Now
Fair
83°
High
82°
Low
63°
Full Forecast

Jobs

Cars

Homes

Rentals

Alerts

Subscribe
Home > Opinion > Editorial
Bookmark Us   •   Make Us Your Homepage

Global warmth means change in Nebraska

Comments 46 comment(s)  
E-mail Story E-mail Story
Print Story Print Story
Share  Share
Text Size: 
Tools Sponsor

Sunday, Feb 04, 2007 - 12:39:49 am CST

Last week’s international report on global warming adds more urgency to efforts to put water usage in Nebraska at a sustainable level.

The debate over whether global warming is occurring basically is over. Dr. Susan Soloman, chairwoman of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, which produced the report, put it this way: “Warming of the climate system is now unequivocal, unequivocal.”

She wasn’t the only expert to resort to repetition to emphasize a point.

“Now we have very high scientific confidence in this work — this is real, this is real, this is real,” said Richard Alley, a Penn State professor who was one of the report’s lead authors.

If Nebraska’s drought should be blamed on global warming, then the effect of the change has been disastrous.

The state is now in its eighth year of drought. Since the drought began, groundwater levels in parts of the state have dropped by more than 30 feet. In southwest Nebraska, groundwater levels have dropped more than 50 feet since large-scale groundwater irrigation began.

It’s still unclear how global warming will affect specific regions. But the general rule is that areas that currently are wet probably will receive even more rainfall, and areas that are dry will receive less.

Experts say different computer models used to assess the effect of climate change still fail to produce consensus on how global warming will affect wind patterns.

A long-term change in wind patterns could have a ruinous effect on Nebraska and other parts of the Midwest.

University of Nebraska-Lincoln scientists reported last year that the Nebraska Sandhills were desert dunes of windblown sand only 1,000 years ago.

In a story on the global warming report, the Christian Science Monitor wrote that “many of these dune systems (in Nebraska, Kansas and Colorado) are on the knife’s edge of mobilization and could begin to wander across the landscape if moisture becomes much more scarce.”

The report by the panel said that even if steps are taken immediately to reduce production of greenhouse gases that contribute to global warming, the current trends are likely to continue for hundreds of years.

Nebraska already has taken some steps to reduce usage of water for irrigation and to find more effective ways to raise crops with less water. Just last week, UNL took another step with the purchase of 1,280 acres in western Nebraska to conduct research based on real-life conditions in a part of the state experiencing a water shortage.

Meanwhile, controversy continues over Nebraska’s new water policy aimed at keeping water usage at a sustainable level.

But the new report on global warming strengthens the evidence in favor of taking strong action to cope with climate change. The real controversy over Nebraska’s water policy should be whether it goes far enough.


$1 Sunday Delivery - Subscribe Today!
Editorial > Back to Top of Story

Post Your Comment

Standards and Rules
All posts to JournalStar.com are subject to our Terms and Standards.
Your posted comment will appear after it has been approved.
Frequently asked questions about story commenting.
(optional)
   
Hide Comments Hide Comments   Newest First Newest First  
Roger wrote on February 4, 2007 1:04 am:
" It is difficult for me to accept much about this global warming thing, because the Scientist do not have enough data about weather changes and temperature of the earth from historical data to determine, at least that is what I am made to understand. Because meteriorologist and weather men and women can not go back much further than the start of 1900 to determine how weather patterns were then. Unless Scientist have some magical way of determining temperature from History books etc. and the content of air polution in previous centuries, I do not see how their determination of Global warming can be anything but educated guess and political meandering. "

 Tamora wrote on February 4, 2007 1:49 am:
" The underground rivers have too long been taken as an unlimited resource, but wells across the state are having to be drilled deep and deeper. While the governor bathes in self proclamation as an economic savior, counties not too far away are questioning if that alternative extraction will do more harm than good. "

 Sandhills Movement wrote on February 4, 2007 7:27 am:
" The sandhills have been in continuous movement for hundreds of years, having nothing whatsoever to do with 'global warming.' It's 6 degree in Lincoln today, and the wind chill in Chicago is 30 below. 'Global warming' is not a proven fact born of human science, it's a poltical boogeyman born of human arrogance. "

 charles W wrote on February 4, 2007 8:17 am:
" I wonder if now the Lincoln city council or the state will actually take any action and enact some legislation to help encourage conservation , alternative energy and recycling. looking at past performance and current politics I would say no. I will predict in the year 2007 less than five bills or actions will be introduced this year that will actually have any real effect. "

 WCG wrote on February 4, 2007 8:23 am:
" Unfortunately, it seems like the vast majority of Nebraskans would rather whine about drought and beg for government subsidies, than think about the long-term damage we're doing to our environment. Just look at our water policies. We've never cared about sustainability, only what we can get NOW. We've never accepted science, only "faith-based" water policy (i.e. if only we want it bad enough, the water will be there). And we consider any water that leaves our state - or that is used by fish and wildlife - to be "wasted." So you can bet we'll keep voting for politicians who tell us only what we want to hear. Go back to sleep, Nebraska - everything's fine. Like the deficit, let your children and grandchildren pay the price. "

 Hank wrote on February 4, 2007 8:25 am:
" Given the precarious water situation in Nebraska, why on earth are we pushing ahead with the foolish corn ethanol program, which does nothing to reduce emissions that are causing global warming and requires ever more land, water, and petroleum products for fertilizer, tractor fuel, and fuel to run processing plants? Oh yes, I forgot, the large farmers will get even richer from the subsidized ethanol program that the rest of us nice people will pay for. We obviously can't let economics and our environment stand in the way of the interests of ADM and the farm lobby. "

 Terry wrote on February 4, 2007 8:56 am:
" The obvious solution to the problem is for everyone in the United States to abandon their life style and get more in line with the quality of life in the non-industrialized world. After all, it's the Americans that are causing this! Let's all go to the tried and true system that's worked for centuries. Growing food using nothing but human labor and sticks for implements. How about cooking and heating with wood and animal dung? Everyone could abandon the supermarkets and raise their own chickens or a couple of cattle or hogs. Look at the peace and prosperity this lack of technology and "less selfish" life style has provided in places like Africa, Central America, Southeast Asia, and the Middle-East. And look at the wonderful lack of pollution and environmental destruction in these areas! Get real, people. Is there global warming? Possibly. Can man do anythng about it? NO! It's one of the cycles that the earth goes through. Look at real science and you'll plainly see that! Must we adapt? Yes. The species that haven't through history are extinct. That's just the way it is. All these bogus reports and conjectures are is a way for otherwise unemployable "scientists" to drum up funding so they can continue to produce nothing of value, yet still collect a pay check. Like "urban legends," if you repeat a lie enough times, it eventually is accepted as truth. "

 Helen Donlan wrote on February 4, 2007 9:47 am:
" These comments clearly illustrate the problem with making positive change in Nebraska, the US, the World. I read Negativity, Denial, Apathy, and Ignorance. It is not too late to make change. We are intelligent, amazing creatures, capable of achieving just about anything when we apply ourselves. Nebraska has much in the way of natural resources with which to work toward energy independance and a more earth friendly lifestyle. It takes clear thinking, education, leadership and action. Lets start focusing on what CAN be done and do it. "

 Gerard Harbison wrote on February 4, 2007 10:38 am:
" Scientists can tell the state of past climate from tree-rings, isotope ratios, and ice cores. These are all reliable and tested methods. I was a global warming skeptic for a long time, but the evidence is now so strong it's unavoidable. This doesn't mean we have to wreck our economy and undergo huge lifestyle changes, but it does mean we have to be thoughtful about what we do. The editorial hits about the right balance, in my opinion. "

 Scott wrote on February 4, 2007 11:42 am:
" Holy cow! When Gerry Harbison agrees with global warming it means skeptics you should take heed. And I mean that as a compliment, Gerry. "

 Jody P. wrote on February 4, 2007 11:44 am:
" Well let's see. On the one hand we've got the vast majority of the world's climate experts telling us that it is 90% likely that man is causing the current global warming. On the other hand we've got the laymen naysayers posting here on the LJS who don't know anything about climate science. No offense to Terry, Roger, et al, but since the fate of civilization may be at stake I think that I'll have to take the climate experts' word on this. As I've mentioned before here, the general rule-of-thumb is that Republicans would rather eat their children that part with their money. And in the case of global warming, they'd rather their children, grand- and great-grandchildren suffer the consequences of disastrous climate change than possibly part with a few of their dollars today. Touching, isn't it? "

 whatever wrote on February 4, 2007 11:45 am:
" If the drought continues for another 2 or 3 years it's going to get real interesting. Actually, if we want to see some real changes made in water policy we probably should hope it continues. All we need is a couple of years of above normal rainfall and serious water policy discussions will disappear. "

 Zoomie wrote on February 4, 2007 11:52 am:
" Notice how often critics of the idea of global warming completely misstate reality? Terry below attacks it by saying we'd have to become like a non-industrialized nation (conveniently ignoring the industrialized nations of the EU who have been reducing CO2 production while still maintaining their level of life), or Sandhills who points out its freezing cold in Chicago, so how can there be global WARMING (ignoring the solid evidence that under global warming we'll actually see greater extremes of hot and cold, not just warming)... I was struck years ago when C-Span spoke with the Ambassador to the US from Denmark, who discussed how they've switched from 90% oil based energy to only 30%, by relying more on wind and geothermal energy. He pointed out they began the switch 30yrs ago, after the first Arab oil embargo. At the time, all the best technology on wind energy was here in the US, so they came here, learned, purchased. But he then went on to note that the US, beginning under Reagan, pretty much abandoned much support of new energy technology, and so today, the EU is the worlds leader in wind energy technology, not the US. And he point out, as a result, their nation earns millions of dollars annually from their technology and equipment (money we could have earned, except we abandoned it for ideological reasons). Before this century ends, just based on the warming of the ocean, the oceans will rise 1.5-2 feet higher...This ignores any additional volume of ocean caused by melting glaciers, which are melting at faster speeds than we've ever seen before. While its too early to tell with accuracy, its believed we may actually see oceans rise 3-5 FEET!!! "

 Hjalmer wrote on February 4, 2007 12:34 pm:
" Roger,"The weathermen can't go back much before 1900."? Are you kidding? Through various means they've gone though thousands of years of climate information derived from many sources! There are lots of ways to gather the needed information and that's what they've done. "

 anti empiricists wrote on February 4, 2007 1:24 pm:
" As a frequent watcher of the LJS blogs, I'm struck that there is no issue concerning science that many residents of the heartland will not dismiss out of hand in favor of the alternative reality that they find preferable. There is typically no, or very little, empirical evidence to back these opinions that they nevertheless manage to find more credible than those of scientists from around the world who have made it their life's work to study various issues. Details life "unequivocal" evidence never get in their way of clinging to their preferred truth. The report did not say that humans are the sole cause of global warming, but that our actions have likely been the main driving force in accelerating warming since 1950. Their conclusion that global warming is now unequivocal is backed by a bevy of carefully constructed evidence and great care was taken, given the scrutiny that they knew the report would attract, to not state more than their evidence could demonstrate. A seemingly knee-jerk disdain for science and reason is palpable amongst a surprising number on the Plains -- I notice it every time I return having now been gone for a dozen years -- and a curious feature of the region. That's not to say that there are not many, many wonderful things about the region that I miss, nor that the majority or residents are guilty of the type of anti-intellectualism that Richard Hofstadter identified years ago. I guess it's just to say that I'm mildly relieved to be living in a place where I no longer have to feel confronted with a vocal anti-intellectual minority that disdains empiricism yet seems to have disproportionate influence over politics and policy in the region. I mean, how do you reason with folks who refuse to accept reason as the basis for decision making? "

 Sarah wrote on February 4, 2007 2:44 pm:
" Just saw an interesting oped in the Wall Street Journal in which a scientist not from the Heartland questioned the climate study report. He noted the group operates on consensus and mused about what Galileo would have thought about that. Climate is complex, he noted. He was skeptical that there's enough evidence to prove human activity is the primary factor driving global warming. He found promise in recent research on cloud formation that suggests cosmic rays play a role. He may be wrong or right about global warming but at least he's using reason, rather than regional stereotyping, to make his argument. "

 Big Chief wrote on February 4, 2007 2:50 pm:
" Water usage in Nebraska has nothing to do with Global Warming.We have been taking water out of the bank ( the bank known as UNDERGROUND WATER) for the past 5 decades. Now we are in a weather cycle where drought has reduced the supplies of surface water increasing even more the usage of underground water and its replenishment. A lot of farmers are caught up in a Catch 22 situation because they have spent thousand$$ on water wells, pivot systems and so forth just to try to make a profit from crops. Now they have a chance of profits with $3.50+ corn but they may not have enough water to irrigate. Do they pump more water NOW to make a few extra bushels of corn at these current high prices knowing that they may deplete the underground water so much that it won't be there ten years from now? This is not just a farm problem either. How many billions of gallons of water are used in Nebraska cities just so city folks can have a green lawn? How many acres of farmland could be irrigated with the water that Lincolnites pour on their lawns? At least the water the farmers use feed several families. How many people are eating the grass from lawns in our cities? In fact these lawn clippings usually end up in a land fill where nobody or nothing benefits. Who is committing the bigger sins against the environment? "

 ET wrote on February 4, 2007 3:09 pm:
" Big Chief has a point. What is up with the watering of homeowner lawns during the summer? I can't even remember where my sprinkler is, I haven't used it in so long - I let the grass get brown if it doesn't rain enough. Nebraskans - do you know that in some states, (like Arizona), lawns aren't even allowed in new construction? Global Warming or not - could we at least conserve our water, please? By the way, I do believe Global Warming is happening too. "

 wallace mcnabb wrote on February 4, 2007 10:51 pm:
" I have one question. Where are the test results to prove the hypothesis? There is none. There is only speculation based on incomplete data. That is a fact. Global Warming is a hypothesis that has not been proven by any test. "

 Roger wrote on February 4, 2007 11:05 pm:
" Isn't it interesting that this global warming thing has come up in the past decade and all throughout the 60's 70's and 80's we had very cold winters and very warm summers with hurricans and tornados and weather patterns that are different from today in our area but the ones that were in our area have moved to a different area. Also, climatic changes could be from the suns rays and the effects of different planets and also from the gamma rays of the sun and the reflections of explosions in space from meteors and from metoers that are invading and doing damage to the surrounding enviornment of the bubble around the earth. Looking into the skies on a clear night and seeing many shooting stars indicates that there are a bunch of meteorites striking the atmosphere which would cause more damage to the ozone than any of the fossil fuels or man made releases of energy. This is scientific and comes from the history Channel. Look it up on the internet if you want and you will find meteorite showers to be very damaging and can and have caused much damage to the earth and have changed the earths temperature rather quickly. So to say that man has the ability, even with the technology we have today, to create a change of temperature is in my opinion a stretch. The French President is the only one that I know of that has spoken out on this and that too me makes it political meandering "

 Roger wrote on February 5, 2007 12:33 am:
" Please read what effect meteorites and meteors can and do have on the earth and also volcanos etc. Man does not have the ability to create things the spew out as much polution as any of these. Weather recording has only been a science in written form for less than two hundred years, unless the weather men are lieing to us when they tell us that, that is the information they give us. So before you attack me and my comments read up on meteors and other things that effect climate, as well as gamma rays and the rays from sun burst etc. I did not say there were not other ways of gathering this information. It just appears rather interesting that in just the past decade or two global warming has become an issue, and in the 50's 60's and 70's as well as the 80's climatic changes occured as well, interesting that in the 70's there was meteorite of sorts that hit the oceans and some desert parts of the earth had they hit a populated city there would have been much more discussion about them then just global warming, so I am not saying that global warming is not happening, I just don't buy the premise that it is man created. "

 brad wrote on February 5, 2007 4:23 am:
" They should have flooded Ashland with the big lake. If all the water problems continue where will I put my boat? "

 I'm so cold wrote on February 5, 2007 6:14 am:
" This Global Warming farce is the biggest wool the science community has pulled over our eyes since they faked the moon landing back in 1969. You go, Journal Star; continue to perpetuate the myth! It sells papers & look what it's doing to breathe life back into Al Gore. "

 Hjalmer wrote on February 5, 2007 6:19 am:
" While I can certainly agree that water is wasted in both Omaha and Lincoln where more than 1/2 the populations of the State lives, more than 90% of the water used in this state is used for irrigation of crops. Vast areas have been developed for irrigation that are simply unsuitable to grow corn. Irrigation water useage is targeted toward yield maximazation rather than most efficient use of the water. Vast areas in the Sand Hills should have stayed in grass. With the ongoing and rapid depopulation of Western Nebraska, we should be asking ourselves if enough people are being benefited by mining our water resources to justify the environmental damage we're doing. "

 WCG wrote on February 5, 2007 7:49 am:
" None of the naysayers here have explained why they think their opinion of climate change is right when it goes against the vast majority of scientists who have spent their professional lives studying the question. Who is more likely to be right, after all? Do you really think scientists have overlooked other impacts on Earth's climate? Why do you think you know so much more than they do about such a specialized field? Could the vast majority of scientists be wrong? Of course! But that's not the way to bet. And we KNOW that we're changing the composition of our own atmosphere. Yeah, maybe it won't cause the biggest disaster in our history. Wouldn't those fancy pants scientists look stupid then? I don't understand it. All of us enjoy the fruits of science in our daily lives, so the widespread rejection of scientific thought, logic, and evidence just amazes me. I guess many people just believe what they want to believe. "

 you know what else I don't agree with.. wrote on February 5, 2007 8:28 am:
" gravity. I think the science community is making this one up as well for political purposes. Next you are going to tell me that we aren't the center of the solar system! After all, how can a flat planet be warming? Its winter here so that just makes no sense. "

 Don wrote on February 5, 2007 8:35 am:
" Why should I believe these scientists, when people like Al Gore, whom the scientists support, go around saying things about the environment that aren't true. These scientists distort things. I saw a picture of some polar bears on an ice floe the other day. The caption indicated that due to global warming these bears were stranded there, as if they couldn't swim. I think most of these so called scientists who wrote up this latest report believed in global warming before they did their research, and then did the research to prove it. In other words, they read global warming into the facts rather than let the facts speak for themselves. Even before the report came out it was obvious what they would say. I also like many others believe this is just a phase the earth is going through. "

 Jody P. wrote on February 5, 2007 9:44 am:
" check out the Fox News science section article by Ker Than (2/2/07) which describes how microbes, plants, etc. have completely remade the earth's atmosphere in the past. So Roger's premise is emphatically incorrect. Biological organisms (like us) can impact climate. Also Roger, if you have any original views, please submit them to a scientific journal. I'd expect you'd be torn to shreds there. But I assume that you are simply cutting and pasting from anti-global warming web pages, and you are impressed by the terminology etc you see there. However if you truly have an open mind, you would read the mainstream literature as well. Have you actually read the current UN report? It clearly describes how they concluded what the impact of man has been compared to other natural factors. You will find that there is also a lot of impressive terminology, numbers and references, if you are so easily impressed by that. Keep in mind that the anti-global warming people are largely funded by big oil companies. Just as the big tobacco companies resisted admitting that cigarettes caused cancer, I think it's pretty obvious that big oil companies might be slighly biased about global warming. Open up your eyes a little more. "

 dish wrote on February 5, 2007 9:53 am:
" when it comes to global warming...I don't know about everyone else but I would rather believe a scientist who is well educated, has dedicated the majority of his/her life to the issue, and base their stance on emperical evidence than some self-proclaimed know-it-all who writes in to LJS blogs when they should be working at their own job! "

 Amazed wrote on February 5, 2007 11:14 am:
" Unless I spend my lifetime studying these things I can not have an opinion about it. Well, guess what Scientist have spent a life time trying to disprove the Bible and so far they have not been able to do that and even they admit they can't. Scientist on this one say the believe this is what is happening but even they do not know and they are using computor models that are most certianly geared to get the results they want. They also mention meteors and volcanos, but the facts that they give do not give conclusive evidence that this is due to man or mans ability to create engines that produce carbon dioxide, and they do talk about the traposphere the last layer between space and the earths crust as getting more carbon dioxide in it. This is factual only because their computor models say so. Their computor models do not say that we are the center of the universe. Theirs say the sun is, but know theirs say their are more universes and that we are only a smaller part of them and therefore we can not be the center of the universe. Ecology is fine and we are using too many fossil fuels because they do prove that these waste products do create damage to humans, but too say that anything man does will create a change in the planets design and function in the universe is a stretch, there are too many other factors that carry heaveir weight on these than do human factors. Such as meteor shows, sun burst, black holes in the universe If man can change temperature through his use or missuse of things, then man should be able to create weather that is desireable as well, and science has long said that this is impossible. "

 Brrrrrrrr wrote on February 5, 2007 11:30 am:
" I'm ready for the global warming. Please have it kick in soon!! "

 Craig wrote on February 5, 2007 12:25 pm:
" Prior to Columbus, 90% of the "scientists believed the world was flat. Prior to the Wright Brothers, 90% of scientists believed you could not build a propelled flying machine. What is scary here is that 90% of the scientists don't even believe in global warming. A small group of them are proposing this idea supported by a group of environmentalists and a media that loves to hype anything that will scare people and declaring that anyone who disagrees with them is stupid and should be fired. A recent dust up over weathermen who think it is a bunch of hooey who were subsequently pursued by the loud minority seeking their termination is a good example of this issue. Does the weather channel make money by scaring people about this issue and getting you to watch? Does the UN have a political agenda that hyping climate change and blaming it all on the US would serve? You betcha. Just be thankful this media environment didn't exist in the dustbowl, they would have predicted the end of the world by 1950. "

 Dittohead wrote on February 5, 2007 1:16 pm:
" Why would God create something so natural like coal and oil if it were to destroy the earth when it was used? Why would God create people who would develop the technology to burn coal and oil, which has led to great progress as the times are the best now as they have ever been, just to later have them find out it will make the ice caps melt? Carbon dioxide is natural, and global warming if it is occurring is natural. This as a just a liberal socialist ploy to get us to accept bigger government, higher taxes, and loss of personal freedom. "

 An average citizen wrote on February 5, 2007 1:42 pm:
" The cause of global warming isn't being escalated by the average person, it is being escalated by people who over use their share of resources, such as celebrities and other wealthy people who own multiple homes, fly everywhere in a private jet instead of flying commercially, and then speak out about global warming and what a problem it is. Maybe they should all put their money where there mouth is and donate money towards finding alternative resources instead of buying their 3rd, 3th or 5th multimillion estate. "

 Mindless Robot wrote on February 5, 2007 2:04 pm:
" "Prior to Columbus, 90% of the "scientists believed the world was flat" Totally untrue. The ancient Greeks knew the Earth was a sphere. Do the statues of Atlas Carrying the Earth on his back ring a bell? How about Archimedes' writings? The Columbus story about discovering that the Earth is a sphere is a Grade School myth. I have no idea where you got the Wright Brothers info either. "

 Rob wrote on February 5, 2007 4:43 pm:
" Did anybody read this sentence."University of Nebraska-Lincoln scientists reported last year that the Nebraska Sandhills were desert dunes of windblown sand only 1,000 years ago." So, that climate change was due to what? Hello. "

 whatever wrote on February 5, 2007 5:07 pm:
" There is no disagreement that the planet is warming, the only disagreement is to the extent man is contributing to this phenomena. I believe God has blessed us with many things, including reason. I do have one question. Why would God create people who see the benefits and blessings of natural resources, yet chose to misuse the gifts the creator has given us? "

 Ryan wrote on February 5, 2007 5:14 pm:
" Oh man, I think I just lost about twenty IQ points by reading some of these responses. I love how people try to prove their point by referencing the bible or fox "news," rather than listen to what an outstanding consensus of scientists have found and studied over decades. Yeah, and if god created everything so perfectly, does one believe that marijuana should be legal? Or cocaine? Why would god create things if they could be used for harm? What an argument. Good grief. "

 dear craig wrote on February 5, 2007 5:32 pm:
" 90% percent of all stats quoted on the LJS blogs are made up. Its a fact. So are we to believe that 6.5 billion humans have NO effect on this planet? Really? No effect? Curious as to those who don't 'believe' in global warmning even graduated high school. "

 Scientist wrote on February 5, 2007 6:47 pm:
" I have read numerous scientists, and spoken with some who focus on cosmic radiation, who believe the whole global warming thing is a bunch of bunk. Not that cliamte doesn't change, it always changes and always will, but reject the idea that we have impacted the climate. (I have an advanced college degree, in case you are wondering.) If you care to look at both sides of the issue, you will see a lot of well respected scientists who reject the whole theory (just as a number of well respected scientists rejected the the idea that we would all freeze in an ice age as was reported on the cover of Time during the 1960's). Of course, I wouldn't expect you to actually research the issue, not when your mother earth religion is challenged liked this. "

 Skeptic wrote on February 5, 2007 7:24 pm:
" There are scientists that believed that the dinosaurs became extinct due to the earth's axis completing a 180 degree flip. Some believe that a major volcanic eruption contributed to their demise. Based on what scientists have published, I don't believe that dinosaurs driving SUV's contributed to their extinction. I am more inclined to believe in mother nature. We've had less than 100 years of burning fossil fuels, less than 70 years at a major rate. Volcanic eruptions, meteor showers, forest fires, and other acts of nature that are supposed to contribute to the depletion of the ozone layer have been around since the beginning of time. I've had numerous conversations, sometimes arguement's with people about the effects of animal flatulance on the atmosphere, and how rancher's are to blame. Maybe dinosaurs' had bad gas, who knows??, colossal animal's with larger colons..... We are in a large debate, nearing an election year. Oil prices are at a major high, and gas prices are through the roof. Propaganda will always be here. Figure it out..... "

 Amazed wrote on February 6, 2007 12:00 am:
" Truly now do any of you really believe that this global warming thing is real, and do you really believe if you do believe it is real that it is man made. 100 years of fossil fuel use and we have effected the weather, get real folks, we do not have that much control over temperature on this earth. It is 25,000 miles around the equator and the earth is revolving around the sun every 364 1/2 days, if we have any effect on the earths saving this carbon dioxide, it would be fabulous but to believe that we effected the weather in 100 years is just beyond human comprehension, and then to believe that we can control that effect in the next 50 years is even more unbelievable. So you believe the scientist you want to believe and I'll believe those that do not agree with your believe that it is man made and that we can control it. That is almost like saying that ants can create changes in the people of the earth just because they are so many and multiply so quickly. Dream on, and put your comic books away. "

 EO wrote on February 6, 2007 12:26 am:
" In many moral issues facing our society, there are uncertainties and incomplete information. This is not unique to environmental problems. The conservative approach to problems like this is to err on the side of caution for preserving life and not take our chances that we are wrong. A more liberal approach would say "We don't know for sure, so let's do nothing and things will work themselves out." This is quite ironic, given the parties that advocate each position on this topic. "

 global cooling wrote on February 6, 2007 10:59 am:
" Wasn't it just 30 years age scientists were alarming and warning us of global cooling? Yes it has been hot and dry these past seven years. Is that any reason to jump through our butts? We blame coal fired power plants for acid rain, yet St. Helens put more ash and pollutants in the air than these plants could put out in millions of years. "

 No problem wrote on February 6, 2007 1:10 pm:
" We can just move the corn fields to Arizona and let retired East coast folks move to the palm trees of Lincoln. "

 Carl wrote on February 6, 2007 4:24 pm:
" If the Easter Islanders, Greenland Vikings, the Mayans, the Anasazi, and countless other civilations are any indication, Mother Nature doesn't necessarily provide free lunch to those that kick her in the shins to many times. I'd say those of us concerned ought to look into Mars a backup plan, but apparently it would be impossible for humans to use greenhouse gasses to terraform the Red Planet, at least according to some skeptics of global warming on Earth. "

Ads by Yahoo!

More Stories In Editorial