See all stories on this topic (http://news.google.com/news?ie=utf8&oe=utf8&persist=1&hl=en&client=google&ncl=http://www.philly.com/mld/inquirer/news/editorial/15214506.htm) Global warming is a myth (http://www.herald-mail.com/?module=displaysection&section_id=671&format=html&edition_id=1552)
Hagerstown Morning Herald - Hagerstown,MD,USA
Tuesday - Looking back: Keedysville Historical Society works to keep history alive. Learn why its members are so involved. Wednesday ...
See all stories on this topic (http://news.google.com/news?ie=utf8&oe=utf8&persist=1&hl=en&client=google&ncl=http://www.herald-mail.com/%3Fmodule%3Ddisplaysection%26section_id%3D671%26fo rmat%3Dhtml%26edition_id%3D1552)

[foot_soldier]

.

[Boomer Chick]

Thanks, FS!


Google Alert for: global warming




On global warming, the real question is--whodunit? (http://fredericksburg.com/News/FLS/2006/082006/08102006/212021)
The Free Lance-Star - Fredericksburg,VA,USA
The Aug. 4 editorial "Polar melting" misconstrues the position of many who have doubts about global warming. The doubt arises not ...
See all stories on this topic (http://news.google.com/news?ie=utf8&oe=utf8&persist=1&hl=en&client=google&ncl=http://fredericksburg.com/News/FLS/2006/082006/08102006/212021)

Angelides’ Emerging Unified Theory of the Campaign and Global ... (http://www.californiaprogressreport.com/2006/08/angelides_emerg.html)
California Progress Report - Oakland,California,USA
... He knows his stuff and is able to rattle off statistics and put a complex issue such as global warming and a 32 page single spaced piece of legislation into ...
See all stories on this topic (http://news.google.com/news?ie=utf8&oe=utf8&persist=1&hl=en&client=google&ncl=http://www.californiaprogressreport.com/2006/08/angelides_emerg.html)

New Agreements to Focus on Global Warming (http://www.lacanadaonline.com/articles/2006/08/10/news/lnws-globalwarming0810.txt)
Valley Sun - La Cañada Flintridge,CA,USA
Whether the recent heat wave that La Cañada Flintridge residents suffered through is caused by global warming or a natural cyclical event, the push is now on ...


THE POLITICAL LANDSCAPE:Cold to global warming (http://www.dailypilot.com/articles/2006/08/10/politics/dpt-pollandscape03.txt)
Daily Pilot - Costa Mesa,CA,USA
... with British Prime Minister Tony Blair in Long Beach earlier this week to talk about how to reduce emissions that some consider responsible for global warming. ...


Global warming: man-made or natural (http://www.zwire.com/site/news.cfm?BRD=1346&dept_id=434928&newsid=17038523&PAG=461&rfi=9)
Huntington Herald - Shelton,CT,USA
Global warming is a theory proposed by scientists pointing to the observed increase in the average temperature in the earth's atmosphere and oceans in recent ...
See all stories on this topic (http://news.google.com/news?ie=utf8&oe=utf8&persist=1&hl=en&client=google&ncl=http://www.zwire.com/site/news.cfm%3FBRD%3D1346%26dept_id%3D434928%26newsid% 3D17038523%26PAG%3D461%26rfi%3D9)

Scientists say global warming heightens hurricane threat (http://www.dailypress.com/news/local/dp-96245sy0aug10,0,1116203.story?coll=dp-news-local-final)
Daily Press - Newport News,VA,USA
The next 50 days or so are when hurricanes are most likely to hit Virginia, and climate scientists warned on Wednesday that global warming has heightened the ...
See all stories on this topic (http://news.google.com/news?ie=utf8&oe=utf8&persist=1&hl=en&client=google&ncl=http://www.dailypress.com/news/local/dp-96245sy0aug10,0,1116203.story%3Fcoll%3Ddp-news-local-final)

Groups Attacking Global Warming Science Attack ThinkProgress (http://thinkprogress.org/2006/08/10/groups-attack-thinkprogress/)
Think Progress - Washington,DC,USA
First, the National Center for Public Policy Research accuses us of “libel” for suggesting that Cohen receives funding from the fossil fuel industry. ...
See all stories on this topic (http://news.google.com/news?ie=utf8&oe=utf8&persist=1&hl=en&client=google&ncl=http://thinkprogress.org/2006/08/10/groups-attack-thinkprogress/)

Cities, States Take on Global Warming (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/08/10/AR2006081001492.html)
Washington Post - United States
With Washington lawmakers deadlocked on how best to curb global warming, state and local officials across the country are adopting ambitious policies and ...
Native Alaskans Feel the Heat of Global Warming (http://www.voanews.com/english/2006-08-10-voa37.cfm)
Voice of America - USA
... But that could soon change. As VOA's Brian Padden reports, conditions attributed to global warming are now threatening the environment itself. ...
See all stories on this topic (http://news.google.com/news?ie=utf8&oe=utf8&persist=1&hl=en&client=google&ncl=http://www.voanews.com/english/2006-08-10-voa37.cfm)

[halva]

Global Warming? Keep Laffin'!
http://villagevoice.com/news/0630,sutton,73936,9.html

[halva]

bump

[Boomer Chick]

Google Alert for: global warming





Experts come together to tackle global warming (http://www.yorkshiretoday.co.uk/ViewArticle2.aspx?SectionID=56&ArticleID=1738069)
Yorkshire Post Today - Leeds,Yorkshire,UK
ENVIRONMENTALISTS and business leaders will gather in York next week to try and find ways of cutting global warming. Participants ...


Arnold Schwarzenegger: Green Gov. leads the way against global ... (http://people.monstersandcritics.com/article_1197398.php/Arnold_Schwarzenegger_Green_Gov._leads_the_way_aga inst_global_warming)
Monsters and Critics.com - Glasgow,UK
... "I don't think one should look at greenhouse gas emissions or global warming as a political issue," Schwarzenegger told ABC News. ...
See all stories on this topic (http://news.google.com/news?ie=utf8&oe=utf8&persist=1&hl=en&client=google&ncl=http://people.monstersandcritics.com/article_1197398.php/Arnold_Schwarzenegger_Green_Gov._leads_the_way_aga inst_global_warming)

City Attorney's Office Releases Report On Global Warming (http://www.10news.com/news/9773338/detail.html)
10News.com - San Diego,CA,USA
SAN DIEGO -- Global warming could lead to shrinking beaches, increased energy use, compromised water supplies and more wildfires in San Diego, according to a ...
See all stories on this topic (http://news.google.com/news?ie=utf8&oe=utf8&persist=1&hl=en&client=google&ncl=http://www.10news.com/news/9773338/detail.html)

California Legislature Passes Historic Global Warming Bill (http://renewableenergyaccess.com/rea/news/story?id=45876)
RenewableEnergyAccess.com - Peterborough,NH,USA
Sacramento, California [RenewableEnergyAccess.com] This week, the California Legislature passed the Global Warming Solutions Act, AB 32 (Nunez/Pavley ...


Reality, Wrecking a Good Global Warming Buzz (http://blog.nam.org/archives/2006/09/reality_wreckin.php)
Manufacturers' Blog - Washington,DC,USA
Of course, this flies in the face of all the global warming hysterics who have been screaming about the effect of their theory on hurricanes. ...


Less pessimism on global warming - report (http://www.iol.co.za/index.php?set_id=1&click_id=31&art_id=qw1157196241950S516)
Independent Online - Cape Town,South Africa
Sydney- The world's top climate scientists are slightly less pessimistic in their latest forecasts for global warming over the next 100 years, the Australian ...
See all stories on this topic (http://news.google.com/news?ie=utf8&oe=utf8&persist=1&hl=en&client=google&ncl=http://www.iol.co.za/index.php%3Fset_id%3D1%26click_id%3D31%26art_id%3D qw1157196241950S516)

Vt. walk aims to spur action on global warming (http://www.rutlandherald.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060901/NEWS/609010375/1004/NEWS03)
Rutland Herald - Rutland,VT,USA
RIPTON — Bill McKibben can't recall the last time more than 200 Americans launched a five-day walk calling for government action on global warming. ...
See all stories on this topic (http://news.google.com/news?ie=utf8&oe=utf8&persist=1&hl=en&client=google&ncl=http://www.rutlandherald.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article%3FAID%3D/20060901/NEWS/609010375/1004/NEWS03) Global Warming: Apocalypse Now? (http://www.commentarymagazine.com/article.asp?aid=12202044_1)
Commentary - New York,NY,USA
... This “greenhouse effect” is the cornerstone of the contemporary notion of global warming. 1 A hundred years after Arrhenius ...
See all stories on this topic (http://news.google.com/news?ie=utf8&oe=utf8&persist=1&hl=en&client=google&ncl=http://www.commentarymagazine.com/article.asp%3Faid%3D12202044_1)

[halva]

Scientific witch-hunts

This has been an extraordinary week for the UK scientific establishment and all those concerned about scientific integrity. The controversy happened to be about an issue which is itself controversial climate change but the implications are much broader than that.

On Wednesday, the Guardian carried a front page item under the headline 'Royal Society tells Exxon Stop funding climate change denial' (see http://business.guardian.co.uk/story/0,,1876540,00.html). The basis of this was a letter written by Bob Ward, the RSs head of Policy Communication, to Nick Thomas, Esso UK s director of Public Affairs (http://image.guardian.co.uk/sys-files/Guardian/documents/2006/09/19/LettertoNick.pdf) and leaked to the Guardian.

Before looking at the letter itself, we should say that putting it into the public domain in this way is unprofessional and, at the very least, discourteous to Exxon, who seem to have been in discussion with the Royal Society in good faith. This is one of the worlds most prestigious scientific organisations, representing a highly distinguished group of Fellows, playing politics in the worst possible way.

It is, of course, quite legitimate for any body to promote its own views, and the highly influential Royal Society undoubtedly does so all the time. But this letter smacks rather of using the Societys authority to stifle legitimate comments. At one point, it talks of '…your documents lack of consistency with the IPCC assessment…'.

More worrying even Orwellian is this passage: 'I would be grateful if you could let me know which organisations in the UK and other European countries have been receiving funding from ExxonMobil so that I can work out which of these have been similarly providing inaccurate and misleading information to the public.'

This betrays a worrying desire to whip people into line and shut down dissent. This is completely at odds with how scientists should behave. Science proceeds by testing theories in the most rigorous way: by gathering evidence which could falsify them. And if a theory is found wanting, it is modified or a new one proposed and tested. Unfortunately, in the looking glass world of official climate science, scientists are funded to look for evidence of global warming which, of course, they find rather than taking a broader view and genuinely seeing whether the theory stands up against the evidence. The Royal Society, to its discredit, takes this process a stage further by trying to quell all dissent rather than put its faith in the strengths of its arguments.

Fortunately, they have not gone unchallenged. Bob Ward struggled to defend his actions against the cogent arguments of David Whitehouse on the Today programme on Thursday. And we made our own modest contribution via the following letter in the Guardian:

As the current director of the Scientific Alliance, one of the groups named in your article on climate change (Royal Society tells Exxon: stop funding climate change denial, September 20), I have to register my concern at the increasing intolerance of normal scientific argument by the scientific establishment.

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has made a political synthesis of the work of many hundreds of expert scientists, and implies that the science is settled. Far from it: there is very considerable uncertainty about the influence of various drivers on global climate. Science is not democratic. Science doesn't work by consensus. Science calls for an honest evaluation of theories in the light of all available evidence. Theories stand or fall on the basis of interpretation and discussion of the evidence, not attacks on the integrity of those you may disagree with. The Royal Society is indeed taking an unprecedented step: it is seeking to close down debate, which is deeply disturbing.

The Scientific Alliance has never received money from ExxonMobil. And we will continue to encourage rational scientific debate, whoever chooses to fund us and whatever the official view of the Royal Society.
Martin Livermore
Scientific Alliance

There is an important principle at stake here. If we dont get back to a position where environmental policy making is based on hard evidence rather than peoples convictions, science as well as society will suffer. We hope that many of our readers will agree and put their own views forward.

[jayreynolds]

There is an important principle at stake here. If we dont get back to a position where environmental policy making is based on hard evidence rather than peoples convictions, science as well as society will suffer. We hope that many of our readers will agree and put their own views forward.

If Wayne Hall would only put into practice what he just posted.
But that would be honest, and Wayne isn't, so he won't.

[halva]

From "Ridgewalker"

I am not a typical "bothsides" poster and am not particularly caught up in the debate over chemtrails, although plenty of evidence exists if one has the persistence and neural power as Jay so smugly said, to do the SCIENTIFIC research.

I have come here to expose Jay Reynolds for just what he is. A hillbilly, scumsucking bottomfeeder who derives pleasure from causing others distraction, to say the least and personal pain at his most detestable.

Mr. Reynolds recently commented on an Adrants thread about a "Fake Viral Disease" invented to promote an upcoming theatrical release. This disease is called Morgellons. There is much debate currently over the legitimacy of the disease itself, but as a sufferer and patient who is terminally ill, along with my husband, I was discussing the disorder and to my great surprise and satisfaction, many along the thread, including the website owner became convinced that this was a true disorder that is now being acknowledged and a research team has been put together at the CDC for study. I have worked with researchers and physicians at Oklahoma State University where a study is ongoing. There have been numerous regional media stories in the past weeks regarding the disorder that includes skin lesions, arthralgias, myalgias, what patients call "brainfog"...a short term memory loss, siezures, tremors, with many leading to progressive ALS and MS. Two weeks ago Oakland A's relief pitcher Billy Koch and his family were interviewed on an Oakland station and admitted that this disease was the cause of his early retirement with his entire family falling ill to the disease. I am very ill or I would post all links, but you can research all recent media coverage at Morgellons.org the website for the Morgellons Research Foundation and link to the "Media" section that has streaming video of news broadcasts and audio of radio interviews. This disorder is also being studied in Italy and Japan. Patients have registered from all 50 states and 18 countries.

Mr. Reynolds took it upon himself to blow my screen name, reveal my actual name and link it to an attempted rape / assault incident that involved a group of fraternity thugs and me and my husband. What he failed to recognize in his ignorance and hasty (or lack of ) research, was this was a University newspaper and the writer was a member of the very fraternity that was in question. Yes, charges were pressed against my husband. One of the multiple assailants scratched his face with my husband's cane as it was ripped from his arms. Charges were later dismissed against my husband and the cane was found in the assailant's apt. as they feigned sleep when the police arrived after my husband had received nearly 2 dozen blows mostly kicks to the head, that nearly killed him and left him with irreversible disc damage and permanently disabled. The paper also quoted that I had been listening to music and drinking with these youngsters all evening. I was singing with nearly two dozen other people that evening and had witnesses to that effect, so it was never brought up again either in the investigation or in court. The assailants entered my apartment in the early morning and I did recognize one of them from my son's highschool, under the pretenses of wanting to purchase CDs that my sons had recently released as they belong to a band that plays Oklahoma and Arkansas and this was their first commercial release and I was helping them promote the album. They had no enemies that I knew of. The punks forced their way into my apartment and as a pledge hazing had planned a gang rape. As I mentioned on the other site, my husband and I both being 100 percent disabled, I found it quite admirable that he tried to defend me. I also mentioned that our local REAL newspaper had the sense not to cover the story until the facts were known. The assailants have been arraigned for aggravated assault and battery and are facing felony charges and 5 years in prison. The judge, at arraignment and pre-trial was quite severe in his treatment of these thugs.

Mr. Reynolds seemed to find this quite amusing. I have located where and how he determined my personal information. I have determined where Mr. Reynolds lives and how to subpoena him and I have contacted the owner of the website in L.A., Oklahoma State University, and Northeastern State University for their assistance in discovery of all information pertaining to Mr. Reynolds' inhumane and illegal misuse of my personal information. Formal slander, defamation of character and several Federal privacy violation act charges are being filed against this unimaginably ignorant man who seems to have nothing better to do with his life, which at least he has, than to torment and abuse the terminally ill.

I just want you to know what kind of person you are dealing with here. At first I did not understand why Mr. Reynolds attacked me the way he did, but after spending many hours reading a lot of his worthless theories, he somehow connected me to a Morgellons support group of which some members hold a belief in Chemtrails. As I told him, I could give a flying duck about chemtrails, I am trying the best I can to live the rest of my life as best I can supporting others suffering from this new emerging disease. To release my personal information on a public forum was not only unforgiveable, was highly illegal and he knows it. To harass two people who face pain, disability and death daily is beyond sick, it is sociopathic.

Thank you for listening and any bullshit this duck may quack to defend himself, I will gladly and easily refute.

[jayreynolds]

Formal slander, defamation of character and several Federal privacy violation act charges are being filed against this unimaginably ignorant man who seems to have nothing better to do with his life, which at least he has, than to torment and abuse the terminally ill.
I remember this encounter with a crazed promoter of the morgellons hoax during the summer. I was out of town for a few months and evidently no charges were ever filed. Most likely 'KC Ridgewalker' was just blowing smoke or her terminal illness finally did her in.

You could ask yourself why the 'Morgies' got their hoax debunked in the Journal 'Nature', whilst your own hoax never even got mentioned, Wayne.

[halva]

Royal Society tells Exxon: stop funding climate change denial

http://business.guardian.co.uk/story/0,,1876540,00.html

David Adam, environment correspondent
Wednesday September 20, 2006
The Guardian


The Royal Society is worried about climate change lobby groups, including those funded by Exxon.


Britain's leading scientists have challenged the US oil company ExxonMobil to stop funding groups that attempt to undermine the scientific consensus on climate change.

In an unprecedented step, the Royal Society, Britain's premier scientific academy, has written to the oil giant to demand that the company withdraws support for dozens of groups that have "misrepresented the science of climate change by outright denial of the evidence".

The scientists also strongly criticise the company's public statements on global warming, which they describe as "inaccurate and misleading.

In a letter earlier this month to Esso, the UK arm of ExxonMobil, the Royal Society cites its own survey which found that ExxonMobil last year distributed $2.9m to 39 groups that the society says misrepresent the science of climate change.

These include the International Policy Network, a thinktank with its HQ in London, and the George C Marshall Institute, which is based in Washington DC. In 2004, the institute jointly published a report with the UK group the Scientific Alliance which claimed that global temperature rises were not related to rising carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere.

"There is not a robust scientific basis for drawing definitive and objective conclusions about the effect of human influence on future climate," it said.

In the letter, Bob Ward of the Royal Society writes: "At our meeting in July ... you indicated that ExxonMobil would not be providing any further funding to these organisations. I would be grateful if you could let me know when ExxonMobil plans to carry out this pledge."

The letter, a copy of which has been obtained by the Guardian, adds: "I would be grateful if you could let me know which organisations in the UK and other European countries have been receiving funding so that I can work out which of these have been similarly providing inaccurate and misleading information to the public."

This is the first time the society has written to a company to challenge its activities. The move reflects mounting concern about the activities of lobby groups that try to undermine the overwhelming scientific evidence that emissions are linked to climate change.

The groups, such as the US Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI), whose senior figures have described global warming as a myth, are expected to launch a renewed campaign ahead of a major new climate change report. The CEI responded to the recent release of Al Gore's climate change film, An Inconvenient Truth, with adverts that welcomed increased carbon dioxide pollution.

The latest report from the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), due to be published in February, is expected to say that climate change could drive the Earth's temperatures higher than previously predicted.

Mr Ward said: "It is now more crucial than ever that we have a debate which is properly informed by the science. For people to be still producing information that misleads people about climate change is unhelpful. The next IPCC report should give people the final push that they need to take action and we can't have people trying to undermine it."

The Royal Society letter also takes issue with ExxonMobil's own presentation of climate science. It strongly criticises the company's "corporate citizenship reports", which claim that "gaps in the scientific basis" make it very difficult to blame climate change on human activity. The letter says: "These statements are not consistent with the scientific literature. It is very difficult to reconcile the misrepresentations of climate change science in these documents with ExxonMobil's claim to be an industry leader."

Environmentalists regard ExxonMobil as one of the least progressive oil companies because, unlike competitors such as BP and Shell, it has not invested heavily in alternative energy sources.

ExxonMobil said: "We can confirm that recently we received a letter from the Royal Society on the topic of climate change. Amongst other topics our Tomorrow's Energy and Corporate Citizenship reports explain our views openly and honestly on climate change. We would refute any suggestion that our reports are inaccurate or misleading." A spokesman added that ExxonMobil stopped funding the Competitive Enterprise Institute this year.

Recent research has made scientists more confident that recent warming is man-made, a finding endorsed by scientific academies across the world, including in the US, China and Brazil.

The Royal Society's move emerged as Chris Rapley, director of the British Antarctic Survey, warned that the polar ice caps were breaking up at a faster rate than glaciologists thought possible, with profound consequences for global sea levels. Professor Rapley said the change was almost certainly down to global warming. "It's like opening a window and seeing what's going on and the message is that it's worse than we thought," he said.

[Dingo]

If there were a financial and or psychological benefit associated with the idea that 2+2=3 you can be sure that that view would be vigorously defended and its critics ruthless excoriated. Two examples would be our earth centered universe and Biblical creationism. The first has finally gone down in flames, no doubt because new emerging interests no longer needed the geo-centered view, but the latter critics are still fighting a gallant rear guard action. Many folks still have a psychological and often material investment in Biblical authority (Think of how many people would be out of work without it) and some just can't come to terms with the idea that they are the distant cousin of a worm. LOL

Somebody has to fund the antiglobal warming cranks. How else do we bring the screwballs out of the closet and get them on the record.

[halva]

I don't know Dingo, but you are now picking a fight with Reynolds. Is this what you want to do? After all, that would be helping me, something you have never previously shown any interest in doing.

[Dingo]

I'm doing what I'm doing and it has nothing to do with your narcissistic fantasies about your grand battle with Reynolds. :rolleyes:

[halva]

Reynolds doesn't make much use of religious arguments in his harassment here.

[halva]

http://obituaries.sastandardtimes.com/obit.cfm?ID=6115

[jayreynolds]

I leave for a few days to find your above posting.
There is no relevance to posting my mother's recent obituary within this thread, Wayne Hall.

Perhaps you derive some warped pleasure at the knowledge?
Maybe you felt you could inflict some personal pain upon me or my family by introducing the subject here?
If so, you are wrong Wayne.
You exert no power over me by this act.
You only show your true colors and your desperation for all to see.

What's next, will you post other people's obituaries here in a futile attempt to convince them of your hoax?

What a complete imbecile you are!

[halva]

.

[halva]

How to talk to a climate sceptic
http://gristmill.grist.org/skeptics

Mentioning everything other than the possibility of telling them to look at this

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2397492645376591958

[halva]

Here is some more material in the crybaby mode from Smogblog.
http://www.desmogblog.com/tim-balls-last-gasps-hope-so

(Of course we agree with what they say. Just not with the way they say it.)

[jayreynolds]

Some views of the wonderful world of low-emission technology which the Greens would have the whole world adopt:
http://www.parish-without-borders.net/cditt/cambodia/dailylife/2006/dailylifekh06.htm

[halva]

More from DeSmogBlog, on the climate change debunker Monckton publishing in Nexus magazine.
http://www.desmogblog.com/monckton-global-warming-ufos-and-time-travel#comment-17579

[halva]

EU petitioning White House
http://www.desmogblog.com/europe-to-put-global-warming-pressure-on-white-house-today

[jayhawk]

Some thing is going on. Monday and Tuesday of this week, (early January) I went to the pop up trailor because it had airconditioning.
This is not normal weather for central Florida. Last week it never got below 60 degrees in the morning. Usually we get several frost each winter and average about 1.5 freezes.
Last week was about 18 degrees above normal.

[halva]

Yes. It seems that this is so.

We have been carrying out a kind of police operation here and have not been able really to give this subject its due.

[erich]

Hi All,
What do you all think about this analysis of the Carbon Cycle

From Duane Pendergast; Carbon Cycle section

"Finally, and perhaps of most importance to us, we come to the carbon cycle on land. Details on the fate of the 120 billion tonnes of carbon absorbed annually from the atmosphere by plants (GPP – Gross Primary Production) are of interest. Half of this (autotrophic respiration - 60 billion tonnes carbon) is almost immediately used by the plants themselves as food, returning carbon dioxide to the atmosphere. That leaves 60 billion tonnes (NPP – Net Primary Production) to be incorporated in their leaves, stems, roots, fruits and seeds. Some 55 billion tonnes carbon content is co-opted by animals – of many sorts - and ultimately returned to the atmosphere as carbon dioxide (heterotrophic respiration). Some 4 billion tonnes is consumed by combustion. That leaves about 1 billion tonnes to be incorporated into soil or dissolved in water and washed down rivers to the ocean.

Humans directly control and manage a major part of earth’s vegetation and animal life through agriculture. We also influence the carbon cycle through our use of forests. This review of the carbon cycle thus raises some questions. Are IPCC figures and data subtly downplaying the role of human influence on the carbon cycle? Is human use of fossil fuels overemphasized as the source of the problem? Are humans involved in other major activities which influence the carbon cycle and composition of the atmosphere? Is it possible that some aspects of the carbon cycle, other than fossil fuel use, could be modified to play an important role in greenhouse gas management?"

http://www.computare.org/Support%20documents/Fora%20Input/CCC2006/Energy%20Paper%2006_05.htm




Man has been controlling the carbon cycle , and there for the weather, since the invention of agriculture, all be it was as unintentional, as our current airliner contrails are in affecting global dimming. This unintentional warm stability in climate has over 10,000 years, allowed us to develop to the point that now we know what we did and that now we are over doing it.

The prehistoric and historic records gives a logical thrust for soil carbon sequestration.
I wonder what the soil biome carbon concentration was REALLY like before the cutting and charcoaling of the virgin east coast forest, my guess is that now we see a severely diminished community, and that only very recent Ag practices like no-till have started helped to rebuild it. It makes implementing Terra Preta soil technology like an act of penitence, returning misplaced carbon.

The Best estimates are that the total loss of forest and soil carbon (combined
pre-industrial and industrial) has been about 200-240 billion tons since the agricultural revolution. Of
that, the soils are estimated to account for about 1/3, and the vegetation
the other 2/3. Some estimates have said that 1/3 of the total was
pre-industrial and 2/3 industrial. but it may have been more like
50/50.


On the Scale of CO2 remediation:

It is my understanding, and please correct me if I've got these figures wrong, That atmospheric CO2 stands at 379 PPM, to stabilize the climate we need to reduce it to 350 PPM by the removal of 230 Billion tons.

Since man controls 24 billion tons in his agriculture then it seems we have plenty to work with in sequestering our fossil fuel co2 emissions as charcoal.

As Dr. Lehmann at Cornell points out, "Closed-Loop Pyrolysis systems such as Day's are the only way to make a fuel that is actually carbon negative". and that " a strategy combining biochar with biofuels could ultimately offset 9.5 billion tons of carbon per year-an amount equal to the total current fossil fuel emissions! "
http://www.css.cornell.edu/faculty/lehmann/biochar/Biochar_home.htm


Erich J. Knight

[halva]

http://scienceblogs.com/framing-science/2007/01/at_the_wall_street_journal_bjo.php

[halva]

http://www.desmogblog.com/tim-ball-rewrites-the-truth-once-more

[EdSnell]

Re Halva's directly above posted link:

Richard Littlemore replied, "Can you say more about this?"
There you go, Wayne, he has given you the soap box. Remember, pal, we will be right there with you.

A side note: I don't know if you can or want to do anything about this, but I have noticed others having difficulty understanding your bizarre sentence structure.

[halva]

Who be will there with them depends on who they want to have there with them.

[erich]

I would really like to know your all's opinion. Thanks

Humans began altering global climate thousands of years ago: 01-30-2004
http://www.virginia.edu/insideuva/2004/02/ruddiman_william.html


Also:

New Terra Preta Page & Mail List

My latest activities include being drafted by these guys at REPP- CREST to coordinate a central data base for all things Terra Preta: http://info.bioenergylists.org/?q=about .

The Terra Preta website is:
http://terrapreta.bioenergylists.org


Erich J. Knight

[EdSnell]

Who be will there with them depends on who they want to have there with them.That's better.

[EdSnell]

I would really like to know your all's opinion. Thanks

Humans began altering global climate thousands of years ago: 01-30-2004
http://www.virginia.edu/insideuva/2004/02/ruddiman_william.html


Also:

New Terra Preta Page & Mail List

My latest activities include being drafted by these guys at REPP- CREST to coordinate a central data base for all things Terra Preta: http://info.bioenergylists.org/?q=about .

The Terra Preta website is:
http://terrapreta.bioenergylists.org


Erich J. Knight

Eric, the Terra Preta page is mostly empty.

As far as the article on Ruddiman's ideas I think his ideas are wild and far-fetched. I believe they would be impossible to prove. It sounds as though he has had too much idle time since his retirement.

Sure, humans affect Earth's climate every time one of us takes a breath or exhales, everytime one of us is born or dies, Earth's climate is affected minutely. The same holds true for every plant and animal.

Earth's population has been relatively small until the past couple hundred years, which makes it even more difficult for me to believe humans could have had such a tremendous impact as to prevent an "ice age that should have begun 4,000 to 5,000 years ago."

I am more inclined to look at solar and volcan activities than human activities as sources of climate change (or stabilization).

[erich]

The Terra Preta was justed started last week,

the first link is the "about" , page , stating the purpose , I hope this link stays working:

http://terrapreta.bioenergylists.org/?q=about

There are five pages of the most important articles and studies at
Terra Preta Home:
http://terrapreta.bioenergylists.org

[halva]

http://www.desmogblog.com/taking-the-microphone-away-from-deniers

[EdSnell]

The Sun Moves Climate Change (http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/news/story.html?id=d2113c58-030a-4390-a12c-30f45d75dfa5)

Lawrence Solomon
Financial Post

Friday, January 05, 2007

Man produces greenhouse gases and greenhouse gases cause global warming, most scientists agree, but how, exactly, do greenhouse gases cause global warming? While theories abound, as do elaborate computer models incorporating a multitude of gases and other climatic factors, none has been conclusive. And if greenhouse gases aren't responsible, what else could be? A clear, verifiable mechanism showing how a greenhouse gas or other physical entity can drive climate change has eluded science. Until now.

For more than a decade, Henrik Svensmark of the Danish National Space Center has been pursuing an explanation for why Earth cools and warms. His findings -- published in October in the Proceedings of the Royal Society -- the mathematical, physical sciences and engineering journal of the Royal Society of London -- are now in, and they don't point to us. The sun and the stars could explain most if not all of the warming this century, and he has laboratory results to demonstrate it. Dr. Svensmark's study had its origins in 1996, when he and a colleague presented findings at a scientific conference indicating that changes in the sun's magnetic field -- quite apart from greenhouse gases -- could be related to the recent rise in global temperatures. The chairman of the United Nations Intergovernmental panel on Climate Change, the chief agency investigating global warming, then castigated them in the press, saying, "I find the move from this pair scientifically extremely naive and irresponsible." Others accused them of denouncing the greenhouse theory, something they had not done.

Svensmark and his colleague had arrived at their theory after examining data that showed a surprisingly strong correlation between cosmic rays --highspeed atomic particles originating in exploded stars in the Milky Way -- and low-altitude clouds. Earth's cloud cover increased when the intensity of cosmic rays grew and decreased when the intensity declined.

Low-altitude clouds are significant because they especially shield the Earth from the sun to keep us cool. Low cloud cover can vary by 2% in five years, affecting the Earth's surface by as much as 1.2 watts per square metre during that same period. "That figure can be compared with about 1.4 watts per square metre estimated by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change for the greenhouse effect of all the increase in carbon dioxide in the air since the Industrial Revolution," Dr. Svensmark explained.

The Danish scientists put together several well-established scientific phenomena to arrive at their novel 1996 theory. The sun's magnetic field deflects some of the cosmic rays that penetrate the Earth's atmosphere, and in so doing it also limits the immense amounts of ions and free electrons that the cosmic rays produce. But something had changed in the 20th century: The sun's magnetic field more than doubled in strength, deflecting an extraordinary number of rays. Could the diminution of cosmic rays this century have limited the formation of clouds, making the Earth warmer?

That was a plausible theory. But exactly how cosmic rays might create clouds was a mystery -- an unprovable theory, many said. Some even claimed that it was inconceivable for cosmic rays to influence cloud cover.

To discover a mechanism, a team at the Danish National Space Center assembled by Dr. Svensmark undertook an elaborate laboratory experiment in a reaction chamber the size of a small room. The team duplicated the chemistry of the lower atmosphere by injecting the gases found there in the same proportions, and adding ultraviolet rays to mimic the actions of the sun.

What they found left them agape: A vast number of floating microscopic droplets soon filled the reaction chamber. These were ultra-small clusters of sulphuric acid and water molecules -- the building blocks for cloud condensation nuclei-- that had been catalyzed by the electrons released by cosmic rays.

We were amazed by the speed and efficiency with which the electrons do their work," Dr. Svensmark remarked. For the first time ever, researchers had experimentally identified a causal mechanism by which cosmic rays can facilitate the production of clouds in Earth's atmosphere. "This is a completely new result within climate science."

Dr. Svensmark has never disputed the existence of greenhouse gases and the greenhouse effect. To the contrary, he believes that an understanding of the sun's role is needed to learn the full story, and thus determine man's role. Not only does no climate model today consider the effect of cosmic particles, but even clouds are too poorly understood to be incorporated into any serious climate model.

Because of the work of Dr. Svensmark, other agencies are now building on the Danish findings. CERN, the European Organization for Nuclear Research in Geneva, has just started a multi-phase project that begins with a rerun of the Danish experiment, only CERN will use an accelerator rather than relying on natural cosmic rays. This multinational project will provide scientists with a permanent facility for studying effects of cosmic rays and charged particles in the Earth's atmosphere.

The clouds may be lifting on scientific inquiry into climate change.

Lawrence Solomon is executive director of Urban Renaissance Institute and Consumer Policy Institute, divisions of Energy Probe Research Foundation. Email: Lawrence Solomon@nextcity.com.

[halva]

http://www.desmogblog.com/is-geo-engineering-the-answer

[EdSnell]

http://www.desmogblog.com/is-geo-engineering-the-answer

I reported your article as SPAM promoting the chemtrail hoax, Wayne. I know it was the proper action to take.;)

[halva]

OK. We'll see how you go.

[foot_soldier]

January 27, 2007
US: Use mirrors to solve global warming
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/01/27/nsun127.xml

By Bonnie Malkin

The US government has called on the world's scientists to research using giant mirrors or reflective dust to slow global warming.

It says learning how to block sunlight would be "important insurance" against rising emission, the Guardian newspaper has reported.

The government has lobbied for such a strategy to be recommended by a major UN report on climate change, the first part of which will be published on Friday.

The US has also tried to steer the report, prepared by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), away from conclusions that would support a new worldwide climate treaty based on binding targets to reduce emissions, the Guardian said.

In response to a draft copy of the report, the US said the idea of interfering with sunlight should be included in the summary for policymakers, the prominent chapter at the front of each IPCC report.

The response, obtained by the Guardian, says: "Modifying solar radiance may be an important strategy if mitigation of emissions fails. Doing the R&D to estimate the consequences of applying such a strategy is important insurance that should be taken out. This is a very important possibility that should be considered."

Scientists have previously estimated that reflecting less than 1 per cent of sunlight back into space could compensate for the warming generated by all greenhouse gases emitted since the industrial revolution.

Possible techniques include putting a giant screen into orbit, thousands of tiny, shiny balloons, or microscopic sulphate droplets pumped into the high atmosphere to mimic the cooling effects of a volcanic eruption.


The U.S. wants to explore interfering with sunlight.

[foot_soldier]

The Sun Moves Climate Change (http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/news/story.html?id=d2113c58-030a-4390-a12c-30f45d75dfa5)

Lawrence Solomon
Financial Post

Friday, January 05, 2007

Man produces greenhouse gases and greenhouse gases cause global warming, most scientists agree, but how, exactly, do greenhouse gases cause global warming? While theories abound, as do elaborate computer models incorporating a multitude of gases and other climatic factors, none has been conclusive. And if greenhouse gases aren't responsible, what else could be? A clear, verifiable mechanism showing how a greenhouse gas or other physical entity can drive climate change has eluded science. Until now.

For more than a decade, Henrik Svensmark of the Danish National Space Center has been pursuing an explanation for why Earth cools and warms. His findings -- published in October in the Proceedings of the Royal Society -- the mathematical, physical sciences and engineering journal of the Royal Society of London -- are now in, and they don't point to us. The sun and the stars could explain most if not all of the warming this century, and he has laboratory results to demonstrate it.....
Very interesting, Yaak/EdSnell.

So, given this Fleeting Sound-Byte World we live in, I suppose the newest strategey is to lard public forums with articles displaying "The Sun Is To Blame" headlines. Since most people remember headlines if nothing else, they should be well-prepared for the next phase of the media-faciliated public perception management project, yes?

That phase will undoubtedly include more articles on the wondrous benefits of "blocking the sun" as a way of dealing with regional pollution-driven climatic destabilization.

It's wonderful that you're so accommodating in the "helping people" department. God knows where we would be without heroes such as yourself working overtime to save people from having to confront the truth of our situation.

[halva]

Ignore Smellie, Footsoldier.

Talk with me instead.

What do you think of the potential of the position Richard Littlemore has taken at DeSmogBlog. Don't you think there should be more of us there talking to him?

I can't understand this mania for continuing to talk with checkmated nincompoops. And NOT talking with people towards whom we should have an intelligent stategy for intervention.

[halva]

In the past I drew parallels with Jehovah's Witnesses.

Here is another parallel. In my teens and twenties I was a great admirer of the Trotskyist theoretician Ernest Mandel. Mandel wrote great pamphlets in the 80s too, including one entitled 'Socialism and Nuclear War'.

But when the Soviet Union fell to pieces in 1991: a key event that should have been a signal for world-moving proposals by Trotksyists, all that Mandel could do was renew his squabble with the rival Trotskyist leader Tony Cliff,

For what purpose have you been doing all this study all these years, Footsoldier? What event are you waiting on to induce you to bring it to bear intelligently in the big political arena?

[EdSnell]

Foot_soldier, do you have explanations, theories or ideas for the cooling period Earth experienced in the 1970's? I know that we are the same age, so you might remember. "The Sky is Falling" alarmists were screaming that the Earth was cooling because of pollution.

Now, a similar crowd of well meaning but ignorant alarmists are yelling just the opposite as Earth's climate swings into a warming cycle.

Do you have explanations, theories or ideas as to why our entire solar system is warming and not just Earth?

---------------------------------------------

Halva, if it wasn't so much fun verbally poking you in the ribs, I would ignore you, because, basically, you are an idiot.

[J-Vitum]

Ignore Smellie, Footsoldier.

Talk with me instead.

What do you think of the potential of the position Richard Littlemore has taken at DeSmogBlog. Don't you think there should be more of us there talking to him?

I can't understand this mania for continuing to talk with checkmated nincompoops. And NOT talking with people towards whom we should have an intelligent stategy for intervention.

Talk about multiple personalities, who in the HELL is Ed Snell really?

Ed S-n-e-l-l
Jason
Y-a-a-k
YaakMT
Whitemajikman
Cydoniaquest
fastwalker
Neo
yodabreath
Billy Joe McAllister
Observer
Observer99
Annex
Falconer
Yak
Guntoter
Shawn
Weatherman717
Buzzkill
Empereor_1009

***********

OR JUST A JERK NO ONE REALLY GIVES A RATS ASS ABOUT !!!!

[halva]

Foot_soldier, do you have explanations, theories or ideas for the cooling period Earth experienced in the 1970's? I know that we are the same age, so you might remember. "The Sky is Falling" alarmists were screaming that the Earth was cooling because of pollution.

Now, a similar crowd of well meaning but ignorant alarmists are yelling just the opposite as Earth's climate swings into a warming cycle.

Do you have explanations, theories or ideas as to why our entire solar system is warming and not just Earth?

---------------------------------------------

Halva, if it wasn't so much fun verbally poking you in the ribs, I would ignore you, because, basically, you are an idiot.

Go on Footsoldier. Talk to him. Talk to him.

[EdSnell]

Talk about multiple personalities, who in the HELL is Ed Snell really?

Ed S-n-e-l-l
Jason
Y-a-a-k
YaakMT
Whitemajikman
Cydoniaquest
fastwalker
Neo
yodabreath
Billy Joe McAllister
Observer
Observer99
Annex
Falconer
Yak
Guntoter
Shawn
Weatherman717
Buzzkill
Empereor_1009

***********

OR JUST A JERK NO ONE REALLY GIVES A RATS ASS ABOUT !!!!

I'll give you an honest answer, asshole:

Yaak - used all over the Web
YaakMT - used at CTC and Carnicom's after the Yaak ID was banned
Yak - used once a Megasprayer
Observer99 - used at Carnicom's
Observer - used at Gastroenteritis

None of the rest of the names you listed are, nor have been, used by me.

Obviously, you do not have correct knowledge of who I am or the screen names I have used. You have listened to the drug induced rantings of Mike Lutgen, which caused you to come here and make a fool of yourself.

How many screen names have you used, and how many are you still using? You had best take a look at yourself, boy, before you attack me.

[halva]

There were two articles on geoengineering yesterday 28th January in the mainstream Greek national press, suggesting an upgrading of the publicization/legitimation effort, along with some residual ridiculing..

One comment cited was from the professor of nuclear and particle physics at the University of Athens Athanasios Geranios who said: “Even if it exists, the spraying cannot shape the climate (flash flooding, etc.). It can only pollute the atmosphere if it is toxic.”

Is this an enlightening, useful and/or intelligent remark?

What is the meaning of this “Even if it exists”. Are the qualities of non-existent spraying different from the qualities of existent spraying, theoretically speaking?

[halva]

There were two articles on geoengineering yesterday 28th January in the mainstream Greek national press, suggesting an upgrading of the publicization/legitimation effort, along with some residual ridiculing..

One comment cited was from the professor of nuclear and particle physics at the University of Athens Athanasios Geranios who said: “Even if it exists, the spraying cannot shape the climate (flash flooding, etc.). It can only pollute the atmosphere if it is toxic.”

Is this an enlightening, useful and/or intelligent remark?

What is the meaning of this “Even if it exists”. Are the qualities of non-existent spraying different from the qualities of existent spraying, theoretically speaking?

Any comment on this Footsoldier?

[foot_soldier]

Any comment on this Footsoldier?
I would have to see the articles to which he was responding.

[halva]

He was being interviewed by a journalist on his attitude to geoengineering and on reports of "chemtrail" spraying.

[EdSnell]

Global Warming is Natural (http://www.drudgereport.com/flash2.htm)

Two New Books Confirm Global Warming is Natural; Not Caused By Human Activity
Tue Jan 30 2007 10:02:32 ET

Two powerful new books say today’s global warming is due not to human activity but primarily to a long, moderate solar-linked cycle. Unstoppable Global Warming Every 1500 Years, by physicist Fred Singer and economist Dennis Avery was released just before Christmas. The Chilling Stars: A New Theory of Climate Change, by Danish physicist Henrik Svensmark and former BBC science writer Nigel Calder (Icon Books), is due out in March.

Singer and Avery note that most of the earth’s recent warming occurred before 1940, and thus before much human-emitted CO2. Moreover, physical evidence shows 600 moderate warmings in the earth’s last million years. The evidence ranges from ancient Nile flood records, Chinese court documents and Roman wine grapes to modern spectral analysis of polar ice cores, deep seabed sediments, and layered cave stalagmites.

Unstoppable Global Warming shows the earth’s temperatures following variations in solar intensity through centuries of sunspot records, and finds cycles of sun-linked isotopes in ice and tree rings. The book cites the work of Svensmark, who says cosmic rays vary the earth’s temperatures by creating more or fewer of the low, wet clouds that cool the earth. It notes that global climate models can’t accurately register cloud effects.

The Chilling Stars relates how Svensmark’s team mimicked the chemistry of earth’s atmosphere, by putting realistic mixtures of atmospheric gases into a large reaction chamber, with ultraviolet light as a stand-in for the sun. When they turned on the UV, microscopic droplets—cloud seeds—started floating through the chamber.

“We were amazed by the speed and efficiency with which the electrons [generated by cosmic rays] do their work of creating the building blocks for the cloud condensation nuclei,” says Svensmark.

The Chilling Stars documents how cosmic rays amplify small changes in the sun’s irradiance fourfold, creating 1-2 degree C cycles in earth’s temperatures: Cosmic rays continually slam into the earth’s atmosphere from outer space, creating ion clusters that become seeds for small droplets of water and sulfuric acid. The droplets then form the low, wet clouds that reflect solar energy back into space. When the sun is more active, it shields the earth from some of the rays, clouds wane, and the planet warms.

Unstoppable Global Warming documents the reality of a moderate, natural, 1500-year climate cycle on the earth. The Chilling Stars explains the why and how.

[halva]

http://www.canadafreepress.com/2007/global-warming020507.htm

Notwithstanding my declared opposition to debate with anthropogenic climate change debunkers, we have embarked on an interesting exploratory discussion with Dr. Tim Ball. It will be interesting to see where, if anywhere, it leads.

[halva]

The question of whether they can help to serve our purposes is open.

[halva]

http://www.enouranois.gr/english/political/Dialogue_with_a_Climate_Change_Contrarian.doc

[Lou]

Global Warming is Natural (http://www.drudgereport.com/flash2.htm)

Two New Books Confirm Global Warming is Natural; Not Caused By Human Activity
Tue Jan 30 2007 10:02:32 ET

Two powerful new books say today’s global warming is due not to human activity but primarily to a long, moderate solar-linked cycle. Unstoppable Global Warming Every 1500 Years, by physicist Fred Singer and economist Dennis Avery was released just before Christmas. The Chilling Stars: A New Theory of Climate Change, by Danish physicist Henrik Svensmark and former BBC science writer Nigel Calder (Icon Books), is due out in March.

Singer and Avery note that most of the earth’s recent warming occurred before 1940, and thus before much human-emitted CO2. Moreover, physical evidence shows 600 moderate warmings in the earth’s last million years. The evidence ranges from ancient Nile flood records, Chinese court documents and Roman wine grapes to modern spectral analysis of polar ice cores, deep seabed sediments, and layered cave stalagmites.

Unstoppable Global Warming shows the earth’s temperatures following variations in solar intensity through centuries of sunspot records, and finds cycles of sun-linked isotopes in ice and tree rings. The book cites the work of Svensmark, who says cosmic rays vary the earth’s temperatures by creating more or fewer of the low, wet clouds that cool the earth. It notes that global climate models can’t accurately register cloud effects.

The Chilling Stars relates how Svensmark’s team mimicked the chemistry of earth’s atmosphere, by putting realistic mixtures of atmospheric gases into a large reaction chamber, with ultraviolet light as a stand-in for the sun. When they turned on the UV, microscopic droplets—cloud seeds—started floating through the chamber.

“We were amazed by the speed and efficiency with which the electrons [generated by cosmic rays] do their work of creating the building blocks for the cloud condensation nuclei,” says Svensmark.

The Chilling Stars documents how cosmic rays amplify small changes in the sun’s irradiance fourfold, creating 1-2 degree C cycles in earth’s temperatures: Cosmic rays continually slam into the earth’s atmosphere from outer space, creating ion clusters that become seeds for small droplets of water and sulfuric acid. The droplets then form the low, wet clouds that reflect solar energy back into space. When the sun is more active, it shields the earth from some of the rays, clouds wane, and the planet warms.

Unstoppable Global Warming documents the reality of a moderate, natural, 1500-year climate cycle on the earth. The Chilling Stars explains the why and how.

"Singer and Avery note that most of the earth’s recent warming occurred before 1940,"

Really, these clowns wouldn't just be trying to sell a book now, would they?
__________________________

The real facts.

http://environment.newscientist.com/article/dn10800-2006-was-earths-sixth-warmest-year-on-record.html

2006 was the Earth's sixth warmest year on record, averaging 0.4°C above the 1961 to 1990 average, according to the World Meteorological Organization. The records extend back to 1861. And the UK charted its warmest year ever – its records go back to 1659.
Advance figures for the Status of the Global Climate in 2006, released on Thursday, reveal that global temperatures have risen by 0.7°C since 1900. Most of this is due to a sharp rise (0.18°C per decade) since 1976. Final figures will be released in March 2007.

The report also finds that virtually no corner of the planet was spared from extreme weather events in 2006, many of which were record-breaking.

The US experienced its warmest January to September on record, and July in Europe was also the warmest on record, nearly 3°C above the norm. In the southern hemisphere, Brazil and Australia also experienced heat waves between January and March. The town of Bom Jesus in Brazil recorded 44.6°C on 31 January – one of the highest temperatures ever in the country.

Extreme rainfall
Nor was Africa spared. Having suffered its worst drought in a decade this summer, Somalia is now undergoing its worst flooding in recent history. The extreme rainfall is affecting the entire Great Horn of Africa, where some regions have received more than six times their average monthly rainfall and hundreds of thousands of people have been affected.

Even the Sahara desert got rare heavy rainfall in February, which damaged 70% of food production and displaced 600,000 people.

Back in Europe, the River Danube rose to its highest level in more than a century because of heavy rainfall and snow melt. And in the US, New England and the north-east suffered exceptional rainfall which forced some 200,000 people to evacuate. Vancouver, in Canada, received nearly twice its monthly average rainfall in November.

$10 billion losses
In China, millions of hectares of crops were damaged by drought in Sichuan province during the summer and in eastern China during the autumn. China also suffered its worst tropical cyclone season in a decade: more than 1000 people died and the storms cost China $10 billion in economic losses.

In the Philippines, typhoon Durian affected some 1.5 million people in November and December, claiming more than 500 lives with hundreds still missing.

As for Arctic ice, researchers have noted that it is continuing to melt faster than ever (seeArctic ice: Going, going…). The WMO estimates that sea ice is now declining by 8.6% every decade, equivalent to 60,421 square kilometres a year.

Most climate researchers agree that rising greenhouse gas emissions from human activities will lead to global warming of between 1.4°C and 5.8°C, the range of predictions made by in the last IPCC report.

___________________________________

Now why did 'Singer' and 'Avery' conveniently leave all of this out of their books I wonder ?

Who funded their research, Exxon Mobil ? ( Ha ! )

The real facts.

http://environment.newscientist.com/article/dn10800-2006-was-earths-sixth-warmest-year-on-record.html

2006 was the Earth's sixth warmest year on record, averaging 0.4°C above the 1961 to 1990 average, according to the World Meteorological Organization. The records extend back to 1861. And the UK charted its warmest year ever – its records go back to 1659.
Advance figures for the Status of the Global Climate in 2006, released on Thursday, reveal that global temperatures have risen by 0.7°C since 1900. Most of this is due to a sharp rise (0.18°C per decade) since 1976. Final figures will be released in March 2007.

The report also finds that virtually no corner of the planet was spared from extreme weather events in 2006, many of which were record-breaking.

The US experienced its warmest January to September on record, and July in Europe was also the warmest on record, nearly 3°C above the norm. In the southern hemisphere, Brazil and Australia also experienced heat waves between January and March. The town of Bom Jesus in Brazil recorded 44.6°C on 31 January – one of the highest temperatures ever in the country.

Extreme rainfall
Nor was Africa spared. Having suffered its worst drought in a decade this summer, Somalia is now undergoing its worst flooding in recent history. The extreme rainfall is affecting the entire Great Horn of Africa, where some regions have received more than six times their average monthly rainfall and hundreds of thousands of people have been affected.

Even the Sahara desert got rare heavy rainfall in February, which damaged 70% of food production and displaced 600,000 people.

Back in Europe, the River Danube rose to its highest level in more than a century because of heavy rainfall and snow melt. And in the US, New England and the north-east suffered exceptional rainfall which forced some 200,000 people to evacuate. Vancouver, in Canada, received nearly twice its monthly average rainfall in November.

$10 billion losses
In China, millions of hectares of crops were damaged by drought in Sichuan province during the summer and in eastern China during the autumn. China also suffered its worst tropical cyclone season in a decade: more than 1000 people died and the storms cost China $10 billion in economic losses.

In the Philippines, typhoon Durian affected some 1.5 million people in November and December, claiming more than 500 lives with hundreds still missing.

As for Arctic ice, researchers have noted that it is continuing to melt faster than ever (seeArctic ice: Going, going…). The WMO estimates that sea ice is now declining by 8.6% every decade, equivalent to 60,421 square kilometres a year.

Most climate researchers agree that rising greenhouse gas emissions from human activities will lead to global warming of between 1.4°C and 5.8°C, the range of predictions made by in the last IPCC report.

___________________________________

Now why did 'Singer' and 'Avery' conveniently leave all of this out of their books I wonder ?

Who funded these two braintrust research, Exxon Mobil ? ( Ha ! )

Call me a skeptic but I don't trust these two bandwagon boys, they smell bad.

[halva]

Lou, if you have noticed some of the discussion and/or one-sided rhetoric on my part with Megasprayer over the usefulness of accusing people of being "paid" by oil companies or whoever, you will have seen that I don't like being trapped into a kind of debate that is not threatening for our opponents. Climate change debunkers always respond to accusations of being in the pay of oil companies by accusing their critics of being in the pay of some other environmental interest group, or whatever.

The result of this is a kind of "who pays your bills" discourse which as far as I am concerned is a major source of distraction and an element in the "divide and rule" scenario that is keeping us in a state of political paralysis.

This is not to say that even within existing political structures some legislative measures against the political practices of the oil/coal/nuclear lobbies might be possible. But by and large our side is fighting a losing battle and has been outmanouevred.

I think we need to be more intelligent. I don't know if this is a subject you are interested in examining. It certainly is for me.

[Lou]

Lou, if you have noticed some of the discussion and/or one-sided rhetoric on my part with Megasprayer over the usefulness of accusing people of being "paid" by oil companies or whoever, you will have seen that I don't like being trapped into a kind of debate that is not threatening for our opponents. Climate change debunkers always respond to accusations of being in the pay of oil companies by accusing their critics of being in the pay of some other environmental interest group, or whatever.

The result of this is a kind of "who pays your bills" discourse which as far as I am concerned is a major source of distraction and an element in the "divide and rule" scenario that is keeping us in a state of political paralysis.

This is not to say that even within existing political structures some legislative measures against the political practices of the oil/coal/nuclear lobbies might be possible. But by and large our side is fighting a losing battle and has been outmanouevred.

I think we need to be more intelligent. I don't know if this is a subject you are interested in examining. It certainly is for me.


Well, what's interesting to me is the fact that Global Warming is happening as we speak, regardless of politics or whether not one is pro or con to the issue, it's happening and it's continuing at an unprecedented rate, who's right and who's wrong is really irrelevant in the face of the climate changes that are becoming so obvious to all.

The point I was expressing to 'Snell', if he can comprehend it, is that we are all stuck on this rock. pro or con doesn't play into it anymore than politicians do, nature will ultimately rule no matter what we say or do.

[halva]

http://www.desmogblog.com/science-versus-fiction

[mrpuma]

Does it really matter if it's man made or a natural cycle??? We are going to have a refugee crisis of epic proportions. Miami, New Orleans, lower Manhattan, where are these people going to go??? That's just the US mind you. What about the Netherlands, Bangladesh??? It boggles the mind.

[halva]

Does it really matter if it's man made or a natural cycle???

Not to me, except insofar as the "man-made" element is weather modification, serving military, political or economic objectives. Then I want to know who is doing it, and why.

[Janus]

But what do we do?

[halva]

http://www.german-times.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=116&Itemid=1

[b[Don’t howl. Act.[/b]

Climate change is real. It’s time to get serious about it – By Nick Reimer

At the beginning of February, the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change published its latest report. Faced with the scenario painted by scientists, the public howled. From Stockholm to Madrid, Dublin to Berlin the question was, can the earth still be saved? The answer is yes – provided we understand the writing on the wall and finally start to protect the earth against climate change.

First, there must be an end to self-denial. We have to admit that we Europeans, too, harm the environment. People are only too happy to point at the U.S. when it comes to the environment and accuse Americans of being the worst offenders. And that is true. But how do things look within the European Union?

In 1990, when the EU consisted of 12 member states, these countries made the pledge, under the Kyoto Protocol, to produce 8 percent less greenhouse gas by 2012. By 2005, they achieved just a 0.9 percent reduction. How is it possible to trim 7.1 percent more in the remaining seven years?

It’s time for the stick. Anyone dumping old fridges in the forest is committing “illegal waste disposal.” What goes for fridges should also go for carbon dioxide. The EU has published regulations on how to reach the Kyoto goals. Now the EU Commission has to ensure that they’re adhered to – or that violators be heavily punished. The EU Commission has enough means. Canceling regional subsidies would soon bring people to demand more environmental protection from their governments.

Moreover, carbon dioxide must be priced appropriately. Waste disposal costs money, quite a lot even. Smart shoppers have developed a clever strategy to minimize these costs: the packaging stays in the store. That has caused some retailers to pressure suppliers to package their products more sparingly.

For greenhouse gases, too, the rule is that the polluter must pay. That is the original idea behind the trade in carbon dioxide certificates. Because this “climate trash” is invisible, the EU’s given it material form via stocks. The trade in these pollution rights is basically a good thing. Whoever produces less CO2 than he has shares can sell them.

Foolishly, the EU Commission torpedoed its own system. The lobbies, from the energy producers down to the cement industry, banged on Brussels’ doors until the Commission gave in and framed weak standards. It left the organization of the dirt trade to the member states.

It was a capital error. In Germany, the Schröder government gave out more pollution certificates than there was pollution. The energy companies priced these in – including the surplus* – and are celebrating two billion in extra profits every year. It’s the consumers who have paid. And the effect on environmental protection was zero.

Angela Merkel’s government is copying its predecessors. Environment Minister Sigmar Gabriel (SPD) wants the EU to issue 467 million certificates in 2010. But in that year, the industry itself predicts that they are going to need only 451 – 16 millions less than Gabriel is asking for. The result: carbon dioxide is no longer worth anything. If a ton still cost €30 before the annual deadline, today it’s traded on the exchange for €2.20. At these prices, decreasing waste isn’t worth the effort.

Fortunately, there is the EU Environment Commissioner Stavros Dimas. He wants to allow German industry only 453 million certificates. That might still be two million more than industry itself says it needs but at least it is 12 million less than the government in Berlin wants Brussels to permit.

Stick to your guns, Mr. Dimas: Germans have to do more. Above all, they have to stop posing as champions of the environment. Per head, Germany is the third biggest polluter on the planet. Just once did it achieve 6 percent with their environmental protection policy; the rest is due to the economic collapse of the former East Germany. When factories close, CO2 emissions also decrease.

But as successful as Dimas is, his failure is just as certain. Today’s structure of the EU is not going to allow for his success. Therefore, the EU Commission ought to be restructured. Europe needs a climate commissioner who concentrates solely on saving the world.

This should be the new EU climate commissioner’s to-do-list for the first 100 days: Introduction of a European-wide environment tax such as the one in Germany; cutting the number of carbon dioxide certificates issued by 10 percent immediately in order to raise the price of pollution; banning new cars that emit more than 120 grams of carbon dioxide per kilometer after 2010; an immediate tax on aviation fuel; and ending construction of new soft coal power stations – for as long as they emit CO2.

Second thoughts from states on the tax on aviation fuel? Get over it quickly. The Transportation Commissioner objects to the ban on transport planes? Denied. The expansion of renewable energy sources is held up in southeast Europe? The heads of government have to be spoken to.

In addition, there has to be a Europe-wide change in energy use. Fossil fuel power stations and nuclear reactors utilize only a small part of the energy produced, currently 30 to 40 percent. The rest is lost as heat. It has long been known that combined heat and power generation can prevent that.

As long as large power stations are in service, small, decentralized wind, solar, hydro-power stations cannot compete. The giants with their coal and nuclear power stations are so much cheaper. Everything that big hinders decentralized power generation.

The most effective way to control CO2 emissions is called efficiency. Experts believe the countries of the European Union could save a quarter of their energy requirements if they would revolutionize the efficiency of their power stations.

And we have to curtail flying in Europe, too, because nothing contributes more massively to global warming than air travel. Britain’s Tyndall Institute has calculated that by 2040 alone, civil aviation will produce as much carbon dioxide as the EU member states are permitted to generate in total. So make those who want to fly pay for the damage.

By the way, this possibility already exists today. Via the clearing agency “Atmosfair” (www.atmosfair.de ), air passengers can voluntarily pay for the environmentally damaging gases they cause. The money is invested in solar, hydro, biomass or energy saving projects. *

The EU-27 has to invent new departments as long as every member state is entitled one commissioner. Recently, it installed a commissioner for multilingualism. If another country joins, they quip in Brussels, the Commission for Maritime Affairs will have to be split up into one commission for fresh water fish and another one for the salt water variety. Why not start with a climate commissioner?

– Nick Reimer leads the business and environment section of the Berlin daily, taz. He is co-author of “Climate Change is Here. How to Save the World.” The book will be published in German in May.


Copyright © 2007 The German Times

[halva]

But what do we do?

At the level of official politics the possibilities for action may be better in the European Union than in the United States.

Americans should support Gore, or Hillary Clinton or whoever, with their votes, but at the same time support the 911 Truth Movement in direct action.

[Janus]

At the level of official politics the possibilities for action may be better in the European Union than in the United States.

Americans should support Gore, or Hillary Clinton or whoever, with their votes, but at the same time support the 911 Truth Movement in direct action.

What if an American doesn't support the bulk of positions held by Gore, or Hillary, regarding foreign policy, role of government, or myriad other issues? What if an American hasn't seen anything compelling in the 911 Truth Movement?

I think there are a lot of Conservatives/Moderates who dont want to abandon there core politics, but see Global Warming as a serious issue. What are these people to do?

[halva]

Do you think I support the positions put forward by Clinton, Gore, or whoever? If I were an American I would vote for them because to do anything else is to vote for continuation of the present situation or something even worse, if that is possible, or to waste your vote. The more you dislike the Democrats the less important a role voting should play in your political behaviour.

Concentrate on strengthening in the European Union the kind of conservatism you like and weakening the geopolitical influence of the United States.

[halva]

Help to build social forums in the United States and demanding an institutional role for them, as is beginning to happen in Europe and elsewhere.

Develop an alternative to mass politics and demand rights for it.

[halva]

Re-examine your attitude to the 911 Truth Movement and don't expect sympathy or understanding for rejection of it.

[halva]

This is a crit of the Al Gore slide show by an old school friend of mine in Australia. I think his criticisms don't get at the essence of what is wrong.

A Slightly Inconvenient Truth (Or: ‘Honey, the Poles are melting. Let’s change the light bulbs.’)

In 2006 Al Gore’s PowerPoint presentation on climate change appeared as a box-office-records-breaking documentary film entitled An Inconvenient Truth. (In Australia it was rated PG because it contained “mild themes.” Like the wholesale collapse of the biosphere and the potential end of civilisation).

To critique the film puts one in an awkward position. It caused quite a stir in the small community I live in and most of the people I know loved it. One could be charged with the failings of a quite common intellectualist stance: an overly quick, purely cerebral and negative judgement of anything may sometimes serve to block off an emotional response to troubling content, to ward off or deflect from what the heart or gut may be saying. Could I be using a quick form of intellectual judgementalism to ward off my own despair in the issue? Moreover, one also may easily stand accused of a carping ‘know-all’ elitism and, possibly even worse, irksome ‘greener-than-thou-ism’.

To avoid such misunderstandings, I hasten to stress that I happily admit that mass culture, in all its inherent ambivalence and despite its furthering of passive consumption of industrially produced spectacles, can nevertheless sometimes be useful. Who would doubt that visualising, simplifying popularisations of important and complex issues can be more important for the development of mass consciousness than more differentiated intellectual tracts that can only ever reach an educated few. And after all, isn’t it some sort of sign of cultural progress that the climate crisis issue can get into the mass movie market at all (the film is produced and distributed by Paramount )?

Undoubtedly. In my view the film also has other merits. It has all the zoom-in zoom-out fascination and charm of Google Earth. It well and entertainingly explains global macro-systems in the ‘spaceship earth’ tradition (cf. Kenneth Boulding, Buckminster Fuller and others in the late sixties/early seventies). It, possibly, helps cement the quasi-spiritual (and urgently necessary) One Earth notion/metaphor with great visual effect. For people wholly new to the whole issue of climate chaos, it well outlines the seriousness of the threat on the specific levels of global inundation/environmental refugees, droughts and heatwaves (though the food/famine consequences are underplayed), the spread of contagious disease epidemics and some biodiversity loss.*

So what’s the problem? My problem is that the film neither emotionally moved me as I expected it would, nor, in my view, did it do intellectual justice to the issue itself. I am, in fact, not too sure whether the film will actually contribute to real solutions or rather, in the end, help sabotage them. My critique of the film centres on five key aspects: its basic perspective, its lacunae (what it studiously does NOT say), its neo-liberal ideological bias, its manifest contradictions and its suggested solutions to climate crisis.

Denying Suffering: The Macroscope Perspective

The PowerPoint presentation Gore uses throughout the film seems to rely a lot on software like Google ‘Earth’ and other ‘macroscopic’ programmes that constantly show things from a satellite or plane perspective high above the earth. This perspective is not only that of the atmospheric scientists on whom his presentation mostly relies. This perspective admirably mirrors Gore’s own material reality as a member of the ‘globalist’ power- and jetset elite who in the film is shown spending a considerable amount of time high above the earth in the particular technosphere of that elite: in planes, airports, helicopters, high-rise hotel rooms. Men (and women) in suits at the apex of the social pyramid tend, like the eagles they often emblazon on their symbols of power, to gravitate towards ‘macroscopic’ or ‘big picture’ views and look down on nature and society very much from on high. Suffering, grime, disease and death are what happen to others down there on the ground.

This initial aesthetic strength in the film then quickly becomes one of its core weaknesses. In the end, the film, despite its topic, does not move the heart. From the macroscopic perspective the film takes (as that of scientists, astronauts, global jet-setters or bomber pilots), we are almost always flying high over the actual lives lived down on the ground. The huge and very real personal pain, suffering, loss, death and grief that global heating and the climate crisis actually already causes people, animals and plants (particularly in the developing countries) becomes invisible, non-existent. Apart from some very brief shots of grieving victims during Hurricane Katrina in New Orleans , the film gives us no one to suffer and empathise with, and thus be emotionally moved by, except – in moments - Al Gore himself.

One can assume that this is no coincidence. The film is firmly within the ‘celebrity hero’ genre, the ‘good guy’ we can perhaps (?) again vote for. (Realistic cynics have suggested the film is most likely a preparation for a renewed presidential candidature at the next elections). We are to identify with the green good guy as he is contrasted with those Bush bad guys or the non-listening idiots in Congress who for some strange reason just don’t rise to Senator Gore’s most rational and reasoned warnings. The only moments approaching something like real human empathy are when he talks of the death of his sister and the near-death of his son or as he sits in deep contemplative seriousness before his apple mac laptop (product placement?) with the weight of the world on his shoulders, (correctly) pondering his ‘failure to communicate the message’. In contrast, when we move away from Al himself and two suffering animals are portrayed, the film insists on using a cartoon (frog in a jar) or animation (polar bear vainly searching for a slab of ice in the sea), both of which immunise against heartfelt compassion and even produce a certain comic, infantile effect. Hey, look kids, catastrophe is like a cartoon.

Because of this well-nigh emotionless ‘aerial’ perspective and its in-built denial of human/animal suffering and empathy, I can’t see this film having much of an impact, on young people especially. It does have some kid-friendly, entertaining animations and about three jokes but it’s all overly didactic and much too much like what they get at school, albeit with more, bigger, whiz-bang visuals. (Emotionally, one could even wonder if the fictional Day After Tomorrow global warming horror movie perhaps achieved more. Then again, it’s all vicarious spectacle and we all love a bit of catastrophe, blood and guts and the end of the world on the screen…)


*

[halva]

Failure to ‘Connect The Dots’

At one point in the film Gore speaks (almost movingly) of regret that his father and he had not ‘connected the dots’ much earlier between their own growing of tobacco and the lung cancer from which his sister died, a failure they pursued even after the first official health warnings in 1964. It is a personal and moving analogy to the current inability of many of us to ‘connect the dots’ between climate chaos and fossil fuel consumption despite all the scientific warnings and evidence over the last fifteen years or so. The problem is that this inability can also be levelled at much of Gore’s presentation and the film itself.

Here, of course as dot points, are just some of the more obvious ‘dots’ the film simply ignores and fails to connect with the issue of climate crisis.

·******* The pressing urgency and ramifications of other possible ecological ‘tipping points’, i.e. catastrophic points of wholesale climatic collapse, positive feedback and irreversibility besides polar melting (e.g. release of methane under melting Siberian permafrost, wholesale continental forest dieback, warm soils as carbon sources rather than sinks, heat death or acidification of carbon-binding oceanic plankton etc.)

·******* The now dawning era of ‘peak oil’ production, skyrocketing oil prices and its huge ‘post-carbon’ consequences for societies, economies, suburban settlement patterns, lifestyles, technical ‘fixes’ and the eventual reduction of carbon emissions

·******* The objective impossibility of global suburbanisation and middle class lifestyles for all the planet *(4/5 planets needed), given we have already overshot global carrying capacity by perhaps 25-30% or more

·******* The geopolitical Empire/War connection to climate crisis/peak oil as a scramble for control of dwindling oil and gas (20% of us hog 80% of global resources and this must be kept that way…) and distraction from issues

·******* The connection between climate chaos, industrialisation and the capitalist structural imperative for limitless growth of profits, capital accumulation, consumption, markets, material throughput

These are just some of the film’s analytical blind spots or lacunae that also match the macroscopic ignoring of human and animal suffering outlined above. That these thornier, systemic, ethical, suffering-causing aspects intimately connected to the issue of climate change are no where even touched on in the film is, of course, no coincidence. They would provide an alternative framing of the issue to the one implicitly Gore subscribes to and which underpins the main political message of the film: the neo-liberal and social-democratic/light green ideology of ‘eco-modernisation’.

Social-democratic/Light Green Ideology of ‘Eco-Modernisation’

A sustained critique of this ideology would take up a book, so just a few words on this. (More below in the essay on Carbon Trading). The basic message of this widespread ideology is technocratic. It is that there are technical fixes and bandaids to most ecological (and social) problems and that to ‘fix’ climate change etc. capitalism (officially known as the ‘free market’ system) simply needs to be technically ‘modernised’ in a greener direction without any systemic changes to its socio-economic power structures, inequalities and value systems.

This ‘eco-modernisation’ (as it was known in ‘red-green’ Germany from 1998 onwards) *entails a technologically innovative move away from ‘old’ capital to ‘new’ capital, i.e. away from fossil fuels and their old ‘rust bucket’ and ‘sunset’ industries and towards newly ‘competitive’ and profitable ‘sunrise’, service, information, bio- and environmental industries supplying ‘green jobs’ and ‘green’ forms of consumerism. One early version of the theory was aptly called ‘natural capitalism’ (Amory Lovins et al. of 70s Soft Energy Paths fame, now mainly propagating hydrogen ‘hyper-cars’ and helping to ‘green’ the Pentagon). This theory is globally shared by all of the modern ‘centre-left’, most environmentalists and some of the ‘centre-right’ neo-liberal mainstream political spectrum from Social-democrats/Labor to Greens.

The theory is of course less a ‘theory’ in the strict sense than an ‘ideology’. (‘Ideology’ is here used not in the now prevailing sense of any ‘belief system’ but in the original critical sense of a theory that consciously, semi-consciously or unconsciously rationalises the material class and/or psychological interests of its adherents.) The quick way to detect an ideology is to ask the classical political question of cui bono, whom does it benefit?

The light-green ideology of ‘eco-modernisation’ rationalises the interests of the minority ‘global consumer classes’ (Wolfgang Sachs) and of old and new entrepreneurs and Big Business in the rising service, information, bio- and ‘environment’ sectors. It is an ideology that helps, under new global conditions, legitimise ‘business as usual’, i.e. the continuing inequitable flow of wealth and resources to support both the power and the ecologically unsustainable lifestyles of the rich and the middle classes in the over-industrialised (and, increasingly, the industrialising) world. It sees no limits to anything, least of all to capitalism, consumerism and the technical fixes to social and ecological problems that have created many or most of the problems in the first place. It is a means of avoiding the radical challenge that the very principles or laws of ecology and physics pose for the industrial-capitalist system itself. No real ‘paradigm shift’ is needed here.

Thus, the key ‘good news’ messages of An Inconvenient Truth, it turns out, are not so ‘inconvenient’ after all. In fact, they are thoroughly convenient for the powerful and privileged economic order-givers, their governments, media and attendant global consumer class (and thus thoroughly ideological):

‘the environment’ is ‘good for business’ (‘smart and green’ business of course)

the holy cow of (capital) growth and linked present power structures and social inequalities can continue

the rich and middle classes do not have to reduce their exorbitant, unjust and unethical consumption of the world’s resources, just ‘green it up’ a bit. (Don’t buy a Ford or Holden, buy a Toyota Prius …and if you must have a Ford or Holden, well then just keep checking that tyre pressure and save hundreds of kg of CO2).

(Inconvenient corporate aside: Given their appearance or positive mention in the film, at times one could be forgiven for assuming that the film has been sponsored by ‘smart and green’ capital like Apple or Toyota. As sixth largest global marketer, Toyota spent a mere $ 2.6 billion on advertising in 2004.[1] While Gore would no doubt enthusiastically subscribe to the latter’s ‘Prius’ hybrid-car advertising as ‘good news for planet earth’, one wonders whether he would also trumpet the fact that Toyota lobbied against and helped stall clean air and energy conservation legislation in the US for a decade, that its cars sold in 2005 had worse average overall fuel efficiency than those of 1990 because of the negative impact of their high-emission SUV (Lexus) quotient, or that its Philippines factory sacked 233 workers and the union committee in 2006 after a ballot elected the latter to be the workers’ representative body.[2] From this perspective, new ‘smart and green’ would seem to seamlessly blend with old ‘exploitative and destructive’ without too many problems of adaptation. As for Apple, Greenpeace in 2006 labelled the ‘cool’ company of Michael Jobbs as the worst environmental offender of all computer firms.[3])


*

[halva]

Unintentionally and ironically, Gore himself provides the key to understanding why he and others like him should have such an ideology. Perhaps elements of Gore’s own unconsciousness peak through at this juncture. At one point he favourably and effectively quotes US (old lefty) author Upton Sinclair’s percipient aphorism: “A man cannot understand anything if his salary depends upon him not understanding it.” As a eulogy or presentation of a presentation, the film of course does not ponder the relationship between Gore’s own ‘salary’ (both economic and psycho-ideological) as a member of the US power elite and his particular understanding of the climate crisis issue. We, however, could extend ‘salary’ to notions like ‘wealth’, ‘lifestyle’, ‘resource consumption’, ‘psychological investment’, ‘status’ etc. and the systemic blinders of this ideology may become a little clearer. In the usual case, the rich can have no deep interest in truly recognising the unjust, unethical and anti-ecological system that supports them.

If this argument is accepted, it raises ‘inconvenient’ questions for us as well. Can we ourselves, rich as we globally are as members of the privileged global consumer class, move beyond the blinders of our ‘salaries’, our wealth and unsustainable lifestyles and dare to ‘understand’ that we belong to the roughly 20% of humanity over-consuming and hogging roughly 80% of the world’s resources? Understand the global economic system, unjust trade patterns and our own over-consumption that produces climate crisis? Understand the social-democratic/light green ideologies that seek green-tech bandaids to paper over the cracks of (and prolong) this rapacious, planet-destroying system in ‘eco-modernised’ guise?**

Self-Contradictions, Political Bandaids and Market Pseudo-Solutions

Gore’s self-contradictions are mainly twofold. One relates to his own lifestyle, the other to his emphasis on the power of politicians and the Kyoto Protocol.

At no point is there even a hint of irony or self-awareness with regard to the contradiction of preaching radical carbon reductions and jetting around the world over 1000 times to preach it.

Presumably that’s all taken care of through the market voodoo of so-called ‘carbon offsetting’ . The titles at the end reveal that the film is proudly “carbon neutral”. The latter means Gore has probably paid some ‘greensmart’ and profitable ‘offset companies’ to run some monocultural (often eucalypt or pine, possibly even genetically engineered), tree plantations somewhere in the developing world – ecologically ruinous and often displacing local people dependent on the original land/.forest - which are supposed to soak up the equivalent of all that carbon his plane and car travel is responsible for. A nice arrangement for the middle class green conscience. Problem is: the carbon arithmetic of trees as carbon sinks is fraught with uncertainties and thus infinitely malleable[4], there are lots of real world complicating factors and large convenient loopholes and, at the end of the day, the trees decay and die, releasing their carbon back into the atmosphere. A tree carbon sink then becomes a carbon source. That is, even in the best and most honest of cases, while Gore’s jets and cars have directly pumped huge amounts of carbon into the atmosphere, his equivalent tree ‘offset carbon’ has not been magically made to ‘disappear’. It has, at best, only been temporarily delayed from entering the atmosphere. Once it then does enter, there is then the double whammy of its contribution plus Gore’s original jet and car contribution.[5]

No wonder middle class consumers, industry and Al Gore love ‘carbon offsetting’ and ‘carbon trading’: they avoid carbon taxes, government regulation and allow corporate ‘self-regulation’ and thus Swiss cheese loopholes, fraud and business as usual. That is why these schemes were (or, in Australia ’s case, are about to be) introduced. We need no reductions in our production and consumption, we can continue producing and consuming ourselves silly. Profits and capital can continue to grow and accumulate. According to this convenient ideology, we can in fact consume our way out of the problem: buy green gadgets, buy green jet holidays to eco-tourist destinations to see the last endangered species or tribes. We can drive (preferably a $ 45,000 Prius) and fly and consume as much as we want, we can eat our healthy ‘organic’ food packaged, cooled and flown in from across the world (as in many supermarkets in ‘Green’ Germany ). In theory, we could even drive a $ 123,000 Lexus or even a $ 375,000 Bentley Continental using around 20 litres per 100km. Just buy your ‘offsets’. Apparently Gore’s own home mansion consumes an incredible 220,000 kilowatt hours of power per year (worth $34,000), a figure that is twenty times the already stupendous US average.[6] *That is quite a lot of ‘Green Energy’ and/or ‘offsetting’ Gore has to finance. No wonder he has to jet around the world so much spreading an Inconvenient Truth, training his ‘climate messengers’ or working on his own considerable eco-financial business interests.

Gore’s other (and related) self-contradiction relates to his pushing of the notion that politicians and ‘ Kyoto ’ are important in addressing climate change. Apart from changing our light bulbs, checking tyre pressure and buying a Prius, the main thing the film implicitly suggests we can do is vote in nice Green sensible politicians (like Al Gore, if only he were running again…) Again, at no point is there any awareness shown of the deep irony of this position. If ever there has been empirical proof of the powerlessness of politicians and mainstream institutional politics in achieving any change to capitalist ecocide and business as usual, then it is (apart perhaps from Germany’s Green ex-Foreign Minister Joschka Fischer) Al Gore himself.

This ‘greenest’ of politicians (author of Earth In The Balance and derided by President Bush Senior as a job-destroying eco-nut) was, as US Vice-President, the purportedly second most politically powerful man on earth for seven or eight years. And yet what did he actually achieve? He “dragged his feet on climate change” while US carbon emissions increased 15% (faster than any time previously) and helped water down the Kyoto Protocol.[7]* The Clinton-Gore administration also gutted what was left of the US welfare state, signed neo-liberal trade deals that cost thousands of jobs and helped capital privatise public assets, allowed GE crops and foods to dominate US agriculture, baulked at even introducing energy efficiency standards for US cars, and, last but certainly not least, helped kill around a million Iraqis (500,000 children under five) through a draconian sanctions regime that they pushed at the UN.

The Clinton-Gore equivalent in ‘green-progressive’ Germany, the ‘Green-Red’ Coalition under Fischer-Schröder from 1998-2005, while facilitating the expansion of new capital in the form of a profitable renewable energy industry, nevertheless also achieved a similar neo-liberal agenda of welfare state ‘reform’ and wage reductions, a further expansion of the authoritarian surveillance state and gutting of civil liberties under the guise of ‘anti-terror’ legislation and supported NATO’s military interventions, bombing and killing of thousands of civilians in Serbia and Afghanistan.[8] To achieve this, the German Green Party had of course to become conformist parliamentarian ‘realists’ and successively divest itself of all its original radical principles based on the ‘four pillars’ of participatory democracy, non-violence, social equality and ecology. One result of this shift to the neo-liberal right was a great yawning disillusionment and apathy within a previously very active and engaged German civil society. (With the usual cultural time lag, the Australian Greens also seem set on a similar neo-liberal and social-democratic/light green trajectory of ‘mainstreaming’ and ‘achieving credibility’ with the corporate media.)

What conclusions can we draw from such repeated so-called ‘betrayals’ by ‘progressive’ politicians like Gore or Fischer? No doubt many. One may be a fairly common sense series of questions. Could it be that ‘economics’ and not ‘politics’ rules the world? Could it be that no politician on earth can ever really change anything of substance as long as the corporations have the real power, i.e. make the key economic decisions, and as long as all so-called state or ‘national interests’ are perceived as a political and military (often bloody) securing of those decisions and interests for the good of ‘the economy’? Could something like that be the real ‘inconvenient truth’ that ‘An Inconvenient Truth’ also distracts from and that will win no votes for anyone and definitely no Oscars?

[halva]

Conclusion: False Choices Between False Alternatives

In sum, like almost all ‘progressive’ corporate media products, the Gore film is deeply ambivalent. It is both a useful introduction to climate change science AND just another deeply ideological framing of an important issue in such a way as to provide a passive-consumer ‘choice’ between what are actually pseudo-alternatives.

The ‘hidden curriculum’ of this film is that you don’t actually have to think things through for yourself, communicate with peers and organise and act collectively. As an isolated consumer of movies and ideologies, you simply have a false ‘choice’ of ‘brands’ to buy, each with its particular ‘sell’ and ‘spin’: brand Gore or brand Bush, Democrat or Republican, centre left or centre right, mass slaughter by sanctions (Clinton, Keating) or by invasion, economic imperialism or militarist imperialism, hunger or guns, green Pentagon or Pentagon, Kyoto 5% or Clean Coal-Nuclear, Toyota or Ford, Apple or Microsoft, new smart green capitalism or old unsmart grey capitalism, Howard-Turnbull or Rudd-Garrett, Pepsi or Coke…* ‘Politics’ in late capitalism has been reduced to monotonous PR ‘spins’ heatedly exchanged between various neo-liberal Tweedledees and Tweedledums on various re-arrangements of the proverbial deckchairs on the proverbial Titanic. Meanwhile democracy is further eroded, business seeks to privatise and commodify all life, the survival of humane civilisation is threatened, the biosphere slowly collapses and the minority global consumer class is allowed to play Russian roulette with the atmosphere.

With such ‘choices’, no wonder the young would rather stay home and indulge in ‘real’ brand commodities, trance themselves with SMS or iPods. If that is ‘politics’, who needs it?

Honey the poles are melting, let’s change the light bulbs.
*
*********************** (2006)

[1] From the Worldwatch Institute’s Vital Signs 2006-2007, cited in New Internationalist No. 393, September 2006, p. 5. According to this source, Gore’s ‘unsmart’ Toyota competitors Ford and GM spent $ 2.7 and 3.9 billion respectively, while the top global spender was Procter & Gamble with $ 7.9 billion. Total world ad expenditure in 2005 was $ 570 billion, roughly seven times total world aid in 2004 ($ 79 billion). An increasing amount of this incredible corporate propaganda expenditure now goes to ‘green’ consumables and corporate ‘greenwash’.

[2] S. Irving , ‘Beneath The Gloss’, in New Internationalist No. 393, September 2006, p. 18.

[3] ‘Apple may be cool but it comes last on green list’, SMH, 8/12/2006, p. 13.

[4] Scientists have, for example, “found that estimates of the carbon balance in Canadian forests could vary by 1000% if seemingly small factors – such as increased levels of atmospheric CO2 – are taken into account.” (J. Kill, ‘10 things you should know about tree offsets’, in New Internationalist No. 391, July 2006, p. 7). German scientists have also found that climate change and attendant increases in soil temperature and moisture - in another disastrous vicious circle potentially affecting the use of trees to mitigate global warming - could cause forests to emit more and more nitrous oxide, a greenhouse gas 296 times as powerful as carbon dioxide. (‘No laughing matter for forests’, New Scientist, 16/9/2006, p. 16).

[5] On ‘carbon offsetting’, cf. New Internationalist No. 391, ‘CO2NNED. Carbon offsets stripped bare’, July 2006.

[6] ‘Oscar, Al and the blue-chip battlers’, Sydney Morning Herald editorial, 3-4/3/2007, p. 34.

[7] G. Lean, ‘Inconvenient truths for Al Gore and the rest of the planet’, The Independent, 17/9/2006.

[8] J. Bischoff et al (2005), Schwarzbuch Rot-Grün.
*

[Boomer Chick]

Hello.

Well, I finally viewed the Gore film on Climate Change including the addendums, and he has neatly packaged most of the information we have studied on this thread.

Melting glaciers
Plankton failing to make protective shells -- same with coral due to acidity
CO2 over production
Algae blooms
Atmosphere as thin compared to size of earth
Droughts
Floods
Hurricanes
Amazon basin changes
Graphs showing climate through the ages
Ocean currents

OK, so I'm not as articulate and erudite on writing a critique, but for me the documentary didn't present anything new . However, for those who didn't have the time or inclination to research as I did it is a fine INTRODUCTION to climate change. Light on solutions and heavy on proving that change is under way.....it was a fine INTRODUCTION.

I remember the message "we can do it." Somehow Gore thinks we can change our habits, we can change the way the Western World operates and beyond that he assumes that if we change within a decade and a half we can somehow improve the situation. It looks as though we're headed into change and that no matter what we do the change is upon us. We could blame and point fingers...but why?

We started all of forest fires? Not just man.

Do what you can do and the scientists of the world and the governments of the world will have to adapt . Can we suck CO2 out of the atmosphere? Can we bury it? It seems the melting once frozen permafrost will produce gigantic amounts of methane and CO2 and it seems no one cares much. Perhaps the real hidden knowledge is that no matter what we do as man on this planet with our present knowledge of technology, the weather, and the oceans, there's nothing we actually and in reality can do. The damage is done, the cycle has started and for all we know, tiny beings on this blue marble planet, the sun and galaxy will present its own version of change coinciding with our mistakes.

I'm not saying I'm giving up or despairing, I'm just saying I can accept reality and will do what i can. Beyond that, others must organize and do what they can. I wish us a great deal of good fortune because we'll need it as a species on a small, polluted planet.

Politics? I didn't see it....just a wake up call.

[jayreynolds]

Re: Gore, Politics, or science?

The NYT is reporting some reputable scientists not on Exxon's payroll are put off by Gore's scaremongering:
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/13/science/13gore.html?_r=2&oref=slogin&oref=slogin

Then there was Al's energy addiction scandal:
http://www.tennesseepolicy.org/main/article.php?article_id=367

How long before Ozone Al goes into an energy rehab center and reemerges walking down the road with a sandwich board calling us all hypocites?
Dream on.................

[jayreynolds]

And from those notorious Chemtrail debunkers, "The Discovery Channel":
Frostbite Ends Global Warming Trek

http://dsc.discovery.com/news/2007/03/13/trekkers_tra.html?category=travel&guid=20070313101500&dcitc=w19-502-ak-0000

March 13, 2007 — A North Pole expedition meant to bring attention to global warming was called off after one of the explorers got frostbite. The explorers, Ann Bancroft and Liv Arnesen, on Saturday called off what was intended to be a 530-mile trek across the Arctic Ocean after Arnesen suffered frostbite in three of her toes, and extreme cold temperatures drained the batteries in some of their electronic equipment.
"Ann said losing toes and going forward at all costs was never part of the journey," said Ann Atwood, who helped organize the expedition.

On Monday, the pair was at Canada's Ward Hunt Island, awaiting a plane to take them to Resolute, Canada, where they were to return to Minneapolis later this week.

Bancroft, 51, became the first woman to cross the North Pole on a 1986 expedition. She and Arnesen, 53, of Oslo, Norway, were the first women to ski across Antarctica in 2001.

But the latest trek got off to a bad start. The day they set off from Ward Hunt Island, a plane landing near the women hit their gear, punching a hole in Bancroft's sled and damaging one of Arnesen's snowshoes.

They repaired the snowshoe with binding from a ski, but Atwood said the patch job created pressure on Arnesen's left foot, which led to blisters that then turned into frostbite.

Then there was the cold — quite a bit colder, Atwood said, then Bancroft and Arnesen had expected. One night they measured the temperature inside their tent at 58 degrees below zero, and outside temperatures were exceeding 100 below zero at times, Atwood said.

"My first reaction when they called to say there were calling it off was that they just sounded really, really cold," Atwood said.
She said Bancroft and Arnesen were applying hot water bottles to Arnesen's foot every night, but had to wake up periodically because the bottles froze.

The explorers had planned to call in regular updates to school groups by satellite phone, and had planned online posts with photographic evidence of global warming. In contrast to Bancroft's 1986 trek across the Arctic with fellow Minnesota explorer Will Steger, this time she and Arnesen were prepared to don body suits and swim through areas where polar ice has melted.

Atwood said there was some irony that a trip to call attention to global warming was scuttled in part by extreme cold temperatures.

[halva]

http://www.debatebothsides.com/showpost.php?p=763288&postcount=1900

[jayreynolds]

http://www.debatebothsides.com/showpost.php?p=763288&postcount=1900

http://debatebothsides.com/showpost.php?p=763544&postcount=75

[halva]

It is definitely progress when Raynolds too comforts himself with thoughts that God is going to do his work for him.

Raynolds, you are a gutless fraud and an anti-Semite!!

[jayreynolds]

Oh, wow, Wayne, what acccusations!

or isn't this just one of those 'desperation tactics'?

But you have never developed any proof, in fact, when asked you tritelysaid you needed no proof, just like you said about your precious "chemtrails".

[halva]

I have many times made the point that it is your own social support that you are destroying, Raynolds, starting with those closest to you politically. You cannot disintegrate my support group, but you can make yourself many many enemies on your own home turf. I would not like to be you when the day comes to pay the bill, if you are still in the land of the living.

[halva]

Oh, wow, Wayne, what acccusations!

or isn't this just one of those 'desperation tactics'?

But you have never developed any proof, in fact, when asked you tritelysaid you needed no proof, just like you said about your precious "chemtrails".


http://www.debatebothsides.com/showpost.php?p=763827&postcount=1919

[halva]

It doesn’t give a damn about whether the facts stack up – as long as it creates a controversy.
http://www.monbiot.com/archives/2007/03/13/channel-4s-problem-with-science/

By George Monbiot. Published in the Guardian 13th March 2007.

Were it not for dissent, science, like politics, would have stayed in the Dark Ages. All the great heroes of the discipline – Galileo, Newton, Darwin, Einstein – took tremendous risks in confronting mainstream opinion. Today’s crank has often proved to be tomorrow’s visionary.

But the syllogism does not apply. Being a crank does not automatically make you a visionary. There is little prospect, for example, that Dr Mantombazana Tshabalala-Msimang, the South African health minister who has claimed that AIDS can be treated with garlic, lemon and beetroot, will one day be hailed as a genius. But the point is often confused. Professor David Bellamy, for example, while making the incorrect claim that wind farms do not have “any measurable effect” on total emissions of carbon dioxide, has compared himself to Galileo(1).

The problem with “The Great Global Warming Swindle”, which caused a sensation when it was broadcast on Channel 4 last week, is that to make its case it relies not on future visionaries, but on people whose findings have already been proved wrong. The implications could not be graver. Just as the British government launches its climate change bill and Gordon Brown and David Cameron start jostling to establish their green credentials, thousands of people have been misled into believing that there is no problem to address.

The film’s main contention is that the current increase in global temperatures is caused not by rising greenhouse gases, but by changes in the activity of the Sun. It is built around the discovery in 1991 by the Danish atmospheric physicist Dr Eigil Friis-Christensen that recent temperature variations on earth are in “strikingly good agreement” with the length of the cycle of sunspots(2).

Unfortunately, he found nothing of the kind. A paper published in the journal Eos in 2004 reveals that the “agreement” was the result of “incorrect handling of the physical data”(3). The real data for recent years show the opposite: that the length of the sunspot cycle has in fact declined, while temperatures have risen. When this error was exposed, Friis-Christensen and his co-author published a new paper, purporting to produce similar results(4). But this too turned out to be an artefact of mistakes they had made – in this case in their arithmetic(5).

So Friis-Christensen and another author developed yet another means of demonstrating that the Sun is responsible, claiming to have discovered a remarkable agreement between cosmic radiation influenced by the Sun and global cloud cover(6). This is the mechanism the film proposes for global warming. But, yet again, the method was exposed as faulty. They had been using satellite data which did not in fact measure global cloud cover. A paper in the Journal of Atmospheric and Solar-Terrestrial Physics shows that when the right data are used, a correlation is not found(7).

So the hypothesis changed again. Without acknowledging that his previous paper was wrong, Friis-Christensen’s co-author, Henrik Svensmark, declared that there was in fact a correlation – not with total cloud cover but with “low cloud cover”(8). This too turned out to be incorrect(9). Then, last year, Svensmark published a paper purporting to show that cosmic rays could form tiny particles in the atmosphere(10). Accompanying it was a press release which went way beyond the findings reported in the paper, claiming it showed that both past and current climate events are the result of cosmic rays(11).

As Dr Gavin Schmidt of NASA has shown on www.realclimate.org, five missing steps would have to be taken to justify the wild claims in the press release. “We’ve often criticised press releases that we felt gave misleading impressions of the underlying work”, Schmidt says, “but this example is by far the most blatant extrapolation-beyond-reasonableness that we’ve seen.”(12) None of this seems to have troubled the programme makers, who report the cosmic ray theory as if it trounces all competing explanations.

The film also maintains that manmade global warming is disproved by conflicting temperature data. Professor John Christy speaks about the discrepancy he discovered between temperatures at the earth’s surface and temperatures in the troposphere (or lower atmosphere). But the programme fails to mention that in 2005 his data were proved wrong, by three papers in Science magazine(13,14,15).

Christy himself admitted last year that he was mistaken. He was one of the lead authors of a paper which states the opposite of what he says in the film. “Previously reported discrepancies between the amount of warming near the surface and higher in the atmosphere have been used to challenge the reliability of climate models and the reality of human-induced global warming. Specifically, surface data showed substantial global-average warming, while early versions of satellite and radiosonde data showed little or no warming above the surface. This significant discrepancy no longer exists because errors in the satellite and radiosonde data have been identified and corrected.”(16)

Until recently, when found to be wrong, scientists went quietly back to their labs to start again. Now, emboldened by the global denial industry, some of them, like the film makers, shriek “censorship!” This is the best example of manufactured victimhood I have ever come across. If you demonstrate that someone is wrong, you are now deemed to be silencing him.

But there is one scientist in the film whose work has not been debunked: the oceanographer Carl Wunsch. He appears to support the idea that increasing carbon dioxide is not responsible for rising global temperatures. Professor Wunsch says that he was “completely misrepresented” by the programme, and “totally misled” by the people who made it(17).

This is a familiar story to those who have followed the career of the director, Martin Durkin. In 1998 the Independent Television Commission found that, when making a similar series, he had “misled” his interviewees about “the content and purpose of the programmes”. Their views had been “distorted through selective editing”(18). Channel 4 had to make a prime-time apology.

Cherry-pick your results, choose work which is already outdated and discredited, and anything and everything becomes true. The Twin Towers were brought down by controlled explosions; MMR injections cause autism; homeopathy works; black people are less intelligent than white people; species came about through intelligent design. You can find lines of evidence which appear to support all these contentions, and, in most cases, professors who will speak up in their favour. But this does not mean that any of them are correct. You can sustain a belief in these propositions only by ignoring the overwhelming body of contradictory data. To form a balanced, scientific view, you have to consider all the evidence, on both sides of the question.

But for the people who commissioned this film, all that counts is the sensation. Channel 4 has always had a problem with science. No one in its science unit appears to understand the difference between a peer-reviewed scientific paper and a clipping from the Daily Mail. It keeps commissioning people whose claims have been discredited – like Martin Durkin and a certain nutritionist of our acquaintance. But its failure to understand the scientific process just makes the job of whipping up a storm that much easier. The less true a programme is, the greater the controversy.

www.monbiot.com

[halva]

References:

1. David Bellamy, 14th August 2004. An ill wind blows for turbines. Letter to the Guardian.

2. Eigil Friis-Christensen and Knud Lassen, 1991. Length of the solar cycle: an indicator of solar activity closely associated with climate. Science, Vol 254, 698-700.

3. Paul Damon and Peter Laut, 2004. Pattern of Strange Errors Plagues Solar Activity and Terrestrial Climate Data. Eos, Vol. 85, No. 39.

4. Knud Lassen and Eigil Friis-Christensen, 2000. Reply to “Solar cycle lengths and climate: A reference revisited” by P. Laut and J.Gundermann. Journal of Geophysical Research Vol 105, No 27, 493-495.

5. Paul Damon and Peter Laut, ibid.

6. Henrik Svensmark and Eigil Friis-Christensen, 1997. Variation of cosmic ray flux and global cloud coverage: A missing link in solar-climate relationships. The Journal of Atmospheric and Solar-Terrestrial Physics, Vol 59, 1225-1232.

7. Peter Laut, 2003. Solar activity and terrestrial climate: an analysis of some purported correlations. Journal of Atmospheric and Solar-Terrestrial Physics Vol 65, 801-812.

8. Nigel Marsh and Henrik Svensmark, 2000. Low cloud properties influenced by cosmic rays. Physical Review Letters Vol 85, no 23. 5004-5007.

9. Paul Damon and Peter Laut, ibid.

10. Henrik Svensmark et al, 2007. Experimental evidence for the role of ions in particle nucleation under atmospheric conditions. Proceedings of the Royal Society Volume 463, Number 2078, 1364-5021.

11. Danish National Space centre, October 2006. Getting closer to the cosmic connection to climate.

http://spacecenter.dk/publications/press-releases/getting-closer-to-the-cosmic-connection-to-climate

12. Gavin Schmidt, 16th October 2006. Taking Cosmic Rays for a spin. http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2006/10/taking-cosmic-rays-for-a-spin/

13. Carl A. Mears and Frank J. Wentz, 2nd September 2005. The Effect of Diurnal Correction on Satellite-Derived Lower Tropospheric Temperature. Science. Vol 309, pp1548-1551.

14. B.D. Santer et al, 2nd September 2005. Amplification of Surface Temperature Trends and Variability in the Tropical Atmosphere. Science. Vol 309, pp1548-1551.

15. Steven J. Sherwood, John R. Lanzante and Cathryn L. Meyer, 2nd September 2005. Radiosonde Daytime Biases and Late-20th Century Warming. Science. Vol 309, pp1556-1559.

16. Tom Wigley et al, April 2006. Temperature Trends in the Lower Atmosphere – Understanding and Reconciling Differences: Executive Summary. The U.S. Climate Change Science Program.

http://www.climatescience.gov/Library/sap/sap1-1/finalreport/sap1-1-final-execsum.pdf

17. Geoffrey Lean, 11th March 2007. An inconvenient truth… for C4. Independent on Sunday.

18. Independent Television Commission, 1st April 1998. Channel 4 to apologise to four interviewees in “Against Nature” series. Press release.

[jayreynolds]

I have many times made the point that it is your own social support that you are destroying, Raynolds, starting with those closest to you politically. You cannot disintegrate my support group, but you can make yourself many many enemies on your own home turf. I would not like to be you when the day comes to pay the bill, if you are still in the land of the living.
There is a great deal of difference between us, Wayne.

Wayne, your premise comes from your paradigm, not mine. As a communist, you rely on the support of a mass you hope to gather behind you, as you know your position is so weak that it can only give the appearance of strength if it is hidden among a multitude of Babelers .

As an Individualist, I need no such support. My contentions in this debate stand by themselves, held high by fact and logic, need no appeals to higher authority to silence the opposition or subterfuge to succeed. I chose my position here on the Good Ground long ago because it was correct and unassailable, with deep roots into the Truth of Life. I knew from the outset that I could not fail, no matter what happens.

It's way late for you to speak of your alleged 'support group', for you have revealed to others far too many times that you personally deserve no such support and indeed have none.

For evidence, just look at your failure to attracy even one person to your supposed discussion forum.

.

[halva]

Most of what I'm doing is off-line or at a Greek discussion forum.

[halva]

And of course there is http://www.enouranois.gr

[halva]

Why don't you just give up, Raynolds? You are a time-wasting fool.

[halva]

Any comments on this article by Sven Giegold? Giegold is a key leader of ATTAC in Germany and he should be made familiar with our problematic. He impressed local people with his dynamism here in Aigina three or four years ago when he gave an address to the public following an ATTAC cadre meeting held here.

The Climate as Merkel Propaganda

All of a sudden everyone is talking about the climate, especially the
German Chancellor. That's a way to cover up the social conflicts
within the EU and G8. But protecting the climate will be impossible
without justice.

The EU is in deep crisis. Many people are dissatisfied with the social
insecurity, their precarious employment, the growing poverty and
inequality. Now the EU discovers a new source of common identity:
saving the climate. Angela Merkel returns as a shining victor from the
EU-Council. In the German media she is celebrated for two resolutions
till 2020: 20 % less carbon-dioxide as well as 20 % renewable sources
within the energy-mix of the community. In Germany well known
solar-power guru Franz Alt triumphs: The community of 27 countries
looking for a goal could become the engine for a turnaround in solar
power worldwide. In future the breakthrough for renewable energies and
the hopes for a solar power trend will have a new champion: Angela
Merkel!'

With this European draft now the host would like to push through the
turnaround in climate policies at the G8 in Heiligendamm. For this
reason the G8 Ministers for Environment met during in March 2007 in
Potsdam, with poor results. The G8 has itself similar problems to
those of the EU. Among the member countries there are huge political
tensions and the asocial results of their neo-liberal policies are
increasingly less well accepted. This shows for example at the World
Trade Organisation (WTO) and at the International Monetary Fund (IMF),
which are both G8 dominated. The WTO-negotiations are not getting
anywhere, since the developing countries are demanding a fair deal and
the industrialised countries can no longer push through their
interests. At the IMF hardly any developing country is asking for
their poisonous loans. Years of on-going criticism by the
anti-globalisation movement, combined with some progressive developing
countries, have put brakes on the power structures of the
industrialised countries. Worldwide the G8 has become a symbol for
destructive neo-liberal politics.

Nevertheless even from such a delegitimised institution like the G8 it
must to be demanded that climate protection must be furthered. In the
current climatic crisis only the suicidal and cynical can refuse to
grab at any straws that could save them. This is an old tradition,
also on the left: as much as the capitalists were hated., improving
the working conditions were of course demanded from them. It is
legitimate to address even an illegitimate institution for legitimate
demands.

But it can be doubted if effective climate policy is compatible with
the politics of the G8. First of all there is a problem of
credibility. While Merkel is declaring international climate
protection, she conducts old fashioned politics at home and represents
at the EU short-sighted interests for German polluting industries.
German motorways have no speed limit. When the EU tries to set
carbon-dioxide limits for cars the strongest outcry comes from Berlin.
Germany plans 6 new power plants for brown coal and 17 for anthracite.
Air traffic in general, the construction of new airports and motorways
are publicly subsidised. The railways as the most environmental
friendly means of transport are not going to be massively expanded,
but is to fall into the hands of private investors. For years the will
has been lacking to push consequently for energy efficiency while
renewable energies were successfully developed. Most likely the EU
will also miss its internationally binding Kyoto target to reduce the
emission of greenhouse gasses by 8 % in comparison to the year 1990.
Additionally despite international commitments the reductions are
largely not achieved domestically, but by financing climate
protective measures in the Third World. Without successes at home one
can hardly demand climate protection measures by newly industrialising
and developing countries.

Even greater contradictions exist between the neo-liberal
globalisation and effective climate protection policies. Opening
global markets for capital and goods leads to continuously growing
imbalances and environmental destruction. International climate
politic will not be successful if the globalisation process is not
brought under social and democratic control. For this three examples:

First, the developing and newly industrialising countries are the main
victims of climate change. According to the Polluter Pays Principle
the industrialised countries ought to pay for the immense damages.
Faced with streams of refugees, droughts and floods enormous financing
is required. Therefore instead of demanding of the developing
countries that they pay back their debts of two thousand billion
dollars the debts ought to be cancelled and the development aid
massively increased.

Second, the developing and newly industrialised countries need access
to efficient technologies. For the fast distribution of future
innovations it is crucial that developing and newly industrialised
countries are able to produce these technologies by themselves and
develop them further. For this intellectual property rights have to be
limited, while still favouring innovation, and transfer key
technologies to the developing countries. This is exactly the opposite
to the policies of Angela Merkel, who demands from the G8 a strong
worldwide enforcement of intellectual property rights for patents. As
with drugs and seeds, technologies saving resources are vital for
survival, which as far as possible must to be made available to the
developing and newly industrialised countries free of charge.

Third, climate protection will only be feasible in industrialised
countries if a social turnaround happens. Until 2050 the emissions of
carbon-dioxide have to be decreased by 80% to avoid the worst impacts
of climate change. This reduction target harbours many opportunities
for new jobs and economic development. At the same time many people
have to change their habits. Such a level of change can only be
accepted with social security. But this is incompatible with
neo-liberal employment policies like pensions and unemployment
benefits (Hartz IV) on poverty level. It can hardly be imagined that
the increasing differences between rich and poor can go together with
serious climate protection. The increasing prices for energy will lend
an additional dimension to the social disparity. While some can still
afford air travel and luxury limousines others can hardly effort their
heating bills. It is unlikely that this will be accepted. Climate
protection needs social justice.

Climate policy therefore is much more than just environmental policy.
It raises basic questions about justice, which governments have always
responded to only under strong public pressure. This pressure has to
be build up massively by social movements, non-governmental
organisations and trade unions during the G8 summit in Heiligendamm.

>SVEN GIEGOLD, Attac Germany

[Lou]

Why don't you just give up, Raynolds? You are a time-wasting fool.

Ha,....just when you think the pool filter is working fine, Oop's, a piece of crap bobs to the surface causing the swimmers to flee from the pool,... time to bring in the net_A-What? :D

[halva]

Any comments on Sven Giegold's article, Lou? This orients us to the future rather than the sad past of this section of the DBS forum.

[Lou]

Any comments on Sven Giegold's article, Lou? This orients us to the future rather than the sad past of this section of the DBS forum.

No Wayne, it's all far to EU political for my taste, plus I have no business injecting my views into other countries affairs, Bush has done that and look at the mess he has caused - ongoing.

I'm not out to save the world Wayne_I'm just trying to sort out the madness that is running loose in it.

[halva]

OK. Now the task is to get Socrates off subjects that we can't discuss collectively here.

[Lou]

Have you seen this / very interesting.

A Global Warming Model / Clifford E Carnicom

http://www.carnicom.com/gwmodel.htm

...Exerpt....

"A study has been done to examine the role of the aerosol operations with respect to global warming. It has long been proposed1 that the aerosol operations have the effect of aggravating the heating condition of the planet, and that they show no prospect for cooling the earth as many have claimed. This is in direct contradiction to many of the popular notions that commonly circulate regarding the operations, i.e., that these operations are somehow intended for our benefit, but it is best that their true nature remain undisclosed and closed to fair examination by the public. Whether or not such popular theories are intended to mislead the public is open to question; the facts, however, speak of an opposite end result. The aerosols are being dispersed into the lower atmosphere, and it can be shown that from this fact that they will indeed heat up the lower portion of the atmosphere. Global warming itself is defined as the heating of the lower atmosphere and earth2."

cont,

[halva]

Socrates/Jeff Reynolds posted it in the "Truth about Chemtrails" thread. I respond in postings 26 ff. and particularly in
http://www.debatebothsides.com/showpost.php?p=774481&postcount=30

What do you say?

[Lou]

Socrates/Jeff Reynolds posted it in the "Truth about Chemtrails" thread. I respond in postings 26 ff. and particularly in
http://www.debatebothsides.com/showpost.php?p=774481&postcount=30

What do you say?

I believe that it goes much deeper than you're response to JR #2. in that there is a concerted effort not only to modify the atmosphere through covert aerosol spraying activities but also a covert effort to modify and control the publics perception of the activities that are taking place.

It's no longer a matter of choking it up to a few conspiracy theorist who could be dealt with by branding them fringe lunatics, now there are thousands of people worldwide that see that something is not right in our sky's and they are speaking out about it and those trying to control that are loosing ground fast and they realize it, they must now change there tactics and attempt different means of molding public perception.

I know that going in this direction is probably not the response that you where expecting but the mind games I see being played out between 'Government' and the public with regard to the spraying issue is absurd, they are trying to stop the coming flood by sticking there proverbial finger in the leaking dike, in this case there is no patch that will hold back the flood of questions being asked worldwide, Government is going to end up loosing in this cover up because they are covering it up with to many lies, that even once skeptics can see through.

Our Government lied for twenty plus years trying to cover up the use of "Agent Orange" and it's cancer causing effects in Southeast Asia during the Vietnam War but eventually they where forced to admit the truth to the conspiracy fringe lunatics of that time but they never offered an apologize for there years of blatant lies. I feel that the spraying issue is going the same route as did "Agent Orange", the lies will continue to be fed to us on a daily basis until Government is forced to admit the truth, how long will that take_is anyone's guess.

[halva]

When is the message going to register at places like this?
http://www.desmogblog.com/how-can-we-be-better#comment-59329

[halva]

The approach that we in Europe, with our unfinished Constitution, may be able to take is that those who recognize reality will BE the government.

[Lou]

When is the message going to register at places like this?
http://www.desmogblog.com/how-can-we-be-better#comment-59329

Wayne, if people feel safe and secure in there denial, apathy and or ignorance why would they want to deal with the reality of truth_that would upset there perfect little world that they have constructed for themselves.

Haven't you observed how self centered, defensive and narrow minded the critics and debunkers are of the spraying issue ( and in general ), doesn't it strike you that they are really afraid that what we are saying could be possible and they are grasping for anything that will hold there preconceived tidy little world together even though it's cracking all around them.

Sadly, far to many people hide there fears by showing anger and rage because they are ignorant and do not want to admit it, or they are afraid of what might be the truth and they would rather live in denial or convenient apathy, distant from anything that could disturb there safe pathetic lives_my question is, why would or should we bother with these people, isn't that a waste of our time and effort that could be directed into more positive directions?

[Lou]

The U.S. Supreme Court say the Bush interpretation of the law is wrong. / Go figure.
__________________________________________________ ____


http://www.voanews.com/english/2007-04-04-voa59.cfm

Environmentalists Cheer US Supreme Court Ruling on Car Pollution

By Paul Sisco
Washington, D.C.
04 April 2007

Environmentalists are elated by a U.S. Supreme Court ruling on pollution by automobiles. They say eventually the ruling could prompt the government to take more direct action to reduce greenhouse gases that most scientists blame for global warming. VOA's Paul Sisco reports.
The United States' highest court says the government's Environmental Protection Agency can and should regulate carbon-dioxide and other pollutants that cars produce. Until the Supreme Court stepped in, the EPA had declined to set limits on automobile exhaust gases, widely seen as a major factor in global warming.

The ruling is a rebuff for the Bush administration and a major victory for environmentalists. David Hawkins of the Natural Resources Defense Council says, "This opinion is a huge hammer blow in favor of doing something about global warming. The opinion says that the Bush administration has basically gotten the law wrong."

The environmental agency has contended it lacks the authority to regulate new cars' gas emissions, but in a 5-4 vote, the Supreme Court said such action is a federal responsibility. The ruling notes that U.S. vehicles are by no means the biggest source of atmospheric pollution, but the billions of tons of carbon dioxide they produce are a "meaningful" part of the global-warming trend.

"We think this decision is an overdue wake-up call," said Hawkins. "We think it will force action."


The court ruling does not order any specific regulatory action, but legal analysts say it opens the door for future cases that may do so. Senator Barbara Boxer says lawmakers on Capitol Hill will be watching the administration closely.

"If they don't do what they need to do, and they have the power to do, we will do it with them or for them," the Democratic senator from California said.

The government had questioned whether it was authorized to regulate automobile emissions, but White House deputy press secretary Dana Perino said, "Now that the Supreme Court has settled that matter for us, we are going to have to analyze it and see where we go from there."

The auto industry says emissions regulations will take years to implement and could raises the cost of every new vehicle by thousands of dollars. "Prices will go up and, in the end, it is not the companies [but] the consumers that will be paying more," said Myron Ebell of the Competitive Enterprise Institute.

Scientists working with the United Nations are preparing to release a major report on the impact of global climate change, following up their recent finding that human activity and the burning of fossil fuels is warming the planet.

[halva]

Sadly, far to many people hide there fears by showing anger and rage because they are ignorant and do not want to admit it, or they are afraid of what might be the truth and they would rather live in denial or convenient apathy, distant from anything that could disturb there safe pathetic lives_my question is, why would or should we bother with these people, isn't that a waste of our time and effort that could be directed into more positive directions?

I think we should be focusing on interventions in the climate change movement. In any case, I am going to keep doing it.

[halva]

This is what happens when grass-roots movements are built on a basis of denial and half-truths. Lack of credibility and ultimately defeat at the hands of cynics and fools.

We do not have to tolerate it.

The aristocratic eccentric climate change contrarian Christopher Monckton has issued Al Gore with a public challenge to debate.

It looks as if Gore is going to ignore the challenge. The activist site DeSmogBlog defends the ignoring strategy, or rather absence of strategy.
http://www.desmogblog.com/heartland-institute-and-puzzling-genius-throw-down-gore-debate-gaunlet

I have already tried to challenge DeSmogBlog over this lack of seriousness. Do these people deserve to lead the climate change movement?
http://www.desmogblog.com/how-can-we-be-better

Monckton claims that climate change “is not a crisis”.

Let’s call this character’s bluff and refuse to follow the lead of the losers who are running the climate change movement.

Let’s ask Rosalind Peterson to publicly accept Monckton’s challenge to Al Gore and debate him on his assertion that climate change is not a crisis.

Rosalind’s site is http://www.californiaskywatch.com and her e-mail
info@californiaskywatch.com

[halva]

So far almost the only feedback I have got on the previous posting has been from Rosalind Peterson herself.

[halva]

Some positions of Rosalind Peterson:

RP: The last point is that Gore is, in my opinion, selling a "caps and trade money market scheme" to millions of people. This market will allow polluters to buy credits from those who pollute less allowing the polluters to continue to pollute on an escalating basis - it is all about money and money markets. This is not about reducing pollution.

WH: But it is explained and/or defended by those involved in the relevant negotiations as being the result of compromises forced on them by the "contrarian" lobby.

RP: Business is the only game in town. They don't want to control pollution and the automobile industry does not want us to stop using fossil fuels. It is only about money just like the "money market cap and trade schemes". And if you will note jet emissions and persistent contrails that NASA states exacerbate global warming are never on the list of things Gore talks about.

WH: These are matters for public discussion with proponents of geoengineering rather than with Gore. Wouldn't you agree? European Commissioner Stavros Dimas has politics not essentially different from Gore's, and he gladly talks about how jet emissions can exacerbate global warming. But he will not hold an honest conversation about geoengineering, or about "chemtrails" (or whatever you like to call them. That is to say, the deliberate use of jet emissions for geoengineering or other purposes.)

RP: We can't prove that jet contrails are being made for deliberate geoeningeering purposes...I wish I had the documents to back up this fact. I don't. Unless they appear I can't make the argument that it is deliberate. It is only an opinion. However, I can prove that jet emissions do negatively impact our environment.



RP: And if you look at persistent jet contrails and atmospheric heating and testing programs, along with HAARP...they and other programs started about 1988, as close as I can figure. This leads me to believe that the dramatic shift in climate not only comes from increasing pollution from industry around the world, more cars, more fossil fuels being used, etc., but most importantly from all of these programs - and this includes the myriad of weather modification programs.

WH: That may be. But shouldn't we look for some point of entry into the climate change discussion, which after all is the mass discussion. And doesn't geoengineering represent that point of entry?

RP: Yes, it does. But this is a segment of the discussion...it is something I am working on at this time.

[halva]

There is climate change censorship - and it's the deniers who dish it out
http://www.monbiot.com:80/archives/2007/04/10/the-real-climate-censorship/

Global warming scientists are under intense pressure to water down findings, and are then accused of silencing their critics

George Monbiot
Tuesday April 10, 2007
The Guardian


The drafting of reports by the world's pre-eminent group of climate scientists is an odd process. For months scientists contributing to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change tussle over the evidence. Nothing gets published unless it achieves consensus. This means that the panel's reports are conservative - even timid. It also means that they are as trustworthy as a scientific document can be.
Then, when all is settled among the scientists, the politicians sweep in and seek to excise from the summaries anything that threatens their interests.

The scientists fight back, but they always have to make concessions. The report released on Friday, for example, was shorn of the warning that "North America is expected to experience locally severe economic damage, plus substantial ecosystem, social and cultural disruption from climate change related events".
This is the opposite of the story endlessly repeated in the rightwing press: that the IPCC, in collusion with governments, is conspiring to exaggerate the science. No one explains why governments should seek to amplify their own failures. In the wacky world of the climate conspiracists no explanations are required. The world's most conservative scientific body has somehow been transformed into a conspiracy of screaming demagogues.

This is just one aspect of a story that is endlessly told the wrong way round. In the Sunday Telegraph and the Daily Mail, in columns by Dominic Lawson, Tom Utley and Janet Daley, the allegation is repeated that climate scientists and environmentalists are trying to "shut down debate". Those who say that man-made global warming is not taking place, they claim, are being censored.

Something is missing from their accusations: a single valid example. The closest any of them have been able to get is two letters sent - by the Royal Society and by the US senators Jay Rockefeller and Olympia Snowe - to that delicate flower ExxonMobil, asking that it cease funding lobbyists who deliberately distort climate science. These correspondents had no power to enforce their wishes. They were merely urging Exxon to change its practices. If everyone who urges is a censor, then the comment pages of the newspapers must be closed in the name of free speech.

In a recent interview, Martin Durkin, who made Channel 4's film The Great Global Warming Swindle, claimed he was subject to "invisible censorship". He seems to have forgotten that he had 90 minutes of prime-time television to expound his theory that climate change is a green conspiracy. What did this censorship amount to? Complaints about one of his programmes had been upheld by the Independent Television Commission. It found that "the views of the four complainants, as made clear to the interviewer, had been distorted by selective editing" and that they had been "misled as to the content and purpose of the programmes when they agreed to take part". This, apparently, makes him a martyr.

If you want to know what real censorship looks like, let me show you what has been happening on the other side of the fence. Scientists whose research demonstrates that climate change is taking place have been repeatedly threatened and silenced and their findings edited or suppressed.

The Union of Concerned Scientists found that 58% of the 279 climate scientists working at federal agencies in the US who responded to its survey reported that they had experienced one of the following constraints: 1. Pressure to eliminate the words "climate change", "global warming", or other similar terms from their communications; 2. Editing of scientific reports by their superiors that "changed the meaning of scientific findings"; 3. Statements by officials at their agencies that misrepresented their findings; 4. The disappearance or unusual delay of websites, reports, or other science-based materials relating to climate; 5. New or unusual administrative requirements that impair climate-related work; 6. Situations in which scientists have actively objected to, resigned from, or removed themselves from a project because of pressure to change scientific findings. They reported 435 incidents of political interference over the past five years.

In 2003, the White House gutted the climate-change section of a report by the Environmental Protection Agency. It deleted references to studies showing that global warming is caused by manmade emissions. It added a reference to a study, partly funded by the American Petroleum Institute, that suggested that temperatures are not rising. Eventually the agency decided to drop the section altogether.

After Thomas Knutson at the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) published a paper in 2004 linking rising emissions with more intense tropical cyclones, he was blocked by his superiors from speaking to the media. He agreed to one request to appear on MSNBC, but a public affairs officer at NOAA rang the station and said that Knutson was "too tired" to conduct the interview. The official explained to him that the "White House said no". All media inquiries were to be routed instead to a scientist who believed there was no connection between global warming and hurricanes.

Last year Nasa's top climate scientist, James Hansen, reported that his bosses were trying to censor his lectures, papers and web postings. He was told by Nasa's PR officials that there would be "dire consequences" if he continued to call for rapid reductions in greenhouse gases.

Last month, the Alaskan branch of the US fish and wildlife service told its scientists that anyone travelling to the Arctic must understand "the administration's position on climate change, polar bears, and sea ice and will not be speaking on or responding to these issues".

At hearings in the US Congress three weeks ago, Philip Cooney, a former White House aide who had previously worked at the American Petroleum Institute, admitted he had made hundreds of changes to government reports about climate change on behalf of the Bush administration. Though not a scientist, he had struck out evidence that glaciers were retreating and inserted phrases suggesting that there was serious scientific doubt about global warming.

The guardians of free speech in Britain aren't above attempting a little suppression, either. The Guardian and I have now received several letters from the climate sceptic Viscount Monckton threatening us with libel proceedings after I challenged his claims about climate science. On two of these occasions he has demanded that articles are removed from the internet. Monckton is the man who wrote to Senators Rockefeller and Snowe, claiming that their letter to ExxonMobil offends the corporation's "right of free speech".

After Martin Durkin's film was broadcast, one of the scientists it featured, Professor Carl Wunsch, complained that his views on climate change had been misrepresented. He says he has received a legal letter from Durkin's production company, Wag TV, threatening to sue him for defamation unless he agrees to make a public statement that he was neither misrepresented nor misled.

Would it be terribly impolite to suggest that when such people complain of censorship, a certain amount of projection is taking place?
Monbiot.com

[halva]

Here (http://us.f320.mail.yahoo.com/ym/ShowLetter?MsgId=8096_19186008_3515176_2607_19674_ 0_57048_50039_852788044&Idx=0&YY=43486&y5beta=yes&y5beta=yes&inc=25&order=down&sort=date&pos=0&view=a&head=b&box=Inbox#8217_0) is another example of climate change movement 'militancy' in the face of the unrelentingly aggressive and litigious stance of the various anti-social lobbies against whom these well-meaning no-hopers are persistently measuring their strength, to their detriment.

DeSmog Blog Truly Sorry about Heartland Institute "Inaccuracy"

Heartland Institute President Joseph Bast, tireless defender of big tobacco and trenchant critic of climate science advocates, has demanded that the DeSmogBlog "retract an inaccurate statement" that we had included in a post challenging Heartland to a debate over the harmful effects of tobacco.

We would like to make that retraction here and now:

The DeSmogBlog had reported in this post that the Heartland position on tobacco was "on the record," and we included this quote as an example of the material you could find on the Heartland website: "Instead of raising cigarette taxes, simple justice demands that cigarette taxes be reduced to zero. In fact, states should consider taping a dime or a quarter to every pack of cigarettes as a way of thanking smokers for reducing the burden on taxpayers!"“Cigarettes offer real benefits for the elderly, the clumsy, the forgetful, and the easily distracted. (These benefits have been intentionally underplayed by the public health community.)”

In his complaint today, Bast said this is not a fair reflection of Heartland's official view. Rather, it "is from an article that appeared in a 2004 issue of Chronicles magazine, and is a tongue-in-cheek account of the young writer's decision to start smoking."

We at the DeSmogBlog apologize. We are famously inept at figuring out which Heartland pronouncements are intended to be satirical and, on this occasion, we obviously leaped to an incorrect conclusion when we found the quote under a Heartland heading that reads: "Get the facts about secondhand smoke, the social costs of smoking, and anti-tobacco lawsuits."

Our mistake.

The DeSmogBlog would also like to thank Bast for directing us to the lead essay under Heartland's "Smoker's Lounge." Co-authored by Bast with Maureen Martin (Hearland's senior fellow for legal affairs), the essay offers the most spirited argument for smoking and "smokers' rights" that we have seen in a decade. Especially compelling (although not entirely clear) is the paragraph that reads: "Instead of raising cigarette taxes, simple justice demands that cigarette taxes be reduced to zero. In fact, states should consider taping a dime or a quarter to every pack of cigarettes as a way of thanking smokers for reducing the burden on taxpayers!"

So, again, with juicy morsels like that lying around, the DeSmogBlog is extremely sorry to have chosen something that the Heartland Institute could - under any circumstances - deny.

We retract the earlier post completely and apologize unreservedly.

So, given that we have now met President Bast's condition ("Before we can discuss a debate on smoking, you need to retract an inaccurate statement you made in your original post on the subject"), we are looking forward to working out the details for a public debate on the dangers (or even the apparent public benefits) of tobacco, in all its wondrous and addictive forms.

(end of quote)

The upshot is that inside of organizing to have tobacco lobby spokesman banned from public debate they are begging them to JOIN debate.

[halva]

http://www.desmogblog.com/scientists-try-to-protect-british-public-from-a-spreading-swindle

Scientists Try to Protect British Public from A Spreading "Swindle"
25 Apr 07
Dozens of British climate scientists are trying to block the DVD release of a controversial programme that claims global warming has nothing to do with human greenhouse gas emissions. Sir John Houghton, former head of the Met Office, and Bob May, former president of the Royal Society, are among 37 experts who have called for the DVD to be heavily edited or removed from sale. The film, the "Great Global Warming Swindle," was criticised by scientists as distorted and misleading.

Here's some of the previous posts we have done here at DSBlog on the "Great Global Warming Swindle:"

(click the link above)

[halva]

UN facing a backlash on emissions action plan

http://observer.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,,2068075,00.html

Environmental groups go on the attack as world experts reveal proposals to tackle climate change

Amelia Hill, Juliette Jowit and Robin McKie
Sunday April 29, 2007
The Observer


The world's leading climate change experts will this week outline highly controversial plans to save the world from global warming. Their proposals - which include a major expansion in nuclear power, the use of GM crops to boost biofuel production, and reliance on unproven technologies, including the underground storage of carbon dioxide - will put the UN's climate group on a collision course with a host of environmental groups.
The proposals for saving the planet are outlined in a draft version of 'Mitigation of Climate Change' by the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). This is the third part of the panel's 2007 analysis of global warming. Previous reports have focused on the science of climate change and its likely impacts. The third and final report concentrates on measures that can be taken to save the Earth from the worst, most catastrophic effects of rising temperatures triggered by the pumping of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere.

A draft version, which has been obtained by The Observer, will be debated by UN climate experts this week, and a final version will be published on Friday. It is clear that experts now believe the situation is desperately urgent.
'Global emissions must peak,' states the draft report. 'Mitigation efforts over the next two or three decades will determine the long-term global temperature increase.'

Crucially the IPCC panel insists that it is 'technically and economically' feasible to stabilise greenhouse emissions - but only if countries are prepared to pay the extra costs of transforming everything from energy supply networks to agriculture to waste. By 2030, the report estimates that the cost of stabilising greenhouse gases at levels that are considered the maximum for avoiding catastrophic climate change would cost between 0.2 and 0.6 per cent of global wealth.

As well as plans for more nuclear power, genetically modified biofuels and carbon capture and storage, the report sets out a vision of the future that is a mixture of existing policies, such as energy efficiency and renewable energy from wind and wave farms, and more futuristic ideas for hydrogen car fleets and 'intelligent' buildings which can control energy use. In addition, the report makes it clear that both developed countries, including the United States, and developing nations, in particular India and China, will have to play major roles.

Last night Tony Juniper, executive director of the environmental pressure group Friends of the Earth, said far more fundamental lifestyle changes were needed than had been considered by the UN group. 'Simply replacing one set of technologies with another set of technologies won't work, especially when there are such big downsides with some of them,' he said. Nuclear reactors are dangerous and land clearance and chemical pesticides and fertilisers used to grow fuel crops can cause huge environmental damage, he added. 'Structural change to the economy, behaviour change and culture change - those have to be elements in a world of decarbonisation,' said Juniper.

However, other groups criticised the IPCC for not being sufficiently robust in its support for technological fixes to the world's climate problems. Bruno Comby, president of Environmentalists for Nuclear Energy, said nuclear power should provide an even bigger proportion of energy than that envisaged by the UN scientists and politicians. 'Nuclear is not the only solution, but it's the biggest solution,' he said.

The news of the IPCC's controversial plans comes as Britain continues to bask in exceptionally hot weather. Yesterday the Met Office released figures which showed this month will be the warmest April for more than 140 years. The average temperature for the past month has been 11.1C (51.9F), beating the previous record of 10.6C (51F) set in 1865.

Met Office figures also indicate that the past 12 months have been the warmest in 10 years, with average figures of 11.6C. Experts at the Met Office's Hadley Centre in Exeter, Devon - which undertakes research on climate change - said this was consistent with global warming predictions. 'The effects of temperature rise are being experienced on a global scale,' said Dr Debbie Hemming. 'Many of the regions that are projected to experience the largest climate changes are already vulnerable to environmental stress from resource shortages, rapid urbanisation, population rise and industrial development.'

[halva]

Vancouver Sun Promotes Climate Swindle
30 Apr 07
http://www.desmogblog.com/vancouver-sun-pomotes-climate-swindle#comment-76113

The Vancouver Sun added its voice today to the campaign to remove science - or even common sense - from the climate change debate.

In response to an initiative to show the award-winning Inconvenient Truth in British Columbia classrooms, the Sun has joined the effort to "balance" that movie by also showing The Great Global Warming Swindle , a shoddy counterpoint featuring a host of discredited scientists and industry apologists questioning the role of CO2 in climate change. As reported here before, the single reputable scientist in that UK documentary, Massachusetts Institute of Technology Professor Carl Wunsch, has complained loudly about the blatant manipulation of the program - demanding, without response thus far, that his contribution be removed from future broadcasts.

The Sun's premise that students "need all the facts" in this case is ludicrous. The aptly named Swindle is not overburdened with fact. It is larded with the kind of misinformation that could only appeal to an oil company executive - to someone like EnCana director Mike Chernoff (inset), who is offering to pay to have the Swindle distributed. Equally silly is the notion that students should be exposed to all opinions, so they may learn better how to make up their own mind. If teachers, school trustees and newspaper editors are too thick to recognize the Swindle for what it is, why should we foist it on adolescents? Students have a right to expect that their teachers are showing some degree of discrimination - some due diligence - before presenting "facts" in the classroom.

Of course, you could go all the way with this alternative theory exercise. We could show the slick Unlocking the Mystery of Life, a manipulative religious tract that questions the science behind evolution. We could show Loose Change, the documentary that "proves" that 9/11 was an inside job, orchestrated by the U.S. government.

We could, but we should not.

It doesn't matter if the Fraser Institute alumni writing editorials at the Vancouver Sun want to deny the science of climate change - to themselves or to B.C. students. Or it shouldn't matter in setting high school curriculum.

What should matter is the best science currently available. The Inconvenient Truth is in accord with that science - perfectly in accord with the most recent report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. The Swindle is a bad joke by comparison. We should not be collecting our students in classrooms for the purpose of playing bad jokes, no matter how willing oil company executives or newspaper editors are to promote that option.

[halva]

http://www.newswire.ca/en/releases/archive/May2007/01/c3389.html

Canadians among those most concerned about climate change - Synovate and BBC World unveil global attitudes on climate change in new survey

TORONTO, ON, May 1 /CNW Telbec/ - International market research firm
Synovate announced the key findings of its first global opinion survey carried
out in conjunction with the 24-hour international news and information channel
BBC World.
The survey, which was carried out across 21 markets on six continents
during February 2007, looks at global attitudes on climate change. BBC World
is covering this topic extensively in its Climate Watch season of news,
business, documentary and factual programming.
Rob Myers, Managing Director of Synovate Canada says, "The survey shows
some strikingly common views, but also illustrates that Canadians are among
those most concerned. It is another indication to our government and
businesses that the Canadian people support real action and are prepared to
take a global lead in tackling climate change."
<<
Key Canada findings:

- 33% of Canadians are "very concerned" about the effects of climate
change, while another 43% are "somewhat concerned". Only 0.4% believe
the climate isn't changing.
- Respondents believe the main factors causing climate change are
pollution (21%) and human causes such as land clearing, waste and
population increases (21%).
- Only 18% believe one country is to blame for climate change but of
those, 83% blame the US.
- Canadians think that the main danger of climate change is flooding
(21%) followed by erratic weather conditions (16%).
- When asked what they've personally done in the past year to help reduce
the effects of climate change, 86% recycled waste, 77% saved power, 64%
reduced use of packaging and bags, 62% bought energy efficient devices,
49% decreased water consumption, 42% bought green products and 31%
improved home insulation. One quarter have bought or plan to buy a
smaller car.
- 47% of Canadians have watched Al Gore's documentary "An Inconvenient
Truth", second only to Australia with 54% having seen the film.

Key global findings:

- More than two-thirds of the world are concerned about climate change
with the South Africans and Brazilians among those most anxious. As a
result they are most likely to encourage their friends to become
greener.
- Respondents in the two major industrialized nations not to have signed
the Kyoto Protocol are well ahead of their leaders, with 84% of
Australians and 57% of Americans concerned about climate change.
- People are unclear as to the consequences of climate change. One in
seven who had an opinion on climate change did not know what the main
danger would be, such as desertification, drought, flooding or hunger.
Asians (Koreans, Chinese and Singaporeans) especially remain uninformed
about the dangers of climate change.
- 41% believe one country is responsible for climate change and almost
all of those look at the United States. Two-thirds of all respondents
blame the US before any other country.
- Almost four in five Americans, however, think that no one country is to
blame while more than 40% of Indians think that India is most
responsible.
- There is a significant section of the population that does not back the
prevailing scientific view. A quarter of Americans either do not
believe climate change is man-made or are unconcerned about it. 1.2% of
all respondents are pleased with the results of climate change - most
of who live in Poland and Russia.
- The island nations of Japan and the UK, and the low-lying Denmark are
most worried about flooding. The Japanese are also most likely to be
worried about erratic weather in the future.
- More than 20% believe human causes, including pollution, are the main
factors causing climate change.
- Germans are far more likely to blame cars and aircraft use for global
warming.
- Only 1.4% blame divine intervention, except in Dubai where the number
of respondents increased to one in five.
- People tend to attack climate change through their consumption
patterns. More than half have bought green products; energy efficient
devices; reduced packaging; or saved power. Relatively few, have done
anything more proactive with only 5% joining a lobby group and 28%
encouraging friends to be green.
- People are unlikely to let their treasured possessions go. Only 20%
have bought or plan to buy a smaller car and 28% have changed their
travel plans.

Notes to editors:

The Synovate Global Omnibus survey on climate change interviewed 14,220
respondents across 21 countries including: US, Canada, Brazil, China, India,
Hong Kong, Singapore, South Korea, Japan, Dubai, France, Germany, Italy,
Norway, Spain, Denmark, UK, Australia, South Africa, Poland, and Russia.
The survey was conducted throughout February 2007, during which time the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPPC) issued a major report from
the contributions of more than two thousand scientists specializing in the
topic. It indicated there was a direct link between climate change and human
activities.

Question one: "How do you feel regarding the effects of climate
change?"

Question two: "What do you believe is the main factor causing the
earth's climate change?"

Question three: "Have you personally done any of the following to reduce
the effects of climate change in the past year?"

Question four: "What do you regard as the main danger of climate
change?"

Question five: "Do you believe that one specific country is most
responsible for the climate changes on earth?"

Question six: "Which country do you believe is the most responsible for
the climate changes on earth?"

Question seven: "Recently Al Gore, former Vice President of the United
States, released a documentary called 'An Inconvenient
Truth'. Prior to participating in this study, had you
heard of Al Gore's documentary, had you seen this
documentary, or had you neither heard of nor seen this
documentary?"
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>

About BBC World

BBC World, the BBC's commercially funded international 24-hour news and
information channel, is owned and operated by BBC World Ltd, a member of the
BBC's commercial group of companies. BBC World is available in more than 200
countries and territories worldwide, and reaches 282 million households
(147 million 24-hour homes) and more than 1.3 million hotel rooms. It is also
available on 48 cruise ships, 36 airlines and 31 mobile phone platforms. The
channel commenced transmission in 1991 as BBC World Service Television and in
1995 was re-branded BBC World, a 24-hour news and information channel
broadcasting across Europe, Asia, the Middle East, Africa and Japan. For
further information on how to receive BBC World, download schedules or find
out more about the channel, visit www.bbcworld.com.

About Synovate

Synovate, the market research arm of Aegis Group plc, generates consumer
insights that drive competitive marketing solutions. The network provides
clients with cohesive global support and a comprehensive suite of research
solutions. Synovate employs over 5,700 staff in 118 cities across 52
countries.

For more information on Synovate visit www.synovate.com.


For further information: Rob Myers, 1(416) 738-9397,
rob.myers@synovate.com; Jennifer Chhatlani, 1(312) 526-4359,
jennifer.chhatlani@synovate.com; BBC World - Press Office: +44 20 8433 1078

[halva]

http://www.desmogblog.com/does-glenn-beck-really-believe-what-he-says

What if he doesn't?

[halva]

http://www.counterpunch.org/cockburn04282007.html

From Papal Indulgences to Carbon Credits
Is Global Warming a Sin?
By ALEXANDER COCKBURN

In a couple of hundred years, historians will be comparing the frenzies over our supposed human contribution to global warming to the tumults at the latter end of the tenth century as the Christian millennium approached. Then, as now, the doomsters identified human sinfulness as the propulsive factor in the planet's rapid downward slide.

Then as now, a buoyant market throve on fear. The Roman Catholic Church was a bank whose capital was secured by the infinite mercy of Christ, Mary and the Saints, and so the Pope could sell indulgences, like checks. The sinners established a line of credit against bad behavior and could go on sinning. Today a world market in "carbon credits" is in formation. Those whose "carbon footprint" is small can sell their surplus carbon credits to others, less virtuous than themselves.

The modern trade is as fantastical as the medieval one. There is still zero empirical evidence that anthropogenic production of CO2 is making any measurable contribution to the world's present warming trend. The greenhouse fearmongers rely entirely on unverified, crudely oversimplified computer models to finger mankind's sinful contribution. Devoid of any sustaining scientific basis, carbon trafficking is powered by guilt, credulity, cynicism and greed, just like the old indulgences, though at least the latter produced beautiful monuments. By the sixteenth century, long after the world had sailed safely through the end of the first millennium, Pope Leo X financed the reconstruction of St. Peter's Basilica by offering a "plenary" indulgence, guaranteed to release a soul from purgatory.

Now imagine two lines on a piece of graph paper. The first rises to a crest, then slopes sharply down, then levels off and rises slowly once more. The other has no undulations. It rises in a smooth, slowly increasing arc. The first, wavy line is the worldwide CO2 tonnage produced by humans burning coal, oil and natural gas. On this graph it starts in 1928, at 1.1 gigatons (i.e. 1.1 billion metric tons). It peaks in 1929 at 1.17 gigatons. The world, led by its mightiest power, the USA, plummets into the Great Depression, and by 1932 human CO2 production has fallen to 0.88 gigatons a year, a 30 per cent drop. Hard times drove a tougher bargain than all the counsels of Al Gore or the jeremiads of the IPCC (Inter-Governmental Panel on Climate Change). Then, in 1933 it began to climb slowly again, up to 0.9 gigatons.

And the other line, the one ascending so evenly? That's the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere, parts per million (ppm) by volume, moving in 1928 from just under 306, hitting 306 in 1929, to 307 in 1932 and on up. Boom and bust, the line heads up steadily. These days it's at 380.There are, to be sure, seasonal variations in CO2, as measured since 1958 by the instruments on Mauna Loa, Hawai'i. (Pre-1958 measurements are of air bubbles trapped in glacial ice.) Summer and winter vary steadily by about 5 ppm, reflecting photosynthesis cycles. The two lines on that graph proclaim that a whopping 30 per cent cut in man-made CO2 emissions didn't even cause a 1 ppm drop in the atmosphere's CO2. Thus it is impossible to assert that the increase in atmospheric CO2 stems from human burning of fossil fuels.

I met Dr. Martin Hertzberg, the man who drew that graph and those conclusions, on a Nation cruise back in 2001. He remarked that while he shared many of the Nation's editorial positions, he approved of my reservations on the issue of supposed human contributions to global warming, as outlined in columns I wrote at that time. Hertzberg was a meteorologist for three years in the U.S. Navy, an occupation which gave him a lifelong mistrust of climate modeling. Trained in chemistry and physics, a combustion research scientist for most of his career, he's retired now in Copper Mountain, Colorado, still consulting from time to time.

Not so long ago, Hertzberg sent me some of his recent papers on the global warming hypothesis, a construct now accepted by many progressives as infallible as Papal dogma on matters of faith or doctrine. Among them was the graph described above so devastating to the hypothesis.

As Hertzberg readily acknowledges, the carbon dioxide content of the atmosphere has increased about 21 per cent in the past century. The world has also been getting just a little bit warmer. The not very reliable data on the world's average temperature (which omit most of the world's oceans and remote regions, while over-representing urban areas) show about a 0.5Co increase in average temperature between 1880 and 1980, and it's still rising, more sharply in the polar regions than elsewhere. But is CO2, at 380 parts per million in the atmosphere, playing a significant role in retaining the 94 per cent of solar radiation that's absorbed in the atmosphere, as against water vapor, also a powerful heat absorber, whose content in humid tropical atmosphere, can be as high as 2 per cent, the equivalent of 20,000 ppm. As Hertzberg says, water in the form of oceans, clouds, snow, ice cover and vapor "is overwhelming in the radiative and energy balance between the earth and the sun Carbon dioxide and the greenhouse gases are, by comparison, the equivalent of a few farts in a hurricane." And water is exactly that component of the earth's heat balance that the global warming computer models fail to account for.

It's a notorious inconvenience for the Greenhousers that data also show carbon dioxide concentrations from the Eocene period, 20 million years before Henry Ford trundled his first model T out of the shop, 300-400 per cent higher than current concentrations. The Greenhousers deal with other difficulties like the medieval warming period's higher-than-today's temperatures by straightforward chicanery, misrepresenting tree-ring data (themselves an unreliable guide) and claiming the warming was a local, insignificant European affair.

We're warmer now, because today's world is in the thaw following the last Ice Age. Ice ages correlate with changes in the solar heat we receive, all due to predictable changes in the earth's elliptic orbit round the sun, and in the earth's tilt. As Hertzberg explains, the cyclical heat effect of all of these variables was worked out in great detail between 1915 and 1940 by the Serbian physicist, Milutin Milankovitch, one of the giants of 20th-century astrophysics. In past postglacial cycles, as now, the earth's orbit and tilt gives us more and longer summer days between the equinoxes.

Water covers 71 per cent of the surface of the planet. As compared to the atmosphere, there's at least a hundred times more CO2 in the oceans, dissolved as carbonate. As the postglacial thaw progresses the oceans warm up, and some of the dissolved carbon emits into the atmosphere, just like fizz in soda water taken out of the fridge. "So the greenhouse global warming theory has it ass backwards," Hertzberg concludes. "It is the warming of the earth that is causing the increase of carbon dioxide and not the reverse." He has recently had vivid confirmation of that conclusion. Several new papers show that for the last three quarter million years CO2 changes always lag global temperatures by 800 to 2,600 years.

It looks like Poseidon should go hunting for carbon credits. Trouble is, the human carbon footprint is of zero consequence amid these huge forces and volumes, and that's not even to mention the role of the giant reactor beneath our feet: the earth's increasingly hot molten core.

[halva]

Response to Cockburn
by George Monbiot
May 03, 2007

http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?SectionID=57&ItemID=12743

Let me begin this response with an admission of incompetence. I am not qualified to comment on the scientific claims made in Alexander Cockburn's article. But nor is Cockburn qualified to make them.

When a non-scientist attempts to dispute the findings of an entire body of science, a good deal of humility and a great deal of research is required. Otherwise he puts himself in the position of the 9/11 truthers. Though they might know nothing about physics, structural engineering, ballistics or explosives, these people still feel qualified to assert that the experts in these fields are wrong, and that the Twin Towers were in fact brought down by controlled explosions.

A prominent progressive writer recently said the following of such amateur detectives.

"[They] proffer what they demurely call "disturbing questions", though they disdain all answers but their own. They seize on coincidences and force them into sequences they deem to be logical and significant. Like mad Inquisitors, they pounce on imagined clues in documents and photos, torturing the data *- as the old joke goes about economists -- till the data confess. Their treatment of eyewitness testimony and forensic evidence is whimsical. Apparent anomalies that seem to nourish their theories are brandished excitedly; testimony that undermines their theories--like witnesses of a large plane hitting the Pentagon -- is contemptuously brushed aside."

The writer was Alexander Cockburn. I charge that his treatment of climate change resembles their treatment of the events of September 11th 2001.

To sustain or to refute his argument about the link between carbon dioxide emissions and global temperatures requires a detailed knowledge of the following issues. They are all complex matters. You have to spend a great deal of time, and you must have some expertise in and understanding of climate science, to be able confidently to comment on them:

1. The measurement record for carbon dioxide emissions.
2.. The measurement record for carbon dioxide concentrations in the atmosphere.
3. The possible biases in these records, and whether or not they have been recognised and allowed for by the standard climate models.
4. The possible smoothing effect of the lag between carbon emissions and averaged atmospheric concentrations.
5. Carbon concentrations in the Eocene.
6. Other factors affecting Eocene temperatures.
7. The current state of the Milankovitch cycle and its likely impact on temperatures, with and without the extra radiative forcing caused by the addition of anthropogenic CO2.

Cockburn provides no evidence that he has mastered these issues, or that his research into his chosen subject is any more extensive than that of the conspiracists he so correctly and so entertainingly derides. But this is not the only resemblance between his case and the case made by the truthers.

· The first test of whether a scientific critique carries weight is whether or not its claims can be traced to articles published in peer-reviewed journals. Cockburn provides no references of any kind. As a result it is impossible for someone who is not an expert in this field to assess his claims. Have the "papers" he refers to been published in a peer-reviewed scientific journal? Cockburn does not tell us. If they have not, they carry no scientific weight.

· He appears to rely on the testimony of one man who studied meteorology for three years a long time ago, while dismissing the work of thousands of others with greater experience and better credentials. As Cockburn must know from his work on the 9/11 conspiracists, you can find an "expert" to support just about any position on any subject. If you want to believe that HIV does not cause AIDs, you can find a professor of medicine who supports that view. If you want to claim that smoking does not cause cancer, or that black people are less intelligent than white people, you can find a self-appointed "expert", with academic qualifications, to defend that position. The cherry-picking of experts is just what the 9/11 conspiracists have done, and this is just why their approach is unscientific.

· He provides no evidence that he has asked other climate scientists to determine whether or not Martin Hertzberg's argument has merit. The scientific approach demands that, rather than sheltering them from criticism, you subject your beliefs to the same scrutiny and scepticism with which you treat opposing views.

· He uses arguments - such as the claim that "water is exactly that component of the earth's heat balance that the global warming computer models fail to account for" and the claim that global temperatures were higher in the medieval period than they are today - that have long been discredited. For a discussion of these positions, see here and here.

· He has not understood that a temperature rise initially pre-dating an increase in CO2 in the ice core record strengthens rather than weakens the standard theory. Temperatures rose as a result of changes in the Milankovic Cycle, sunspot activity or other forcing agents. They then caused the release of greenhouse gases from the biosphere, which then caused temperatures to rise further. Climate scientists warn that rising temperatures caused by carbon dioxide emissions today will cause exactly the same effect: the release of further carbon dioxide and methane by oceans, soils and forests, causing further rises in temperature. What would he expect to find - evidence of industrial civilisations 600,000 years ago?

The fact that Cockburn appears to be unaware that these arguments carry no weight lends support to the suspicion that he knows no more about this subject that the 9/11 truthers know about the thermal properties of structural steel. And yet he feels he can brush the conflicting data contemptuously aside. Where does this confidence come from?

Cockburn's article cannot be taken seriously until we have seen his list of references, and affirmed that the key claims he makes have already been published in peer-reviewed scientific journals. This would not mean they are correct, though it does mean that they are worth discussing. Could he possibly have gone into print without first ensuring that the scientific claims on which he bases his arguments have been properly published? I find this hard to believe, for it would be the height of irresponsibility. But Cockburn now has to demonstrate, by providing his references, that he did indeed carry out this basic check.

George Monbiot's book Heat: how to stop the planet from burning is now published in the US by South End Press.

www.monbiot.com

[Lou]

From: http://www.clayandiron.com/news.jhtml?method=view&news.id=900


The Unified Atmospheric
Preservation Act

Dr. R. Michael Castle
Revised May 18, 2005
5-7-7


Preamble

Prohibiting the utilization of aerial deployment regarding aerosolized chemicals or biological agents for any purpose in the United States Global Warming Mitigation, Climate Change and/or Weather Modification Programs which are deployed into the unified atmosphere over the United States or Canada. This will result in irreparable, long term, toxic and heavy metal poisoning of the populace. This is not to exclude the infinite environment of the United States and Canada, which includes our land masses, rivers, lakes, waters, forests and seas. The atmosphere, and upper-atmosphere will also be affected." This Environmental Terrorism must end.


A proposed Law that effectively Bans and Prohibits the deployment or otherwise released, into or on the Earths Natural Atmospheric/Stratospheric column:


1. Banning mixtures (any Organic or Inorganic chemicals or compounds, elements of the Periodic Table, gases, solids or plasmas) of chemical materials known as chaff from military training operations. Ceasing the operation of Chemical trails (ChemTrails) that occlude sunlight. Weather modifications or any combination of chemical biological mixtures used for any purpose are expressly prohibited;


2. Cloud Seeding and Atmospheric/Stratospheric seeding technologies that utilize chemicals, gases, synthetic filament carriers or biological substances of any sort for the purposes of weather manipulation/modification, such as precipitation, drought, cyclonic, ultra-violet, infra-red heat or cosmic storm management.


3. Electro-Magnetic radiation/radio and SCALAR or plasmic energy waves generated, transmitted, propagated, reflected or otherwise articulated into a focused beam or pattern. These include: microwave, Extreme Low Frequency (ELF), Extreme High Frequency spectrum, all energies traveling through the Atmosphere, bedrock or oceans reflected back to the planet surfaces. Doing so would result in total and cumulative radiation dosage to Humans and the Environment. The use of such technology exceeds pre-set EMR thresholds and limitations and is banned from use.


4. Vaccines deployed into or unto the Atmospheric/Stratospheric Air Column. Bio-controls deployed aerially in mass are expressly banned and prohibited from usage that have any mixtures of chemical or biological materials. Bio-controls containing genetically engineered microbes or biological life forms, natural or genetically engineered are banned and prohibited.


5. Document Vectors/Modalities and Standards


6. Emergency Research Funding-$8.0 Million to research for environmentally benign substitutes to replace UV and Cosmic energy aerial radiation screens, shields or reflectants. Exo-Atmospheric, low-sub-orbital materials to achieve same.


7. International Operational Coordination and Treaty by the Directives of this Bill, the President of the United States shall seek International cooperation through the coordination of all technologies utilized, globally.

The President shall engage In International negotiations for the Enjoinment of the United States in an International Treaty for the prohibition and banning of A aerosolized chemicals or biological agents and/or genetically engineered life forms, released into the Unified Atmosphere or Stratosphere of the entire planet.


Purpose: Ceasing aerial chemical / biological / electromagnetic treatment, deployment, modification or manipulation of the Unified Atmosphere/Stratosphere via any artificial means, for any and all purposes.


Scope: A vote by the citizens of the United States of America through our elected United States House of Representatives and the United States Senate, with the signature of the President of the United States, this legal and binding authorization would put a ban and prohibit the release of any organic/inorganic chemicals, compounds, elements as heavy metal aerosol particulates, polymer filaments, dipoles of metallized glass or crystalline compositions. This would include vaccines; bio-controls of genetically altered biological life forms. This Law will effectively abate all fallout (back-to-earth), aerial-released chemicals, biological materials, extraneous and spatial reflected electromagnetic radiation.


Section 1. This Law shall ban and prohibit the intentional and purposeful release of all chemical and biological substances into the Unified Atmosphere including the upper atmosphere/stratosphere. Current laws and International treaties do NOT recognize, prohibit or regulate atmospheric/stratospheric releases of chemicals, elements, or biological materials which are used in Global Warming Mitigation, Weather-Modification(s), Climate change or other biosphere mitigation strategies.


These substances and agents will fall back to Earth with results of widespread chemical and heavy-metal contamination of breathable air, food, water supplies (including groundwaters), foliage and fauna. The release of toxic substances will be causative of chemical poisoning and toxicity to the infinite environment and humankind as a whole.


cont,

[Lou]

This Law is intended to interrupt and impede current and all future practices of artificial/man-made aerial releases or deployment(s) of various chemicals, which cause residual fall-out of pollutants that will descend to the earths surface.


Section 2. This Law is designed to intercede and bring to immediate cessation any and all current and future operations. To also ban and prohibit deploying of aerosolized polymer filaments, chemical technologies, climate changing/weather modification/manipulation chemicals, and EMR energy-excited operations for the further cause of Global Warming Mitigation. To declare an immediate national moratorium on the deployment or use of Global Warming Mitigation technologies that are intended to artificially shield the Earths surface from ultra-violet and cosmic radiation or in-situ reparations of the ozone or ionospheric layers in the unified atmosphere/stratosphere.


Section 3. Vaccine Prohibition - Prohibits the aerial release of any artificial vaccine en-masse onto segments of the human or animal species. This encompasses chemical or biological experimentation on humans until such a time when exacting, exhaustive public, civil and private-sector medical/scientific studies can prove the overall benefit(s) to humans and the environment. To also inform the Public of the acute/chronic effects that the vaccines will have on humanity and mother earth.


No Agency of the United States, including the U.S. Military shall have the authority or official capacity to dispense, deploy or otherwise release some form of mass vaccine(s) on to the Civil or Military populace. Specifically, the President of the United States nor the Secretary of Defense may order mass aerial vaccines be deployed unless a Declaration of War has been declared by the United States Congress.

Section 4. Document Languages/Vectors/Modalities and Standards


Human Health Risk Assessments, Environmental Impact Statements, Public and Civil Disclosures shall be written in languages, statistics, data and vocabularies that common people and citizens of the United States of America may read, hear or otherwise be informed of; to understand any transmitted communication on the subject(s) of this Law.


All information pertaining to the Unified Atmospheric Preservation Law shall be the responsibility and duty of the U.S. Homeland Security and/or the U.S. Justice Department for collection and transmittal or disbursement to the public. The public notification(s) will be vectored through the Federal Agency to the States Attorney General Offices to the Regional or State Emergency Management Agency, direct to the public. The US Environmental Protection Agency is excluded and shall not, in any way, be involved with Policy issues, public information or interface and be relegated to the role of overseeing testing and accumulation of data. The US EPA shall report all findings to the U.S. Homeland Security Agency or the U.S. Justice Department.


Prior to deployment or usage of any UV/Cosmic radiation screening technologies, an exhaustive disclosure should be made available to the Public of all the known health risk factors, environmental consequences or predicted conclusions, which includes cause and effect surrounding the deployed countermeasure technologies. The issuance of a clear, concise and unbiased Comprehensive Environmental Impact Statement would provide and protect Humans and the natural infinite Environment from any chemical, energy and biological pollutants, should the effects be warranted.


This Law will ensure that pre-deployment knowledge, derived from toxicological and integrative research of Earths Bio-spherical/Geo-spherical system sciences with disclosure(s) of all Human Health Risks and Environmental Impact factors be in compliance with the directives contained herein, for any current or future countermeasure technology considerations.


An original Standard for direct or reflective source(s), Electromagnetic Radiation Exposure (EME) shall be established and maintained by this Law. These standards shall establish exacting electromagnetic exposure thresholds and limits to Humans and the infinite Environment from point source, reflected or cumulative energy specificity. These Standards will prohibit the utilization of HAARPS (Tesla/Eastlund), High-Energy technologies and plasmic transmissions to orbiting geo-stationary satellite receivers and re-transmitting to the Earth's surface. Also prohibits reflected high dosage sources of microwave, Extreme Low Frequency (ELF), Ultra-Low Frequency (ULF) and Electromagnetic Radar/Airborne Chemical synergism Interface via the ionosphere.


Section 5. Emergency Research Funding


Understanding the magnitude of the task of substituting the current toxic technologies utilized and the funding for current operations will be a great necessity to find or develop benign technologies to replace them on a national or global basis.


The Unified Atmospheric Preservation Act of 2003 responds to this anticipated necessity. The President shall establish monetary provisions for Emergency Research Funding to explore, evaluate and develop these varying benign solutions for the expressed doom. Therefore, major Research Grants shall be established and funded to Universities, Private sector, Governmental Agencies and Citizen Groups of the United States to find these solutions that are benign to Humans and the Infinite Environment.


The initial feasibility Appropriations Funding Grants shall be $800 Million dollars. The initial funding phase will be directed towards the feasibility to research, evaluate and develop substitutions for technologies that are passive and benign in terms of Human and Environmental toxins. An expansion of this technical marshalling plan will be developed and provided for Agency Oversight and Budget Appropriation Guidelines.


Research to protect the Earth and her Life.


Section 6. International Operational Coordination and Treaty


The Unified Atmospheric Preservation Act of 2003 shall direct the President of the United States to engage in active consultation and negotiations of a Comprehensive International Treaty to enjoin in the international research for UV and Cosmic energy screening and filter alternatives to the aerosolized technologies banned and prohibited by International Treaty.


This Legislation will also encompass Emergency Research Funding for technology alternatives to the aerosolized/electromagnetic/biologic scenarios. The science currently understood in the realm of mitigation technologies for Global Warming, Ultra Violet and Cosmic Radiation deflection do not consider or account for the Human suffrage or infinite environment destruction caused by the deployed countermeasures utilized. Toxicology to Humans and the entirety of the Earth's infinite environment has been ignored. Upon passage of the "Unified Atmospheric Preservation Act of 2003", the International Treaty, will ban and prohibit use of aerosolized particulates, plasmas, biological and/or chemical/EMR technologies. This will also ensure that Environmental Terrorism will not occur, again, as a result of Global Warming/Climate Changing/Weather Modification countermeasures or mitigation efforts.

"We, the People, will prevail"

DRAFT

Prepared and authored by Richard M. Castle, Columbus, Ohio, USA
December 7, 2002
Revised May 2005

[halva]

This draft law by Mike Castle is something that can be discussed in the context of an initiative about to be announced where I am. Thank you Lou. I have never seen this before.

Let's do our level best to counteract the negativity and nastiness that is overtaking these threads, making debunkers feel at home, demoralising almost everybody.

[Lou]

This draft law by Mike Castle is something that can be discussed in the context of an initiative about to be announced where I am. Thank you Lou. I have never seen this before.

Let's do our level best to counteract the negativity and nastiness that is overtaking these threads, making debunkers feel at home, demoralising almost everybody.

Yes Wayne, I agree, that's why I am only posting information , I do not want to wallow in the filth with the pigs that are mucking up the place at present, I have had enough of there childish antics and crude behavior.

Some light reading when you find the time.
___________________________________

http://www.bariumblues.com/methodic_demise_of_natural_earth.htm

METHODIC DEMISE OF NATURAL EARTH
~An Environmental Impact Overview~
By Dr. R. Michael Castle

[halva]

http://www.desmogblog.com/will-fox-news-stop-peddling-junk-science

[Lou]

You just have to read between the lines on this one and do some addition, I'm not even going to say a word on it.

http://www.nasa.gov/centers/goddard/news/topstory/2007/twilightzone_particles.html

[EdSnell]

You just have to read between the lines on this one and do some addition, I'm not even going to say a word on it.

http://www.nasa.gov/centers/goddard/news/topstory/2007/twilightzone_particles.html

The article makes sense to me. There has to be a transition zone between clouds and clear sky where the clouds form or sublimate / dissipate.

I don't like their unscientific use of the term "Twilight Zone," though.

Also, the article indicates that there is more to be learned about Earth's atmosphere.

[kola]

what a fuckin idiot you are, eddy munster. :mad:

kola:cool:

[Lou]

I'm not even going to touch that. :rolleyes:

[Boomer Chick]

The article makes sense to me. There has to be a transition zone between clouds and clear sky where the clouds form or sublimate / dissipate.

I don't like their unscientific use of the term "Twilight Zone," though.

Also, the article indicates that there is more to be learned about Earth's atmosphere.

Hello, Ed !

I found the article logical and quite interesting. It makes me wonder, though, why it took scientists so long to identify such a particulate region. I suppose improved technology in the science of particulate spectrometry and analysis helped identify this cloud region. Seems like a no-brainer to me, though.



Thanks, Lou !

:)

[Boomer Chick]

Thanks to Denny in the Current Events section:

http://news.independent.co.uk/enviro...cle2556466.ece (http://news.independent.co.uk/environment/climate_change/article2556466.ece)

Earth's natural defences against climate change 'beginning to fail'
By Michael McCarthy, Environment Editor
Published: 18 May 2007

The earth's ability to soak up the gases causing global warming is beginning to fail because of rising temperatures, in a long-feared sign of "positive feedback," new research reveals today.

Climate change itself is weakening one of the principal "sinks" absorbing carbon dioxide - the Southern Ocean around Antarctica - a new study has found.

As a result, atmospheric CO2 levels may rise faster and bring about rising temperatures more quickly than previously anticipated. Stabilising the CO2 level, which must be done to bring the warming under control, is likely to become much more difficult, even if the world community agrees to do it.

The news may give added urgency to the meeting in three weeks' time between the G8 group of rich nations and the leading developing countries led by China, at Heiligendamm in Germany, when an attempt will be made to put together the framework of a new world climate treaty to succeed the current Kyoto protocol.

"This is a timely warning in advance of Heiligendamm and the G8 that the climate clock is beginning to tick faster," said the leading environmentalist Tom Burke, visiting professor at Imperial College London.

"The shift that has been detected in a four-year study by researchers from the University of East Anglia, the British Antarctic Survey and the Max-Planck Institute for Biogeochemistry, published in the journal Science, is one of the most ominous in the development of climate change. It implies a breach in the planet's own defences against global warming.

Human society has hugely benefited from the earth's natural carbon absorption facility, which means oceans and forests take up roughly half of the CO2 pumped into the atmosphere, in the so-called carbon cycle. What is left in the atmosphere is known as the "airborne fraction".

If sinks weakened, the airborne fraction would be likely to get bigger. Although supercomputer models of the climate have for some time predicted the weakening of the ocean and terrestrial sinks, no example of it happening has actually been detected - until now.

Now the research team has found the vast Southern Ocean, which is the earth's biggest carbon sink, accounting for about 15 per cent of the total absorption potential, has become effectively CO2-saturated.

The level of the gas it is absorbing has remained static since 1981 - but in that time the amount emitted has grown by 40 per cent, so it has stopped keeping pace and much more CO2 is left over to trap the sun's heat.

The effect - revealed by scrutinising observations of atmospheric CO2 from 40 stations around the world, is thought to have been caused by an increase in ocean wind speeds. Stormier weather and stronger waves are churning up the sea and bringing natural CO2 stored there closer to the surface - which reduces the ability of the surface to absorb the gas from the air.

The increased winds are believed to be caused by altered atmospheric temperature regimes produced by two separate processes - the depletion of the ozone layer over Antarctica by chlorofluorocarbon gases from aerosol spray cans (now phased out), and global warming.

It is thus a positive feedback - an effect of climate change which itself makes climate change worse. Some researchers fear that feedbacks may make global warming happen much faster, and harder to control, than generally appreciated. The pessimism of scientists such as James Lovelock is largely based on the fact that most feedbacks in the earth's system are likely to work against us.

"This is the first unequivocal detection of a carbon sink weakening because of recent climate change," said the lead author of the study, Corinne Le Quéré, of the University of East Anglia. "This is serious. Whenever the world has greatly warmed in the past, the weakening of CO2 sinks has contributed to it."

Professor Chris Rapley, director of the British Antarctic Survey, said: "Since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution the world's oceans have absorbed about a quarter of the 500 gigatons [millions of tonnes] of carbon emitted by humans. The possibility that in a warmer world the Southern Ocean is weakening is a cause for concern."

The Government's chief scientific adviser, Sir David King, said: "We have quite a large number of positive feedbacks to worry about, and this appears to be another one. But the seriousness of it would depend on if it was affecting the whole ocean, or merely the Southern Ocean."

In recent years it has become clear that the rate at which CO2 was accumulating is itself increasing. The level currently stands at about 382 parts per million by volume (ppm), up from 315 ppm in 1958.

In the past decade the rate has jumped from about 1.6ppm annually to well above 2ppm - a fact which, as The Independent reported in October 2004, may well signal that the earth's absorption ability is shrinking.

Asked if this rate increase could now be linked to weakening sinks, Dr Le Quéré said: "I think we are just at the border of detecting that." She added: "All the carbon cycle experts have their eyes on it."

Saturations of the Southern Ocean CO2 sink due to recent climate change, Le Quéré et al, published this week in Science

***

Similar reports dealing with this new development regarding carbon sinks would be appreciated.

[foot_soldier]

Thanks to Denny in the Current Events section:

http://news.independent.co.uk/enviro...cle2556466.ece (http://news.independent.co.uk/environment/climate_change/article2556466.ece)

Earth's natural defences against climate change 'beginning to fail'
By Michael McCarthy, Environment Editor
Published: 18 May 2007

The earth's ability to soak up the gases causing global warming is beginning to fail because of rising temperatures, in a long-feared sign of "positive feedback," new research reveals today.

Climate change itself is weakening one of the principal "sinks" absorbing carbon dioxide - the Southern Ocean around Antarctica - a new study has found.

As a result, atmospheric CO2 levels may rise faster and bring about rising temperatures more quickly than previously anticipated. Stabilising the CO2 level, which must be done to bring the warming under control, is likely to become much more difficult, even if the world community agrees to do it.

The news may give added urgency to the meeting in three weeks' time between the G8 group of rich nations and the leading developing countries led by China, at Heiligendamm in Germany, when an attempt will be made to put together the framework of a new world climate treaty to succeed the current Kyoto protocol.

"This is a timely warning in advance of Heiligendamm and the G8 that the climate clock is beginning to tick faster," said the leading environmentalist Tom Burke, visiting professor at Imperial College London.

"The shift that has been detected in a four-year study by researchers from the University of East Anglia, the British Antarctic Survey and the Max-Planck Institute for Biogeochemistry, published in the journal Science, is one of the most ominous in the development of climate change. It implies a breach in the planet's own defences against global warming.

Human society has hugely benefited from the earth's natural carbon absorption facility, which means oceans and forests take up roughly half of the CO2 pumped into the atmosphere, in the so-called carbon cycle. What is left in the atmosphere is known as the "airborne fraction".

If sinks weakened, the airborne fraction would be likely to get bigger. Although supercomputer models of the climate have for some time predicted the weakening of the ocean and terrestrial sinks, no example of it happening has actually been detected - until now.

Now the research team has found the vast Southern Ocean, which is the earth's biggest carbon sink, accounting for about 15 per cent of the total absorption potential, has become effectively CO2-saturated.

The level of the gas it is absorbing has remained static since 1981 - but in that time the amount emitted has grown by 40 per cent, so it has stopped keeping pace and much more CO2 is left over to trap the sun's heat.

The effect - revealed by scrutinising observations of atmospheric CO2 from 40 stations around the world, is thought to have been caused by an increase in ocean wind speeds. Stormier weather and stronger waves are churning up the sea and bringing natural CO2 stored there closer to the surface - which reduces the ability of the surface to absorb the gas from the air.

The increased winds are believed to be caused by altered atmospheric temperature regimes produced by two separate processes - the depletion of the ozone layer over Antarctica by chlorofluorocarbon gases from aerosol spray cans (now phased out), and global warming..... (continued)

***

Similar reports dealing with this new development regarding carbon sinks would be appreciated.

May 18, 2007
Southern ocean carbon sink weakened
Scientists have found that the Southern Ocean's ability to absorb carbon dioxide has weakened substantially.
http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2007-05/ca-soc051807.php

Scientists have observed the first evidence that the Southern Ocean's ability to absorb the major greenhouse gas, carbon dioxide, has weakened by about 15 per cent per decade since 1981.

In research published today in Science, an international research team – including CSIRO's Dr Ray Langenfelds – concludes that the Southern Ocean carbon dioxide sink has weakened over the past 25 years and will be less efficient in the future. Such weakening of one of the Earth's major carbon dioxide sinks will lead to higher levels of atmospheric carbon dioxide in the long-term.

Dr Paul Fraser, who leads research into atmospheric greenhouse gases at CSIRO Marine and Atmospheric Research, says the international team's four-year study concludes that the weakening is due to human activities.

"The researchers found that the Southern Ocean is becoming less efficient at absorbing carbon dioxide due to an increase in wind strength over the Ocean, resulting from human-induced climate change," Dr Fraser says.

"The increase in wind strength is due to a combination of higher levels of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere and long-term ozone depletion in the stratosphere, which previous CSIRO research has shown intensifies storms over the Southern Ocean."..... (continued)

Antarctic ozone depletion causes an intensification of the Southern Ocean super-gyre circulation
W. Cai
CSIRO Marine and Atmospheric Research
Aspendale, Victoria, Australia
http://www.agu.org/pubs/crossref/2006/2005GL024911.shtml

Received 10 October 2005; accepted 23 December 2005; published 10 February 2006.

Abstract

Recent climate trends over the Southern Hemisphere (SH) summer feature a strengthening of the circumpolar westerly and a weakening of the midlatitude westerly extending from the stratosphere to Earth's surface.

Much of the change is attributable to Antarctic ozone depletion. However, the consequential ocean circulation changes are unknown.

Here I demonstrate that the observed surface wind changes have forced a southward shift and spin-up of the super gyre, which links the subtropical South Pacific, Indian and Atlantic Ocean circulation, advecting more warm water southward.

The circulation change includes a strengthening of the East Australian Current (EAC) flow passing through the Tasman Sea.

The southward shift may be responsible for the observed unusually large warming in the SH midlatitude ocean and may contribute to the reported range extension to the south of many marine species in the South West Pacific.

Sea Surface Temperatures
http://www.ssec.wisc.edu/data/sst.html

NASA
Jet Propulsion Laboratory
California Institute of Technology
Links to additional Sea Surface Temperature data
http://podaac.jpl.nasa.gov/sst/sst_links.html

[EdSnell]

Hello, Ed !

I found the article logical and quite interesting. It makes me wonder, though, why it took scientists so long to identify such a particulate region. I suppose improved technology in the science of particulate spectrometry and analysis helped identify this cloud region. Seems like a no-brainer to me, though.



Thanks, Lou !

:)

Hi, Boomer. What happened to WMM's forum. You are welcome at this forum: http://p214.ezboard.com/bcatfights

[kola]

>ED<

I am still waiting for you to show me proof that expanding lingering "contrails" have taken place pre 1986.
You have stated you have thousands of pictures yet I have been asking you for 6 months to post them or lead me to them. I have seen zero.

WHAT DA' FUCK?

[foot_soldier]

One more thing: carbon dioxide is less soluble in warm water than in cold. In other words, as sea surface temperatures increase, the ability of the ocean surface waters to retain CO2 decreases.

A suitable analogy would be that much more CO2 is released when one opens a warm can of soda than a cold can.

[Boomer Chick]

Hi, Boomer. What happened to WMM's forum. You are welcome at this forum: http://p214.ezboard.com/bcatfights

Thank you. I'm having trouble with the login there. I wanted to go "global" as they say, but they wouldn't accept my registration because I already had a local membership and so they sent the old user name and password and that won't work.

See ya later over there. I noticed Stuart posts there....who else may I ask? Fairly new?

WMM just took the board down one day. He never explained it.

Whatever.

Who started the Cats board?

[Boomer Chick]

One more thing: carbon dioxide is less soluble in warm water than in cold. In other words, as sea surface temperatures increase, the ability of the ocean surface waters to retain CO2 decreases.

A suitable analogy would be that much more CO2 is released when one opens a warm can of soda than a cold can.

Excellent, FS, thanks! That's a great way to see it in action! ;)

[halva]

Thank you. I'm having trouble with the login there. I wanted to go "global" as they say, but they wouldn't accept my registration because I already had a local membership and so they sent the old user name and password and that won't work.

See ya later over there. I noticed Stuart posts there....who else may I ask? Fairly new?

WMM just took the board down one day. He never explained it.

Whatever.

Who started the Cats board?


Jeff Reynolds, what are your comments on BC? Is she a paid agent? Do you approve or disapprove of her stance towards Smellie? Do you approve or disapprove of FS dialoguing with her?

Would you like to condemn BC for talking to Footsoldier or Footsoldier for talking to BC?

Are these petty comments? Do you disapprove of people personalising matters in this way? Is it OK to be friendly towards Smellie? Is it evidence of being a debunker oneself? Or a disinformation agent?

I would be in favour, if you wish, of trying to work out a common approach to posters we judge to be seeking to disrupt and/or lower the level of discussion on these threads, or who are doing it unintentionally. Or are being friendly towards disruptors for other reasons of "Christian principle". indifferent towards what others think of this. And indifferent to the effects on the success or failure of our efforts.

[foot_soldier]

One final submission, if I may, to add to my two most recent posts on this thread:

Atmospheric CO2 Concentrations--Mauna Loa Observatory, Hawaii, 1958-2002 (revised July 2003)

C. D. Keeling and T. P. Whorf

Since 1958, air samples have been continuously collected at Mauna Loa Observatory and analyzed by infrared spectroscopy for CO2 concentrations. Data are averaged to give monthly and annual atmospheric CO2 concentrations.

These data represent the longest continuous record of atmospheric CO2 concentrations in the world. This precise data record covers a single site (Mauna Loa Observatory, Hawaii). It is a reliable indicator of the regional trend in the concentration of atmospheric CO2 in the middle layers of the troposphere and is critical to CO2-related research.

http://cdiac.ornl.gov/ftp/ndp001/maunaloa.co2

Air Map New England
University of New Hampshire at Durham
http://airmap.unh.edu/data/data.html?site=AIRMAPTF

The UNH Observing Station at Thompson Farm is located in Durham, NH approximately two miles south of University of New Hampshire (43.11N, 70.95W, elevation 75ft). The site is characterized by rolling fields surrounded by mixed forest. Most of the air quality measurements are performed on air sampled from the top of a forty foot tower. One of NOAA's Climate Reference Network meteorological stations is also located at Thompson Farm.

Current CO2 reading at 11:00pm Eastern Daylight Time: 421 ppmv (parts per million volume)

Thank you.

[Boomer Chick]

Great contribution, FS .....guess the recent news on the CO2 and the Southern oceans prompted me involve myself with the climate change topic, again.

Halva......hello to you and I'm sorry if I didn't recognize your presence here. I do so appreciate your keeping the threads going. I have no idea what went on these months I wasn't here. So please don't think I'm in cahoots with anyone for any particular purpose other than just to monitor the climate changes and discuss them.

Has Jay Reynolds been around?

I've known Ed Snell for a few years now as an online personality and my greeting him has nothing to do with anything other than just a simple hello. OK?

I know Swampgas as well and would say hello to him, too!

Halva, I say hello to you and wish you and yours well ! You know that. I didn't mean to be rude to you.

I hope your summer in Greece will be a beautiful and warm one with clean skies! Again, I invite you to Colorado if you so wish, and would help you with your plans.

Is everything OK with you?

[kola]

acting polite and greeting an asshole like ed snell? wtf???

do you people realize how much bullshit this asswipe has caused on every fuckin chemtrail forum??

wake up...smell the fuckin coffee



kola

[CDsNuTz]

BC knows "ED" well, very well..

[halva]

This is BC's stance generally Kola. It would be OK if it weren't for the fact that we are engaged in a war here, complicated by the antics of Jeff Reynolds.

[Boomer Chick]

BC knows "ED" well, very well..

CDnutz,

Were you a member of the CTC forum when I was there? I swear I recognized your board name from somewhere. Was that you?

I know Swampgas better than I know Ed Snell.

I've talked to Swampgas and his wife on the phone, listened to his CD's, and exchanged Christmas cards until he freaked out because I disagreed with him that vegans are automatically more spiritually evolved than people who eat fish and poultry. But, I will always like him anyway.

CDnutz, were you here when Jay Reynolds was posting frequently? Ed Snell controls himself and is honest. He's no troll. He's just Ed saying what he thinks. Jay Reynolds no longer intimidates.

This is not a war, here. Halva has always over-dramatized this board and become overly involved in social relations rather than stick to the facts at hand and attempt to get to the truth.

Actually, a voice of opposition is a good exercise to test your logic and rhetorical skills. Ed Snell is your gift. Treat him with respect.

Halva, do you know the "Golden Rule?" Well it applies all around the globe. Let's practice it here, shall we?

"Owner of a Lonely Heart" is playing on the radio now by YES ! I've seen them do it......live...awesome.

Peace to You All and I'll answer any questions.

I'll accept any proof !

[CDsNuTz]

Sometimes I wonder if Eds,Jays,BCs and several other debunkers sever distain for halva limits our ability to convince them..
__________________

[halva]

I'm not stopping you from trying to convince BC, CDsNuTz.

[CDsNuTz]

CDnutz,

Were you a member of the CTC forum when I was there? I swear I recognized your board name from somewhere. Was that you?

I know Swampgas better than I know Ed Snell.

I've talked to Swampgas and his wife on the phone, listened to his CD's, and exchanged Christmas cards until he freaked out because I disagreed with him that vegans are automatically more spiritually evolved than people who eat fish and poultry. But, I will always like him anyway.

CDnutz, were you here when Jay Reynolds was posting frequently? Ed Snell controls himself and is honest. He's no troll. He's just Ed saying what he thinks. Jay Reynolds no longer intimidates.

This is not a war, here. Halva has always over-dramatized this board and become overly involved in social relations rather than stick to the facts at hand and attempt to get to the truth.

Actually, a voice of opposition is a good exercise to test your logic and rhetorical skills. Ed Snell is your gift. Treat him with respect.

Halva, do you know the "Golden Rule?" Well it applies all around the globe. Let's practice it here, shall we?

"Owner of a Lonely Heart" is playing on the radio now by YES ! I've seen them do it......live...awesome.

Peace to You All and I'll answer any questions.

I'll accept any proof !


I was there reading early 04 joined july got into it with swamp right off became good friends with most of the regulars..Admind 06 quit in disgust over thermit actions.Heard lots about all that went on in the early days..So yes I know of and have heard much about all of you..I also thought i had heard of you even before i heard of you at CTC..Did you by chance play QUAKE2...??


Swamps a good guy, He just bashes me because i think GLOBAL WARMING is more then just man made..So i left gastro, big deal..

I've done battle with Jay, HATE HIM.Don't like Ed much either....

And yes halva what are we going to do about halva??Could be or own worst enemy..

[Boomer Chick]

Sometimes I wonder if Eds,Jays,BCs and several other debunkers sever distain for halva limits our ability to convince them..
__________________

Sweetie, Halva is Halva and his attitude has no bearing on my ability and motivation to research the subject of whether our government is spraying something in our skies or not.

I started on that trail soon after I started on the 911 truth trail. I found evidence in the case of 911 as an inside job, but the evidence for spraying our skies with substances has proven more difficult.

You can sit there and smugly assume all kinds of things about me and dig away and chip away at what you think your intuition is telling you. But I'm telling you now: I did my work on this chemtrail subject and now I want someone else to dig up the clues and point them out. I did what I could do and spent way too much time and energy on it and probably hurt myself physically from spending too much time at the computer. I now have two degenerated discs in my neck and muscle spasms that won't quit.....ANYWAY.....I found search engines I didn't know existed, internet sites sporting university experiments (plasmas in space), satellite experiments, and all manner of investigating jet fuel companies and other mentioned companies even Dyn...what was it? Dynacore? Some gel substance? Oh God, we did nothing but research everything and anything we could get our hands on on the net. I even helped compile an internet board totally devoted to the subject and YET..............................it didn't reveal anything startling other than Teller's advice, satellite images of the cloud formations, and the realization that if there was a program designed to reflect the suns rays and cool the planet, it wasn't working because it wasn't implemented globally and at night, the cirrus clouds produced kept the heat in rather than allowing the heat to escape. It defeated its purpose, if that was the purpose. We went round and round and round and still, we couldn't find anything definitive.

What have you guys found that I missed?

[Boomer Chick]

I was there reading early 04 joined july got into it with swamp right off became good friends with most of the regulars..Admind 06 quit in disgust over thermit actions.Heard lots about all that went on in the early days..So yes I know of and have heard much about all of you..I also thought i had heard of you even before i heard of you at CTC..Did you by chance play QUAKE2...??


Swamps a good guy, He just bashes me because i think GLOBAL WARMING is more then just man made..So i left gastro, big deal..

I've done battle with Jay, HATE HIM.Don't like Ed much either....

And yes halva what are we going to do about halva??Could be or own worst enemy..

So appreciate your sharing. I thought I recognized you. I was at CTC in 2004, too --- I think. Maybe the first part of the year. One of my 911 threads still comes up on a google search. I saved it in my favorites:
http://www.chemtrailcentral.com/ubb/Forum6/HTML/001445-9.html

Hating others is a waste of time and spiritually holds us back. It just does.

I too believe that global warming is both a huge cyclic (solar/galactic) event ALONG WITH greenhouse gas contributions both natural and man made. Hey! Why not be inclusive?

Well, I'm getting tired.....take care.

PS Quake 2? Never heard of it so it wasn't me....sorry. Peace !

[CDsNuTz]

I guess I shouldnt have classified you in with the debunkers, Ive read enough of what you've posted to know you didnt totally disagree. And over time Ive become more like you in that with no exact proof, what are you going to do?? I did my research I looked at many angles,NOBODIES going to convince me it's not happening, I can see otherwise..There's just so many options, opinions, speculations, and theories who knows.. BTW I passed through BF on my way home from the springs about a month or so ago..Nice little town!!:D

[halva]

I think you will find that BC is not going to stick around here very long CDsNuTZ.

[Jeff Reynolds]

...and the realization that if there was a program designed to reflect the suns rays and cool the planet, it wasn't working because it wasn't implemented globally and at night, the cirrus clouds produced kept the heat in rather than allowing the heat to escape. It defeated its purpose, if that was the purpose. We went round and round and round and still, we couldn't find anything definitive.

What have you guys found that I missed?

It's called going for a blank check. It's called blocking out uv-b rays. It's called messing around with Frankensteinian atmospheric shenanigans. Of course, you will soon say you believe in them. The script is fairly transparent now. Better regain total control of all boards now, make 'em extra kooky. :mad:

on edit: crank up the volume for the enigma factor :mad:

[CDsNuTz]

I think you will find that BC is not going to stick around here very long CDsNuTZ.

WTF?? Always starting shit..Do you actually think you're telling me something I dont know?? You're not the wealth of knowledge and wisdom you think you are...

[halva]

It's just that you thought that I perhaps was a factor preventing you from winning her over. I don't think I am.

[CDsNuTz]

It's just that you thought that I perhaps was a factor preventing you from winning her over. I don't think I am.


Not necessarily "just" her..And I've given up trying to win anyone over on the internet..Something I'm suprised you havent learned to do for yourself...

[CDsNuTz]

I don't think I am.


You are simply because you're an easy target for their backlash...

[halva]

You are simply because you're an easy target for their backlash...

Will you be in a stronger position if I go away?

[halva]

It's called going for a blank check. It's called blocking out uv-b rays. It's called messing around with Frankensteinian atmospheric shenanigans. Of course, you will soon say you believe in them. The script is fairly transparent now. Better regain total control of all boards now, make 'em extra kooky. :mad:

on edit: crank up the volume for the enigma factor :mad:

Jeff Reynolds you do not even attempt to answer Boomer Chick's argument that none of us have any proof of the existence of chemtrails. You just make unsubstantiated insinuations that she is a "fake", acting out some kind of "scripted" scenario, and that she will soon change her position, once again for the purposes of deception.

These are not assertions that will persuade either her or anyone else. Don't you even care any more about having some kind of plausibility?

[dewey189]

Jeff Reynolds you do not even attempt to answer Boomer Chick's argument that none of us have any proof of the existence of chemtrails. You just make unsubstantiated insinuations that she is a "fake", acting out some kind of "scripted" scenario, and that she will soon change her position, once again for the purposes of deception. There is no way Boomer is a fake. No way.

[kola]

what a fuckin circus act

[halva]

Are we all fakes Kola?

[kola]

no halva...my "circus act" comment came after reading the bullshit from a couple of posters...I think you and Lou are quite genuine. Kola

[Boomer Chick]

Dews, can you believe this? Isn't it hilarious?

Let's see here.....just exactly WHO started this thread? Hmmmm, could it be moi?

Halva knows I tell it like I see it and always have and frankly, I have learned not to care what others think of me who don't know me. And yes, I may just leave this forum any old time I want. Is that a horrible thing or a good thing? ;)

Dewey knows me and we've corresponded about our families, our children, and exchanged pictures....we know we are real people and sincere in posting our views. I appreciate her a lot and I appreciate Foot Soldier who is also a mature woman who knows her mind and is intelligent as well.

I know that Halva is sincere and Swampgas knows me, also, and respects me even though we may disagree.

CDnutz relates in a adult manner and I appreciate his sharing and sincerity as well....or her. I don't know this person as well as some of the others I have met online. Thanks, CDnutz! You seem quite positive, real, and sincere to me. I live in the forest called Black Forest just north of town and our town is sprawling out easterly into the plains....growing too fast!

Now, as Halva knows, although I interact socially more frequently than Foot Soldier, I do appreciate sticking to a topic. This is the "Climate Change" thread so let's get back to some discussion on what is happening on that front. Is that too demanding of me?

I don't know Jeff Reynolds nor do I know kola, but I will see what they bring to the table. Trust issues always come into play when someone absent returns to a new group or someone new simply joins.

And again, I don't care what people I don't know think of me until they get to know me and we have formed some kind of bond...........you know? Let's not be too out of touch with reality, OK?

:)

What do you think of this?

http://blog.wired.com/wiredscience/2007/05/scientist_says_.html

[CDsNuTz]

CDnutz relates in a adult manner and I appreciate his sharing and sincerity as well....or her. I don't know this person as well as some of the others I have met online. Thanks, CDnutz! You seem quite positive, real, and sincere to me. I live in the forest called Black Forest just north of town and our town is sprawling out easterly into the plains....growing too fast!

Thanks BC I try...We've had this discussion on where ya lived, and as i said earlier I zipped through your town about a month ago coming home from the springs..I was way out MarkSheffel Blvd and Woodman, thought I'd take a chance and go down BlackForrest rd, I know I've seen a Black Forrest down 83, so I figured what the hell..I didn't end up at 83 and black forrest, althought I took Black Forrest from Woodmen To the end, not sure what that road was but after turning left and getting back to 83, then back to Parker I found that I saved about 25 min. coming home...So that will be a regular way home when I'm out that direction working..

I couldn't see much from the road but i wouldn't doubt the urban sprawl has got to you town also..
Been to Parker lately??Friggin amazing,My Dad's been out here since 82 so I've seen a huge change....All and all it's nice to be away from the city..

PEACE

[CDsNuTz]

:)

What do you think of this?

http://blog.wired.com/wiredscience/2007/05/scientist_says_.html


Interesting, but you know I'm not really convinced that the whole change in a fuel sorce is the answer..I mean we will still be getting screwed no matter what fuel we're burning in our cars..
Funny how people dicovering real "Free Fuel Alternatives" end up dead. And their invention is never heard about again...There's to much energy in nature for there not to be a free/clean energy source...

[kola]

funny man..small world... I live in Coloraod too, just outside Co Springs..and own property in Guffey. Kola

sorry, don't wanna hijack this..

[CDsNuTz]

Heh,Lived here all my life never heard of Guffey. Not that I've heard of every town in CO.,so I quess thats all Irrelavant, Never mind...

[kola]

CD..sounds like you ain't been otta the city too often..lol

Guffey is about 20 miles west of Cripple Creek elevation 9000 ft..surely you have heard of Cripple Creek!!...west of Pikes Peak..that big mountain with snow on top...pine trees..aspens..elk...???

Kola

[CDsNuTz]

CD..sounds like you ain't been otta the city too often..lol

Guffey is about 20 miles west of Cripple Creek elevation 9000 ft..surely you have heard of Cripple Creek!!...west of Pikes Peak..that big mountain with snow on top...pine trees..aspens..elk...???

Kola

I went to Cripple Creek way back in 5th grade on a field trip. We got to go down one of the mines, like 1 mile down..To a fifth grader thats incredible..Also went to the Sand Dunes a ways south of there in the same grade,different field trip.. In my first 21 yrs that was about all the traveling I did.Then met my wife an have traveled way more in the last 20.Been camping all over the front range from about as far south as pueblo north to Fort Collins north east to Sterling north west up through Steam Boat all the way through Dinosaur National Monument out to Utah up to Idaho into Washington.

[CDsNuTz]

Oh and to get this thread back on topic, I think this is the most "normal" I've seen Colorados weather In many years.. Not sure how long you two have been here. I've seen more 3-4 oclock showers this spring then I've seen in the last 5 yrs..

[kola]

CD,,man u gotta hit the mountains...its heaven...go up to Pikes Peaks, Royal Gorge in Canon City,,Telluride is called "Little Sweden"..you got all the wonders of the world in your backyard bro..get out there and LIVE..

LIVE ..I SAY LIIIVVVEEEEEE...GO FOR THE GUSTO!!!!!!

umm sorry:redface:
kola

[kola]

I agree with this spring..up in the mountains almost everyday it clouds up, dumps some good rain for an hour or two then stops..but then are still chemtrailing almost every day..

the sad thing is in just the last year the visibilty has really decreased..there is always that smokey hazy sheen and it is from fuckin chems.

Kola

[CDsNuTz]

Will you be in a stronger position if I go away?

No probably not.

The biggest problem I can see with the majority of your posts is a sense of intelectual superiority on your part, people have said numerous times your post don't make sense.... Whether intentional or not, It's not something us "common folk" take lightly. You want to get "through" to Americans?, learn to communicate like one..I know you can do it I've seen it in you..

[Lou]

CD,,man u gotta hit the mountains...its heaven...go up to Pikes Peaks, Royal Gorge in Canon City,,Telluride is called "Little Sweden"..you got all the wonders of the world in your backyard bro..get out there and LIVE..

LIVE ..I SAY LIIIVVVEEEEEE...GO FOR THE GUSTO!!!!!!

umm sorry:redface:
kola

Yes sir, take a ride up the "Gold Camp Road", Yehaaaaaaaa ! :D

[CDsNuTz]

CD,,man u gotta hit the mountains...its heaven...go up to Pikes Peaks, Royal Gorge in Canon City,,Telluride is called "Little Sweden"..you got all the wonders of the world in your backyard bro..get out there and LIVE..

LIVE ..I SAY LIIIVVVEEEEEE...GO FOR THE GUSTO!!!!!!

umm sorry:redface:
kola

Oh I Do when I say the front range I mean from the continental divide east...:D

[halva]

No probably not.

The biggest problem I can see with the majority of your posts is a sense of intelectual superiority on your part, people have said numerous times your post don't make sense.... Whether intentional or not, It's not something us "common folk" take lightly. You want to get "through" to Americans?, learn to communicate like one..I know you can do it I've seen it in you..

i was or rather am wanting to start a discussion on an alternative approach to chemtrails which I think we need if we want to get the ecological and activist leftist milieu to start paying attention. They, particularly the latter, can't perceive anything as a problem unless it illustrates the evils of neo-liberalism (called neo-conservatism in the United States).

If you think e.g. about Crutzen's protestations that he has to propose his ideas to fill the stratosphere up with sulphur because the political system makes it impossible to hope that any other solution will gain the required political support then you can see that a packaging of chemtrails to fit into the anti neo-liberalism (anti neo-con) agenda is feasible.

Of course this subject reflects my own practical needs and priorities. They don't want me to start discussing it at Megasprayer and if as you say a lot of the people here don't like discussions of this kind either, perhaps I will confine it to Gastronamus

The main thing that has to be done here is to stop discussion degenerating under the influence of debunkers, tolerators of debunkers, or madmen like Jeff.