PersianPaladin

Thats always a good question.

Don't mix up the victims' families who were involved with the Commision (and who demand a new, independent investigation, accountability and exposure of the cover-up) with the sensationalist Alex-Jones people.

In this case Pete, you're right.

This is a good interview with George Monbiot: -

http://www.independe...wn-1830666.html This is a good story. I also think its time for this approach: - http://www.brighthub.com/environment/science-environmental/articles/13699.aspx

A fair assessment in my view.

Sunny days and snow-covered ground does actually help me

I think I do suffer from SAD. Its not simply a Vitamin D issue (although this is important). Its also to do with the amount of light that your body receives and this influences the hypothalamus.

I don't think this is a laughing matter. The earth may be resilient in the long-run, but at what cost of the total biosphere and human life? Life is cheap in our corporate world. Right now, arms companies like Raytheon are literally making a killing AND contributing to pollution.

CO2 is not pollution in and of itself; but too much of it...is. Its not the only greenhouse gas being discussed. Would you like an atmosphere of 90% Nitrogen and only 10% Oxygen? Probably not. Both are vital, however.

George Monbiot is interviewed by TheRealNews: -

Man is the most ignorant and wasteful of creatures. Typical of the corporatists like Lord Monckton to keep denying our contribution to throwing fuel on a fire and polluting the earth. The earth is going to give these "deniers" a rude-awakening if we don't damn well do something about it. I think corporations should be taxed for polluting the earth and contributing to global warming. Government should be reformed and used as a voice for vigorous daily public relations promoting (rather than legally enforcing) community permaculture economies. I don't like the cap and trade or carbon-credits approach because they are ponzi schemes and do nothing to rapidly push for new solutions. We can do better without hurting so many people or being hypocrites (such as that idiot Al Gore). Why are we still using plastic? Why are we still using fossil fuels? Hmmm.... These emails are a DISTRACTION.

Hacked climate change emails - a tempest in a teapot or a real storm? Paul Jay talks to Michael Brklacic

I cant see any evidence of a massive conspiracy here either. The only conspiracy I see (and its not really a conspiracy theory to be honest) is that big energy companies don't want to lose more of their capital-assets or risk losing them for carbon-credit derivatives that are a restrictive game and more along the lines of damage-control (and under too much influence of the big banks like Goldmann Sachs). Capital-intensive, labour-intensive and financial-sector businesses tend to form different blocks and naturally will form compromises or oppositions to such shifts in political-economic policies. The carbon-credits are perceived as another ponzi-scheme and not everybody in the corporate world are going to "buy" it. Big energy companies based in the US are trying to discredit global-warming science. One potential reason is that cost-increases on capital-assets could damage profits for burgeoning markets. For example, the proposed Afghanistan TAPI gas pipeline could be rejected by India in favour of the cheaper Iranian IPI pipeline if GW legislation occurred. So, people are being "played". The government and a few big banks are taking advantage of a real crisis, and the big energy companies are maintaining a false front of support for AGW whilst simultaneously funding anti-AGW front-groups. I think people just look for conspiracies when its convenient to them. How much are people looking into this? Probably not very much in my view.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/paulhudson/ His take.

Hot 'Climategate' debate: Scientists clash LIVE on RT I find it hilarious that they allow Piers Corbyn on. It really makes "solar" skeptics look rather....laughable. It is a shame though for genuine skepticism.

Iran is investing in nuclear fuels so as to avoid the needless burning of natural gas and coal. I do wish they'd use less dangerous tech though.

Agreed. I apologise.

An honest scientist is usually one who has further separated himself from the manipulative interests of those who wield the profit-motive.

What none of these "skeptic" idiots say is the simple fact that the acceleration in stratospheric cooling at our poles has been correllated with CO2 increases. The same correllation has been noted in the planet Venus given its very high atmospheric content of CO2 and high temperatures, and notably Venus' upper atmosphere is over 4 to 5 times colder than the upper atmosphere of Earth. These emails, are a storm in a tea-cup and POSSIBLY orchestrated and over-hyped by the big capital-intensive special interests.

Hoodwinked? How do you know? Are there any whistleblowers regarding these emails? Any real confirmed unjustified cover-ups, lies, distortions, malevolent motives, etc? I don't think there are. What do you know about lies? How active are you really about the corporate and government mendaciousness in the world? Do you understand the scale of the financial cover-up conducted by Henry Paulson, Tim Geitner and other members of the Obama administration? The Downing Street Memo? Do you understand the issues surrounding 9/11? Corporate-welfare and lobbying of governments? Vaccine science and its history? The legality of wars? Are you aware that some conspiracy theories have low credibility? Right-wing global warming conspiracies, "chemtrails", HAARP, fake moon-landings, no-planes hitting the Pentagon on 9/11, tin-foil hats, etc. We need to look at each case on its own merit.

There's plenty of evidence that man has impacted the environment, and to deny that is ridiculous. Corporations are clearly out of control, and I think we can all agree that their pollution has caused some pretty nasty environmental damage. Man is impacting the planet by feeding fuel to a fire.... http://www.africaact...01/shel0107.htm http://www.independe...ls-1726207.html http://www1.american.../TED/bhopal.htm http://overfishing.o...overfishing.php http://archive.green...ctbt/read9.html But yes, I'm sure these companies care about CO2 emissions just as much as their callous polluting action don't they?

Back to the real world: - http://rawstory.com/...oto-scientists/ A society based on waste, greed and consumption - deserves a demise.

Trying to persuade people on conspiracy forums that this leaked-emails controversy is taken completely out of proportion and misunderstood - is very difficult. Heck, I even saw the same mentality on Canada Free Press and other right-wing news sites it seems. Right-wing conspiracy theories seem to be very popular for some reason. Do people not ask sensible questions anymore, like "who benefits?" or "how would they get away with it?", or "what could possibly be the motive?", or "how could they control many independent scientists not helping to sell a product/financial derivative as part of research?", etc. Dead ears.

I agree with that. Albeit CO2 is part of the picture, but not the only variable.