Glenn Beck: The Other Side of the Global Warming Debate: Headline News, 7P ET Tonight

[Naturalized-Texan]

Glenn Beck: The Other Side of the Global Warming Debate (http://www.glennbeck.com/tv/)
Exposed: The Climate of Fear - Wednesday, May 2nd
The Other Side of the Global Warming Debate
Headline News, 7PM ET

[MrSanity]

I don't have cable TV, but I'm not letting myself miss this special.

[Rhino]

According to the flyer, it's at 7PM, 9PM and midnight.

[Rhino]

Yep. All three times confirmed on the HLN site.

[hellinon]

Why on CNN, not Fox?

[MrSanity]

Why on CNN, not Fox?Because CNN/Headline News offered him a show, not Fox.

[Rhino]

Why on CNN, not Fox?Preaching to the choir?

[DoctorDoom]

There is no "debate". There's a pseudoscientific religion trying to silence all opposition, and real scientists trying to break through the wall of censorship.

[Naturalized-Texan]

Glen Beck did a very good job showing that there is no consensus about the cause of global warming and in rebutting AlGore's Big Lie Propaganda garbage.

[MrSanity]

SOB, I didn't get to see it after all.

Anyone got a link to a video clip I can download or watch?

[Rhino]

Dunno about video, but here's the transcript:

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0705/02/gb.01.html

[GOP Woman]

Glenn Beck: The Other Side of the Global Warming Debate (http://www.glennbeck.com/tv/)
Exposed: The Climate of Fear - Wednesday, May 2nd
The Other Side of the Global Warming Debate
Headline News, 7PM ET
Watched the midnight repeat. Glenn did a great job! Anybody think any of the info Glenn provided got through to any Albore believers and helped them see the light?

[Naturalized-Texan]

Watched the midnight repeat. Glenn did a great job! Anybody think any of the info Glenn provided got through to any Albore believers and helped them see the light?
Since it was on CNN's Headline News where the viewership is predominantly liberal, there is a possibility that viewers may have been exposed to the truth for the first time in their lives to the point that a few may have seen the light.

[GOP Woman]

Since it was on CNN's Headline News where the viewership is predominantly liberal, there is a possibility that viewers may have been exposed to the truth for the first time in their lives to the point that a few may have seen the light.
I hope the facts get through their heads.

[Borgia]

First off, we all agree the climate is heating up, right? We all agree that the average temp has gone up, right?

So the real question is what is causing it. A quick reference check on some of the names that BEck quotes reveals this:

1. John Christy agrees that the temperature rise is partially due to humans. That is not revealed in Beck's interview.

2. Tim Ball has said we have had global cooling since 1940. I don't know any climatologists or residents here who agree with this odd claim.


A final observation, even ExxonMobil scientists have said there is climate change and understand that reducing the human component will help. I recall a while back Naturalized-Texan said he would trust energy company scientists BEFORE he would trust others. Well, here is his chance to be consistent with his words and change his stance on global warming and agree with ExxonMobil scientists.

[DesertFox]

Everyone here knows, and has commented on, the fact that global warming, aka climate change, is reality. Everyone here also knows, and has commented on, the fact that the issue is whether it's man caused or natural.

Do try to keep up.

Who's John Christy? Who's Tim Ball? Which ExxonMobil scientists? all of them? one or two out of the hundreds they employ? And what kind of scientist? who cares about a geologist's opinion on global warming? Climatologists, sure; botanists, no.

Everyone here knows that the bulk of the miniscule global warming since 1900 happened before 1940, and that things have cooled down since. That's hardly an "odd claim" since it just makes sense. But the 0.5-degree "climate change" prior to 1940 was so small that the balancing "climate change" in the opposite direction is also small.

[oldcoastie]

...and there's that pesky fact of global warming on Mars, too.

Did the Sun get approval from the EPA before it decided to start messing things up?

[DoctorDoom]

The Borg is a Gorebot. How unexpected. :rolleyes:

First off, we all agree the climate is heating up, right? We all agree that the average temp has gone up, right?The average temperature has gone up and gone down for as long as there has been climate, entirely without human influence. And if in fact the average temperature is iincreasing now, it is also entirely without human influence, despite the doctrines of the religion of Gorebull Warming©.

The average temperature on Mars is also increasing. Since there are no SUVs and barbecue grills on Mars, the ONE common influence on Earth and Mars is ... get ready for a revelation ... brace yourself ... here it comes ... the SUN. When average temperatures change simultaneously on more than one planet, the sun is the cause.

What's amusing is watching "scientists" pull bone-headed "explanations" out of their asses to avoid admitting the obvious and thus not agreeing with "The Consensus".

1. John Christy agrees that the temperature rise is partially due to humans. That is not revealed in Beck's interview.Beck is not obliged to be balanced. Beck IS the balance for ABC, CBS, NBC, NPR, PBS, CNN, MSNBS, NY Times, LA Times, Boston Globe, Washington Post, Time, Newsweek, etcetera etcetera etcetera. Why must Beck give time to Dr. John Christy when Christy can get air time in abundance, but Dr. Richard Lindzen is utterly ignored by AlBore's fawning DBM groupies?

BTW, define "partially". That's an open-ended word encompassing a continuum between 0% and 100% human-caused. It's a lovely word for liberal spinmeisters who want to imply that without man, there would be no Gorebull Warming, but who will not commit themselves to a specific number.

0.0000000001% is "partially". 99.9999999999% is "partially". Give us hard data.

2. Tim Ball has said we have had global cooling since 1940. I don't know any climatologists or residents here who agree with this odd claim.From Dr. Ball:

Believe it or not, Global Warming is not due to human contribution of Carbon Dioxide (CO2). This in fact is the greatest deception in the history of science. We are wasting time, energy and trillions of dollars while creating unnecessary fear and consternation over an issue with no scientific justification. For example, Environment Canada brags about spending $3.7 billion in the last five years dealing with climate change, almost all on propaganda, trying to defend an indefensible scientific position while at the same time closing weather stations and failing to meet legislated pollution targets.

No sensible person seeks conflict, especially with governments, but if we don't pursue the truth, we are lost as individuals and as a society. That is why I insist on saying that there is no evidence that we are, or could ever cause global climate change. And, recently, Yuri A. Izrael, Vice President of the United Nations sponsored Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) confirmed this statement. So how has the world come to believe that something is wrong?

Maybe for the same reason we believed, 30 years ago, that global cooling was the biggest threat: a matter of faith. "It is a cold fact: the Global Cooling presents humankind with the most important social, political, and adaptive challenge we have had to deal with for ten thousand years. Your stake in the decisions we make concerning it is of ultimate importance; the survival of ourselves, our children, our species," wrote Lowell Ponte in 1976.

I was as opposed to the threats of impending doom global cooling engendered as I am to the threats made about Global Warming. Let me stress I am not denying the phenomenon has occurred. The world has warmed since 1680, the nadir of a cool period called the Little Ice Age (LIA) that has generally continued to the present. These climate changes are well within natural variability and explained quite easily by changes in the sun. But there is nothing unusual going on.Global Warming: The Cold, Hard Facts? (http://www.canadafreepress.com/2007/global-warming020507.htm)

So who gets the column-inches and air time, Timothy Ball, PhD, or AlBore, PoS?

BTW, note the bold text. Your lie about Dr. Ball's position has been exposed. But don't let being proven a liar interfere with your bullshit-flinging.

Fact time, troll: the Gorebull Warming religion censors all opposing viewpoints; peddles a politically correct consensus as science; uses fear-mongering as a weapon against logic and reason; demands that trillions of dollars be spent to do what they cannot demonstrate is even possible; and then attacks REAL scientists like Dr. Ball and Dr. Lindzen for daring to speak the truth.

Troll, the lunatic rhetoric of the Gorebots is becoming more strident and preposterous at an exponential rate. It has passed the "jump the shark" moment. And its shameless lies are being exposed with increasing frequency.

I haven't used this list in a while, because most of our kneejerk Gorebots have gone away. This seems to be a good time to repost it.

Outline for us what would be required to reduce the A-CO₂ emission level to reduce the GCC rate by a specific level. The analysis must include:

• Unarguable scientific evidence that human activity is causing GCC;
• Unarguable scientific evidence of the percentage of GW attributable to human activity;
• A scientific study showing that a reduction of X% of anthropogenic CO₂ will result in Y% reduction of the rate of GCC;
• A scientific study showing that a Y% reduction in the rate of GCC will result in the desirable effects two or more centuries in the future;
• The necessary technologies for achieving the reduction;
• The costs of research and development to optimize them;
• The costs of manufacturing, distributing, installing, operating and maintaining the technologies;
• The negative environmental effects of the technologies;
• The economic impact of the technologies on the nations' businesses and governments;
• The impositions on the lifestyles of the people of the nations;
• The cost-benefit ratio of dollars spent vs the value of the proposed reduction in the rate of GCC;
• The cost of minimizing natural changes in the level of "greenhouse gases";
• The source of funding for bringing the technologies online and operating them;
• The total economic burden of the entire process.
• The arguments against spending far less money to prepare for inevitable eventualities than to attempt to stop an unstoppable process.

We will be awaiting your dazzlingly brilliant analysis. :wait:

A final observation, even ExxonMobil scientists have said there is climate change and understand that reducing the human component will help. I recall a while back Naturalized-Texan said he would trust energy company scientists BEFORE he would trust others. Well, here is his chance to be consistent with his words and change his stance on global warming and agree with ExxonMobil scientists.Since your claims have zero credibility, link, please.

[DesertFox]

I understand it's also heating up on Mercury.

[The_Elucidator]

First off, we all agree the climate is heating up, right? We all agree that the average temp has gone up, right?


The same can be said for Mars; but why? I will be awaiting your answer!

[Borgia]

Who's John Christy? Who's Tim Ball?
Um, you did see Beck's special, didn't you? I mean, I read the transcript posted in this thread. Do try to keep up. I find it a bit humorous that you are commenting on a thread devoted to Beck's show and clearly you have no idea of the details of that show. :)

[John Galt]

First off, we all agree the climate is heating up, right? We all agree that the average temp has gone up, right?


Not me, I do not agree. A one degree trend in a hundred years of noisy data is not statistically significant.

[Borgia]

Why must Beck give time to Dr. John Christy when Christy can get air time in abundance, but Dr. Richard Lindzen is utterly ignored by AlBore's fawning DBM groupies?

It appears Doom is another poster who posts to a topic before actually reading the source material. Listen to Beck's show. Read the transcript. Beck interviewed Christy! But Beck certainly quote-mined in the editing room since Christy DOES agree humans have effected the climate.

Regarding Dr. Ball:

"Since 1940 it’s been cooling down. The evidence for warming is because of distorted records."<SUP class=reference id=_ref-8>[ (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timothy_F._Ball#_note-8)</SUP>
<SUP></SUP>
http://www.fcpp.org/main/publication_detail.php?PubID=864
<SUP></SUP>

[Borgia]

Not me, I do not agree. A one degree trend in a hundred years of noisy data is not statistically significant.

Ah, a statistician. Please advise what the standard deviation is of temperature measurements are to make you come to your "statistical" conclusion. Also, a confidence interval or confidence level woudl be appreciated. Surely you based your position on some actual math or science instead of just guessing that the magnitude of the noise was too high.

I humbly await your numbers.

[Borgia]

Also, go to Exxonmobil.com. Scroll down the page and on hte right you will see a link for Climate Change.

Exxon is prepared to start reducing emssions.

[John Galt]

It ain't worth the effort, the magnitude of the noise is obviously way way way too large. Looking that deep into the noise for a trend is what caused the ice age hysteria of the 70's and the previous version of global warming in the 30's and 40's.

[Borgia]

It ain't worth the effort, the magnitude of the noise is obviously way way way too large. Looking that deep into the noise for a trend is what caused the ice age hysteria of the 70's and the previous version of global warming in the 30's and 40's.

So it appears you are just going on a hunch of yours. How....scientific of you.

Noise is common in a lot of data. It can easily be accounted for by increasing the number of datapoints. Also, a regression analysis shows the trends and you can examine the R value to determine the confidence in your regression. If R approaches +/-1 we see strong correlation despite any noise.

[DoctorDoom]

It appears Doom is another poster who posts to a topic before actually reading the source material. Listen to Beck's show. Read the transcript. Beck interviewed Christy!And Borg as usual is trolling. I DO have the transcript.

"CHRISTY: In IPCC 2001, I was the lead author." And that is supposed to give him credibility? He's the head "consensus scientists" for a politically-motivated UN report. Color us impressed, liberal. :rolleyes:

But Beck certainly quote-mined in the editing room since Christy DOES agree humans have effected the climate.He was paid to do so. What else WOULD he say? The question that must always be asked, troll, is, "But is it true?"

You have my list of points. Address them.

[The_Elucidator]

Borgia - I said that Mars is also heating up, why is that? Do you need your phonics monkey?

[Naturalized-Texan]

Doc: Dr. John Christy is one of the many prominent REAL scientists who have thoroughly refuted the trash scientists' claim of human-caused global warming. Dr. Christy is correct in saying that the temperature rise is partially due to human activities, but he also adds that the dispute is about how much is due to human activities. He has also correctly maintained all along that the human contribution is minuscule.

See my sig line for the truth about the extent of CO2 and greenhouse gas contribution to global warming when compared with water and water vapor.

[Naturalized-Texan]

And Borg as usual is trolling. I DO have the transcript.

"CHRISTY: In IPCC 2001, I was the lead author." And that is supposed to give him credibility? He's the head "consensus scientists" for a politically-motivated UN report. Color us impressed, liberal. :rolleyes:

He was paid to do so. What else WOULD he say? The question that must always be asked, troll, is, "But is it true?"

You have my list of points. Address them.
Dr. John Christy resigned from the IPCC in disgust over the false information contained in the executive summary that had nothing to do with what was contained in the body of the IPCC 2001 report.

It appears to me that Borg has somehow convinced you that Dr. Christy is one of those trash scientists, when he is actually a REAL scientist.

[Naturalized-Texan]

Not me, I do not agree. A one degree trend in a hundred years of noisy data is not statistically significant.
This is especially true when one considers the FACT that at least two-thirds of the warming that has occurred in the past 100 years occurred prior to 1940, prior to the huge post-war industrial expansion, prior to the post-war population boom.

[CONSERVATIVE HERO]

...and there's that pesky fact of global warming on Mars, too.
Not only on Mars, but on Pluto (http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/pluto_warming_021009.html) as well, in addition to a study that found the Earth was warmer during the middle ages (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2003/04/06/nclim06.xml&sSheet=/news/2003/04/06/ixhome.html) than it is now.

I blame Big Oil (and in effect Bush). As I've stated before, they're the only ones with the means and motive to send SUVs through space and time that their evil plan for world destruction reach fruition.

[DoctorDoom]

Thanx for the correction, N-T. I judged him based on the Borg's citing him as a source, which tainted him unfairly, it seems.

I note that Borg hasn't addressed the points list.

[Naturalized-Texan]

Borg is a typical science denier. He denies the overwhelming scientific evidence that the warming of the past 100+ years is the natural recovery from the 500-year Little Ice Age and is being caused by a hotter Sun.

IPCC 2001 also denied science when it published Michael Mann's fraudulent "Hockey Stick" graph that erased the scientific evidence of the 500-year Medieval Warm Period and the 500-year Little Ice Age from history. Fortunately, the National Academies of Science thoroughly discredited Mann's "Hockey Stick" and it has been airbrushed out of IPCC 2007. Unfortunately, AlGore is still perpetuating that fraud, among many others.

[Beowulf]

Borgia, no Liberal has satisfactorily answered this question to me yet. When they do, I'll start listening to the "Global Warming" issue being a man made problem. The question is:

The polar caps on Mars are also melting as that planet's temperature is also rising yet we people aren't on that planet to screw it up. Please explain why this is?

I call it a change in the sun, a solar body that will also change over time. Solar radiation will create climate change not just on Earth but on other celestial bodies. That is why I don't buy the "man made" argument.

[The_Elucidator]

I note that Borg hasn't addressed the points list.

I have noticed that he is very selective on what he argues about. He will pick some obscure point and pound it like a monkey on a football.

[CONSERVATIVE HERO]

Watched the midnight repeat. Glenn did a great job! Anybody think any of the info Glenn provided got through to any Albore believers and helped them see the light?
I doubt it got through to very many. Mainly because, despite their claims to the contrary, they're simply not rational human beings. They're zealots of the leftist Earth religion. Because that's what Global warming is (a replacement for religion).

In global warming we see the Judeo-Christian God of our culture replaced with an all-powerful Earth deity, which requires of us its own set of (leftist) rites (like changing light bulbs, driving hybrid cars, voting for democrats, etc., etc.), lest the Earth (being a vengeful God) smite us all with calamity and catastrophe.

I can't say what disturbs me more. The fact the democrats would even attempt to create a political platform so blatantly absurd, or that millions of people have actually swallowed it hook, line, and sinker. Ultimately Al Gore's movie says one thing. It's a means of brushing aside virtually all other issues, leaving only one solitary issue of utmost importance (saving the Earth), an issue to which the solution is efficiently drilled in so very subtley. "Vote for democrats or the world will end." That's the Democratic Party's platform for 08, as per Al Gore's "An Inconvenient Truth." "Vote for a democrat or you're all going to die."

Sadly, there are millions of mouth breathing leftist morons out there who believe just that. Just wait and see if a democrat wins the presidency. They'll pass legislation while in office to stifle/alleviate global warming, which their pseudo-science will just as fraudulently "prove" worked, allowing them to literally portray themselves as having saved the world during their term. "When I took office 4 years ago the Republican policy of fossil fuel dependancy had us headed down a road ending in global catastrophe. I fought the oil corporations and their stranglehold on our country, and passed legislation that reduced carbon emissions by (enter BS #% here), significantly counteracting the warming of our planet and effectively staving off impending global crisis." Basically, "the world is still here because I saved it."

It's also for the purpose of advancing socialism by extending centralized government control over all business under the pretext of "protecting the environment"/"saving the world."

I've also noticed that virtually every rabid environmentalist and animal rights activist with which I've spoken almost always suffers from a hopeless case of "human guilt." They fervantly believe man is evil and unnatural. My pointing out to them that nature created man also, therefore we too are "natural," and designed us to adapt to and prosper in any climate and dominate the other forms of life usually leaves them either confused or angry.

[The_Elucidator]

I doubt it got through to very many. Mainly because, despite their claims to the contrary, they're simply not rational human beings. They're zealots of the leftist Earth religion. Because that's what Global warming is (a replacement for religion).

In global warming we see the Judeo-Christian God of our culture replaced with an all-powerful Earth deity, which requires of us its own set of (leftist) rites (like changing light bulbs, driving hybrid cars, voting for democrats, etc., etc.), lest the Earth (being a vengeful God) smite us all with calamity and catastrophe.

I can't say what disturbs me more. The fact the democrats would even attempt to create a political platform so blatantly absurd, or that millions of people have actually swallowed it hook, line, and sinker. Ultimately Al Gore's movie says one thing. It's a means of brushing aside virtually all other issues, leaving only one solitary issue of utmost importance (saving the Earth), an issue to which the solution is efficiently drilled in so very subtley. "Vote for democrats or the world will end." That's the Democratic Party's platform for 08, as per Al Gore's "An Inconvenient Truth." "Vote for a democrat or you're all going to die."

Sadly, there are millions of mouth breathing leftist morons out there who believe just that. Just wait and see if a democrat wins the presidency. They'll pass legislation while in office to stifle/alleviate global warming, which their pseudo-science will just as fraudulently "prove" worked, allowing them to literally portray themselves as having saved the world during their term. "When I took office 4 years ago the Republican policy of fossil fuel dependancy had us headed down a road ending in global catastrophe. I fought the oil corporations and their stranglehold on our country, and passed legislation that reduced carbon emissions by (enter BS #% here), significantly counteracting the warming of our planet and effectively staving off impending global crisis." Basically, "the world is still here because I saved it."

It's also for the purpose of advancing socialism by extending centralized government control over all business under the pretext of "protecting the environment"/"saving the world."

I've also noticed that virtually every rabid environmentalist and animal rights activist with which I've spoken almost always suffers from a hopeless case of "human guilt." They fervantly believe man is evil and unnatural. My pointing out to them that nature created man also, therefore we too are "natural," and designed us to adapt to and prosper in any climate and dominate the other forms of life usually leaves them either confused or angry.

Nailed it! :claps:

[Beowulf]

I have noticed that he is very selective on what he argues about. He will pick some obscure point and pound it like a monkey on a football.

Most Libs do that.

[The_Elucidator]

Borgia, no Liberal has satisfactorily answered this question to me yet. When they do, I'll start listening to the "Global Warming" issue being a man made problem. The question is:

The polar caps on Mars are also melting as that planet's temperature is also rising yet we people aren't on that planet to screw it up. Please explain why this is?

I call it a change in the sun, a solar body that will also change over time. Solar radiation will create climate change not just on Earth but on other celestial bodies. That is why I don't buy the "man made" argument.

Stop it Beo...everytime you ask this turd a question that he can't answer the cricket chirping gets so loud I have to turn off my speakers!

[DoctorDoom]

Deafening silence.

[MrSanity]

From the transcript:

BECK: Developing nations, like China and India, aren`t mandated to reduce their emissions under Kyoto. That`s a big problem for the U.S., especially since many developing nations are big polluters. No friggin kidding.

China has a terrible problem with pollution.

But go ahead and blame capitalism.

[TheIrishman]

Let me stress I am not denying the phenomenon has occurred. The world has warmed since 1680, the nadir of a cool period called the Little Ice Age (LIA) that has generally continued to the present.

Must have been a lot of automotive polution in 1680.

[MrSanity]

Must have been a lot of automotive polution in 1680.:biglaugh:

There is as much outrage from the left as a result of the industrial revolution as there is on the right as a result of the sexual revolution.

Needless to say, the industrial revolution has enormously benefitted any country that has actively subscribed to it. Foreign aid should be replaced with programs that are specifically designed to boost African companies to compete with the rest of the world.

Property rights, not bureaucratic chokeholds, are the the key to protecting the environment.

[TheIrishman]

<TABLE style="FONT-SIZE: 1em" cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0><TBODY><TR><TD class=msgview>During the past several years, more than 17,100 basic and applied American scientists, two-thirds with advanced degrees, have signed the Global Warming Petition.
Signers of this petition so far include 2,660 physicists, geophysicists, climatologists, meteorologists, oceanographers, and environmental scientists (select this link for a listing of these individuals) who are especially well qualified to evaluate the effects of carbon dioxide on the Earth's atmosphere and climate.

Signers of this petition also include 5,017 scientists whose fields of specialization in chemistry, biochemistry, biology, and other life sciences (select this link for a listing of these individuals) make them especially well qualified to evaluate the effects of carbon dioxide upon the Earth's plant and animal life.

Nearly all of the initial 17,100 scientist signers have technical training suitable for the evaluation of the relevant research data, and many are trained in related fields. In addition to these 17,100, approximately 2,400 individuals have signed the petition who are trained in fields other than science or whose field of specialization was not specified on their returned petition.

Of the 19,700 signatures that the project has received in total so far, 17,800 have been independently verified and the other 1,900 have not yet been independently verified. Of those signers holding the degree of PhD, 95% have now been independently verified. One name that was sent in by enviro pranksters, Geri Halliwell, PhD, has been eliminated. Several names, such as Perry Mason and Robert Byrd are still on the list even though enviro press reports have ridiculed their identity with the names of famous personalities. They are actual signers. Perry Mason, for example, is a PhD Chemist.

The costs of this petition project have been paid entirely by private donations. No industrial funding or money from sources within the coal, oil, natural gas or related industries has been utilized. The petition's organizers, who include some faculty members and staff of the Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine, do not otherwise receive funds from such sources. The Institute itself has no such funding. Also, no funds of tax-exempt organizations have been used for this project.

The signatures and the text of the petition stand alone and speak for themselves. These scientists have signed this specific document. They are not associated with any particular organization. Their signatures represent a strong statement about this important issue by many of the best scientific minds in the United States.

This project is titled "Petition Project" and uses a mailing address of its own because the organizers desired an independent, individual opinion from each scientist based on the scientific issues involved - without any implied endorsements of individuals, groups, or institution.



Seems it's a long way from a consensus.

www.oism.org (http://www.oism.org)
</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

[Naturalized-Texan]

Needless to say, the industrial revolution has enormously benefitted any country that has actively subscribed to it. Foreign aid should be replaced with programs that are specifically designed to boost African companies to compete with the rest of the world.
But the global warming alarmists want to prevent Africa from becoming industrialized because they believe that development in Africa would produce CO2 emissions that would make global warming even worse. Consequently, those alarmists want to limit electricity to the amount that can be produced by solar panels and windmills, eliminating any possibility of industrial development.

Africa has abundant resources of fossil fuels - coal and oil - that could be used for development, but the alarmists want to prevent the use of those resources. In other words, the alarmists want to keep Africa primitive.

The video, The Great Global Warming Swindle, showed an example of the limitations of solar panels. There is a hospital in Africa that is powered by huge solar panels on the roof. That hospital has a refrigerator in which to store medicines to keep them from spoiling. However, if the hospital wants to run the refrigerator, it's electric lights cant be turned on because there isn't enough power. Conversely, if they want to use their electric lights, they can't run the refrigerator.

That's what the global warming Nazis want for us, while they keep their elitist lifestyle intact, e.g., AlGore:

http://www.investors.com/editorial/cartoons/IMAGES/CARTOONS/toon022807a.gif

[dPrasse]

Not only on Mars, but on Pluto (http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/pluto_warming_021009.html) as well, in addition to a study that found the Earth was warmer during the middle ages (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2003/04/06/nclim06.xml&sSheet=/news/2003/04/06/ixhome.html) than it is now.


I thought scientists claimed Pluto was a ball of ice , and not a planet some time ago ?? Did that change , or , will we soon only have 8 planets circling the evil sun ?

I've been calling for the extinguishing of the sun for years now , to save us from the deadly Solar assault ...

I blame Big Oil (and in effect Bush). As I've stated before, they're the only ones with the means and motive to send SUVs through space and time that their evil plan for world destruction reach fruition.

So, the "Burning Bush" in the Bible is actually a metaphor for
a Bush driving an SUV with a booming stereo ?

SUV's were responsible for the plagues , also ???...

damn Big Oil and their time machines ....

[DoctorDoom]

It's Doctor Who's fault.

[dPrasse]

It's Doctor Who's fault.

Dr Who is a Brit ...

so , it is a joint alliance between the Bush's and Haliburton and the Queen of England and British Petroleum and a consortium of British and Nazi scientists ??

I still think camel farts cause GW and the mid east needs to be cleansed ... maybe we could call it "Honor Killing" ??

[DoctorDoom]

Dr Who is a Brit ...Actually, he's a Gallifreyan, but he's under contract to the Brits. They pay better than American TV, and the operating expenses of a TARDIS are rather high.

[MrSanity]

But the global warming alarmists want to prevent Africa from becoming industrialized because they believe that development in Africa would produce CO2 emissions that would make global warming even worse. Consequently, those alarmists want to limit electricity to the amount that can be produced by solar panels and windmills, eliminating any possibility of industrial development.It never occurs to them that money and debt relief alone don't do squat to help Africa in the long run. It just makes the government look good.

Africa has abundant resources of fossil fuels - coal and oil - that could be used for development, but the alarmists want to prevent the use of those resources. In other words, the alarmists want to keep Africa primitive.It appears so, there's no other way to explain it.