Wow. You saw that all the way at the bottom? I thought no one would ever see it. It appears you have your doomsday date 14 1/2 years in the future though. Shouldn't it be 10 years? Or has Algore given us a 4.5 year respite?

Posted by Oyster at August 1, 2006 01:47 PM

The extra 4 and 1/2 years is because of miscalculations in Gore's formula. ;-)

Posted by GM at August 1, 2006 05:01 PM

The date the Earth will end is good information. I will obtain a loan payable 5,266 days from now.

Posted by Woody at August 1, 2006 07:48 PM

In my recent post, I discussed whether green issues can be vital agendas for liberals. America will continue to be "The Right Nation", if current trends do not change. It is unlikely that Democrats attract voters with this agenda.

One thing I am concerned is the impact of global warming issue on US-European relations.

Posted by Shah Alexander at August 2, 2006 01:26 AM

As I said in another comment, if you can't suggest an alternate, ridicule the idea. If your alternate is to do nothing, well.......
But be of good cheer. When the population is reduced to the residual suvivors, the earth will begin to heal itself. The green flora will once again use the CO2 faster than the suvivors can produce it.
But in fifteen years, I could be an even 100. I suspect that as far as I will be concerned, the problem is moot. But good luck to all of you.

Posted by James Melbert at August 2, 2006 09:51 AM

James, there is an alternate idea...adapt. Mankind adapted to the last glacial period and adapted when it warmed up again--which it still is, and we still are. Why I even adapt every season. I put on a coat when it gets cold and I crank up the air when it gets hot.

We really don't have any choice, since mankind's contribution to global warming is so insignificant, any attempt to moderate our influence will not make a noticeable difference. Claims to the contrary are mainly politics and not science.

I hope that you live to be a hundred, and fifteen years from now you can come back onto GM's Corner and admit that the hype back in 2006 was not warranted.

Posted by Woody at August 2, 2006 12:57 PM

Good answer Woody,but one correction please. Your statement that the claims of GW were mainly politics, and not science is one hundred eighty degrees wrong. All the Government scientists that report global warming must have their reports edited by he White House Lawyers. They actually change the reports to suit the administrations stance, which is also your and GM's stance.
Look at he censoring that was shown on Sunday Night in that "ultra leftist" program 60 minutes. Government reports on GW are the lawyers, not the scientists claims.

Posted by James Melbert at August 2, 2006 04:03 PM

James, the politics is on both sides. I didn't see that 60 Minutes you referenced. Don't forget that President Clinton did not submit the Kyoto Treaty to the Senate, and that Senate still conducted a vote showing 95-0 against it! So, global warming must not have been a problem under Clinton-Gore. Now, Al Gore is going around telling everyone to ignore those who are not convinced, and the left is almost rabid...change that, they are rabid over this issue.

But, honest scientists true to scientific principles are still debating the extent and causes of climate change. If I could be convinced that global warming is real, then I would jump on the band wagon. Much of my reluctance comes from not trusting the messengers--and, they regularly reinforce the distrust.

Posted by Woody at August 2, 2006 04:39 PM

James, as a scientist of no small merit yourself, you know full well that "Occam's razor states that the explanation of any phenomenon should make as few assumptions as possible, eliminating those that make no difference in the observable predictions of the explanatory hypothesis or theory."

It is a known fact that Mars, as well as Venus, Saturn and Pluto are also experiencing "global warming." The explanation for this is obviously not anthropomorphic green house gasses such as CO2 (unless you believe, as I don't think you do, that earthlings have hatched a diabolical plot to lull us into catatonia over this). However, it is also a scientific fact that the SUN is experiencing the highest level of activity in 1000 years!

Back to Occam's Razor, if the simplest explanation is that sun activity is most likely behind the so far quite mild increase in global (earth style) warming than that is the best explanation.

You decry our attempts at ridicule. Well beloved friend and relative, it should be obvious that we honestly believe that the "consensus" scientists are so full of B.S. that only ridicule and humor will knock them down a peg or twelve. Too, if the GW cultists were not so danged dogmatic in their approach, they just might be able to get a few more folk on their side. And if you really and truly believe that white house lawyers censor all the data, how come it's getting out by these cultists in the first place? It doesn't add up and that is precisely my problem, the data doesn't add up and until I can be convinced that I am wrong (and that possibility still exists - after all, I voted for Hubert Humphry in 1968 me, a conservative raised by your brother-in-law, the fellow that was to the right of any conservative you can name) then I will trumpet that to the rooftops. Until then, science is not on the side of the cultists but on the side of further inquirey into what could be a natural phenomina. After all, we lived through the Alar scares, the Global Cooling scares and the Nixon is the Anti-Christ and gonna take away all of our freedom scares, all without destruction of the planet and without destruction of our civil liberties or the need to purchase down jackets.

As a last note from the Telegraph article above on increased sun activity I present the following:

"The Sun's radiance may well have an impact on climate change but it needs to be looked at in conjunction with other factors such as greenhouse gases, sulphate aerosols and volcano activity," he said. The research adds weight to the views of David Bellamy, the conservationist. "Global warming - at least the modern nightmare version - is a myth," he said. "I am sure of it and so are a growing number of scientists. But what is really worrying is that the world's politicians and policy-makers are not.

Instead, they have an unshakeable faith in what has, unfortunately, become one of the central credos of the environmental movement: humans burn fossil fuels, which release increased levels of carbon dioxide - the principal so-called greenhouse gas - into the atmosphere, causing the atmosphere to heat up. They say this is global warming: I say this is poppycock."

Poppycock indeed!!!

Posted by GM at August 2, 2006 05:13 PM

Don't forget cow flatulance. Instead of man-induced warming, let's blame it on the cows in India. I'm doing my part to keep down herds here by eating steak.

Posted by Woody at August 2, 2006 05:34 PM

Check this on Al Gore's "Inconvenient Truth." It's great!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IZSqXUSwHRI

Posted by Woody at August 4, 2006 08:44 AM

This comment from Mark York attempting once again to bypass a ban, has been removed by the site administrator.

Posted by Fl at August 8, 2006 05:43 AM