If you are going to site Newsmax as your source, a site which relies on such intellectual heavyweights as Ann Coulter and d*** Morris, and which sells Sarah (Palin) Kuda Coffee, do you expect to ever be taken seriously on this forum in the future.

Its about as ingenuous as the people who write on this site asking for opinions for which shoes to buy, just so you will click on their website selling fake Nikes. If this is your mode of operation, your honesty must be called into question.

Squid...the " source " can produce any media report true or false no matter who they are or how mickey mousey or big source they are. Look at all the US sources that reported "factual" info on Weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.It is not unheard of from other sources that solar activity has been cited many times but people seem to dismiss it rather readily because it is difficult to understand. I wonder how we have had other ice ages and how it was that the ice melted without CO2 and all the other pollutants in the atmoshhere. Thats something worth looking into if people are serious students of global warming but we never seem to hear enough about that. I think that is what the Japanese scientists have been looking at.

http://www.thebeijinger.com/forum/2009/02/25/Australian-divorce-rate-cau...

Did they finally run out of western scientists who were willing to say global warming is just a weird coincidence?

You're the fool, squid. Just as stupid as those hidebound conservatives who refuse to read anything from The Guardian.

Sure, Newsmax is forwarding its agenda by presenting this news story. Does that mean the story is false or doesn't exist? That it's not worthy of consideration? Have you ever pondered the fact that by not running this story, your chosen news outlets may be forwarding their own agendas? By being such an ideologue, you are limiting your own perspective.

Being objective is like being perfect - you will never get there, but you need to try and get as close as humanly possible. That's why it's important not to dismiss out of hand publications that don't fit your worldview.

how about global dimming the remedy?

Hi Owynne! Are you talking about people getting dumber?

goggle it the remedy, and this world needs a remedy to global dimming as well as global warming. it means the world is getting less sunlight but hotter....

Good morning the remedy. Although I was referring to global dimming, you do have a valid question about people getting dumber but we will need a new forum to explore that one.

We're all well aware of the thousands of studies - and the hysterical predictions of many of the authors of these studies, too. And the grants they receive to carry out their research. Well, the article was presented here as "new cracks appear in AGW theory", not "a comprehensive refutation of AGW theory". I don't see how citing this one study to that end somehow invalidates it from consideration.

However, you appear to be an ideologue with an ossified mind regarding this issue. There is little point having a rational discussion with you about it.

You've got to be joking. You're saying the country that gave us the Kyoto protocol comes out with a study saying global warming is a silly thing to believe in, and you dismiss it because of who reported on it? And at the same time you say we are the biased ones?

You are a hypocrite and a fiend.

So, let me get this straight. Let's turn this on its arse. Every time a newspaper or magazine publishes a story about the latest apocolyptic prediction from a group of scientists of the horrors that will be wrought by AGW, that newspaper should also post another article to refute the claim - to avoid the label of "propagandist"?

You really haven't thought very much about this, have you?

We r all gonna die!

There are plenty of whales. The issue with the Japanese is that they are yellow-skinned. You don't see anyone attacking Icelandic, Norwegian, or American whalers, do you?

*drops jaw*

I know people like this exist. But it still baffles me when someone says sh*t like this and means it.