Bush snubs Gore's global warming film

Ridge wrote:

<quoted text>
Your first post is from an industry source and is written in its own self interest, your second pbs article is 6 years old and mostly backs up what i have been saying with some doubts from some scientists and there has been a pronounced shift in the opinions of legitimate scientists since then and the third site you quoted from goes on to say that the areas that are cooler couldn't be accurately measured because the equipment used can't determine the temperature under the snow in that area.

Ridge wrote:

There are many real reasons to reduce CO2 here is another one,
Man-made Carbon Dioxide Emissions Collect in Oceans, Putting Marine Life at Risk
New evidence shows that the ocean is the primary repository for excess carbon dioxide produced during the past 200 years of industrialization. The change in the concentration of CO2 in ocean waters could threaten shell formation in certain plankton, corals and mollusks.
The amount of CO2 in the atmosphere has risen from about 280 parts per million in 1800 to 380 parts per million today. But this increase accounts for only about half of the expected contribution from human activity. In a study published today in the journal Science, Christopher L. Sabine of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and his collaborators determined from a worldwide survey of water samples that 48 percent of the estimated CO2 from the burning of fossil fuels and cement manufacturing has ended up in the ocean. This implies that the terrestrial biosphere, which includes soil and plant life, has not been a long-term carbon sink for industrial emissions and may in fact be a net source for CO2 over the given time frame, owing to forest clearings and other land-use changes.
Some people on this site will tell you they know more than Scientific American who published this article, the NOAA, and the PHDs and Scientists working on this and other projects but I think not.
Would you go to your University trained doctor if you had Cancer or would you go to some crackpot.
That is the choice you must make if you want to understand what is known to date from reliable sources. Go to the people who's information is based on observation and experiment and not on what they think sounds good.
The other thing to watch out for is Corporate sponsored "Science" Dupont and others continue to hire "BRIBE" "scientists" into reverse engineering their claims into "science" to use as propaganda.