Level 11 want to state why you downvoted instead of just being a rude ass?

It's not that the Earth is warming, it's that the weather is being CHANGED by excess CO2. Rain patterns are changing, storms are becoming fiercer.

The warmer ocean waters are melting the ice, which will then enter the oceans and cool them, creating more weather havoc.

There are photos available which SHOW that the polar ice cover HAS drastically reduced. I don't know where he was, but England has been in what they consider a drought for as long as LA has been.

You cannot deny that man has made an impact on this planet, and that in many cases, the impact is BAD. Garbage in the ocean, pollution everywhere, CFC now causing record amounts of skin cancer in southern hemisphere countries.

Generating electricity by wind power will not return us to the Dark Ages. I wonder if this guy is in the pay of the coal lobby? He certainly is not a good scientist himself if he cannot understand the data that is available on this subject!

While temperature records have only been kept for a few hundred years, other records indicate that the weather patterns ARE changing, and we just don't know how bad it can get.

I for one don't want to become an extinct species because of greed and shortsightedness on the part of a handful of humans!

Usually I upvote articles upon which I comment, but this one is so awful that I just can't bring myself to do so.

I am all for critical reviews of any scientific theory and political proposition, but this fellow seems to be in no place to call out different scientists on their work when he seems to have little scientific understanding at all.

For example:

This displays the author's gross ignorance of most earth and atmosphere scientists' theories and research on the topic of climate change. Unusually cold winters happening more frequently - is this not climate change?!

I wish this article was written without bias, as this is something that pissed off many scientists! There's nothing worse than having some journalist or politician misunderstand or misinterpret (intentionally or not) science and then advertise the non-facts!

*edit* Okay, okay, I had to upvote due to the fact that the article generated some discussion. I like discussion.

I am not agreeing with him. Just thought it may be worthy of a debate.
But apparently no one wants to take his side :)

I'm afraid Mr. Booker has no actual credibility. This is the same guy who claims asbestos and second-hand smoke are completely harmless (despite mountains of hard science to the contrary), and is a backer of Intelligent Design. Here is George Monbiot's take on him -



Repeating the same claim 38 times after it's been shown to be blatantly wrong is not good journalism - it smacks more of desperation to be right when all else has failed.

The wikipedia entry on Booker is instructive as well (provided you stick to the footnoted facts).

The peer-reviewed science overwhelmingly refutes Mr. Booker's stance on CO2 and warming. As bcgrote and chinook have already pointed out, the simpleton view that "winters must get colder for there to be climate change" is profoundly wrong and displays ignorance of the facts one is trying to refute. To Mr. Booker, I say go study basic climate science and then we'll talk. Until then, leave it to the grownups.

You troublemaker you! :)

I'm calling bulls**t on this claim. I don't think that cleaning up our act will be all that expensive; its just the industry complaining.

Here is a graph showing the regulation of SO2 emissions with cap and trade:

Look at the difference between the projected cost and the actual cost. Its the same thing with CO2, the industry complains about how this will send us back into the dark ages and how it will bankrupt the economy, but its all bs. Regulating CO2 will turn out to be cheaper than it seems like its going to be.

We don't have to choose between the economy and the environment, we can have both. Some businesses might have to invest in new technology(oh horror of horrors! businesses actually have to spend money!), but its not going to bankrupt the economy. These people always complain about any sort of regulation as if its the apocalypse, just like they did with the SO2 emission cap and trade, but look at how well that turned out.

It would be easier, and more fun, to just argue against the existence of gravity :)

I usually don't listen to journalists, since the Uni didn't close my online library account when I graduated, I can still read most journals online for free :D

That reminded me of a poster I saw once. It said:

GRAVITY
IT'S THE LAW!!

:D

The climate change issue is purely political

Care to support your argument instead of just making a statement and scampering away?

I had figured out the cyclical nature of the weather as a 10 year old during the "GLOBAL COOLING" scare. Some years are warmer, some are cooler. But as my hubby points out, if you look at the temperature TREND over time, it has been increasing over the last 50 year. As in, getting warmer.

Yeah, this guy must be in the pay of some wealthy folks...

I just wish there was less rubbish and more facts on the net