« Open Thread | Main | President Osama bin Obama's First Formal Interview »

By now any thinking person realizes the global warming folks don't care about global warming. The real agenda is the destruction of free markets, free men and free nations. The old them "watermelons" comes to mind. Green on the outside but red on the inside.

More lies and even more lies from goverment buricrats all this GLOBAL WARMING bull kaka and the biggist amount of HOT AIR is comming from the mouths of the buricrats especialy AL GORE and from the various eco-freaks like GREENPEACE and liberal doofuses like SUSIE SALMON(WHICH SOUNDS LIKE WHENY OU WOULD FIND IN A KIDS CARD GAME OF GO FISH)

These people you hear talking from NOAA/NASA/etc., their job is to appropriate research money. It's a lot easier to do so if there's an impending crisis, rather than for the sake of observation and the general advancement of human knowledge. The scientists who actually develop the radiative forcing models will tell you that a dangerous global warming is a possibility, not a certainty. It is definitely not yet to the point of kneecapping our economy by forcing the development of products the market is not ready for, but it is worth continued research by the people who know what they're doing.

I will be landscaping my yard this spring and will gladly sell the carbon offset credits to anyone who wishes to purchase them. You will be helping to save the planet by installing grasses, shrubs and trees in a suburban setting. I have about $10,000 worth of credits to sell. Just reply here and I'll get in touch with you.

It is comical that the libs who have been able to change common sense into a curse word and to batter down opposition by a perverse alliance of media, lies, and appeal to the most base of human desires, would pick the one thing that is not affected by these tactics. Nature and the physical laws of the universe do not give a damn! The sun has no spots. The cycles that define our climate are changing. No rhetoric and no screaming hysterical ranting can even slow much less stop the inexorable cooling.

If I freeze to death in the dark while starving, it will be great comfort to know these bastards are just as cold, just as hungry, and just as miserable in their own dark unheated hovels.

The real concern is that the longer we wait to do something, the higher the level of irreversible climate change to which we'll have to adapt.

Humans are the most adaptable species on Earth. I think we'll manage, "climate change" or no.

the answer will be socialist polar bears.

I drove up to south Georgia yesterday. The climate change is even affecting the pecan trees! They're starting to grow!

I talked to my slightly more liberal significant other about the sea ice indicator that global warming isn't happening.

They responded that the information should be supressed so that people don't think they can simply be wildly irresponsible and cause environmental damage in other ways.

While I agreed with her "most people are idiots" position, I still feel that you need to be honest with people. The truth must form the basis of discussion on anything.

What we're seeing here is a more extreme reaction. This lady figures she has to wildly exaggerate to get people to comprehend (her understanding of) the truth. I fully admit this is a major flaw in liberal thinking.

I just love the "It is inevitable and irreversible" line, which is immediately followed by "so we must act as quickly as possible."

If something is inevitable and irreversible, then WHAT THE HELL ARE THEY TALKING ABOUT? By definition, it's too late and nothing we can do will stop it.

These guys are running the biggest shell-game in history. Mean time, it snowed in Dubai for only the second time on record.

Matt, I know you don't agree with what she said, but your point in the first two sentences is pretty thin. It's rather obvious what she is saying is "We've already caused this amount of damage, which is currently irreversible (for lack of technology), so we must take action so as not to exacerbate the problem even more." The form is correct, you may dispute the basis.

"I'm A Lasagna Hog at January 27, 2009 6:17 PM"

What part of "irreversable" don't you understand? You "warmies" have been saying that the tempature will CONTINUE to get hotter and hotter, so if that is "irreversable" NOTHING will stop that. So you better put on your suntan loation and tell the rest of us "we told you so". If you can't stop a fifty-car express train by standing on the tracks with your hand up, it won't help to hold up a stop sign!

What you fools SHOULD HAVE done was to call the whole thing off when the tempature fell. You could then claim that all your "efforts" worked and you "saved" the planet form burning up, before running to the bank with your loot before anyone caught on.

If youve ever seen that dumb liberal movie WATERWORLD the earth will all be flooded and we will have doofushead dum dums like KEVIN KOSNER swimming around looking like a complete dork and looking for dryland with some doofus named MARINER with goofy gills and that webbing between his fingers DUMBASS IDIOT

It's somewhat amusing to me that because I didn't denounce global warming in a rank-and-file manner, that you instantly assume I must be on the far left. No matter what someone else tries to tell you, the heating method of radiative forcing does not form a positive feedback loop. Aerosol direct and indirect effects (scattering&absorption and functioning as cloud condensation nuclei, respectively) eventually kill out radiation reflected by Earth's surface albedo. If this mechanic did not exist, then you would be correct in the sense that the warming would continue on this runaway effect on its own, regardless of human intervention (or non-intervention). What was stated in the original article may have been worded in an unclear manner. By "irreversible damage," what she means is that the Earth may warm to some extent**, which would function much like a DC offset, if you took a climate versus time graph as a signal. "Taking action" (or however it is she phrased it) is the difference between having a small offset, or a slightly larger offset. Now, of course, it is certainly your perogative to debate the premise that the earth is warming at all (although, you will have much better luck seeking to dispute the hypothesis that the currently slight warming could cause some kind of worldwide ecological cataclysm).

** Assuming a relative constancy of parameters, so it would exclude a large cooling event like a volcanic eruption reaching the stratosphere, as in Mt. Pinatubo or Krakatoa.