Posted by Chris Zaharias, a resident of the Crescent Park neighborhood, on Nov 6, 2009 at 8:41 am

Web Link

Please read their peer-reviewed research: Web Link. Interesting tidbit about the infamous UN IPCC “consensus”: The United Nations IPCC also publishes a research review in the form of a voluminous, occasionally-updated report on the subject of climate change, which the United Nations asserts is “authored” by approximately 600 scientists. These “authors” are not, however – as is ordinarily the custom in science – permitted power of approval the published review of which they are putative authors. They are permitted to comment on the draft text, but the final text neither conforms to nor includes many of their comments. The final text conforms instead to the United Nations objective of building support for world taxation and rationing of industrially-useful energy.

What’s this? Expanding glaciers? How’s that happening? Web Link

What’s this? Potential global crop failure b/c of falling temperatures? But I thought that Obama said the debate was over? Web Link

Funny, never heard Gore/Hussein/Waxman mention this: Web Link

Posted by wingnuts, a resident of the Downtown North neighborhood, on Nov 6, 2009 at 8:56 am

The wingnuts are still in denial about global warming. The rest of us have to live with their mistakes.

Posted by Al Baloney, a resident of another community, on Nov 6, 2009 at 11:04 am

@ The wingnuts are still in denial about global warming. The rest of us have to live with their mistakes.

What mistakes? Either post facts or accept that your noise is just more prattle.

@ Maybe because we consider the deniers of global warming to be on a par with denial of the Holocaust?

Funny how nothing is explained by your oddball single-tone nonsensicality. Odd but I guess that what you do when you have NO FACTS.

Posted by An Engineer, a resident of the Downtown North neighborhood, on Nov 6, 2009 at 11:35 am

"What’s this? Expanding glaciers? How’s that happening?"

From the link: "BUENOS AIRES, Argentina - Argentina's Perito Moreno glacier is one of only a few ice fields worldwide that have withstood rising global temperatures. Nourished by Andean snowmelt, the glacier constantly grows even as it spawns icebergs the size of apartment buildings... ."

Of course. Melting snow from the mountains sustains a glacier at one end as it breaks up at the other end. Warmies point out that increasing snowmelt is a consequence of global warming. This phenomenon supports their claim. The real issue is: How long until the snow all melts and the glacier gives up its last iceberg?

"Funny, never heard Gore/Hussein/Waxman mention this:"

Apparently they're too honest. As the referenced article points out: "While the science on this is questionable at this point, one should note that if the results went the other way, our valiant media would no doubt trumpet the news worldwide."

This does break new ground, however. I've never seen an attempt to prove admittedly questionable science by innuendo before. Obviously it works, thereby illustrating the correctness of H. L. Mencken's observation that: "No one ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American people. People can easily be persuaded to accept the most inferior ideas... ."

Posted by Looking at Reality, a resident of the Charleston Meadows neighborhood, on Nov 6, 2009 at 11:47 am

Facts, we've got them by the gazillions, starting with the 19th century research which showed that CO2 is a big chunk of why the Earth is as warm is it is: Web Link to the steady ongoing increase in atmospheric CO2 concentrations to the vast quantities of coal, oil, and natural gas people are burning to the remarkable stability of solar output Web Link to the profound impacts that dissolved CO2 is having on the oceans to temperature records Web Link

The problem here isn't facts, it's the creation of a bogus set of alternate "facts" by the fossil fuels industry Web Link has hired former tobacco-lung-cancer denial PR experts Web Link ) and a large publicity campaign to convince the public of them.

Posted by wingnuts, a resident of the Downtown North neighborhood, on Nov 6, 2009 at 12:31 pm

I agree that arguing with climate change deniers is pretty much the same as arguing with holocost deniers. They are a fringe group that is not worth your time. Even mainstream conservatives like George Bush and John McCain agree that climate change is a real problem.

Posted by Looking at Reality, a resident of the Charleston Meadows neighborhood, on Nov 6, 2009 at 12:43 pm

wingnuts: There is a problem with that: right now, the fossil fuel industry PR campaign is changing a lot of Americans' minds. (see Web Link ) Propaganda works. Even counterfactual propaganda works. And shifts in public opinion can make taking the necessary legislative action harder.

Posted by Walter_E_Wallis, a resident of the Midtown neighborhood, on Nov 6, 2009 at 7:45 pm
Walter_E_Wallis is a member (registered user) of Palo Alto Online

Did Schneider explain what happened to the Coming Ice Age he predicted a while ago, another catastrophe that Mirabeau Dicta, had the same cure as that now prescribed for Warming. ,

Posted by Looking at Reality, a resident of the Charleston Meadows neighborhood, on Nov 6, 2009 at 9:44 pm
Looking at Reality is a member (registered user) of Palo Alto Online

Of course, the notion that there was once a scientific consensus of a "coming ice age" thing is a piece of mythology created and perpetuated by denialists. See Web Link for a survey of the early climate literature.

Posted by Walter_E_Wallis, a resident of the Midtown neighborhood, on Nov 7, 2009 at 2:09 am
Walter_E_Wallis is a member (registered user) of Palo Alto Online

Winston Smith, you old devil. Tell Julia I said hi.