OK, time for the AGW'ers out there to step up and show everyone how committed and certain they are.

Me, I'm putting some money down just in case so I can get some beachfront property in Tenn.

LOL, just kidding.

Oooooooo, the old "2012" scare....grow up, people.

i would like to know the odds someone can figure out the ECO scamsters solution to the following:

how do we solve u.s. energy independence?

1) nucleur fission...AGW'r "nope, it is not safe and gives off a bad byproduct that we cant safely store nevermind it is safely being used all over the world and gives off no co2

2) coal...AGW'r "nope, number one on our hit list because of all the bad co2 byproduct and acid rain nevermind we cant prove either is or did effect our environment, the u.s. has the largest coal reserves in the world, and technology now is nearing zero emission

3) oil...AGW'r "nope, same as coal but not as bad, so we'll develop something called a hybrid car that runs on batteries using electricity nevermind we dont know where electricty comes from nor realize oil provides us with the quality of life in everything we do daily including keeping us warm in this blizzard of winter caused by global warming

4) gas...AGW'R "nope, same as oil, just not as bad, nevermind you cant use it to fly airplanes and drive trucks

5) wind...AGW'R "yes, nevermind the amount of energy it will ever generate wont amount to squat and we dont think we like it anyway, because it kills birds and destroys the ocean front view...

6) geothermal...AGW'r "yes, nevermind it wont amount to squat and its marginally economic in vary few places

7) ethonal...AGW'r "yes, even though it takes more energy to make a gallon of fuel than it produces as well as subsidizing, farmers like Midland Archer Daniels with billions of our tax dollars, driving up the price of corn, beef, chicken and pork so the poor folks are starving all the while polluting the streams with fertilizer and ravage the land for corn is ok, because big oil is not getting the money

8) hydrogen...AGW'r "our golden child, nevermind the technology current does not exist, nor is commercial with all the above bad carbon based fuel...kinda like ethanol, but we're not helping the poor ole farmers with all our tax subsidies.

9) therefore, drumroll, please...AGW GOLDEN BULLET....lets scare people into a pyrimad scheme and trade carbon credits with those that dont have carbon thereby miracously solving all our energy problems in conjunction with saving the world from boiling over because our "hot foot"print is canceled out and we can sleep at night feeling good about ourselves saving the world from imminent doom while we scammed 'em to get rich quick!!!

I'll save my money for a houseboat since the coast of Texas will be underwater in a few years!

:-)

Studying global warming is a waste of time and energy - the real crisis is the fact that, prior to the belief of many, OIL DOESN'T LAST FOREVER. When oil production peaks, which it will in the next 10 years, gas prices will skyrocket to levels never seen before (hard to predict, but $15 or even 20 dollars a gallon would be plausible). Scientists need to focus on researching solar power, not researching ways to reduce CO2 emissions. Oil must be eliminated as a source of power because it will not last. If we can't come up with an alternative to power our world, we will revert to a "cave-man"-like existence.

If you want to be treated like a scientist act like one. Otherwise your just another idiot with an agenda. No one takes anything seriously anymore because no, so called experts tell the truth objectively.

This is rich. Global warming actually stops hurricanes from forming now. I guess since we did not have a massive hurricane year they had to come up with a new theory.

http://today.reuters.com/news/articlenews.aspx?type=topNews&storyid=2007-04-17T223135Z_01_N17419452_RTRUKOC_0_US-WEATHER-HURRICANES-SHEAR.xml&src=rss&rpc=22
After we have a few years of cooling, how long before someone comes out with the story that "Clobal warming actually will cause cooling for a short amount of time".

This whole debate reminds me of playing checkers with a 5 year old. First it is best out of 3, then when he looses 2 games, it is best out of 5, then best out of 7. It is to be expected when so much money, so many jobs and reputations have been placed on a weak theory.

The odds are very long, particularly given the recent studies from the University of Colorado showing that ocean temperatures are not rising, and may be cooling.

Other peer-reviewed studies show that most of Antarctica is cooling, and that the Greenland ice cap is thickening at the higher elevations.

Betting on flooding would seem to be a poor wager in light of these facts.

Sorry to disappoint Matt, but oil production will not peak in 10 to 15 years. These predictions about running out of oil have been going on for over a hundred years. A few examples:

1914, U.S. Bureau of Mines: Total future production limit of 5.7 billion barrels of oil, at most a 10-year supply remaining.

1939, Department of the Interior: Oil reserves in the United States to be exhausted in 13 years.

1951, Department of the Interior, Oil and Gas Division: Oil reserves in the United States to be exhausted in 13 years.

We now have over 1.28 TRILLION barrels of oil in proven reserves, so it is unlikely we will run out of oil for many decades, if not centuries. In any case, we will develop cheaper and more abundant energy resources long before our oil is depleted.

Greg,
And yet they say that oil shortages are the reason for gas prices. Kind of funny.

"Give me disinformation or give me death," eh, Patrick? I assume you understand that every bit of that is wrong, either directly or because cherry-picking is involved.

Actually, it's not the oil shortages that are causing the problem, it's the fact that we aren't very efficient at refining it. Maybe if we had a "greener" way of refining our oil, that would help some.

Answer me this. What is melting the ice caps on Mars. Cars or power plants? Or, just plain old sunlight like here on earth? Is the sun getting warmer or are we getting dumber?

Julie, you are close to the answer. You might think that U.S. oil companies are building new refineries to keep up with increasing demand, but you would be mistaken. Care to guess when the last oil refinery was built in this country? The answer is 1976. I'll leave it for others to debate the reasons for a paucity of new construction, but I wouldn't be too quick to point a finger at the oil companies.

greg,

i would also add that the "oil shortage" that has caused the increase in higher gasoline prices in recent years is the result of daily oil demand outpacing daily supply...this is not the result of oil resources becoming scarce...it is in part, as you suggest, the lack of increasing our refining capacity to meet increasing demand...why didnt or dont we do that? frivilous environmental lawsuits and not in my backyard protests...the end result, is waling, whining, screaming, and finger pointing at big oil everytime you go to fill up at the gas station...all the while, the aging refineries are running flat out to meet increasing demand... these same people screaming at $3 dollar gas are trying to shut down drilling in the u.s and its offshore waters and are totally against nuclear and coal fired plants that could relieve pump prices and electricity bills...their solution?...make ethanol that is dirtier and soaring the cost of beef, pork ect while it pillages the land...oh the hypocrisy of it all or are they just that ignorant...think about what they are saying... I want cheap gas to travel to the next save the world convention on global warming, which by the way, got snowed out this year...that was priceless!!!

Doesn't ethanol production create a clean, edible byproduct for chickens, etc to eat? I read that somewhere, don't know if it's true(just trying to perhaps cool down some hysteria, but I agree the ethanol deal is largely a political gesture for the farmers, and if it's MORE polluting overall than oil we certainly don't want it).

It's hilarious how people such as Dave say our 300 years of recorded weather history is not enough data to prove AGW; yet, a few years of Mars observations from a satellite -- no surface observations, mind you -- is somehow more than enough information for Dave to draw conclusions. Not to mention that Mars' weather is completely different than ours, and -- as Darren likes to say -- is like comparing apples to bricks.

Wow I was quoted. From a different post even. Thanks.

Good point though on the Mars thing. Not much time to go. What we need is on the scene reporting to really quantify the Mars situation. I think we should all demand Congress send a delegation to review the conditions on Mars and determine the potential outcome of the apparent "warming". Sigh, i only a polar bear was endangered....it would happen.

Now if we could just send the entire Congress, maybe us regular citizens could actually resolve the problems in the world instead of just debating and politicking (sp) them ad nauseum and we could then all just get along.

May not work, but at least we could try.

Mark--give us a link to the 300 year recorded world wide ocean tempertures and the 300 year recorded tempertures in Dallas, Tucson, Denver, and Settle. Give us a link to the recorded CO2 consentration in the atmosphere over the past 300 years. Give us a link to the recorded solar effects on our weather over the past 300 years. We can all give you volumes of recorded attempts by man to control things on this magnificant globe that he knows very little about
and is relatively too puny to have any effect. Our most success (sometimes)has been to not foul our own nest, relatively speaking. The best we can really attempt to do is to understand our globe. By doing this, we will have a small window into understanding the mind of our creator. IMHO

I point to Herschel as evidence of my claim that most people who think that we "puny humans" can't affect our climate are those who have a religious view of the world rather than a scientific view.

Mark--Amen brother. Thanks for the compliment. Oh-by the way, the folks out in Tulia, Texas would have appreciated scientist's help in preventing the tornado that wiped out their town. Still, everyone does appreciate the science that understands God's creation to be able to define and identify tornadic weather so folks can duck. Of couse out there, they have a saying that if the horse you are riding knew how puny you are, it would stomp you. It is all relative. If you don't know where Tulia is, it is 15 miles south of Happy.