|
The Inflated One will stamp out these small efforts and snort nostrums about 'alternative pristines' and 'environmental energy'. He will do this just to placate those who believe in such phantasms, to keep them grinning and quiet. Whether he actually believes in either one position or the other will not be taken into account. His administration will be remembered for the phrases, "I talked about that" and "What I said was....". It is Nov 20, 2008. Oh, and Miss. "plagued by the ecoterrorism of mountaintop removal", what we are plagued by is the bioterrorism of limb and life and suctioned brain removal in the pristine environment of the womb. Perhaps if tree seedlings were being exterminated...? Or baby fishes...? |
|
Mike,
Lindzen has worked for Exxon, known for their contributions to the global warming denying industry.
So his opinions are a tad suspect.
I'm not citing authority, just good science. |
|
Dear Ms. Sane:
If you don't even know what I was referring to in the "hockey stick", you are very poorly informed on the subject. Now, if you prefer to base your arguement on authority (citing published papers rather than presenting actual arguement/data), I point you to the writings of Richard Lindzen of MIT or John Christie of the U. of Alabama. Both are acutal climate physicists (a long word for a guy like me who can't spell) and strong sceptics of human caused global warming.
You would be correct to say that CO2 measurements (started by Keeling at Mona Loa) have risen about 70 PPMV since the late 50s. CO2 is 0.03% of the atmosphere and apprixmately 18%of that has been contributed by humans. So, humans, at most, have contributed 0.0054% to the atomsphere in the form of added CO2. Hey, I can do arithmatic! But a theory (hypothesis?) has to be backed by real data.
However, the satelite based data hasn't supported the theory and Anthony Watts has repeatedly shown that quality control for the ground based data is very poor. Garbage data in, garbage research out, published or otherwise. |
|
Mike,
I'm sure you're a fine marketer. But I spent most of my career as a scientist.
My doctorate is in physics; I worked mostly in brain and nerve research.
I'm not a climatologist, but I understand the basics of good science.
Every published paper on the subject printed in a peer reviewed journal comes to the same conclusion: that we are warming the planet with our car exhaust and smoke stacks.
I don't know how anything could be more clear.
I don't know about hockey sticks and far less about hockey moms (thank God). Don't get confused by these. No credible scientist disputes the Keeling Curve on which the theory of global warming is based.
Once again, go to Google Scholar and type in "global warming." You'll get some good information.
The EPA is a good place as well. |
|
Ms.Sane Woman:
I probably know considerably more than you do about the data. That's why I can say with confidence taht the data is of poor quality. The hockey stick was discredited, the claim that 1998 was the hotest year on record has been discredited (the hotest was in the 1930s, the HISTORICAL temperature anomolies change each month (makinig the past look cooler) but Hansen refuses to open his algorithms to public review,we know that the locations for collecting temperature do not meet minimum established standards or are not not controlled for changes in the environment over time (resulting in data that compares apples to oranges, if you will) doesn't have a verifiable method to control for the heat island effect of cities or land use patterns, and just this month we find out that October was NOT the warmest October on record due wierdly high temperatures in Russia. Turns out that September's data was simply copied into October. Of course, Hansen's fabulous technology never noticed. It took outside skeptics to find the error.
In marketing (my field) you need unbiased and accurate data to ever hope to make a correct conclusion. You must be able to show the data actually meets that standard. Hansen's has no quality control method for his data. The only source that does is collected by satellite and doesn't show global warming.
Mam, you assume too much and know too little. |
|
|
As far as his rhetoric has told us, Obama will do his best to make sure that this nation is secure economically. It is the #1 goal of his presidency, adn it has to be. If Obama fails to push this through, he will be sending a message out to the nation that he is going to do everything to save this countries financial state, except... |
|
|
What Obama needs to completely understand is the strategic value of domestic energy production. If he wants to carry through with his stated unwise policy of giving credibility to idiots like Hugo Chavez by sitting down to "talk," fine. However, he better talk from a position of strength or Chavez et.al. will go to great lengths to humiliate him and us. |
|
So you say were warming. Then please tell all of us why NASA & Hassen lied about the warming last month when every other temp reading was showing us getting colder. Then hassen lost it when he was proven wrong.
In case you haven't heard. WORLD temps have dropped and we have record early snow arould this planet. |
|
Mike,
Actually there is a lot of very compelling data on global warming. You can find a lot of it by just clicking around on the internet.
The EPA has some to the best material to explain global warming.
http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/basicinfo.html
And if you go to Google Scholar and put global warming in the search box, you'll get an amazing amount of information on the current research. |
|
Very "sane" woman, the globe isn't warming (supporting data is of very poor quality) and replacing oil isn't as easy as going to the moon. Oil, including from shale, is probably much less damaging to environment than any other option out there, including reverting to horse and buggy. Briggsy, get an original thought.
Obama will not allow drilling or shale exploitation or anything else until forced to. Without additional, economically viable, energy sources the economy will revert to "Carter's World". He'll change or be discredited and we'll do what we need to do to develop our resources - of which we have an abundance. As an added benefit, royalties will help keep down taxes. I just wish it were located here in Texas where we control most of our own lands and (by virtue of our treaty with the US) our off-shore territories as well.
However, since coal seam methane works(bacteria in water bearing coals seams break down coal to form methane) would the same process work by injecting coal slurry into depleted oil wells? Just wondering. |
|
|
The American people voted in this past election. And it was a rejection of this very thing that has been taking us down the wrong path for too long. |
|
oil buddies loot public lands.
Hurry, there is still some unplundered wealth belonging to the People and so very little time to steal it! |
|
At this time of increasing warming of the globe, this is exactly what we don't need right now. What Eisenhower did with the highway system and what Kennedy did with the space program, that is what Obama needs to do right now with a clean energy program.
If this country could put a man on the moon in ten years, then we can exchange our outdated mode of energy use to a model of energy generation for the 21st century.
As someone who lives in a state plagued by the ecoterrorism of mountaintop removal, I know we need to do something now. |
|
|
to get the drilling started and not let up. The border is as important-all the bordres. The gulf is very vunerable and florida is a target as well. Obama has to hear us loud and all the time. Flood the White House with e-mails and written letters. Hand written letters are bulky and hard to ignore unlike and email that gets deleted before it's opened. It'll work remember the group who sent thousands of bricks? |
|
|
Obama and Pelosi have both made it clear that no drilling will be allowed and either Congress or Obama will recind it by legislation or executive order. Therefore gas and heating oil will be going up and up and up till they are gone! |
|
|
like we conservatives like to point out, if they had approved drilling in ANWAR in the 80s, we'd be sitting pretty now. |
|
|
|