Every day we put another 110 million tons of global warming pollution into the sky as if it's an open sewer, and it's still building up. And the scientists tell us it's a race against time. We've stabilized emissions globally now for the last three years, but they need to start coming down quickly. We've got the momentum, we've got the wind in our sails, we're gonna win this.
Industrial production of meat makes a huge contribution to global warming.
Global warming, indeed much of environmentalism, has become a new religion. Like the old religions, environmentalism preaches much good sense, is well meaning, but has a worrying lack of logic at its core.
To be clear, geoengineering won't solve global warming. It's not a 'techno-fix. ' It would be enormously risky and almost certainly lead to troubling unforeseen consequences.
. . . those who are absolutely certain that the rise in temperatures is due solely to carbon dioxide have no scientific justification. It's pure guesswork.
Ideology on which the Kyoto Protocol is based, is a new form of totalitarian ideology, along with Marxism, Communism and socialism.
I think [George W. ] Bush has done nothing right about global warming.
They say if the warming trend continues, by 2015 Hillary Clinton might actually thaw out.
Global warming threatens our health, our economy, our natural resources, and our children's future. It is clear we must act.
The evidence for man-made global warming is as final as the evidence of Auschwitz.
We know more about Tom [Cruise] and Katie [Holmes] than we do about global warming. We're the most entertained, least informed people in the world.
Global warming, climate change, it's a total.
I am a skeptic. . . Global warming has become a new religion.
If we don't figure out global warming, we're not going to be able to be here.
The greatest danger facing our nation isn't terrorism, global warming or the energy crisis. It is out-of-control, unbridled government spending.
Unfortunately, The End of Nature turns out to be correct, although I wish it were not so. The only places that I was incorrect was, as with environmental science at the time, the estimation of the speed at which we see the effects of global warming.
But, when it comes to global warming, the public- at-large really doesn't know whom to believe anymore. And NASA has contributed to that confusion.
Those who are already feeling the effects of climate change don't have time to deny it - they're busy dealing with it.
When I listen to the public debates about climate change, I am impressed by the enormous gaps in our knowledge, the sparseness of our observations and the superficiality of our theories.
In any event, it has never been true that we ignore mainstream science; and anyone who reads AEI publications closely can see that we are not 'skeptics' about warming. It is possible to accept the general consensus about the existence of global warming while having valid questions about the extent of warming, the consequences of warming, and the appropriate responses.