Our friends at Minnesotans for Global Warming -- the folks who brought us the fabulous video "If We Had Some Global Warming" -- have just released a new number deliciously set to John Lennon's "Imagine."
Update: Lyrics at end of post.
You folks are the first to see it. I've asked Elmer to send me the lyrics, and will post them once he responds.
*****Update: Elmer has been gracious enough to forward us the lyrics!
Imagine there's no warming
It's all just been a lie
CO2 is not a pollutant
The Polar Bears aren’t gonna die
Imagine if all the people
Livin' another day
Imagine there's no Kyoto
It isn't hard to do
Gas at 99 cents a gallon
And no carbon taxes too
Imagine all the people
Driving SUVs
You may say I'm a denier
But I'm not the only one
31,000 scientists
Say the world’s climate follows the sun
Imagine no politicians
I wonder if you can
No one to fear monger
No need to eliminate man
Imagine all the people
Drilling all over the world
You may say I'm a dreamer
But I'm not the only one
I hope someday you'll join us
And the world will be more fun
Thanks, Elmer!















Editor at Large

Comments Policy
Love it. Keep up the good
July 12, 2008 - 15:02 ET by HermanoLove it. Keep up the good work guys. You may say I'm a denier, but then so are the 1000 Dr. Bunson Honeydews!
Oh priceless, precious and
July 12, 2008 - 15:03 ET by bigtimerOh priceless, precious and a must pass-on....
Thank you...
It helped lighten my mood with Snow leaving us.
Btw...I loved the pictures of Obama, McCain, algore.
The words were spot-on.
"America isn't the problem...America is the solution." ~ Rush Limbaugh
----
July 12, 2008 - 15:25 ET by dahliatraversGood video; great website.
Thanks for bringing it to our attention, Noel.
That video was great.
July 12, 2008 - 15:33 ET by garyganuThat video was so good, and true, that I embedded it on my own blog. Please read my blog "The global Warming Myth Revisited" and let me know if you can find any fault with it. http://garyganu.blogspot.com/2008/07/global-warming-myth-revisited.html
CO2
July 12, 2008 - 16:05 ET by JDWConsider our atmosphere, how many PPM consist of CO2?
JDW
SAPPY NEWS
DAILY WAVE
Carbon Dioxide in the atmosphere...
July 12, 2008 - 19:38 ET by on-the-rocksmeasures about 380 ppm. That is the equivalent of 0.038%. Much ado about very little. It is all about controlling our fuel use. Urban Heat Islands and Tropical Deforestation are other ways that we could affect the climate.
Enjoying...
July 12, 2008 - 16:17 ET by Copperhead Ridge...the decade long break from global warming.
The global warming hoax is one of the most brilliant political ploys I've seen or even read about. The left -- worldwide left -- has politicized the weather. It's great because very few are ever happy with the weather. With no science and all propaganda they can spin every weather event into a result of global warming.
We had tornados in Kentucky this May. Wow! That never happens.
yay M4GW!!
July 13, 2008 - 00:09 ET by candanceI discovered these guys when I lived in MN and sympathized with them immediately, especially since last winter was the coldest MN had seen in a decade (a little global warming would have been nice).
Glad to see they're getting the attention they deserve.
so the world isn't getting warmer?... is it round or flat?
July 13, 2008 - 23:26 ET by abeautifulpersoni do want to take issue with the 31,000 person survey based on the study done TEN YEARS AGO...
a few important things to know about this study.
yes, it is 10 years old.
more than half the people who signed it, did so 10 years ago.
the scientific paper was deceptively formatted to look like an official document of the NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES. it was not.
of the original 17,000 signers, dr. robinson admitted only 2100 signatories were actually from climate science and it was discovered non-credential signatories existed.
dr frederick seitz initiated the study; was also a paid consultant to RJ REYNOLD TOBACCO Co, from 1979.
writer dr. arthur robinson nor any of the co-authors were climate scientists.
dr. arthur robinson also does not believe in evolution. he believes in intelligent design.
dr. arthur robinson previously concluded that high doses of vitamin C might actually be harmful. he was wrong.
dr. arthur robinson was forced to resign from the LINUS PAULING inst. of Sc + Med, his research labeled as "amateurish" and inadequate.
dr. arthur robinson wrote 2 books on surviving nuclear war, noting that "the dangers from nuclear weapons have been distorted and exaggerated".
i raise these points not to say global warming is happening or its not, but to question this paper and the petition. unfortunately, people like to bandy about information without fact-checking it. when something smells fishy, go fishing.
sources:
http://www.sourcewat...
http://en.wikipedia....
http://naturalscienc...
http://www.desmogblog.com/flawed-oregon-petition-rises-again
http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2006/05/warming200605
non-sequitor much? In the
July 13, 2008 - 23:44 ET by botgnon-sequitor much?
In the End, God will Speak
OMG beauty
July 13, 2008 - 23:46 ET by candanceFirst of all I dunno what 10 year old petition you're going on about because M4GW is just a bunch of guys from Minnesota. We're all here having a good time with a silly video and you go into some tirade about junk science.
And as for your claim that you're not here to defend or deny global warming - that might be believable if you hadn't equated it with still thinking the earth is flat at the beginning of your post. You've given yourself away as believing in GW so no use in acting neutral.
NASA recently confirmed that the earth has been cooling for the past decade. So to answer your question, no, it's not getting warmer.
review the video, listen for the 31,000 'scientist' reference.
July 14, 2008 - 08:33 ET by abeautifulpersonyou're right, i'm not neutral. i am in the loop with real climatologists. the debate only continues to rage in the furthest corners of conservative denial.
but my point was, i didn't want to debate global warming, but merely debunk the pseudo scientific report and the shoddy petition.
fortunately, i can tie in the vast amounts of real science with personal observation. my home town had loads of ice in the bay, in winter. fishermen enjoyed driving onto the ice with their trucks and sitting around a hole hoping a fish came out (personally i don't get it, but...) today, and for a few years now, fishermen are lucky if the ice freezes over at all. from several inches thick to sometimes no ice— in 40 years.
but of course that is anecdotal. and no doubt someone will want to newsbust it.
oh and forgive me in advance if i run away. i have a busy schedule today so if i am silent to the oncoming attacks here, its a time thing, not a running-away-and-crying thing.
cute song btw. it rhymes and everything.
no doubt someone will want
July 14, 2008 - 08:39 ET by Free Stinkerno doubt someone will want to newsbust it.
No, but some of us may ask what you think about the fact that the so-called greenhouse gas Carbon Dioxide accounts for about 4.2-8.4% of the greenhouse effect. Multiply that by the 3.4% of carbon dioxide emitted to the atmosphere annually that Humans can claim responsibility for, and you get a huge 0.2856% of global wrming that is human related. Even if we ignore the fact that Global warming stopped in 1998, worse case is that humans only are responsible for 0.3%
Zero point three percent.
Meanwhile, other planets and satellites are heating up too.
How do you explain that? Ever heard of The Sun?
Since you had to step away, we'll all check back tonight to see what answer you have, if any.
Still Awaiting your answer
July 14, 2008 - 23:48 ET by Free StinkerStill Awaiting your answer . . .
keep waiting
July 15, 2008 - 00:03 ET by abeautifulpersoni've heard this argument before, not touching it. some of those links are a stretch at best.
So you're saying the other
July 15, 2008 - 00:09 ET by Free StinkerSo you're saying the other planets are not warming?
Or that the CO2 numbers are wrong? If so, what are the right numbers?
Although it seems pretty clear that you didn't come here to learn anything, just to regurgitate the same old global warming talking points.
anecdotal evidence
July 14, 2008 - 11:07 ET by candanceWhile I believe your story is true, it may not necessarily be a sign of global warming. Like I mentioned above, last winter in MN was the coldest in a decade, to the point that even Lake Minnetonka almost froze over completely. I saw this with my own eyes.
We were told for years leading up to this that warm weather was coming. Then we get hit with an arctic blast - and still the local weathermen are defiantly saying that unending snowfall in negative temps is somehow proof of climate change.
For every example of a city getting warmer there's another city getting colder. I'm not trying to argue, I'm just telling you the way it is. You keep insisting that the debate is over and pushing critics farther and farther back to the fringes of the right, when many of them are not like that.
And again, if you didn't want to debate global warming then you shouldn't have posted such a rant about science.
tackling shoddy science piece by piece
July 14, 2008 - 11:28 ET by abeautifulpersonits about taking on a very misleading (and arguably purposely dishonest) 'fact' about 31,000 so-called scientists, which initiated my rant. its too bad i came upon this disinformation within the cute ditty on this website, but hey, there you go.
had i come upon very misleading, atrocious statistics which merited being debunked, that liberals were using to support their cause, i would have tackled it, as well. problem is, no one on this site would be able to enjoy it, because it wouldn't be on this site.
i'm an equal opportunity target. liberals and conservatives don't like it (or me) when i counter their points. but i find liberals... ummm a bit nicer. i find conservatives tend to argue in absolutes, moreso (not always). so many things aren't black 'n white.
i find conservatives tend
July 14, 2008 - 11:48 ET by Jack BauerOh... is that what you "find."
Really? Is that an "absolute" from you?
The funny thing is, I find it's leftists who argue in "absolutes."
Take the absolute conviction of so-called "manmade global warming" zealots. Most of them are liberals, right?
Most of them think the debate should be closed down, right.
Think that's seeing things in "black and white"?
So far, you haven't made a
July 14, 2008 - 13:07 ET by NL207So far, you haven't made a single credible argument on this thread. Strictly second stringer stuff. And you want to slug it out with the big boys?
who's a 'big boy', you?!
July 14, 2008 - 18:29 ET by abeautifulpersonha!
Yeah, beauty
July 14, 2008 - 18:32 ET by BlondeNL207 is the big Mac Daddy here.
So....proceed at your own peril.
I, for one, will enjoy the takedown.
David Gregory, do you know which damn network you lie for? ~ Uncle Jimbo, @Blackfive
arguing in absolutes?
July 14, 2008 - 16:15 ET by candanceReally? You mean like saying "the debate is over" and equating Gw skeptics to flat-earthers....that's not painting an issue in black and white?
Insisting that abortion be completely legal with no resrictions for babies born alive, and not giving me the right to keep my tax dollars away from it....that's not defining an issue in black and white?
Wanting to repeal the 2nd amendment and hounding the NRA as a fringe group - that's a more sensitive, nuanced approach?
Throwing pies at Ann Coulter and physically chasing the Minutemen off your campus....that's a complex view of free speech?
Don't sit there and tell me lefties in America really see multiple sides of an issue.
dear me
July 14, 2008 - 23:54 ET by abeautifulpersonyou have be confused with someone else. but then again, we all look the same, don't we?
ABP
July 14, 2008 - 23:57 ET by Free Stinkerthen again, we all look the same, don't we?
No, you Liberals just sound the same because you use the same talking points, instead of thinking for yourselves.
Exactly Free!
July 14, 2008 - 23:58 ET by Dee BunkIt's so easy to get them confused
"Constantly attacking (peaceful) religions rather than politely sharing your own shows lack of faith " DB
you all look the same??
July 15, 2008 - 11:30 ET by candanceLet's go over this very slowly.
You said libs are more open to complex discussion instead of seeing the world in black and white.
I provided several issues that libs tend to approach with a strident "my way or the highway" attitude.
Instead of understanding my point, you took it as a chance to throw a random insult.
Not only do you disappear in the middle of debates, you also enjoy twisting things around to get off topic and paint yourself as the victim. Exhibit B that you are a troll.
Your rant is full of lies
July 14, 2008 - 21:10 ET by PopularTechThe scientists are all real. It is too bad you are so pathetic at searching the Internet all you were able to do was link to a bunch of lies and propaganda smear sites.
You are an equal oppurtunity liar as I have just proven.
I argue in facts.
The Anti 'Man-Made' Global Warming Resource
You're in the "loop."
July 14, 2008 - 11:50 ET by Jack BauerYou're in the "loop." Really?
Well, you're loopy. I'll give you that.
"you're right, i'm not
July 14, 2008 - 13:04 ET by NL207"you're right, i'm not neutral. i am in the loop with real climatologists. the debate only continues to rage in the furthest corners of conservative denial."
You aren't at all in tune with what's going on in the scientific community at large. The "climatologists" are a small, self selected group of scientists. Their views of the magnitude of human contribution to natural climate change are neither shared by the majority in the scientific community nor are they supported by the body of empirical data available. All of the radical doomsday scenarios these people present are based entirely on computer model predictions. These models have all been shown to be flawed and their predictions in the past have been shown to be wrong. In spite of all this, kool-aid kids like you continue to buy the propaganda campaign these people are waging.
Now lets see you debate this topic. This peer-reviewed paper says this in reference to the reliability of Climate Model predictions: "This makes future climate projections not credible"
all the way to greece?
July 15, 2008 - 00:30 ET by abeautifulpersonhow about some homegrown peer-reviewed info.
the EPA: http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/
scientific american: http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=even-skeptics-admin-global-warming-is-real-video
science daily: http://www.sciencedaily.com/videos/2007/0902-our_changing_climate.htm
photos of receding glaciers is just the tip of the iceberg on this site: http://www.worldviewofglobalwarming.org/
are any of these sources credible?
The most moronic reply I have witnessed yet
July 15, 2008 - 00:35 ET by PopularTechYou were asked about Climate Models and come back with random crap that has nothing to do with what was asked.
The Anti 'Man-Made' Global Warming Resource
PT... That's a typical
July 15, 2008 - 00:41 ET by bigtimerPT...
That's a typical leftist for ya'...and a troll to-boot.
Sometimes I can't understand your patient tenacity...but I sure admire it.
"America isn't the problem...America is the solution." ~ Rush Limbaugh
i am in the loop with real
July 14, 2008 - 16:04 ET by Dan The Man 2i am in the loop with real climatologists - A mobius loop? Fourty years is a blink in teh scheme of it all? It was just a few hundred years ago for teh Little Ice age
Nuke em til they glow then shoot em in the dark.
DTM2 modius!! where is he.oh i got worried whew' he's not,
July 14, 2008 - 18:50 ET by upcountrywaterhere..good
Cold and rainy here today (Hawaii), days are getting shorter now freezing weather in Idaho last nite.
NO sun spots today.
Sunspots are late they should have showed up in March
I pray the crops will mature this year.
Liberals62%
IranianUranium
More Petition Propaganda from a Smear Merchant
July 14, 2008 - 21:12 ET by PopularTechArt Robinson Responds to Petition Slander (OISM)
"Only one false name has ever appeared on the petition. It was put there by Ozone Action (now Greenpeace USA) and removed immediately thereafter.
Every listed signer has a university degree in science. The posted listing gives their highest degrees. (MDs were listed only if their underlying degrees were in science.) Thousands of physicists and chemists signed - including about 100 members of the National Academy, about 500 meteorologists and climate scientists, and numerous very eminent people in American science.
...while about 25 have asked to have their signatures removed.
For every signer we have a physical signature mailed to us by first class mail from the signer's address. No one has been listed who did not actually sign - except the Ozone Action signature, which they sent with false credentials, a false address, and a false signature.
The review article sent with the petition could not possibly have been mistaken for a PNAS reprint. I have published many research papers in PNAS. I am very familiar with reprint formats.
The PNAS claim originated because Frederick Seitz - past president of the National Academy and past president of Rockefeller University signed a letter that was circulated with the petition. (Dr. Seitz, like everyone else who has actively opposed the "enviro warmers" has been smeared with many false claims.) Also, the first signers of the petition were several rather famous members of the National Academy.
Neither I nor any of my colleagues at the Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine have ever received any funds whatever from any energy industry corporation. The costs of the petition were born entirely by individual non tax deductible donations to a non tax deductible entity established solely for the petition. No energy industry funds were received."
You can read the truth about the late Dr. Fred Seitz here:
Vanity Scare
And of course you use Alarmist and worthless sources:
Sourcewatch
- Sourcewatch (Discover the Networks)
"SourceWatch seeks to expose what it calls the "propaganda activities of public relations firms" and the activities of organizations working "on behalf of corporations, governments and special interests." These "exposes," which tend to be critical of their subjects, deal predominantly with conservative entities... [...]
As with the online reference Wikipedia, the contents of SourceWatch are written and edited by ordinary Web users.
...The perspectives are mostly leftist; the entries rely heavily on leftist and far-leftist sources."
Says SourceWatch: "You don't need any special credentials to participate -- we shun credentialism along with other propaganda techniques." While stating that it seeks to maintain fairness in the profiles and articles appearing on its website, SourceWatch does acknowledge that "ignoring systemic bias and claiming objectivity is itself one of many well-known propaganda techniques." [...]
Wikipedia
The Faith-Based Encyclopedia (Robert McHenry, Former Editor in Chief, the Encyclopedia Britannica)
Wikipedia's Zealots (National Post, Canada)
- The Real Climate Martians (Financial Post, Canada)
- The Opinionator (Financial Post, Canada)
Wikipropaganda (National Review Online)
DeSmogBlog
Who is James Hoggan? (Financial Post, Canada)
Finally for the truth about Dr. Art Robinson Ph.D. Chemistry:
Art Robinson: A Scientist Finds Independence (American Spectator)
Thanks for the lies as it never gets old showing alarmists the door.
The Anti 'Man-Made' Global Warming Resource
a great collection of sources..
July 14, 2008 - 23:43 ET by abeautifulpersonthanks for taking the time. i hope you don't mind if i don't automatically take your sources as word (and dismiss mine at your say-so). in canada, the NP/FP isn't known to be particularly objective and you already know i think little of dr. robinson and family. its not surprise a contributor to TCS daily came up.
some fascinating reading. and i have learned quite a bit about lawrence solomon. not sure what to think of him yet. he's been influential in the past, but i think - like dennis miller - he's a smart guy who picked the wrong team and is seeing it through. still trying to find his credentials. in his essays he admits his deniers often agree that the planet is heating up fast... but its still just a coincidence with the most human activity in history.
feel free to share your thoughts on the other points i made. thanks for showing me the door. pardon me if i don't take you up on it.
More Rhetoric
July 14, 2008 - 23:50 ET by PopularTechJust like I thought more rhetoric. What did you run out of Wikipedia propaganda?
Oh and please stop with the spin about Solomon, they do not often agree it is heating up 'fast'. Nice change of subject as I realize how embarrassing it is to be proven wrong but you will get over it in time.
The Anti 'Man-Made' Global Warming Resource
abeautifulperson buddies with Giles?
July 14, 2008 - 23:45 ET by PopularTechNow it all makes sense. Your buddy Giles already tried all these lies before and got him no where. Here you come and recycle the same propaganda, typical.
The Anti 'Man-Made' Global Warming Resource
Imagine Better Lyrics
July 13, 2008 - 02:03 ET by nofateImagine better lyrics
it's easy if you tryyyyy
I'm so sick of Imagine
If I hear it one more time I think I'll die
Thank God that someone finally
Penned it a better way!
OK. I'll stop. Too bad we've had to hear over 20 years of this imaginary utopian sophistry masquerading as deep thoughts.
"The future is not set. There is no fate but what we make for ourselves."
michaelyon-online.com
green in the face!
July 13, 2008 - 07:44 ET by Jack BauerFrom those wonderful people now promising you massively undeveloped "alternative" energy to replace all the oil they don't want you to drill up from US territory...
Thanks Barack for your braindead mantra: wind, hyrogen "battery" shamattery cars...
Read .. and laugh at the enviromental cases as another of their great ideas crashes and burns, baby, burns... in just 18 months.
----
July 13, 2008 - 09:12 ET by dahliatraversFrom those wonderful people now promising you massively undeveloped "alternative" energy to replace all the oil they don't want you to drill up from US territory...
Jack, they want us ("Western" countries) to cut our fossil fuel consumption in half by 2050; same for developing countries who are far from our level of comfort in terms of electricity, heat, ac, food. BUT THEY HAVEN'T TOLD US WHAT WE'RE SUPPOSED TO USE IN PLACE OF FOSSIL FUELS. It's the most amazing disconnect. Apparently, we're supposed to get along on half the heat, half the electricity, go to work only half time, eat only half the food. Has there ever been such empty, pointless, dangerous dreaming?
Thank heavens for England, by the way. Given such items as the making of "The Great Global Warming Swindle", you guys clearly haven't fallen for Al Gore and James Hansen's tale quite as much as America has.
dahlia -- Here's a big stat
July 13, 2008 - 09:59 ET by Jack Bauerdahlia -- Here's a big stat that should really make US citizens (and pre-US citizens) sit up and blink rapidly.
The socialism nutcase known as the British Prime Minister, recently announced grandiose plans to spend $200 billion turning the UK into one giant windfarm -- and that's just to supposedly meet 15% of the electrical energy needs of the UK.
Now get this ... the whole of the UK is just a tad smaller than the state of Oregon.
Experts estimate it would take the entire windfarm construction industry of the world, the next 30 years to get anywhere near producing the wind generators needed in the UK alone to meet this nutty target.
And that in real economic terms, THEY ARE NOT VIABLE.
Now think about what Barack Obama says everytime he tries to sell a bill of goods that says what's the point of drilling in ANWR as that will take "ten years" (actually it would take 2 years tops) ... why not develop alternative energy sources?
Well if he's ruled out nuclear, coal and oil fired for electrical generation... what's left? Wind. How long is THAT going to take?
US is a BIG country. UK is a small country. And look at the figures, and the time frames over there.
----
July 13, 2008 - 10:49 ET by dahliatraversOh no. My deep sympathy to the British. I honestly thought Prime Minister Brown was smarter than that.
[Has Al Gore visited England recently? If so, he must have slipped the Prime Minister some cool-aid ...]
Since then, however, the
July 13, 2008 - 09:29 ET by motherbeltSince then, however, the biofuels dream has been disintegrating with
the speed of a collapsing card house. Environmentalists, formerly keen
on this "green energy", expressed horror at the havoc it was inflicting
on the world's eco-systems, not least the clearing of rainforests to
grow fuel crops....
[ ]...
The damage this was inflicting on the
world's poor led a United Nations official to describe the
rush for biofuels as "a crime against humanity".
Ah, yes, the famous "Law of Unintended Consequences"......
Shoot 'em all; let God sort 'em out! - Marge Simpson
Excellent. MORE, MORE...
July 13, 2008 - 09:22 ET by TruthMattersExcellent. MORE, MORE...
That is Great. Should me
July 14, 2008 - 12:59 ET by bassndudeThat is Great. Should me mandatory viewing in public schools!!
Save a SeAL, club a liberal!!