Comments (38) Jump to Comments Form

1. 

   toasteroven said, about 1 month ago

   See, the problem I have with this is that only some polar bear populations are growing. Actually, according to Polar Bear International, only one subgroup has shown an increase in population. Eight are in decline.

   And there really isn’t much debate over climate change, from what I’ve read. The climate is changing, the ice caps are shrinking, glaciers are receding, etc. The debate is over whether these changes are man-made or natural, and what the long term results will be.

   But Chuck here isn’t any more interested in debate than he believes Al Gore to be.

2. 

   ChrissieL said, about 1 month ago

   I suppose when the melting Arctic ice/Greenland glaciers/Canadian and Russian tundra diverts the gulf stream and the British Isles plunge into the sorts of winters Montreal has, they’ll say that climate change/global warming isn’t happening and there’s the proof….

3. 

   Copperdomebodhi said, about 1 month ago

   The real Al Gore’s answer wouldn’t be “Shut up”, it’d be “Because polar ice is melting, and they’re going to drown”.

   It IS true that the population numbers for polar bears has risen … because of international agreements signed in 1973 to limit hunting. Every conservative trying to smear environmentalists by talking about polar bear population statistics is really saying “Hooray for government regulation! International treaties are totally effective!”

4. 

   cdward said, about 1 month ago

   Sorry Nandy, the only one proven wrong is you and your ilk. Over and over. Scientific consensus is that Al Gore is substantially correct. The polar bears have been helped by the international treaties, but they are endangered by loss of habitat.

   Asay and deniers tend to be the ones sticking their fingers in their ears and shouting “Na na na na na, I can’t hear you!”

5. 

   harleyquinn said, about 1 month ago

   “Scientific consensus is that Al Gore is substantially correct”
   Yet 35 errors were found in his sci fi special effect horror flick. All slanted towards a “warming” trend. The hockey stick has been dis proven yet again. The “scientific” evidence has been shredded.
   Oh the followers of gorebull warming have many holes in their dogma.

6. 

   michael said, about 1 month ago

   Harleyquinn– “Yet 35 errors were found in his sci fi special effect horror flick. All slanted towards a “warming” trend. The hockey stick has been dis proven yet again. The “scientific” evidence has been shredded. Oh the followers of gorebull warming have many holes in their dogma.”

   The disconnect is mostly political. What’s happening with the science surrounding climate change is the same that happened the last time science and industry collided, first with cigarette smoke and then with second-hand smoke.

   What happens is industry hires specific think-tanks who’s job it is to knowingly generate false and misleading evidence. With any scientific theory there’s evidence for and against, so its easy to find the real evidence that’s contrary. The fun starts with something like Al Gore’s slideshow, where they simply come up with a plausible reason why its false, and the non-scientific audience, i.e. you, don’t have the background to check one way or the other.

   Over the long haul the truth is known, but the delays save industry money so its worth the investment. With cigarette smoke it took 30 years for most of the public to finally get that it causes cancer. I don’t know if you remember, but at first tobacco companies denied that the smoke caused cancer. They passed around lots of stories about Aunt Bessie who smoked a pack a day and lived to 100, therefore smoking was perfectly safe. Once the evidence became overwhelming they switched to admitting that it caused cancer, but everyone knew it so they weren’t liable.

   Once firsthand smoke was sorted out, the battle switched to second-hand smoke where the same dance occurred, first denying it was a health hazard, and then the evidence was so overwhelming even the Bush Administration had to admit it.

   Its the same people putting out false information about global warming. Seriously, there is no debate about the earth getting warmer, the current debate is what’s causing it and what to do about it, both legitimate questions, although the first is largely, but not completely settled.

7. 

   DrCanuck said, about 1 month ago

   Assay has made an interesting but unintended slip here that reveals the truth of the situation. The polar bears are SWIMMING. At this time of year, they should be walking and hunting on the ice. But there is little ice. Starvation is imminent.

   Many bears are invading small northern communities looking for food, leading the residents to complain that there are “so many bears” around. Which leads deniers to claim that bear populations are growing.

8. 

   Magnaut said, about 1 month ago

   deja moo

9. 

   av8tor said, about 1 month ago

   You non-believers in global warming…. er…. I mean climate change will soon pay when my comrades and me get the cap and tax passed….Er… I mean cap and trade…soon LA will be under 12 feet of water and the true meaning of wetbacks will be known..

10. 

    scottfreitas said, about 1 month ago

    Funny how only politicians stridently push “global warming” on us, and EVERY “solution” they have for it involves THEM making tons more money off the “green” industry (ala Al Gore, $50 million and counting), AS WELL AS raising everyone’s taxes through the roof–taxes which will all go to THEM, and to their big lobbyist groups (like Goldman Sachs)–and also seizing more of our freedoms, more of our rights, more of our hard-earned wealth, more of EVERYTHING.

    Only girls and feminized males swallow all this government propaganda about global warming. “Funny” how every man I meets who is skeptical of “CLIMATE!!!! CHANGE!!!” is indeed MANLY; not a limp wrist or a feminist streak in sight.

    Girly-men are always quick to unconditionally surrender the freedoms handed down to them by MEN. The same freedoms they themslves are too cowardly to ever secure for others, much less themselves.

    Notice it was girly-men who blamed 9/11 on Bush, and who all bleated in unison that we shouldn’t go to war with ANYONE, retaliate IN ANY WAY, but instead just lynch Bush and Cheney up from trees atop the White House lawn and declare “victory”, then apologize to the rest of the world for ever electing a non-feminist President..

11. 

    av8tor said, about 1 month ago

    shut up Scott, you are confusing the great unwashed masses…and possibly ruining a great moneymaker for my BFF…Algore…….unless they are living in 12 feet of water in LA.

12. 

    ezdeb said, about 1 month ago

    Scott is really REALLY into thinking about girly men, has anyone else noticed?

    It’s weird. No matter the topic of the toon, Striper manages to rail against homosexuals and Scott manages to rail against feminized girly skirt wearing boyish limp wristed, always surrendering….sigh.

    Also, Scott, please correct your post above, as girly men could not possibly stomach lynching someone. They would have to outsource the actual lynching to the manly men who don’t mind torture and murder.

    Oooooh, do go on, Scott, about girls and boys and how girly boys can be.

    Idiot.

13. 

    harleyquinn said, about 1 month ago

    michel
    “Seriously, there is no debate about the earth getting warmer, the current debate is what’s causing it and what to do about it,”

    It could not be that big yellow thing in the sky and the fact the earth goes round and round. I know it is that nasty green house gas “dihydrogen monoxide”
    
    We could not effect local climate and water quality and such by say helping the wet land. No we need to get that demon CO2. It makes up .038 of our atmosphere. man does add to that amount at about 1% but hold on to your hats, the evil oil makes it and we can tax that……..

14. 

    scottfreitas said, about 1 month ago

    Google “feminized males”, blowhard.

    22,850,000 or so results came back last time I tried it.

    Plenty of thought-provoking non-fiction books already exist which document how American publik skewls deliberately feminize male students through hordes of feminist propaganda contained within their Social Studies, Government, Health, etc “studies” books.

    The fact men have fled the K-12 teaching profession in hordes ever since the 1960s speaks volumes, too. 80% plus female teachers today, and if any of those leftist hags even catch a WHIFF of masculinity emanating from a male teacher, they run down to the principal’s office and file complaints about how he is “propagandizing” his students with “patriarchal” or “masculinist” precepts..

15. 

    Libertarian1 said, about 1 month ago

    Not being especially knowledgeable in the field, it was pointed out to me that the warmest recorded temperatures were back in 1998 and the earth is actually cooler since then. The usual normal variations? What are the expectations? It was reported that the experts believe this global cooling will actually last a few more years before reverting back to warming. Why?

16. 

    ezdeb said, about 1 month ago

    Lib, who pointed that “fact” out to you? Source?

    Scott, you prove my point. Thanks! Oh, and thanks for assuring me about all the thought provoking, non fiction you rely on.

    I’m glad you don’t rely JUST on romance novels. Oh, by the way. Those Publick Skewls taught by ignorant hags were good enough for generations of Americans. Just not you. Not enough boy on feminized boy action for you?

17. 

    DrCanuck said, about 1 month ago

    Libertarian, most descriptive statistics contain measures of means and of variances. Temperatures vary, they go up and down in daily, weekly, monthly, yearly (and longer) cycles. Look at the long term averages and you’ll see a continuous increase.

18. 

    ezdeb said, about 1 month ago

    …and then extrapolate the data into the future. It may not be as warm, on average, next year in HQ’s or Anandy’s hometown. This confuses them. In general, however, the climate change is not always directly felt in terms of whether HQ needs a hat today when he clearly remembers NOT needing a hat 2 years ago today.

    Mosquitos flourish where once it was too cold for them to survive the winter. Cattle in those areas die from lung parasites passed on my insects they never had before. Grapes get maggots and crops get ruined. Oranges freeze in that delicate springtime that never used to freeze for more than one night. Crops that used to get rain in the summer now must be irrigated but there’s little groundwater. Snow lasts into June, pushing back planting times and autumn frosts come early altho the daytime temps are warmer. Fluctuations of 60 degrees in a 24 hour cycle when it used to be 30 degrees. These things matter, should be tracked, and the effects discussed.

    Righties continue to prefer plugging their ears and sneering.

    These and countless other “small” effects of climate change are the real harbingers of problems; not the “LA will be under 12 feet of water” warnings.

    Righties think that somehow it has been possible for humans to do all manner of amazing things, but we are not influential enough to damage our environment irrevocably.

    Perhaps not. Only a fool smells smoke and laughs at those who say there must be a fire.

19. 

    scottfreitas said, about 1 month ago

    ezdeb:L those publik skewls have dumbed down and feminized enough men to where a corrupt Chicago gangsta can get elected just by parroting a few single-syllable words. They’ve also feminized them enough to where claiming america has “liberty” is a sick joke. Americans today no more have liberty than the mind-numbed robots depicted in Huxley’s “Brave New World.” Americans DESPISE liberty now. They want everything done for them and handed to them. They go through life looking for any opportunity to sue someone to steal their wealth, they vote for whichever politicians promise to steal the most money from their neighbor’s wallet and put it into their purse, they buy lottery tickets instead of working overtime or getting a second job–the only way to actually EARN wealth–and above all else they are predominantly girl-minded, all squealing and shrieking in horror anytime some male actually talks and behaves in the traditional tough-minded, principled, posterity-minded manner in which men conducted themselves prior to radical feminism taking control of American culture during the 1970’s…

    It’s almost amusing watching the visceral hate girly-men have for truly masculine men. The unapologetic, stop-manipulating-my-emotions-fools types who are today demonized as being “right wing” so as to foster knee-jerk reactions in all the emotion-driven Leftists..

20. 

    harleyquinn said, about 1 month ago

    Sorry Doc but that data is still not there. The latest data say on tree rings, dis proves Owl Gores hockey stick graph. But I guess that is what happens when you cherry pick your data to make a sci fi flick you pass off as fact.

21. 

    harleyquinn said, about 1 month ago

    Turn off his mic how dare he ask a question..
    http://tinyurl.com/yhknoh2

22. 

    dtroutma said, about 1 month ago

    I’m always amazed that climate change deniers reject years of science, but readily accept a dude lived inside a shark (giant “fish”) for four days, and came out just fine. They also buy that water covered the Himalaya (and the rest of the planet) while a guy on a boat that wasn’t big enough to hold even the INSECT SPECIES OF THE WORLD, survived a few weeks with two of every creature, waiting for the water to recede, and then sent out a dove to find an olive branch from a tree that would have required years to grow.

    Right, pick an “exception”, that actually PROVES the theory of climate change is occurring, misinterpret the data, and say those with IQs higher than a gnat are the folks who are “wrong”. Meanwhile the “good book” has the only correct answers, even though written by folks ignorant of most simple facts of the universe, like the Earth revolves around the sun, not vice-versa.

23. 

    DrCanuck said, about 1 month ago

    HQ: Tree rings disprove hockey sticks. Gotcha. Thanks.

24. 

    harleyquinn said, about 1 month ago

    yo doc, showing your ignorance? I am attacking the bringer of the hysteria, Mr. “we must act now” as his rides a lift to show a hockey stick graph that is to show us how hot it will get.
    That graphed has been dis proven in a few ways. One in which it is shown the tree rings used in the graph were not fully understood. Of course when that came to light they destroyed the data used. But hey I am not going into conspiracy theories here.
    
    But if you act now I am sure Owl Gore the high priest of gorebull warming will sell you some carbon credits real cheep. In doing so you can defeat that demon CO2 and make the world a happier place.

25. 

    vhammon said, about 1 month ago

    Global climate change deniers remind me of the IBM executive who insisted at the dawn of the computer age that there would never be a need for more than a couple computers.

26. 

    harleyquinn said, about 1 month ago

    vh you mean like the super computer in Brittan that is in the top 10 polluters in England, and with all that computing power they predicted, wrongly, a BBQ summer for Brittan.

27. 

    DrCanuck said, about 1 month ago

    HQ: Gotcha.
    Tree rings disprove hockey sticks but riding lifts show grapheds.
    Bird-like credits that cheep like owls defeat demons made of carbon dioxide.

    It’s all coming together for me now.

28. 

    dsped said, about 1 month ago

    The truth of the situation: Gore indeed kept dodging McAleer’s questions (he was allowed a question AND a followup) - but McAleer was cut off because he and Gore were going around in circles, and there were several other journalists waiting to ask questions.

    McAleer also happens to be co-producer of an anti-global warming film (“Not Evil, Just Wrong”) that just happens to be opening this weekend, so he’s getting free publicity from any uproar about his “silencing” at the SEJ conference.

29. 

    Loco80 said, about 1 month ago

    I think that Cicken Little and his sky falling has cause enough damage to the national and world economy, and he should comfortably retire with his many millions of dollars. He is just a bitter loser seeking revenge, and he has certainly achieved success. Those climatologists around 15 years ago noted that solar activity in the mid 90’s was going to produce warming of the earth’s atmosphere, and that as the icecaps receded, the CO2 trapped INSIDE and beneath them would be released. Thus it was spoken THEN that CO2 levels would increase from THAT source. CO2 increases are the result of the warming from that period, not the cause of proclaimed warming now. The cause and effect are backwards as presented to the public today.

30. 

    stebon said, about 1 month ago

    The science is that there is not one bit of emperical scientific evidence that shows mankind’s activities has had or will have any effect on global warming(or global climate change).

    Read a book called the P.I.G. to Global Warming, and learn something, i.e., the oceans of the world produce over 99.5 percent of all green house gases. That leaves less than .5 percent produced by all other sources–including all of mankinds activities. That is scientific FACT; deal with it!

31. 

    harleyquinn said, about 1 month ago

    Doc, I hope you know you about the only godless liberal that I can respect.
    “Tree rings disprove hockey sticks but riding lifts show grapheds.
    Bird-like credits that cheep like owls defeat demons made of carbon dioxide.
    It’s all coming together for me now.”
    LOL LOL LOL LOL!!!!!!!
    Sir I salute you!

32. 

    DrCanuck said, about 1 month ago

    Thank you, you are most kind.

33. 

    scottfreitas said, about 1 month ago

    Harley’s probably drunk atm, to not recognize you for the poisonous scorpion you really are…

34. 

    omQ R said, about 1 month ago

    DrC’s barb is not in his stinger.

35. 

    DrCanuck said, about 1 month ago

    (nurf, nurf)

36. 

    harleyquinn said, about 1 month ago

    Scott, not drunk but you are correct, omQ R understands, recognizing the “enemies” strengths and weakness is a strength in of its self.
    Hopefully, maybe, I doubt it, someone as smart as doc thinks he is, might get a clue as to how the world works. But for him I have seen, if it does not fit in his little box where he can study and understand, it juts ain’t so.
    sad really.

37. 

    ezdeb said, about 1 month ago

    ooooh, scott proves he will turn on anyone who even dares to exchange non-hateful words with a liberal!

    It’s too bad HQ had to walk it back in the post above.

    In any case, if attacked at home, I’d rather have a hockey stick than a tree ring to help me.

    Have a hate-free weekend, all!

38. 

    DrCanuck said, about 1 month ago

    HQ: Oh, yes; I’m very sad. Having much trouble getting my bird-like credits to cheep like owls these days. But I DO have hockey sticks. Two of ‘em. They weren’t disproven.