Home > News > Carol Browner on Climate Change: "The Science Has Just Become Incredibly Clear"

Carol Browner on Climate Change: "The Science Has Just Become Incredibly Clear"

Reader Comments
Back to article

The greatest source of energy conservation that all World States achieve is lack of action.
There doesn't seem to be a country in the world that doesn't agree that energy conservation is needed quickly. But they try to out do each other in appeasment only.
Ive tried without success to interest a lot of the G20 countries in my new energy saving invention. Most don't reply. Now it's not as if they have looked at the idea and thought it was unworkable. They haven't. They just ignore it unseen.
With this attiude to new Energy saving products the environment and jobs will suffer while they continue to fly around the world just talking the talk.

Chris Young 6:29AM June 29, 2010

The good leader have to be a good model, open minded, in their soulmate respectively. Each people should have get position, precisely, actual, and theoritically.
The real author in authority is very important role, believe it. Especially, the charismatic born power people around the world. A good dress for success in uniform in unity otherwise it's difficult.
In environmental friendly, please remind the magnitude impact.

Andre Budianto 4:48AM June 02, 2010

Basic chemistry tells us the combustion of organics yields CO - carbon monoxide (from incomplete combustion) and CO2 - carbon dioxide. The CO formed eventually changes - in the presence of oxygen- to CO2. Thus, all the smoke / fumes / whatever is hot CO2. Tons and tons of CO2. Just how these new biofuels and alternative fuels bypass this ruling of Mother Nature is beyond me! "Ain't gonna happen"!
This isn't rocket science. Try Chemistry 101 ... in high school! We cannot / must not continue to pump CO2 into our thin layer of atmosphere! It is suicide....
I shall now make a simple statement : I have developed a simple/cheap modification to any fossil fuel combustion process ( let me restate : "any") which reduces the CO / CO@ levels of formation merely by reducing the amount of fuel required for a given heat (BTU) output. It is called "conservation"! Less fuel required, less CO2 emitted. Simple. E-mail me at the addy given if you can help me promote this concept. Please don't suggest patents, politicians, energy companies, gov't agencies, foundations, groups, etc.,etc. "Been there, done that".
[ CHEMbustion at yahoo dot com ]

R. Hart / CHEMbustion of NC 12:32PM December 08, 2009

Basic chemistry tells us the combustion of organics yields CO - carbon monoxide (from incomplete combustion) and CO2 - carbon dioxide. The CO formed eventually changes - in the presence of oxygen- to CO2. Thus, all the smoke / fumes / whatever is hot CO2. Tons and tons of CO2. Just how these new biofuels and alternative fuels bypass this ruling of Mother Nature is beyond me! "Ain't gonna happen"!
This isn't rocket science. Try Chemistry 101 ... in high school! We cannot / must not continue to pump CO2 into our thin layer of atmosphere! It is suicide....
I shall now make a simple statement : I have developed a simple/cheap modification to any fossil fuel combustion process ( let me restate : "any") which reduces the CO / CO@ levels of formation merely by reducing the amount of fuel required for a given heat (BTU) output. It is called "conservation"! Less fuel required, less CO2 emitted. Simple. E-mail me at the addy given if you can help me promote this concept. Please don't suggest patents, politicians, energy companies, gov't agencies, foundations, groups, etc.,etc. "Been there, done that".

R. Hart / CHEMbustion of NC 12:28PM December 08, 2009

"THE SCIENCE IS CLEAR" Really? I think those 3000 documents and emails recently made public (ignored by "media-left) belie that statement. "Tweaked" stats, ostracizing scientists who don't agree, destroying study results that conflict with their agenda - Doesn't sound like "clear science" to me - but more like an attempt to obscure the actual facts.
There have been many alternating periods of cooling and warming throughout the Earth’s past. The most recent period began with with the Pleistocene Ice Age starting 110,000 years ago and giving way, 14,700 years ago, to the Bolling warm period for 800 years. This in turn gave way to the Older Dryas cooling for 300 years, then the Allerod warming for 700 years, and so on, until the cooling of the Little Ice Age from 1300 to 1850. Since 1850, we have generally had a period known as the "Modern Warming". Although there was a period from 1945 -1984 (period of massive industrial expansion) when global temperatures dropped enough to cause many scientists to predict an imminent Ice Age. However, in general, the period from 1850 to present has been one of the most stable climate periods in the earth’s history. Many astronomers and climatologists predict we are headed for a new cooling period as our current interglacial period comes to an end.
Human-caused climate change is being promoted with religious zeal and there are eco-fundamentalist organizations which will do anything to silence critics. They have their holy books, dogma and their prophet, Al Gore. These modern day Druids are promoting a story which is frightening us witless, using guilt and urging penance for our carbon footprint sins. They’d like to burn me at the stake - but then there’s that non-eco friendly wood burning and smoke thing...
Further, it is obvious that solar cycles are responsible for much of the Earth’s climatic variation over time. Also, in view of the fact that there have been dozens of periods of warming and cooling, stretching back tens of millions of years, it should be apparent that these cycles were not anthropogenic in origin.
It is difficult for non-scientists to understand or engage in the debate over what causes climate change, and whether or not it can be stopped by new taxes, regulations, lifestyle restrictions, and slower growth, because dissenting voices are shouted down by true believers in the scientific community - who claim they alone have the authority to speak for the civilization they despise.
The debate on Global Warming would indeed be over if the eco-religious hysteria - and the massive financial grants to those who support it were to subside, and the true facts and the motives of its proponents made known to the public.

R.L. Schaefer of CA 12:26PM November 30, 2009

Schaefer's comment sounds as if he's a Ban-Abortionist. He opposes regulating populations. He does deny there is temperature change even though the web has proofs from experts, with satellite photos of glacier and snow melt. Maybe he accepts propaganda coming from people who are sorry Gore was VP and publicizes global warning. In some nations, the water level has dropped below the capacity to refill it. De-Forestation continues as hungry people destroy old trees to make farm patches for big families. The Northwest Passage is navigable after a long time. Years ago, a magazine published a photo with packages on a lawn, showing what a family of four ate in one year. It was surprising. Multiply that by population figures and it's obvious this cannot be sustained. What good does it do Schaefer to post his denials of global warming? If he is Pro-Life, that may explain it.

auradawn veirs of CA 10:22PM September 18, 2009

I find it ironic and ludicrous that the very same people who claim that we can't possibly control our southern border believe that we can control the climate of the entire planet. They can't really be serious, right? So what's the real reason behind all of the hoopla on anthropomorphic climate change? Is it the desire to reduce capitalism? If so, this produces on more anomaly int their thinking. How is socialism funded? Through capitalism. I don't understand the willingness of these folks to castigate a system of economics on which you depend on to fund social engineering. There is far too much hypocrisy going on with all of this; hypocrisy, mendacity, and enough hubris to beleive that the American public is too stupid or ignorant to think deeply about any given issue. Amazing, and frightening.

Nancy of GA 8:33AM August 04, 2009

Since the beginning of time the earth has cooled and warmed. Humans cannot effect the clmate. They have not even learned how to make it rain or hail or sleet. Greenland's ice caps are melting? Well, at one time it was green, and thus called Greenland... so how about that? Stop trying to be God just to get our hard earned money. That is what it is all about. Get our money and control ourt lives. Get lost with your global warming hoax! Leonor Tasheiko

Leonor Tasheiko of AZ 1:36AM August 01, 2009

Lot's of stuff lives in the middle latitudes - "Bio Mass" they call it.... Not a lot of "Bio-Mass" on a glacier or at the Poles - Just an observation. But, you can test this hypothesis yourself by planting seeds in your ice-cube tray and putting it in the freezer and then planting others in a "greenhouse" - I think you'll see the difference.
The ice has come many times before. We are now in an interglacial period - the ice will return. Fear the ice.
Don't buy the propaganda - it's about controlling people/populations...

R.L. Schaefer of CA 1:45PM July 17, 2009

In 1988 James Hansen testified before congress to scare us about global warming. See his predictions on page 7 of this PDF from NASA’s website:
http://pubs.giss.nasa.gov/docs/1988/1988_Hansen_etal.pdf
All satellite data, including this from the University of Alabama at Huntsville proves that he was wrong. The predicted warming never occurred:
http://icecap.us/images/uploads/HANSEN_AND_CONGRESS.jpg
2008 was even colder than 1988. Had he predicted what actually happened, no one would have seen the need to waste hundreds of billions of dollars. Now the politicians are threatening to burden the economy with their Cap-and-Trade scheme, which amounts to a massive tax increase on all conventional energy usage, to be paid for by you every time you buy something manufactured or transported using energy, which includes everything you spend your money on. It’s ironic how they claim to be protecting the children from doomsday, when they are really impoverishing your children’s future with this additional burden. Here is more background on this deliberate hoax from 1988:
http://icecap.us/index.php/go/joes-blog/hansens_anniversary_testimony/
31,478 scientists signed a petition opposing the man-made global warming theory. Their reasoning is outlined in a peer reviewed journal article detailing the evidence that disproved the theory. Please follow this link:
http://www.petitionproject.org/
We are being forced to pay for less economical sources of energy while being told they are viable alternatives. This is a lie. All of the so-called ‘alternative’ sources of energy, including wind and solar, equal less than one percent of mankind’s needs. Meanwhile our far more economical access to hydrocarbon energy and nuclear energy is being throttled for no good reason. Obviously Gore wouldn't mind impoverishing the rest of us to enrich himself with his ‘carbon trading’ scheme. With the size of his utility bills and the cost of jet fuel for his private jet flying him all over the world, he needs all the money he can get. If he was really worried about CO2, wouldn’t he act like he was worried about his own emissions, and energy consumption? Of course he is received like a hero in Hollywood; he makes hypocrisy fashionable.

Barry of CA 6:35PM June 22, 2009