Frozen Out: 98% of Stories Ignore That Ice-bound Ship Was On Global Warming Mission

[lostinblue 1,989]

I guess it's easier to hate Al Gore than actually investigate what scientists around the world are working on and the conclusions they are coming to re climate. I don't hate Al Gore, but he is totally irrelevant outside of the head of those who believe he 'invented' global warming.

climate has been changing for a thousand centuries and more. If you stopped giving million dollar grants to these idiots you would find a different answer to this false religion of yours.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Blue, your position like totally sounds like it was arrived after a lengthy period of open minded study.

Why don't you do everyone a favour and go back to yelling at your TV. If that doesn't work for you, maybe crack open a beer and kick the cat.

[lostinblue 1,989]

Blue, your position like totally sounds like it was arrived after a lengthy period of open minded study.

Why don't you do everyone a favour and go back to yelling at your TV. If that doesn't work for you, maybe crack open a beer and kick the cat.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

You don't have a thought-out position on the issue to justify a comment like that. Your every post in the thread has just been demagoguery.

"Liberals BS, it's a religion, yadda yadda yadda"

Yeah... that's convincing. Presumably you don't work in a field where persuasion and relationship building are required skills.

[The Nature Boy 4,224]

climate has been changing for a thousand centuries and more. If you stopped giving million dollar grants to these idiots you would find a different answer to this false religion of yours.

and can you imagine why anyone thinks of Al Gore when someone says Global Warming. How Absurd. Like he had anything to do with promoting that theory. You do know why the left tries to distance it self from Al so badly.

Cause they practically appointed him the Messiah of global warming and gave him every prestigious award know to mankind world wide.

Now most of his wild absurd theories have proven to be total BS and he has made millions and millions off Carbon Offsets and his other ####### that the sheeple bought into.

Yes Al Gore who indeed

Not gonna work

Almost like Hillary being for the war before she was against, but it's all Bushs fault

[Operator 1,927]

Sustainable Schools Year of Action

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

and can you imagine why anyone thinks of Al Gore when someone says Global Warming. How Absurd. Like he had anything to do with promoting that theory. You do know why the left tries to distance it self from Al so badly.

Cause they practically appointed him the Messiah of global warming and gave him every prestigious award know to mankind world wide.

Now most of his wild absurd theories have proven to be total BS and he has made millions and millions off Carbon Offsets and his other ####### that the sheeple bought into.

Yes Al Gore who indeed

Not gonna work

Almost like Hillary being for the war before she was against, but it's all Bushs fault

Maybe your perspective on the subject is limited. Maybe there's a wider debate on global warming outside of the USA that you aren't aware of because you're fixated on partisan nonsense. You even try to associate non Americans with the American left, at least your stereotyped conception of it. That's bizarren in itself.

Al Gore has made millions, I'm sure he has. So what? The simple fact is Al Gore did not invent global warming. Much as you might want to believe otherwise.

Edited January 6, 2014 by Papa Lazarou

[Peikko 1,575]

climate has been changing for a thousand centuries and more. If you stopped giving million dollar grants to these idiots you would find a different answer to this false religion of yours.

Scientists are idiots, the people who tell the truth are those who 'know' there is no such thing as global warming because it's cold outside today? What a brilliantly cogent argument.

[Pooky 3,781]

Scientists are idiots, the people who tell the truth are those who 'know' there is no such thing as global warming because it's cold outside today? What a brilliantly cogent argument.

Perhaps if the term "Global Warming" hadn't been adopted as the catchy slogan, Climate Change may have engendered less division and derision in the non-scientific community.

How can the "man in the street" be expected to believe "Global Warming", when he gets told that there has been a 15 year lull in the increase in temperatures? How can it be getting warmer, when the severe winter weather is getting worse? How can "Global Warming" cause more and bigger hurricanes, when this year's hurricane season resulted in the USA not having a single hurricane come ashore in 2013? There are countless other contradictory examples out there.

Global Warming, not any denialist organisation, has been the single biggest factor detracting from the science of Climate Change in the past 15 years.

[Peikko 1,575]

Perhaps if the term "Global Warming" hadn't been adopted as the catchy slogan, Climate Change may have engendered less division and derision in the non-scientific community.

How can the "man in the street" be expected to believe "Global Warming", when he gets told that there has been a 15 year lull in the increase in temperatures? How can it be getting warmer, when the severe winter weather is getting worse? How can "Global Warming" cause more and bigger hurricanes, when this year's hurricane season resulted in the USA not having a single hurricane come ashore in 2013? There are countless other contradictory examples out there.

Global Warming, not any denialist organisation, has been the single biggest factor detracting from the science of Climate Change in the past 15 years.

The only reason that people on the right wing of US politics reject climate science is because it was labelled 'global warming'? I don't think that's a reasonable or an accurate assessment.

[The Nature Boy 4,224]

Perhaps if the term "Global Warming" hadn't been adopted as the catchy slogan, Climate Change may have engendered less division and derision in the non-scientific community.

How can the "man in the street" be expected to believe "Global Warming", when he gets told that there has been a 15 year lull in the increase in temperatures? How can it be getting warmer, when the severe winter weather is getting worse? How can "Global Warming" cause more and bigger hurricanes, when this year's hurricane season resulted in the USA not having a single hurricane come ashore in 2013? There are countless other contradictory examples out there.

Global Warming, not any denialist organisation, has been the single biggest factor detracting from the science of Climate Change in the past 15 years.

when people make statements like " This is the warmest it has been in 1000 Years and we are seeing Ice melt the worst in 1000 years, man is destroying the planet .

The first question a logical man would ask is" What caused it 1000 years ago?

[dalegg 143]

Global Warming, Climate change, whatever. If it means that all the cold air is focused in the Midwest and Southern Cal gets 80 degree winters, I can live with that.

[Pooky 3,781]

The only reason that people on the right wing of US politics reject climate science is because it was labelled 'global warming'? I don't think that's a reasonable or an accurate assessment.

At some point, it might pay you to understand what is written, not what you want to argue against.

My comment was directed at the debate in general. In the search for a catchy byline, the debate was moved away from the very real issue of climate change, with its complexity of differing climatic effects in different places, to "warming", a problematic over-simplification of the science.

Whereas a general warming trend can be argued against effectively, given the widely publicised lull, the complex effects of climate change can not be disputed. But without warming, it becomes difficult to attribute Climate Change to anthropogenic factors.

Climate Change should never have been dramatised as Global Warming. It was never a narrow focus issue.

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

At some point, it might pay you to understand what is written, not what you want to argue against.

She likes to be contrary, for the sake of being contrary. I mostly ignore her, as she rarely adds anything to the discussion.

[Peikko 1,575]

At some point, it might pay you to understand what is written, not what you want to argue against.

My comment was directed at the debate in general. In the search for a catchy byline, the debate was moved away from the very real issue of climate change, with its complexity of differing climatic effects in different places, to "warming", a problematic over-simplification of the science.

Whereas a general warming trend can be argued against effectively, given the widely publicised lull, the complex effects of climate change can not be disputed. But without warming, it becomes difficult to attribute Climate Change to anthropogenic factors.

Climate Change should never have been dramatised as Global Warming. It was never a narrow focus issue.

I know where your comment was directed, and I think you are dead wrong that the political right in the US would have reacted more positively had it been more accurately portrayed. In fact, I have to question which 'side' of the argument chose this catchy byline. I very much doubt the climate scientists themselves have ever referred to climate science in those terms, nothing I have read (which is not a great deal but more than the average Al Gore hater) suggests that the science is framed in those terms by those scientist who are trying to research the issue which is after all the most useful tool to use if you are actually interested in the topic rather than just a bit of liberal bashing.

She likes to be contrary, for the sake of being contrary. I mostly ignore her, as she rarely adds anything to the discussion.

You would be wise to ignore me in silence rather than doing the opposite and posting back handed insults.