Obama approval rating dropping like a stone

[BigWeiner]

First of all, I don't understand why you would not come here as much b/c of this political stuff. If you don't like the threads, don't go into them, very simple solution. I also think it is extremely naive to just say Obama....or anyone for that matter.....is our president so support him.

Our country is great b/c of debate. If everyone thought like this......support the president just b/c he is president......our country would suck. Too many people don't stand on their own principals and that is a big part of the problem. If you support every president, regardless of what they stand for, just b/c they are president, then you don't stand for anything. Why would you support someone, republican or democrat, that you don't agree with? Why would you support someone that you think is bad for our country? Look, I hope I'm wrong on Obama and this country thrives, but just being a sheep or burying my head in the sand and hoping is extremely naive.

Also, just b/c people come in here and complain about Obama, Bush, or anyone else doesn't mean they don't live life to the fullest.

I too hope you have a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year.

Well get out there and do your part, I'm sure you are daily. There's no way you would think posting on a Gambling site is helping anything.

[Spark]

First of all, I don't understand why you would not come here as much b/c of this political stuff. If you don't like the threads, don't go into them, very simple solution. I also think it is extremely naive to just say Obama....or anyone for that matter.....is our president so support him.

Our country is great b/c of debate. If everyone thought like this......support the president just b/c he is president......our country would suck. Too many people don't stand on their own principals and that is a big part of the problem. If you support every president, regardless of what they stand for, just b/c they are president, then you don't stand for anything. Why would you support someone, republican or democrat, that you don't agree with? Why would you support someone that you think is bad for our country? Look, I hope I'm wrong on Obama and this country thrives, but just being a sheep or burying my head in the sand and hoping is extremely naive.

Also, just b/c people come in here and complain about Obama, Bush, or anyone else doesn't mean they don't live life to the fullest.

I too hope you have a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year.

[harold_bush]

Well get out there and do your part, I'm sure you are daily. There's no way you would think posting on a Gambling site is helping anything.

Zebras have stripes and elephants have trunks.

[KazDog]

Kind of like Al Gore, "The Globe has a temperature" talk about fear mongering. Can you explain that one to me

Explain to me how Obama's Cap and Trade will not lower the standard of living for working class people?

Al Gore's global warming theories are very factual and most scientists are in complete agreement that global warming is REAL and that humans are the contributing factor to global warming. To say global warming doesn't exist is like saying the Earth is flat. That is not fear mongering.

And do you even know what the cap and trade is and how it works? The end result is less pollutants in our environment and more incentives for companies who are creative in lowering the pollutants that they contribute to the atmosphere.

KAZ

[harold_bush]

Al Gore's global warming theories are very factual and most scientists are in complete agreement that global warming is REAL and that humans are the contributing factor to global warming. To say global warming doesn't exist is like saying the Earth is flat. That is not fear mongering.

And do you even know what the cap and trade is and how it works? The end result is less pollutants in our environment and more incentives for companies who are creative in lowering the pollutants that they contribute to the atmosphere.

KAZ

WASHINGTON - A United Nations climate change conference in Poland is about to get a surprise from 650 leading scientists who scoff at doomsday reports of man-made global warming - labeling them variously a lie, a hoax and part of a new religion.

Later today, their voices will be heard in a U.S. Senate minority report quoting the scientists, many of whom are current and former members of the U.N.'s own Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

About 250 of the scientists quoted in the report have joined the dissenting scientists in the last year alone.

In fact, the total number of scientists represented in the report is 12 times the number of U.N. scientists who authored the official IPCC 2007 report.

Here are some choice excerpts from the report:

* "I am a skeptic ... . Global warming has become a new religion." -- Nobel Prize Winner for Physics, Ivar Giaever.

* "Since I am no longer affiliated with any organization nor receiving any funding, I can speak quite frankly ... . As a scientist I remain skeptical." -- Atmospheric Scientist Dr. Joanne Simpson, the first woman in the world to receive a Ph.D. in meteorology and formerly of NASA who has authored more than 190 studies and has been called "among the most pre-eminent scientists of the last 100 years."

* Warming fears are the "worst scientific scandal in the history ... . When people come to know what the truth is, they will feel deceived by science and scientists." -- U.N. IPCC Japanese Scientist Dr. Kiminori Itoh, an award-winning Ph.D. environmental physical chemist.

* "The IPCC has actually become a closed circuit; it doesn't listen to others. It doesn't have open minds ... . I am really amazed that the Nobel Peace Prize has been given on scientifically incorrect conclusions by people who are not geologists." -- Indian geologist Dr. Arun D. Ahluwalia at Punjab University and a board member of the U.N.-supported International Year of the Planet.

* "The models and forecasts of the U.N. IPCC "are incorrect because they only are based on mathematical models and presented results at scenarios that do not include, for example, solar activity." -- Victor Manuel Velasco Herrera, a researcher at the Institute of Geophysics of the National Autonomous University of Mexico.

* "It is a blatant lie put forth in the media that makes it seem there is only a fringe of scientists who don't buy into anthropogenic global warming." -- U.S. Government Atmospheric Scientist Stanley B. Goldenberg of the Hurricane Research Division of NOAA, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

* "Even doubling or tripling the amount of carbon dioxide will virtually have little impact, as water vapor and water condensed on particles as clouds dominate the worldwide scene and always will." -- Geoffrey G. Duffy, a professor in the Department of Chemical and Materials Engineering of the University of Auckland, New Zealand.

* "After reading [U.N. IPCC chairman] Pachauri's asinine comment [comparing skeptics to] Flat Earthers, it's hard to remain quiet." -- Climate statistician Dr. William M. Briggs, who specializes in the statistics of forecast evaluation, serves on the American Meteorological Society's Probability and Statistics Committee and is an associate editor of Monthly Weather Review.

* "For how many years must the planet cool before we begin to understand that the planet is not warming? For how many years must cooling go on?" -- Geologist Dr. David Gee, the chairman of the science committee of the 2008 International Geological Congress who has authored 130 plus peer-reviewed papers, and is currently at Uppsala University in Sweden.

* "Gore prompted me to start delving into the science again and I quickly found myself solidly in the skeptic camp ... . Climate models can at best be useful for explaining climate changes after the fact." -- Meteorologist Hajo Smit of Holland, who reversed his belief in man-made warming to become a skeptic, is a former member of the Dutch U.N. IPCC committee.

* "Many [scientists] are now searching for a way to back out quietly (from promoting warming fears), without having their professional careers ruined." -- Atmospheric physicist James A. Peden, formerly of the Space Research and Coordination Center in Pittsburgh, Pa.

* "Creating an ideology pegged to carbon dioxide is a dangerous nonsense ... . The present alarm on climate change is an instrument of social control, a pretext for major businesses and political battle. It became an ideology, which is concerning." -- Environmental Scientist Professor Delgado Domingos of Portugal, the founder of the Numerical Weather Forecast group, has more than 150 published articles.

* "CO2 emissions make absolutely no difference one way or another ... . Every scientist knows this, but it doesn't pay to say so ... . Global warming, as a political vehicle, keeps Europeans in the driver's seat and developing nations walking barefoot." -- Dr. Takeda Kunihiko, vice-chancellor of the Institute of Science and Technology Research at Chubu University in Japan.

* "The [global warming] scaremongering has its justification in the fact that it is something that generates funds." -- Award-winning Paleontologist Dr. Eduardo Tonni, of the Committee for Scientific Research in Buenos Aires and head of the Paleontology Department at the University of La Plata.

The report also includes new peer-reviewed scientific studies and analyses refuting man-made warming fears and a climate developments that contradict the theory.

It is 4 degrees Celsius (39 Fahrenheit

[KazDog]

WASHINGTON - A United Nations climate change conference in Poland is about to get a surprise from 650 leading scientists who scoff at doomsday reports of man-made global warming - labeling them variously a lie, a hoax and part of a new religion.

Later today, their voices will be heard in a U.S. Senate minority report quoting the scientists, many of whom are current and former members of the U.N.'s own Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

About 250 of the scientists quoted in the report have joined the dissenting scientists in the last year alone.

In fact, the total number of scientists represented in the report is 12 times the number of U.N. scientists who authored the official IPCC 2007 report.

Here are some choice excerpts from the report:

* "I am a skeptic ... . Global warming has become a new religion." -- Nobel Prize Winner for Physics, Ivar Giaever.

* "Since I am no longer affiliated with any organization nor receiving any funding, I can speak quite frankly ... . As a scientist I remain skeptical." -- Atmospheric Scientist Dr. Joanne Simpson, the first woman in the world to receive a Ph.D. in meteorology and formerly of NASA who has authored more than 190 studies and has been called "among the most pre-eminent scientists of the last 100 years."

* Warming fears are the "worst scientific scandal in the history ... . When people come to know what the truth is, they will feel deceived by science and scientists." -- U.N. IPCC Japanese Scientist Dr. Kiminori Itoh, an award-winning Ph.D. environmental physical chemist.

* "The IPCC has actually become a closed circuit; it doesn't listen to others. It doesn't have open minds ... . I am really amazed that the Nobel Peace Prize has been given on scientifically incorrect conclusions by people who are not geologists." -- Indian geologist Dr. Arun D. Ahluwalia at Punjab University and a board member of the U.N.-supported International Year of the Planet.

* "The models and forecasts of the U.N. IPCC "are incorrect because they only are based on mathematical models and presented results at scenarios that do not include, for example, solar activity." -- Victor Manuel Velasco Herrera, a researcher at the Institute of Geophysics of the National Autonomous University of Mexico.

* "It is a blatant lie put forth in the media that makes it seem there is only a fringe of scientists who don't buy into anthropogenic global warming." -- U.S. Government Atmospheric Scientist Stanley B. Goldenberg of the Hurricane Research Division of NOAA, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

* "Even doubling or tripling the amount of carbon dioxide will virtually have little impact, as water vapor and water condensed on particles as clouds dominate the worldwide scene and always will." -- Geoffrey G. Duffy, a professor in the Department of Chemical and Materials Engineering of the University of Auckland, New Zealand.

* "After reading [U.N. IPCC chairman] Pachauri's asinine comment [comparing skeptics to] Flat Earthers, it's hard to remain quiet." -- Climate statistician Dr. William M. Briggs, who specializes in the statistics of forecast evaluation, serves on the American Meteorological Society's Probability and Statistics Committee and is an associate editor of Monthly Weather Review.

* "For how many years must the planet cool before we begin to understand that the planet is not warming? For how many years must cooling go on?" -- Geologist Dr. David Gee, the chairman of the science committee of the 2008 International Geological Congress who has authored 130 plus peer-reviewed papers, and is currently at Uppsala University in Sweden.

* "Gore prompted me to start delving into the science again and I quickly found myself solidly in the skeptic camp ... . Climate models can at best be useful for explaining climate changes after the fact." -- Meteorologist Hajo Smit of Holland, who reversed his belief in man-made warming to become a skeptic, is a former member of the Dutch U.N. IPCC committee.

* "Many [scientists] are now searching for a way to back out quietly (from promoting warming fears), without having their professional careers ruined." -- Atmospheric physicist James A. Peden, formerly of the Space Research and Coordination Center in Pittsburgh, Pa.

* "Creating an ideology pegged to carbon dioxide is a dangerous nonsense ... . The present alarm on climate change is an instrument of social control, a pretext for major businesses and political battle. It became an ideology, which is concerning." -- Environmental Scientist Professor Delgado Domingos of Portugal, the founder of the Numerical Weather Forecast group, has more than 150 published articles.

* "CO2 emissions make absolutely no difference one way or another ... . Every scientist knows this, but it doesn't pay to say so ... . Global warming, as a political vehicle, keeps Europeans in the driver's seat and developing nations walking barefoot." -- Dr. Takeda Kunihiko, vice-chancellor of the Institute of Science and Technology Research at Chubu University in Japan.

* "The [global warming] scaremongering has its justification in the fact that it is something that generates funds." -- Award-winning Paleontologist Dr. Eduardo Tonni, of the Committee for Scientific Research in Buenos Aires and head of the Paleontology Department at the University of La Plata.

The report also includes new peer-reviewed scientific studies and analyses refuting man-made warming fears and a climate developments that contradict the theory.

It is 4 degrees Celsius (39 Fahrenheit

That's a good one.....

How about this one????



(CNN) -- Human-induced global warming is real, according to a recent U.S. survey based on the opinions of 3,146 scientists. However there remains divisions between climatologists and scientists from other areas of earth sciences as to the extent of human responsibility.
A survey of more than 3,000 scientists found that the vast majority believe humans cause global warming.

A survey of more than 3,000 scientists found that the vast majority believe humans cause global warming.

Against a backdrop of harsh winter weather across much of North America and Europe, the concept of rising global temperatures might seem incongruous.

However the results of the investigation conducted at the end of 2008 reveal that vast majority of the Earth scientists surveyed agree that in the past 200-plus years, mean global temperatures have been rising and that human activity is a significant contributing factor in changing mean global temperatures.

The study released today was conducted by academics from the University of Illinois, who used an online questionnaire of nine questions. The scientists approached were listed in the 2007 edition of the American Geological Institute's Directory of Geoscience Departments.

Two questions were key: Have mean global temperatures risen compared to pre-1800s levels, and has human activity been a significant factor in changing mean global temperatures?

About 90 percent of the scientists agreed with the first question and 82 percent the second.

The strongest consensus on the causes of global warming came from climatologists who are active in climate research, with 97 percent agreeing humans play a role.

Petroleum geologists and meteorologists were among the biggest doubters, with only 47 percent and 64 percent, respectively, believing in human involvement.

"The petroleum geologist response is not too surprising, but the meteorologists' is very interesting," said Peter Doran associate professor of earth and environmental sciences at the University of Illinois at Chicago, and one of the survey's authors.

"Most members of the public think meteorologists know climate, but most of them actually study very short-term phenomenon."

However, Doran was not surprised by the near-unanimous agreement by climatologists.

"They're the ones who study and publish on climate science. So I guess the take-home message is, the more you know about the field of climate science, the more you're likely to believe in global warming and humankind's contribution to it.

"The debate on the authenticity of global warming and the role played by human activity is largely nonexistent among those who understand the nuances and scientific basis of long-term climate processes,"

[harold_bush]

Inconvenient truth for Al Gore as his North Pole sums don't add up - Times Online

[KazDog]

Guess we could do this all night....

I'll take his explanation over a 10 year old email.

Al Gore talks about global warming, those e-mails, and his new book. - By John Dickerson - Slate Magazine



I think it's been taken wildly out of context. The discussion you're referring to was about two papers that two of these scientists felt shouldn't be accepted as part of the IPCC report. Both of them, in fact, were included, referenced, and discussed. So an e-mail exchange more than 10 years ago* including somebody's opinion that a particular study isn't any good is one thing, but the fact that the study ended up being included and discussed anyway is a more powerful comment on what the result of the scientific process really is.

These people are examining what they can or should do to deal with the P.R. dimensions of this, but where the scientific consensus is concerned, it's completely unchanged. What we're seeing is a set of changes worldwide that just make this discussion over 10-year-old e-mails kind of silly.* The entire North Polar ice cap is disappearing before our very eyes. It's been the size of the continental United States for the last 3 million years and now 40 percent is gone and the rest of it is going. The mountain glaciers are going. We've had record storms, droughts, fires, and floods. There is an air of unreality in debating these arcane points when the world is changing in such dramatic ways right in front of our eyes because of global warming.

[harold_bush]

you are right about going back and forth all night, so I won't bother any more. I'll just say there is serious debate, and you are very closed minded if you don't see that.

[flarendep1]

Kaz, your right, we could do this all night which is exactly why you cannot make a bold claim that Global warming caused by humans are a fact. Way to much evidence that will not support it.

Do you know why most of those "scientists" go along with the global warming hoax?

Its called government grant money. Dont be so naive to think this is not all about $$$$$$$$$$$$

The scientists who speak out against it are scorned and called "deniers" sounds like a great work enviornment.

[KazDog]

From the story you posted....

Others said that, even if quoted correctly, Dr Maslowski’s six-year projection for near-ice-free conditions is at the extreme end of the scale. Most climate scientists agree that a 20 to 30-year timescale is more likely for the near-disappearance of sea ice.



I guess 20 to 30 years is a huge difference from that of the 6 year projection? If we're not here to see it, who cares? Right?

KAZ

[flarendep1]

Al Gore's global warming theories are very factual and most scientists are in complete agreement that global warming is REAL and that humans are the contributing factor to global warming. To say global warming doesn't exist is like saying the Earth is flat. That is not fear mongering.

And do you even know what the cap and trade is and how it works? The end result is less pollutants in our environment and more incentives for companies who are creative in lowering the pollutants that they contribute to the atmosphere.
KAZ

Yeah, I know exactly what it is which is why I am against it. Are you denying that it will not raise prices and hurt poor people?? Who will absorb the higher energy costs on the mean corporations?? Thats right the consumer who always gets it in the ass. More jobs lost.

[KazDog]

Kaz, your right, we could do this all night which is exactly why you cannot make a bold claim that Global warming caused by humans are a fact. Way to much evidence that will not support it.

Do you know why most of those "scientists" go along with the global warming hoax?

Its called government grant money. Dont be so naive to think this is not all about $$$$$$$$$$$$

The scientists who speak out against it are scorned and called "deniers" sounds like a great work enviornment.

Flare, Flare, Flare.....Don't try and twist words. I never said global warming is caused by humans. I said global warming theories are very factual.

Do you know what a theory is???

Lemme help you out.

the⋅o⋅ry
  /ˈθiəri, ˈθɪəri/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [thee-uh-ree, theer-ee] Show IPA
–noun, plural -ries.
1. a coherent group of general propositions used as principles of explanation for a class of phenomena: Einstein's theory of relativity.
2. a proposed explanation whose status is still conjectural, in contrast to well-established propositions that are regarded as reporting matters of actual fact.


And I'll go along with the over 3000 scientists who agree that global warming is caused by humans, over a guy on an internet gambling forum.

KAZ

[harold_bush]

From the story you posted....

Others said that, even if quoted correctly, Dr Maslowski’s six-year projection for near-ice-free conditions is at the extreme end of the scale. Most climate scientists agree that a 20 to 30-year timescale is more likely for the near-disappearance of sea ice.



I guess 20 to 30 years is a huge difference from that of the 6 year projection? If we're not here to see it, who cares? Right?

KAZ

the debate isn't over global warming, it's over man made global warming.

[KazDog]

Yeah, I know exactly what it is which is why I am against it. Are you denying that it will not raise prices and hurt poor people?? Who will absorb the higher energy costs on the mean corporations?? Thats right the consumer who always gets it in the ass. More jobs lost.

WRONG!

It's meant to bring about incentives for less greenhouse gasses. Less pollutants. It worked for President George H.W. Bush. That's right. Your buddy president Bush senior signed onto a cap and trade when he was in office.

Wha? Can't be? A republican that instilled a cap and trade? Look it up. And it's still working today and is a model for the one they are talking about now. Keep up that fear mongering. Hopefully for you, people are listening.