Second of all (can't believe I actually typed that), I didn't mean "all the earth's scientists", or even "all the kings men". I meant all the scientists who contributed to the IIPC. And "global climate change" is caused by the sum of "local industrial effluvia". Don't mistake examples for all data.

Ah, well, if that's your assertion, and if that's precisely what the IIPC Report stated, then it's utterly wrong.

There isn't a scintilla of data that supports that as a conclusion.

For example, in the early 20th century mercury was used extensively in the mining of gold. It's still contaminates some streams in Montana, 80 years later.

While that's a quantitative fact, it has no relationship to Global Warming.

indeed. Barriers to Markets are what big business thrives on.

I've got to wonder, what do the "environmentalist" have to say about backyard biodiesel guys being shut down? (due to failure to comply with all types of reg's) No more french-fry farts for the TDI.

California, of all places, has and continues to interfere with people trying to make their own biodiesel out of used oil. From trying to force them to get "fat rendering" permits to transport the oil, to permits for volatile chemicals; it's been an ongoing issue.

One of the issues is with people earning a living disposing the used vegetable oil. They don't want anyone taking their oil and making something out of it.

Is the science really settled? Here's a link to some pretty unsettling science for the global warming alarmists.

Cosmic rays, or the lack thereof, cause global warming. Lab tests directly support the hypothesis in a quantifiable way.

http://www.junkscience.com/Greenhouse/Cosmic_rays_and_climate.htm

Damn. I need to remember to lock the door.

Democrat-California has to weight the options first.
Let's see: nationwide grassroots transition towards renewable resources and economic independance, or more regulatory departments, transportation taxes and industry kickbacks? Hmm....

Indeed, we should.

We'd not be overpopulated in America with a population three times the size, the globe isn't overpopulated either.

If overpopulation is o.k., how 'come y'all live way out there in the countryside?

Overpopulation is localized to places where they can't seem to produce enough food for themselves. Overpopulation as you appear to be using the term doesn't exist on planet earth.

In south Carolina the population is 4,255,483 with 32,020 square miles of land including the lakes for a per square mile per square population of 133 persons. The Wyoming population is 509,294 and 97,818 square miles for a populaiton density of just over 5 persons per square mile. In Montana it's more dense with 935,670 people and 147,042 for a per square mile population of just over 6 people. My home is 15 miles from a city with a population of 200,000, though it appears rural the population density on my road is higher than that in Wyoming.

Jeez Pat, there ya go using numbers and data again. You're never gonna convince them that way.

No problem Pat. With an expotential global population doubling every 20 years or so, unregulated immigration from high-birthrate countries, combined with the local conversion of family farms to track housing, that "rural" problem of yours will get cleared up in no time.

How does a templet with Manhattan Il. levels in about 25 years sound?;)

Ouch! It hurts my head when I try to understand "complicated" things like that. Can't I please just believe the simple things that the news media tells me, like "carbon dioxide from burning fossil fuels is causing global warming"? It is so much easier to not have to think and just let other people tell me what to believe.


From the same site (a ten-minute junk science course):

http://www.junkscience.com/JSJ_Course/jsjudocourse/1.html

I'm skeptical about human influence but willing to make some changes.
My collage chem. book says plant decay and animal respiration are responsible for the largest % of CO2.Can't do anything about that.
Smoke stack industry in my area has been on the decline since the 1950s.We can shut whats left down but that will not help much.
We can replace coal fired power plants with nuclear.SCARY.
More hydro power is not good because scientists theorize that water storage in the northern hemisphere has changed earths balance and slowed rotation.And slowed rotation causes guess what?WARMING.
I don't fly much so I'm good with grounding jet airlines.That would eliminate about 12% and it's deposited at the worst place 30,000,feet!
I'm OK with a tax on gasoline.
Lets scrap cruise ships , cause 6 inches to the gallon seems just wrong!

Why are you scared of nuclear power?

Of course - Steven Milloy is a highly respected independent scientist and researcher -

FROM WIKIPEDIA: "Steven J. Milloy is the "Junk Science" commentator for FoxNews.com and runs the website Junkscience.com, which is dedicated to debunking what he alleges to be false claims regarding global warming, DDT, breast_implants, passive smoking and ozone depletion, Mad_cow_disease, among other topics.[1] Milloy also runs CSRWatch.com, which is focused on attacking the corporate social responsibility movement. He is the author of the book "Junk Science Judo: Self-defense Against Health Scares and Scams." From the 1990s until the end of 2005, he was an adjunct scholar at the libertarian Cato Institute, which hosted the Junk Science website. He is currently an adjunct scholar at the Competitive Enterprise Institute. Milloy is also head of the Free Enterprise Action Fund, a mutual fund he runs with former tobacco executive Tom Borelli. Milloy operates the Advancement of Sound Science Center, a non-profit organization which is critical of environmental science, from his home in Potomac, Maryland. Milloy has been criticized for making misleading and false claims, for a variety of unethical actions and statements, and for presenting himself as an impartial journalist on health and environmental matters while accepting funding and editorial input from tobacco and oil companies."

Those who believe bull$it are doomed to repeat it.

Actually not that scared but we did have one disaster and one really close call.
My actual point is that some of these things are just trading one problem for another.

Which disaster, and which close call?

True. Oh so true.

Disaster was (I'll guess the spelling) Chernobyl.
Near miss was Three Mile Island.