NationStates Jolt Archive

An excerpt for those of you that did not see the 60 Minutes piece:
"There's no doubt about that, says Hansen. "The natural changes, the speed of the natural changes is now dwarfed by the changes that humans are making to the atmosphere and to the surface."

Those human changes, he says, are driven by burning fossil fuels that pump out greenhouse gases like CO2, carbon dioxide. Hansen says his research shows that man has just 10 years to reduce greenhouse gases before global warming reaches what he calls a tipping point and becomes unstoppable. He says the White House is blocking that message.

"In my more than three decades in the government I've never witnessed such restrictions on the ability of scientists to communicate with the public," says Hansen.

The article: Rewriting the Science. (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/03/17/60minutes/main1415985.shtml)

All the uncertainty around climate change doesn't really exist. It only exists here in the White House and on conservative talk radio shows because it has been manufactured by oil industry insiders who now have unprecedented access to the Presidency and Congress. In the scientific community the only uncertainties revolve around how bad it will be, when it will be irreversible and how much time we have before we reach the tipping point.

why does reality itself hate america?

why does reality itself hate america?
I think it hates Bush and has a problem with the fact that we elected him twice. He is an idiot, afterall.

This is important. :mad:
Bump

I think it hates Bush and has a problem with the fact that we elected him twice. He is an idiot, afterall.
he can do wahtever the hell he wants now, no running for president again

he can do wahtever the hell he wants now, no running for president again
Yeah, butit will become increasngly harder to act. If he could keep his political capital, sure. But if he becomes a lame duck, which is likely given the polls, then he'll have to sit on his hands.

Just as a matter of academic interest, I wonder how long it will be before, say, UN abassadorship is in here claiming that global warming is a load of liberal lies and that scientists are all liberals in on a huge conspiracy to *mumblemumblemumble*.


:eek: I invoked his name! Verily now he shall come!

I was hoping he woudl earlier but he never did. :(

I was hoping he woudl earlier but he never did. :(

Shame. It woulda brought so much more publicity to this thread too - goodness knows it deserves it.

It might already be irreversable now. i don't know about Europe, but North America has had the weirdest year weather-wise, and it looks like it's only going to get worse. This might be a good time to get away from hippie island before it gets devoured by the sea...

<sarcasm>Oh no!

We're all gonna die!

Unless we turn off all the heat, and stop driving and watching tv, and move to the woods, and hunt and kill our own food, and live like Ted Nugent, we will all die!

The ice on my windshield every morning shows how hot the earth is getting. I could stop the warming, if only I stopped going to work. Yeah, that's it, stop working. Turn off the heat. Go to sleep. So cold, must sleep, cold, sleep, cold, sleep, zzzzzzzzzzzz...
<sarcasm>

Can't help it, sarcasm is inherited.;)

<sarcasm>Oh no!

We're all gonna die!

Unless we turn off all the heat, and stop driving and watching tv, and move to the woods, and hunt and kill our own food, and live like Ted Nugent, we will all die!

The ice on my windshield every morning shows how hot the earth is getting. I could stop the warming, if only I stopped going to work. Yeah, that's it, stop working. Turn off the heat. Go to sleep. So cold, must sleep, cold, sleep, cold, sleep, zzzzzzzzzzzz...
<sarcasm>

Can't help it, sarcasm is inherited.;)
Yeah, but usually the sarcasm is backed with a valid point. In fact, sarcasm as a device for humor really needs a valid point. ;)

it looks like one world leader has retreated into his bunker. . .:rolleyes:

christ, the man won't even listen to his own party. at least other presidents listened to their parties and the people that they represent, whether or not they voted for them.

hooray pronouns!

This is important. :mad:
Bump
Hey, feel free to clip/snip some of my posts. I might be of help.
I'm helping someone move here presently, so i can't hop this much.

Why doesn't this story surprise me? :rolleyes:

Hey, feel free to clip/snip some of my posts. I might be of help.
I'm helping someone move here presently, so i can't hop this much.
Thanks! :p

why does reality itself hate america?
This reminds me of Romulus Os's new thread. One or more of them, actually.

Thanks! :p
Sure. They're on the archives (Forum Search function), but if you want something specific, i'll try on later. I think it's fair to say i've spent some time on the topic.

This link might be significant for this particular thread:

http://www.defendingscience.org/

in the sense of corporate/administrative interference, it's kind of important.

It might already be irreversable now. i don't know about Europe, but North America has had the weirdest year weather-wise, and it looks like it's only going to get worse. This might be a good time to get away from hippie island before it gets devoured by the sea...Winters start later and last longer, floods, tornados in alarming frequency (from almost never ever to possible occurence), droughts. Yup, weather's weird here too.

Climate change is a natural process that will happen whether we do anything or not. The fact is that the Earth is coming out of a mini-Ice age at the moment. The climate is constantly changing - don't forget that in Roman times vineyards were common in England and only 300 years ago winter ice skating was the norm on the Thames.

It is important that we try to minimise the impact humans have on this process, but we can't just expect the weather to be 'like it used to be' for ever and a day. The climate is going to change over the coming century, and one day it will change back again. It's just a cycle.

Let's not take unnecessary risks with the climate; let's reduce our emissions where we can and look for alternatives to fossil fuels, but let's not be silly about it. The weather would be changing now if we all went home and switched everything man made off; it would be better to adapt to these changes and prepare for the future, rather than try to stop nature from being nature.

Climate change is a natural process that will happen whether we do anything or not. The fact is that the Earth is coming out of a mini-Ice age at the moment. The climate is constantly changing - don't forget that in Roman times vineyards were common in England and only 300 years ago winter ice skating was the norm on the Thames.

It is important that we try to minimise the impact humans have on this process, but we can't just expect the weather to be 'like it used to be' for ever and a day. The climate is going to change over the coming century, and one day it will change back again. It's just a cycle.

Let's not take unnecessary risks with the climate; lets reduce our emissions where we can and look for alternatives to fossil fuels, but lets not be silly about it. The weather would be changing now if we all went home and switched everything man made off; it would be better to adapt to these changes and prepare for the future, rather than try to stop nature from being nature.
Well, most of this post is right, in a way. But, there's about four words you use in there somewhere, where, in that particular order, portray a falsehood.

Well, most of this post is right, in a way. But, there's about four words you use in there somewhere, where, in that particular order, portray a falsehood.
Which are...?:confused:

Which are...?:confused:
Key words: four words.
Qualifier: in that particular order.
Next clue: Only.

It looks like some more people are taking it seriously ...

Warming studies an 'eye-opener' for coastlines, Ariz.
Sea levels swelling faster than expected

Shaun McKinnon
The Arizona Republic
Mar. 23, 2006 12:11 PM


Melting ice sheets at both poles could raise sea levels worldwide higher and sooner than once thought, scientists say in a new set of studies released today, threatening coastlines and deepening drought conditions in Arizona and the West.

The culprit: warming temperatures that could climb 4 degrees by the end of this century, creating conditions similar to another time in the planet's history when the oceans swelled by as much as 20 feet.

"This is a real eye-opener set of results," said Jonathan Overpeck, one of the chief researchers on the project and director of the University of Arizona's Institute for the Study of Planet earth. "The warmth necessary to do this isn't all that great."
The research is outlined in two articles set to be published Friday in the journal Science.

Still unanswered is whether we can avert disaster. Overpeck thinks it's possible, if world leaders are willing to reduce greenhouse gasses and other pollutants believed to contribute to warming. But the time to act is short, and the researchers believe there is a point of no return.

"The results suggest the threshold is close to the end of this century, and it could come sooner," Overpeck said. "The Arctic is already warming much faster than we thought it would. To think we're not going to get 4 to 5 degrees warmer in another 50 years is wishful thinking."

Indeed, much of what the studies predict is already occurring: Temperatures are rising, sea levels are inching upward and warmer oceans are playing havoc with weather.

The studies, one led by Overpeck at UA, the other by Bette Otto-Bliesner at the National Center for Atmospheric Research, examined climate data dating back about 130,000 years ago, a time between two ice ages.

Shifts in the Earth's tilt and orbit led to warmer conditions in the Arctic. Temperatures rose 5 to 8 degrees Fahrenheit, melting wide swaths of the Greenland ice sheets. The melted ice raised ocean levels by as much as 11 feet, the scientists believe.

But natural climate records, including evidence from ancient coral reefs, sediments and fossils, indicate sea levels actually climbed by as much as 20 feet in that period. Overpeck theorized that disintegrating ice sheets at the Antarctic were responsible.

The scientists believe the process could occur more quickly today because of global-scale year-round warming. Temperatures are rising in both the northern and southern hemispheres. Man-made pollutants could hasten the melting process by darkening the ice and snow, allowing it to absorb more sunlight, the studies say.

"The implications are global," said Otto-Bliesner. "These ice sheets have melted before, and sea levels rose. The warmth needed isn't that much above present conditions."

What made the findings more urgent is how closely the predictions matched current trends in global climate and ocean conditions, Overpeck said.


• Temperatures have been steadily rising over the past decade. Nine of the 10 warmest years on record have occurred since 1995. The UA study predicted the Earth's temperatures would rise by at least 4 degrees by 2100, which would be comparable to conditions 130,000 years ago when the ice sheets melted.


• Sea levels are rising more rapidly, in part due to expansion of the ocean as it warms, Overpeck said. That expansion didn't occur 130,000 years ago, which means the melting ice sheets will raise sea levels more quickly.

By the end of this century, sea levels could rise three to four feet; if current warming trends continue, "we're committed to four to six meters (13 to 20 feet) in the future," Overpeck said.

The implications for heavily populated U.S. coastlines are ominous. The scientists produced images that show wide areas of the upper Eastern seaboard underwater if oceans rise as high as they once did. The Florida and Gulf coasts would be eaten away, exposing cities such as New Orleans to crippling storm surges more often.


• Warming ocean temperatures are blamed for volatile weather conditions worldwide and are believed to be a contributor to Arizona's drought, now in its 11th year. The melting ice sheets could worsen those trends.

"Arizona's in front of the line to get hammered by this. It's going to make our state drier, hot and drier," Overpeck said. "That's bad for natural vegetation and bad for water supplies. We'll see a lot less snow."

Several studies have concluded that climate change will shorten winters across the West, reducing the amount of snow that falls and the flow of water into rivers and reservoirs. There is already evidence in the northern Rocky Mountains of earlier and shorter runoff seasons.

But he and the other scientists believe it's not too late. Federal and state officials need to impose strict limits on emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gasses thought to accelerate warming. Leaders need to demand energy conservation and step up use of wind, solar energy and advanced biofuels.

He lauded efforts by individual states to address climate change, but he acknowledges that not everyone agrees on the solution - or even the problem. He said corporate interests with a stake in the status quo have enlisted scientists to "make it sound like these things are less certain than they really are."

Arizona and New Mexico have launched a climate change project aimed at blunting the effects of warming temperatures by reducing greenhouse gasses and other pollutants.

The Southwest Climate Change Initiative is one of several state-level programs around the country that have sprouted in recent years amid complaints that the federal government was dragging its feet.

The two states plan to work on developing ways to measure and forecast greenhouse gas emissions, giving credits for reducing those emissions, promoting energy efficient technology and clean energy sources.

Arizona Gov. Janet Napolitano created the Arizona Climate Change Advisory Group in February 2005. It is expected to release its first report in June.

Al Gore had a great plan for the environment.



He still does.

Key words: four words.
Qualifier: in that particular order.
Next clue: Only.
It's just a cycle?

It's just a cycle?
We have a variety of prizes for you to choose from, on this fine occasion!
:D

Climate change is a natural process that will happen whether we do anything or not. The fact is that the Earth is coming out of a mini-Ice age at the moment. The climate is constantly changing - don't forget that in Roman times vineyards were common in England and only 300 years ago winter ice skating was the norm on the Thames.

It is important that we try to minimise the impact humans have on this process, but we can't just expect the weather to be 'like it used to be' for ever and a day. The climate is going to change over the coming century, and one day it will change back again. It's just a cycle.

Let's not take unnecessary risks with the climate; let's reduce our emissions where we can and look for alternatives to fossil fuels, but let's not be silly about it. The weather would be changing now if we all went home and switched everything man made off; it would be better to adapt to these changes and prepare for the future, rather than try to stop nature from being nature.
A process that occurs over many, many thousands of years. Not centuries.

A process that occurs over many, many thousands of years. Not centuries.
And definately not decades.

A process that occurs over many, many thousands of years. Not centuries.
Major climate changes occur over thousands of years. But we are constantly going through micro-climate shifts, as I highlighted in the post above.

I thought this thread had died days ago...

Major climate changes occur over thousands of years. But we are constantly going through micro-climate shifts, as I highlighted in the post above.

I thought this thread had died days ago...
I'd like to see a source other than opinion.

I'd like to see a source other than opinion.
Well, look at the times of the comments then... :p

Can you look it up yourself? I've got to go to bed in a minute, early start tomorrow.

Well, look at the times of the comments then... :p

Can you look it up yourself? I've got to go to bed in a minute, early start tomorrow.
I already know enough about it. I'm open to new information you might have, though.

I already know enough about it. I'm open to new information you might have, though.
This picture is the best I can do at the moment, showing the ice on the Thames at the end of the 19th century.

http://www.scienceandsociety.co.uk/pr/437282487/Science_&_Society_Picture_Library_10454279.jpg

I realise that's probably the least convincing argument ever made in a link, but it's quite a cool picture if nothing else! :p

This picture is the best I can do at the moment, showing the ice on the Thames at the end of the 19th century.

http://www.scienceandsociety.co.uk/pr/437282487/Science_&_Society_Picture_Library_10454279.jpg

I realise that's probably the least convincing argument ever made in a link, but it's quite a cool picture if nothing else! :p
That is very cool. But there is a difference between minute climate changes from region to region and a general trend of warming due to co2 in the atmosphere. I mean, we can seperate the natural co2 from human caused co2 and see precisely how much of it is our fault. Roughly 14 percent (if I remember correctly) which is huge enough to really fuck with our climate. And with all signs pointing to that number increasing.

Seems like a good place for it ...

http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/asection/la-na-warming24mar24,1,4378620.story?coll=la-news-a_section
Ice Sheets Melting at a Worrisome Rate
By Dennis O'Brien, Baltimore Sun
March 24, 2006




BALTIMORE — Polar ice sheets are melting faster than authorities realize and could eventually submerge coastal communities worldwide, according to two studies released today.
Researchers from the University of Arizona and the National Center for Atmospheric Research noted that sea levels rose 20 feet during a warming period 129,000 years ago and said the waters could rise just as high sometime after 2100 if global temperatures continue to climb.

Scientists have warned for decades that carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases from power plants and vehicle exhaust are warming the planet and raising the seas. They say the best way to minimize the damage is to significantly reduce smokestack and tailpipe emissions.

Although some researchers dispute specific aspects of global warming, more than 2,000 scientists from 100 countries who served on the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change concluded in 1995 and 2001 that global warming was real and that carbon dioxide produced by humans was largely to blame.

The two studies published today in the journal Science argue that the impact of melting from Antarctica's ice sheets has been underestimated.

The studies, funded by the National Science Foundation, are among several recent reports that used satellite imagery, ice cores and geological records to measure the effects of warming on glaciers and ice sheets.

A study last month by NASA showed substantial melting of Greenland's glaciers, and a University of Colorado study published earlier this month found substantial melting in Antarctica.

The Goddard Institute for Space Studies in New York released a report in January showing that 2005 was the warmest year on record. A NASA study released in September showed less sea ice floating in the Arctic Ocean than at any time in the last century.

The Bush administration, which has often been criticized for not taking steps to combat warming, declined to discuss the latest studies.

No one is sure of the extent of the melting or the timing of its effects.

But the researchers say that with the warming climate, melting ice sheets in Greenland, the Arctic and Antarctica could inundate coastal areas around the world.

Maps released with the studies show extensive coastal areas in Florida, New Orleans and Cape Cod, Mass., that the researchers say might one day be submerged.

"As [Hurricane] Katrina pointed out, we only need a meter of sea level rise to make much of New Orleans unlivable. The same goes for a number of coastal areas," said Jonathan T. Overpeck, a geosciences professor at the University of Arizona and lead author of one study.

Ice cores and ancient sediments show a 20-foot rise in sea levels during the warm stretch 129,000 years ago, known as the Last Interglaciation.

The seas rose because of melting ice in Greenland and in the Arctic, as well as the melting of two Antarctic ice sheets.

The impact of the Antarctic ice sheets has been underrated, the researchers say.

"I was really surprised at the amount of sea level rise and how little warming you need to get to it," Overpeck said.
---

Straughn, you save me a lot of Googling.

Straughn, you save me a lot of Googling.
Yay, i'm noticed!! *weeps with what might be joy*

Blah! You all pick on CO2, blame the removal of nature's carbon dioxide scrubbers, if'n you're looking to fix it. :P

Blah! You all pick on CO2, blame the removal of nature's carbon dioxide scrubbers, if'n you're looking to fix it. :P
Are you tasking me? I seem to recall having already gone through this with you ... ;)

Are you tasking me? I seem to recall having already gone through this with you ... ;)

Maybe, mostly DM who mentions Co2 explictly this time. I've been convinced we cause this with industrialization, but industrialization is a lot of things, more than an increase in CO2.

P.S. :P

P.S. :P
Ah, ya got me! *lists off, wounded & bleeding ....*

Ah, ya got me! *lists off, wounded & bleeding ....*

Lists? I enjoy making lists as well, add "not have a limb or limbs" and "covered in gunpowder" as I assume this list is about things that civil war soldiers did.

Not sure how many here have seen this:

http://www.ucsusa.org/scientific_integrity/interference/scientists-signon-statement.html

It's been around for several years now.

Maybe, mostly DM who mentions Co2 explictly this time. I've been convinced we cause this with industrialization, but industrialization is a lot of things, more than an increase in CO2.

P.S. :P
I don't deny that. It's more of a matter of one thing at a time. Reduce CO2, make it work in a way that it we will continue to decrease the amount we generate, on to the next task to attempt to reverse the effects we put on the climate.

I don't deny that. It's more of a matter of one thing at a time. Reduce CO2, make it work in a way that it we will continue to decrease the amount we generate, on to the next task to attempt to reverse the effects we put on the climate.

I imagine helping nature fix itself is the best way to....help it fix itself (shut up, you know what I mean :P). We've gotta get off the fossil fuels, that transcends global warming, but conveniently, plants use CO2...Hmm...You think if algae oil works, algae farms would take up extra CO2?

I imagine helping nature fix itself is the best way to....help it fix itself (shut up, you know what I mean :P). We've gotta get off the fossil fuels, that transcends global warming, but conveniently, plants use CO2...Hmm...You think if algae oil works, algae farms would take up extra CO2?
Say, an algae farm the size of Australia?

Say, an algae farm the size of Australia?

Till we figure out how to grow back the rain forest, sure, we got plenty of ocean (b^_^)b

Lists? I enjoy making lists as well, add "not have a limb or limbs" and "covered in gunpowder" as I assume this list is about things that civil war soldiers did.
Funny how not too far a while back, i was asked what my IQ was. It occurred to me that i couldn't be sure. The time that i took the test, it was fun and easy. Now that i'm older and have more experience, i find there's a lot more than one answer for many, many things. Pertinence being, of course, that just factual recall itself isn't inherently indicative of overall Intelligence Quotient.
So when i say "lists" .... *tap*

Not sure how many here have seen this:

http://www.ucsusa.org/scientific_integrity/interference/scientists-signon-statement.html

It's been around for several years now.
Good post. Topical, of course.

Al Gore had a great plan for the environment.



He still does.

Which is?

Which is?
Hey Corny, just to save you some familiar humiliation, would you consider looking him up on the net, perhaps through one of his sites, and read what he has to say before this gets embarrasing? Please? I'm seeing a huge painful set-up here.

Hey Corny, just to save you some familiar humiliation, would you consider looking him up on the net, perhaps through one of his sites, and read what he has to say before this gets embarrasing? Please? I'm seeing a huge painful set-up here.

Im sorry but getting Kyoto ratified doesn't hack it since it has proven itself worthless.

Which is?
His major life work. Read serveral books he's published on the subject. He also has a presentation on the Environment that gets standing ovations everwhere he shows it.

His major life work. Read serveral books he's published on the subject. He also has a presentation on the Environment that gets standing ovations everwhere he shows it.

What precisely is his plan?

I imagine helping nature fix itself is the best way to....help it fix itself (shut up, you know what I mean :P). We've gotta get off the fossil fuels, that transcends global warming, but conveniently, plants use CO2...Hmm...You think if algae oil works, algae farms would take up extra CO2?
Yes algae would take up CO2, and it would remain taken up untill the algae oil was burned. The only way to deal with increased atmospheric CO2 would be to allow the CO2 sequestered as biomass by plants to remain there, not only regrow the rainforests but create conditions to allow laying down new coal measures... it aint happening i'm afraid.

The environment is not my speciality but I can tell that It involves many broad and gradual changes. It starts with Kyoto for example. The GLOBE program is his also.

http://www.ontheissues.org/Celeb/Al_Gore_Environment.htm
http://clinton1.nara.gov/White_House/EOP/OVP/html/Enviro.html
http://www.globe.gov/fsl/welcome.html

a speech. http://civic.moveon.org/gore3//speech.html

The environment is not my speciality but I can tell that It involves many broad and gradual changes. It starts with Kyoto for example. The GLOBE program is his also.

And yet everyone has figured out that Kyoto has failed.

http://www.ontheissues.org/Celeb/Al_Gore_Environment.htm

I'm reading this link now and so far, no plans.

http://clinton1.nara.gov/White_House/EOP/OVP/html/Enviro.html
http://www.globe.gov/fsl/welcome.html

I'll be reading these as soon as I get my coffee.

a speech. http://civic.moveon.org/gore3//speech.html

And this link is unreliable as it is moveon.org.

Funny how not too far a while back, i was asked what my IQ was. It occurred to me that i couldn't be sure. The time that i took the test, it was fun and easy. Now that i'm older and have more experience, i find there's a lot more than one answer for many, many things. Pertinence being, of course, that just factual recall itself isn't inherently indicative of overall Intelligence Quotient.
So when i say "lists" .... *tap*


...Huh?

And yet everyone has figured out that Kyoto has failed.The US has failed at Kyoto. There is a difference. Without American conformity to Kyoto, Kyoto is doomed to failure.


I'm reading this link now and so far, no plans.They are Al Gore's views on specific topics that involve the environment.


I'll be reading these as soon as I get my coffee.
If you know anything about Al Gore you should know that the environment is his specialty. Read his books if you're really that interested.


And this link is unreliable as it is moveon.org.
?!?!?!?!? It's merely a transcript of an Al Gore speech. Why should that be unreliable? Are you insane?

Buy and read this (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0452269350/sr=8-1/qid=1143299443/ref=pd_bbs_1/104-0820012-3264741?%5Fencoding=UTF8) .

The US has failed at Kyoto. There is a difference. Without American conformity to Kyoto, Kyoto is doomed to failure.

Then why is Canada's emissions gone up? Why has Britain's PM saying that it isn't working? Why were they in Montreal discussing new ways of protecting the environment? Kyoto was a big joke and even scientists stated that it wouldn't do much of anything. Stop living in denial and just admit that Kyoto failed and it wasn't because of the United States.

They are Al Gore's views on specific topics that involve the environment.

And if we follow half of them, I see major major forest fires coming around. What about all that dead brush that needs to be pulled out of there? Under Gore's plans, we wouldn't be able to do that. Care to tell me what would happen if a fire is lit among all of that fuel with Santa Anna Winds, and a drought?

If you know anything about Al Gore you should know that the environment is his specialty. Read his books if you're really that interested.

Your job is to provide the proof. Not for me to go out and buy his book and make him even richer than he is now.

?!?!?!?!? It's merely a transcript of an Al Gore speech. Why should that be unreliable? Are you insane?

Then find it on another website.

Buy and read this (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0452269350/sr=8-1/qid=1143299443/ref=pd_bbs_1/104-0820012-3264741?%5Fencoding=UTF8) .

I see that it received mixed reviews and that it is rated 3 stars.

Then find it on another website.
So that's a yes.

Then why is Canada's emissions gone up? Why has Britain's PM saying that it isn't working? Why were they in Montreal discussing new ways of protecting the environment? Kyoto was a big joke and even scientists stated that it wouldn't do much of anything. Stop living in denial and just admit that Kyoto failed and it wasn't because of the United States.I'm not saying that Kyoto is a success. It is clearly insuficient. However Kyoto was still better than no Kyoto. Getting back into Kyoto would be the first step in the right direction.

And if we follow half of them, I see major major forest fires coming around. What about all that dead brush that needs to be pulled out of there? Under Gore's plans, we wouldn't be able to do that. Care to tell me what would happen if a fire is lit among all of that fuel with Santa Anna Winds, and a drought?I have no idea what the hell you are talking about. Where exactly does Gore dissaprove of Brush clearing?

Your job is to provide the proof. Not for me to go out and buy his book and make him even richer than he is now.I'm not being paid to educate idiots. That is not my job.

Then find it on another website.
Absolutely no comment.

I see that it received mixed reviews and that it is rated 3 stars.3 out of 5 would have made him president.

I'm not saying that Kyoto is a success. It is clearly insuficient. However Kyoto was still better than no Kyoto. Getting back into Kyoto would be the first step in the right direction.

Why when it isn't going to do anything for the environment but ruin economies. Not to mention it excludes developing countries like China who is industrializing like no tomorrow and will be the world's biggest polluter. If your going to have an international greenhouse treaty then NO ONE should be excluded. That is why this treaty won't work andit hasn't.

I have no idea what the hell you are talking about. Where exactly does Gore dissaprove of Brush clearing?

Read up in your first link.

I'm not being paid to educate idiots. That is not my job.

LOL! Nice cop out.

Absolutely no comment.

Not surprised.

3 out of 5 would have made him president.

Except for his antics during the election.

Fuddle duddle.