Skip navigation

 Login or Register | Member Centre

Welcome to the new climate

MARTIN MITTELSTAEDT

From Saturday's Globe and Mail

Latest comment posted at 3:08 AM EDT 27/01/07

Climate change is no longer a vague threat. A new Globe polls finds that 4 out of 5 Canadians say they've seen it first-hand. We fear for our children and our grandchildren. We want action. We're ready for sacrifices. But what action? ...Read the full article

This conversation is semi-moderated What is moderation? | How do I report a comment?

  1. BJ Shellac from Quebec City, Canada writes: My heart breaks for the polar bear and all the other majestic beasts that we are threatening with extinction. My heart should break more for us, humanity, but we are the ones doing the damage. And there is no forum where the polar bear can plead his case.
  2. bill johnson from Quebec, Canada writes: Good science requires consideration of all alternative hypotheses, and sequentially excluding them (all but one ideally) through testing. I think that alternative hypotheses for climate warming are not given the attention they should have, instead we villify the people proposing them as sell-outs to Mobil oil. Very sad. Test and eliminate the hypotheses not the personalities. If we can prove the link between CO2 and warming, we are in trouble indeed. If not, we are about to engage in the largest boondoggle in history, whilst worthwhile caused like elimination of malaria and provision of safe drinking water will be ignored. If post-Kyoto means we involve China and India and the USA in the solution, then I would agree to it.
  3. BJ Shellac from Quebec City, Canada writes: We need good science, but we need to be human first. Science has already taken us far enough from our humanity. I don't trust methods that appropriate the language of whatever it is they are trying to overcome. A fresh start is what we need.
  4. Carl Eric Codere from Saint-Lambert, Canada writes: At least Canadians are waking up, and i am sacrificing part of my way of life for makingthe environment a better place... EVERY CANADIAN, EVERY GOVERNMENT should do the same... This is a collective effort for all Canadians, and for all countries of the world...
  5. Don Adams from Canada writes: Bill,agreed. There's just no 'proof' that global warming is caused by humans. Yes, a lot of science points to the fact human activity contributes to GW, but my argument is similar to yours..... the key words being Contribute and Cause. Yeah, we could be facing a large boondoggle over this so I hope the saner heads prevail. Absolutely nothing wrong with expanding technology, going GREEN, over time, and in a way it won't kill our economy. My biggest problem is with the chicken littles who jump on the bandwagon, they want to move way too fast, but my secondary problem is with the ones 180' opposite, who won't even accept the idea that warming is taking place. These 2 extremes are the ones us centrists have to fight against, ATTEMPT to make the 2 extremes think rationally. This is going to be a hard fight though.
  6. J Billins from Toronto, Canada writes: Here comes the green taxes.
  7. mr motoc from Vancouver Island, Canada writes: Unbelievable. . . . Mr Stephen ('Canada LAST') Harper is going to alienate the core of the Conservative-Republican Annexationist Party if he caves in to reality on this or any OTHER issue.
  8. Duncan Munro from Langley BC, Canada writes: If the scientific community is correct, then global warming is being caused by human activity and we can slow it down, or reverse it. However, if we do nothing, and they are correct, we will be responsible for severe changes to climate that may kill billions of people and create a wave of extinctions. We don't have 20 years to debate the issue as the current rate of warming just doesn't give us that luxury. The people who are paid to do the science, tell us that Global Warming is human created. We have to listen and to act accordingly.
  9. JD Wood from Toronto, Canada writes: Thanks Stephen Harper and G.W. Bush, perhaps two of the last people on earth who don't understand the dangers of global warming (or the fact that it even exists!!)
  10. Jeff Peterson from Calgary, Alberta, Canada writes: I would just like to mention the great passage I read the other day in a novel written by Farley Mowat in 1967 entitled 'Top of the World Trilogy Vol-2 Polar Passion'. It is very interesting how he discusses a period about 5000 years ago called the Holocene Optimum where the treeline advanced well into the tundra and the polar ice sheets nearly vanished completely. If you are interested this is on page 20 of the book. Then on page 21 he quotes a paper from the UNESCO Symposium on Climate Change in Rome in 1961 that says 'The arctic pack ice had melted so far back that the appearance of drift ice in the waters near Iceland and Greenland south of 70 degrees was rare in the 800’s and 900’s and apparently unknown between 1020 and 1200 when a rapid increase in the frequency of pack ice began.” Then on page 46 of the book Mowat also discusses when Henry Hudson set out to sail across the arctic ocean to Cathay in 1607, he carried sailing directions with him written for Arctic waters written by Ivar Bardarsson a Greenland Norseman in 1350 which indicated the existence of an open ocean to the north. These are just a few of the references in the book to an ice-free polar sea. Interesting indeed….. Maybe this has happened before????
  11. r b from Calgary, Canada writes: What exactly do these opening lines from the article mean:
    'Paris is forecast to be unseasonably warm next Friday. The current long-term prediction is 8 degrees, significantly above the historic high for early February of closer to 5.'?

    Does the author mean that the February 1st all time high temperature for Paris is 5 C and that forecast of 8 C therefore a record high?

    This is highly unlikely since a google search for Paris Climatic data reveals that the February AVERAGE high temperature for Paris is approximately 8C ( it increases gradually throughout February from approx 5 C to 11C) , and the RECORD high for February is 20 C . And precipitation graphs show that Paris actually has quite small variances in average precipitation from month to month, with February's average being slightly below other months. Slightly. The article makes it sound like rain is unheard of in February. Good golly.

    Never let facts get in the way of a good story.
  12. sean wood from vancouver, Canada writes: By all means Canadians, get yer sexy pollution, green house gas climate warming leotards on now and kick the c**p out of Canada's 2%contribution to climate global warming change.Some may say 2% so what, but if ordinary Canadians just went out of their way to cut back on their own little contribution to GHG or pollution or whatever then that 2% would be reduced dramatically.Resist the temptation to turn on the AC in a TO summer.You won't die, honest. Ride that bike hiding in the garage, get rid of your gas guzzler, throw away your electric hedge clipper, mower, weed eater that you have been using on your postage stamp property.Take a bus once a week!! It's not up to some useless politician to look after you and the earth. It's up to you and you alone comrade.
  13. Duncan Munro from Langley BC, Canada writes: There have undoubtedly been periods of warming in the past, but the big problem is that temperatures have already exceeded the average temperatures during these warming periods plus the % of green house gases is higher in the atmosphere now than then. This all points to a scenario where the warming will accelerate and the temperature will peak at a much high levels than during recent (IE within the last 10 - 100 thousand years. This kind of warming is unprecedented in the geological record and pushes the planet into uncharted territory so to speak. The loss of the Icecap, in Greenland could cause dramatic rises in sea levels, while the rapid melt of freshwater into the Atlantic could disrupt the gulf stream current, leading to extremely unstable weather.
  14. Donald White from Hong Kong, Canada writes: Could someone at the Globe and Mail please respond to r b's comment above? If he is correct then you have some explaining to do.
  15. Duncan Munro from Langley BC, Canada writes: Donald, the average temp for Feb 1 is likely to be a lot different from the average for the entire month or the extremes for any day in the month.
  16. Steve S from Western Canada, Canada writes: Living in Saskatchewan I have to say that I've really enjoyed the last 3 mild winters, however, I do realize that they have to stop and go back to normal.....cold and nasty. Before we screw this planet up totally we have to grow up and act responsibly. Unfortunately the all mighty dollar seems to be more important to some than survival. I've never been able to understand that but it's the way this world works. Not all is bad, we do have a new species of bear from what i understand. A grizzly and a polar bear mated and made 'Grizzlar'. Usually their territories don't cross but the grizzlies have been venturing further north and the polar bears have been forced more south looking for food. Hopefully the new bread will thrive and we can also save the polar bears and the grizzlies.
  17. Mark Denis from Canada writes: So who was fooled by the picture at the start of this article that it was taken in the artic. It could have been taken anywhere on this world or country that has mountains. Possibly ??????
  18. B Fulsom from Menlo Park, United States writes: This Globe-CTV poll is so loaded, I'd like to know how these questions were asked. As discussed in an article yesterday, pollster Alan Gregg indicated that 20% of this sample were somewhat or very likely to vote Green in the next election. This number is wildly out of line with every other poll conducted, which show the Green party with a maximum of 10% support. Nearly half of the respondents felt Canada can make a significant contribution to climate change and more than 65% want to stick with Kyoto. There is no indication those polled were asked if they know Canada's GHG contribution (only 2% of world emissions, decidedly insignificant), or have a concept of what it will cost or require to meet our Kyoto targets (over by 33%, meaning we need to cut our current level of consumption/economy by one quarter in less than four years, *very* significant). Yes, the environment is an important and emerging issue, but let's not forget the media has been pushing it hard for months (some might say the G&M daily since Dion won the leadership, but I digress). I agree with Don Adams...we need cooler heads to prevail here (pun intended), not the deniers and doomsayers. Let's move forward prudently with informed decisions instead of knee-jerk reactions from an uninformed public or by throwing money aimlessly in an attempt to buy our way out. Our entire society will not change overnight and neither will the planet; this is going to take a generation or more. And to repeat what I said yesterday, along with all the griping about global warming, let's at least be thankful we have a booming economy, low unemployment, and such a high standard of living that a quarter of Canadians can now espouse the weather as the biggest concern in their lives. Goodnight.
  19. Rohit Dixit from Montreal, Canada writes: Canada is making efforts in the right direction to stress on the importance of environment.But the question is Canada's effort in isolation in the world is enough.I am an immigrant from India,and it is a fact that any polluting industry from North America and other developed country driven out gets its foothold in India.India and China is quickly emerging as the biggest consumers of oils and other polluting things.There is no firm environmental plan in India nor is it an important political issue.Global Environment cannot be sustained by Canada alone.The full world must be involved.Just remember the biggest polluters in the years to come will be China and India.Evironment has become a polital issue in Canada for only vested political purpose.Liberals feel that only they can curtail global warming and Conservatives believe they can.Worse on top the extremist and seperatist parties like Bloc and PQ ,which would have been easily banned in other stronger democratic countries beleive that having their dream baby independent Quebec will turn world green.Environment must be a global initiative pushed stongly by United Nations,with severe sanctions on those countries deviating from set rules of the world.
  20. dave srigley from Toronto, Canada writes: Are Canadians really willing stop using clothes dryers? Stop cutting their lawns? Will they compel the gov't to ban SUVs? Ban suburban development? Stop eating exotic foods shipped from around the world? Stop selling our oil to the USA until they sign Kyoto?
    No. doubt it. heck No. nope. no. and HA NO! The only thing that will be accomplished is more Harper bashing and complaining.
  21. Brendan Caron from Vancouver, Canada writes: Extremes in temperature on any given day were recorded as the exception to the rule and not a day by day reporting of the event. Global warming is a reality and all the hiding from it that the car manufacturers and the oil men want to do is not going to change the fact that the environment is warming up today. The standard dilatory tactic is that of claiming that the scientific work is not up to par. Now if they could only find scientists to agree with them then they could corroborate, effusively, their point of view. Their biggest mistake is not realizing that the population is as smart as they are. They can't pretend to lead because of some superior breeding anymore. They now have to contend with people not subjects.
  22. Robb Stevenson from Kelowna, Canada writes: Given the sheer volume of variables, it is highly unlikely that science will ever prove, with 100% certainty, that the current climate change trend was caused, for the most part, by human activity.

    There are periods in the Earth's history that experienced climate change equivalent (if not greater than) to what we are experiencing now. The difference? Climate change then occurred over thousands of years - now, we've managed to cause a drastic shift in under a century.

    Unfortunately, we've run out of time for more study. We know we're causing an impact - to measure the size of that impact so 'we can know for sure' is simplistic and naive. Did the crew of the Titanic need to study the size of the crack in the hull to know the ship was going to go down?

    Climate change is only one part of the need for a drastic change in how humans interact with our environment. We are directly responsible for habitat distruction, species extinction, and the poisoning of our planet (Tuna once a month now, is it?)

    While sitting around talking, studying and being 'sure' we're causing some sort of global catastrophe would be nice - it's too late. We've simply run out of time.
  23. Mark Denis from Canada writes: Rohit Dixit from Montreal,

    I, as a born Canadian and could not agree with you more. Thank you for your post. It makes to much sense for the doomsday sayers.

    Welcome to Canada.

    Dave Srigley, They want you freezing and walking while their warm and driving your SUV.
  24. A West Coast Opinion from Vancouver, Canada writes: Guys - it doesn't make a darn bit of difference what we do. Sure - i think we should do what we can, but even if we reduced emmissions by 100 percent, globally china alone will be putting out more ADDITIONAL pollution over the next 15 years than we produce in Canada now - so we won't have made any headway.

    It's important to do what we can. But it's also important that we look at other ways to adapt to what's going to happen. Because like it or not - human caused other - it's going to happen.
  25. Frank Luzten from Canada writes: Once again, I see the armchair climatologists are out in force. 'Maybe it hasn't occurred to the global scientific community that they should subject their hypotheses to tests!' 'Maybe the Earth's climate has varied before!' What stunning insights! I can't believe the constant stream of comments from those who apparently think that thousands of researchers worldwide have somehow collectively ignored the basic tenets of the scientific method. Scientists who aren't selling themselves to the highest bidder have not ignored alternatives that they find inconvenient - these alternative explanations that are continuously trotted out have already been considered, and have been rejected as false. Being ignorant of the research that has been done does not mean that it doesn't exist!

    Jeff Peterson: So the polar ice caps vanished at the peak of a previous climactic cycle - does that really make you eager to see what will happen when we reach a global temperature that has no precedent? Nobody is questioning that the climate has changed before - people are worried because the climate is changing faster than we've seen in over half a million years of data, and that in the past 100 years CO2 levels (which have historically been very strongly correlated with global temperature) have shot way above the historical maximum. The fact that the relatively minor swings in the past have caused huge changes is not reason for comfort, it is reason for even greater concern.
  26. F Luzten from Canada writes: Bill Johnson: It's not all that unreasonable to label somebody who publicly denies the existence of global warming as a 'shill for the energy industry' if they actually are in the employ of the energy industry! Next time you see one of these alleged 'scientists' spouting off in a newspaper article 'alternative explanations', I would strongly suggest you try typing their name into Google. I've done so a couple of times (although admittedly 'a couple of times' isn't a huge sample) and each time I've found very strong evidence of their connection to the energy industry. The fact that the only scientists who deny anthropogenic climate change are those who receive money from the oil companies should perhaps tell you something. The CBC had a program on recently called 'The Denial Machine' that was quite interesting - I'd strongly recommend you watch it. It's available for free (your tax dollars at work) - check it out at http://www.cbc.ca/fifth/denialmachine/index.html.
  27. Duncan Munro from Langley BC, Canada writes: ' Are Canadians really willing stop using clothes dryers? '
    These can be increased in efficiency to cut energy consumption
    'Stop cutting their lawns? '
    Yes, I only cut mine once or twice a year. If you don't water it and set your mower on a high position, then you don't need to cut it very often. Keeping the lawn long protects the roots and soil.
    'Will they compel the gov't to ban SUVs?'
    From 1939-45 this country banned all auto production. There is no reason why vehicle size and weight cannot be regulated. Jimmy Carter's CAFE plan would have cut fuel consumption by about 1/2 had it not been scrapped by Reagan.
    'Ban suburban development?'
    We should be reverting to row housing (with individual yards) on a much larger scale as an alternative to the single family dwelling (SFD). However a SFD can be fitted with solar panels and re-engineered to dramatically decrease energy consumption. A national program to produce and install solar panels would cut the cost per KwH to the point where it would be quite economical. The point is , is that it must be done on large scale so that mass production can drive down the unit cost.
    'Stop eating exotic foods shipped from around the world?'
    sure.
    'Stop selling our oil to the USA until they sign Kyoto?'
    By re-tooling the North American auto industry to mass produce lightweight, hybrid technology vehicles, both countries would reduce fuel consumption while Cdn petroleum reserves will be available to future generations
    All these things can be done, and quite easily too. We have the technology now we just need the will. In 1939 Canada had barely any military production, yet by 1945 we were supply 10% of the military needs of the entire Commonwealth. This country has almost unlimited potential, if we are willing to harness it.

  28. John L. Murlowe from Colony of Vancouver Island, Canada writes: A pol gets up in the morning, wets his finger, sticks it in the air and one side of the finger feels cool and the other side warm. He gets up next morning, wets his finger, sticks it in the air and the side that felt cool now feels warm. 'Hmm,' he says, 'looks like 'Climate Change.' I'd better get someone to create a few statistics so I can build a bridge where there is no river.'
  29. Duncan Munro from Langley BC, Canada writes: If Canada re-engineers its economy, if will also drive down the unit costs of things like solar panels, which in turn will allow for their widespread use in emerging economies like India. Similarly the need to access our economy will also drive design into energy efficiency.
  30. Hugh Campbell from Canada writes: dave srigley: 'Are Canadians really willing stop using clothes dryers? Stop cutting their lawns? Will they compel the gov't to ban SUVs? Ban suburban development? Stop eating exotic foods shipped from around the world? Stop selling our oil to the USA until they sign Kyoto?'

    It may be easier to get your head around these issues, one at a time, by thinking in relative terms, instead of all-or-nothing absolutes. For example: an electric lawn mower likely uses less energy/generates less emissions than a two-stroke gas mower; a push-mower uses less than an electric mower, and gives you more exercise; clover lawns are lower maintenance than grass lawns.
  31. Hokey Dokley from Calgary, Canada writes: JD Wood, 'Thanks Stephen Harper and G.W. Bush, perhaps two of the last people on earth who don't understand the dangers of global warming (or the fact that it even exists!!)' Could you please explain the dangers of global warming. Smart scientists are actually worried about the next global cooling... but let's live in the moment and discuss your current worry. The affects of short term global warming are....?
  32. wolfram dressler from BNE, Australia writes: To the skeptics. Do you actually now how consensus on the factors that contribute to global warming are demonstrated? We're not talking about conspiracy theories, a tilt in the Earth's axis, a heating spurt in an interglacial, or extra flares being emitted from the sun. Most of the world’s leading atmospheric scientists – many of whom work for the ICCP – have long said that increases in greenhouse gases cause micro and regional level atmospheric warming that affects the health of ecosystems of which we are part and dependent upon (sorry to say). Why do you still look for credible evidence when the world’s leading scientists are in agreement on the immediate causes and consequences of global warming? We have had audiences be skeptical of nearly every environmental issue that scientists (those who aren’t sponsored by the petroleum industry) have warned us about. First it was the decline in whale stocks (and the ensuing anti-whaling campaigns in northwest pacific), then the acidification of our soils and water, then the collapse of our Cod stocks, now Pacific and Atlantic Salmon, soon Snow Crab, then use of phosphates in water in the Great Lakes. The list is much longer. It was largely those who profited from industry that ignored ALL of the warnings that accompanied each of these major environmental issues. Do we only move forward once the skeptics lead us to act on the basis of environmental brinkmanship? If California and Europe can act quickly on environmental threats, then so can we. On top of all this we hop upon and smother other countries in order to suck oil, while our continent's permafrost slumps and city air and water gets soiled. We should be ashamed!
  33. JD Wood from Toronto, Canada writes: 'Hokey Dokley' has requested a 30 second speed lesson on global warming. It is unfortunate that people do not receive the necessary education in school.

    Global warming will lead to:
    - floods/droughts
    - rapid species loss, due to seasonal changes
    - collapse of arctic ice shelf (more species loss)

    Now these are just the bare basics. There is no single reputable scientist who disagrees that humans are the cause of global warming.
  34. Terrence Punch from Halifax, Canada writes: Having read a good deal about World War Two and Canada's part in it, I have failed to detect that there were such things as a Liberal war effort, a Conservative war effort or a CCF war effort. The issues were too large for partisan bickering. If an ecological crisis truly looms, as I think we generally agree it does, it is time to surmount partisan ambition and get our act together.

    When one party promises to throw a 10-metre rope to a person drowning 100 metres from shore, what is the good of another party claiming to be preferable because it will toss out a 15-metre rope? Like the bubonic Plague, climate change affects us all and it is far too pressing a matter to squabble about. We need solutions, not slogans, and every Canadian has to become part of the solution, even if it does mean giving up luxuries such as overpowered SUVs, and stop overheating our malls.
  35. Brad Buss from Toronto, writes: So if we cant get the wonderful Chinese to have human rights, do we think we can get them to stop destroying the world environmentally? They will be the ones who make or break any of this on pure numbers alone.
  36. Jeff S from Calgary, Canada writes: how arrogant are we humans to actually think that we have an affect on the environment that we are witnessing in today's global warming. Global warming is not caused by humans.
  37. Scot Loucks from Pickering, Canada writes: You are right Jeff S from Calgary. It's caused my JD Wood and his ilk.

    JD... you are usually on ignore, but 'No single reputable scientist'?? Give me a break. You have outdone yourself.
  38. Scot Loucks from Pickering, Canada writes: Nice to see that based on today's Globe Poll.... 41 percent of us still pass for inteligent life on this planet..... well, at least on this web site.
  39. G Smith from Canada writes: I'm still looking for 1 reputable scientist against the 1000's that say global warming is reality. I'm sure that the naysayers will post 1 name each that says it isn't happening. Try posting 1000 names. My analogy is this:

    If 1000 experts tell you one thing and 1 expert paid by the oil companies tells us the opposite, who are you going to believe?

    These are the same people that told us smoking didn't cause cancer, that Saddam had WMD's, etc.
  40. Robert Dryburgh from Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada writes: B Fulsom from Menlo Park, United States. Your absolutely correct. Show us the poll in it’s entirety. Polls and surveys can be rigged to obtain desired results. I use to work for a Crown Corp. that routinely had pollsters take “stacked” surveys to compile the figures the way they wanted.
  41. Scot Loucks from Pickering, Canada writes: G Smith. Look a little harder. just a little.

    Why is it called Greenland and how did the Vikings manage to farm it under all that ice. Maybe the ice didn't use to be there?

    How much gas was there going into the air when millions of buffalo roamed free in North America? Our current bovine population contributes 20 percent of our GH gasses. I believe it is third on our list after coal burning plants and diesel vehicles.

    Concentrate on pollution of the environment if you really want to be an environmentalist...... quit being a sheep following junk science.
  42. James Young from Brantford, Canada writes: The Deluge
    The cause of this judgment was the corruption and violence that filled the earth in the ninth generation from Adam.

    God in righteous indignation determined to purge the earth of the ungodly. Amid a world of crime and guilt there was one household that continued faithful and true to God, the household of Noah. 'Noah was a just man and perfect in his generations.'

    Let us pray and get back to God.

    Durgen.
  43. Scot Loucks from Pickering, Canada writes: James Young.... it's Saturday, not Sunday, stuff your sermon and go back to bed.
  44. James Cyr from Balmertown, Canada writes: The environment is the number one issue due to sensationalist articles published by the media. '56 % of Canadians support fossil fuel rationing' is the height of ignorance and stupidity and is a perfect example of people knowing NOTHING about the topic. I doubt that anyone has thought through the consequences of fossil fuel rationing. Steps should be taken to eliminate pollution and to bring on line alternate energy sources. Climate change will happen regardless of what we do. At any rate, Kyoto is NOT the way to do it!
  45. Dave Medich from Windsor, Canada writes: I hope the new 'cult' doesn't get out of hand and create eco-terrorism where the brain-washed zealots take matters into their own hands. I'm sure an 'inquisition' would prevent this by punishing the 'heretics'. They'd better be careful about the selling of 'indulgences' (carbon credits) which forgives all sins. This brought down the Catholic Church and led to 'Protestantism'. However, it looks like the new 'cult' is growing rapidly but we must be prepared to 'de-program' in the future. Many may discover that the new 'cult' is not filling their spiritual needs and is really about enriching the church's hierarchy.
  46. Catherine Wilkie from Canada writes: The health of the global population requires that we take global warming seriously and deal with it responsibly. I don't agree with Don Adams on his presumption that the environmental band-wagon is tracking with reckless abandon towards the future. It is labouring, rather, with the present gov't refusing any action for a year, and finally picking up policy from the past and applying it, again. That's a start. But to give the notion that environmental concerns are blinding us to all is is foolish. Compare the yearly outlay of monies for the military to what we are spending on the environment. The environmental concerns are health concern, sovereignty concerns and future enterprise opportunities. We need to lose our sun accellerated cataracts and adapt. That includes an acceptance that the problem includes man-made habits that are emphasizing our destructive pattern of over-consumption and damage.
  47. Scot Loucks from Pickering, Canada writes: Please Catherine Wilkie, it's bad enough that you are on the band wagon, give it up on taking shots at a 1 year government when the previous 13 year government not only signed Kyoto..... but then ignored it. (Rightly so on the ignore, shame, shame on the signing).
  48. Silly Putty from Whammo, United States writes: Global Warming...ooooh sorry Manmade Climate Change...will be seen 50 years from now as the biggest swindle in the history of the world. Go to Google Images and punch in Mt. St. Helens or Mt. Pinatubo or Mt. Insertyourfavoritevolcanohere. There's your real culprit - the Earth itself.
    Human's are but mere specks on the Earth; how silly and egocentric of some of you to believe we can actually reverse what is a completely natural cycle, if we all just ride our bikes to work or buy a Prius.
    Get over it, and enjoy the mild winters.
  49. Scot Loucks from Pickering, Canada writes: Whatever Glen Murtz, what are you saying? The only intelligent life in Canada is in Alberta?

    As I said before, 1000 years ago there was no ice in Greenland and millions of buffalo roamed North America, spewing gas at 100 times what our current cattle put out (20 percent of Canada's GHG). BTW, the rest of the world burned coal.

    Today, the northern pole is melting and the southern pole's ice field is growing.... natural cycle. note natural.

    40 years ago these same scientists were warning of a new ice age. Read Farley Mowat.

    You want to be an environmentalist? Start caring about pollution of every kind, especially our air and water..... and give this global warming/climate change/Kyoto crap a rest.

    Cute line about flat earth.... I believe that was junk science as well, just like you and your flock are following now.
  50. Hugh Campbell from Canada writes: Scot Loucks: If you're looking for thoroughness, why not go all the way:

    1. 'Kyoto' has never been considered by anybody to be the sole solution to AGW, except perhaps by those opposed to it;

    2. The Liberal government did indeed sign Kyoto, and did little towards its goals.

    3. The Liberal government introduced dozens of minor programs which were at varying stages of implementation when the Conservatives took over;

    4. The Conservatives eliminated most of those Liberal programs almost immediately, and replaced them with nothing ... they've announced more programs but details won't be available until spring;

    5. Scientific consensus on AGW has been increasing annually for the past twenty years.

    It seems to me the Liberals did the minimum possible. When the Conservatives pulled into town, they should have started improving and expanding programs, and introducing alternative solutions where appropriate, rather than eliminating them.
  51. Don Adams from Canada writes: Rohit, excellent post. I agree, welcome to Canada. We need more middle of the road thinkers like you who are willing to listen, compromise, yet still move forward. One other thing we need to do is send people like Duncan Munro to India. They sure need him more over there than we do over here.
  52. PATRICK TREMBLAY from Montreal, Canada writes: This global warming propaganda is getting out of hand. Weather is and never was in a static state. Even if proof can be found to convince me, solutions like Kyoto are useless. China is building 500 coal burning electric plants, what difference would it make if we reduce here a little and emissions grow big elswhere?
  53. Don Adams from Canada writes: Jeff, you're as bad as JD Woodiot, except you're 180' opposite. I agree that global warming is a natural progression, but I also have to agree it's been speeded up by human actions. It hasn't been CAUSED by humans Woodiot, but we CONTRIBUTED to it Jeff. There is no one answer to what we can do, lots and lots of good ideas here and on yesterday's post though. Two things we CAN'T do.... blindly follow Kyoto and send $$ out of Canada, or move too fast and totally disrupt our economy and our lifestyles, as the ultra idiots would do. Somehow, sane people have to meet in the middle, and come up with compromise solutions. We also need to round up the idiots on both extremes and either send them out of the country or pack them away into institutions until the sane people have agreed on action and gotten started on it. We're sure not going to be able to slow down GW, but there are things we can do, eg clean up the air in our cities
  54. Scot Loucks from Pickering, Canada writes: Hugh Campbell.... can't disagree with what you are saying.

    Would like to add one thing though.

    When the PC's cancelled the programs, they stated that each program would be reviewed and decisions made after the review.... most were money wasters.

    They have actually reimplemented some of the Liberal programs, with some tweaks to make sure they are cost effective. How can you complain about that?
  55. Scot Loucks from Pickering, Canada writes: Don Adams; I thought that was exactly what the PC's were trying to do with their Clean air act.

    Pollution of all kinds, especially air and water, should be our attack points. Unfortunately, the cult of Kyoto has taken over.
  56. J.C. Davies from Canada writes: Previous comments have referred to the CBC's Fifth Estate documentary 'The Denial Machine' which stars Vancouver PR man James Hoggan. Mr. Hoggan made a number of disparaging remarks about a group of 60 scientists who signed a letter to Prime Minister Steven Harper urging him to review the science of climate change. According to Mr. Hoggan, the scientists who signed are not to be trusted. 'We looked into the folks who were on that, and all but 19 were Americans and most of them are kind of infamous characters from the states who worked for the tobacco industry.'

    In fact, only 12 are Americans and at most two have done past science work on tobacco. About 20 are Canadians, while others are from about a dozen other countries, including France, Norway, Australia and the Netherlands. So Mr. Hoggan's statements on the scientists are dead wrong.

    This is no small matter of incidental fact. Mr. Hoggan's statement, along with a few others, formed the basis for The Denial Machine's major theme, which was a claim that scientists who are skeptical of official global warming theory are part of an oil industry front that is made up of the same hack scientists who acted in the tobacco industry debacle a decade earlier. (From the National Post.)
  57. Erin Ballantyne from Canada writes: I think we should do what we can to limit pollution--and that includes pressuring the Chinese and the Indians to follow 'green' routes to prosperity. But some drastic all-out program? As has been stated many times before, our paltry 2% is meaningless unless everyone else in the world does the same. Why are we being constantly harangued by this journalistic enterprise? When I was in journalism school many years ago, my professors would have called this sensationalism 'yellow journalism.'
  58. Mike Bellows from Canada writes: This is reading like the script for a B grade movie. This media obsession and the resulting hysteria is reminisant of War of the Worlds ( the famous 1938 incident kids , not the Tom Cruise movie ). The climate is changing , the climate is changing. Of course it is. It is dynamic and in a small way humans influence climate change. However , I share Dave Medich's concern that this obsession is breeding some extremists and turning into a cult. Lawnmowers of the world beware.
  59. Grant Samuel from Nanaimo, Canada writes: We owe a debt of gratitude to Stphen Harper. His ineptitude and caviller attitude to the environmental file has helped to bring the issue to the forefront. His recent environmental epiphany is pure political opportunism. He can not be trusted.

    Thank you to poster Luzten I saw CBC's Fifth Estate program 'The Denial Machine' it was excellent and well worth another watch.
  60. Scot Loucks from Pickering, Canada writes: J.C. Davies; It's the CBC.... what do you expect? Liberal propoganda machine since Trudeau.

    Erin Ballantyne; are you trying to use logic on this current crop of sheep and their mesiahs... the media? Good post and good luck.
  61. Sue W from Canada writes: I'm expecting spam in my inbox any day now encouraging me to buy shares in Save the World Hedge Fund.
  62. Scot Loucks from Pickering, Canada writes: LOL Sue W. 8:30 in the morning and i'm laughing... good stuff :)
  63. Joe Mead from Winnipeg, Canada writes: This article is unbelievable. Canadians don't take the climate as serious as this article states. The Christmas lights still came on and burned in every house. Nobody sold an SUV for a Moped yet. All the climate change whiners are just that - whiners. They want somebody else to foot the bill on change, rather than start taking personal responsibility for what they nag about. When will these environmental couch-potato NAZI's give up on trying to get us to all to conform to their wishes, when they cannot even do it themselves. Lies and exaggerations.
  64. Don Adams from Canada writes: Catherine, Catherine, Catherine. You're getting to be ALMOST as bad as JD Woodiot (but he's in a class by himself) I suggest you read Scott Loucks post re Cons and cancellation and re-implementation of programs. Global Warming and Clean Air are just NOT going to besolved quickly. Reality. Face it, as much as you hate it. With one year in power, and the immense amount of work that has to be done, programs re-viewed etc. is just not enough time. The Libs were notorious for bringing in programs that were complete money wasters. Also notorious for bringing in programs that were useful at the time, but are no longer useful, but of course, Libs would never include sunset clauses. Since the Cons had no real information while in opposition, they need time for review. Some programs will be cancelled, some will be brought back, and some will be re-worked, improved on, then brought back. But it can't all be done in one year.
  65. David Bakody from Dartmouth, writes: Times are changing, and mankind can get use to anything. Think even the most harden criminal can live in cell. It nowl become the will of the goverment to inforce good rules. Kyoto is the starting point for the world, if Stephen & George think they can divide the world for their self-interests with cowboy oil men who believe big profits will save their grandchildren then let them try. A new generation is taking hold 'Senior Boomers' and they want their grandchildren to have a planet to live on. Think, and Think, then Think again the next time you hear your grandchildren breathing when you hold them and think about their future. Ladies and gentlemen we have had a reality good safe life since WW II. The NDP has chosen to jump in bed with the Conservative and by doing so dumped Kyoto and that leaves only Mr. Dion, his pal Kyoto and Liberals who can put a respected foot forward with the world. Can Stevie & Co eat crow and admitt thier mistakes, sure, but will they or will they continue to talk about yesterday's news?
  66. r bruce wareing from BOGOTA, Colombia writes: CAN YOU EXPECT PRIME MINISTER STEVEN HARPER TO FIX A 100 YEAR PROBLEM,GIVE HIM TIME AND HE WILL DO THE RIGHT THING THIS IS A WORLD WIDE PROBLEM,LOOK WHAT HAPPENED IN BRAZIL.
  67. Catherine Wilkie from Canada writes: Don, Don, Don
  68. A Pragmatic Realist from Toronto, Canada writes: And the saddest part of all is that Margaret Wente now thinks she's an expert on climate change. But then, she did support Harper in the last election.
  69. Scot Loucks from Pickering, Canada writes: Keep drinking that kool-aid David Bakody from Dartmouth.... I'm guessing you were born in the 80's.
  70. Grant Samuel from Nanaimo, Canada writes: Don Adams says, 'Since the Cons had no real information while in opposition, they need time for review.'

    Well they had access to the same information as everybody else but chose to ignore it and slashed programs on solely ideology, whilst gleefully marching off to the precipice of their flat earth brains.
  71. Dave Medich from Windsor, Canada writes: I wonder when travel agents will see a rise in trips to the 'Mecca' of the new religion. I'm sure many new converts would like to visit 'Kyoto' to worship in the holy city where their religion was founded. Maybe they can have big rallies of the converted with sermons from the Reverend Al Gore and his peer-reviewed Apostles. They could also introduce a 'tithe' where adherents give 10% of their income to advance the new communion. We have found the new Messiah!
  72. Catherine Wilkie from Canada writes: I will be interested in how the Prime Minister will handle this issue. Many of his supporters, here, are certainly unbelieving in the science of global change and unforgiving with others who believe gov't's must make changes to address the problem. Will an election be forced if the NDP does not come to an agreement with the gov't on the environment committee? Will you people attack the NDP for their position? Or, will the Prime Minister actually do the flip-flop and appease them? I have seen posters make the 180 degree change with this gov't before (income trusts, not dealing with China, soft-wood lumber...) The spin will be a sight to behold.
  73. Derek Holtom from Swan River (Only cowards don't use their real name on here), writes: Here's the media playing up global warming doom and gloom to sell more papers.
    and once again, the idea someone could come on here and say Kyoto is garbage, and that there must be another way to cut greenhouse gases, will get you branded a knuckle dragging neo con
    i suggest everyone who buys into the doom and gloom sell all your electical toys, your car, don't use anything not recyclable, and live in a mud hut.
    after all, visiting this site on a computer is adding to greenhouse gases, isn't it?
    sarcasm aside...
    perhaps when the media quit whipping the public into a frenzy, some sane debate can be had on how to reduce ALL our pollution, and we can forget the garbage that is Kyoto was ever created
  74. Ed H from Williamsford, Ont, Canada writes: I'm still waiting for someone from the G&M to answer rb from Calgary who asked (way back in this post) what is unusual about 8 degrees C in Paris on Feb 1st? This is so typical of the enviromental movement. If they would simply state the facts instead of giving us a heap of exaggerations, clumsy anecdotes, & confusing different issues we may begin to understand the issues. This reporting is at the same level as Waterworld!
  75. Scot Loucks from Pickering, Canada writes: Grant Samuel from Nanaimo, they didnt' know exactly how much money was being wasted..... being as they were liberal programs.

    They have re intstated more than one of these programs (of course, Dion and his kool aid drinkers accused them of stealing their ideas). But with something callled checks and balances.

    The only ideology that was going on was the idea that wasting Canadian taxpayers money was wrong...... you have a problem with that?
  76. Dave T from midwest, Canada writes: Reading the posts this morning about global warming made me think of a quote from the poet Rene Char who said, 'Lucidity is the wound closest to the sun.'
  77. Scot Loucks from Pickering, Canada writes: Catherine Wilkie; Your NDP are irrelevant.... if Taliban Jack actually achieves anything within this minority government, I will be impressed.

    Derek Holtom from Swan River; Right on.

    Ed H from Williamsford, Ont,; Good luck on that one. (I agree).
  78. G Smith from Canada writes: To Quote:
    'As I said before, 1000 years ago there was no ice in Greenland and millions of buffalo roamed North America, spewing gas at 100 times what our current cattle put out (20 percent of Canada's GHG). BTW, the rest of the world burned coal.

    Today, the northern pole is melting and the southern pole's ice field is growing.... natural cycle. note natural. '

    Really?

    I guess the ice core samples frome the ice sheets on Greenland dating back 10's of thousands of years are phoney?

    The ice field at the south pole is shrinking, not expanding. Recent NASA satellite measurements show a loss of 36 cubic miles annually.

    The bison that roamed the plains were not fed farmed grains as is today's practice and their environmental impact per capita was much smaller than today's animals.

    Your sources are incorrect and therefore your conclusion is flawed, Want to try again?

    ;
  79. David Niemczycki from Hamilton, Canada writes: Global warming, fact or fiction? That is the question. If it is fact then we have to look at the major contributing factor to this problem. The major problem here is the uncontrolled population growth that is going on in the world. We are spreading like a cancer through out this world consuming it like there is no tomorrow. If it is fiction, then there is no need to worry.
  80. Catherine Wilkie from Canada writes: Good morning Scot:
    I've printed your response about the NDP. It will be nice to replay back to you, in the near future.
  81. Grant Samuel from Nanaimo, Canada writes: Listen Scotter Thought before action is always the best way to proceed wiping something out and then rebiulding virtually the same thing costs way more. They had no intention of doing any of what they are doing now until Rona at the behest of 'The Harpy' crashed and burned.