Monday October 19, 2009, 4:16 pm
That all depends on what kind of catastrophe you want. Without passage plants continue to get the non-polluting CO2 they need and the growing problem of world hunger does not accelerate. With passage the world will face economic disaster as nations begin passing cap and trade laws to implement the biggest tax increase the world has ever seen. What he and other world leaders are attempting to do is to shift the cost to the taxpayers of the world. World hunger will skyrocket as more and more land and resources are geared towards reducing the essential ingredient plants need to live and at the same time reduce the amount of oxygen plants give off for we humans and other animal life to breath. Passage fortunately will not stop or even noticeably slow the production of CO2 as Mother Nature produces well over 99% of the CO2 in our atmosphere. If we eliminated every molecule produced by humans CO2 levels would continue to rise at the same rate they are currently rising at because Mother Nature is in control not we arrogant humans that want to control everything.

Monday October 19, 2009, 9:54 pm
You have absolutely no cluse what you are talking about Raplh ...We dump BILLIONS OF TONS of CO2 into the atmosphere each year at ever increasing rates but I guess all of that just dissapears, right???? The arrogence comes from people like you who think we can dump huge ammounts of pollution into the atmosphere and have no ill effects ...

Want a Strong Climate Deal? Become a Citizen of Hopehangen

We're coming into the home stretch before the COP15 climate talks in Copenhagen and we need to put as much pressure as possible on our national representatives that at this moment there is no more important single issue ...

http://www.care2.com/news/member/918337647/1279545

Tuesday October 20, 2009, 11:07 am
That "billions of tons" amounts to 3% of the total already there.

CO2 is only measured in PARTS PER MILLION and the present level is actually low in terms of earth's history.
Plants grow better at higher levels . You are being lied to to evil purpose.
“Personal carbon rations would have to be mandatory, imposed by Government in the same way that food rationing was introduced in the UK in 1939… Each person would receive an electronic card containing their year’s carbon credits …see the Tyndall Centre’s study on “domestic tradable quotas”… and their recent establishment on the political agenda…the card would have to be presented when purchasing energy or travel services, and the correct amount of carbon deducted. The technologies and systems already in place for direct debit systems and credit cards could be used.”

(Environmental Audit Committee minutes-House Of Commons-London)

Preface. This is a factual account of the highly politicised concept of catastrophic man made climate change. The views quoted above are supported in principle by the UK govt but said to be ahead of their time. However, the means to achieve them are now being quietly introduced into main stream thinking through the systematic use of a political agenda that uses the alarming notion of catastrophic man made climate change as the means to force through a measure of social engineering unequalled in the UK in modern times.

In promoting this notion, alternative and well researched views that oppose the science lying behind the unproven hypothesis are stifled, and derision heaped on those pointing out previous well documented warming and cooling periods that occur in, as yet, little understood cycles throughout our history.

This is a long and complex document so it is suggested that a read through of the text that can be seen on your screen should serve as a useful introduction to the highways and byways of our political and scientific establishments. Additional information is provided in many of the links-some deserving of considerable time- so a second much more leisurely examination of the account will enable the reader to acquire a deeper knowledge of the subversion of science in pursuit of political objectives.

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/10/20/revealed-the-uk-government-strategy-for-personal-carbon-rations/


“No matter if the science is all phoney, there are collateral environmental benefits.... climate change [provides] the greatest chance to bring about justice and equality in the world.”
Christine Stewart
Canadian Environment Minister
Calgary Herald
14 Dec 1998

“The answer to global warming is in the abolition of private property and production for human need. A socialist world would place an enormous priority on alternative energy sources. This is what ecologically-minded socialists have been exploring for quite some time now.”
Louis Proyect
Columbia University

“The data don't matter. We're not basing our recommendations [for reductions in carbon dioxide emissions] upon the data. We're basing them upon the climate models”
Chris Folland
UK Meteorological Office

“Isn't the only hope for the planet that the industrialized civilizations collapse? Isn't it our responsibility to bring that about?”
Maurice Strong
Head of the 1992 Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro

Tuesday October 20, 2009, 3:31 pm
So JUDY, where does all the carbon GO? No matter who you are or where you go, the laws of physics still apply. We are pumping millions and millions of tons of carbon into the air- where does it go?
Judy, stop pasting propaganda you can't evaluate and start explaining the science. Where does the carbon go?

Tuesday October 20, 2009, 7:10 pm
What's Up With That - a silly denialist BLOG - all of the prapaganda with none of the science LMAO!!!! followed by empty (headed) retoric...

Human CO2 is a tiny % of CO2 emissions - MYTH

http://www.skepticalscience.com/human-co2-smaller-than-natural-emissions.htm

Climate myths: Human CO2 emissions are too tiny to matter

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn11638-climate-myths-human-co2-emissions-are-too-tiny-to-matter.html

I guess acid rain never happened either??? Different molecule but same princile - we had an effect on the atmosphere while contributing a "small" ammount of a trace gas (nature produces a lot more SO2 than we do, but we managed to change the chemistry of the atmosphere with our "little contributions"...AND we managed to address the problem through CAP-AND-TRADE :)

Arogence is saying we can dump BILLIONS OF TONS of a plutent into the atmospher at ever increasing rates and have NO effect ... the same message brought to you by the tobacco companies (by the same PR firms) about smoking safty ....

Tuesday October 20, 2009, 7:17 pm
Judy doenst know where all the carbon goes...does she??? I sure would like to know...

Big Gorilly Hugs

Wednesday October 21, 2009, 6:48 am
Here is a hint Judy:

http://www.carboncommentary.com/wp-includes/images/Mauna_Loa_carbon_dioxide.png

Wee how the levels are going UP - this CLEARLY shows that EXCESS CO2 is staying in the atmosphere - that IS what the DATA say!!!!!

Wednesday October 21, 2009, 9:47 am
The new climate treaty is about creating world wide central governance at the expense of the western world, not about cleaning the planet. Unless you look at removing freedom and lowering living standards as cleaning the planet. The Sun is the most influential force on our climate, next is planetary influences. The human influence on climate is extremly small. The effects of the climate bill will cause immediate hardships on people that would be far worse than a 1 or 2 degree increase in temperature. The whole concept of greenhouse gas warming by CO2 holding in the suns radiation was estimated through computer models that is now being shown to be a much weaker force than expected. Pollution should be reduced where ever possible, but the consequences of antipollution laws and treaties should be carefully considered before passing them.

Wednesday October 21, 2009, 10:01 am
Thannx... climate change definitely needs to be addressed urgently.. all companies should be brought into line and stricter measures enforced sooner than later

Wednesday October 21, 2009, 10:04 am
How does one deal with deliberately ignorant parrots.

How many times do you need to ask the same dumb question?

Look up 'Carbon sink"

Oh, look Chris found another site. OK...so CO2 levels went up....but TEMPERATURES WENT DOWN ANYWAY.
Funny that your graph doesn't show that. Maybe because there is little correlation between temperature and CO2?

Wednesday October 21, 2009, 11:17 am
I knew I'd find you here, Judy - with the same old denials and altered facts. If we don't wise up and DO something about climate change, we will have such extremes as we've never seen before. Maybe we'll be able to convince you when Canada has tropical weather all year long...

Wednesday October 21, 2009, 1:14 pm
ignorant parrots???? Dont follow us around Judy....for YOUR ignorace shows so well....

Big gorilly hugs

Wednesday October 21, 2009, 1:15 pm
Arielle...LMAO

Wednesday October 21, 2009, 7:19 pm
Who's going to be paying for all of this..also from what I've read it..we will be loosing our sovereignty to the UN..and paying a higher portion of the monies..is this true ...and just where do you all plan on getting this money from..we're already $1.4 TRILLION in debt..and that is just from this year..which btw includes that first stimulus package that the dems rammed through back in Feb..so ...just where is this money going to come from again...

Wednesday October 21, 2009, 7:41 pm
Sounds like someone's been talking to our "denialist" in house. Someone who's been one this site for three years and suddenly pops up, and kinda sorta sounds like..... ummmmm?

Lync

Wednesday October 21, 2009, 7:43 pm
The buildup of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is a cumulative effect. There are more of us burning fossil fuel than there have been. We are about to find out For a bit over about two centuries the world has burned enough fossil fuel to measurably affect the atmosphere' s ability to absorb heat. Deny as will We are not yet seeing the worst effects of climate change but it looks as though nine billion people cannot share an atmosphere without poisoning themselves in their own waste. Earth's atmosphere scrubs itself by acidifying the ocean which appears to be very bad for coral. Climate change Climate sift is no swift process and we historically have been blissfully ignorant of it. Have we added too much carbon dioxide to the ecosphere? Can we stop?

Wednesday October 21, 2009, 9:10 pm
This is all such BS! Oceans teaming with life cover 72% of the world's surface. Add abundant sunlight and you have TRILLIONS of tons of CO2 that has been generated for hundreds of millions of years. Not to mention hundreds of millions of years of carbon dioxide produced by forests virtually untouched by man until the last two centuries. Volcanoes also have produced pollution at rates comparable to industrialized nations for a million times as long as the time industrial nations have existed on this planet.

All of you are gifted with amongst the largest most powerful brains in the animal world ! USE THEM!!!
You are being told rediculously obvious lies by con men who only want to separate you from your money and dictate how you live your lives. All the while living in mansions, getting driven in chauferred limos and flown all over the world in private jets.

PLEASE FREE YOUR MINDS!!!!! Slavery is closer than you think....

Friday October 23, 2009, 2:03 pm
Perhaps the most interesting finding in this poll ... is that the more Americans learn about cap-and-trade, the more they oppose cap-and-trade," said Sen. James Inhofe, R-Okla., who opposes the Senate bill and has questioned global warming science.
Other results of the survey also suggest that it will be tough politically to enact a law limiting emissions of global warming pollution. While three-quarters of Democrats believe the evidence of a warming planet is solid, and nearly half believe the problem is serious, far fewer conservative and moderate Democrats see the problem as grave as they did last year.

Friday October 23, 2009, 4:34 pm
"Oh, look Chris found another site. OK...so CO2 levels went up....but TEMPERATURES WENT DOWN ANYWAY."

BULL!!!! No matter how many times you say it, the FACTS don't change:

http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/graphs/Fig.A2.lrg.gif

Does that look like falling tempratures???

"Funny that your graph doesn't show that. Maybe because there is little correlation between temperature and CO2? "

Dogma repeated ad nasium - and debunked repeatedly:

The skeptic argument...In recent years, global temperatures have been steady while CO2 was rising. If CO2 causes warming, shouldn't temperature be rising steadily also?

What the science says...
Even during a period of long term warming, there are short periods of cooling due to climate variability. Short term cooling over the last few years is largely due to a strong La Nina phase in the Pacific Ocean and a prolonged solar minimum.

details:
http://www.skepticalscience.com/co2-temperature-correlation.htm