i think the addiction to oil, by the us,we produce 50% of the polution, i think the easy solution is to get the U.S. off oil. the solution to that is biodeisel and ethinal. an owner of a zipps recycles the stores cooking oil by running the oil through two filters. he then runs it in his deisel truck. for ethinal you can use any grain that ferments, not just corn. i think this country could be off all non U.S. oil in less than five years.
i find it odd that the oil companies have not gotten into the green fuel buiseness, because their running out of oil. green fuel is totally renueable. at this time only private companies are advancing into the green fuel buisiness.

WHY IS THE UNITED STATES NOT ADDVANCING ENVIORMENTALLY SAFE FUELS AND LIQUID COAL FIRED POWER PLANTS, VERY CLEAN ???????

is there anything that is being done about this issue?

another question. What does this mean about the doomsday clock? Is disaster going to hit soon?

These people are a bunch of nuts. I wonder who will be blamed for the last ten years of increase in Solar activity. Republican...maybe? Wacko, wacko...du da!

Hogwash......another scare organization. Is this from the same group of scientists that 30 years ago told us we need to warm up the plantet because the greenhouse gases and things like jet-con trails will be blocking out so much solar energy that we face an ice age???? Is the planet warming up? Certainly. What is the cause. You don't know for sure. They don't know for sure. And those long-range forecasts certainly have stunk lately. So why should I buy any of this until you can prove it?

"Climate change" is the latest iteration of buzzwords used by some of those who insist, despite the evidence (or complete lack thereof), that humans are causing global warming, global cooling, etc. The truth is, "scientists" have predicted both over the last 100 years. When it wasn't "global warming" it was "global cooling." Now, perhaps realizing that those phrases have lost some of their impact, those who push such agendas use the term "climate change." After all, since they're not really sure about which direction worldwide temperatures are headed, it's just easier all-around to use the phrase "climate change," thereby covering their backsides regardless. For those interested, go to the Business & Media Institute's website and read their article regarding the "science" and "journalism" of "climate change" over the past 100 years ( http://tinyurl.com/pwju4 ). And, while you're online checking out that article, you may wish to read about some scientists that -- GASP! -- disagree with the "climate changers." Go to http://tinyurl.com/2fxnw8, http://tinyurl.com/c23h4 and http://tinyurl.com/2bspnn, among others. It's not cut and dried, this "climate change" hysteria. As always, follow the money.

I AM NOT SURE THAT WE ARE THE CAUSE OF GLOBAL WARMING. IS IT POSSIBLE THAT 100 YRS OF WEATHER DATA WOULD NOT BE ENOUGH TO MAKE AN INTELLIGENT DECISION C CONSIDERING 1,OOO,OOO,000 BILLON YEARS
OLD OR MORE. I AGREE ON ALTERNATE POWER SUPPLIES FOR DIFFERENT REASONS 1) STOP SENDING OUR MONEY OVERSEAS THEY R GETTING RICHER WHILE WE ARE BORROWING MONEY FROM THEM.2) A CLEANER ENVIROMENT
ALSO SCIENTISTS AT NASA HAVE CONCLUDED THAT SMOG HAS DECREASED BY 20 PERCENT AND GLOBAL WARMING HAS INCREASED. THEY FEEL THE SMOG WAS ACCUALLY STOPING GLOBAL WARMING. SO SHOULD WE POLLUTE MORE TO STOP GLOBAL WARMING. THE TRUTH IS MOST SCIENTISTS AND ENVIROMENTAL ADVOCATES ARE NOT INVOLVED BECAUSE THEY ARE INTELLEGENT , THEY ARE INVOLVED BECAUSE THEY WERE OR ARE PRIVELEDGED OR A LITTLE CRAZY AND NEED TO HAVE A CAUSE.THEY WENT TO SCHOOL BECAUSE THEIR PARENTS HAD MONEY SO THE BEST AND BRIGHTEST ARE USUALLY NOT REPRESENTED.ONLY THE RICH AND PRIVELEDGED.

I live in Michigan, where we have the Great Lakes which were carved out by glaciers. How did all of that ice melt? Did man do it then also? Nobody mentions that transition from the ice age til now. Why?

So now Stephen Hawkings beleives we can actually stop climates from changing? I've always heard that genius is on the razors edge of insanity. I guess he's fallen off the edge. Ta ta.

Obviously the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists has found that peedling fear of nuclear weapons isn't generating enough revenue for them so they need additional fear-mongering in their arsenal of nonsense.

This global warming page is useless. The earth has cooled and warmed as long as the earth has been around and we are currently in a warming phase (which will probably be short lived). There are much more influential causes to the warming than the manmade greenhouse gases. Try solar activity, upper air patterns and the North Atlantic Oscillation, if we could go back and look at the warmer periods of earth we would see that these influences probably looked very similar to the present. Also, Why was there SO much CO2 in the atmoshpere when dinosaurs roamed the earth? Did they not have pollution controls for their cars?

I know that this site and others probably get their funding from global warming activists, but it just gets old to me.

It should be noted that the artist who created the origional poster of the Doomsday Clock set the hands at the position shown, 12:53, purely for artistic reasons; in other words it just "looked good". Now they are running articles about the impending climatic doomsday. Who sets the clock now, maybe Al Gore?
Jim

Can anyone say Federal Grant money. Most of the Climate Change fanatics are special interest groups giving you the answers they were paid to give. :P

I have wondered, as John has mentioned, how some of those that espouse the idea of global warming can base it on only a few-hundred years-worth of data given that they also probably hold that the earth is 4.6 billion (give or take) years old. That's the "scientific method"? You have to be kidding. No wonder it's called "junk science."

Thirteen comments, all of them ad-hominem. No further response is merited.

Well, I first read that headline (The End Is Near) when I woke up this morning. I'm in England and as you may know, it's been quite stormy over here with damaging winds... So I suppose I was scared. I wonder: Have skeptics felt the same when they first read that?

I know, that clock can't tell us how close to a disaster we are.

Oh, by the way, if any of the commenters or Laura know anything about an island whose inhabitants will have to move due to rising sea-waters, your info will be more than welcome. I saw it on TV earlier today.

Ed,
The U.S. will never be off oil. Oil is the lifeblood of our way of life, our economy. OUr country was not structured the same as European countries so therfore mass transit , trains etc. do not and will not work in every city across the country.

Biodiesel and ethanol use more energy to produce the product right now than what it costs for a gallon of gas. Will it come down? Probably someday but until then we use oil.

The solution for us is to get rid of the red tape that requires an oil company to go through 10 years of crap to get approval, I said approval, to build a refinery. You can have all the oil in the world but if you don't have the refineries, it doesn't matter.

We could stop buying foreign oil tomorrow and guess what - China , India and Japan would buy it up. Wouldn't solve a thing. Supply and demand is a very basic economic principle and when the foreign oil companies raised the price per barrel to a level never before seen - we still had little old ladies clogging up the road everyday for really no important reason.

This country could solve this perceived energy problem by doing a few simple things. Reduce the EPA's role and power in the permit process for new refinerie. Start drilling in Alaska and other areas known to have vast amounts of oil and start using coal to it's full potential. Finally get over the word nuclear and start building nuclear power plants. Realize that there are far more people killed in coal mines than has ever been killed as a result of nuclear power.

Ed, also realize that there are probably better that 15 million semis on the roads in the U.S. everyday. That's a lot of cooking oil.

Most political debates on global warming all seem to point away from the fact and law placed into to action by the EPA and the United Nations. Most of us would like to believe that its our oil consumption, yet clean oil burning and refining actually creates carbon dioxide which is used to create oxygen by way of feeding our plantlife. Some of us would just rather stick to the fact at hand. That fact is the world losing its ozone layer which is the reason for the global warming to begin with. Fact: If the atmosphere lets through more U.V. rays then the earth absorbes more thus causing a higher earth temperature. Hence came forth the Clean Air Act. The delimma that enacted the clean air act wasnt oil,or sulfur or even radon. It was CHLORINE GAS. See when Chlorine reaches the upper atmosphere or any atmosphere containing ozone molecules the chlorine molecule attaches itself to the ozone molecule like a magnet and destroys it by turning it back into a oxygen molecule. In the upper atmosphere this is happening at a rate faster than the sun can create ozone naturally. once the cancer (chlorine) molecule destroys the ozone molecule, that single molecule of chlorine destroys approximately 100,000 more ozone molecules. Now multiply this event by 1 trillion. So I can not stress highly enough the importance of two things:#1 Find and put into action immediately the alternatives to chlorine concerning all aspects of its cosumption, because Chlorine cannot be consumed. Chlorine is and element with a 78*f boiling point, which means it can only be mixed it can not be changed from being chlorine unless you burn it which creates Phosgene gas. #2 Find and put into place the alternative to ground level ozone creating devises. Change the chemistry of fuels or something please, because when we take Chlorine out of the picture we wont have anything that changes the ozone back into oxygen at the ground level. I'm no scientist why am I having to tell you scientists this? Should I send a resume?

P.S. Please make haste men and women the earth has cancer and we gave it to it by utilizing the one element that destroys everything it comes into contact with.

To answer a couple of questions. Is It possible that the scientists created the doomsday clock about the time they utilized chlorine as a home useable chemical because they predetermined how long it would take to destroy the earths ozone layer? Hmmm. And is it possible that they also knew that we would have to create ozone producing machines to help offset the amount of chlorine we would be placing into the atmosphere in say the year 1994 when the clean air act took affect? Ohh and by the way Chlorine is what we use to clean our environment. Hmmm. Ohh and the end is near it gets closer with every chlorine molecule we place into the environment.

Global warming is somewhat misleading by the name alone. Yes, the climate overall in warming, but the result is changing weather patterns and more extreme weather during the colder and warmer periods. This is playing itself out this year all around the world.

The cause can probably be attributed to 3 main causes happening simultaneously, solar activity, natrual warming cycle and green house gases. The most controversial is the man made component, green house gas emmissions. I cannot beleive that 100 trillion tons pumped into the atmosphere anually for 100 years has no effect. That coupled with 10,000 square miles of forests cutdown yearly will and has had a dramatic affect.

It's clear that the weather and climate will get much worse befor it gets better. Iran and Korea are broken countries with limited capabilities, so they are not the threat to the world. Mother Nature can can muster a far bigger blow to humanity.

Wow. I just read through the comments and am shocked at how many people are spewing out uneducated opinions based on things they hear from mass media. But then again, thats the American way.

The only debate with the cause of global warming is in the mass media. There is unprecedented consensus in the scientific community. At least in the community of scientists not currently being paid by Exxon Mobil.

If you look at the data that goes back 650,000 years from core ice samples, it shows there is far more CO2 in the atmosphere now than at any point on that timeline. The correlation between CO2 levels and warmer temperatures is not in question.

To think 6.5 billion oil and coal junkies can't effect the composition of a thin layer of air is simply naive.

http://www.webelements.com/webelements/elements/text/Cl/key.html
http://www.cmdl.noaa.gov/noah/publictn/elkins/cfcs.html
http://www.cmdl.noaa.gov/noah/publictn/elkins/cfcs.html
http://www.ciesin.org/TG/OZ/cfcozn.html
These are websites that support what i have told you above.
This is for the world to know.
Its been in front of us yet hidden from us all along.
Demand changes.

Jeff to speak on uneducation you have left no facts at all, only complained and tried to make everyone posting here look stupid.
Myself: My proffession requires that i carry at all times a universal CFC card which is granted to me on the faith of the United Nations that I will in my proffession of hvac/r haveing 19years experience, do my part to help protect the environment from (chloro)flouro carbons, and but not limited to hydro (chloro) flouro carbons which is water soluable due to its hydrogen molecule. So its harder for the chloro molecule to reach the ozone layer, thus now we have to create ground level ozone to offset the amount of chlorine at the ground level. Take a good look at Jupiters climate, then take a good look at the chemistry makeup of the atmosphere and you will see a massive amount of chlorine gas that makes the storms on jupiter so severe that we couldnt even imagine the outcome yet the outcome is clear, just look at Jupiter.
It should be known that I never created this site nor do i work for any corporate entity designed to mislead, misinform, or negotiate the matter at hand which is; why is the earth getting warmer and causing our polar caps to melt to say the least, and why is our weather so bad? Look at Jupiter our weather isnt bad, but pandoras box is open and i bet it was full of chlorine.
Moan and complain all you want, make excuses and place blame where you will but, peroxide works better than chlorine and it doesnt burn us up in years to come because it took our ozone layer away. Carbon dioxide is simply another problem which can be cured by planting high co2 eating plantlife, know of anything that can eat chlorine and survive? me either.

Funny thing about those correlations between CO2 and temperature found in core samples. Turns out the CO2 increases followed the temperature increases. In addition, there hve been periods when there was an inverse relationship between the two. I am a little slow so I need a simple explanation how so many people conclude that CO2 is causing a rise in temperature. Anyone?

The uneducated American way?

Bearing such a narrow mentality as that will never allow us as people to fully unite as nations in order to solve this GLOBAL issue. Pointing fingers has never and will never solve anything.

Nuclear power plants are only 30-40% efficient when it comes to using the combusted energy from oil, coal, etc.

Lets work on achieving increased efficiency ya?

thanks.

btw, ethanol as an alternative energy source is just as wasteful if not more than using oil. There is no space on this planet to devote land to corn and grain production in order to create ethanol. Demand > Supply.

ciao.