Privacy Policy

Privacy Policy for www.capitolannex.blogspot.com

If you require any more information or have any questions about our privacy policy, please feel free to contact us by email at adoex.adsen@gmail.com.

At www.capitolannex.blogspot.com, the privacy of our visitors is of extreme importance to us. This privacy policy document outlines the types of personal information is received and collected by www.capitolannex.blogspot.com and how it is used.

Log Files
Like many other Web sites, www.capitolannex.blogspot.com makes use of log files. The information inside the log files includes internet protocol ( IP ) addresses, type of browser, Internet Service Provider ( ISP ), date/time stamp, referring/exit pages, and number of clicks to analyze trends, administer the site, track user’s movement around the site, and gather demographic information. IP addresses, and other such information are not linked to any information that is personally identifiable.

Cookies and Web Beacons
www.capitolannex.blogspot.com does use cookies to store information about visitors preferences, record user-specific information on which pages the user access or visit, customize Web page content based on visitors browser type or other information that the visitor sends via their browser.

DoubleClick DART Cookie
.:: Google, as a third party vendor, uses cookies to serve ads on www.capitolannex.blogspot.com.
.:: Google's use of the DART cookie enables it to serve ads to users based on their visit to www.capitolannex.blogspot.com and other sites on the Internet.
.:: Users may opt out of the use of the DART cookie by visiting the Google ad and content network privacy policy at the following URL - http://www.google.com/privacy_ads.html

Some of our advertising partners may use cookies and web beacons on our site. Our advertising partners include ....
Google Adsense


These third-party ad servers or ad networks use technology to the advertisements and links that appear on www.capitolannex.blogspot.com send directly to your browsers. They automatically receive your IP address when this occurs. Other technologies ( such as cookies, JavaScript, or Web Beacons ) may also be used by the third-party ad networks to measure the effectiveness of their advertisements and / or to personalize the advertising content that you see.

www.capitolannex.blogspot.com has no access to or control over these cookies that are used by third-party advertisers.

You should consult the respective privacy policies of these third-party ad servers for more detailed information on their practices as well as for instructions about how to opt-out of certain practices. www.capitolannex.blogspot.com's privacy policy does not apply to, and we cannot control the activities of, such other advertisers or web sites.

If you wish to disable cookies, you may do so through your individual browser options. More detailed information about cookie management with specific web browsers can be found at the browsers' respective websites.

From: Peter Henderson, Reuters

Schwarzenegger to Obama cabinet: Water... please!

SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger has demanded that President Barack Obama's cabinet rethink federal policy that would divert water from parched farms and cities to threatened fish, his administration said on Wednesday.
California's rivers used to brim with salmon and sturgeon, but a massive system of canals diverted water that fed farms and cities, now suffering through a third year of drought.
Schwarzenegger has gained credibility as an environmentalist for his push to curb greenhouse gases but he argued that federal plans to save fish will worsen a water crisis that has cost farmers more than $700 million and caused mandatory rationing in cities of the most populous state.
Article continues

Global Warming - Burning My Iceland

Living on a tropical island, is quite unique. If you love the natural world, there are many things you could do it. I grew up in a small valley in the hills south of my island and I have known my whole life.

Field trips to a pretty fast pace of the canyon hills hundred meters is all worth it when I have to choose a place near the top only. It is a true blessing to be able to do. It is a wonderful job, too. The tops of steep hills to near the base is covered by savannah grasslands. The very steep slopes and along its base are wooded ravine. More than jungle delirium. If you look in the mountains in the distance, are the golden color of the meadows a great contrast to the dark green jungle hills. It is amazing to know how my mind that a hundred years ago, almost all of these dark hills. Jungles all the way up. Wow. And one reason why not.

Fire was a tool for humans used almost since its discovery. He also has done before. And one of the biggest weapons for hunting deer has become here in the jungles of the south. What they do is a fire. Just set a fire the flame and let it rip. Help if you would have difficulties. For once it's gone and burning in arable soil, a wonderful thing called life happens next. New shoots of grass from the hills and burned black. And the deer is probably a surprise, because they consume these tender buds. The wild hunter waits.

Oh, but all the other things that there was kindled a fire in the hills happened. Surely this is not the arsonist would have thought about it. Let us straight in the direction that things go happen. The fire is determined and set on fire. The atmosphere is the first hit. A powerful greenhouse gas (carbon dioxide), a by-product of combustion of vegetation is directly exposed to the atmosphere. But wait. We do not really feel their effects for a long time. No, not right. Global warming. Exactly. It is not surprising that the collective memory of vegetation in the world is still a significant contribution to global warming? his strike.

While in the flames, a fire are often lost in a jungle. The fire will stop, right? That is true. The last time. But the fire will not die once they walk into the jungle. He has to burn its way into a little "to run into the water and most of the jungle. You know, it will take at least one meter. Do burnout. So how can you burn burn, walking to the size of forests . The more you burn, the less the jungle. Strike two.

Now, the fire died and the hills are bare. When the rain comes, and then the soil to wash away. I have never burned washed flee a hill by the rain. Soil erosion by sedimentation in water. But that does not matter. The ocean is big. Will not hurt. In the grand scheme of the oceans, not too much. For aquatic life in rivers, coral, and the open sea populations that feed and live on these reefs, the damage is absolutely fatal. Strike three.

Add all. We have professionals on the one hand, the shot immediately after a new fire is enticing deer. It would be easier to catch. And only useful for the hunter. We are opposite on the other side, and the list is impressive.

- The air in our atmosphere gets an infusion of a potent greenhouse gas that contributes to global warming. We know without doubt that large and persistent global warming has caused and is accelerating, climate change may very well end our day.

- It is the country. Our lower jungle. This quickly leads to loss of habitat for animals. The bright green jungle of our gold and the sea of our savannas are burned from the hills of text and black. All animals, nests or caves caught fire, food, well, that's just their loss. And if it rains, we lose our topsoil. The roots in the city, burned clean. accelerated soil erosion, I despise. .

- It is the sea, rivers are included. Immediately after the soil erosion is the effect of sedimentation. This transported soil spreading. And blankets and suffocates when it finally stabilized. Sedimentation is the bearer of death for microscopic organisms, plants, fish and corals, to say the least. In the aquatic environment, is the destruction of large and extended. Imagine that your air is filled with the ashes of all time. What would be the quality of your life, what then?

He has about 700 million tons of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere every day. There is no doubt, no debate. A large percentage comes from the constant reminder of the natural landscape. We have to change the way they do things.

The survival of our race, have to stop global warming. Climate change in progress should be maintained, if not reversed. If we refuse to realize this, it will matter in fifty or a hundred years? Spread the word. Take part. We can still save.

Proof of Evolution and challenges of global warming

The idea of anthropogenic global warming is under fire in recent months. Those who collect and disseminate information, it was discovered the numbers have changed, so that man is warming seems to be done.

Some of these "scientists" are now conceded that the data shows global warming has not happened since 1995.

Thousands of scientists have provided information that the idea of artificial contradiction with global warming. Only recently has this idea confirmed.It-against has been shown that global warming scientists "have falsified data. This is already accepted.

This reveals the fact that politics can affect the results of some scientists. Ie. Scientists are not all looking for a little 'practice.

Our world, of course, seems to be cooling or heating. This site is for thousands of years. However, until now, there is no evidence that humans are the trends van deze case (solar activity seems to be the TE Meest scientific explanation).

It 's amazing how the idea of man and global warming seems to Darwinian evolution made in parallel with each other.

O data and information was collected mainly in universities and government institutions (this is the fox guarding the hen house?).
or Both make use of ad hominem attacks, like the call of the opposition "flat earthers" or other names.
Opponents or are prohibited by most of the original data. I'm just not allowed much of the information used to support the ideas seen.
o The two have strong support from the media, despite the fact that the scientific evidence against two ideas overhelmingly
or Both are strongly encouraged in public schools and universities.

It is easier to transmit data on global warming to find (even if the data were kept secret years) is that Darwinism Because dealing with the evolution of different aspects of science.
The person is interested in digging beneath the surface of normal university or high school during the next hoaxes (or science just terrible) was used to "prove" the theory of evolution.

or Piltdown Man, a creature with characteristics of both humans and monkeys. Used for four decades, the theory of evolution is to take hold "in the United States until someone discovered that the" monkey-man'was formed by mixing of two monkeys and human bones were found with the bones as they age, filed teeth, etc.
Or Nebraska man was a man-ape of high-profile ", used in the test Sccopes (high profile). It 'very instrumental in establishing the idea of man evolving from apes. Following this" monkey man "was shooting with a single tooth of an extinct pig.
or embryos Haeckel was a chart with various vertebrates that "all steps in the evolution" in its infancy (which is also the same phase of Gill). This image is a hoax at the end of 1800. (Although we still found in many textbooks today).

These hoaxes and bad science are not the exception. There are literally dozens of scientific laws, principles and facts that directly contradict the theory of evolution.

Statist regimes (including Nazism), socialism and communism are all based on the Darwinian theory of evolution (in particular to eliminate the idea of Judaism and Christianity). Their posters often include the theory behind their ideas.

Today it seems that the same people behind the artificial global warming is pushing the idea of evolution.

Unless something beneath the surface of typical hand, we remain convinced of information that educators and politicians for decades teaches us that both ideas.

Politics and science do not mix. And if they do not mix together, always knowing that suffers at the expense of politics. Recent discoveries have shown that the "science of man-made global warming is seriously compromised. With all the facts that we discover the trend, it seems that the same happens with it as well.

For some form of evolution is clear evidence to support the theory, Darwinism is more than likely continue on the same track as the man who took the global warming. It could also last for many decades, however, the current serious problems of evolution to the public.

You and the global warming debate

And 'concern is not the proper way to active scientific argument on global warming. This application is based on best practices of science, scientific data and evaluation of evidence. In the short term in a context of science, the presence of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere creates a greenhouse effect which helps to keep warm. This is acknowledged by all scientists. Global warming scenario arises because we have a lot of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere for our activities - such as burning coal. The more carbon dioxide into the atmosphere can lead to abnormally warm temperatures, with potentially devastating consequences. Scientists have spent years trying to find out if this scenario is correct. Environmentalists say that yes, skeptics say no. Among scientists, the majority say 'yes', but a small and vocal minority crying, no! What about this?

The way of working scientists is as follows. We Are Scientists, and I'm one of them, a number of hypotheses, some ideas that we want to control. We make observations and experiments, often supported by calculations. What we are looking for a number of tests, which can, in principle, to show that we are wrong, that we want evidence that potentially can be shown that Our assumption is wrong. It 'important that such evidence exists. If you can get without testing can be done in principle able to demonstrate that your idea is not correct, scientists turn away from you. This may at first seem a bit 'strange, but this is the way we work. What are you doing this to show that neither you nor anyone else can prove that you're so wrong, maybe you're right! Remember, the finding that corresponds to your hypothesis by itself does not prove that your hypothesis is true, because who can say that some other assumptions may not fit the observations?

For example, when they met two competing ideas. A classic example is the Copernican system against the old Ptolemaic system of the Sun and planets. Copernican system, with the sun at the center was not accepted by both scientific and religious op gronden was a time when this vastgesteld Ptolemaic "system works equally well - indeed beter in a way. There was no obvious way to demonstrate whether the system is, at that time.

Another recent example is the problem of the ozone hole in 1980 and 1990. Hypothesis (a) that emissions of chemicals used in refrigerators and hair sprays, etc., can cause destruction of the ozone layer is over the upper atmosphere. Test to prove that the error may be the following. If we take the concentration of ozone in the upper atmosphere for a period of time, and I think it has not fallen, it falsifies the hypothesis That human activity caused the destruction of the ozone layer - because there is nothing to explain. Note that the position in front of the depletion of ozone observation does not prove that human activities are causing the destruction of the ozone layer. Something, but not necessarily of human activity.

Positive feedback is exhausted and then open the question of natural or human activities. All we can do for some is to falsify the hypothesis that human activity has caused the destruction of the ozone layer. What actually happened was the discovery of the ozone layer over the Antarctic ozone hole's mass, with significant ozone depletion. Combined with a healthy observational data of any kind, for which the Nobel Prize, the ozone hole would swift and decisive action in the international form of the Montreal Protocol. Thus, although initially only to distort the situation, a great weight of evidence can be very convincing in the truth of hypotheses. The risk that we are causing the ozone hole was very large.

The same scientific method is not applicable in the case of debate global warming. In fact, this method can not, in my view, be applied. However, discussions are mainly represented as scientific debate, with political and economic consequences that follow relied on the results of objective scientific discussion. I maintain that no objective scientific debate, simply because the rules of science are not met. Instead, I propose that this discussion assumes the risk. What is the risk of climate skeptics wrong? What is the risk to the environment (if it is) that he would not? Instead of continuing in this dry, I justify my position, telling an imaginary conversation between two physicists, Horace, and Twinkle.

Before you begin, remember, there are two kinds of skeptics of climate skeptics who deny the absolute existence of global warming at all, and skeptics of climate relative who agrees that there is global warming but is not blame our introduction of additional carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, which is not our fault. Rather, the observed warming is only part of the natural cycle of the earth. Horace is somewhere in between, mostly relatives, but with a touch of absolute.

Enter Horatio and Twinkle, sitting with his coffee in the dining room on the seventh floor of a well-known Department of Physics, who will remain nameless. Dining room overlooking the harbor, and you can change the path to the hills on a day to see clearly how the present. But this is not the position that they are interested. This is an old argument, that focus. Horace is a climate skeptic. Twinkle, his friend, believes that humans cause global warming, and that "something must be done.

"This climate of the Copenhagen meeting began," says Twinkle to get the ball rolling.

"Yes," replies Horatio. "Let's see if a good case for this time to come, rather than simply repeat the catechism faithful defenders of the environment!

And now, "murmurs Twinkle, sipping coffee.

"Well, you know what I mean, says Horace." You can see that these emails from the University of East Anglia say. It 's a bit increased.

"I've read them. I guess I should respond Twinkle. But it is a normal story. Sceptics say that e-mail to change everything, and great people say that nothing will change. You have heard that the Saudi representative to the meeting in Copenhagen. Talk your interests.

"Yes, but you can! Climate change over time, changing a lot. How do we know that, as a result of human activities?

"Look, we know something. Outset weather people tell us that the temperature is rising so fast that it must be unnatural. And all models show that if we have more CO2 in the atmosphere cause temperature rise. We created the CO2 'atmosphere. The temperature is rising. of course!

"Yes, you are basically good. I agree that more or less. I'm not so sure the temperature is increased. But this is not the point.

"What's the point then? Twinkle adds pauses, as Horace with a cup of coffee.

Horace takes her hand.

"You know, like me that the model .....' begins.

"Can I come with you? Socrates, the new professor of Greek, put the tray on the table beside them.

"Yes, yes, of course, says Twinkle." We just talked about the climate in Copenhagen.

"Yes, I'm just saying that climate models are really bad" Horace again. Socrates Horatio nods and continues. 'Biosphere is not bound up, and worst of all, from a physical point of view, the treatment of clouds just totally unrealistic. We simply can not predict the amount of temperature increase due to the presence of a certain amount of CO2' atmosphere.

"These models are really that bad? Socrates asks.

"Clouds are the key, says Horace.

"Then you do not trust any predictions of the model?" Asks Socrates.

"In addition to the overall result of the introduction of CO2 in the atmosphere caused the earth - Horace agree," introduces Twinkle.

"Yes, but like the earth?" Said Horace. "I do not think people came out with figures. There is very little influence. Maybe it does not matter what people Have done. Perhaps the most important changes are very natural. Models proves nothing!

"Oh, God!" Twinkle says. It is unclear whether this is a common expression of anxiety or attention with his friend and colleague of Horace. Three sat in silence a few minutes, drinking coffee. The silence is broken Socrates.

"Can I ask you, Horatio?

"Of course!

'If I ask you, that no evidence would have changed his mind and said it was wrong, what you reply''

"You mean that the observational data?

"If you want answers to Socrates.

"Well, 'says Horace. And then there is a silence, as he reflects on the question." This is an interesting question.

"He wanted to see the growth temperature of 10 degrees, and he knows that he is mistaken," Twinkle introduces cunning.

"I never said that!" Horace said, smiling at his friend.

"Well, we are waiting. What would convince you're wrong? Requests Twinkle.

"Maybe I can ask the same question, Twinkle? Said Socrates. What would convince the skeptics were right all the time?

"The fall of 10 degrees temperature! Horace says, laughing.

There is silence. But this time it's different kinds of silence. Horace and thought Twinkle.

'Well, of course, Twinkle, says over time, "when we went to introduce the current rate of atmospheric CO2 and temperature rise, and then ..... say in the next 50 years .. .. "

"What are you, Horace?" Socrates asked how to stop fading.

I'm not sure that there is one thing to prove to me that people give answers that significant global warming Horace. Maybe a lot of factors, "he adds.

Horace and Twinkle look and frowned. Both know that the theory is a theory, as it is objectionable in principle in an experiment or observation - or at least decent call "thought experiment. Socrates crystallizes their concerns.

"I wonder if you could say that global warming is not so much a theory about how you feel?" It gives you an embarrassed chuckle.

"Well, there are things that can prove one way or another. Want me to say that this is far from proven, says Horace.

"Yes." But asked what would be our position to refute! Twinkle Bulb. In addition, all experiments that do not consider the experiments that we are willing to risk to do, right? How can I do nothing and wait 50 years! This is the problem!

Horace pulls a wry face, but are not actively agree.

"We can not refer to the question of perceived risks? Asks Socrates. It stops time." As global warming seems compelling, "he added.

"You say that with great risk? - I was right, and it is not, and vice versa? Requests Twinkle

"Hey, wait, I. ..." Horace said, see the issue.

"Well, it must be admitted, because none of us are acceptable evidence, or Rather, a refutation, is down on the risks, is not it? Interrupt Twinkle.

"You mean the more serious consequences if the skeptics are wrong? Socrates asked Twinkle.

"I must say, Twinkle says," is not it? "

"Look, it's crazy." Horace is a bit 'crazy. "Therefore, nobody could have predicted the end of the world, but because we can not disprove, we need to place ITS head. This is not science, it's anarchy!

"Yes, this is a good philosophy," says Twinkle. " I totally agree with you that if I have a crazy theory, this is for me to try to prove that is not for you to refute. But there are two things. First, we agree that global warming can not be proved or disproved in a way that satisfies us. Secondly, the theory is not crazy .... in reality, not just a theory, Socrates turned to us. But this is a good qualitative basis, although not quantitative, agree. I think, Socrates asked the right question. Comments that convince you that you're wrong? I have no answer. You do not understand. The risk we are talking about, not worthy of rigorous science. The risk of error is worse, Horatio, than risk my mistakes. "

Horace grumble, but retains his world.

What follows from this conclusion? I suspect most people will look at Twinkle. Adverse effects of environmental misconduct, of course, because we are many resources, human and natural, very effective in combating a nonexistent problem to use. Perhaps global economic growth will be slower than usual. However, as Horace wrong, and we do little or nothing in his opinion, no single package of bank's survival, advertisements, chairman of the Federal Reserve System of wisdom from any source, to save us from a series of disasters, the least that can be major problems. Most people, almost all countries at the meeting in Copenhagen, the defender of the "precautionary principle. They are divided on the side of Twinkle. Precautions should be taken.

Parts of the above vision is a bit 'different from the global warming debate. This is a relief, because the way the discussion tends to believe that it is absolutely impossible for a layman to understand that scientists believe, even when the disputes between environmentalists alone. It is said that sea level rise of 3 feet, others say six feet! How to know who is right? You can not make your mind from the effects of global warming, climate scientists to listen to dissent, that the better the general pattern of atmospheric circulation on Earth! In my opinion, the above is that the global warming debate is not based on science, because the correct application of standard scientific arguments are not sufficient. Thus, the non-scientist simply make their own choices based on how they see the danger, not realizing that their lack of experience prevent them from holding opinions.

Articles Global Warming About

This is not the time to be complacent and apathetic. We need to act positively and constructively. There is pain and destruction is imminent. We must not shy away from the truth, but "An Inconvenient Truth" can be. It's time to put our shoulders to the wheel and focused with all the concentration. With global warming going to engulf us. And if we spend too much time, we really swallow. Then you walk in the dark. We can provide the biggest disaster that we saw and spoke only to fight in the exciting films remains to be established in fact. If global warming is expanding its tentacles over us, will not continue reading this article. Why humanity will die!

Understanding global warming

Global warming is a phenomenon that occurred for some time. Our blue planet hotter because of the increased volume of carbon dioxide. tons of carbon dioxide from burning fossil fuels and nonrenewable resources such as coal, natural gas, gasoline, oil, oil shale, etc. The use of fossil fuels on a large scale began with the 16 th century Industrial Revolution in the early Great Britain and colonies of Great Britain. The Industrial Revolution witnessed the opening of the steam engine that runs on fossil fuels. But for centuries, scientists have found that gradually burning of fossil fuels is associated with high levels of air pollution. Burning of fossil fuels leads to a large percentage of harmful gases such as carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide, sulfur dioxide, nitrogen, etc., left in the atmosphere. These toxic gases have a negative impact on the climate and ecology of our planet. They also have a negative impact on our health.

Emissions of sulfur dioxide and nitrogen in the water with the formation of corrosive acids, dissolve, damage irreparably damage the graves and palaces of marble.

Sulphur dioxide and water, sulfuric acid (very aggressive)

Nitrogen dioxide and water to nitric acid (strong corrosive acid)

Sustainable

Therefore, when these toxic gases in a mixture of water and form rain water, the inevitable consequence of acid rain, acid rain, such as vulgar. This acid rain can eat the surface of architectural splendor, as mentioned above. Refinery near the Taj Mahal in Agra, India released a deadly gas into the air above the mausoleum. These gases have led to the formation of acid rains, which have a devastating impact on this area was pure white marble Taj Mahal. The destruction was so great that the management of the plant will be developed by the Government of India, and environmental activists. The factory was ordered to reduce their emissions to reduce the high level of production and close some of its activities on a beautiful monument and the tomb of Mughal Emperor Shah Jahan and his wife Mumtaz Mahal (then the name of the monument) to prevent all falls to pieces. The plant has made several attempts to methods for their production, planting trees, through the development of ecological park, which currently is home to many migratory birds and rare birds. protection, and a sincere response from the plant one of the seven wonders of the modern world of decadence, reassured the government and activists. However, environmental defenders could not sleep. We hurt hundreds of companies around the world, environmental laws and regulations in their daily lives. Measures for environmental protection should be done in the long term. environmental projects in the short term and sudden provocation "ecological systems" for the sake of advertising and image quality are desirable, nor useful. Sustainable development and environmental protection are the only weapon we have to deal with global warming.

Greenhouse

The temperature on our planet is increasing because of global warming. The burning of fossil fuels will lead to emissions of greenhouse gases. Carbon dioxide, water vapor and methane, some of the greenhouse gases are known. These gases absorb infrared radiation, and to give. Greenhouse gases tend to trap heat and raising temperatures on our planet. Thus, as a result of greenhouse gas emissions, which is our planet is always heated by an enormous size and global warming in this steady rise in temperatures and parameters of the catastrophic consequences for our planet and our lives. The hot air melts the glaciers and snowy peaks of thawing. When the heat intense, ice and snow, most of the mountain ranges around the world will melt very quickly. Melted ice and snow will enter the waters of rivers and eventually into the sea, and the unprecedented rise in sea level. Swell rivers and seas overflow and flood the country. Coste vanish, plunge whole countries. In addition to flooding, extreme weather events such as heatwaves and cold periods, floods, droughts, hurricanes and other T'ikapapa global warming.

Deforestation

Deforestation is another aspect that global warming, because it causes an abnormal increase in the amount of carbon dioxide. Global warming is already installed on our planet. Nevertheless, if global warming is underway, will eliminate all existing forests of our planet, and cause complete destruction of marine flora and fauna. Thus, global warming, deforestation and global warming, which, in turn, causes the causes blurred woods. What a vicious circle!

Ozone layer

The ozone layer protects the earth from ultraviolet radiation, direct and unapologetic (UV) rays of the sun is exhausted. Some gases better than chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) and halons and CFCs or hydrobromofluorocarbons produced by our industry as we know, the food ozone. Aerosols produced various industries because of the ozone layer wear away. Ata ozone hole or depression in the ozone layer, usually a hole in the ozone layer. As the ozone hole is growing in this area, more UV rays penetrate the Earth's atmosphere as possible. Elevated levels of ultraviolet radiation in the atmosphere make our planet uninhabitable. Excessive exposure to UV radiation leads to the development of skin cancer and cataracts in humans. Excessive exposure to UV radiation also causes irreparable damage to many species of animals and plants. The consequences of this is an incurable problem in the food chain. Ozone depletion is a very contentious issue, as professionals, as well as disadvantages. Irony (w) hole in connection with the fact that ozone is a greenhouse gas. Too much is growing, and global warming is not a sufficient population, complete skin cancer outcome.

Meltdown

This distribution differs from the economic collapse that we have recently experienced. Although we have yet again demonstrated that the feet of decline in the autumn, we, our proven, or someone did not like and does not affect if all caps melting icecaps and glaciers in the world, and if we used these phenomena, and widespread fear of global warming.

We are ready ...?

Unfortunately, I'm not ready to face a catastrophe of this magnitude. We have divided among us, to reduce emissions in countries and to what extent. At various meetings and conferences at the highest level, we only discuss the numbers, levels and prices, and the land is ticking biological clock threatened. There is no unity among all developed countries, developing and underdeveloped countries because of global warming. Everyone agrees that global warming is a threat to universal disaster and spells destruction. But the big question: which country has jurisdiction and that the country should take the initiative to sharply reduce harmful emissions. Blame blame and Buck everywhere, and pointed accusing fingers, increasing the burden of proof, and allegations against the prosecution and it seems that on the agenda, while global warming continues to constantly engulf our planet. Developed countries are always ready to correct the pressure and intimidation in the less developed countries, as well as supporting LDCs to developed countries, the slogan of hoarseness. Mercury does not show signs of weakness. You can shoot at an alarming rate, and the policy is a step ahead of speeches, debates, heated mirrors, power and domination.

Real enemy

What the hell are we all, for all of us? Time is running out. Get up, wake up, all you dream and stop the controversy and strife. We want another disaster like what happened 65 million years, and erased all the dinosaurs on Earth? No, we want to be destroyed. And it keeps us united against a common cause? What prevents us put aside our individual problems? Because in reality we are all made from the same creator. Rather than emphasize that because we have decided to forget and focus on our differences a number of other walls that we built our country into a nation, race, state by state, race, and man by man? There is a big enemy of global warming? Enemy who is in ourselves?

The choice is ours. If we work together and make concerted efforts to avoid global warming, or let the enemy within us, to create several groups with us and beat us all. If we keep the enemy at a distance, for us, we will eventually overcome all of us. And if we, the people of 21 century living in this beautiful, middle and base enough to prefer the power and political interests should be protected, and racism, and not threaten our planet, we must win by heating in general. Because our opponents do not seem to global warming, but ourselves.

Warning on global warming the gullible

It is not surprising that with all the talk about global warming (GW), which we
was only one of its coldest winter we have had for a long time? Of 2007
Farmers' Almanac, which provides forecasts are accurate to 85%
cold temperatures, up to 20 degrees below seasonal norms (and
almost 40 degrees colder than last winter), in Montana, the Dakotas and parts of Wyoming. For the Gulf Coast through New England,
unusually cold shower, "the conditions are to be expected. Snow,
much of it is also for the belly of the nation, part of the new forecast
England and the mountains of the northwestern Pacific. "The Great Lakes

and Ohio River Valley is the only area to be spared the extreme cold,
Shows Sandi Duncan, editor in chief, "but that does not mean that this area
not without significant snowfall and cold periods. "

Wonder why they did not get the message!

Recently we had a 11-year-old who literally in tears
to discuss progress for the GW fear in the school. The
Child argues that "If the world ends, why worry about something
but sat with my family? "

Any natural disaster takes place these days, the GW is due.
Many world leaders to accept as GW, the truth of the Gospel. A recent survey
showed that 33% of Americans see GW as a real threat to our
exist. TV shows such as Discovery "Planet Earth" are strong,
large pieces of propaganda for the agenda of GW.

A question of faith

Recently read news item: "Global Warming is not on human health
Contribution of carbon dioxide. "Dr. Tim Ball is the Chairman of the
Natural Resources Stewardship Project, a Victoria-based
Environmental consultant and former professor of climatology at the
University of Winnipeg. 02/05/2007 In an article entitled "Global
Warming: The cold, hard facts? "Ball writes:" Global Warming, as
We think we do not know. And I'm not alone in trying to
to open our eyes to the truth ... see only a few listen, despite the fact
the fact that I am one of the first Canadian Ph.Ds. was in the climatology and
I have extensive experience in climatology, especially the
Reconstruction of past climate and the effects of climate change on
human history and human existence. to hear soon, even if I
a Ph.D. (Doctor of Science), University of London, England
and was a professor of climatology at the University of Winnipeg. For
For some reason (actually for many), not the world is listening. Here is
why.

"... What happen, if we'd been told tomorrow that the earth is flat?

It was probably the most important news in the media
and it would be much discussed. So why is it that when scientists
Who said studying the phenomenon of global warming for years
People are not the cause nobody listens?

"Believe it or not, global warming is not due to human contribution
Carbon dioxide (CO2). In fact, this is the greatest deception in the
History of science. We waste time, energy and trillions of dollars
Creating fear and terror for a problem with
no scientific justification. For example, Environment Canada
about 3.7 billion dollars in U.S. spending in the last five years dealing with climate
almost all on propaganda trying to defend, change an indefensible
scientific position while at the same time closing weather stations
and not achieving the objectives of pollution established by law.

"... To seek the truth, we are lost as individuals and as
Society ... There is no evidence that we are, or ever cause global
Climate change ... How has the world to believe that something
is wrong?

"Perhaps for the same reason we believed 30 years ago, and the world
Cooling was the biggest threat: a matter of faith. "It's a cold fact: the
Global Cooling presents humankind with the most important social
political, and the challenge of adjustment that we have employs ten
thousand years. Their participation in decisions that we on
is extremely important for the survival of ourselves, our children, our
Species, "wrote Lowell Ponte in 1976.

"I was against the threat of impending doom global cooling
Because when I look at the threats to global warming ... Are
to deny the phenomenon has occurred. The world has warmed
Since 1680, the nadir of a cool period called the Little Ice Age that
usually continue until the present. These climatic changes are well
within the natural variability and explained quite easily by changes
Sun, but it's nothing special happened. "

Truth Or ... something else?

GW is a fact? Yes indeed. As Dr. Klaus Töpfer, Executive Director
the United Nations Environment Programme, said: "Always
more people around the world are aware that there is climate change.
No one is in doubt. "

But do not buy, any advice from Hollywood "scientists" is generated
such as Alec Baldwin, Leonardo, Tom Hanks, Will Farrell movies like
"The Day After Tomorrow". They took offered by Bate
All ex-Veep-time favorite movie maker and Al Gore
Global warming crusade. More about him coming (be warned).

GW is our fault? No, it is not. Although the European Parliament
called for trade sanctions against the United States if it agrees with
to reduce CO2 emissions, the scientists always talk
For those who say mankind is to blame. Pat climatologist
Michaels of the Cato Institute, said: "Climate change, but hey ...
the climate in the past without people changed with some
to do ... "

When we embrace what environmentalists say, we all believe
Polar ice caps melt and America's coasts will be flooded
shortly. Do not start building an ark yet. When you consider that the North
Pole is a huge block of ice floating in the ocean, because it melts at Summer's
End, this does not mean sea level. Antarctica is the largest ice
the mass of the planet. Experts say that losing the ice.

The temperature of our planet, ranging from a minimum
Invention of the thermometer. They say it was warmer 1000 years ago
If this is the case, but has started cooling. Colonial America was taken over
the last days of the Little Ice Age, some of the deepest snow
and the coldest temperature recorded in the history of North America. Remember
Valley Forge? Jefferson wrote about life in this climate queue
to change. In his book "Notes on Virginia," he wrote, "the snow
used to lie on the ground for months at a time, so now not only
Weeks or days ... "

It was not until 1800. 1816 known as the "year without summer."
Today, some climatologists are worried about other Ice Age
global warming. CBN News reported that "experts
stifled by a worldwide movement to make global warming
Skeptics as evil, even comparing with people, to deny the existence
Holocaust. "

CBN continues: "At least part of the hatred of the left parties in Europe
George Bush is his refusal to the Kyoto Protocol (KP) to sign
Agreement between the industrialized nations to lower carbon dioxide
Emissions as a way to combat global warming. But not all
President Bush's fault - under President Clinton, killed the Senate
Treaty 95 to nothing. But at the 2005 G-8 summit in Scotland, United Kingdom
Prime Minister Tony Blair has called on U.S. President Bush to finally join the
to combat global warming.

Although it was signed symbolically, Bush declared, "America's
should embrace restraint with a bad contract does not read our
Friends and allies as any abdication of responsibility. In contrast,
My government is to provide a leadership role in the question of the committed
Climate change ... Our approach must be consistent with the long-term
Objective of stabilizing greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere. "

It has been said that the reason that the U.S. has not ratified, the agreement is that
In contrast to Europe, we recognize that the Kyoto Protocol to do nothing
measurable global warming. In other words: "G. Dubya 'is not
decreased for the entire GW. According to one estimate, would be a
Difference of only seven hundredths of a degree Celsius, according to a
50 years - an amount too small to measure. The European response
seems to be doing, "At least something!"

Yes, they do something. The Bush Administration
Perspective, they are wasting money that you can use it to invest in
Future technologies, throws himself on solar energy and windmills. This
noted that the biggest proponents of the framework in developed countries
World have the worst economy, most with unemployment in double digits
(The United States is only 4.4%, by the way). Critics say the signing of the Kyoto
Year would take billions of our gross domestic product. New
Technology will replace fossil fuels, unless
Cripple their economies first concepts such as the Kyoto Protocol.

CBN relations, Stephen Milloy, who runs JunkScience.com, says
Companies to pressure from environmental activists yielding.
He said: "Global warming pushers go to companies
As a management company to support both the Kyoto Protocol or other
GW provisions. Finally, the development of sufficient political
support companies that start businesses, bold
GW lobbying for restrictions in the U.S. "

An absurd TRICK

"Scientists have an independent obligation to respect and submit
Truth as they see it, "Al Gore calls his film" An Inconvenient Truth. "
Verissimo asks Al to them: "What do world climate experts actually
Thoughts about the science of the film? "

Professor Bob Carter Marine Geophysical Laboratory at James
Cook University, says: "indirect Gore's arguments are so weak
are pathetic. It is simply incredible that they, and his film,
Commander of the public attention. "

Carter is to be sure what part of the Gore-sites like small paintings
"Climate change skeptics" who do not agree with the majority
Scientists. "Y'think? In fact, according to Tom Harris, Executive
Natural Resources Stewardship Project Director, is a Carter
Hundreds of highly qualified non-governmental, non-industry, non-lobby
Group climate experts who are against the hypothesis that human emissions
CO2 climate change causing significant overall. By
Harris, "Climate experts" is the operative word here. Why? "Why
What Gore's "majority of scientists" think is immaterial when only a
very small fraction of them actually work in the field of climate change. "

While scientists focus their research on global change everything
Polar bears on Poison Ivy, which are not all as climate
Experts change.

Carter writes: "We used to hear most scientists, the real data
try to understand what nature actually tell us something about the causes and
Extent of global climate change. In this relatively small community,
There is no consensus, regardless of what Gore and others suggest. "
He gives an example of the debate we almost never GW
listen

Carleton University paleoclimatologist Professor Tim Patterson - "There is
is no significant correlation between CO2 and global temperature
About this [time] geology. In fact, when CO2 levels were over ten
times higher than they are now, about 450 million years ago, the planet
was in the bottom of the absolute coldest period in the second half billion
Years ... How can you still believe that the recent relatively small
increased CO2 emissions would be the main cause of the last century
modest warming? "

"Patterson concluded his testimony by explaining what his research and
"Hundreds of other studies show: on all time scales, it is very good
Correlation between the Earth's temperature and natural celestial phenomena
such as changes in the brightness of the sun ... Antarctica has survived
warm and cold events over millions of years. A merger is not easy
a realistic scenario in the near future, "said Carter.

Gore says in the film, since 1970 there was a steep
drop-off in the quantity and the size and thickness of Arctic ice cap. "
This is misleading, according to Ball: "The survey that Gore cites was
a transect of the Arctic basin in the month
In October 1960, when we were in the middle of the cooling system
Period. In the year 1990 is done in the warmer months of September,
with a completely different technology. "

A document in 2003 from the University of Alaska professor Igor published
Polyakov shows that the Arctic, where temperature increases
supposedly endangering polar bears showed fluctuations since 1940 but
no global warming.

Dr. Wibjorn Karlen, emeritus professor, Department of Physical Geography
And Quaternary Geology, Stockholm University, Sweden - "For a number of
published documents is a decline in the last 50 years "

Carter added: "What Gore's view of the world
Warming ... In addition to the northwest in the areas of the mass cooling
Cooling are in North and South Pacific, all of
Valley of the Amazon, on the north coast of South America and the Caribbean;
Eastern Mediterranean, Black Sea, Caucasus and Red Sea, New
New Zealand and even the Ganges Valley in India. ... "

"Gore's point that 200 cities and towns in the American West all the time to
High temperature records is also misleading, "says Carter.
Dr. Roy Spencer, Principal Research Scientist at the University of
Huntsville, Alabama - "There are for some locations, the unusual
Thousands of towns and villages in the United States, has broken all records, "said
says. "The facts also show that the temperatures in the past
U.S. were not unusual. "

Carter added: "He [Gore] is an embarrassment to U.S. science and its
many good doctors, many of whom know (but I do not feel
publicly) that his propaganda crusade is mainly due to junk science. "
How is this criticism? Hollywood, the film has an Oscar
Best Documentary - that speaks volumes to me - and Gore
was nominated for the Nobel Prize in October for its wide
efforts to attract the attention of the world to the dangers of global warming.

Deception is everywhere at all times.

As others have said, follow the money and those who
Cult to find out what really happened. Or Gore
Concept of "carbon offsets, which it would be the richest man in town
(By the way, he has made a firm * credits to buy
to help us in all our carbon footprint - a concept to reduce
to pay, make sure that we are used to license fees for the use of fossil fuels), or a proposal
CO2 tax would not solve a problem to reduce emissions
also shown that there is someone who elbows her money machine
This disaster required.

* The supplier offset invested his money in planting trees and projects
similar projects, the position of the environmental impact assessment under
Their emissions - cars, commercial air transport. One-off by an acquired
Non-profit organization for the conservation of the forest in the northwest, or carry
could with the restoration of the rainforest in Ecuador to help. This does not apply
It is literally a tree in the rainforest of Ecuador with your name
on. Unfortunately, customers do not get to decide how their donations
distributed. A possible place to go where your money because
Thus the project aims to reduce CO2 emissions at truck stops
would be that the driver to close in their trucks at night, rather than
Idle.

Be still and know that I am God

Environmentalists say that we do not continue to spew CO2 into the air. I agree
We are the best guardians of the planet that God has given us.
But I've also read that more air comes out of the kitchen
Chinese villages and burn the gas has left the company in the world that the animals
our cars and factories. Seriously!

The answer skeptical that the world is doomed. Such talk instills fear
People and the fear is the belief in the devil. As Christians, our faith FEEL
to be in God

Be anxious for nothing!

Fear not, the Lord is with you!

Extreme positions on both sides of the aisle are none of us have ever heard
About this issue. It seems to me that there is always something
We can all do more. But I can live healthier lives
People is known to eat well, exercise and avoiding cigarettes and alcohol, but
I was hit by a truck of beer at any time. We have also
Care of this beautiful country, but when we had our race, our race over.
Heaven and earth will pass away, but the word of God will never
Jesus said. The prophecy is fulfilled. Things get worse before
better.

Meanwhile, we, the church, have a great command
keep us busy. We will not change, debating this world through lobbying,
make propaganda films, with brief showers or carpool. Namely,
After all, that Jesus presents to do.

I love this planet. I really am, but we want to be sure to worship the Creator and
Not only was his creation.