NASA warming scientist: 'This is the last chance'

[RedEarth]

Source: (AP)

WASHINGTON (AP) — Exactly 20 years after warning America about global warming, a top NASA scientist said the situation has gotten so bad that the world's only hope is drastic action.

James Hansen told Congress on Monday that the world has long passed the "dangerous level" for greenhouse gases in the atmosphere and needs to get back to 1988 levels. He said Earth's atmosphere can only stay this loaded with man-made carbon dioxide for a couple more decades without changes such as mass extinction, ecosystem collapse and dramatic sea level rises.

"We're toast if we don't get on a very different path," Hansen, director of the Goddard Institute of Space Sciences who is sometimes called the godfather of global warming science, told The Associated Press. "This is the last chance."



Read more: http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5i3NLY5naFMJIsbKHNeiWIKMTsEiQD91G3IBG0

[catgirl]

1. K & R

[lovuian]

2. I so agree we have to change the whole way

we live

[Xipe Totec]

3. Peak oil to the rescue nt

[Subdivisions]

90. Yup. What people don't know or realize is that Peak Oil will

devastate the world long before global warming's worst effects can.

I've tried to warn. Nobody cares or wants to hear it. Oh well.

[tama]

133. What ff said and

problem with CC is that self-feeding dynamics have been already set in motion.

Only sensible thing is to stop using any and all fossile energy NOW (OK, 10 years grace period can be negotiated for relocating etc.), everybody learns permaculture gardening and we let nature to do what she knows best. I'm not believing for the second that we will do the sensible thing, on the contrary we will just keep on hitting the gas pedal with the wall 10 feet away.

[Sequoia]

141. I like your graph.

Maybe we can have solar powered trains too.

[freedom fighter jh]

112. Maybe, maybe not

If the response to an oil shortage is to try to make it up with other CO2-generating stuff like coal, then it doesn't help.

We need a strong leader to promote renewables, which will help out with both energy needs and climate concerns.

[Xipe Totec]

156. We're not allowed to burn leaders for fuel

no matter how strong...


:yoiks:

[galledgoblin]

171. that's the thought that terrifies me

that the reaction will be the opposite of the needed one.

imagine if climate change starts to really affect basic habitability in politically unstable regions... regions that today are collecting the old Cold War weapons.

maybe Futurama was right, nuclear winter will cancel out global warming.

[SergeyDovlatov]

154. How about Solar? One paper shows Solar will eliminate Fossil Fuels by 2105

The price of renewables such as solar power have been dropping by more than 50%
per decade over the past 30 years. If this trend continues it will mean the beginning of renewables as a substantial source of energy by 2025 and the end of fossil fuels by 2065. Even if a much lower price decrease of 30% per decade is assumed for the future, it means phasing in renewables by 2035 and the end of fossil fuels by 2105

Edit: Link to the paper removed.

Here is an abstract instead

http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/abs/10.1086/516390?journalCode=jpe

[Xipe Totec]

157. Price is irrelevant

the question is, how much energy does it take to make a solar cell. In other words, is there a net energy gain, once you factor the energy cost of purifying silicon, fabrication, distribution, installation, and maintenance.

[Hekate]

163. Sadly, about a century too late. Government has to get behind renewables like they do War...

...then "price" to individuals becomes irrelevant.

We've had one missed opportunity after another here. President Jimmy Carter put solar panels on the White House, which Ronald "Morning in America" Reagan ripped out. Vice President Al Gore outfitted his entire official residence with energy savings devices, which Dick (and I do mean dick) Cheney ripped out. Both were Republican gestures of contempt for Democrats.

If Franklin Roosevelt had been president on 9-11, my fantasy is that he would have declared our energy independence by slapping solar panels on every government building in the country, just to lead the way and show how it's done. Then he would have made it a national priority to build as many solar panels for homes and businesses as possible.

I could go on, but you get the picture.

Hekate

[gateley]

4. Wow - I think he's even a little optimistic.

I think it's too late to "get back to" how we were in the past. All we can do (IMO) is start NOW to stop creating further damage, then learning how to adapt to what we've already wrought.

[SpiralHawk]

5. "Time to go on vacation. Smirk." - Commander AWOL

"When the going gets tough, and the fact-based science starts piling up, I like to head out the Imperial Pig Farm Upon Crawford, and fire up some petro-chemical based charcoal to roast cow meat and space out on all the problems I have been creating or ignoring. Smirk."

- Commander AWOL

[Ian David]

6. ...

"I said I'm SORRY, already! I honestly thought there was still debate about the reality of Global Warming!"

[Auggie]

7. Nature's system of checks and balances at work.

[ohio2007]

8. Brits are willing to wait for the next chance

Poll: most Britons doubt cause of climate change
The majority of the British public is still not convinced that climate change is caused by humans - and many others believe scientists are exaggerating the problem, according to an exclusive poll for The Observer.

The results have shocked campaigners who hoped that doubts would have been silenced by a report last year by more than 2,500 scientists for the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), which found a 90 per cent chance that humans were the main cause of climate change and warned that drastic action was needed to cut greenhouse gas emissions.

......

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2008/jun/22/climatechange.carbonemissions

Climate chaos? Don't believe it

The Stern report last week predicted dire economic and social effects of unchecked global warming. In what many will see as a highly controversial polemic, Christopher Monckton disputes the 'facts' of this impending apocalypse and accuses the UN and its scientists of distorting the truth
....

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1533290/Climate-chaos-Don't-believe-it.html

Guess they will wait and see when the Arctic is ice free in 2010 as predicted. That prediction will prove somebody right or wrong with satellite imaging

[Nihil]

27. No, just the less intelligent ones getting confused by the denial machine

> six out of 10 agreed that 'many scientific experts still question
> if humans are contributing to climate change'

Not totally unexpected when the well-funded climate change denial
machine is getting so much airtime & paper (and blog/forum time ...).

Still, there is good news in that poll:

> four out of 10 'sometimes think climate change might not be as bad
> as people say'

= 6/10 did not agree with the above statement.

> Despite this, three quarters still professed to be concerned about
> climate change.

What are the US figures then Ohio? :-)

> More than half of those polled did not have confidence in international
> or British political leaders to tackle climate change

At least some people can see through (some of) the greenwash.

The really sad part is this:
> Those most worried were more likely to have a degree, be in social
> classes A or B, have a higher income

i.e., the least gullible segments of the population.
This reinforces the problem of allowing the media to brainwash those
with insufficient education to make a rational decision. They are also
the sector that is least able to survive by cooperation and most likely
to survive by barbarity.

Just goes to show that it happens all over the world ...

[AntiFascist]

103. People won't listen until parts of Florida are underwater....

and even then it will only be mostly Floridians.

[ohio2007]

170. We should know in a few months as "experts" predicted the Arctic would be ice free in 2008

North Pole Could Be Ice Free in 2008

By CATHERINE BRAHIC
April 27, 2008


http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/story?id=4728737&page=1


The Brits have Catherine Brahic "on the clock" so is it going to be show time for an october surprise

Doubt it because wild cards such as volcanism can be played while China's one coal burning electric plant built every three weeks should be able to counterbalance any global cooling.

It was brought up in this thread but it was "locked"



Thor_MN (1000+ posts) Wed May-07-08 08:10 AM
Response to Original message
64. Antarctic (and Greenland) is where the trouble will be
Melt that ice and it raises the oceans. As Mother Earth swivels her hips, a good portion of that water is going to go to her waist. Since the Pacific side has significantly more ocean (maybe more correct to say more land on Atlantic side) the weight distribution of the planet is going to change. That's going to put some wobble in her hula action. Consequences unknown and quite probably unknowable on a human life scale, but the planet may be needing a new "North Star" sooner than we expected.


http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=3286732&mesg_id=3286732

[aasleka]

9. 2004 was our last chance, it is to late now

by the time we really wake at this point the permafrost swamps will melt and we will accelerate the problem.

[Amonester]

10. We're screwn. n/t

[lutefisk]

20. Big time. n/t

[cayuga]

11. I worked at NASA Ames Research Center twenty years ago.

This is where Hansen worked also (in the Space Science Division) in Earth Science research. He wrote papers on 'the Greenhouse Effect' then and he was spot on.

One paper he wrote has stayed with me all these years. He wrote about the 'albedo effect' and how the snow on the polar caps reflected heat away from Earth. One consequence of 'the Greenhouse Effect' was the melting of those ice caps and the increased absorption of heat. Once the process hit a certain point, things would happen fast. and would be irreversible.

He was right all along and we have done nothing in twenty years. i seriously doubt we will do anything now...it's not in our nature to be proactive. No one likes to hear that their reality is about to end. And the fact that there is no one in charge doesn't help either.

[defendandprotect]

12. We've had the Global Warming model since the 1950's . . .

JFK, I believe, would have made the changes necessary ---

Everything was out of the bag at that point ---

Rachel Carson's "Silent Spring" --- a huge smack at the petroleum industry ---

medicine -- lies --- restoring our attachment to nature.


Hansen has behaved courageously -- I'm sure this has been dangerous for him!

Tremendous controls on NASA since the Reagan era ---

When was the last time we heard anything about the ozone hole --- ??!!!

I agree, it's too late --- but we have to keep hoping --- even if only to save the planet.

[deaniac21]

45. Just before his death, JFK was prepared to roll out the first of

his global warming inititives. In his second term he would have eleminated the problem.

[defendandprotect]

69. Never heard that before, but the Dem platform he ran on called for nationalizing oil industry...

ending allowances --

Notice, you can't even get a member of Congress now to mention this most logical of moves!

Not a one seems to be mentioning Electric Cars --- !!!

It's insane --

The American public have been lied and propagandized by the oil industry to while Congress sat back and watched --

From LBJ to Cheney/Bush, the oil industry has owned our leadership and legislators ---

[Hekate]

164. Christ on a Trailer Hitch, talk about a motive for assassination....

:wow: I had no idea, being too young at the time to pay attention to party platforms...

Hekate

[dixiegrrrrl]

131. jeez....that was succinct....horribly so.

Lemmings, meet cliff.


I bitterly resent being dragged along the moran's learning curve.




George Carlin is rolling around way up there, laughing his ass off.

[DRex]

13. If this guy is right....

I fear we may be too far gone.

I see no far-reaching changes of the sort we really require in the pipeline, and anything that happens now may be too little too late to avoid complete catastrophe.

I fear for the future.

[Zachstar]

17. With my calculations I calculate if we shave a few years off EMC2 Fusion development and get ...

Bioractors online en masse. We may stand a slight chance.

That requires tho that.

#1 Obama grow a pair and tell us right to our face that we are fucked otherwise.

#2 Congress grow a pair and give just a billion to speed fusion development up and a billion to get a massive amount of algae bioractors online and a billion to get coal and oil plants shut down.

May god have mercy on us otherwise.

[pokercat999]

25. Put a Tr in front of the illion and you have a start.

Make that several trillion. Make that every thing we have, its time to go "all-in", as we like to say. (sorry Mike)

When you get close to the end of the poker tourney and you find your self short stacked (almost out of chips) you have only one choice find the best place as fast as possible to put all your chips into the pot in an effort to win a big one and stay in the game. The blinds and antes (forced bets) are eating your stack and unless you act, you'll be broke soon anyway. That's where the people of the earth are it seems to me, in relation to climate change.

One question we must ask ourselves at this point is what are we saving it for (the money) if we don't act there will be no tomorrow. If however we can find a source of unlimited clean energy the future for earth and all its peoples would be very bright indeed.

The other thing that has puzzled me is what do the deniers have to gain? If they think it's a hoax why not jump on the bandwagon and get their "share"? It's certainly not scruples that holds them back. If we find a clean source of energy or many as will probably be the case and we really didn't need to, as climate change wasn't man-made then what have we lost?

As I see it fighting man-made climate change is a win-win activity.

[dccrossman]

37. It really wouldn't cost that much. That's the sad thing.

I agree with your sentiment, but billions really are enough to do what's necessary. Unfortunately, the cost-benefit analysis doesn't know how to deal with the potential of a lost environment (estimated cost?) or the opportunity of a saved planet (estimated benefit?).

Of course, every day that goes by increases the cost required to do enough to make a difference.

Add to that, we as a society have trained ourselves and become incredibly short-sighted. If there isn't benefit in the near-term, to direct supporters, then taking the effort is difficult.

As already stated here somewhere, our gov't is not proactive, it is reactive. When we lose Orlando or Miami or Manhattan or San Diego or half of Hawaii, or some other major population or tourist center, suddenly people will jump up and try to figure out how to turn the ocean back. It'll be too late, but what will our gov't do? Probably building high levees and barricades along the beaches to try and stop the inevitable.

Am I cynical or am I just being a realist?

[pokercat999]

96. Hmmmm they did react so well in New Orleans I'm

surprised you even have to question their future reactions to disaster.

Dems included.

[Zachstar]

111. There is no way in hell a trillion dollars is going to be spent.

And BTW it is also wrong because many crack-pot people would get funding as well. Like the "free energy" devices that always get to the point of peer review then they want to hide with the excuse the gov is on to them.

No we need to be focused on what can do the most change soon which is fusion. If you want side developments focus them on grid improvement research and Battery research. With possible subfunding in that to improve LED technology so you don't have to pay 100 dollars for a single effective Edison socket LED bulb.


But again lets focus on political reality here. We are SERIOUSLY in debt with the wrong people. We can't afford to spend a trillion dollars because even if we got tons of wonderful tech we would spend decades trying to pay it off with the dollar being close to worthless. Its already in danger of that now.

[pokercat999]

114. Need I remind you we are spending as much as seven

TRILLION dollars in the Iraq adventure when it all is added up? I don't see the problem in spending everything we have in trying to save the world as opposed to destroying it.

Like I said it's "all-in" time, win or lose we don't have much choice.

[Zachstar]

124. Spending a trillion dollars has the same chance NASA is going to be able to fund this monster

http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/content/?cid=5451


Lets stop with the romantic talk and start thinking politics. We have to accept what we can get instead of thinking about going to capital hill and saying "Trillionz for Earthz" which has about a 100 percent chance of turning the idea of reversing the damage into one of the funny papers.

FOCUS! What can do the most reduction in CO2 levels in under a decade? The MOST...

If you said Gen2 EMC2Fusion connected to Bioreactors after Gen1s replace coal and oil plants you would be correct as that is the ONLY way to effectively put a serious dent in output ASAP!.

Again like I said. Billions of Windmills and solar cells is great but NOT NEARLY fast enough.

Add in political reality and you have got to FOCUS!

[defendandprotect]

70. People sit in front of their TVs just to hear something like that . . ..

I'm laughing, but IMO in some sense they actually do rely on TV to tell them what's

really happening!!!

And, can you imagine at this point, telling the American public they have no futures

and "the end is near" -- !!!

The elites will do everything they can to prevent anything like that to the last ...

IMO, because they don't want the public to understand any of it -- especially WHY

they weren't told the truth.

In other words, we're losing all life on the planet and perhaps the planet itself because

of the suicidal inclinations of those controlling the oil industry ---

[DRex]

88. That's the misconception about evironmentalism...

The idea that its about the planet itself, and not the people and animals on it.

If we really continue to fuck up, the planet will be fine. It has its own ways of dealing with things.

It's us that will be truly boned, and our fellow complex organisms that rely on our static ecosystems.

Life will return en masse to the the earth after a natural cleanup period, long after the last of us have died of exposure, thirst and hunger.

[Raksha]

132. The truth would discredit the elites FOREVER.

That's why they are fighting it so hard. It would be the end of their power, the end of the globalist and "free market" dogmas some people are still dumb enough to swallow.

Re The elites will do everything they can to prevent anything like that to the last ...

IMO, because they don't want the public to understand any of it -- especially WHY

they weren't told the truth.

Once they realized WHY they weren't told the truth, why they were fed this ridiculous snake oil about "the global warming hoax," even the stupidest would realize they've been had. They would then turn on their masters and join the revolution, whatever form it takes.

Re In other words, we're losing all life on the planet and perhaps the planet itself because

of the suicidal inclinations of those controlling the oil industry ---

I don't think they're suicidal. But I do think the elites suffer from a delusion of their own. I think they have become convinced of their own exceptionalism. They believe they have the resources to ride out the storm, even in the event of "the Great Die-Off" which they not only expect but actually WANT. It's a delusion because nothing will protect them from the rage of "the mob" when the mob learns the full extent of their global and species treachery.

[kineneb]

169. delusions of survival

They believe they have the resources to ride out the storm, even in the event of "the Great Die-Off" which they not only expect but actually WANT. It's a delusion because nothing will protect them from the rage of "the mob" when the mob learns the full extent of their global and species treachery.

This is what I have thought for some time. No matter how sophisticated the weaponry, a million Blackwaters will not be enough when the mob goes a' hunting. 'Twill make the French Revolution look like a Sunday picnic.

[tama]

135. Deer in the headlights syndrom

Know it well. Perhaps happy denial would be better? Nah, no it isn't.

[JDPriestly]

107. You should listen to the Thom Hartmann show this morning.

He is in Denmark. One hour of his program was dedicated to the use of alternative energy in Denmark. They are doing amazing things and also planning very specific actions in the foreseeable future. We are doing nothing. We are going to lose out economically because we are doing nothing.

Twenty percent of Denmark's energy needs are now met by electricity generated by wind turbines, and the proportion is steadily increasing. Thanks to advances in technology and turbine design, the cost of wind power has been reduced by 75 percent since 1970, when the programs began.
. . . .
Other Danish alternative-energy sources include the burning of waste products, or biomass, in combined heat and power plants; electricity generated by photovoltaic, or solar-energy, cells; and geothermal turbines powered by the escape of underground steam.
. . . .
Most households have only one car, and at least one spouse typically uses the extensive Danish public transportation system for commuting, said William E. Griswold, a member of Clean Power Now, whose wife, Dorte, is Danish.
. . . .
The average Danish household consumes only 350 kilowatt-hours of electricity usage per month, whereas American homes average between 600-kwh and 1,000-kwh a month.

More

http://cleanpowernow.org/index.php?name=News&file=article&sid=555

We can solve this problem, but we have to have the political will to do it. Most important, Americans have to set aside their suspicion of "ivory tower intellectuals" and science geeks and start listening to their ideas. You might not have wanted to have a beer with Einstein or Feynman (although I would have), but they sure did a lot to help America develop expertise about nuclear power and nuclear weapons.

Too many Americans listen too much to Pat Robertson and too little to our leading scientists.

[Zachstar]

110. None of that is fast enough.

Sure it will be quite easy to move to renewable in two decades but for now its a costly process that not many Americans can/will consider...

No we need a large source now! Not these puny side technologies.

[JDPriestly]

160. Nuclear energy is dangerous because hundreds of years from

now the waste and the reactors themselves will be hot spots that kill people. If the societies that exist then are sophisticated, they may understand the problem, but if not, we are leaving them a deadly legacy.

I have not forgotten Chernobyl.

Also, nuclear energy produces electricity. It does not, in and of itself, replace oil any more than many less dangerous alternative energy sources do.

[XemaSab]

167. Where do you think electric cars get energy from?

:shrug:

If we want to start plugging our cars in to reduce dependance on oil, that electricity needs to come from somewhere. Your choice: coal or nuclear? :shrug:

[balantz]

14. The end is near.

"We're toast if we don't get on a very different path," Hansen, director of the Goddard Institute of Space Sciences who is sometimes called the godfather of global warming science, told The Associated Press. "This is the last chance."


Pass the butter

[Hugabear]

15. Can't we just do nothing and debate for another decade?

That's exactly what the fucking RWers want to do...

Makes me want to :puke:

[zazen]

16. Hansen: hope "if Americans turn out to pasture the most brontosaurian congressmen"

"Democracy works, but sometimes churns slowly. Time is short. The 2008 election is
critical for the planet. If Americans turn out to pasture the most brontosaurian congressmen, if
Washington adapts to address climate change, our children and grandchildren can still hold great
expectations. "

text of speech at <http://www.columbia.edu/~jeh1/2008/TwentyYearsLater_20080623.pdf>

[bjobotts]

18. Why they are trying to amass great wealth. To save themselves while we all fry

[toadzilla]

64. yep

why save humanity, when its much easier to just save yourself?

[bdamomma]

98. but don't they get it, they will fry too, and so will their kids.

[Hekate]

166. There are those who believe that money can buy them anything. Think of the Plague, though...

The wealthy with their moated castles must surely have believed for a time that the Bubonic Plague could not get to them behind their walls, and how wrong they were.

I have had this image in my mind for quite awhile regarding the most powerful and wealthy families of our day. There's only so long they can hide from the ruin of the planet they did not move heaven and earth to save.

Hekate

[Tillseptember]

19. kick n/t

[DUlover2909]

21. I think we need to study the issue some more and wait til all the science is in.

That way all us rich folks can buy land in Colorado while the rest of you drown and die from starvation.:P

[SammyWinstonJack]

55. Sounds like a plan.

:silly:

[abelenkpe]

22. Sent this article to nutcase relatives

Yeah, that's right. My parents, brother and sister all think climate change is a conspiracy by the left destined to turn our country into a socialist fascist state.

I thought briefly that an article from a NASA scientist would give global warming a bit of a boost.....but really, why bother. They also think there is enough oil in the US for us to drive around on 1.50 gallon gas for 200 more years but that environmentalists won't let us drill for it, that Obama is the anti-christ, that the economy is faltering because the democrats won control of congress in 2006, that evolution is false, that gay marriage is evil, and that illegal immigrants are ruining the country.

Yeah, that's right, they worship FOX, and Rush and are basically fools.

I'm gonna go cry myself to sleep now.....the shame......:o(

[SammyWinstonJack]

56. Bummer! So sorry for you!

I'd cry myself to sleep too. :hug:

[ananda]

23. Wonder why we're at this impasse?

"Frank Maisano, a spokesman for many U.S. utilities, including those trying to build new coal plants, said while Hansen has shown foresight as a scientist, his "stop them all approach is very simplistic" and shows that he is beyond his level of expertise."

This is why.

A utility company spokesman has the gall to claim that Hansen is beyond his level of expertise and too simplistic?

A.. maze.. ing.

[Nay]

24. Well then, we're fucked. Cuz this bunch (R & D) aren't going to do a

THING except cosmetic feel-good shit designed to fool the masses and keep the $$ rolling in for the big guys.

[Ganja Ninja]

26. We're toast!

There's no plan on the drawing board and it's likely there never will be. We don't even have a plan to cut our consumption and the rest of the world is adding more CO2 every day. We should have started changing over back in the 70's if we wanted to prevent what's coming.

[CrispyQ]

144. Think what a head start we would have had if Carter's policies had been adhered to.

Damn that fucking Reagan & the greedy neocons. It was the beginning of the end.

[closeupready]

28. And just like all the other warnings, this one will also be ignored.

n/t

[Hekate]

29. What might have been....if President Gore had been at the helm. nt

[defendandprotect]

71. Have you ever heard Gore call for NATIONALIZING the oil industry?

Gore is telling you about light bulbs . . .

not major change --

not even electric cars!

Gore had lifelong career support from oil company ---

[Hekate]

165. Oh I forgot, it must be his fault.... No, wait, he tried to have a climate workshop as Veep....

...I remember him inviting TV meteorologists to Washington thinking they would give a damn, and all of them giving perky weather reports from the White House lawn because it was just so cute for the folks back home. Look, I got invited to Washington!

And ever since then every time there's an especially deep snowfall you can count on TV weathercasters to make the same lame jokes about how global warming can't possibly be true, look at it snow.

Hekate

[cobalt1999]

30. A global problem requires a global solution

Never going to happen.

With China and India cranking up the carbon load exponentially, most Western nations still doing nothing significant, and everyone is not willing to change, we are NOT going to reduce carbon dioxide in the Earths atmosphere.

Even Kyoto left out the "emerging nations" and their increase alone is more than the proposed reductions had everyone actually agreed and flowed Kyoto.

[hatrack]

31. I think Kurt Vonnegut, of all people, nailed it . . .

"We probably could have saved ourselves, but we were too damned lazy to try very hard and too damned cheap."

[SammyWinstonJack]

57. And too damn greedy!

[glitch]

108. 1980 was the turning point.

We could have done it then with far less pain. Now, not so much. HOWEVER I think we need to keep fighting and not give up, because 1) it's more humane (and interesting) to fight and b) we might win.
Even extremely long shots pay off sometimes.

[Xeolyte]

32. The Sky Is Falling! The Sky Is Falling!

I jumped off the Global Warming Hysteria bandwagon 3 years ago. There was just too much good science being ignored or shoved under the couch by the Global Warming hysterics. I’m wondering if Al Gore will have to return his Nobel Prize when it becomes obvious that we are headed into a phase of global cooling for the next 20 – 30 years. With the popularity of fossil fuels waning, the greedy people of our country had to find something else to tax in order to continue the “gravy train” of dollars out of our pockets .. it’s called the Carbon Tax.

Our government is basing future energy and economic policies on an unproven theory, a theory based entirely on computer models in which one minor variable is considered the sole driver for the entire global climate system. NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies last year quietly made changes to its historical temperature records.

http://www.smh.com.au/news/opinion/cold-hard-facts-take-the-heat-out-of-some-hot-claims/2007/08/17/1186857765035.html?page=fullpage

Canadian researcher Steve McIntyre discovered errors in NASA’s methodologies which ultimately downgraded considerably the magnitude of recent rises. He’s also the guy who also debunked the now infamous “hockey stick” temperature graph that was a keystone of the 2001 United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Report.

Global warming and cooling is a natural cyclical process and carbon dioxide does not drive our climate. The sun does. One of the major climate drivers by the sun are cyclical solar winds which has a direct effect on how much cloud cover and humidity is in our atmosphere which in turns affects global temperature. The solar winds are now on the increase.

We keep hearing about ice shelves falling into the sea in the Arctic and Antarctic .. yet we don’t hear about the build up of ice and snow in the centers. Comparison of satellite pictures from 1979 to the present show that Antarctica is actually increasing in size. Rest assured, the penguins and polar bears are safe, and oddly enough, the Canals of Venice are getting shallower during normal tides and Neap tides! Hmm .. I though with global warming they’d get deeper since all that ice is suppose to be melting.

CO2, carbon dioxide is NOT a poison. It’s NOT bad for the environment. With an increase in CO2, plants thrive, increasing crop yields and reducing famine. If we truly were in a period of global warming it would actually be a good thing for humans as a whole. The more northern countries such as Canada would have longer growing periods and winters wouldn’t be as cold decreasing fuel costs to keep warm.

The sky is not falling.

Xeolyte

[hatrack]

33. Nice bait, troll! Did you write it yourself, or just lift it from the Frontiers of Freedom website?

:silly:

[tom_paine]

47. They almost never think for themselves. It's what makes them who they are.

Water-carriers for the wealthy and the Bushie tyrants.

[Amonester]

34. "to continue the “gravy train” of dollars out of our pockets"

how about borrowing trillions and spending them on unnecessary (and illegal) wars?

is that okay/dokay with you?

[Blue_Tires]

35. ok, so you found one of the one tenth of one percent

of people who just know the entire 99.9 percent of the remaining scientific community are wrong...

First of all, wiki says Steve McIntyre isn't even a published peer-reviewed scientist, he simply runs a blog...Second of all, I saw his livlihood is in oil/gas exploration -- so we already know what side his bread is buttered on...

[tekisui]

36. That'd be laughable if it weren't so stupid.

[City Lights]

38. Ah, citing Steven "CGX Energy" McIntyre.

Whatev...

[redqueen]

50. I wonder if trolls are really that gullible... or if they think others are.

Either way... pretty sad.

[SergeyDovlatov]

106. And that makes him ineligible to audit climate data how?

see my post #105 further down the thread

[kestrel91316]

120. Where did your hero get his PhD in climatology?

Just curious.

[SergeyDovlatov]

151. Do those climatology guys have enough knowledge of statistics to use principle components ...

analysis of their data?

Do you have to be a aeroengineer to compute an average speed of a flying airplane?

McIntyre initial contribution to the field was digging through the statistical techniques used by Mann and friends in producing the Hockey stick graph. You can read their initial argument, counter-argument, counter-counter-argument and make your mind.

The point I made in the post #105 is valid irrespectively of your field of expertise. When huge investment are to be made, the science contributing to the policy decisions should be scrutinized at least as thorough as it is done in mining and oil exploration business.

[Shoelace]

162. heh, compared to McIntyre, Dr. Mann, Dr. Hansen have ample training in these fields

Dr. Michael Mann's bio:

Dr. Mann received his undergraduate degrees in Physics and Applied Math from the University of California at Berkeley, an M.S. degree in Physics from Yale University, and a Ph.D. in Geology & Geophysics from Yale University. His research focuses on the application of statistical techniques to understanding climate variability and climate change from both empirical and climate model-based perspectives. Current areas of research include paleoclimate data synthesis and statistical climate reconstruction using climate "proxy" data networks, and model/data comparisons aimed at understanding the long-term behavior of the climate system and its relationship with possible external (including anthropogenic) "forcings" of climate. Other areas of active research include development of statistical methods for climate signal detection, and investigations of the response of geophysical and ecological systems to climate variability and climate change scenarios.
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php?p=47

For a complete bio with list of accomplishments, research papers, awards, etc.:
http://holocene.meteo.psu.edu/Mann/cv/cv_hyper.htm

Also, at this website, you can view many more climate scientists qualifications, bios, etc:

Oh then there Dr. James Hansen. Let's look at his bio:

Dr. James Hansen directs the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies in New York City and is Adjunct Professor of Earth Sciences at Columbia University’s Earth Institute. He was trained in physics and astronomy in the space science program of Dr. James Van Allen at the University of Iowa, receiving his bachelor’s degree with highest distinction in physics and mathematics, master’s degree in astronomy, and Ph. D. in physics in 1967. Dr. Hansen was a visiting student, at the Institute of Astrophysics, University of Kyoto and Dept. of Astronomy, Tokyo University, Japan from 1965-1966. He received his Ph.D. in physics from the University of Iowa in 1967. Except for 1969, when he was an NSF post-doctoral scientist at Leiden Observatory under Prof. H.C. van de Hulst, he has spent his post-doctoral career at NASA GISS.

More about Dr. Hansen here:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dr-james-hansen

In contrast to Steve McIntyre, I'd say that these scientists are far more qualified to serve humanity than "flash in the pan" McIntyre!

[City Lights]

145. "Ineligible" is your word choice, not mine.

He's free to audit climate data til the cows come home, and I'm free to take it with a grain of salt.

[cobalt1999]

40. How about we go right to the source and see what they say...

http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/updates/200708.html

"Contrary to some statements flying around the internet, there is no effect on the rankings of global temperature. Also our prior analysis had 1934 as the warmest year in the U.S. (see the 2001 paper above), and it continues to be the warmest year, both before and after the correction to post 2000 temperatures. However, as we note in that paper, the 1934 and 1998 temperature are practically the same, the difference being much smaller than the uncertainty."




That change sure doesn't look as significant as your article suggests

[fascisthunter]

42. Another Know-It-All Know-Nothing Conservo-goofball

welcome to ignore.

[RedEarth]

43. That's laughable..... using a mining consultant as someone knowledgeable about climate change..lol

Stephen McIntyre is, according to the Wall Street Journal, a "semiretired Toronto minerals consultant" who has spent "two years and about $5,000 of his own money trying to double-check the influential graphic" known as the "hockey stick" that illustrates a reconstruction of average surface temperatures in the Northern hemisphere, created by University of Virginia climatologist Michael Mann. McIntyre claims Mann and his colleagues used "flawed methods that yield meaningless results," the Journal writes.<1>

McIntyre does not have an advanced degree and has published two articles in the journal Energy and Environment, which has become a venue for skeptics and is not carried in the ISI listing of peer-reviewed journals.<2> McIntyre was also exposed for having unreported ties to CGX Energy, Inc., an oil and gas exploration company, which listed McIntyre as a "strategic advisor." <3>

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Stephen_McIntyre

[deaniac21]

46. We each need to reduce our carbon footprints to the 1910

level in the US. It's not fair that we use such a large percentage of the world's energy.

[cobalt1999]

51. Reducing carbon dioxide emissions globally will NOT be fair.

Global Warming is an issue; Fairness is another issue. Combining them will lead to agreements like Kyoto that just moves the emissions from one country to another, globally we are still screwed.

People don't want to hear it, but fixing this will mean capping where countries are today (even if that means some countries never get to our level), then reducing the biggest producers from there.

[corkhead]

84. No worry, our friend XEO has left a granite footprint

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=user_profiles&u_id=211194

[asthmaticeog]

48. You should really wait for more than six posts before you out yourself.

It makes us dumb libruls feel tingly-special when we figure out a long-term troll. Newbie trolls are low-hanging fruit, so try a little harder when you register your zombie account, OK?

[klyon]

65. don't you think we should take out an insurance policy just in case

cover our asses so to speak just in case it us that is causing the problem
it might create some jobs at the very least better than spending our money on bombs and big guns

[defendandprotect]

73. What wonders--!! Can't wait for the crops to come in from the Midwest -- !!!

Rush? Are you there, Rush?

[louis-t]

92. Ah, yes, and global warming is actually GOOD for humans.

Longer growing season, blah, blah, warmer weather blah, blah.... You've totally missed the boat on ocean levels. The ice melting is already at sea. No change in sea levels will result until land mass ice begins to melt.

[Danieljay]

93. Ha, you fool. Are you referring to the Steve McIntyre who worked for oil and mineral

exploration companies? No conflict of interest there, huh? Think he was funded and supported by CGX? Could it be?



He holds a Bachelor of Science degree in mathematics from the University of Toronto.<1> He studied philosophy, politics and economics at the University of Oxford.

McIntyre has worked in hard-rock mineral exploration for 30 years, much of that time as an officer or director of several public mineral exploration companies. He has also been a policy analyst at both the governments of Ontario and of Canada.<3> He was the president and founder of Northwest Exploration Company Limited and a director of its parent company, Northwest Explorations Inc. When Northwest Explorations Inc. was taken over in 1998 by CGX Resources Inc. to form the oil and gas exploration company CGX Energy Inc., McIntyre ceased being a director.

McIntyre was a strategic advisor for CGX in 2000 through 2003. (OIL AND GAS EXPLORATION)

Prior to 2003 he was an officer or director of several small public mineral exploration companies.

[SergeyDovlatov]

105. And that makes him ineligible to audit climate data how?

I worked for a little bit writing software for oil exploration in Russia.
The amount of scrutiny data and code has to go through is increadible.
Before committing funds to expensive exploration, big bucks are payed to 3rd party auditors to go with a comb over seismic data collected, algorithm used to project possible oil reserves, etc.

When you are poised to invest millions of dollars into something that could end up be a dud, because a programmer or a data collector was sloppy, the amount of time/money you put into trying to verify that the data is accurate is of utmost importance (well, it is your money and profits that are on the line)

Now, those who use scientific data to propose policy changes that have could cost billions and billions of dollars, should be at least as thorough if not more as mining / oil campanies do when they try to verify whether a particular exploration has high probability of containing a mineral / oil you are looking for.

In that sense, McIntyre is perfectly fine in auditing the data and algorithms used that give grounds to AGW theory.
Moreover, because of his experience in exploration, he is exceptionally in position to understand importance of auditing of the data that is fed into decision making process involving very large expenditures. Scientific peer review is not sufficient for such important matters.

[kestrel91316]

123. Where did this guy get his PhD in climatology that makes

him so much better qualified to evaluate the data than ACTUAL PhD climatologists??

You remind me of the freaks who presume to lecture me about microbiology and veterinary medicine and public health by cutting and pasting stuff they can't begin to comprehend........

[SergeyDovlatov]

147. Do those climatology guys have enough knowledge of statistics to use principle components

analysis of their data?

Do you have to be a aeroengineer to compute an average speed of a flying airplane?

McIntyre initial contribution to the field was digging through the statistical techniques used by Mann and friends in producing the Hockey stick graph. You can read their initial argument, counter-argument, counter-counter-argument and make your mind.

The point I made in the post #105 is valid irrespectively of your field of expertise. When huge investment are to be made, the science contributing to the policy decisions should be scrutinized at least as thorough as it is done in mining and oil exploration business.

[Shoelace]

126. McIntyre may have expertise in oil/gas exploration - which doesn't qualify him to "audit climate"

but you are right to assume that he would and undoubtedly has been very good at making money for oil/gas corporations given his experience in these fields.

The problem with folks like McIntyre "auditing" climate data is that so far, he's come up with a mistake that amounted to 1/1000th degree and that is about all in terms of data auditing.
What else has he done? The same thing that most deniers do; plant enough doubt in peoples minds to stall any policy changes, their anathema since switching to alternative energy would mean a loss of profits to those corporate entities to which most if not all skeptics/deniers are connected in one form or another.

I used to hang out on Stevie's blog "Climate audit" just to see what was being thrown about there. Lots of right wing BS between the lines, which in my humble opinion, does not make any of these folks "perfectly fine" for auditing anything but their own checkbooks.

Further, after having read a huge number of research papers by climate scientists, I see few if any mentions of "policy change." They present the data which is peer reviewed for good reason, and is indeed the most valuable tool we now possess to quantify future changes in global climate change. Much of their findings are already evident in a 400% rise in extreme weather events, rising sea levels, melting Arctic ice, etc.

Decisions are pretty clear now. We must go into "oil addiction" rehab and the only way to do that is to fund much more scientific research into alternative energy.

That the oil/mining consortiums have delayed these decisions are testament to their power over global decision making. Now the Saudis will pump a bit more oil, just so we don't start thinking about ways to successfully tear us from the "oil tit"!

Too little too late methinks dear Saudis! The science is clear, the answers are there, all we need to do now is implement them for the sake of our children's future. The deniers will be a footnote in history.

[SergeyDovlatov]

149. are we at an optimum temperature right now?

Should it be a little bit cooler or, maybe, a little bit warmer?
Being from Russia, I don't mind earth warming up a little bit.

With respect to 1/1000th degree correction, I assume you refer to 0.15°C degree downward correction of 2000-2006 instrumental record.

Climate Audit: I agree, there are a number of guys there (but not all) that have automatic rejection of anything global warming and probably inhabit the blog for gloating and reinforcing their beliefs and occasionally they feel disappointed when the data audit showed that correction suppresed the warming (as opposed to enhance it).

Hockey Stick:

This one that got me interested in McIntyre stuff. Medieval Warm Period which was a common knowledge was suddenly erased from the climatology with Mann et all paper.

What used to be:

(red line in the following graph, from 1990 IPCC report)



Distinct MWP hump disappeared and was replaced by the hockey stick graph



McIntyre demonstrated that the hockey stick reconstruction was wrong. (No need to be a climatology expert to do that). You can read up papers and arguments on this, but, what the most convicing data for me was that given a random red noise, the algorithms used by Mann would produce a hockey stick 95% of the time.

Now, we have a whole slew of reconstructions (see spagetti graph on wiki) some shows that there was an MWP warmer than today, some don't.

Which temperature is the optimum one for human life? The one we had during MWP? During little ice age? or in 1970?

[riverdeep]

159. "I don't mind the earth warming up a little bit."

You do know it's not just about what you want, don't you? Small differences in average temperature lead to enormous changes. One small example, the permafrost in the arctic. The permafrost is getting at lower and lower levels every year and this has huge impacts both at the local and global level.

An expert in permafrost, Vladimir E. Romanovsky (and fellow Russian!) has the following to say about the deleterious effects of permafrost melt in the Arctic, which I've summarized, go to his website for the full story:

Some negative effects of permafrost melt:

-Permafrost degradation can substantially change the surface hydrology (lack of groundwater)

-Northern ecological systems depend on permafrost conditions (increased dryness of soil, increased stress on vegetation)

-Significant amounts of carbon are now sequestered in perennially frozen soils (the arctic turns from carbon sink to carbon source, increasing potential for runaway warming)

-Thaw settlement related to permafrost degradation (sinkholes, road collapse, infrastructure damage)

http://www.arctic.noaa.gov/essay_romanovsky.html

But please, as long as you're able to get a tan in January, that's what really matters.

[Shoelace]

161. what really matters is the future climate, not just what is comfy today

and since some like it hot and some don't, nobody can define "optimum temperature" for humans since there's such wide divergence of adaptability, etc.
What matters is future predictions of a warming planet. These predictions continue to be upgraded as new findings are presented. For instance, recent findings conclude that ocean temps and sea levels have risen 50% higher between 1961-2003 than the IPCC predicted in it's 2007 climate change report. See article here (dated; June 19, 2008):
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/06/080618143301.htm

Many scientists suspect that global mean temperatures will rise much faster than the IPCC has predicted as well, much to the chagrin of our beloved skeptics.

What is really disturbing is a new report as of June 20th; "Expect More Droughts, Heavy Downpours, Excessive Heat, And Intense Hurricanes Due To Global Warming, NOAA"

The report is based on scientific evidence that a warming world will be accompanied by changes in the intensity, duration, frequency, and geographic extent of weather and climate extremes.

"This report addresses one of the most frequently asked questions about global warming: what will happen to weather and climate extremes? This synthesis and assessment product examines this question across North America and concludes that we are now witnessing and will increasingly experience more extreme weather and climate events," said report co-chair Tom Karl, Ph.D., director of NOAA’s National Climatic Data Center in Asheville, N.C.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/06/080619175522.htm

Concerning the Hockey Stick controversy, here's a quote from Scientific American about M&M's work regarding Mann's data:

The work of Eugene Wahl of Alfred University, New York, and Caspar Ammann of the National Center for Atmospheric Research in Boulder, Colorado, raised serious questions about the methodology of Mann's critics. They found the reason for the kink in the McIntyre and McKitrick graph was nothing to do with their alternative statistical method; instead, it was because they had left out certain proxies, in particular tree-ring studies based on bristlecone pines in the south-west of the US.

"Basically, the McIntyre and McKitrick case boiled down to whether selected North American tree rings should have been included, and not that there was a mathematical flaw in Mann's analysis," Ammann says. The use of the bristlecone pine series has been questioned because of a growth spurt around the end of the 19th century that might reflect higher CO2 levels rather than higher temperatures, and which Mann corrected for.

What counts in science is not a single study, however. It is whether a finding can be replicated by other groups. Here Mann is on a winning streak: upwards of a dozen studies, some using different statistical techniques or different combinations of proxy records (excluding the bristlecone record, for instance), have produced reconstructions more or less similar to the original hockey stick.

(and the crux of the matter from this article)
What really matters is the future. The IPCC is predicting a rise of between 1.4 and 5.8 °C by 2100. Now take a look at the scale on the hockey stick graph. As Stefan Rahmstorf of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research in Germany points out: "If humanity takes no action and this century sees a temperature rise of 2 °C, 3 °C or even more, the current discussions over whether the 14th century was a few tenths of a degree warmer or the 17th a few tenths cooler than previously thought will look rather academic."

http://environment.newscientist.com/article/mg18925431.400

[riverdeep]

158. Here's another idea.

If what the majority of climate scientists say is true, then there will be hell to pay, not just for our species, but for all living species. That's not something we have the right to foist on future generations or other species. Since there is only one earth, one place that can host life without artificial support, a conservative (in the classic, not political sense) approach grounded in risk management would be the most prudent path. By the time the data is clear enough for oil industry and coal industry paid scientists to acknowledge global warming is real and harmful, it will be too late. Actually, considering that the cigarette industry doesn't formally acknowledge the harm from cigarettes, I'm wouldn't hold my breath.

[IggyReed]

109. ...

A few problems. Plants might consume CO2, they also produce CO2. You might also notice that plants and forests are disappearing. Plankton, plants in the ocean, are as well. So there are less plants in the sea and on land to consume the CO2. Do you plan on doing something about the deforestation rates that are increasing and will eventually wipe the forests out, or is that another consipiracy?

Very few of the deniers even claim that CO2 is nothing to worry about, most of them say it is but less so than the standard argument. Fine, that is logical, CO2 IS a warming agent and past events (like the Permian extinction) give us a good idea of what can happen when CO2 levels rise above a sustainable level.

What do you have to say about CO2's connection to possible methane gas emissions?

The sun theory has been disproven, do some damn research from "the other side". There has been no connection between the two for the last few decades, at least.

People like yourself show that you are ignorant to ecology. The environment is a self sustaining organism, whatever is not created by life itself (which oxygen, methane, O3 & CO2 is) will alter the environment. Whatever is created in large amounts, like emissions since the industrial revolution, is even more of a worry because of connected events, like methane emissions.

You also fail to realize that CO2 emissions are just one part of an overall concept, the connection between the economic system and the environment. The environment has a finite amount of resources, consumption beyond the sustainable level (which deforestation is) is a cost which increases the more that is consumed beyond the sustainable level. Some say we’re about 30% beyond that level now. The same holds true of pollution, of all kinds, that are created within industrial society. The environment will be negatively effected whenever something is created not by life but by something outside of it (industrial society, asteroids, etc). Industrial society is negatively harming the commons of the environment and there is no logical counter you could offer to that. Soil erosion is now a worldwide severe problem, deforestation rates are increasing worldwide (the most in the tropics, you denier god Lomborg claims that the Amazon will ONLY be gone by the end of the century, so we shouldn’t worry about it NOW), consumption and population growth (and pollution) is increasing in a world of finite resources.

Tackling these problems, which CO2 emissions is just one part of, comes down to the same thing. A radical reconstruction of economics, social relations and our relationship to the environment. There is no way around this and no counter argument, these are cold hearted facts that we cannot argue our way out of.

[kestrel91316]

117. "......CO2, carbon dioxide is NOT a poison......"

Well, perhaps you could cite links to some published reasearch (in a legitimate scientific journal) refuting the existence of hypercarbia/hypercapnia, for starters..........

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypercapnia

Sorry to burst your bubble.

[SergeyDovlatov]

152. By that standard everything is poison. Provided that the dose is large enough. Take water, for ...

example.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_intoxication

Water intoxication (also known as hyperhydration or water poisoning) is a potentially fatal disturbance in brain function that results when the normal balance of electrolytes in the body is pushed outside of safe limits by water.<1> Normal, healthy (both physically and nutritionally) individuals have little to worry about accidentally consuming too much water. Nearly all deaths related to water intoxication in normal individuals have resulted either from water drinking contests, in which individuals attempt to consume more than 3 gallons of water over the course of just a few minutes, or long bouts of intensive exercise during which electrolytes are not properly replenished, yet massive amounts of fluid are still consumed.

[IggyReed]

134. !!!

The “scientist” you cited has an agenda, he has an economic incentive to lie. His money is worth more than saving the only habitably planet we know of at this point in the universe. It’s horrific, immoral and inhumane. If there is a hell he’ll be there, screw him and everyone like him for being paid propagandists for the interests destroying the planet. He does have an economic incentive to do so however, as short sited as that justification may be.

What is your excuse? Do you not like the implications of global warming in regards to economics & social relations? Are you religious, think that it would intrude on the word of god? Do you just not want to change how you live and are looking for any excuse (ie nihilistic materialism)? Do you dislike environmentalists or people on the left and allow that personal dislike to cloud your logic on this far more important issue?

Regular people who are part of the “denier” community (the actual scientists of this group even admit that CO2 emissions from industrial society DO cause warming, they just dispute the extent) do so usually out of a pre-determined ideological objection. Once they decide that it’s part of a leftist conspiracy they no longer become interested in having even a hint of objectivity. I’ve found this out by debating people like yourself, you all offer the same arguments and you all show that it’s beneath you to spend a fraction of the time you spend looking for reasons to doubt global warming on reading the science itself (told from both sides), which would allow you to have an overall deep understanding of the issue. We are going to destroy the planet because of selfish, short cited entrenched interests, their paid propagandists, ideologically rigid nihilists, religious fundamentalists and honest scientists whose work is used by the previous groups to further their irrational and reactionary agendas. I wish you’d all just go away and rot, it sucks that we all have to share the commons of the environment with you.

[Raksha]

138. Enjoy your stay, which I trust will be a short one. n/t

[tama]

148. Actually, I agree

Climate change is not bad for the enviroment. It's just very bad for human civilization accustomed to it's ways, together with Peak Oil, meaning massive relocations, die-off, and other aspects of collapse. And what is bad for human civilization is good for the planet.

[dysfunctional press]

39. this is why we've given up saving for retirement for at least the next 7-10 years...

if things don't go kablooey by 2013, we'll reassess our situation.

[JeanGrey]

61. You've given up savin for retirement? That's real smart.

I would reassess that if I were you.

[dysfunctional press]

85. we're not giving up that which has already been saved...

we're just not adding to it at this point. i think that society is going to be structured somewhat differently in the not too distant future. we'll also have some modest inheritances in the coming years, and those will be used for retirement purposes.

and we're only talking about retirement for my wife- i already am. due to total/permanent disability.

[JeanGrey]

89. Well that sounds much better!

[Phred42]

41. The Conservative mindset is suicidal - We're toast.

They would prefer killing us all to changing their point of view.

maybe Jesus will come and save them 'eh?

[SammyWinstonJack]

59. I wish he would come *save* them now. Then maybe the rest of us could get somethings done in the

right direction.

[defendandprotect]

74. Patriarchy, organized patriarchal religion, capitalism --- all suicidal concepts --!!!

[Zachstar]

121. If I remember the Bible correctly Jesus will come down with a sword.

So trust me if he comes he is going to go after their asses.

Remember that he also overturned the tables. Don't let some people paint Jesus as a sissy. If he comes hes kicking ass.

Those assholes using the bible as uncle sam are going to get their asses kicked.

[go west young man]

44. Thank you Dr. Hansen.

A fearless scientist.

[BrklynLib at work]

49. According to Carlin and Vonnegut we are just an annoying virus that mother earth is trying to get

her immune system to get rid of...sort of like fleas on a dog.

There are times when I would not blame ol' Gaea for trying to get rid of the pesky human race that is ruining the planet for everyone, including themselves.

[klyon]

67. that is right, at one point oxygen was the waste gas

and we are jst the pond scum that formed with #32 being a prime example

[bean fidhleir]

82. Bucky Fuller noted that we're just another one of Earth's many experiments

...and there's no guarantee that we'll be a successful one. Earth has produced a lot of genus Homo experiments. We're the only one left, and the others lasted a helluva lot longer than we've managed to do yet.

[bdamomma]

99. I think * hates mother nature, and trying to fight for the finish

in his sick delusional head, and hides behind his extreme fundi ideas which he has not a shred of.

[BrklynLib at work]

104. In his reality, Nature is the enemy...

[Lydia Leftcoast]

52. You know what's behind global warming "skepticism," don't you?

"B-b-but my life will be meaningless without my two $60,000 vehicles and my 3,000 sq. ft. trophy house on a two-acre lot thirty miles out of town!"

[SammyWinstonJack]

53. We're toast then.

x(

[Javaman]

54. We have a congress that just gave moron* a big gift with the new "FISA" bill and

passed a funding bill for this war without benchmarks.

Do we honestly believe that they will stand up, do the right thing and demand action on what is basically our survival?

We have been getting more and more dire warnings over the last 5 years. All have had in them terms referring to the fact that we have to do something and that something has to be right now. Yet, have we signed on to the Kyoto agreement yet? has there been any real limitations put on polluters other than this carbon trade and tax total bullshit?

come on folks, we had a good run. We did some really cool things. Hell, we even made it to the moon and sent out some spacecraft that some other civilization will use as a paper weight.

We are running out of oil and the best that these fucking morons* we "elect" can come up with is "DRILL FOR MORE OIL" and "let's regulate the speculators so we can lower the price so we can use more gas and oil!!!"

I keep thinking of the old movie "the Poseidon adventure". There is a scene where the famous people group going up pass by the expendable central castings group going down. The few famous people group have all the smarts while the lemmings from the central casting group goes with stupidity.

Sadly, we are being lead to the bottom by the central castings group.

We. are. fucked.

[SammyWinstonJack]

60. "We. are. fucked"

Well and truly!

[Zachstar]

116. I don't believe it is over yet. There may be hope with a catch.

The catch is that we know now that we are past the point of passive return. Even if humanity fell off the face of the earth there will be another runaway cycle. As there have been in the past.

So we HAVE to devote a portion of future energy reserves into C02 and Methane removal from atmosphere through distillation plants and the far more likely Algae bioreactor farms with product routed to the nearest mine for dumping to store the carbon underground again.

Can congress do this? Depends. Personally I am sticking around because I am curious (Tho not optimistic) to see what the .gov will do with Obama at the helm.

(Oh and of course I want to play that "Spore" game from EA when it comes out)

We just need to focus. I love solar and wind to reduce pressure on the grid far away from a Fusion Plant but they simply cant be made en masse fast enough when you have to account that they give dirty power so must be fed into a battery bank.

We have to focus in my view on this http://www.emc2fusion.org/ IF they have confirmed Phase 1 is complete which is a matter of months here while a peer review team is called in. Notice they need only 200M so that means devote half a billion to them through the NAVY (Who funds them) And spend half a billion on other projects and maybe we can have something in 4-5 years.

[Mabus]

58. And the people who failed us the most were the media

The media, in their attempt to show "both" sides to an issue, failed the American public. Couple this with the media's bias toward conservative talking heads from the outlier institutes while having no real counterbalance. These worked together to have more skeptics from GOP-corporation friendly "think tanks" working against centrist pundits who either didn't know what to believe themselves or didn't know enough to defend it.

This brings up another way that the media failed us, they made global climate change a political issue rather than a scientific one. Time and time again, they went for pundits over scientists. A lot of times they would have the usual suspects debating whether global climate change was occurring rather than informing us that it was real and that we needed to do something. Worse, they marginalized the champions of environmental issues by demonizing activists that were trying to make change. I remember back when the first Bush administration used to call Al Gore "Ozone Man" and called him an extremist. The media will show the tree sitters and mock them rather than talk about why they are there. On the other extreme, it wasn't really until the Terry Schiavo protests that the media showed some extreme conservative protesters and, even then the media didn't mock them as they do those who work for liberal causes. Before then, the media would portray extreme conservative protesters more sympathetically as supporting the president and the troops or the Brooks Brothers Riot (showing well-groomed Congressional aides).

One of the reasons I despise the media at times is because they've done mankind a disservice by not doing their jobs. Why did they continually present 'both' sides when there was only one side? They should have been talking about the rapidity, the consequences and our role in the climate crisis. Instead, they spent their time helping to manufacture a controversy. It just makes me so mad.

[The Stranger]

62. But Chimp doesn't believe there is global warming and the Nancy Traitor is protecting him.

[defendandprotect]

76. Yeah, but Cheney /Bush are the OIL industry in the White House . .. !!!

[The Stranger]

77. Yet our very own Nancy Traitor refuses to abide by the will of the people and her duty to the Const.

[defendandprotect]

83. Nancy is as elite as Bush/Cheney . . . isn't she?

[klyon]

63. one problem is some people believe we are in the "end times"

in other words it is god's doing and nothing can be done
so don't worry
praise god

or it is all nature, the earth just does this

either way nothing to be done

sad but true, we won't get through to them

oh and Al Gore is just out to make lots of money

my mother tells me so

[cobalt1999]

66. That's the argument Reagan and James Watt used on protecting our national parks.

"It's the end times, why save these wilderness areas?"

Religion and logical thinking have never gone together.

[defendandprotect]

78. Yeah, a lot of religous screws loose -- but others are working to end "Manifest Destiny" . . .

and get some truth to the religious nut community ---

I think it's Jim Wallis/? is one preacher who is correcting some of that info and making

clear that the creation is "god." Not something to be exploited and abused.

I think it's getting thru -- there are new religious movements in that direction ---

and well there should be!!!

[tama]

150. In fact

Taoist or buddhist philosophy of not-doing is pretty good candidate for solving the problem of civilization in the end times. Certainly better idea than the hubris of western technocivilization of man over nature.

If there is a problem, don't try to do anything to solve it, that will only cause more problems to solve etc. Just stop doing what causes the problem.

[FirstLight]

68. There is so much I want to say to this...

and yet the other part of me is wanting to just shift to another page, another thread...rather than see the locomotive heading for our collective asses.

My kids and friends think I am a little bit of a whack-job because I keep reminding them to eat within 100 miles or less of their home, that local food and community living will be the only way to survive in the near future.

...and at the same time, I go to work, to the grocery store, I drive the kids to school...etc...what am I realy doing? waiting for the other shoe to drop, hoping that it won't. Living in denial because the alternative is too painful, expensive and frankly...totally out of reach for me at this point. It is easy to rape the planet when 80% or more of us are just trying to survive as it IS... and though I continue to work and live and raise a family...the nagging reality that the time is past and it's time to ACT is still there in my psyche. I know it, many of us DO know it...and what can we Do? the paradigm of helplessness has ingrained itself so deeply that we will just watch the water boiling around us and forget to jump.

I am so ready to JUMP, I can't tell you man. I have 40 ac. just waiting to be turned into a farm and a retreat center, etc.. but it is my parents, and though it just sits there, unworked, uncared for...I can't go there because it is "too remote" and "not safe"

so I am just gonna have to work with what I have.
Go to the farmer's market as much as possible
plant in the backyard
enjoy running water and find joy in my life where we are right now
appreciate the ease of it now, before it gets really hard
love my kids, and pray they will be able to rise to the challenge, that they will have a world left to work with
...grieve, mourn for all that is already lost, and all that is going to be leaving us
recognize that there is about to be some serious population 'culling' going on
and hang on for the wild ride, pray to whatever deity will listen...

and instead of thinking of the Earth as a foe that wants to be "rid" of us
tht we are Her stewards, and the relationship is truly symbiotic
and maybe, just maybe...the earth is scared too
she's never had a fever like this one before
she's lost species, but not one like us before
maybe she is hoping beyond hope that we can pull it out of the bag for her sake too...

:cry:

[FirstLight]

72. Kick & rec BTW

too much of an issue, this is THE issue

don't let this sink

[shireen]

79. i feel your frustration

i live in an old apartment building, with all the energy inefficiencies it brings.

It is very painful to hear these warning calls from Hansen, Gore, and so many other scientists. As individuals, we can do our best within the constraints imposed on our lives.

But any meaningful way to address global warming requires leadership at a national level -- we need fundamental changes in the operation of our infrastructure and industry.

Meanwhile, all we can do is change how we live our little day-to-day lives, and hope our collective actions makes a difference.

40 acres sounds so nice. i have similar dreams of organic farms and hydroponics greenhouses. Lots of books about those subjects, but no land. I'm getting too old and sick, running out of time to make dreams come true, given property prices in Maryland. :(

[defendandprotect]

80. I don't want revenge, but I do want understanding and accountability . . .

I want the public to understand how and why this has happened ---

And, even if our species is doomed, I think we have to try to fight for the planet, itself.

There's every chance the planet may not make it ---

[shagsak]

87. I wouldn't worry

It won't affect you as much as it will affect your children. Most people on this board will be old and gray when the "I told you so's" come to pass. By then we'll be dying for other reasons.

Honestly, if the price of oil stays where it is, the majority will be forced to change their ways. In 20 years gas probably won't be the fuel of choice. Only question is will it be too late.

[Raksha]

139. You speak for many of us, totally locked into the world "as it is,"

and therefore unable to create the world that could be and MUST be, if there's going to be a world at all.

[tama]

153. I hear you

I'm in very similar situation in many ways and this is my hug to you:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1n3n2Ox4Yfk

And while waiting for opportunity to plunge your fingers in the soil of that 40 acre, and as long as you spent time at computer, why not study more about permaculture, natural farming, multilayerd gardening, agroforestry, intentional communities, ecovillages etc., as I'm sure you have been doing. Here's articles about one enlightened guy, a natural farmer called Fukuoka, that has been a source of inspiration and strength for me: http://fukuokafarmingol.info/farchive.html

Comparing civilization to a cancer trying to grow at expence of its host, Mother Earth, lethally for both of them, is a good analogy. I've heard a story about a woman who was diagnosed with a lethal cancer that was not considered worthwhile to try to cure by western medicine. The woman accepted her faith and decided not live her last days in fear and agony, hating the cancer that would be her doom. Instead she loved the cancer as part of her, with gratitude, talked to it gently in her mind. Miraculously the cancer vanished!

If we can find it in our hearts to love Mother Earth in gratitude for all that she gives, she responds in kind. What is much more difficult, is to identify with Mother Earth not feeling separate from her but feeling her pain as your own and changing that pain into unconditional love towards all of her, including the cancer of human civilization, that is the hard part. I'm not yet free of all bitterness and hate towards civilization and all the blind and wastefull cruelty that it is doing. Maybe some day. Some moments here and there.

[nam78_two]

75. K&R.nt

[defendandprotect]

81. When was the last time anyone here heard a media report on the Ozone Hole?????

...but you can see antique road shows and tattoo parlors and lots of gambling ---

the news readers still think a lot is funny -- and I don't think that the weather

forecasters are mentioning Global Warming???

If we don't stop them soon, they are going to think they are getting away with this---!!!

How about the precious Sunday Tawk Shows???

Anyone hearing about Global Warming there -- or ozone holes --- or crop failures?

Anyone mentioning how we keep making ourselves sicker every day??



PS: I happened to catch Amy Goodman on a show on Sunday with an African-American host
who is wonderful and whose name I don't recall. Haven't seen him in years! He's great!

[agent46]

86. It can be done.

No deus ex machina. But deus in machina, yes. The earth is life. We must take it back. No guns. Numbers - sheer numbers and the will to step out of the box we've been bought and sold into by the princes of capitalist corporatism. Now. The fearlessness, will and imagination to change everything - beginning with the language we use. Language is power. We need to speak a new visionary language of fierce urgency and love. We each need to be willing to speak with one another and the world with our own authority. We need rebuilding and inter-weaving local communities starting with our own neighborhoods and housing complexes. We need temporarily shutting down local/national media and washington itself, if necessary, to create a pattern interrupt long and loud enough to reverberate everywhere. The question is, how do millions of awake human beings strike the bell all at once? How? I don't know yet, but I do know it can be done.

In my world, there's no fear. It will be done.

Mick

[cloudythescribbler]

91. The KEY question we should be asking is: WHAT CAN WE DO (aside from lifestyle)????

There used to be an activism corps at DU, one which should be revived now for the election, and specifically for such issues as this one in particular.

The first thing is that there is a SPECTRUM of crisis, and the more successful activism is, the less awful the global consequences (as long as a minimum level of effectiveness is achieved). WE CANNOT GET QUICKLY TO NET NEGATIVE GREENHOUSE GAS (GHG) EMISSIONS, AS HANSEN CLEARLY REQUIRES, UNLESS THERE IS AN ORGANIZED DEMAND FOR IT ON GROUPS (AT LEAST SUPPOSEDLY PROGRESSIVE, LIKE THE ENERGY ACTION COALITION), AND POLITICIANS, NOT THE DIE-HARD DENIALISTS BUT THE SUPPOSEDLY PROGRESSIVE ONES ON THIS ISSUE, LIKE BOXER AND GORE!!!!!

[cobalt1999]

94. aside from lifestyle?

That's where it all begins and ends.

What can you do? Radically change YOUR lifestyle. That's all everyone needs to do. No waiting for governments, no mass rallies, no laws, no activism is needed. This can only be solved by each person doing more than token changes of behavior.

What can we do? Simple

Go turn off your A/C. People complain about SUV's but that central air system is running 24/7 in those same folks homes using a hell of a lot more energy.
Buy locally especially food.
Turn your lights off.
Grow your own food.
Plant some trees.

More importantly, stop waiting for someone else to fix this. We each have our part in this problem to fix.

[mdmc]

95. I bet the world will end the minute my student loans are paid off

We still have time America.

[cobalt1999]

97. Selfishly then, I hope you have a shitload of student loans and it takes 100 years to pay them off

:)

[mdmc]

102. why do you hate grandkids?

:)

[Zachstar]

113. BINGO cobalt!

Enough with the side crap. If you actually want to attempt to have an impact... DO SOMETHING!

I'm sure most everyone here has switched to CFLs and LEDs out of necessity right? If not DO IT! Normal lights are PIGS that add a TON to your bill.

Also consider minor renewable projects. For instance I am currently doing research to build a small station in the back to power a battery charging pack, A heating system to boil water, and string lights.. My hope is that we may get ourselves out of this energy hole before it ends up having to power a heck of alot more.

[tex-wyo-dem]

142. Good advice, colbalt!

Actually, doing some simple things like what you have listed is its own form of activism and protest. For instance, I've been riding my bike to work two to four times per week for three years now -- 12 miles each way through blazing hot Texas summers and non-bike-friendly Dallas streets. It's a pain sometimes, but I figure that when people see me peddling past them as they sit in traffic in their 10-mile-per-gallon SUV it might just spur a few into looking into biking to work themselves, or at the least considering some other alternate form of transportation.

Now that gas is at $4/gallon I have a bit more company, but I like to think I had at least some influence on it :)

[bean fidhleir]

168. Hang a sign on your bike detailing your total gas purchase this year

I've bought 10 gals this year, and still have 2-3 yet to use. I don't have a sign on my bike, but I do see a lot of faces turn greenish and/or thoughtful when I mention in the shops how little I've had to buy.

[xxqqqzme]

100. silly space scientists

at Goddard, didn't they hear ignorant one, chosen by god, speak in Europe that there will be an agreement before he leaves office - see it will all be just fine.

[AntiFascist]

101. K&R, people only seem to listen to high gas prices n/t

[kestrel91316]

115. "....we're toast......." - perhaps quite literally.

[reggie the dog]

118. in the late 80s or early 90s

I remember my father showing me an article clipped from a newspaper from Milwaukee, WI stating that a man who had made a motor which ran on water and did not pollute was found murdered and that his research had been destroyed and his computers stolen. He told me that no matter what money ran the world and that if you went up against vested interests this would likely happen. He did not want me to believe that we lived in a world run by science. We live in a world run by money.

[Zachstar]

122. Take off the tinfoil hat

When he had a chance to "prove" his invention he made an excuse in court. And set back any possible effective research in that by a decade.

Stop worshiping that asshole!

[reggie the dog]

125. who are you talking about???

I just remember my father showing me a clipping saying some kind of scientist reasearhing a water powered engine was found murdered and his research destroyed. I was only about 10 or 12 at the time. Please enlighten me if you can and at least give me the name of the guy you are talking about. Is it the same guy I am talking about? I am all for peer review as an essential part of the scientific process, plus if the idea really worked more scientists would have the knowledge and the genie could be let out of the bottle so to speak.

[Zachstar]

127. This

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanley_Meyers%27_water_fuel_cell

His car was due to be examined by the expert witness Michael Laughton, Professor of Electrical Engineering at Queen Mary, University of London and Fellow of the Royal Academy of Engineering. However, Meyer made what Professor Laughton considered a "lame excuse" on the days of examination and did not allow the test to proceed.

Please don't fall for the trap these people do. Many of these so called clips on youtube are jokes people post to generate hits for their other videos. Its fraud in my view.

I am fully willing to accept the so called free energy machine or water car if enough people can actually take one apart and demonstrate it. But too many times have I seen some inventor on a news station claim he has a free energy device have his buddies claim it works. The poof nothing happens. They never seem to move to that next step of peer review. And people claim its because of the "Evil .gov 9/11 hoax moon hoax 111!!!11!!" No its because many of these so called inventors are fraudsters and sometimes they have to be sued.

[reggie the dog]

128. ah, ok

I will look through my fathers clippings this summer when I go to his house. I would love to be able to put the article about the data being destroyed up on the net. Frauders suck because they make people think that the ideas are impossible. True scientists never shy away from peer review, they encourage it.

[Smear Talk Express]

119. I dunno if I can trust this guy...

I dated a Hansen and she cheated on me. I was not the least bit nice about it.

[happygoluckytoyou]

129. TOAST!!! WE'RE TOAST!!! and the gop celebrates that we are not FRENCH toast

the morons of the world... yes ... the inbred ones with the money don't really care.... they never did...

and im certain when we have saved the world... taken it on the chin... the gop will call us TREE HUGGERS

[demo dutch]

130. Americans are too lazy to get serious about energy consumption, & with a shrinking bee population

which is of great concern,(and as usual Americans have little or no clue about that devastating situation) there will be no food for the world population, so the end is sure to come sooner then you think!

http://abclocal.go.com/kgo/story?section=news/assignment_7&id=6109390
http://www.organicconsumers.org/articles/article_4682.cfm

[Zachstar]

136. I dispute that to an extent.

For instance finally it is starting to be obvious to turn crap off when not using it. And use of CFLs has skyrocketed to the extent where even the well to do people are using them.

To get serious at this point means thens of thousands of dollars for solar and wind and storage equipment to remove yourself for the grid. With 20 year payoff. Aint going to work.

[demo dutch]

140. Some states do better than others. My point is that the bee decline is under reported

and very very scary. No bees, no food growing.... Nevermind global warming!

Bee pollination is responsible for $15 billion in crop value, about one mouthful in three in the diet directly or indirectly benefits from honey bee pollination. Fortunately there were just enough bees to supply all the needed pollination this past spring. Who knows if that's the case next spring! Albert Einstein predicted if the bees died off, then human beings would only have 4 years to live.

[Zorra]

137. I'm not worried. Me 'n Billy Bob's buildin' a rocket ship in the barn.

We're gonna fly to whatever other planet is just like Earth.

[CrispyQ]

143. My husband & I figure we'll be exiting this planet at just about the right time.

I suspect by the end of our lives it's gonna be as ugly as it's ever been on planet Earth. I think we'll see the first wave of massive die off followed by a complete breakdown of anything left of civilized society as the savage side of homosapien fights for the few remaining resources.

Holy fuck, I'm glad I'm not 20.

[Zachstar]

146. ... Ya thanks

/me Notes he turns 20 the 11th

[SCBeeland]

155. To be honest, I don't think it matters anymore

The world will be a nightmare very soon, probably by 2100. We're never going to explore the stars or do all that fantasy Star Trek stuff, instead, the few that are still alive will be spending their lives searching for and fighting over the little food that's left. Then they'll slowly die out and join the millions of other species we've slaughtered over the years. Even if I wanted to fight the inevitable, I won't change what's going to happen, so instead I live each day trying to use as little as possible while trying my best not to be an asshole to everyone I see.

[babydollhead]

172. kick