Switched

His error is that he begins with the premise that global warming is human induced. This assumption is not shared by many, many respected scientists. The entire solar system is warming. Al Gore's Vostock ice core drillings chart shows correlation between c02 levels and temperature, but he does not reveal to the viewer that co2 levels lag as much as 1,000 years...indicating temperature cause co2, not otherwise. He never cites a scientific finding of co2 causing temperature increase. I suggest viewing the BBC production The Great Global Warming Swindle and going to the Ottawa University's website as a resource for further info on this misinformation that the politically oriented IPCC and carbon trading investment firms find so convenient.

Reply

Sadly; Mr. Craven's logic works, and all he is saying is that it's a good idea to hedge our bets and to treat the Earth like our descendants will live here.
I want to say something to the twits like T. L. Hart, Catherine, and Matt Matthews who are attacking this guy or his ideas. The world doesn't care what you want to believe. I hope your children will piss on your graves for the cesspool you have enthusiastically helped leave them.
Now for one fact i have seen: I have climbed all over the western hemisphere. I have been on Glaciers from Canada to Southern Chile, no doubt over a hundred of them. Two are growing;, the tiny Konwakiten on Shasta (the other six are shrinking), and one on Mt. Olympus in Washington (all the others are receeding). The Earth is either growing warmer or drier. Take your pick. Both are bad choices.
I believe that a life based on consumption and exploitation is an ugly life.

Reply

I thought he presented this in a great, understandable way, and I absolutely agree with him.. I know that a lot of people are saying that "this is a normal change" and "people are panicking over nothing", but what I think they don't understand is that the difference from the earth's previous natural catastrophes is that this time around, us humans are here affecting the natural cycles... Just a bit of info, in China a new coal factory opens every week! And one of those coal factories emit as much carbon dioxide per day as an entire day of traffic in one of the states in the US... So I think it's BS that politicians keep talking about how everyone should be riding a bike everywhere instead of driving, instead of focusing on the big important things, like factories, trailers, war, and so on.
And, to everyone else out there, remember that it's better to do something and maybe save the planet than to do nothing and have to watch our planet die.

Reply

Similar arguments to regulate human action were made by Karl Marx in his Communist Manifesto.

No Mr. Stevens, I'm afraid that global warming is and has been happening for a long time whether we humans want it or not. Unless you can figure out a way of turning down the sun that is. May I suggest the following test before you expose anymore young impressionable minds to your theories:

http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/GlobWarmTest/start.html

Once you have taken this test you should be well oriented on the facts of earth climate science because it is full of credible references from expert research on the subject.

Sorry, but you won't be convincing me to purchase fancily branded feel good "green" products that come with a steep sticker price under the guise of fear. I prefer the warmer climate to an ice age.

Reply

I agree with Mr. Craven, if we do nothing to try and prevent global warming and it does cause all of these catastrophe"s in column B then humans and animals will gradually be wiped off the face of the earth. In-action in this case is not a very good choice on our part. Anything we can do such as driving less and using less energy can help fight global warming. I believe it"s true, why else would the North polar ice be melting so much. Also, why else would there be such extreme"s in the weather all around the world that have never been seen before?

Reply

Simple, yet eloquent argument that is the most compelling I have heard. Kudos to Mr Craven who obviously does justice to his profession and helps to enlighten all of us.

Reply

The weakness in Mr. Craven's conclusion is that he says we do not know and can't make an informed decision so we have to use the precautionary principal. I believe we do know a lot about the earth and nature. There is no sure thing but the scientific understanding leads one to be skeptical of the doomsayers. Natural systems are not normally extremely sensitive to small changes such as we are discussing with the increase of carbon dioxide levels from 200 ppm to say 400 ppm. There is also the history of the extreme side which has been wrong in almost every instance in which doom was predicted. The case with the most devastating results is that of DDT. DDT was banned due to the supposed effect on birds and that it was a human carcinogen, we now know that DDT is not a carcinogen ( the science is very stong) and that DDT does not have the devastating effects on birds at the low levels which were purported. The results of the ban has caused the deaths of MILLIONS of children. So a wrong decision can have severe consequences. We would expect that the drastic changes called for by the leaders of the global warming contingent would have far reaching consequences in the lives of most living on the earth. We have been terrible at predicting second order or third order effects from actions taken. So my response to this is to say let's go at a pace where we don't destroy the world we are trying to save. There are many reasons why we should reduce the use of fossil fuels, let's put some real effort in developing the alternative fuels.

Reply

Sorry, Mr. Craven, you have sugar coated column A as to downside of "yes" actions. Many of B True box negatives will also be in A false or true. Also, economic depression of A False goes into A True. That leaves the only choice to be not on your chart. The right choice is to proceed as proper sewards of the earth without taking draconian anti-warming action.

Reply

interesting, and well done, though flawed. In column A, you have a false choice for global warming, and a true choice. In the false, you have depression, and a host of other things listed. in the true choice, you have a smiley face. that if falsehood number one. In the true section, you still have the same exact consequences as you would in the false choice. the same with the theoretical repair for global warming. Having lived through the 1970's, i vividly recall the same emotions being vented about global cooling. we must have either repaiered that freezing issue a little too well, or we are experiencing normal fluctuations with reguard to temperature, as seen via science thru the centuries. We also need to explore flawed thinking number two: global warming itself. is it real? you can find as many scientist that can prove it is flawed as you can that say it is real. think of this however: if indeed, it is a real and viable threat, WHY woudl Al Gore still, STILL, be flying his private jet, and living in a huge house with wasteful energy usage. and WHY would he be driving the vehicles he does? IF this is real, and he is dead set sure it is, why has he not changed his lifestyle, but insists we change ours? ok , he buys global warming (carbon)offsets, but it is a proven scientific fact that those supposed offsets are, if measurable at all, not going to be measurable for many decades- as it takes trees time to grow, for one thing.
also, WHY does al gore own such a strong financial partnership in carbon offsets? could it be that he does not change his lifestyle because it isnt as real as he says? cold it be, perhaps, that Al Gore is using this chicken little issue to line his own pockets?
Just some thoughts to add to your thoughts with the video.

Reply

I am personally tierd of the talk about global warming. It is a cycle that cannot be stopped. The Earth started warming over 14,000 years ago when no fossil fuels or land clearing. There is not a way to stop this cycle so why spend money on something that is going to happen anyway. It does cause more problems but the effects in collum one are completly downsisded. You can share this with others causingus to spend funds for a lost cause but there is no way to prevent it.

Reply

It ia a joke! Get real. A hoax of the greatest magnitude

Reply

The ice at the south pole is growing at the same rate that the ice is melting at the north pole

Reply

One argument that should also be taken into account is the block indicating that Global Climate Change is false and we take action. If the actions we would take are effective and GCC is false, would these actions not cause a GCC in the opposite direction that we had assumed? So, instead of Global warming, Global cooling? Thus, if we are only "playing once" action could be as devasting as inaction until we know whether GCC is true or false.

Reply

The Great Global Warming Swindle was also compelling, but it was done in Britain and the only way I could see it was to download it on my computer. The dvd was supposed to be available in the U.S., but I haven't seen it. I wonder wonder who's stonewalling it - probably Al Gore.

Reply

In column A both true and false lead to economic depression and that will lead to war unrest etc. So we can either guarantee that we commit economic suicide, or we can take a 50 - 50 chance and hope we didn't cause Global warming.

Also, there is ample scientific evidence to show that the current warming trends are part of a cycle and there is scarce to no evidence to prove that global warming is human caused.

Reply

I don't doubt for a minute that global warming is real. The doubt I have is how much is man made and how much man can change it. These things run in cycles, and what is frightening, is that humans will make the changes needed either way, the cycle will change back, and the politicians will say see, we told you so. By the time the next cycle is complete, the generation that made the changes will be old or dead and gone. IF EVERY country that signed the Kyoto protocol had met their "numbers", in 10 years the overall change to the mean temperature would be less than 1 degree. And that is a big IF. Common sense should prevail, yes humans have taken their toll on Mother Earth, but we are far from any type of doomsday scenario.

Reply

Mr. Craven makes a great arguement using formal logic, I am impressed. Understanding that climate change is cyclical is very important in these issues, however, that is not the arguement being made here. Regardless of climatic changes in the Earth's bioshpere, I believe it is important to begin looking for more sustainable methods of industry and energy. Mr. Craven's arguement does just that by supporting action to be taken on our part. Whether we (the human race)like it or not, our consumer based lifestyle cannot last forever and with our dependancies on so many finite resources, the world as we know it will come crashing down some day.
Therefore I am not concerned with whether or not we are inflicting climate change, I am concerned about our sustainability. Mr. Cravens logic cube is as well and I think we all should pay a little bit more attention to it.

Reply

The premise that the this fellow presents is based on the assumption that global warming can be changed / stopped, etc., by human actions... However, it is based on the cause also being based on human actions... There is also a vast group of scientists that have evidence that places the cause of global warming to be the Sun... He doesn't consider that aspect of the changes in climate... Several other planets in our solar system have EXACTLY the same rate of warming as does Earth. The same polar ice melt, the same ratio of surface temerature increase, etc... So, taxing us to death and creating HUGE govenment agencies to control our lives, will do nothing to change the activities of the Sun... There are no SUV's, no coal powered electric plants, or steel mills on Mars - or any of the other planets, but they are having the same increases in temperature as Earth - because of solar activity... The Earth has experienced climate change many times over millions of years, long before any human existed... This "All Gore" approach is "pop culture science" is not real science, and the beat of his drum is attracting millions of "lemmings" to run in mass without questioning the obvious flaws in his "Pied Piper" story...

Reply

I feel he presented it in a great way and a way everyone could understand . My thinking on this subject is I often wonder if we are actually at the end of the ice age and although a big change for us it is a normal change for the earth . Is it possible that all the natual disasters we have been having over the past 10 years or so is actually mother earth cleanseing herself and in a few years it will settle back down ? who knows no one person does so we have to prepare anyways just in case and do our part or that worst this guy is saying happens it is going to be quite nasty everywhere !

Reply

Great job! I am with the teacher. Even if human made global warming was false, the actions suggested to slow it are the same actions we should be taking anyway. So given the FACT that the human population will continue to grow exponentially and given the FACT that humans will continue to use the planet's resources, outpacing sustainability, we will destroy the planet at the rate we are going REGARDLESS of global warming. I am happy to see that at least a couple of people on here can look past the politics to social conscience and ethical reasoning!

Reply