| Author | Message | ||
     Aesquire |
From the guys who made the "hockey stick graph" showing that we're all going to die..... ( that lovely ( faked ) asymptotic curve showing the temperatures rising like a rocket until we all fry. ) we have a piece of crap propaganda piece on how the Medieval warming period wasn't all that. Something that would come as a surprise to my ancestors while they colonized Europe, Near asia ( Russia ), Iceland, Greenland, Vinland, and the British isles during a period of exceptional warmth, food production and prosperity. ( and population growth ) A bit later when the Viking colonies on Vinland and Greenland failed, due to global climate change as the Earth entered a cooling period, later known as the Little Ice Age, some in scandahoovia feared the coming of Fimbulwinter and the end of all things. There is no sign however, that those fearing the end of all wanted to create a world dictatorship, with them in charge to save the day... Although there were many that would have been thrilled to rule all before them, there is no evidence in the sagas that anyone considered using fear and lies to do so. Unlike the IPCC. http://www.ipcc.ch/ipccreports/tar/wg1/070.htm Lucky for us there are still real scientists on the planet, as opposed to the economists who run the IPCC, who, as stated, wish to rule the world with an iron fist. To save us all, of course. http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/03/23/warm_perio d_little_ice_age_global/print.html As an aside, one wonders why a "climate fund" needs diplomatic immunity. Based on past UN actions, that could be a range from having the head of the UN's kid smuggle luxury cars, taking massive bribes in sanctions cases, or establishing a whorehouse for UN troops staffed with children. I, being biased, suspect the latter is closest to the truth. http://www.myfoxphoenix.com/dpps/news/climate-fund -seeks-un-style-diplomatic-immunity-dpgonc-km-2012 0322_18755189 | ||
| Aesquire |
http://www.infowars.com/climate-change-skepticism- a-sickness-that-must-be-treated-says-professor/ The source here is biased. However. The threat of "treatment" for "mental illness" is quite real, and in recent history. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_abuse_of_ps ychiatry_in_the_Soviet_Union By recent, I mean...today. | ||
| Aesquire |
http://planet3.org/2012/04/04/what-just-happened/ | ||
| Cityxslicker |
went to the local 'transition/sustanianable/resilience ' group meeting.... OMG Ever been to an AMWAY meeting where all the newbs are glossed over and zoned happy -? it was that. so having read their history, white paper, and their track record BEFORE; while fully ignoring their glossy brochure.... The basic tenant is that we will all need to band together to stop the coming onslaught of catastrophy from global warming, natural disaster, or civil rioting..... (yep - I agree; you certainly would not wish to depend upon the government - especially when they are the ones pulling the trigger) *BUT Their notion of 'cooperation' is a list survey of every animal, asset, property, account and population in the county - to charge appropriate carbon offset allowances to deal with climate change.... ie - you have a farm - we want to know how many head of cattle you have - and you will be charged an excise for each and for the carbon foot print of your farm and the DAMAGE it causes to the local eco system. ...... They are not elected, they are not law enforcement, they are not from the government - but if you 'want' their help for preparation and support during the 'crisis' you agree to their by laws... it is the HomeOwners CC&R's gone wild. So in a group of 70.... We have limited resources - no economy to speak of in the meeting room. I have twenty dollars in my pocket to go to changing the climate in the room. 'What does that accomplish?' .... Well we need more than your 20 to affect a change to the climate - Surely , but just for this room, and the population at hand - what does 20 of my 'carbon' credits DO ? Well nothing, we would need more of course to be affective - surely we would have to asses the credit requirements across the whole room .... So 20 per person in the room ? (1400) Well, no, we would still need to be more than a one time assessment, it would have to be an ever vigiliant and ongoing effort from all concerned to lower the Co2 emmssions and affect the climate. So lets just make it 100, per person, for say the remainder of the hour that the meeting lasts - is that enough to change the climate to the room ? Well we should think that would make an admirable start (starting to get the idea that no matter what you pay - it ain't never enough ?!?!?!- you are getting warm) So really the only way we can really change the climate in the room, is to make it too expensive for those that cannot afford to be here to LEAVE the room =silence= And if they refuse to pay, or refuse to leave the room ? *angry glares* So really the only clear way to effectively change the CO2 emmissions that you evaluate as dangerous - is to empty the bank accounts from those in the room, and purge those that can no longer afford to pay . ..... At this point I as asked to leave (damnit) I left - singing the Soviet Anthem Learn the words folks - its coming. | ||
| Aesquire |
 | ||
| Geedee |
City, you were lucky crazy 'Professor' Noorgard wasn't at the meeting  http://www.prisonplanet.com/professor-norgaard-urg ed-obama-to-ignore-democracy-public-opinion.html | ||
| Chauly |
A slightly different, Objectivist analysis: 'The Marginal Economics of "Green Energy" by Robert Tracinski When the federal government bailed out General Motors, you may remember that we were told the government would transform GM by moving it away from manufacturing big, gas-guzzling trucks and SUVs (you know, the vehicles that were actually making a profit) and instead make sure that GM rode the real wave of the future: electric cars. Well, here's where the wave of the future has taken us: GM just shut down the assembly line of its electric car, the Chevy Volt, for five weeks because demand for the Volt is making the Edsel look like a roaring success. Observers are divided over whether the Volt has flopped because of its limited all-electric range, its high price tag (despite massive government subsidies), or the fact that its battery might have a tendency to catch on fire. The Volt is just the latest commercial failure for "green" technology. We are in the middle of what you might call a global warming bubble. It is a failure of the global warming theory itself and of the credibility of its advocates, but also a failure of the various "green energy" schemes proposed as a substitute for fossil fuels. Take the sleek Tesla electric roadster, brought to you with about half a billion dollars in government-backed loans, which turns into an immovable "brick" if you run down its battery too far, say, by taking a long drive and parking it for a while. The failure of the solar panel maker Solyndra has been followed by the bankruptcies of a variety of other government-subsidized green energy firms, such as Beacon Energy, which makes an energy storage device needed to smooth out the energy production of erratic "renewable" sources, and battery maker Ener1. But maybe we're just not subsidizing green power enough, because surely you've heard—probably from Tom Friedman—that China is beating us to the future with its support for green energy. But China's solar energy firms are also heading into a slump and laying off workers. Part of the reason for the solar slump in China is that they were counting on generous subsidies for their product from the West, particularly Europe. In effect, the Chinese were manufacturing solar panels in order to cash in on subsidies from Western taxpayers. But now the subsidies are drying up. That leads us to the most interesting of these stories. Germany is phasing out its solar subsidies, but the economically revealing part is why they are eliminating the subsidies. As Bjorn Lomborg explains: Subsidizing green technology is affordable only if it is done in tiny, tokenistic amounts. Using the government's generous subsidies, Germans installed 7.5 gigawatts of photovoltaic capacity last year, more than double what the government had deemed "acceptable." It is estimated that this increase alone will lead to a $260 hike in the average consumer's annual power bill. At the end of last year, I wrote about the marginal economics of the welfare state. Many welfare-state policies seem to work so long as they are implemented on a small scale but fail when they are expanded to cover a larger portion of the population. The Medicare program, for example, takes advantage of the fact that it can dictate lower prices for medical services, because it only needs to pay the marginal costs (the relatively low cost of treating one additional patient in an existing hospital), while non-Medicare patients are billed at higher rates to cover big capital expenditures (the cost of building the hospital in the first place). But if the government starts paying for all health care, it suddenly has to pay a lot more to fund those capital expenditures. Something similar applies to green technology. It can be sustained only as a token or showpiece designed to distract attention from all of the coal, natural gas, and nuclear power stations that actually keep the lights on. The Chevy Volt, for example, is openly billed by GM as a "loss leader": they're losing money on it for the sake of all of the good "green" PR they hope to get. But the moment you try to use these technologies to generate a noticeable portion of a nation's electricity, the costs rise to ruinous levels. Thus, as Lomborg explains: Solar power is at least four times more costly than energy produced by fossil fuels. It also has the distinct disadvantage of not working at night, when much electricity is consumed. In the words of the German Association of Physicists, "solar energy cannot replace any additional power plants." On short, overcast winter days, Germany's 1.1 million solar-power systems can generate no electricity at all. The country is then forced to import considerable amounts of electricity from nuclear power plants in France and the Czech Republic. The same applies to wind energy, too, for the same reason. Just as the sun doesn't shine consistently every day, so the wind does not blow consistently. The natural fluctuation of wind power means that every megawatt of wind power requires an equal amount of conventional, fossil-fuel-powered generation to prevent power dips on the electric grid. Which is to say that solar panels and windmills are really just ornaments. They are monuments to greener-than-thou environmental vanity. That these forms of renewable energy are capable of generating only minimal amounts of power is no accident. Ten years ago, I published an article by Jack Wakeland which examined the growth of "renewable energy" and concluded that every time an "alternative" power source grew large enough to produce energy on a truly industrial scale, environmentalists turned against it, as they have done with hydro-electric dams, geothermal plants, and even wind farms. So the fact that green energy is capable of generating only a small fraction of the power needed to fuel an industrial civilization is no accident. In effect, the inability to generate industrial-scale power is what makes green energy green. But what that means is that green energy is doomed as an economic proposition. It has all of the hallmarks of an economic bubble. As with the Internet, housing, and higher-education bubbles, green energy is fiercely believed in, not just as an investment but as a superior lifestyle and a positive social good. And as with housing and education, it is propped up by government tax breaks, loan guarantees, and massive subsidies, all of which support a growing edifice of economically unproductive activity. But this artificial stimulation eventually expands the industry beyond the point where it can be sustained, either economically or politically, and the bubble bursts. It looks like the global warming bubble is hitting that point. | ||
| Aesquire |
http://paulinhouston.blogspot.com/2009/10/perspect ive-on-man-made-global-warming.html A bit of perspective. As the Prez and minions work hard to shut down coal fired power plants, in the name of Global Warming, I have to ask, again... HOW are you going to charge those electric cars? ( an action I have some sympathy for, actually, Coal leaves behind a huge cost in human lives, radioactive waste, and environmental damage from large scale "overburden removal" mining ) I understand the motivation to raise energy costs so that very expensive and often nonexistent "alternative" stuff can compete. It's much like demanding that lemonade be priced high enough that Champaign is competitive. An idea that only a politician or a con man could embrace. And both do. | ||
| Hootowl |
http://sppiblog.org/news/scientific-american%e2%80 %99s-climate-lies Long, but informative. | ||
| Sifo |
If you can't convince them with facts, just burn their houses down. Now that's science! http://www.infowars.com/climate-alarmist-calls-for -burning-down-skeptics-homes/ | ||
| Aesquire |
So the skeptics call for better understanding before making a decision, and the faithful call for murder and property damage. A totalitarian intolerance of dissent. Anyone else see a pattern here? Mandatory indoctrination of our kids is in progress. Calls for children to inform on their parents apostasy. ( also so familiar.... ) I'm sticking with my understanding of the greatest threats to human freedom. There are currently 2 1/2 religions that call for total control of your life, total obedience or death, and have as a basic foundation of the faith that to lie is good, if it advances the faith. If anyone unleashes Captain Trips, it's the Greenies. ( something I've worried about since the PETA backed activists started "freeing" critters from university labs. See also "13 Monkeys". ) | ||
| Aesquire |
http://www.pjtv.com/?cmd=mpg&mpid=56&load=6888 | ||
| Aesquire |
oops sorry, the movie was "12 monkeys". Not 13. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0114746/ From Terry Gilliam, it has a marvelous cast and a solid sci-fi premise. I enjoyed it. Like "Brazil" it's a cautionary tale....... | ||
| Aesquire |
http://xkcd.com/556/ | ||
| 1eyert |
When I was in middle/high school in the 70's I remember we were all told a ice age was coming. Now its man made global warming, now that has been morphed in global climate change. I got news for you, climates always change, its not really us, ITS THE SUN YOU MORONS!!! You remember that big hot nuclear furnace in the sky? Why does nobody believe that the sun is the reason for the warming/cooling cycles we go through? It seems to easy and there is no $$$ in researching it. While the scare tactics go on and we should all pay our part since we (USA) use more per capita than anyone else shouldn't we pay even more. But what about China, India, Brazil, etc...they are exempt from the "taxes" the USA will have to pay and they can feel free to spew all the CO2 into the atmosphere without fear of causing global warming? The hypocrisy is amazing!!! Will common sense ever come back??? | ||
| Aesquire |
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/earthnews/9234715 /Wind-farms-can-cause-climate-change-finds-new-stu dy.html I've been asking for years what the climate effects of large scale windfarms will be. I've been concerned with total energy transfer.... mixing effects never occurred to me. This is real science. | ||
| Aesquire |
http://www.npl.washington.edu/AV/altvw79.html As a child of the nuclear age, the space age, and the computer age, I have different attitudes on the problems of technology, than those who are children of the Welfare age, the Self Esteem age and the Statist age. While some problems, like nuclear proliferation, or famines, seem to be completely political, they have technological solutions, at least in theory, and often in practical ways that are ignored by those with a mindset that manipulates people, rather than reality. We can clean up nuclear waste. We can do so reasonably safely, and with a reasonable budget. ( bear in mind that Congress, and other such groups tend to cheap out short term to the cost of long term insanely high costs. See The Space Shuttle, Nuclear waste processing, and any other program that can be ruined by idiots whose specialty is to get people who don't know them to vote for them based on a 10 second sound bite ) Japan has shut down it's reactors. That means more fossil fuel consumption. That means higher costs to live world wide. We need safe, clean, nuclear power, and lots more of it, to replace old fossil fuel plants and to charge the millions of electric cars that won't get us to work otherwise.... There are often solutions to technological problems from better technology. | ||
| Blake |
Interesting. | ||
| Gregtonn |
LONDON – Dinosaurs may have farted themselves to extinction, according to a new study from British scientists. The researchers calculated that the prehistoric beasts pumped out more than 520 million tons (472 million tonnes) of methane a year -- enough to warm the planet and hasten their own eventual demise. Until now, an asteroid strike and volcanic activity around 65 million years ago had seemed the most likely cause of their extinction. Giant plant-eating sauropods were fingered as the key culprits in the study, which appears in the latest edition of the journal Current Biology. An average argentinosaurus, weighing around 90 tons (82 tonnes) and measuring 140 feet (42m), chomped its way through half a ton (half a tonne) of ferns a day, producing clouds of methane as the food broke down in its gut. Professor Graeme Ruxton from St. Andrews University in Scotland and co-researcher David Wilkinson, from Liverpool John Moores University, worked out just how much of the greenhouse gas the billions of dinosaurs would have generated during the Mesozoic era, starting 250 million years ago. "A simple mathematical model suggests that the microbes living in sauropod dinosaurs may have produced enough methane to have an important effect on the Mesozoic climate," Wilkinson said. "In fact, our calculations suggest these dinosaurs may have produced more methane than all the modern sources, natural and human, put together." The dinosaur output of 520 million tons (472 million tonnes) is comparable to current natural and man-made emissions of the greenhouse gas, which scientists say is around 21 times more powerful than CO2 at trapping heat on Earth and causing climate change. Cows and other farm animals globally contribute up to 100 million tons (90 million tonnes) a year of methane. Seriously? | ||
| Madduck |
Study is probably meaningless as cattle on grass produce remarkably little methane but grain fed cattle produce copius amounts. Never having seen a dinosaur will limit the calculations accuracy. | ||
| Hootowl |
When those plants drop leaves or otherwise die, they decompose and give off methane anyway. So how much MORE methane would the dino's have released by eating them vs. them decomposing on the ground? They should take that into account when lofting these ridiculous claims. Seems they think everything happens in a vacuum. | ||
| Sifo |
If a dinosaur farts in the woods and there's no one there to smell it, does it still cause global warming? | ||
| Aesquire |
| ||
| Aesquire |
http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/299649/astr onauts-cool-it-warming-deroy-murdock | ||
| Aesquire |
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-21485 57/The-Voice-judge-Will-goes-Oxford-University-cli mate-change-debate-gas-guzzling-helicopter.html ...His trip from London was a total of 286 miles and used 71.5 gallons of fuel, ploughing three-quarters of a tonne of CO2 into the atmosphere, which is the same as the average UK person produces in an entire month. He landed his enormous green helicopter in Oxford's University Parks and travelled to meet Mr Allen at the Radcliffe Observatory weather centre on a much more environmentally-conscious bike. Despite his highly polluting journey to the university, speaking at the talk, the star said: 'Climate change should be the thing that we are all worried and concerned about as humans on this planet, how we affect the planet, our consumption, and how we treat the place that we live in.' But his transportation to the event did not escape the attention of those at the university - or physics professor Mr Allen. He said: 'The irony didn’t escape everybody. But he’s committed to the issues and he’s written songs about it.' He added that a better understanding of the problems is probably more important than whether he travelled in the helicopter. .... Excuses, excuses. If he gives you money and supports your cause, he could serve Komodo Dragon and Condors on his coal burning yacht at the fundraiser, and you'd be all for it. | ||
| Strokizator |
Interesting how the radical enviros are silent on wind turbines killing bald eagles, yet they shut down the entire central valley project, taking water away from farmers and people in So.Cal and costing thousands of jobs, all ostensibly to save a 2" long bait fish. Farming and jobs= BAD Green Energy=GOOD I'd hate to see what would happen if they found an eagle carcass outside a coal-fired plant. http://tinyurl.com/7r6fczh | ||
| Aesquire |
I'd think that you'd do much better improving society issuing Pimp hunting permits than Bald Eagle "killing them accidentally, but our butt's are covered" ones. I admit, I'm biased against slavers, and I know there are usually restrictive gun laws in the Pimps environment. ( no discharge of firearms in city limits, no lead bullets in CA, only rich people allowed to have guns in NY & DC, etc. ) But it just makes sense to have a bow season in the hood. One must weigh the consequences to society of such things. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ummmN3wlGw Monolithic is doing it's part by killing most of the birds that nest around our beautiful oil refineries. Birds eat up a lot of food, and as everyone knows food takes a lot of energy to grow and prepare. So the fewer birds there are, the less energy will be wasted. Now, how can you help? Well, if there are any old folks around the house, just set them outside at night. This looks like a long hard winter, and the fewer people there are the less energy demand there'll be. | ||
| Aesquire |
http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/300877/clim ategate-continues-andrew-montford | ||
| Aesquire |
http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2012/05/29/4000-yea rs-ago-climate-change-caused-massive-civilization- collapse/] Also the city-state of Petra, the Pueblo Dwellers, the Viking Colonies on Greenland and Vinland, and most of Mesopotamia. | ||
| Ducbsa |
It's getting worse! http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2012/06/this -is-just-too-funny.php |
