Regarding the 'global warming' issue, would anybody like to articulate?

Question

Regarding the 'global warming' issue, would anybody like to articulate?

Answer 1

Apart from opening a can of worms and having a shouting match on how bad global warming may or may not be, I think some governments are finding out that quickly moving to renewable energy like solar and wind is not financially feasible.



Germany is in a world of hurt and England is not far behind. Even in the USA, renewable energy companies are collapsing weekly with taxpayer guaranteed loans going who knows where. China and India are putting coal power plants online by the week. Emissions trading markets like the one in the EU are failing miserably. The Chicago Climate Exchange was up for a few years but collapsed.



Climate talks have essentially been complete failures. The only thing I see happening is a transfer of wealth under the guise of "combating" climate change which will be handled by the UN at a very likely high fee for "administration" and a difficult process for determining accountability.



The UN wants money and power. A global climate crisis is just the ticket for them to achieve that. Can you see them ever coming out and saying maybe this CO2 emissions issue is not the urgent one we thought it once was? Not going to happen. How anyone could claim the UN IPCC is objective is beyond me.



If somebody sees a different reality, then please let me know soon so I can sleep better.

Answer 2

I like being right more than most people, but my being right ends where your rights begin.



Warmons believe they are right, besides what we want to do to fix the problems are the right things to do anyway so it's unimportant whether or not the reason we are doing them is happening or not. The first commandment of warmonism is the Ends always justify the means.



I have no idea why but it seems that since a completely democrat house/senate and president failed to pass cap and tax there hasn't really been much mainstream discussion on the impending doom. Even Obama hasn't come out and said we aren't drilling for oil because I am trying to save the planet from AGW when he has a perfect opportunity to bolster support for doing something about the crisis.

Answer 3

You are not as confused as those who are proponents of GW.



John Barnes, climate scientist: “If you look at the last decade of global temperature, it’s not increasing,” Barnes said. “There’s a lot of scatter to it. But the [climate] models go up. And that has to be explained. Why didn’t we warm up?”..."We do have satellites that can measure the energy budget, but there’s still assumptions there. There’s assumptions about the oceans, because we don’t have a whole lot of measurements in the ocean.”.



John Daniel, climate scientist: “We make a mistake, anytime the temperature goes up, you imply this is due to global warming,” he said. “If you make a big deal about every time it goes up, it seems like you should make a big deal about every time it goes down.”



James Hansen, climate scientist: "All the climate models, compared to the Argo data and a tracer study soon to be released by several NASA peers, exaggerate how efficiently the ocean mixes heat into its recesses....that climate models have been overestimating the amount of energy in the climate,...“Less efficient mixing, other things being equal, would mean that there is less warming ‘in the pipeline,’” ....it also implies that the negative aerosol forcing is probably larger than most models assumed."



These scientists are rather chagrined that their predictions haven't come true.They finally are starting to admit that they don't know as much as they thought they knew.



But that won't stop them they have too much money invested in their agenda.



Quote from the UN's Own "Agenda 21": "Effective execution of Agenda 21 will require a profound reorientation of all human society, unlike anything the world has ever experienced a major shift in the priorities of both governments and individuals and an unprecedented redeployment of human and financial resources. This shift will demand that a concern for the environmental consequences of every human action be integrated into individual and collective decision-making at every level."



So you see, even the experts agree that the environment is just a vehicle to line up us peons and pick out pockets.

Answer 4

the corporate media brainwashes all and sundry, it would not p.c.. on liberals. The brainwashing isn't all at a wakeful element, in case you watch any mainstream media you've been contaminated. that contains pretend. the international warming stuff is getting previous. definite, I truly have heard that the "Powerz" are utilising this as an excuse to implement "international governance". it would also be genuine, and it does sound attainable. considering the fact that i'm not truly "contained in the large club" to quote George Carlin, it really is not likely that i will ever recognize for particular. I truly have not started to ensure a concise medical evidence exhibiting the thermodynamic results of CO2 contained in the ambience and precisely the way it motives international warming. i'm extremely particular such an evidence does not exist. If it does exist i'd be at liberty to think about it. It fairly does not count number how commonly going on this theory is or isn't with scientists or all and sundry else. What concerns is evidence, and the load of evidence is with the proponents of a theory, not its critics.

Answer 5

Dude, you know how every number of years, there is an ice age? The earth goes through warm periods, and cold ones. We are in the transition of a cold period to a warmer one. The last ice age was only about 20,000 years ago. I know that seems like a lot, but in geological time, its a very short period. Eventually, once we reach our warm period peak, it will begin to go cold again. Our sun has been burning for 5 billion years, and because of how much gas it has, it will burn for 5 billion more. It won't explode or anything. We are 93 million miles away from the sun. The earth has a slightly elliptical orbit, so throughout the year we do go a BIT closer to the sun, but we move back throughout the orbit. Also, because how the gravity works, we aren't moving closer and closer to the sun. The only reason we are having Global Warming is because of our temporal periods.

Answer 6

It is a very real dilemma that mainstream AMERICAN media is ignoring for the most part. Oil and other energy companies lobby a lot and pay scientists to say that there is no man-made impact on the environment. 97% of all scientists say man-made climate change is a fact. About 2% say that they are not completely sure and want to wait and see what develops. About 1% say that it doesn't exist.



The oil industry would lose a lot of money if people decided to switch to non-polluting sources of energy and most of the CEO's won't be around to experience the negative effects of their industries. People in America overall are either in denial because it threatens their lifestyle choices or they're too apathetic to do anything about it. Because its not just about finding "green" energy, it is about overhauling our entire way of life and people tend to get very threatened about that. Driving everywhere, buying imported goods, creating so much garbage, etc etc are all things would need to change. Americans are fat and lazy for the most part and don't want to have to bike anywhere or eat locally grown food or not buy new things all the time. Its about changing our values from a focus on consumerism and waste to thinking about the future and preserving our natural world so that our children will have clean air and water in 100 years or so.



Because of how set people are in their ways and their refusal to take science seriously, many of the rest of us are very apathetic about it. It feels hopeless. Irreparable damage has already been done, we are past the point of no-return. Without huge, major overhauls, we are basically doomed. The more you read about it and look at the facts the more depressing it gets. People don't want to be depressed so they bury their heads in the sand. Its human nature.

Answer 7

This is way beyond me. Billy could provide a good answer.

Answer 8

It is a concerning issue.

Answer 9

People are tired of global warming, especially as the debate has polarized factions that would rather grasp at false information rather than accept the overwhelming wealth of information from accepted sources or the obvious presence of damage that has occurred. The costs to reduce global warming are prohibitive and it isn't clear if reduction or mitigation is possible. Plus people now have more immediate concerns from the economy.



It's the very nature of the concept of global warming and our current social economic structure that by the time it's obvious that something needs to be done, it will almost certainly be too late and beyond our influence, the situation could only be influenced by man before it has reached certain points where natural reinforcements take over such as the loss of albedo, the thawing of the permafrost, wide spread decay from die offs, etc. Of course it can be said that the conservative nature of our society's reaction guards against false claims and that is true but it won't help much as a claim proves to be true by becoming intransigent.



To a certain extent, the presence of the deniers are a little comforting as if there were no deniers, then it would be far too late and skepticism of any form is good. The ridiculousness of the evidence they espouse to is becoming disturbing as it's clear that we simply have the less rational deniers remaining.



Propping up wind turbines, solar panels and buying hybrids and EV's aren't going to save us from a global warming threat whether or not the threat is man made. It would take a herculean effort of fourth generation molten fluid thermal nuclear reactors that uses fuel far more plentiful than uranium, the synthesis of hydrocarbon fuel from atmospheric CO2 and H2O and actual carbon sequestration such as bio-char not CO2 sequestration or biodegradability to address the issues. These are measures that may offend the sensibilities of many environmental supporters, especially the nuclear power and forgoing biodegradability to sequester carbon and even the bio-char might offend many who would prefer a more natural agricultural technology but it would take such compromises to make a difference. People are tired and do not want to compromise in any way.

Answer 10

If you want to know to know the intent behind AGW/ACC, read the entire answer, and read what they are saying in their own words quoted, so there can be no misunderstandings of their actual intent.



These are a few statements that are legally binding for the countries that surrender their rights to the UN COP. Segments of the expose are shown below, and an expanded expose is at:

http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/images/PDFs/UNFCCC-AWGLCA-objective.pdf

(though not a full list of their demands and aspirations)

(the COP is Conference of Parties, an established organization by the UN for a one world government, and "Convention" is the countries that surrender to the COP through the treaty.)



Page 39, #32

"Funds will be under the control of the COP as the supreme authority of the Convention."



The COP will have unconditional, unrestricted power over the economy and society. Why is this stated if it is all about science, and nothing to do with a one world government and absolute global rule???



Page 18, #36

"..adoption and carrying out of public policies, as the prevailing instrument, to which the market rules and related dynamics should be subordinate, in order to assure the full, effective and sustained implementation of the Convention."



Market rules and dynamics subordinate???? This IS what has caused the current global economic meltdown - Market rules and dynamics subordinate.



Page 7, #3

"a major obstacle to efforts to promote [sustainable] economic and social development [and to [reduce] poverty] [eradication] [promote poverty aliviation,] [which are the first and overriding priorities of all developing countries]."



If it about AGW, why is poverty eradication the primary and overriding priority????



Page 18, #38 (a)

" The government will be ruled by the COP"



Does the US want a foreign dictator to have absolute rule over society and the economy???



Page 29, (q)

"Any lack of full scientific certainty should not be used as a reason to postpone or scale down action on adaptation];"



It is suppose to be about irrefutable science. Why would this be stated if there is any lack of certainty? - because it is all about a lack of science certainty for the claim of Global Warming.



Page 78, #4

"economic and social development and poverty eradication are the first and overriding priorities"



Poverty eradication again?? Stated many times. Isn't this issue about saving the planet??



Page 87, #77

"A separate pool of funding to finance national coordinating bodies through a direct line item in the secretariat’s budget shall be established. Such support shall not be subject to measurement, reporting and verification."



Poverty eradication is named numerous times. The COP will have absolute and unconditional authority, and billions of US dollars will be extorted to fund their pet projects and no one will know where the billions will go - i.e. Page 87, #77, second sentence - "Such support shall not be subject to measurement, reporting and verification."



Check out this publication of exposing only a few segments and statements shown in full so there can be no misunderstanding of their intended objectives in the statements and what the sections translate to mean.

http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/images/PDFs/UNFCCC-AWGLCA-objective.pdf



The full 181 page document is at:

http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/2009/awglca7/eng/inf02.pdf

http://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2009/10/un-fccc-copenhagen-2009.pdf



Science and AGW/ACC has nothing to do with the issue. By the way, by 1933 the world was to be in turmoil caused by AGW/ACC according to publications in 1922 -

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2008/03/16/you-ask-i-provide-november-2nd-1922-arctic-ocean-getting-warm-seals-vanish-and-icebergs-melt/

http://www.snopes.com/politics/science/globalwarming1922.asp



Is it really about AGW/ACC, or is AGW/ACC an invented issue as a means to an end as they have wanted for the last hundred years????? Giving absolute rule to dictators will be the result of signing the Copenhagen Treaty, or whatever name they give it at the time is the whole reason AGW/ACC exists. Actually, the whole reason AGW/ACC exists at all, is to get countries to sign the Copenhagen Treaty (like what the AGW/ACC promoters want), to give the UN COP absolute control over the US economy and society (in their own words below). They have drafted a 181 page document outlining that they will have absolute authority unquestioned and unaccountable to no one but themselves (in their own words).



Whether you like the answer or not, this is the whole reason AGW/ACC exists. It is a politically invented issue in by the UN.

Answer 11

I think it is a very real dilemma the mainstream is now ignoring. A few years back, they used to talk about it on the news and such a lot, but now you barely ever hear it mentioned in conversation anymore. Much less on the news.

Look people: Global warming is and was not just a ******* trend of the moment. It's real.

Answer 12

If you mind the pun, global warming has a lot of fair weather friends. When it is warm, people believe in global warming. When it is cold, they think that Al Gore is out to steel their money. The recent warm winter will bring global warming back into the forefront. But Global warming is not about snow, or lack thereof, but about long term trends. And it is happening

http://www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories2010/images/warmingindicators.jpg

And we are causing it

http://planetsave.com/2010/08/18/humans-cause-global-warming-10-indicators/



The ten warmest years in the instrumental record are 2010, 2005, 2009, 2007, 2002, 1998, 2006, 2003, 2004 and 2011.

http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/

Answer 13

Global warming beyond natural warming is a fib, instigated by that liberal lunatic and fat pig Al Gore. Natural global warming is our friend and it is what saved us from the ice ages.



Global warming is no longer an issue, because people's intuition has informed them it's not a problem, and to dwell on it would bore them to sleep. Our country has real problems and concerns to address, and global warming is just a dumb and mindless distraction. In addition, it has been debunked by many prominent scientists.

Answer 14

dfsdafsa