Through Earth's history,the planet has been 6 degrees warmer thousands of times. In addition the polar ice caps have been completely melted away thousands of times, for large periods of time. You climatologists are actually ruining the credibility of REAL SCIENTISTS. Please, STOP!

I am trying to figure out if you are ingorant or have an agenda. Have you ever heard of SOLAR VARIABILITY? It is responsible 91-96 percent of earth's temperature flux, but, I don't see it mentioned. I,also, am not seeing any mention of the INCREASE in the ANTARTIC ICE in the last 14-18 months. What is going on?

Watching the SIX DEGRESS special right now and I'm seeing a HUMMER COMMERCIAL!?!?!?!

Preserve our planet and support your advertisers? Wow -- talk about a mixed message. Credibility just went right out the window!!!

Please, please get rid of the Hummer commercial!! I am very hopeful that the wonderful program you just broadcast will "speak" to some who still don't take global warming seriously, but how can we reach them with such a mixed message. One cannot ask consumers to do everything possible in their lives to prevent the catastrophe and at the same time permit every five minutes an advertiment of the worst polluting car on this planet to muddle the message.

I enjoyed the show, but it left out one very important way that we could significantly reduce global warming-- switching to a plant based diet! They touched on it with the cheeseburger segment, but avoided the details (probably due to the power of the meat industry). Animal agriculture accounts for more global warming gases than all the car emissions in the world. A plant based diet is sustainable. Raising animals for food is a great waste of resources such as land and water and is also a major source of pollution. It takes about 13 pounds of grain to produce 1 pound of beef. If we feed the grain to people rather than to the animals, no one would have to starve. Much of the rainforest deforestation is to make room for cattle. most of the soy beans raised in the Amazon goes to feed farmed animals, not humans. Even reducing meat consumption would be of benefit.

Wow...

I've just finished watching Six degrees yadda, yadda, yadda; and I've come to conclusion that the biggest release of C02 has come from the piles of Bullsh!t that spilled from my TV screen and speakers.

You chicken littles get up on your soapboxes and preach your doom and gloom end of the world warnings as if they are cold hard gospel facts - yet when you predict the horrific peril and ecological diaster the world faces; you use words such as
"might", "could", "pehaps", "maybe", "possibly", "if"; when it comes to global warming/climate change.

So which is chicken littles? Is Global warming a fact? Or a 21st century boogie man you perpetuate to keep those research $$$ from the government rolling in?

I'm just an average joe-six pack, working guy; and I can truthfully say that I do more to reduce my "carbon footprint" (damn, what a bullsh!t phase that is), than you people. I know I do a thousand times more than that gas bag, Al Gore.

I work in Phoenix AZ, a 27 mile commute, and I ride the bus, Five days a week (sometimes on Saturday) I've been doing that for over 15 years.
Can Al Gore boast that? Can that windbag Alec Baldwin (your narrator)? CAN YOU?

I don't think so.

I'm 50 years old, and I remember well the birth of the environmental movement, just as I remember that the chicken littles of that day were predicting Global Cooling, we were all going to day of starvation because a second ice age was going to destroy crops world wide.

And whaddaya know, we're still here.

I've never watched the National Geographic Channel until tonight; and I never will again.

Plus I'll soon be cancelling my subscription to your magazine (I've been a member since 1977), in order to save the world.

I mean after all, if Global Warming is such a horrible monster lurking in the closet, and if we must significantly reduce our carbon footprint; I'm sure you enviromentally concious people at NGS will be more than willing to stop printing your magazine in order to save polar bears and glaciers.

Hey NGC, keep those Hummer commercials going, you can be as hipocritical as Al Gore that way.

Six Degrees would make Joseph Goebbels proud.

I watched 6 degrees last night and was appalled. After the show I was force to spend an extra hour explaining the language used. “Models”, “Could”, “May”. For Pete’s sake. When a MODEL can correctly predict the weather farther out than 3-7 days, then I will listen to “predictions”, until then thanks but no thanks. The Sierra Club can also thank you for my canceling my membership just before this email

I watched Six Degrees on NGC this past weekend, as I usually watch most of NGC's shows on global warming. I may not always agree, I may be skeptical, but the more info I get on either side, the more informed I will be. However, perhaps I didn't notice before, during this airing of a show specifically speaking of global warming and the evils of those creating it, I was astounded to see not one, but two HUMMER commercials. I wasn't just astounded...I was insulted! How can you possible tout the evils of carbon dioxide and fossil fuel consumption, and then sell your souls for the money provided to you through advertising, no matter how unethical. I'm sure the Hummer people are laughing right now. The problem is, they're also laughing at those of us who have a genuine concern for this planet. Thumbing their not-so-green thumb, so to speak. And you let them do it. For money. And what exactly is the problem with getting our environment cleaned up adequately? People out for money???

Hello all,
I may be completely derailed on this train of thought but, I see the focus of fault is now directed to each individual, no longer the responsability of the giant companies dumping waste into the ocean, destroying the ancient forests or, now the giant business of the natural gas industry.
They advertise, as a clean burning fuel, what they fail to mention is the pollution created by the thousands of trucks, heavy equipment and the destruction of our quality of life just to harness a natural resource. (Nature will reclaim itself, it always does, I just hope to fill the void created by the So smart, it's stupid person, these old valcanos don't explode.
There are still a handful of people here that simply want to beleive that people are good at heart and aren't here just to take from our natural enviorment, to turn a profit without, regard to the clean water wich is now contaminated and, flows through the faucets in our homes.
Cleaner burning natural gas, at the price of our clean air and water.
The same rich people that wanted to strip mine Fishers Peak.
Someone, Please explain how, fresh water and air, lost it's importance?

Focus! not on the sponsers but on the message.
sponser something, it's helping something financially, most large companies have people to, take care of each division, most of the time, the business is ran by people that don't even know each other they just get a memo dictating a particular goal, this is relayed to a few individuals without a complete knowlegde of the whole picture. idea's are submitted and without a complete understanding of the particular goal at hand, one is accepted,
then carried out.

Your entire organization should be embarrassed after airing the program “Six Degrees Could Change the World”. The horror visions of a rising sea level, melting pole caps and developing deserts in North America and in Europe are fictitious consequences of fictitious physical mechanisms as they cannot be seen even in the climate model computations. The emergence of hurricanes and tornados cannot be predicted by climate models, because all of these deviations are ruled out. The main strategy of modern CO2-greenhouse gas defenders seems to hide themselves behind more and more pseudo explanations, which are not part of the basic science portion of academic education. Good examples are the radiation transport calculations, which are probably not known by many. Another example is the so-called feedback mechanisms, which are introduced to amplify an effect which is not marginal but does not exist at all. Evidently, the defenders of the CO2-greenhouse thesis refuse to accept any reproducible calculation as an explanation and have resorted to irreproducible ones.

As far as CO2 is concerned, it is not a pollutant. In simple terms, CO2 is an integral component of the survival of plants. No CO2, no plant life. No plant life, no humans. Why has National Geographic made every effort to ignore this basic scientific fact?

Thus, I ask that National Geographic provide the scientifically valid data that proves the causal link between CO2 levels and changes in global average temperatures. And, by proof, I do not mean the output of climate models.

I will be waiting for the National Geographic response to my request...