Reader comments
State setting greenhouse gas goals

Over 31,000 American scientists have signed the following petition:

"There is no convincing evidence that human release of carbon dioxide, methane, or other greenhouse gases is causing or will cause, in the foreseeable future cause catastrophic heating of the Earth's atmosphere and disruption of the Earth's climate." (petitionprojectdotorg)

Instead of the scientists, it is politicians searching for more revenue sources (taxes) are controlling the debate on this issue.

CO2 is NOT a pollutant, no matter what the Supreme Court ruled. IPCC, and all the policy makers on the bandwagon to reduce human output of CO2 are misguided. They have little insight or inspiration. There is ample proof against the Anthropogenic Global Warming theory that they all choose to ignore. If they don't have the ability to THINK about this nonsense they all need to be replaced. Political laws to mitigate human CO2 output have the potential to lead our country to ruin. In light of the terrible price increases for oil and gasoline, and they are talking about this? It is so completely and totally misguided. I can't believe for a minute these people are even thinking about it.

is on the ropes, due to obscene government spending, the war and high energy prices. It looks like the new senate climate proposal wants to finish it off.

Why are we detroying ourselves?

I agree totally with Professor. Global warming (the more intelligent liberals should now be calling it climate change because everyone knows global warming has been proven wrong) is obviously propaganda. Name one scientist who thinks otherwise (and please none affiliated with the UN). You can't name one, but I can name 100's of politicians who are so called climate experts. Don't you see something wrong with that? Al Gore, Rocky Anderson, John Huntsman the Younger, Arnold? These are climate experts? Oh please!!! Grow a brain!

I can't name a scientist that thinks global warming is real? Not one? Heck, here's a bunch just off the top of my head. They've even done some pretty good research along these lines: Jennifer Logan, Bill Chameides, Henry Pollack, David Chapman, Mario Molina, Paul Creutzen, William Curry, Warren Washington, Norm McFarlane, Steven Schneider.

Professor: Why even bring up the Oregon Petition? It gets debunked for the same reasons every time: most of the signers don't have a PhD, don't do research in the area of climate change, or when contacted would no longer sign the petition. Yes, a handful of the signers are researchers in the field of climate change, but so what? It doesn't change the reality that these are a small minority.

It might be worth while to check out noimpactman's informative post to his blog 5/30/08 titled 'What I'd say if I was wrong about climate change.'

He lists many co-benefits we would get by working to mitigate Climate Change, not least improved air quality (less NOx, SOx, PM, ozone). It's a very interesting list.

He closes asking, 'What would you feel if we went your way and you turned out to be wrong?' Think about it, if Climate Change is real, and we don't make useful changes, the result is much more harmful & long-lasting than if we take Climate Change seriously and are wrong.