Important: NEW INFO JUST OUT (deliver report to Campaign HQ)
The Doctor now has data to support his statements made in the press. I am amazed that suddenly a report come out that backs exactly what Dr. Paul has said in the press.
On the Question on if he agrees to "man made" on global warming?
Senate Report Debunks "Consensus"
"U.S. Senate Report: Over 400 Prominent Scientists Disputed Man-Made Global Warming Claims in 2007 " the full report due out today:
http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Minority.B...
The Dr. speaking on this new avant garde and popular consensus on Global warming "caused by man". He said point blank that he is experienced and old enough to know that consensus is rarely right.
(I choose to believe its a natural cycle that results from high sun flares, mega radiation explosions, this is a real statistical cycle that spans 800,000 years. Back in Jr. high it was "we are going into an new ice age. We were going to be able to drive over to Europe.
Whatever happened to that consensus?)
Perhaps the best stance on
Perhaps the best stance on this is "concerned" but seeking more data, especially in light of a lack of scientific consensus.
..................
"The main thing that I learned about conspiracy theory is that conspiracy theorists actually believe in a conspiracy because that is more comforting. The truth of the world is that it is chaotic..." —Alan Moore
Global warming
I got a lot of flack from my left wing friends when I told them I didn't believe in man made Global Warming. My point simply was that I hear about CO2 emissions causing global warming, a lot of arguments and not much proof. My big problem was that I didn't hear opposing theories and I tend to distrust one sided arguments. I am not educated enough to endorse the concept, nor discredit it, however I refuse to blindly accept popular opinion.
Especially when the opinion is used to justify so many regulations which I also don't understand the consequences of. I feel like I am being intentionally kept in the dark...
Careful
With this one. There are a lot of left leaning people who are just starting to look to Ron Paul. I think he risks alienating some of them if he comes out against Global Warming too strongly.
Just so you know
I live in an off-grid home powered by solar panels. I do this for various reasons. Now, I can understand people not wanting to blindly follow the likes of Al Gore. But, just because someone you don't like or trust tells you that potatoes are food, that doesn't mean they are not. Look at Holland. They are drowning and will likely lose much of their land to the sea. Ice is melting like crazy all over. Now, probably we are in a warming trend anyway, but throwing a big greenhouse over the planet in the form of CO2 doesn't help, and in fact, intensifies the problem, creating a positive feedback loop. We don't have control over the sun, but at least we can cut our own contribution. There is a real problem, and humans need to figure out a way to lessen our impact. Unfortunately, China is a huge problem, and Americans don't have much control there. But we did export to them all our old, polluting technology and ignorant consumerism.
Go, Ron, GO!
I thought is a report for all to read: not argue about
I read the full report and it is enlightening and fits right in with Ron Paul's message of Prosperity and Freedom.
Over all, man can not control the planet and this "consensus" will do more harm to humans by lessening prosperity. Countries need to promote economic growth so they are better equipped for change which is a natural phenomenon through the ages. Temperatures since 1998 have actually dropped was an interesting point tid bit.
I do notice that the Antarctic is bigger today than it ever has been in human history! Even an experienced Tour ship encountered an sunk due to an iceberg where one never existed. Another fact which is new to me is that sun spot activity has been declining for the last 15 years and has recently collapsed and non existant. I think this could account for the actual average drop in world temperatures since 1998.
Here is a good conclusion for those that do not have the time-
>>>> "It is not possible to stop climate change, a natural phenomenon that has affected humanity through the ages. We therefore need to equip nations to become resilient to the full range of these natural phenomena by promoting economic growth and wealth generation.
The United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has issued increasingly alarming conclusions about the climatic influences of human-produced carbon dioxide (CO2), a non-polluting gas that is essential to plant photosynthesis.
While we understand the evidence that has led them to view CO2 emissions as harmful, the IPCC's conclusions are quite inadequate as justification for implementing policies that will markedly diminish future prosperity. In particular, it is not established that it is possible to significantly alter global climate through cuts in human greenhouse gas emissions, on top attempts to cut emissions will slow development, the current UN approach of CO2 reduction is likely to increase human suffering from future climate change rather than to decrease it.
*The average rate of warming of 0.1 to 0. 2 degrees Celsius per decade recorded by satellites during the late 20th century falls within known natural rates of warming and cooling over the last 10,000 years.
The current UN focus on "fighting climate change, is distracting governments from adapting to the threat of inevitable natural climate changes, whatever forms they may take. National and international planning for such changes is needed, with a focus on helping our most vulnerable citizens adapt to conditions that lie ahead. Attempts to prevent global climate change from occurring are ultimately futile, and constitute a tragic mis-allocation of resources that would be better spent on humanity's real and pressing problems. <<<<<"
I agree
And may I add that it is a double edged sword. If in 20 years from now things are not worse it may not matter but if in 5 years from now it is indisputable it could be irreversible.
You can't have freedom if you don't have a planet.
I understand not wanting to be force fed something and that the consensus isn't always right but 2+2 still equals 4 in any part of the universe.
The "facts aren't in" approach that the GWB administration has taken has not proven fruitful.
Steps are being taken by other governments around the world to protect their land and citizens from the potentially massive destruction this could cause and that has nothing to do with the U.S.
I think the position from this administration has to acknowledge there may be a problem and that it will study the facts so they may make a clear and informed decision when appropriate.
History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or the timid.
Dwight D. Eisenhower
I have been a doubter of the
I have been a doubter of the Global Warming propaganda a la ALGORE. I believe that a true free market will work toward solving energy problems. Pollution is something we should all work to reduce, but the government mandating it will not work.
This is an interesting report.
There's somethin' happenin' here...
Power To The People?
WOW
So I'm not alone!
I have been taking MAJOR crap about my skepticism of man-made CO2 - Global Warming.
I only had that superb BBC video to use as ammo. This is GREAT!
Thanx!!
You've been taking crap?!?
You should be dishing it OUT! Anthropogenic global warming is an outrageous assumption promulgated on the people by certain interest groups.
Whenever anyone starts to talk to me about it THEY are on the receiving end of the crap. And that is how it should be. They speak of the end of the world but never mention the misanthropic solution the "leaders" have in store for us if they are given the power.
If you want to reduce pollution, great. I'm all for it. Let's find solutions. But don't tell me how a (possible) seven-inch rise in water levels over a hundred years requires me to go back to the stone age.
Ugh.