Comments on: U.S. media largely ignores latest warning from climate scientists: “Recent observations confirm … the worst-case IPCC scenario trajectories (or even worse) are being realised” — 1000 ppm

By: John A

John A — Sun, 11 Oct 2009 22:39:30 +0000

And the hard question Jason must ask himself, is how he intends to stop doing what he knows to be detrimental to the future of life on the planet Earth.

I promised myself I won’t dominate this blog for long stretches.

Good luck, you’ll need it, prayer is so ineffective.

Have a nice St. Patrick’s day!

By: glennz

glennz — Sat, 25 Apr 2009 20:01:53 +0000

I’m not worried about a thing!
except maybe penguings not being able to get through the ice in antartica.
the “professor” will next be in the ice breaker business!
http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/ cryosphere/ IMAGES/ current.anom.south.jpg

http://www.the-green-wind.com

By: James Reed

James Reed — Thu, 09 Apr 2009 03:53:33 +0000

Coolexcitingname@gmail.com Leave lies at the door, and bring misconceptions.
Human CO2 is not a sin, and will not bring about the apocalypse.

http://www.co2web.info/whatisco2.pps <- Is a powerpoint and must be opened either using powerpoint or google.

Contact me and I will happily discuss global warming.

By: Thomas Lee Elifritz

Thomas Lee Elifritz — Fri, 20 Mar 2009 15:25:23 +0000

Besides, the creation stories of the cosmologists are getting almost as wacky as those of theologians.

Mathematics and physics are indeed wacky. Honest people just shouldn’t be basing their cosmological speculations on things like that, they should just let their imaginations run wild.

By: lgcarey

lgcarey — Wed, 18 Mar 2009 18:16:27 +0000

Pete – I think that, notwithstanding the real likelihood of peak oil, the data regarding total fossil fuel resources suggest that there’s more than enough remaining fossil resources to create a climate catastrophe if we insist on burning all the fossil fuel we can get our hands on, working our way to ever harder to extract resources: all the natural gas, all the coal, all the tar sands, all the oil shale, all the methane deposits, etc.

By: Fred

Fred — Wed, 18 Mar 2009 16:32:15 +0000

Pete : don’t worry about oil, they’ll extract and we’ll happily burn coal and tar sands – which both are much worse about releasing CO2 than oil.

Just my 2c : French main newspapers hadn’t a single line about Copenhagen either – even in “Le Monde”’s recently created “Planet” section. And “of course” nothing on TV.

I’m seriously thinking about going to Copenhagen in December to protest – does anyone know about precise dates and protests being organized ?

By: Brian S.

Brian S. — Wed, 18 Mar 2009 16:24:35 +0000

I’d suggest that people with faith just ignore Thomas Lee Elifritiz. He uses blog posts like some people use the bathroom walls — to insult and provoke.

Science and religion may not be the easiest of fits, but who said life was supposed to be easy? If religion is keeping some people in the dark about climate change, it is, increasingly, motivating others to begin changing their wasteful ways.

Wasn’t it science that helped get us in this predicament in the first place? Figuring out how the world around us worked helped us create technology to manipulate that world. There’s a whole lot of science involved in the creation of the internal combustion engine, after all. All this was blithely called “scientific progress” until not so long ago. Doesn’t seem like “progress” now, does it?

Yes, science will be hugely important in helping us get out of the mess that science, and faith, and human nature helped get us into in the first place. But it may only be a science wedded to humility that can save us. Many people find a real humility through faith. Some can get there through science, too.

Besides, the creation stories of the cosmologists are getting almost as wacky as those of theologians. String theorists talking about universes within universes, quantum weirdness, and maybe we’re all just the Sims:
http://www.nytimes.com/ 2007/ 08/ 14/ science/ 14tier.html?_r=1&pagewanted=2

Brian

By: Pete Best

Pete Best — Wed, 18 Mar 2009 15:27:59 +0000

There is simply not enough fossil fuel for this A1F1 scenario to surface. Oil will be a problem come 2020, we cannot simply state that we have enough of the stuff to being forth scenarios such as these. If peak oil occurs and there is plenty of evidence to demonstrate that it will then the cost of the stuff will rocket, exports to places such as the USA will srop off and we can expect another war or too.

By: jorleh

jorleh — Wed, 18 Mar 2009 08:05:44 +0000

Fine story Joe. People really don`t know where we are going. A few days ago Jorma Ollila presented in Helsingin Sanomat the oil company Shell`s vision of the future of oil (Ollila being head of board of Shell and Nokia). That future was in short business-as-usual. There was nothing of the real science of the climate change. And, however, we are heading for 1000 ppm. Is the case lost?

By: David B. Benson

David B. Benson — Wed, 18 Mar 2009 01:39:06 +0000

Thomas Lee Elifritz — Bye. Hope you regain your poise soon.