Skip navigation

 Login or Register | Member Centre

Warming likely to hit travel hard

RANDOLPH E. SCHMID

The Associated Press

Latest comment posted at 11:26 AM EDT 11/03/08

Trains, boats, planes and bridges all expected to be affected by climate change ...Read the full article

This conversation is closed

  1. Alfons Materna from Dogs Nest, Canada writes: Ok, that's for the US.
    What about Canada?
  2. Ed Long from white Rock, Canada writes: But first we have to make it through this winter so the Arctic ice can begin the melting cycle again.
  3. jill of all trades from Ottawa, Canada writes: Global warming? Tell that to the 7 feet of snow covering my BBQ.
  4. Uncle Fester from A Land Before Time, Ont., Canada writes: Another one of those articles based on predictions. A lot of 'if's, when's and expected to be's. I am surprised this wasn't the result of a university's experimental computer model. It's a lot easier to tax worried people.
  5. BEN DOVER from WESTERN CANADA, Canada writes: More fear-mongering. Is Toronto's winter part of global warming?
  6. Jean Malice from Fight Global Walarmism and Carbon taxes, Canada writes: Another fearmongering scenario despite the fact that there is no statistical evidence to show any increase in Hurricanes number and intensity. The bandwagon is still hot for some latecomers to the cult and the press always obliges without any critical view. Funny how the globe did not cover the reunion in NYC last week of climatologists who don't buy AGW... That's information for you!
  7. Tyler Williams from seattle, United States writes: Interesting.

    Alfons Materna from Canada writes: 'Ok, that's for the US - what about Canada?'

    Alfons, check a map and then re-read the article ('...drier conditions are likely in the watersheds supplying the St. Lawrence Seaway and the Great Lakes - the resulting lower water levels would reduce vessel shipping capacity, seriously impairing freight movements in the region...').
  8. S L from Canada writes: funny that they never mentioned that global cooling will cause similar effects on climate change and will have similar impact on travelling.
  9. Uncle Fester from A Land Before Time, Ont., Canada writes: Lake Ontario is expected to reach it's average water level this year. One winter replinished it. Isn't that the one that drains into the St Lawrence? I guess it will be at it's average level as well.
  10. Shawn Bull from Canada writes: I forgot that the globe was warming. Hard to tell in -10 degree weather and 4 feet of snow.
  11. S L from Canada writes: Did the Globe and Mail follow up on the convention on global warming last week in New York? of course not, silly me. That was only a gathering of a minority of misinformed people disguised as scientists
  12. CD W from Canada writes: As of last saturday, Lake Michigan water levels are up one foot from last october, and now the melt will add to that. I am not sure of the Superior snow pack, but it could make things interesting in Huron and Georgian Bay this spring. The gates on the Severn waterway section are wide open draining the central area including Lake Simcoe. I await the measurements and the spring flooding.
  13. Silent Majority from Canada writes: Joe,
    You are correct. Notice how the study was produced by those that would benefit with more spending on infrastucture, etc.? The religion of global warming/ climate change is nothing more than a means to extort money from taxpayers, plain and simple. Spread fear amongst the general population and then steal money from their collective pockets. What a great business model.
  14. Erik D. from Ottawa, Canada writes: To Shawn Bull: perhaps you should visit Calgary, I hear they have lttle if any snow, the temps in the teens and some folks are playing golf...
  15. The Bubble from Canada writes: You people are a laugh. There has to be a concentration of stupidity in Canada especially amongst the right wingers. Oh well, it will be the rich and greedy who will suffer the most. There is nothing to fear and the propogandists above will, in the end, be shown for just how out of touch with reality or how small they are for posting this propoganda for a living. I assume most of the posters so far work for the oil business.
  16. bill williams from Canada writes: -

    Yeah...more 'nonsense'. Do you people ever look at ANYTHING that is not in accord with your expectations and beliefs. You sound like a bunch of religious zealots. This would only be nonsense if there were little or no chance that global warming was for real. You can all make your little cases that the scientific research is not settled on this issue (I disagree), but you have to be seriously delusional to argue that there is no real chance that AGW is happening, and if there is a serious chance, then lots of things, including transportation systems and infrastructure have to be examined in that context.

    Absolutely the only point that comes across in your postings is that you're terrified and don't want to hear about this. If that's not the way you want to be perceived, make a change, because your stuff is getting old, and is reinforcing that image for you. Even the Harper/Baird submarine is starting to come up to periscope depth on globall warming. You're getting marginal.

    Do me a favour: stand in front of a mirror and say 'No reasonable case can be made that anthropogenic global warming is a serious possibility'

    Now, are you done laughing at yourself?

    -
  17. Alan Burke from climatechange.dynalias.com in Ottawa, Canada writes: So 'Silenty Majority', among other posters, let me ask whether you're just shooting from the lip or have you done some independent web research triggered by the G&M story?

    I've done a bit and I see some backing science. So far all I've seen here is the usual politically-polarized conspiracy-theory crud that usually follows from stories like this.

    Please, people, do your own research. I'll follow on from the leads in this story - the NRC is usually a credible source.

    Please do the same before you spout your usual venom.
  18. Cliff Dunlop from vancouver, Canada writes: God, what a crock. I guess we can add the National Research Council to the list of Chicken Littles that are running around wringing their wings and looking for the king. I wonder who's the fox? Maybe the author's civil engineering firm who'd get RICH, RICH RICH, replacing all our infrastructure.

    By the way, why does the Globe feel it has to print every tacking report that comes its way? Why not hire someone competent to separate the BS from the real stuff. Your credibility is slowing slipping away as well guys.
  19. R. M. from Regina, Canada writes: Who chaired this committee, Chicken Little? Navel gazing gone crazy.
  20. Silent Majority from Canada writes: Bill, Alan amongst others, what have you done to save the planet from complete and utter destruction.
  21. Uncle Fester from A Land Before Time, Ont., Canada writes: These are the same kind of predictions that are found in Revelations. They are just as relevant today as they were when the Romans sacked Jerusalem.
  22. Jeff S from Canada writes: More alarmism from the media.

    The climate has always been changing. And always will.

    The enviromental terrorists don't want to acknowledge that though. Would want to cut off those funding dollars.
  23. Alan Burke from climatechange.dynalias.com in Ottawa, Canada writes: Cliff Dunlop, why hire critics when they can get get polarized views here to do their own market research? Of course they have to face the usual pile of manure that results from every story but perhaps they can glean a few pearls among the residue. Your's won't be one of them if their criteria are facts rather than political opinion.

    Oh I forgot. Sensationalism is what sells. Not reality.
  24. Mike McFae from Canada writes: Another report containing predictions. Nice to see that these articles are farther and fewer between. It's hard to get a rise over the same old mantra and listen to the same old tirades from Bubble and Bill who are really all that scares most of us.
  25. Evan Davies from Canada writes: Do you skeptics have some sort of coordination so that you can all reply to any climate change article on G&M so quickly?

    Here's a little science for you. Climate does not equal weather. Weather is short term, and climate is long term. If you have snow now, that does not disprove climate change science.

    Do a little reading. Climate change information, especially from the IPCC (ipcc.ch), is free. You can download it and read it yourselves. Then you won't look so ignorant.
  26. Orest Zarowsky from Toronto, Canada writes: Mark Bowen's 'Censoring Science' describes how GWB worked very hard to suppress hard scientific evidence of AGW/CC. The work of Dr. James E. Hansen, Director of NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies since 1983, is the world's leading expert on the subject. He was the one who raised the issue 20 years ago. And he and his section have been under continuous attack by GWB's adminstration. Not to mention all the rest of the climate research done by various US agencies. The likes of the pundits that have posted here so far are - correctly and accurately - described as court jesters for the vested interests in the oil and coal business who actually do know better, but are applying economics-based 'rational self-interest' to justify their short-term profits. The other book you fools should read is Jarred Diamond's 'Collapse'. Very interesting and informative, but very scary. Especially that 'ISEP' attitude and approach so common to the 'business as usual' crowd. ISEP = 'It's Someone Else's Problem'. Which is exactly what the Rabid Right Wing is pushing. As for 'socialism', well your ability to act as an individual is limited by the population density of your society. The higher the density, the lower your 'freedom of action', and the more regulated and 'socialist' the society becomes. For the simple reason that your freedom to urinate at will into the creek outside your door is constrained by the trivial fact that my drinking water comes from the same creek, but I happen to live downstream from you. As you live downstream from someone else. I don't want to drink your urine, and I'm sure you don't want to drink your upstream neighbour's urine either. Same principle applies to AGW/CC. Reality - accept and deal with it. Or you will be dealt with by reality. And that WILL be harsh and unpleasant indeed. Funny how 'responsibility and accountability', so beloved of the neo-cons and RRW, is so quickly abandoned when it comes down to cases. 'I am ENTITLED to my Hummer'.
  27. Silent Majority from Canada writes: You remember recently when people talked about how brutal this winter has been the Kyoto police were out in full force talking how this is weather not climate. You can damn well bet that when we get warm weather in the summer (imagine that) they will be shouting how it is climate change and that we are all doomed.
  28. Alan Burke from climatechange.dynalias.com in Ottawa, Canada writes: 'Silent Majority', you can find my contributions by doing some research. You know how to find my website. You can follow links. Unless you're willing to step up to accountability for your own claims, I'll not play your game.
  29. Brian W from Burlington, Canada writes: Whatever. Global-warm the frigging 5 feet of snow on my lawn, then we'll talk.
  30. Mike McFae from Canada writes: Silent Majority , when do you predict the earth will incur ' complete and utter destruction ' as you describe it ? I would like your insight as my brother and I were planning to start building a bunker.
  31. jimmy dunnit from Canada writes: the planet is warming. it grows increasingly warmer with all the deniers and their unbelievable bs.

    what an incredible waste of time arguing with these little insects.

    there's 7 ft. of snow on my bq, similar effects of global cooling, oh my!
    too funny. get onto something more in tune with your limited ability to think. creationism. or go to neal sheppard or media research centre.

    it's warming, get used to it.
  32. Alfons Materna from Dogs Nest, Canada writes: Tyler Williams from seattle my point was: Let's see a Canadian story about this instead of an AP rip n read. Canada is more than the Great Lakes and St Lawrence Seaway. A Canadian perspective is would be highly welcome.
  33. Silent Majority from Canada writes: Evan,
    Ya the IPCC, that UN organization that was asking for billions from developed Countries to have developing Countries adapt to the copmplete and utter destruction of the planet?
  34. Alan Burke from climatechange.dynalias.com in Ottawa, Canada writes: Orest, you have described very liquidly 'The Tragedy of the Commons'. Thanks.
  35. Alan Burke from climatechange.dynalias.com in Ottawa, Canada writes: 'Silent Majority', a 'climate' issue is normally regarded as something spanning 30 years.
  36. Silent Majority from Canada writes: Orest,
    What have you done to save the planet?
  37. Alan Burke from climatechange.dynalias.com in Ottawa, Canada writes: Have you read 'Alfons Materna' about the exaggerated effect at the poles? You'll find it on my website.
  38. Brian NAV from Daytona, United States writes: http://www.globalwarmingheartland.org/

    I wish the alarmists would stop spending my money (via taxes) on these foolish studies. If they want to do something about their belief, then fund it themselves and let me enjoy my life. Read some facts re 'the myth of global warming' above. Al Gore sure fooled a lot of lemming's.
  39. Uncle Fester from A Land Before Time, Ont., Canada writes: AGW theory can be use to explain the upcoming ice age. The theory of all theories, a theory that can predict everything. We have not experienced such pronounced group think since the Inquisition.
  40. Alan Burke from climatechange.dynalias.com in Ottawa, Canada writes: And 'Silent Majority', what have you done?
  41. Tony . from Waterloo, Canada writes:
    A few points stick out to me in this article:

    1. The assumption that climate change will lead to more hurricanes is quite heavily disputed. Even the IPCC only gives it a 50% probability. There are about as many climate scientists predicting warming will reduce hurricanes as those predicting an increase.

    2. As is often the cases the 'bad' points of climate change are emphasized here while the 'good' points are mostly ignored. Warmer temperatures should lead to less freeze/thaw cycles in many temperate areas in the U.S. (not so much Canada), and that should reduce infrastructure maintenance costs in those areas.

    Overall the pros/cons of warmer temperatures for transportation infrastructure are probably a bit of a wash. There are some good and some bad depending on where you live. Canada is likely to be a net beneficiary here, as we are in virtually every single aspect of global warming.

    The basic premise of the study though makes a fair bit of sense. If the climate is changing we need to build our infrastructure to handle future weather patterns. When making something to last 50-100 years it makes a lot more sense to build for tomorrow rather then for yesterday.
  42. Silent Majority from Canada writes: Mike,
    I'm sorry I don't have an answer for you but you can contact Alan, Orest et al because they know the exact date.
  43. Tim Larson from Canada writes: The Anti-GW conference was well documented in the rather conservative National Post. That's about it. Reason being that most of the presented studies/hypotheses of this conference - when read in detail and cross-checked with actual data - were not deemed scientificly correct concerning employed methodology, data acquisition and on top of it many participants were sponsored by lobby groups, industry, etc.
    Interestingly, this North-American mini-conference did not get any noteworthy echo elsewhere on this planet with the exception of short commentary, i.e. by the German Spiegel which rather ridiculed the convention by simply pointing to many places on this planet where people actually experience what is commonly referred to as climate change, like accumulation of severe droughts within recent years in Australia, Africa, worst storms and floodings in 100 years in Great Britain, rising average temperetures year after year throughout Europe, faster than expected melting of the Greenland ice and alpine glaciers worldwide.
    For all of you who - like me currently - drown in layers of cold Canadian snow, I understand how the concept of global warming does not work for you. But once again: Please keep in mind that it is only called global warming in North America. The Eu, AustralAsia, even China... commonly refer to the phenomenon as climate change and they get their good share of change. Severe weather conditions - as mentioned in the G&M article - are accumulating inr ecent years in Europe and Asia causing billions of $$ damage. In Australia the denial of any climate change cost the former Premier his job - the drought and skin cancer plagued Australians voted for somebody who is willing to reduce CO2 and other greenhose gases, make water use more efficient and so on for the sake of their health and well-being.
    While we had the most snow ever for a February and March in Toronto, it was once again one of the warmest Januaries and Februaries in Western Europe...
  44. Alan Burke from climatechange.dynalias.com in Ottawa, Canada writes: I see that the cannon fodder denialists are already out. The strategists will soon follow.

    I appeal to each of you to do your own independent research on the web. It was invented to share knowledge. Search. Be skeptical. But please do not shoot from the lip.
  45. Alan Burke from climatechange.dynalias.com in Ottawa, Canada writes: Tony, your point is good but how do you suggest dealing with the parts of the world in disruption? Some of whom have nuclear, chemical or biological weapons and will not die lightly?
  46. John Percy from Halifax, Canada writes: Uncle Fester from A Land Before Time, Ont., Canada writes: Another one of those articles based on predictions. A lot of 'if's, when's and expected to be's.'

    Isn't that what each federal budget is?
  47. Alan Burke from climatechange.dynalias.com in Ottawa, Canada writes: Do you ever answer a question directly 'Silent Majority'?

    A simple yes or no will not win the debate. Evasions of questions is pretty close to admission of defeat.
  48. V ADS from Canada writes: If it was fair game to blame recent hot summers on 'global warming,' it is fair game to blame this year's brutal winter on 'global cooling.'

    Now the doomsday rhetoric has moved on to 'extreme weather events' as if floods, droughts, hurricanes, etc., of today are somehow far worse than they had been in the past.
  49. bill williams from Canada writes: -

    Silent

    I have done nothing in an effort to save the planet from complete and utter destruction, because I don't think that's what we're risking. The planet is indifferent to our effects. The planet will survive and there will be some form of life on it... that's my guess. What's at risk is the planet in the form that we know it, and in a form that supports our kind of life the way it has existed for a mere few million years (modern humans, a few hundred thousand.

    What I have done to try and minimize the possibility of this sort of rapid change is to try and influence as many as I can by way of example, viz: move from 3000 sq ft home to small efficient townhouse condo; operate a MUCH smaller car; drive only when I absolutely have to; drive slower on the highway; emphasize locally produced and unprocessed food as much as possible in my shopping; reviewing my role as a 'consumer' (a term I despise when it is applied to me) by buying what I feel that I truly want and need; purchasing a renewable energy contract for my home, etc, etc ... and yes ... CFL lightbulbs.

    -
  50. I hate the G Comment Section from Ottawa, Canada writes: This winter was among the coldest EVER with record snowfall. I can't believe people are still trying to push climate change.
  51. The Bubble from Canada writes: I'm thinking there's a few oil workers on this post, the ignorance is greasy. The anger at having to read more proof that their industry is killing the planet palpable. It's going to be fun to watch them eat crow. Even the American public doesn't want that dirty oil sands oil. Ed Stelmach is the worst form of beauraucratic Nazi I've ever seen in a premier. Just doin his job. Maybe Alberta will soon revert back to an ocean, that'll learn them.
  52. Alan Burke from climatechange.dynalias.com in Ottawa, Canada writes: I remember an expression from my sports-car days, modified slightly here:

    Please engage your brain before putting your mouth in gear.
  53. Alan Burke from climatechange.dynalias.com in Ottawa, Canada writes: But perhaps they've already done that and just want to speed down the road.
  54. The Bubble from Canada writes: Only dumb people mix up weather with global warming. It's global warming that produces wierd weather. The west best get ready for tornado season, it'll be bigger than last year. I suppose it's fine that the posters here are from out west, it looks like some extreme weather out there and the deaths of some of these people will be needed to convince them.
  55. Mike McFae from Canada writes: Silent Majority , I was hoping for a more specific answer about timing of the world's end since you have warned us about the planets 'complete and utter destruction '. If you can't explain yourself perhaps you could tell me if my brother and I should use wood, straw or brick to construct our bunkers. Martha, I see the usual suspects are responding like Pavlov's dog to this latest cookie cutter article .
  56. Alan Burke from climatechange.dynalias.com in Ottawa, Canada writes: I'll be back.
  57. Craig Scott from Republic of Newfoundland, Canada writes: So when is this armogedon going to take place? Next year? 10 years? 100 years? 1,000,000 years?

    I am so sick of hearing about the sea levels rising and am curious to see it happen. I have lived next to the ocean all my life and I have never seen the ocean levels rise. I know of marks on rocks at my home town beach that have been in exactly the same place since I was a kid 30 years ago.

    I guess it is easy to convince the sheep in Toronto that the sea levels are rising when they likely haven't seen it in thier lives.
  58. Mike McFae from Canada writes: Bubble, obviously English is not your first language. In any event , wishing death on people is a sign that you need help my friend. Call a help line , they will be there for you. God bless.
  59. Jeff Kelly from Kitchener, Canada writes: G Comment - Even a fourth grader understands the difference between climate, seasons, and weather. Using your nitwit logic, if I look outside my window in July, and it is 30 degrees out, I guess I can conclude that Canada has a warm climate.

    This year's winter was a good reminder of what winter used to be like when I was a kid. I haven't seen a winter like this lately. Have you forgotten that? The climate is changing over the whole planet, and you think that snow on your lawn somehow makes you smarter than scientists who have studied this for decades? Wow. You give new meaning to the word ignorance.
  60. Silent Majority from Canada writes: The Bubble,
    My God, I didn't realize that even Calgary at 1100m above sea level was also threatened by the inevitable rise in sea level caused by the absolute direct correlation between mans combined CO2 emissions and climate change.
  61. J M from Realityville, Canada writes: It is high time we depopulate Alberta and shut the entire GD province down. The tar sands are now the single worst source of CO2 on the entire planet. Global warming has accelerated dramatically since the tar sands have been on production and it is expected that the rise of .7 degrees C/yr is to continue for decades. We should enjoy the snow now while it still exists in Canada. This is what you get with a PM from Alberta which shouldn't be allowed under any circumstance. Do yourself a favour and join the war on Alberta for the benefit of progressive Canadians everywhere.
  62. Bart Farquart from Land of Vanilla, Canada writes:
    'V ADS from Canada writes: If it was fair game to blame recent hot summers on 'global warming,' it is fair game to blame this year's brutal winter on 'global cooling.'

    Now the doomsday rhetoric has moved on to 'extreme weather events' as if floods, droughts, hurricanes, etc., of today are somehow far worse than they had been in the past.'

    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Agreed. Climate alarmists are forever escalating the hysteria. Its kind of like pornography. As in: 'Railway tracks will warp', 'a third of all species will become extinct', 'dirty socks will be left on the coffee table', etc.

    Every anecdotal weather event becomes another occasion for hysteria, finger pointing, and the vilification of dissenters by church members.

    Climate alarmists are probably hoping all the apocalyptic events they so fervently predict actually happen. Otherwise they will go down in history as the most tiresome bunch of groupthink zealots the world has seen since the Spanish Inquitistion.
  63. Silent Majority from Canada writes: Mike,
    I don't have an answer for the date of the complete and utter destruction of the world because I am not all knowing like the Kyoto police on this thread. My belief is that the earths climate will continue to change for some time (you know get hotter, get colder). Concrete and steel is always your best bet for the bunker. I'm going to scrap the bunker and go and plant a bunch more trees.
  64. Erik D. from Ottawa, Canada writes: To I hate the G Comment Section from Ottawa, Canada writes: 'This winter was among the coldest EVER with record snowfall. I can't believe people are still trying to push climate change.'

    Actually, although Ottawa has had a lot more snow than normal, the temperatures have been milder than the norm. We had a nice warm spat in January, remember the rain?
  65. Tim Larson from Canada writes: Oh Craig and all the other people who are getting so boring with their ever-so-Canada-centred perspective. There is a big world out there - yes, outside the borders of this lovely green, water-rich, beaver infested land there are - now, fasten your seat-belts - other countries. And while we have the COLDEST, SNOW-RICHEST winter HERE, others had yet another WARMEST WINTER ever. WOW!
    But honestly, I am no longer worried about people who join a discussion to simply repeat over and over and over again, that their thermometers in their cuty gardens show - 10 °C (hence no climate chnage, i.e. warming) or that they never saw their tiny little bit of ocean rise (while the South Pacifics little islands will have drowned within the next 50 years - but, oh well, that is once again outside Canada and hence not important).
    4 years ago G&M posters were 90% climate change deniers - and now look at the CHANGE: Deniers, i.e. lazy people: down,
    people who want to create a safe environment for the generations to come: up.
    That says it all.
  66. Alan Burke from climatechange.dynalias.com in Ottawa, Canada writes: 'Bart Farquart', you must be a troll. Show me your real critiques of the science rather than your misdirections.

    Show me your credentials. You can find mine. Give me links to real studies. Don't give me political claptrap. This issue is too important for uninformed political polarization.
  67. Silent Majority from Canada writes: J M,
    We all knew it was just a matter of time before you would come out and bless us with your informed thoughts.
  68. Joe Canada from Kingston, Canada writes: The Bubble from Canada writes: You people are a laugh. There has to be a concentration of stupidity in Canada especially amongst the right wingers. Oh well, it will be the rich and greedy who will suffer the most. There is nothing to fear and the propogandists above will, in the end, be shown for just how out of touch with reality or how small they are for posting this propoganda for a living. I assume most of the posters so far work for the oil business.

    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    No one here means to insult your God or your religion but here is an interesting article on media and climate change.

    http://nationalpost.com/news/story.html?id=364265
  69. R J from Montreal, Canada writes: It is true, we do not have the right to foul our beautiful planet.

    According to 'experts' the planet is 4.6 billions years old. We have been keeping records for 300 years ( if that ). Do we really believe the experts know what's going on with the planet. Throughout geological time there have been many episodes of warming and cooling.

    I hope everyone is thinking for themselves...

    RJ
  70. Alan Burke from climatechange.dynalias.com in Ottawa, Canada writes: Given that you appear to have no thoughts of your own 'Silent Majority', isn't it hypocritical to deny others who post here?
  71. Joe Canada from Kingston, Canada writes: V ADS from Canada writes: If it was fair game to blame recent hot summers on 'global warming,' it is fair game to blame this year's brutal winter on 'global cooling.'

    Now the doomsday rhetoric has moved on to 'extreme weather events' as if floods, droughts, hurricanes, etc., of today are somehow far worse than they had been in the past.

    -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    You are wrong. The IPCC clearly states that global warming is responsible for increased snow fall and cooler temperatures.
  72. Rollie Beethoven from Canada writes: Just yesterday a writer on this site stated that the term global warming was history and the new definition is climate change. Well shiver my timbers 'the more things change the more they remain the same' and if thats not enough 'the only constant is change' and if that is still not enough 'only time will tell'.
  73. harry carnie from Northern, B.C., Canada writes: GOOD NEWS! an asteroid is likely to hit the earth within the next 100 years......so none of this will matter a f**. (announced by chicken little)

    There ARE concerns with our environment..air pollution ..water resources.ect..we should be addressing these concerns, and making necessary adjustments.
    B.S announcements such as this,(article) destroys the credibility of any of us that have a PRACTICAL concern for our environment.
  74. Alan Burke from climatechange.dynalias.com in Ottawa, Canada writes: 'Joe Canada', there's little point in debating but I'd love to know the demographics of those who respond to these issues. Usually they are beyond what I'd expect of rational and objective people.
  75. Pablo W from Mid Ontario, Canada writes: To those who look out and see all the snow, THIS IS WHAT THEY ARE TALKING ABOUT.
    It is real easy to forget what has happened in the last few years
    I wonder how many of you realize that when the snow starts to melt don't be surprised to hear about roof collapsing in or record flood levels in rivers(Lake Simcoe is close to record levels). Huntsville had flooding in January. People don't realize the actual size of a river's watershed (check grand river conservation authority as an example)and times that by the depth of snow in your back yard or on your BBQ.
    It is easy to say that it isn't happening, odd winter etc. Ask someone who is 100 about what they have experianced in terms of weather and the changes they have seen.
  76. Bart Farquart from Land of Vanilla, Canada writes:
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    'Silent Majority from Canada writes: J M,
    We all knew it was just a matter of time before you would come out and bless us with your informed thoughts.'
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Do you mean J M from Realityville at 12:30pm? My theory is that it's some sort of self-parody. It can't be a serious post.
  77. Steve . from Western Canada, Canada writes: For those of you saying that this winter is a result of 'extreme' weather, think again. Southern Ontario hasn't broken the snowfall record from the 70's yet. That's right, the 70's, the last time Global Warming was used to try and increase spending. Global Warming exists very much, don't get me wrong but it is moving no slower nor faster than it always has moved. Yep, the world is headed to another ice age. I learnd this when I was in grade 2. It's called a weather cycle and works much like our seasons. The Governments would love for you to believe their little two act play. This would allow them to raise costs, increase your spending by making you buy specific products and give them the reason they need to tax your butt off. What keeps the economy of a country going? Why, it's spending and taxes. How else do you think Al Gore could have come up with any of the stuff he's been spewing? Face facts here people, both sides of this arguement are correct but there isn't a darn thing you can do to stop this natural cycle from happening. Of course the more ignorant you are of the topic and the more propaganda you read then the happier the Governments will be. Nothing has changed in mylifetime. The same 5, 7, 10 and 20 year cycles still exist and happen as they always have. Rather than believing everything you read in the paper, try watching and keeping track of the little things that go on around you. You'll soon see that there are an abundance of cycles on this planet, all merrily going about their business.
  78. Arec Bardwin from Canada writes: Before cars there was no such thing as 'hurricanes' or 'rain.' 'Flooding' and 'heat waves' have only started in the last ten years. Before fossil fuels no one had ever heard of 'wildfires' or 'erosion.'
    Can't you all see how afraid we should be? Natural earth process will destroy you and your whole family. There is hope though, if you quit heating your house in the winter, sell you car and purchase carbon offsets. We might be able to stop natrual earth processes in their tracks. Just think of the perfect climate that the earth before humans. Every spot on the globe had a daytime high of 23 C, there was no such thing as 'storms' or 'erosion.' Won't somebody think of the children!
  79. Craig Scott from Republic of Newfoundland, Canada writes: Tim Larson from Canada.............................

    I hardly would concider the North Atlantic a tiny piece of ocean. I don't know how islands in the Pacific can be disapearing due to ocean levels rising without the Atlantic Ocean rising as well.

    So you are telling me that water level markers that have been here for a couple of hundered years that are still at the same level, will stay that way while the pacific ocean rises?

    Maybe there are other reasons for these islands going under water....maybe they are sinking?
  80. John Percy from Halifax, Canada writes: Climate change can be warming or cooling, more rain, more snow, more dry heat, depending on what region you live in. Natural cycle or man-made or a combination of the two is really totally irrelevant. There is no point in assigning blame. And Calgary may not need to concern itself with rising sea levels, as pointed out by one wag, but then again Halifax need not concern itself too much with desertification, but warmer ocean temperatures, more hurricanes and even more rain than we get now (please God, no) most of the winter are relevant to this region.

    We're undoubtedly the first generation in history to be able to foresee this change and do something to fend off many of the more dire effects.

    The only question that is relevant is, 'Do you want to be part of the problem or part of the solution?'
  81. Alan Burke from climatechange.dynalias.com in Ottawa, Canada writes: Until the G&M provides accountability for comments, I'm forced to discount their authority or responsibility. I find myself once again engaged in a useless discussion with the usual correspondents who continue to spout nonsense.

    This is a forum for jokers, idiots, advocates and trollers.
  82. Uncle Fester from A Land Before Time, Ont., Canada writes: Sea levels have risen a 150 meters in the last hundred thousand years. Glaciers have been retreating for the same amount of time. Alaska and Asia were once joined. England was once part of continental Europe. Sri Lanka was part of the Indian sub-continent and Madascar was part of the African Continent. The leading science predicts that the massive increase in sea level likely happened in two or three massive catistrophic events. Humanity has always gathered on coastlines. Much of our pre-history is under water already. Doomsday is always looming. Get used to it.
  83. Alan Burke from climatechange.dynalias.com in Ottawa, Canada writes: John Percy, I'd like each of the deniers here to turn to finding solutions. Many of them of smart but ignorant.

    I appeal again to each reader - read the science, not just the politics.
  84. Alan Burke from climatechange.dynalias.com in Ottawa, Canada writes: Jean Malice, you have no reason to trash me beyond your own beliefs.

    There's no 'pseudo-philosophy' in what I say, it's opinion backed by references to science. It's called objectivity, not opinion.

    For those of you who doubt me, search for 'scientific method' on the web.
  85. John Percy from Halifax, Canada writes: Steve . from Western Canada, Canada writes: both sides of this argument are correct but there isn't a darn thing you can do to stop this natural cycle from happening. Nothing has changed in mylifetime. The same 5, 7, 10 and 20 year cycles still exist and happen as they always have.'

    No argument there Steve, there is nothing we can do to stop the natural cycle, but forewarned is forearmed. We can reduce the impact. Heck, economics works in measurable cycles as well. There's boom and bust. We can be flush or in depression. We aren't too bad now at predicting earthquakes and volcanic activity. To say that it's a natural cycle and there's nothing we can do about it is to say that thousands of people will die, and too bad. We can foresee the consequences of the shifting cycles (pick one) and plan for them to reduce the impact.
  86. Tim Larson from Canada writes: Dear Steve,

    What do you refer to when saying: the last time Global Warming was used to try and increase spending.
    Where do I pay more when my house is better insulated, when I reduce water and energy use and affiliated costs, drive a fuel-efficient car, buy local products (good for our farmes, too)? I could go on and on.
    Part of my family lives in Europe: They have, like an increasing percentage of people, solar panels on their roof. It insulates in the winter, makes far more energy than they can use in the summer - which allows them to sell it back to their local energy provider who directs it to other households. My family members make an additional 500 € per months in the summer and need no heating for their water during this time. The solar panels are subsidised by the EU and have been developed and build in the EU so it's a nive economic cycle of give and take which keeps people happy and employed and the air clean.
    Now, who looses money? Nobody - rather the opposite.
    This was only one example of clean energy.
    Green technology bears so much potential for the economy and other nations have discovered this a good time ago.
    Please do not say false things - this climate change has not been created so that some pott-smoking kids can sell bags made of hemp and increase their income dramatically!
    Innovations in the green energy sector are very beneficial for the society who invents, produces, exports and USES them.
    Your problem is that you are afraid of the immediate costs at time of re-setting standards, which is understandable.
    But projects like tar sands are already old-fashioned and Alberta would be better off if they would invest in wind and solar and other renewable energy. Space should not be the issue.
  87. Brian W from Burlington, Canada writes: J M from Realityville, Canada writes: ... it is expected that the rise of .7 degrees C/yr is to continue for decades.

    Where did you get that number? LOL, that's insane!
  88. J Lee from North Vancouver, Canada writes: Just dropped by to check and see that the deniers were still well and living large. Which they are. And to see if they might quote from or make reference to the lastest edition of Science or Nature of even one of this month's journals in any one of the fields of biology, geography, geophysics, climatology, ecology or related sciences. Which they haven't.
  89. Biggest Redneck from Somewhere, United States writes: For something to be considered a scientific fact, it must be testable with the scientific method.

    1. Observe some aspect of the universe.
    2. Invent a tentative explanation, called a hypothesis, that is consistent with what you have observed.
    3. Use the hypothesis to make predictions.
    4. Test those predictions by experiments or further observations and modify the hypothesis in the light of your results.
    5. Repeat steps 3 and 4 until there are no discrepancies between theory and experiment and/or observation.

    Real science is humble. Many things are unknowable. It is a human tendency to not to accept the idea that some things are beyond our reach of knowing, but there are things we can't know, no matter how much money is poured into research.

    Step 4 of the scientific method requires an experiment. An experiment requires a control. What are the controls in climate science?

    Sorry Alan but you haven't convinced me yet.
    You don't have enough control to forward that your hypothesis is correct. In other words you can't know 100% that you are right as your hypothesis cannot be proved using scientific method.

    Keep repeating steps 3 and 4 your not there yet.
  90. D Brown from Canada writes: Here we have thousands of scientists and billions of dollars to stop the 3% of CO2 humans emit in the grand total. Meanwhile, the coalition of the willing is dropping TONNES of depleted uranium on Iraq and Afghanistan. Mercury containing fluorescent light bulbs are being dumped into land fills, leaching mercury into the very ground water we drink. Yet, we should run scared because the earth is PREDICTED to increase in temperature a couple degrees? Predictions based on computer models that cannot predict weather patterns. In the 1970's the scientists were concerned with Global Cooling, what gives?

    This is all a scam by the elitist groups to empower themselves to create a one world government and a world wide tax on life. They are already getting themselves filthy rich with the wars, rise in energy prices. What more do they want?
  91. Steve . from Western Canada, Canada writes: John Percy from Halifax, what your saying is correct but to interfer with the natural regeneration of the planet would be to REALLY cause some havoc. This is not a bad thing like everyone seems to think it is. The Dino's went extinct because they didn't have the mental capacity to survive, this has been proven. Humans did survive because they have that mental capacity. We will survive again. This doesn't happen in minutes or seconds but rather in Centuries. It's like flushing your toilet. The water in your toilet starts out nice and clean, after a few trips in the bathroom, it's getting a bit yucky, so you flush and fresh new water is there. The earth cleanses it's self through ice ages and regeneration. Populations get high, increase the output of CO2 gases (as in passing gas which every creature does), ice age comes, kills many species off, recedes and starts anew with new species that have adapted to a new environment. You want to stop global warming and interfer with the natural cycle? This would have dire consequences. We have got to stop trying to play 'god' and stopping natural cycles. This will have much greater consequences than allowing them to happen.
  92. Tim Larson from Canada writes: Hi Craig,

    The oceans are actually not 'levelled' or even at all. There are graet areas which are depressed relative to others which can be as much as 10 or more meters higher (somewhere 1000ds of km away). It is a bit complicated but consider the rotation of the earth and combine it with strong currents which also distribute different types of water (warm, cold, salt-enriched) you may understand that this immense body of water can hardly be compared to the water in a pond or for the same matter with the - in relation to the remaining body of ocean - small piece of the Atlantik you see.
    There are maps (online, National geographic) which show this phenomenon.
    And btw: Some islands are already evacuated and natives are asking Australia and New Zealand to get asylum.
  93. D Brown from Canada writes: The climate is and always will be changing!
  94. Orest Zarowsky from Toronto, Canada writes: @ Silent Majority: Well, baitch, I use public transit to get around, among other things. And I refute the lies that goombas like you keep repeating. Now, what have YOU done?
  95. R M from Toronto, Canada writes: Okay Alan and Bill, can you find it in yourself to discuss climate change without referring to everyone who disagrees with you as 'deniers', 'right wing', 'trolls' or 'ignorant'? You're inches away from joining the camp of Bubbles, who now says the deniers are Nazis.

    Now, over to the article: is this based on studies of the IPCC report, which predicts a global shift in temperatures of 2 to 3 degrees Celsius, or another more apocalyptic report that hasn't been published yet? Is our infrastructure so close to the brink that a few degrees warmer