For me, all the debates about the authenticity of global Warming is not important. The genuineness of global warming is not proven but we cannot deny that the climate change in some parts of the world is devastating farmers in developing countries. Finding solutions to the environmental problems that are plaguing the planet is much more important than proving or disproving global warming.

I agree, Joem. Only I'd emphasize finding "practical" solutions to the environmental
problems that are plaguing the planet rather than proving or disproving global warming.

For me, all the debates about the authenticity of global Warming is not important. The genuineness of global warming is not proven but we cannot deny that the climate change in some parts of the world is devastating farmers in developing countries. Finding solutions to the environmental problems that are plaguing the planet is much more important than proving or disproving global warming.

The science of global warming is not confirmed. The problem that I have with Mr. Gore is that he takes the worse case projections and then calls them facts. We discuss this regularly on my blog on global warming:
http://www.globalwarming-factorfiction.com.

Thanks for putting up these videos. I think they help to create constructive dialog on the subject of global warming.

The science of global warming (GW) is absolutely proven. The planet is definitely warming above and beyond historically expected amounts. There is NO debate about this amongst scientists.

Some may believe there is a debate about the anthropogenic cause of GW. But in fact, 90% of the scientific community specializing in climatology agree on the human cause of global warming - warming above and beyond the historical record.

Please check my blog entry at http://renewable-energy-sources.blogspot.com/ for an explanation of this position - a position backed by science.

Chris, man made effects on global warming are far from beng "settled science," we're not seeing anything near a "not before seen" event in earth's history, and your "jump" to finality on the issue betrays your scientific maturity. Thirty years of experience in scientific research has taught me to beware, be very aware, of papers and people that claim "absolute" anything. Remember, only, 30 years ago, there was talk of an ice age coming. We're really talking about "climate" Chris, it changes - that's the nature of climate.

Change your brand of funny weed, Chris.

Although we usually delete spam, we'll leave up your plug to your post, especially since anyone that has actually looked at the facts will get a nice laugh out of your "proof" at your post. It's very Al Gore-ish. You'd do better to stick to software, Chris, hopefully you're better at it than understanding complicated issues like climate. You should really think about trying a little harder to differentiate science from political agendas.

Like Joem and Sean O say in their comments; the genuineness of global warming is "not" proven, although we cannot deny that climate change in some parts of the world is devastating farmers in developing countries. The "science", ergo the inevitability, of global warming is not confirmed. The problem with folks like you and crazy Al Gore, Chris, is that you take the worse case projections and then call them facts. The same goes for your choice of "science" to accept.

You'd do better to stick with software Chris.

abdul - The personalization in your response is pathetic. My background in software is irrelevant. Inferring drug use as your best response to this dialog is also pathetic.

The inability to predict the future is and remains a fact. Of course we cannot say with 100% assurance that global warming is in our future. But it is highly likely given all of the scientific evidence before us.

Why don't you cite one recent article, backed by prominent scientific peer review, that refutes and calls into question the conclusions of the most recent series of IPCC reports? Just respond with the link and leave the obvious, politically motivated hate out of your response.

Chris, you really do need to lighten up and get a sense of humor. The 'smokin'reference was a joke, but I see from your response you know very little about humor - too much time spent on the keyboard, there kiddo!

As for the "obvious, politically motivated hate," part, again, you really do need to lighten up. It appears that folks who find your post "proving" the sky is falling because of so-called "settled science - laughable, are all hate-filled political agended meanies.

I read every word of your post and found absolutely nothing in the way of what actually constitutes a "proof"; apparently you haven't a clue as to what constitutes "proof" in scientific debate. As for references "backed by prominent scientific peer review, that refutes and calls into question the conclusions of the most recent series of IPCC reports," apparently you haven't gotten the word that that there the whole issue is still being debated, hence the purpose of the whole argument in the first place, especially in light of all the denouncement of the IPCC report, and subsequent multiple disclaimers and qualifiers, since it came out.

For starts, Chris, try watching the video, read what the other commenters have to say (none so far seem to find your comments worthy of response), and check out Sean O's site (http://www.globalwarming-factorfiction.com.) He's obviously spent a heck of a lot more time thinking about global warming than you have - oh one of no political agenda (LOL).

BTW, you might notice that you're the only one foolish enough to claim global warming is settled science or that even thinks about using the word "proof."

Not to be too personal here Chris, but you're making an idiot of yourself.