What a load of shite...

[Fred_Nguyen]

Blame Bush...

"An Iraqi couple enjoys a snow battle in a garden in Sulaimaniyah"

A First! Snow Falls in Baghdad

"The science is settled"

[Stewart]

More extremes of weather is exactly what the IPCC report predicts....so, again, well done on supporting the climate change enthusiasts

And go on posting your examples of one....and anyone with a most basic understanding of the scientific process will be laughing at you

[stogie bear]

Classic argument of the pro-warmers... "Well, of course - it gets colder first!"

You can't win. It's like religeon.  

[thaibound]

(stogie bear @ Jan. 11 2008,13:50) . It's like religeon.  

minus the inquisitions, crusades and other countless excuses for mass murder and attempted genocide.

[donnnnnny]

[Fred_Nguyen]

(Stewart @ Jan. 12 2008,01:40) More extremes of weather is exactly what the IPCC report predicts....so, again, well done on supporting the climate change enthusiasts

And go on posting your examples of one....and anyone with a most basic understanding of the scientific process will be laughing at you

"How now! a madman! Why, thou peevish sheep..."

... do you blindly accept what is so absurd?

These sycophants with the IPCC have constructed the "facts" such that any result validates their politics. If it's colder, if it's warmer... it's the fault of humans. This is a grossly masochistic political agenda.

If global warming was really occurring, the temperature extremes between the poles and the equator would be equilibrating. Therefore, an honest bastard would predict fewer instances of climate porn (hurricanes, tornados, etc.), since it is opposing temperatures that drive these extreme events.

But honesty is not what feeds grant-hungry scientists, the news media, the U.S.-hating European left or self-absorbed gluttons like Al Gore.

Also, please tell us about your background in science that allows you to Ziggyistically sneer, "anyone with a most basic understanding of the scientific process will be laughing at you".

[Fred_Nguyen]

(stogie bear @ Jan. 12 2008,03:50) Classic argument of the pro-warmers... "Well, of course - it gets colder first!"

You can't win. It's like religeon.

Spot on. It is religion. And Al Gore is the high priest.

But like many religions, the priest is both a hypocrite and a financial beneficiary of his own holiness...

[mesmer]

(Fred_Nguyen @ Jan. 12 2008,09:20)

(stogie bear @ Jan. 12 2008,03:50) Classic argument of the pro-warmers... "Well, of course - it gets colder first!"

You can't win. It's like religeon.  

Spot on. It is religion. And Al Gore is the high priest.

But like many religions, the priest is both a hypocrite and a financial beneficiary of his own holiness...

its all about grant money and PC - al gore makes me sick

[Looker]

Actually, the most disturbing and disgusting thing it's how companies have turned this problem around to make more even money.
I refer to the carbon credits business.
Al Gore himself have purchased some so that he can justify the pollution being created by his car and the electricity consumption of his mansions..how hypocritical

[donnnnnny]

(mesmer @ Jan. 12 2008,09:42)

(Fred_Nguyen @ Jan. 12 2008,09:20)

(stogie bear @ Jan. 12 2008,03:50) Classic argument of the pro-warmers... "Well, of course - it gets colder first!"

You can't win. It's like religeon.  

Spot on. It is religion. And Al Gore is the high priest.

But like many religions, the priest is both a hypocrite and a financial beneficiary of his own holiness...

 its all about grant money and PC - al gore makes me sick  

you got this one right frederick

[katoeylover]

If there is any sort of freak weather, the scientists say this is what we are predicting. FFS they can't even predict the weather for next week let alone next year.

We were told that this summer in the UK was going to be a scorcher,a drought. What happens, wet normal weather.

This winter, a regular cold winter.

All these guys say is bollocks.

If it was as bad as they say, then why not do something really positive by government law, instead of watching a load of politicians get rich off carbon credits.

From The UK:

A British court has determined that Al Gore's "documentary" "An
> Inconvenient Truth" contains at least eleven material falsehoods.
>
> For those that haven't been following this case, a British truck
> driver filed a lawsuit to prevent the airing of Gore's film in
> England's public schools.
>
> According to the website of the political party the plaintiff, Stewart
> Dimmock, belongs to:
>
> In order for the film to be shown, the Government must first amend
> their Guidance Notes to Teachers to make clear that 1.) The Film is a political work and promotes only one side of the argument.
2.) If teachers present the Film without making this plain they may be in breach of section 406 of the Education Act 1996 and guilty of political indoctrination.
3.) Eleven inaccuracies have to be specifically drawn to the attention of school children.

And what are the alleged inaccuracies?

* The film claims that melting snows on Mount Kilimanjaro evidence global warming. The Government's expert was forced to concede that this is not correct.
* The film suggests that evidence from ice cores proves that rising CO2 causes temperature increases over 650,000 years. The Court found that the film was misleading: over that period the rises in CO2 lagged behind the temperature rises by 800-2000 years.
* The film uses emotive images of Hurricane Katrina and suggests that this has been caused by global warming. The Government's expert had to accept that it was "not possible" to attribute one-off events to global warming.
* The film shows the drying up of Lake Chad and claims that this was caused by global warming. The government's expert had to accept that this was not the case.
* The film claims that a study showed that polar bears had drowned due to disappearing arctic ice. It turned out that Mr Gore had misread the study: in fact four polar bears drowned and this was because of a particularly violent storm.
* The film threatens that global warming could stop the Gulf Stream throwing Europe into an ice age: the Claimant's evidence was that this was a scientific impossibility.
* The film blames global warming for species losses including coral reef bleaching. The Government could not find any evidence to support this claim.
* The film suggests that the Greenland ice covering could melt causing sea levels to rise dangerously. The evidence is that Greenland will not melt for millennia.
* The film suggests that the Antarctic ice covering is melting, the evidence was that it is in fact increasing.
* The film suggests that sea levels could rise by 7m causing the displacement of millions of people. In fact the evidence is that sea levels are expected to rise by about 40cm over the next hundred years and that there is no such threat of massive migration.
* The film claims that rising sea levels has caused the evacuation of certain Pacific islands to New Zealand. The Government are unable to substantiate this and the Court observed that this appears to be a false claim.

[stogie bear]

But there is an upside to all this... If you can scare half the west with a single photo of a polar bear then imagine what these morons would do if they saw pictures of starving children in Africa...

Oh wait... I got that wrong, didn't I? They don't give a fuck about the starving millions in Africa, do they? Just the welfare of a few oversized cute looking bears!

Green equals moron!

[allstar88]

britains going back to nuclear to tackle the problem?

[stogie bear]

Nuclear power is clean and efficient. I fully support this move.

[Monkey]

As long as it's looked after, we don't have a Chernobyl and it doesn't leak as much as Sizewell then I'm all for them.

Go ahead and build as many as we need plus one, and tell the Russians where to stick their gas.