Nola, WHERE are said studies?  If they existed, you liberal types would have rubbed our noses in it the moment they were published.  If they were done millions of times, it should be easy for you to find.  Don't bother with computer models because that's not proof.  Garbage in, garbage out.

Man made global warming is a religion in which faith is needed to believe.  Faith is not science.

http://climate.nasa.gov/evidence/

Fred19Flintstone said:

Oh brother buffalo!  Where art thou?

Agree^^^^^^. And standing by for his appearance. 

Fred19Flintstone said:

JohnInCarolina said:

Proof - you keep using that word.  I do not think it means what you think it means.

I think PROOF means it is PROVEN (repeated and consistently) that because of X happening, Y occurs.  When it comes to man made global warming, there is nothing like that.  Al Gore is a politician, not a scientist.

You're confused Fred.  There is no “proof” in science — that is a property of mathematics. In science, what matters is the balance of evidence, and theories that can explain that evidence. Where possible, scientists make predictions and design experiments to confirm, modify, or contradict their theories, and must modify these theories as new information comes in.

In the case of anthropogenic global warming, there is a theory (first conceived over 100 years ago) based on well-established laws of physics. It is consistent with mountains of observation and data, both contemporary and historical. It is supported by sophisticated, refined global climate models that can successfully reproduce the climate’s behavior over the last century.

Given the lack of any extra planet Earths and a few really large time machines, it is simply impossible to do any better than this.

As for Al Gore, I don't know why you keep bringing him up, aside from the fact that he is fat.

My work is part of a multi faceted approach to reducing the impact of lower level ozone, or smog, typically seen around the major population areas. I develop materials environmentally "friendly" not environmentally "safe." 
My job is a product of the clean air act of 1970. The work we have done, and actually improved the process with much more robust products, and higher performing application equipment has positively impacted the lower level Ozone situation. It has also impacted positively business in both productivity and profitability. 
Based on my research, lower level ozone is a real problem. Theoretically, it may have some effect on global warming, a theory could connect the dots. However, I do know, no definitive research has been able to lock Ox as the root cause for the elevation of earth's atmosphere. Could it be a factor? Yes. Is it the soul cause? No.

Fred19Flintstone said:

Fair & balanced, eh?  (A tweak for my liberal egghead friends.). I don't see an inconsistency.  Unproven problem: man made global warming.  Solution to fix said unproven problem: incredibly expensive to the point where many will lower their standard of living.

You liberal types claim to be compassionate where us conservatives are cold hearted bastids.  I believe this proves otherwise.  Pretty soon granny will have to eat cat food just to pay the electric bill.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/larrybell/2012/07/17/that-scientific-global-warming-consensus-not/

It's a good thing we started the Apollo program in the 60's, because we'd never be able to do it today.  NASA would have been viewed as a giant liberal conspiracy to mostly take taxpayer money, and nobody would believe we'd landed on the moon, because the only thing government scientists can do is fudge data.

Legume said:

Davec433 said:

Political cartoons only offend if there's some truth to them!

Come on dave, don't sell yourself short, don't be 'soundbite guy' that's just too easy and you're better than that.

I'm not offended, just disappointed in the lack of objective dialog and how quickly some people politicize this.  For anyone keeping score or putting people in boxes, I'm a registered Republican.  I just don't run around trying to politicize everything - isn't that what politicians are for?

Wait....there's data for that too. 

Ok... Which one of you whiny warming believers flagged me?

Thanks Nola... It was going to ruin my thanksgiving.... Leave them. A badge of trolldom 

henapple said:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/larrybell/2012/07/17/that-scientific-global-warming-consensus-not/

Brought to you by Forbes, an organization that cares a great deal about climate science, and not at all about billionaires.

johnnyp said:

http://climate.nasa.gov/evidence/

Oh, is this the "evidence" that NASA was caught fabricating (by changing the "real" data)?

If you believe "evidence" from a politicized body over a highly politicized issue..well, there ain't much we can do to help you.

"Global Warming" / "Climate Change" / whatever they want to call it this week after the earth has been COOLING and "Global Warming" got laughed off the block due to some of the snowiest winters on record is a bunch of HOOEY.  It's simply a way for politicians to try to force MORE of their whims on us and do more wealth redistribution - all in the name of "climate change".  What a bunch of crap.

Go read Michael Cricton's excellent "State of Fear" novel for some real insight on this malarky.  He died only 4 years after writing it, at a pretty young age.  Hmmmm.

Now, back to the original subject - taxing our meat?  We'll vote EVERY. LAST. ONE. of them out of office if they even TRY doing that.

Don't mess with the meat.

From your friends at NASA..

"GLOBAL WARMING? NASA says Antarctic has been COOLING for past SIX years"
http://www.express.co.uk/news/science/622043/GLOBAL-WARMING-NASA-Antarctic-COOLING-six-years-Arctic-north-pole-climate-change

In the last few weeks NASA has revealed the overall amount of ice has increased at the Antarctic and the amount of sea ice has also extended.

Hmmm....