Climate change= more variable weather

[derek75]

accountable

[mustardman]

Derek I think you need more oxygen .
Your spelling is slipping.

Pull your head out of the sand and take a deep breath.

[derek75]

is this how it works Mustardman? you question the intelligence of the people who disagree with you?

[sawfly]

can not help but think that burning fossil fuels has a definite effect on CO2 levels. and possible green house effect .

a lot other causes i think are nonsense ,
cow farts etc. there were millions of bison roaming north amercia , they must have farted too.

storing carbon in surface residues is another one that's debatable.
any forests and grasslands not in tropical areas must have burnt at some point.releasing much of there stored carbon .

if 90-95% of science thinks warming is happening . then i think we have to trust them. can not see any reason for that big of a conspiracy.

funny how opinions on the subject break down along political lines , for the most part the right are the naysayers ,

the left is pushing it and getting people to think about their actions and in some cases going a little overboard.

i tend to think the rain this year is just natural variability,just like the droughts were. we don't know.

being middle aged i won't have to worry too much about the outcome anyway.
warmer retirement does not hurt my feelings.

even if we assume the science is right , it will be very hard for us to change our ways in any meaningful way.

China India all want the good life too.
and who are we to deny them.

if we work on perfecting nuclear power , wind solar, conservation, and plant some trees.
at least we can say we tried.

I do not think we can credibly pretend we don't know any better.

but screw it , my SUV 4wd flies down the gravel, i might live if i crash it.
and mexico is nice in winter .

hell i deserve it, have been no tilling for 25 years storing all that carbon ,doing
my part.

[mustardman]

I do question Why people choose to side with the climate change deniers (who have a vested interest in keeping the status quo)
when all the intellect and expertise is on the other side, and have no Vested interest (other than planet survival)
And on the other side are the likes of Sarah Palin and Rush Limbaugh.
So it like I said earlier its like a debate between Scientists and Mr Potato Head. I choose to listen to the scientists

[silverback]

The problem is that 90 - 95% of science don't believe higher co2 is going to change the world for the worse. Just because the UN and CNN say there is a "consensus" does not make it true.

Pollution is the problem in this world and co2 is fertilizer.

It is breaking along political lines because most conservative people think we pay way too much in taxes and the government already intrudes into our lives more than we need, and the socialists think the bigger government can get and the more taxes they can collect the better. Taking money from Canada and sending it to Africa or China will not change the pollution being put into the environment one little bit - unless you believe they will really use that money to build things that will offset our outputs?

[mustardman]

Silverback WHERE do you get your information on this topic?

[Jay-mo]

Mustard and his ilk obviously keep their heads very close together. Even the msm were finally forced to report on the scandal at East Angalia university. We're not talking about potato heads here.
I really have trouble giving any of the co2/pollution and doomsday prophecy's for 10, 20, or 50 years into the future any credence.
Many of the dire predictions from the 90's should already have wiped out the earth by now.
Even in April, none of our meteorologists predicted the kind of weather we're having across the prairies right now
With this in mind, we're supposed to trust climate scientists for weather forecasts 20 years from now,shut down our economies and voluntarily reduce the worlds population by 90%?
The bigger question is, who is willing to take one for the good of the earth?

[Choice2U]

Mustardman...unless you're using horses that don't fart to pull a plough on land that does not release carbon when tilled, you have no credibility because you don't walk the talk. I therefore assume you don't have a half ton or car, don't burn any carbon based fuels, your house and buildings are lit by solar/wind power (which you built out of reusable materials) on your farm and your geothermal heat system works quite nice. Please let me know which ones you have. Extreme measures are required according to the alarmists so you better be doing your part regardless of everyone else so you won't end up in Hell like me where there really is warming.

[mustardman]

Choice2u Why do you believe in hell and that It is hot?? but don't believe in climate change ?

[FarmRanger]

FYI. The "Consensus" of climatologists isn't
nearly as large as was portrayed by the IPCC
and those with a vested interest in propagating
the "climate change is caused by humans"
agenda.

I recently came across this excellent summary.
A little long and full of scientific jargon, but well
worth the read if you are truly interested in
educating yourself on the subject.

http://www.americanthinker.com/2010/06/heartlan
d_conference_establish.html

Or you can watch "An Inconvenient Truth" if you
just want info from someone who's making
hundreds of $millions pushing climate alarmism.

[burnt]

Whoa there mustardman, I think you must be one of those whose mother should have hugged him more often . . .

Nihilism is a sad mental disorder and seems to be the motivation behind the "man-made" climate change theory. A sense of worthlessness may just be what lies at the root of it. Hence, more of momma's hugs . . .

Climate change is real and ongoing, just as it has since the beginning. Humanity has little or nothing to do with it.

So quit the navel gazing already! Life is good!