Comments on: No Consensus: Warmie Hysterics Ignore Reality

By: norwegian university of life sciences | Digg hot tags

norwegian university of life sciences | Digg hot tags — Tue, 23 Dec 2008 06:32:45 +0000

[...] Vote No Consensus: Warmie Hysterics Ignore Reality [...]

By: physical science news articles | Digg hot tags

physical science news articles | Digg hot tags — Mon, 22 Dec 2008 18:14:27 +0000

[...] Vote No Consensus: Warmie Hysterics Ignore Reality [...]

By: Ymarsakar

Ymarsakar — Mon, 22 Dec 2008 02:00:10 +0000

We can influence only one of these mechanisms. How come we don’t hear calls from the warmies to plant more trees and stop cutting down the rain forest?

Cause they need those forests for the newspapers…

By: Kirk Strong

Kirk Strong — Mon, 22 Dec 2008 00:14:45 +0000

Here’s another thought — something I have yet to find in all the blathering about the “problem” of so much CO2 in the atmosphere:

Consider that even if we completely eliminated all combustion of fossil fuels on earth, it would not remove a single molecule of CO2 from the atmosphere — not one!

There are only two ways that any significant amount of CO2 can come out of the atmosphere: (1) absorption in the oceans and (2) absorption by plants.

We can influence only one of these mechanisms. How come we don’t hear calls from the warmies to plant more trees and stop cutting down the rain forest?

By: Kirk Strong

Kirk Strong — Mon, 22 Dec 2008 00:02:55 +0000

It appears that the wheels on the global warming bandwagon are getting wobbly and about ready to fall off. Why then is Obama appointing so many warmies to key energy- and environmentally-related posts in his administration?

By: Laer

Laer — Sun, 21 Dec 2008 19:35:25 +0000

That’s twice you’ve caught me making that dumb mistake. I don’t know where “morphic” comes from in my scattered head! Obviously the root is “genic!” Thanks.

By: J. Ewing

J. Ewing — Sun, 21 Dec 2008 03:01:10 +0000

The word is “anthropogenic” global warming, not “anthropomorphic.” Other than that it is good. I would be perfectly willing to listen to the AGW fanatics so long as their fears do not result in foolish policy. Kyoto has been a miserable failure, not only because of non-compliance of the signatory nations, but because the climate has not complied with the predictions made if Kyoto was not implemented. We should be seeing excessive warming from non-compliance with Kyoto, but the opposite seems to be true. The over-reliance on computer modelling that cannot predict the past and has not, to date, predicted the future, would seem to be a foolish basis for such Draconian measures.