There have been a couple of good debates following the Channel 4 documentary on the Guardian's blogsite Comment is Free. This is today's thread following an article by the Great Moonbat himself:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/story/0,,2032575,00.html

This was an earlier one - very long but lots of good stuff:

http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/david_adam/2007/03/envirocon.html

here for example: http://www.veoh.com/videos/v2929577GEeQHxM?searchId=5280542933435081349&rank=0
Alternatively you can download a high quality version from various torrent sites like isohunt.com

>>This whole misguided campaign against global warming is going to damage the image of the scientific community for some time to come--just when we badly need the power of science and rational thought to combat the Muslim crazies.

Till you will not understand the loving relation between Green, left and Islamofacist.... you can't do anything.....

Right had came from extreme to neutral in last 6 decades.... and left had moved to other extreme in last 6 decades...... go search the new complex equations of left, Green and Islamofacist... then you will know that its not Science verses Islamofacist.... but its Power hungry extremist/politicians Vs. liberal moderate and democratic peoples.

hopefully you will analyze the things beyond flowing in emotions.... as i made this mistake in past to analyze things in emotions... but emotion is our weekness here .... which make us baised.

Google removed the video... as it came under fire from Green Moonbats....

and i was the 1st to publish the link on brusselsjournal :p

A thousand thank yous, as the Norwegians say, for posting the link to that Channel 4 documentary about the "global warming swindal."  Reaction to the program on environmentalist sites led me to expect an opportunistic, unscientific program.  In fact, it sticks largely to the science and makes a very solid case.  I think I've finally been pushed too far by the environmental hysterics:  they are clearly anti-science, and anti-rational argument.  They should be refuting the main points the video raises--that warming is greater at the earth's surface than in the troposphere; that sun spot activity tracks with temperature much better than do C02 levels--rather than smearing scientists with whom they disagree.  This whole misguided campaign against global warming is going to damage the image of the scientific community for some time to come--just when we badly need the power of science and rational thought to combat the Muslim crazies.

British Channel 4 recently aired a documentary in which meteorologists, geologists, oceanologists and other specialists from numerous universities and institutions around the globe prove that Man Made Global Warming is a lie. Viewable here: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=9005566792811497638&q=Global%20Warming%20Swindle&hl=en

Amsterdamsky: "As usual I agree with you Kapitein except on GMO foods.  Pest resistant crops reduce or eliminate the use of herbicides.  In addition they are starting for be used for the production of medicines and vaccines.  It is completely retarded to prohibit them like the EU does.  It is merely a cynical ploy to keep out foreign produce and keep the insane system of farm subsidies in place."
 
I do not believe in GMOs or herbicides; I buy organic. Agribusiness will permit people to eat garbage (e.g. Kraft, McCain, etc.) if it is profitable. Secondly, people (e.g. obese Westerners) will eat garbage, and many save money by buying garbage. GMOs can be carried by the wind to reproduce amongst organic crops, and if the European Union ends their ban on them it will be a dark day for organic foods.
 
Furthermore, Americans have many protective measures in place for foreign imports* and support their farmers with subsidies also.
 
*Arguably, as noted by Paul M. Kennedy, the British during the 19th century were more free-trade oriented than the Americans ever were.

well as you said "while not actually grounded in reality, is a good thing because it forces us to consider the environment more. I can accept that religion, despite its questionable foundations, serves a perfectly valid purpose"

i will say, here you make a tremendous mistake in analyzing, its quite easy to blame others and ignores others in any point too, and then after blaming u have power of vote bank.... make a case study after WW2......

the earliest peoples who were demonized was right group... anyways i don't really know on what bases you develop the line between right at left in modern world.... then the blame of Hitler insane behavior was thrown on religion...

In India, Hindus who fought Hitler during WW2 were tagged radicals, and in west blame was thrown on catholic church, especially Pope Pius... ignoring the fact that Pope pius was helping jews in WW2. the Hindus had to fought Gandhi's congress, which was misguiding peoples marking Hitler as a great soul...... so before coming in real war in Europe, Hindus were fighting a psychological war in India... due to Gandhi's relation with German agency named "Abwehr", and due to a Heroic figure hitlor attains in pre-war era, which even had made him nominated for "Nobel peace prize" ....

The problem here is again the same, that there are peoples who want to throw the world back to dark ages.... they are against globalization, industrilization.... as well as against humanity... but the propaganda is showing them as great heros...

i think you had seen the documentation i linked below. i

its just a hidden angle, which links left, green and islamist.... and it is a well known truth... even Osama sang the song of Global warming .... so will you say, because osama speaks against global warming.... he is a hero ?

in short.... west need to be defeated this way or another..... you must better learn your enemy now... then later...hope people will wake up from the sleep. Hope u will not ignore the things so easily..... as this is the birth place of libels and all horrible things

Photosynthesis \Pho`to*syn"the*sis\, n. (Plant Physiol.)
The process of constructive metabolism in which green plants utilize the energy of sunlight to manufacture carbohydrates from carbon dioxide and water in the presence of chlorophyll. Giving off oxygen as a by product.

The more co2 in the air the more plants thrive, thus more more plant growth= more food and more oxygen for humans to breathe. co2 at 1000ppbillion and plants really take off, the co2 presently is about 650ppbillion, one could correctly say that this co2 greenhouse warming is nothing more than greedy agrobusiness companies trying to cause food shortages, famine and death in poor countres. I say pump as much co2 into the atmosphere as possible and END world hunger forever.

It alarms me to read comments to the effect that the global warming hysteria, while not actually grounded in reality, is a good thing because it forces us to consider the environment more.  I can accept that religion, despite its questionable foundations, serves a perfectly valid purpose.  But when we start using science in this way, I think we're screwing ourselves over.  How are vaccines going to be developed from a scientific community that sways in the political wind?  For that matter, how will new energy technologies be discovered and perfected within this distorted environment?  Scientists have to be able to stare reality, the physical world, in the face without prejudice.  It is not merely galling but dangerous to permit the climate alarmists to cloak their hysterical predictions in scientific garb just because, for now, we support the outcome of their campaign.  We may be very opposed to future outcomes, at which point it will be too late.  Certainly, the upperwardly mobile peasantry of China, India, and Brazil won't be too thrilled about having their prosperity impeded ten or twenty years from now because of faulty science that even its supporters acknowledge is faulty. 

Man made global warming is a false premise. Any thing based on the premise is false and should be avoided and opposed. The people, governments and corporations who promote this are chasing the new money that can be fleeced from the average person. New taxes and fees on emissions amount to a breathing tax.

It has never been about the environment. The environmental movement was hijacked some 40 years ago by the communist / socialist / population control factions.

We know the equations used by the global warming “scientist“ are false. We know this because it does not matter what data you put into the equation, the results are the same. These are the same factions that stated in the 60s that overpopulation is killing the planet. In the 70s is was the new ice age. In the 80s it was the food shortage. Now it’s the man caused global warming. Even to modest thinking people the premise is not only laughable but is to be ignored. Theses guys cannot get their story straight and therefore any thing they say is suspect as fraud. It’s both a con game on a global level and a power grab at every level of government
Global warming is meant to fleece the population of their money and freedom, what little is left of it.

It's the Big LIE all over again.

These people are fascists and must be stopped.

check this..

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=9005566792811497638&hl=en

As usual I agree with you Kapitein except on GMO foods.  Pest resistant crops reduce or eliminate the use of herbicides.  In addition they are starting for be used for the production of medicines and vaccines.  It is completely retarded to prohibit them like the EU does.  It is merely a cynical ploy to keep out foreign produce and keep the insane system of farm subsidies in place.

The concept of global warming, as a process that - (a) is unnecessary and purely the result of human activity, (b) is irrevirsible and will result in catastrophic climate change, (c) is the single largest threat facing human civilisation, and (d) is controllable by Western governments - has become sacrosanct in academic and popular discourse, in spite of the growing chorus of voices, expert and otherwise, that challenge it. Indeed, there is strong scientific evidence to suggest that the Earth experiences warming and cooling phases on a regular basis f.e. the British Isles were warmer during the early medieval era and wine was produced in abundance in southern England; however, without an "unnatural" warming system in the North Atlantic, the British Isles would have the same climate as Norway. Furthermore, the industrialisation occurring with rapidity and little concern for environmental or human welfare in India, China and Brazil will impact "global warming" far more than any reduction in carbon dioxide emissions on the part of Western states.
 
However, I am not opposed to this fanaticism. Without it, environmental issues would not be on the agenda of Western governments; without a clear and present danger, whether real or preceived (global warming), Western citizenry would not be as nearly concerned with them as they are now. People were quite willing to suffer heavy levels of pollution up until very recently, and they can thank environmentalists for lobbying governments to introduce legislation to protect and clean up the environment; indeed, the air in Western cities is far cleaner than it was during the 1970s, and the same for the water, etc.
 
The real concern for me is not global warming, but excessive fishing, logging and hunting, non-organic foods (i.e. over-processed, artificially preserved, antibiotic and hormone-laden, genetically modified, etc.), scarification, and toxic pollution in the air, oceans, seas, rivers, lakes, soil etc. If fear-mongering is what is necessary to allow organics to flourish and to keep our environment as pristine as possible, than so be it.

Since nothing nothing exciting ever really happens in Europe, the myth 'global warming' panic gives the bored euroweenies something to talk and worry about. I cannot believe that people put their faith in someone like the has-been politician Al Gore. It is so obvious to a smart person that he is pinning his political comeback on the global warming issue. For every expert on climate change, there is an expert to counter the claim that it is a human issue. The Al Gores of this world are hoping that the scare tactics will be believed without question by those people who are unwilling to research the other side of the issue. If you say the lie over and over, then it must be true. Write a book, hob nob with the hollyweird's crowd, and bingo you are in the news again. Gore's mansion and the energy used for it are a perfect example of a hypocrite who talks the talk, but does not walk the walk.

who cares? It is about a socialist hopping on a helicopter to go to the movies. The title of the movie: An inconvenient truth. That's really inconvenient, isn't it?

This answer taken into consideration, I think the author in "La Libre Belgique" confused tons with kilograms. Meanwhile I found out that the weight of the A109 is closer to 3 tons than what I suggested before (between 1 and 2 tons).
But all this side-tracking now is of minor importance. Let's give Flahaut his chance to defend himself. I am sure he will be pleased to join us here....

The 250 kg per km was mentioned in La Libre Belgique (see link in the article) but after reading some of the comments here, I must admit that the number sounds very improbable.  Maybe they meant 250 kg per hour of flying?

If flying at 150 km/h and spewing out 250kg CO2 per km, the exhaust produced is around 32 m3/s.

I have no clue about the size of the exhaust pipes, but assuming a large combined crossection of 1000 cm2 (a bit more than a square feet), the gasses leaves the pipes at a speed of 1150 km/h.

The thrust produced by the exhaust alone is thus almost 3000 horsepower.

Still, that pales in comparison to the ~53000 horsepower delivered to the rotor (assuming a low engine efficiency of 35%). I'm going by memory here, but isn't engine fuel about 9.5Mcal/kg ?

Besides ships, is there anything that would use 56000 hp to reach a speed of 150km/h ?

The A109 produces approx. 250KG CO2/KM and it flew a total of 2 hrs from Bierset to Evere to Hasselt and from Hasselt to Evere to Bierset (home base). Google Earth, roughly: Bierset Airport to Evere HQ is 76km and from Evere to Hasselt city centre is 64 km. Totals 140km*2*250= 70t CO2.

If the trip took 45 minutes, thats around 20000 liters of fuel per hour or more than 5.5 liters per second.

He could have saved both time and fuel if he had borrowed an airforce combat jet instead ;-)

Although I do agree with the strain of this remark, I still have my doubts about the amount of CO2, mentioned in it.
I think an helicopter of that type must have a weight comparable with a better class car, let's say somewhere between one and two tons (I might be wrong by a ton), it is hard to believe that it produces 45 tons of CO2 in an hour or so ?

Flahaut himself /is/ 300 tons of gas. Gas and flab.

REPLY: You want to fight global warming? Want to stop it? Duct tape the mouths and assholes of guys like this (especailly Al Gore) so no more hot air spews!.....

This article reminded me of Britain's very own environmental windbag, Prince Charles, and his recent trip to the United States to collect an environmental award from Al Gore.

Flahaut himself /is/ 300 tons of gas. Gas and flab.

Is there any doubt that this is all a ploy to raise revenue through fines and carbon taxes to create a eurocommiesuperstate?  This has nothing to do with the environment as clearly shown by these idiots off tv/microphone actions.

Don't forget the 2500€ cost per hour and it went around for 2 hrs...