Action on global warming good, but late

Yeah it may be too late for small countries like Kiribati but it's not yet late for the world. Today is the right time to start. We all need to do actions even it's an individual action together with the rest of the world it will work and I guess many political leaders must take the lead, let's just forget about our greedy intentions, money is nothing if the world will vanish there's no way you can enjoy or splurge it if the world is already gone. Nothing disappears but I believe things change. Many Islands appeared because of Ice-age, Ice age decreased the sea levela nd beacsuse it's real hot now glaciers are melting so sea level rises and Ice- age iceland will be back again under the water. It takes hundreds and thousands of years for an island to be developed....let's do our share....

Global warming isnt real. Natural or manmade. Did you know in Al Gore's documentry where he showed the ice caps melting. That was the 2% of the ice caps melting. 98% of the ice cap is actually expanding.

Another thing the Earth has gone through cycles. About 2000 to 3000 years ago grapes could grow in Scandanavia and Great Britain. They can't grow there any more because it is to cold. go figure.

PS- Global warming is not real

Yes we know that global warming is a risk to our small island nations
we better start working out something before it is too late.

globalwarmingfake wrote:

Global warming isnt real. Natural or manmade. Did you know in Al Gore's documentry where he showed the ice caps melting. That was the 2% of the ice caps melting. 98% of the ice cap is actually expanding.
Another thing the Earth has gone through cycles. About 2000 to 3000 years ago grapes could grow in Scandanavia and Great Britain. They can't grow there any more because it is to cold. go figure.
PS- Global warming is not real

Sorry you've got a number of points wrong that can mislead the readers.
1. The IPCC, which is the most authoritative source on Climate Change research, has clearly stated that CC or global warming is real. The impact may vary from one country to another.
2. Global warming has been ascertained and determined beyond doubt by the IPCC that it is due mainly to human-induced activities (less to nature).
3. In fact Alcore is supporting the fact that global warming is happening. But his testimonials are however rather exaggerated that tend to scare people.
4. The impact of global warming are more obvious on coral atoll islands.
So please do not be ignorant, be supportive in efforts to curb impact of CC.

I support your comment Sun on global warming. I live on Tarawa atoll and have seen it first hand especially during spring tides. I'm thankful for the new Australian government's policy on greenhouse emission, a positive action. Thank you.

Sun wrote:

<quoted text>
Sorry you've got a number of points wrong that can mislead the readers.
1. The IPCC, which is the most authoritative source on Climate Change research, has clearly stated that CC or global warming is real. The impact may vary from one country to another.
2. Global warming has been ascertained and determined beyond doubt by the IPCC that it is due mainly to human-induced activities (less to nature).
3. In fact Alcore is supporting the fact that global warming is happening. But his testimonials are however rather exaggerated that tend to scare people.
4. The impact of global warming are more obvious on coral atoll islands.
So please do not be ignorant, be supportive in efforts to curb impact of CC.

answer to 2
There is no evidence that CO2 has ever ‘driven’ the climate in the past, nor is there any compelling evidence that it is doing so now.
http://www.greatglobalwarmingswindle.com/co2_...

video: http://www.youtube.com/watch...

answer to 1
Lindzen mocked fears of global warming by comparing them to children's imaginations. "I think it's mainly just like little kids locking themselves in dark closets to see how much they can scare each other and themselves," Lindzen said.

Lindzen, a past UN IPCC contributor, also explained how only a dozen scientists were involved in writing the 2001(Third Assessment Report) IPCC media hyped Summary For Policymakers that purported to speak for thousands of scientists.
http://www.canadafreepress.com/2007/global-wa...

Lord Christopher Monckton, a UK climate researcher, had a blunt message for UN climate conference participants on Monday.

“Climate change is a non problem. The right answer to a non problem is to have the courage to do nothing,” Monckton told participants.

“The UN conference is a complete waste of our time and your money and we should no longer pay the slightest attention to the IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change,)” Monckton added.

Monckton also noted that the UN has not been overly welcoming to the group of skeptical scientists.

“UN organizers refused my credentials and appeared desperate that I should not come to this conference. They have also made several attempts to interfere with our public meetings,” Monckton explained.

“It is a circus here,” agreed Australian scientist Dr. David Evans. Evans is making scientific presentations to delegates and journalists at the conference revealing the latest peer-reviewed studies that refute the UN’s climate claims..........
http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/...

answer to 4.
I lived on 2 coral atoll islands. 1 in the Indian Ocean, 1 in the Pacific. Nothing has changed. Except the fear mongers are choosing places that very few people pass by on a daily basis to observe that the AGW crisis peddlers are wrong.
Like Antarctica. Living even there we have eye witnesses who produce evidence that the fears are unfounded. Sure the peddlers proclaim all over the media ice melting blah blah blah but then government officials request funding for ice breakers because the ice is so extensive that they can't get through. Choice: Big mouths proclaiming ice is all gone or going. Or people quietly requesting means to deal with record amounts of ice.

Thanks JRS for your comments,
Your points you argued on were merely from skeptics, that were not complete and had overlooked a number of crucial issues. Let me clarify a few points here:
-global warming theory (GWT) like any new and revolutionary science theories can face resistance and even mockery by some notable scientists. Galileo's theory that defied the earth as the center of the universe, G Mendel's genetic theory, plus many others, had taken so much a hard time and even centuries to convince the scientific community
-thus GWT must also have its skeptics.
-however, GWT is based on facts and consensus by many notable scientists, even many notable scientists that did not contribute to the 2001 IPCC report support it, including scientists at CSIRO
-it's not about how many scientists wrote or contributed to the 2001 report that is important. No. The facts that the document presents are what that matters or important
-GWT or one that is readily promoted by the IPCC is based not only on temperature analysis. Other factors were also considered. The few skeptics' theories were merely based on temperature data analysis. But even their temperature data were not accurate or contained some misleading data
-the video you showed about one skeptic,JCU Professor Bob Carter is not so convincing as the facts presented by IPCC. Bob used temperature data well before the 1800s, and also at times 10-15000 years ago! Who the hell could have measured these temperatures at these periods?? The IPCC acknowledged that there were less available temperature data before the 1860s, therefore Bob's data must be misleading. More so, it contains more speculations rather than facts!
-the correct temperature data is one that was presented by the IPCC, much different to that of Bob. This correct temp data showed that a clear rise in average global temp was observed in the 1900s, when all other factors have been taken into account. The problem with the skeptics' data is that they overlooked other important factors, and that their theories are more or only focussed on temperature analysis.
-let not forget that there are many important factors that are considered in the GWT analysis. Let us not forget too that there is a real ozone hole above Antarctica that clearly can contribute to GW through the GH effect
-unfortunately there is not enough space here to provide all these data in support of the GWT including websites against your 2-4 points. I urge you to read the IPCC report carefully, I guess you had not!
-even next to the video you provided, a video of Sir David, another notable scientist testifies in support of GWT!

I can also be a skeptic, however, so far based on scientific facts, I believe in GWT. But I do not believe in some peoples' views where they had exaggerated and so distorted the facts about GW in instilling a sense of fear to people. This is particularly disastrous to the theory's credibility.
Your remarks that nothing had changed, is totally wrong and misleading. It's merely just based on your ignorance and arrogance.
Changes are obvious in my country, Kiribati. Now some places and houses can be flooded during high tides, the day's temperature on STarawa is increasingly unbearable, etc, which were never experienced before.

Therefore while I believe in GW, however,
I do not believe that my country Kiribati will disappear under water in the next 50-100 years in contrary to some of my countrymen beliefs. I strongly believe that Kiribati will continue to exist in the next 50-100 or so years.

Hope this has helped in clarifying your doubts. I advise you to read the IPCC 2001 report and other scientists' research reports, etc, if you had not!

ARA BWAI TE MAURI TE RAOI AO TE TABOMOA!

"Global Warming

Action on global warming good, but late"

Yes, so late, that the warming has now stopped, proving that the whole thing was a scam.

Giblets, are you a skeptic or just any skeptical opportunist that merely pursue groundless ideals to meet your own ignorance and arrogance?
Please talk on scientific facts, not personal speculations.

Even action than no action is better. More so, there is a saying that "It's better to be late than not..."

Scientific, Skeptical or igorance. To settle the issue, have the gut,pack your stuff from your comfort zone, go to 'Te Abanuea' islet in the lagoon of Tarawa islands, Rep of Kiribati and say stay there for 20 or 30 years to scientifically prove or dispove sea level rise. Other proposed field study places are 'Funapala islet' in the lagoon of Fuanfuti, Tuvalu islands Group or the Carribean sea. Carry out the study meticulously as your results will convice islanders and the whole wide world.

Come back, publish your research result in the scientific 'Peer Review Journal'. Got the proof,'Eureka', the scandal is sorted out. End of story. Wait for another issue that will affect Kiribati.

The same proposal, same proposed approach, the scandal is sorted out. End of story.

Replicate the scientific approach and proove it. The scandal sorted out, agree or disagree, migrate or not migrate. End of story.

Te Mauri, Te Raoi ao Te Tabemoa iaora ni bane