4 mile thick sheets of ice once covered a vast portion of the globe and now they are gone, I learned that in 4th grade. I've explored the Kennedy Straits in the early 80's and noted glaciers had receded over 3 miles since the 40's. I would call that a warming trend, wouldnt you?

Its the global warming nut cases that that think its something new raising the statistical hype, hysteria, the dogs and cats living together crap which has so far only served to raise my taxes. Global warming, whoop-dee-do-da-day.

Both pro and anti climate changers have become a religion of their own. Honestly though, what are the down sides of attempting to reduce carbon dioxide in the atmosphere? Surely it's better to try, even if we don't succeed, than to just not bother?
Not to mention the fact that eventually the fossil fuels are going to run out, so the sooner we move away from them the easier it will be for us when they do.

http://www.bradblog.com/Images/JoelP...ing_120709.jpg

We need another energy source sooner or later, yes. But our own industry and ... errm 'influenced politicians' do not really want it. The world order is based on the current give, take, make war because of, oil.
Imagine someone would find an energy source, that can be used by anyone cheap, and especially de-centralised! (read: without government control :03: )
Oh the HORROR!


For me (and maybe you?) there is no down side of keeping human influence on the planet as low as possible (but you sure know this is not the right wing/redneck/republican approach ?), but why blame carbon dioxide? Individual traffic is laughable in comparison to industrial waste and gases, and this again is being completely dwarfed by just one volcano eruption, per century.

I am all for politicians forbidding volcanoes to erupt. Show me one, i will vote for him. I am just afraid this will have as much influence, as what is done now against CO2.

(B.t.w. my cycads and tree fern would be happy to have more of CO2 (like they had some hundred million years ago), and the Sahara will be green within two centuries, if we get climate conditions like during the time of the Roman empire. Yes, it was much warmer, and we had more CO2. But the CO2 was a product of the earth's higher temperature mean value, not the other way round. People tend to forget that.)

Will higher overall temperature affect our western (now) temperate zones? Of course. How? Need more data.
But base politics and global strategies on that, just to keep others down?


"I know what the people say, mostly i have been the first one"
(Shoogar, "The Flying Sorcerers")

:O:

That is wildy incorrect.

That's what I said. Briefly :O:

Hippies are as bad as the talking heads and scientists are shun from both sides because of it while the fat cats in offices milk both sides dry :/\\!!

We need thermonuclear reactors and cheap energy I would say.

Things ain't getting better.

Then again, maybe it's not so bad.

a new climate summit is imminent, a new nightmare report was to be expected, we also got a dedicated one just for ygermany two days ago.


we still switch off nuclear plants and hope people would just consume less energy. the windmill revolution over here currently falters. they already plan to rationize charging electricity so far not produced forecars currently not build. government, so save its great coalition, released punishing payment schemes for heating and oil and gas consummation, will within just a few years become crippling for many households and house owners.


greetings from the biggest mental asylum on the planet.

There are now 7.7 billion people on the planet and our numbers are growing. Nature laughs at mans puny attempts to cut his generated greenhouse gasses.

If the climate nuts are allowed to make electricity and home heating oil too expensive for the average person what will they do with all the extra greenhouse gasses produced when those billions decide to burn them all out?

The EU's Super-Uschi, and Germany holy mother Angela held two speeches today, at Brussels, and in Berlin, both claiming that it is the Europeans' burden to show the world the way. "Who, if not us?"


I am certain those hundreds of millions in India, China and Africa are just waiting for showing them the way. They must be happy top not want to reahc our livin standards anymore, to prevent the climate from doing ewhat it will do anyway.



Pure megalomania and arrogance. Super-Uschi wants to spend 3 trillion on climate prevention - at the expense of the European tax payers who never got asked anyway, but quite some of them, especially Germans, are stupdi enogh to even wnat that. Oil heating gets forbidden ober her. Gas heati8ng gets forbidden over here. The rest already now is close to breakign down and blacking out national power supply.


A squirrel's paradise. All nuts.



Its not about rejecting the ckimate trend. We cannot reverse it, we cannot chnage it. Itds about to adapt to the warmer new world we will need to live in. For that we should spend our ressources now, instead of wasting them to chase phantoms. And we must become less people. Fast. Else nature will reduce our numbers, and without any sentimentality.

So, while we are all still alive and I suspect die of old age before the climate kills us I have one word 'COPPER'. Wait, make that two words the other being 'WATER'.

Statistically, I read last week, across Europe still there are more people dying in winter's cold time than during the heat waves of summer.

Sorry, I was referring to the religion and politics of climate change. Not the things which should come as no surprise such as winter. People don't die from climate change. They die from exposure to the elements some reasons would be due too their age, physical or mental condition, lack of or inability to afford clothing, heat or shelter. I'm sure we could think of more all of which we CAN control.

We should think about that this season. Nothing wrong with giving kewl stuff to your friends and family. But, maybe too find what a reputable local shelter might need and help out.

Oh, I did not mean to criticise you there. I just took it as a starter to post what I said: thgat the media report a lot about deaths from heat wave sin france and Spain and Germany. But almnost enver about deatsh from the cold in wionter. And statistically that is the bigger problem . Winter's cold in Europe causes more deaths than summer's heat waves.

Ill try and find a link but saw a i good doc on this while back, switching over to newer types of energy production is not so simple. What people tend to over look is how grids actually operate and the vast amounts of aging infastructure in every nation that has to be completley re-designed and rebuilt. (there's alot more to it than just building a new power plant or ten)

Wind and solar, forget it - they can assist with clean power production, but will never be enough to power cities on their own, both are way too ineffcient, the options are 'clean gas' possible hydrogen fuel cell (if they can ever work out all the kinks) and nuclear which is today a hell of alot safer and less waste producing than it once was, but yeah fukashima anyone? there is still a risk.

Some seem to hold the misconception its just a case of government growing a pair and slapping the fossil tycoons in line with green legislation, and like magic it will all be solved. Sadly not.