Global Warming Deniers

DWill · Posted: Thu May 22, 2008 12:47 pm Post subject: Global Warming Deniers

A book disputing that a consensus on global warming exists has been making some impact. It's titled The Deniers: The world-Renowned Scientists Who Stood Up Against Global Warming Hysteria, Political Persecution, and Fraud--and Those Who Were Too Fearful to Do So , by Lawrence Solomon. The author, a Canadian writer for The National Post, has some solid environmentalist credientials. Some of his articles for the National Post that were incorporated into the book are available online.

I've considered it an article of faith that a consensus on global warming does exist, and that the Al Gore version is basically right. But Solomon appears to merit a serious look. The Amazon reviews of the book help to make me think so. There may be a more significant other side than I've been willing to recognize
DWill.

Saffron · Posted: Thu May 22, 2008 4:04 pm Post subject:

But what about the melting going on in the north - Alaska and the glaciers? It is undeniable that the glaciers and the permafrost in Alaska are melting.

Penelope · Posted: Thu May 22, 2008 5:11 pm Post subject:

I don't doubt for a minute that Global Warming is happening but I do question (having read and listened to Scientists' arguments) whether it is being caused by CO2 emissions.

I have to admit that we do pollute the planet......ie plastic bags and bottles and although I find it irksome to separate all my rubbish into paper, plastic, glass, aluminium cans, garden compostable rubbish.... We have five different bins per household!!!! But I do it, because I can see that it needs to be done.

The arguments I have read and heard don't seem to be able to agree as to what is causing global warming......or even what is the largest producer of CO2. For some years they said it was cows......now they say it is termites.......but surely the numbers of termites haven't fluctuated that much over the centuries.

DWill · Posted: Thu May 22, 2008 7:03 pm Post subject:

God, I'm confused! Sometimes we don't know whether what's being disputed is whether the warming is occurring globally (which does seem to be obvious, as Saffron says), or whether we have been the cause of it. I would suspect Solomon and the elite scientists he interviews are skeptical about the latter, but maybe there are discordant data even about the former. I think what frightens many is that we may dither for decades about whether action will do any good, while the world goes to hell in a handbasket. In any case, what's an average, scientifically unschooled Joe like me to think?
DWill

Robert Tulip · Posted: Fri May 23, 2008 12:40 am Post subject:

DWill, in my view, climate change deniers are Quislings to the oil industry, taking the devil's coin to spread lies in service of profit. It often happens that such mercenaries take scientists' comments out of context, pretending minor points are the main message. If you had three blankets on your bed on a summer night, would adding a fourth blanket make you warmer? That is what is happening with the anthropogenic CO2 emissions which have increased the atmospheric carbon load from 500 gigatonnes to 800 gigatonnes since the start of the industrial revolution. Shifting carbon at such a scale from under the earth into the air is not sustainable. We need large scale new transformative technologies such as algae biodiesel to be introduced rapidly, so we can stop this mad global experiment with fossil fuels. Otherwise, its Venus here we come.

Penelope · Posted: Fri May 23, 2008 4:41 am Post subject:

Thank you Robert for that. I trust what you say.

And thank you for not pointing out that cows do not produce CO2 but Methane as do the termites. It is kind of you not draw attention to my numpty brain.

DWill, if you are an ordinary Joe......I'm Henry Kissinger!!!!!!

ralphinlaos · Posted: Fri May 23, 2008 5:20 am Post subject:

We're all confused, DWill. Everytime I see another statistic I cringe; where did that come from and what axe is he grinding? Wheat from the chaff, huh?

Ralph

Saffron · Posted: Fri May 23, 2008 6:55 am Post subject:

Daisy

There is no disputing the melting of glaciers. I have seen it with my own eyes in Glacier Bay from trips 2 years apart.

I am personally not convinced that specific causes have been proven.

I think this is the cool "cause of the week". Rolling Eyes

Kind of like "Save Africa" in the 1990's. And Africa is still mostly a mess.

It doesn't mean that I don't try to be environmentally conscious, and hope others will be as well.

I just don't believe the cause has been defined.

Penelope · Posted: Fri May 23, 2008 12:33 pm Post subject:

Well, what do you know.....Daisy.....some sense from Dallas!!!!

Isn't it hard when you want to help and you feel helpless?

I keep trying to do my little bit.....but then, some years ago, my daughter worked for 'Greenpeace' and was arrested for destroying GM crops....she was in prison for 36 hours....then at the trial....she was acquited with 28 other protesters from Greenpeace.....but she never would do it again....and, although I am proud....I never want her to do it again!!

We must keep discussing the issues between ourselves....then at least we might have an idea as to what is going on....even if we can't do much about it. Smile

DWill · Posted: Fri May 23, 2008 10:00 pm Post subject:

Ophelia · Posted: Sat May 24, 2008 7:45 am Post subject:

I haven't heard any scientist question the reality of global warming in France for... many years, at least ten years I think.
People here greatly respect Al Gore-- not because he says something new, but because scientists agree with him and both environmentalists and ordinary people see that there is a little hope from the US if there are people like him.

In the last two TV programmes I saw on the issue, I noted that all the scientists agreed on climate change, and the only person they could find to defend the view that climate change was not certain and everything had been exaggerated was... a journalist who presented the weather forecast on the radio.
The scientists presented a united message saying that yes, there were differences in the figures they came up with as to how much hotter it would be, or how long it would take to reach a crisis point, and exactly what was due to human activity, but they said the only thing that mattered was what they 100 % agreed on, ie it was going to get warmer and there was something we could do, and the time was now.

I think that in order to measure the urgency of the situation there are a few indicators worth following, for example the measures taken by people who are directly concerned by the rise in sea level:

1- The Dutch government. The Netherlands is a country of immensely practical people. They are working on "hydropole villages" which can float in the case of rising waters. How much they invest in this might be a test.
It's not attracting much attention in the media because there is nothing spectacular to see for now.

In theory, the Sacramento Delta in California and Bengladesh should be considering action too, but it seems that action is blocked or very little is done-- for very different reasons.

How about Florida? Aren't people worried?

2- One can watch the behaviour of insurance companies.
This is only an indicator, if a country or the planet waits until insurance companies start refusing to insure properties near the coast, it will be very late to act.
But I'd be willing to bet that, while some people and governments might still be arguing that they need to hear a few more dissenting voices before they make up their minds, the insurance companies would know for a fact that they've got every bit of information they need.

psyops · Posted: Mon Jul 07, 2008 10:22 am Post subject:

Like any other fanatic religion that denigrates its detractors as "deniers" or "heretics", the religion of global warming is discovering that its worst enemies are empirical science and a free press with conscientious investigative reporters.

The Canadian Broadcasting Corporation produced an excellent documentary (free online: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3309910462407994295) titled "Global Warming: Doomsday Called Off". It's excellent; if you're still unconvinced that "global warming" is a political movement having nothing to do with empirical science, watch it. It may change your mind for good.

And since this thread has a distinctive Canadian overtone, consider that Dr. Patrick Moore, one of the three original founders of Greenpeace, is campaigning against "global warming" hysteria as nothing more than a media and Marxist-inspired antidevelopment political movement with no basis in empirical science! Gosh, when one of the planet's most notable environmental activists is making statements like that, maybe it's time we sat up and listened.

dillonbrownsisland · Posted: Mon Jul 07, 2008 9:41 pm Post subject:

Interesting discussion here, I had to chime in!
First off, has anyone here read the speech that renown author Michael Crichton gave a few years back? It's titled "Aliens Cause Global Warming" and basically the speech states that until the science is perfected, we will never know whether another life form exists outside of our planet and the same goes for whether or not we will ever know what the cause of Global Warming is. Crichton has a strong stance against Global Warming, however, so you have to take the speech in with an unbiased oppinion, if possible. I agree with Crichton here, to some extent. I do believe that the earth is undergoing major climatic changes, that's undeniable. But whether or not we're doing it or the fact that it's possibly being pulled into the sun's gravitational pull further or just simply ageing, we will never know. I personally believe that political figures and celebrities have simply jumped on the band-wagon to get elected into office and have something to promote. The thing that scares me the most is the fact that Global Warming is turning into more of a scare tactic to put on the nightly news amongst the murders, wildfires and car accidents, instead of being looked at as a scientific "happening" by the common public. I understand this view may be far different than others who are discussing this topic, but I feel people in general (especially readers) are open-minded enough to hear a different belief from time to time.

To read Crichton's speech (I believe he's written a few on this topic, as well as controversial issues reguarding gene-therapy and genetic research) you can visit his official website at www.crichton-official.com

LanDroid · Posted: Sun Jul 20, 2008 1:44 pm Post subject:

One of the reasons for confusion is climate change skeptics have changed positions over time, something like the following.

1. Global warming is a complete hoax, the earth is not getting warmer.
2. Earth is getting warmer, but this is due to natural phenomena.
3. Earth is getting warmer and human activity has some effect, but this is not a significant factor.
4. Earth is getting warmer and human activity has a significant effect, but the problems this causes will not be very serious and corrective actions are not required.

It used to be all climate change skeptics were at level 1. Now it seems most have moved on, but they rarely clarify their stance.


	FORUMS	ABOUT	BOOKS	VIDEOS	TRANSCRIPTS	LINKS	BLOGS	DONATE	CONTACT