Silly me, I failed to note that Mahasatva posted more links than TSG.

__________________
...If you want to continue to be the slaves of bankers and pay the cost of your own slavery, then let bankers continue to create money and control credit.

Sir Josiah Stamp, Director of the Bank of England, 1927

No. It's not the quantity of links provided. I'm saying Mahasatva proved the argument more thoroughly. Very enlightening.

Then why don't you forward this thread to all the scientific societies and scientists who presently think that we need to cut CO emissions and no doubt they'll see the error of their ways?

Mahasatva did raise an interesting point or two but I've seen nothing that constitutes proof of his assertions.

__________________
...If you want to continue to be the slaves of bankers and pay the cost of your own slavery, then let bankers continue to create money and control credit.

Sir Josiah Stamp, Director of the Bank of England, 1927

I can't think of one scientist let alone a scientific society who thinks any emission of carbon monoxide is a good idea. It's a toxin.

It's just that in a forum of serious debate over issues, you need more than "Yes, it is!" and "No, It isn't!" as proof to back your arguments. In that respect, in this discussion, Mahasatva clearly is far above TSG with supporting facts. I'm not saying, ya know... just saying.

When it comes to global warming, there is no serious debate. Global warming is a liberal myth borne from a festering hatred of industrialization and capitalism. I know that sounds harsh, but facts are facts. There are no hard scientific facts to substantiate global warming. I have never read any scientific proposal or theory that has been peer reviewed by a credible scientific body. All we have is empiracal data which is completely inconsistent over time. Nor has anyone actually stated a theory which can be tested in the laboratory.


If you go back in history, you see this type of social activism again and again. The earliest that comes to mind is the book, "The Jungle" by Upton Sinclair. That book and Sinclair's methodology set the standard for yellow journalism used to this day. The tactic socialist activists use is to write a biased account of the organization(s) they want to cripple or subjugate. They follow with wave after wave of propaganda demonizing the industry and the people who run it. Once the political mood is ripe, the anticapitalists propose legislation that limits the ability of the industry or destroys it entirely. Once the legislation is in place, government can use those laws to make the industry in question do their bidding.

The socialist structure in the country is broad and powerful. We all know it prevails in Northeastern society. But what many don't know is how prevalent it is in the American university system, legal system, nor how it is financed. It destroyed Johns-Manville through asbestos litigation. They have crippled the chemical industry with endless litigation for polution. And now they have targeted the oil industry and health care.

Global warming histeria is just the demonization phase of their efforts. The ultimate goal is to establish a cap and trade system where government can control how much these industries produce. Once in place, they can shake the industrial complex down for any favor they need.

If you read the history of Italian Fascism, you will see that is the form of industrial socialism they long for.

RJ

__________________

CO2 is not a pollutant. It is requirement for all plant life. Higher levels of CO2 have been shown to have great benefits for plant life. Those are facts that have been long established. The move to attempt to establish CO2 as a pollutant has everything to do with politics and nothing to do with science.

I know what the peak oil theory claims. I also know that they have to change the numbers every few years when production continues to rise or when new reserves are found.

You named the largest oil field in the world. New reserves have been found off the cost of Brazil, Cuba, in Russia.

Brazil: Carioca discovery potentially one of the largest oilfields in the world Exploration and production Petroleum Economist - May 2008 - Latin America - Exploration, Deep water
Oil Fields Are Refilling...Naturally - Sometimes Rapidly There Are More Oil Seeps Than All The Tankers On Earth

Several have claimed that Ghawar is about done. Then production keeps going and they have to revise their prediction. They pump water into oil fields because they lack the pressure that would push the oil out. They have found the fields they have gone out of production still have a lot of oil locked into the rocks. By pumping CO2 into those fields they have found that they are able to get more oil out of them. The CO2 binds with the oil and causes it to rise up under pressure.

And yet there has been no decline in world production due to a lack in available oil -- that is what you don't get. The only declines that I know of have been caused by human mismanagement or human maliciousness.

tashi deleks,

M

__________________
"They haven't got Brains, any of them, only grey fluff that's blown into their heads by mistake, and they don't Think." -- Eeyore, The House At Pooh Corner

Sit like a mountain,
Breathe like the wind,
Mind like the Sky.

When all the Gods are crazy, who do you pray to?

Not true.

Insects Take A Bigger Bite Out Of Plants In A Higher Carbon Dioxide World

And of course:

For plants, C[O.sup.2] means bigger, not better - carbon dioxide - Brief Article | E: The Environmental Magazine | Find Articles at BNET


Just one example; we clearly don't know enough yet to say what impact elevated CO2 will have on ecosystems.

__________________


Question those who think themselves above questioning.

What does the matter of whether or not CO is a pollutant have to do with it's being a greenhouse gas? More dissembling?



Saudi production does indeed appear to be in decline. Again, unless we can somehow manage to discover a field appr. the size of Ghawar, we are left to hoping that it's decline is slow and graceful, but with the water cut as high as has been reported, that doesn't seem to be likely.

__________________
...If you want to continue to be the slaves of bankers and pay the cost of your own slavery, then let bankers continue to create money and control credit.

Sir Josiah Stamp, Director of the Bank of England, 1927

http://www.oism.org/pproject/GWReview_OISM300.pdf
ScienceDirect - Soil Biology and Biochemistry : Impact of atmospheric CO2 and plant life forms on soil microbial activities
Positive Effects of Carbon Dioxide for Plant Growth
Elevated Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide Effects on Cotton Plant Residue Decomposition -- Torbert et al. 59 (5): 1321 -- Soil Science Society of America Journal
The first sentence in the abstract from the link above: "Assessing the impact of elevated atmospheric CO2 concentration on the global environment is hampered due to a lack of understanding of global C cycling."
Long-term effects of elevated atmospheric CO2 on the mechanisms determining plant species abundance
Responses to Elevated Carbon Dioxide in Artificial Tropical Ecosystems -- Körner and Arnone 257 (5077): 1672 -- Science
The last sentence in the abstract from the link above: "This study points at the inadequacy of scaling-up from physiological baselines to ecosystems without accounting for interactions among components, and it emphasizes the urgent need for whole-system experimental approaches in global-change research."
Free-Air CO2 Enrichment of Sorghum: Soil Carbon and Nitrogen Dynamics -- Prior et al. 37 (3): 753 -- Journal of Environmental Quality
Surprise: Earths’ Biosphere is Booming, Satellite Data Suggests CO2 the Cause « Watts Up With That?

Your articles were interesting and they do add to our data base, but obviously further study is required. I would like to see the above research replicated and verified independently, not just reviewed. You are right, "we clearly don't know enough." I do find it interesting that with the elevated CO2 today we see none of the negative effects alarmists have warned us about.

tashi deleks,

M

__________________
"They haven't got Brains, any of them, only grey fluff that's blown into their heads by mistake, and they don't Think." -- Eeyore, The House At Pooh Corner

Sit like a mountain,
Breathe like the wind,
Mind like the Sky.

When all the Gods are crazy, who do you pray to?

The only way that the EPA or other agencies can regulate CO2 emissions is if it is labeled a pollutant. This has been done by judges and politicians -- not scientists. I have already posted links and graphs that bring into question the claims that CO2 is a major factor in warming trends. It does not help the alarmists that the warming trend stopped in 1998 and has begun to reverse itself.

Does it? Has it? How has this effected world production? It has not.

Why would you accept hearsay? "A friend told me," is not a really good source to base one's assumptions. The mail person of my cousin's hairdresser's garbage man says, it is really dumb to accept second hand or third hand hearsay as evidence.

tashi deleks,

M

__________________
"They haven't got Brains, any of them, only grey fluff that's blown into their heads by mistake, and they don't Think." -- Eeyore, The House At Pooh Corner

Sit like a mountain,
Breathe like the wind,
Mind like the Sky.

When all the Gods are crazy, who do you pray to?

You sure about that? If that is indeed the case, was it done with no input from qualified scientific authorities? That seems rather unlikely.



What was really dumb was to ignore his reference to the BP Statistical Review of World Energy 2008. If you'd gone to the trouble to have a look at it then you'd know that global production did indeed decline in 2007.

Oil production | Statistical Review 2008 | BP

__________________
...If you want to continue to be the slaves of bankers and pay the cost of your own slavery, then let bankers continue to create money and control credit.

Sir Josiah Stamp, Director of the Bank of England, 1927

Yes, I am sure. Input from qualified scientific authorities? To a degree. The fact remains, the arguments were legal and made by lawyers and the judgment was handed down by other lawyers (judges). Not one of those judges has a degree in science. Its like the UN's IPCC, a lot of scientists are involved in the body of the report, but when it comes to writing the summary that is done by government officials and a few token scientists who accept the official dogma.

What is dumb is not placing things into context and not looking behind the numbers. A small 2% decline in world production (The share of global supply from the Africa, Asia and the FSU grew in 2007, meanwhile, Middle East, North America, Latin America and Europe lost share), due to human mismanagement, bad maintenance (Iran, Venezuela, Russia), politics (OPEC, Saudi Arabia, Venezuela), environmentalists (America), terrorist attacks (Iraq, some of the African nations), criminal activity (some of the African nations), war, or natural disasters is not evidence of a real loss of oil in the world.

A couple examples:
Iran actually is short of oil - International Herald Tribune
http://www.business24-7.ae/articles/...693ecd67a.aspx

We also see good news from some places we would not expect: Hope arises for Iraqi oil production - USATODAY.com

tashi deleks,

M

__________________
"They haven't got Brains, any of them, only grey fluff that's blown into their heads by mistake, and they don't Think." -- Eeyore, The House At Pooh Corner

Sit like a mountain,
Breathe like the wind,
Mind like the Sky.

When all the Gods are crazy, who do you pray to?

Here's one who isn't a scientist but he does have worthy credentials: He's been a writer at 'The Nation' since 1984.

He wrote 4 AGW skeptic articles in 2007 in The Nation. While we can't add him to the scientist skeptic list, we can add him to the apparently growing AGW skeptic camp.


Kramer

__________________
“We should never be more vigilant than at the moment a new dogma is being installed. … The left has been swept along, entranced by the allure of weather as revolutionary agent, naïvely conceiving of global warming as a crisis that will force radical social changes on capitalism.”

TheNation, June 7, 2007

If we weren't at peak production then I would say that these human factors wouldn't register at all, as production would merely shift elsewhere, but we are at the point where that can no longer go on. The Saudis certainly can no longer pick up the global slack, and there is no indication at present that any other nation can, either.

__________________
...If you want to continue to be the slaves of bankers and pay the cost of your own slavery, then let bankers continue to create money and control credit.

Sir Josiah Stamp, Director of the Bank of England, 1927