Skip to main content

Secondary menu

User menu

  • Join
  • OR
  • Log In

MNN - Mother Nature Network

Friday, May 24, 2013
SPECIAL FEATURES:
  • Leaderboard
  • Nest
  • TreeHugger
  • Photos
  • Blogs
  • SB 2013
  • Joy of Less

Search form

Social links

Main menu

  • Earth Matters
    • Browse all »
    • Animals
    • Weather
    • Energy
    • Politics
    • Space
    • Translating Uncle Sam
    • Wilderness & Resources
  • Health
    • Browse all »
    • Allergies
    • Fitness & Well-Being
    • Healthy Spaces
  • Lifestyle
    • Browse all »
    • Arts & Culture
    • Travel
    • Natural Beauty & Fashion
    • Recycling
    • Responsible Living
  • Green Tech
    • Browse all »
    • Computers
    • Gadgets & Electronics
    • Research & Innovations
    • Transportation
  • Eco-Biz & Money
    • Browse all »
    • Green Workplace
    • Personal Finance
    • Sustainable Business Practices
  • Food & Drink
    • Browse all »
    • Beverages
    • Healthy Eating
    • Recipes
  • Your Home
    • Browse all »
    • At Home
    • Organic Farming & Gardening
    • Remodeling & Design
  • Family
    • Browse all »
    • Babies & Pregnancy
    • Family Activities
    • Pets
    • Protection & Safety

Breadcrumb Navigation

MNN.COM › MNN BLOGGERS
    x
  • Tweet
  • Email
  • Bookmark and ShareShare
  • Earn Points
    What's this?
Top 5 billionaires saving the planet
Will it be up to the super-wealthy to step in where government has failed? Watch Planet 100's video countdown.
Fri, Feb 19 2010 at 5:09 PM
 7

Related Topics:

Green Energy, Economics

 
Ralph Nader once said that it would likely be up to a small group of intelligent and wealthy people to save the planet by stepping in when government fails. And that is just what these five men are doing.
 
In the last week two big announcements came from two multibillionaires — Bill Gates, who announced his pledge to find and fund clean energy solutions, and Richard Branson, who announced a "war on carbon" through a Green Capital Global Challenge which will fund the greening of 10 cities around the world.
 
The private sector may lead the way, but can they solve the whole problem? What do you think? Leave comments below.

The opinions expressed by MNN Bloggers and those providing comments are theirs alone, and do not reflect the opinions of MNN.com. While we have reviewed their content to make sure it complies with our Terms and Conditions, MNN is not responsible for the accuracy of any of their information.

Previous Post
Richard Branson declares war on carbon
Next Post
Vancouver: Torchbearer for green cities

You might also like:

Join the conversation

Comments: 7
Sign in with one of these accounts to add your comment.
Log in or
create an account
  • Sign in using this account:
anonymous
Arno Arrak Nov 21 2010 at 7:45 PM
deCristo is talking about Arctic warming which is very real. Problem is he thinks it is part of that non-existent global warming that I spoke about in my original post. This is not the case, for Arctic warming is caused by warm water, not by any imaginary greenhouse effect. Kaufman et al. have determined that it began abruptly at the turn of the twentieth century after a two thousand year, linear, cooling trend. A sudden start requires an equally sudden cause and carbon dioxide simply cannot do that.
.... More
The absorptivity of carbon dioxide in the infrared is a physical property of the gas that cannot be changed. If you want it to absorb more to create a warming you have to put more gas into the air and we know this did not happen. The only other way to start a massive warming suddenly is to direct warm water north. This hypothesis requires that a rearrangement of the North Atlantic current system took place at the turn of the twentieth century which directed the Gulf Stream unto its present northerly course. There is no alternative: carbon dioxide, volcanoes, and the sun are all ruled out as causes of Arctic warming. Which means that no anthropogenic global warming has ever been detected anytime, either now or in the past. Colossal sums of money for "mitigation" or to pay natives for the sin of warming the world, and laws to curb emission are all for nothing because the danger they are supposed to fight is imaginary. You have to go back to the eighteenth century to find a time when the scientific establishment was as misdirected as the global warming advocates are today. The imaginary agent of warmth was then called phlogiston.
|
  • Log in or register to post comments
  • Report This Post 
anonymous
♦Arno Arrak Apr 02 2010 at 5:18 PM
It is amazing how people who have access to the best scientific advice can still be fooled by fake science. I can only conclude that the advice given to them is deceptive and has been corrupted by global warming advocates. This has made them tools of the green propaganda machine. Let me draw the picture. We are supposed to be experiencing a global warming caused by the carbon dioxide greenhouse effect that will eventually make large parts of the earth uninhabitable. In 1988 James Hansen testified
.... More
to the Senate that global warming indeed had started and that its cause was carbon dioxide we were putting into the air. His testimony helped start the IPCC and gave a kick start to the present global warming movement. Global temperature curves from NASA, NOAA, and the Met Office do indeed show a so-called "late twentieth century warming" in the eighties and nineties, just when Hansen spoke. But here is the problem: satellites have also been recording global temperatures and they simply cannot see this warming. What they do see in its place is a temperature oscillation, up and down by half a degree for twenty years, but no rise. This is very different from a steady rise but it has been conveniently ignored by global warming advocates. I have analyzed those curves and concluded that they are all cooked. As in falsifed. But now consider this: if there was no warming in 1988 then there is no basis whatsoever for claiming that any greenhouse warming exists. It simply has not been observed, either then or now. The climate history of our time does show actual warming, a very abrupt warming which started when the super El Nino of 1998 showed up. But its cause was not carbon dioxide in the air but a storm surge in the Indo-Pacific region. This storm dumped much warm water to the beginning of the equatorial countercurrent, and that is where all El Ninos begin. The one-time temperature rise caused by the super El Nino was a full degree Celsius, more than the entire warming recorded for the twentieth century. Its warm water lingered and was responsible for the "twenty-first century high," a run of six warm years that followed. Temperature stayed high but did not rise while carbon dioxide kept increasing at the rate it has been for the last fifty years. But all this came to an end in 2008 when a La Nina cooling appeared. It signified the resumption of the oscillatory climate of the eighties and nineties obliterated by the fake warming of NASA, NOAA and the Met Office. From now on, expect a succession of El Ninos alternating with La Ninas and no carboniferous warming predicted by IPCC. They are part of the ENSO system in the Pacific and have existed since the Isthmus of Panama rose from the sea. For more on this and other important climate features read "What Warming?" available on Amazon.com. My advice to the billionaires is to use it as a guide to our real climate and dump those warmist shills.
|
  • Log in or register to post comments
  • Report This Post 
anonymous
DCristo Jun 19 2010 at 6:43 PM
While I do agree that there is a lack sometimes of big picture investigation into whether global warming is man made, etc...Wouldn't it be more helpful to gather the many things that do indicate a global warming trend along with things that you and others have sited and ACTUALLY put them all on the table and see what we have. So how do you explain the receding of many glaciers across the globe or Greenland residents now being able to grow cabbages. Or for vast expanses of tundra thawing...or for
.... More
the size of the arctic ice sheet thinning. You can say these are all cooked evidence as well...but I am listening. I have no vested interest in weather global warming happens or not. But stop ranting and raving just to be right...which is what it sounds like to me. There are lots of things happening on the globe...not just one thing to indicate a warming...the question is has man caused it. And you are right we are in a natural warming trend regardless of whether man has caused it or not...core samples of Antarctica and Greenland both verify this. But personally if this fiction or not occurrence is man's deal or not...I would rather error on the side of reasonable doubt. And besides it is not like we are living in some blissful harmony on the planet in the first place.
|
  • Log in or register to post comments
  • Report This Post 
anonymous
Guest Nov 21 2010 at 7:41 PM
deCristo is talking about Arctic warming which is very real. Problem is he thinks it is part of that non-existent global warming that I spoke about in my original post. This is not the case, for Arctic warming is caused by warm water, not by any imaginary greenhouse effect. Kaufman et al. have determined that it began abruptly at the turn of the twentieth century after a two thousand year, linear, cooling trend. A sudden start requires an equally sudden cause and carbon dioxide simply cannot do that.
.... More
The absorptivity of carbon dioxide in the infrared is a physical property of the gas that cannot be changed. If you want it to absorb more to create a warming you have to put more gas into the air and we know this did not happen. The only other way to start a massive warming suddenly is to direct warm water north. This hypothesis requires that a rearrangement of the North Atlantic current system took place at the turn of the twentieth century which directed the Gulf Stream unto its present northerly course. There is no alternative: carbon dioxide, volcanoes, and the sun are all ruled out as causes of Arctic warming. Which means that no anthropogenic global warming has ever been detected anytime, either now or in the past. Colossal sums of money for "mitigation" or to pay natives for the sin of warming the world, and laws to curb emission are all for nothing because the danger they are supposed to fight is imaginary. You have to go back to the eighteenth century to find a time when the scientific establishment was as misdirected as the global warming advocates are today. The imaginary agent of warmth was then called phlogiston.
|
  • Log in or register to post comments
  • Report This Post 
anonymous
andy cruz Feb 27 2010 at 1:20 AM
solving it all doesnt bother me. but here in the southern mindanao, Phillipines few friends of our are sharing pennies for us to buy radio airtime for our radio program EQUILIBRIUM for our green advocacy, we are slowly having partnership with GOs, and others for our seed banking, nursery and others, with hope that everyone sees their obligation to save mother nature. if you would like to share more ideas with us please e mail us at brodkaster585@yahoo.com doing our little share could be of help rather
.... More
than just having arguements. lets start doing something for mother nature
|
  • Log in or register to post comments
  • Report This Post 
anonymous
Homeless in America Feb 20 2010 at 4:20 PM

Lotsa people trying to "save the planet."
Who's going to save THE PEOPLE, espec. here in the USofA?
50 million w/o health insurance;
32 million+ below in poverty
20% unemployed and millions homeless or having their homes foreclosed on.
Whither the billionaires? Whither RN? Whither our government?
(Hint: too busy making more moola!)

|
  • Log in or register to post comments
  • Report This Post 
anonymous
Scribhneoir Feb 20 2010 at 8:47 AM

So Gates is - to find and fund clean energy solutions? Doesn't he know that clean solutions have been around for some time now? Why not start by supporting those that already exist? ex pv, domestic wind etc....

|
  • Log in or register to post comments
  • Report This Post 

EDITORS' PICKS

tease weird things

line

tease cellars

line

tease fishing

Advertisement

TODAY'S MOST POPULAR ON

  1. Student science experiment finds plants won't grow near Wi-Fi router
  2. 15 famous people who mysteriously disappeared
  3. 9 habits that may do more harm than good
  4. How to attract spiders to your garden
  5. 10 false facts most people think are true
  6. 13 natural remedies for the ant invasion
  7. Man looks for missing cat, finds 'UFO' instead
  8. World's oldest beehive discovered in ancient church
  9. The 9 nastiest things in your supermarket
  10. Why you should not plant bamboo in your yard
+ Add this to my site

NEWSLETTER

Mother Nature. Delivered
Advertisement
Advertisement
Google Profile

Footer menu

  • Quick Links
    • Joy of Less
    • About Us
    • Advisory Board
    • Editors' Blog
    • Press
    • Privacy
    • Sitemap
    • Terms of Service
  • MNN Tools
    • Advice
    • Blogs
    • Day in History
    • Eco-glossary
    • Infographics
    • Lists
    • Photos
    • Videos
  • Connect
    • The Nest
    • Contact Us
    • Mixed Greens
    • Newsletters
    • RSS
    • Social
    • TreeHugger
    • Mobile
  • Channels
    • Earth Matters
    • Health
    • Lifestyle
    • Green Tech
    • Eco-Biz & Money
    • Your Home
    • Family
    • State Reports
  • Follow MNN
    • Facebook
    • Twitter
    • Pinterest
    • Tumblr
    • Google+
    • StumbleUpon

Copyright © 2013 MNN Holdings, LLC. All Rights Reserved. Website by GLICK INTERACTIVE | Powered by CIRRACORE

SPONSORS