Thursday October 15, 2009, 8:39 am


Please sign Bruce's petition!!!!

Thursday October 15, 2009, 9:58 am
Signed thanks Cher

Thursday October 15, 2009, 11:47 am
Signed, thanks Cher.

Thursday October 15, 2009, 11:37 pm
You signed this petition on Oct 15 and emailed the following representatives:

Barack Obama , Richard Shelby and Jeff Sessions
Thanks Cher

Friday October 16, 2009, 4:11 am
signed

Friday October 16, 2009, 4:25 am
Done thank you

Friday October 16, 2009, 5:12 am
Thanks Cher.

You signed this petition on Oct 15 and emailed the following representatives:

Barack Obama , Richard Burr and Kay Hagan

Friday October 16, 2009, 8:53 am
This is a very important issue - thanks Cher. A strong REDD component to any climate action plan is essential. Saving rainforests is the most effective and economical way to address climate change ... plus it has all the benefits of protecting environmental health and biodiversity - truely a "win win" situation...

Friday October 16, 2009, 8:58 am
Oh I thought I missed this one but didnt I just forgot to post that I signed....

Big Gorilly Hgus

Friday October 16, 2009, 9:08 am


Thnx everyone!!!

Friday October 16, 2009, 3:14 pm
Kari Dyrdahl Mounds View, MN
Sent letter to Barack Obama , Amy Klobuchar and Al Franken
Oct 15

Friday October 16, 2009, 4:42 pm
Signed! Thanks Cher...and that John Michael for telling me!

Friday October 16, 2009, 8:00 pm
Noted and signed thanks Cher

Friday October 16, 2009, 11:11 pm
You have it only partly right. Global Warming is the biggest SCAM mankind has ever had to face.

The faked the data and then when caught, they destroyed the data.

A big chill on global warming
Examiner Editorial
October 16, 2009

Something important is happening when even the BBC is compelled to ask, as it did this week, "What happened on global warming?" The British news organization has heretofore insisted that the scientific consensus was cemented long ago that global warming is real and is mainly caused by human use of carbon-based fossil fuels. Put simply, what has happened is global temperatures have dropped every year since 1998, recent peer-reviewed research has uncovered the decisive influence of hot and cold cycles in the oceans on land temperatures, and growing numbers of scientists with unquestioned credentials are stepping forward to question the conventional wisdom.

But reaching a new consensus will be exceedingly difficult because the raw data on which the landmark 1996 United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change based its conclusion has been destroyed. The University of East Anglia's Climate Research Unit acknowledged in August that it discarded data that, in addition to the IPCC report, has been cited by other international studies as the main justification for severe restrictions on carbon emissions worldwide. This development raises more troubling doubts about global warming just as scientists and policymakers are expected to call for harsh new limits on energy use in its name when they meet in December in Copenhagen, Denmark.

Every schoolchild knows that the last step in the scientific method is independent reproduction of results. But lost climate data cannot be reproduced, which is a huge problem for everybody. "Every time CRU massaged the temperature data, they were getting more warming from the same numbers. It's incumbent upon scientists to find out why, but you can't find out if you don't have the data," Dr. Patrick Michaels, senior fellow in environmental studies at the Cato Institute, told The Examiner. "The data needed to verify the gloom-and-doom warming forecasts have disappeared."

The Competitive Enterprise Institute has formally requested that the Environmental Protection Agency, which helps fund CRU, "reopen the record" and allow CEI and others to submit newly uncovered information regarding the East Anglia data destruction. The conservative think tank also wants to submit information about flaws in other data EPA is using as it devises stringent new anti-global warming regulations. Congress should also investigate the dumping of data partially paid for by U.S. taxpayers and other suspicious global warming anomalies, such as the temperature readings taken from "ghost weather stations" like the one at Maine's Ripogenus Dam. It was officially closed in 1995 but allegedly is still transmitting climate data 14 years later. Such questionable data sources must be eliminated if credible policy decisions are ever to be reached.
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/A-big-chill-on-global-warming-8393618-64452337.html

Saturday October 17, 2009, 1:24 am
Judy, your sources are so biased and your logic and facts are no good.
We're pumping MILLIONS of TONS of carbon into OUR atmosphere - WHERE DOES THE CARBON GO??
No matter who you are or where you go, the laws of physics apply. Never in the history of the planet have we pumped so much carbon into the atmosphere with so few filtering resources (cleared the forests, cut down trees, killed plants and phytoplankton). In the distant past, there were no humans to be harmed and big massive forests to slowly absorb and filter the carbon but NO MORE.
SO, WHERE DOES THE CARBON GO??
And why, when it's obvious that people on this site aren't receptive to your pasted propaganda, do you continue to bring wild and silly tales about scams - do you get paid by ExxonMobil? Maybe by big coal? Why are you working the scams; what's in it for you? We've seen this before when big tobacco bought off people to tell lies and we're watching big coal/big oil do it now.
And when are you going to tell us where the carbon goes??

Saturday October 17, 2009, 4:07 am
Noted, Signed, forwarded to friends at Change.org Sorry Judy its time for you to grow up and see the world as it is TODAY. Thanks Cher & Chris.