[george76]

Exactly why is the worlds biggest polluter allowed to sign Kyoto but is completely free of all aspects of the Kyoto protocol and its wealth transfer scheme, is it because they are Communists?

[snarks_when_bored]

An excellent interview.

[ConservativeDude]

it is “very likely” that global warming is the result of human activity."

This is now the view of both the Bush administration and ExxonMobil.

Disgraceful.

[Battle Hymn of the Republic]

i would say the greatest deception would be darwin and his "theory"

[Donald Rumsfeld Fan]

But the minute you play that card [fear card], you are now taking the issues and the debates out of the rational and logical and reasonable and sensible and calm into the emotional and hysterical.

The whole aim of practical politics," wrote H.L. Mencken in 1920, "is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary."

[bmwcyle]

Tim site

Tim was on this show

[Popocatapetl]

Something never mentioned in the global warming debate, but should be: Because of the concern over global warming, scientists have at least discovered some of the "weak points" in the Earth's system of temperature balance. But what has not be addressed are the positive ways, through technology, we might be able to *correct* some of these "weak points", if we observe them changing. For example, some of the Earth's deep undersea cold tidal currents are directly responsible for the formation of significant weather patterns, like el Nino. But just the change of a few degrees in temperature could cause this system to break down, resulting in some pretty nasty side effects. Though it sounds bizarre, we could lay pipe deep in the ocean that would act as a huge cooling system, to try and reduce the temperature of this current by a degree or two. It would literally be like laying a thick pipe under water, over the width of a river, and cooling the average temperature of the water past that point by a degree or two. Not entirely ridiculous, just making a slight, marginal change to an existing system, that makes all the difference in the world.

[secretagent]

The other thing that you are seeing going on is that they have switched from talking about global warming to talking about climate change. The reason for that is since 1998 the global temperature has gone down -- only marginally, but it has gone down.

Tim Ball misleads the audience, I think. 1998 spiked above the trend line, but that doesn't negate the trend line:

At the time, 1998 was a record high year in both the CRU and the NASA GISS analyses. In fact, it blew away the previous record by .2 degrees C. (That previous record went all the way back to 1997, by the way!)

http://gristmill.grist.org/story/2006/11/4/175028/329

According to NASA, it was elevated far above the trend line because 1998 was the year of the strongest El Nino of the century. Choosing that year as a starting point is a classic cherry pick and demonstrates why it is necessary to remove chaotic year-to year-variability (aka: weather) by smoothing out the data. Looking at CRU's graph below, you can see the result of that smoothing in black.

http://gristmill.grist.org/images/user/6932/cru_2005.gif

[VOA]

bump

[Chena]

bttt

[Mr.Unique]

This can't be true. I watch TV and they told me that ALL scientists say there is global warming. Even the one on Cavuto's show today who didn't realize that correlation isn't causation.

[xcamel]

FReepmail me to get on or off
Click on POGW graphic for full GW rundown

---

Feeling used yet?