Glenn Beck: global warming's equal time

TheCurrentsWillShift

polaris wrote:

the thing is most people agree already ... it's not like a 50-50 split here ... there is an overwhelming consensus ... .

First off you sound like Laurie David..... Mrs.'s don't question my movie....

polaris wrote:

what have you been reading? - no one is saying CO2 goes up with temperature, temperature goes up with CO2 ... again - the greenhouse effect is not disputed by anyone ... there should not be a debate anymore as to the cause ... .

Maybe if you took a minute to read all the ice core data (remove yourself from Laurie David's rear) for the last.... I don't know maybe, you could see the whole 5MM years worth, than you will not see the selective garbage that is being thrown around daily in the media .... As temperature goes up CO2 lags behind, in some epochs, CO2 catches up (like now) and levels with temperature. It rides the line for a little while, then temperature begins to go down, CO2 lags behind. There have been several temperature drops in ice core data, where CO2 is higher. Not the other way around.

polaris wrote:

maybe if you wanna grasp - you can argue the degree of impact but really then you're just looking at ways to not do anything ...

The people who agree with you happen to be making the most noise about this. That is the "consensus". There is something to be said for perpetuating a point for political purposes (i.e. - trying to sway a population to win an election... sadly this is the motivating factor).

We should be doing our best not to polute the environment. There are plenty of good reasons to cut back on fossil fuels. But blaming rising CO2 levels for the warming trend on earth is not it, and we will eventually accept that fact. CO2 is an extremely minor greenhouse gas. Molecule for molecule CH4 (methane) is 20x stronger than CO2 as a greenhouse gas. It is more effective at trapping gases in the atmosphere than CO2. Many scientists, who are proponents of man-made global warming don't want to touch that hand (because that would tie to the oceans - which is known for the outgassing of CH4, many many times in the distant past and recent past). And that will cut into their grant money. I am all for science as the way of things, but sometimes, some people will use it for their own purposes (including some scientists).

Why is it that we have to be zombies and tow the line ? Differences in opinion are important. Throwing around opinion as fact is dangerous. There are many, many dissidents in the scientific community, give it time they will make their voices heard.

Q. Is warming happening ???? A. YES !
Q. Are we contributing ???? A. Not unless all humans, animals, and plants collectively fart non-stop for 5000 years ! (and throw in a couple CH4 ocean farts for good measure).
Q. Can we control it ????? A. Absolutely not, there are forces at hand driving this and we can't do a damn thing about it ! We can't control our cyclical albedo, we can't control the cyclical intensity of the sun, we can't control CO2 outgassing by the planet !. We can only hope the nature of things balances this all out, like it has in the past. If not then we can find ourselves in a greenhouse stage (bad) or an ice age phase (bad).

floyd1975

It still wasn't that long ago that we could have replaced "environmentalism" and "global warming" with "eugenics" and the debate would have been very similar. "How can it be bad policy with so much science backing it up?"