I don´t see mankind having the rigth to vote for the future of this planet by our selves. Even if there´s some good things coming.

Not complaining. Demonstrating that CEI uses fraud to make bogus claims that are not backed by the very research they cite.

By the way, these commercials aired in 2006. Why have we not heard more from these guys?

You would deny the CEI the right to publish its interpretation of the data?

I believe you refer to this passage:

But other scientific studies found exactly the opposite. Greenland's glaciers are growing, not melting. The Antarctic ice sheet is getting thicker, not thinner.

Here is what one article stated in 2005:

Increased snowfall over a large area of Antarctica is thickening the ice sheet and slowing the rise in sea level caused by melting ice.

A satellite survey shows that between 1992 and 2003, the East Antarctic ice sheet gained about 45 billion tonnes of ice - enough to reduce the oceans' rise by 0.12 millimetres per year. The ice sheets that cover Antarctica's bedrock are several kilometres thick in places, and contain about 90% of the world's ice. But scientists fear that if they melt in substantial quantities, this will swell the oceans and cause devastation on islands and coastal lands.

What is fraudulent about the CEI interpretation?

agendas jamie surely you see this is the case , cei have 1 now what do you think that might be , are they connected to an oil lobby , gas lobby etc ie do they have a monetary reason for spouting their guff , well call me a cynic but i bet its yes

granted its best to never accept things at face value but the truth is plain to see , fossil fuel use has aided global warming and a bit of snow aint gonna make that mess pristine

You don't think the AGW alarmists have an agenda?

Who gains financially? The promoters or the skeptics.

YES ANOK1,

"With more than a 3 million dollar annual budget, CEI is supported by both conservative foundations and corporate funding. Known corporate funders, in addition to ExxonMobil include the American Petroleum Institute, Cigna Corporation, Dow Chemical, EBCO Corp, General Motors and IBM."

(http://disinfopedia.org                             /wiki.phtml?title=Competitive_Enterprise_Institute)

Other projects include advocating the use of DDT in Africa to 'fight malaria,' and a 13 year lawsuit declaring The Tobacco Master Settlement Agreement to be unconstitutional, which the Supreme Court refused to hear in 2011. Lots more.Seriously, just google it.

Estimates reveal that the federal government will spend more money on fighting global warming than it will on tightening border security. Global-warming spending is estimated to cost approximately $22.2 billion this year [2013], twice as much as the $12 billion estimated for customs and border enforcement.

According to the White House, there are currently 18 federal agencies engaged in activities related to global warming. Those agencies fund programs that include scientific research, international climate assistance, renewable energy technology, and subsidies for renewable energy producers.'

You are correct - follow the money

co2 is perfectly safe.  i keep the air in my house up around 2000 ppm to help the plants and i suffer no ill effects it's great more co2 for all and the world would be much better.

The 22.2 billion includes a little more then 13 billion in tax credits and payments in lieu of tax credit. So that leaves 9.2 billion in actual expenditures.

https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/assets/legislative_reports/fcce-report-to-congress.pdf

The 12 billion does NOT include 6 billion for Immigration and Customs Enforcement and 10.5 billion for the US Coast Guard. This is out of a total 46.5 billion Homeland Security budget.

https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/MGMT/FY%202014%20BIB%20-%20FINAL%20-508%20Formatted%20%284%29.pdf

Please read the sources of your cherry picked points before posting

The point being, the BILLIONS spent by the US federal government lines the pockets of lots of people, such as the owners of Solyndra and other failed "investments"; to "climate scientists" (sic), who have become very wealthy suckling at the pubic tit; to buying off foreign governments' cooperation; etc.

This dwarfs the small amount of private funding to air the other side of the issue.

Forget the comparision to border control - it is beside the point - the issue is monies spent on airing the global warming debate.

You really should be ashamed of yourself.

JD said: "Forget the comparision to border control - it is beside the point - the issue is monies spent on airing the global warming debate."

Well, funny enough it was you, Jamie that brought the comparison to table! xD

Is it really the case with climate-deniers that all money spend with climate related things, how ever thin the correlation, is ill-spending? Like development of reneuvable energy sources? Isn't that just a perfectly normal, tax payer benefitial act of progress? With climate-deniar attitude nations will fall into a new trap of dependance. They will be outsmarted and outcompeted by nations that do spend the money to develop new more efficient energy sources.

I just included the entire paragraph.  I should have snipped away the unimportant and off-topic part of the quotation.

Border control is off topic for this blog.

Also, the term "climate denier" is a pejorative, meant to denigrate by association with Holocaust Denial.  And it is inaccurate.

Thanks for the comment.  Bye.

dont buy into this myself jamie , bit surprised you have but they are good at hoodwinking aint they ,

what is agw , anti global warming ? of course they got an agenda , we all have tbh , theres although al gore has certainly bulged his pockets too is more honoyrable tho instead of risking the very planet we live on at least the good bit for them is a social responsibility for the mess weve made of things on earth

doubt you gonna get out of the trench youve dug yersen into tho as you is as stubborn as me lol but you are backing the wrong uns ,

And everyone who has their thoughts based on the vast majority off data/study are "Alarmists"? What´s that then, accurate? Climate Deniers are the opposing polarity to Climate Alarmists in journalistic depate. Tiger can´t escape it´s stripes dear Climate Denier..

BR, Alarmist

P.S.

I hope Jamie will withstand a bit of humor here.

Even if we agree that we should try to lower CO2 levels (even assuming human-caused global warming), the automatic assumption by most people seems to be that the remedy requires slowing down worldwide economic activity by top-down regulations (taxes and caps).

But meanwhile, many scientists have been looking at atmospheric CO2 as a useful resource.  Just as plants can extract CO2 from the air and use it to build their bodies through the process of photosynthesis, humans can remove CO2 from the air to produce useful chemical commodities and possibly fuels.  If this idea proves to be economically viable, the combined efforts of nature and human activity could lead to a net reduction of atmospheric CO2 levels within decades.  And instead of resulting from unpopular economy-slowing regulations, this reduction could come from spontaneous business-friendly economic growth.

Science and technology give us the power to harm or heal nature.  For better or worse, humans are and always will be key players in the health of our biosphere.  We need to remember to use our imaginations, not panic, and keep our options open.  Trying to force a global economic slow-down would fail anyway -- too many developing countries refuse to go along with such a drastic and unproven plan.  

This looks promising:

 http://www.poughkeepsiejournal.com/story/news/local/2015/10/12/artificial-leaf-progress/73815602/

Artificial leaf progress

(Photo: Aldo C. Zavala via Flickr.)

 1CONNECTTWEETLINKEDINCOMMENTEMAILMORE

The Joint Center for Artificial Photosynthesis was established at Caltech and its partner institutions in 2010 with one main goal: To find a cost-effective way to produce fuels using only sunlight, water and carbon dioxide. The natural process of photosynthesis in plants accomplishes exactly the same thing. As a result, such a solar fuel generation system is generally described as an artificial leaf. The JCAP has continued to make progress on many aspects of the problem over the past five years and they have recently reported the development of the first complete, efficient, safe, integrated solar-driven system for splitting water to create hydrogen fuels.

This first artificial leaf is described in the Aug. 24 issue of the journal Energy and Environmental Science. The system has three main components:

 

The Joint Center for Artificial Photosynthesis was established at Caltech and its partner institutions in 2010 with one main goal: To find a cost-effective way to produce fuels using only sunlight, water and carbon dioxide. The natural process of photosynthesis in plants accomplishes exactly the same thing. As a result, such a solar fuel generation system is generally described as an artificial leaf. The JCAP has continued to make progress on many aspects of the problem over the past five years and they have recently reported the development of the first complete, efficient, safe, integrated solar-driven system for splitting water to create hydrogen fuels.

 

This first artificial leaf is described in the Aug. 24 issue of the journal Energy and Environmental Science. The system has three main components: Two electrodes — a photoanode and a photocathode — plus a plastic membrane. The photoanode oxidizes water molecules producing protons, electrons and oxygen gas. The photocathode recombines the protons and electrons to form hydrogen gas. The membrane keeps the oxygen and hydrogen gases separate so they don’t react. The hydrogen produced is then collected for use on its own or reacted to form hydrocarbon fuels.

The performance of this system breaks all previous records for artificial leaf technology by a large margin. Of course, there is plenty of work left to be done to extend the system’s lifetime and to develop methods for volume manufacturing. But if this all succeeds, it represents the ultimate answer for how to capture the almost unlimited energy available from the sun and store it for use in a clean-energy economy.

“Earth Wise” is heard on WAMC Northeast Public Radio and is supported by the Cary Institute.

http://www.poughkeepsiejournal.com/story/news/local/2015/10/12/artificial-leaf-progress/73815602/