The Heritage Foundation - Leadership for America

October 13, 2009 Frank Canzolino, Elmhurst Illinois writes:

Please, somebody explain something to me. When environmentalist talk about “climate change” to what climate are they comparing? What is the “ideal” climate they want? The history of Earth contains several different climates, and changes between them. Age of the Dinosaurs good enough? How about the Ice Age? Geesh…

October 13, 2009 It Is Wise To Know What We Do Not Know « Prayer, News & Action writes:

[...] … which seems to be the admission of the Waxman-Markey cap and trade legislation. Heritage asks: “If cap and trade is meant to solve our climate crisis, why does the bill include funding to under… [...]

October 14, 2009 Bobbie Jay writes:

There has to be some way to stop this government made scam! In all areas of Intrusion! Falsities! Thievery! Defamation! Noncompliance to their governmental expected duties!

THIS GOVERNMENT IS SERVING THE PEOPLE NOTHING BUT CORRUPTION!!!…and we’re paying for it. The government majority must be put in it’s place!

October 14, 2009 John Mason writes:

Why is it that no one wants to address the core of the problems, there is comming a time when there will be too many humans on the planet?

October 14, 2009 Bill, CO writes:

Cap and trade is not acceptable. The climate change issue is not widely understood and does need to be further studied. We should not be willing to risk the collapse of the US economy for this disastrous legislation. Write your Senators at http://tiny.cc/pxIgi.

October 14, 2009 Jack Mildam writes:

If the fire prevention bill is meant to solve our fire crisis, why does the bill include funding to understand how fires begin, spread and can be put out?

You wingnuts are funny.

October 14, 2009 Steve Jordan, Pensacola FL writes:

The comments above are fine illustrations of what your column and the conservative agenda are pushing: ignorance and fear of change. CO2 and other greenhouse gases absorb solar radiation and warm the planet. Greenhouse gases have been increasing exponentially over the past century and will continue to increase for the foreseeable future. A warmer planet means rising sea level with serious threats to coastal communities. High concentrations of CO2 are acidifying the oceans, threatening coral reefs and other marine life. These are facts and physics, not opinions. It is not about what we choose to believe. Wake up!

October 14, 2009 Andy Duncan, West Chester PA writes:

Mr. Jordan, where did you get your “facts”? I’d be curious to know, because my understanding is that most real scientific evidence does not support global warming. Mr. Mason, not to worry, this planet was created to sustain life and will continue to maintain balance. Where did you get your facts to ask this question and if you are correct, do we consider genicide or euthanasia, perhaps forced birth control? What gives any human the right to determine the life of another? Sir, please reconsider your perspective on the value of human life.

October 14, 2009 TexansRfree writes:

Since when is CO2 a green house gas, just because the courts say it is does not make it so. Show me data to back up your satement and I will take a look at it and make up my own mind. But when the EPA and the UN’s own report state that there is no real evidence to back up the claim of global warming I have to wonder if it is true. All of the data I’ve seen indicates that the earth is in the same weather cycle it has been in for the last 3000 years. You wake up and get your facts straight.

October 14, 2009 Karl, Clovis CA writes:

My question: Why do I have to pay for another stinking government agency to do another stinking study what every stinking university in the world is already studying?

October 14, 2009 Bruce, Hillsboro Oregon writes:

Steve, your just restating Al Gore failed science. CO2 makes up 3 1/2% of all green house gasses. Of that, only 3 1/2% of it is man made. The worlds oceans show a cooling in temperature as well as the total weather for the last 10 years. If you take a look at geological studies of weather from before man, you find that global warming happens before the increase of green house gasses. Most of the ignorance comes from green people who fail to look at all the science before coming to a conclusion.
WE are still slowly coming out of the last ice age, for a long time. History shows that both poles have been totally melted and covered in green with no sight of man anywhere. I think that submerging the coastal bastions of liberal wrong thinking would be a good thing. Buy a boat.

October 14, 2009 Andy Delahunty writes:

Steve, I think that you have missed the point of the article. No one opposes being educated about or making an educated decision on the topic of global warming. But the histeria that something drastic must be done now before our costal cities join Atlantis is non-sensical. I think that if you re-read the last paragraph you’ll see a more sensical approach.

October 14, 2009 Bobbie Jay writes:

The only “fear of change” I know of, are the people that have been so severely brain washed, they’ll believe anything without thorough study. And are the true ignorant that mute opposition.

Unless man created the universe, man will NEVER have the means to control nature. What an insult to the Creator… and look at what a mess U.S. congress is making. Holding their hands out for money, money, money, all of which will do NOTHING they suggest it will. Except create wasteful and useless jobs to drowned out private industries. It’s the MONEY, power and control.

MAN’S LIFE EXPIRES. Who’s to say, when EARTH’S LIFE EXPIRES? The Creator is in charge of BOTH! POLLUTION IS NOT MAN-MADE GLOBAL WARMING and nature balances itself.

They are thieves and will distort ANYTHING to get the power and control to ensure all are inferior to government. Think things through.

October 14, 2009 Marshall,Michigan writes:

I’m with Bill!

October 14, 2009 John Roane Sarasota, Florida writes:

It seems ignorance reigns supreme. The world’s climate has been changing long before man walked on the earth and will continue to do so. The current panic is being caused by some taking an improper sampling of earth’s temperature over a short period and applying it to current day. Please our last attempt was to restore ozone only finding when we did we made it worse. We should not correct what we don’t understand.

The sky is not falling so head back to your hen house. Or spend your time snipe hunting.

October 14, 2009 Bill, Kansas City, Mo. writes:

Steve,
Then how come the temps have been going down for the past 11 years?

October 14, 2009 Al, The Villages, Fl writes:

Mr. Mason, according to the experts back in the 50s when I was in school, they predicted that(based on the current birthrate for that period) the world would overpopulate and starve to death in 20 years. Now there is talk that, because of the birthrate in the world, there will be noone born to work and support the old folks by 2050. The current environmentalists claim man-made doom and gloom using the same faulty science to make money and/or force the world economies to decline for ideological reasons. Man does not do a good job, one way or the other, of “fixing” Mother Nature. As for cap and trade, it is another environmental misstep that intends to raise tax revenue, kill jobs and do nothing for the environment all in the name of a needed energy policy (which we need- it’s called drill now plus other steps including taking us off gasoline, nuclear power etc.).

October 14, 2009 Danny/Fla writes:

Dear Morning Bell: This is absoulutely the best planet going. Climate may be studied, and it may be calculated, as to what influences are effecting it. There are thoughtful persons who cannot get by a day, without a chuckle. It is those who have a good voice, that influence most of the population, with what we have done wrong, and where we are going to end up. Where are the positive plans, for adapting human resources that are needed- such as generators for a dying country, - such as africa.Just because someone has millions of dollars to spend on projects-if it does not save /or help human life-what-is more importan’t people or some distant planet, that has not benefited those, who die daily.We will have checks balances, but to destroy people by plans, that don’t have good -rational outcomes will ultimately fail. Whether it is disease, and the profit, that it is done for, or the control of needed nourishment, to prevent such an scenario clearly shows it is manipulation-of-a planet, a people who suffer from such poor, and most of the time fostered, choices will rise, and soon through such actions go-into oblivion. There is no other choice, either sink or swim. Eat or die- survive or cease to exist. Human life is shot, as-it- is- to live, and enjoy it is certainly a blessing- that is my concern.

October 14, 2009 Joseph C. Moore, Cpo USN Ret., Lake Ariel, PA writes:

“These are facts and physics, not opinions.” The real fact about global warming is that there has Not been a warming trend for the past 12 years, but rather, a cooling trend (however slight). This is Fact not Opinion.

October 14, 2009 Spencer Peters, Carson City, NV writes:

Waxman-Markey has nothing to do with the environment…is is all about MONEY!!!

October 14, 2009 Vince, IL writes:

The above comment omits a bit of facts, physics and common sense. 95% of all GHGs are water vapor which leaves 5% of all other GHGs. Of this amount 3% (of the 100%) is CO2. of this only 1% (1% of the 3%) is generated by all of mankind’s activities. If we wanted, we could not compete with Nature, its oceans, volcanoes, termites and forest decay. If the US attempts to control their CO2 emissions, the emissions will simply move overseas along with our jobs. You wake up!

October 14, 2009 Bob Wilson, Spring TX writes:

Steve, where did you get this information? If it’s not first-hand research knowledge, don’t portray it as irrefutable fact. I don’t have first-hand knowledge of climate research either but have heard enough contrary claims reported by the scientific community to rely on my common sense that sun spot activity has been more responsible for climate change throughout geologic history than CO2.

October 15, 2009 spangled drongo writes:

Steve Jordan,
You worry too much. Check these real facts:

Global cooling by 0.71 deg C from 1878 to 1911, for 33 years.

Global warming by 0.53 deg C from 1911 to 1944, for 33 years.

Global cooling by 0.48 deg C from 1944 to 1976, for 32 years.

Global warming by 0.67 deg C from 1976 to 1998, for 22 years.

Not much happening here folks, move along now!

October 15, 2009 Randy Ridgel, Kelseyville CA writes:

The situation described above could either be wonderful, mediocre or awful for the world if the stated evidence turns out to be demonstrable and true. It isn’t. Nevertheless, history shows that warming is a good thing for most of us. Bring it on.

October 15, 2009 harry kuntz elberta, alabama writes:

steve you are obviously ignorant of how our planet and it’s systems work. carbon dioxide for example is used in greenhouses to accelerate plant growth, therefore, more co2 in the atmosphere means increased plant growth and more food. co2 is not acidifying the oceans. the”renaissance” in europe accompanied a warming trend or should i say less cooling or what is it? in the 70’s i was present when “global cooling” was proposed. that was bullcrap then as “global warming” is now. the sun comes up and it’s warm, the sun goes down it’s cold.

October 15, 2009 LW, Newport News VA writes:

Steve in Pensacola: You’ve been sucked into the vortex. MOST scientists who study the environment now agree, according to a recent poll, that the earth is cooling. Since 1998, temperatures have cooled.
There is a political agenda to the idea of climate warming, and it is to destory the U.S. economy by placing huge taxes or penalities on businesses and YOU. Some are advocating installing meters in our homes (as they have in many European countries whose lawmakers have bought into this ridiculous idea) that would monitor usage and tax us if we use too much. Who decides how much energy, electric power, is too much? The government.
It is no one’s business if a family uses $50 worth of electricity in a month or $5,000. And consider this—those who shout the loudest about us ordinary citizens using too much energy like Al Gore and Sean Penn are the very ones flying around in private jets, living in 12,000 sq. ft. homes while urging us average Joes to cut off lights and to carpool or ride public transportation! By the way, Al Gore’s film had so many untruths that the British government who has bought the idea of global warming hook, line & sinker, banned that film in their school system unless students were first warned of its falsehoods.
Wake up and realize our freedoms—all of them—are being chipped away before our eyes with ideas that would make Marx & Engles proud.

October 15, 2009 Dave Chelsea, MI writes:

Americans should demand that “science” science be used to make these determinations, NOT political science.

October 15, 2009 Bill, Forney, TX writes:

Steve & Jack should ride together … Jack misses the point that the “fire bill” is still trying to determine if there IS a fire … and for Steve, the greenhouse gas with the greatest impact on temperatures is WATER (set up a little greenhouse and you will see) - let’s get rid of water! … never mind that all the dire temperature curve predictions from the “experts” on this years ago bear no resemblance to actual temperature variation and that our neighboring planets are also seeing similar variations (I think the sun might have just a LITTLE to do with this) and you have the comedy of blank stares when the experts are asked about it. Why should we change our way of life for the long-term based on “expert” predictions when their short-term predictions don’t even hold up? …

October 15, 2009 Roger, Pittsburgh writes:

Mr. Jordan,

Please just spend an hour on the internet looking at the results of a “global warming debunked” web search and then decide if your neatly packaged argument still holds true. This is far from “settled science” and it is idiotic to proceed with drastic solutions without first spending the time to properly identify it there is a problem.

October 15, 2009 Mike, Wichita Falls writes:

If you are worried about overpopulation, stop reproducing and encourage the like-minded to do the same.

If you are worried about rising CO2 levels, stop breathing or at least stop driving your car, stop heating your house in the winter and cooling it in the summer, stop cooking food, stop watching TV and using your computer, buy local and encourage the like-minded to do the same.

If you are not worried about these things, just enjoy your life and encourage the like-minded to do the same.

October 15, 2009 J Thornton, Fort Smith, AR writes:

Sad to say but a few people that have posted here have missed the boat completely and are part of the problem by continuing to propogate the Global Warming scare tactics that are not scientifically supported contrary to what their chief science officer Al “I took the initiative in creating the internet” Gore blindly spews. Taking the initiative and independently researching scientific studies of this problem supports such a statement. Below is just some of the many examples of science on this subject that is available to anyone open minded enough to seek the truth on this issue. My apologies for the length of this reply, but it’s necessary to inform and educate certain individuals who I sincerely hope will be open minded enough to consider the findings and conclusions of these research studies.

The George C. Marshall Institute, a nonprofit research group founded in 1984 is dedicated to fostering and preserving the integrity of science in the policy process. Below the link for the article is the summary from the 2003 article entitled “Lessons & Limits of Climate History: Was the 20th Century Climate Unusual?” by Willie Soon and Sallie Baliunas.

http://www.marshall.org/pdf/materials/136.pdf

“Summary: Was the Climate of the 20th Century Unusual?
We know that global average surface temperature rose during the 20th century, and that the 1990s were the warmest period in the 140 year-long direct temperature measurement record. However, these facts, alone, do not support a claim that the climate of the 20th century was unusual.

Support for a claim that the climate of the 20th century was unusual could come from either a valid reconstruction of the climate of the past 1,000 years or from a valid estimate of natural climate variability. Neither is available. Lacking this knowledge, the claim that the temperature of the 20th century was unusual cannot be supported.

Proxy information (tree growth, isotope concentrations in coral reefs and ice cores, etc.) can be used to estimate past local temperatures. A survey of the scientific literature shows that 79 of the 102 proxy temperature studies identified a 50-year period during the past millennium that was warmer than any 50 years in the 20th century. While these results do not allow estimation of globally-averaged surface temperature for the past 1,000 years, they are strong evidence that the temperatures experienced during the 20th century were not unusual.”

Regarding CO2 and man-made pollution and their effects on Global Warming I suggest the following link to help put things into perspective:

http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/ice_ages.html

To borrow yet another quote from this second body of research…
“The idea that man-made pollution is responsible for global warming is not supported by historical fact. The period known as the Holocene Maximum is a good example– so-named because it was the hottest period in human history. The interesting thing is this period occurred approximately 7500 to 4000 years B.P. (before present)– long before humans invented industrial pollution.”

And finally this quote from the same article regarding CO2:
“CO2 in our atmosphere has been increasing steadily for the last 18,000 years– long before humans invented smokestacks ( Figure 1). Unless you count campfires and intestinal gas, man played no role in the pre-industrial increases.

As illustrated in this chart of Ice Core data from the Soviet Station Vostok in Antarctica, CO2 concentrations in earth’s atmosphere move with temperature. Both temperatures and CO2 have been steadily increasing for 18,000 years. Ignoring these 18,000 years of data “global warming activists” contend recent increases in atmospheric CO2 are unnatural and are the result of only 200 years or so of human pollution causing a runaway greenhouse effect.

Incidentally, earth’s temperature and CO2 levels today have reached levels similar to a previous interglacial cycle of 120,000 - 140,000 years ago. From beginning to end this cycle lasted about 20,000 years. This is known as the Eemian Interglacial Period and the earth returned to a full-fledged ice age immediately afterward.

Figure 2
3. Total human contributions to greenhouse gases account for only about 0.28% of the “greenhouse effect” (Figure 2). Anthropogenic (man-made) carbon dioxide (CO2) comprises about 0.117% of this total, and man-made sources of other gases ( methane, nitrous oxide (NOX), other misc. gases) contributes another 0.163% .

Approximately 99.72% of the “greenhouse effect” is due to natural causes — mostly water vapor and traces of other gases, which we can do nothing at all about. Eliminating human activity altogether would have little impact on climate change.”

October 15, 2009 Louis L Cesar F Levy DAYTON OH writes:

Fortunately lot of mindful, anti-alarmist and smart people here:Duncan, Bruce,Andy,Bobbie, JOHN ROANE, Al, Spangled…
As Nick himself cited the clever Ben Liberman, there is NOTHING TO WORRY ABOUT,…save OUR MONEY is being SPENT WHERE IT SHOULD NOT, for the same same song I sung. Let’s worry about all what aims seriously to DESTROY AMERICA, UNconsciously or not and that’s what matches our wordly dimension and is (already much very immensely…)Enough. No more Bogus bill nor Bogus bell.

October 15, 2009 Jerry from Chicago writes:

Well, Al Gore bamboozled enough people to believe that “We’re on the Eve of Destruction”. But if we will only purchase ‘carbon credits’ from the government or one of Al’s green companies, everything will be a-ok.

Gore has made over a hundred million dollars in investments in “green companies”. Gore is also a partner in an auto company making “fuel-efficient” sports cars, to be sold in Finland, of all places. And the U.S. government just gave his company a huge loan to help him along in this venture.

Proving yet again, “It’s not what you know, it’s who you know.”

October 15, 2009 BT, Port Allen, LA writes:

john mason (which also happens to be my g grandfather’s name) where did you get your info about there coming a time when there will be too many people on the planet? I have heard that all the people in the world could fit in the state of Texas and not crammed in like sardines either. So please, tell me where you get your info. I would like to read it for myself.

October 15, 2009 BT, Port Allen, LA writes:

Al Gore, for all of his “concern” for the environment, has one of the most energy consuming homes in the US. He, and people like him, hold to the adage of “do as I say, not as I do.
for those of you who have not seen this, check it out.

http://www.truthorfiction.com/rumors/g/gore-bush-houses.htm

October 17, 2009 Craig Goodrich, Las Vegas writes:

“The verdict on climate change is quite uncertain.”

Umm, no, it is quite certain. The CO2-driven warming hypothesis, which would have appeared ludicrous on its face to any moderately-bright 13-year-old who had been paying attention in his Earth Science class, and indeed did appear ludicrous at the time to the vast body of climatologists and meteorologists in the country, has been as definitively disproven as the phlogiston theory of fire.

There was no evidence whatever for it at the time it was proposed two decades ago, and now, after more than $50 billion in taxpayer-funded research grants, there is *still* no evidence whatever for it. (Computer models are not evidence, they are theories. I could write a computer model predicting that Tasmania would be two meters deep in pink stuffed bunnies by February unless everyone sent me $5 before Friday.)

On the other hand, the most promising current hypothesis — the effect of solar wind and cosmic rays on the hydrological cycle — has good correlation with data over periods ranging from months to millions of years.

CO2 is not a pollutant, much less a danger to the planet. “Global Warming” due to fossil energy use is arrant nonsense, as is the idiot search for “renewable energy.” For all but the last couple of centuries of its existence, all that humanity had was renewable energy; life was, as they say, nasty, brutish, and short. This is what the eco-industrial axis is trying to return us to.

October 19, 2009 redpens, PA writes:

Global warming, climate change. Whatever it’s being called this week, it’s not about the enviroment, it’s about control over our lives, and as Al Gore himself said, “global governance.” Now, the EPA is trying to intimidate the Senate into passing legislation by threatening to implement its’ own radical regulations if legislation is not passed. Congress holds the purse strings, the EPA needs to be reminded of this. I say we should call Congress and tell them to cut all funding to the Eco-wacko Propaganda Agency.

October 19, 2009 Nicolai Alatzas writes:

Frank Canzolino, Elmhurst Illinois -

Climate Conditions are based on historical data on registered temperatures, ice Pacts, ocean currents, temperatures as well as geological and vulcanological evidence.

Of course there are natural cycles in regards to ice ages and periods when the planet is very hot and volatile.

With the current pollution and carbon dioxide emissions we have expedited this process. We see this is our ocean temperatures and our ocean currents. This is why we have seen increased Hurricane activity in the Atlantic and an increase in the frequency of large damaging storms.

We are in the 3rd evolution of humanity whether you like it or not. First the Agricultural Revolution, Second the Industrial Revolution then we had the Information Era. Which changed the way we exchanged information and communicate our experiences world wide. This new insight and information technology era was the predecessor of the greatest revolution known to man. The “Green Revolution” a new era to shed light on our sustainability of humanity on this planet and impact the the environment around us.

Be proud of the times you live. And don’t go around preaching the world is flat unless that is the group of people you want to go down in history as. Make a conscious decision to make a positive impact for future generations.

God Bless, I hope this words find you in a place of peace and not hostility.