Reader comments
War urged against carbon dioxide
53 comments | Read story
liberal larry | 6:32 a.m. March 9, 2008
I can never figure out conservatives. If they need medical advice they seek a
doctor who is the most experienced, brilliant, well educated person they can
find. A person who distills the scientific knowledge of thousands of other well
trained professionals and uses that knowledge to treat them. But when it comes
to global warming they get their information from people like Paul Harvey and
Rush Limbaugh and totally ignore the warnings of the vast majority of the
qualified scientific community.
Gerold W. Pratt | 8:18 a.m. March 9, 2008
�I just wanted to voice my opinion. I have been working
all my life, with my nose to the grindstone, raising a family. I have a BS in
Chemical Engineering. It has only been the last year that I have really been
able to quench the burning thirst in my soul for information enough to be able
to refute the greatest lie that I have ever been confronted with, that says that
CO2 is causing global warming. Now, after this last year, I am finally able to
do some rebuttals of my own, even though, I've always known that it was not
true. Yes, I'm a denier, and proud of it. I am at the point now that when
I hear of any person whosoever who believes in the CO2 lie, then I immediately
hold suspicion for him, because if he doesn't have the insight to realize
the truth about CO2, then he doesn't have the insight to know the truth of
other things less obvious, and that especially holds true with my feelings
regarding all the presidential candidates. I don't trust any of them, I
don't trust Bill McKibben. He is calling for the destruction of our
country, period.
WarmongersRThem | 8:32 a.m. March 9, 2008
Let's see: The War on Poverty has resulted in more poverty. The War on
Drugs has resulted in more drug abuse. And the War on Terror has resulted in
more terrorists and terroristic acts.
And at a cost to our peace and prosperity (unless you're one of the soldiers or equipment vendors profiting from these wars).
Point: Can't the Left come up with a better moniker for their strategy to control all of us instead of another "war"?
And at a cost to our peace and prosperity (unless you're one of the soldiers or equipment vendors profiting from these wars).
Point: Can't the Left come up with a better moniker for their strategy to control all of us instead of another "war"?
Comments continue below
Lionheart | 7:34 a.m. March 9, 2008
When this hobgoblin of global warming fails to materialize, these people will
move on to other scare tactics to try to fight capitalism and install forms of
socialism which is their true cause.
BasicGuy | 10:12 a.m. March 9, 2008
Why do we keep reporting on the global warming issue from the perspective of the
fear-mongers and Gore-ites? We've turned the corner on the truth about
global warming and Gore's campaign of fear that even he doesn't live
by. Haven't DesNews reporters watched the BBC special called "The
Great Global Warming Swindle" yet? Haven't you noticed recent reports
about ice fields in Antarctica that have regained lost ground this winter? Come
on. Wake up! Quit reporting on this issue like it's a forgone conclusion.
Since when is the Deseret News a promoter of half truths and fear? Get the full
story and report it or don't report anything at all.
Laughable | 9:17 a.m. March 9, 2008
Carbon dioxide in earth's atmosphere is basically a trace molecule. Carbon
dioxide is naturally produced by respiration. It is reverted to usable oxygen
by photosynthesis. There IS NO CRISIS here!!!
Smartest Person Alive | 10:32 a.m. March 9, 2008
A war on CO2 is a war against plant life. How would we like it if plants
engaged in a war to deprive us of our oxygen?
Just a Guy | 12:25 p.m. March 9, 2008
Global Warming is a Farce and always has been. No scientific proof to back it
up.
Stewart | 1:08 p.m. March 9, 2008
Don't forget that without global warming Earth would turn into a giant
snowball(ice ball) which has happened in the past. 95% of the global warming is
caused by water vapor while only about 1% is caused by CO2, the remaining caused
by other trace gases. CO2 is also considered a trace gas. The plants would
certainly benefit from more CO2, and produce more food, lumber, and other
products, while CO2 would have to increase thousands of times to even be a
significant factor in global warming. The Deseret Morning News is jumping on the
propaganda bandwagon. By the way what ever happened to the ozone hole, and the
global cooling of the late 70s?
Shivering in the snow | 12:27 p.m. March 9, 2008
What's the right temperature for the earth...? Let's see, it's
....hmmm...maybe like the last ice age...or maybe like the medieval warming
period (must have been those SUV's they were driving then), or maybe like
the 1930's, or 1980's...hmmm...
I am sure the scientists have the right temperature figured out...why don't they tell us...
And by the way, 2007 saw the greatest drop in world temperatures ever recorded.
I am sure the scientists have the right temperature figured out...why don't they tell us...
And by the way, 2007 saw the greatest drop in world temperatures ever recorded.
Being Smart in Trying Times | 1:41 p.m. March 9, 2008
Plants trying to evolve to sequester trillions of tons of oxygen in some way
analogous to humans hoping to sequester tens of billions of tons of carbon
dioxide....Yea, RIGHT! Carbon sequestration is foolish enough.
I have worked with or near, some of the most dangerous chemicals in existence and have done considerable safety-engineering work in other areas. When the stakes are very, very high, the level of care and certitude brought to bear on a problem go sky-high. This is rationality itself.
Even though there are holes in the case for global warming, it is of such supreme importance that we must deal with it in the fastest, most cost-effective, and surest methods possible. It is smart, even without Global Warming.
Top-flight engineering and economic analysis are key to the best solutions.
Unfortunately, our politicians and media react to hysteria, not sound engineering judgment. This hysteria and Utah-visioning is driving us toward money-wasting non-solutions on many fronts while, (boring) sound engineering is ignored.
We have many huge problems facing us. I believe we must walk the most hazardous of high-wire-acts ever, just to survive. There are lots of problems jiggling that high-wire, too. Pretty high stakes indeed!
I have worked with or near, some of the most dangerous chemicals in existence and have done considerable safety-engineering work in other areas. When the stakes are very, very high, the level of care and certitude brought to bear on a problem go sky-high. This is rationality itself.
Even though there are holes in the case for global warming, it is of such supreme importance that we must deal with it in the fastest, most cost-effective, and surest methods possible. It is smart, even without Global Warming.
Top-flight engineering and economic analysis are key to the best solutions.
Unfortunately, our politicians and media react to hysteria, not sound engineering judgment. This hysteria and Utah-visioning is driving us toward money-wasting non-solutions on many fronts while, (boring) sound engineering is ignored.
We have many huge problems facing us. I believe we must walk the most hazardous of high-wire-acts ever, just to survive. There are lots of problems jiggling that high-wire, too. Pretty high stakes indeed!
itsjustme | 12:53 p.m. March 9, 2008
In order to eliminate a large amount of carbon dioxide emissions, I believe that
all life on this planet that breathes air should just stop doing so. That would
teach us all a valuable lesson. (It would not matter that there would be no one
around to see the results, because there would not be any difference in the
amount of CO2 in the atmosphere between now and then.) The people that blame
man-kind for "global warming" and "green-house gas" give
humans way too much credit. All you need to do is go outside in the daytime and
look up. There you will see the cause of "global warming".
Every time a volcano erupts somewhere on our planet, that one event spews more toxins and so-called "green-house gas" into the atmosphere then man-kind has since the Industrial Revolution began over a century ago.
The earth goes through cycles of warming and cooling, and has done so since the beginning of time. And all we can rightfully do is blame the sun.
Every time a volcano erupts somewhere on our planet, that one event spews more toxins and so-called "green-house gas" into the atmosphere then man-kind has since the Industrial Revolution began over a century ago.
The earth goes through cycles of warming and cooling, and has done so since the beginning of time. And all we can rightfully do is blame the sun.
MoJules | 1:09 p.m. March 9, 2008
My husband has a disease in the MD family which weakens his muscles and he has
lung weakness, this results in his retaining CO2. But the sad thing is, he has
been feeding the problem by lack of information, he is on a c-pap at night set
at 20, with 4.5 O2 bleed in, he also is on O2 when he does things. So what is
suppose to be helping him, has actually been harming him, he is going to be put
on a bi-pap now. One thing that we as able bodied people can do is breathe out.
As for the earth, I think sometimes too much information is too much,
everything I do these days is going to kill me, yet my life expectancy is higher
than ever. I do believe that we need to treat the earth kindly, but I also
believe we need to treat people kindly. Many of these "findings" have
existed for ever, we just know how to find it now and so scientists make is
sound like it is the first time this has happened, right.
no problem | 1:30 p.m. March 9, 2008
Is China going to participate in our "war against Carbon Dioxide"?
Skeptic | 1:33 p.m. March 9, 2008
Like others, I'm alarmed that the Deseret News continues to push the
anthropogenic global-warming panic button. Amy Choate-Nielsen, and Bill McKibben
need to get current on their research. There is ample evidence, from literally
hundreds of research studies, that we are in the midst of a warming period, yes,
but one that began roughly in 1850, at the end of the Little Ice Age. Is is
human-caused, a result of our CO2 emissions? Not likely. The current consensus
is that cyclical variations in solar activity, which are fairly predictable, has
this earth on roughly a 1,500-year warming-cooling cycle. Compared to the power
of the sun to affect our climate, whatever measly things we do pale in
comparison.
It doesn't surprise me that the woman or man on the street would believe warming is human-caused--the media says it is! But you'd have to judge for yourself what would cause a scientist to ignore all the human temperature records, as well as all the geological and biological temperature proxies (data from tree rings, deep ice cores, stalagmites, seabed sediments, tree lines and pollen) that amazingly all confirm the interval and timeline of earth's global 1,500-year climate cycle. Go figure....
It doesn't surprise me that the woman or man on the street would believe warming is human-caused--the media says it is! But you'd have to judge for yourself what would cause a scientist to ignore all the human temperature records, as well as all the geological and biological temperature proxies (data from tree rings, deep ice cores, stalagmites, seabed sediments, tree lines and pollen) that amazingly all confirm the interval and timeline of earth's global 1,500-year climate cycle. Go figure....
MetricWrench | 2:41 p.m. March 9, 2008
The most abundant byproduct of hydrocarbon combustion is water vapor. The amount
of CO2 is small by comparison. Why don't they attack water vapor for the
green house gas that it is. About 70% of what comes out of the tailpipe of your
car is H2O, the rest is CO2 and trace gases. The reason that nobody attacks H2O
is because it would sound stupid and nobody would beleive them, then how could
they make any money speaking about it at symposiums.
Another problem is computer modeling. No computer model on climate or temperture has ever withstood the test of time. This applies to the computer models concerning global warming as well as the computer models concerning the 7 day forecast for any given city. When they can accurately tell what the temperture will be 3 days from now then they might be able to tell what the temperture will be 30 yeas from now.
These guys don't even know enough to know that they know anything.
Another problem is computer modeling. No computer model on climate or temperture has ever withstood the test of time. This applies to the computer models concerning global warming as well as the computer models concerning the 7 day forecast for any given city. When they can accurately tell what the temperture will be 3 days from now then they might be able to tell what the temperture will be 30 yeas from now.
These guys don't even know enough to know that they know anything.
liberal larry | 1:38 p.m. March 9, 2008
I encourage all of the brilliant, global warming denial, geniuses, who have
posted here, to send their insightful ideas to peer reviewed, scientific
journals. I'm sure that the slow witted "experts" will read the
articles, slap their foreheads and exclaim "volcanos, water vapor, cattle
flatulence, why didn't we think of these things? These shrinking glaciers,
and dying coral reefs, are all part of the liberal fear agenda! No more
"Journal of Climate Science" for me, from now on I'm listening to
Paul Harvey for the latest on global warming research."
EndIsNeigh | 2:56 p.m. March 9, 2008
The US government expanded Daylight Savings Time to "save energy."
However, research indicates that eliminating Daylight Savings Time could go a
long way to solving the problem of Global Warming.
The California Energy Commission says that "Daylight Saving Time "makes" the sun "set" one hour later. They ran the numbers and have determined that if DST is in effect half the year for an hour a day, that is fully 1/48th of our total exposure to the sun that could be eliminated with the canceling of Daylight Saving Time, almost 2% of solar heat gain annually. That's huge!
So why did the Government really extend DST? Because of AlGore, who is in the back-pocket of the powerful solar energy lobby and alternative energy corporations.
Take Back the Night and Fight DST. The last thing we need right now is an extra hour of sunlight.
The California Energy Commission says that "Daylight Saving Time "makes" the sun "set" one hour later. They ran the numbers and have determined that if DST is in effect half the year for an hour a day, that is fully 1/48th of our total exposure to the sun that could be eliminated with the canceling of Daylight Saving Time, almost 2% of solar heat gain annually. That's huge!
So why did the Government really extend DST? Because of AlGore, who is in the back-pocket of the powerful solar energy lobby and alternative energy corporations.
Take Back the Night and Fight DST. The last thing we need right now is an extra hour of sunlight.
Lionheart | 3:14 p.m. March 9, 2008
To Being Smart in Trying Times. We must "walk the most hazardous of
highwire-acts ever, just to survive"? 1. Individual humans will not
survive, WE ARE ALL GOING TO DIE! What a novel idea this seems to be to so
many. 2. Even in mass die-offs in a species, the hardiest and most adaptable
survive to repopulate. 3. I don't think the world can get rid of humans
if it shook like a dog trying to shake off fleas. Humans are here to stay. 4.
After many years of listening to the latest 'end of world scare
stories', I have come to believe, that it is the fear of individual death
that causes humans to buy into these scenarios, they can't believe they are
going to die and the world goes on, so they postulate that the world will come
to an end, not them. Just a thought.
russ | 2:39 p.m. March 9, 2008
Liberal Larry: hang in there. It is hard to talk science and reviewed
publications and research with people who obviously work with a different
paradigm.
There are changes occuring on this planet. The changes are indicative of a steady problem: global warming. It is a complex issue, but it can be understood with patience, an open mind, and lots of reading reading reading.
Hang in there, Liberal Larry.
There are changes occuring on this planet. The changes are indicative of a steady problem: global warming. It is a complex issue, but it can be understood with patience, an open mind, and lots of reading reading reading.
Hang in there, Liberal Larry.
itsjustme | 2:46 p.m. March 9, 2008
I remember a story from several years back, that a student gave a report in a
science class decrying the fact that a product called dihydrogen monoxide was
killing 100's of thousands of people a year. That this product was
perfectly legal to use and no one had ever attempted to ban it. The student
urged his classmates to write their elected officials and demand that the
worldwide genocide caused by this product be addressed.
The students wrote to the officials demanding that this problem be looked into.
Several students later brought in letters from their elected officials stating that the information in the letter was not known, but that it would be addressed, at the highest levels of government.
The facts that: 1)The students sent in the letters, and 2)They got a response back, floored me. I would think that a science class, and government officials would know that the proper name for dihydrogen monoxide is: WATER. (Go to Wikipedia and put in "dihydrogen monoxide" for the whole story.)
What this shows me is that we, as a society, are very gullible. If enough people say something is true, it becomes a fact, whether it is or not.
The students wrote to the officials demanding that this problem be looked into.
Several students later brought in letters from their elected officials stating that the information in the letter was not known, but that it would be addressed, at the highest levels of government.
The facts that: 1)The students sent in the letters, and 2)They got a response back, floored me. I would think that a science class, and government officials would know that the proper name for dihydrogen monoxide is: WATER. (Go to Wikipedia and put in "dihydrogen monoxide" for the whole story.)
What this shows me is that we, as a society, are very gullible. If enough people say something is true, it becomes a fact, whether it is or not.
Sagacious Inquisitor | 4:57 p.m. March 9, 2008
Let�s see.
Concerning this new religion, �Man Caused Global Warming� (MCGW) Believers.
They pretend to make rules, change them at their whim. They never let other opinion or information be presented in schools, the press or spoken word.
Afraid of competition because their belief extends only to that point where they can use it against others.
They label others who hold equally valid theories as . . . heretics. They call them . . . DENIERS.
In 1989 (still marginally within the definition of the Age of Modern Science) 550 ppm of carbon dioxide emissions was the safe threshold for Earth life. In 1995 someone, smarter than silly Believers of only 6 years earlier, determined that the �ancient� belief was incorrect. MCGW True Believers changed their faith to 450 ppm CO2 emissions. Now, behold, a new revelation from the prophets of MCGW. 350 is the mystical number. If you don�t believe that you are a DENIER.
When will the next 250 ppm prophet arise?
Sounds like a Medieval Religion to me.
Sadly this time it is trying to impose taxation power, and Social Control, over all the people for the benefit of the few True Believers.
Concerning this new religion, �Man Caused Global Warming� (MCGW) Believers.
They pretend to make rules, change them at their whim. They never let other opinion or information be presented in schools, the press or spoken word.
Afraid of competition because their belief extends only to that point where they can use it against others.
They label others who hold equally valid theories as . . . heretics. They call them . . . DENIERS.
In 1989 (still marginally within the definition of the Age of Modern Science) 550 ppm of carbon dioxide emissions was the safe threshold for Earth life. In 1995 someone, smarter than silly Believers of only 6 years earlier, determined that the �ancient� belief was incorrect. MCGW True Believers changed their faith to 450 ppm CO2 emissions. Now, behold, a new revelation from the prophets of MCGW. 350 is the mystical number. If you don�t believe that you are a DENIER.
When will the next 250 ppm prophet arise?
Sounds like a Medieval Religion to me.
Sadly this time it is trying to impose taxation power, and Social Control, over all the people for the benefit of the few True Believers.
Timj | 5:18 p.m. March 9, 2008
Wow. I don't even know where to start.
"Powerful solar energy lobby"? Ya, you know, those guys have so much power that they go and start wars in Iraq, just so they can secure their obtainment of solar power...
"I've always known it was not true"? How, pray, did you know it was not true before you started studying it? Was it because Al Gore says it happens, and you know that everything Gore says is false? You claim to be a scientist, but that's not how research or science is done.
Think about how much gasoline you pour into your vehicle. Ten to thirty gallons each time. Where, exactly, does that go? Now, how many other people are doing the exact thing? How often? And that's not even considering all the coal that's burned to supply us with electricity.
Only fools think that their actions have no consequences. And even if you don't accept global warming, at least realize that there is a genuine need for reducing how many non-renewable resources we use, and there's a genuine need for more of us to use renewable resources.
"Powerful solar energy lobby"? Ya, you know, those guys have so much power that they go and start wars in Iraq, just so they can secure their obtainment of solar power...
"I've always known it was not true"? How, pray, did you know it was not true before you started studying it? Was it because Al Gore says it happens, and you know that everything Gore says is false? You claim to be a scientist, but that's not how research or science is done.
Think about how much gasoline you pour into your vehicle. Ten to thirty gallons each time. Where, exactly, does that go? Now, how many other people are doing the exact thing? How often? And that's not even considering all the coal that's burned to supply us with electricity.
Only fools think that their actions have no consequences. And even if you don't accept global warming, at least realize that there is a genuine need for reducing how many non-renewable resources we use, and there's a genuine need for more of us to use renewable resources.
Bookaholic | 4:20 p.m. March 9, 2008
I'm impressed with the wisdom shown in the previous posts. Sure, we should
care for the earth, be good stewards. But, I definitely don't believe that
we are on some death spiral caused by global warming. If we did all we could
possible, little difference would result as the primary mover in global warming
is the SUN. The Global Warming Swindle explains it in an easy to understand
manner.
I read recently that the earth had warmed one degree celsius in the last 100 years. But, it cooled one degree celsius in just this LAST YEAR ALONE. I predict it won't be long before we are hearing hysterics hollering about the global cooling coming down the pike, reminiscent of the 70s.
One of my favorite cartoons shows a news anchor at his desk, saying--"And now, over to Maria for the weather." On the other side of the studio sits Maria, a gypsy, in front of a crystal ball.
The fact that we can't reliably predict the weather three days from now, should worry people. The location of NOAA weather thermometers finds them placed inappropriately--poorly sited next to cars, furnaces, exhaust fans, etc. which throws off readings.
Global warming's a HOAX.
I read recently that the earth had warmed one degree celsius in the last 100 years. But, it cooled one degree celsius in just this LAST YEAR ALONE. I predict it won't be long before we are hearing hysterics hollering about the global cooling coming down the pike, reminiscent of the 70s.
One of my favorite cartoons shows a news anchor at his desk, saying--"And now, over to Maria for the weather." On the other side of the studio sits Maria, a gypsy, in front of a crystal ball.
The fact that we can't reliably predict the weather three days from now, should worry people. The location of NOAA weather thermometers finds them placed inappropriately--poorly sited next to cars, furnaces, exhaust fans, etc. which throws off readings.
Global warming's a HOAX.
Skeptic | 4:23 p.m. March 9, 2008
To: liberallarry
Why stop at the Journal of Climate Science? You need to get out more. Why not check out: Quaternary Science Reviews, Geophysical Research Letters, The Holocene, South African Journal of Science, Climate Dynamics, Quaternary Research, The Geographical Journal, Journal of Glaciology, Quaternary International, International Journal of Climatology (I could go on if you like). For a little lighter reading, you might try Science, and perhaps Nature.
When you're done, perhaps you'll have a little broader perspective. You may wake up and realize that you, in fact, have been living in a make-believe world created by Global Circulation Models that have only a marginal correspondence to reality.
And for your information, I don't listen to Paul Harvey OR Rush Limbaugh, but I do like to read.
Why stop at the Journal of Climate Science? You need to get out more. Why not check out: Quaternary Science Reviews, Geophysical Research Letters, The Holocene, South African Journal of Science, Climate Dynamics, Quaternary Research, The Geographical Journal, Journal of Glaciology, Quaternary International, International Journal of Climatology (I could go on if you like). For a little lighter reading, you might try Science, and perhaps Nature.
When you're done, perhaps you'll have a little broader perspective. You may wake up and realize that you, in fact, have been living in a make-believe world created by Global Circulation Models that have only a marginal correspondence to reality.
And for your information, I don't listen to Paul Harvey OR Rush Limbaugh, but I do like to read.
Sensible Scientist | 5:40 p.m. March 9, 2008
Problem is, there is no evidence that CO2 is a climate driver. It certainly
never has driven climate in the past.
Read all the peer-reviewed scientific literature you want-- you will not find evidence that CO2 is a climate driver. You will find that large group of recognized climate experts have great doubts about anthropogenic warming.
Global temperatures have been flat or slightly cooling now for 10 years since the El Nino - induced warm year of 1998. Isn't that enough (yet) for the alarmists to give up their hoax?
Read all the peer-reviewed scientific literature you want-- you will not find evidence that CO2 is a climate driver. You will find that large group of recognized climate experts have great doubts about anthropogenic warming.
Global temperatures have been flat or slightly cooling now for 10 years since the El Nino - induced warm year of 1998. Isn't that enough (yet) for the alarmists to give up their hoax?
Buried in Morgan | 6:53 p.m. March 9, 2008
We have had more cold and snow this year in this area than any of the old timers
can remember. And, it is well scientifically documented that 2007 was the
biggest drop in global temperature ever. It snowed in Iraq for the first time
ever. The east is having record lows. Yes, the earth's temperature can
change from year to year and decade to decade both up and down. But no
recognition of all this recent cooling evidence from the left. Let's see,
who are the real deniers???
Robert | 7:02 p.m. March 9, 2008
Whether or not climate change is anthropogenic, we should make the transition to
renewable energy as quickly as possible. It makes no sense to continue to
subsidize some of the world's worst governments. And we wouldn't have
to fight wars for access to solar energy.
Sagacious Inquisitor | 6:00 p.m. March 9, 2008
Timj,
Your points about using renewable resources are well taken. That will begin to happen when it can be economically justified. Until then, the Socialistic agenda proposed by the Man Caused Global Warming religion (MCGW)is a very poor way to promote such action.
Global Warming is indisputable. Absent that fortunate experience you would most likely be having Wooly Mammoth for dinner tonight in your igloo.
It is MCGW, and the entire religion that has sprung up around it, that is in dispute.
Just ain't so. At least according to many scientific, peer reviewed publications which do not enjoy widespread publication because they do not fit the Political Peer Review process.
Force feeding firm religious belief in unprovable theories, at the exclusion of un-politically correct open discussion, is dilusional and destructive of knowledge and progress.
Your points about using renewable resources are well taken. That will begin to happen when it can be economically justified. Until then, the Socialistic agenda proposed by the Man Caused Global Warming religion (MCGW)is a very poor way to promote such action.
Global Warming is indisputable. Absent that fortunate experience you would most likely be having Wooly Mammoth for dinner tonight in your igloo.
It is MCGW, and the entire religion that has sprung up around it, that is in dispute.
Just ain't so. At least according to many scientific, peer reviewed publications which do not enjoy widespread publication because they do not fit the Political Peer Review process.
Force feeding firm religious belief in unprovable theories, at the exclusion of un-politically correct open discussion, is dilusional and destructive of knowledge and progress.
Uritaata | 6:52 p.m. March 9, 2008
Newt Gingrich said, during a roundtable discussion with reporters November 1,
2007 at the Williams Club in Manhattan, "One of the great failures of the
Bush Presidency is the decision not to invest in climate science".
Newt Gingrich our former GOP Speaker of the house and science teacher acknowledged that global warming is real, and offered what amounted to an unexpected apology for his party's inaction on curtailing greenhouse gas emissions (capitol Hill conference on April 10, 2007). He also added that
the evidence that humans are causing the earth to warm was "sufficient" and that there was urgency to deal with the issue.
Newt added that we have now passed the tipping point of whether the argument of global warming is happening, the real argument is over how to tackle the problem.
It is therefore time for ignorant amateurs to stop pretenting to know more that world wide renowned climatologist experts becasue they want to defend an ideology that is not longer defendable.
Newt Gingrich our former GOP Speaker of the house and science teacher acknowledged that global warming is real, and offered what amounted to an unexpected apology for his party's inaction on curtailing greenhouse gas emissions (capitol Hill conference on April 10, 2007). He also added that
the evidence that humans are causing the earth to warm was "sufficient" and that there was urgency to deal with the issue.
Newt added that we have now passed the tipping point of whether the argument of global warming is happening, the real argument is over how to tackle the problem.
It is therefore time for ignorant amateurs to stop pretenting to know more that world wide renowned climatologist experts becasue they want to defend an ideology that is not longer defendable.
Coal Power | 7:02 p.m. March 9, 2008
The United States is the middle east of coal. Coal produces electricity at a
fraction of the price of wind or solar. When that is considered with the FACT
that fluctuations on the sun and NOT humans cause global warming, we are insane
if we give up our coal advantage.
Citizen | 7:04 p.m. March 9, 2008
Decaying plants discharge CO2. Volcanoes discharge C02. Should we plug up
the volcanoes and kill all plant life on the planet? But wait, plants discharge
Oxygen so that would cause a minor problem.
And if Algore and company really can lower the temperature of the planet by forcing the masses to buy his carbon credits, we will need to burn more carbon to keep from freezing to death.
And if Algore and company really can lower the temperature of the planet by forcing the masses to buy his carbon credits, we will need to burn more carbon to keep from freezing to death.
Professor | 8:18 p.m. March 9, 2008
Bill McKibben is not a scientist. He is a radical socialist writer by trade
and is making some big bucks exploiting this issue. Take a look at this carbon
footprint and see if he walks the walks or if he just talks the talk.
WTF | 7:21 p.m. March 9, 2008
Its sad that people in this state continue to debate whether or not climate
change is "real" when the peer-reviewed, hard scientific facts are
uncontestable. And people keep mentioning the liberal agenda - concern for the
well-being of future generations is hardly an agenda relative to those promoted
by the naysayers tied to big oil and the auto industry.
Citizen | 8:43 p.m. March 9, 2008
Professor you are right. I just looked at the Carbon Footprint of his speaking
schedule on his web site. This fellow is flying to a new city almost very day
on fossil fuel.
Speaker Fees and Time Book Sales would mean Mr. McKibben is generating a very nice living exploiting a political fear issue.
This subject is generating interest. Unfortunately none of our universities will take it out of the political arena and bring in credible scientists on both side of the issue to debate it.
Speaker Fees and Time Book Sales would mean Mr. McKibben is generating a very nice living exploiting a political fear issue.
This subject is generating interest. Unfortunately none of our universities will take it out of the political arena and bring in credible scientists on both side of the issue to debate it.
Professor | 7:59 p.m. March 9, 2008
Citizen,
Credible scientists debating the issue would be a good start in Utah. But your are right about the institutions of higher learning in the state. Instead of spending money on bringing in credible scientists on both sides of the issue, Utah Valley State College looking for money bring in Al Gore.
Credible scientists debating the issue would be a good start in Utah. But your are right about the institutions of higher learning in the state. Instead of spending money on bringing in credible scientists on both sides of the issue, Utah Valley State College looking for money bring in Al Gore.
Tumbleweed Tom | 9:10 p.m. March 9, 2008
With all this talk of doom and gloom (wonder what this guy's getting paid
per public speech?), I'm surprised no one has raised the suggestion that we
do what the people in the Bible and other scriptures did to avoid drought,
famine, pestilence, flood, earthquake and destruction by our enemies. Simply
repent.
uritaata | 8:27 p.m. March 9, 2008
Michael ALDER where are you? Your help is needed..
G. Michael Alder, �Earth�A Gift of Gladness,� Ensign, Jul 1991, p 27
G. Michael Alder, �Earth�A Gift of Gladness,� Ensign, Jul 1991, p 27
veedub | 9:45 p.m. March 9, 2008
Speaking of carbon footprints, it seems to me that whatever they're
preaching should be called "Gorebal Warming." With all his world
travel, plus that of his high priests of doom like this professor, together they
must be putting out more CO2 every year than most of us produce in a
lifetime.
But then, doesn't Algore own part of a company that sells "carbon indulgences" so they can all feel better about all the travel they do? Hmm, wonder if there's a connection there...Naw, surely filthy lucre can't be part of his motivation!
But then, doesn't Algore own part of a company that sells "carbon indulgences" so they can all feel better about all the travel they do? Hmm, wonder if there's a connection there...Naw, surely filthy lucre can't be part of his motivation!
Conservative Allen | 10:20 p.m. March 9, 2008
Global warming is a HOAX to the highest level of deception. In the 1970s the
hoax was "Global Freezing" which should have occurred already! Just
like Liberals to make up crap like this. They want POWER to TAX the hell out of
it citizens and "force" them to comply with their dictatorship type
control! Don't fart (fluctuating cows/animals/humans), don't die
(biodegrading bodies & plants) and don�t exhale! C02
is GOOD for the environment yet not good for animals/humans (H20-Human/animal
& C02-Plants. This has nothing to do with global warming. Did you know
there have been record cold temperatures throughout the planet this winter!!!
Mahershalalhashbaz | 10:24 p.m. March 9, 2008
Again another article without a shred of evidence. Never once in the history of
the news media have they presented a shred of evidence. No links to these
scientific journals, no names of cutting edge climate scientists, nothing.
Simply incredible. And yet people believe it. We've been begging for
evidence. But no, too scare to post any, because then someone will make you
look like a fool huh. You libs can cut and paste evidence from your so called
"scientific journals" with sources cited to tell us why you believe,
but no. Just mocking. You liberals and global warming religionists are
pathetic!
Another know it all | 11:42 p.m. March 9, 2008
Boy I've never seen a board more full of know-it-alls.
Here was a funny one:
"The most abundant byproduct of hydrocarbon combustion is water vapor. The amount of CO2 is small by comparison. Why don't they attack water vapor for the green house gas that it is. About 70% of what comes out of the tailpipe of your car is H2O, the rest is CO2 and trace gases. The reason that nobody attacks H2O is because it would sound stupid and nobody would beleive them, then how could they make any money speaking about it at symposiums."
This part was correct: "the reason that nobody attacks H2O is because it would sound stupid." And the reason it would sound stupid, dear MetricWrench, is because unlike CO2, H2O condenses and falls right out of the air at concentrations and temperatures relevant to ambient conditions. So if it builds up, it falls right out of the gas phase. It is a little-known phenomena known as "rain". So, if you went to a symposium and "attacked H2O" (with a fork maybe?), it would in fact sound quite stupid, and you would in fact not make any money speaking about it.
Here was a funny one:
"The most abundant byproduct of hydrocarbon combustion is water vapor. The amount of CO2 is small by comparison. Why don't they attack water vapor for the green house gas that it is. About 70% of what comes out of the tailpipe of your car is H2O, the rest is CO2 and trace gases. The reason that nobody attacks H2O is because it would sound stupid and nobody would beleive them, then how could they make any money speaking about it at symposiums."
This part was correct: "the reason that nobody attacks H2O is because it would sound stupid." And the reason it would sound stupid, dear MetricWrench, is because unlike CO2, H2O condenses and falls right out of the air at concentrations and temperatures relevant to ambient conditions. So if it builds up, it falls right out of the gas phase. It is a little-known phenomena known as "rain". So, if you went to a symposium and "attacked H2O" (with a fork maybe?), it would in fact sound quite stupid, and you would in fact not make any money speaking about it.
Sensible Scientist | 9:41 a.m. March 10, 2008
Those above who claim that anthropogenic global warming is
"indisputable" have not done their homework. The facts are regularly
disputed in peer-reviewed literature and increasingly in accessible forums and
publications.
Insane Scientist | 9:16 a.m. March 10, 2008
Can we please get a reference to one of these peer-reviewed studies that refutes
that humans are the cause of an increase in global temperature? I'd really
love to see something non-oil subsidized and actually peer-reviewed.
Skeptic | 12:11 p.m. March 10, 2008
To: Insane Scientist...
We can't post URLs here, but if you'd like a starting point on why many of us here are skeptics on global warming being human-caused, Google up these search arguments: senate epw 400 prominent scientists
We can't post URLs here, but if you'd like a starting point on why many of us here are skeptics on global warming being human-caused, Google up these search arguments: senate epw 400 prominent scientists
What happend to real Science? | 1:48 p.m. March 10, 2008
If anyone cares to look... there is perfectly good scientific evidence to refute
every claim made by Mr. Bill McKibben. If the "sky is falling" let it
fall on this kind of crap albeit wrapped in the cloak of "Science".
This whole thing is being trumped up to create panic among the "unwashed masses" to get them to vote more power and money to the "intellectual elite" to be used for their own purposes and their own gain.
Can't we get our "news" to at least vet out the truth before they go publishing theswe scare headlines.
This whole thing is being trumped up to create panic among the "unwashed masses" to get them to vote more power and money to the "intellectual elite" to be used for their own purposes and their own gain.
Can't we get our "news" to at least vet out the truth before they go publishing theswe scare headlines.
Timj | 2:17 p.m. March 10, 2008
To Skeptic:
He didn't ask for the names of scientists with opinions. He asked for a paper published in a peer-review journal.
There's a big difference.
Find it, give us a good way to find it without posting the URL, and you might have something. Otherwise, we just have opinion, not good hard evidence.
He didn't ask for the names of scientists with opinions. He asked for a paper published in a peer-review journal.
There's a big difference.
Find it, give us a good way to find it without posting the URL, and you might have something. Otherwise, we just have opinion, not good hard evidence.
student | 5:18 p.m. March 10, 2008
To Skeptic: find anything yet? I'm anxious.
Not Surprised | 12:21 a.m. March 12, 2008
Did no one find a peer-reviewed article debunking that humans are causing
climate change?
quiet & shy | 1:50 p.m. March 14, 2008
I don't quite know what to think about this, simply because it could be
either. There HAS been a masive amount of this "greenhouse gas", but
that doesn't mean that it's going to kill us eventually!! We should be
happy that we have all of the amazing technology that we take for granted. But,
on the other hand, there was a spike of co2 a couple million years ago, and we
humans didn't cause that, now did we? I say we just enjoy what we have!!
Technology!
Add your comment
Comments are monitored. Any comments found to be abusive, offensive, off-topic, misrepresentative, more than 200 words or containing URLs will not be posted.
Words Remaining
E-mail address: For internal use only. We may want to contact you to publish your comment (not your e-mail address) in the newspaper or for a separate story idea.
Bill McKibben delivers keynote speech at the 13th annual Stegner Symposium. He said carbon dioxide levels in the United States already are unsafe and are quickly getting worse.
- Salvation Army now credit ready 9:08 p.m.
- AIG settles dispute with ex-chairman 9:07 p.m.
- Fed offers credit tips at movies 9:07 p.m.
- Washington Post closes bureaus 9:06 p.m.
- Stores look to basics to lure buyers 9:06 p.m.
- Toyota to replace 4 million gas pedals 9:05 p.m.
- Digital advertising topic of lecture 9:05 p.m.
- Black Friday: Shoppers' green light 9:05 p.m.
- Elk Meadow resort auction online 9:05 p.m.
- Holiday hiring starts to pick up 9:04 p.m.
- Donny and Kym dance to victory
- Howard made the rivalry a rivalry
- Crews free man in Utah County cave
- Cougars cruise past Southern
- Loyal to Cougarettes, Crimson Line
- Twitterati to BCS: 'We hate you.'
- Y. focused on 10-win season
- BYU has slim shot at BCS
- Thunder rolls by Jazz
- Witness describes '99 killing
- BYU would like friendlier rivalry
258 - Glenn Beck to enter politics?227
- Protests against Phoenix LDS temple207
- RSL wins MLS Cup on penalty kicks202
- Bronco, Kyle rubber match139
- BYU records with win133
- Letters: Rushing to judge Palin129
- Boys basketball rankings107
- Thunder rolls by Jazz102
- Hall, Johnson matchup key102
Latest comments
re: RE: Utes Obsessed | 11:09 a.m. Nov. 25, 2009 FYI - I believe...
WAY TO GO COACH!! I got spoiled on your football program when you were...
yeah I kept on hoping that movie " THE NEW WORLD" would pick up but every...
We all go through difficult times. Hang in there Jeff and good luck.
Sloan/Johnson need to design about a dozen 3 point plays for this team to...
It's to bad we don't know who these blogs are from. I have read the document...
So funny to have everyone talking smack on Bingham and their coach. Bingham...
Was the card in her name, or just a school district general purchasing card?...
I am cool with this because we keep the bulk of this squad and do not lose...
After reading "Stirred up a hornets' nest, posted at 12:21 p.m., where he...
Advertisements