On Jul 21, 11:46*am, D Peter Maus wrote:
Dave wrote:
On Mon, 21 Jul 2008 10:41:29 -0400, dxAce wrote:

* Interesting that no one's talking about that pile of Saddam's
'fictional' yellowcake that ended up in Canada.
Yeah via D{e@o G@r(}a , that place that should not be mentioned.

A pile of ore is not a weapon. *It is not a gathering threat.

http://www.dg.navy.mil/web/

http://www.globalsecurity.org/milita...ego-garcia.htm

* *Denial is a marvelous thing.

Like your ridiculous claims on global warming science, which are
entirely false?

On Jul 21, 7:55*am, RHF wrote:
On Jul 20, 11:18*pm, wrote:



On Jun 18, 3:15*pm, RHF wrote:

On Jun 18, 2:42*pm, Dave wrote: On Wed, 18 Jun 2008 08:05:33 -0700, wasatch wrote:
Mr. Bush is about to propose offshore oil drilling even though there is
plenty...

U.S. imports 70% that we use.

- - How to Find Gold : Dig For It!
- -
- - More Oil : Drill For It!

- There is no shortage of crude oil.

Dave that is Factually True
-but- That Vast Supply of Oil is still in the Ground.
-specifically- In the USA for the USA.
-ps- Plus a Whole Lot More Coal Too.

First - There is a Shortage of Getting the Oil
out of the Ground to meet the Demand.
-specifically- In the USA for the USA.
-solution- Drill for more Oil in the USA.

Second - There is a Shortage of Oil Refining
Capablility to meet the Demand.
-specifically- In the USA for the USA.
-solution- Build more Oil Refineries in the USA.

ALTERNATIVE : WALK ! -or- Go Nowhere.

facts are facts ~ RHF
*.

- No, the fact is you don't care about the future.

I 'care' about the "Future" Every Day ~ RHF

- Carbon based fuel is NOT an option for long term energy use. *

I Am Carbon Based - What Are You "Silly-Com" ?
{Silly Communist}

- Perhaps you haven't heard about global warming?

D'Oh ! The Global Warning Mantra :
Say It Ten Times in a Row
-and- You Are Full of Hot Air.

-*You should be informed.

D'Oh ! . . . and you are ? - Not ! ~ RHF
*.

You're spouting nonsense.

You have no idea what scientists say. You're getting your "science"
from nutcase political hotair types.

wrote:
On Jul 21, 4:55 am, dxAce wrote:
D Peter Maus wrote:
wrote:
Can't go on using oil for more than another 10 to 20 years due to the
global warming emergency proven by science, dumbass.
Nothing has been proven. There is considerable debate within the
scientific community about the validity of the claims made by the global
warming movement. To underscore the point, NOAA released figures this
past quarter that indicate global temperatures have dropped by .6 of a
degree in the last 12 months.
As for greenhouse gasses...well, let's look at that. Carbon dioxide
is only .04% of atmospheric content. Every living creature on the planet
emits CO2. Even plants, in the absence of sunlight. In the presence of
sunlight, they consume CO2 at a voracious rate.
Water, on the other hand, is the primary greehouse gas, with a known
impact on atmospheric temperature through cloud formation. And yet....no
one has even hinted at it's regulation.
A previous poster is correct....global warming is a socialist
movement. It's goals are precisely the same as the alarmists who set
their crosshairs on the oil industry when Rockefeller was building the
Standard Oil monopoly.
Michael Savage had a fellow on in the past week who outlined what the socialists
have done over the years to instill fear in the people. If I recall, there may
me a link on his site to the info, though I've not looked at it.

The guest made a point about what the left will do when the 'global warming'
craze subsides and that will be to manufacture another crisis and on and on it
will go.

Savage is a nutcase.

The science is case closed.

You are wrong.


You've proven my point. A closed mind. Not very scientific.

You, my friend, are the one in error.

wrote:
On Jul 21, 2:27 am, D Peter Maus wrote:
wrote:

Can't go on using oil for more than another 10 to 20 years due to the
global warming emergency proven by science, dumbass.
Nothing has been proven. There is considerable debate within the
scientific community about the validity of the claims made by the global
warming movement. To underscore the point, NOAA released figures this
past quarter that indicate global temperatures have dropped by .6 of a
degree in the last 12 months.

As for greenhouse gasses...well, let's look at that. Carbon dioxide
is only .04% of atmospheric content. Every living creature on the planet
emits CO2. Even plants, in the absence of sunlight. In the presence of
sunlight, they consume CO2 at a voracious rate.

Water, on the other hand, is the primary greehouse gas, with a known
impact on atmospheric temperature through cloud formation. And yet....no
one has even hinted at it's regulation.

A previous poster is correct....global warming is a socialist
movement. It's goals are precisely the same as the alarmists who set
their crosshairs on the oil industry when Rockefeller was building the
Standard Oil monopoly.

There is no longer any serious debate.

Scientific bodies which AGREE that human activity drives global
warming: THIRTY FIVE
Scientific bodies which describe human caused global warming as a
"consensus": FIVE
Scientific bodies which DISPUTE human activity driving global
warming: ZERO (none, nada, zilch, ZERO)

QUOTE:

Statements by dissenting organizations

With the July 2007 release of the revised statement by the American
Association of Petroleum Geologists, no remaining scientific body of
national or international standing is known to reject the basic
findings of human influence on recent climate.[46]

NONE. NADA. ZERO. Stop lying about the science. It's case closed.


Scientific bodies CONCURRING with human causation of global warming:

Scientific consensus

A question which frequently arises in popular discussion of climate
change is whether there is a scientific consensus. Several scientific
organizations have explicitly used the term "consensus" in their
statements:

* American Association for the Advancement of Science: "The
conclusions in this statement reflect the scientific consensus
represented by, for example, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
Change, and the Joint National Academies' statement."[19]
* US National Academy of Science: "In the judgment of most climate
scientists, Earth’s warming in recent decades has been caused
primarily by human activities that have increased the amount of
greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. ... On climate change, [the
National Academies’ reports] have assessed consensus findings on the
science..."[48]
* Joint Science Academies' statement, 2005: "We recognise the
international scientific consensus of the Intergovernmental Panel on
Climate Change (IPCC)."[49]
* Joint Science Academies' statement, 2001: "The work of the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) represents the
consensus of the international scientific community on climate change
science. We recognise IPCC as the world’s most reliable source of
information on climate change and its causes, and we endorse its
method of achieving this consensus."[50]
* American Meteorological Society: "The nature of science is such
that there is rarely total agreement among scientists. Individual
scientific statements and papers—the validity of some of which has yet
to be assessed adequately—can be exploited in the policy debate and
can leave the impression that the scientific community is sharply
divided on issues where there is, in reality, a strong scientific
consensus. ...IPCC assessment reports are prepared at approximately
five-year intervals by a large international group of experts who
represent the broad range of expertise and perspectives relevant to
the issues. The reports strive to reflect a consensus evaluation of
the results of the full body of peer-reviewed research. ... They
provide an analysis of what is known and not known, the degree of
consensus, and some indication of the degree of confidence that can be
placed on the various statements and conclusions."[51]
* Network of African Science Academies: “A consensus, based on
current evidence, now exists within the global scientific community
that human activities are the main source of climate change and that
the burning of fossil fuels is largely responsible for driving this
change.” [52]

Statements by concurring organizations

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) 2007

Main article: Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change

In February 2007, the IPCC released a summary of the forthcoming
Fourth Assessment Report. According to this summary, the Fourth
Assessment Report finds that human actions are "very likely" the cause
of global warming, meaning a 90% or greater probability. Global
warming in this case is indicated by an increase of 0.75 degrees in
average global temperatures over the last 100 years.[2]

The New York Times reports on the report:

The world's leading climate scientists said global warming has
begun, is very likely caused by man, and will be unstoppable for
centuries, ... . The phrase very likely translates to a more than 90
percent certainty that global warming is caused by man's burning of
fossil fuels. That was the strongest conclusion to date, making it
nearly impossible to say natural forces are to blame.[3]

The report said that an increase in hurricane and tropical cyclone
strength since 1970 more likely than not can be attributed to man-made
global warming. The scientists said global warming's connection varies
with storms in different parts of the world, but that the storms that
strike the Americas are global warming-influenced.[4]

The Associated Press summarizes the position on sea level rise:

On sea levels, the report projects rises of 7-23 inches by the end
of the century. That could be augmented by an additional 4-8 inches if
recent surprising polar ice sheet melt continues.[5]

InterAcademy Council

As the representative of the world’s scientific and engineering
academies,[6][7] the InterAcademy Council (IAC) issued a report in
2007 entitled Lighting the Way: Toward a Sustainable Energy Future.

Current patterns of energy resources and energy usage are proving
detrimental to the long-term welfare of humanity. The integrity of
essential natural systems is already at risk from climate change
caused by the atmospheric emissions of greenhouse gases.[8]

Concerted efforts should be mounted for improving energy
efficiency and reducing the carbon intensity of the world economy.[9]

Joint science academies' statement 2008

In preparation for the 34th G8 summit, the national science academies
of the G8+5 nations issued a declaration reiterating the position of
the 2005 joint science academies’ statement, and reaffirming “that
climate change is happening and that anthropogenic warming is
influencing many physical and biological systems.” Among other
actions, the declaration urges all nations to “(t)ake appropriate
economic and policy measures to accelerate transition to a low carbon
society and to encourage and effect changes in individual and national
behaviour.”[10]

The thirteen signatories were the national science academies of
Brazil, Canada, China, France, Germany, Italy, India, Japan, Mexico,
Russia, South Africa, the United Kingdom, and the United States.

Joint science academies’ statement 2007

In preparation for the 2007 G8 summit, the national science academies
of the G8+5 nations issued a declaration referencing the position of
the 2005 joint science academies' statement, and acknowledging the
confirmation of their previous conclusion by recent research.
Following the IPCC Fourth Assessment Report, the declaration states:

It is unequivocal that the climate is changing, and it is very
likely that this is predominantly caused by the increasing human
interference with the atmosphere. These changes will transform the
environmental conditions on Earth unless counter-measures are taken.

The thirteen signatories were the national science academies of
Brazil, Canada, China, France, Germany, Italy, India, Japan, Mexico,
Russia, South Africa, the United Kingdom, and the United States.

Joint science academies’ statement 2005

In 2005 the national science academies of the G8 nations, plus Brazil,
China and India, three of the largest emitters of greenhouse gases in
the developing world, signed a statement on the global response to
climate change. The statement stresses that the scientific
understanding of climate change is now sufficiently clear to justify
nations taking prompt action[11], and explicitly endorsed the IPCC
consensus. The eleven signatories were the science academies of
Brazil, Canada, China, France, Germany, India, Italy, Japan, Russia,
the United Kingdom, and the United States.

Joint science academies’ statement 2001

In 2001, following the publication of the IPCC Third Assessment
Report, sixteen national science academies issued a joint statement
explicitly acknowledging the IPCC position as representing the
scientific consensus on climate change science. The sixteen science
academies that issued the statement were those of Australia, Belgium,
Brazil, Canada, the Caribbean, China, France, Germany, India,
Indonesia, Ireland, Italy, Malaysia, New Zealand, Sweden, and the
United Kingdom.[12]

International Council of Academies of Engineering and Technological
Sciences

In October 2007, the International Council of Academies of Engineering
and Technological Sciences (CAETS) issued a Statement on Environment
and Sustainable Growth[13]

As reported by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
(IPCC), most of the observed global warming since the mid-20th century
is very likely due to human-produced emission of greenhouse gases and
this warming will continue unabated if present anthropogenic emissions
continue or, worse, expand without control.

CAETS, therefore, endorses the many recent calls to decrease and
control greenhouse gas emissions to an acceptable level as quickly as
possible.

European Academy of Sciences and Arts

In March of 2007, the European Academy of Sciences and Arts issued a
formal declaration in which they stated, “Human activity is most
likely responsible for climate warming. Most of the climatic warming
over the last 50 years is likely to have been caused by increased
concentrations of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. Documented long-
term climate changes include changes in Arctic temperatures and ice,
widespread changes in precipitation amounts, ocean salinity, wind
patterns and extreme weather including droughts, heavy precipitation,
heat waves and the intensity of tropical cyclones. The above
development potentially has dramatic consequences for mankind’s
future. “[14]

Network of African Science Academies

In 2007, the Network of African Science Academies submitted a joint
“statement on sustainability, energy efficiency, and climate change”
to the leaders meeting at the G8 Summit in Heiligendamm, Germany.

“A consensus, based on current evidence, now exists within the global
scientific community that human activities are the main source of
climate change and that the burning of fossil fuels is largely
responsible for driving this change.”

“The IPCC should be congratulated for the contribution it has made to
public understanding of the nexus that exists between energy, climate
and sustainability.”[15]

The thirteen signatories were the science academies of Cameroon,
Ghana, Kenya, Madagascar, Nigeria, Senegal, South Africa, Sudan,
Tanzania, Uganda, Zambia, Zimbabwe, as well as the African Academy of
Sciences.

National Research Council (US)

In 2001, the Committee on the Science of Climate Change of the
National Research Council published Climate Change Science: An
Analysis of Some Key Questions [16]. This report explicitly endorses
the IPCC view of attribution of recent climate change as representing
the view of the scientific community:

The changes observed over the last several decades are likely
mostly due to human activities, but we cannot rule out that some
significant part of these changes is also a reflection of natural
variability. Human-induced warming and associated sea level rises are
expected to continue through the 21st century... The IPCC's conclusion
that most of the observed warming of the last 50 years is likely to
have been due to the increase in greenhouse gas concentrations
accurately reflects the current thinking of the scientific community
on this issue.[17]

European Science Foundation

The European Science Foundation has issued a Position Paper on climate
change in which they concur, "There is now convincing evidence that
since the industrial revolution, human activities, resulting in
increasing concentrations of greenhouse gases have become a major
agent of climate change. These greenhouse gases affect the global
climate by retaining heat in the troposphere, thus raising the average
temperature of the planet and altering global atmospheric circulation
and precipitation patterns." The paper concluded, "While on-going
national and international actions to curtail and reduce greenhouse
gas emissions are essential, the levels of greenhouse gases currently
in the atmosphere, and their impact, are likely to persist for several
decades. On-going and increased efforts to mitigate climate change
through reduction in greenhouse gases are therefore crucial."[18]

American Association for the Advancement of Science

In December of 2006, the American Association for the Advancement of
Science adopted an official statement on climate change in which they
stated, "The scientific evidence is clear: global climate change
caused by human activities is occurring now, and it is a growing
threat to society....The pace of change and the evidence of harm have
increased markedly over the last five years. The time to control
greenhouse gas emissions is now."[19]

Federation of American Scientists

In their Energy and Environment Overview, the Federation of American
Scientists state, “There is no serious doubt that human activity is
altering the earth's climate in potentially catastrophic ways. Even
skeptics are forced to admit that the risk is real and that prudence
demands action if only as an insurance policy, the only serious debate
is about how best to respond." [20]

World Meteorological Organization

In its Statement at the Twelfth Session of the Conference of the
Parties to the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change, the World
Meteorological Organization (WMO) confirms the need to “prevent
dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system.” The WMO
concurs that “scientific assessments have increasingly reaffirmed that
human activities are indeed changing the composition of the
atmosphere, in particular through the burning of fossil fuels for
energy production and transportation.” The WMO concurs that “the
present atmospheric concentration of CO2 was never exceeded over the
past 420,000 years;” and that the IPCC “assessments provide the most
authoritative, up-to-date scientific advice.” [21]

American Meteorological Society

The American Meteorological Society (AMS) statement adopted by their
council in 2003 said:

There is now clear evidence that the mean annual temperature at
the Earth's surface, averaged over the entire globe, has been
increasing in the past 200 years. There is also clear evidence that
the abundance of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere has increased over
the same period. In the past decade, significant progress has been
made toward a better understanding of the climate system and toward
improved projections of long-term climate change... Human activities
have become a major source of environmental change. Of great urgency
are the climate consequences of the increasing atmospheric abundance
of greenhouse gases... Because greenhouse gases continue to increase,
we are, in effect, conducting a global climate experiment, neither
planned nor controlled, the results of which may present unprecedented
challenges to our wisdom and foresight as well as have significant
impacts on our natural and societal systems.[22]

Royal Meteorological Society (UK)

In February 2007, after the release of the IPCC’s Fourth Assessment
Report, the Royal Meteorological Society issued an endorsement of the
report. In addition to referring to the IPCC as “world’s best climate
scientists”, they stated that climate change is happening as “the
result of emissions since industrialization and we have already set in
motion the next 50 years of global warming – what we do from now on
will determine how worse it will get.” [23]

Australian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society

The Australian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society has issued a
Statement on Climate Change, wherein they conclude, “Global climate
change and global warming are real and observable…It is highly likely
that those human activities that have increased the concentration of
greenhouse gases in the atmosphere have been largely responsible for
the observed warming since 1950. The warming associated with increases
in greenhouse gases originating from human activity is called the
enhanced greenhouse effect. The atmospheric concentration of carbon
dioxide has increased by more than 30% since the start of the
industrial age and is higher now than at any time in at least the past
650,000 years. This increase is a direct result of burning fossil
fuels, broad-scale deforestation and other human activity.”[24]

Canadian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society

"CMOS endorses the process of periodic climate science assessment
carried out by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and
supports the conclusion, in its Third Assessment Report, which states
that the balance of evidence suggests a discernible human influence on
global climate."[25]

Canadian Foundation for Climate and Atmospheric Sciences

In November 2005, the Canadian Foundation for Climate and Atmospheric
Sciences (CFCAS) issued a letter to the Prime Minister of Canada
stating that "We concur with the climate science assessment of the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) in 2001 ... We
endorse the conclusions of the IPCC assessment that 'There is new and
stronger evidence that most of the warming observed over the last 50
years is attributable to human activities'. ... There is increasingly
unambiguous evidence of changing climate in Canada and around the
world. There will be increasing impacts of climate change on Canada’s
natural ecosystems and on our socio-economic activities. Advances in
climate science since the 2001 IPCC Assessment have provided more
evidence supporting the need for action and development of a strategy
for adaptation to projected changes."[26]

International Union for Quaternary Research

The statement on climate change issued by the International Union for
Quaternary Research reiterates the conclusions of the IPCC, and urges
all nations to take prompt action in line with the UNFCCC principles.

“Human activities are now causing atmospheric concentrations of
greenhouse gasses - including carbon dioxide, methane, tropospheric
ozone, and nitrous oxide - to rise well above pre-industrial
levels….Increases in greenhouse gasses are causing temperatures to
rise…The scientific understanding of climate change is now
sufficiently clear to justify nations taking prompt action….Minimizing
the amount of this carbon dioxide reaching the atmosphere presents a
huge challenge but must be a global priority.” [27]

American Quaternary Association

The American Quaternary Association (AMQUA) has stated, “Few credible
Scientists now doubt that humans have influenced the documented rise
of global temperatures since the Industrial Revolution,” citing “the
growing body of evidence that warming of the atmosphere, especially
over the past 50 years, is directly impacted by human activity.” [28]

Stratigraphy Commission of the Geological Society of London

The Stratigraphy Commission of the Geological Society of London
stated, "We find that the evidence for human-induced climate change is
now persuasive, and the need for direct action compelling."[29]

International Union of Geodesy and Geophysics

In July of 2007, the International Union of Geodesy and Geophysics
(IUGG) adopted a resolution entitled “The Urgency of Addressing
Climate Change”. In it, the IUGG concurs with the “comprehensive and
widely accepted and endorsed scientific assessments carried out by the
International Panel on Climate Change and regional and national
bodies, which have firmly established, on the basis of scientific
evidence, that human activities are the primary cause of recent
climate change.” They state further that the “continuing reliance on
combustion of fossil fuels as the world’s primary source of energy
will lead to much higher atmospheric concentrations of greenhouse
gasses, which will, in turn, cause significant increases in surface
temperature, sea level, ocean acidification, and their related
consequences to the environment and society.” [30]

International Union of Geological Sciences

In their Climate Change prospectus for the International Year of
Planet Earth project, the International Union of Geological Sciences
(IUGS) stated, “The idea that there is a strong human imprint on
recent climate change is now compelling, with forest clearing,
building and man-made gas emissions all having a strong influence on
Earth’s warming.”[31]

We know that human activity has resulted in changes to atmospheric
chemistry and land cover, and caused serious decline in biodiversity.
[32]

European Geosciences Union

In July 2005, the European Geosciences Union (EGU) issued a position
statement in support of the joint science academies’ statement on
global response to climate change. Additionally, the EGU concurred
that the IPCC “represents the state-of-the-art of climate science
supported by the major science academies around the world and by the
vast majority of science researchers and investigators as documented
by the peer-reviewed scientific literature.” [33]

Canadian Federation of Earth Sciences

The Canadian Federation Of Earth Sciences has issued a position paper
on global climate change in which they state, “ Canada's Earth
scientists also recognize that humans are adding greenhouse gases
(GHGs) to our atmosphere at an ever increasing rate. The level of CO2
in our atmosphere is now greater than at any time in the past 500,000
years; there will be consequences for our global climate and natural
systems as a result….These could include: increased frequency and
severity of drought, coastal erosion, sea level change, permafrost
degradation, impact of reduced glacier cover on water resources,
groundwater quality and quantity, and occurrence of climate-related
natural hazards such as flooding, dust storms and landslides.”[34]

Geological Society of America

"The Geological Society of America (GSA) supports the scientific
conclusions that Earth’s climate is changing; the climate changes are
due in part to human activities; and the probable consequences of the
climate changes will be significant and blind to geopolitical
boundaries. Furthermore, the potential implications of global climate
change and the time scale over which such changes will likely occur
require active, effective, long-term planning."[35]

American Geophysical Union

The American Geophysical Union (AGU) statement [36] adopted by the
society in 2003 and revised in 2007 affirms that rising levels of
greenhouse gases have caused and will continue to cause the global
surface temperature to be warmer:

The Earth's climate is now clearly out of balance and is warming.
Many components of the climate system—including the temperatures of
the atmosphere, land and ocean, the extent of sea ice and mountain
glaciers, the sea level, the distribution of precipitation, and the
length of seasons—are now changing at rates and in patterns that are
not natural and are best explained by the increased atmospheric
abundances of greenhouse gases and aerosols generated by human
activity during the 20th century. Global average surface temperatures
increased on average by about 0.6°C over the period 1956–2006. As of
2006, eleven of the previous twelve years were warmer than any others
since 1850. The observed rapid retreat of Arctic sea ice is expected
to continue and lead to the disappearance of summertime ice within
this century. Evidence from most oceans and all continents except
Antarctica shows warming attributable to human activities. Recent
changes in many physical and biological systems are linked with this
regional climate change. A sustained research effort, involving many
AGU members and summarized in the 2007 assessments of the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, continues to improve our
scientific understanding of the climate.

American Astronomical Society

The American Astronomical Society has endorsed the AGU statement:[37]

In endorsing the "Human Impacts on Climate" statement [issued by
the American Geophysical Union], the AAS recognizes the collective
expertise of the AGU in scientific subfields central to assessing and
understanding global change, and acknowledges the strength of
agreement among our AGU colleagues that the global climate is changing
and human activities are contributing to that change.

American Institute of Physics

The Governing Board of the American Institute of Physics endorsed the
AGU statement on human-induced climate change:[38]

The Governing Board of the American Institute of Physics has
endorsed a position statement on climate change adopted by the
American Geophysical Union (AGU) Council in December 2003.

American Physical Society

In November of 2007, the American Physical Society (APS) adopted an
official statement on climate change: "Emissions of greenhouse gases
from human activities are changing the atmosphere in ways that affect
the Earth's climate. Greenhouse gases include carbon dioxide as well
as methane, nitrous oxide and other gases. They are emitted from
fossil fuel combustion and a range of industrial and agricultural
processes.

"The evidence is incontrovertible: Global warming is occurring. If no
mitigating actions are taken, significant disruptions in the Earth’s
physical and ecological systems, social systems, security and human
health are likely to occur. We must reduce emissions of greenhouse
gases beginning now."[39]

American Chemical Society

The American Chemical Society stated:

Careful and comprehensive scientific assessments have clearly
demonstrated that the Earth’s climate system is changing rapidly in
response to growing atmospheric burdens of greenhouse gases and
absorbing aerosol particles (IPCC, 2007). There is very little room
for doubt that observed climate trends are due to human activities.
The threats are serious and action is urgently needed to mitigate the
risks of climate change.
The reality of global warming, its current serious and potentially
disastrous impacts on Earth system properties, and the key role
emissions from human activities play in driving these phenomena have
been recognized by earlier versions of this ACS policy statement (ACS,
2004), by other major scientific societies, including the American
Geophysical Union (AGU, 2003), the American Meteorological Society
(AMS, 2007) and the American Association for the Advancement of
Science (AAAS, 2007), and by the U. S. National Academies and ten
other leading national academies of science (NA, 2005). This statement
reviews key global climate change impacts and recommends actions
required to mitigate or adapt to currently anticipated consequences.
[40]

Engineers Australia (The Institution of Engineers Australia)

"Engineers Australia believes that Australia must act swiftly and
proactively in line with global expectations to address climate change
as an economic, social and environmental risk... We believe that
addressing the costs of atmospheric emissions will lead to increasing
our competitive advantage by minimising risks and creating new
economic opportunities. Engineers Australia believes the Australian
Government should ratify the Kyoto Protocol."[41]

Federal Climate Change Science Program (US)

On May 2, 2006, the Federal Climate Change Science Program
commissioned by the Bush administration in 2002 released the first of
21 assessments. Though it did not state what percentage of climate
change might be anthropogenic, the assessment concluded:

Studies ... show clear evidence of human influences on the climate
system (due to changes in greenhouse gases, aerosols, and
stratospheric ozone). ... The observed patterns of change over the
past 50 years cannot be explained by natural processes alone, nor by
the effects of short-lived atmospheric constituents (such as aerosols
and tropospheric ozone) alone.[42]

American Statistical Association

On November 30, 2007, the American Statistical Association Board of
Directors adopted a statement on climate change:

The ASA endorses the IPCC conclusions. ... Over the course of four
assessment reports, a small number of statisticians have served as
authors or reviewers. Although this involvement is encouraging, it
does not represent the full range of statistical expertise available.
ASA recommends that more statisticians should become part of the IPCC
process. Such participation would be mutually beneficial to the
assessment of climate change and its impacts and also to the
statistical community.[43]

Noncommittal statements

American Association of State Climatologists

The 2001 statement from the American Association of State
Climatologists noted the difficulties with predicting impacts due to
climate change, while acknowledging that human activities are having
an effect on climate:

Climate prediction is difficult because it involves complex,
nonlinear interactions among all components of the earth’s
environmental system. (...) The AASC recognizes that human activities
have an influence on the climate system. Such activities, however, are
not limited to greenhouse gas forcing and include changing land use
and sulfate emissions, which further complicates the issue of climate
prediction. Furthermore, climate predictions have not demonstrated
skill in projecting future variability and changes in such important
climate conditions as growing season, drought, flood-producing
rainfall, heat waves, tropical cyclones and winter storms. These are
the type of events that have a more significant impact on society than
annual average global temperature trends. Policy responses to climate
variability and change should be flexible and sensible – The
difficulty of prediction and the impossibility of verification of
predictions decades into the future are important factors that allow
for competing views of the long-term climate future. Therefore, the
AASC recommends that policies related to long-term climate not be
based on particular predictions, but instead should focus on policy
alternatives that make sense for a wide range of plausible climatic
conditions regardless of future climate... Finally, ongoing political
debate about global energy policy should not stand in the way of
common sense action to reduce societal and environmental
vulnerabilities to climate variability and change. Considerable
potential exists to improve policies related to climate.[44]

American Association of Petroleum Geologists

The American Association of Petroleum Geologists (AAPG) Position
Statement on climate change states that "the AAPG membership is
divided on the degree of influence that anthropogenic CO2 has on
recent and potential global temperature increases ... Certain climate
simulation models predict that the warming trend will continue, as
reported through NAS, AGU, AAAS and AMS. AAPG respects these
scientific opinions but wants to add that the current climate warming
projections could fall within well-documented natural variations in
past climate and observed temperature data. These data do not
necessarily support the maximum case scenarios forecast in some
models."[45]

Prior to the adoption of this statement, the AAPG was the only major
scientific organization that rejected the finding of significant human
influence on recent climate, according to a statement by the Council
of the American Quaternary Association.[46] Explaining the plan for a
revision, AAPG president Lee Billingsly wrote in March 2007 that
"Members have threatened to not renew their memberships ... if AAPG
does not alter its position on global climate change ... . And I have
been told of members who already have resigned in previous years
because of our current global climate change position. ... The current
policy statement is not supported by a significant number of our
members and prospective members."[47]

Statements by dissenting organizations

With the July 2007 release of the revised statement by the American
Association of Petroleum Geologists, no remaining scientific body of
national or international standing is known to reject the basic
findings of human influence on recent climate.[46]



And you prove a number of my points for me.

Thank you for you cooperation.

On Jul 21, 10:45*pm, wrote:
On Jul 21, 7:55*am, RHF wrote:





On Jul 20, 11:18*pm, wrote:

On Jun 18, 3:15*pm, RHF wrote:

On Jun 18, 2:42*pm, Dave wrote: On Wed, 18 Jun 2008 08:05:33 -0700, wasatch wrote:
Mr. Bush is about to propose offshore oil drilling even though there is
plenty...

U.S. imports 70% that we use.

- - How to Find Gold : Dig For It!
- -
- - More Oil : Drill For It!

- There is no shortage of crude oil.

Dave that is Factually True
-but- That Vast Supply of Oil is still in the Ground.
-specifically- In the USA for the USA.
-ps- Plus a Whole Lot More Coal Too.

First - There is a Shortage of Getting the Oil
out of the Ground to meet the Demand.
-specifically- In the USA for the USA.
-solution- Drill for more Oil in the USA.

Second - There is a Shortage of Oil Refining
Capablility to meet the Demand.
-specifically- In the USA for the USA.
-solution- Build more Oil Refineries in the USA.

ALTERNATIVE : WALK ! -or- Go Nowhere.

facts are facts ~ RHF
*.

- No, the fact is you don't care about the future.

I 'care' about the "Future" Every Day ~ RHF

- Carbon based fuel is NOT an option for long term energy use. *

I Am Carbon Based - What Are You "Silly-Com" ?
{Silly Communist}

- Perhaps you haven't heard about global warming?

- - D'Oh ! The Global Warning Mantra :
- - Say It Ten Times in a Row
- - -and- You Are Full of Hot Air.

- You're spouting nonsense.
-
- You have no idea what scientists say.
-*You're getting your "science" from
- nutcase political hotair types.

DG McD - Keep Repeating Your Global Warning Mantra :
Say It Ten Times Over and Over in a Row
-and- You Are Still Full of Hot Air. ~ RHF

Telamon wrote:
In article ,
Dave wrote:

On Mon, 21 Jul 2008 10:41:29 -0400, dxAce wrote:


Interesting that no one's talking about that pile of Saddam's
'fictional' yellowcake that ended up in Canada.
Yeah via D{e@o G@r(}a , that place that should not be mentioned.
A pile of ore is not a weapon. It is not a gathering threat.

http://www.dg.navy.mil/web/

http://www.globalsecurity.org/milita...ego-garcia.htm

Really? What about the illness it caused in Iraq?


The illness caused when we left the stockpile unguarded and the locals
dumped the powder out and reused the barrels for drinking water? Tragic.

RHF wrote:
On Jul 21, 3:45 pm, Dave wrote:
On Mon, 21 Jul 2008 14:45:47 -0700, RHF wrote:
Dave Two Words : "Dirty Bomb" ~ RHF
Al Qaeda pursued a "Dirty Bomb"

- The subject was Iraq, not Al Qaeda.

Simply Matching "The Source" -with- "The Doer"

US Removes Uranium from Iraq -and-
Sets Back the Islam-O-Facist "Dirty Bomb" Project
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.r...022144f484dbcf

- A "dirty bomb" would contaminate a few acres,
- at best (worst).

Dave you are simply dismissing reality.

A Dirty Bomb like most Bombs can be small enough
to 'contaminate' an Office - the little terror

-or- BIG enough to Cover a City's Down Town Area.
Making that City's Down Town Area "Contaminate"
and a No-Man's Land for Years or Decades.
THE BIG TERROR !

A Small Plane {Crop-Duster} at 5K Feet with the right
Chemical Dispersal Equipment could Spiral Out from
City Hall and Around and Around Down Town Raining
Hell from Above. SPREADING THE TERROR !

For that matter the same Small Plane could cruise
along at 100 Feet over Bumper-to-Bumper Crowded
Freeway at 5 PM on a Hot Summer Day and Rain
Down Radioactive Contamination on both directions
of Commuter Traffic for 5 Miles or more.
TRANSMUTING THE TERROR ! from a single City's
Down Town Areas to an Metro's Whole Population via
Single-Point Urban & Suburban Migratory Dispersion.

- You have thrown your country away because you
- are afraid of a media created Boogeyman.

Dave - You Are The Boogeyman of Disbelief Playing
the Part of an Ostrich. The Terrorists Are Here . . .
http://www.realanimalfacts.com/wp-co...trich_head.jpg

(OT) : Islam-O-Facist "Dirty Bomb" Terrorist Projects Continue . . .
.
Total bull****. Grow a pair.

Dave wrote:
D Peter Maus wrote:

"Nuclear" has been a dirty word since the movie 'The China
Syndrome,' a film often pointed to as a reference in debates where
nuclear plants were to be constructed. As a population, most of what
is 'understood' about nuclear energy production comes from that film.

Three Mile Island was the horror it was BECAUSE of the The China
Syndrome, when in fact, though a meltdown had occurred--some 8 feet of
reactor core was lost--the systems did precisely what they were
supposed to do, and shut the reactor down.

Odd, no one ever talks about THAT.

The problem is not the ignorant 'drill happy' folks.

The problem is the ignorant uneducated folks attempting to create a
panic based on short sight, and snapshot focus on a very narrow
picture of global events. And an overall suppression of understanding
of energy production by so-called professionals in education.


Nuclear plants need lots of water. Many installed nukes are running on
low power now due to water shortage.


There is no water shortage. Record snows last year, record rains this
spring, and the wettest summer in 50 years have rivers overunning their
banks. Lakes over their piers, and even tributaries with white water for
the first time in a century.

Nuclear plants are built on the shores of rivers, lakes and other
bodies of water. They're not running at half power due to low water.

The hard reality is that most of them have been shut down by the
ignorant demands of an uninformed public.

I'm about a 3 wood in any direction from a nuclear power plant. Three
are shut down. One was built and certified, but never started.



We need to consume less and not allow the rest of the world to become
the oinkers that we already are. A few years of economic depression
will do wonders for speeding that along.


Well, aren't we the very soul of arrogance.

You don't get to make that call.

Dave wrote:
D Peter Maus wrote:
m II wrote:
D Peter Maus wrote:

Subject: Wild Pigs

Of course none of this movement to totalitarianism has happened in the
last seven and a half years. The Patriot act is merely for your own
good.




mike





You keep forgetting how many times Bill Clinton tried to pass the
Patriot Act. And how many times the Republican Congress blocked him.

Or that Projects Echelon and Carnivore were built during his
administration.


The (not even) Patriot Act is a hodge-podge of fascist dreams that has
been kicking around for decades. Clinton is no benchmark of virtue; why
do you worship him so?

LOL! You ARE on drugs.

Dave wrote:
D Peter Maus wrote:
Dave wrote:
On Mon, 21 Jul 2008 19:56:17 +0000, D Peter Maus wrote:

Dave wrote:
On Mon, 21 Jul 2008 18:46:51 +0000, D Peter Maus wrote:


Denial is a marvelous thing.
As is courage; as is skepticism in the face of mass hysteria; as is
wisdom.


So far, all I see from you is denial.

A lot of what I see from you is baseless criticism and a complete
unwillingness to back up anything you say with any kind of factual
matter.


The fact that I don't post links that you yourself could find using
the same search engines as I is only an indication that I choose not
to do your work for you.

If you were interested in the whole truth, you'd look them up
yourself. Just as I do.

???


If you'd actually have read the post instead of deleting it, you'd
have your answer.