People doubt climate change because the noise of the people pushing agendas has drowned out the actual science. Even the major media, both 'defending' and 'attacking' climate change all get things entirely wrong and misrepresent the actual science. Lets be honest most people, particularly many of the people claiming to be well informed, really haven't looked at the actual science available and assessed it honestly.

99% of the world right now fits into two camps, the 'believers' defending the coming apocalypse that we've created and must adapt to yesterday, and the deniers who disagree.

The actual scientists observing that there is a warming trend that we are contributing to aren't listened to be EITHER side. When the IPCC posts projections for 2100, even the IPCC most optimistic view riles up the deniers and even the IPCC most gloomy view is dismissed by the 'believers'.

Don't hold out any hope that facts, reason and logic are gonna shift humanity anytime soon. Historically speaking it's pretty much not gonna happen,

God the US will miss Chomsky when he's gone.

So will the ROW (the 19 out of 20 people on Earth that US power considers disposable meat..)

BTW from the outside it looks like the last days of Rome.. crazy all round, torture, non-judicial murder, mobs burning things, unchecked power, total obfuscation and confusion sown all around by rogue members of the powerbase for their own reasons, xenophobia, public statements of religious eschatology.. ..

Take it from a Brit - the end of total global power does not HAVE to be an apocalypse.. you guys need to get into tea and cricket, stat..

The cultural obsession in the 50s and 60s (Dead of the Dead) is now often interpreted to have been a way of playing out the mass psyche's anxieties around communism---and about being coming the "organizational" man.

Not sure what it is now; a statement about suicidal terrorists who, to mass appreciation, seem just as senseless and confusing as an assault by zombies? A larger statement about the foreclosure of a sense of opportunity (doom and apocalypse) by the chief audience for movies, teens and 20-something year olds based on the new, new normal of a zombie economy?

Not sure myself. It will probably be blinding apparent with 20/20 hindsight in 20 more years....

Despite that I thought this was well done, I really really really don't understand pop-culture's obsession with zombie apocalypse over these past few years. I really don't get the appeal and subsequent ubiquitous-ness now of it all.

It's officially known as a report on the "Measurement of the Duration of a Trendless Subsample in a Global Climate Time Series." In lay-speak, it's a study of just how long the current pause in global warming has lasted. And the results are profound:

According to Canadian Ross McKitrick, a professor of environmental economics who wrote the paper for the Open Journal of Statistics, "I make the duration out to be 19 years at the surface and 16 to 26 years in the lower troposphere depending on the data set used."

In still plainer English, McKitrick has crunched the numbers from all the major weather organizations in the world and has found that there has been no overall warming at the Earth's surface since 1995 - that's 19 years in all.

During the past two decades, there have been hotter years and colder years, but on the whole the world's temperatures have not been rising. Despite a 13 per cent rise in carbon dioxide levels over the period, the average global temperature is the same today as it was almost 20 years ago.

In the lower atmosphere, there has been no warming for somewhere between 16 and 26 years, depending on which weather organization's records are used.

Not a single one of the world's major meteorological organizations - including the ones the United Nations relies on for its hysterical, the-skies-are-on-fire predictions of environmental apocalypse - shows atmospheric warming for at least the last 16 years. And some show no warming for the past quarter century.

This might be less significant if some of the major temperature records showed warming and some did not. But they all show no warming.

Even the records maintained by devoted eco-alarmists, such as the United Kingdom's Hadley Centre, show no appreciable warming since the mid-1990s.

Despite continued cymbal-crashing propaganda from environmentalists and politicians who insist humankind is approaching a critical climate-change tipping point, there is no real evidence this is true.

There are no more hurricanes than usual, no more typhoons or tornadoes, floods or droughts. What there is, is more media coverage more often.

Forty years ago when a tropical storm wiped out villages on a South Pacific Island there might have been pictures in the newspaper days or weeks later, then nothing more. Now there is live television coverage hours after the fact and for weeks afterwards.

That creates the impression storms are worse than they used to be, even though statistically they are not.

While the UN's official climate-scare mouthpiece, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), has acknowledged the lack of warming over the past two decades, it has done so very quietly. What's more, it has not permitted the facts to get in the way of its continued insistence that the world is going to hell in a hand basket soon unless modern economies are crippled and more decision-making power is turned over to the UN and to national bureaucrats and environmental activists.

Later this month in New York, the UN will hold a climate summit including many of the world's leaders. So frantic are UN bureaucrats to keep the climate scare alive they have begun a worldwide search for what they themselves call a climate-change "Malala."

That's a reference to Malala Yousafzai, the Pakistani schoolgirl who was shot in the head by the Taliban after demanding an education. Her wounding sparked a renewed, worldwide concern for women's rights.

The new climate spokeswoman must be a female under 30, come from a poor country and have been the victim of a natural disaster.

If the facts surrounding climate-disaster predictions weren't falling apart, the UN wouldn't such need a sympathetic new face of fear.

http://www.darkhorizons.com/news/33756/-x-men-apocalypse-to-film-in-montreal

You fellas defending the cops need to think again.

You DO NOT SHOOT except to SAVE LIFE. I don't care if its Charlie Manson - if he's unarmed and surrendering in broad daylight YOU DO NOT SHOOT HIM.

Failure to respect this code leads to paranoia, violence, rage, hatred and TOTAL SOCIAL APOCALYPSE.

Ferguson will get back from the brink but only because of people who understand that.

Btw Norway has the most liberal, kindest, most forgiving judicial system in the world (AFAIK) and also the LOWEST REOFFENDNG AND CRIME RATES.

USA reoffending rate 85%. Incarceration rate highest outside of Somalia. So if the moral spiritual ethical stance is too lefty for you try BASIC FUCKING STRATEGY.

only 4.3 million? Well, it's a start, but I was kinda hoping we'd get a lot more.

These people are what's wrong with humanity. They are anti-science idiots who cling to their stone age beliefs waiting for the second coming all the while oblivious to the real apocalypse that we're staring down the barrel of.

After these idiots are gone, we can then move on to the WBC, creationists, homeopaths, astrologists, the food babe and finally to the real menace, Justin Bieber and his fans.

Or maybe it was a fucking joke?

idiot.

Okay - Now Enter Apocalypse!!!!

I want someone to create Grand Theft Auto: Zombie Apocalypse.

I would TOTALLY buy that. A true mission-based, open-world, zombie war.

Dead Island was more like zig-zag across the level, switch-hunting.

pretty sure this is one of the signs of the apocalypse.

@Sniper007

Colonisation of other planets, if it happens, will not ease overpopulation on Earth. Assuming it's actually done with humans rather than, say bacteria which are so much easier to transport; it must involve small seed populations of colonists, not firing billions of people off into space. Where do you imagine the energy required would come from? As it stands in 2014 we can barely move a handful of people into low earth orbit, a few hundred kilometres away.

Think about the logistics of transporting and housing all these billions of colonists in a hostile environment. Making the environment itself habitable is an even greater challenge; we can't even seem to fix the one we have on Earth, the one we spent billions of years evolving to suit.

The expansion of the universe, meanwhile, is always giving us less material to work with and perpetually moving it further away.

@SDGundamX

Relying on technology to solve overpopulation is like refusing to stop smoking because by the time you get cancer science will have found a cure.

Scientific advancement is not a given. It doesn't progress at a guaranteed rate and it isn't a genie that will automatically offer a salve to every need. Or, to coin a cliche, "Where's my jetpack?"

Luckily however, in the instant case scientists have offered an easy solution to overpopulation: Stop having so many children.

@RedSky

Poverty reduction without population reduction - reduction, not stabilisation - is catastrophic. The current global population of ~7.2 billion is only survivable, never mind sustainable, because most of those billions are impoverished peasants who barely consume any resources at all. Elevating the poor to a rich, westernesque lifestyle multiplies the effects of overpopulation tremendously, even if it slightly slows population growth in absolute terms.

Rosling doesn't seem to understand the actual problem, and his predictions are at any rate, horrifyingly optimistic.

We need to be shooting for a global population in the range of 100 million - 1 billion. Any substantially higher number than that is an apocalypse waiting to happen.

My own zombie-apocalypse compound will use this for perimeter defense.

I could not make through the first season before I was talking about how pathetic and unreal the characters were-Days of Our Lives w/zombies. Buncha vapid boobs. During some actual zombie apocalypse, the real world would NOT respond and develop similarly. Show blows.