Deconstructing Channel 4's Great Global Warming Swindle »
Posted by: dominian 1 year, 5 months agoThose of you watching Channel 4's slick documentary, The Great Global Warming Swindle, may be forgiven for second guessing the foundations upon which many of us rest our policy research.
Read Full Story at inthegreen.typepad.com
Join the Discussion 
+ Add Comment
Comments So Far: 37
-
0%
Eagle_Eye1 year, 5 months ago
I can't call it "Global Warming" any more, I have to refer it to "Climate Change" because it is happening in decades rather than years.
The average person I don't think has really paid attention to the recent changes in activity. But I do know from what I have seen from being an environmentalist over the past 3 decades is horrible climate change that affects everyone.
You can't deny it any longer, be it global warming or solar flares, there is a climate change on our planet and we the human population are contributing factors at expiditing it.
Reply-
0%
ramblingwreck1 year, 5 months ago
Eagle Eye: You can't deny it any longer, be it global warming or solar flares, there is a climate change on our planet and we the human population are contributing factors at expiditing it.
ramblingwreck: Can't deny what? That climate change is happening (no argument here) or that human's are expediting it (not proven). We can tell from the geologic record that substantial climate change has happened in mere decades in Earth's past even before human's became so prevalent on this planet.
I believe that we need to reduce our use of fossil fuels to levels as low as possible, but need to do it because fossil fuels will eventually run-out; not because we are having a substantial impact on Earth's changing climate.
Reply-
100%
KingOfTruth1 year, 5 months ago
The climate is changing as it always does in response to solar activity.....it gets warmer for a while and then gets colder for a while before it gets warmer again....it tracks the sun ac5tivity exactly....in this case, the current Gorbal Warming scare is being orchestrated by Al Gore so that he can make billions at his 'carbon credits trading company'.....
Reply
-
-
-
-
100%
engineer1 year, 5 months ago
Global warning is real check any reliable weather source. Not left or right and you will see the rate of increase is greater in later years. Also where do you think all the extra heat goes? It does not leave the Earth. Anything we do contributes. Of course the burning of Fossil fuels is the greatest contributor. More of it is used. The CO2 reflects the heat back to the Earth.
Reply -
-
0%
ramblingwreck1 year, 5 months ago
"Even better than their predecessors in the tobacco industry. Remember, there is no proof cigarettes are not good for you!"
Nonsense. Going back to the late '60s or early '70s cigarrete manufacturers were required to print the warning on a pack of cigarettes. Anyone who used the product after that did so at their risk (including me).
A better comparison would have been to compare the current "man is causing global warming" crowd with their most closely related predecessors, the "man is causing global cooling" crowd. Many of the same arguments were used to predict the catastrophe that "global cooling" was going to cause as are used today.
Reply -
0%
Tyron1 year, 5 months ago
Alright yesitstrue, lets say that you are right and we are the only cause of global warming through the use of carbon base fuel. What reasonable choices due we have? The only one that I can thing of is going to corn or sugar base fuel.Just think, land that once was used to feed the world is now going to be turned to growing 'fuel' crops.
I can easly see the cost of food going up to the point where people in other countries can not afford our produce. What do we tell these people - sorry, but I am doing my part for global warming.
Mexico is having this problem now. Their corn harvest can bring more profit being used for fuel than food.
Reply-
91%
joeblowe1 year, 5 months ago
This won't work. Burning ANY hydrocarbon will have the same effect. Growing more grain, faster (if it were possible, that is...) would help to balance the cycle, but THAT might have other unsuspected effects. For example, taking a great deal of energy just to help produce the grain that is used to produce the ethanol. Remember, "There ain't no such thing as a free lunch." Nuclear power does NOT involve the carbon cycle.
Reply
-
-
95%
protoham1 year, 5 months ago
The number one thing that removes CO2 from the air are PLANTS. As the climate warms up so will the plant growth. It is a System. It will take care of itself.
Reply -
0%
Munk011 year, 5 months ago
Any one who believes humans aren't the largest contributing factor to the warming is a fool. If humans don't change or adapt you can forget leaving a living legacy. You don't need to be a college grad to see whats going on with the climate. We evolve or become extinct it's that simple.
Reply-
-
100%
KingOfTruth1 year, 5 months ago
Tyron:
Actually cows (and other animals) are the largest producer of the most dangerous greenhouse gas, METHANE.....if we collected all of that, then we would have a huge source of natural gas for energy....
Reply
-
-
-
0%
redwriter1 year, 5 months ago
Access granted; smog has caused a decelerated rate of global warming that history (ice cores) have proven.
London fog has disappeared because they are using less coal factories, as a result the suns radiation is reaching the earth which is retaining the heat.
Do you have anything else stupid to say, or are you going to wait to be told what to say nest by your moronic leaders.
Reply
-
-
0%
protoham1 year, 5 months ago
The real problem is population, you are right we need to kill off a few Billion.
Reply -
0%
protoham1 year, 5 months ago
Did you pay attention in Science Class in High School. Did you know that a log rotting in the woods gives off the same amount of CO2 as a log that is burned. A log is just like oil it is a bio-mass.
Did you know that Solar Cells take 20 years worth of energy to manufacture. So while people are spending $25,000 to cover their roofs, most of that $25,000 is to pay for the energy to make the solar cells. Most solar cells will not last 20 years. So as we are jumping to fix a problem that does not exist, we are actually making it worse.
If you want to help, turn off your lights and carpool. And tell Big Al to stop flying around messing up your breathing space.
Reply-
95%
ybdogsct1 year, 5 months ago
PROTOHAM:
"Did you pay attention in Science Class in High School. Did you know that a log rotting in the woods gives off the same amount of CO2 as a log that is burned. A log is just like oil it is a bio-mass."
The equilibrium of [CO2] emitted may be the same, but the kinetics is certainly not. Decomposition releases CO2 in a slower, steadier process that allows autotrophs time to reabsorb the CO2 through the photosynthetic anabolic biosynthesis of glucose, starch, and cellulose. The kinetics of hydrocarbon combustion, however, are much faster and quickly overwhelm photosynthetic processes.
Reply
-
-
-
0%
jdhatl1 year, 5 months ago
You should not confuse the people who are trying to do something about global warming with the PETA people. PETA has horrible tactics, they are a very naive organization, run with a college student activist mentality. The global warming issue is much more serious, and much bigger, than what PETA is going after. Any attempt to collude these two movements is nothing but a typical rightist smear campaign tactic. Worse than peta are Earth First types, who set fire to SUV's, which is can't possibly be good for the environment. These groups are not mainstream leftists, they are very much a fringe element. I think most of those people mean well, but they are painfully naive, and their tactics are counter-productive.
Reply -
92%
KingOfTruth1 year, 5 months ago
jdhatl: anyone who is involved with supporting the Gorbal Warming UN/Al Gore scam is very naive.....
Reply -
100%
ntuitive11 year, 5 months ago
Why doesn't anyone realize that global warming may in fact be a natural phenomenon that we have accelerated and increased beyond natural levels due to the use of fossil fuels? Can't both be true? Does everything have to be reduced to political polemic?
Reply -
71%
Nowalive1 year, 5 months ago
I am by no means a scientist. I am a mechanic. I have been following this closely, and can not for the life of me find the truth. I have noticed that MANY of the SAME scientists that have signed off on the global warming research, are the VERY SAME scientists who were warning of GLOBAL COOLING in the early and mid '70's. Recently the UN revised it's numbers DOWNWARD in regard to the effect of "climate change". The only number that has not changed is the temperature increase over the last 100 YEARS. That remains constant at 0.6 degrees farenheit. Again, I am no scientist, but it would seem that NEITHER side can get their story straight. Now to address the total FREAKS on this issue(BOTH SIDES). The name calling from some of you indicates a total lack of intelligence, and class. If you can not form a cogent thought and hold civil discussion, then say nothing. "It is better to keep silent and be thought a fool, than to speak and remove all doubt".
Reply -
0%
Nowalive1 year, 5 months ago
Btw, for every 10 pounds Al has gained since 2004, his private jet burns an additional 75 pounds of fuel per hour, and produces an additional 300 pounds of "greenhouse gases" per hour. That works out to about an additional 12000 pounds of CO2 per round trip from his 20,000 sq. ft. palacial mansion to New York. Additionally his electrical consumption is 40 times the average household, he buys "carbon credits" from himself. I calculated my "carbon footprint" and it is 7.1 tonnes per year. That is 11 tonnes below the "average" according to all the carbon calculators. When is Al going to buy carbon credits from me?
Reply -
0%
AnvilHead1 year, 5 months ago
Carbon credits are paid to those that lock up carbon long term, like forestry projects(a mature tree is 40 or fifty years old) that when harvested keep the carbon locked in forestry products, houses, furniture etc. things that can last for hundreds of years.
Reply -
0%
AnvilHead1 year, 5 months ago
The goal would be by whatever means to create a carbon nuetral society. Granted there are other cycles that contribute but these are things that we can with forethought control.
Reply -
0%
hammer7321 year, 5 months ago
If the Global Warming alarmists are correct and man-made CO2 is does indeed warm the atmosphere, but sulfates and aerosols cool the atmosphere, shouldn't we just pump more sulfates and aerosols back into the atmosphere? Then we'll get a nice cooling period like we had from 1940-1975. Problem solved! I won't even charge the industrialized world one cent for this brilliant solution! You're welcome!
Reply -
0%
Fabulous20071 year, 1 month ago
Great article! Thank you. Weighty arguments.
I absolutely agree with you, especially with 8 point.
A lot of people think that environmentalists want to stop our industrialization and economic growth. It is not true. They just want it is developed in a better way, the way that would not ruin our planet.
I am sure that we will change our lifestyle and will make it more healthier.
Reply
Submitted By:
dominian
Related Articles:
Why not submit a story?
Also Propping This Article
Groups Watching This
No groups are watching this story. Why not share it with your group?
