North Polar region

[Wayne County Hose]

I believe it was back inthe winter, but I remember reading that Russian scientists have found that the polar regions of Mars have warmed by the same amount as Earth's. The warming of the planets was traced directly to the sun's activity and was determined that this was just another cycle of the sun. Heard about this for maybe a day, then nothing since. Maybe because it's not a fact that fits the agenda of what's been drilled into our heads?

 

[Egon]

Oh ho, the whole solar system is heating up???

It is indeed strange that the real scientist's are not heard from???

 

[MikePA]

This article from 'down under' sums it up quite nicely.

 

[Timber]

It's the result of a normal warming and cooling cycle and the 70s Ice Age was not just part of the popular press. The press was reporting what scientists said back then. Then the 'experts' were predicting a 'New Ice Age' using just as much 'proof' as the 'experts' are now using to 'prove' man made global warming.

When will people learn this is just another ploy by politicians to grab more money and take away more liberty.

Just putting your fingers in your ears and Keep singing La la la la la la la la and it will all be ok

 

[MikePA]

Just putting your fingers in your ears and Keep singing La la la la la la la la and it will all be ok

Did I attack you personally? No, I did not. Anyone who doesn't believe is to be belittled. Good plan.

 

[czechsonofagun]

It's the result of a normal warming and cooling cycle and the 70s Ice Age was not just part of the popular press. The press was reporting what scientists said back then. Then the 'experts' were predicting a 'New Ice Age' using just as much 'proof' as the 'experts' are now using to 'prove' man made global warming.

When will people learn this is just another ploy by politicians to grab more money and take away more liberty.

I agree with you; seen and experienced too much of that in my life already. The average Joe will never believe - for instance - that there is more radioactive pollution from coal burning power station than from nuclear power station; something about the name prevents them from grasping the concept.

Nothing against any Joe personally; I would never question other people's religion such as Global Warming.

 

[Timber]

Did I attack you personally? No, I did not. Anyone who doesn't believe is to be belittled. Good plan.

I thought that was just kinda funny,Hardly an attack but if that is how you feel I guess I can't help that

 

[jdbower]

I thought that was just kinda funny,Hardly an attack but if that is how you feel I guess I can't help that

The problem is it's common for the pro-AGW crowd to be dismissive of any dissenters and call them "deniers." This avoids any sort of debate and leads to fairly extremist views - either man is a virus destroying the planet or there's no way we can affect something as big as the Earth. More legitimate conversations can lead to compromises and better understanding - definitely better than the 40 years of apocalypse predictions the media's been reporting.

For example, looking at the numbers at a larger scale shows that natural sources contribute to greenhouse gasses as well. With these numbers it becomes difficult to see how worthwhile it would be to even drop to fully "carbon neutral." This doesn't mean that minimizing our impact on the environment is a bad thing, but it certainly puts the cost and urgency into perspective. On the plus side, being "green" is trendy. This is leading luxury car makers to move towards non-oil-based solutions. Whether this has an impact on the environment is questionable, but at least it will have an impact on oil dependence. And the wealthy can afford to make these changes without government subsidies, by having people voluntarily invest in this technology the ones that work will move more mainstream.

Moreover, keeping track of predictions and figuring out what works and what doesn't is crucial towards understanding. After Katrina we were supposed to be swamped with high powered hurricanes, but that year seemed to be an aberration. However last year they predicted a decline in the solar cycle and a colder winter - and that came true. Once we can accurately predict things we can start talking about what to do to prevent events, but until then we'd be much better off spending money to help survive disasters than to risk that we're suddenly correct about climate science. Given a choice between building more modern water retaining systems and trusting that outlawing SUVs would prevent flooding guess where I'd put my money...

 

[MikePA]

The problem is it's common for the pro-AGW crowd to be dismissive of any dissenters and call them "deniers."

This is exactly what Al Gore has said, we don't have time to debate we must act and act now.

While they wouldn't admit it, for many believers in man made GW, it's a religion. Facts mixed with faith.

Earth = God
Scientists = Prophets
Believers = Believers
Deniers = Heretics to be silenced.
Tithe = Taxes
Carbon Footprint = Degree of sinfulness
Electric car, Replace light bulbs with CFLs - Forms of Penance

 

[RavensRoost]

If the world population went from 1 billion to 6 billion, then reducing population growth would seem to be smart.

RavensRoost