Ron Paul on Global Warming?

[LibertyEagle]

Ron Paul believes in man-made global warming? Huh?


"Global temperatures have been warming since the Little Ice Age. Studies within the respectable scientific community have shown that human beings are most likely a part of this process. As a Congressman, I've done a number of things to support environmentally friendly policies. I have been active in the Green Scissors campaign to cut environmentally harmful spending, I've opposed foreign wars for oil, and I've spoken out against government programs that encourage development in environmentally sensitive areas, such as flood insurance."

http://pesn.com/2007/11/05/9500456_RonPaul_on_GlobalWarming/

I was debating with someone and they threw this at me.

[heavenlyboy34]

Ron Paul believes in man-made global warming? Huh?



http://pesn.com/2007/11/05/9500456_RonPaul_on_GlobalWarming/ (http://pesn.com/2007/11/05/9500456_RonPaul_on_GlobalWarming/)

I was debating with someone and they threw this at me.

Later in that page, RP is also quoted as saying "Then you have to deal with the volcanoes, and you have to deal with China... so what are you going to do, invade China so they don't pollute? ... But that doesn't mean that you shouldn't do what we can to slow up the emissions and stop subsidizing big oil companies. I don't like subsidizing oil companies. They've been doing that for years. We go to war to protect oil, so that we can buy more oil, and burn more oil. So I say our foreign policy contributes to global warming -- by subsidizing a policy that is deeply flawed. And that's why we're in the Middle East, to protect oil interests.", and similar things which seem quite reasonable. I never got the impression that RP's stance was unreasonable or in line with the global warming cult (but I haven't known him for that long). :):cool::D

[Epic]

RP straddles the issue. He points out that there is science on both sides.

[Dreamofunity]

I was watching the Penn and Teller episode on the eco-movement last night, and if their numbers are correct, and co2 does contribute to global warming, then humans are only causing around 3% of the damage. So technically, all things given, Paul's statement is true. I just wish he would have said how much of the process we could be contributing to instead of just mentioning that we might be part of the problem.

[RonPaulVolunteer]

This is also from 2 years ago, and we know a lot more now than we did then.

[Objectivist]

http://www.scotese.com/climate.htm
Above shows the temperature of the planet over time.

If you need some GW questions answered ask. For now, man plays a very small part in global "warming".

[Elwar]

If CO2 causes global warming then a single man would "be part of this" merely by breathing. As well as dogs, cats, mice, bears, etc.

He made a factual statement.

[Rangeley]

If CO2 causes global warming then a single man would "be part of this" merely by breathing. As well as dogs, cats, mice, bears, etc.

He made a factual statement.
This isn't actually true. When plants die, they release carbon into the air naturally. But no more than they took in during their life cycle, thus the result is carbon neutral. When you breath out, the CO2 is from the natural life cycle and is just releasing CO2 which was captured by plants some time earlier.

The reason burning fossil fuels is a problem is that whereas CO2 from breathing (or from plants dying even naturally) just releases CO2 that was already out there, fossil fuels contain carbon that hasn't been in the atmosphere for millions of years.

[shenlu54]

Ten years after,maybe US would invade China in the name of against pollution......

[fr33domfightr]

This isn't actually true. When plants die, they release carbon into the air naturally. But no more than they took in during their life cycle, thus the result is carbon neutral. When you breath out, the CO2 is from the natural life cycle and is just releasing CO2 which was captured by plants some time earlier.

The reason burning fossil fuels is a problem is that whereas CO2 from breathing (or from plants dying even naturally) just releases CO2 that was already out there, fossil fuels contain carbon that hasn't been in the atmosphere for millions of years.

Good point. So if the Carbon was in the air previously, why would it be bad to put it back into the air, where it was originally?

Seriously though, Carbon Dioxide has risen about 100ppm (parts per million) since the Industrial Revolution. It's hard to believe that all the warming you hear about is caused by only 100ppm.


FF

[nbhadja]

Ron Paul has said many times before that there is a lot of evidence that global warming is not happening.

[Rangeley]

Good point. So if the Carbon was in the air previously, why would it be bad to put it back into the air, where it was originally?

Seriously though, Carbon Dioxide has risen about 100ppm (parts per million) since the Industrial Revolution. It's hard to believe that all the warming you hear about is caused by only 100ppm.


FF
Because its been under ground for millions of years and not impacting the climate at all, unlike the carbon currently in the system in todays plants, animals, etc. You could almost compare it to if someone suddenly discovered trillions of missing dollars under ground (or printed trillions of dollars out of thin air.) Spending this money in the economy would effect it in a way just spending normal money wouldn't.


Ron Paul has said many times before that there is a lot of evidence that global warming is not happening.
I don't recall him ever saying this, and the evidence that some warming is happening (for whatever reason) is pretty conclusive.

[erowe1]

Ron Paul believes in man-made global warming? Huh?



http://pesn.com/2007/11/05/9500456_RonPaul_on_GlobalWarming/

I was debating with someone and they threw this at me.

If you carefully read the quote you gave from RP, he never says he believes in man-made global warming, and everything he does say (at least in the snippet you gave) is completely true. It looks to me like the statement was very carefully worded both to satisfy people who fear man-made global warming, and to do so in such a way that RP remains noncommittal as to the validity of that fear.

[ladyjade3]

Read this week's column http://www.house.gov/paul/index.shtml

[torchbearer]

A "part" of the problem. Sure.
Think about this-
If human activity was removed from the planet, how would that effect the planet?
Only a small degree... and at worse- 10 degrees(though not likely).

If you removed the Sun, how much would that effect the temp?

What is the number one cause of heat on this planet?
CO2? CFCs? or the Sun?

[jsu718]

A "part" of the problem. Sure.
Think about this-
If human activity was removed from the planet, how would that effect the planet?
Only a small degree... and at worse- 10 degrees(though not likely).

If you removed the Sun, how much would that effect the temp?

What is the number one cause of heat on this planet?
CO2? CFCs? or the Sun?

You could actually argue that when it comes right down to it, the sun is responsible for 100% of the heat on the planet. The rest are just parts of variables as to how much sticks around.

[torchbearer]

You could actually argue that when it comes right down to it, the sun is responsible for 100% of the heat on the planet. The rest are just parts of variables as to how much sticks around.

yup.

[Dr.3D]

You could actually argue that when it comes right down to it, the sun is responsible for 100% of the heat on the planet. The rest are just parts of variables as to how much sticks around.

Well of course there is the internal heat of the planet too. We had a pretty hard El Niño a few years ago and that caused a lot of ocean warming.

Now when the ocean warms, it releases carbon dioxide, and when it cools, it takes in carbon dioxide. It's much like a bottle of soda pop. When it is cooled, it holds the carbon dioxide but when it is warm, it will often foam up when the cap is removed. This is because warm water will not hold as much carbon dioxide as cold water will.

Now if we look at history, there were times when there was more carbon dioxide in the atmosphere when the oceans were warmer. Isn't if funny how somehow, the climate cooled anyway, regardless of the excessive carbon dioxide present in the atmosphere at the time?

The sun does cycle in the amount of heat radiated on our planet and that is the major cause of climate changes. We may also notice the ice caps of other planets growing or shrinking as ours does at the same time. It's not like carbon dioxide from humans is causing the other planets to have climate changes.

[jsu718]

Well of course there is the internal heat of the planet too. We had a pretty hard El Niño a few years ago and that caused a lot of ocean warming.

Now when the ocean warms, it releases carbon dioxide, and when it cools, it takes in carbon dioxide. It's much like a bottle of soda pop. When it is cooled, it holds the carbon dioxide but when it is warm, it will often foam up when the cap is removed. This is because warm water will not hold as much carbon dioxide as cold water will.

Now if we look at history, there were times when there was more carbon dioxide in the atmosphere when the oceans were warmer. Isn't if funny how somehow, the climate cooled anyway, regardless of the excessive carbon dioxide present in the atmosphere at the time?

The sun does cycle in the amount of heat radiated on our planet and that is the major cause of climate changes. We may also notice the ice caps of other planets growing or shrinking as ours does at the same time. It's not like carbon dioxide from humans is causing the other planets to have climate changes.

Yeah, all of the internal heat came from the sun too.

[Objectivist]

A "part" of the problem. Sure.
Think about this-
If human activity was removed from the planet, how would that effect the planet?
Only a small degree... and at worse- 10 degrees(though not likely).

If you removed the Sun, how much would that effect the temp?

What is the number one cause of heat on this planet?
CO2? CFCs? or the Sun?

The Core....

[Objectivist]

Yeah, all of the internal heat came from the sun too.

No it didn't, our Core is a nuclear reactor that puts out heat energy into space.

Do you guys watch these vids?
YouTube - The Early Earth and Plate Tectonics (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QDqskltCixA&playnext_from=PL&feature=PlayList&p=C9C8452F4990876C&playnext=1&index=31)

[Dr.3D]

Yeah, all of the internal heat came from the sun too.


The inside of the earth is probably still heating up from the radioactive decay of uranium, thorium, and potassium.
http://www.trivia-library.com/a/inside-planet-earth-modern-scientific-beliefs.htm

[Akus]

Ron Paul believes in man-made global warming? Huh?



http://pesn.com/2007/11/05/9500456_RonPaul_on_GlobalWarming/

I was debating with someone and they threw this at me.

What exactly were you debating?

[nbhadja]

I don't recall him ever saying this, and the evidence that some warming is happening (for whatever reason) is pretty conclusive.

Actually over the past decade the world's temperature has dropped and the media leaves out the fact that over half of Antarctica is getting colder.

[itshappening]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_scientists_opposing_the_mainstream_scienti fic_assessment_of_global_warming

[jsu718]

No it didn't, our Core is a nuclear reactor that puts out heat energy into space.

Do you guys watch these vids?
YouTube - The Early Earth and Plate Tectonics (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QDqskltCixA&playnext_from=PL&feature=PlayList&p=C9C8452F4990876C&playnext=1&index=31)


The Core....


http://www.trivia-library.com/a/inside-planet-earth-modern-scientific-beliefs.htm

You guys aren't going far enough back if you think the energy didn't come from the sun.

[Rangeley]

Actually over the past decade the world's temperature has dropped and the media leaves out the fact that over half of Antarctica is getting colder.
Down from the most recent highs? Sure, but the trend is still there, as any cursory glance at a temperature graph would show.

[Dr.3D]

You guys aren't going far enough back if you think the energy didn't come from the sun.

Well, there is nothing to say the earth ever came from the sun.
It may have very well been trapped in Solar orbit as it was passing by.

Our planet has heat in it because it produces it. The sun has heat in it because it produces it. If a planet were to get big enough, it would turn into a star, because of the immense gravity and pressure.

You seem to fail to understand where the sun gets it's energy from.

[nbhadja]

Down from the most recent highs? Sure, but the trend is still there, as any cursory glance at a temperature graph would show.

good explanation of it-

* Timothy F. Ball, former Professor of Geography, University of Winnipeg: "[The world's climate] warmed from 1680 up to 1940, but since 1940 it's been cooling down. The evidence for warming is because of distorted records. The satellite data, for example, shows cooling." (November 2004)[5] "There's been warming, no question. I've never debated that; never disputed that. The dispute is, what is the cause. And of course the argument that human CO2 being added to the atmosphere is the cause just simply doesn't hold up..." (May 18, 2006; at 15:30 into recording of interview)[6] "The temperature hasn't gone up. ... But the mood of the world has changed: It has heated up to this belief in global warming." (August 2006)[7] "Temperatures declined from 1940 to 1980 and in the early 1970's global cooling became the consensus. ... By the 1990's temperatures appeared to have reversed and Global Warming became the consensus. It appears I'll witness another cycle before retiring, as the major mechanisms and the global temperature trends now indicate a cooling." (Feb. 5, 2007)[8]

[Rangeley]

good explanation of it-

* Timothy F. Ball, former Professor of Geography, University of Winnipeg: "[The world's climate] warmed from 1680 up to 1940, but since 1940 it's been cooling down. The evidence for warming is because of distorted records. The satellite data, for example, shows cooling." (November 2004)[5] "There's been warming, no question. I've never debated that; never disputed that. The dispute is, what is the cause. And of course the argument that human CO2 being added to the atmosphere is the cause just simply doesn't hold up..." (May 18, 2006; at 15:30 into recording of interview)[6] "The temperature hasn't gone up. ... But the mood of the world has changed: It has heated up to this belief in global warming." (August 2006)[7] "Temperatures declined from 1940 to 1980 and in the early 1970's global cooling became the consensus. ... By the 1990's temperatures appeared to have reversed and Global Warming became the consensus. It appears I'll witness another cycle before retiring, as the major mechanisms and the global temperature trends now indicate a cooling." (Feb. 5, 2007)[8]
He contradicts himself even in the quotes provided. "There's been warming, no question. I've never debated that;" followed by "The temperature hasn't gone up." Further, the statement that temperatures have declined since 1940 is simply false:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f4/Instrumental_Temperature_Record.png

[speciallyblend]

hey do not worry about it,just move inland;) if you do not think global warming is real. i have a bridge to sell you in vail!! good luck. move closer to water;) i promise you will be fine in the next 5-20 yrs. purchase property close to the water and enjoy;) just make sure you have some floating devices!

the fact is water levels are rising ,so go ahead by waterfront property;) be my guest!

put your money where your mouth is,buy water front property asap!

unless your planning on moving inland and to higher ground. good luck in the future near water!!

[PaulaGem]

in this case I wouldn't really worry about what he believed when he appointed the panel.

As a person of integrety he would apoint 10-20 experts in the field and listen to them.

On the other hand... we have the Shrub and his "Stem Cell advisory panel" . Not a single bloody scientist except Nobel Prize winnner Elizabeth Blackburn... oops, she got fired too - and the advisory panel was then composed of a bunch of idiots that didn't know more about stem cells than the Shrub himslef.

http://pub.ucsf.edu/magazine/200408/stemcell.html

[Objectivist]

You guys aren't going far enough back if you think the energy didn't come from the sun.

Then you can go back much further to a point where the mass may have been whole and all the stars in the universe came from one source.

But for the point of the discussion at hand the Sun sends heat energy our way and our Core radiates it's own heat energy, which by the way fluctuates slowly over time. If you have any understanding as to the change in the Mantles thickness and the Faults being in flux then it's easy to see the dynamics of the Planet as a heat source.

If I could do a study, I'd place thermometers underground over the entire planet to get a better idea of Core fluctuations. It would be much cheaper to do than this Cap & Trade scheme.