Environment

Will the ‘Coming of the New Ice Age’ Mark the End of the Global Warming Era?

Last week, the Blaze reported about an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal signed by 16 scientists and engineers with the general thesis that “drastic action” to curb global warming is unnecessary and not economically beneficial. Today, climate scientists who support taking action to mitigate the effects of man-made global warming have written a rebuttal – with 39 authors — in WSJ.

The heart of the rebuttal is that those in the group of 16 have “no expertise in climate science” and those who do “have extreme views that are out of step with nearly every other climate expert”:

Do you consult your dentist about your heart condition? In science, as in any area, reputations are based on knowledge and expertise in a field and on published, peer-reviewed work. If you need surgery, you want a highly experienced expert in the field who has done a large number of the proposed operations.

You published “No Need to Panic About Global Warming” (op-ed, Jan. 27) on climate change by the climate-science equivalent of dentists practicing cardiology. While accomplished in their own fields, most of these authors have no expertise in climate science.

The 16 scientists stated last week that “There is no compelling scientific argument for drastic action to ”decarbonize” the world’s economy.” They also write that even if there were, it would not be economically justifiable.

The scientists in the more recent WSJ op-ed rebuttal state that a quote by Kevin Trenbirth saying it was a “travesty” that they couldn’t “account for the lack of warming” was taken out of context in the “No Need to Panic” piece. They clarify what Trenbrith was really saying was that the systems that track warming trends in the ocean were inadequate to show actual warming.

These scientists also call attention to the National Academy of Science’s opinion, as a reputable authority, that “the world is heating up and humans are primarily responsible“ and mitigation of the effects will ”require significant reductions in emissions of heat-trapping gases”.

Scientists Discuss Economics of Global WarmingAt the same time, a third related and interesting observation has been brought up by the blogger going by “Zombie” on PJ Media. Zombie writes that he has been looking into ”The Weather Conspiracy: The Coming of the New Ice Age” published in 1977. Here are some of the things Zombie learned:

• Climate change is happening faster than we realize and it will have catastrophic consequences for mankind.
• There’s very little we can do to stop it at this late stage, but we might be able to save ourselves if we immediately take these necessary and drastic steps:

- Increase our reliance on alternative energy sources and stop using so much oil and other carbon-based fuels;
- Adopt energy-efficient practices in all aspects of our lives, however inconvenient;
- Impose punitive taxes on inefficient or polluting activities to discourage them;
- Funnel large sums of money from developed nations like the U.S. to Third World nations;
- In general embrace all environmental causes.

Sounds familiar, right? Zombie writes that these are exactly the same efforts that global warming alarmists are stating must be done to deal with impending consequence of global climate change. He points out in both cases that there is call to “cede power and money from the First World to the Third World”. This is already happening: at the conclusion of the most recent United Nations Conference on Climate Change in Durban, South Africa, there was an agreement to set up bodies that will collect, govern and distribute funds to poor countries adversely affected by climate change.

Zombie expounds on his opinion further:

The true purpose of climate change disaster-mongering is to permanently cripple the First World, and to elevate the Third World, in order to create a planet with no economic inequality. The goal remains constant; the supposed imminent catastrophes justifying it come and go as needed.

The 16 scientists in the WSJ piece don’t come right out to say that the ultimate goal of climate alarmism is to reduce economic inequality, but they do suggest we “follow the money”. The scientists state that, according to research by Yale economist William D. Nordhaus, third world countries could actually benefit from “a policy that allows 50 more years of economic growth unimpeded by greenhouse gas controls.” Nordhaus, as reported by the New York Times Dot Earth blog, has said that the scientists misrepresented his work. Nordhaus told the Times that he as “long taken the view that policies to slow global warming would have net economic benefits”.

The Times, in a separate post, includes the thoughts of Yale economics and forestry professor Robert Mendelsohn who states that the authors in the initial WSJ article are correct in that “evidence to engage in harsh mitigation programs is very scanty.“ But Mendelsohn also states that ”a rational modest policy would permit continued economic growth into the future including the continued development of emerging and undeveloped countries.”

Comments (201)

1 2 3 4
  • Fla Del
    Posted on February 1, 2012 at 9:03pm

    Instead of bickering lets get educated.
    Everyone needs to go on line and order Cold Sun by John L. Casey.
    He, and many scientist around the world, proves that we are starting a normal drop in temperature called the Dalton Minimum. It happens every 206 years.
    It is going to get much colder in the next 10 to15 years.
    Besides, if we shut down every plant, stop using gas in cars and plugged up the asses of all cows for the next 50 years all over the world, it would not reduce as much CO2 (or carbon footprint) that was caused by the volcano that stopped flights to Europe last year. Global Warming (excuse me) Climate Change is an expensive joke.

    Report Post » Fla Del  
    • MCDAVE
      Posted on February 1, 2012 at 9:11pm

      Makes Al Gore rich..allows for Government control and higher taxes

      Report Post »  
    • SHOWMESTATEGUY
      Posted on February 1, 2012 at 9:21pm

      Maybe Palin was right. Drill baby drill. We will need something to heat our homes with during the new ice age right? Why are the dem libs so quick to jump on the latest fab (global warming) without all the facts. Okay, leave Gore out of it. Besides Gore.

      They do this time after time. The examples are too numerous to list here. But if you insist I will be glad to list them in a later post.

      Report Post »  
    • jzs
      Posted on February 1, 2012 at 9:33pm

      Wow, this is about the stupidest thing I’ve ever read. A lede that has no other purpose than appeal to the ill-informed and those without an education who get their science from Rush Limbaugh. Somehow 16 people with letters after their names, representing some sort of education unrelated to global warming, came together to write a WSJ article opposing the conclusions of the 97% of the thousands of publishing real climate scientists who agree, to some degree or another, that global warming is real and anthropogenic.

      And so this website brings in the tie breaker, an anonymous person “Zombie” who posts on PJ Media, whatever that is. And he give his paranoid conspiracy theory that global warming is a hoax, “The true purpose of climate change disaster-mongering is to permanently cripple the First World, and to elevate the Third World, in order to create a planet with no economic inequality.”

      Zombie on PJ Media, the go to guy on science. Please, please, tell me you guys are not so stupid or mentally f- up to believe this kind of crap. From Zombie. On PJ media.

      jzs  
    • TXPilot
      Posted on February 1, 2012 at 9:52pm

      “Global warming”, is nothing more than the scientific equivalent of Sharia law. It is an excuse to implement rules that will vastly change our lives, for no reason other than to give our enemies both here and abroad more power over us. Through the broad reach of this doctrine, taking away our liberties, jobs, homes, money, and even our very lives, can easily be justified……..its one of the best and most dangerous examples of “whats good for the collective” to be found today.

      Report Post » TXPilot  
    • Liberty_Hound
      Posted on February 1, 2012 at 9:58pm

      BTW.. Santorum is the only renaming candidate to openly say that man made Global Warming, also know as, AGW is a hokes.

      Report Post » Liberty_Hound  
    • RJJinGadsden
      Posted on February 1, 2012 at 9:58pm

      JZS,
      Wow, looking up big adult words now are we? I for one am certainly impressed. Everything that you said was pandered to us back in the ’70s when the buffoons were pushing the next ice age was coming BS. As for the scientists, follow the money. When they were essentially financially herded to agree with the so called global warming experts or their grants and pay checks would be cut off. Oh yeah, very scientific stuff to lay your claim on Bud. Furthermore, too many of the so called EXPERTS have back tracked on far too many of their wild claims. The crap is it’s very own cottage industry enriching some while empowering others.

      Report Post » RJJinGadsden  
    • PretzelLogic
      Posted on February 1, 2012 at 10:16pm

      JZS, were you born this stupid or did you have to work really hard at it?

      Report Post »  
    • 3monkeysmomma
      Posted on February 1, 2012 at 10:21pm

      @ LibertyHound Santorum is NOT THE ONLY candidate who has spoken out against it:

      “The greatest hoax I think that has been around for many, many years if not hundreds of years has been this hoax on [...] global warming.” – Ron Paul on Fox Business, Nov. 4, 2009

      Report Post » 3monkeysmomma  
    • decendentof56
      Posted on February 1, 2012 at 10:30pm

      FLA DEL……….
      The UN is behind this. It has been sucking the teet of the US since its inception. There has been nothing but global war since the UN has been in existence, and now the use of “global warming” to redistribute ‘global wealth’.

      Report Post »  
    • jzs
      Posted on February 1, 2012 at 10:37pm

      RJJinGadsden, no I didn’t use any “adult words” although your idea that I did speaks voluminously about your limited erudition. Whatever, here is some info for you. Something, for a change, that didn’t come from Limbaugh:

      http://www.skepticalscience.com/argument.php

      Report Post » jzs  
    • 13th Imam
      Posted on February 1, 2012 at 11:15pm

      Jeez,,,,,,,,,, One group of Scientist Leeches saying they deserve AMERICAN TAXPAYERS Stolen money more than an other group of Scientist Leeches. Defund all these thieves.

      Report Post » 13th Imam  
    • mr.goodvibe
      Posted on February 1, 2012 at 11:44pm

      Thank god! It was 80 here today just east of Houston, give me sonme winter.

      Report Post » mr.goodvibe  
    • Constantine Ivanov
      Posted on February 1, 2012 at 11:58pm

      “Global Warming (excuse me) Climate Change is an expensive joke,” you said, dear FLA DEL.
      No, it was not a joke. It was an intentional provocation preplanned by all kinds of Greens and Commies designed to do actually the same as what obama is doing: destroying the Capitalist economics of our country so that it will be then nationalized and socialized.
      So, it’s a lot worse than just a joke.
      By the way, every person who lived in Russia knows that the Global climatic fluctuations occur every (roughly) 30-40 years and they have nothing to do with any human activities.
      In 1941, it was a very cold Winter in the European part of the USSR (which had helped to defeat Germans in the Moscow Battle on December 6, 1941).
      In 1973 (32 years later!), it was -44 Celsius (-47.2F) in Moscow. In 2004, it was again extremely cold in Moscow. See: every 30 years. And in between – relatively mild weather.
      So, only absolutely dishonest and/or absolutely ignorant Americans could have believed all that al-Gore Warming crap.

      Report Post » Constantine Ivanov  
    • Constantine Ivanov
      Posted on February 2, 2012 at 12:00am

      “Global Warming (excuse me) Climate Change is an expensive joke,” you said, dear FLA DEL.
      No, it was not a joke. It was an intentional provocation preplanned by all kinds of Greens and Commies designed to do actually the same as what obama is doing: destroying the Capitalist economics of our country so that it will be then nationalized and socialized.
      So, it’s a lot worse than just a joke.
      By the way, every person who lived in Russia knows that the Global climatic fluctuations occur every (roughly) 30-40 years and they have nothing to do with any human activities.
      In 1941, it was a very cold Winter in the European part of the USSR (which had helped to defeat Germans in the Moscow Battle on December 6, 1941).
      In 1973 (32 years later!), it was -44 Celsius (-47.2F) in Moscow. In 2004, it was again extremely cold in Moscow. See: every 30 years. And in between – relatively mild weather.
      So, only absolutely dishonest and/or absolutely ignorant Americans could have believed all that al-Gore Warming rubbish.

      Report Post » Constantine Ivanov  
    • USAMEDIC3008
      Posted on February 2, 2012 at 12:13am

      Holy crapppp
      Now I don’t know /
      Buy more shorts or longjohns????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

      Report Post » USAMEDIC3008  
    • mharry860
      Posted on February 2, 2012 at 12:18am

      Thank you.

      Report Post » mharry860  
    • KickinBack
      Posted on February 2, 2012 at 12:39am

      I would prefer a global warming over global cooling. Crops don’t grow well in the cold.

      Report Post » KickinBack  
    • thelonious
      Posted on February 2, 2012 at 1:31am

      I think you are all missing the picture. I have one question for anyone; What is the plan for modern society after the planet’s petroleum reserves have become scarce and insufficient?

      Report Post »  
    • thelonious
      Posted on February 2, 2012 at 2:37am

      The modern “Free” Market of Capitalism runs on oil. A hundred million barrels a day gets every American to and from their cubicle so they can ramp up the profits, lets every cargo ship, plane, and semi-truck scramble resources, and moves the very same war machines we use to pilfer it from unstable regions. Then we enjoy our super bowls and american idols and the commercials in between in reverence to our supreme god Consumerism. Then we spread that ideology in faux innocence to get other nations to “develop” and conform. Yet, it’s a fact that obtainable oil and coal reserves will RUN OUT EVENTUALLY and our system ignores this in exchange for immediate personal gratification. Unsustainable energy will flood the media and tabloids like the Blaze for the next few decades with stories like this. They obfuscate basic geoscience with gross oversimplifications like total “cooling” versus “heating”. They are trying to keep as many customers as they can loyal to pressure politicians into dragging their heels at energy reform. Do yourself a favor and oppose the plutocrat-controlled focus on retro energy, challenge the throw-away culture that achieves greater personal slothfulness and more corporate control, and do it not for complex climatic reasons but because someone before you did it.

      Report Post »  
    • gdbhusker
      Posted on February 2, 2012 at 2:59am

      @thelonious…..We are NOT running out of petroleum reserves!! Brownfield was another deception. I have worked in the oilfields of the US for a long while now and can tell you that everywhere they drill , right now, as I speak, they are pulling HUGE amounts of OIL out of the ground! In OK there was almost no oil left here after the 70′s… OK was the worlds oil capital in the 30‘s and 40’s..then nothing…. We have re-entered abandoned wells that have been void of anything for 40 years and right on our capital lawn they are pulling 6-700 bbls a day!! They are getting oil in places that they said could never yield oil. The Bakken(north Dakota) has wells pulling 1800-2400 bbls a day and the EPA is trying to shut them down!! I know I work for the major oil companies and all, but if you think about it….the only way to jack prices up on something that is plentiful..is to artificially make it scarce… they say Dinosaurs and vegetation is where “fossil fuels” come from…but I tell you that they are drilling in the northern most areas in Russia, at amazing depths of 35K’ and the oil coming out is like the old “gusher” movies….what lived at that depth??? unless the Earth started off the size of a melon….. There are new petroleum physicists that are changing their views on fossil fuel every day… though they get De-Funded by big oil.. they have very interesting theories…about tectonic plate drift and shale…you should read up… have a very “oily” day….

      Report Post » gdbhusker  
    • nzkiwi
      Posted on February 2, 2012 at 3:05am

      @JZS

      Actually you are wrong about 97% of scientists supporting global warming theory. Scientists who actually support AGW are in an ever shrinking minority. I’m not trying to belittle you, it is just a fact.

      Many ask why in that case there is so much noise on the subject and the answer is that it is simply a means to a political end.

      “In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill. All these dangers are caused by human intervention, and it is only through changed attitudes and behavior that they can be overcome. The real enemy then, is humanity itself.”–Al Gore, Club of Rome executive member.

      Kind of cynical, isn’t it?

      I think that you are a person of intellectual integrity so I’ll just leave you to search for the petitions that tens of thousands of scientists have signed stating that AGW is overblown. This includes scientists who were formally authors of the UN’s various IPCC global warming papers, including this from Dr Hansen – the guy that kicked this thing into high gear in the late 80′s:

      “The forcings that drive long-term climate change are not known with an accuracy sufficient to define future climate change.” — James Hansen

      Report Post »  
    • Zer0
      Posted on February 2, 2012 at 3:53am

      Gorbachev, “Green is the new Red.”

      Yes, in the 70‘s and the early 80’s the great fear amongst climate “scientists” was the onslaught of the impending Ice Age. I still remember Leonard Nimoy narrating a docudrama about the topic, filled with terror as a young boy as I watched and listened. I told my parents the only thing we could do to save ourselves will be moving somewhere along the equator to escape the freezing tempratures and mass starvation. Fast forward 30+ years and now it’s Global Warming with the same pomp, terror, and misinformation as the vintage Reefer Madness. It is all a ploy to simply transfer wealth.

      Report Post »  
    • scarebear83
      Posted on February 2, 2012 at 4:51am

      @ JZ- I wouldn’t down PJTV or Zombie for that matter. Zombie does his homework. In fact on his own blog you can find hundreds of photos of liberal protests and parades etc. and see for yourself how the left tends to act.

      Now if you would actually go to article linked in this one you’ll see that Zombie has done his homework. He read a 1970′s book on global cooling which has spouted the exact same things global warming advocates have said and has scanned several of the pages from that book which you can see for yourself. He also provides several links to articles that you can look at. In fact I’ll give you one here: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2093264/Forget-global-warming–Cycle-25-need-worry-NASA-scientists-right-Thames-freezing-again.html#ixzz1ku6F2Ksk No one‘s claiming he’s the “go to” scientist, just that he did his homework like we ALL should do, including you.

      Report Post » scarebear83  
    • FLDeb
      Posted on February 2, 2012 at 5:35am

      JZS (would have rather replied directly to you), how old are you????? Does no one remember the ’70s when some of the SAME scientist on global warming were screaming we were all going to FREEZE to death????? Too many other factors involved in the earths CYCLES for man to be the only cause or the only cure for that matter.

      Report Post » FLDeb  
    • TomFerrari
      Posted on February 2, 2012 at 6:06am

      @jzs…
      Okay, DON‘T take the 16’s word for it.
      How about MULTIPLE studies by NASA???
      Or, are they a bunch of wannabe scientists too?

      Your argument is, that we are not permitted to question so-called, self-proclaimed “experts” simply because they have suckled at the govt teat more than anybody else. Yet again, you want government to pick winners and losers, not FACTS. If you want facts, you go to UNBIASED sources like NASA whose job is not dependent upon finding a self-justifying, self-perpetuating crisis.

      Using your logic, we would all be visiting our nephrologists for regular check ups because only a more experienced nephrologist would ever be permitted to question the quack science behind global ice ages, er, I meant global warming, er, I meant global climate change, er, I meant nephrology. After all, they ARE the experts, right?
      Perhaps you should try to find ONE source studying climate for altruistic purposes, who have NO financial upside, nor ties to those who do. You know, someone like NASA who clearly states it is caused by SOLAR CYCLES.
      Maybe you could report to us the tons of greenhouse gasses pumped out by natural causes each year like volcanoes, natural coal fires, forest fires, etc., and compare it to electric plant emission? To vehicular emission?
      Or, you can just keep on regurgitating the soundbytes you pick up on M0veon / huffnpuff / lsm.

      Report Post » TomFerrari  
    • Honestybefore truth
      Posted on February 2, 2012 at 8:00am

      I’ve never been a fan of vast conspiracies, they generally fly in the face of human nature (like communism and socialism) crumpling under the weight of differing agendas. What IS at work here, is a lack of integrity within the scientific community as a whole. Somewhere along the line scientists have stopped the practices (like Scientific Methodology) that insured unimpassioned factual reporting. Science with an agenda is no longer science…it is activism!

      Report Post »  
    • smokeysmoke
      Posted on February 2, 2012 at 8:10am

      JZS,
      remember when the science community said that the world was flat…. or that black people have smaller brains…. THE SCIENCE COMMUNITY IS NOT RIGHT… THEY PUSH POLITICALLY BENIFICIAL KNOWLEDGE… so mabey its better for you to question with boldness, and look that the big picture… taht since OUR REVOULTION we have been comming out of a mini ice age… THUS WARMING…. and we are hitting the peak of those temps and they are going to start going back down again…. there are many carts of solar activity and the malankovitch cycles which can predict what the climate will be like…. Global Warming is a HOAX…. used LIKE LAWS IN ATLAAS SHRUGGED TO MAINTAIN CONTROL OVER HOW THE PRODUCERS CAN PRODUCE AND HOW MUCH…. THE REAL QUESTION IS HOW ARE HUMANS DESTROYING ECOSYSTEMS,, AND WHAT CAN WE DO TO MINIMIZE OUR EFFECT ON LARGE ECOSYSTEMS AND WATERSHEDS TO PROTECT OUR LAND AND WATER… controlling people so that they dont put a substance that we breathe, that is in magma, that comes out of swamps, yes humans can amplify that effect and make it worse… BUT NO ONE CAN PROVE A CONNECTION BETWEEN CARBON AND TEMPETURE…. I MEAN THINK HOW MUCH TECHNOLOGY HAS ADVANCED IN 30 YEARS…. WE BUILT THE OLD SCHOOL COMPUTER, TO THE ipHONE, BUT WE STILL CANNOT HAVE A SCIENTISTS COME OUT AND SAY… LOOK AT THIS CONNECTION…. BECUASE IT DOES NOT EXIST

      Report Post » smokeysmoke  
    • smithclar3nc3
      Posted on February 2, 2012 at 8:11am

      The scientist that pushed this MAN MADE TRIPE have done more to tarnish the ceditability of science than those wack jobs in the dark ages. They should brought up on criminals chrages as well for lying to the public in an attempt to extort money in a redistribution scheme. THEY ARE ENEMIES OF THE STATE

      Report Post »  
    • smokeysmoke
      Posted on February 2, 2012 at 8:14am

      @JSZ
      you do realize that the #1 climate change myth that is posted on the web site you posted is that the climate changes…. HOW DUMB ARE YOU TO POST SOMETHING THAT SAYS THAT THE EARTH CHANGING TEMPERTURES IS A MYTH, AND THEN CALL OTHERS DUMB…. GET OUT OF HERE WITH YOUR ECOLOGICAL FACIEST CRAP. there is a history of the earths climate that dates for millions of years and we can see the climate changing constantly, and life adapts…. SO YOU POST SOME IDOCY, saying you only get your info from rush…. WHO TELLS YOU WHAT TO THINK… MSNBC….

      Report Post » smokeysmoke  
    • RJJinGadsden
      Posted on February 2, 2012 at 9:05am

      JZS, LOL, I can easily see that my “limited erudition” likely exceeds yours. You are simply not old enough to have seen the earlier power grabs and Chicken Little like scares of the coming ice age followed by the very same “scientists” began to harp about global warming. To me it’s almost hilarious how Discovery or The History Channel will run a program talking about the major changes to the earth through out history and how, yes, the weather has changed, the polar axis has shifted. Current desert lands show signs of having been lush forests or been under fresh or oceanic water. Fossils of aquatic animals have been found in large numbers. Dang, the climate changed along with other things. The earth itself tells us it changes. Simply put, change is the only constant. The earth’s land masses shift, the flow of water changes, generally in the path of least resistance, but ocean currents change as well. The earth heats and cools in cycles.
      Go back to Skeptical Science and read those “mythical” statements again. Many, many of them have been debunked, while many more have been recanted by their originating theorists. Mainly because they have been caught in their lies and deceptions. If you desire to be Chicken Little, by all means go ahead, You are apparently too young to see beyond the tip of your nose. Which apparently has a ring in it so that you can be lead around so easily.

      Report Post » RJJinGadsden  
    • HKS
      Posted on February 2, 2012 at 9:08am

      The sheep of society (Democrats) will fall for anything, making society as a whole vulnerable to such scams. People that think for themselves are the only hope this society has to lean on. Mostly tea party, independents and a few republicans will have to carry this load. Democrats are the dead weight.

      Report Post » HKS  
    • RJJinGadsden
      Posted on February 2, 2012 at 9:10am

      Pardon me, I had an interruption and failed to state what I thought was hilarious. The funny thing to me is that after running such a program on the above stated channels, they will turn around and run a “Climate Change” program next that say that the climate has not changed until recently.

      Report Post » RJJinGadsden  
    • Tomr
      Posted on February 2, 2012 at 9:11am

      @ Mother of JZS

      My bet is that you married your brother.

      Report Post »  
    • jzs
      Posted on February 2, 2012 at 9:21am

      RJJinGadsden says, “Go back to Skeptical Science and read those “mythical” statements again. Many, many of them have been debunked, while many more have been recanted by their originating theorists.” You say that so casually, as though it were common knowledge.

      Okay, show me. Show me a link to the debunking or a link to a scientist recanting their original theory. Should be easy, since you have that “fact” at your fingertips. Or wait. Maybe you just made that up?

      Report Post » jzs  
    • RIGEL_ORION
      Posted on February 2, 2012 at 9:33am

      No point in addressing JZS directly guys. It’s always the same spin with whomever is running the account. Call everyone else stupid, provide a similarly one-sided link and dismiss the myriad facts that simply cannot be explained through the current theory of man made climate change.

      The problem with climate science is that the power mongers got a hold of it. This is a very complicated field with multitudes upon multitudes of variables whose interactions are not fully understood. However, the thieves of the world saw its potential for seizing wealth and power and demanded results that would support these actions. The very fact that it’s so complicated made it that much easier to come to a predestined conclusion and then align the facts to match.

      Any fool could tell you that a poll of 10 people isn’t a large enough sample to determine any sentiment in the U.S. Yet, the climate change lobby uses an even smaller sample size and then holds its selected facts up as gospel. JZS and his fellow believers are using 40 years of data to make assumptions of something that’s regularly occurred over billions. At which point in the natural 100,000-year cycle should we be at, so that we can accurately determine the impact of man?

      If you can’t answer that question, you can’t regulate my carbon.

      Report Post »  
    • RJJinGadsden
      Posted on February 2, 2012 at 9:34am

      JZS, Please do your own research. You are more likely to believe rather than having me hook that ring in your nose and leading you about. Furthermore, have you not paid attention to the news in the last couple of years beyond the likes of BSNBC? There have been discussions of what I stated on a variety of news programs and no, not just Fox. Let me ask you this, Do the characteristics of the earth ever change?

      Report Post » RJJinGadsden  
    • RJJinGadsden
      Posted on February 2, 2012 at 9:40am

      RIGEL_ORION, I know, I know. But sometimes when I am bored it is sort of fun to poke a turd with a long stick just to stir the flies. I’m expecting JZS to break down and conduct himself in the manner of THE_MONK below. But, I have to say that so far he has conducted himself in a better than expected manner. I am an old fart and know it. He just gives me the feeling that he is very young and inexperienced. So is my son, but he has his head on more firmly than many his age.

      Report Post » RJJinGadsden  
    • bigmouthmom
      Posted on February 2, 2012 at 10:07am

      Fla Del is correct. This book explains exactly what has been and what is happening. The book is a good educational read and it is written so that the layman (average people) can understand it. I highly recommend you read it and John Casey will respond to your emails if you have questions.

      Report Post » bigmouthmom  
    • JRook
      Posted on February 2, 2012 at 11:21am

      Let me get this straight the author of this report is quoting a blogger named Zombie. Well that’s clearly an authoritative source.

      Report Post »  
    • Lloyd Drako
      Posted on February 2, 2012 at 11:35am

      In the 1970s some scientists hypothesized that earth was entering an era of global cooling. There was nowhere near a scientific consensus on the matter, just some interesting speculation. Today there is something approaching a scientific consensus that we are living in an era of global warming, that human activity is contributing to it. This is not agreement among a “shrinking majority,” it is an overwhelmingly majority conclusion. What if anything should be done about it is another question.

      I would have more to say, but my tee time is only an hour away. I live in the Upper Midwest. Nuff said.

      Report Post » Lloyd Drako  
    • EchoHawk
      Posted on February 2, 2012 at 1:23pm

      See ya in the funny papers FLA DEL, hope you can tread water well.

      Report Post »  
    • smithclar3nc3
      Posted on February 2, 2012 at 1:39pm

      Lardo wrote,
      In the 1970s some scientists hypothesized that earth was entering an era of global cooling. There was nowhere near a scientific consensus on the matter, just some interesting speculation. Today there is something approaching a scientific consensus that we are living in an era of global warming, that human activity is contributing to it. This is not agreement among a “shrinking majority,” it is an overwhelmingly majority conclusion. What if anything should be done about it is another question

      There is no a single working climate model that can perdict next week much less 100 years from now. The fact that so many scientist reach the same conclusion without any real data only serves to show that herd mentality that now exist in the scientific community. Fact is no scientist would say the debate is over until all avenues have been explored…your post only should how blanatantly falice AGW is………SCIENCE MEET THE EVIROMENTALIST RELIGION- ENVIROMENTALIST RELIGION MEET SCIENCE.

      Report Post »  
    • jzs
      Posted on February 2, 2012 at 2:52pm

      RJJinGadsden, man up. You made the claim. It’s not up to me to disprove it. You say, “Many, many of them have been debunked, while many more have been recanted by their originating theorists,” a statement you can’t support even with google. No debunking, no “original theorist.” Even the name of an original theorist. I guess you get your science from Zombie at PJ Party or Rush Limbaugh?

      I see this a lot here. Somebody makes a ridiculous claim and when challenged, they say I should do my “research.” RJJinGadsden, you shouldn‘t make claims can’t support or defend.

      Sure the Earth changes! Good for you for watching Discovery or whatever (I don’t have cable and rarely watch TV). What ought to scare you is exactly that, the feedback mechanisms that drive climate one way or another. The new factor now? Humans, pumping thousands of tons of greenhouse gases into the paper thin atmosphere of the Earth.

      Report Post » jzs  
    • RJJinGadsden
      Posted on February 2, 2012 at 3:50pm

      JZS,
      http://epw.senate.gov/repwhitepapers/6345050%20Hot%20&%20Cold%20Media.pdf
      http://www.abd.org.uk/green_myths.htm
      http://www.savage-productions.com/debunking_global_warming.html
      http://samnite.blogspot.com/2010/09/top-scientists-debunk-global-warming.html
      http://newsbusters.org/node/13948
      http://www.treehugger.com/corporate-responsibility/debunking-the-great-global-warming-conspiracy-conspiracy.html
      http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-1230113/The-devastating-book-debunks-climate-change.html
      http://junkscience.com/ Get some T shirts here
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=441f4oMMQbE
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D8FhmuWWcGw
      http://www.climategate.com/now-satellite-radiation-data-debunks-global-warming-theory
      http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/189386/20110729/global-warming-roy-spencer-nasa-terra-debunked-al-gore-climate-change.htm
      http://www.coolingnews.com/debunk-global-warming-minutes.html
      http://nikitas3.com/1341/debunking-global-warming-easily/
      http://www.orkut.com/Main#Main$CommMsgs?tid=5320924177153153078&cmm=1086050&hl=en
      http://www.sitewave.net/news/
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zock7fyWqJ0
      http://www.john-daly.com/hockey/hockey.htm If you refuse to read any of the others at least take the time to read this one.
      http://tnation.t-nation.com/free_online_forum/world_news_war/global_warming_theory_debunked
      http://deadlinelive.info/2011/07/29/4-recent-scientific-blows-to-the-global-warming-theory/
      To be continued

      Report Post » RJJinGadsden  
    • RJJinGadsden
      Posted on February 2, 2012 at 4:05pm

      JZS, To the provocateur, this message is continued. When I was an instructor I would tell students the same thing. That I would not do their research, but would often point them in the right direction. Usually the library. I don’t know why I am doing this. It will only be a lot of trouble followed by your casting more disparaging remarks my way and accusations that I am cherry picking sites. So, go ahead, don’t read any of these sites, and call me whatever you wish. Now, it’s your turn to man up.
      http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/blog/2010/apr/21/iceland-volcano-climate-sceptics
      http://www.climategate.com/german-physicists-trash-global-warming-theory
      http://mcauleysworld.wordpress.com/2009/03/29/the-global-warming-myth-debunking-global-warmings-5-commandments/
      http://www.durangobill.com/Swindle_Swindle.html
      http://listverse.com/2009/01/19/10-debunked-scientific-beliefs-of-the-past/
      http://kansas.watchdog.org/1498/film-and-mike-smith-debunk-global-warming/
      http://www.thedailygreen.com/environmental-news/latest/inhofe-global-warming-deniers-47011101
      http://www.2012officialcountdown.com/2012/theory.html
      http://notrickszone.com/2011/08/09/james-e-hansen-worshipper-gets-debunked/
      http://co2insanity.com/2011/04/18/debunking-the-greenhouse-gas-theory-in-three-simple-steps/
      http://news.yahoo.com/nasa-data-blow-gaping-hold-global-warming-alarmism-192334971.html
      Remember that the big greenhouse gas boogie man is now carbon dioxide. That stuff we exhale that all plan

      Report Post » RJJinGadsden  
    • jzs
      Posted on February 2, 2012 at 5:19pm

      RJJinGadsden, nice work. You found articles from climate change sceptics. No doubt they exist. If you think the sheer quantity of link adds weight to your argument, go to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_opinion_on_climate_change to find the internationally recognized scientific organizations that support (and oppose) the belief in climate change.

      But you make two claims: one is that former climate scientists have recanted and changed their views. Let’s start there. Which video is that? Which link is that? What are the names of the scientists? Just the names will be fine, I’ll look them up along with their qualifications. Since you so confidently stated that was a fact, that should be easy to find or tell me which link I should follow.

      Not trying to quibble, but you made a flat statement of fact, which was the basis of your argument against climate change. You can’t back that statement up.

      Your second claim was that the falsehoods I linked to about climate science I linked to have been “debunked.” Okay, pick one on that list and send a link that debunks it. Simple. Since you KNOW they’ve been debunked, pick and and send me a link to the debunking.

      Whatever you used tell your students, it’s not my place to disprove a statement you make which I suspect you invented. That‘s kind of silly don’t you think?

      Report Post » jzs  
    • SpeckChaser
      Posted on February 2, 2012 at 6:07pm

      JZS

      Do you find it a little ironic that you’re telling RJ it is not your job to disprove his claims, yet you tell others to provide links that disprove global warming…an issue that has yet to be proved?

      Report Post » SpeckChaser  
    • RJJinGadsden
      Posted on February 2, 2012 at 6:53pm

      JZS, We’ve come to that stalemate that I mentioned earlier. Only a fool will argue another man’s opinion. You have your opinion and I have mine. I have enough sense to not argue your opinion. While in my opinion you seem to be parroting Al Gore, and many others I see things differently and disagree with them. I was well into my adulthood when this pap changed from new ice age to global warming. And, no I can‘t pull out of my rectum the crap that was spewed in the very late ’70s and early ’80s. But, it was pretty transparent to anybody willing to really look at the so called facts. Following the early days it was obvious to me that ‘facts’ were being twisted to support a previously decided outcome. Prior to this hoax, it was the same way many thought of the ice age loons. It was a short period of cooling and guess what? It started to warm a little and voila` Global Warming!
      Yes, you are quibbling, but you have that right so I will not argue. If you had checked out all of those sites you would have found a couple that supported the global warming theories. You really would have tried to beat me about the head and shoulders in words for failing to support my, oh yeah, here it is again, that word OPINION. As SPECKCHASER points out below your post, everything you have mentioned or site you point out are just theory, just as well the sites that I pointed out. Global Warming is anything but proven fact. Continue to do your own homework and maybe you too can become a waterme

      Report Post » RJJinGadsden  
    • RJJinGadsden
      Posted on February 2, 2012 at 7:11pm

      Hmmm, that’s the second time it has cut me off when I several characters remaining. JZS, that last word was supposed to be watermelon. For your particular bent I can’t see you as taking this as an insult. So, none is intended. If you need that term explained, scroll down to THE-MONK’s and my posts. Still wondering about that mention of the Martians. Well, Looney Tunes’ Marvin the Martian did have a green helmet and skirt, but nothing else was ever actually revealed.

      Report Post » RJJinGadsden  
    • SpeckChaser
      Posted on February 2, 2012 at 8:32pm

      JZS said “16 people…of education unrelated to global warming…opposing the conclusions of the 97% of the thousands of publishing real climate scientists who agree…that global warming is real and anthropogenic.”

      Does this make sense? JZS will only accept opinion from climate scientists but, if GW is a hoax, it was created by Climate Scientists. What he is saying is he will accept no evidence other than that from the possible purveyors of a hoax, to disprove the hoax.

      To those wondering why he would discount opinions of other scientists, who are most likely smarter that he, let’s refer to his own words concerning that subject.

      JZS recently said “She has a PhD in public policy, and is a lot smarter than everyone who posted here. Small wonder you guys hate her.”

      By his statements we can determine his rejection of their opinions is simply because he is less educated and therefore “hates them.” Those grapes are pretty sour aren’t they?

      Report Post » SpeckChaser  
    • jzs
      Posted on February 2, 2012 at 8:51pm

      No RJJinGadsden, we haven’t been talking about “opinion” as much as you’d like to change the subject. You made the statement that, “Many, many of them [theories] have been debunked, while many more have been recanted by their originating theorists.”

      That’s a statement of fact, not opinion. Either “many” theorists have recanted the climate change theories or they have not. That’s a provable or disprovable statement. You made that statement and yet can’t give a single example of a theorist who recanted his theory despite me asking three times to give me one. If you can’t give me a single example, how can you claim it’s true? What can I possibly conclude except that you made it up?

      Thanks for declaring yourself though RJ. You dropped any pretension of objectivity when you start using words like “parroting,“ ”spewed,“ ”rectum” and whatever else. And when you quote Speck as an authority on anything (no offense Speck), it‘s obvious you’ve conceded that you can’t back up your statements of fact (not opinion).

      Sure RJ, the other posters here got your back. But when you claims about facts, prepare to be challenged. And thanks for dropping the condescending remarks, another thing that doesn’t add to your argument.

      Report Post » jzs  
    • RJJinGadsden
      Posted on February 2, 2012 at 8:53pm

      SPECKCHASER, Well said.

      Report Post » RJJinGadsden  
    • SpeckChaser
      Posted on February 2, 2012 at 9:07pm

      @JZS

      None taken. Never claimed to know everything. You on the other hand…

      Report Post » SpeckChaser  
    • RJJinGadsden
      Posted on February 2, 2012 at 9:24pm

      JZS, I must give you credit for your tenacity at the very least. But, I am not changing the subject by referring to our opinions. Your observations, readings, and possibly even personal contact with others has helped mold your opinions. So be it. The same has occurred with me. So we are back to it being our opinions, and as I stated, I am not fool enough to argue opinions.
      But, you are quite right regarding one thing that I said. I did not properly word my sentence regarding the debunking and did make it read as a declarative statement. I should have stated that others has presented theories to debunk the theories of global warming. You split hairs well and actually I salute you for that. Just as you can only provide us with sites that quote theory that is also all that I am capable of. There, you won, just try not to hurt yourself patting your own back too much.
      Parroting, you find that offensive? It simply means you tend to repeat the likes of Gore and others with whom I disagree.
      Rectum offends you? You mean that you do not understand the old statement pulling old facts out of my @$$? Originally just did not want to use such a word, and I was referring to my own, not yours.
      Spewed? Well, if you are that thin skinned, go ahead and take offense.
      I don’t think that I need anybody to watch my back, but I have to agree with SPECKCHASER above.
      Yes, we are back to opinions regardless of what you say.

      Report Post » RJJinGadsden  
    • jzs
      Posted on February 2, 2012 at 9:38pm

      Speck, are you keeping a dossier on me like your friend BIlly? Your quoted remark was about Rachel Maddow and yes, I think she’s awesome.

      Anyway, I think we’ve given this topic a good working over and have reached the point of diminishing returns. I look forward to our next argument!

      Report Post » jzs  
    • RJJinGadsden
      Posted on February 2, 2012 at 9:50pm

      JZS, Rachel Madcow? That explains a lot.

      Report Post » RJJinGadsden  
    • jzs
      Posted on February 2, 2012 at 10:07pm

      RJJinGadsden, I think the spelling is “Maddow” but, yeah, I’ve heard the joke. I think you’re okay by the way, regardless of your opinion of me! Anybody who has the interest to watch science shows is okay in my mind, regardless of what they conclude from them.

      Report Post » jzs  
    • RJJinGadsden
      Posted on February 2, 2012 at 10:38pm

      JZS, I agree with you there. But, you will essentially have to accept the sarcastic joking around with such names as Madcow as much as the things you say on your postings. BTW, I can’t think of the exact statement at this moment, but I do recall something I spotted yesterday that you posted on one of the stories that I very much agreed with. Should have posted that agreement, but promise to do so in the future. Otherwise, I suspect that we will continue to be somewhat adversarial. If we all thought the same this world would be a very boring place.

      Report Post » RJJinGadsden  
    • Leader1776
      Posted on February 3, 2012 at 1:01am

      @jzs
      Obviously you know little of the Scientific Method or what is required for a hypothesis. The Climate Science crowd have proven nothing and have not explained the existence of facts that counter their arguments. Then there are the 1000′s of emails …….. when taken in context …….. demonstrates these pseudo-scientists have plotted to hide data and destroy their testing methodologies so others could not attempt to duplicate data. If you are a scientist and follow this crowd, you should begin to question your dedication to science, because it is quite obvious this current crop of clown climate scientists care little about real science.

      Report Post » Leader1776  
    • nzkiwi
      Posted on February 3, 2012 at 3:23am

      I enjoyed that. Finally a decent debate on the Blaze like we used to have.

      Report Post »  
    • rs9
      Posted on February 4, 2012 at 2:44pm

      JZ azz hole some of us actually lived thru the “coming ice age” bull sh#t and we remember being told the same crap that you and you’re lying lib frienfs are preaching now. isn’t it amazing to you that the same man made crap can be responsible for both global cooling and warming. wake up azz hole it’s you who is being duped once again

      Report Post »  
  • TRILO
    Posted on February 1, 2012 at 9:03pm

    Get your terms correct. It is not global warming it is global climate change. Remember that several years ago they realized that the actual temperatures were not getting warmer all across the globe so they had to change the term. Plus,don’t forget that it gets colder before it gets warmer. So an ice age before warming makes perfect sense.

    No matter what they call it; whether it is warming or an ice age the science nuts, grant whore$ and the globalists will still be calling for more and more funding together with a call for the greatest transfer of wealth from the evil industrialized countries.

    I’m sure Newt and Romney will go right along with it as they both believe in man made global climate change. No difference between them and the tyrant in chief on this issue.

    Report Post » TRILO  
  • Wreck14me
    Posted on February 1, 2012 at 9:02pm

    Oh no Al. Not another Inconvenient Truth!!! I wonder how long before he restarts his rhetoric in this direction in an attempt to rip off the world with his BS???

    Report Post »  
    • Darmok and Jalad at Tanagra
      Posted on February 1, 2012 at 9:13pm

      Al Gore is like an old lady…I’m too hot, now I’m cold. Open the window and get me a sweater.

      Report Post » Darmok and Jalad at Tanagra  
    • jb.kibs
      Posted on February 2, 2012 at 1:07am

      yeah. it’s just too bad these are solar maximums and minimums…

      Report Post »  
    • K G
      Posted on February 2, 2012 at 9:22am

      antoher thing that doesn’t make sense is…i thought these people were for population control?? so wouldn’t they want to just exacerbate the climate changing to wipe out people even faster? on a second note…here is some truth for us all from a really interesting fellow…check it out: this video is titled “The Age of the Earth.” there are also more on the site.

      http://freehovind.com/watch-4308235066145651150

      Report Post »  
  • bornagaincowgirl
    Posted on February 1, 2012 at 9:00pm

    If they want to take the money from first-world countries and funnel it to third-world countries in the name of global climate change, then wouldn’t that mean that we would all basically be living in a cess pool, say, going backwards about 100+ years? Although, its true, there would now be global equality. What is the final goal and initiative of these people? It can’t be concern for the environment, it doesn’t make sense. It has to be a strategy for a power grab by elitest who want to lead the sheeple along into alignment for their own devised “perfect world.” Wasn’t it satan who said “I will arise?”

    Report Post »  
    • UBETHECHANGE
      Posted on February 1, 2012 at 9:07pm

      Look up Thomas Malthus.

      Report Post »  
    • Mateytwo Barreett
      Posted on February 1, 2012 at 10:52pm

      They’re not only taking the moneyfrom the first world countries – but- from us too! Since it has ben my interpretation that a third world country exports raw materials and uses the money received to purchase usable products. Since we ship our scrap metal to China ( iron, steel , copper, etc.) and we buy their plastic bu**^^^^t from Walmart! There don’t seem to be any heavy manufacturing left, The coal mines are being shut down, we are building no new generation facilities, Russia has got a US loan guarantee to mine iron in the Mesabi range, We don’t build piplines through what is arguably the biggest oil deposits in the world, and the deposits in our neighbors land is going to be sold to China Yep, I’d say thats goose cooking that I smell.

      Report Post » Mateytwo Barreett  
  • boundforglory
    Posted on February 1, 2012 at 8:56pm

    These so-called global warming nuts say that the oceans are warming up because of man, they dont take into account the underwater volcanos and vents that are spewing out 600 degree water, that just may be why the oceans are getting warmer! They say that all the tornados and hurricanes are because of the so-called green house effect. These storms are getting worse and not because of global warming, its because of God’s warning, He has been trying for years to get mans attention, wanting man to turn to Him instead of man continueing in sin, (drunkenness, porn, rapes, murders, theifs, drugs, and all other things that are against God). God is about to pour out His wrath on this world because this world prefers wickedness and evil instead of God and His righteousness. Nowadays if anyone talks about Jesus and His plan of salvation, its called hate speech, (evil). Nowadays porn is called good when its what is evil but man calls it good. We live in a time when good is called evil, and evil is called good.

    Report Post »  
    • bornagaincowgirl
      Posted on February 1, 2012 at 9:07pm

      Amen, well said. The Psalms tell us that where there is righteousness there is peace. That would mean peace on our borders, peace with the weather, peace in our homes, peace in our lives.

      Report Post »  
    • rabidsnoopy
      Posted on February 1, 2012 at 11:20pm

      Well said my friend. The beginning of wisdom is the fear of the Lord.

      Report Post »  
  • truckerwife1998
    Posted on February 1, 2012 at 8:54pm

    What kind of sick and twisted people want total world suffering instead of total world happiness? Indeed, total world suffering would come from the loss of wealth through redistribution (Marxism), whereas total world happiness would come from the growth of wealth through capitalism. History has already proven this. It must be the very sick and stupid who think wealth redistribution (taking by force from those who produce and giving it to those who do not) raises everyone’s standard of living. Quite the opposite happens, as proven in the communist countries of Soviet Russia, China, Cuba, Viet Nam, North Korea, etc. and in the statist countries of Italy, Spain, Poland, France, etc. This man-made climate change pseudo-science is about power and greed pure and simple. These fools don’t care about people, especially those living in impoverished areas mostly created by statist governments. In fact, I would venture to guess they really want to destroy most if not all of mankind.

    Report Post »  
    • MCDAVE
      Posted on February 1, 2012 at 9:07pm

      YOU are 100% correct

      Report Post »  
    • wbalzley
      Posted on February 2, 2012 at 6:07am

      AGREED: The best way to lift the poor is to create wealth. CAPITALISM creates wealth–not Crony Socialism, and not Marxism–and it does so exponentially…we are VERY close to ending poverty as it has existed in the past…all we need is a few more doubling times and EVERYONE could be rich!

      Report Post »  
  • MrMagoo
    Posted on February 1, 2012 at 8:50pm

    Poor little Lord Fauntleroy of the Weather, Al Gore(and Obama,his twisted twin ). He must be feeling so misconstrued,misunderstood.
    The common man will be trading ‘carbon credits’,all without his greedy hands involved.

    “Alternative energy companies will be given billions of pounds in grants to dismantle wind turbines. These will be smelted down and converted into giant mirrors designed to reflect the sun’s rays in an attempt to reopen the hole in the ozone layer.
    Thousands of these mirrors will be erected in areas of outstanding natural beauty all over Britain(and USA). Landfill sites will be converted into vast open-air incinerators, operating around the clock in an attempt to maximize carbon output. Town Halls are to introduce twice-daily dustbin collections to provide the raw materials to keep the home fires burning, although this is expected to lead to a 300 per cent increase in council tax.
    Households which fail to produce sufficient combustible material will face heavy fines. Anyone using more than one dustbin will go to prison for five years.
    Those people who have installed solar panels, double glazing and loft insulation will have to pay higher taxes. This is necessary to recoup all the money spent in the past subsidising the installation of solar panels, double glazing and loft insulation.
    It is hoped that by 2025, every home in Britain(and USA) will be heated by a wood-burning stove.”

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2004463/Cooler-Earth-Th

    Report Post » MrMagoo  
    • MrMagoo
      Posted on February 1, 2012 at 9:05pm

      At last, some good news for polar bears. The world is about to enter a mini Ice Age. Scientists working for the American Astronomical Society are predicting a significant drop in solar activity over the next decade.

      Last time this happened, between 1645 and 1715, global temperatures plummeted and the River Thames froze over every winter.

      While climate change alarmists insist we are heading for meltdown, the truth is that the world has actually been getting cooler in recent years.

      Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2004463/Cooler-Earth-The-Ice-Age-coming–dont-panic.html#ixzz1lBbR4txy

      Report Post » MrMagoo  
  • lel2007
    Posted on February 1, 2012 at 8:50pm

    In this age of excesses, why can’t we have bot global warming and global cooling. It‘s only fair we accommodate both sides of the ’scientific’ community.

    Report Post » lel2007  
  • West Coast Patriot
    Posted on February 1, 2012 at 8:48pm

    Vote Ron Paul and he will tell them to stick it where the moon does not shine, Vote Gingrich, well he In 1989, co-sponsored the Global Warming Prevention Act. Gingrich was an environmentalist fanatic from the beginning. Go here and see: http://www.newtexposed.com/

    Romney, he just does not know what is causing Global warming, but he is backed by Goldman Sachs, Credit Suisse Group, Morgan Stanley, HIG Capital, Barclays, Kirkland & Ellis, Bank of America, PriceWaterhouseCoopers, EMC Corp, JPMorgan Chase. If these companies decide global warming is real, where will he stand?

    Santorum, well I can say he is not a believer in global warming, he wants to heat up the world with war.

    Report Post » West Coast Patriot  
    • tzion
      Posted on February 1, 2012 at 8:56pm

      I think you mean “where the sun doesn’t shine”. The moon doesn’t shine at all.

      Report Post »  
    • tlg1956
      Posted on February 1, 2012 at 9:34pm

      I beg to differ TZION, I was born in Tennessee and saw lots of moonshine.

      Report Post »  
  • UBETHECHANGE
    Posted on February 1, 2012 at 8:46pm

    “cede power and money from the First World to the Third World”.

    “The true purpose of climate change disaster-mongering is to permanently cripple the First World, and to elevate the Third World, in order to create a planet with no economic inequality. The goal remains constant; the supposed imminent catastrophes justifying it come and go as needed.”

    Yep that about sums up the NWO elitists agenda.

    Report Post »  
  • MrObvious
    Posted on February 1, 2012 at 8:42pm

    Just think about the carbon foot-in-mouth print we could reduce if we got rid of all the solar variance deniers: AGW nutters, IPCC, greenies, the EPA, and assorted liberal elites using the fake issue to grab power.

    Report Post »  
  • RJJinGadsden
    Posted on February 1, 2012 at 8:39pm

    “WILL THE ‘COMING OF THE NEW ICE AGE’ MARK THE END OF THE GLOBAL WARMING ERA?”
    No, it will simply change the Chicken Little mantra back to what I remember back in the mid ’70s. Apparently what comes around, goes around.

    Report Post » RJJinGadsden  
    • Rogue9
      Posted on February 2, 2012 at 3:57pm

      Snowball Earth to Global Warming and back to Snowball Earth

      Report Post » Rogue9  
  • Leader1776
    Posted on February 1, 2012 at 8:36pm

    We want proof, not rhetoric. Climatologists have delivered NO proof. Feel-good helps no one. You leftists can move back to the communes, but don’t think you can change the thinking of sane humans. Time for you to move back to your ancient rituals.

    Report Post » Leader1776  
    • Fla Del
      Posted on February 1, 2012 at 9:00pm

      Everyone needs to go on line and order Cold Sun by John L. Casey.
      He, and many scientist around the world, proves that we are starting a normal drop in temperature called the Dalton Minimum. It happens every 206 years.
      It is going to get much colder in the next 10 to15 years.
      Besides, if we shut down every plant, stop using gas in cars and plugged up the asses of all cows for the next 50 years all over the world, it would not reduce as much CO2 (or carbon footprint) that was caused by the volcano that stopped flights to Europe last year. Global Warming (excuse me) Climate Change is an expensive joke.

      Report Post » Fla Del  
  • From Virginia
    Posted on February 1, 2012 at 8:32pm

    “Scientists” work on grants. They get the results those supplying the grants want them to get. Shame really. No one believes them anymore.

    Report Post »  
  • PoliticiansRCrooks
    Posted on February 1, 2012 at 8:31pm

    Wow!! Are you kidding me? More environment CRAP. Why would Beck even allow this article on here. I can’t stand half of these so called journalists. Your a joke Liz.

    Report Post » PoliticiansRCrooks  
  • kurtnut
    Posted on February 1, 2012 at 8:30pm

    It’s Climate Change, dumb-asses! How dare you people think for yourselves.

    Report Post »  
  • junior1971
    Posted on February 1, 2012 at 8:29pm

    Kevin Trenbirth saying it was a “travesty” that they couldn’t “account for the lack of warming” was taken out of context in the “No Need to Panic” piece. They clarify what Trenbrith was really saying was that the systems that track warming trends in the ocean were inadequate to show actual warming. Uuuuuhhh, Which way did he go George? He rebutted his rebuttal!!!!!

    Report Post » junior1971  
  • Texas.7
    Posted on February 1, 2012 at 8:26pm

    Environmental movement is all about “Social Justice”, or how a very small group define that idea. That is why it is so difficult for them to give up on the theory. They made it their battle cry and put too much of their influence equity behind it to back down now. Unless, maybe they are going to succeed at blaming global cooling on us too… Maybe the polar bears are going to freeze to death and not be able to break thru the ice to fish- and it will be all our fault!

    Report Post »  
    • From Virginia
      Posted on February 1, 2012 at 8:35pm

      They tried it in the 70′s and while everybody believed them (we really did!) and we thought it sucked, no one was TERRIFIED of the idea. After all, we lived through one already – how bad could it be? They’ve been trying to come up with something to TERRIFY people into giving up their liberty and quality of life.

      Report Post »  
  • Politijack
    Posted on February 1, 2012 at 8:26pm

    Yup,

    Green is the new Red!

    Report Post »  
    • RJJinGadsden
      Posted on February 1, 2012 at 8:49pm

      Watermelons, green on the outside and red inside.

      Report Post » RJJinGadsden  
    • The-Monk
      Posted on February 1, 2012 at 9:07pm

      @RJJinGadsden
      Just like those nasty Green Aliens…

      Report Post » The-Monk  
    • RJJinGadsden
      Posted on February 1, 2012 at 10:14pm

      THE-MONK,
      So, you have proof that those green Martians are red inside? First that I have heard of it. By all means, enlighten the rest of us.

      Report Post » RJJinGadsden  
    • RJJinGadsden
      Posted on February 2, 2012 at 8:38am

      THE-MONK, The term Watermelons comes from the fact that so many former Communists have fled from those dying governments and desire to hold onto power through the green initiatives. It merely means those who claim to be green and push for big government control are actually Communist red under the surface. I simply did not catch onto your reference to Martians. My question was for clarification and in no way meant to be an attack or an insult.

      Report Post » RJJinGadsden  
  • smalldog
    Posted on February 1, 2012 at 8:25pm

    What good does funneling money to the third world make anything better if the governments are corrupt?

    From one corruption to the next?

    If any man, woman, or child earns a unit of money they should be allowed to spend it based on their own priorities and expect to live in a free society.

    How is life better when corrupt governments have all the money?

    Report Post »  
    • Just4Rocks
      Posted on February 1, 2012 at 8:54pm

      People in any goverment are smarter and better educated, so they KNOW what is best for for us. That’s why they are called RULERS. In the US of A, we get to hire representitives to work with the rulers in Washington DC. Self-Government is a joke, God created kings and any thought of cruption only shows your lack of understanding. I advise you to pray for our LEADERS.

      Report Post » Just4Rocks  
    • TomFerrari
      Posted on February 2, 2012 at 7:37am

      It actually IS BETTER…
      for our politicians.
      You see, hillary and obama go to those other countries, and make deals with their corrupt leaders that give hillary, obama, their puppet masters (“donors”), friends, family, etc. lucrative investment deals that pay big bucks in exchange for crippling their own nation! They are essentially SELLING the U.S. economy to those other countries!!

      Report Post » TomFerrari  
  • marion
    Posted on February 1, 2012 at 8:25pm

    It doesn’t matter what we do, if Mother Nature isn’t happy, she will simply wipe us all out or reduce our population to the point she wants us to start over, again, and it has happened many times in the past. Now, this does not mean pollute. It means be clean and watch contaminants, but in all seriousness, CO2 as a contaminant? It was all about the money and the Progressive movement, equality for all.

    Besides, if the weather doesn’t alternate on the planet she will die. Good and bad/extreme weather corrects problems naturally, so deal with it.

    Report Post »  
    • Twobyfour
      Posted on February 1, 2012 at 10:49pm

      Mother Nature? Good lord, if there was real justice, she’d be in a slammer for life! So many capricious extinctions that it’s hard to find anything remotely humorous about it. Some mother…

      Report Post » Twobyfour  
    • nzkiwi
      Posted on February 2, 2012 at 5:12am

      @Marion

      You are basically correct.

      The fact is that from 1940 to 1975 globally-averaged temperature declined (giving rise to a much-hyped scare about a looming ice age) while manmade CO2 emissions increased.

      From 1975 to 1998 average temperatures increased giving rise to the global warming alarm.

      Global temperature has fallen slightly since 1998 despite ever-increasing CO2 emissions.

      So for 27 of the last 50 years, globally-averaged temperatures have declined while CO2 emissions have increased.

      Climate change is natural and cyclical, but it is being used by the unscrupulous to scare the uninformed into subscribing to a political dogma.

      Report Post »  
    • @leftfighter
      Posted on February 2, 2012 at 7:16am

      Wait. So they were yellling for us to curb CO2 to save the world from burning up and it turns out we’re cooling?

      Uh- does that mean we should have been putting more cars on the road? Theoretically, if we did more of what makes us warm, we should stay warmer when the world NATURALLY cools, right?

      Not only is the earth’s temperature cycling, so are the alarmists. Give ‘em a year, they’ll figure out how man is causing it.

      Report Post » @leftfighter  
  • IvanK
    Posted on February 1, 2012 at 8:25pm

    Only time will tell… Hopefully the world won’t be fleeced by the current generation of grant money gluttons.

    Report Post » IvanK  
  • Ira WIlson
    Posted on February 1, 2012 at 8:25pm

    Now where’s my jacket…?

    Report Post » Ira WIlson  
  • ThankBabyJesus
    Posted on February 1, 2012 at 8:22pm

    A warmer planet is a greener planet.

    Report Post » ThankBabyJesus  
  • lukerw
    Posted on February 1, 2012 at 8:20pm

    We are over due for a New Ice Age… enjoy!

    Report Post » lukerw  
    • rukdnme13
      Posted on February 2, 2012 at 6:58pm

      JZS, you sir, or ma’am, are a complete idiot! I’m 52 yrs. old Have been through one Ice Age (1970s) then global warming late 80s- current. Read “ The report from Iron Mountain” fool, you are the very definition of a “useful idiot”

      Report Post »  
1 2 3 4

Sign In To Post Comments! Sign In

Sign Up For Our Newsletter!

Glenn Beck Radio

Listen to Glenn Beck 24/7 Listen Now
Restoring Love