Reader comments
Mankind blamed for global warming

Well, that settles it for me: humans are destroying the planet. The Utah experts have spoken (or regurjitated the pop thinking). No matter many so-called experts are now back-peddling, Utah has decreeded otherwise. Let it be written; let it be done. Amen.

I was taken by surprise that a report like this would come from conservative Utah. My hat is off. Cognitive Dissonance is alive and well in Utah so many will continue to deny that global warming exists and that man is playing a major role. But maybe, just maybe this will change the thinking of a few.

And thus continues Governor Huntsman's drive as our first openly Environmentalist Governor. Over time he will wreck havoc on our economy.

And as for this issue being beyond a doubt, man made. What about the revelation of just last week that NASA data has been skewed and that in fact it is no where near as warm as claimed? Does that matter? Does it matter that this is nothing more than like the media getting bored, nothing to report on so suddenly they cover every shark attack that happens. By the end of the summer everyone is talking about the 'dramatic number of shark attacks.' Only to later find out it was actually a much slower year for shark attacks. The media just hyped it up.

Governor Huntsman need to be impeached.

Before the epic "Yes it is, No it isn't" comment argument about man's responsibility for global warming begins, I just want to say that it really won't matter. Before we ever get to the dreaded 450 ppm, we are going to experience shortfalls of economically producable reserves of all the major hydrocarbon fuels. We are going to meet some of the most ambitious CO2 reduction goals not by determined effort, but simply by running low on fuel.
Google "Peak Oil"

Isn't it ironic that conservatives in this area only follow their elected leaders as long as they read from the Republican handbook. As soon as one sways with a bit of independent thinking, or colors "outside the lines" they all rally for an impeachment.

Clean air will destroy the economy.

What do "conservative" and "Republican" have to do with each other? Anyone who thinks Hunstman is a conservative is a fool.

This isn't a conservative vs. liberal issue. No one is debating that the earth is getting warmer. No one disputes that CO2 is a contributing factor. If man produces CO2 then clearly man is responsible, to some degree, for global warming. Now before we start panicking, there are a few other facts that should also be given just as much fanfare.
1. The earth is not a stable place.
2. The greatest effect on the earths temperature is the sun.
3. The earth spends more time in history without ice-caps, than with ice-caps. The state we live in today is not the earth's typical state.
4. Methane is many-times over a more effective green-house gas than CO2.
for more info go to junkscience.com

We must be idiots if we're going to bury CO2 emissions underground.

Alternative source for energy is all well and good, but, how much would litigation promoted by the environmentalist group cost. History shows they oppose any project which offers alternative energy.

Who was on the "Blue Ribbon" committee? Was there any suggestion as to how these ideas could be implimented? What about the impact of these measures on the economy and food production costs? How effective will the measures be in acheiving the desired goal. What is the goal? How much did this report cost the state and how is it different from all the other blue ribbon reports by other states and agencies?

What's happened to Utah politics? First "Rocky" and now Huntsman.

Did this task force take into account NASA's recent revelation that the temperture figures were over reported and in error? Isn't the global temperture delta over the last 30 years the foundation of the whole global warming movement? Just wondering?

Wouldn't it be ironic if the experts declared that man was responsible for global warming and there was no global warming?

We have already read that the scientific community unanimously agrees on all the talking points of global warming (usually in the context of discrediting any dissenting voice) will they now unite in discrediting NASA? Just wondering?

The earth's median tempature was higher in
the time period of 1920 - 1939. Go check the
historical record.
Man is not responsible for global warming!
The God created animals all over the planet
release for co2 into the air every hour than
mans use of petroleum using devices.
Most scientist that formulated the "global warming"
theme have clearly stated that actuality does not
confirm the thesis as stated for global warming.

It still surprises me how often we are swayed into panic by the crisis of the month, year, decade, I can remember when I was a young woman that there was a huge fear, with articles in all the popular magazines of the day, that another ice age was coming soon.
Of course we should be "good stewards" of the earth, and of course we should explore all the innovative technology possible to do so--solar, wind power, lots of possibilities. But we do have a couple of groups with prior agendas driving this particular controversy--the big oil interests (have you ever wondered why cars can't be more economical--try checking out the interlocking directorates of the big oil and automotive companies--it's interesting). Then we have a good few people in the environmental movement whose underlying mission is population reduction and anything that serves that goal is taken up and used.
There are reputable scientists on both sides of this issue, solid ones. But it seems true that dissenting voices about global warming are ridiculed, not seriously considered, by the media.
I guess the solution is for all of us to quit breathing--of course, the forests won't like that--they need CO2.

Well, the Republicans have said it's a myth, so therefore it is clearly a myth.
No scientifically determine if there is something to concept that man may cause global warming, if the neo-cons say it's a myth then lets just forget about it and follow their lead. They clearly know what they're doing, I've even heard The Good Lord inspires them.

It was warmer in 1934 in the US than any year since. "The last 50 years" includes 25 years of the cooling period from 1935 to 1975. Why the downturn, even while CO2 emissions were exponentially growing? The only hypothesis advanced by the UN IPCC is that sulfates from coal burning counteracted warming. All we have to do is stop controlling sulfate emissions, and the temperature should drop!

The problem with government programs like this is that they impose burdens without any cost-benefit analysis. The evaluations that have been done conclude that we could shut down our economy and it would make almost no difference to global warming becuase the CO2 is already there, and we will see NO difference for at least 50 years! Regulators will just want to impose more and more ineffectual regulation, at great cost. We will kill ourselves while China and India keep CO2 growing.

These programs are like decreasing sewage pollution by making all adults wear diapers.

The only cost-effective way to fight warming is to remove CO2 from the ambient air (e.g. growing trees, fertilizing oceans), and actively shade the earth with particulates. The costs of fighting warming globally instead of locally are negligible, especially if we let the economy grow naturally.

Just one thing to add to the discussion, and that is that the majority of carbon dioxide emissions came in the latter half of the 20th century, and most of the warming that happened took place in the first half of the 20th century. The so-called scientific consensus on global warming has been spending a huge amount of time trying to show us that CO2 causes global warming, but any statistician could tell you that when temperatures rise before CO2 emissions go up, that can't even be considered correlation, much less causation.

I might also point out that all the models that indicate that global warming is caused by mankind specifically exclude any consideration of what effects the sun might have on warming. For the life of me, I cannot imagine how you can remove from consideration the ultimate source of all warming on earth (excluding minor heating from the earth's core) and still expect to gain any useful knowledge.

Check the facts: there is NO correlation in the past (including the past century) between CO2 concentration and temperature. In reality, CO2 rises always lag behind temperature rises by hundreds of years. This simple, indisputable fact pulls the rug out from under the global warming alarmism. Global warming has therefore been thoroughly debunked, and fighting this windmill is a terrible waste of resources.

The 100 year old con on climate change.

In order to be an intelligent reader you must have a basic knowledge. Please do your own homework, a starting point http://www.InteliOrg.com

There is a powerful group of people who don't believe in God. They want to conquer the whole world.(read Ether 8). They made up this global warming scare.

How do you conquer a nation? Read the communist manifesto. You outlaw God using propaganda (10 commandments/crosses coming down, all Muslims and Mormons are terrorists, all Catholic priests are child molestors, religions cause all of the wars/fighting/terrorism). They are trying to get rid of guns (ask the NRA), they fight freedom of speech, unless it fits their agenda, they are trying to kill off as many of us as possible (the fewer of us there are the easier it will be to march their Chinese/Russian army in here and defeat us).

So they push the homosexual agenda, the abortion agenda, the global warming agenda. They are trying to convince everyone that there is no God, and way too many of us, and we need to stop populating this country. Then they'll crash the economy (The US does not own the Federal Reserve, they do.) They just saved the economy by pumping billions into it and they can crash it too, when the time is right, and half of us will starve to death (less than 2% of the country farms and then only if they have a loan at the beginning of the year). After that it will be easy to conquer the US (or so they think). They have used their money to nearly take over the entire government (including in Utah), and we are in trouble. The only way to beat it is for everyone to repent. Truth is stranger than fiction.

Get with it and look at "ALL" the evidence not just that which makes your case!

This article states the same old diatribe of 'Consensus'. There IS NO consensus, unless you count the consensus of scientists that buy into the Man Made GW theory.