Comments on: Cold Water on "Global Warming"

National Review Online: Skeptics To Gather In Gotham To Discuss The Cold, Hard Facts

[aremes-2009]

At one point in a very recent past EGOLOGY degenerated into ECOORGY

[mediapreachr]

Posted by LawyerTom1 at 06:24 PM : Mar 01, 2008
Are you by any chance an environmental lawyer?
I hear those guys make 300 bucks an hour...

[lawyertom1]

I love it when the deep-deniers try to downplay the unfortunately overwhelming evidence that global warming is occurring. One can certainly argue about the rate of increase, and the percentage attributable to CO2 versus methane (e.g., from rice fields, ruminants). However, the most recent data analysis has tossed in the waste basket the solar cycle thesis as causation. But, let''s face it, until Florida and Manhattan are under water, these idiots will say it is not happening. How truly sad. But, then, as they say, neurotics build castles in the sky, and psychotics live in them. Obviously, the NR and its fellow travelers are deep into the latter.

[doujoh101]

I want to jump on the man made global warming scam bandwagon. I will sell carbon credits to any of true believers who may need them (do the lights on your house come on when you flip the switch?) I will plant 10 additional carpathian walnut trees this spring. Send me 500 dollars for each tree and I will send you the carbon credits for that amount. As a bonus, I will remove my coal stove from my house two months early (but only till this fall) for only 1000 dollars. There''s no use in your high priests Al Gore and Maurice Strong getting all of your money.

[it_oldtimer]

It just boggles the mind to think that even the ignorant neanderthals at NRO could STILL be so utterly clueless on this entire subject that they''d actually write an article as dumb as this one, and dare to present it as anything other than satire.

If ignorance is bliss, then the NRO staff have got to be some of the most blissful people on the entire planet. They truly are a bunch of evolutionary throwbacks.

[sinibaldi1]

The silent sound of a waterfall.

Near the bush
where singing
blackbirds describe
a signal of care
I see the beautiful
darkness, and
also that sunset,
when my sound
fades away, discovers
a dream and a
tender idea.

Francesco Sinibaldi

[jcr103]

What this conference should really be called is the "head in the sand club." Thomas Sowell, naturally, can be the president.

[nodemotwit]

Some points:
While the consequences and causes of the earths''
most current warming trend ARE open for debate,
despite a group of left-leaning scientists that
have assumed the mantel of
''we are obviously mental giants and therefore
refuse to debate the mathematics behind
our findings'',
there are OTHER valid and pressing reasons to
reduce our carbon emissions,
such as:
. * With huge middle class populations coming
. on line in China and India,
. who are just as entitled to a middle-class
. lifestyle as the anyone in the West,
. the projections of the worlds remaining oil
. supplies have to be adjusted radically downward.
. Recently Dutch Oil revised peak world
. production to peak in the next 7 yrs.
. Rather that risk the apocalypse of a global
. war for the oil that''s left, why not just
. get off the oil teat?

. * The massive particulate-contamination
. (coal, carbon fuels, etc) of the air
. mass that moves from China into the
. Western US is just going to get worst.
. These particulates are known
. causers of lung cancer. Why not save
. lives just get off the oil teat?
(cont)

[nodemotwit]

(cont)
. * Don''t we owe it to next US generations
. the legacy of unspoiled National Parks
. and Wilderness areas ? They will not
. remain so if opened for oil exploration,
. so why not just get off the oil teat?

If the US will invest in newer technology,
like fast-neutron nuclear reactors, and convert
all vehicle to battery and/or fuel cell power,
the whole global warming debate, as least as
far as US contribution to same, becomes a mute
point. Further, this technology can recycle
OLD technology nuclear waste, and result
in a very significant (over 100X) reduction
in the 1/2 life of the resulting waste,
reaching safe levels in several 100 yrs instead
of the tens of thousands of years required
for old technology reactor waste.

Let''s get beyond the ''global warming'' debate
and find common ground to do what must
invariably be done.

[dostojevskij-2009]

What if you held a conference, and no (real) scientists came?

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2008/01/what-if-you-held-a-conference-and-no-real-scientists-came/