--------------------------------------------------------------------------


If Global Warming IS caused by man and the burning of fossil fuels and it (tiny temperature increases-IE--the 1 degree it's gone up in the last 100 YEARS ) isn't just a natural occurrece that has fluxuated up and down for thousands of year---What kind of SUV's were they driving around the time of the middle ages or around 1000 AD to make the earth even hotter than it is now?

Oh, I get it.

If SUV emissions didn't warm the earth THEN, then they can't be warming the earth NOW.

Right?

Good one. That education of yours is really paying dividends.

Don't worry Rory....God has your back :rolleyes:

AP GETS CAUGHT ON GLOBAL WARMING

Somebody at the Associated Press named Seth Borenstein, identified as the AP's "science writer," wrote an article stating that scientists have OK'd Al Gore's global warming movie for accuracy. According to Borenstein, the 19 climate scientists he asked agreed Gore got it right. But the headline didn't say '19 climate scientists OK Gore's movie." It just said "scientists," implying...well, pretty much everybody.

But you see...in this day and age, news travels quickly. And somebody was watching the wires...and decided to take on the AP. That somebody turned out to be the Senate Committee on the Environment and Public Works. They have called into question a number of the AP's "facts" about global warming, including:

The article ignored "scores" (a score is 20, for those of you fresh out of government school) of scientists that have criticized the Gore movie.

The committee also notes that the AP article fails to list all 19 climate scientists sourced for the piece, nor do they disclose the 100 top climate researches mentioned in Borenstein's article.

Gore's movie relies on the "hockey stick" graph that allegedly shows temperatures were stable for 900 years, then spiked in the 20th century. That theory has been completely discredited.

The rebuttal goes on and on. So once again, the AP has been caught with their hand in the cookie jar...this time all the way up to their elbow. What they don't want to admit is that global warming is a theory....and a theory not supported by all scientists. The debate is nowhere near being over.

Remember ... global warming is not an environmental issue. It's a political issue.

U.S. Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works

http://www.epw.senate.gov/pressitem.cfm?party=rep&id=257909

Majority Press Release
Contact: MARC MORANO (marc_morano@epw.senate.gov) 202-224-5762, MATT DEMPSEY (matthew_dempsey@epw.senate.gov) 202-224-9797

AP INCORRECTLY CLAIMS SCIENTISTS PRAISE GORE’S MOVIE

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
June 27, 2006

The June 27, 2006 Associated Press (AP) article titled “Scientists OK Gore’s Movie for Accuracy” by Seth Borenstein raises some serious questions about AP’s bias and methodology.

AP chose to ignore the scores of scientists who have harshly criticized the science presented in former Vice President Al Gore’s movie “An Inconvenient Truth.”

In the interest of full disclosure, the AP should release the names of the “more than 100 top climate researchers” they attempted to contact to review “An Inconvenient Truth.” AP should also name all 19 scientists who gave Gore “five stars for accuracy.” AP claims 19 scientists viewed Gore’s movie, but it only quotes five of them in its article. AP should also release the names of the so-called scientific “skeptics” they claim to have contacted.

The AP article quotes Robert Correll, the chairman of the Arctic Climate Impact Assessment group. It appears from the article that Correll has a personal relationship with Gore, having viewed the film at a private screening at the invitation of the former Vice President. In addition, Correll’s reported links as an “affiliate” of a Washington, D.C.-based consulting firm that provides “expert testimony” in trials and his reported sponsorship by the left-leaning Packard Foundation, were not disclosed by AP. See http://www.junkscience.com/feb06.htm

The AP also chose to ignore Gore’s reliance on the now-discredited “hockey stick” by Dr. Michael Mann, which claims that temperatures in the Northern Hemisphere remained relatively stable over 900 years, then spiked upward in the 20th century, and that the 1990’s were the warmest decade in at least 1000 years. Last week’s National Academy of Sciences report dispelled Mann’s often cited claims by reaffirming the existence of both the Medieval Warm Period and the Little Ice Age. See Senator Inhofe’s statement on the broken “Hockey Stick.” (http://epw.senate.gov/pressitem.cfm?party=rep&id=257697 )

Gore’s claim that global warming is causing the snows of Mt. Kilimanjaro to disappear has also been debunked by scientific reports. For example, a 2004 study in the journal Nature makes clear that Kilimanjaro is experiencing less snowfall because there’s less moisture in the air due to deforestation around Kilimanjaro.

Here is a sampling of the views of some of the scientific critics of Gore:

Professor Bob Carter, of the Marine Geophysical Laboratory at James Cook University in Australia, on Gore’s film:

"Gore's circumstantial arguments are so weak that they are pathetic. It is simply incredible that they, and his film, are commanding public attention.["

"The man is an embarrassment to US science and its many fine practitioners, a lot of whom know (but feel unable to state publicly) that his propaganda crusade is mostly based on junk science." – Bob Carter as quoted in the Canadian Free Press, June 12, 2006

Richard S. Lindzen, the Alfred P. Sloan Professor of Atmospheric Science at MIT, wrote:

“A general characteristic of Mr. Gore's approach is to assiduously ignore the fact that the earth and its climate are dynamic; they are always changing even without any external forcing. To treat all change as something to fear is bad enough; to do so in order to exploit that fear is much worse.” - Lindzen wrote in an op-ed in the June 26, 2006 Wall Street Journal

Gore’s film also cites a review of scientific literature by the journal Science which claimed 100% consensus on global warming, but Lindzen pointed out the study was flat out incorrect.

“…A study in the journal Science by the social scientist Nancy Oreskes claimed that a search of the ISI Web of Knowledge Database for the years 1993 to 2003 under the key words "global climate change" produced 928 articles, all of whose abstracts supported what she referred to as the consensus view. A British social scientist, Benny Peiser, checked her procedure and found that only 913 of the 928 articles had abstracts at all, and that only 13 of the remaining 913 explicitly endorsed the so-called consensus view. Several actually opposed it.”- Lindzen wrote in an op-ed in the June 26, 2006 Wall Street Journal.

Roy Spencer, principal research scientist for the University of Alabama in Huntsville, wrote an open letter to Gore criticizing his presentation of climate science in the film:

“…Temperature measurements in the arctic suggest that it was just as warm there in the 1930's...before most greenhouse gas emissions. Don't you ever wonder whether sea ice concentrations back then were low, too?”- Roy Spencer wrote in a May 25, 2006 column.

Former University of Winnipeg climatology professor Dr. Tim Ball reacted to Gore’s claim that there has been a sharp drop-off in the thickness of the Arctic ice cap since 1970.

"The survey that Gore cites was a single transect across one part of the Arctic basin in the month of October during the 1960s when we were in the middle of the cooling period. The 1990 runs were done in the warmer month of September, using a wholly different technology,” –Tim Ball said, according to the Canadian Free Press.

Well, we all know the AP has a liberal bias.

But speaking of false reporting and bias, did ya hear Santorum says they found WMDs? Gotta be true 'cause Fox reported it.

Another layman chimes in.

Stephen Hawking: Earth to Get as Hot as Venus
Stephen Hawking expressed concern about global warming Wednesday even as he charmed and provoked a group of Chinese students.
Before an audience of 500 at a seminar in Beijing, the celebrity cosmologist said, "I like Chinese culture, Chinese food and above all Chinese women. They are beautiful."
The audience of mostly university students and professors and a smattering of journalists laughed and applauded.
Asked about the environment, Hawking, who suffers from a degenerative disease, uses a wheelchair and speaks through a computerized voice synthesizer, said he was "very worried about global warming."
He said he was afraid that Earth "might end up like Venus, at 250 degrees centigrade and raining sulfuric acid."
The comment is a pointed one for China - which is the second largest emitter of the greenhouse gases that are blamed for global warming, after the United States. Experts warn that if emissions aren't reduced the world's glaciers could melt, threatening cities and triggering droughts and other environmental disasters.
An occasional visitor to China, Hawking was in Beijing to attend a conference on string theory, an area of physics that attempts to explain and model the universe. Hawking's ability to explain abstruse scientific concepts to laymen has given him a worldwide following. In China, whose communist government regularly preaches that scientific prowess is crucial to the country's future power, Hawking has near-superstar status.
When he was wheeled onstage 20 minutes into the event, the audience rushed forward, taking pictures with their mobile phones.
Many stood and craned to see him better throughout the talk and one man in the fifth row watched Hawking through binoculars.
Xu Fanrong, a 23-year-old student at the Chinese Academy of Sciences' Institute of Physics in Beijing, praised Hawking's pithy and humorous remarks during the one and a half hour event. He said Hawking's appearance could help inspire more young Chinese to study physics.
"Our country needs science," said Xu. "No basic science means no basic technology and no economic development."
Other speakers at the seminar included Edward Witten, winner of the Fields Medal in mathematics in 1990; David J. Gross, winner of the 2004 Nobel prize for physics; and Harvard University physics professor Andy Strominger.

Matt Hartley, Times Colonist
Published: Thursday, June 29, 2006

Scientists are worried that global warming might have contributed to creating an algae bloom off the west coast of Vancouver Island that is so big it can be seen from space.

At the Institute of Ocean Sciences in North Saanich, researchers are tracking the swirling mass that runs the length of the Island's west coast. They believe it consists mainly of coccolithophore, a naturally occurring, single-cell phytoplankton.

It's the biggest algae bloom institute physicist Jim Gowen has seen.

"The bloom is good in that it means there are lots of nutrients out there for things to grow," he said. "But what we're worried about is that if global warming is going to really kick in and start warming everything up, then the prediction has to be that we'll see more of these things more often. It's certainly worrying when you see the biggest one, because you think that it's a sign things are getting worse."

The bloom first appeared as a small patch in Barkley Sound on June 21, Gowen said, and is concentrated about 15 kilometres off the west shore of the Island. Warm weather and sunshine are ideal bloom-creating conditions, making them a common summer occurrence in waters off the Island.

Red tide is another form of algae bloom; it carries the paralytic shellfish-poisoning toxin, or PSP. An outbreak of red tide has closed bivalve shellfish harvesting operations on much of Vancouver Island and the Gulf Islands.

Species of algae are blooming in record numbers in waters around Vancouver Island. "Basically, this bright green bloom is just the latest symptom of this strong growth this summer," Gowen said. "It's probably not a very dangerous one although there are almost certainly some harmful species in amongst it." Gowen said there are no known records of coccolithophores, likely the most plentiful species of algae in the bloom, harming fish or other marine life.

Since the ability to track blooms via satellite is a relatively new technology, researchers don't have much information on how often they occur.

"More growth of this kind of thing in the ocean might be bad for things like salmon that try to swim around in it," said Gowen.

Although visible from space, the bloom is hard to see from a plane and next to impossible to spot from shore.

Researchers say the phenomenon could last up to two weeks, although a storm could stir up the ocean and disperse it sooner. Two currents pushing the tiny organisms in opposite directions cause the bloom's swirling motions.

Researchers will head out aboard the Canadian Coast Guard ship Sir Wilfrid Laurier on Friday to collect water samples from the bloom area. They want to confirm which species of algae the bloom consists of, as well as the level of algae concentration.

A spokeswoman for the B.C. Salmon Farmers' Association said farms along the Island's west coast regularly monitor for algae density. "It's not something that we're worried about. But at this time of year, with these kinds of conditions, you can bet the farmers are watching it very closely," said Mary Ellen Walling.

http://www.transbuddha.com/mediaHolder.php?id=1147&pID=550021

Well it looks like Rory was correct about Global Warming after all