-
RSS Subscribe
-
The Global Warming Consensus Nuts Just Lost
This article is to point the folly of Al Gore and the rest of you dolts that have bought the mantra of Global Warming – Hook, Line and Sinker. The big crime is the assertion that this is “settled science.” It is not only now called into question by the group from which the assertion first came, but also is starting to lean in the direction that and degree of settlement on the science is in the direction the point that Global Warming if it indeed exists is not man made HERE. Are 50,000 Physicists enough to shut up the lie that the scientific community is in consensus on Global Warming?
For goodness sake, what is settled is the fact that man’s unique contribution to the carbon in the atmosphere is limited to 2-3 percent. Now for those of you that hold the arrogant view of the mainstream on Global Warming and think the rest of us are right wing nuts should read the link below and crawl back into your hole of ignorant bliss.
comments
11 Responses to “The Global Warming Consensus Nuts Just Lost”
Leave a Reply
i am not denying the political pull that global warming has on science. i see the stuff myself where i work. however, i can say that the push to conserve our resources, use them wisely and effeciently as well as putting the “conserve” back in conservative is imperative. i think this applies to lifestyle choice rather politics. i know that q and i have enjoyed the financial as well as relational benefits of “cutting our carbon footprint”, recycling, starting our sustainable garden and other green thumb projects. we have really enjoyed the peace of mind, financial savings and enjoyment of gardening without using pesticides and the like. how this pertains to the warming of our planet, well, we have cut back our carbon use, but i am not convinced that even if half the population was as intentional as us, it would make much of a “dent” in the overall emissions of our country alone. things get really dicey when russia, india, brazil and china are included in the global carbond scheme
Hi Matt……… I don’t see a thing wrong with the personal lifestyle changes that you and Q have made and the favorable impact it has made on your lives, but that is altogether a different question than the one at hand. I’m here and now saying that the “man made global warming” issue is “man made scaremongering” (and for personal gain by some). I cringe when I hear you and other say we are reducing emissions and I think of that point as being “emissions” are not the problem. No problem with you or anyone reducing them, but if we are talking about “carbon” emissions I must yawn. They are neither a pollutant nor significant contributor to overall carbon accumulation in my opinion.
If we want to clean up our rivers and streams in the name of the environment, or clean up the atmosphere from chemical discharges, etc. or the likes of that, well then sign me up. But the discussion of reducing or carbon footprint or emissions feeds into the political agenda of the left and propagates the myth, thus itself becoming political.
Matt, I think this GW scare is going to go down as another big leftist canard. I only hope I live long enough to see it. I’m sure you will. Hope all is well on the baby front………………steve
i guess that i might have mistakenly used the carbon emmission. to me it means cutting back your usage for non-political purposes. that is saving money, buying local rather than overseas shipped merchanside, being practical about transportation and the like. the whole idea behind the gw bandwagon for the sake of politics is odd to me. why cut back when the green elite are taking private jets, have enormous homes etc. to me, the carbon emission thing is pertinant to conservation of resources not political ideology.
here is an example… i bet the food coming out of local farms is more nutrient dense and significantly more flavorful than anything that requires shipping. last year, q and i went to kauai, hawaii and the mango, pineapple, bananna fruits and even the steaks and fish tasted more flavorful and sustained us longer when we ate there. now, if one is obliged to ship food, it picks up transportation costs such as decompostion in transit, the odd taste of exhaust trapped in containers and the process of food decomposition (ethylene common to green veggies). these foods come out flat in more ways than one. so, buying local preserves the common community farmer as well as acts as a supply/demand force that only consumers can exhert.
hopefully, this short explanation of reducing carbon emissions makes sense. to me, the political kind for the sake of glamour, being cool or bandwagon jumping is idiocity. and wheter or not people like it, planting more trees would help. trees love to eat up carbon sources and grow stronger, faster in such nutrient dense soils and air. quite the socio-economic quagmire when science muddies the waters.
Hey Matt………I know where you are coming from. We should all be conservationists as I believe you are saying. We should do so for both personal and public reasons. The GW thing is a scam of a different order in my opinion. This is not to say that I don’t believe there is GW (there might be, we have long cycles of Global Warming then Global Cooling and we are undoubtedly between those two extremes at this point and moving probably towards the warming side). This is the snake oil salesman’s golden opportunity to jump on the point and sell the phony elixir after sinking the hook (selling the fear). The left led by Gore are the ones responsible for this. It wouldn’t be so bad if it wasn’t for the the fact that the elixir will have a major detrimental economic effect on the world with the most acute on the under economic classes. But it may be worth it since Al Gore may get rich and can lie about reducing his personal footprint at his own home while actually expanding it by 10% and then riding jets and limos to within a few blocks of a venue he is speaking at and change into a hybrid car. He’s a great American and even deserves (correction won) the Nobel Peace Prize. (I can’t believe what gullible fools we have in the world and in the US).
BTW…..thanks for the nice phone message when I was in the Hospital. Got home the night before last and I am totally anemic. I lost 1/2 my blood supply and took 4 units of blood in Transfusion. I’ll need some time to recover fully, but the good news is that the biopsy was negative………………steve
It’s interesting to look at the lazer-like focus on carbon as the element/compound to reduce. What about methane? It’s more damaging to the environment than carbon, and Europe produces much more of it than carbon. It just so happens the reverse is true about the US.
Steve, hope you have an expedient recovery.
Thanks Bryan glad to hear from you……..steve
methane is CH4 and it is one of the carbon emissions in question. pure carbon (meaning carbon black, graphite or diamond are relatively inert to the environment, that is in human terms… diamond transforms into its allotrope graphite in about 1300 years. de beers got it wrong, graphite is “forever”) the carbon emissions (methane gas CH4, carbon dioxide CO2 and the like are a catch 22. trees use, need and thrive under saturated conditions. however, too much throws other ecosystems out of balance. that is where other gases such as SO, SO2 NO, NO2 and the like dont get used, absorbed or converted. what we have here is a political, socio-economic mess with science being misused on both sides. the green elite hide info pivital to the role of the sun and earth, and the gw deniers downplay the fact that over-extended energy policies and drilling us out of the problem are short-term answers. i guess what is the best is to let the free-market present viable energy solutions. until then, washington will butcher the economics and science while the privileged few will make buckets of money at the expense of the middle class consumers.
and, steve, glad to hear that you are well. do yourself a favor and eat a high iron meal. green leafy veggies, lentils, or a steak if the docs say you can have it. and q and i are praying that you will live long enough to see the canard flop, that way, you can tell us and our kids you called it back in 08… the baby is fine, but q’s appetite for anything garlic, salt or sugary treat is through the roof
Hi Matt……….there you go again proving why you are smarter than the rest of us. Can’t do the green leafy’s because I’m on blood thinners and the K in the GL is an antidote for the coumanin. Glad the Baby is fine. At least the garlic will keep those pesky vampires away………….steve
Hi Steve,
I didn’t know you were sick, which is good because it saved me all that worrying. Still, even only knowing about it at this late date, I’m definitely glad you’re on the mend! Oh, go garlic!
You are correct on the Global Warming issue. It’s interesting to note just how lame the data used to support the Global Scam is, consisting as it does of such limited information that, in many cases, temperature readings from one weather station are assumed to be correct for an a 500 km radius around it, and that subsurface ocean temperatures accurately reflect air temperature above the sample point. This is much the same as my doctor looking at my bald spot and concluding all my body hair is falling out.
Hi Grit……Yeah, I know…..I think I read about this on your blog one time, maybe it was your “Global Warming Resistance” blog……steve
Hi matt,
The key point in your attempt to be conscientious about your life is that you chose to do so. The Global Warming Fanatics aren’t all that big on free will, and are hell bent on making us behave like they think we should, for our own good, of course.
On the other hand, since we (as in the world population) can’t seem to control our reproductive habits, a lot of the Global Warming junk turns out to have unintended merit. Mostly this comes from pointing out that we need to diversify the sources of energy on which our civilization relies, for strategic national defense reasons if nothing else. Fortunately, science is once again coming to our rescue, Solar power, for instance, has just taken a giant step forward with the introduction of low cost thin film solar panels. At the moment, they’re not as efficient as the old silicon crystal ones, but they are much less expensive to make, and even less costly to install. A really cool side note is that they can be produced with ink jet printers, using the right ink and paper substitute! One of the leading companies in this area, Nanosolar, if memory serves, which is owned by Google, won’t even give price quotes because their entire production for the next year has already been purchased. Oh, even cooler is that these solar cells are flexible, and can be bonded onto a cloth backing and worked into everyday items. For instance, you can now buy a backpack that has a solar cell on top that produces enough electricity to keep your cell phone charged. Another example is that the Army is working on a new tent with solar cells on the outside that will keep all of a solder’s electronic devices charged.
Hi bd,
On top of that, why are the Climate Change Alarmists afraid to take carbon sinking into consideration? The US, for instance, takes more carbon out of the atmosphere, according to some estimates, through our enormous amount of forested area and even larger agricultural production, than we release from burning fossil fuels. Heck, even my small farm sucks 30-40 tons of carbon out of the atmosphere every year just from hay production, and I would bet that our 50 acres of forest soak up even more than that. On the bright side, when the Government gets around to legislating a carbon trading system, I’ll make big money selling people assurances that I won’t cut down trees I wasn’t going to cut anyway
the Grit
quoting the Grit, “On the other hand, since we (as in the world population) can’t seem to control our reproductive habits, a lot of the Global Warming junk turns out to have unintended merit.”.
I saw an article last week noting that despite the famines and civil wars in Africa, the population on the dark continent has more than doubled in the past 60 or so years. In contrast, during the Irish potatoe famine, the population of the emerald isle nearly immediately shrank by 30%.
Can’t agree with you more about the vast green tracts of land in the US removing lots of carbon from the atmosphere. Hope to see that continuing for a long time to come. Did you get a chance to read the Fast Company article on carbon trading? Looks to be shaping up to be another case study of what happens when all the smart guys get together in the same room.
Thanks for the post. You should probably check this out….
http://wattsupwiththat.wordpress.com/2008/07/22/roy-spencers-testimony-before-congress-backs-up-moncktons-assertions-on-climate-sensitivity/
John………glad to hear from you after a while, with me mostly away from blogging. Thanks for the Link to Spencers testimony. The liberals are going to have their hands full trying to descredit the thousands of scientists that now doubt mans resonsibility for global warming. It is sort of like them trying to blame high gasoline prices on Bush. Hope America is as stupid as I sometimes fear………..steve
Energy efficiency & conservation serves us economically & politically regardless of any climate change drama.
Identify a problem & then fix it in that order.
We have serious energy problems…
Who wants to be a part of the greatest transfer of wealth in the history of mankind? Not me…
I’ve been waiting seven plus years for BushCo to step up & address this responsibly (or address it at all).
Steve you can stay on this boggieman global warming thing hell bent on discrediting the “left” & keep your eye off the ball, but I refuse to.
We’ve talked about this on NSL for years now. Shift your focus…
Meanwhile Chavez & the rest of the arms race kooks out there & getting filthy rich on our backs.
It’s sickening!
& it’s not “offshore drilling”… That will have a marginal affect on our problem… We need to develop ALTERNATIVE forms of energy! Some mistakes (Ethanol) will be made as we hasten ourselves to do so, but lets keep it moving (progress) & continue to explore. Not cram our heads back up our collective a$$es & head back to bed with the oil barons.
Steve you’re caught up on “stop blaming Bush, it’s not his fault… the lefties are scamming us to get rich, there’s no such thing as global warming, gas should be five bucks a gallon blah blah blah”
Who cares?
This needs to shift from winning a debate or court case to changing the world.
It’s the year 2008 AC for crying out loud… Can we figure out our energy problems properly already… My Gawd!
Good to be back… I think? -M
M2………..Welcome back. Lot here, don’t know where to begin. Main theme. I’d move ahead, love to………but the GW crowd won’t so I’m not going to let them translate junk science into fully implemented Koyto while exempting China and India without comment, and more comment. They are idiots and it should have been apparent when Gore started lying about “settled science” and the minions fell in line with their renewed talking points. Gore won’t debate anyone with knowledge on the matter and will soon be know as an honorary member of the Flat Earth Society.
If you limit the argument to the inaccurate narrow issues you can win the debate, but the argument is not “offshore” drilling. It is combined approach to drilling, shale, nuclear, wind and oh yes if you like ALTERNATIVE DEVELOPMENT. What is dishonest is when they pretend that the Alternative Development is sufficient, but lie that drilling won’t solve the problem of high prices. (they don’t want it to) When you give me a date on Alternative Availability, I’ll shut up on conventional fuels as well. The left is obscuring the issue by stating we can’t have any of the additional supplies for 10 years. GROSS overstatement……..some in as little as 2-3 years. Of course they used the same argument back in 94-95 when Clinton vetoed the Anwar drilling legislation (passed by the Republicans). They said it would take 10 years then as well……….that argument rings a little hollow now 13 years later when we are in an energy crisis and our national security is at risk.
We have more energy in this country if you count shale and off shore than the Middle East. Of course the Democrats want the existing leases to be drilled first. I’m sure you have figured out why…….. They don’t want any more oil in this country so change the topic and make “big oil” drill where they know it doesn’t exist or at least isn’t likely in order to buy time till the next election. Can you imagine those “barons” your reference sitting awash on all those oil leases and not drilling with gas around $4.00. Sounds like Reid is trying to pass one by the ignorant masses as though they have plenty of oil they can drill……….He is a bigger liar than you might say Bush is. But at least he is in sympathy with Pelosi who is only trying to save the planet.
Obama said it right when he stated that the problem with $4.00 oil was the rapidity of the price rise. High energy prices are their policy any way you summarize their (D) previous statements but they are trying to blame Bush for high prices. I know that Bush’s energy policy isn’t the same as yours, but common, you can’t say that he has no policy because he doesn’t support yours.
Obama’s policy. High prices. Punish Big Oil with windfall taxes. Re-distribute and pretend it is an energy policy, not just some socialist ruse. I did finally hear what “windfall profits” could be defined as by those operatives in the Obama camp (he never directly associates his name with these canards). Since the profit as a percent of Sales is rather normal in the Oil industry, they are now complaining about rate of return on Invested Capital, which they state is 31%. I’ve been looking over some Hollywood statistics on “movie production” When you look at their moderately successful movies as well as the blockbusters and add up production, marketing and distribution costs, you will find that they make 31% look like underperformance. I’d like at least the Congress be honest and fair (if they want to meet Constitutional muster) and say that they will apply the “windfall profits tax” to any industry that exceeds 31% (wait the number must be lower or you don’t pick up any revenue………..ok lets say 25% and tax heavily the difference between 25 and 30………..ah hell, lets just take it all. At that point you would hear the Movie Industry screaming, not to mention the Rolling Stones, Madonna, Bradolina, and others. Especially since everyone knows that taxes are not passed on to consumers by the corporate payers and that high taxes encourage energy development…………………..I think these guys (especially Obama) studied economics at KinderCare.
But just the same it is time to move on (not capitalized) since it is 2008 and change the world (with change we can believe in). But one caution………don’t let your political emotions get out in front of sound economic theory and reality………..steve
P.S. again sorry for the rant, must be that ½ tank of blood I’m working on.
P.S.S. B-T-W……..I was listening to Air American on XM Satellite and they had some idiot fielding calls on “Big Oil” and they seemed to be concluding that the US should (to use one prominent Democrats word) “Socialize” the oil Industry. (I think what they meant was Nationalize). Though they are in love with Cuba and Venezuela they fail to understand that this is the United States and when this country confiscates property from people they actually “pay” for it under the doctrine of eminent domain. This would probably come as a bit of surprise to them, but I wondered if their tune would change if they realized that the U.S. Treasury would be turning over 1-2 Trillion Dollars to those people they hate, the owners of Big Oil.
P.S.S.S. Speaking of Talk Show Hosts, you will be humored to know that on the Saturday night of the U.S. Open (it ran to 9PM EST) my wife and I spent the evening sitting with Rush Limbaugh eating, drinking and watching the match at Nick & Johnnies on Palm Beach. He was a totally great, humble and charming guy. His girlfriend is a real babe too. When the Band started at 9 PM Susan and his girl danced (to a Gloria Gaynor number). Nick & Johnnies is the latest “hot” spot on Palm Beach and occupies the space that Chuck & Harrolds did before the fire.
I have pretty thick skin & usually only just think of having to take a shower after reading most of NSL’s content
…
I actually did take a shower after reading the P.S.S.S…. I do feel a little better now.
Oh & gas could be seven bucks a gallon for all I care… (Actually should be). I’m just simply worried about our dependence on it… & the fact that we refuse to even properly discuss fixing the problem of dependence… & then there’s always the people we tend to depend on for it (all while we borrow money from China to do it).
Does Hollywood get crazy tax breaks & government kick backs? Probably…
M2………Hollywood Tax Breaks………dunno, but they are making much more of a windfall than 31% ROI, how unconscionable.
Anyway we would be far less dependent on ME Oil and China financing had Clinton not vetoed the Anwar legislation in 95. But alternative energy is like the Aids cure. Not there yet on either front and we must do something to cope with until we get there. If you have the science worked out, put it on the table and get rich and shut up us unreasonable right wingers.
Also, if gas was $7 per gallon we would be in a real economic crisis of the 30’s magnitude with the least suffering the most, but for “all you care” why should I mention it. But then you might feel better given your blind faith in Global Warming being caused by fossil fuels.
Thought you would appreciate the PSSS. ……….steve
“given your blind faith in Global Warming being caused by fossil fuels.”
Never said that… I’m of the “practice conservation” just because it’s the right thing to do crowd (the reason for my seven bucks a gallon comment). Something you’d like to think “conservatives” would embrace? Oh but wait, conservatives are supposedly wealthy & the wealthy benefit when the masses consume product they control…
M2……….I’ll interline my response………….$7 bucks a gallon will be in fact the final swan song for those impoverished masses that you seem to blame on the sucessful or rich.
There’s always a reason why (Clinton fingerpointing), but never a solution (well, I suppose status quo & procrastination while the system in place milks record profits during its swan song is the solution?) when debating any problem… But it’s hard to find a solution when your department of energy has forty some odd “energy crisis summit meetings” with the oil industry & (to my knowledge) three with the alternative energy crowd in seven plus years.
If you are looking for the government (i.e. dept of energy) to solve the energy crisis you really need to go back to the 101 class. The solution will not come from Govt or the Oil industry, but entrepreneurital Capitalism, but if I had the perfect solution today and the capital, given the infrastructure of existing autos that everyone owns and is making installment payment for and the distribution system that is in place it will take 15-20 years to evolve as the replacement and render the oil industry to buggy whips, though industries like airlines, etc will take much more time and the fossil fuels will still be needed. In the interim I doubt even you will enjoy paying $7 per gallon especially on the left coast and that will be the end of the middle class, not so much because they are spending all their money on gas, but because the economy will slow and go into retrograde and totally wipe out the Middle Class……………don’t you see that?
& the least have been suffering the most since the advent of capitalism… It’s part of the deal. The problem is when the least have a slimmer & slimmer chance at acquiring “the American dream” with each passing generation when the exact opposite is supposed to be the way capitalism actually works. Rich stay rich, poor stay poor, middle class dwindles… Nice little cycle huh…
WHAT…….“the least have been suffering the most since the advent of capitalism.” ………There is nowhere in the history of mankind where the “least” have prospered as much as under Capitalism. Your point does not wash historically. Our lower quartile look like millionaires to the rest of the world. F on this section. You can sell this type of nonsense to the move on lovers, but not me or anyone else with the real data.
P.S. - Danced all night to Hector Lavoe songs at a place called South Of The Border with Noam Chomsky & his wife Carol… Looked for you & your buddy?
Now I have to take a shower……….Wouldn’t think you would have thought so much of Chomsky (socialist) especially in view of his unambigious anti-semetic world view. But I can see where you would appreciate his anti-capitalism as well as BHO’s …………………..
We’re a hopeless combination.
I’ll be back later (or shoot you an email to avoid “the internets”).
In the meantime…
Use Irish Spring!