Hey, at least we'll be spared another Clinton presidency.

I uhhh thought 30 years ago we were going to freeze to death. Oh wait, I saw a movie once where global warming caused New York to freeze overnight. It can happen, right?

Environmentalists everywhere are seething with outrage over the author's use of the "N word."

Wait, you mean there isn't time to elect Algore Dictator of the World's Environment so he can declare global martial law and outlaw SUVs?

The sky is falling! The sky is falling!

It's OK. All we have to do is pass around the Carbon Offset Collection Hat, and we'll be good to go. Anybody want to take a guess as to how much we'll need to collect by the end of the year?

Paul, who should we make the checks out to? (I vote to make them out to me.)

Bwhahahahahahahahahaha.....OMG.

God must have created liberals just to give him something to laugh at.

The chief climatologist at the Massschusetts Institute of Technology says CO2 is not what causes global warming but is the result of global warming. Basically, that algore is full of shit, which causes him to spew methane, a true greenhouse gas. Anytime someome says the science is settled is trying to pull something. Ponzi anyone?

Zelsdorf, you owe me the cost of a new monitor. I just spewed my beverage all over mine reading your comment. :lol:

Isn't the title of this post "Global Warmers Give Us 8 Months to Live", a bit inaccurate?

Saying that the world must act within the next 8 months to avoid a tipping point is not the same as saying that we have 8 months "to live".

>Isn't the title of this post "Global Warmers Give Us 8 Months to Live", a bit inaccurate?

lol Oyster... No less accurate than the story...

It amazes me really... You look at this post and the most inaccurate thing you can find is my humorous title...

You crack me up.

really oyster... I have to ask.

Are you REALLY that stupid??? I know you can't say "yes" to that but I have to ask it anyway...

Are you really so stupid as to think my smartassed subject is the most inaccurate thing in that post?

Damn, I just renewed my cell phone package for another 2 years! From now on, my definition of "future" is everything within the next 8 months.

Paul, you disappoint me.

Son of Kyoto? SON? Those sexist bastards!!

OHTEHNOES!

The article is correct in that we are fast approaching a tipping point that once passed we can't retreat back from. Scientists at CERN are conducting a number of experiments this summer under the code name CLOUD. The results of those experiments will demonstrate the validity of the one scientific theory that accounts for most of the current and past climate data discovered so far. The tipping point is that the experimental results will likely prove scientifically that Al Gore and the IPCC are full of shit. The downside is that we won't be able to get environmentalist backing to build Nuclear power plant, and if you are a framer, some of the hoopla driving biofuels will be gone.

The CERN CLOUD experiments are designed to measure the cloud producing effect of cosmic rays. Not surprising if you have ever seen an experiment to detect radiation in a cloud chamber. Here's the interesting thing. Primary cosmic rays consist of charged particles and as they approach Earth the magnetic fields of the Earth and Sun bend their paths. When the Sun's magnetic field is most active it boosts the effect and more cosmic rays are bent away from Earth's atmosphere, which results in less cloud cover and more heating of the atmosphere. When the Sun's magnetic field is less active more cosmic rays reach the atmosphere, which results in more clouds and more cooling.

The Sun's magnetic field is currently twice it's long term normal value, so there are fewer cosmic rays hitting the atmosphere and fewer clouds being formed and the result is global warming. However, the Sun is due to enter the beginning of a minimal cycle in 2012 which means more cosmic rays causing more clouds and maybe global cooling. The CERN experiments are being done to estimate the cloud forming effect of cosmic rays. Preliminary results put the effect at more than a magnitude greater than that of doubling of atmospheric CO2. That means were are headed for a period of cooling on par with the little ice age of 300 years ago. Doubling of the atmospheric CO2 will offset some of the cooling and help plants withstand colder summers, but there will be hardships until the Sun enters it's next long term active phase in about 150 years.

Anyway, Al Gore and his ilk have not been able to stop the CERN experiments so far with their call for no more science. They obviously see the potential tipping point of their credibility rapidly approaching, which is why they are ratcheting up the disaster predictions. 10 years and we would be starting to feel the cooling effect, so now they are down to 8 months. They want nations to bind themselves with ignorant treaties and they hope to silence any opposition to the IPCC's monopoly. I can just see Gore standing on the frozen Thames (which it did in winter back in the 1700 hundreds) telling the crowed that this frozen river is the result of the global warming he warned about. Like many liberals, Gore's thinking is impervious to facts.

Here's a link to the CERN CLOUD site.

This is EXCELLENT! So, when the end of the year comes and we haven't done all that stuff, THEN will the eco-nuts SHUT UP, since they'll have failed to save mankind??

Algor-abge is burning up the roads and the world making frequent trips to the bank to deposit his 'carbon' offset profits. Can I convince any of you that you are facing certain death if you don't possess a limestone rock from Va. I own several tons and have access to millions of tons. What should I ask per pound? What is Algor-abge charging per pound of 'carbon' credit. I'll match that, but the buyer pays shipping...You will actually receive something, not like the bag of hot air you get from Algor-abge.
Has everyone forgot that he actually owns an interest in the company selling them?
Told you the democrats would provide laughts for the next two years, lots of laughs.

What amazes me is that the entire rightie world is so damned certain that humans have no impact on the global environment and, with that certainty, are willing to gamble the existence of life on this planet should there be any credibility to the Global Warming theory.

The one inescapble problem: if Global Warming theories are even partially correct, the inactions humans, encouraged by the rightie idiots, will take us to a point of extinction.

According to a BBC Report on Global Warming, humans create 25 billion tons of CO2 gases a year. Anyone want to seriously argue that the volume of that much carbon dioxide is negligible and that those who are concerned about the cumulative effect of that volume of pollution are simply whackos?

What the extremists on the right are proving is that most of themselves are genetically malprogrammed for survival of the human species.

If natural selection worked all the time, the human gene pool would have been spared of these crazies eons ago.

According to a BBC Report on Global Warming, humans create 25 billion tons of CO2 gases a year. Anyone want to seriously argue that the volume of that much carbon dioxide is negligible and that those who are concerned about the cumulative effect of that volume of pollution are simply whackos?

Sure.

That much-beloved lefty mouthpiece, the United Nations, has said:

Carbon dioxide is released to the atmosphere by a variety of sources, and over 95% percent of these emissions would occur even if human beings were not present on Earth. For example, the natural decay of organic material in forests and grasslands, such as dead trees, results in the release of about 220 billion tons of carbon dioxide every year.

So, is less than 5% really enough to "tip the balance" in 8 short months?

Weider, real science shows, from examining artic and antartic ice, that CO2 is a result of the oceans warming, not the cause of warming. You can call us kooks all you want to for not following the pipers call of the charlatans you follow. So I have an offer for you. I will sell you carbon credits for 3/4 the cost algore charges. You and all of your doomsday friend can just make your checks out to Zelsdorf Ragshaft III. I will also make arrangement to accept your credit cards for your convenience. I will sell you 50 credits for 3 payments of $29.98. You will feel good and so will I.

Hey, if carbon offsets work, why not other kinds of offsets?

Can I get a politeness offset? I send money to some third party for them to be polite, and then I can be rude to everyone I meet?

Can I get a meat-eating offset? Can I pay vegetarians to eat veggies so I can have my cheeseburgers?

The possibilities are endless, if the concept of "offsets" really works.

C-C-G:

Can I get a politeness offset? I send money to some third party for them to be polite, and then I can be rude to everyone I meet?

Can I get a meat-eating offset? Can I pay vegetarians to eat veggies so I can have my cheeseburgers?

Carbon offsets are just as ephemeral as those wonderful alternative offsets you have proposed. They are the equivalent of the ancient practice of "indulgences", whereby rich people absolved their sins not through prayer or good deeds but rather a sizable contribution to the local Bishop. Carbon offsets make rich people feel better about their repeated, hypocritical violation of the central tenets of the so-called faith.

Further proof that the "Green Movement" is the religion of the secular.

Wieder,

Anyone want to seriously argue that the volume of that much carbon dioxide is negligible and that those who are concerned about the cumulative effect of that volume of pollution are simply whackos?

First there's no real world evidence the human caused CO2 causes any warming. Yes, CO2 is a greenhouse gas, but so is water vapor. The approach the IPCC has taken is like the high school science problems that say to calculate the speed of some falling object, but ignore atmospheric drag. Yet such calculations would have sky jumpers hitting the ground at over the speed of sound. It's the same with the global circulation models that the entire case for CO2 induced global warming is based on. Simply put, no one can model what they don't understand.

If the CERN CLOUD experiments, which won't be complete until 2010 demonstrate a strong link between cosmic ray and cloud formation the cooling effect will make doubling of CO2 nearly insignificant. If the top Russian astrophysicist is correct, the Sun will start into a long quiet period around 2012 which was its condition during the little ice age. All of the CO2 humans have pumped into the atmosphere by then will only be able to minimize the cooling by a degree or two. If you want to help the world avoid a global cooling catastrophe you can start using coal to heat your home and buy the biggest SUV you can afford. I doubt you'll be able to match Gore's carbon output unless you have your own private jet, but we can all start somewhere.

Here's another "inconvenient truth":

http://tinyurl.com/3dlpca

Basically, Mars has heated up more than the Earth has.

So, either the Martians have been voting for eeeeeeevil Republicans and driving Hummers...

...or...

Planetary warming is caused by something other than human activity... like, say, the Sun?

Someone ought to clue the lefties into the fact that carbon offsets were an Enron scan to begin with. So now they are pursuing the phantom quarry of a dead hunter. Or maybe they are the quarry.

MacLorry is right about CERN, and I have little doubt that the preliminary findings will be borne out. Cooling starting soon. I was amused to read his suggestion about buying an SUV. Years ago I was calling for greater public recognition of the valiant soccer moms charging through the frontlines of the Carbon Liberation Wars in their Suburban Assault Vehicles. Once cooling sets in, watch CAFE standards drop by fiat.
=====================================

Kim, I wasn't aware that Enron was in on the carbon offset thingy... or perhaps I knew it once and forgot it.

Puts a whole different spin on what Algore is doing, doesn't it?

"MacLorry is right about CERN, and I have little doubt that the preliminary findings will be borne out. "

The silly climate specialists are out in full force tonight.

The silly climate specialists are out in full force tonight.

The theory CERN is examining explains most of the observed evidence collected so far, and that's a lot more than the CO2 induced warming crowed has going for it. Gore and his ilk will do anything to suppress real science that doesn't support their anti-human environmentalist religion.

A blinding insight: these guys are timeshare salesmen. I got exactly the same

You have 30 minutes to buy,
Or you will die,

in Mexico last year.

I did not buy
But I did not die.

There is a study linking aurorae borealis with Nile River levels that fits the magnetism idea, and has data from long series in both cases.

Wieder, got any silly ideas for me to harpoon? Like Gore as a prophet?
==================================

I seriously think that you are taking the warning out of context Paul. I doubt that anyone actually believes that there is any clear cut date for anything. In fact there was no clear consenses on whether or not we were even entering a long term warming trend until recently. I am leaning towards the idea that global warming is occuring. The earth has experienced warming and cooling trends throughout its history, and in the past it never had a single thing to do with burning hydrocarbons. However, if the science is correct, there is no reason to to reject the theory that the current warming trend is being caused by man. This should not be political. Its whatever the facts are.
Paul, perhaps what was meant was that if in 10 years { or 8 months, whatever the date was} if changes are not put in place, it will be too late to stop damage to the atmosphere. I think somebody did a calculation and determined our current pollution levels vs the current rate of atmosphere damage, and came up with a ballpark figure. Just leave it alone. Its not some big conspiracy to force us all to go back to living in caves. Maybe the researcher was right, maybe he was wrong. He was only trying to do his best to save your sorry ass.

You, harpoon an idea???? What a flatulent twit. (apologies for the typo)

Wieder sounds.
=========

You know, Bob, when someone claims to be saving my sorry ass to his own benefit and my own loss, I'm entitled to criticize and object. You agree the science isn't settled; why should we settle the policy?
============================

Hey C-C-G, I really don't like Al Gore either, but to call him a dictator when he isn't even an elected official is just ignorant. Even when Al Gore was VP he did not act like a dictator. But this is not a defense of Al Gore. I am shocked that you would call Gore a dictator, when the very president that I am assuming you support, is acting more like a dictator than any other president in history. There are provisions in the Patroit Act that are clearly unconstitutional, and the president says that its fine. He does not care. At least with the feds, probable cause is no longer needed. But the 4th amendment clearly states that it is. Warrentless searches and seizures. Probable Cause is clearly stated as a determing factor in determining a search and seizure. Clearly stated in the 4th Amendment. But who cares, its only for terrorists, right? Then why are they tapping the phones of millions of Americans? Its not like other branches of the Federal Government like the IRS haven't been caught red handed fabricating evidence. Do you really trust them? I assume that most of the Bush supporters here on Wizbang consider themselves good Americans and supporters of the American way of life. But do good Americans support a president who has no regard for the Bill of Rights? I myself voted for President Bush in 2000, but it was not until I began to see the abuses and blatent disregard for the law, that he lost ALL my support. Bush speaks of freedom, but he is the greatest threat to freedom in America today.

Bob,

Which website did you copy and paste that screed from?

Obviously you've never actually read the USA PATRIOT Act (it's an acronym, so you capitalize all the letters).

If you'd stop listening exclusively to the ACLU, you'd learn that the one part that has been ruled unconstitutional was amended by Congress in the reauthorization in 2005, and that a later court case regarding that section was dismissed as moot.

In other words, there was one problem, and it was fixed long ago. Please try to keep up with current happenings, or, at the very least, research things before putting fingers to keyboard. Saves mucho embarrassment later.

You know, Bob, when someone claims to be saving my sorry ass to his own benefit and my own loss, I'm entitled to criticize and object. You agree the science isn't settled; why should we settle the policy?
============================

To his own benefit?
No the science isn't settled, perhaps its even caused by cow manure, who knows. But when you object, you stand in the way. Just let them conduct the research, and keep an open mind. There will be false starts and mistakes, but true science is the persuit of fact. I don't detect much of openmindedness here on Wizbang. Lack of openmindedness is a clear indicator that minds are already made up. And that indicates to me that you feel you know more than the climate researchers. How that for ego?

Oh, apparently you also didn't read closely what I had written, Bob.

I suggested that the global warming kooks wanted to elect Algore as dictator, not that he already was one.

It's called sarcasm. It's also called satire.

Please try to pay attention. Makes you look less foolish.

Lack of openmindedness is a clear indicator that minds are already made up.

Tell that to Algore. He shows a decided lack of openmindedness to the concept that it might not be human-caused.

By the way, my mind is open... just not far enough that just anything can fly in.

Ever notice the huge rush the lefties are in to convince everyone of us of this man made GW bs? Hurry! Hurry! No time to waste! The debate is over!! That alone tells you something ain't up to snuff.

And it also tells me that the democrat party knows that without this GW crap, they don't have much hope of sustaining much political power.

There's nothing like the lefties admitting (without actually admitting) that without GW, they're pretty much history. Yeeeehaw!

C-C-G, website? No, I saw a tv interview where a Bush spokesman was dening that the 4th Amendment even called for Probable Cause.
And no, you never actually read the USA Patroit Act either, its a huge document, and even lawyers are ripping their hair out. As for listening to the ACLU, you've got to be kidding. As I stated eariler, I VOTED for Bush in 2000. I am a conservative, I just don't support Bush and his shreding of our civil liberties any longer. Civil Liberties should not be the concern of lefties exclusivley. It concerns us all.
And no, there was not just one problem, Bush has stated that he does not care if its illegal or not, he will continue to conduct illegal wiretaps as well. These types of blatent disregard is the hallmark of the Bush Administration. What about the illegal torture of POWs? Even Conservative John McCain has stated that torture is pointless, as the prisoners will eventually confess to anything just to make it stop. I'm not talking about panties on the head torture, I mean the stuff that can kill people. Nobody minds seeing terrorists hurt or killed, but the problem here is that no everybody taken in as a POW is guilty. An arab man living in Canada was mistaken for a terrorist by the Canadian government and handed over to the US military. He was taken to a prison somewhere in the middleast and tortured for six months or so. This man's family never knew what happened to him. He was finally determined to be innocent and released. But it was too late his life was ruined and his buisness in shambles. I do not fear terrorists. I fear a government that can do this to people. Its the willingness to abuse the law by the Bush Administration, that concerns me. I don't care what Congress has approved, unless there has been a constitutional convention, and parts of the 4th amendment deleted, congress has no business oking anything that the 4th Amendment or any other part of the Bill of Rights forbids. End of story. Its that simple. Some Christian.

I really don't care what Al Gore has to say. He's the reason I voted for Bush in 2000.
There are HUGE constitutional problems with the USA Patriot Act, and all the arguing in circles doesn't change a thing. I just wanted a reason to say what I had to say. Perhaps I would have read your post more closly C-C-G, if I truly thought a mindless Bush Lemming such as yourself really had anything enlightening to say.

Posted by: Wieder at May 5, 2007 05:37 PM

"According to a BBC Report on Global Warming, humans create 25 billion tons of CO2 gases a year."

Weider, the BBC is hardly a source for unbiased reporting, which the BBC itself freely admits.

Try listening to internationally acclaimed experts such as William Gray.....here's an article about his recent comments which you obviously missed:

'Hurricane forecaster Gray says ocean currents, not humans' CO2 emissions, causing global warming'

http://tinyurl.com/39do92

On top of that, the USA has been show to be increasing it's numbers of planted trees, which greatly helps to convert CO2 to oxygen, while the rest of the world is producing more CO2 than their dwindling forests can process:

http://tinyurl.com/2kl7bv

The USA has the toughest environmental laws in place currently of all nations globally, and they are energetically applied, with violators readily penalized.

If the rest of the world had these same eco-friendly laws in place, and were made to adhere to them, they would be screaming and shouting and throwing hissyfits about unfair laws which penalize their countries economies.

Fact is, the rest of the world wants the United States to pick up the tab for cleaning up their messes, on top of our own. Funny how we seen to have a history of cleaning up other countries' messes....hmmmmm.

Mac, shoot me a mail, paul@

When I object, Bob, I stand in the way? Do you realize the sort of authoritarian you sound like Bob?
=================================

Wieder's gone poof.
===========

Just 2 years ago they gave us 10 years to do something about global warming
...
But now the hucksters have decided that our time to do something about global warming can accurately be measured in months.

Geez, Paul, do you have such poor reading comprehension that you couldn't actually understand those articles you cited? Those two things you laugh at being contradictory are not even the same things! The first says we need to do something within 10 years. The second says that if we're going to do something within 10 years, we need to come up with a plan to do something by the end of the year. They are not mutually exclusive, and in fact one is the prior step for the other.

If you want to post an anti-global warming rant, go right ahead. But you demonstrate how few facts you base that on when you not only misread something, but actually post the article that you misread so we can all see your mistake! (And I'll give you the benefit of assuming it was a mistake, and not an intentional misrepresentation.)

Brian, there isn't any question that the warming adherents are promoting a 'the train is leaving the station' mindset. The problem is they haven't any idea where the train is headed.
======================

Mac, I look forward to the findings from CERN, but I wouldn't get my hopes up too much about Svensmark's theories about cosmic rays. Rasmus Benestad details much of the criticism here.

mantis,

This all seems like the usual an healthy debate among scientists. Obviously, there are a significant number of scientists who see the theory as promising or else the money for the CERN project wouldn't be available. What's new is there is finally experimental science underway to test a global climate theory.

If it was just a political power grab then Svensmark's would have created a computer model to account for cosmic ray forcing and used the model's output as evidence. Sorry, but now that Al Gore's move is being shown to school kids as if it were the truth there needs to be political opposition to such nonsense as well as scientific investigation. Otherwise, the science will just be ignored and we'll be trading carbon credits as the world heads into a dangerous cooling phase.

mantis, did you read comment #10?

You know RealClimate is Mann's site. That doesn't mean everything there is garbage, but you ought to read climateaudit.org, which is Steve McIntyre's site.

And I agree with Mac. Showing it to kids is the last straw.
===============

Heh, what might be so dangerous about the coming cooling phase? Should we try to avoid that danger?
==============================

There are HUGE constitutional problems with the USA Patriot Act, and all the arguing in circles doesn't change a thing.

What are these supposed problems?

Details, man, details!

But you don't have any, because the law has passed constitutional muster in most areas since the beginning, and in all areas since 2005.

This idiot fails to remember that Clinton politicized domestic intelligence. There is not, nor likely ever will be, proof that Bush did so.
===============================

And I can show you how Clinton's crew ignored the skeptics of the hockey stick and 'fixed' the science around their preconceived ideas. Wasn't 1997 the hottest year on record? Who was President?

See?
============

Excellent points, Kim.

If ya ever get the yen to write for a blog, you can contact me through mine. :)

Ah, yes, Rasmus, Mr Independent and Identically Distributed Random Variables. Steve McIntyre doesn't seem to think a whole lot of your boy's statistics, mantis.

Thanks, C-C-G, fully occupied at the moment, but you are a sweetie. Tell DJ.
===========================

By the way, mantis, where would Benestad's objections be if CERN does show the corrrelation that the preliminary findings do? Just imagine.

Then look at the Nile River/Aurorae data. Long series of observations, there. I'd have to put on my thinking cap to remember if it's the denominator or the numerator, but that length of time is going to add significance to what is a retrospective study.
==========================

Tell DJ

Sorry, Kim, my morning caffeine hasn't kicked in yet... tell DJ what? :lol:

He's too left-brained to tolerate my right-brainedness.
==================================

Okay, now I am really confused. I must need more caffeine.

Greenhouse gases include carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxide, as well as, water vapor, carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxide, nitrogen dioxide, and ozone.

I propose that we eliminate all the greenhouse gases and see what happens. We need to stop being so conservative on what gases we reduce.

That hot liquid you are drinking was steeped in my resentment over a private quarrel. I'm sorry I poured it out.
==================================

Okay, at least now I know I am not losing what's left of the little mind I started with.

Well Brian, it is you who need to learn a bit of reading comprehension.

The second article never says we have to make a plan now but we can wait 10 years to implement it... indeed it says we must act "immediately."

But you know what Brian... none of it matters... it's all nonsense anyway so discussing the fine point is meaningless...

It's like that story a while back that scientists had determined -as a fact- that the raising climate was causing children to get sick. And they based this finding on 4 kids being admitted to a single hospital.

The global warming scaremongers will say anything, no matter how loopy and some gullible idiots will believe it.

I choose not to be that gullible idiot. Your milage may vary.

What I don't understand is why, with or without the cloud forming nuclei, the clouds instigated from cosmic rays don't simply re-evaporate. Do cosmic rays change the dewpoint? Not likely. Why do the clouds persist?

I think I've never heard so loud,
The quiet message in a cloud.
====================

I do think the beauty of it is that water can be a positive or negative feedback DEPENDING UPON NEED.
==============================

The referrant for 'it' in my previous post is 'climate regulation'. I think that water, maybe in all its phases, acts as a positive or negative feedback loop in climate regulation. Perhaps it can do so, because it acts in so many places of this chaotic system.

I haven't got it all figured out, yet, but I do have a unified system.
=================================

I mean I have a unified theory of the system of climate regulation. Carbon dioxide is very important in it, because of the role that the carbon cycle has in it, but I suspect this abrupt uncorking will have little long term consequence.

Besides, why waste all those lovingly constructed chemical bonds by destroying them for the energy needs of humans? We need them for structure, feedstocks for plastic to shelter us.
=============================

OK, out of gas. Damn, who put earth juice in the spare tank?
==============================

kim,

What I don't understand is why, with or without the cloud forming nuclei, the clouds instigated from cosmic rays don't simply re-evaporate.

Even when the air temperature is below the due point clouds don't typically form without nuclei to initiate droplet formation. Cosmic rays create a supply of such nuclei. Once droplets form they won't evaporate until the conditions change from condensing to evaporation. It all sounds simple, but it's not. The process of condensation releases heat that allows the air to hold more water vapor yet as the air around the droplets heats up it also rises, which brings the droplets into contact with colder air. Science has been studying cloud formation a long time and yet there are still plenty of gaps in knowledge with the cosmic ray connection being one more.

The process of cloud formation and then rain or snow removes the nuclei from the air that the cloud needed to form in the first place. With cosmic rays, the nuclei are created in the atmosphere without needing to be uplifted from the surface.

Well Brian, it is you who need to learn a bit of reading comprehension.

The second article never says we have to make a plan now but we can wait 10 years to implement it... indeed it says we must act "immediately."

Oh, really?

Article:

World leaders will have to agree the shape of a "son of Kyoto" treaty before the end of the year

Paul:

So there you have it. We have 8 months to do something or we all die. If we wait 9 moths [sic], it's just too late.... Global Warmers Give Us 8 Months to Live

Sorry, you can't spin your way out of this one. Clearly the "do something" of yours refers to the need to come up with the treaty. And even the "immediately" that you quote from the article to defend yourself refers to plans to develop a climate change treaty, not concrete actions to cut emissions.

And your hand-waving was entertaining too, with the "er... well... ummm... none of it matters, anyway! Yeah! And besides, those global warmists will say anything, but I'm not that gullible!"

Well, you may not be gullible, but if you're going to take two separate timelines, combine them, and call them contradictory, then you're just dishonest.

Why don't we just wait. We could kill two birds -- global warming and the Iraq war -- with one stone.

Brian, if a bit of confusion over timelines is the worst criticism you can come up with, why even bother?

LOL, if this were anywhere near the truth we could raise and lower the earth's temperature at will to meet our needs every couple of years. These non-scientists are just toooooo funny.

Very helpful, Mac. I still don't understand, but I understand that it is understandable.

Brian, get on the skeptic's train before it leaves the station. Johnny come lately doubters get the back of the bus.
========================

Well, yes, Mac, it makes sense if there are times when the atmosphere becomes supersaturated because of the absence of terrestrial cloud forming particles, and why shouldn't there be. I had assumed that air couldn't rise above 100% hummidity. That it can in the absence of cloud forming nuclei, and that it does, completes the cosmic ray scenario for me.

Now, don't these variations in magnetism explain only the regular climate cycles associated with the Solar Cycles, of which #25 is the imminent one? If these are the dominant determinants of climate then we may be able to get a little predictability into the picture.

Now what are the dangers of oncoming cold, and should we try to do something about it?

One irony that amuses me is that man, when unable to effect climate, was able to adapt to whatever change came. Now that we might be approaching the power to modulate climate, we may be approaching the power to effect a change to which we cannot adapt.
===================

C'mon, guys, Son of Kyoto will be really useful. Not only will it address the global warming issue, but it'll also use its spiky tail and fire-breathing to protect us from attacks by Mothra and Gigan.

Bring it on!

We are far more likely to err fatally advertently, than inadvertently, as has been the burning of hydrocarbons.

Then again, with increasing insight, inadvertent shades to advertent.

What to do? Don't know.
===============

Paul writes "Are you really so stupid as to think my smartassed subject is the most inaccurate thing in that post?"

No, Paul. I never said the title was "the most inaccurate thing in the post". I think the post, which is largely a quote, speaks for itself. It seems to be an unnecessarily alarmist article. However, the title is inaccurate, and unnecessarily alarmist, too. This detracts from your point, that's why I brought it up. I assumed you preferred to be accurate rather than inaccurate. I don't really think it's such a badge of honor to be slightly less inaccurate than something you're mocking, but suit yourself. I'd guess you'd prefer to wonder about my stupidity than correct your errors.

Now, if I thought for a second that your title was an attempt at some "over-the-top" humor, I'd give it a pass. But, with all due respect, your posts are so consistently devoid of humor that the only charitable thing to do is assume you're never trying to be funny.

Such odds claim the best course is first, to do no harm.
============================

Go suck on a pearl forming nucleus.
=======================

"C'mon, guys, Son of Kyoto will be really useful. Not only will it address the global warming issue, but it'll also use its spiky tail and fire-breathing to protect us from attacks by Mothra and Gigan."

Aieeeee! Run for your lives! It's Son of Kyoto!!

Just too rich. I for one welcome global warming, the rising oceans will flood the coasts - then we do not have to put up with those doggone California and New York weirdos. They will have to move to the Midwest where they will be promptly arrested for their bizarre antics.