Unstoppable Global Warming

Message Topic Search Topic Options Post Reply Create New Topic Printable Version Translate Topic

   Clearly, most of my posts here and the information I'm either linking to or reposting is lopsided, because these Global Warming Lunatics are becoming increasingly unhinged, and continue with their propoganda and socialist lifestyle reconditioning program without even the slightest shred of evidence to support their claims that it is human beings that are causing an apparent increase in the global climate.

So I want to post something from the other side, from Spiegel Online, not exactly the greatest bastion of truth in the world.  But here it is, direct from The United Nations Panel on Global Warming, a little group of honks being paid by the most corrupt and ineffective organization in the world to spout a predetermined conclusion regardless of evidence to the contrary:

______________________________________________________________

March 02, 2007 Font:

UN REPORT EXCLUSIVE

Climate Change Impact More Extensive than Thought

By Volker Mrasek

Global climate change is happening faster than previously believed and its impact is worse than expected, information from an as-yet unpublished draft of the long-awaited second part of a United Nations report obtained by SPIEGEL ONLINE reveals. No region of the planet will be spared and some will be hit especially hard.

Is the world's weather already out of control? Is the pollution of the past decades having an impact on the present? That's exactly what the United Nations' Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change fears: Human influences over the last 30 years "have had a recognizable effect on many physical and biological systems," write the authors of the as yet unreleased second part of the 2007 global climate change report.

According to information obtained by SPIEGEL ONLINE, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is convinced global warming is already making the world sweat. At least that's the gist of the "Summary for Policymakers" from the group made up of hundreds of scientists.

The second part of the report is to be presented in April in Brussels after final discussions with government representatives from around the globe. The meta-study is certain to have a major political impact on the ongoing debate about climate change.

Mounting evidence: Climate change is happening now 

The main conclusion of the report is that climate change is already having a profound effect on all the continents and on many of the Earth's ecosystems. The draft presents a long list of evidence:

Glacial lakes are increasing in both size and number, potentially leading to deadly floods 

Permafrost in mountainous regions and at high latitudes is warming increasing the danger of land slides. 

As the temperature of rivers and lakes rises, their thermal stratification and water quality is changing. 

River currents, affected by melting glaciers and ice, are speeding up during the spring. 

Springtime is starting earlier, causing plants to bloom earlier and changing the migrations of birds. 

Many plants and animals are expanding their habitats into mountainous regions and higher latitudes that are becoming milder. 

The authors of the report have sifted through some 30,000 data sets from more than 70 international studies documenting changes to water circulation, to cryospheres (ice zones), as well as to flora and fauna over a period of at least 20 years.

REPRINTS

Find out how you can reprint this SPIEGEL ONLINE article in your publication. According to the IPCC, "more than 85 percent" of the data show "changes in a direction that would be expected as a reaction to warming." In other words: Researchers found evidence of environmental changes due to the greenhouse effect caused by mankind in nearly 9 out of 10 cases surveyed.

The researchers consider it "very unlikely" that the changes observed could be naturally occurring phenomena. They argue that the patterns of regional climate warming and environmental changes match up well with each other. And a similar consistency exists between the scientists' observations and what climate models have predicted would happen as temperatures rise.

Nature under threat 

The UN experts go beyond the current situation. They also explore how populated regions and ecosystems will develop in the future as the world becomes warmer.

Many natural resources are likely to fall victim to climate change according to the IPCC draft report:

Some 20 to 30 percent of all species face a "high risk of extinction" should average global temperatures rise another 1.5 to 2.5 degrees Celsius from their 1990 levels. That could happen by 2050, the report warns. 

Coral reefs are "likely to undergo strong declines." 

Salt marshes and mangrove forests could disappear as sea levels rise. 

Tropical rainforests will be replaced by savanna in those regions where groundwater decreases. 

Migratory birds and mammals will suffer as vegetation zones in the Artic shift. 

The IPCC expects the following world regions to suffer the most due to climate change:

-The Arctic due to the greatest relative warming 

-Small island states in the Pacific as sea levels rise 

-Africa south of the Sahel zone due to drought 

-Densely populated river deltas in Asia amid flooding 

This list alone makes abundantly clear that mankind will not escape these changes unscathed.

Heat-related deaths, floods, drought, storms 

The UN climate panel expects "increasing deaths, injuries and illness from heat waves, floods, storms, forest fires and droughts." The draft summary for policymakers details "heat-related mortality" especially in Europe and Asia.

Several hundred million people in densely populated coastal regions -- particularly river deltas in Asia -- are threatened by rising sea levels and the increasing risk of flooding. More than one-sixth of the world's population lives in areas affected by water sources from glaciers and snow pack that will "very likely" disappear, according to the report.

The climate experts detail the potential consequences for most of the world including Europe, Africa, Asia, the Americas, Australia, New Zealand, polar regions and small Pacific islands. For the most part, global warming will have negative effects for both humans and the environment across much of the planet. The positive aspects -- such as better agricultural and forestry yields in northern Europe -- will be more than outweighed by the threats presented by rising temperatures and the perils that accompany them.

The draft also makes clear just how strongly the authors stand behind their forecasts. Most of their conclusions belong to category two, which means the researchers back them with "strong certainty." Some are even designated "very strong certainty," including the example that North America will be hit by stronger forest fires and heat waves in large cities, as well as the assumption that climate change poses the biggest risk to small island states.

More food in the north and a possibly greener Earth 

The report also lists specific positive developments due to global warming -- but they are expected to be of an ephemeral nature.

The experts apparently do not have concerns about the planet's food production capabilities. Conditions for agriculture are likely to improve in higher latitudes, leading to greater global yields overall. However, numerous developing countries are likely to be hit by greater periods of drought at the same time -- thus threatening their populations with hunger. The climate panel expects yields in the north and deep south only to begin to sink once temperatures rise by more than three degrees Celsius. Overall, they put "average trust" in their predictions about food production.

Rising carbon dioxide concentrations in the Earth's atmosphere will at first help the plant world. Vegetation growth will be stronger and the planet will become greener. The absorption of CO2 by plant life will to a certain extent work against climate change, but not forever. "In the second half of the century terrestrial ecosystems will become a source of carbon which will then accelerate climate change," the IPCC report warns.

The ability of the world's oceans to absorb CO2 is also expected to be depleted by the end of the 21st century. By then they could begin to release greenhouse gases instead of absorbing them.

Rich nations also at risk 

Although the inhabitants of poorer, developing nations are likely to suffer the most from climate change, the IPCC report makes clear that richer industrial nations such as the United States are also at risk. North America, the report cautions, is hardly prepared for the "growing risks and economic losses caused by rising seas, storms and floods." The IPCC report also explicitly details the threat posed by tropical storms. Climate change is expected to increase the number of strong hurricanes leading to the concern that insurance companies might refuse to cover damages in regions threatened by such storms like New Orleans and the rest of the Gulf of Mexico.

Just as they did in the first part of the IPCC report released in February, the climate experts warn that air pollution and greenhouse gases are likely to have long-lasting effects since the planet's climate reacts slowly to changes. It's already a "fait accompli" that average temperatures near ground level will rise a further 0.6 degrees Celsius by 2100, according to the report. Humanity will have no choice but to adapt to the global changes.

According to information obtained by SPIEGEL ONLINE at the end of February, the climate panel will demand radical changes and massive investment against global warming in the third part of the IPCC report expected to be released in May in Bangkok. Some $16 billion (�12.1 billion) will be required by 2030 and humanity only has until 2020 to turn back the trend.

Whether the summary for policymakers will be released in its current form is unclear. Delegates from several countries wrestled with the wording of the first part of the report up until the last minute before its publication. Because, of course, for both scientists and politicians it can make a big difference whether the consequences of climate change are "likely," "very likely," or "practically certain."

_________________________________________________________________

WHAT A BUNCH OF CRAP.

Not even once in this alledged report did anyone make any significant claim as to how exactly human beings are contributing to the alledged climate change.  They simply show signs of a constantly changing terrestrial environment, nothing new since the beginning of time, and link that to the greenhouse effect, also around since the Earth was born, and have decided that it is human beings who are causing it.  

Their solution?  Fan the flames of paranoia, accuse the richest nations and people of being the biggest culprits, and demand that they pay through the nose and cower to new restrictions on living their daily lives in order to appease the brilliant people at the UN who are only looking out for the best interests of nothing less than the entire freaking planet.  Evidence?  They don't need no stinking evidence.  They have studies!  They have a glacier somewhere that is melting!  Imagine that, a temperate planet third in line from the sun and there is ice on its surface that has the audacity to go and melt!  

We must change our ways, we must tax the rich, or we shall all surely perish the most horrible deaths imagineable, and it will happen soon.  Trust us, we know better than you stupid people driving your SUVs.  Never mind my own, SUV, I work fro the United Nations and therefore I am exempt from anything I ever tell anyone else they need to do.  It says so right in my job description.

How I hate these people.

Author	Message Topic Search Topic Options Post Reply Create New Topic Printable Version Translate Topic
WhiteWolf Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Visit Members Homepage Add to Buddy List Guru Climate Change Denier Joined: October/03/2005 Status: Offline Points: 5127	Post Options Post Reply Quote WhiteWolf Thanks(0) Quote Reply Posted: March/03/2007 at 5:32am
	Clearly, most of my posts here and the information I'm either linking to or reposting is lopsided, because these Global Warming Lunatics are becoming increasingly unhinged, and continue with their propoganda and socialist lifestyle reconditioning program without even the slightest shred of evidence to support their claims that it is human beings that are causing an apparent increase in the global climate. So I want to post something from the other side, from Spiegel Online, not exactly the greatest bastion of truth in the world. But here it is, direct from The United Nations Panel on Global Warming, a little group of honks being paid by the most corrupt and ineffective organization in the world to spout a predetermined conclusion regardless of evidence to the contrary: ______________________________________________________________ March 02, 2007 Font: UN REPORT EXCLUSIVE Climate Change Impact More Extensive than Thought By Volker Mrasek Global climate change is happening faster than previously believed and its impact is worse than expected, information from an as-yet unpublished draft of the long-awaited second part of a United Nations report obtained by SPIEGEL ONLINE reveals. No region of the planet will be spared and some will be hit especially hard. Is the world's weather already out of control? Is the pollution of the past decades having an impact on the present? That's exactly what the United Nations' Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change fears: Human influences over the last 30 years "have had a recognizable effect on many physical and biological systems," write the authors of the as yet unreleased second part of the 2007 global climate change report. According to information obtained by SPIEGEL ONLINE, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is convinced global warming is already making the world sweat. At least that's the gist of the "Summary for Policymakers" from the group made up of hundreds of scientists. The second part of the report is to be presented in April in Brussels after final discussions with government representatives from around the globe. The meta-study is certain to have a major political impact on the ongoing debate about climate change. Mounting evidence: Climate change is happening now The main conclusion of the report is that climate change is already having a profound effect on all the continents and on many of the Earth's ecosystems. The draft presents a long list of evidence: Glacial lakes are increasing in both size and number, potentially leading to deadly floods Permafrost in mountainous regions and at high latitudes is warming increasing the danger of land slides. As the temperature of rivers and lakes rises, their thermal stratification and water quality is changing. River currents, affected by melting glaciers and ice, are speeding up during the spring. Springtime is starting earlier, causing plants to bloom earlier and changing the migrations of birds. Many plants and animals are expanding their habitats into mountainous regions and higher latitudes that are becoming milder. The authors of the report have sifted through some 30,000 data sets from more than 70 international studies documenting changes to water circulation, to cryospheres (ice zones), as well as to flora and fauna over a period of at least 20 years. REPRINTS Find out how you can reprint this SPIEGEL ONLINE article in your publication. According to the IPCC, "more than 85 percent" of the data show "changes in a direction that would be expected as a reaction to warming." In other words: Researchers found evidence of environmental changes due to the greenhouse effect caused by mankind in nearly 9 out of 10 cases surveyed. The researchers consider it "very unlikely" that the changes observed could be naturally occurring phenomena. They argue that the patterns of regional climate warming and environmental changes match up well with each other. And a similar consistency exists between the scientists' observations and what climate models have predicted would happen as temperatures rise. Nature under threat The UN experts go beyond the current situation. They also explore how populated regions and ecosystems will develop in the future as the world becomes warmer. Many natural resources are likely to fall victim to climate change according to the IPCC draft report: Some 20 to 30 percent of all species face a "high risk of extinction" should average global temperatures rise another 1.5 to 2.5 degrees Celsius from their 1990 levels. That could happen by 2050, the report warns. Coral reefs are "likely to undergo strong declines." Salt marshes and mangrove forests could disappear as sea levels rise. Tropical rainforests will be replaced by savanna in those regions where groundwater decreases. Migratory birds and mammals will suffer as vegetation zones in the Artic shift. The IPCC expects the following world regions to suffer the most due to climate change: -The Arctic due to the greatest relative warming -Small island states in the Pacific as sea levels rise -Africa south of the Sahel zone due to drought -Densely populated river deltas in Asia amid flooding This list alone makes abundantly clear that mankind will not escape these changes unscathed. Heat-related deaths, floods, drought, storms The UN climate panel expects "increasing deaths, injuries and illness from heat waves, floods, storms, forest fires and droughts." The draft summary for policymakers details "heat-related mortality" especially in Europe and Asia. Several hundred million people in densely populated coastal regions -- particularly river deltas in Asia -- are threatened by rising sea levels and the increasing risk of flooding. More than one-sixth of the world's population lives in areas affected by water sources from glaciers and snow pack that will "very likely" disappear, according to the report. The climate experts detail the potential consequences for most of the world including Europe, Africa, Asia, the Americas, Australia, New Zealand, polar regions and small Pacific islands. For the most part, global warming will have negative effects for both humans and the environment across much of the planet. The positive aspects -- such as better agricultural and forestry yields in northern Europe -- will be more than outweighed by the threats presented by rising temperatures and the perils that accompany them. The draft also makes clear just how strongly the authors stand behind their forecasts. Most of their conclusions belong to category two, which means the researchers back them with "strong certainty." Some are even designated "very strong certainty," including the example that North America will be hit by stronger forest fires and heat waves in large cities, as well as the assumption that climate change poses the biggest risk to small island states. More food in the north and a possibly greener Earth The report also lists specific positive developments due to global warming -- but they are expected to be of an ephemeral nature. The experts apparently do not have concerns about the planet's food production capabilities. Conditions for agriculture are likely to improve in higher latitudes, leading to greater global yields overall. However, numerous developing countries are likely to be hit by greater periods of drought at the same time -- thus threatening their populations with hunger. The climate panel expects yields in the north and deep south only to begin to sink once temperatures rise by more than three degrees Celsius. Overall, they put "average trust" in their predictions about food production. Rising carbon dioxide concentrations in the Earth's atmosphere will at first help the plant world. Vegetation growth will be stronger and the planet will become greener. The absorption of CO2 by plant life will to a certain extent work against climate change, but not forever. "In the second half of the century terrestrial ecosystems will become a source of carbon which will then accelerate climate change," the IPCC report warns. The ability of the world's oceans to absorb CO2 is also expected to be depleted by the end of the 21st century. By then they could begin to release greenhouse gases instead of absorbing them. Rich nations also at risk Although the inhabitants of poorer, developing nations are likely to suffer the most from climate change, the IPCC report makes clear that richer industrial nations such as the United States are also at risk. North America, the report cautions, is hardly prepared for the "growing risks and economic losses caused by rising seas, storms and floods." The IPCC report also explicitly details the threat posed by tropical storms. Climate change is expected to increase the number of strong hurricanes leading to the concern that insurance companies might refuse to cover damages in regions threatened by such storms like New Orleans and the rest of the Gulf of Mexico. Just as they did in the first part of the IPCC report released in February, the climate experts warn that air pollution and greenhouse gases are likely to have long-lasting effects since the planet's climate reacts slowly to changes. It's already a "fait accompli" that average temperatures near ground level will rise a further 0.6 degrees Celsius by 2100, according to the report. Humanity will have no choice but to adapt to the global changes. According to information obtained by SPIEGEL ONLINE at the end of February, the climate panel will demand radical changes and massive investment against global warming in the third part of the IPCC report expected to be released in May in Bangkok. Some $16 billion (�12.1 billion) will be required by 2030 and humanity only has until 2020 to turn back the trend. Whether the summary for policymakers will be released in its current form is unclear. Delegates from several countries wrestled with the wording of the first part of the report up until the last minute before its publication. Because, of course, for both scientists and politicians it can make a big difference whether the consequences of climate change are "likely," "very likely," or "practically certain." _________________________________________________________________ WHAT A BUNCH OF CRAP. Not even once in this alledged report did anyone make any significant claim as to how exactly human beings are contributing to the alledged climate change. They simply show signs of a constantly changing terrestrial environment, nothing new since the beginning of time, and link that to the greenhouse effect, also around since the Earth was born, and have decided that it is human beings who are causing it. Their solution? Fan the flames of paranoia, accuse the richest nations and people of being the biggest culprits, and demand that they pay through the nose and cower to new restrictions on living their daily lives in order to appease the brilliant people at the UN who are only looking out for the best interests of nothing less than the entire freaking planet. Evidence? They don't need no stinking evidence. They have studies! They have a glacier somewhere that is melting! Imagine that, a temperate planet third in line from the sun and there is ice on its surface that has the audacity to go and melt! We must change our ways, we must tax the rich, or we shall all surely perish the most horrible deaths imagineable, and it will happen soon. Trust us, we know better than you stupid people driving your SUVs. Never mind my own, SUV, I work fro the United Nations and therefore I am exempt from anything I ever tell anyone else they need to do. It says so right in my job description. How I hate these people.

Sponsored Links

Dr Moosa Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Add to Buddy List Newbie Joined: March/03/2007 Location: Pakistan Status: Offline Points: 1	Post Options Post Reply Quote Dr Moosa Thanks(0) Quote Reply Posted: March/03/2007 at 9:34am
	We can Stop Global Warming, it is all because of man..the best example in this regards is Himayalan Glaciers, where two arch rivel melting Siachen and other himalayan Glaciers since last 23-years.., which has become of increasing concern to environmentalists. Removal of troops and the setting up of a nature reserve there has been strongly recommended by different world bodies. The Pakistan and Indian governments have as yet not been moved by such arguments. May request Global Community to intervene in this war over longest glaciers of the world to save Himalayan Glaciers. Exchange Siachen confrontation for peace[/FONT Q. Isa Daudpota and Arshad H. Abbasi Opinion-makers in India and Pakistan should tell their governments to stop ruining the future of our water supplies and our weather system. Bringing the troops down from Siachen would be the first step BACK IN 2003, one of us (Daudpota) signed an email petition titled the Siachen Peace Park Initiative located at the glacier that bears this name. It had to do with getting India and Pakistan to withdraw from the futile conflict in the mountains and to let nature revert to its snowy tranquillity. "As part of the normalisation process/confidence-building measures, the governments of India and Pakistan are urged to establish a Siachen Peace Park to protect and restore the spectacular landscapes which are home to so many endangered species including the snow leopard." This was the statement adopted as a lead-up to the 5th World Parks Congress held in September 2003 in Durban, South Africa. The petition was a follow-up to win widespread support for the idea from citizens of India, Pakistan, and around the world, so that the Indian and Pakistani Governments could move forward without loss of face, or strategic liability. Sadly there has been no progress in resolving this decades-old dispute. But new strongly worded reports from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) released on February 2 this year could perhaps make the decision-makers change their minds about this wasteful, futile conflict. The IPCC forecasts that global temperatures would rise by 1.8 degrees Celsius to 4 degrees Celsius this century. There are already signs that South Asia will be one of the worst affected regions � the monsoon could be affected with reduced agriculture production, the sinking of island communities is likely, and vector-borne diseases could increase. Here, however, we will mainly consider the impact of human presence and war on the glaciers of this region and the impact of this on the region and globally. Note that melting of the Himalayan glaciers contributes about 25 per cent to the sea-rise globally. Serious consequence A serious unforeseen consequence of the Siachen war is the danger posed to four other glaciers: Gangotri, Miyar, Milan, and Janapa, which feed the Ganga (first two glaciers), Chenab, and Sutlej rivers respectively. This is because of the heavy traffic on the Indian road from the plains to Siachen passing near these glaciers on the Delhi-Manali-Leh route. This finding is corroborated by a recent report by one of us (Abbasi) for the Worldwide Fund for Nature (WWF), available at http://tinyurl.com/23b5de. According to M.N. Kaul, Principal Investigator on glaciology in the Indian Department of Science and Technology, "the ecology, the environment, and the health of the glacier can be under severe threat in case the Baltal route to the holy Amarnath cave was frequented by thousands of pilgrims." Professor Kaul said heavy pilgrim traffic besides mountain expeditions resulted in depletion of glacier and environmental degradation. He explained that "this depletion and degradation are the result of human breath, refuse and land erosion." When pilgrims can cause so much damage to the glaciers, imagine what the continual presence of troops from both countries must do to the ice and snow given their high-energy requirement. Science bureaucrats who wish to be totally "objective" can often be very conservative in their assessment of complex phenomena that require immediate attention and action. Often a watertight assessment is not feasible and decisions ought to be based on the "precaution principle." Unlike Professor Kaul, Rajendra Pachauri, director-general of the Energy and Resources Institute, is quoted as saying: "A number of scientists say Siachen should be made a protected area, a heritage site of sorts, and that there should be no army presence on either side. For purely ecological reasons, this might be a good idea. But I don't see why there would be melting as a result of military presence and activity." But Professor Pachauri holds an even more important position as chairman of the IPCC. Launching the finding of the international report on February 2, he strongly emphasised the danger if no action was taken on reducing greenhouse emissions, which, among other things, melt glaciers. Research about the Gangotri, India's largest glacier � which feeds the Ganga � has found that the rate of retreat has almost doubled to 34 metres a year compared to what it was in 1971. The melting of Himalayan glaciers could have serious consequences as more than 500 million residents of the Indus, Ganga, and Brahmaputra river basins rely on them for water supply. As with Gangotri, so with Siachen the increasing melting can be largely attributed to human activities in these areas. In Siachen, which provides water to the Nubra river, a tributary of the Indus, the ecosystem has been hugely disturbed by the presence of nearly 15,000 troops on its two sides, consuming and defecating, soiling the area and littering it with the remains of war. Much of this debris will flow into the Indus as the glacier melts. India airlifts food and vital supplies to supplement material that goes up on an all-weather road. Fuel needed for cooking and keeping warm is provided by India through a 250-km-long pipeline. Vehicular traffic and the heat generated from the activities on this 21,000-foot-high glacier has led to unprecedented melting and diminishing of this 72-km-long glacier. Currently temperature rise in the area is recorded as 0.2 degrees Celsius annually, resulting in destructive snow avalanches, formation of glacial lakes, and snow holes. Note that Pakistani troops lie on the western side of the Saltoro ridge, which essentially runs north-south, while Indians are on the eastern side. This is where the Siachen glacier is. Due to much lower activity on the Pakistani side the western glaciers are stable, as shown by recent independent studies by researchers from the U.K. and Italy. Unfortunately, climate "experts" in Pakistan seem to lack knowledge of the importance of glaciers for our ecosystem. In 2001, some of them associated with the Global Climate Change Impact Studies Centre in Islamabad suggested that glaciers be melted artificially (by lasers or darkening) to alleviate the drought in the plains! This Centre was set up by old hands of the Pakistan Atomic Energy Commission. It took one of their own colleagues, Khalid Rashid, to debunk in a conference paper their suggestions, which he labelled science fiction. Glaciers can also be made secure by the use of common sense. It is for opinion-makers in India and Pakistan to tell their respective governments to stop ruining the future of our water supplies and our weather system. Bringing their troops down from the inhospitable heights of Siachen would be the first step. This would be welcomed by the troops as well as the mountain wildlife that has been displaced by the war. (The writers are Islamabad-based environmentalists.)

WhiteWolf Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Visit Members Homepage Add to Buddy List Guru Climate Change Denier Joined: October/03/2005 Status: Offline Points: 5127	Post Options Post Reply Quote WhiteWolf Thanks(0) Quote Reply Posted: March/10/2007 at 8:34am
	This guy gets it. International Intelligence Published: March 9, 2007 at 5:58 PM Czech Pres: Environmentalism is a religion WASHINGTON, March 9 (UPI) -- Environmentalism is a religion that is based more on political ambitions than science, the president of the Czech Republic warned Friday. Speaking at the Cato Institute, a public policy think-tank, President Vaclav Klaus said that environmentalists who clamor for policy change to combat global warming "only pretend" to be promoting environmental protection, and are actually being driven by a political agenda. "Environmentalism should belong in the social sciences," much like the idea of communism or other "-isms" such as feminism, Klaus said, adding that "environmentalism is a religion" that seeks to reorganize the world order as well as social behavior and value systems worldwide. As for government spending on global warming studies, the former finance minister and of the Eastern European nation and trained economist said that such efforts were a "waste of money," adding that there was already sufficient scientific evidence for those seeking policy change to back up their proposals. Meanwhile, he pointed out that those seeking to protect the environment could do a great deal under the existing political framework and with existing technologies, such as importing less goods from far-flung regions that require enormous jet fuel use. Klaus concluded Friday his week-long tour of the United States, having met with a number of senior Bush administration officials, including Vice President Dick Cheney.

christophersnow Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Visit Members Homepage Add to Buddy List Guru "Snowballman" Joined: February/01/2004 Status: Offline Points: 11195	Post Options Post Reply Quote christophersnow Thanks(0) Quote Reply Posted: March/13/2007 at 4:14pm
	OSC weighs in again, and this time he references the book Unstoppable Global Warming.
	"It had to be said. The world is perishing from an orgy of self-sacrificing." - Howard Roark Dean Koontz= Always working!

WhiteWolf Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Visit Members Homepage Add to Buddy List Guru Climate Change Denier Joined: October/03/2005 Status: Offline Points: 5127	Post Options Post Reply Quote WhiteWolf Thanks(0) Quote Reply Posted: March/14/2007 at 5:57am
	BRILLIANT!!!! GENIUS!!!! Card, being a great writer, is putting into words very succintctly every single thing I have been trying to say about this garbage. This is the stuff that is driving me more crazy than anything else I read in the news. Still think I'm crazy? Still think I'm making it all up? Ranting and raving and wasting my time? Well, if you read this article and still think any of those things about this thread then you truly are an idiot. Thanks, Snowman. I would have come across it sooner or later, but I always prefer sooner. I AM CURRENTLY IN THE PROCESS OF PRINTING SEVERAL COPIES OF THIS AND E-MAILING IT TO AS MANY PEOPLE AS POSSIBLE.