What tripe - In the seventies it was an impending ice age .
We have had periods where the earth has been up to 5 C warmer (and more) and the atmospheric CO2 much higher than it is now - polar bears appear to have survived OK - this is according to the ice record.

Pure propaganda rubbish promoted by the many kakistocracies

Joe Orton, oxford, UK

"Rapid rise in global warming is forcast." Yeah, I call it summer. But seriously, the earth goes through these natural stages anyway. At the rate we're releasing green house gases we shouldn't be so worried. I also agree with what Henning said. The conclusion doesn't seem to make a whole lot of sense. Here, this is an interesting read.

http://www.netscape.com/viewstory/2007/05/30/junk-science-hot-air-study-melts-global-warming-theory/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.foxnews.com%2Fstory%2F0%2C2933%2C275267%2C00.html&frame=true

Brent, Franklin, TN, USA

this results are dificult to understand. More wind and intens mixing of air and seawater should normally enhance CO2 absorption in sea water. Is there antisipated any change in the solubility of CO2 in seawater, i.e that the Henry constant for CO2 is reduced? I find the conclutions very dificult to accept. It would be nice if someone ot the researcher could comment my views.

Henning Reier-Nilsen, Oslo , Norway

Those who conveniently highlight the sun as the main culprit seem to be ignoring the solar indicators. Actual peer-reviewed research (vs. the manipulated rubbish found on contrarian websites) indicates average warming has strengthened over the last few decades, in the absence of an upward trend in average solar activity (or a correlative trend in cosmic rays, the latest overblown natural forcing theory).

As for "the models" (of which there are several types, despite blanket statements often made about them), they do tend to be tested and validated. Certainly they're not perfect, and are more error-prone at high resolutions/when dealing with complex regional climates, but they are valuable indicators. See #1 at http://globalwarmingtruth.org/

Harry N, Springfield, Oregon, USA

Almost every week or so we learn that global warming is accelerating. All mainstream climatologists now agree this is manmade and increasingly dangerous. We run the very real risk of crossing a threshold beyond which we will be able to do nothing to prevent our extinction.

An added factor is our defective societal system, under which we have never solved even one of our societal problems. We must dispense with this system and adopt one that allows to solve our societal problems. Of which global warming is the major one at the moment.

This is all as explained in my book on Global Warming, "The Biblical Flood: Global Warming & Bush's Havest".

William W Morgan, Hai Phong, Vietnam

You know, I think sometimes that the pop culture of the 1960s was very bad for the U.S. The only thing that seemed to stick was a reaction against science and a relativistic view of the truth. So if Americans hear something they would prefer to believe (Saddam was responsible for 9/11) or deny (the scientific consensus on global warming is overwhelming) they simply go all hippy-dippy and decide based on what they "feel." We have an entire misinformation industry to serve this sophistry, from Deepak Chopra to Sean Hannity. In the case of global warming, the misinformation is very well funded for obvious reasons. To Americans, what they choose to believe about such matters is just another commodity, without any real connection to anything.

If you're actually confused and looking for answers, I suggest you check out:

http://mediamatters.org/action_center/global_warming/

Eric Knorr, San Francisco, CA

Well, one good link deserves another. And there is nothing at all new from the alarmists here except their usual sneers and blind faith in the spinners of unverifiable models, which stems from their eagerness to shut down industrial civilization.

The following link takes you to a website that summarizes a tremendous amount of peer reviewed science on every facet of the global warming issue - and debunks every little piece of it. Most of the scientists whose work is summarized would classify themselves as believers in the supposed crisis, but each sees some problems with one or another facet of the nonsense.

So go to www.co2science.org , and click on "Subject Index" and see the thousands (by now, and adding all the time) of studies that contradict each and every link of the global warming apocalypse.

While there is no doubt that rising CO2 in the atmosphere has a little warming effect, it is little, with little to show from net amplifying feedbacks.

Ralph M., Findlay, Ohio

More AGW hysteria. What we have here is a conclusion "wind patterns are decreasing the oceans ability to absorb excess co2" buit on an assumption "increasing co2 is effecting climate". It is a FACT that it has NOT been proven that co2 increases effect climate in any measurable way. To base a conclusion on an unproven conjecture is just bad science. More alarmist rhetoric from the AGW faithful.

BTW, you can't have it both ways. The Ozone whole is shrinking because climate alarmists demanded action be taken to make it shrink (CFC's anyone). Now they don't know if the shrinking Ozone whole (which would have a measureable and more proveable effect) or increased co2 (an assumption) is having a greater effect on WEATHER, which of course AGW faithful have been telling us for a decade has nothing to do with climate (stupid). The oceans ability to absorb co2 ALWAYS decreases with warming temperatures. Blaming something we know happens on a conjecture, does not make it factual.

Mike, Charlotte, NC / USA

To Joe Kemec
1998 was a sharp peak year related to an exceptional El Nino. Using it as a baseline to support the idea (a la Linzen) that AGW stopped, is invalid. The warming trend continues - after every other theory predicting an imminent cooling reverse has failed to materialize.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Instrumental_Temperature_Record.png

Your follow-on statement, about the name change, has nothing to do with any 'realization' - it has to do with consequence and impact.

To Mr. Peteee
If the issue is redefined as Illinois Warming Spring 2007, your cold spell may be important. In the long-term global context of the global air-condiitoning system breaking down, it is not. The bigger and longer picture urges reconsideration of your concluding sentence.

Any saturation or disruption of a major carbon sink should be considered unwelcome news.

S Church, Toronto,

"Is there a creative way of feeding this excess carbon dioxide to plants to regrow forested areas and oceans?"

Restoration of our soils by well understood and proven 'organic' means could sequester all excess CO2 in a surprisingly short time. See Allen C. Yeomans .. Priority One Together We can Beat Global Warming ... free pdf download at http://www.yeomansplow.com.au/priority-one-contents.htm

Gerald Brittell, Lancaster, Virginia, USA

I am sorry, aren't these the people who are in effect, weathermen? These idiots cant figure out what tomorrows weather will be and I am supposed to take their word about this or more importantly, the cause of this.
If tomorrow all of mankind reduced the CO2 in the atmosphere 90% the climate ofthe earth would still get warmer. It has happened 6 or 7 times before and this is just the cycle coming around again. If you dont believe me ask yourself this. Why did the planet warm and cool before? I dont remember seeing any Dinosaur cars or factories.
Finally, as far as the people who complain about the US and what energy hogs we are and how evil we are, I have this to ask; What have you done to reduce global warming? Stopped driving a car have you? Installed solar panels? Stopped buying foods that were produced more than one hour away? Dont buy any things that were produced in another country? No? Then shut your trap.
People in glass houses and all of that.

Dan , Frederick , US

The ubiquitous “climate models” is becoming extremely irritating. All “climate models” should be named and their software and the input data made public by law. The proprietary concerns and I suspect the BS factor has motivated those who own the patents on the software to refuse their publication. Given that the world is considering setting up a world government structure to vet every use of energy by humanity through a system of carbon trading that functionally will accomplish every item on the Marxist agenda… one might think that there would be some small outrage somewhere in the world at scientific fascists in service of international world socialism. Global Warming is the biggest power grab in the history of the world primarily driven by media control, however the comments made publicly by “scientists” to the effect that: yes is regrettable that we have to lie and inflated the data by the purpose is moral” is disgustingly arrogant and those who do so should be jailed.

Kelly, Aspen, USA

<em>I still believe that the main culprit of global warning is the timber industry which is responsible for the massive destruction of trees in the world. It doesn't take much more than a passing familiarity with elementary biology to know that trees mop up carbon dioxide and release oxygen through photosynthesis. Why then in heaven's name, are we chopping them down so indiscriminately if we're so worried about global warming?

Dr.Nicholas Lee, Windsor, UK
</em>

I have to seriously question whether you are a true "doctor" or not because the truth is that there are more trees on earth now than there were even 50 years ago. Trees are grown specifically for the timber and paper industries, so as they cut them down, they also replant for 20-30 years later. Besides, as the article stats, "plants" only soak up a smaller percentage than oceans, and trees only make up a small percentage of all "plants. Use some basic logic, it's not just less trees, especially since it's not true...

Robert, phoenix, az

At the end of the story "Professor Chris Rapley, director of BAS, said uncertaintities remained, but the findings were “a serious concern”."

The writer is negligent in not noting specifics about linking to more details on the study so that one can judge. Too many scare stories are touted to give any credence without at least a mildly convincing explanation.

For example: climate models are not supposed to be able to correctly account for clouds, which climatologists believe to impact temps greatly.

This is only one factor that makes the climate models were supposed to have faith in unrelieable. In the long ago(!) initial Kyoto agreement this was acknowleded.

A courteous skeptic

Mike, North Chicago, USA/Illinois

The problem with the Left is that you have cried wolf far too often. Everything corporate is bad; everything government is good. All problems are because of corporate greed. You change definitions to suit your points of view. You incrementally try to slip things through legislations and when that doesn't work you go to court. And the shrillness... Oh my - you couldn't sell steak to a starving man. (And of course, you wouldn't sell steak because, according to Left mantra teachings - steak is ba-a-a-a-d.)

Give me one good reason that I should believe the hysterical, lock-step thinking, brown-shirt thug-mugging of the Environmentalists - who are among the worst of the bunch.

Just one.

Harry

harry, Chatsworth, USA / CA

I would just like to make one point the article doesn't. CO2 only blocks a certain range of frequencies in the spectrum; it's not a wall trapping all energy. Nor does it even trap all the infra-red. At some concentration, the additional CO2 will not trap any more energy, so it's not like we're going to end up like Venus with a atmosphere that traps most of the heat in. Each additional ton of CO2 has less of an effect as the last. The truth is that the ocean not sopping up more of that CO2 is a good thing for the corals that the carbolic acid would destroy. Catastrophe this is not; even if I agree we should stop burning fossil fuels.

Mike, New York, New York

Vertingotorix: so, please compare and contrast the contributions of US vs EU-educated citizenry to human advancement over the past 50 years. The US education system leaves much to be desired, but I don't see any beacons of enlightenment emanating from across the pond. Especially from the UK or France.

martin, wash dc,

97% of "greenhouse gasses" is water vapor. So we are concerned about less than 3% of all greenhouse gas. CO2 accounts for about 60% of that remaining 3% or about about 2% of the total amount of greenhouse gas. Nature accounts for most of the CO2 in the atmosphere so we are down to about 1% of atmospheric CO2 attributable to mankind.

The global warming hystrionics would be fun to watch if it wasn't just a lust for cash among the "scientist-reaserchers" and a lust for control by central governments. The world's climate has always changed, it will always change. If mankind could ever control the climate, cooling is much more dangerous than warming.

A cooler Earth brings death.

Elmer, Perth

Elmer, Perth,

The question is not whether we have global climate change. ALL we've ever had is global climate change.

The question is whether climate is headed in a direction that is 1) catastrophic and 2) avertible through directed human actvity. The jury is out on that question, but that hasn't stopped political types whose arguments for power based on economics floundered from turning to The Threat of Global Warming as their last, best hope for taking charge.

In '75, as a young science editor, I read a scholarly article that said we'd just enjoyed a 60-year stretch of the mildest, most constant weather in the entire Holocene and would be gradually entering a more normal pattern of hotter summers and colder winters. Global warming would be preferable; at least folks from Juneau to Toronto to Stockholm to Saint Petersburg would prosper. But neither scenario is the basis for giving Al Gore any authority.

Charlie Tips, Flower Mound, Tx, USA

You deniers make me sick. When the entire earth is covered in water and you have no where left to go, I wonder if you'll be scoffing at global warming? Look at the bright side though, for a few years, Antarctica will be open for building houses.

leftandproud, san francisco, USA

it´s funny for me the comments about that in all planet happen the same after all. ok, then, let´s destroy our planet cos it will happen anyway!!!!

Willy, Madrid, Spain

Global Warming was not caused by man alone as it is cyclical. It happens after every ice age. Humankind in this generation will have to get used to a little warmer weather and adapt. And then when the next ice age comes again, humankind will adapt again. And it will be like this for eons and eons.

People will migrate north and learn to live farther inland and away from the shores in years to come. And in generations to come we will migrate south and move where ever we want to because that's what we do best.

I was driving from Sacramento to Reno a few weeks ago and saw hundreds of wind turbines dotting the hillsides. And every one was shut down sitting idle. The explanation given to me was, "Birds were flying into the blades and killing themselves". I say, "Let them adapt and learn to fly around them and adjust to their new environment, just like we will have to adapt to ours". It's nothing new. Humankind has been doing it for hundreds and hundreds of years.

Rich Ferris, Indianapolis, Indiana

So long as solar activity continues to play havoc with our climate, the greeniacs will claim that the changes are due to carbon dioxide emissions. This is akin to claiming that changing the 3-point line in basketball is the reason that more home runs are being hit in major league baseball these days. Yes, the two are concurrent; no, there is no relationship between the two events -- other than that players in both sports are getting bigger and stronger. Or it is like saying that illegal immigration is responsible for the stock market's bullish run during the Bush Administration and not the tax cuts.

Duggan Flanakin, Austin, Texas USA

Climate variability is a natural process; it is controlled by a number of natural and more recently anthropogenic variables such as solar activity, carbon stores, atmospheric and oceanic circulation as well as volcanicity. The issue of contemporary climate change and the impact of anthropogenic activity is real and should be a necessity in government policy because whether the change in climate is natural or not; the impact is much more severe to today's society, economy and environment because of how developed the world is and the catastrophic impacts that will happen. It cannot be denied that the natural variability is occuring more rapidly as a result of increased anthropogenic activity and to save the world we live in, it must be taken seriously - regardless of the how the media chooses to 'hype' it up.
This issuse is no longer somebody else's problem, and those too ignorant to take responsibility while they can will live to pay the consequences much sooner than they expect.

Rebecca, London, England

All you aare doing is causing an alarm situation. We are not causing the global warming. the link is higher sun temperatures. the steps the western world are taking helps al little, 1% at best. We cannot control the temp. rise. Nature does what it wants and dont ask us if its OK!

Bob, Middle island, NY

The right in America, using corporately funded (& therefore compromised) bodies, such as the Advancement of Sound Science Coalition (TASSC), have become increasingly irrelevant & tiresome in their attempts to cast doubt on, & disparage every piece of scientific analysis that contradicts their bizarre claims. One only has to take a look at the amount of finacial backing given to groups such as the TASSC by petroleum & tobacco companies like Philip Morris to see how they are little more than corporate pawns. Their soul purpose is to cast doubt in the public mind on scientific issues which threaten their vested interests. The demand for "Sound Science", such a misleading term in the hands of US right, is little more than a thinly disguised attempt to prevent government action on issues of major concern to the whole planet. These are the same people who tried to terminate funding to the immensely valuable (remember the 2004 tsunami?) US Geological Survey in the 1990s-Sound Science indeed!

Rudi, London, UK

The planet has been changing since day one..... for millions of years, yet somehow it's now mans fault.

Most of the planets existence, it couldn't support the life it has on it now. It's naive to think it will be able to forever.

Evidence is everywhere we're told, yes evidence that the planet continues to change.

Who decided that 100 years ago was going to be called the ideal temp and now it's gone up a half a degree and so we are "warming".
Who is to say that warmer is really the norm? As we come out of an ice age.

Does any of you believers understand that the solution is to restrict the US and steal their money giving it out to third world thugs?

Why don't people put their engergy into freeing the non free on this planet from corruption and tyranny, instead they buy into any crisis.

People really are idiotic and such believes in "end of the world" scenerios, pathetic weak minded followers.

Tim, Simi Valley, USA

it is encouraging to see that people who believe in global warming
do read, because it is obvious they can't think
This "controversy" reminds me of Chicken Little meets the Boy Who
Cried Wolf
the tempature has gone up 1 degree F (.6 C) and you guys are
ready to shut down the world economy and starve the underdeveloped
third world
bravo !!
how about the warming found on titan, jupiter, mars, and even pluto
(must be SUVs)
study after study shows that CO2 is a lagging, not leading, indicator
of tempature

this is one of those debate where, the more information comes out, the
more the proponents look like fools

regards
mackinacnick

mackinacnick, mackinac, il, us

All of these articles, and following commentaries, have a sadly predictable pattern.

“It’s all the American’s fault!”

Never mind that by year’s end, the largest emitter of Carbon Dioxide gasses will be China.

That in the next 10-15 years, new coal fired plants already being planned by China will emit more CO2 than every car in America combined.

That India is growing perhaps even faster than China.

And that both countries are entirely exempt from Kyoto. Likewise they are exempt from any criticism.

IF all the scientists are exactly correct about climate change, you could shut the US down tomorrow – every car, factory, power plant and household, and China and India would take up the slack in 20 years.

In the US, the population is made doubly skeptical by the voices advocating relief. Al Gore and Laurie David (to name two), live immensely profligate lifestyles with multiple homes and personal jets. Gore’s home in Nashville alone uses 20 times the average American’s.

Steve, Palm Beach, USA

I read just yesterday that Mars is also undergoing global warming - indicated by shrinking polar caps. This seems to support a growing number of skeptics of the anthropoligical cause of global warming who suggest that increased solar radiation and a decrease in cloud cover, caused by a corresponding decrease in cosmic radiation, could be the major influence of climate change. Or perhaps someone snuck a bunch of SUV's to Mars?

I have come to believe that a segment of the scientific community has discovered that funding for "interesting phenomena" is harder to obtain than funding for "impending castastrophy". I am also dismayed to see many of those who question global warming dogma, based on the science, being persecuted with a fervor that brings to mind the religious persecution Galileo and Corpernicus.

Rick Podraza, Phoenix, Arizona USA

I have searched the literature and cannot find the equation that is used to calculate the "average temperature" of the atmosphere of the entire earth. It must exist because the scientists are predicting a global warming.
I found "Temperature in non-equilibrium states: a review of
open problems and current proposals" by Casas-V´azquez and Jou, published 14 Oct 2003 in the REPORTS ON PROGRESS IN PHYSICS 66 (2003) 1937–2023 available to read at www.iop.org/EJ/article/0034-4885/66/11/R03/rpp3_11_R03.pdf
Depending on the equation used to calculate the "average" temperature, the earth is cooling, or warming. The great minds in their wisdom chose an average that suggests a warming. If they had used a different equation, the average would be cooling.
No international scientific body has yet ratified a definition for average temperature that also makes thermodynamic sense.

Simon E. Bode, Bath, United Kingdom

Nothing new from the naysayers here. It's all debunked many times, most recently in the current issue of New Scientist:

http://environment.newscientist.com/channel/earth/dn11462

Hugh Campbell, Ottawa, Canada

The only reason the oceans would give off more CO2 is if the temperature of the oceans increased, or the partial pressure of CO2 in the atmosphere decreased, thereby reducing the solubilty of the CO2 in seawater.

What these researchers describe could be man made. However, it could also be due to rising temperatures from increased solar activity or other natural cyclical causes--theories attributed by many notable researchers. So, there is no proof one way or the other that this is a man made rather than natural occurrence.

Also, since the solubility of CO2 in seawater is dependent not only on temperature, but also by the partial pressure of CO2 in the atmosphere, as atmospheric CO2 increases, the solubility of CO2 in ocean water also increases, having the reverse effect argued in this research. I am not saying they are wrong. I am saying they do not really know and cannot know without more research into each of these possible causes and factors.

Julian Irby, Pensacola, Florida

I was a "Head-in-the-sand-Global-Warming-Denier"/skeptic vis-a-vis the role of CO2 but it's elementary that CO2 density in the atmosphere indeed traps heat. That being said, man's slice of the CO2 pie is but a (very) thin sliver. That being said, consider the extent of discoloration in a liter of water with a few drops of ink; or what happens to you when your body temperature rises a mere 2-3 degrees; or what happens to you when inflicted by a microscopic virus-- or to a computer program when attacked by its own type of virus; or what happens to a macroeconomy when interest rates rise a mere one percent... So one shouldn't be too dismissive of tiny increments (especially when they're linked to chain reactions). And all of that being said, while swatting an unusual amount of flies and thinking of ways to overhaul the entire garbage disposing and sewer treatment systems of the community, one shouldn't be blind to the elephant in the room (i.e. the sun).

John Lambrou, Arlington, VA

I've been researching this topic for over 2 years. I have yet to come across any studies (not computer models) showing that CO2 contributes significantly to warming. Conversely, many studies and data sets suggest that the sun is primary cause. Can someone please point me to a study showing that CO2 causes anything but plants to grow faster and healthier? I go where the data leads me.

John, West H, CT

Why is it that the general attitude seems to be that of the doubting Thomas? Well we won't believe it till we see it... I personally agree with the comments arguing that Climate change is happening. Weather patterns are shifting, and we are going to see a drastic change in the climate over the next 30 years. By the time some people wake up to this fact its liekly to be too late.

It brings to mind a philosphical argument i once came across arguing for belief and worship of God:

If he doesn't exist then you've not missed out on much by living a decent and faithful life, If he does exist then those who believed in him and worshiped him will go to heaven the rest will go to hell... So it makes sence to believe in God (Hedge your bets)

Surely better safe than sorry....Thats all im saying!

Chris, Birmingham, UK

I love the fact that 90% of the comments saying that Global warming and climate change are myths, come from Americans, who, as Simon from Lancing, West Sussex quite rightly points out "..are quick to rubbish this scientific research here - without producing any sound scientific research of their own to refute it in a coherent or conclusive way..."

Surely, any human being can see that we don't have the chance to be wrong about climate change. If we ignore the majority of scientists who say we have a major problem, and we do nothing, what do we do when it turns out they were actually right? We have no room to be wrong here, and if there's any small things we can do to try and stop climate change or slow it down to make this world a habitable place for our children, we should do so.

And shame on those that can't or wont try and make a difference because it may slightly inconvience them.

Rebecca, Oxford, UK

These 'computer models' they use cannot even demonstrate an ability to accurately predict the present using past data; why should anybody trust them to predict the future? Warmer air can hold more water vapor - the number one greenhouse gas. Not one scientist will dispute that plant life on average does far better with more warmth, more moisture and more CO2. A warmer climate promises to bring a GREENER planet and be much BETTER for all life on average; paleogeologic data suggests that this was true in the past. The global warming fear mongers have nothing but their suspect 'models' to refute such data.

Mike M, Boston, USA

A little paranoid Bruce? Nowhere in this article is the finger being pointed at 'America', infact it mentions fossil burning in China & India. Calm down dear it's only an article.

Infact there seems to be a lot of anger generated over this, and it seems to me that noone wants to admit that yes, we have scarred this planet & continue to do so at alarming rates. So for all of you that seem to think that research into the one thing that sustains our life is a waste of money, and we as a whole continue to put our heads in the sand & continue on the theory that this is just another 'natural cycle' & hope that it just sorts itself out, well I just hope I'm not around for the earth to say I told you so. I doubt it'll be very pretty.

morticia, Reading, U.K

We had Brazilian exchange students living us with now since 2001. I challenged each of them to find me ONE proven link between mankind and global warming. All they can come up with are nut jobs like the "scientists" in this article. Last week here in Ohio, it was 20 degrees above normal. This morning, it is near freezing and 20degrees below normal. Are we doomed then to bake or freeze? What a crock it all is - I predict within a decade the whole warming crowd will be exposed as frauds and the entire effort to get us exited about this non-existant "crisis" will have been proven to be no better than a hoax. By the way, global warming would be great for the US overall and really great for our Canadian friends who are forced to come to the USA each winter to escape the bitter cold. Oh, show me where the oceans are overwhelming the coastal cities - nope, there aren't any so no need to move inland yet!

Dennis Kelly, New Carlisle, USA OH

It's like a game these people are playing. One side makes ever more outrageous claims to counter the other side of the debate. The earth like anything else goes thru constant changes of ebb and flow, yin & yang or whatever you want to call it. Environmentalists are looking at every little thing they can to perpetuate their flawed view no different than an extreme fundamentalist looking for the end times and Revelations in the daily news headlines, or some wacko Islamic fundamentialist trying to get an Imam to come out of a cave by prompting a war. Reasonable people have been pushed aside by a vocal minority. Meanwhile it just makes me more determined than ever to conitinue to eat meat, drive vehicles that burn fossil fuels, smoke an occasional cigar, buy women gifts of animal skins, etc. - all in moderation of course. To the extremists of any stripe, to you I raise my middle finger.

Michael, Prague, Czech Rep

Maybe all the Americans commenting were born in Badidlyboing Idaho and will show us photographs of their local sunspots. Then we can watch them on Ruddy Hell It's Harry and Paul. I happen to live in the Baguio Philippines and the temperature here has risen around two degrees celcius over the past few years, everyone complains about it getting hotter, but many farmers still practice slash and burn farming contributing to global warming. They talk about global warming but they do not understand it or how they are contributing to it. But like many things they will find out too late when it is too hot and there is too little water left to grow their vegetables anymore

Roger, Baguio City, Philippines

should we be as concerned with Mars and all of the other planets that are warming at the same pace as earth? And can somebody please explain why the average global temperature seems to fillow the same pattern as solar intensity? I'm really confused...and oh yes...I have been reading about scientists finding entire villages and farms where the glaciers are retreating....how did they get there? Does that mean that the glaciers etc. have retreated before..? Or is it some vast conspiracy or maybe aliens that transported them there to confuse us...? And one last question that has really been bugging me...what caused the even higher global temperatures in the Medieval period...?? Aliens again, no doubt...their ships (I hear) put out more harmful carbon that all of the cows on earth...ONE SHIP! Can you BELIEVE IT??

Alex Peters, Metropolis, Idaho

Please search on Google 'The Great Global Warming Swindle'
it's an interesting Channel 4 documentary that tells the other side of the story

Chun, Grenoble, France

What is the Southern Ocean? There's the Atlantic, the Pacific, the indian...the Southern? Is this a new special body of water with the exclusive use of absorbing CO2? Cool. Can we fish?

John, Washington Twp, OH

It is incredible to see so many people ducking and diving this issue any way they can. Man made or just the Earth 'going through it's cycle; either way we are in for a terrible time, whether you like it or not. Too hot? or too cold? hundreds of millions of people are going to die very unpleasant deaths through all the disease, famine, war and mass displacement that is VERY SHORTLY on it's way. Face it now and start to prepare for the worst, or perish amongst the chaos to come. It really is as simple as that. Deal with it or die.

Humanity, in the 21st Century, bears more relation to Ostrich's than apes, both in their behaviour and brain capacity.

What a stupid animal we are!

A. Realist, London, England

Global warming "believers" here deny that there is any credible scientific opinion that observed warming is caused by factors other than human CO2 emissions, which is not true, there are many credible skeptics.

They accuse any of us who don't agree with them of denying the existence global warming.

They don't respond to any of the countervailing observations, such as behavior of temperatures, ice caps and etc. on other planets, changes in solar radiation output, natural glacial/interglacial periodicity, etc.

We who are branded as "skeptics" on global warming don't disagree with efforts to protect the environment, for the most part. We do want to see an even-handed approach to this issue.

Finally, if so many people worldwide are convinced that man is causing global warming, where are the voluntary reductions in use of fossil fuels and etc.? Seems to me that the only demand is that the US do something, basically.

Pete, Rock Hill, SC, USA

So are man-made carbon emissions also causing climate change on Mars, Venus and Neptune?

See: http://www.worldclimatereport.com/index.php/2007/05/08/neptune-news/

D S A Murray, London,

To
Chris Parker Jones, sequim, US, Washington State.

Kudos to you Mr Jones. Well put.

Max, Drogheda, Ireland

The Apocalyptic Golbal Warming (AGW) believers and promoters are now having to transition to the term 'Climate Change' to maintain credulity since it is clear that nothing like what they originally predicted is happening. We now know that tropical cyclones are not getting stronger or more frequent. We now know that temps since the late 1990's have not been trending up but down. We now know that sea levels are not rising significantly. The roots of AGW, which lie in extreme environmentalism, have a noble end: cleaning the environment. But we are now seeing that AGW is eating up those goals. Ethanol is actually worse than gasoline and disrupts and damages environment and agriculture. Declining to use nuclear energy, the cleanest form of high energy, only means that messy alternatives like windmills or hydropower are more prevalent.
One of the first things that needs to happen is to delink climate hysteria from envirnomentalism. Hysteria does not serve good policy. AGW is now hysteria

hunter, Earth, USA

"It's curious that most of the Americans think (!) that Global Warming is a lie."

Well, with all the U.S. bashing on this comment section, someone from the U.S. might say in response, that on average, Americans are perhaps more educated about these issues than our European counterparts. However, I think it is we are simply more suspicious of government politicos in the "Big Science" industry (yes "big science" industries are just like the tobacco, and oil industries) that get much of their money from governments, who say; "we are here to help you, but we need to take more of your money first."

What I find funny, is that we are supposed to accept the results of "computer models" that are probably run on Microsoft's Operating Systems. I can't even get my word processor to run correctly under MS's OS, and we are supposed to alter the world based on these "computer models" which are wildly inaccurate to begin with? Thanks but no thanks...

Red, Cheyenne, Wyoming, United States of America

It amazes me that such apparent lifechanging news is hardly broadcast on national news. I have to read a newspaper to find out. Surely this sort of info should be reaching everbody!?

A Lang, Leicester, UK

midwestern cold? very mild winters over most of the last decade, a long run of very high temperatures in March 2007, followed by a cold April- symptoms of a climate in severe flux. if you haven't noticed in Illinois or Michigan you shouldn't be posting drivel

Mark , London,

The earth is just too complex to model. These "FACTS" indicated above...show me the data...show me the proof. It's all conjecture based on computer modeling. The earth is constantly changing, and history has proved this to be true. It has always adapted to change...so should we. Personally I could use a bit warmer weather.

Rod M., Belleville, MI

Gary is dead on. CO2 is a factor, but solar activity is the most plausable and more highly indicative culprit. Even if we were to double current CO2 in the atmosphere over the next 10 years, global temperature would rise about one degree. My numbers might be a little off, but the point is, CO2 is not a significant factor. To drive this home, 60 leading Canadian scientists recently submitted a report urging Prime Minister Harper to join the U.S. and withdraw from Kyoto for the reasons I outlined above and more.

Shawn Northrop, Niceville, USA/FL

They've got it all backwards. The ocean absorbs less CO2 because its warmer. Its warmer because the sun has been heating all the planets in the solar system more. Reducing man-made carbon emissions won't make a whit of difference to atmospheric or ocean temperatures.

Jon Reese, New Providence, NJ

Forgive the Americans, for they know not what they do! Living here (in the US) is a case of perpetually gazing through the looking glass.

Never have facts interfered with the beliefs or comforts of middle-Americans. Individualy, so many of them are congenitally selfish & self-centred.

They universally speak of their rights, but are seemingly oblivious of the fact that each right has attached to it, indivisibly, an obligation.

To those Cro Magnons across the US, innocent of any scientific rigour, global warming is real. Even if you don't want to believe it, because you may have to forgo your gas guzzling utility vehicle.

Fact is, 99.99% of scientists...REAL scientists...can PROVE it and overwhelmingly support the evidence.

johann, portland, USA

I really question if those reporting these findings are scientifi? A basic tenet of scientific theory is that what I find in my experiment must be reproduced by a colleague scientist somewhere else. What's interesting here is that one scientists opinion, and that's what it is since there no data to support the point, based on projections that aren't real is affirmed by other scientists who have not performed the experiment Hence, this is not a scientifically based view, it has yet to be reproduced, but a group of activist scientists opining what they think might happen. Sheesh! I think they need more to do.

Tim Freeman, Kansas City, Kansas

The "anthropogenic global warming" lobby IS wrong plain and simple! Far from being harmfull CO2 is essential for a healthy biosphere. As the earths population rises so does the need for CO2 to nurish the plant life we all need to survive. The eco lobby has used every dirty trick in the book to stifle debate and smear the opposition. the lobby has been very skillful in using and manipulating the media by planting scarey disaster stories so beloved of the media as these sell newspapers! Scientists who try to inject common sense and alternative views are denied access to funding and media platforms and smeared and threatened in the most terrible way. The REAL objective of the "eco taliban" seems to be to destroy western capitalism and western prosperity! Why would they want this? Power? Influence? Social control? Do they (eco lobby) wish to detroy capitalism to bring about some vision of a marxist/soviet workers paradise? More than likely I think it is trendy fad that will pass soon.

stephanie clague, Larnaca, cyprus

What I really like about this discussion is that the lay people have huge skepiticism about the whole gloabal warming broohaha. I will bet all day long that the average people have it right and the elites who are trying to promote all this fear are just consumed by utter rubbish ideas.

GY, Washington, DC

w.spencer, kitchener, canada, I hope you don't mind but I am adding your quote to my email signature. You have a future as a great philosopher when all of these gloom and doom global warming commit suicide, and stop exhaling carbon dioxide, because of their fear that the end is near.

Bob, Chowchilla, California

It amazes me how stupid and idiotic some of my countrymen and women can be. They ignore the preponderance of evidense and think it's a massive conspiracy because their puny intellects can't fathom the truth that mankind is having a detrimental effect on our environment.

It doesn't matter what it's called: Global Warming, Climate Change, Whatever. As individuals, what we do or don't do may seem inconsequential, but there are over 6 billion of us now, and the scales do NOT balance out.

Every year, we make progress towards better understanding how nature works. It is normal for there to be some fluctuations, but not like what is happening now.

I live in L.A. where the weather used to be very reliable. Summer started in late June and continued through late September / early October. Now, the only thing predictable is that each year will be unlike the previous.

It's not that every year will be hotter than the last, it's that the trend is hotter and the norm is extreme.

Cam, Los Angeles, USA

Why do you think we have not detected any other inteligent beings in the universe? Because none of them is inteligent enough to avoid the destruction of its planet.

We are doomed.

Hua Lu, London, UK

One of the following is true: 1. The earth's climate is cooling; or 2. The earth's climate is staying the same; or 3. The earth's climate is warming. Number 2 is plainly wrong. The panic mongers are peddling # 3. These warming advocates have a history of telling any lie that will advance their dream of bigger and bigger government, which is to say less and less freedom. So even when, and if, they tell the the truth, no one can accept it without skepticism. So let's have the statistical analysis. There must be some regression or multiple regression models that support their thesis. So how did they collect the data, how did they analyze it, and why the furtive concealment of the techniques employed? Let's see it. Let's see it now.

Richard Young, flint, mi., USA

Some of our friends from America show, with their comments, that if global warming is likely to be the problem many scientists predict then one of the biggest hinderances is likely to be the USA.

Creating by far the most CO2 emissions per head of population many of their citizens live by the curious and parochial notion that if it isn't happening yet in their own back yard then it isn't happening at all.

Every great power eventually falls. Some leave lasting legacies. Perhaps global warming and the extinction of vast swathes of the planet will be the greatest legacy of the greatest superpower known to man.

If you are not part of the solution then you may find yourself to be a massive part of the problem.

Keith, Kinlochewe,, Western Highlands, Scotland.

Yes, I guess Warren wants to drown again! The southern tip of Lousiana is slowly sinking and moving away from the mainland, a few millimeters a year. But; Its just data, its just science, better not believe it...

Markus Fleckinger, Kufstein, Tirol/Austria

Let's really go after the truth here. Global Warming is a present day version of "The King's New Clothes". There is sensationalism, suspense, the thrill of being on the edge of complete destruction, it has to be one of the best fairy tales ever. I almost wish I could stick around for the next 200 years to hear the reasons why the oceans didn't overflow California and allow Pheonix, AZ to become a seaport. You guys are great - expensive - but really great comedians! I wish I had a degree in Climatology, Cinematography, or Oceanography so I could play too.
Oh, by the way, all you climate commedians need to coordinate your stories with the outerspace people. They have started to talk about a large meteor exploding the earth within the next few hundred years. That project is going to be much more expensive than "Gobal Air Conditioning". And when the Hollywood storytellers jump onboard with the space folks all the gobal A/C funding could go by-by. Now that is a serious problem.

James Stroup, Lakeland, FL

Ok - Climate change is a fact. History proves it. We should definately adjust our lifestyles to produce less waste, which may or may not help.

We cannot count on Government for an answer - just think of their inability to do simple things. I will put my eggs in the basket of ingenunity. Given basic freedom and the ability to allocate resources with little government intervention, fellow man will provide our solutions as long as the ability to innovate has not been stifled by overreaching governments.

Rick, Truckee, CA, USA

The SKY is falling, The SKY is falling......said the CONSENSUS SCIENTISTS (not sure what sort of Science that is..CONSENSUS - especially since there is NOT a consensus when you dig deeper into the issue). Actually, Chicken Little, NOT the Consensus Scientists, said that the Sky is Falling. The Consensus Sceintists said that the Mankind is destroying the planet and creating global warming. Are these the SAME scientist who warned me of Global Cooling in the 70s???? The provided all sorts of nightmare scenarios and suggested how to keep that happening (if you do not want to snow sky in Jamica, change your ways now..etc.). Now, apparently completely wrong on Global Cooling, they are trying to warn me about Global Warming..same tactics. Of course, everytime they try to predict something (in keeping with actual vice consensual science), their predictions do not prove especially accurate. Remember the super storms due last year due to Global Warming? Storms never materialized.

Randy Stroud, Summerville, USA, South Carolina

Bloody hell you Americans are crazy. If you don't "believe" the science now, you'll probably still be saying it's all natural when the southwest dries up, the midwest turns to desert and the New Orleans is finally drowned in 100 years time.

But there are plenty of good reasons to move away from a carbon-based economy apart from fighting global warming. Not only will it re-energize your industries (which aren't all looking very healthy right now, especially the automotive manufacturers), it would also enhance your security by reducing reliance on middle-eastern oil. But unfortunately your leaders don't have this kind of vision. I suppose we end up with the politicians we deserve, eh?

Philip, Stuttgart, Germany

Interesting how the majority of climate change-sceptics expressing opinions here are Americans...

MB, Bristol, UK

I bet if there was a legitimate "consensus" taken among both scientists and the populace -- with oceanographic/atmospheric/climatological/meteorological scholars weighed in appropriately, you would find the majority, if not the VAST majority, were convinced that this man-made global warming was the bundle of trumped-up baloney we know it is.

And, of course, five or ten years from now, when the earth is obviously not going to dry up and blow away from searing heat, nobody will take to task the panic-button-pushers, the "sky is falling" crybabies -- nobody will call them out onto the carpet for their misinformed carrying on. Just like with the lethal ozone layer hole, that was most assuredly going to wipe us all out by 1985 or 1995. You'd think they'd be subdued or at least a little embarrassed after that. It never ends with the ranting, raving, faithless, lunatic, knee-jerk paranoid left and their misplaced beliefs. These are the folks who know what's best for the rest of us. Oy vay.

Biff Ulysses, Cleveland, OH

It could be the sun, but it's also obvious that CO2 emissions are having some impact - they make plants grow faster for one.

Eventually we're going to have to realize that exponential population growth is unsustainable. There are 6 billion humans on the planet. Six billion of anything is going to have some impact, even if we all just live in caves and pick berries.

Loren, USA,

i cannot understand anyone who cannot step back and look at the bigger picture. This planet Earth that we live on, the planet that mankind has played a very very small and insignificant part of and that part only very recently, has spent billions of years changing. The continents have split and moved across the planet themselves, lifeforms have flourished and then died out in regular cycles for millions of years, the oceans have raged, Volcano's have spewed Co2 into the atmosphere, Meteors have crashed into the Earths surface leaving giant craters one even causing a major event that wiped out many species of animals, the dinosaurs. During that time this planet has been warming up and cooling down on a regular basis, we are dependent on a great ball of fire not very far away from us that itself experiences temperature changes on a regular basis. All of this is FACT, it is basic stuff, nobody can disagree right? So can someone tell how the hell we are responsible for climate change???

Gary, London,

I'm among the uneducated, so I will defer to the scientists:
This Independent Summary is written by 10 scientists with Ph.ds and climate experience. It expresses skepticism over the IPCC predictions and conclusions as to human causes. The comments by 50 additional scientists are tabled at the end. This doesn't capture the interest of the mainstream media, however:
http://www.fraserinstitute.ca/admin/books/files/Independent%20Summary5.pdf

The next is "Climate Momentum Shifitng: Prominent Scientists Reverse Belief in Man-made Global Warming--Now Skeptics," and it includes the scientists and their credentials.
http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Files.View&FileStore_id=c5e16731-3c64-481c-9a36-d702baea2a42

The next reports demonstrates that we have accomplished much. Too bad this is never emphasized, but the article also explains why isn't.
http://www.ncpa.org/pub/st/st294/st294.pdf

Loryienne, Boise, ID

interesting that in Brazil they are way ahead of us with regards to biofuel - do they have more advanced technology than the UK and US???? Or are some great politicians making some great choices?

Oliver, London, UK

Global Warming is "settled science". Right. And until Copernicus came along settled science held that the earth was the center of the universe. GW is the most amusing case of wide scale group think to come along since Global Cooling in the 80s. Imagine a world full of Michael Moore clones, only fatter.

martin, wash dc,

When weather forecasters can tell me if it will rain or snow tomorrow and how much, I’ll consider taking them seriously on whether the planet is heating up because of me.

Rich, D.C,

The evidence is indeed piling up...that Global warming, as laid out in this piece, IS JUST NOT HAPPENING!

The last 3 months have been COLDER than its been in years around here. That, for all of you with lower levels of sense and intelligence IS THE EVIDENCE THAT YOU ARE IDIOTS!

g, Lansdowne, USA

There is no goddess but Gaia and Algore is her prophet!

Bald Eagle, Salisbury, MA

warren, new orleans, USA: "Creating a crisis that does'nt exist! And the world is being affected by this nonsense at all levels that's the real tragedy of this lunacy. It will cost us all, if thinking people don't stand up against this madness. "

That's the same line used when the wetlands in Louisiana started to be sold off for private development. That's the same line used to avoid strengthening the levees. Today the same people with vested interests in robbing the family silver are running the same line past you.

Open you mind to the possibility that treating the world like your own public toilet might have ramifications.

Dan, Hampton, UK

Never trust a scientist when he could have wrote the conclusion before he started the study. Political science majors.

Bob, Coraoopolis, USA

Most sensible people would certainly agree that to recycle rubbish is not such a bad thing. However to suggest that people in the west should recycle when China and India are running rampant with their emissions is akin to peeing in the wind. Anyway for every emminent scientist pushing the climate change barrow you'll find another emminent scientist rubbishing the theory.

James, Auckland, New Zealand

As the great USA Circus Magnate P. T.Barnum said years ago, "There's a Sucker born every minute". Followers of his theory believe everything they see on the Telly, read in newspapers or hear as rumors.
Stop and think for a moment. This is hype designed to seperate the believers from their monies. The movement was kick-started by former US Vice President Algore. And believers of Algore's faux theorums have bitten. Anyone with a smattering of knowledge as to weather phenomenon, are laughing aloud at Clow Algore.

Neal Real, Cowtown, USA California

More global warming jargon, just more scientists not satisfied with their current research grants looking for ways to con politicians and the public out of even more money. I regard myself as an environmentally conscious perrson but do not believe in this new world religion.
Then again what the hell, "global warming" is the best money spinner politicians have had in years and they are not about to let it go.
Global warming as we know it is more likely caused by changes in solar activity, do not just look at one point of view. So-called environmentalists should stop branding those who have an alternate explanation for this phenomena as heretics. I am of the opinion that all points of view should be taken into account, especially those that do not have a financial bias.

ANDREW, HACKNEY, LONDON

Gordon Bennet! Empty vessels make most noise as my mum used to tell me. Hundreds of posts from pig-ignorant Americans keen to tell the world that they can't see anything going wrong at all, anywhere, so hey, let's just get leap in the Humvee on head on down the road a bit. All this says says way more for the total failure of education in the USA. What on earth was the point of teaching these people to read and write? And who's going to take responsibility for looking after them when the deal goes down, as it surely will - because they're going to be clearly incapable of looking after themselves in a post-oil, post climate change society.

Vertingetorix, Toulouse, France

Oh gee, so now the total percentage of CO2 in the atmosphere will be 0.04% (which you can literally call zero point zero) instead of 0.0383% (which you can also call zero point zero)..Run for your lives, we`re all doomed. My God, it`s absolutely ridiculous how far this hoax has been taken. What`s next, the stars are falling from the sky?

Edhallick, sunnyside New York, us

Global warming caused by carbon dioxide = huge lie.

Tom, Earth,

Judging from the avalanche of comments being made about this hot topic. A lot of readers are getting very hot under the collar over this global warming issue. All these heated arguments and debates are just plain silly. Let us just stay cool and calm about the whole thing and enjoy the sun while it lasts. We have heard a lot of hot air from both sides. The fact that world leaders and scientists can not come to a consensus on the subject just leave us all cold!

Wing, Poole, UK

Many voices of doubt and dissent, few in support of the scientists seeking solutions to the carbon dioxide problem.
What is it that these voices most object to? The likely moderating effect on western lifestyles which any solution will involve? The money paid to scientists who do their jobs? The suspected (though illusory) anti-americanism of the main thesis?
Look, guys, this is a global problem. If London floods so will New York. Take off the blinkers, look at the facts, and listen.
Even if there is only a 50% chance that the nightmare scenarios being painted turn out to be true, then all human energy and ingenuity should be focused on saving our future.

John Pownall, Dorset, England

What a great opportunity!! I've already bought my Hummer and some prime real estate in Alaska - just waiting for the global warming to turn the mountain property into a tropical beachfront hideaway. By the way, whatever happened to the alleged "hole in the ozone layer" and the "coming ice age" the alarmists were so worried about a few years ago?

Tom, Spartanburg, South Carolina

Why do people willfully ignore the truth?
The Earths climate IS changing. The Earths climate HAS ALLWAYS changed, The Earths Climate WILL ALLWAYS change. The current rate of change is neither faster or greater than previous cooling /warming cycles. The only difference with this one, is that we are here to observe it.
King Canute tried to demonstrate that humans do not control nature hundreds of years ago.
Get your heads out of the sand and LOOK at the planets climatic history. dont just believe what you are being fed.

Peter East, Grays, Essex

I love it. The chicken littles are finally--and deservedly--losing on their outlandish warming assertions, soooo....they're now predicting "it'll be much, much worse!".
This is an admission that they're losing.

dave, Dayton,

Has this calimatologic research was performed by astrologers or scientists?
If indeed the Britain was a tropical wilderness, the, what source of CO2 (cigarettes smoke?) caused it to cool?
If Europe was a sheet of ice 15,000 years ago, what caused it to warm up? Excess CO2 release by the industrial revolution? When? 10,000 years ago? 500 years ago?
Astrologers' thermometers.
Oh by the way, come visit us in Michigan if you are too hot.

Mandy, Mid-Michigan, USA

He said: “This is the first time we have been able to get convincing evidence that a change in the uptake of CO2 by the oceans is linked to climate change.

What evidence? A climate model? A guess? Puhleeeese!

Bunchapeepee, Macon, Georgia, USA

How can a group of people predict the weather of the future when they cannot even predict tomorrow's weather? Weather patterns change, always have and always will. The truth is that we will be seeing these things come to pass as the world's end approaches as predicted in the Bible. There is nothing man can do about it. Our planet is a living being and it is constantly changing. Man's destruction lies in his ignorance to take care of it, but as for what we call Greenhouse Effect, I feel there needs to be a lot more proof before it can be enforced. Afterall, was there a Greenhouse Effect back in the times of Noah? Was it man-made? What about all the droughts throughout time? Were those man-made? Come on people, get your heads out and get real! You are bowing to a huge political movement which will only bancrupt your own wallets!

P Young, Tehachapi, CA/USA

Reading the report 2 things jump out, one, based on the 'models' the 2nd does not account for the windiness of the southern ocean. If windiness is the problem, could we instead build some sort of floating wall across the Indian Ocean to divert the wind? Have one of those sophisticated 'computer models' to check it out.

John, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania

If I lived in a flood plain (and many do) I would be foolish not to think about the possibility of floods and take commensurate precautions against the eventuality.

Peter Day, Doncaster, uk

Yeah, Igno Ramii, global warming is just a "theory." So is evolution, and so is quantum theory. But the theories work, because they explain the past and predict the future with some accuracy.

The only way that Global Warming will be proved adequately to the nay-sayers (mainly listeners of AM Talk radio in the USA), will be after Bangladesh is underwater and half the species on earth are extinct.

Hopefully global warming will take out Rush Limbaugh, too - he doesn't look like he can take much more heat without having a heart attack.

Todd, Chicago, IL

This is way too much fun. In 1962 I was a young lad in the second grade. Our teacher had me fully convinced of a coming ice age. The great scientific minds of our time had used the incredible technology at hand and predicted the future. Fortunately the evil greedy carbon emmiters have caused the earth to warm and prevented us all from freezing to death. I am sorry but the longer I live the less likely I am willing to believe that man can predict long term weather events. I think the word believe has a great deal to do with the debate. When a global warming advocate is challenged they sound like a religious zealot.

James Hutchings, Anaheim, usa/ca

They can not tell you with more than a 30% "chance" of rain tomorrow, but hell yes brother it will be 2.5 degrees hotter in 20 years...you can take that to the bank.

When I see the envirowhackomentalist stop trying to shut up/down or threaten everyone who disagrees with them, maybe I will listen, but it always has been my opinon, that if you have to threaten someone to belive you..you may be doing something wrong.

It is also curious on just how big the ego's are in the EU..wow. I would never call someone stupid because they do not belive what I do, that is their right, well at least in the US..but hey I am a conservitive I must be wrong eh ?

Kyle, Charlotte, NC,

I have 2 full sized cars and 2 SUV's

We use about 150 gallons of gas per week. 200 on a busy week. I'm doing my part to prevent global cooling.

I like big vehicles for safety and will never get a pint sized car.

My family is first every time

I

joe, bloomington , IN

the air is too clean we need more soot in the upper atmosphere

joe, bloomington , IN

Now that we know for a fact that CO2 FOLLOWS the increase in temperature why do these global warmist nazi's keep lying to us?

Capitalist Infidel, Monroe, NC

global warming is a bunch of crap

jim, wilmington, usa, nc

It's funny that the rest of the world thinks American's are just ignorant uneducated fools when time after time we've proven we're the best and brightest. Just like anything else success breeds envy. For 20 years "scientists" have been warning us that we've "passed the tipping point."

Al Gore says the sea is going to rise 20ft, not even close to the IPCC numbers. Do any scaremongers care? Nope. It "feels good" to be concerned. Someone alert me when something "abnormal" happens, because right now it's all hyperbole.

Michael, Sarasota, FL, FL

Weather is unpredictable. Global warming believers will not give a bit of credence to the rising tide of scientists who have changed their mind on it, let alone the thousands who don't assign it to human activity. The arrogance of people to say that because there's snowing now where it never did reflects their belief that their lifetime is the history of weather.

Ken, Ft. Bragg, California

Global warming..why not just call it climate change....which has been going on since the world began. Every thousand years or so, there has been changed in the worlds climate..and this is happening again, in fact it has been going on since the time of Victoria , and not just in England. The winters in Victorian England were a lot worse then they are now. are we to blame the products we use now, when they did not exist then. Our scientists have to follow each others thoughts if not it will seem they will be foolish.

victor, westclff on sea, uk

Lawn grass converts 20% more CO2 than the same footprint of trees. Lawn grass converts CO2 further into twilight and starts earlier in he dawn.

As to the "new study," what they actually found was that there was less CO2 converted by the ocean because there is less CO2 to convert.

Oops!!!

Richard, Greenville, SC USA

So why is Mars and every other planet in the solar system heating up?
Did that one little mars rover do all that global warming on Mars, so its our fault too? You guys are stupid and gullible fools, as well as, mostly lefty sickos. Grow the hell up!

Wes, Minneapolis, MN

About 2/3 of the gas emitted by volcanoes is carbon dioxide. I would imagine that one good eruption would dump quite a bit of CO2 into the atmosphere. But I would imagine that point may be lost on the rabble-arousers in the 'logic-free zones' of Washington, London and UN Headquarters.

Besides, I think Al 'Living-Large' Gore would be a lot more convincing if he were to be seen driving a Prius.

Tomás, Troy, Michigan USA

Most americains ignore it because most americans are christians. They figure jesus will probably return in their lifetime so there is no need to do anything about global warming.

Steve, Victoria,

The new breed of free thinking scientists look at the data and predict Global Cooling in the next 5-10 and a slow decent into a mini ice age...

andy, thousand oaks, ca

Global warming is a socialist plot. If CO2 emissions are limited, real people will lose their lives by the millions. When it turns out to be a lie, AlGore may just say OOPS! Just like global cooling. A lie. There are plenty of "scientists" that will tell you anything you want to hear if you fund their research. Creating the hysteria is all part of the drill. Read the real evidence: Look at senator Inhof's website.

Claude Slagenhop, Dallas, TX, USA

Whoa! Is this what is making the Mars ice cap recede at the same time as we are seeing a climate shift on Earth?
I didn't know the Southern CO2 vacumme sink had such a big effect.
Looks like another "chicken little" looking to justify their government (our taxes) Grant.
How about we give these guys Grant money for them to stop? More bang for the buck.

Engineer Bob, Lakeland, Florida, USA

Chris from Grand Rapids needs to make the distinction between global warming and man-made global warming. None of the 28% of Bush supporters denies that the world is in a warming trend. They are however very skeptical that man is the cause. More and more climatologists are rethinking man's role in all of this and are now focusing on the power of the sun to warm the earth and the effect that water vapor (over 90% of the atmosphere) on climate change. Liberal or conservative keep reading the science and make your decisions based on scientific fact not political dogma. I love this debate just keep the name calling and political crap out of it.

Donnie McGean, Kihei, Hi USA

More nonsense from the global warming alarmists. If you look at the larger pool of data, you will surprise yourself with the lack of consensus on this subject. Most of any warming going on is of natural causes - i.e. the variation in radiation output by the SUN - not by SUVs. The whole global warming issue is not a scientific discussion, but rather a political one. Quit tainting the science with political contaminants. Study the real data - not the so-called consensus point of view. Besides, periods of "global warming" in the past have been associated with prosperity -periods of cooling associated with calamity. Just remember, polititians trying to solve problems in nature tend only to MAKE THEM WORSE!!! The world will do just fine if you will just tend to your own garden. Don't forget the law of unintended consequences.

Bill Beck, Portage, Michigan, USA

Maybe the world governments should create floating trees to absorb all that ocean's Co2.

Tia ann, Bryant, Arkansas

Tianna, Bryant, Arkansas

This article assumes that CO2 emmisions contribute to atmospheric warming. That is far from proved.

Furthermore... human activities contribute a mere 5% of all CO2 emissions into the atmosphere and a miniscule 0.117% of total greenhouse emissions.

The global warming fanatics need to sell the car and house and move to the wilderness, already. Leave civilization to us folks who are prepared to enjoy it.

Now excuse me while I go for a joy ride in the SUV.

undisclosed, Salvador, Brazil

I'm still waiting for the ice age to occur which was predicted with "certainty" by scientists back in the '70s.

If we have an ice age still pending and are also waiting for a spot of global warming to occur, won't they simply cancel each other out and leave us with some fairly decent weather?

Besides, global warming is just a "theory." It hasn't been "proven."

Thomas, Atlanta, GA, USA

People say ignoring it won't make it go away. ...Neither will listening to pseudo scientists who don't look at the whole picture, that CO2 used to exist is far greater quantities and the earth was cooler. There are many other quite clear and valid arguments against the latest CO2 is warming the earth fashion / make-us-feel guilty-tax-raising zealots whom the governments obviously love ("useful idiots" as Lenin would have said). I feel sorry for the fools who buy into the "Co2 is warming up the earth and it's all humans' fault" - they really should look into the science and history of the earth in more detail before spouting government-inspired soundbites.

James, Ewell, Surrey

More Americans get their news from David Letterman and Jay Leno than any other source. The second most popular source for news is the morning drive DJ.

Al Gore (I wish he would learn some physics) goes around sounding like a backwoods southern preacher. If Einstein talked like that there would be no nuclear weapons!

Bill H, San Antonio, Texas

As an American, I am embarrassed by the typical American's distrust of science and scientists. These "good folks" would rather leave it up to God, so they can watch the Dallas Cowboys (or some other all-important sport team). A large portion of our country doesn't even believe in evolution (in a recent study, only Turkey believed in it less than us).

How can one even have a discussion with people that have such fear and distrust of science?

JA, Chicago, USA

The hubris of mankind to think that they can somehow reduce Global Warming™ to any significant degree or control natural Climate Change™ never ceases to amaze me. Who is to say that this climate that we have now is the right one? Naturally occurring Swiss glacier melt has exposed silver mines that were working hundreds of years ago when it was warmer than it is now. Mankind as well as the flora and fauna seemed to have survived that pretty well. We’ll survive another increase just fine as well.

The climate has been changing since the earth was lifeless and will continue to change in spite of anything we do or do not. In the 70’s scientists were suggesting that we ADD C02 to the atmosphere to avoid global <i>cooling</i>. Should we have listened to them then? The natural systems creating and maintaining climate are not completely (and I understate) understood. We listen to the chicken little’s at our peril.

Steve, Kenmore, WA, U.S.A.

It's good to see that all 28% of Bush supporters in the US decided to comment on this issue. Anyone who doesnt believe in global warming clearly knows nothing about the issue.

A liberal conspiracy involving all the world's scientists? Please stop listening to Bill O'Reilly and Sean Hannity- you're embarassing yourselves.

To Jamie from London and everyone else who is writing the same type of comment about Americans: you’re just making generalizations about everyone in the US and, thus, acting as ignorant and obtuse as the people who don’t believe in global warming.

Chris, Grand Rapids, MI, USA

Rapid Rise in Global Warming is Forecast!

Here in Arizona we call it SUMMER!!

Brad, Tucson,

I would like to thank all of our cousins across the pond for continuing to stick their head in the sand with regards to climate change.

It is completely irrelevent that US scientists were not involved in the research.

God forbid you could ever have an auto industry that could produce a car that acheived more than 15 miles to the gallon......

James, London, UK

Interesting how many US folk have posted on here - almost to a man they disbelieve all the mounting evidence. I'm not saying I know for certain, but I tend to take more interest in what thousands of different scientists are saying than what those refusiniks would like to think.
Just in case the scientists might be right, I can't think of any good reason why carbon emmissions should not be reduced - by use of biofuels and other technology for instance.
I'm sure that 50 years ago, the same people on here would have been denying smoking caused cancer, or saying that leaded petrol was good for you.
All I know now is that we don't get snow in England yet 25 years ago we got a healthy dollop every year.

Chris, Northampton, England

It's curious that most of the Americans think (!) that Global Warming is a lie. Some ignore it because they don't want to understand it, some because what I call stupidity. If you don't accept the studies from high educated people, it isn't only irritating because you think you know better, but also stupid. Those researchers have done research based on facts. And no, it isn't the fault of the US. But their signature under the Kyoto treaty isn't only welcome but also necessary.

Thomas, Brussels, Belgium

Ok, here's what we need to do immediately: elect a one world government or maybe we can just use the UN (since they do a really good job of deciding things like human rights and peacekeeping) to take over all the resources of the world. They should decide what is best for everyone and the survival of the earth. And if some people have to die, then they should be brave and know they are sacraficing so future generations can live. What do you think? Is everyone on board with this idea?

Robin, Chicago, IL, USA

I'm so glad it's rising. I'm ready for a good summer. It's about time.

Frank Drone, Redmond,

There's nothing funnier than Americans who don't believe that humans are responsible for the dramatic changes in the world's environment. How could people seriously believe that the pollutants we put into the air don't cause global warming? Thank God that these are not the same people running the US government... oh wait, I was wrong.

Robert, Montreal, Quebec, Canada

For all your warmers, the bees are coming too.

Wess, Boise, USA

Hilary, I've oftened wondered if the US is on another planet, but thanks for confirming it.

Gavin, London, UK

For all the Anti USA readers. Practically all the technology used in these observation seem to come out of American research facilities. Hubbell, Space shuttle,, Satelites launch capabilities.
Not bad for a Nation as backwards as we, the USA seem to be.

Robert Granville Lee, Bloomfield hills,, Michigan

Significantly more Americans having their say about Global Warming than anyone else

Funny that....

Jamie, London, England

its good to see so many brave people here taking a stand against all these scientists.

Just because the vast majority of scientists who study the climate seem to agree about global warming, that doesn’t mean they’re right.

To be honest, I don’t care how many qualifications someone has, how many studies they’ve conducted or how many of their peers agree with them, my opinion counts too. And I say they’re all wrong.

And is there any good reason why I shouldn’t know just as much about climate change as all the scientists, just because I’m a hair stylist?

Dan, munich, germany

I think that we humans should stop attempting to afix blame or to suppose that we can actually do anything about climate change. If we look back into time, we can see periods of warming and periods of cooling. We can take from this that the Earth's climate is dynamic and is often in a state of flux that, in the past, was not caused by human activity. We should accept that the climate may be working against us overall and focus on surviving as opposed to silly concepts like carbon offsets. If we come to a common ground it may not be too late for us. We should focus on surviving climate change, not blaming climate change. This is the best way to help the future generations.

John Tesh, Orange, US

quick quick, we must change more lightbulbs

John Ledbury, Lowestoft, UK

A wish people could think 'big'. As little as 15,000 years ago Europe was just one huge sheet of ice, and few million years before that Britain was a tropical wilderness. As much as we like to think that Humans and the Earth will be here forever, the facts kinda speak for themselves..we're all doomed! Now it's possible we might develop ways of 'terra forming' the Earth and other planets but that is but a dream with the present technology.

chris, newton-le-willows, England

Go watch a Science Fiction Movie? LOLOLOLOLOL That's even more funny than "The earth has a fever"

Bill, Holliston, ma

Joe of Atlanta.

I must say I am pleasantly surprised that the Americans are just as capable of light-hearted sarcasm as any other.

If only more Americans were like you.

Pete, Cov,

We should all stop driving, cutting grass and trees, running factories, and using electricity. We are killing our earth to be more comfortable in our homes. I think we should all quit our jobs, eat organically, and sit around the campfire singing Koombaya. Then, after we've saved the planet, we can all say, "see, I told you so'.

Chris, Atlanta, GA

I have an open mind, but I refuse to be stupid. I have been following the case for and against AGW (Anthropogenic Global Warming) very closely and, to date, I remain unconvinced that man rather than natural cycles is the cause for the current global warming (GW) .

Scientific findings in just the last few months suggest we know far too little about the how our planet's weather system really works to form any sort of conclusion, let alone madate radical and costly limitations on our global energy usage. ie, A prominent ice core expert believes the co2 levels taken from ice cores are significantly understated and that the whole argument that co2 has risen sharply and above historical levels is in question. Another experimental finding suggest that increased solar activitity blocks cloud forming rays coming from outside of our solar system. Less cloulds - more of the suns radiant energy gets through.

Phil, Philadelphia, PA

When Scientists get next week's weather 50% accurate, I'll begin taking their analysis of next century's weather a little more seriously.

Steve, Marysville, WA

Steve , Leicester, UK: "Can someone explain how water absorbs CO2"

There are many ways the ocean can be a CO2 sink. The obvious one is the construction of carbonate shells by many organisms, from diatoms to molluscs, which ultimately sink to the ocean floor. It might be useful to reflect that most limestone and chalk deposits were actually atmospheric CO2 during the Cretaceous and Jurassic epochs.

Paul Schleifer, Chiswick, UK

I will not comment on the crew that have stuck there heads in some unnamed place, needless to say they are spearing out at the world through their belly buttons. I guess it comforts them to remain in their state of denial and since they are too simple minded to contribute to the solution of an extremely complex problem, I guess as long as they don't get in the way, they should be left alone to sing in the rain, or whistle in he grave yard or whatever. The rest of the adult world has a great deal of serious work to do and he longer we delay the more difficult and costly the task. There are enough children dieing from the lack of clean drinking water as it is, let's not exacerbate that problem ten, a hundred or a thousand fold.

Supercritic, NYC, NY,USA

Dear me...some of the responses on here. Someone press the nuclear button now and get it all over with. It's obvious no one gives a monkey's any more.

Note to God on the human race. D minus (must try harder next time).

JS, London,

Being a chemist, I find it very easy to understand how buffer capacity can be exceeded. This sounds like what's happening here. The thing about buffer capacity is how rapidly things change once you go outside the buffer range.
On a side note it really disgusts me to see all the ignorant masses (unless you know what you're talking about, you are ignorant) attacking scientific data without a shread of evidence to support the contrary. So, to all the critics - present your data or SHUT UP!!!!

bill, Lafayette,

That Tony Almond sure sounds like a smart guy to me.

Dr. Itza Sunstupid, Katy, Texas

To think it only took the human morass 50 years to discover the dangers of "smoking", now they tell the masses that all the chemicals released through aerosol spray, pesticides, herbicides, refinery by-products, smelters and refineries, coking plants, plastics, and these are just off the top of my head, and I haven't looked under the sink for inspiration from cleansing, scouring chemical stews that I will ALL pour down the drain through regular intended use. Yup, to tell me now that all this had and have consequences??????? and now, chemical brews to "sweeten" the air I breathe that I vapourize all over the house and furniture, throw-away household cleaning agents and supplies, disposable lighters, I SUPPOSE THAT THAT WILL ALSO BE DETRIMENTAL....... any of this sound ludicrous when the reality of our wastful and wasted ways come home to "roost"??????? Read some of the first comments and remember that there are lobbyists just waiting to abuse forums, GOOD LUCK to the human race.

joseph picard, ottawa, canada

When one of these so-called scientists can explain how the increase of CO2 on earth can cause the observed melting of the polar ice caps on Mars, then I will listen to their cries of "man-made global warming." Until then, I stick with the common element between the two, the sun.

Paul Hamilton, Papillion, Nebraska, USA

Well, well,well. If you ostriches will just put your heads in the sand for about 50 years I guess we will all see whether or not there really is any "global warming" or "climate change". In the meantime, my hopes lie with China. They have the government that can actually force change, they seem to realize pollution IS a problem, and they don't appear to be in bed with the Oil Industry. Oh, and my next car will be a hybrid. Would have been an electric car but the oil companies saw to it that those are not available. Remember to put on your sunscreen, ostriches, so your fannies won't get burned!

Morgan Le Fay, Loachapoka, Alabama, USA

The most sensible course of action is to accept that future climate changes are inevitable and now individuals must make their own preparations and encourage others to do the same. Don't waste time in denial, despair or pointing a finger of blame. Our duty to future generations is to vote for local and global action to meet immediate and future climate challenges.

James Geikie, Tasmania, Australia

Are we not in the middle of an interglacial? I thought it was quite natural for weather patterns to change during these periods? It is no use just a few countries trying to reduce emissions- the big polluters such as America should lead by example which they are clearly failing dismally- Lets not forget also that if the polar Ice caps melt sufficiently the Gulf Stream will be cut off and England will be freezing- on the other hand some are saying that it will become a Mediterranean climate- what the hell are we supposed to believe??!!

Catherine Whyman, Hintlesham, England

Yesterday, the Weather Bureau issued a frost warning for my region. The low temp reached 44`F. If forecasters cannot accurately predict weather 12 hours in advance, why do you think a reasonable person would believe "scientists" forecasts years in advance? Ah, the scientist's name must be Nostradamus or Karnak.

Global warming is more about politics than science.

mark, usa,

The Earth's rotation is slowing. By fractions of a second a year. Except when it is increasing. The Moon's orbit is growing. By a few inches a year. The sun's output has increased by 34% in the 4.5 billion years the Earth has existed, which is less than 1% every 100,000,000 years. These three items have a far greater impact on climate than Man ever will. Over the next 5 billion years.

The oceans are a part of the Carbon cycle, but this is largely because fragile organisms create carbonate shells and bones, extracting carbon from the water, burying it as rock, which then weathers to form CO2 again. It's true that temperature plays a role in the amount of CO2 (or carbolic acid) the water can hold), but it stands to reason that dumping 26 billion tonnes a year of fossilized CO2 into the atmosphere by burning fossil fuels is not a good idea if it heats the system or acidifies the air or water past endurance.

Reduce emissions, Billy Pecora.

Edumacate yo'self.

Brant Boucher, Ottawa, Canada

The VAST majority of scientists agree with the idea of global warming and that it is man made. There will always be a few who don't believe anything. Open your eyes and start reading. The signs are out there and becoming more ominous everyday. Just because you do not believe something, does not make it untrue.

wolfie52, Charlotte,

I think its fair to say that a significant proportion of the answers to this article sound like they are shouting rather calmly discussing the issue. Who would you trust with the future of the world a highly worked up emotional person or someone trying to calmly reach a solid conclusion?

Also there is another issue closely linked to Climate Change and that it is energy security. With China and India's demand for oil, gas and coal increasing along with ours, basic economics kick in. How long do you think cheap energy will last for? Before the old chestnut of wars over resources start up? Maybe the climate change deniers/claimers can't agree, but surely the sharply increasing competition for limited non-renewable resources is yet another good reason to find suitable alternatives and to lower our reliance on them? Along with cleaner air in cities and a greater respect for the world.

Stephen, Maidstone, UK

There seems to be an awful lot of blaming of other countries going on here. But I say we blame Prometheus because he (allegedly) invented fire. I still don't know who we're going to hang respiration and oxidation on, though. God, maybe?

Reese Bobby, Durham, NC

Thank God for small mercies! I was just worrying about the acidification of the Oceans. CO2 forms carbolic acid in water. If the water becomes too acidic, corals, shellfish and everything with bones or shells, internal or external die, even such plankton as makes carbonate rather than silicate shells.

All in all, it's better to keep the CO2 in the atmosphere for a couple or three centuries. Sure, it'll melt the ice and destroy the rainforests, but as mass extinctions go, a mass extinction on land is relatively insignificant compared to a collapse of marine ecology. It's a whole different game if the seas go.

By the way, it is total nonsense to say CO2 is a consequence of warming rather than a cause. There are too many feedback loops involving CO2 for it to be anything but a cause AND a consequence of warming. No one who knows even the first page of Global Warming 101 denies that CO2 is a greenhouse gas. A schoolchild can prove that with a Science Fair project.

Brant Boucher, Ottawa, Canada

I'm a bit confused. Isn't "The Sims" a computer model of life? If so, then why isn't it more effective at predicting human society in the next three to ten years? True the models being used may be a bit more sophisticated than "The Sims" but isn't that just a matter of scale and the difference between computer capacities used to run the models? Of course, maybe the programmers who wrote "The Sims" only had an agenda of making money. But wait, scientists must eat too. Oh, it's just much to confusing for the average individual, so let's leave it up to the really concerned folks to worry about it.

Madison Bagley, Hooks, Texas

I find it disheartenig that the question that everyone is skirting is this. We can agree that the Global climate always changes, if it does is MANKIND fully responsible for it. What % are we talking about? 10%, 25%, 50%, 75%, or 90%. Clearly MANKIND can not be responsible for 100% after all if that were so we could stop Hurricanes and Typhones, which we can not. When the scientists give a % then we can then see even if we stopped using ALL fosil fuel and stopped emmiting CO2 how much an effect this would be. It is not a bad idea to reduce emmissions but will this have an effect? A secondary question is how much can we truely affect the CO2 level. If you think it is a lot Turn off your computer and Stop using electricity or driving. After all every little bit helps!!!

Anthony, Fishers, USA

So one year in millions is warmer or even one decade in millions or even one century in millions.
How short sighted!

Shary, Seattle, WA, USA

All you Lefties have wanted to reduce the World's population for a long time. This is your chance - if you're part of this new cult, the Global Warming Religion (previously also known as the global cooling religion back in the 1970s) which forecasts that if we don't do anything, the World's population will be reduced to 10% of it's current size. This is what you've wanted for a long time - so sit back and let the carbon do its magic.

It is going to be funny to see the results of all of this paranoia over the next 20 years or so. As any sane person understands, carbon emissions cannot be cut back and they will actually grow but the climate will not change - this will be like all the other scares of the last 30 years: global cooling, AIDS, SARS, Nuclear War, Bird flu, Y2K, Mad Cow disease, and on and on. You Lefties are all crazy.

Martin Dijkema, Lawrenceville, Georgia, USA

blah, blah, blah. "Global Warming" is the biggest hoax in recent world history and it is fun to watch, especially as many "scientists" are beginning to change their tune and recognize that man has little to do with the warming and cooling the Earth has done for millions of years. The sad thing is the public believe everything they are fed by politicians and seem eager to pay a great deal for no results. Yes, a sucker is born every minute. I can't wait until we are asked to pay to stop the global warming that is occuring on the other planets that man doesn't live on.

Ryan, Austin, TX

"Why is there no comment in the story from other experts who disagree with manmade global warming? "

Because there isn't any respected scientists that do disagree with man-made Global Warming. The disagreements come from all the ignorant and ill-informed armchair-experts like yourself.

E, Newcastle, UK

Re: Unconcerned commentors from the USA

So it's low risk is it?

Say we're happy to take the 0.00...1% chance this event leads to global catastrophe. What about the next 'low risk' event, and the one after that?

If we're planning on staying on this planet for an indefinite period of time, mathematically one of them will catch up with us in the long term.

It's time for an independent global authority to assess and deal with these risks.

Mark Temple, Woking, UK

Whether this particular study is accurate is not really the important issue. It ought to be obvious to all of us that our collective actions can and are changing our environment - and not usually for the better. Look at the region around Chernobyl. A wasteland for how long? We humans are an industrious lot. If you think we don't have the capacity to ruin our own nest, think again.

Al Klein, Philadelphia, PA / USA

"The sky is falling!"- Such was the subject of many a youthful bed time story. Personally, I believe in good stewardship and not in tales of woe interpreted from some computer model - garbage in, garbage out, after all. Defining the premise "a lot " - is an arbitrary number, supposedly more than a few. And yet, more and more of these scientists are changing their mind (this is easily found information if you look for it), but you don't often hear about that .
Persuasive critical argumentation requires presentment of premises and supporting facts from both sides. Why then, is one side presented as " fact " and the opposing side merely dismissed, if not solely for the purpose of manipulation? (oops, I'm not supposed to figure that out, considering I was schooled in the public forum - damn)
Think for yourself, you have the ability - use it. I know it's hard, especially if you haven't been taught (purposely I think).
The Truth Is Out There.....

MD, Groton , CT

Ah, the 'popular' view of the flat-earthers and the head-in-the-sand brigade. How dare these eminent scientists raise any question that needs thinking about, and might persuade some of us to ease up on our profligate use of natural resources?

It is symptomatic of the selfishness and greed in the world today, and the view that as we are only temporary custodians of the planet, we shouldn't care about the mess we will leave behind us for others to clear up - if it's not too late!

Shame on the all, and more power to the scientists who think before they rant!

Arthur, Woodbridge, Suffolk, UK

Fine, so while every US citizen denies there's anything happening, us people from NZ and Australia will carry on getting sunburnt in 10 minutes because there is no Ozone hole above us. Thanks for that unforeseen side-effect, guys. And because we love you and your money so much, just go ahead and keep driving and polluting. We'll all be so glad to suffer the consequences of your inaction. Come on USA, show us what you can really do with open minds.

William, Wellington, New Zealand

Global warming is mostly a NATURAL, not manmade, phenomenon.

The world has been heating up relentlessly for roughly the past 15k years. Since the end of the last ICE AGE.

There used to be a glacier in North London. But it melted thousands of years ago. Long BEFORE the arrival of factories, planes and SUVs.

The world's climate goes in long-term CYCLES. It cools down a bit. It warms up a bit. And so on.

History will judge this current period to be as hysterical as those who once thought the Earth was flat.

Neil M, MK, UK

If our huge human population is contributing to global warming, less humans would cause less. So if we're serious about the long-term - and no one seems to have picked this up - let's start taking measures on family sizes. Pay benefits for only one child - none for any more. IVF treatment - forget it. And not be wasteful with what we're already using.

Phil, Preston,

I think the "idiot scientists" point was that net absorption was static whilst CO2 levels were increasing in the atmosphere.

Obviously if they had only considered gross absorption they would have seen an increase relative to the increase in atmospheric CO2, masking the real problem.

Emma, London, UK

The Earths climate IS changing. The Earths climate HAS ALLWAYS changed. The Earths climate WILL ALLWAYS change. The only things different about THIS warming cycle, is that 1. Humans are around to observe it, and 2. emissions from human activity could be having an effect on it.
As we are increasing the global population at the rate of 77 million a year, any effect which can be contributed to human emmisions is going to increase. There are those who realise that the climate is not controlled by man and think about how to adapt to change, and there are those who believe we control nature, and can stop climate change. you pays your money and takes your choice.

Peter East, Grays, Essex

Interesting how global warming has morphed into global climate change since people weren't buying into the former. The folks who want to control our lives will never stop. First it was the overpopulation lie, then global cooling, then global warming, now global climate change.
You notice this morphing had to take place because there is some evidence that the long warming cooling cycle is beginning to shift back to cooling with the lag time of a few decades. I could give the footnotes but why? This is all politics, not science.

John, Pittsburgh,

This is my favorite absurd comment from the US maybe of all time:

'Thes global warming alarmists forget one important thng . . . this is God's world and we CANNOT destroy it . . . it will be here long after we are gone.'

J, London,

It will be interesting watching all these people having to eat their words in a few years' time when the solar cycle starts going the other way...

Pigeon, All alone in the crazy city,

How arrogant of man.
Global warming, religion for the non religious.
God, why did you give us oil if not to be used as fuel?

Wendy, West Hills, CA, USA

Whether or not man is causing it is a political issue. The fact is, it's happening. What we need to understand better is how fast it's happening, to what degree, and - if necessary - how to maybe survive it. I mean as a species.

I'm adverse to the term 'Global Warming'. It's true enough technically, but I think it's a misleading name. A term better suited is 'Extreme Weather'. Since global mean temperature rise - even if only slight - equals more BTUs available in the atmosphere to feed global weather systems, we will experience higher energy weather.

Nelson Borden, Cedar Rapids, Iowa

If the gas and feces from livestock contributes more CO2 than all of human activity, imagine the CO2 footprint that the dinosaurs must have had. I don't think it was a meteor that killed them but rather a huge increase of CO2 on one gasey day for the dinosaurs.

Where is my funding to study this?

Dan, London, UK

global climate change is not as simple as temperatures rising in a uniform manner, in all places, at the same time. higher overall temperatures cause the expedited calving and melting of glaciers, and other historically immense ice masses. this contributes to changes in the temperatures of the oceans, and interferes with the conveyor effect that powers the currents of the oceans. with greater masses of cold water in places thay do not belong, especially at times of the year when there would normally be warmer masses of water, the air currents are displaced as well. the unseasonal cold here in the lower 48 is due to the displacement of cold air masses that belong farther north--the normally colder nothern regions are experiencing record unseasonal warmth. the freeze comes later, is weaker, and thaws far too early.

this is not hard to understand, if one simply opens one's mind and attention span beyond the end of one's nose.

Rachelle M. Greene, Houston, TX

So, let's get this straight. A variation of between 5% and 30%, which MAY lead to an increase of 1/3 in the temperature rise, which is currently forecast at 1.5C. So the most that would happen is that the temperature would go up by 2C and may not vary at all. I think that the scientists have left a big enough margin of error for this to be meaningless, but it achieves the aim of attracting more funding, whilst scaring as many people as possible, to the least effect.

David Leslie, Perth, Scotland

What happen to you Brits? You gave up on the crop circles and found a new fantasy "Global Warming". What ever happened to the last great eco panic "acid rain"? Did that one get solved? And just how is the current Mars polar melt caused by CO2 on Earth?

These news stories might carry more weight if they actually named the "scientist" or the institutions they are from.

Gerry, Chino, USA /CA

I am an American living in Florida, USA. My husband van pools to work every day and we practice all of the "green" issues that we can. We do not have any of the "old fashioned" light bulbs in our home, I only wash laundry when the tub is "extra full", we only water our grass 2x a week and we have taught our children the same. All of our neighbors are aware of the issues and we talk about them frequently, literally. "All Americans" are not bad people, we feel, think and breathe just as any other people do. It is governments which cause hard feelings between nations and thus peoples and although our government does not engage in active global warming issues we still can read about them through papers like yours and we can still go down the right path. Our governments only last for 4 years at a time. Let us all hope our next commander in chief has wider vision. But if not the people of American can still react. We have "green towns" in this country. Does England?

Carol, West Palm Beach, USA

Tell Al Gore to add this to his $175,000, per showing, PowerPoint presentation, LOL. The human contribution to carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is a minority amount of the total carbon dioxide in the atmosphere and carbon dioxide is only one of many variables contributing to earth's temperature, so how can such dramatic conclusions be reached? I afraid that many people starving for publishing are making the results of their studies meet a human caused global hypothesis. Fossil fuels are on the way out and new technologies are on the horizon, I seriously doubt that my grandchildren will be driving fossil fueled vehicles when they reach driving age. The human caused global warming is an excuse to redistribute income, yes socialism on a global basis. Of course the largest socialist country in the world, China, will laughing while their economy continues to expand at an ever increasing rate, while free world economies contract at an increasing rate.

Bo, Chowchilla, California

Do you think I could get a nice well paid scientific job looking at the effects of Global Warming if I could find some nice statistics to manipulate and massage that relate to global warming?

If not I’m sure i could find something relevant like the demise of the common house sparrow or something !
As they say lies, dam lies and statistics !!

Sorry guys but looking back in "Documented" history I can see lots of dips and rises in global temperature and funnily enough nobody was running a V8 BMW at the time!

Tony , Oxford, UK

I still have not heard a rational explanation for the average 800 year lag between temperature rise start and subsequent CO2 rise seen in ice core data. This isn't even a "post hoc ergo propter hoc" argument; this is the central problem with the anthropogenic warming hypothesis.Feedback pathways in nature tend to return systems back to their original states, not to accelerate unusual patterns.A CO2 rise 800 years after an event CANNOT have precipitated the previous event. This is simple logic. In a similar manner, thunder does not cause the lighting bolt that proceeded it; a bellring does not cause the clapper to strike the side of a bell before the ring occurs.If it cannot be proven in the available data that rising CO2 levels cause the observed historic temperature rises that are documented,CO2 levels cannot be proven to cause climate change.QED.

d

leibnitz, dale city, virginia USA

I'm still waiting for the ice age that these same scientists, back in the 70's, predicted would be upon us now. What will the be the new crisis 30 years from now?

Thor, Houston, USA

Please stop blaming America for global warming. Thats like hitting the bus driver over the head while the bus is speeding straight at a wall. Global Warming is now inevitable - we're going to hit it. The answer lies in adjusting to it and moving past the dependence of civilization on carbon and CO2 producing energy technology.

Gavin Pelham, Las Vegas, USA

Whatever ... And tomorrow the world will end.

Dave, Minneapolis, MN

Everyone relax please. Global Cooling hysteria is only a few years away!!!

Bob Sloggin, fairfax, USA

You know people, if you deniers really believe the hot air that
you spout you should put your money where your mouth is:
Buy up sea-front property now!
Sell your air-conditioning to gullible buyers!
Buy those SUVs while they're cheap!

Believe me, the rest of the human race isn't going to miss you.

Nihil, London, England

The best fishing lures catch, not fish, but fisherman. "Global warming" is right up there with Y2K, and my only question is, how can I get in on the scam.

john, Austin, Texas

The Earths climate IS changing, it ALLWAYS HAS has changed, and it ALLWAYS WILL change. Global C02 is with the exception of a `terrace' which occured 300 million years ago is at it lowest level since the Earths foramtion 4.6 billion years ago. The only difference with this change is that . 1. Humans are around to observe THIS particular change, and 2. Emmisions from human sources could be having an accellerative/decellerative effect on THIS particular change.
As we are adding 77 million extra people a year to the planets population (and remember, not only do the things that humans do, create emmisions but also as they breathe they create C02) With a rapidly rising population and a rapidly dwindling set of resources, wars over those dwindling resources OR climate change could just be the Earths way of getting rid of us, in the same way as a fox gets rid of fleas by immersing itself in a stream. Just a question of which will get us first.

Peter East, Grays, Essex

Don't worry, this "research" will be repudiated by some future study. These "researchers" publish too soon, include only data that supports their preconceived notions, and make invalid logical conclusions. The public, largely unfamiliar with either science or statistical analysis, is therefore gullible an willing to believe.
Do your homework and don't take this trash "science" too seriously.

Steve Bell, Ft Lauderdale, Florida

I don't understand why the weather forecast for tomorrow can not be relied upon, yet we are led to believe that the forecast[s] as to temperature change 20 to 30 years hence, is a sure thing.

Bill Marriott, Sea Girt, NJ

I will need to see independent corroboration of these findings. This Global warming issue is just a fraud. When will people stop believing everything some "scientists" say?
This is just an attempt to demonize and control the United sStates by the UN.

Drew, Brownwood, USA/Texas

The history of science is the history of "the experts" being totally wrong -- again and again. The "experts" promoting man-made global warming are largely politicians and bureaucrats. Actual climatologists are deeply skeptical and the more courageous ones call it a pile of nonsense.

All this alarmism is based on "computer models" -- the same models that can't accurately predict the temperature in London next week. Yet anthropogenic warming zealots expect us to believe they can predict global temperatures a century into the future.

Human beings are a superstitious species, no matter how modern and sophisticated we may imagine ourselves to be. Man-made global warming is a religious cult for secular humanists, complete with SIN (carbon emissions) and GOD'S VENGEANCE (climate change!) leading to DOOMSDAY.

In fact the current tiny warming trend (1/2 degree C. over the past 150 years) is very mild, perfectly normal and ultimately a good thing for biodiversity and for humans.

Steve O, Venice Beach, CA

What about drinking water...I've heard we're(the world) is
going to have 80% of the population without clean water in the near future!!

Bill, Ladner,

Curse the scientists and liberals and their evil plan to cut corporate profits in order to save the human race!

Michael, Daphne, Alabama, United States

When I read the title to this link, I thought, yeah, it's called summer.

Richie, Dallas,

First i have to address this "American this" and "Yank that" comments on this thread. While Europe was still dumping trash into their rivers - the US passed the first comprehensive laws and regulations driving clean air, water, and environmental standards in the early 70's. By Nixon no less. Many of America's largest cities recycle over 60% of their trash/refuse. My state of Virginia recycles 75% of its garbage.

Having said that - I think most will agree that some form of climate change is going on. The degree of change and the cause has not yet been defined. I think it would be more reasonable to come up with near term and practicle ways to reduce emissions as well as determining methods to react and live with the change we cannot impact.

However, a lot of the alarmists are providing solutions that will do more to enhance their control over people's lives and ability to take their money than help. Having an international body "solving" this problem is funny - UN anyone?

Nicholas, Centreville, USA/Virginia

Hmm, why again are ice caps on Mars melting? Is it the SUV's, I forget? Perhaps the same reason for the warming period from 900 AD to 1300AD? Europe prospered during this era, the warming that occurred between 1000 and 1350 caused the ice in the North Atlantic to retreat and permitted Norsemen to colonize Iceland and Greenland. Back then, Greenland was actually green. Europe emerged from the Dark Ages in a period that was characterized by bountiful harvests and great economic prosperity. So mild was the climate that wine grapes were grown in England and Nova Scotia. Whose fault was that? Probably the Americans, eh? Oh, wait, they weren't around to blame things on then. I guess we'll just have to blame the solar cycles for that warming period, but everything bad since then is definitely the Americans.

Riley, Houston, Texas

I recollect a similar crisis from my younger days. In the eighties I attended conferences on weather change. We were worried that an Ice Age was upon us because temperatures had been dropping steadily since about the nineteen forties. The problem that really bothered us then was that carbon dioxide was increasing at the same time. We couldn't find an explanation as we expected temperature would rise, not fall for so many decades. The other problem we had was the definition of "average" temperature - which average do we use? The air is a non-equilibrum atmosphere - the "average" is NOT the sum of a set of temperatures divided by the number of readings. We call that a temperature statistic and it is meaningless in a thermodynamic analysis. This science "blast from the past" may help someone keep a perspective in this whole very political issue. It isn't science anymore. Too bad.

Simon E. Bode, Bath, United Kingdom

Loki, Australia - you clearly understand the data. For those of us who don't, can you explain what is meant by there remaining uncertainties in the data, and what the impact on the theory is. Now, while you are at it, these strong winds: they bring CO2-saturated (and cold) water to the ocean surface. The water warms - presumably?- and is able to carry less CO2. The CO2 is therefore released to the atmosphere, or the water can absorb less CO2. How long does it take to saturate the oceans with CO2? Data-wise, can you clarify the first para of the article, which implies that the oceans' inability to mop up man-made CO2 is increasing global warming by 30%? How does a 30% increase link to the 2 deg temperature rise that the article refers to? And if the man-made component is 30%, is the entire CO2 (natural plus anthropogenic) closer to 300%? Or was that just sloppy journalism?

d'argent, London,

You always have to go to the last few paragraphs of sci-fi fantasy articles like this to get any actual facts. There we find that the measurements cover a mere 23 years! Moreover, in that time, the Southern Ocean has apparently absorbed the SAME amount of CO2 (0.3 billion tons per year) not less. Third, no evidence at all is provided for any increased winds in this time, to say nothing of why we should think the presumed lower wind speeds of 1981 were typical of all time previous to 1981.

Then I love the ending to this article: "The researchers accepted there were limits to the data available from the Southern Ocean and that 'the magnitude of the CO2 sink is heavily disputed'."

This utterly undercuts the significance of ANY of this, to say nothing of shredding the notion of the "Scientific Consensus — the Debate is Over" mantra. Unless, somehow, the scholastics of global warming can explain how a consensus can also be "heavily disputed."

Try again, Chicken Little

Jon Burack, Stoughton, WI

When the leaves fall from the trees and die during fall, this releases more CO2 into the atmosphere than all of the humans. Let's tax the trees for their carbon foot print, or better yet, let's tax the owner of the tree.

Just look at the big ball of light in the sky if you want to know what causes warming.

American's don't believe in GW because A) we're not Socialist / border line Communist and B) we actually research both sides of an issue before making a conclusion. Give it a try, it's worth it.

Energy costs aren't even 3,000 pounds in a year, so I don't know how I'd ever save that in a year if I went green. From my calculations, the costs of going green would take about 15-20 years to recover - not worth it for a made up problem.

Look at the carbon levels in this site: http://biocab.org/Global_Warming.html
Current CO2 shows no resemblance to the current temperatures.

Please research for yourselves instead of listening to the far left media.

Dan, London, UK

"if this is true, why did we have nearly a whole month of record cold here in Midwestern us?? our normal last freeze is April 15-20, yet we had a freeze warning in michigan just four days ago, global warming?? i think not"

Peteee,

Take a look at the wind patterns over the Northern hemisphere and you will see that Western Europe has a much stronger flow of warm moist air running up from the Caribbean. That increased flow has in turn pushed the Northern Polar air mass further over the top of the planet towards the North American continent. That is why Southern Texas had freezing rain this winter. That is why Central US is seeing much colder weather right now. All the cold air at the North pole is being replaced with warm moist air and the cold air from the pole is being heated by the great plains of the US.

This in turn means the polar ice is being heated much faster than expected and will melt much sooner each year as this heating progresses and the Greenland ice sheet melts.

Chris Coles, Medstead, Alton, United Kingdom

There are a vast array of influences on our climate and they are all constantly changing. To blame C02 emission for all of the change is in my opinion daft! The Earth's rotation is slowing, the moon's orbit is growing and the sun's output is increasing. These three items have a far greater impact on climate than Man ever will.

the oceans are a part of the Carbon cycle, as they cool they absorb co2 and when they warm they emmit, so it stands to reason that as the currents transfer heat they also help transfer co2.

Reduce emissions to breathe cleaner air, but not out of fear the world will burn up.

Billy Pecora, Kansas city, Missouir

The press release did not give the measurement uncertainties. From the way the press release ended the principal scientists did not seem overly confident in the data. Will more study ($$$) be recommended? Methinks the study needs serious peer review. The devil (uncertainties) will be in the details.

Doug, Richland,

The Southern Ocean is over 20 million square kilometers in area. What method did these researchers use in measuring the CO2 absorption rate? How many samples and from what geographic distribution were they made? Over how long a period of time have these samples been taken?

This article is peppered with words like "forecast", "believed", "calculated", and "predicted". How so many definite conclusions (“carbon sinks” had been shown to be weakened by Man’s own actions) can be drawn from such imprecise observations and assumptions, is it any wonder the rush to Global Warming Skepticism by more and more climatologists has surged to tidal wave proportions?

BA, Pittsburgh, USA

Ray Blinn (Dublin, Oh): your arithmetic is correct, but you're missing the point.

What these data are showing us is that we can no longer assume that the oceans are absorbing an increasing proportion of CO2 as it increases in the atmosphere: one of the brakes on our runaway train has failed much earlier than we'd hoped it would.

Sadly, this is a further indication that the projections published by the IPCC are actually conservative rather than alarmist, as many would prefer to believe.

Paul Schleifer, Chiswick, UK

RUN AWAY!!! We're all gonna die! On a more serious note; do it for the children!

Tom, Adak, AK

Yes. There is linkage between CO2 and warming. However, the CO2 is a product of warming and not the cause. A direct correlation has been found between Solar activity and climate changes through the ages. Yes, driving less is still a good idea for many reasons.

Gary Dickson, San Francisco, CA

Do they teach anything in science classes outside of the US but victimology (blame George Bush, USA and Chine) and political indoctrination (have to have control over the world to solve this problem).

Art, new york city,

The polar ice caps on MARS are melting.
It's the SUN, stupid. I learned in high school that if you heat water (the oceans) , it liberates gas (CO2). OF COURSE IT'S NOT ABSORBING AS MUCH CO2 AS USUAL.
This is nothing more than "research" directed by money that seeks a manmade- global -warming induced outcome.
Climate change is a FACT. Manmade global warming is a FARCE.

Tony Almond, Jamacia beach, USA

Mark, Woking, UK - if GW is not true then can we sue the socialist countries that have been draining the US for funding since they concocted this theory beginning with M. Thatcher?

You can't trust a scientist who comes up with a conclusion before the hypothesis.

Dan, London, UK

I disagree - I the warming of our Planet has nothing to do with C02 emissions but is to do with the Sun. Nothing to do with this over commercialised C02 emissions blah blah blah...

Allan, London, UK

We have got news like this everyday. We all say that we are very worried about it and that we must search a solution. But goverments all around the world are doing nothing and they are the only ones able to do it. So What kind of world will i give to my child?

ANGEL ALONSO, PUERTO DEL ROSARIO, SPAIN

Storms in the US, we're told it's Global Warming, Hot April in the UK, we're told it's Global Warming, Cold April in the US, we're told it's Global Warming, Ice melts in summer, earth gets cooler, Ice storms, dry winds, floods, drought, desertification, my mum feels chilly - Must be global warming, right?

DannyJ, Stoke-on-Trent, Midlands

Oh, forget it, Times. There's no point. People are too fond of their big cars and other poncy things to take articles like this seriously. They just don't want to know.

starling, Lancaster,

To think that man, who only occupies 2-3% of the Earths surface, can affect the world's oceans on a catastrophic scale in 20 years in absurd. Surely in it's incredible design, the Earth has a way to compensate for any change in the atmosphere over a short amount of time. By the way, a million years to the Earth is a short amount of time. This planet lives and breathes on a much larger scale than we give it credit for and it has survived a lot worse than we puny, insignificant humans in the last 4 billion years. I think we sadly over estimate our position on this planet. We are powerless to the forces of Mother Nature time and time again and to think we can reshape it in 100 years is just pure, intoxicating vanity. If the Earth wanted to tomorrow, it could shake us off like bad case of fleas - and it would not miss us.

Kevin, New York, NY, USA

Was i the only person to see the recent programme on channel four that had various scientists, leading climatologists and the like, claiming that the rise in global temperatures was caused by the Sun and not man? Will the scientific community, media and politicians at least behave in a scientific manner and explore this avenue? Or is the "global warming" lobby yet another movement to be hijacked by leftist anarchists? Man produces 6% of the Co2 globally via industrial output so why is the rise in temperatures blamed on us when the biggest contributor are the oceans which are heated by the Sun and then give off Co2?

dave mcdowell, london, uk

I still believe that the main culprit of global warning is the timber industry which is responsible for the massive destruction of trees in the world. It doesn't take much more than a passing familiarity with elementary biology to know that trees mop up carbon dioxide and release oxygen through photosynthesis. Why then in heaven's name, are we chopping them down so indiscriminately if we're so worried about global warming?

Dr.Nicholas Lee, Windsor, UK

If we had abided by the ";precautionary pinciple" which translates into "don't do anything until you know what damage it may cause" we would stil be working out whether it was safe to ride a horse or even eat a potato.

Climate models are just that.Figures fed to a computer that spits our a series of answers which are then translated by human beings who may have preconceived ideas about the outcome.

It hasn't hit home in Sydney where the "new rich" many from the alternative energy business are building their multi-million pound homes on Sydney's waterfront.

grant watt, Glenning Valley, australia

I have invented a personal CO2 reducer. I am able to hang a common hosehold plant around my neck. As I breathe my Co2 emmissions are directly absorbed by this plant. I calculate I have reduced my personal pollution quotient by .0457 percent. This is calculated by counting the number of times I breathe a year and dividing by the average oxygen output of a common houseplant over the same time period. I then created an algorithm to account for rain absorbtion, times when I stand in a rain forest and times when I breathe hard or talk too much.
if 4 out of 5 people on the planet did the same thing, I figured we could look reduce our global CO2 footprint by 93% within 8 years.
I am excited by my findings and hope to have a government grant to further my studies shortly.

jack, clearwater, Fl

I find it quite disturbing that so many people here are deeply mistrustful of scientists who are experts in their field. I would guess that a scientist can make a better evaluation than me about climate change, just as my plumber's better at finding out what's wrong with my boiler than I am.

Of course there's a lot of different and contradictory opinions out there, and we don't have magicians who can foretell the future. But the general consensus is: we've got a problem on a scale ranging from 'will-make-life-a-bit-difficult' to 'we're-all-screwed' and sadly for both humans and the planet, ignoring it won't make it go away.

Beckie, London, UK

"Apres nous, le ... deluge !" - what is what Louis the ...th of France used to say and what seems to be true of reader's opinions expressed here. The scale of scepticism towards scientific evidence here is terrifying. Has anyone of the sceptics ever been to a green house ?

Krzysztof, Warsaw, Poland

Simon:
I notice that you are quick to rubbish Americans. Could you please point to one conclusive piece of data in the study mentioned in this article? When I hear scientists or jounalists say the words "could" or "may" it tells me that it also "could not" and "may not". What I read here are unsubstantiated conclusions. To the authors, please don't think most people are not educated enough to understand. We are, and would appreciate you sharing your raw data, calculations, and methods of experimentation. We'll draw our own conclusions.

Fred, Avon, CT, USA

A majority of the alarmists , both academics and politicians, rely for a fat living partly upon promoting global warming. Common sense suggests it is about as likely as Iraq's weapons of mass destruction. Nature has a way of dealing with such things; would that it could do the same with the alarmists.

Marshall Askew, Moraira, Spain

mmm.. it seems Americans are cynical and defensive of their stance as ever.. there is no mention of America being responsible, it ain't ALL about you

bjorn, london, england

it is very worrying that all those who belive that this is just spin are from the world's largest polluting country. I pity the future generations who will suffer because of our inability to make sacrifices. We glibly stand by and watch the changes happen in our world and either blame the industrial revolution, China or India for enjoying their own industrial revolution now, or that by some miracle and without having to do anything, the global crisis has stopped and possibly reversing. I hope you non-beleivers will remeber this when you look into the faces of your grandchildren as they ask why as a generation yours did nothing to stop it. History is lttered with mankind ignoring the obvious until it is too late. So much for us being the 'superior species'

Richard, Singapore,

Does it really matter how we call it "Global warming" or "Climate Change"?The problem stays a problem,it exist and its real.And if somebody doesnt believe in it and think its "nonsense",it means he is blind,but if he actually read this article then he is not,or stupid,but again if he reads The Times its not completly true.So may be the answer is he doesnt have enough knowlege on this subject and doesnt read enough about whats happening in the world.But,in any case,if you didnt see any changes on your local level does not mean this problem doesnt exist.

Irini, Thessaloniki, Greece

Data collectors are doing the right thing by raising alarm bells. There must be political will from all nations to combat this menace in a substantive manner. The greed of few industrialists and multinational companies should not be permitted to bring misery to the whole populace of the world. We have the moral responsibility to leave a safer planet for our future generations and the generations to come.

Laxman Ullal, Mangalore, India

This is not science but theology.

It is rather similar to the discussions of how many angels can stand on the head of a pin. Each side totally ignores the 'inconvenient truths' of the data that contradicts their position. When is true science going to look at this hypothesis objectively.

(Just look at the theological comments on both sides below)

Just how is human activity causing the observed identical global warming on Mars?

PS. Greece and the Med is having the coldest April/May since 'records began'.

Brian Vallance, LEFKIMMI, Greece

warren, new orleans, USA: "Creating a crisis that does'nt exist! And the world is being affected by this nonsense at all levels that's the real tragedy of this lunacy. It will cost us all, if thinking people don't stand up against this madness. "

That's the same line used when the wetlands in Louisiana started to be sold off for private development. That's the same line used to avoid strengthening the levees. Today the same people with vested interests in robbing the family silver are running the same line past you.

Open you mind to the possibility that several billion people treating the world like their own public toilet might have ramifications.

Dan, Hampton, UK

Right, they can't predict the weather for next Thursday but they know the 30 year forecast. OK. Sign me up, I'm a believer. What do I do next?

Drew Hunter, Davison, MI, USA

Having read the US comments...

Given they reflect US policy...

If global warming happens...

And it's Americas fault...

Then...

Can we sue America?

Mark, Woking, UK

Denial is just another form of self-delusion mr Kemec. The evidence is everywhere for us to see, on the mountains, in the oceans, at the poles, even in our own gardens. April here was the hottest since records began. That is a fact. I dare say you will deny that too, but it is true, and can be very easily verified with the Met Office. I dare say next year's will be again. The only question is can we do anything about it? I have my doubts if we can, to be honest but I am certain that we will not, as your thread pretty much shows. It really should not be an emotive subject. So next time why not just say 'so what, I think I'll be alright, and to hell with the rest of you'.

dougie, inverness,

I thought that as the world warmed up, the sea (by definition water) would RELEASE more CO2. Indeed some convicing evidence suggests that the sea is by far the biggest CO2 emmiter. Can someone explain how water absorbs CO2 and how this will change by the world, allegedly, getting hotter?

Steve , Leicester, UK

No explanation of how the mysterious hole in the ozone layer causes higher winds or how this might impact observed global warming on Mars though. But Mars might be a great place to send the brain dead scientists who put their names on this political statement that has been cleverly cloaked in the guise of science.

Robert L. Crocker, Chehalis, Washington/USA

I apologise in advance for my pedantry, but can I respectfully suggest that when presenting such serious scientific findings, the terms ‘ carbon’ and ‘carbon dioxide’ not be interchangeable? (Unless, of course, that is the reporter‘s intention).

I feel that it gives the impression that those reporting on the story might not have a full grasp of climate change mechanisms. I am sure this isn’t the case with Mr. Smith, but perhaps a little more attention to detail would help here?

Guillermo Lopez, Dubai, UAE

Well stated Robert. One of the best responses I've read challenging popular assumptions about global warming.

eric, punta gorda, fl

It’s amazing how indescribably some stupid people are. The “worlds oceans are vast” give him a banana, “you can’t predict the weather” what a gem. It would be interesting to look at the qualifications of those posting comments on this site. Oh and Modelling is a representation of the real world, not an exact science, but a lot better than Fox news and Bush industries anti Kyoto stance.

Mark, London, England

So it's low risk is it?

Say we're happy to take the 0.00...1% chance this event leads to global catastrophe. What about the next 'low risk' event, and the one after that?

If we're planning on staying on this planet for an indefinite period of time, mathematically one of them will catch up with us in the long term.

It's time for an independent global authority to assess and deal with these risks.

Mark Temple, Woking, UK

why do they never mention the largest part of the climate?
by that I mean Precipitation. maybe because they have no Idea how that works.

Jason , Earth,

Could the Press please stop using the term "global warming"? It makes Americans think that they shoud feel it getting warmer. "Climate change" is a less confusing term, and no more difficult to write or say.

Niel, Bronkhorstspruit, South Africa

In past centuries our prophetic advisors declared that we must sacrifice our virgins in order to prevent climate disaster.Now they want whatever we have left,our homes,our jobs and our freedom to think independently.

w.spencer, kitchener, canada

Frankly, a lot of scientists seem to agree on this. Its pretty hard to believe they're all part of some great money-making conspiracy to convince the world that the end is nigh. Of course there's a margin for error, but wouldn't it be better to adopt the precautionary principle, assume they're telling the truth and drive our cars a bit less, rather than refuse to change our lifestyles because of a conviction that climate change experts are really just looking for the next pay cheque, or because there still exists some evidence that could be used to build alternative theories for changes in the world temperature, though not necessarily convincingly.

Becky, Oxford, England

The net absorbtion stays the same yet this forecasts rapid warming? Headline should read: "Nothings changed, idiot scientists still shout fire"

David, Santa Rosa, CA

To the nay sayers, the term is climate change of which global warming is an aspect not the whole shooting match. If ocean waters become too warm it could trigger a mini iceage in the northern hemisphere, Go watch "The Day After Tomorrow" for a quick lesson on the possible consequences, just stretch the timeframe over 50 to 100 years.

John, Perth, Australia

Data "Collectors" are being PAID to falsify results. Follow the Money to the Socialist Internationale.....

Howard, Denver, USA Colorado

The sky is falling. In another couple of years we'll be told that the earth is cooling again. These people have no idea what they are talking about. They can't tell what the weather will be next week but we're suppose to go along with all this doom and gloom. Give me a break.

Ron, Columbia, USA SC

Do not forget overconstruction. We are killing all the green spaces
and puting concrete over them. The population explosion has got
to be stopped. What else but globally warmed can a planet be if
it's just one continuous global city?

Eugene, Heidelberg, germany

Agree with Dean of Atlanta. Seems as though any variant from
the so called norm in weather, climate, wind or ANYTHING, means
that the world is coming to a warm end.

Ed, Wayne , PA

I notice that our American climate-change denying friends are quick to rubbish this scientific research here - without producing any sound scientific research of their own to refute it in a coherent or conclusive way. A case of shoot the messenger?

Simon, Lancing, W Sussex, UK

Climate change is just that, and does not only include global warming. Extreme weather in all it's forms is increased.

Mark Eastty, London, UK

Give it up. Global warming is nonsense.

J Sumner, New York, USA

Yes you are right Dean. It's those liberal scientists that want the world the suffer. They are liberal insurgents, moles sent to prestigious universities to someday grow up and become evil scientists. Muhahahaha! Muhahaha!

John, San Diego, CA, USA

Recent studies show that temperature impacting cloud formation around the world is impacted by a 12 to 20 year sun spot cycle. Clouds/water vapor in the atmosphere have an exponentially greater impact on heat retention/reflection than CO2.
In fact, their is strong evidence that CO2 increases actually lag well behind the warming which produces them.
Man made global warming theory has become more and more like religion and less and less like science - along with all of the fundamentalist intolerance one might expect from a new religion.
Its very scary when leading magazines and newspapers run headlines like, The Science Is Over! All Good People Will Believe Or Burn In Hell!

Chris Parker Jones, sequim, US, Washington State

There are now more scientists than ever that are confident that global warming is not happening at a rate anywhere near what some say and that it is not proven that man has anything to do with it.

This debate will sharpen in the years to come and since this sort of climate change has occeured many times on this planet before the industrial age, it will be proven that there is no man-made global warming.

Mike Hayden, Murrieta, Ca, USA

If carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere typically lag temperature rises by several hundred years, couldn't this reported observation also be shining light on the time lag - it has been postulated to take years for the temperature rise to affect ocean currents and bring the dep CO2 rich waters to the surface where they can out-gas in the warmer climate. Again, we need more study on which is the cause and which is the effect

John , San Francisco, CA

I find it humerous that people are flaking out because of this current warming trend. CO2 has little if anything to do with the current trend and the hysteria that "we are all going to die", "the planet will burn", blah, blah, blah...what a bunch of crap! How about all of you who truly want to change the politics and economies of the industrial world simply commit suicide? That would cause a small reduction in food demand, energy demand and put your minds at ease because you won't be here, on earth to "suffer" the ravages of the current global warming trend.
Lemmings...here comes the cliff!!

C.Ewe Panic, small town, USA

Global Warming cultists are reminding me more and more of that weird-looking, old cult leader, Rev. Henry Kane in the movie Poltergeist II, where he looks in the Freaky Freeling's screen door, screaming "YOU'RE ALL GONNA' DIE IN THERE!!!! ALL OF YOU! YOU ARE GONNA' DIIIIEEEEEE!!!...."

Red, Cheyenne, Wyoming, United States of America

The annual summer season is beginning... It is the time for global warming zealots to get in gear once more. Ho-Hum!!

Randy, Woodbury, MN

Aren't we just suffocating ourselves?

Producing CO2 uses oxygen - the more CO2 the less oxygen. At the moment O2 production (from trees etc) is way way lower than CO2 production.

Nobody seems to talk about this - cars and industry hoovering up O2 - at what point does the lack of oxygen prove to be the real problem?

Simon, Nottingham,

what's the weather going to be for Memorial Day weekend?

Barry, Eugene, Oregon

Aaaargh! Lets all commit suicide before we die!
No wait! we all change our cars and never travel.
Sorted!

Frank H., London,

I don't know who this is news to - warmer oceans obviously can't hold as much of any gas. Are climate scientists that dense? As for the "models" not taking it into account - they are already pouring double the "actual" increases in CO2 into their models to get them to predict ANY warming at all - so this HAS been accounted for.

I'm not even going to go into the logarithmic nature of this particular feedback - the fact that each molecule of CO2 you put into the atmosphere only has 1/2 the effect of the molecule before it!

More "theory" looking for a "crisis" so they can squeeze more "funding" out of someone!

Stan, Louisville, KY

Has any of those interviewed bothered explaining how one approaches measuring CO2 absorption in the Southern Ocean? Why not start with a smaller ocean with your test chamber. The Mediterrainean is only 1/10th the size, why not start there? Make sure no one breaths while you take you samples.

Steve, fort lauderdale, USA/Florida

.6-.3=.3
.8-.5=.3
The Southern Oceans are absorbing CO2 at the same rate as they did 25 years ago. They are using words like ever reducing proportion to mask the fact that the net quantity being absorbed hasn't changed.

Ray Blinn, Dublin, Oh

Why is there no comment in the story from other experts who disagree with manmade global warming? Typical one sided blame America first crowd.

Bruce, Atlanta, GA

Another not too subtle request (demand) for more funding for the Merry Lads at the British Antarctic Survey. How about taxing the CO 2 that all the Joggers exhale. Capture the Bloviateing that is always present in the hallowed halls of Parliament and use the CO 2 to gasify the Soda's. C'mon guys and gals, you can no more prove that the Temp has gone up .6 of a degree C since 1907 than I can equal McDonatds even time 100 Yd Dash. Please give us a break from the Chicken Little doomsday rantings. A Hundred Pounds to a charity of the Times' choosing, if you can demonstrate the Methodology used to ascertain the average temperature over all of the Earth's 197.000.000 square mile, in 1906.

Robert Granville Lee, Bloomfield hills,, Michigan

Run, run, run the sky is falling. Another fairy tale along with tooth fairies and UFO's

norm , Cleveland,

Global warming is happening. Just like it has done many times in the past, the earths temperature will rise and that will be followed by global cooling. Check out the Malenkovitch Cycles (wikipedia and other places), check out the changes in the output of the sun, and go back in the validated history of the cycles of the earth written in the ice of the antarctic and you will see that global warming is not new but cyclic over millions of years. At the end, GW will happen regardless of what the steps taken now or later. We should spend our energies and resources on adapting to GW, not fighting it. But then, there would be less grant money for the self-described scientists and no money for Al Gore and his legion of parasites, and no unethical gains for the carbon offset hawkers.

Jim Black, San Angelo, Texas, USA

They stress the oceans impact too much....

“I think we can control the carbon dioxide rather easily, because it’s a question of land management essentially and the amounts that are involved in the vegetation are so large that if you merely just change some of the forest management practices or do a little more irrigation in some places, it’s quite likely you can absorb all the carbon dioxide you want, at a cost which is far less than stopping burning coal and oil. So that’s essentially what I’m trying to understand.” -Freeman Dyson

jack burton, Oceanside, USA

Something about the above comment tells me that science education in Georgia leaves a lot to be desired...

caerbannog, San Diego, Ca

This is beyond ridiculous.

The global atmospheric C levels have been many multiples greater than today without the corresponding temperature increases.

Anyone consulted Mr.Sun sitting way up there in the sky? No? What could he possibly have to do with the planet's climate?

These "scientists" are simply justyfing their own existence by churning out volumes of rubbish. It's a battle for funding and nothing more. The fact that it is banner headline news simply devalues your paper.

Simon, London, England

There is a typo in this article:
'Professor Chris Rapley, director of BAS, said UNCERTANTITIES remained, but the findings were “a serious concern”. ' (second last paragraph).

Sandra, Darwin, Australia

That China is the most obscene polluter the world has ever known and that China is the most inefficient user of energy in the world, is common knowledge.

To prevent China's continued destruction of our earth, myself and thousands of others who grow in numbers daily, have made a most difficult decission.

We refuse to buy any product made in China. Stop buying China's products and help save the world. Sad to say, but true.

Richard G Murray, Vancouver, CANADA

"The oceans are losing the capacity to soak up rising man-made carbon emissions"

Ahh, so they have a way to tell the difference between a "man-made" CO2 molecule and a CO2 molecule from volcanoes or from degrading vegetation. Who knows, they may even be able to tell the difference between all those CO2 molecules and a cow fart CO2 molecule. Ahh, the wonders of "modern science".

Kevin, Carrollton, Texas

Are you people complete idiots!! when oceans warm they release CO2 when they cool they absorb CO2. the earth warms and cools in natural cycles. that is why temperatures increases precede higher CO2 levels. It would be nice if your scientists knew a little science. These are not obscure facts, if you don.t understand the science don.t publish the article

philip verslues, Holts Summit, Mo.

Global Warming, as portraited in this article is hog wash. We are directly influenced by the SUN. And have been for millions of years. If the sun is hotter, we will be hotter. Ask yourself, if man is the cause, WHY are most of the other planets in our sun's solar system tracking the SAME as earth?

Al Martin, Birmingham Al,

if things are so dire,how come I still see traffic jams every morning in every city of the world I am travelling to?Until I hear that comprehensive world rethink of our global economic/social model is making the car industry a fossil,I can't take all this hand wringing too seriously.

mark, montreal, canada

What planet is this .uk place on? On my planet, Earth, we don't have a
Southern Ocean... we have a continent.

Hilary, alexandria, VA

I can't believe studies of this type actually get published. As someone who is used to making assumptions to fill in the holes when solving problems as an engineer, it's obvious that there are so many assumptions in this study it couldn't possibly be worth the paper it's written on.

Nathan, Nashville, TN, USA

In the Middle Ages governments had soothsayers. Now we have climate scientists, whose jobs and grants depend upon whipping up hysteria to perusade their governments to raise taxes some of which is expended on climate scientists. Thirty years ago they were claiming the earth was cooling. Then we had the ozone layer problem, which now seems to be going away.
Most of Britain was permanently covered in ice only 13,000 years ago. It's been getting warmer for sometime now. The human race will have to react to climate change just as it has always done, except in the past nobody thought of scaring the population about it, or using it as an excuse to raise taxes. That's why the scientists who disagree with the notion that mankind is responsible for global warming are unable to get the grants - there's no money in it for the egotistical politicians.

Tony G, Harrogate, UK

"...finding evidence for something that they want to see."

And that smells like someone wanting to ignore something they don't want to see! Rather incredible considering the ALL the scientic evidence ALL pointing to the same conclusion!

Piers, Stavanger, Norway

Something about Dean smells like someone who doesn't want to believe evidence that he doesn't want to see. Stick your head back in the sand little man.

Phil, San Rafael, USA CA

Gotta love the "models" that are being used to make these predictions. The only thing I am certain of about these models is it provides a level of job security for these people (as long as they predict doom).

Once they can acurately predict next weeks weather, I might start taking these predictions for 50 years into the future a little more seriously.

Tim, Houston, TX

how about posting the articles that speak of the high ranking IPCC scientist that have seen the light that the only thing man made that is driving our climate is MONEY.

Jeff, Indianapolis,

This global warming "science" all seems rather dubious to me. The world's oceans are vast. How can they possibly test them for carbon absorption? And against what historic measures? We only have incomplete records going back a little more than a century.
There are too many variable and too much best guessing going on. I predict in 20 years they'll be alarming us about another Ice Age.

Scott, Tulsa, OK

Well Dean when your grandkids are choking and drowing in the man made filth in 50-60 years timet hey will be praying you are right.

Tom, Sydney, Australia

Ice cores show that CO2 levels lag behind temperature change by 600 years. The sun is a major factor when regarding climate change.

Max, Drogheda, Ireland

Any reading of atmospheric CO2 levels will show about .03%, regardless of the time or place of the reading. The oceans have been absorbing and releasing CO2 for billions of years, and the level remains unchanged. CO2 is a weak greenhouse gas, but vital for primary food producing plants. Man's contribution to the levels of Co2 have, and will continue to be, negligible.

Lee Clemons, Atlanta, Georgia USA

You are all NUTS!!! You can't predict tomorrow's weather!!!

mike ferrante, croen point, in

Well done guys, the first two statements are from two citizens of the United States and to say that their "scientific findings" are along the same lines of Prof GW Bush is facinating, sorry Pres GW Bush. The scientists who have protrayed this model are very serious and this problem needs to be tackled by the developed world. We need to lead, China and India will follow. As for Peteee and Dean please tell me your comments were not serious!!

eugene, Sydney, Australia

hmmm - guess I should advise kids to become morticians cause *we're all gonna die!" except the cockroaches... they'll live... and the people who are like cockroaches - the algoreiemovers (who love to create junk and "offset" their guilty consciences) and the michaelmooronicons - they'll live - and the barbarians at the gates - they'll live... but other than that - *we're all gonna die!*

harry, Chatsworth, USA/CA

...and another thing, nothing in nature is static, all is always in flux to a greater or lesser degree, just like the weather. It is always changing.

Jack Flintstone, Los Angeles, CA

With all the data, there's no specific prediction. The models apparently won't give a timetable that can be checked. In the 1980's Jim hansen of the Goddard Space Flight Center proclaimed that his models showed a 3 to 5 degree C rise in aver4age temperature by 2000. The change didn't even come with in 3 to 5 degrees C of his prediction. These guys have learned to cry "Wolf" without checkab;e dates.

I wonder what's their political agenda?

CTulip, Chester, MD USA

This article continues the propaganda of fear. Key words could, might, 5 to 30% in truth these scientist are just guessing. In engineering we call this WAG (wild ass guess). The important thing to remember is that man is adding less that 5% additional carbon to atmosphere. In a system as complex as the weather it is impossible predict what a 5% change will do. All weather models predict that the upper atmosphere will be the first to warm due to the CO2 increase. Both satellite and balloon data show only insignificant changes in temperature..

Richard, Erie, USA/Colorado

The fast global warming is a hot world issue, I agree !!
Each country should try to find more real breakthrough.
Especially, US and CHINA !! This big problem is to be solved by leading nations as well.
The current industrialization can not be booming anymore.
We must study to make out a new field now and future.

Young, IKSANCITY, KOREA

The sky is going to fall on our heads, we are doomed, we are doomed ..... and, echoing Peteee, this is not the warmest May since records began (in London), so how exactly is the link between models and reality being established?

d'argent, London,

CO2 has about as much effect on weather.. as front porchs have on paper boys. Get a new mantra TIMES

r hooks, beaumont , texas

Yes, you can probably limit your view to your village, town and state (Illinois, for instance) and still get a satisfactory (and a comforting) feeling that things have not changed after all. But If you watch the news, read magazines you notice that the number of storms, floodings, mudslides (you could go on for some days, I suppose).. The climate is changing, men have caused at least in part; but that is not the point: It is going to affect the whole world, whether you ignore the problem or not. Why do we put ourselves into the role of the passive onlooker? It is contradictory to celebrate progress (and active role) of mankind and at the same time state that we cannot do anything about our very lives.
To sum it up: If you put yourself in the desert and then cmplain how hot it is.....Who can you blame?

Markus Fkeckinger, Kufstein, Tirol/Austria

What?! When will you people realize that you Hummer driving freaks need to stop polluting around the Southern Ocean!......wait, nobody is near the Southern Ocean....darn penguins. It's man-made somehow! uhhh I'll give a reason.....in a few years after I make a study.

This is the icing on the cake though:

**This is the first time we have been able to get convincing evidence that a change in the uptake of CO2 by the oceans is linked to climate change.**

**The researchers accepted there were limits to the data available from the Southern Ocean and that “the magnitude of the CO2 sink is heavily disputed”. **

Joe, Earth,

I think that this is momentous, in that it indicates a much faster acceleration of the downward spiral than was previously thought.
We should not take this lightly as once the symptoms of change become the reason for that change then we will no doubt find that humans are unable to reverse the process.

Dan, Lanzarote, Spain

I weep for the poor polar bears floating away on their lonely melting floes. What a tragedy - if we would just all breathe slower - we'd be using up less oxygen - people - please - think before you breathe heavily - do you really NEED all that oxygen?

Flynn Touron, Reading,

The extent of global warming is intensified in some areas more than others. The figures provided are averages accross the Earth. We have had the warmest April since records began in England. Take a look at Darfur or even Australia if you need evidence of global warming effects. Incidentally, some places may be cooler if warming does occur through effects such as the collapse of the gulf stream for example.

Angela Redshaw, Guisborough, England

i guess it might smell like contrived evidence if you dont understand the data... but dont worry, keep your head in the sand, and everything will blow over, right?

Loki, newcastle, australia

Oceans release CO2 when the atmosphere warms up and absorb it when the atmosphere cools. Our planet is being warmed by THE SUN and the oceans release CO2 in response. Please stotp with all of the fear mongering.

Thes global warming alarmists forget one important thng . . . this is God's world and we CANNOT destroy it . . . it will be here long after we are gone.

Laxy Max, Cool Town, USA

oh shut up.

Hank, Dodge City , Kansas / America

Is this the same BAS that claimed that the whole of the Antarctic was melting because a small part of the peninsula was.

More beat ups based on prescious little, and at least they have the good grace to admit that their data it is highly disptued

Malcolm Hill, Adelaide, Australia

What a surprise another yank who does'nt believe in global warming I bet your a bush lover aswell

ark, London, uk

Is there a creative way of feeding this excess carbon dioxide to plants to regrow forested areas and oceans?

Emma H., Ottawa, Can

Balderdash!

geo, Trego, mt

Let's not forget another factor, the makeup of the air we breathe. Dinosaurs rose and insects grew to be a metre long when the planet had only slightly lower levels of oxygen.
Preventing climate change and pollution which only benefits a few gready industrialists is a no brainer. Also, green savings will quickly reach 3000 pounds per household annually, once we ditch polluting petrol and home heating fuels.

Emma H., Ottawa, Can

This is complete garbage.

Alan, Charlotte,

"researchers accepted there were limits to the data available", is all you need to know about this report: the data doesn't exist to make the conclusions. However, it wouldn't promote the global warming scare and the research money that goes along with it to say that the data doesn't really exist, so they created the info necessary to keep the hoax alive.

Ed Engels, New York,

This story directly contradicts republican family values, so it must be wrong. Besides, if there was really any problem God would protect us just like he protected the people in the twin towers on 9/11.

Joe, Atlanta, Georga, USA

Increased Sun Spot Activity replenished the ozone layer, ending global cooling and causing global warming, now thats over, global warming has stopped, politicians and alarmists have been blowing a lot of hot air in attempt to bring back global warming and stop the new cooling cycle.

Ed, Ellenton, FL

Too extreme for me,

I'll wait and see, like everything the truth usually is somewhere in the middle, North America had the coolest April on record, now I read temps will rise too fast. So I vote for average temps, a little warm one week a little below normal the next. Besides there are so many pieces to this equation, using alarmism isn't going to make me not run my A/C when it's 105 outside under normal average summers.

So I figure its best to let them be alarmists.

Mike, Phoenix, AZ / US

The tide has already turned against the substitution of consensus and speculative computer modelling. It is too late for these crypto-socialists to panick the world into a massive expansion of the powers of state and super-state powers. This fulmination will just make future attempts look all the more ridiculous.

Daniel, San Diego, CA, US

Creating a crisis that does'nt exist! And the world is being affected by this nonsense at all levels that's the real tragedy of this lunacy. It will cost us all, if thinking people don't stand up against this madness.

warren, new orleans, USA

For crying out loud. Doesnt anyone see all the danger cars and no-recycling etc is doing! The heat conveyer is another thing to worry about. anyone who thinks this is rubbish, or doesnt do anything about it... SHAME ON U!

Annonymous, Auckland, New Zealand

Any finding is possible where there is enough money injected. I'm sure that if I donated a few tens of millions of pounds to research into flying pigs some research group somewhere would be able to show that pigs do actually fly.

Christopher Hall, Sheffield,

This is great news. It shows that global warming is real and we've been to ignorant and selfish to become aware of it or give a damn. Of course the US and its sheep will do nothing about it and say this is all wrong. Did you notice the scientists arent from the US? I wonder why no one from the US was involved in the research. But then again I am not surprised.

joe, chicago, USA

The biggest problem with this is that Global "Warming" has STOPPED.

The PEAK year was 1998, and it has been no "warmer" since then. (I think maybe 2004 "tied" it ... but it was not "hotter" than 1998.)

(The three years after 1998 were cooler than 1980.)

In fact, there was just another article yesterday that said April was the coolest in 47 years.

SOME activists have indeed realized this, and without admitting it have switched to warning of Global "CLIMATE CHANGE" !!!

Joe Kemec, Sacramento , California

if this is true, why did we have nearly a whole month of record cold here in midwestern us?? our normal last freeze is april 15-20, yet we had a freeze warning in michigan just four days ago, global warming?? i think not

peteee, northern , illinois usa

Something about this smells like data collectors finding evidence for something that they want to see.

Dean, Atlanta, Georgia, USA