New study on climate change

There was never anything approaching a concensus there. Even folks that are "denialists" concede that.

Me too. I like to think of it in terms of risk mitigation. Right now I don't think we're properly mitigating the risks.

 

As efusco already noted, it is reprint of an opinion column -- and whenever you take an opinion column (which implies no fact checking at all) as fact, you're asking to be misled.

The author of the Jakarta post column, Bjorn Lomberg, is a political scientist not a climate scientist and teaches at a business school. These Scientific American articles on him might help you understand the flaws in Lomborg's work:
Misleading Math about the Earth
and
A Response to Lomborg's Rebuttal

 

I can't believe the link was to a Lomberg piece. What makes me even more sick is that so many people read his BS (and Steven Milloy) and believe it is true.

It is missinformation like this that gets us into trouble and keeps us from acting in a timely and responsible manner. I swear if I ever start to really lose it I'd make these guys my first "target" for the simple fact they are harming everyone in the world with their lies.

 

GW is a theory, not an opinion.

 

Thanks for the concise reply. I've been out a few days and I see you still have to occasionally battle the misconception you are an enemy of GW rather than exactly who you say you are.....someone listening, but not accepting evidence because it is "required" of you. I personally think that is a good thing.....even though many are unhappy about it.

The next followup point I would like to hear from you follows: Would you question that all the oil and coal that is burned, either for electric power (mostly coal) or for transportation (mostly petroleum) has the combustion products released to the air (as CO2) ?

You can see where I am headed.....and it certainly is not down a path that belittles your posting in any way.

 

That actually is a very good aspect to question. Let's assume that 1% is the number and the effects are minimal. (Just keep bearing with me.) Next question, how much coal and gas is available to burn that is still in the ground?

 

Hello I have been lurking here for a few days now that I had found this site. I am looking for the best solution for me in a more fuel efficent mode of transportation. I am not doing this just for the environment. Frankly the main reason is to save money. In my business I do quite a bit of driving and since I work alone there is not any chance of carpooling being an option either. I came on this site to learn more about hybrids and there seems to be quite a bit here.

What I can not understand is how so many seemingly well educated people can utter statements as the one I highlighted above. This is probably the most asinine statement I have read. A writer has an opinion that is different from this guys and so "He is harming the Earth and should be a target" (Never mind there is a first admendment right in United States that guarentees this individual Freedom Of Speech) If you sir were to "target" this individual how would you feel 10 years down the road if his opinions or even part o his opinions turned out to be sopt on true. Frankly on most other chat boards I have been on this would have gotten at least a temporary ban. As threats no matter how idle are just plain unacceptable (and should be). You or I have no right to make this guy feel phsically threatened for his beliefs or opinions.

I also disagree with you that people are taking what he says and just believing him with doing their own research. People are for the most part smarter then what you are giving them credit for. Every person has the right to hear all sides to an issue and make a choice on what and how they need to react. We do not need a minorty deciding how to make the rest of us live our lives. Whether it be an issue on GW or any other issue.

I believe there is GW. I do not believe man has played part in GW. Yet I still have an open mind and want to conserve and not pollute any more than necessary. I own a farm so nature and environment are very important to me.

I realize this my indeed get me a ban as from what I have read my view seems to be more of a theat than the above quoted fellows.

Also I am not Bigfoot, or Warhorse. Never owned a Corvette my passion has been of more exotic marques.

Again I came here to look for information on hybrids. What I found was kind of appauling.

Not just the threats but some threads suggesting some type of superiority because you own a hybrid. I have owned many cars in my life (some marques are even considered to be exotics) none have ever made me feel superior to any other person because they don't subscribe to the sam lifestyle I have chosen.

 

The threat as I saw it was directed to the author of the article you quoted. I would agree it was more than likely not something he would actually carry out either. Regardless though the threat is way over the top IMO.

 

I wrote out a nice long reply then thought better of it. You're not worth the effort really. Have a great evening.