I say challenge them in court and put this nonsense down once and for all. There is tones of prior art. The vfat code was written before the patent was filed. They should just challenge Microsoft in court. I mean really. Whats wrong with challenging them. I'd say this is the safest bet at this point.
It runs faster really? Does it run on Linux because I don't have windows and I can't run IE. And no I'm not going to switch. All my programs only run on Linux and I can't switch. It would be a horrible inconvenience.
I think Mozilla will have a very hard time if Google wants out of this deal. Google doesn't need Mozilla to survive. They are doing pretty well on their own.
I think this company is going down a path thats really irrelevant. Its not the time that it takes windows to start up that will make people want to use Linux. The windows users that have the most trouble with windows are the ones that will have trouble with any technology that is out there. I should know. I've done tech support for years. Things like having to install drivers, viruses, and ad-ware cause most of the grief on the windows platform. But also that windows isn't as easy to use as everyone may believe.
The biggest barrier to entry for Linux right now I believe is the fact that hardware companies don't support it as well as they should. Compatibility with new hardware is the biggest pet peeve and the tweeking it takes to make hardware work is what drives some users batty. This is not to detract from the massive progress on this front. The next biggest issue is to have the software work well. Too often you install a package that has been put out and it isn't very usable due to some little issue. This isn't the case in every package but it happens enough to keep novice users away. Case in point Scribus. If anyone has tried to use this on ubuntu lately they will know the print function doesn't work very well. Documents on some printers are just not printed properly. This is annoying considering this is a desktop publishing package.
Another thing is the developers of open source should be to really go after new innovative functionality. They really want to push forward a perception that new technology shows up on open source first before windows in fact. Right now most of the advancements are under the hood. But flashy features that catch users attention will do more to promote open source then any other advancement.
A single distro is not necessary. I think people here have made that clear. But I can say what is necessary is a standard base library file list so that people creating commercial software can release software without having to provide source code. Now I know that some of you will say they can release the source its better. But in some cases it is not. Especially if you have trade secrets you want to protect. Commercial vendors are never going to agree to releasing their source code. Something similar to install shield would be ideal. Something that detects the distro and provides the bindings to the correct libraries. Maybe even downloads the dependencies for you.
Well the short answer to this question is yes. OpenOffice does read MS Office files. There will be some problems with formatting but that is understandable due to the fact that the two programs have completely different architectures and handle things differently. Thats not to say that you should disqualify migrating because of it. The easiest time to migrate is when your company is still small. The overall money you will save by doing the change over now is well worth the switch. Free is Free. As the company grows thats money that it can put into doing what it does best.
Don't expect any change of technology to go without problems though. That almost never happens. But don't be afraid to use a technology just because there are problems switching because there are always problems. There are also problems with not switching. It all comes down to which risk you want to take.
Functionally, OpenOffice is every bit as feature rich as MS Office if not more. Its a better product in my view. But thats MYHO. You may want to make that decision on your own.
Its funny how closed source pushers keep putting out that closed source innovates more then open source. In reality it couldn't be further from the truth. What innovation have we seen in any Microsoft OS in 15 years? I'll tell you now. None! The real truth is that most technology has been developed on Open Source first. At least some variation. We can look at all the tech thats out there. Despite all the rambling that Bill Gates did about innovation the reality is Microsoft has done very little to push modern information technology. Today Linux and other variants of Unix still have features put into these OS's that Microsoft still hasn't implemented. And those features are very powerful. For example XWindow still has a major advantage over windows for network transparency, Linux's many Journalizing file systems are still more reliable then NTFS, and now that open office for instance is going to have plugin that lets it interface directly with subversion. Imagine the power of an office suite that does version control. That is a bigger innovation then the fancy new interface in vista. So wake up open source is now easier to use then windows or mac. Thats right I said it.
Linux today is easier to use then a windows or a Mac machine. The new distro's have done a superb job at setting up the OS and now we are starting to see OEM's adopt it. You could now put your grand mother in front of a Linux box and she will do alright. The only thing that needs to happen is we as technologists we need to convince the established users that they are better off in a Linux environment. Those people who say Linux isn't ready for prime time are the people who have something to lose in the move. Those who have them most to complain about are the ones who have a vested interest in the establishment. Its not the customer. The customer is crying out for something better then what they got right now. The customer wants something better then the empty promises of the closed source industry and right now they aren't getting it.
When you look at the Unix system you have to agree that it has survived because it works. It works better then any competing technology out there. The simple Unix model is one that is tested and tested again. Its a technology that has been refined over 30 years. And in MHO its one that has proven to be the most effective. Too often we see closed source create some flashy junk software that barely does what it is advertised to do and then they call it innovation. True innovation is something that is new and then is tested over time. Its eventually made to work instead of a hodge podge of technology that barely works.
Why don't these people who review Linux based computers and give the OS a bad review just come clean. Its not hard to do. All they have to say is the following:
" I'm an idiot and too lazy to want to learn a new Operating system like Linux"
Is that hard. Please someone tell me. Is that really hard to say?
I've been using Linux for 10 years and doing Microsoft tech support for the last five. In 10 years I've never had the problems with Linux that my customers call in every day with windows. So I ask which system is harder to use? Windows which you have to call tech support all the time for or Linux which you never do.
Actually the Levy is a very bad thing for small business. Canada's software industry is pathetic and the Levy is the reason why. People writing software and putting it on CD's get automatically levied whether they are pirating or not. Every time I have to pay that stupid levy I realize that this tax is whats killing my career and it makes me very angry.
Personally I have no sympathy for the RIAA or its Canadian version. I think they are scum and their industry should die a painful death for what they have done. As a result I don't buy music anymore unless its an artist selling his CD at the bar I go to. Those big business music companies I pirate them all. I have no love for those companies at all. I hope they all go bankrupt.
Its funny how the wine people whine about the legal department of some company taking a long time to do things right but they don't entertain the fact they are taking too long to get wine actually working.If they spent more time coding and less time wondering what other people were doing then they would have something worth looking at and worth while. However they don't do that and they are complaining about someone who is trying to make something worth while. Hmmmm... does anyone else see the irony here.
Wine is vapor ware anyways. It is highly unlikely they will every produce a working windows emulator. They've been at it for 13 years. Its not like Microsoft took 13 years to write windows 95 and they didn't even have a reference platform to go by. I've tried wine many times. I've even tried to contribute in the debugging process. And got sick of getting flamed by wine developers when all I was doing was trying to help. The project is useless. Nothing will ever come of it.
I don't know I think this version of the GPL is a little too heavy handed. I don't think its right to restrict people from using the software to create DRM tools. If a commercial vendor wants to stupidly restrict their customers from being able to use their product then thats their problem. I don't think its necessary to prevent that in the GPL. There are already allot of people fleeing the GPL because its considered too restrictive already. You see it when it comes to libraries etc. I mean firefox doesn't use it. And there are plenty of apps out there that don't use it. They make it too restrictive and they will scare away all commercial support for open source.
Maybe I'm reading too much into this but I am suspecting Microsoft is planning to put out their own Linux distro. They are probably getting these companies to sign as a precautionary measure so they don't get sued when they do. The fact is allot of companies are moving over at this point. Linux represents a share of the market they can't penetrate at this point. So they may be putting out a distro to get a piece of that market. Don't be surprised if they do. I know I would do it. It doesn't cost anything to put out a distro. I mean think about it. They can continue to go along with windows and continue to be shut out of the web server market or they can join them and go along with it. It won't be surprising to me if they do. Lets face it they are at the top right now. There is nowhere to go but down.
Yeah I agree. These guys don't see the damage that they are doing by signing such a deal. They are giving Microsoft legitimacy to bully people in the community. The companies of Xandros, Novell and LG will never be free of Microsoft who provides them with no benefit when it comes to the Linux Community if they keep doing this. I guess they don't realize that what the community is fighting for is ultimately better for them then what Microsoft is offering.
The reality is that software patents are bad for the Software industry as a whole. It will be the undoing of the industry creating a situation that even Microsoft won't be able to afford to operate in. What benefit will they have when they have to pay company X for one patent and then company Y for another patent and company Z for another patent and company Q for another patent. Its a situation that will bring even Microsoft down. I wouldn't be surprised if Windows already violates thousands of patents today while they are professing their fictitious patents against Linux. The way the US Patent office has been filing such patents has probably already created such a situation. Pretty soon the only places where people will be able to innovate is places like Canada where Software patents are not recognized by the Legal System.
Hmmm... Is the Linux community going to be switching to GPLv3? I thought the Linus was against it. At least that was the article I read a long time ago.
I think the Open Source community should consider Litigation against Microsoft and serving them with a cease and desist order. In most countries there are laws against slandering a person or another group of people. If Microsoft believes that there are patents being violated they should talk to the developers of that software and get them to change it. They are basically saying to the customers of the Open Source community that Linux is violating their patents but they haven't demonstrated proof to the community that this is the case. As a result they are extorting partners and businesses in that community to give them money. If there are no patent violation this could be slanderous activity and the community should be very concerned about this. This could damage the reputation of the Linux community if they (Microsoft) are allowed to continue. This as a result can be a sign of extortion where they are extorting money from hardware vendors for patents that don't exist. This could be a serious indication of a very criminal offense in some countries. It is definitely a something to look into. I hope the people at the Free Software Foundation and the Free Linux foundation are keeping an eye on this. It concerns me.
In Canada for instance someone making a claim about another person or group of people must ensure that the public claim is true. If the public claim is not true that is slander and the person being slandered can be sued for damages. So if Ballmer says that Linux is violating 238 of their patents they better make sure there are 238 patent violations or this will be slander. The courts will also take into consideration that the person in question gave the other person the opportunity to reverse the patent violation. So if they do have that number of patents they are doing themselves a disservice by not identifying them.
Hmmm.... You know in some countries telling lies about another person, or group could be construed as slander and is a suable offense. I think Microsoft should be careful in what they say. If they don't identify the patents that they are accusing the open source community is violating then the Open Source community has a good case to sue them for slander in those countries.
There is proof that CO2 is related to global warming. However not the proof everyone thinks. They have everything backwards. CO2 has always lagged temperature changes by 800 years.
Here are more numbers for you. 95% of the greenhouse gases in the atmosphere is water vapor. Of the remaining 5% only one of the the gases in question is actually CO2. Of that CO2 humans are only one of several emitters. The oceans emit CO2 when the surface of the water is heated. Volcanoes also emit CO2 and so does rotting leaves. So man made CO2 may in fact be about 2% of all Greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. This is a conservative estimate. It may be less then that.
I believe the author of this article is right. I think its fair to have perpetual Copy write. The work that that artist went through to create the work needs to be recognized. Its a compilation of words yes but words are his tool for creating his art. Would you deny a painter or his decedents the right to make money just because he didn't make the paint he used. Its the same thing. Furthermore I feel that copy write has had a bad shake recently with all the piracy going on today. Music, movies, computer programs, and books are being copied all the time. Not enough is being done to stop it. I feel people have a right to make a living off their work if they so choose to do so. So do their children and grand children if their work goes beyond their life.
Think about the effect this would have on book publishers too. They would be forced to look for new talent more vigorously then they have because eventually the copy write for older works will be unmanageable. This would give more opportunity for younger artists trying to make a living. This would be a good thing all around.
I want to point something out though. Although I feel this way about copy writable material. I don't agree with it with patents. Patents should be a limited thing. They offer too much protection in some cases for inventions.
The Great Global Warming Swindle has been published on YouTube. Its a BBC documentary. But there is another one that is also relevant. That was done by the Canadian Broadcasting Commission. Its in multiple parts. I'm sure the infighting on the facts go back and forth though. The one thing the people in those movies do admit is more science is needed.
Listen I'm all for sticking it to the oil companies. And the more fuel options we have the better off we will be. However, I've heard some ludicrous ideas, like creating satellites to block out the sun, dropping thousands of tones of iron into the south pacific and of course my favorite carbon credits. Give me a break. Given the gas prices today alternative fuels are coming guaranteed. But I don't like the idea of artificial solutions to the problem. I think that the solution to global warming should be habitat reconstruction and making the planet better for all life to live. Not crazy schemes that do nothing but hurt the most underprivileged of our world.
BTW, the increase in CO2 doesn't correspond entirely to the CO2 increase. There are other sources of CO2 besides humans. The biggest contributor to CO2 comes from the ocean. When you heat water it releases the dissolved gas that are in the water. Its called Henry's Law and its a proven scientific principle. And Volcano's also produce allot more CO2 then humans. Rotting Vegetation produces allot of CO2 as well. All in all the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere accounts for less then 5% of all greenhouse gases. And the amount created by humans is around 1% - 2% The number one greenhouse gas is Water vapor at a whopping 95%. So if your going to claim that greenhouse gases are to blame then which one do you think is going to be the number one cause of global warming? Are you going to blame the small number or the big one? Also in terms of greenhouse gases water vapor has a greater impact in trapping heat then CO2. CO2 is measured in the atmosphere in parts per million. Current amount of CO2 is about 380 parts per million. So how can we say its CO2 causing this? There has to be other factors.
I've seen An Inconvenient Truth. I believe the skeptics. The Great Global warming swindle and global warming doomsday called off is another movie you should watch. Those two movies are both BBC and CBC documentaries. And I think that if you watch all the movies you get a pretty balanced view of whats going on. I still believe the skeptics. I don't believe that global warming is man made.
Slashdot Mirror
I say challenge them in court and put this nonsense down once and for all. There is tones of prior art. The vfat code was written before the patent was filed. They should just challenge Microsoft in court. I mean really. Whats wrong with challenging them. I'd say this is the safest bet at this point.
It runs faster really? Does it run on Linux because I don't have windows and I can't run IE. And no I'm not going to switch. All my programs only run on Linux and I can't switch. It would be a horrible inconvenience.
I think Mozilla will have a very hard time if Google wants out of this deal. Google doesn't need Mozilla to survive. They are doing pretty well on their own.
I think this company is going down a path thats really irrelevant. Its not the time that it takes windows to start up that will make people want to use Linux. The windows users that have the most trouble with windows are the ones that will have trouble with any technology that is out there. I should know. I've done tech support for years. Things like having to install drivers, viruses, and ad-ware cause most of the grief on the windows platform. But also that windows isn't as easy to use as everyone may believe.
The biggest barrier to entry for Linux right now I believe is the fact that hardware companies don't support it as well as they should. Compatibility with new hardware is the biggest pet peeve and the tweeking it takes to make hardware work is what drives some users batty. This is not to detract from the massive progress on this front. The next biggest issue is to have the software work well. Too often you install a package that has been put out and it isn't very usable due to some little issue. This isn't the case in every package but it happens enough to keep novice users away. Case in point Scribus. If anyone has tried to use this on ubuntu lately they will know the print function doesn't work very well. Documents on some printers are just not printed properly. This is annoying considering this is a desktop publishing package.
Another thing is the developers of open source should be to really go after new innovative functionality. They really want to push forward a perception that new technology shows up on open source first before windows in fact. Right now most of the advancements are under the hood. But flashy features that catch users attention will do more to promote open source then any other advancement.
hmmm... Its funny I think Ubuntu will run on your Macbook pro. And I bet you its allot easier to use too.
A single distro is not necessary. I think people here have made that clear. But I can say what is necessary is a standard base library file list so that people creating commercial software can release software without having to provide source code. Now I know that some of you will say they can release the source its better. But in some cases it is not. Especially if you have trade secrets you want to protect. Commercial vendors are never going to agree to releasing their source code. Something similar to install shield would be ideal. Something that detects the distro and provides the bindings to the correct libraries. Maybe even downloads the dependencies for you.
Well the short answer to this question is yes. OpenOffice does read MS Office files. There will be some problems with formatting but that is understandable due to the fact that the two programs have completely different architectures and handle things differently. Thats not to say that you should disqualify migrating because of it. The easiest time to migrate is when your company is still small. The overall money you will save by doing the change over now is well worth the switch. Free is Free. As the company grows thats money that it can put into doing what it does best.
Don't expect any change of technology to go without problems though. That almost never happens. But don't be afraid to use a technology just because there are problems switching because there are always problems. There are also problems with not switching. It all comes down to which risk you want to take.
Functionally, OpenOffice is every bit as feature rich as MS Office if not more. Its a better product in my view. But thats MYHO. You may want to make that decision on your own.
So true so true.
Its funny how closed source pushers keep putting out that closed source innovates more then open source. In reality it couldn't be further from the truth. What innovation have we seen in any Microsoft OS in 15 years? I'll tell you now. None! The real truth is that most technology has been developed on Open Source first. At least some variation. We can look at all the tech thats out there. Despite all the rambling that Bill Gates did about innovation the reality is Microsoft has done very little to push modern information technology. Today Linux and other variants of Unix still have features put into these OS's that Microsoft still hasn't implemented. And those features are very powerful. For example XWindow still has a major advantage over windows for network transparency, Linux's many Journalizing file systems are still more reliable then NTFS, and now that open office for instance is going to have plugin that lets it interface directly with subversion. Imagine the power of an office suite that does version control. That is a bigger innovation then the fancy new interface in vista. So wake up open source is now easier to use then windows or mac. Thats right I said it.
Linux today is easier to use then a windows or a Mac machine. The new distro's have done a superb job at setting up the OS and now we are starting to see OEM's adopt it. You could now put your grand mother in front of a Linux box and she will do alright. The only thing that needs to happen is we as technologists we need to convince the established users that they are better off in a Linux environment. Those people who say Linux isn't ready for prime time are the people who have something to lose in the move. Those who have them most to complain about are the ones who have a vested interest in the establishment. Its not the customer. The customer is crying out for something better then what they got right now. The customer wants something better then the empty promises of the closed source industry and right now they aren't getting it.
When you look at the Unix system you have to agree that it has survived because it works. It works better then any competing technology out there. The simple Unix model is one that is tested and tested again. Its a technology that has been refined over 30 years. And in MHO its one that has proven to be the most effective. Too often we see closed source create some flashy junk software that barely does what it is advertised to do and then they call it innovation. True innovation is something that is new and then is tested over time. Its eventually made to work instead of a hodge podge of technology that barely works.
Why don't these people who review Linux based computers and give the OS a bad review just come clean. Its not hard to do. All they have to say is the following:
" I'm an idiot and too lazy to want to learn a new Operating system like Linux"
Is that hard. Please someone tell me. Is that really hard to say?
I've been using Linux for 10 years and doing Microsoft tech support for the last five. In 10 years I've never had the problems with Linux that my customers call in every day with windows. So I ask which system is harder to use? Windows which you have to call tech support all the time for or Linux which you never do.
Actually the Levy is a very bad thing for small business. Canada's software industry is pathetic and the Levy is the reason why. People writing software and putting it on CD's get automatically levied whether they are pirating or not. Every time I have to pay that stupid levy I realize that this tax is whats killing my career and it makes me very angry.
Personally I have no sympathy for the RIAA or its Canadian version. I think they are scum and their industry should die a painful death for what they have done. As a result I don't buy music anymore unless its an artist selling his CD at the bar I go to. Those big business music companies I pirate them all. I have no love for those companies at all. I hope they all go bankrupt.
Its funny how the wine people whine about the legal department of some company taking a long time to do things right but they don't entertain the fact they are taking too long to get wine actually working.If they spent more time coding and less time wondering what other people were doing then they would have something worth looking at and worth while. However they don't do that and they are complaining about someone who is trying to make something worth while. Hmmmm... does anyone else see the irony here.
Wine is vapor ware anyways. It is highly unlikely they will every produce a working windows emulator. They've been at it for 13 years. Its not like Microsoft took 13 years to write windows 95 and they didn't even have a reference platform to go by. I've tried wine many times. I've even tried to contribute in the debugging process. And got sick of getting flamed by wine developers when all I was doing was trying to help. The project is useless. Nothing will ever come of it.
I don't know I think this version of the GPL is a little too heavy handed. I don't think its right to restrict people from using the software to create DRM tools. If a commercial vendor wants to stupidly restrict their customers from being able to use their product then thats their problem. I don't think its necessary to prevent that in the GPL. There are already allot of people fleeing the GPL because its considered too restrictive already. You see it when it comes to libraries etc. I mean firefox doesn't use it. And there are plenty of apps out there that don't use it. They make it too restrictive and they will scare away all commercial support for open source.
Maybe I'm reading too much into this but I am suspecting Microsoft is planning to put out their own Linux distro. They are probably getting these companies to sign as a precautionary measure so they don't get sued when they do. The fact is allot of companies are moving over at this point. Linux represents a share of the market they can't penetrate at this point. So they may be putting out a distro to get a piece of that market. Don't be surprised if they do. I know I would do it. It doesn't cost anything to put out a distro. I mean think about it. They can continue to go along with windows and continue to be shut out of the web server market or they can join them and go along with it. It won't be surprising to me if they do. Lets face it they are at the top right now. There is nowhere to go but down.
Yeah I agree. These guys don't see the damage that they are doing by signing such a deal. They are giving Microsoft legitimacy to bully people in the community. The companies of Xandros, Novell and LG will never be free of Microsoft who provides them with no benefit when it comes to the Linux Community if they keep doing this. I guess they don't realize that what the community is fighting for is ultimately better for them then what Microsoft is offering.
The reality is that software patents are bad for the Software industry as a whole. It will be the undoing of the industry creating a situation that even Microsoft won't be able to afford to operate in. What benefit will they have when they have to pay company X for one patent and then company Y for another patent and company Z for another patent and company Q for another patent. Its a situation that will bring even Microsoft down. I wouldn't be surprised if Windows already violates thousands of patents today while they are professing their fictitious patents against Linux. The way the US Patent office has been filing such patents has probably already created such a situation. Pretty soon the only places where people will be able to innovate is places like Canada where Software patents are not recognized by the Legal System.
Hmmm... Is the Linux community going to be switching to GPLv3? I thought the Linus was against it. At least that was the article I read a long time ago.
I think the Open Source community should consider Litigation against Microsoft and serving them with a cease and desist order. In most countries there are laws against slandering a person or another group of people. If Microsoft believes that there are patents being violated they should talk to the developers of that software and get them to change it. They are basically saying to the customers of the Open Source community that Linux is violating their patents but they haven't demonstrated proof to the community that this is the case. As a result they are extorting partners and businesses in that community to give them money. If there are no patent violation this could be slanderous activity and the community should be very concerned about this. This could damage the reputation of the Linux community if they (Microsoft) are allowed to continue. This as a result can be a sign of extortion where they are extorting money from hardware vendors for patents that don't exist. This could be a serious indication of a very criminal offense in some countries. It is definitely a something to look into. I hope the people at the Free Software Foundation and the Free Linux foundation are keeping an eye on this. It concerns me.
In Canada for instance someone making a claim about another person or group of people must ensure that the public claim is true. If the public claim is not true that is slander and the person being slandered can be sued for damages. So if Ballmer says that Linux is violating 238 of their patents they better make sure there are 238 patent violations or this will be slander. The courts will also take into consideration that the person in question gave the other person the opportunity to reverse the patent violation. So if they do have that number of patents they are doing themselves a disservice by not identifying them.
Hmmm.... You know in some countries telling lies about another person, or group could be construed as slander and is a suable offense. I think Microsoft should be careful in what they say. If they don't identify the patents that they are accusing the open source community is violating then the Open Source community has a good case to sue them for slander in those countries.
There is proof that CO2 is related to global warming. However not the proof everyone thinks. They have everything backwards. CO2 has always lagged temperature changes by 800 years.
Here are more numbers for you. 95% of the greenhouse gases in the atmosphere is water vapor. Of the remaining 5% only one of the the gases in question is actually CO2. Of that CO2 humans are only one of several emitters. The oceans emit CO2 when the surface of the water is heated. Volcanoes also emit CO2 and so does rotting leaves. So man made CO2 may in fact be about 2% of all Greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. This is a conservative estimate. It may be less then that.
I believe the author of this article is right. I think its fair to have perpetual Copy write. The work that that artist went through to create the work needs to be recognized. Its a compilation of words yes but words are his tool for creating his art. Would you deny a painter or his decedents the right to make money just because he didn't make the paint he used. Its the same thing. Furthermore I feel that copy write has had a bad shake recently with all the piracy going on today. Music, movies, computer programs, and books are being copied all the time. Not enough is being done to stop it. I feel people have a right to make a living off their work if they so choose to do so. So do their children and grand children if their work goes beyond their life.
Think about the effect this would have on book publishers too. They would be forced to look for new talent more vigorously then they have because eventually the copy write for older works will be unmanageable. This would give more opportunity for younger artists trying to make a living. This would be a good thing all around.
I want to point something out though. Although I feel this way about copy writable material. I don't agree with it with patents. Patents should be a limited thing. They offer too much protection in some cases for inventions.
yeah I'm aware of that. But not all the water in the ocean stays in the ocean either.
The Great Global Warming Swindle has been published on YouTube. Its a BBC documentary. But there is another one that is also relevant. That was done by the Canadian Broadcasting Commission. Its in multiple parts. I'm sure the infighting on the facts go back and forth though. The one thing the people in those movies do admit is more science is needed.
Listen I'm all for sticking it to the oil companies. And the more fuel options we have the better off we will be. However, I've heard some ludicrous ideas, like creating satellites to block out the sun, dropping thousands of tones of iron into the south pacific and of course my favorite carbon credits. Give me a break. Given the gas prices today alternative fuels are coming guaranteed. But I don't like the idea of artificial solutions to the problem. I think that the solution to global warming should be habitat reconstruction and making the planet better for all life to live. Not crazy schemes that do nothing but hurt the most underprivileged of our world.
BTW, the increase in CO2 doesn't correspond entirely to the CO2 increase. There are other sources of CO2 besides humans. The biggest contributor to CO2 comes from the ocean. When you heat water it releases the dissolved gas that are in the water. Its called Henry's Law and its a proven scientific principle. And Volcano's also produce allot more CO2 then humans. Rotting Vegetation produces allot of CO2 as well. All in all the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere accounts for less then 5% of all greenhouse gases. And the amount created by humans is around 1% - 2% The number one greenhouse gas is Water vapor at a whopping 95%. So if your going to claim that greenhouse gases are to blame then which one do you think is going to be the number one cause of global warming? Are you going to blame the small number or the big one? Also in terms of greenhouse gases water vapor has a greater impact in trapping heat then CO2. CO2 is measured in the atmosphere in parts per million. Current amount of CO2 is about 380 parts per million. So how can we say its CO2 causing this? There has to be other factors.
I've seen An Inconvenient Truth. I believe the skeptics. The Great Global warming swindle and global warming doomsday called off is another movie you should watch. Those two movies are both BBC and CBC documentaries. And I think that if you watch all the movies you get a pretty balanced view of whats going on. I still believe the skeptics. I don't believe that global warming is man made.