At that time, I believe the majority of people in the world believed GW was man-made. If anything, the skeptics are the minority and have been for a while.

And GW is not a myth. The claim that it's mostly caused by man (AGW) is highly suspect.

Was there any 'science' in Gore's movie that helped you see through this "smoke screen of politics?"

Speaking of "smoke screen politics," in reality, the temperature in that ice core graph of Gore's movie changed hundreds of years BEFORE the CO2 changed. Does this 'error' bother you?


There was already a hugh global pro-AGW discussion and media blitz under way. If anything, that movie opened up a needed discussion of it's approx. 10 major errors. And does these ~10 errors bother you? Do you see these errors as "smoke screen politics" or simple honest errors by objective scientists just trying to save the world and humanity?


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

I believe a subset of them (and some within some AGW organizations) are using AGW as a means to kill two birds with one stone (saving the world from a fiery death and ending poverty and global disparities in wealth).

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

There was no error there. The lag time only bothers people who have no basic understanding of the science.

Andrew

__________________
“...corporations and those who run them cannot stop exploiting resources and amassing wealth until they have... .I cannot finish this sentence, because the truth is that can never stop; like cancer, they can only continue to expand until they kill the host.”

-- Derrick Jensen

Do you have any evidence of this fraud or are you just relying on faith?

Andrew

__________________
“...corporations and those who run them cannot stop exploiting resources and amassing wealth until they have... .I cannot finish this sentence, because the truth is that can never stop; like cancer, they can only continue to expand until they kill the host.”

-- Derrick Jensen

It is absolutely a GHG. What I question is the claim of the power of it's warming ability. Past history doesn't show this power of CO2.

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

Cmon, I know what you've said before on this. You said (I'm recalling from memory) that once the external trigger starts the earth warming again, some CO2 outgasses and then takes over the warming until some other external trigger forces the earth to cool (even though CO2 is higher).

I don't buy this.

What I think happens is some external trigger (Mlkvch cycles maybe) forces a warming trend, CO2 outgases (this added CO2 causes additional warming but nothing compared to the external forcing) and when the cycle (or whatever) switches to the cool forcing mode, the CO2 starts dropping.

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

Yeah, the evidence is in those words that your side wrote which I posted with links in the first post of this thread.

You're not going to say that they don't mean what they say, are you?

__________________
“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

The radiative effects of the change in solar input vs the radiative effects of CO2 are well known and have been measured and observed. The solar/orbital effects are not enough to melt the glaciers in the northern hemisphere, only the positive feedback of GHG and albedo effect are enough to account for the difference.

Whether you buy it or not is irrelevant. Perhaps if you did your own research testing your hypothesis and published your results in a peer reviewed journal that challenged this consensus your hypothesis would be more credible.

Andrew

__________________
“...corporations and those who run them cannot stop exploiting resources and amassing wealth until they have... .I cannot finish this sentence, because the truth is that can never stop; like cancer, they can only continue to expand until they kill the host.”

-- Derrick Jensen

You did not post any evidence of a scientific fraud.

Andrew

__________________
“...corporations and those who run them cannot stop exploiting resources and amassing wealth until they have... .I cannot finish this sentence, because the truth is that can never stop; like cancer, they can only continue to expand until they kill the host.”

-- Derrick Jensen

??? Yes it does. But not only that, lab analysis going on over 100 years, combined with observation, confirms its radiative effects quantitatively.

Andrew

__________________
“...corporations and those who run them cannot stop exploiting resources and amassing wealth until they have... .I cannot finish this sentence, because the truth is that can never stop; like cancer, they can only continue to expand until they kill the host.”

-- Derrick Jensen

No it doesn't bother me, Gore isn't a scientist. The content of his message is simply a waste of time to debate. His message is correct however - we need to do something.

__________________
The bush administration and bank lobbyists proudly killing our economic system - 2003.

You think issues like creating a hockey stick with made up bogus statistics (Mann), cherry picking trees to create a hockey stick (Briffa), and refusing to release data, methods, and code to independent researchers is "credible?" It's not and it breeds distrust and suspicion.

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

I didn't say it was fraud, did I? I'm just saying that there are people who are using AGW for what looks like global wealth redistribution (convergence of incomes and national GDPs).

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

The content of his message is a waste of time to debate because you cannot answer for the errors in his movie.

As are as we need to do something, this "something" is not transferring unprecedented amounts of our wealth in order to have a convergence of incomes, both within and among nations as well as convergences of GDPs of all nations.

And I take it you're ok with Mann's first bogus hockey stick, the issue with Briffa's hockey stick, issues with holding back data, code and methods, massaging temperature data and things like this?

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

OK. That could very well be.

Andrew

__________________
“...corporations and those who run them cannot stop exploiting resources and amassing wealth until they have... .I cannot finish this sentence, because the truth is that can never stop; like cancer, they can only continue to expand until they kill the host.”

-- Derrick Jensen