Former astronaut scoffs at global war...

Former astronaut scoffs at global warming

There are 2406 comments on the The Santa Fe New Mexican story from Feb 14, 2009, titled Former astronaut scoffs at global warming. In it, The Santa Fe New Mexican reports that:

Harrison "Jack" Schmitt, one of the last men to walk on the moon and a former U.S. senator from New Mexico, doesn't buy the idea that humans are causing global warming.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at The Santa Fe New Mexican.

Judge Roy Bean

Woodstock, IL

#21 Feb 15, 2009
and when you wrote:
<quoted text>
try to do something about it, building nuclear plants, one of which will produce more electricity than all the windmills, the kooks shut that idea right down.
Right on. Lefty kooks have us behind the 8 ball again.

Albuquerque, NM

#22 Feb 15, 2009
the Global warming scare (as someone put it) could be used to DECREASE our dependence on the government and large corporations by increasing clean energy and smart use of the environment.

Now tell me: do you think you can keep spending money you don't have, using water you don't have, without attending to the source?

No. You can't.

we live on a planet with limited resources and without a lot of responsible stewardship. Thinking you can p00p an unlimited amount of p00p into the atmosphere or in front of your house and it will magically not pollute anything - that's fantasy.

Don't believe me? Run a hose from the running car in your garage to your house and tell me about the air quality you are enjoying...


Since: Feb 08

Santa Fe, NM

#23 Feb 15, 2009
Steve van Dresser wrote:
Former Senator Schmitt thinks that there is a "political consensus that burning fossil fuels has increased carbon-dioxide levels, temperatures and sea levels." Nonsense. There is no political consensus on climate change. That is why nothing is being done in the United States.
There is, however, a scientific consensus. Every major scientific society in the world is in agreement that global climate change is occurring at an accelerating rate and that man made emissions are a significant part of the problem.
This is correct. And the assertion that global warming is some kind of a government conspiracy to control the masses is just right-wing paranoid nonsense. If you look into the background of the Heartland junk-science organization that was mentioned in the article, you will see a trail of money that goes back to ExxonMobil.

Since: Aug 08

Sarver, PA

#24 Feb 15, 2009
Judge Roy Bean wrote:
<quoted text>
Right on. Lefty kooks have us behind the 8 ball again.
That's OK. You haven't been in the scientific billiard table for a long time.

Florence, AL

#25 Feb 15, 2009
Burned Out Hippie wrote:
<quoted text>
Consesus isn't proof. There was a consensus that the earth was going into an ice age in the 1970s. That didn't happen. There was a consensus that the world would run out of oil by 1980. That was wrong also. I prefer proof to consensus, especially since the consesus is driven by the desire for government research funding.
I agree with you that consensus is not proof. Unfortunately you make 2 erroneous statements to support you claim. There was no consensus there was going to be an ice-age in the 70's, nor was there anywhere near a consensus that the world would run out of oil in the 80's. Druggie and the other propagandists have attempt to revise history with their falsehoods. You obviously bought into their LIES.

Personally I will take the consensus that has built over the last 15 years than listen to the deniers who are funded by the fossil duel industries.

If the consensus is wrong, the environment will be improved. If the deniers are wrong?????????


#26 Feb 15, 2009
Fair Game wrote:
Consensus comes from inside science- you don't get a vote.
I get the same vote that you get.

[QUOTE who="Steve van Dresser]
If you think there is "no consensus on the amount of climate change we're causing," you haven't read or didn't understand the consensus opinion adopted by all of the most significant scientific societies in the world.

Try this link or the one posted with my prior post.[/QUOTE]Sorry Steve, the only consensus is political.

Florence, AL

#27 Feb 15, 2009
Breaking: CLIMATE WARMING GASES RISING FASTER THAN EXPECTED - Randolph Schmid, AP Science Writer Randolph E. Schmid, Ap Science Writer Feb 14,

"...Carbon emissions have been growing at 3.5 percent per year since 2000, up sharply from the 0.9 percent per year in the 1990s, Christopher Field of the Carnegie Institution for Science told the annual meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science....

"The largest factor in this increase is the widespread adoption of coal as an energy source, Field said,'and without aggressive attention societies will continue to focus on the energy sources that are cheapest, and that means coal.'

"Past projections for declines in the emissions of greenhouse gases were too optimistic, he added. No part of the world had a decline in emissions from 2000 to 2008....."

Oakland, CA

#28 Feb 15, 2009
Let's not forget who this dummy schmidt is: when reagan took office in his first term there was a large number of republicans who landed in office on his coattails but schmidt was the ONLY incumbent repub senator to lose his seat. he was worthless in 1980 and he's that with senility now.

“Jimmy Tha Most”

Since: Sep 08

Sangre De Cristos

#29 Feb 15, 2009
the only reason for this story is to stir all you no life crack pots up. Mission accomplished. Another NON news item courtesy of your local rag.
Tessa Que-en

Silver City, NM

#31 Feb 15, 2009
Pollution and global warming will not destroy the earth, but they will destroy most plants and all human and animal life on earth. The earth will come back; it may not be able to sustain any life like Mars, hey but the climate change people will say, "we told you so--earth still exists.

You climate change-denier morons aren't even smart enough to see that the damage that we are doing to earth's climate hurts us. Yeah, you idiots, Earth will be fine--without us!
as cold fronts

Albuquerque, NM

#33 Feb 15, 2009
pass through the great plains they suck gulf moisture up with them. This is why the great plains are the breadbasket of the world.

Global warming/climate change will only enhance this effect.

Our moisture gain will be China's loss.

We can trade food for the national debt we owe China, all will be good, for us, why do anything to reduce our carbon footprint, it's not in our best interest.
Cousin Jethro

Altamonte Springs, FL

#34 Feb 15, 2009
More "Republican science," from another "Republican senator," -- what part of big oil interests may he represent? There is a consensus of thermometric data and interpolated readings that we are nearing a 150,000 year high in global warming temperatures; perchance, what part of oil company revenue has been diverted to the great seeming authority of our ex-astronaut to deny the data? Perhaps for him it is a mere diversion from the attentions the nation has towards that most famous place of his state, Roswell -- of which he may seem equally clueless
I thought the issue was

Albuquerque, NM

#36 Feb 15, 2009
Jo Hansen wrote:
We are currently living in an interglacial event, the Holocene, and anthropogenic production of certain 'greenhouse' gases are without doubt.
But, recent studies indicate that it will take at least 1,000 years to reverse any 'global warming' changes from certain atmospheric aerosols.
The questions we should be asking are:
Do we want to prevent or slow the onset of another ice age?
And is it even possible to stop an ice age? Certainly the solar cycle has a much greater effect upon climate than human activity.]
see , and
At current population growth rates, we should have 11 billion people on the planet by 2050. All of those people need to be fed, so a certain amount of global warming may not be so bad for crops.
Regarding CO2 production, we should certainly examine whether ocean acidification can be slowed by carbon capture technologies, such as agriculture, oceanic algae, forests, and smoke stack controls.
warming, not another ice age.

The kooks want the ice age. That will save the polar bears.

Zephyrhills, FL

#37 Feb 15, 2009
With regard to people.. we know people under siege produce more babies..etc.. the survival mechanisms at work..

Try peace and cooperation for a change.. Even the Mormons will settle to have zero kids.. I think :)

Lincoln, NE

#38 Feb 15, 2009
What happened to Schmitt's brain did he leave it on the moon.

Florence, AL

#39 Feb 15, 2009
there is consensus wrote:
that the left wing kooks who judge comments negatively have their heads in their dark holes.
Another anonymous, inane, hit and run, mental midget flamer.

Florence, AL

#40 Feb 15, 2009
pro Obama wrote:
that is one drunkenass sonafabitch in the space.
Another anonymous, inane, hit and run, mental midget flamer.

Florence, AL

#42 Feb 15, 2009
pulled wrote:
<quoted text>
your head out just long enough to read that comment.
Another anonymous, inane, hit and run, mental midget flamer.

Since: Sep 08

La Madera, NM

#43 Feb 15, 2009
Have you ever noticed spots of a light dew or frosting on your car windshield facing east evaporating early in the morning? Sometimes even before the sun really shines light on it?

That is solar radiation. Light and charged particles punching through the atmosphere and striking the water, which absorbs the energy and retransmits it within itself, separating the molecules that go flying off into the air. Each molecule takes on a charge, and since like charges repel, the water turns into vapor as the molecules try to escape the influence of each other. The structure of water allows this. I have seen this even on cold mornings.

Solid objects have stronger forces that bind it together, and that energy transfer turns into heat. If they get hot enough they lose that binding and turn into liquids or gasses.

The earth is like an object in a microwave oven. It is always receiving energy from the sun as it orbits. Its revolution on its axis creates a balance of sorts. The sunward side gets baked by the incoming radiation, and as it turns to the night side some of that heat energy received is released back to space as light. The clearer the night sky, the more it can release. Cloud cover will inhibit that transfer, which will raise the ambient temperature, which wants to go somewhere. This creates air and ocean currents that spread the heat around. Your weather.

You will also get hotspots in the crust. Areas that can absorb a lot of heat. Thermal mass. It holds heat longer, and it too will affect the wind and water currents. Heat will always seek a cooler place. If there is matter for it to be conducted through, it will do that. The earth is matter so it gets conducted throughout the earth. The space around the earth is a relative vacuum, so it doesn't. Light is the only escape for the heat.

So the environment we live in on earth is a delicate balance of the transfer of heat and energy. The incoming radiation and dispersal of that energy fluctuates. Cause and effect and inertia all doing their thing, but the stronger forces of our rotation and gravitational and electromagnetic balance with the sun and rest of the cosmos rule. There is an equilibrium from those that the cause and effect try to maintain. But that can be overcome.

Every physical thing on this planet is formed from that transfer of heat and energy and is maintained by that balance. That includes you, me, your children, and your ancestors. It may even include our minds and souls. Anything that enters the influence of this planet also becomes subject to those forces.

We are all facets of this place we call home.

Since: Sep 08

La Madera, NM

#44 Feb 15, 2009
There has been news lately of the earthquake swarm in Yellowstone, and of course the analysis and doomsday scenarios. Let's step back a bit and get over the doomsday fear and examine what is happening.

Mankind affects the surface of the earth and the heat and energy transfer upon it. We will naturally affect our environment, which in turn will affect the transfer of heat and energy of that which created us and our host. At least on the physical level.

But look what those supervolcanoes actually are. Heat transfers and modifiers.

The earth's crust is only about 1/100th of the radius of the earth at its thickest sections. It is the cool surface of a hot ball. When the interior gets too hot for its comfort it works its way to the surface, melting holes in it, and spewing all sorts of nastiness into the air. Much of this nastiness is in the form of particulates, solid particles. The ash and smoke. This ash and smoke intercepts the solar radiation that did strike the ground. Momma Nature puts on some sunscreen. Helps to cool her off. The particulates will retransmit much of the energy received from space back into space as light.

Action and reaction in a seemingly intelligent manner.

As part of her our minds are shaped by her. This can explain politics and differences of opinion. A balance of forces to achieve an end. If you have scientists that claim they can fix everything, make them prove their knowledge before letting them loose. Too risky assuming they do know. As it is, there is much controversy between them about the matter. Another fact is sooner or later we will encounter more radiation from sources other and in addition to the sun that will have to be dealt with. Real scientists go slow, those who want to rule you instill fear and the bum's rush. It would seem preparing for adaptation to those changes would be a better goal for the resources and time we have than gambling on making the universe fit us at this time.

Things like this are more about power and control than saving the planet.

Don't second guess the old girl, as some scientists want to do. Let her do what she knows to do. We are part of her. She will take care of us in the long run. You evolve with her.

New age sounding, eh? But old as time itself. Existence is much more complex than we can understand from this view.

Being part of the flow gives the reason for much of those mystical things in life.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

The Santa Fe New Mexican Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News 'Dreamers' left in limbo as Senate rejects immi... Feb 18 spud 15
News 'I'm glad it's over': Family, friends welcome c... (Oct '08) Feb 13 Moving on 33
News Spaceport secrecy bill clears New Mexico Senate... Feb 1 Tinman 4
News Convicted stalker running for Pearce's seat as ... Jan '18 Laura 9
News Pojoaque Bible Church moves to SPMDTU Hall (May '09) Jan '18 Living by grace 3
News India is on the hunt for 24 - untraceable' hist... Jan '18 Archaeonaut 1
News New Mexico's population growth slows to crawl Jan '18 Tinman 2
More from around the web