I've learned not to try to argue facts or logic about anthropogenic induced climate change with a true believer. The following proposition does meet with at least silent shock:

Regardless of whether or not you believe that humans can actually change climate, let us assume that the nation decides to undertake a Manhattan style project to move to clean energy as fast as possible (this, of course, assumes the unending stream of agencies that make life miserable can be swept aside). The Earth's power supply currently comes 70% from carbon-based fuels, 20% from nuclear sources, 7% from hydroelectric, and 3% from "clean" sources (wind, solar, geothermal). An effort to accelerate the installation of clean energy will require the use of enormous amounts of energy for development, construction, transportation, installation, and distribution. Since most energy currently is supplied by carbon fuels, more of those fuels must be expended in the near term to meet this need. Efforts to reduce the use of carbon fuels will therefore make it impossible to move to clean fuels faster, and will actually slow any effort to increase those power sources.

Where I sit was under a mile of ice 13,000 years ago. the sea level was 260 odd feet lower and Mammoths roamed what is now under the sea. We are in a "interglacial warming period" which has thousands of years to go before the ice sheets return and grind Montreal and New York into glacial debris. I like climate change and hope for more soon. Increased energy means more life forms spread over more of the earth. Science is discovering that life forms which lived through the last interglacial cycle have genes adapted for warmth. When Darwin sailed across the Pacific he sailed over villages on submerged islands and saw climate change.

So volcanic emissions have a cooling effect.
Well, la dee da. How about that?
Here in Alabama, the EPA recently closed down some plants that make electricity by burning coal.
What does the EPA want us to do?
Gag due to the EPA's man-made heat while jobless?
Oh, I forgot. I never believed in man-made global warming.
As for "climate change," I've heard of massive volcanic eruptions temporarily disrupting "the weather" and ruining crops due to clouds and cold for a year or two.
The climate (that does gradually change) generally snaps back to its current normal after the volcanic clouds clear.
I do believe that's history.

The only shocking thing about this is that CBS acknowledged that A = A.

CBS had to admit this or lose their last viewers.

People die of the cold. In the United States today, people do not die of the heat--at least, not in such numbers.

Anthropogenic climate change is questionable science but it is an excellent political tool. The politicians most powerful tool is fear and inducing fear of a global catastrophe provides considerable political leverage to those that seek to establish a world wide collectivist society. Whether or not climate change is a real threat is completely irrelevant. As a scientist I know that there is no such thing as "settled science". Newtonian gravitation theory and Einstein's relativity are firmly established as fundamental scientific principals but no scientist considers either of them as "settled". There are simply too many places where they don't work. If these powerful theories cannot be considered as settled how can anyone with a straight face claim that climate science is? Rule number one "Always be skeptical when a scientific 'finding' supports a political ideology".

http://www.galtsgulchonline.com/posts/2c...

Bayesian analysis is somewhat controversial because the validity of the result depends on how valid the prior distribution is, and this cannot be assessed statistically.
Every global warming model, and analysis, I have been exposed to in personal research for not only myself but for college papers I have had to write over the past two years, indicates that Bayesian Analysis is the approach used to “prove” Man Caused Global Warming.
1st It is important to note that temperature measurements which include C02 have only been going on for the past 40 – 50 years depending on who you ask.
Next we have only been documenting temperatures for approximately 170 years.
Considering the earth is estimated at 4.5 billion years old, this is too small of a statistical sample to come to any conclusion, unless you use Bayesian Analysis.

Now to explain how this form of analysis works I will give a layman’s approach to this.

First is to formulate a theory.

Theory:
Water boils in 10 minutes.
Experiment 1:
Place 1 gallon of water in standard stainless steel pot.
Turn on burner, and time until water boils, when water boils look at your clock.
Result: 5 minutes.
Ignore Experiment, decrease heat on the burner, and time:
Result: 10 minutes.
Theory Proven.

Next someone says what if you use 5 gallons and a copper pot.

Theory:
Water boils in 10 minutes.
Experiment 2: Place 5 Gallons of water in copper pot on stove.
Turn on burner time and wait. Result 20 minutes.
Ignore result, increase heat to max and re-time.
Result Water boils in 10 minutes.
Theory proven.

So we now extrapolate:

Theory:
Water Boils in 10 minutes and our experimentation we document proves this beyond a shadow of a doubt.

Experiment 1, 1 gallon of water stainless steel pot burner on low, water boils in 10 minutes.
Experiment 2, 5 gallons of water copper pot burner on max, water boils in 10 minutes.

Theory proven...

THIS IS HOW GLOBAL WARMING SCIENCE WORKS!!!!

Human kind has historically and prehistorically done well when the earth warms a little. It's cooling that is hard to deal with. Until we have a meaningful distribution of average and standard deviations of the temperatures for a couple of thousand years, we don't know if today is aberrant of not. My guess is not, when you consider the Medieval warming period and the Mini-Ice Age.
In any event, humans will adapt, adjust and overcome.

maybe cbs has just thrown up their hands and is now admitting that gore was wrong, as are all the other people who have followed his lead. they are all lemming.

I think that the earth has heated and cooled for millions of years, all on its own for many factors, and the earth is so BIG that its just hard to believe that this warming trend (if its happening at all) is due to something that a carbon tax will fix.

Global warming believers are the true deniers. They deny that the world’s temperatures have ever changed. They deny that there have been Ice Ages. They deny that there have been inter-glacial warm periods when crocodiles, elephants and lions roamed in Europe. There is plenty of evidence that Neanderthal men lived among hippopotamus, African elephant, spotted hyena, lion leopard, etc. during interglacial warm periods. Paleolithic plant studies have shown that global warm periods produce more rainfall and lush vegetation. The opposite is of course true of ice ages. In other words, warmer leads to more food and colder leads to less food. Do the climate change controllers think that they can keep global temperatures from changing forever? During recorded history, there have been many warm and cold periods. Vikings colonized Greenland during a warm period and had to leave 100 years later because of cold. There was a mini-ice-age during the nineteenth century. Plants rely on CO2 for growth and convert it into O2 and H2O. The climate change worriers are using several logical fallacies in their arguments. The fallacy of distraction from ignorance. Reducing CO2 emissions is not known to reduce global temperatures so it must be true. The slippery slope of increasingly unacceptable consequence is drawn, most of which are figments of someone’s imagination. The proposition is argued to be true because it is widely held to be true. The person’s character is attacked in the false dilemma that skeptics believe in a flat earth.

We the humans need to leave Mother Earth alone. She is quite capable of taking care of herself. If we the humans ever actually become the problem that is purported by the teeth sucking Liberals Mother Earth will shake us off like a hand full of ticks!

Climate change is not really a science at all. It is a religion. Climate is always changing.
I have evaluated the present and historical data sets and I find it to be very meager and hopelessly inadequate to substantiate their claims. Please look at my several posts on LinkedIn and my website www.texanhomeenergy,com
Man Caused Climate Change is a fraudulent science designed to implement the governmental control of the energy sectors of our economy. Cap and Trade will give the government control of energy. If it succeeds we will have lost the last remaining vestige of our freedom.

The whole history of the environmental movement is one phony emergency after another, made up to give government more power. This is just another, and there'll be plenty more.

The principle we need to follow is, "Extraordinary demands on other people require extraordinary proof." (With apologies to David Hume.)

Climate change is the ten commandments of the environmentalist religion.

Almost nobody seems to address what I would think is a fundamental question: Is there such a thing as a global temperature? If my mouth is at 104 Fahrenheit and my toes at 93.2, the average is 98.6, so I'm not running a fever, right?

Is an average of several temperatures itself a temperature?

I think that it is a false concept that is being sold to us for some purpose, perhaps as an article of faith for identifying and destroying nonbelievers.

Anyone have further thoughts?

IMHO we have always had climate change. When I was a kid we called it weather.

I believe it was Will Rodgers that said, "Everyone is talking about the weather, but no one is doing anything about it!"

Now the progressives have figured out what to do with weather, TAX it.

I have a cure for the supposed global climate change plant lots of trees.

these climate models are subject to tweaking, and
like East Anglia, it has been done. . this whole area
is a big worldwide scam to tear down the first world
to do a Cloward-Piven reshuffle of power, IMHO. -- j

It’s true the left beat people in the head with climate change to sell their message of The Evil American. And if we just turn the country over to liberals, actual worthy people, things would be okay.
But…
1 gallon of gasoline weighs around 6 pounds or about the same as a gallon of water or, 2 average sized textbooks or, a basket full of kittens. The United States uses 375,000,000 gallons per day or times 6lb. is 2,250,000,000 pounds of gasoline. Since I spent 18 years teaching science I keep thinking about all that weight on top of me. The principle of mass conservation implies that mass can’t be created or destroyed so in a reaction starting materials must be equal to the mass of the products. So by converting 2,250,000,000Lbs of liquid gasoline into gasoline combustion gas vapor, give or take the efficiency of the burn, the result is 2,250,000,000 pounds of gas vapor into the atmosphere. Or 1,125,000 tons or around the weight equivalent of 3 Empire State Buildings or roughly 2 Pentagons (not including the hot air) Around 5,500,000lbs is the most humans have ever been able to lift and that was by Industrial Steel Inc. (USA) and Buffalo Hydraulic (USA) on 23 January 2004.

That 2,250,000l,000bs times 365 days equals 821.25 billion lbs of gas vapor into the atmosphere. Small compared to the weight of Lake Erie, 762,000,000,000,000lbs. In 50 years however the gasoline vapor weighs more than Lake Tahoe, which is only a mere 39 trillion pounds compared to the 41 trillion pounds of gas vapor from the gasoline emissions.

Now in conclusion, if you are driving south from San Francisco on Highway 101 at evening rush hour leaving the elevated area around South San Francisco you can see cars bumper to bumper all the way to San Jose. After you have been teaching science to kids all day and there you are stuck in that traffic you ask yourself, “Why aren’t I being crushed?” and allow your eyes to grab a glimpse of the thickening smog.

I watched a documentary that said the Amazon Rain Forest is an ecosystem that sustains itslef but does not effect any place else as has been assumed. The sea and sea life connect the globe more than any surface plants.

Well now maybe Mr Obama will snap into action signing an executive order (by autopen from his golf cart of course) outlawing volcanos! And about time!

I'm collecting some graphs and cartoons at http://www.plusaf.com/global-warming/glo... for your information and amusement.
I find the ones on the Milankovitch data to be the most interesting... they show some interesting correlation with cyclical phenomena that keep lining up VERY nicely... much better than anything Gore or any other Warmites claim.

I have found another article on climate change - one that is worthy of its own thread. Please see Common Core and Climate Change.

Jan