PRUDEN: A bad day for the red-hots

The American Physical Society has on the front page of its web site this statement: "Emissions of greenhouse gases from human activities are changing the atmosphere in ways that affect the Earth's climate. An article at odds with this statement recently appeared in an online newsletter of the APS Forum on Physics and Society, one of 39 units of APS. The header of this newsletter carries the statement that "Opinions expressed are those of the authors alone and do not necessarily reflect the views of the APS or of the Forum." This newsletter is not a journal of the APS and it is not peer reviewed." (www.aps.org) So, the 50,000 members of the APS apparently do still believe that "The evidence is incontrovertible: Global warming is occurring." It seems to me that the entertainment value of Mr. Pruden's caustic opinion is considerably diminished by his gross inaccuracy and witless speculations. Conservatives need to take this topic more seriously.

The idea of anthropogenic global warming is a scam perpetrated by the left wing wacko environmental movement, in order to move us closer to the reality of the new world order of one gov't under the UN,and realization of the new socialist order. The 3 trillion is just the beginning. They want to control you through this hyped up baloney. RESIST!!!!

Jprof, Remember that the earth's surface is 70% water covered. If that were not the case, the earth would FREEZE from radiation into deep space! Radiation occurs at the 4th power of the absolute temperature of the source. Deep space is at 3K or so, while the earth is at 300K or so on the cold side, where radiation occurs normal (at right angles) to the surface. Do the math (if you're capable).The concentration of water vapor, a greenhouse gas, is about 85 times the concentration of CO2. Anthropogenic global warming? Hogwash and more hogwash! Owl Gore has never taken a university course in physical chemistry, thermodynamics, or heat and mass transfer, so how can he be an expert in anything having to do with how the earth is warmed or cooled? He couldn't even pass divinity school, for crying out loud! My guess is that you are equally uninformed about such sciences, and therefore, without the facts, you gullibly latch on to whatever liberal poppycock some hypocrite like Owl Gore espouses! He's in this strictly for the tax money from "cap-and trade", and it should be obvious to anyone with even half a brain. I note that it is not obvious to you!

Jprof, You should learn to read a little better. The article stated "There is a considerable presence within the scientific community of people who do not agree ...." and "The physicists are trying to open the debate with the publication of a learned paper ...." The appropriate conclusion is that many in The American Physical Society do NOT agree with the official policy and are attempting a correction. Your conclusion -- which is wrong -- reduces to: All 50,000 members ascribe to the official position and Mr. Pruden twisted the facts. Try reading with comprehension and get your facts right.

Call me whacky (many do!) but I have been a skeptic of anthropogenic global warming since "I" did the math. We could squeeze the entire 6 billion person population of earth inside the city limits of Jacksonville, Florida, which is 820 square miles (approximatly 25 billion square feet). The surface area of earth is 197 MILLION square miles! How this relatively small number of people could create enough pollutants to change global temperatures is puzzling, especially since only about one-third of the total population (the industrialized countries) own the so-called culprits of global warming (autos, factories, etc.).

I agree with Wes Pruden. Not only is Al Gore wrong about global warming but he is now wrong about switching to biofuels. We did the research on that in the seventies and the biofuel we decided would best replace gasoline as a fuel was not ethanol. We could make the other biofuel for cars, but not legally. Congress was promptly duped into outlawing this biofuel and gave us ethanol instead. These green people are organized and way ahead of us.

Bwahahahaha! We conservatives have been saying this all along - we actually prefer bona-fide scientific evidence rather than the emotional class-war driven drivel that emanates from the left on this issue. We've known for years that the whole global warming debate has been a scam, a con to usher in the socialist's one-world, wealth-thieving, Bronze-age society.

P T Barnum was right.... and the Democrats (aka the dyed-in-the-wool socialists) are obviously aware of the fact that a "sucker is born every minute, and ALL of them vote Democrat..... " It's all about the money folks..... YOUR MONEY, and the real question is HOW MUCH CAN BE STOLEN BEFORE THE PIGGY BANK IS EMPTIED? Gore wants several 'trillions'... Reid and Pelosi seek hundreds of trillions to squander on worthless enterprises, ALL of which are designed to enrich them and their morally and intellectually bankrupt cronies..... And only they know how much of your money is enough....... Of course, nothing will get done, as the past four years clearly demonstrate.... the people's money will be gone, and the people will be forever in debt, but the politicians and their cronies will be rich.... that is, until the dollar finally collapses..... and then they will also be broke..... and will come begging for a handout.... Would you give them anything other than the back of your hand???? If so, you are an even bigger sucker than they thought you were.

If anyone had bothered to actually read what the APS published you will find that actually there isn't a shift in consensus only a couple of scientists disagree: http://www.livescience.com/environment/080718-aps-gw.html Simply because some people disagree with a theory does not imply the theory is true or not true. Heck you can find scientists to support almost any theory you want, you can find scientists that disagree with even well established theories like general relativity and quantum mechanics, in either case it does not completely invalidate the theories. No theory is perfect including General relativity and quantum mechanics yet both provide adequate approximations within their realms of applicability. Same goes for global warming theory, within specified limits it gives us adequate approximation to past, present and future climate. People must remember that you can't PROVE any scientific theory!! IN any case if you believe that your arguments against global warming are so compelling then they should stand up to scrutiny, tell them to actual climate scientists: http://www.realclimate.org/ In addition you should visit the following webpage: http://gristmill.grist.org/skeptics

Pruden's whole editorial is based on distortion, which appears to be deliberate. The APS itself never repudiated the view that climate change is a result of human activity. If you go to the official web site of the American Physical Society, this much will be clear. What did happen is that a couple of scientists from what is a huge organization, wrote a note that challenged some of the global warming assumptions. The American Physical Society far from attacking what Gore said yesterday, largely agrees with him. Go to the website and check for your self.

Where is Rachel Carson when we need her? She was fairly easy to refute. The primary media outlets in the world have all taken up the cause on behalf of Mr. Gore. Because these media outlets are so heavily populated by true climatology scientists, what they tout as an impending doom for mankind just MUST be true. The Friis-Christensen and Lassen study shows that the average land surface temperature has increased by less than 0.3 C since 1860. Scary, isn't it.

It's my guess that these same people espousing globallony warming as fact, would also be the same ones who can't interpret the 2nd Amendment to the Constitution. With some of the extreme conclusions they come up with for that one, I can only imagine the gobbledygoo in their heads when they interpret scientific issues.....I can hear Al now: "Only the federal government should be in control of the weather" (and everything that affects it)

Global warming is increasing the temperature at the rate of a few thousandths of a degree per year. At this rate, some time in the 21st century, it just might get as warm as it was a thousand years ago before the "little ice age" in the middle of the last millennium. Can you imagine the horrors of of more lush, verdant vegetation, of a longer growing season and possibly even lower food prices? The Lord High Doomsayer Al Gore must lie awake at night, trembling in his silk PJ's on his waterbed full of Evian, at the thought that the world might not end and that people could possibly be better off without owing their fortune to the brilliant minds in Central Planning. Of course, that warming wasn't caused by higher CO2 levels, but then CO2 levels have fluctuated wildly over the preceding millennia, sometimes being much higher than it is now, and, I know this will come as a shock to the Church of the Prophet Gore, but the runaway greenhouse effect didn't turn the Earth into Venus, although the cloud of gaseous carbonic emissions over Washington has similar choking characteristics, and the climate of much heat, but very little light, could possibly melt lead. In the 1980's the study of meteorology led to Chaos Theory, which determined, among other things, that the weather is way too complicated for us to make these kinds of predictions. We've gone from the idea of a butterfly possibly causing hurricanes due to the vagaries of trillions of unpredictable random processes, to running to the market in the minivan for milk causing fire, floods and destruction due to the unquestionable certainties of environmental dogma. Skeptics are warned that calling this into question runs the risk of further carbon emissions from their being burned at the stake for daring to call into question the ex-Vice President's, er, scientific credentials. But don't let that stop you from sacrificing your lives and well-being to Enviro-Pope Gore, who is becoming obscenely rich shilling for his doomsaying, while offering his imprimatur upon socialism for the mere proles like you and me, who lack the wherewithal to buy indulgences against conspicuous consumption. After all, if it was really the Earth he was worried about, the Vicar of Gaia would call for a crash course in expanding nuclear power, which is a completely carbon-free power source, that unlike everything he is pushing, doesn't rely on unproven and unperfected technology. Just ask France, who contributes less to global warming than the bovine flatulence of one of His Ozone-Holeyness' admonitions to "Do as I say, not as I do." But don't let real solutions get in the way of lofty pipe dreams, or lining Mr. Gore's pockets and possibly Mrs. Gore's shoulders with faux mink (no animals harmed). After all, if the problem is solved, his bread-and-butter would disappear and he'll have to go back to guest-starring in cartoons as a living, which, unlike his former government jobs, he's actually good at.