Lets see Rome and Copenhagen comment on this one

[JRPO]

The crucially important anti-climate warming Petition Project that has been signed by over 30,000 American scientists has received very little comment
The project is simply a venue that collects signatures of experts who have studied the biggest hoax of this century – and much of the last – that the world is undergoing rapid warming.
The petition reads:-
“we urge the United States government to reject the global warming agreement that was written in December 1997 and any other similar proposals.
The proposed limits on greenhouse gases would harm the environment, hinder the advance of science and technology, and damage the health and welfare of mankind.
There is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon dioxide, methane, or other greenhouse gases is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the earth’s atmosphere and disruption to the earth’s climate.
Moreover, there is substantial scientific evidence that increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide produce many beneficial effects upon the natural plant and animal environments of the earth.”
The Petition Project is funded by donations from individuals and run by volunteers. It receives no money from industry and companies.”

Details about the project can be found on the internet site
www.petitionproject.org

What one discovers when reading the website is that of 30,000 American scientists signatures over 9000 hold PhDs, so further evidence that anyone who claims that there is a so-called world wide consensus on the climate issue is simply wrong.

 

[Aboveallbereal]

I think it is now widely known and accepted that there is no concensus on Global Warming nd that the Goreite/IPCC crowd at the very least seriously overegged the pudding and exaggerated hugely.

We know that what is going on in Copenhagen is nothing to do with climate which will go along its merry way no matter what we do and everything to do with the power blocs The E.U., China, The U.S ) trying to buy position and advantage in Africa and other potentially mineral/product rich third world areas.

If Hillary Clintons 100 billion dollar a year notion is followed through we will see the grossest most sickening amount of corruption is history as money hungry third wrld kleptocrats who regard climate change talk as wooly nonsense get their noses into the trough and scuffle for euros and dollars. One hopes the buy offs to these kleptocrats willl be far smaller than Clinton threatens.

 

[JRPO]

I think it is now widely known and accepted that there is no concensus on Global Warming nd that the Goreite/IPCC crowd at the very least seriously overegged the pudding and exaggerated hugely.

Yes well why does The Holy Father in Rome join in and say that we need to look after the enviroment and many other clergy around the world siding with the lefties.

 

[Chris0711]

“Yes well why does The Holy Father in Rome join in and say that we need to look after the enviroment and many other clergy around the world siding with the lefties.”

I think the answer to your question is in the fact that we are called to be stewards of the Earth. We are the dominate life form on the planet and God calls us to be care-takers of his creation. While global warming is debatable, what is not debatable is that human activity has adversely affected the environment and that care must be taken on our parts to care for and preserve the marvels of God’s creation.

 

[JRPO]

[Ihuman activity has adversely affected the environment and that care must be taken on our parts to care for and preserve the marvels of God’s creation.

Chris
Have you read what the 30,000 scientist had to say. When we discover the truth the more we realise that there is not too much wrong with the earth at all.your statement above couldn’t be more wrong.

The fact of the matter is the whole greeny enviroment thing was born in the 1960,s by left wing hippies many of them now are our parliamentarians They are nothing but a mob of Zealots with a left wing agenda.
[/quote]

 

[Chris0711]

Chris
Have you read what the 30,000 scientist had to say. When we discover the truth the more we realise that there is not too much wrong with the earth at all.your statement above couldn’t be more wrong.

The fact of the matter is the whole greeny enviroment thing was born in the 1960,s by left wing hippies many of them now are our parliamentarians They are nothing but a mob of Zealots with a left wing agenda.

The 30,000 scientists are addressing global warming. As I said global warming is up for debate and may be proven or disproven with further research. I give you that point and agree that policy makers need not spend so much time on it. But my statement addressed human effect on the ENTIRE environment and I think it is quite difficult to say that humans have not had some adverse effects. Crude oil polution in oceans, human waste products in natural environments that result in death of wildlife, deforestation and habitat destruction. These effects are quite evident for all to see and those are the things that we should be combating and thereby be good stewards of God’s creation.

And as far as the green movement starting in the 1960’s; I believe you are misinformed. While there was a wide spread movement for environmental conservation in the 60’s and 70’s (EPA etc.) an awareness of man’s responsibility to care for God’s creation is much older. For example: In the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) on October 2, 1909 a doctor named Harold B. Woods published an article entitled “The Economic value of Protecting the Water-Supplies”. While the good doctor quotes economic reasons for conservation clearly this shows an awareness for conservation far before the 1960’s. I’m sure with a bit more research earlier examples may be found (this was just the one sitting on my desk as I wrote).

 

[JRPO]

Crude oil polution in oceans, human waste products in natural environments that result in death of wildlife, deforestation and habitat destruction. These effects are quite evident for all to see and those are the things that we should be combating and thereby be good stewards of God’s creation.

We’ve been listening to this over exaggerated nonsense for too long.Let me give you a fact.
Former American president Jimmy Carter was told in the 1970s that by the year 2000 all forrests in the world would be gone and the earth would be an entire desert.

whatever someone said in the early 1900s is irrelevent. The lefties (probably on dope half of them) started this rediculous greeny hoax in the 1960s.30,000 intelligent scientists are putting the facts in front of us and you continue to spit out your ****.

 

[dusza]

“Yes well why does The Holy Father in Rome join in and say that we need to look after the enviroment and many other clergy around the world siding with the lefties.”

I think the answer to your question is in the fact that we are called to be stewards of the Earth. We are the dominate life form on the planet and God calls us to be care-takers of his creation. While global warming is debatable, what is not debatable is that human activity has adversely affected the environment and that care must be taken on our parts to care for and preserve the marvels of God’s creation.

Do we adversely affect the environment when we flush a toilet or would it be more responsible to leave it under the bush as was originally intended?

Do you think that God made a mistake by leaving coal, natural gas, and oil deposits at our disposal? Or perhaps He didn’t think we’d find them? Or perhaps they’re evil in and of themselves? Which is it? What about Uranium? Did God create things without a purpose?

Somehow I don’t think that creating greater misery for humanity for the sake of being “good stewards” of the Earth is was God intended. Anything that does that is inherently evil and that includes the AGW movement, which is just the new Marxists’ quasi-religious wing.

 

[Chris0711]

We’ve been listening to this over exaggerated nonsense for too long.Let me give you a fact.
Former American president Jimmy Carter was told in the 1970s that by the year 2000 all forrests in the world would be gone and the earth would be an entire desert.

whatever someone said in the early 1900s is irrelevent. The lefties (probably on dope half of them) started this rediculous greeny hoax in the 1960s.30,000 intelligent scientists are putting the facts in front of us and you continue to spit out your ****.

As far as the entire earth being a desert, yes that is rather alarmist and I am acutely aware of such absurd claims. What you cannot ignore is that from the 1970’s until now a great deal of the earth has been deforested. Period.

And how can you say that what was said in the early 1900’s is irrelevent? I cited that source as an example that conservation and a sense of responsibility for OUR environment was around before the 1960’s. How is that point irrelevent to our discussion?

An my good sir, if you wish to insult me by saying what I speak is **** (I take it you can insert a number of things there) I feel sorry for you. I have in no way tried to provoke you to profanity, merely only to have intellegent discourse with another God fearing soul. If you are unable to continue such a discussion without resorting to profanity, might I suggest that we end this discourse.

Peace of Christ

 

[Chris0711]

Do we adversely affect the environment when we flush a toilet or would it be more responsible to leave it under the bush as was originally intended?

Do you think that God made a mistake by leaving coal, natural gas, and oil deposits at our disposal? Or perhaps He didn’t think we’d find them? Or perhaps they’re evil in and of themselves? Which is it? What about Uranium? Did God create things without a purpose?

Somehow I don’t think that creating greater misery for humanity for the sake of being “good stewards” of the Earth is was God intended. Anything that does that is inherently evil and that includes the AGW movement, which is just the new Marxists’ quasi-religious wing.

You raise a good and interesting point. Yes I believe that God created everything for a purpose. However, is the purpose that humanity uses a given resource the real reason God placed it on the Earth? For example: the peanut. Gearge Washington Carver discovered hundreds of uses for the peanut, but which one was the peanuts “God given purpose”? Maybe all, maybe none, maybe we have not discovered it yet. Its a though, thats all. The mind of God is so vast; can we really definatively say what his purpose is for a given item, Uranium, coal, etc. As far as coal, oil, and natural gas desposites, no I think God intended us to find them I am not refuting that point. I am only suggesting that we exercise responsibility when using said resources, that we use the resources while keeping the other life that inhabits Earth in mind. That is all.

And I do not understand how being environmentally aware and resposible creates greater misery for humanity. How much misery have you experiance when walking through a National Park, or a Wildlife Reserve? Is it miserable to install solar panels to provide electricity to your home so that you and your family sustain your own energy needs through a vastly renewable resource like the sun. I fail to see how actions such as this cause misery for humanity.

 

[dusza]

You raise a good and interesting point. Yes I believe that God created everything for a purpose. However, is the purpose that humanity uses a given resource the real reason God placed it on the Earth? For example: the peanut. Gearge Washington Carver discovered hundreds of uses for the peanut, but which one was the peanuts “God given purpose”? Maybe all, maybe none, maybe we have not discovered it yet. Its a though, thats all. The mind of God is so vast; can we really definatively say what his purpose is for a given item, Uranium, coal, etc. As far as coal, oil, and natural gas desposites, no I think God intended us to find them I am not refuting that point. I am only suggesting that we exercise responsibility when using said resources, that we use the resources while keeping the other life that inhabits Earth in mind. That is all.

And I do not understand how being environmentally aware and resposible creates greater misery for humanity. How much misery have you experiance when walking through a National Park, or a Wildlife Reserve? Is it miserable to install solar panels to provide electricity to your home so that you and your family sustain your own energy needs through a vastly renewable resource like the sun. I fail to see how actions such as this cause misery for humanity.

Misery is created when expenses are mandated by the government. Free market has the power to make these things accessible, inexpensive, and even popular. When governments mandate them (based on corrupt science) they are only a burden. Do you have solar panels and if not then why are you still waiting?

 

[JRPO]

Chris 0711 Sorry, lets change **** to nonsense.

Now what part of " the world does not have a global warming problem" don’t you understand.

And don’t give me the “enviromentally aware and responsible” nonsense.

THERE IS NO EVIROMENT PROBLEM.

The world has never been in better shape.

 

[Chris0711]

Misery is created when expenses are mandated by the government. Free market has the power to make these things accessible, inexpensive, and even popular. When governments mandate them (based on corrupt science) they are only a burden. Do you have solar panels and if not then why are you still waiting?

I accept your point that government mandates are not an answer to environmental problems and that we should allow the free market system to work. However, in order for the free market to work we need an educated populous that is willing to accept responsibility for their part in the environment. We have no such populous. We have two extremes: people who deny that we should and have a reposibility conserve and those the believe that we should all be living in thatch huts and wearing clothes made of soy. We need people who can split the difference, who are logical and educated enough to take resposibilty for the environment but who also recognize that human needs must be met as well. It saddens me that we as a people are unable to find such a medium and seem to find it necessary to divide ourselves into two camps.

As for me having solar panels, I do. I also recycle all the recyclable goods that come through my house. However I also drive a gas powered car, work in a hospital and clinic that uses plastic material derived from fossil fuels, and flush my toilet rather than leaving under a bush (I though that was a rather clever point ) I can see what you are saying when your statement is applied to developing nations that need food more than national parks, but as far as the United States is concerned that is a different story altogether.

 

[Chris0711]

Chris 0711 Sorry, lets change **** to nonsense.

Now what part of " the world does not have a global warming problem" don’t you understand.

And don’t give me the “enviromentally aware and responsible” nonsense.

THERE IS NO EVIROMENT PROBLEM.

The world has never been in better shape.

I sincerely appreciate your apology and change of word choice. Thank you sir.

I understand that the world may not have a global warming problem (emphasis on may) As you have said, the research suggest that there is not global warming, but the research that has been does leads to inconclusive evidence. This means that the research cannot support global warming, but cannot refute it fully either. The 30,000 scientists that you refered to stated in their proposal that reducing carbon emissions may even be harmful, again this is research that leads to a thoery that may be proven or disproven. As far as I’m concerned the jury is out on man-made global warming. Personally I need much more research evidence to sway me one way or another. (I also believe that in my first post I stated that I viewed global warming as debatable)

And I must firmly disagree with your notion that the Earth has never been in better shape. I could go on and on listing areas of the environment that are in need of serious restoration and attention. Deforestation (rainforest and otherwise), wild fishery populations decreasing, coral reefs shrinking, habitat destruction caused by human expansion, etc, etc. These areas need no more research. We have hard evidence of these occurence, purhapse not on the drastict time table that you said was told to Carter (such a claim is quite alarmist as I said) but at a rate that can have long reaching effects on the world that our children will have to live in. I do not understand how you can make such a claim that “The world has never been in better shape” when one must merely pull out a map from a few decades ago and compare it to one now (to compare the expanse of human development, habitat destruction, etc). I am quite curious as to your rationale behind such a claim.

 

[sidbrown]

The crucially important anti-climate warming Petition Project that has been signed by over 30,000 American scientists has received very little comment.

Thirty thousand scientists? I doubt that many of them have published papers in climatolgy.

 

[sidbrown]

Now what part of " the world does not have a global warming problem" don’t you understand…

Melting glaciers:
worldviewofglobalwarming.org/pages/glaciers.html

 

[spn82756]

Thirty thousand scientists? I doubt that many of them have published papers in climatolgy.

My friend…doubting is not showing. You’ve discounted everything article, website, or letter shown.

I love what the huge AGCC backer says…the center of the earth is millions of degrees hot!

 

[CHESTERTONRULES]

And I do not understand how being environmentally aware and resposible creates greater misery for humanity. .

I’ll give you one sickening example.

Environmentalists, led by Rachel Carson, worked to ban DDT production and distribution in most of the world.

During the 70s and 80s, malaria had been nearly wiped out around the world by using DDT for mosquito control.

These well meaning, but incredibly misguided, activists are responsible for approximately 9 million malaria deaths.

It is disgusting, evil, and largely ignored by the media and their leftist allies.

Evironmentalism is an evil blight on humanity.

Conservation and good stewardship of the earth is our duty, but the destruction and degradation of human life advocated by the environmentalists is evil.

 

[JRPO]

Melting glaciers:

Wrong. Completely and utterly incorrect.

Recent Photo graphic evidence has shown that the ice in both the North and South Pole
is actually increasing at the present time.

The Melting ice is a yearly event thats been happening since time began.I can tell you that every year around March-April( the end of the Southern Hemisphere Summer) in the South Pole the Ice Melts. Happens every year and always has. Thats a fact.

And every year every leftist media operation that can get their hands on a camera go down there, film it and then try their little tricks at trying to convince us that the ice is melting and the globe is warming.

Deliberate deceitful nonsense.

 

[spn82756]

Wrong. Completely and utterly incorrect.

Recent Photo graphic evidence has shown that the ice in both the North and South Pole
is actually increasing at the present time.

The Melting ice is a yearly event thats been happening since time began.I can tell you that every year around March-April( the end of the Southern Hemisphere Summer) in the South Pole the Ice Melts. Happens every year and always has. Thats a fact.

And every year every leftist media operation that can get their hands on a camera go down there, film it and then try their little tricks at trying to convince us that the ice is melting and the globe is warming.

Deliberate deceitful nonsense.

As a career and degreed meteorologist of over 30 years…I agree JRPO…but you realize what you are doing…don’t you. :banghead::banghead::banghead::banghead:

I’m still waiting to reach a point where I can truly say that 5% of the my co-workers across the country are honestly proponents of AGCC. Now of course…NOAA’s official stance is that it is happening. But that also depends on the current administration. We’re back to people who carry the AGW banner being in power. And just think of what will happen when the the several million degree temp of the earth’s core works its way to the surface. The solar system will no longer need the much colder sun…but will depend on the earth for heat and energy! :harp: