Critics: Polar bear plan must fight global warming

Even if there were merit to the GW case, are we supposed to retool our entire economy for trillions of dollars in a futile attempt to stop the inevitable? This is environmentalism run amok. It is long past time to put a stop to it.

it's all worth it if people lose jobs and companies move to less restrictive countries if it saves just one polar bear.

Owl Gore wrote:

it's all worth it if people lose jobs and companies move to less restrictive countries if it saves just one polar bear.

yes. even if millions must starve because of the ethanol fiasco, just one more bear is worth all the death and suffering. What a pity we can't swap Al Gore for that one bear.

save a bear, starve a child.

**A Skeptic's Take on Global Warming **

http://www.humanevents.com/article.php...



Timothy Ball is no wishy-washy skeptic of global warming. The Canadian climatologist, who has a Ph.D. in climatology from the University of London and taught at the University of Winnipeg for 28 years, says that the widely propagated “fact” that humans are contributing to global warming is the “greatest deception in the history of science.”

Ball has made no friends among global warming alarmists by saying that global warming is caused by the sun, that global warming will be good for us and that the Kyoto Protocol “is a political solution to a nonexistent problem without scientific justification."

Needless to say, Ball strongly disagrees with the findings of the latest report from the United Nations' Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, which on Feb. 2 concluded that it is “very likely” that global warming is the result of human activity.

The mainstream media would have us believe that the science of global warming is now settled by the latest IPCC report. Is it true?

Timothy Ball: No. It’s absolutely false. As soon as people start saying something’s settled, it’s usually that they don’t want to talk about it anymore. They don’t want anybody to dig any deeper. It’s very, very far from settled. In fact, that’s the real problem. We haven’t been able to get all of the facts on the table. The IPCC is a purely political setup.

(Excerpt) Read more at humanevents.com ...

----------

Exactly why is the worlds biggest polluter allowed to sign Kyoto but is completely free of all aspects of the Kyoto protocol and its wealth transfer scheme, is it because they are Communists?" ~

***On Global Warming: Follow the Money Indeed!***

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,251458,00...


***At the United Nations, the Curious Career of Maurice Strong***

http://www.foxnews.com/printer_friendly_story...

It's also of interest to note that Maurice Strong was behind the Global-cooling hysteria of the seventies.
It didn't work, but no doubt was something he never gave up on, tweaking the basic plateform to become the much more scarier "Global warming".

I'm afraid that the global warming issue is a snowball (pardon the pun) rolling downhill and we cannot stop it. The media puts out story after story after story and reports it as settled fact. Stupid people automatically just buy it in droves.

All three presidential candidates want to enact expensive legislation to help "prevent" it.

We. Are. Screwed.

You call it screwed, I call it progress...FINALLY, I LOVE IT!!

I know-lets raise taxes and regulate business to the point that we shutdown the economy.

Just in case global warming is for real!

Brilliant

Polar bears; remember the box turtle, pileated woodpecker, and on and on. What a bunch of frickin idiots.

There are a lot of people who are convinced Obama should be president and those same people think Global warming is man made.

Sorry it's now climate change after this colder than average winter they had to change the name so it FIT their adjenda.

All I know for sure is if Global warming and/or climate change is caused by humans there is a simple solution: All liberals nutralize themselves, problem solved!!

What NO BALLS!

It's for the betterment of the planet, come on just DO IT!! Be brave once in your life!!

Apparently the polar bear population has increased five-fold since the 1970s. Also, the ice shelfs are getting larger.

This is the scary thing--facts are no longer even necessary. Just claim anything and pass a law. We truly live in an age of religion and superstition. Science is simply the public face of pantheist faith.

Mr Giblets,
Yes! YeS! YES!
"save a bear, starve a child"

Perfect! What are children anyway but proof of birth control and abortion failures. Children lead to people. Without children, we won't need all of Hillary's village to raise them- even more carbon savings!
This gets better and better...

Where are the enviro-nuts? It isn't very good sport when you don't even show up!!!

By the way, what was the “carbon footprint” of that volcano that blew last week in Chile? I would bet that in hours it exceeded even the annual output of China, and it is still spewing.

FACT: "In the 1950s the polar bear population up north was estimated at 5,000. Today it's 20- to 25,000, a number that has either held steady over the last 20 years or has risen slightly."

Just another flunky bureaucratic Big Government move, in lock step with AlGore's agenda.

http://www.polarbearsinternational.org/ask-th...

CyBear,
We can start suggesting drilling in ANWR, building new refineries and many new "safe, clean" nuclear power plants.
That should lure 'em in close!

What the heck, we have a polar bear in Como Park.

There isn't a shortage of them!!

We need more polar bears, less people.

We should round up 50,000 people, two for each bear, and replace them with the polar bears.

"Save a polar bear, starve a child".

The new eco-movement.

***Simple, Low-cost Carbon Filter Removes 90 Percent Of Carbon Dioxide From Smokestack Gases***

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/05/...

Researchers in Wyoming report development of a low-cost carbon filter that can remove 90 percent of carbon dioxide gas from the smokestacks of electric power plants that burn coal and other fossil fuels.
Maciej Radosz and colleagues at Wyoming's Soft Materials Laboratory cite the pressing need for simple, inexpensive new technologies to remove carbon dioxide from smokestack gases. Coal-burning electric power plants are major sources of the greenhouse gas, and control measures may be required in the future.
The study describes a new carbon dioxide-capture process, called a Carbon Filter Process, designed to meet the need. It uses a simple, low-cost filter filled with porous carbonaceous sorbent that works at low pressures. Modeling data and laboratory tests suggest that the device works better than existing technologies at a fraction of their cost.

>>>>>Should I sell all of those carbon credits I have in my drawer at home?

Bob wrote:

There are a lot of people who are convinced Obama should be president and those same people think Global warming is man made.

If the American who believe in anthropogenic climate change vote for Obama, he'll get 80% of the vote.

Do you relish being in an ever-shrinking minority of crackpots fueled by irrational anger and fear?

why just Obama? All 3 crackpot frontrunners believe this tripe.

there are plenty of crackpot choices.