Is Daniel Really That Easily Influenced

[addagirl 0]

Hey, I'm just passing along the info from the pundits! Don't shoot the messenger!

[Muck, You Suckers! 0]

Hey, I'm just passing along the info from the pundits! Don't shoot the messenger!

LOL okay. I believe in doing things to conserve. Just cut corners though. Don't take us back to the stoneage.

[Balloon guy 158]

Religion: People who are way off the chart on religion (and DN is getting awfully close - dont be surprised if he one day says hes quitting poker and gambling and becoming the next Kirk Cameron (dude refused to say "BONER" on his tv show which caused the cancellation)) don't even believe the ICE AGE happened. Remember - its not in the bible, therefore it didnt happen. Dinosaurs weren't in the bible, therefore they are just a lie by the devil (most likely us Jews).

When does the boner clause kick in for a TV show?Hope House can say it.

[nutzbuster 7]

Most of todays cars have computers so "warming up the car" is no longer and issue. The chips wont let you drive if your vehicle is at any risk.The worlds biggest polluters are China, Mexico, India and Russia (not necessarily in that order). The US has the largest number of the cleanest burning and most efficient cars on the planet. Our industrial facilities are the cleanest on the planet!The US leads the world in clean energy. We lead the world in new car (hybrid, electric, etc) technology. These things are all coming and many are already here NOW. It pissed me off that many think we are not doing anything.

[nutzbuster 7]

When does the boner clause kick in for a TV show?Hope House can say it.

Kirk Cameran actually had a speach impediment.He never said the word boner because it was too hard. (lmao to myself...)

[DanielNEGROnu 0]

Daniel,If you're really that concerned about gobal warming why are you selling your cars? It might clear your conscious but you wouldn't be doing anything to help what you perceive to be a problem. If you were truly passionate about the issue the proper thing to do is have the cars destroyed. DUCY?

[DanielNEGROnu 0]

3. As of this moment, stop shopping at supermarkets. Only buy food (that includes salt, canned tuna, fresh fruit, canned fruit, cerial etc. etc.) that was either grown, canned, packaged, within 100km radius of where you live. The fact that you save on emissions with your vehicle will mean nothing if you're purchasing foods that have been transported by truck, boat, plane- all if which give off way more emissions than your vehicle. This includes NOT eating in resaurants.These are just a few steps that someone "passionate" and serious about this issue can take other than preaching to others about the subject.

Is this a joke? The overwhelming majority of people don't live in an area where tuna, salt, cereal, fruits, meats, or pretty much anything else available in a supermarket is grown, processed, packaged, etc. within a 100 km radius. I'm a big proponent of buying local goods when available, but the reality is that for the average consumer many of the items they use are not. The point of having a supermarket is that you can go to ONE (we're trying to reduce emissions right?) convenient location and buy all the items you may need. I'm not even going to comment on the commercial implications of such a ridiculous idea.Maybe environmentalists would be taken a little more seriously if their ideas were at least somewhat logical/practical....

[jmkiser 0]

Most of todays cars have computers so "warming up the car" is no longer and issue. The chips wont let you drive if your vehicle is at any risk.The worlds biggest polluters are China, Mexico, India and Russia (not necessarily in that order). The US has the largest number of the cleanest burning and most efficient cars on the planet. Our industrial facilities are the cleanest on the planet!The US leads the world in clean energy. We lead the world in new car (hybrid, electric, etc) technology. These things are all coming and many are already here NOW. It pissed me off that many think we are not doing anything.

We 'lead' in those categories?Something tells me this information is quite false... I don't have definite statistic, but I was pretty sure that Europe is ahead of America when it comes to technology on "smart" cars and things of those natures

[gozo 0]

With so little support for Daniel so far on this thread, I feel the need to respond. I'm absolutely shocked at the level of ignorance on the subject even in America where the US government actively censors it's own scientists on behalf of the oil companies ( http://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/29/science/...e7f&ei=5088 and http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,,2002484,00.html ). You just have to read the news on any day to witness the devastation that climate change is wreaking on the world already. A small sample has to include the 2003 heat wave that claimed over 30000 lives in Europe(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2003_European_heat_wave), record droughts in Australia (http://www.news.com.au/business/story/0,23636,21210301-31037,00.html) and Hurricane Katrina (no reference needed) which made a major city in the richest country in the world look like a 3rd world refugee camp!Daniel's entirely right to say that environmental degradation is a far, far greater threat to our way of life than terrorism. To put things in perspective, close to 6000 people will die prematurely this year here in Ontario, Canada due to smog ( http://www.cbc.ca/health/story/2005/06/14/...-oma050714.html )! SMOG!!! Sure, it's not as sexy as fighting 'terrorists', but a war on smog would certainly prevent more deaths. Yet our governments spend billions of dollars bombing and killing people in other parts of the world in a failed attempt to ostensibly fight 'terror' and relatively little on developing the sustainable economy that MUST be developed if our civilization is going to survive. Where is the American optimism and ingenuity when the world needs it most? That half a trillion dollars will be spent this year by the US protecting access to fossil fuels instead of being spent developing an alternative to it is truly a crime against humanity.And for those who think environmental protection is just for us left-wing tree-huggers, I urge you to read the Stern Review, a UK governmental report that predicts a 20% reduction in world economic output if climate change is not addressed immediately ( http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/6098362.stm and summary of report in pdf format http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/bsp/hi/pdfs...06_exec_sum.pdf . It's just not a political issue. It's an issue of facing the hard facts and then getting on with the business of dealing with it. Somebody referred to the loss of jobs that would occur if greater environmental policy was initiated...take a look at the recent performances of GM and Ford. Tell me that their reliance on selling gas guzzling SUVs is not a primary reason they are now looking at record breaking loses, layoffs and looking in the rear-view mirror (pardon the pun) at Asian car companies offering models with far better fuel efficiency.My hat's off to you, Daniel, for doing your small part to change and starting this debate.

[Muck, You Suckers! 0]

Brag post <<<<<<<officially jealous

LOL Sounds fun doesn't it? It is most of the time. But is a lot of work too. And has had it's fair share of bad moments.

[addagirl 0]

The point of having a supermarket is that you can go to ONE (we're trying to reduce emissions right?) convenient location and buy all the items you may need. I'm not even going to comment on the commercial implications of such a ridiculous idea.

The point of the pundits is that the trucks, ships, planes etc. that supply that supermarket that is convenient give off WAY more emissions than one's drive to a distant market to buy local foods.I personally shop at supermarkets so I can't say if it's possible to do this however I watched a show on a couple that do. They live in Ontario where it is possible. I would like to see them (those "thems" you know) make show about people in... say Las Vegas or another harsh climate location, but I have the feeling that these same "thems" would say to move to an area where it can be done.Like I said, I haven't given my personal opinion on the subject (and will not), but I'm just passing along the message.

[avionicz 0]

I say let Daniel believe what he wants to believe. He seems smart enough to get all sides of the issues and make an informed decision on his own. People shouldn't dawg him on it or force their issues on him. Is he really getting rid of his vehicles though? That wouldn't make sense to just sell them to someone who would drive them probably even more. He would have to have them destroyed to stop their emissions all-together and that's just silly. I think he should get his Hybrids and just drive those the majority of the time and probably just keep his other vehicles at his other places he stays for tourny's and would drive very little. (Say NY/NE area). I'm sure he has a place around their for which he stays. Geez- I wish I had those type of problems. Hey honey, what should we do with these extra vehicles just laying around destroying the earth. Would they fit in the Goodwill Box? Were the same, you're just in a higher class of misery !!!

[gilbertology 0]

Wow, is all i can say. I haven't read all the responses to daniel's global warming blog, but some of them just boggle my mind.We don't know if we are responsible for global warming?Scientists have their own interests in mind?How could us humans possibly destroy the earth when it's been around for over 2 billion years?Just because some people don't like the message, or the messenger, doesn't mean what he's saying isn't supported 100% by the facts. I've known about the global warming problem for a long time, but An Incovenient Truth is a great movie because it spreads the message to people who would otherwise have done nothing to help. Some people on this forum are treating Al Gore as if he were Columbus(or whoever it was) when he said the earth was round and not flat.Global warming IS a serious problem, the recent trends HAVE been caused by man, and if we continue to poison the atmosphere the consequences will be disastrous for life on earth, particularly the human species. No, the earth will not explode or die in all likelihood, but species extinction will be massive. If you don't believe me that's fine, I'm just posting my opinions on a forum. However, I urge the people who don't think global warming is a problem or directly caused by humans to read the latest report on global warming by the world's scientific community. Scientists are skeptical by nature, and it is their job to report findings based on the facts, unlike politicians and corporations. They are 90% certain(and many among them have said this number is very conservative and they just did not want to use the scientific "wording" for 99% certain) that the recent trend in global warming has been caused by humans. It is not a "natural" cycle or anything else. Anyway, enough ranting. I recommend that anyone who hasn't seen an Inconvenient Truth should watch it, and I applaud Daniel for taking steps to help the environment

[Squirrelmonger 0]

The question "Why would we people lie about global warming?" was asked.1) Sensationalism has been a driving force behind many propaganda attacks in the history of man. Something that is sensational can drive people to falsify evidence or just simply ignore that which is false. There are so many examples of this throughout history its actually pretty rediculous. Even later when things are found to be wrong they are left wrong. and even tought to children wrong when they are known to be wrong. The best example of this was an example given by Robert Wuhl on an HBO special he did. Basically the legend of Paul Revere while correct in one sense, ignores that fact that he was one of many riders and he rode the shortest distance of the any of the men riding that night. History is well aware of a man by the name of Isreal Bissel who rode over 100 miles (iirc) to warn people, but never is he mentioned in a history class. The reasons for this is because "Listen my children and you shall hear, of the midnight ride of Paul Revere!" sounds a whole lot better than "Listen my children and you shall hear, of the midnight ride of Isreal Bissel!". Or as Robert Wuhl calls it the Liberty Valance effect, aka "When the legend becomes fact, print the legend." We are sensationalist by nature. People like to hear about sensational things and allow themselves to accept things they might not otherwise because they want to believe in something grand even if it is horrific.2) I'm sure most of you will remember Kyoto Protocol/Treaty, what most people don't realise is that it allows countries with lower "emitions" to sell their "polution credits" to countries with higher "emitions" which would result in effectively a socialistic redistribution of wealth from the developed countries to the undeveloped countries. The concept here is basically a type of economic sanction. The amount of money to be redistributed would be measured in the hundreds of billions. I personally think that the whole thing started as sensationalism and was quickly snatched up as a way to force a redistribution of wealth around the world. I'm sure some people thinks this doesn't sound so bad but what you don't realise is that this is in effect removing any incentive for a country to develope. Why would a 3rd world country develope more when they are getting paid tons of money not to. Money they can spend on the goods produced by the countries taking it up the arse. In effect you come to the same problem produced in any socialistic society of a decent size. A portion of the group does all the work while some groups sit by and slack. Until eventually the group doing all the work either stops working or tells the lazy folks to take a hike.Just a warning to those doing research, don't take all your information from one website. Wikipedia especially is easily edited and can be changed by anyone. And keep in mind that correlation does not imply causation. That is to say, just because it starts to rain when I turn on my faucet does not imply that my faucet makes it rain when I turn it on or a more inciteful example...consider the following statement "The dramatic increase in C02 emissions over the last century correlate with a dramatic increase in crime, therefore C02 emissions cause crime." This statement is one most would label as obviously false. I don't expect to change anyone's mind, but I seriously hope that folks on both side of the issue take in as many of the facts as you can find, especially before you set about changing the way you live your life.PS - Weren't we heading towards an ice age in the 70s?

[caclark 0]

This wasn't the first I'd heard of the problem, but there were was some added insight in the slideshow that struck a chord with me for sure. Both 60 Minutes and 20/20 have covered the topic in the past, but not the extent that the film does. It's true, that I often go with my "read" of people and a situation, and I'll continue to do that for the rest of my life as it's served me well over my lifetime. Sometimes I'm wrong, but trusting my instincts about people usually brings me to the right conclusion. I believe that climate control is a legitmate problem. The biggest problem our world faces. I do believe the scientists that say we aren't headed in a good direction. Why would they "make that up?" Clearly, I don't think there is an agenda for a scientist to imagine this threat, but I can see legitimate reasons for a cover up.

Why would they make that up? Perhaps to get funding for their next grant. I saw the movie, I have studied this problem for years and I can say that the movie is one sided. I am not saying that there is not a problem. I am saying that the movie is decidedly one sided.

[Loismustdie 0]

he converted to christianity after reading a book that is demonstratably propaganda. what do you expect?

Lol- I love Crow. And the answer is obviously yes- to form an opinion after seeing one movie is silly.

[Belanger25 3]

When I watched Al Gore's movie I decided it was one very well produced Apple Commercial.

[Incubus77546 0]

You guys have to remember that Daniel is a) a high school dropout (you can argue that he is brilliant because you see him as a good poker player - but I will argue that skill has nothing to do with "intelligence"), B) a religious person, c) desperately in need of people liking him and talking about him. Education: It's obvious that people who are uneducated can be easily influenced - why do you think 3rd world nations with dictatorship type governments keep their people out of school. You wouldn't want them to wisen up..Religion: People who are way off the chart on religion (and DN is getting awfully close - dont be surprised if he one day says hes quitting poker and gambling and becoming the next Kirk Cameron (dude refused to say "BONER" on his tv show which caused the cancellation)) don't even believe the ICE AGE happened. Remember - its not in the bible, therefore it didnt happen. Dinosaurs weren't in the bible, therefore they are just a lie by the devil (most likely us Jews).Low Self Esteem: Poker exploded too quickly and those who were in the spotlight had no way to control their own rise in stardom and unfortunately guys like Daniel didn't know what to do. So, he sets up his website and constantly has to prop himself up as being this great person that everyone should try to be like but never will. Just read most of his blogs - he's always bragging about flying first class, going in limosines, etc. Read other blogs by famous people - THEY NEVER SAY THESE THINGS. Why? It's obvious most of the time and they don't feel the need to elevate themselves amongst us mortals. But daniel does. That is a serious character flaw and this latest blog is yet another one.I feel bad for thim. I really do. He really talks down to most people on this board and the lemmings on here just dont see it - yet. One day, they will realize it and begin ignoring him and DN will just be another has been. I hope he is prepared for that day, because unlike his 50 year death guarantee (which now he wont accept the fact that we will take his bet on), it is a guarantee that his popularity and love by his lemmings will eventually die.

Wow, you just painted an ugly picture. First off I will prove your statements to be very wrong and not only that very hateful.1. Education - Daniel did drop out of high school, but only like one or two credits shy of graduating. I'd hardly call him an uneducated man. Abraham Lincoln as well dropped out, he never even went to high school and he was considered a brilliant man and a great president. Lincoln was also a blatant racist even though he abolished slavery. His reasoning was to have a reason to go to war with the Confederates. Anyways my point is that a smart man will have beliefs whether you agree with them or not. There are many intelligent people who never graduated from high school. I could name a lot more if you're interested.2. Religion - Daniel is a strongly religious man and this also has to go with the smart men have even their own beliefs statement I made earlier. Your remarks about him one day quitting poker is ridiculous. Daniel has made it clear that he will be playing poker till the day he dies, I'd say he'll be playing poker long after the so called "poker boom" dies down. I doubt that Daniel will let his religion change his lifestyle but it will influence it. I dont really see Daniel as an extreme Christian but he is believer and he should be entitled to have his own beliefs.3. Low Self-Esteem - This is just absurd. I cant see why you would think that Daniel because of the poker boom and his success in poker makes him want to brag about his lifestyle. This website is absolutely his and he shares a lot of his life with anyone who chooses to come here. I dont think he has the need to brag about anything unless its his poker playing ability. Also for talking down to the people with different beliefs than him, well lets say you're with your best friend and you tell him something you strongly believe in and he just stares at you and laughs and says that your ideas are "Absolutely wrong and stupid." You cant tell me that you wouldnt be even the slightest bit mad at your friend. Well a lot of these posters mostly in this thread are the "laughing friend" and Daniel is just reasoning with these people and telling him why his beliefs are not just absolute rubbish. Do I agree with Daniel and his decisions on how to deal with the enviroment, Not exactly, I do support him for trying to protect the enviroment but I dont believe that this world is doomed in 50 years. Because I have my beliefs and he has his I will not ridicule him because I would hate for him to ridicule my beliefs.Also yes, one day Daniel will not be as famous as he is today. He will always be famous in the poker world, but will the poker world always be famous itself? The answer is most likely not but Daniel really hasnt changed much personality wise after the poker boom, and when its over I think Daniel will still be the same no matter how famous he is.Your post and how you totally make absurd remarks actually shows me that its not Daniel bragging its you, that is jealous of Daniel and his lifestyle.

[Mr. DNA 0]

With so little support for Daniel so far on this thread, I feel the need to respond. I'm absolutely shocked at the level of ignorance on the subject even in America where the US government actively censors it's own scientists on behalf of the oil companies ( http://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/29/science/...e7f&ei=5088 and http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,,2002484,00.html ). You just have to read the news on any day to witness the devastation that climate change is wreaking on the world already. A small sample has to include the 2003 heat wave that claimed over 30000 lives in Europe(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2003_European_heat_wave), record droughts in Australia (http://www.news.com.au/business/story/0,23636,21210301-31037,00.html) and Hurricane Katrina (no reference needed) which made a major city in the richest country in the world look like a 3rd world refugee camp!Daniel's entirely right to say that environmental degradation is a far, far greater threat to our way of life than terrorism. To put things in perspective, close to 6000 people will die prematurely this year here in Ontario, Canada due to smog ( http://www.cbc.ca/health/story/2005/06/14/...-oma050714.html )! SMOG!!! Sure, it's not as sexy as fighting 'terrorists', but a war on smog would certainly prevent more deaths. Yet our governments spend billions of dollars bombing and killing people in other parts of the world in a failed attempt to ostensibly fight 'terror' and relatively little on developing the sustainable economy that MUST be developed if our civilization is going to survive. Where is the American optimism and ingenuity when the world needs it most? That half a trillion dollars will be spent this year by the US protecting access to fossil fuels instead of being spent developing an alternative to it is truly a crime against humanity.And for those who think environmental protection is just for us left-wing tree-huggers, I urge you to read the Stern Review, a UK governmental report that predicts a 20% reduction in world economic output if climate change is not addressed immediately ( http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/6098362.stm and summary of report in pdf format http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/bsp/hi/pdfs...06_exec_sum.pdf . It's just not a political issue. It's an issue of facing the hard facts and then getting on with the business of dealing with it. Somebody referred to the loss of jobs that would occur if greater environmental policy was initiated...take a look at the recent performances of GM and Ford. Tell me that their reliance on selling gas guzzling SUVs is not a primary reason they are now looking at record breaking loses, layoffs and looking in the rear-view mirror (pardon the pun) at Asian car companies offering models with far better fuel efficiency.My hat's off to you, Daniel, for doing your small part to change and starting this debate.

I applaud your efforts, gozo, but I'm afraid your warnings will be falling on deaf ears. I myself have also been shocked and appalled by the level of ignorance displayed by our American friends here, but when you consider the cover-up job that their government has been doing, it's not really that surprising. In Britain, climate change is a real issue that concerns the vast majority of us, and to hear such absolute crap coming from the guys on this forum is both shocking and frightening.

[Vikingmn 0]

Here's another article talking about global warming from The Sunday Times. Pretty interesting.An experiment that hints we are wrong on climate changeNigel Calder, former editor of New Scientist, says the orthodoxy must be challengedhttp://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article1363818.eceHere's a little piece of it:So one awkward question you can ask, when you’re forking out those extra taxes for climate change, is “Why is east Antarctica getting colder?” It makes no sense at all if carbon dioxide is driving global warming. While you’re at it, you might inquire whether Gordon Brown will give you a refund if it’s confirmed that global warming has stopped. The best measurements of global air temperatures come from American weather satellites, and they show wobbles but no overall change since 1999.

[mk 11]

Why would they make that up? Perhaps to get funding for their next grant. I saw the movie, I have studied this problem for years and I can say that the movie is one sided. I am not saying that there is not a problem. I am saying that the movie is decidedly one sided.

it's one-sided because there is only one side. there is as much consensus among climatologists on this issue as there is amongst doctors that cancer kills people. i am continually surprised at the number of people who, like DN said, would choose to err on the side of potentially catastrophic consequences as opposed to erring on the side of a cleaner environment. i simply do not understand why anyone who does not hold a large amount of stock in big oil would be so eager to drink the chevron kool-aid.this issue is NOT a political issue, it's an issue for all of mankind. environmentalism didn't used to be a conservative/liberal thing. if anything, true conservatives of the past (eisenhower etc.) wanted to protect the environment more than progressives. it's only become politicized because the energy conglomerates have spent billions of dollars trying to re-frame the conclusions of scientists as being part of some "debate" rather than scientific conclusions, and the modern GOP has chosen to align itself with interests of big oil due to campaign contributions. if you think for even one second that lowly scientists have a greater financial stake in this debate than do the major energy conglomerates and major oil-producing nations, then umm...i can't really help you. what grants, exactly, do you expect scientists are receiving for 'cooking' their data to show that humans are elevating CO2 levels in the atmosphere? who benefits from them showing this? toyota is doing just fine without huge sales of priuses.i applaud DN for being willing to speak his mind whenever something he sees has an effect on him. it takes courage to speak out in a very public manner on divisive issues. if only he could stop ripping on the bears...

[Zealous Donkey 0]

it's one-sided because there is only one side. there is as much consensus among climatologists on this issue as there is amongst doctors that cancer kills people. i am continually surprised at the number of people who, like DN said, would choose to err on the side of potentially catastrophic consequences as opposed to erring on the side of a cleaner environment. i simply do not understand why anyone who does not hold a large amount of stock in big oil would be so eager to drink the chevron kool-aid.this issue is NOT a political issue, it's an issue for all of mankind. environmentalism didn't used to be a conservative/liberal thing. if anything, true conservatives of the past (eisenhower etc.) wanted to protect the environment more than progressives. it's only become politicized because the energy conglomerates have spent billions of dollars trying to re-frame the conclusions of scientists as being part of some "debate" rather than scientific conclusions, and the modern GOP has chosen to align itself with interests of big oil due to campaign contributions. if you think for even one second that lowly scientists have a greater financial stake in this debate than do the major energy conglomerates and major oil-producing nations, then umm...i can't really help you. what grants, exactly, do you expect scientists are receiving for 'cooking' their data to show that humans are elevating CO2 levels in the atmosphere? who benefits from them showing this? toyota is doing just fine without huge sales of priuses.

Your whole post is just absolute bullshit. I don't get my views from the oil companies or anyone else. I don't even know what stance they take on the issue of global warming. Hell, I would agree that most oil companies are run by a bunch of greedy crooks, and they give money to all politicitions, not just republicans, as a matter of fact Al Gore had a larger oil investment interest than GW Bush did. I have heard this **** for the last 20+ years. All sealife is supposed to already be dead, and the east coast is supposed to already be under water according to the same scientists you have elevated to Godlike status. If you did a little digging you will find that they have all been in this since the beginning crying wolf over and over. The Kyoto accord was simply a way to shake down America for cash and nothing more. Yes we need to take care of the envirnment and try to reduce all kinds of pollution but Al Gore and his documentery is not scientific but a political movement with an agenda that has been moving forward with the help of the mainstream media since the 1980s.PS Excuse my language mk, it is used for emphasis not as a personal attack on you.

[solderz 0]

Your whole post is just absolute bullshit. I don't get my views from the oil companies or anyone else. I don't even know what stance they take on the issue of global warming. Hell, I would agree that most oil companies are run by a bunch of greedy crooks, and they give money to all politicitions, not just republicans, as a matter of fact Al Gore had a larger oil investment interest than GW Bush did. I have heard this **** for the last 20+ years. All sealife is supposed to already be dead, and the east coast is supposed to already be under water according to the same scientists you have elevated to Godlike status. If you did a little digging you will find that they have all been in this since the beginning crying wolf over and over. The Kyoto accord was simply a way to shake down America for cash and nothing more. Yes we need to take care of the envirnment and try to reduce all kinds of pollution but Al Gore and his documentery is not scientific but a political movement with an agenda that has been moving forward with the help of the mainstream media since the 1980s.

Your an idiot, as are most political conservatives on this issue in the United States. The climate predictions based on the global warming model have almost all come true. In fact, many, including the rising of the world's oceans, have been occuring faster than originally predicted. The facts are not disputable.

[Balloon guy 158]

Your an idiot, as are most political conservatives on this issue in the United States. The climate predictions based on the global warming model have almost all come true. In fact, many, including the rising of the world's oceans, have been occuring faster than originally predicted. The facts are not disputable.

It's you're not your.That's an important little point when calling someone an idiot.good luck

[Zealous Donkey 0]

Your an idiot, as are most political conservatives on this issue in the United States. The climate predictions based on the global warming model have almost all come true. In fact, many, including the rising of the world's oceans, have been occuring faster than originally predicted. The facts are not disputable.

No they haven't and the if the world is gone in 50 years, which is their latest prediction, it wont' have anything to do with Global Warming. I not wasting my time linking you to artlicles over the past 25 years, but they are there in all the mainstream magazines. The Planet has become somewhat more polluted as predicted but that has not a damn thing to do with Global Warming.