Ah citizen, why not just give us virtual sticks with which to pummel one another?

Steph, I think she's got the Tech staff working on it.

Umm, I thought we changed it, officially, to Global "Climate Change," so we could b*tch about it even as we're having the coldest winters in the last 100 years?

Someone's gonna have a field day with this thread.

Looks like they need a new moral equivalent of war to collectivize us.

Aww, yeah. As if the past couple days around here haven't been, er... exciting enough!

I rub my hands in anticipation!

Well I think the answer is all of the above and we're still reading data.

There are those who speak of it objectively.

Those who hype it up to serve a peripheral benefit and

those who down play it to serve different peripheral benefits.

My advice is to pay attention to the scientist’s word of mouth now and shut out the spokes people and press. Not that most are off the mark but that there is such a stereo of conflicting press now that it begins to leave a growing number of people with no other alternative but to show indifference because the clear path is now several forks in the road and rather than sit in frustration wondering which was to go we’d rather just turn it off.

Remember when something like this would get linked on Yahoo!??

Why doesn't that happen anymore? It used to bring all the crazies out of the woodwork! So fun!

That's because HF and I scared them away...LOL!

haha probably!!

That's how you guys ended up with me.

I saw this article before I left work and knew by the time I got home it'd be all bloody. Imagine my pleasant surprise that it's not. Yay!

I miss those days too!

"Why doesn't that happen anymore? It used to bring all the crazies out of the woodwork! So fun! Smiling"

Actually that's how ya'll ended up with me too. I said what the hell is going on in here! But that's back when the comments used to push 900 to 1000. We lost a lot of die hards after the never ending election the comments don't get that high anymore.

Portrayed accurately.

Exaggerated.

meh best winter ever so i'm not complaining. No snow, no shovelling and no heavy jackets.

Exaggerated.

Maybe there'd be no need for exaggeration if more people just did their part to help our planet.

They just readjusted the data on the artic ice. It appears they made an error in their calculations that overlooked ice about the area the size of California. They are now rechecking older data, to see if there are more errors.

I'm actually shocked and dismayed by the ignorance displayed by this thread. I would think in this day and age people would realize the true threat of global warming based on real science. the fact that people think this is exaggerated is very very sad.

usigebeatha, I do not know what to say. I do agree with "I'm actually shocked and dismayed by the ignorance displayed by this thread". A closed mind is like a closed book; just a block of wood”

Seeing how the media exaggerates everything, I would say it
is exaggerated.

Totally exaggerated.

Exaggerated and cruelly used by politicians.

Absolutely underestimated.

It doesn't help that we do not nearly have enough trained scientists and engineers to appropriately deal with these issues, which I feel is part of the problem.

highly politicized, I should have said ("cruelly used" makes it sound more important than it is...)

I do think we should look into alternatives to preserve as much as we can and pollute as little as we can. But to answer the questions, I do believe the media exaggerates the problem, because sensational news stories get viewers.

Even Citizen is jumping on the band wagon with this story. They were hoping to rile people up with what they thought would be a controversial issue. They will be very disappointed.

Exxagerated. But I'm still conserving in my own way.

People say it is exaggerated and used by the media...but both sides are using it for propaganda. Fox News, for example, really pushes the idea that people are exaggerating.

The problem is that you can quote scientific studies, but who funds those studies? I don't trust extremist green groups, but there are also groups formed by oil and gas companies who are pressured to find a counter argument. So when people say "They just readjusted the data on the artic ice", it is so important to know who the "THEY" is.

Realistically, I think we can see evidence of pollution severely impacting our planet in a negative way, so we should do something about it. Whether it is true "global warming" is irrelevant, IMO.

Oh, and someone mentioned something about global warming and a really cold winter...."Global Warming" means more extremes in temperature, not just that it will get warmer. The title is not the definition.

"So when people say "They just readjusted the data on the artic ice", it is so important to know who the "THEY" is. "

I completely agree, Jillness.

Hmm. Jillness, I'll admit that I don't watch cable news anymore, but I really don't remember FOX ever using Global Warming as a topic, let alone for propaganda purposes. They certainly don't do months at a time rallying against GW, like MSNBC does rallying for GW!

And that's exactly what I said. We changed it from GW to "Global Climate Change" so we can b*tch even when it isn't warming.

Frankly, I have a difficult time taking the topic seriously. The main proponent of it uses GW exclusively for profit and self promotion, while completely disregarding the ideas of respect for our planet in his personal life.
I think that society today is extremely self-important. I'm all about respect for the planet, I take the bus when possible, all that jazz. I think pollution is disgusting, and I chose to live in one of the cleanest air cities in the country for a long time. But to assume that we have such an effect on a world which existed for millions of years without us is extremely arrogant. There have been periods of time of great cooling and great heating over a (relatively) short period of time. From about 1100-1400, there was intense climate change. Global cooling, which caused population shifts throughout North America. The earth hasn't recovered from that, so to assume that it's all us, nothing about the earth's natural shifts in surface temperature seems a bit self-important to me.

I think the bottom line is that we should all be conserving because its a good thing to do.

If we end up in a "little ice age", what then? A demand that we all change to coal?, that we mandate at least one cow,for every quarter acre of property people own? What the heck makes the current climate the optimal climate for mankind any way?

"What the heck makes the current climate the optimal climate for mankind any way?"
So we should start playing around with climates to see what works best for the majority? That's just not an argument I'd repeat...

I don't think that's what he meant Stephley...I agree with Grandpa - we can't know that this is the perfect climate for our world, no matter what the "experts" say.

But we do know that certain climate changes can cause dramatic changes to life as we know it - flooding current coastal areas, turning current farmland into deserts. PERHAPS the changes would end up being better for humanity overall, but that's a pretty big gamble for all of us.

I wonder if people expect the climate would stay exactly the same if we weren't polluting so much.

Underestimated. The earth is being neglected and trashed daily by people being careless. The changes and effects of of the pollutions is obvious; yes, the land naturally goes through adjusts and mountains may grow or tumble, however not at this rate of speed. In the last 30 years there is a drastic change in our planets ground formation. It scares me that such a large group of people think this extreme and very real problem is exaggerated.

It really depends on the source you get it from.
I would have to say that picture is exaggerated though.

Some people probably would think that climate stays the same, but it would be wishful thinking to believe that our pollution would have little or no impact.

Wishful thinking, maybe, but that doesn't make it untrue. Either way, pollution certainly has an effect on quality of life and private property issues.

Worrying about pollution is a luxury of a developed country. The population of third world countries put a priority of feeding and clothing themselves and their children. Turning corn into alcohol here in the U.S. drove up the price of grain related staples throughout the third world. Another example of the "Law of unexpected consequences".

Since the third world doesn't pollute to the extent that the industrialized world does, it shouldn't be the only luxury we're willing to share with them.

Stephley, did you even read the comment? Sometimes, the way you respond - it's like you ignore the comments and just go off on your own little cloud. Grandpa pointed out the NEGATIVE effects of our focus on pollution (ie, corn prices,) and you say it's a good thing.

So I guess life is sacred as long as you're in a 1st world country with plenty to eat?

"Worrying about pollution is a luxury of a developed country. The population of third world countries put a priority of feeding and clothing themselves and their children."
I responded to this - if corn prices were the only issue I might have focused on that more, but it's something of a straw man in the big picture.

If we simply consider environmental concerns a 'luxury', how many more tragedies like Bohpal can be inflicted on Third World countries? How many more Third World citizens will live with the dangerous muck and byproducts of mining that pays them pennies while slowly killing or sickening them ?

I think by definition, a fairy tale is already exaggerated.

Exaggerated. If those who rail against it on a daily basis were that scared of global warming, they would be living in green huts, avoiding use of jets and polyester. I certainly don't see that happening...