Quoted Text

AUSTIN, Texas — Former Vice President Al Gore on Friday called on SXSW attendees to punish climate-change deniers, saying politicians should pay a price for rejecting “accepted science.”.

Quoted from BuckStrider

http://www.chicagotribune.com/.....-20150313-story.html





Death to the apostates! Death to the disbelievers! Death to those who would mock The Prophet! Blessed be Al Gore!

Quoted from DemocraticVoiceOfReason

Al Gore is a useless jack a**.  We can all thank God that he never became president.

Quoted from BuckStrider

Funny you say that.

Since Hillary seems to be on her way out, there has been some talk about getting Gore (Blessed be his name) to run.

Quoted from DemocraticVoiceOfReason

Gore can run -- he will lose anyway.  I have already endorsed John Ellis Bush for President -- and will be supporting him all the way.

Quoted from BuckStrider

Yes, yes we all know you support big government progressives and turncoats like Chris Gibson. Not to get off topic, but when is Gibson joining the Dem party?

Quoted from DemocraticVoiceOfReason

Chris Gibson is certainly not a turncoat.  He is a good person and a great American.  It would be a cold day in hell before he changes party.

And which member of the lunatic fringe do support?  Rand Paul?  

Quoted from BuckStrider

Hey now, it's not MY fault that he double crossed conservatives and voted to fund Obama's illegal amnesty.  

Quoted from Box A Rox

Politicians who lie to the public (Climate Deniers) should pay a price for their lies.
They should be voted out of office.

Quoted from senders

no.....they should be sent to Waterworld

Quoted Text

Why I am a Climate Change Skeptic

Patrick Moore

===============================
Editor’s Note: Patrick Moore, Ph.D., has been a leader in international environmentalism for more than 40 years. He cofounded Greenpeace and currently serves as chair of Allow Golden Rice. Moore received the 2014 Speaks Truth to Power Award at the Ninth International Conference on Climate Change, July 8, in Las Vegas.
===============================

I am skeptical humans are the main cause of climate change and that it will be catastrophic in the near future. There is no scientific proof of this hypothesis, yet we are told “the debate is over” and “the science is settled.”

My skepticism begins with the believers’ certainty they can predict the global climate with a computer model. The entire basis for the doomsday climate change scenario is the hypothesis increased atmospheric carbon dioxide due to fossil fuel emissions will heat the Earth to unlivable temperatures.

In fact, the Earth has been warming very gradually for 300 years, since the Little Ice Age ended, long before heavy use of fossil fuels. Prior to the Little Ice Age, during the Medieval Warm Period, Vikings colonized Greenland and Newfoundland, when it was warmer there than today. And during Roman times, it was warmer, long before fossil fuels revolutionized civilization.

The idea it would be catastrophic if carbon dioxide were to increase and average global temperature were to rise a few degrees is preposterous.

Recently, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) announced for the umpteenth time we are doomed unless we reduce carbon-dioxide emissions to zero. Effectively this means either reducing the population to zero, or going back 10,000 years before humans began clearing forests for agriculture. This proposed cure is far worse than adapting to a warmer world, if it actually comes about.


IPCC Conflict of Interest

By its constitution, the IPCC has a hopeless conflict of interest. Its mandate is to consider only the human causes of global warming, not the many natural causes changing the climate for billions of years. We don’t understand the natural causes of climate change any more than we know if humans are part of the cause at present. If the IPCC did not find humans were the cause of warming, or if it found warming would be more positive than negative, there would be no need for the IPCC under its present mandate. To survive, it must find on the side of the apocalypse.

The IPCC should either have its mandate expanded to include all causes of climate change, or it should be dismantled.

Political Powerhouse

Climate change has become a powerful political force for many reasons. First, it is universal; we are told everything on Earth is threatened. Second, it invokes the two most powerful human motivators: fear and guilt. We fear driving our car will kill our grandchildren, and we feel guilty for doing it.

Third, there is a powerful convergence of interests among key elites that support the climate “narrative.” Environmentalists spread fear and raise donations; politicians appear to be saving the Earth from doom; the media has a field day with sensation and conflict; science institutions raise billions in grants, create whole new departments, and stoke a feeding frenzy of scary scenarios; business wants to look green, and get huge public subsidies for projects that would otherwise be economic losers, such as wind farms and solar arrays. Fourth, the Left sees climate change as a perfect means to redistribute wealth from industrial countries to the developing world and the UN bureaucracy.

So we are told carbon dioxide is a “toxic” “pollutant” that must be curtailed, when in fact it is a colorless, odorless, tasteless, gas and the most important food for life on earth. Without carbon dioxide above 150 parts per million, all plants would die.

Human Emissions Saved Planet

Over the past 150 million years, carbon dioxide had been drawn down steadily (by plants) from about 3,000 parts per million to about 280 parts per million before the Industrial Revolution. If this trend continued, the carbon dioxide level would have become too low to support life on Earth. Human fossil fuel use and clearing land for crops have boosted carbon dioxide from its lowest level in the history of the Earth back to 400 parts per million today.

At 400 parts per million, all our food crops, forests, and natural ecosystems are still on a starvation diet for carbon dioxide. The optimum level of carbon dioxide for plant growth, given enough water and nutrients, is about 1,500 parts per million, nearly four times higher than today. Greenhouse growers inject carbon-dioxide to increase yields. Farms and forests will produce more if carbon-dioxide keeps rising.

We have no proof increased carbon dioxide is responsible for the earth’s slight warming over the past 300 years. There has been no significant warming for 18 years while we have emitted 25 per cent of all the carbon dioxide ever emitted. Carbon dioxide is vital for life on Earth and plants would like more of it. Which should we emphasize to our children?

Celebrate Carbon Dioxide

The IPCC’s followers have given us a vision of a world dying because of carbon-dioxide emissions. I say the Earth would be a lot deader with no carbon dioxide, and more of it will be a very positive factor in feeding the world. Let’s celebrate carbon dioxide.

Quoted Text

Roman Catholic Pope Francis has called climate action “an ethical imperative,” and in
January he expressed his belief that man-made activities are largely to blame for rising
emissions and global temperatures. “For the most part, it is man who continuously slaps
down nature,” the Catholic leader said. Francis is expected to release a first-ever papal letter
on climate change this spring.

This week, the head of the U.S. Episcopal Church called climate change “a moral issue,
in terms of the impacts on the poorest and most vulnerable around the world already,”
Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori told the Guardian. She called climate-change
denial a “blind position” and a “refusal to use the best of human knowledge, which is
ultimately a gift of God.”