30,000 Scientists to Sue Al Gore for Fraud

[Jim Saueressig]

John Coleman the founder of the weather channel and 30,000 scientists to sue Al Gore for global warming fraud......

This is funny!

[Scott Weberpal]

I'm not a scientist yet, but I will be in 3 semesters...I'll be happy to join them and make 30,001. Yes, the earth's climate is warming, but I'm nowhere near sold we as humans have much if anything to do with it.

[Quintin Erdman]

Conman Gore has made $300 million in the global warming scam and has ruined the auto industry, maybe we can get him to donate towards the bailout? A good prosecutor could easily get him on a RICO charge.

The next thing the envirowhackos will do is come up with a way to charge for the consumption of oxygen.

[Brian Emfinger]

funny and stupid. They are as bad as Gore except from the opposite. It may not be a 100% agreement on anything about GW but it certainly not 100% its not so the talk of suing (although just a publicity stunt) is stupid.

I still don't understand how so many people can be so dead set against the possibility that we are part of the cause of GW.

[Rob Wadsworth]

I would have to echo what Scott W and Quintin E both said.
There is enough evidence to support the fact that there is a warming trend, but I dispute the cause. The 'proposed facts' just don't line up with the scale that the polar caps are melting.
Simply put - I dispute the cause; not the evidence...

[Scott Weberpal]

Essentailly they are trying to force Gore to debate them, something he refuses to do. Honestly, most anti-GW scientists have been thrown under the wheel, and if they are being discriminated because of Gore's viewpoint which they think is fraudulent, I don't see what is so bad about taking it to the courts.

Gore has run wild with his assumptions with no public rebuttal, that's all they are seeking.

[Jason Foster]

Below is a response I gave regarding global warming. I too hate that Al Gore is more about the profit side of the argument than actually caring and doing something about it, if it is indeed an issue. Here is my previous post:

Originally Posted by Jason Foster;

My amazement is how much people are still arguing back and forth about if it is or isn't happening. My question has always been....if it is happening, what is a 'realistic' view of the future. At a talk by Kevin Trenberth, Head of Climate Analysis Section - National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR) at a local DC AMS meeting gave me some interesting insight into the Global warming debate. While I don't buy into the Global Warming totally, I acknowledge there are changes happening. My question to him was what is the next step for Scientists in regards to Global Warming studies. He pointed out that there is no forecast model for Global Warming, only projections. That was any extremely important fact to me. Unlike a forecast model, projections only take raw data, and make a linear projection. Forecast models are more elaborate, taking out factors or putting in other data and sources to analyze and predict a real world scenario.

One other aspect to the talk I found interesting is the question of amplitude, not frequency. We know from research that global warming happens, no debate there. However, the question with the recent observations is how rapid, how much, how significant is the warming we are seeing at the moment? What will the trend be?

And even if we don't know these factors to a degree that is going to be considered fact, what is the acceptable level to which we have to understand before making critical social and government decisions that will alter us for the foreseeable future. I think the real focus now is on how do we as citizens respond to the issue (with the current information we do know), and what responses to be need to be prepared for in the future if Global Warming is going to affect our lives significantly.

[Jim Saueressig]

As I have said before there is no doubt the Earth cycles between hot and cold but whether or not we are helping or hurting it is a toss up, one thing I have no doubt about is that the pollution is bad for us and the environment both and should be curbed. These global warming alarmists however are just distracting people from the realities of pollution to make a few billion more bucks.

[Rob Wadsworth]

I think that it is high time that the 30k scientists opposed to the Global Warming scam go toe-to-toe with their best evidence and let the chips fall where they may. You can bet that I am rooting for the underdogs - the 30k. All they need do is to have enough evidence of another plausible cause and to put the CO2 argument to rest - as it should be.

My best guess of the warming trend is the possibility of the Earth's core heating from within and thereby gradually heating the ocean floor. We know that on a global scale, volcanism has been increasing along the 'ring of fire' over the last thirty years. If it is caused by large dosages of radiation from the Sun (including heat, light, and other/all sub-atomic particles) over the last thirty years - then it less to do with the accumulation of CO2 and more to do with the Sun - in essence. There can the mixing of all of the above that make it happen...

[Connor McCrorey]

Like many others I believe that GW exists, or at least that we are currently in a warming trend, but I am not at all sold on it being our fault. Maybe I just haven't seen enough evidence, but I do not plan on completely altering my lifestyle just to satisfy a theory.