What Happened To Global Warming, it's NOT!!

Status
Not open for further replies.

Comments on his views tell it all::suspicious:
Showing comments 66-95 of 386<< PreviousNext >>
Sort: first to last

  • Richard - Tuesday, December 15, 2009, 9:05PM ET Report Abuse
    • Overall: 4/5
    Great points. Add more benefits (a) reduce imports of oil, (b) improve balance of trade, and (c) create US jobs as we pursue what will obviously be a leading industry of the next 100 years - alternative energy. Someone should tell Congress.

  • Yahoo! Finance User - Tuesday, December 15, 2009, 8:56PM ET Report Abuse
    • Overall: 1/5
    This writer immediately identifies himself as naive as to the scientific process, in stating "All reasonable evidence suggests that climate change poses serious, long-term harm." Evidence is not reasonable, or unreasonable. It is either evidence, or not evidence. The strength of a scientific law is the lack of disproof, not proof. This is not consensus building. This writer attemps to use the typical fear tactics, trying to sell the reader on the idea that we have the computer models to prove that any climate change is the result of human endeavor. It seems so logical that if we have climate change, it is due to human activity. Show me the evidence.!! I also hold a "Pile it Higher & Deeper" degree!!

  • LoricM - Tuesday, December 15, 2009, 8:49PM ET Report Abuse
    • Overall: 1/5
    Cap and trade is a scam. It will just create a product that can be traded around and taxed. One business that has excess carbon credits just sells them to another business but no carbon is saved. Guess who will be a big player in the carbon credit trading. You guessed Goldman Sachs! The same people who brought us this economic depression we're enjoying right now. They'll get really creative with it too and package all those credits into derivative packages that can be sold and insured and sold again. Oh man those people are almost drooling over this deal and you can bet they've got their hands in what's going on in Copenhagen right now.
 
If there's one thing I've learned over the years it's that education as validated by a degree does not necessarily make one smart. That holds true all the way up to PhD's. :rolleyes:
 
That's for sure...memorizing and passing a test etc to get another degree...only prooves dicipline. It also doesn't mean one will act smart or make the right decisions..case in point ..our current leader. He is surrounded by social types, so his decisions are skewed toward that way of thinking...no matter how well educated he his...it doesn't mean nothing. "Common sense goes along way" Me
 
Obama is in Denmark...promising money for developing countries to lower the carbon output...I guess that means less cows....CO2 output. Alot of them in Africa barely eat now, and we think they are going to choose global warming over food and medicine...get real. China...has the same problems....they are currently going thru the Industrial Revolution like the US did...and uses coal substantially, like we did. They will say yes...and do little! But it all will look good to the earth people and be written down in the history books! Oh what a success! BS.
 
way back when, all the malcontents used to joke "pretty soon they'll figure out how to tax the air we breathe".

i should have seen this coming when slick willie said he didn't inhale on opposite day. little did i know at the time but it was a tip-off to the banksters to get in on the whole exhaling carbon thing. good thing his domestic partner gots a good job, she can afford to cover his unpaid emmissions.

well we can't tax-and-trade backside bodily emmissions, that would be an intrusion of the whole personal biological-atmospheric interface, don't ask don't smell, besides who cares what folks do in the privacy of their own homes. but in public at the discount retailer, now that's a different story. them mouth breathers better get ready to pony up because we all know the nasal whiners are better filtered, graduated scale gonna be applied.
 
Looks as if Copenhagen is null, some agreements were made but none are binding. That means they all know it's crap and agreed to get the GREENIES off their backs. Another nail in the coffin of injustice!! I'm happy!!! false%20teeth.gif
 
Looks as if Copenhagen is null, some agreements were made but none are binding. That means they all know it's crap and agreed to get the GREENIES off their backs. Another nail in the coffin of injustice!! I'm happy!!! View attachment 7671

All those numbnuts there in Copenhagen, need to go down the street to some of those fine cafe's and chill out..if ya know what I mean..
icon_pimp.gif
 
All those numbnuts there in Copenhagen, need to go down the street to some of those fine cafe's and chill out..if ya know what I mean..
icon_pimp.gif
No problem chillin' out in Copenhagen, coldest winter in 15 years helps!!:laugh::laugh::laugh:
 
Looks as if Copenhagen is null, some agreements were made but none are binding. That means they all know it's crap and agreed to get the GREENIES off their backs. Another nail in the coffin of injustice!! I'm happy!!! View attachment 7671

Lets hope it stays non-binding, because we could use our tax dollars that bHo want to give away to countries, that probably hate us anyway, :mad: All this money for a scam.

Charity begins at home and I'm sure if common sense ever sets in, Congress could definately find uses for this money for our own citizens, but the socialists just want to redistribute the wealth, so that means lets keeps sticking it to us with higher taxes. What the heck is going on in this country that so many people seem to be ok with this. :confused: Have we raised a bunch of socialists?

Plus, we just don't have all this money that our socialist leader is promising to our enemies. Where do you think it's coming from? I vote for hugher taxes on us and especially our children's future. I wonder if our children understood what some we are doing to their future they would be thanking us. But first we have to have some understanding and not be so dad burn naive. :(

"Obama's day of hectic diplomacy produced a document promising $30 billion in emergency aid in the next three years and a goal of channeling $100 billion a year by 2020 to developing countries with no guarantees."

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/12/19/obama-brokered-climate-deal-threat-copenhagen/

Lets hope some common sense sets in and bHo is unable to do another US Constitutional run around.
 
I wonder how long the Government (EPA) and others have been hiding any scientific studies that disagreed with their Carbon Based Global Warming, or Climate Change doctrine?:nuts: COOKING THE BOOKS!! 20arr1.gif

June 26, 2009 11:09 PM
EPA May Have Suppressed Report Skeptical Of Global Warming


Posted by Declan McCullagh
image2221856x.jpg
(CBS/AP/iStockphoto)​

The Environmental Protection Agency may have suppressed an internal report that was skeptical of claims about global warming, including whether carbon dioxide must be strictly regulated by the federal government, according to a series of newly disclosed e-mail messages.

Less than two weeks before the agency formally submitted its pro-regulation recommendation to the White House, an EPA center director quashed a 98-page report that warned against making hasty "decisions based on a scientific hypothesis that does not appear to explain most of the available data."

The EPA official, Al McGartland, said in an e-mail message to a staff researcher on March 17: "The administrator and the administration has decided to move forward... and your comments do not help the legal or policy case for this decision."

The e-mail correspondence raises questions about political interference in what was supposed to be a independent review process inside a federal agency -- and echoes criticisms of the EPA under the Bush administration, which was accused of suppressing a pro-climate change document.

Alan Carlin, the primary author of the 98-page EPA report, told CBSNews.com in a telephone interview on Friday that his boss, McGartland, was being pressured himself. "It was his view that he either lost his job or he got me working on something else," Carlin said. "That was obviously coming from higher levels."

E-mail messages released this week show that Carlin was ordered not to "have any direct communication" with anyone outside his small group at EPA on the topic of climate change, and was informed that his report would not be shared with the agency group working on the topic.

"I was told for probably the first time in I don't know how many years exactly what I was to work on," said Carlin, a 38-year veteran of the EPA. "And it was not to work on climate change." One e-mail orders him to update a grants database instead.

For its part, the EPA sent CBSNews.com an e-mailed statement saying: "Claims that this individual’s opinions were not considered or studied are entirely false. This Administration and this EPA Administrator are fully committed to openness, transparency and science-based decision making. These principles were reflected throughout the development of the proposed endangerment finding, a process in which a broad array of voices were heard and an inter-agency review was conducted."

Carlin has an undergraduate degree in physics from CalTech and a PhD in economics from MIT. His Web site lists papers about the environment and public policy dating back to 1964, spanning topics from pollution control to environmentally-responsible energy pricing.

After reviewing the scientific literature that the EPA is relying on, Carlin said, he concluded that it was at least three years out of date and did not reflect the latest research. "My personal view is that there is not currently any reason to regulate (carbon dioxide)," he said. "There may be in the future. But global temperatures are roughly where they were in the mid-20th century. They're not going up, and if anything they're going down."

Carlin's report listed a number of recent developments he said the EPA did not consider, including that global temperatures have declined for 11 years; that new research predicts Atlantic hurricanes will be unaffected; that there's "little evidence" that Greenland is shedding ice at expected levels; and that solar radiation has the largest single effect on the earth's temperature.

If there is a need for the government to lower planetary temperatures, Carlin believes, other mechanisms would be cheaper and more effective than regulation of carbon dioxide. One paper he wrote says managing sea level rise or reducing solar radiation reaching the earth would be more cost-effective alternatives.

The EPA's possible suppression of Carlin's report, which lists the EPA's John Davidson as a co-author, could endanger any carbon dioxide regulations if they are eventually challenged in court. [more]
http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2009/06/26/politics/politicalhotsheet/entry5117890.shtml
 
Funny how they changed from Global Warming to Climate Change? I guess now they can fix the Global Cooling thing too?:laugh:



Copenhagen climate summit held to ransom - Gordon Brown


_46962979_008438459-1.jpg
Gordon Brown wants lessons to be learned from "tough negotiations"

Gordon Brown will accuse a small group of countries of holding the Copenhagen climate summit talks to ransom. The 193-nation conference ended with delegates simply "taking note" of a US-led climate deal that recognised the need to limit temperature rises to 2C.
The prime minister is expected to say in a podcast that at times he feared no deal would be reached at all.
Energy Secretary Ed Miliband called it a "chaotic process", singling out China for vetoing an agreement on emissions.
'Never again'
Mr Brown and Mr Miliband, in an article in The Guardian, both raise the prospect of altering the way negotiations on climate change are run.
But they believe a diluted deal was better than nothing at all.
BBC political correspondent Laura Kuenssberg says politicians were "pointing the finger" after the disappointment of the outcome of the summit.
The prime minister will say: "Never again should we face the deadlock that threatened to pull down these talks.
"Never again should we let a global deal to move towards a greener future be held to ransom by only a handful of countries."
He said lessons must be learned from the "tough negotiations" that took place in Copenhagen.
Mr Miliband said the vast majority of countries wanted a legally-binding treaty to protect the planet.
Developing countries
But he wrote: "Some leading developing countries currently refuse to countenance this.
"That is why we did not secure an agreement that the political accord struck in Copenhagen should lead to a legally binding outcome.
"We did not get an agreement on 50% reductions in global emissions by 2050 or on 80% reductions by developed countries.
"Both were vetoed by China, despite the support of a coalition of developed and the vast majority of developing countries."
The accord was reached between the US, China, India, Brazil and South Africa, but is not legally binding.
China's Foreign Minister, Yang Jiechi, praised the summit in a statement which said: "Developing and developed countries are very different in their historical emissions responsibilities and current emissions levels, and in their basic national characteristics and development stages.
"Therefore, they should shoulder different responsibilities and obligations in fighting climate change."
"The Copenhagen conference is not a destination but a new beginning," he added.
United Nations Secretary General Ban Ki-moon says the agreement must be made legally binding next year.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/8423831.stm
 
Hey CB/CH...check out that amazing "parallel channel" forming within your quoted sources:

BHO's $30B/$100B figures:
"Obama's day of hectic diplomacy produced a document promising $30 billion in emergency aid in the next three years and a goal of channeling $100 billion a year by 2020 to developing countries with no guarantees."

Ethiopian PM MZ's identical figures (prior to BHO's):
"Ethiopian Prime Minister Meles Zenawi—who is representing all of Africa here—unveiled his proposal Wednesday for a system in which rich countries would provide money to poor ones to help deal with the effects of climate change. ... Zenawi said he would accept $30 billion in the short term, rising to $100 billion by 2020."

Looks like a manufactured "Santa rally" - on US tax dollars?! :p :suspicious: :mad:
 
Hey CB/CH...check out that amazing "parallel channel" forming within your quoted sources:

BHO's $30B/$100B figures:
"Obama's day of hectic diplomacy produced a document promising $30 billion in emergency aid in the next three years and a goal of channeling $100 billion a year by 2020 to developing countries with no guarantees."

Ethiopian PM MZ's identical figures (prior to BHO's):
"Ethiopian Prime Minister Meles Zenawi—who is representing all of Africa here—unveiled his proposal Wednesday for a system in which rich countries would provide money to poor ones to help deal with the effects of climate change. ... Zenawi said he would accept $30 billion in the short term, rising to $100 billion by 2020."

Looks like a manufactured "Santa rally" - on US tax dollars?! :p :suspicious: :mad:

Unfortunately it's our children's tax dollars and future that is manufacturing this rally and bHo and his socilaist flunkies could really care less what they are dong. :mad:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top