Global warming is a misleading term. Climate change is more descriptive, although what is happening now is a definite rise in the average temperature of the planet. However, this doesnt mean that we'll all be sunbathing in Lapland any tiime soon. The rise in temperatures increasing global weather volatility, some of which is hot (drought in Australia) and some of which is cold (Upstate NY at the moment, the storms in Europe recently).

So it's getting warmer, but stormier too.

[QUOTE]To my initial response regarding doing nothing I may have been vague. What we need is an unbiased cost/benefit analysis. Much like your response to the nuclear power response as to the transmission loss due to out of state nuclear power.

An off the head example would be; the farming industry will have to reduce the emissions from their harvesting equipment and still be able to provide food stuffs for the native population and send emergency aid to 'starving' nations in Africa or the Indian sub-continent, while continuing to pay for the things of life that will be affected by the increased cost home side.
QUOTE]

Can you respond to this?

To all "Global Warming" belivers:

Please tell me why, way back in the ice-age, did the MASSIVE glaciers reaching down to where Kansas would be, melt? did the cavemen have SUV's and Jet Aircraft to pump CO and CO2 into the atmosphere?

Another opinion, no less valid than a 'scientist's'. Opinion is opinion.
http://www.newmediajournal.us/staff/...t/02092007.htm

That right thier is one of the best arguments against global warming one can find. But not nececairly the correct one or wrong one.

Yes, there is a natural fluctuation of climate change between ice ages and warm periods going back millions of years. Problem is we've just come out of an ice age, and it's getting warm way too early and far too quickly. The same type of temperature rise we've seen over the past couple of hundred, should be happening over thousands of years.

Boris I love your picture man,
Let's say we start a factory and build us some subs......Probably have to go nuclear so we don't harm the world... But hey the world will be 90% water. We can go anywhere..........And what better skippers than the guys right here

I'm afraid that its real... Go to wikipedia and you will see those horrible figures... White House probably related to the covering up of this, hoping that they industrial outputs are not affected or cut (in order to reduce emission of CO2)

However, you should also ask the Australian guys... They have just suffered... Next time, it might be YOU...

Billionaire Offers $25M Prize to Fight 'Warming'
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...020900693.html

Honestly, you can't be serious...can you?

Why should one care what agencies like the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, or what gifted scientists with an impressive track record of a life's work in this field, report? Why bother with the opinion of accredited scientists with PhDs in environmental geology and environmental science, with many cumulative years of laborius and meticulous work within this field, have to offer -- when by your rationale, young Billy's opinion, who's flipping burgers at a local fast food joint, is no less valid?

Scientific consensus is that we are causing global warming. Perhaps they're onto something? Don't we owe it ourselves and others to do some intelligent research into this?

There is no consensus as far as I can tell although both sides of the debate will try to tell you there is (and that their side is right).

As for research, there is plenty being done by both sides. The problem is how much of it can be believed.

The pro human caused global warming camp seems quite willing to make wild claims because it means their research teams continue to get funded. The anti human caused global warming camp are accused by the pros as selling out to the government.

So who can we believe here?

Well, seeing that the last ice age was 20,000 years ago... or is that not enough?

Guys
 

In somewhat more practicle terms.

whether or not you believe in global warming

(which by definition is the increasing mean temperature worldwide
and climate change is a different thing all together that is effected
by this global change. so dont substitute
what you dont understand research it)

or whether you dont

this planet is doomed and we have to leave,
whatever cause anoxic atmosphere nuclear war global warming
meteor strike plague of frogs doesnt matter

the only way you can beat a supernova is to be elsewhere
wouldnt it be a more efficient use of resources if we
started the spore tower now. early in the game.

MM:|\\

Thats the spirtit! Mars shall beceome tattoine and earth Nalhutta

Having taken a very technical class on this very issue recently in school, I thought I might toss in my own two cents. I came into the class thinking that global warming is a done deal, definitely a problem, and I Left much the same, but with a greater appreciation for the complexities of the issue as well as the uncertainties that surround it. All sorts of scientists, politicians, pundits, businessmen, butchers, bakers and candlestick makers have weighed in with their own facts and opinions about it and I think the most important thing to consider about any analysis is who's making it and those coming down in denial of global warming are, by and large with some notable exceptions, those with interests that will be adversely impacted by measures to combat it. The bottom line is that right now we have no way to absolutely and definitively prove or disprove global warmings existence, although the preponderance of the evidence points in favor of anthropogenic (human caused) climate change. My stance, better to be safe than sorry.:roll: