Friday September 5, 2008, 3:26 pm
Lovelock spoke. Who is listening? IAM AND i AM SPEAKING THE SAME SPEECH. WE DO NOT 10 YEARS TO GET A HANDLE ON THIS! WAAKKKEEE UUUPPPP

Friday September 5, 2008, 4:05 pm
Thanks for this informative article Tom.

Friday September 5, 2008, 4:16 pm
Now, that's an article! This man certainly does not mince any words. It is indeed time to wake up; we are, like it or not, one world. Thanks, Tom. Tom, that picture sure looks a lot like Bush, or is it my imagination?

Saturday September 6, 2008, 1:40 am
Climate change is happening like it has allways been happening ups and downs!
Climate Change is not just caused by CO2 fact is that the rise in temperature is setting free the CO2 from the permafrost in Siberia! Speeding up the rise in temperature! Man made global warming is just a very small part of the problem! What we should do is use solar power windpower and hydroenergy and forget about the OIL! But i can tell you a secret BIG OIL will make sure that renewable energy will be to expensive for a long long time as long as they can sell oil! The Billions they are making now can be used to buy all startupcompanies and to kill all the projects....PUT THEM IN THE FREEZER! Unless they can make just as much money with it. But since they do not control solar power how do they want to control that market..latest inventions in solar panel technology requires plastic=OIL! No future without BIG OIL!
Do not buy what you do not need!
Do not drive or fly if you do not have to!
Act local buy local !

Saturday September 6, 2008, 5:16 am

James Lovelock is very good. Thank you Tom for this forwarded!!

Saturday September 6, 2008, 9:39 am
I don't know if I would go so far as to say it will be "curtains for human beings on Earth" - we will make it through - though many thousands (millions) are likely to die in the adaptation process and it won't be pleasent for most... We are likely to lose thousands of other species which can not adapt to the changed earth - but the earth will continue on...we have had mass extincition events in the past (four of the five mass extinction events were associated with warming periods by the way)...So we have a choice...change our behavior in a relatively gentel way..or have it changed for us in a not so pleasent way...Just my opinion of course...

Saturday September 6, 2008, 10:12 am
Has anyone compared global warming to the body's natural defense against disease, fever. I was just thinking, Earth's temp rises causing the water level to rise. This causes famine, war, and pandemic and then POOF! the earth's infestation of humans is over. That's how it works with other organisms that are threatened with destruction by a parasitic infestation.

Of course there are plenty of little organisms that thrive just fine on their host. You can't get rid of them if you try--as long as they don't elicit an inflammatory response.

Saturday September 6, 2008, 10:24 am
wow! Look him up on Wikipaedia and see what he has to say about radioactive waste!!

Saturday September 6, 2008, 10:29 am
Lovelock just said in an interview that it is "too late" to do anything and everyone should move to New Zealand. He also says emission trading schemes will do nothing to prevent the inevitable. "Trying to stop global warming is a total waste of time" hmmmmm!

Dr James Lovelock on Emissions Trading Scheme
Radio New Zealand Radio New Zealand More news and audio on Radio New Zealand.
www.radionz.co.nz/audio/national/mnr/2008/09/04/dr.

Saturday September 6, 2008, 10:45 am
Yes, Judy, we should just roll over and die...NOT...I for one will not do THAT!! I will fight all the way!!!

Teresa - yes, Lovelock is a strong proponent of nuclear - but I think many believe that is not the proper course of action. There are MANY ways to fight climate change - stopping deforestation, planting trees, reducing the use of fossil fuels by promoting renewables, becomming more energy efficient, persuing "good" biofuels (not the ones derived from corn or palm oil). In my opinion, we should be doing these things, even if it had NO effect on climate (which it does)...

Saturday September 6, 2008, 10:51 am
Noted, Thanks!
We have all known this for many decades.
Hopefully the changes needed will happen SOON!
Jerilyn

Saturday September 6, 2008, 12:04 pm
Yes, Havva, I have thought of that. Man has not evolved or has stopped in its evolutionary process and is stagnant...and what is the first and primary law of Nature? Evolve or die. Nature will checkmate Man. Game over (for our species anyway). Oh, we will survive in pockets here and there but we will never be as big a threat, as we are now, to the Earth again. Nature will see to that, just like it does with any parasite, virus or bacteria that threatens its balance.

Yes, Chris, we have had mass extinctions after a heating phase. But, this is the kicker, after it heats up it always cools down--way down as in Ice Age down. That has also followed every heating phase as well. This time around though is a little different--we are the only species to ever accelerate the process. Do what we can to survive and change our behavior on the individual level and FAST. But like Hans pointed out, the big oil and gas and pro-nuke corporations are going to make sure that we as a species will go extinct for the sake of greed. They will not give up their quest for the last almightly dollar and absolute power over humanity.

Saturday September 6, 2008, 1:25 pm
I am convinced Mr. James Lovelock is right!

Saturday September 6, 2008, 1:57 pm
I am also convinced that Mr. Lovelock is right. I believe our world leaders know this to be true as well. I can scarcely wrap my head around this.

Saturday September 6, 2008, 2:10 pm
Give me a break. Population is still exploding, nobody doing anything about it. People still driving oversized SUVs, people still eating too much meat three meals a day.

Electric cars are on the market, people are beginning to buy them. Solar has now achieved parity in Hawaii. (Note: Hawaii costs about twenty two cents a kwatt hour, it will take time for solar to achieve parity in other states.)

I have made the commitment to family planning. I have no children, and plan on one child and adoption. I eat meat sparingly.

Saturday September 6, 2008, 2:18 pm
Why prolong the agony...just slip a baggie over your head instead of trying to wrap it around a total scam.

You guys are as bad as Jehovah's Witnesses. The end of the world isn't nigh from a minor blip in temperature when we've been as warm as this umpteen times. In fact, this is a pretty cool time in terms of temperature at least
.
http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/PageMill_Images/image277.gif
Global Temperature and Atmospheric CO2 over Geologic Time
http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/Carboniferous_climate.html

Saturday September 6, 2008, 2:25 pm
Of course we just discussed the recent tempratures at great length and in great detail Judy - rather than playing your game of repetition of the same arguments - I would reffer interested readers to out previous discussion"

http://www.care2.com/news/member/246814408/869933

Saturday September 6, 2008, 2:47 pm
Your argument is basically.."that was then . this is now, and it's different"

Well, it isn't different. The CO2 we produce can't do much of anything and you insist that it is magic and can over ride the influence of the Sun.

Major paper shows CO2’s effect on temperature was overstated 500-2000%


Mathematical proof that there is no “climate crisis” appears today in a major, peer-reviewed paper in Physics and Society, a learned journal of the 10,000-strong American Physical Society, SPPI reports.

Christopher Monckton, who once advised Margaret Thatcher, demonstrates via 30 equations that computer models used by the UN’s climate panel, the IPCC, were pre-programmed with overstated values for the three variables whose product is “climate sensitivity” (temperature increase in response to greenhouse-gas increase), resulting in a 500-2000% overstatement of CO2’s effect on temperature.

Climate Sensitivity Reconsidered http://www.aps.org/units/fps/newsletters/200807/index.cfm

demonstrates that a doubling of the concentration of CO2 in the air compared with pre-industrial levels, expected later this century, will be likely to increase global mean surface temperature not by the 6 °F predicted by the IPCC but, harmlessly, by little more than 1 °F. Lord Monckton concludes –

… Perhaps real-world climate sensitivity is very much below the IPCC’s estimates. Perhaps, therefore, there is no “climate crisis” at all. … The correct policy approach to a non-problem is to have the courage to do nothing."
http://nzclimatescience.net/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=310&Itemid=1

Saturday September 6, 2008, 2:55 pm
the repeated daogma continues non-stop...

Christopher Monckton - is a well know (netorious)deniaist ... for those who care, do a search on him...totally biased...

referring to your first link:

"The Forum on Physics and Society is a place for discussion and disagreement on scientific and policy matters. Our newsletter publishes a combination of non- peer- reviewed technical articles, policy analyses, and opinion. All articles and editorials published in the newsletter solely represent the views of their authors and do not necessarily represent the views of the Forum Executive Committee."

So it is nothing but OPINION pices...not peer reviewed...not science...

Saturday September 6, 2008, 3:01 pm
Dogma is statements with nothing to back them up, which people must BELIEVE. Your pronouncement fit the description much better.
Larry Gould, Professor of Physics at the University of Hartford and Chair (2004) of the New England Section of the American Physical Society (APS), has been studying climate-change science for four years. He said: “I was impressed by an hour-long academic lecture which criticized claims about ‘global warming’ and explained the implications of the physics of radiative transfer for climate change. I was pleased that the audience responded to the informative presentation with a prolonged, standing ovation. That is what happened when, at the invitation of the President of our University, Christopher Monckton lectured here in Hartford this spring. I am delighted that Physics and Society, an APS journal, has published his detailed paper refining and reporting his important and revealing results.

“To me the value of this paper lies in its dispassionate but ruthlessly clear exposition – or, rather, exposé – of the IPCC’s method of evaluating climate sensitivity. The detailed arguments in this paper, and, indeed, in a large number of other scientific papers, point up extensive errors, including numerous projection errors of climate models, as well as misleading statements by the IPCC. Consequently, there are no rational grounds for believing either the IPCC or any other claims of dangerous anthropogenic global warming.”

Lord Monckton’s paper reveals that –

➢ The IPCC’s 2007 climate summary overstated CO2’s impact on temperature by 500-2000%;
➢ CO2 enrichment will add little more than 1 °F (0.6 °C) to global mean surface temperature by 2100;
➢ Not one of the three key variables whose product is climate sensitivity can be measured directly;
➢ The IPCC’s values for these key variables are taken from only four published papers, not 2,500;
➢ The IPCC’s values for each of the three variables, and hence for climate sensitivity, are overstated;
➢ “Global warming” halted ten years ago, and surface temperature has been falling for seven years;
➢ Not one of the computer models relied upon by the IPCC predicted so long and rapid a cooling;
➢ The IPCC inserted a table into the scientists’ draft, overstating the effect of ice-melt by 1000%;
➢ It was proved 50 years ago that predicting climate more than two weeks ahead is impossible;
➢ Mars, Jupiter, Neptune’s largest moon, and Pluto warmed at the same time as Earth warmed;
➢ In the past 70 years the Sun was more active than at almost any other time in the past 11,400 years.

I'd pit Gould and Monckton against Cobey Beck, Gore or Hansen anytime.

Saturday September 6, 2008, 3:02 pm
BYW - you keep attacking the IPCC - there are MNAY independent scientists and scientific organizations which support human cused climate change...so your attacks are not all that relevant or convincing...

Saturday September 6, 2008, 3:08 pm
There is no such thing as "independent scientists or organizations" who support the scam. They are all on the receiving end of BILLIONS of $ in grant money provided they pay lip service to it.
Heck, the reason wee are debating this story is because there is a $300 Million slush fund for advertising agencies and PR firms to continue churning this idiocy out.

Saturday September 6, 2008, 3:13 pm
That is you HIGHLY biased opinion - especially since you chide me when I bring up the funding your authors typically have from oil or other fossil fuel industry intresests...When I make such claims, I referr to specific people and instances - and back it up with facts - you simply discount ALL counter arguments and say all are influenced by funding (but your are not of course LMAO)...

Saturday September 6, 2008, 3:18 pm
No you don't. You back it up with opinion pieces from Grist, New Scientist or Realclimate

And how can you have the nerve to compare the $50 Billion in ten years funding to AGW "science" with Exxons pitiful $19 million in 20.

The Green sense of proportion is gravely out of whack!

and you never go near the fact that the WHOLE SOLAR SYSTEM WARMED WHEN EARTH DID.

Explain that with CO2.

Saturday September 6, 2008, 3:20 pm
A reason for or to extinction the "Chinese will control" the world and they will fight the Muslims and the Muslims will fight the Democrats and Demopublicans and then the Characters from South will come alive because they are the Smartest People on the Planet. Oh, Oh the Russians will fight porn and women slavery, for real.
And then:
The ants and cockroaches and slug control the electric grid. Then Building Seven at the World Trade Center Rises from the Ashes and tells the truth. JFk and Abe come back to warn us against The "World Central Banks" who are the real masterminds of all chaoas.

And then the WORLD JUST EXPLODES AND EVERYONE LIVE IN HARMONY.
THE END

Saturday September 6, 2008, 3:24 pm
WHOLE SOLAR SYSTEM WARMED WHEN EARTH DID - Explain that with CO2. Already have MNAY MANY times - you just ignore the explanations - so why bother doing it again???

Since your rants will simply continue - I will stop this sillyness...maybe you could be so kind as to let others speak there mind ON THR SUBJECY ARTICLE...

Saturday September 6, 2008, 3:29 pm
Here's some garlic for the vampire. From:There is no climate crisis:

Larry Gould, Professor of Physics at the University of Hartford and Chair (2004) of the New England Section of the American Physical Society (APS), has been studying climate-change science for four years. He said: “I was impressed by an hour-long academic lecture which criticized claims about ‘global warming’ and explained the implications of the physics of radiative transfer for climate change. I was pleased that the audience responded to the informative presentation with a prolonged, standing ovation. That is what happened when, at the invitation of the President of our University, Christopher Monckton lectured here in Hartford this spring. I am delighted that Physics and Society, an APS journal, has published his detailed paper refining and reporting his important and revealing results.

“To me the value of this paper lies in its dispassionate but ruthlessly clear exposition – or, rather, exposé – of the IPCC’s method of evaluating climate sensitivity. The detailed arguments in this paper, and, indeed, in a large number of other scientific papers, point up extensive errors, including numerous projection errors of climate models, as well as misleading statements by the IPCC. Consequently, there are no rational grounds for believing either the IPCC or any other claims of dangerous anthropogenic global warming.”

Lord Monckton’s paper reveals that –

➢ The IPCC’s 2007 climate summary overstated CO2’s impact on temperature by 500-2000%;
➢ CO2 enrichment will add little more than 1 °F (0.6 °C) to global mean surface temperature by 2100;
➢ Not one of the three key variables whose product is climate sensitivity can be measured directly;
➢ The IPCC’s values for these key variables are taken from only four published papers, not 2,500;
➢ The IPCC’s values for each of the three variables, and hence for climate sensitivity, are overstated;
➢ “Global warming” halted ten years ago, and surface temperature has been falling for seven years;
➢ Not one of the computer models relied upon by the IPCC predicted so long and rapid a cooling;
➢ The IPCC inserted a table into the scientists’ draft, overstating the effect of ice-melt by 1000%;
➢ It was proved 50 years ago that predicting climate more than two weeks ahead is impossible;
➢ Mars, Jupiter, Neptune’s largest moon, and Pluto warmed at the same time as Earth warmed;
➢ In the past 70 years the Sun was more active than at almost any other time in the past 11,400 years.
http://nzclimatescience.net/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=310&Itemid=1

Saturday September 6, 2008, 3:32 pm
Sorry for the misposting. wrong thread. But the important thing to remember is that all of the statements above have numerous references cited from the scientific literature in Monckton's paper.

Saturday September 6, 2008, 3:34 pm
You already posted that same cut and paste above - just shows you do not THINK before posting - just a prapaganda machine ... you do this often... posting the SAME cut and paste in the same thread...

Saturday September 6, 2008, 3:38 pm
I apologized didn't I? I had two threads open and picked the wrong one. A simple mistake.

Saturday September 6, 2008, 3:49 pm
Capatilism is the engine of consumptiom, as the supply and demand scale tips toward demand all hell will break loose. It won't mater how hot the earth gets we would have already eleminated ourselves.

Saturday September 6, 2008, 4:16 pm
Goodness gracious...i was gonna keep my mouth shut for a while but can't.
The arguement is here. Both sides. Anyone who knows me, knows my biggest fear, SOYLENT GREEN. I see it this way, both sides, we are destroying the earth in our ways by hunting and killing nature. Natural preditors. We will eventually be left with rats and insects. DISEASE carrying rats and insects. THEN we will be left eating each other, and not in a sexual way.
We can argue about all this crap til the end of time, til we're hunting and eating each other.
I'm not a Jesus freak, nor am I religious. I am of the Earth religions. But am I wrong to state Jesus was a simple living man? He consumed only what was needed to survive? Did he kill things for sport? Did he use the earths rescourses for greed? Supposidly in the bible, God made a flood. God made a village into salt.
I wonder how so many who are into the religion thing are so greedy. Global warming isn't really the issue, whether it is man made or a natural occurance. The greedy want to say it is natural. So they can keep destroying the earth and the animals that GOD created. For their own greed.
Is that Jesus' way? Is that Gods way? GREED? Killing for fun, wearing Gods CREATURES around ones necks? On ones walls? God created all these creatures. (If you believe in God) i wonder how so many of you religious rieght can believe God created man to be superior over the animals he created. ABOVE the EARTH he supposidly created. He created the earth and the animals just for YOU to kill and crap on...until you are left eating each other, only after eating the disease carrying rodents and insects that will be left?
Hmmmm....

Saturday September 6, 2008, 6:15 pm
Regardless of whether or not global warming is a reality, to say that a warmer climate would be cause for our extinction is alarmist in the extreme. Our species has survived both ice ages and periods of high global temperatures, so there's no reason to believe we wouldn't be able to survive the problems caused by a warmer climate. This does not, however, abdicate us from the responsibility of cleaning up the mess we've made, because the one thing that IS certain is that surviving the increasing levels of pollution we've been dumping into the environment for the last two centuries and the global ecologic collapse it's causing is a far bigger danger to our survival than a changing climate.

Saturday September 6, 2008, 6:50 pm
Thank you Jevan. It is like telling people I work with and know, can you continue to crap in your toilet without flushing? Can you continue to make trash if you have no one to come take it away? What if that were to happen? Will you continue to let the dust and dirt build up in your own home? Without cleaning it, or start to bitch at your children to WIPE their feet before they run into the house?
It is the SAME EXACT thing.
REDUCE, RECYCLE, REUSE...but mostly WIPE YOUR FREAKING FEET!!!!!

Saturday September 6, 2008, 6:59 pm
Exactly right, Marcla! If you want CHANGE, then you have to administer that change WITHIN YOURSELF.

You can't use an ordinary wrench to tighten lug nuts on a car's wheel ... you can try, but it's not going to work very well, you actually have to change wrenches and CHOOSE THE RIGHT TOO.

Saturday September 6, 2008, 7:02 pm
I, for one, don't understand why everyone is so worried about the human race!!!!! What about animals!!!!!

Saturday September 6, 2008, 8:08 pm
History Of The Human Race?There are very few exceptions ,that make us humans even look like we care about anything but ourselves.
The Greed that was mention on here is as old as our ancestry.
We never seem to learn from past history..

That Book No Room No Room /Soylent green was written partly to try and alert the ppeople of what kind of end they was in the offering.
I believe the writer's name was Harry Harris or something like that,
He was a big Sci-Fi writer.
Have I read Lovelock? yes some ,but he would be preaching to the choir with me.
The fact he still thinks there is time to turn this around .This is where we part.Hey, I do not wish us to become part of Soylent Green, but wishing does little to alter the facts.
Before Soylent Green there was that fable about The Grasshopper that fiddle all day instead of storing food for the winter.
I believe this world has mostly human grasshopper even to this very second.
If the few wise here would even try to store up food for the coming end,
Those numerous Grasshoppers would be after them and kill them for the last crust of bread..
So what can we do?. We can go through the motions . When we shout I Told You So, It will not be as sweet as we once thought.
Why ,because of all the missing creatures that we tried to defend will be gone.
All that will be left is those that fiddled and diddled around.
Frankly I don't care anymore.Oh ,it has been coming for a year or more.
I guess the stealing the nomination of Senator Hillary Clinton was my last straw,
I should have went home to The green party 20 years ago. I just kept hoping .
So The End Of man? Just think The Earth still has more time to start over again. Hopfully she will not create another species like us humans.

Last on the subject of Jesus Christ? If there was such a human then that is who we should of strived to be.
So many believe in him yet break all of his Commandments every second.
Wars for God ? Bob Dylan was right.
I got a preacher telling us The End is near>
He expects to go up in the air when it comes lol
I want to ask him sometime what happens if you our not chosen? Will you then turn your back on your God.
alas my wife will not let me ask him.
Truthfully my real church is OUR Earth. these fools have heaven right here and now but fail to reaalize it.
but why not all of their ancesters did nothing but destroy.
SOYLENT GREEN IS TUESDAY

Saturday September 6, 2008, 10:40 pm
Thank you Tom for this article. I agree with you Chris if we change our ways we may be able to get through this .

Saturday September 6, 2008, 11:27 pm
Who funds Climate Change Denial?
http://www.watoday.com.au/opinion/who-is-behind-climate-change-deniers-20080802-3ou6.html?page=-1

Look at Terra preta and charcoal sequestration, biochar, agrichar etc for apart of the solution

How many solar panels do you have?

Sunday September 7, 2008, 10:24 am
OK, you want to talk about pay-offs...how about Hansen?
http://www.dailytech.com/Update+NASA+James+Hansen+and+the+Politicization+of+Science/article9061.htm


You want to pretend that the now almost 32,000 fully accredited scientists who signed the newest version of the Oregon Petition are nobodies? 9000 PhD.s out of the total. All verified and counter checked.
http://www.petitionproject.org/index.html

Notice there are no instances and little detail about these incidents.

This letter from Professor Frederick Seitz has been circulated with the petition. Physicist Frederick Seitz was President of the US National Academy of Sciences and of Rockefeller University. He received the National Medal of Science, the Compton Award, the Franklin Medal, and numerous other awards, including honorary doctorates from 32 Universities around the world. In August 2007, Dr. Seitz reviewed and approved the article by Robinson, Robinson, and Soon that is circulated with the petition and gave his enthusiastic approval to the continuation of the Petition Project. A vigorous supporter of the Petition Project since its inception in 1998, Professor Seitz died on March 2nd, 2008. For more biographical information about Dr. Seitz,
http://www.petitionproject.org/gwdatabase/GWPP/Seitz_Letter.html

That's the man they are trying to discredit.

That piece is the biggest, creepiest piece of scurrilous trash and a new high or low in the BIG GREEN MACHINES BIG LIE PROJECT.

Sunday September 7, 2008, 10:43 am
That petion "projecT" is a fraud perpetetuated by the the Oregon Institute - it is highly contrived and most of the "scientists" have NO BACKGROUND in climate science (though there are economists and many other with Bacholor Degrees in many unrelated sciences). Also, the petition has DEAD PEOPLE on it LMAO!!!! It has been folating around for over TEN YEARS - yet the petitioners never bothered to check if anyone wants to change there mind and be removed from the list! Heck, ten years ago, I thought climate change was no "big deal" - but I have learned over time. Despite all of this, the "petition" is toughted by the denialists as something "meaningfull" LMAO!!!!!!

Sunday September 7, 2008, 11:09 am
The attempt to discredit the Oregon Petition is where the fraud can be found.

32,000 deniers
That’s the number of scientists who are outraged by the Kyoto Protocol’s corruption of science

Posted: May 16, 2008, http://www.nationalpost.com/520843.bin

That’s the number of scientists who are outraged by the Kyoto Protocol’s corruption of science

in this space is a photo of Freeman Dyson's signature in the original

Freeman Dyson is one of the world’s most eminent physicists.

By Lawrence Solomon
Question: How many scientists does it take to establish that a consensus does not exist on global warming? The quest to establish that the science is not settled on climate change began before most people had even heard of global warming.
The year was 1992 and the United Nations was about to hold its Earth Summit in Rio. It was billed as — and was — the greatest environmental and political assemblage in human history. Delegations came from 178 nations — virtually every nation in the world — including 118 heads of state or government and 7,000 diplomatic bureaucrats. The world’s environmental groups came too — they sent some 30,000 representatives from every corner of the world to Rio. To report all this, 7,000 journalists converged on Rio to cover the event, and relay to the publics of the world that global warming and other environmental insults were threatening the planet with catastrophe.
In February of that year, in an attempt to head off the whirlwind that the conference would unleash, 47 scientists signed a “Statement by Atmospheric Scientists on Greenhouse Warming,” decrying “the unsupported assumption that catastrophic global warming follows from the burning of fossil fuels and requires immediate action.”
To a scientist in search of truth, 47 is an impressive number, especially if those 47 dissenters include many of the world’s most eminent scientists. To the environmentalists, politicians, press at Rio, their own overwhelming numbers made the 47 seem irrelevant.
Knowing this, a larger petition effort was undertaken, known as the Heidelberg Appeal, and released to the public at the Earth Summit. By the summit’s end, 425 scientists and other intellectual leaders had signed the appeal.
These scientists — mere hundreds — also mattered for nought in the face of the tens of thousands assembled at Rio. The Heidelberg Appeal was blown away and never obtained prominence, even though the organizers persisted over the years to ultimately obtain some 4,000 signatories, including 72 Nobel Prize winners.
The earnest effort to demonstrate the absence of a consensus continued with the Leipzig Declaration on Global Climate Change — an attempt to counter the Kyoto Protocol of 1997. Its 150-odd signatories also counted for nought. As did the Cornwall Declaration on Environmental Stewardship in 2000, signed by more than 1,500 clergy, theologians, religious leaders, scientists, academics and policy experts concerned about the harm that Kyoto could inflict on the world’s poor.
Then came the Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine’s Petition Project of 2001, which far surpassed all previous efforts and by all rights should have settled the issue of whether the science was settled on climate change. To establish that the effort was bona fide, and not spawned by kooks on the fringes of science, as global warming advocates often label the skeptics, the effort was spearheaded by Dr. Frederick Seitz, past president of the National Academy of Sciences and of Rockefeller University, and as reputable as they come.
The Oregon petition garnered an astounding 17,800 signatures, a number all the more astounding because of the unequivocal stance that these scientists took: Not only did they dispute that there was convincing evidence of harm from carbon dioxide emissions, they asserted that Kyoto itself would harm the global environment because “increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide produce many beneficial effects upon the natural plant and animal environments of the Earth.”
The petition drew media attention, but little of it was for revealing to the world that an extraordinary number of scientists hold views on global warming diametrically opposite to those they are expected to hold. Instead, the press focussed on presumed flaws that critics found in the petition. Some claimed the petition was riddled with duplicate names. They were no duplicates, just different scientists with the same name. Some claimed the petition had phonies. There was only one phony: Spice Girl Geri Halliwell, planted by a Greenpeace organization to discredit the petition and soon removed. Other names that seemed to be phony — such as Michael Fox, the actor, and Perry Mason, the fictional lawyer in a TV series — were actually bona fide scientists, properly credentialled.
Like the Heidelberg Appeal, the Oregon petition was blown away. But now it is blowing back. Original signatories to the petition and others, outraged at Kyoto’s corruption of science, wrote to the Oregon Institute and its director, Arthur Robinson, asking that the petition be brought back.
“E-mails started coming in every day,” he explained. “And they kept coming. “ The writers were outraged at the way Al Gore and company were abusing the science to their own ends. “We decided to do the survey again.”
Using a subset of the mailing list of American Men and Women of Science, a who’s who of Science, Robinson mailed out his solicitations through the postal service, requesting signed petitions of those who agreed that Kyoto was a danger to humanity. The response rate was extraordinary, “much, much higher than anyone expected, much higher than you’d ordinarily expect,” he explained. He’s processed more than 31,000 at this point, more than 9,000 of them with PhDs, and has another 1,000 or so to go — most of them are already posted on a Web site at petitionproject.org.
Why go to this immense effort all over again, when the press might well ignore the tens of thousands of scientists who are standing up against global warming alarmism?
“I hope the general public will become aware that there is no consensus on global warming,” he says, “and I hope that scientists who have been reluctant to speak up will now do so, knowing that they aren’t alone.”
At one level, Robinson, a PhD scientist himself, recoils at his petition. Science shouldn’t be done by poll, he explains. “The numbers shouldn’t matter. But if they want warm bodies, we have them.”
Some 32,000 scientists is more than the number of environmentalists that descended on Rio in 1992. Is this enough to establish that the science is not settled on global warming? The press conference releasing these names occurs on Monday at the National Press Club in Washington.

Financial Post
LawrenceSolomon@nextcity.com
Lawrence Solomon is executive director of Energy Probe and author of The Deniers: The world-renowned scientists who stood up against global warming hysteria, political persecution, and fraud.

Sunday September 7, 2008, 11:28 am
As I said, that is a fradulent petition - people interested and do a search to determine its varacity. Here is a REAL petition, for those interested.

Top U.S. Scientists and Economists Call For Swift, Deep Cuts In Global Warming Pollution

More than 1,700 of the nation's most prominent scientists and economists today released a joint statement calling on policymakers to require immediate, deep reductions in heat-trapping emissions that cause global warming. Issued just days before the Senate begins debate on the Lieberman-Warner climate bill, the statement marks the first time leading U.S. scientists and economists have joined together to make such an appeal.

details:
http://www.ucsusa.org/news/press_release/top-us-scientists-and-0120.html

Monday September 8, 2008, 10:54 am
Petitions!Mine Is bigger Then Yours!
Meanwhile another day, week ,month,year goes by with the same old same old.
People Uif you really want change Then make change yourself. Use less of everything. Reuse everything, Buy only Green products,and as local as you can get.
And encourage others to do the same.
You will get instant change .If this Judy Cross wants to spend more of her money buying from the Powers That Be Let Her.
Do not waste your time arguing over what she believes.
Everytime you answer her it cannot be us people SHE WINS.
Just give her the simplist answer. You practice CONSERVATION in all forms
She wants to laugh let her, you can laugh all the way to a better environment. And it was you yourself that contributed into making it.

Monday September 8, 2008, 12:10 pm
I agree with the buy as little as you can, and reuse as much as you can. There are so many ways to recycle things,if you let your creativity go you can recycle almost anything into something you can use, right in your own home. Cut the tops off your old milk jugs and use them for planting herbs that way you don't use a new plastic pot from W-mart. Take your old t-shirts and use them for washable rags or cut into strips and hook a rug with them. Turn worn sweaters into pillows, reuse the old buttons and lace from dresses, and use the fabric for quilts. There is no end to what you can do with this stuff. Take your old electronics that can't be repaired and recycle the bits from them. It doesn't have to be taken to a recycling center to be effective. People in other countrys recycle our old garbage all the time and then we buy it back at huge prices. Why not do it ourselves and save the export fees.

I do believe in global warming, I also believe that it has happened before, what we are doing now is exacerbating the problem with the polution from all the gas and diesel powered vehicles, try breathing that stuff if you don't think it's poison. As for the unbelievers, Good luck, you will need it. To recycle and live frugally also prepares us for the comming economic upheavals,and they are comming, no prediction as to when. This many people can't live on this small a planet and put out this much garbage and poison chemicals without bad results. It is only a matter of time. we are using up the earth's resources at a frightening rate. When I enter a city now it reminds me of a warren of rats. So many people, all seem to be scurrying to make money and spend it on newer and more things. We are a world of consumers with nothing else to do but consume and produce. It is so sad, when there is so much more to life or should be.

Wednesday September 17, 2008, 8:41 pm
This world needs to step up and change things, people have been talking about changing the world for years now but barley anyone takes responsibility to put these plans into action. Instead of just talking about these issues in a chat room send this to the government and don't just wait around for someone else to do the work because you have something better to do. Personally I'm going to try to put some of my ideas into play with the law and I beleive one person can make a diferance in the world it well just take some time to make a change.