"Global warming" is a political ideology badly disguised as a scientific theory.
By
Urgent
on November 26, 2008
The facts don't seem to matter in this "debate". The media and governments have too much money to lose by admitting the truth about the whole scam.
According to the University of Alabama at Huntsville, near-surface temperatures in 2008 will be lower than in 1980.
Global temperatures have been falling for seven full years since late 2001.
The rate of new Arctic sea-ice formation in mid-October 2008 was among the fastest since satellite records began almost 30 years ago.
Sea level has been rising for 10,000 years in response to the natural global warming that followed the end of the last Ice Age. It has risen 400 feet in that time, at a mean rate of 4 feet per century. However, in the 20th century sea level rose worldwide by less than 8 inches. There is no reason to suppose that sea level will rise significantly faster in the 21st century than it did in the 20th, because most of the land-based ice that once covered North America and northern Eurasia melted long ago, and most of the remaining land-based ice is at high altitudes and also at high latitudes close to the North and South Poles, where there is no danger that it will melt any time soon.
1
12
7.7% 92.3%Similar claims
- 56-133 It's too late to stop global warming.
- 59-15 Humans are most likely the cause of global warming, it is real, and it is up to all of us to do something about it
- 7-28 Building more nuclear plants is not a good way to fight global warming!
- 8-19 Human beings will make themselves extinct in the next 500 years.
- 22-20 Global warming will be solved by some major technological breakthrough, not by people changing their day-to-day behavior.
Discussion (6)
Really, the amount spent on global warming is minimal compared to the amount spent on other things such as defense.
Why spend anything on a non problem?
But that's the thing: why support oil either? In the short run it's cheaper than alternatives, in the long run solar power makes more sense. Also, securing oil is one of the main reasons that a $1 trillion war payed by taxpayers is taking place.
My main point is that we don't need cap and trade. Carbon dioxide is not a problem.
We do need to focus on energy independence, which mean drilling for more of our own oil, nuclear power, more use of coal and cost effective alternatives.
I agree, but I support pollution laws. It would probably help businesses if they could pollute at will, but the skies in most skies would probably be as clean as they were in the late 1800's (when there were no such laws)in, say, Pittsburgh, as in they would be covered each day in smog. Noone likes breathing polluted air. The type of pollution that produces carbon dioxide also makes smog.
Claims inspired by this comment
Opposition to evidence of "Global warming" is a political ideology badly disguised as scientific theoryYou can't burn that much gack is such a short space of time and hope to get away with it.