Barrel Strength

Now that we have run the experiment for 10 years, and see that as CO2 goes up, temperature goes sideways, clearly Human/CO2 caused global warming disaster is a disproved theory. In light of this, how will society deal with the growing disconnect between those in denial of the facts, who just cannot let go of their passionate global warming beliefs and those who are increasingly angry at those who perpetrate and carry on with this disaster cult mania?

The theory may have its flaws, even if we are not the cause of a global rise in temperature, we are the cause of natural resource depletion and environmental degradation.

All of the efforts in being “green” have not gone to waste, because we still face the issues of pollution, smog (especially within cities) and so forth. Global warming may be proven false, but the impact on our environment is still devastating.. so this should not excuse people from all of their responsibilities to the environment

What is your take on the CRU leaks (Admitted to be genuine), specifically the code that was studied and it was found that there is massive number manipulation and fraud.

I was also wondering if CBC was going to do their job and cover the story.

How much ice has melted in North America over the past 20,000 years and has that caused sea levels to rise? I seem to remember in school in the 1960s that the ice over the Great Lakes was 1 mile thick and the first people in the Americas crossed a land bridge from Asia (Bering Straight).

What do you make of the recent revelation that scientists in Britain’s Climate Research Unit “cooked” their data? I have seen some discussion of this on the margins, but no real effort to address what must amount to a serious problem for the entire theory of global warming / climate change.

Now that it appears that “Climate Change” is a discredited hoax, I would like to know what “Big Environment’s” next hoax is going to be to raise money. Will David Suzuki and Al Gore be producing a movie together on the “Next One” to get the ball rolling?

Within the context of the free-rider problem, how in the past could anyone justify the Kyoto Accord or today support any position on climate change other than that of worldwide agreement and acceptance of being subject to third-party enforcement of any such agreement?

Now that the CRU data from East Anglia has been outed, how will the religion of global warming react? I suspect that they will deny and refuse to acknowledge reality. I think this scam is over.

When will we see a report on the CRU leaks covered on CBC??? Probably not too soon, doesn’t fit the agenda does it??

Recently Canada has taken much abuse on the world stage for its environmental record and action. One of our worst problems environmentally speaking is also one of our strongest assets economically.

There is too much at play and too many people dependent on oil for their livelihood to cut cold turkey.

Which industries do you see as viable sectors for Alberta to introduce/expand in order to replace big oil.

Green technology is something which companies could make a lot of money on, especially if using dirty tech becomes illegal.

What are companies, specifically rich oil companies doing, and how much are they spending, to develop green technology and practices? Who are the major players to support in their endeavor?

To Mr. Soloman:
Various people have reported that in your book ‘The Deniers’, you state: “As these rather dramatic reversals for the doomsday view mounted, however, I also noticed something striking about my growing cast of deniers. None of them were deniers.”

If so, then why did you not correct the perception that there are significant numbers of ‘climate change deniers’ who have decent credibility?

Why do so many experts believe that man is solely responsible for climate change when there is little doubt that in the past the Earth has been both far warmer and far colder than it is right now?

In the late Ordovician period, about 450 million years ago, glaciers covered most of the “icehouse” Earth despite CO2 levels being more than 10 times higher than today’s levels.

How is it possible then that CO2, anthropogenic or otherwise, forces climate change and specifically warming?

The University of Melbourne report targets the wobble of the earth’s axis as responsible for climate change. Why isn’t this being discussed?

http://newsroom.melbourne.edu/news/n-119

I could be wrong but it appears from the limited information given that the two guests are singers in the same choir which is hardly a debate.

Is it asking too much to have guests who are accredited climate scientists and who represent the two opposing schools of thought?

The Lake Vostok (Antarctica) study indicates that Carbon Dioxide levels rose at least 13 times over a 400,000 year span due to the wobble of the earth’s axis.

Doesn’t this indicate that greenhouse gas emissions are the effect, rather than the cause of global warming?

How does moving tax dollars from one country to another lower CO2?

At first we were told the issue was global warming. Now we are hearing and reading that the problem may be global cooling. Why should we believe either one?

So you don’t believe in climate change and you don’t think anything is happening to the ice in the polar regions.
No problem.

Since the process of atmosphereic warming probably got started around 200 years ago, we are pretty much already commited to the outcomes which will occur in the next 50 years. The ship is moving and it really can’t change course, regardless of what we do right now.

All of us who survive the next 50 years will get to find out if the problem is real or not. It’s kind of like the old heaven and hell thing. We know that they either exist or don’t, but the only way to find out for sure is to wait until the end, when we die.

Unfortunately, when the water is six feet deep in the streets of Vancouver, it’s probably going to be a little late to prevent a problem. I see the net result as something akin to the outcome from Katrina; everybody knew it was likely to happen, but nobody really wanted to make any preparations to prevent a disaster.

I guess the real question is whetehr you aproach the coming effects of climate change the way we prepared for Y2K or the way we didn’t prepare for Katrina?

Climate changes – it has throughout history with the Roman Warming (250BC-450AD), the Medieval Warming (900-1280AD and in which the IPCC has fraudulently tried to discredit) to the Little Ice Age (1300-1850).

The average temperature during these periods was much higher and lower than today’s average temperature and they certantly were not caused by man. Carbon and oxygen isotopic data from ice cores and sediments show no correlation between CO2 and temperature.

How can you conclude that man-made CO2 emmisions control temperature when man’s input is but a fraction of the total CO2 in the atmosphere and why is this dangerous since historical global warmings have always been times of plenty.