Site Presented By
Sunday, Nov 8, 2009
If present trends continue, the world will be about four degrees colder for the global mean temperature in 1990, but eleven degrees colder by the year 2000. … This is about twice what it would take to put us in an ice age.
—Kenneth E.F. Watt on air pollution and global cooling, Earth Day (1970)
This cooling has already killed hundreds of thousands of people. If it continues and no strong action is taken, it will cause world famine, world chaos and world war, and this could all come about before the year 2000.
—Lowell Ponte in “The Cooling”, 1976
In ten years all important animal life in the sea will be extinct. Large areas of coastline will have to be evacuated because of the stench of dead fish.
—Paul Ehrlich, Earth Day (1970)
This [cooling] trend will reduce agricultural productivity for the rest of the century.
—Peter Gwynne, Newsweek 1976
The continued rapid cooling of the earth since WWII is in accord with the increase in global air pollution associated with industrialization, mechanization, urbanization and exploding population.
—Reid Bryson, “Global Ecology; Readings towards a rational strategy for Man”, (1971)
To feed a starving child is to exacerbate the world population problem.
—Lamont Cole
Cannibalism is a “radical but realistic solution to the problem of overpopulation.”
—Lyall Watson, The Financial Times, 15 July 1995
Phasing out the human race will solve every problem on earth, social and environmental.
—Dave Forman, Founder of Earth First!
Human beings, as a species, have no more value than slugs.
—John Davis, editor of Earth First! Journal
What we’ve got to do in energy conservation is try to ride the global warming issue. Even if the theory of global warming is wrong, to have approached global warming as if it is real means energy conservation, so we will be doing the right thing anyway in terms of economic policy and environmental policy.
—Timothy Wirth, former U.S. Senator (D-Colorado)
We have wished, we ecofreaks, for a disaster or for a social change to come and bomb us into Stone Age, where we might live like Indians in our valley, with our localism, our appropriate technology, our gardens, our homemade religion—guilt-free at last!
—Stewart Brand (writing in the Whole Earth Catalogue).
You can take the evidence gathered by scientists who work in the field that is being discussed. You can accept that in general climate scientists aren't out to get you and they aren't all a bunch of liars.
Or you can pretend that there is a scary worldwide conspiracy of scientists out to take away your civil rights by forcing, forcing you to drive a more fuel effecient car during a period when the price of oil is up.
Judging by your posts, I am going to guess that you are going to go with tinfoil hat option.
I said: "The NAS was set up with extremely elaborate protections to avoid having a political agenda"
You say >You can't possibly believe or expect me to believe this.
On the evidence of what you post, you will believe almost anything.
>Why is it that conspiracy theorists like yourself beleive government info when it suits your kooky world view?
Conspiracy theory?? What planet are you posting from?? The NAS, for the third time, is not "government info." I posted links to what it is; its history and organization. You won't read the links, you won't evaluate the evidence, but just keep repeating the same tired crank talking points. You bring nothing to the discussion but the word "kooky." Please look in the mirror to see what "kooky" means.
>(...And using hyperbolic qualifiers like "extremely" and "elaborate" does nothing to strengthen your case.)
I posted links which provide abundant back-up my claims regarding the NAS. You refuse to read them.
>Do I have to point out how silly it is for you to post such a statement on a board?
"Silly" is a perfect self-desription for someone who insists that he knows science better than the National Academy. even though he doesn't even know what the National Academy is. Adjust your big red nose and put another layer of white on your face.
>Listen, if you're against an open, invective free exchange of opinions, ideas and facts, maybe you should no longer be "an anonymous clown with a keyboard and an internet account."
I'm not the one who doesn't know what the NAS is or does who is telling people I know science better than the National Academy. The big fluffy buttons down the front of your outfit are very becoming. Don't change; you're perfect.
I'll go with the freedom/reality option.
If you'd prefer a motorized skateboard, that's your choice/option.
So your version of reality is populated with mad scientists straight out of bad 1950's comics?
Seriously, you guys do tend to prove the maxim "Every conservative is a conspiracy theorist."
We must be very careful about proposed climate change legislation.
Has anyone seen or heard of the Petition Project?
http://www.petitionproject.org/
Lots of signatures... all scientists. This is something scientists should be debating. And, yes, I still feel there is a debate. This is not settled science.
it seems that the writer of this absurd article is clueless............you want all debate silenced on global warming.science welcomes scrutiny............only anti-science closes down other possibilities.........there are currently over 30,000 scientists..."well-known" that argue that global warming is not man made........stop taking us back to the days of denying the world is round......remember when "science" claimed global cooling in the 70's..?......guess what.science was wrong then..lets not destroy our economy based on junk and unproven science
Taliesan,
”So your version of reality is populated with mad scientists straight out of bad 1950's comics?”
No, however; a scientist who’s funding (and livelihood) is dependant upon perpetuating a myth with political implications would be deemed bias. The same scientific data then manipulated by politicians bent on pillaging successful industries and economies is further suspect.
Look, do it with your own money. Frankly, I was on the fence from the beginning regarding the topic, (but listening). Recent data, within the past 10 years, has proven the global warming theory wrong, (along with Hansen’s failed predictions and Gore’s “windfall profits”). These guys are carnival barkers and snakeoil salesmen. Conserve energy amongst yourselves if you feel that strongly about it.
Postscript: By the way, I do run a energy efficient home and business without government intervention. I don't need government edicts to switch off the lights when I leave a room.
Much of the initial coverage about Fort Hood turned out to be wrong. Is there anything wrong with that?
The accountability imposed by another country for the CIA's kidnapping and torture reveals much about our own.
Fox News' morning show plays to type, talking about whether Muslims in the Army should face "special debriefings"
219 Democrats and one Republican join in favor of the legislation, which passed by a narrow margin
The survivor and author is upset about comparisons some on the right are making to genocide
Salon headlines in your mailbox
