Global warming - scientific evidence for and against?

[Brad]

I'm no fan of Al Gore and I know that cap and trade or carbon offset programs will do nothing helpful. I understand the corruption involved with climategate as well. I know that the founder of the weather channel has sued Gore for fraud.

That being said, I solely am concerned with the scientific validity of global climate change, specifically the effects that humans have on global warming.

So, what do you think?

[Clarence Wentzel]

From my standpoint, I believe that there seems to be a general global warming. My reasons for believing this are based on observations of receding glaciers in North America, Europe, etc., Ice melting in the Arctic, minor water rising etc. My problem is that I am not 100% convinced that this is due to man-made emissions. Several months back, I saw some documents that made the point that much of this change is due to a cycle of sun changes. In other words, no matter what we humans do, the climate will change just as it has in the past.

Based on that, I am really against such items as Cap and Trade and other items that seem to be aimed at destroying the US economy and giving all third world countries a pass. This seems to be another means of wealth redistribution. Yes, it is good to save whenever we can but I can not support the destruction of our way of life because most liberals seem to be embarrassed that we have done so good.

Clare

[Scott Arnett]

The Reality is that global temperatures are always in flux. The climate is not to be viewed as static. It is not, nor will it ever be. Who's to say that a little warming wouldn't be better for the planet. We know from history that the earth has been a much lusher environment at times. We also have had ice ages, which would be much worse for humanity. I believe, at one time we were under a substantial ice sheet here in Michigan.
We truly can't know if man is contributing. There are far too many variables we don't even understand. I do know that I have read science articles over the last decade that have raised the prospect that our solar neighbors have had temp. increases that coincided with ours. Sun spot activity and magnetic field strength have also been relative to the warming and current cooling.
For those who look to the arctic glaciers, I suggest they find out what has been happening at the South Pole at the same time. The thinning and thickening of the poles is most likely due to modest changes in ocean currents.
My belief is that technology will advance and in the next decade or two we will find new ways to create the energy we need for our culture and it will benefit all mankind. We know that it is inevitable that the day will come when fossil fuels (there is good evidence that oil is not a fossil fuel) will become scarce and I have faith in human ingenuity. That is if we don't let pointy headed idiots take our ability and inventiveness away. Of course, that's why We're here! :-)

[Gail Koporetz]

Support of global warming theories have been extremely myopic. Suppression of dissenters has been rampant; with the internet there is no way they can suppress everyone, although you actually have to look for the other side of things. For instance, all of the focus on the polar bears neglects to inform us that the polar bear population has actually increased over the last 30 years - it just increases in other places from where GW proponents focus their counts. Also, the reports that the Antarctica is melting - one part of it is getting smaller, but another part is getting larger. None of the dire reports allow for the normal fluxuation that Scott mentioned. In studying this, I have also read that even if the U.S. completely stopped using all combustion vehicles, it would not even make a dent in the effect on the atmosphere. In other words, we have negligible effect on the air. I know that if you live in a smog-filled city that is difficult to believe, and reducing emissions in those places would have a profound effect on the people living there, but realize that it doesn't take long to get out of it either.

Here's a good article: http://canadafreepress.com/2007/global-warming020507.htm

That all said, I believe in recycling, in not wasting energy, etc. I don't; however, believe in the global warming hoax, nor am I for any of the efforts to "fix" the "problem". It will cripple or even kill the U.S., and will line the pockets of Al Gore (Hi, I'm Al Gore, and I invented Global Warming!), the pockets of our esteemed President and some of his friends from Chicago, along with the pockets of some very influential millionaires from other parts of the world.

[Clarence Wentzel]

I did some digging and found that I had saved the link to the research on global warming and solar cycles. Here is the link;



http://www.petitionproject.org/review_article.php

I recommend downloading the 12 page article. It seems to show that this cycle of warming and ocean increase started before any major increase in so-called Greenhouse Gasses. For this reason, I don't want them to destroy our economy for no good purpose other than wealth distribution.

Back in 1972, a book titled "The Limits to Growth" was published. It predicted that we would all be starving by now. Naturally, the apologists said that they missed a few items but all Hell was still coming. I consider the Greenhouse Gas people to be in the same mold.

Clare