‘Twas a week after Christmas and all through the House, not a creature was stirring, not even a … No, there’s Grover Norquist who’s Up and About! and …
OOPS, WRONG STORY, WRONG TOPIC. I have to wait a bit to tell how that tale ends …
It was something of a shock to read the following article headlined in the Dec. 27, 2012, issue of the Wall Street Journal: “No Need to Panic About Global Warming.” The article was accompanied in its Google perch by numerous supportive pieces, drawing from and adding to the wisdom of its conclusions. Interestingly, the essay was the same piece published many months before, followed by considerable controversy. It was as if we are now to be engaged in a continuous circling of the same ground, to be followed by a December 2013 reprint, and a December 2014, ad infinitum. (Another venerable and beloved Christmas story.)
Consider the following bulletins, analyses and reactions to the wisdom of what with pride of WSJ ownership can in future repetitions be called the Saga of the Wall Street Journal Sweet Sixteen.
• From Skeptical Science, “The Latest Denialist Plea for Climate Change Inaction,” posted Jan. 31, 2012 by dana1981:
“The article is little more than a regurgitation of a number of climate myths we have debunked at Skeptical Science. The signatories of this newest letter are also worth noting for their lack of noteworthiness. Although the climate denialist blogs have labeled them ‘luminaries’ and ‘prominent scientists,’ the list is actually quite underwhelming. In fact, it only includes four scientists who have actually published climate research in peer-reviewed journals, and only two who have published climate research in the past three decades. Nearly half of the list (at least 7 of 16) have received fossil fuel industry funding.
“… Just when we thought the op-ed letter couldn’t get worse, these fake skeptics have the gall to suggest that we ‘follow the money,’ because climate ‘alarmism’ supposedly brings bountiful research funding, ‘an excuse for governments to raise taxes,’ ‘big donations’ for environmental groups, and other similar tinfoil-hattery. Considering that at least 43% of the letter’s signatories have received money from the fossil fuel industry, being given large sums of money just for being climate ‘skeptics’ and publishing error-riddled nonsense like this op-ed, the sheer nerve it must have taken to make this ‘follow the money’ argument is astounding. Do follow their advice … follow their money trail, which leads straight to the fossil fuel industry.”
• Media Matters for America, “The Journal Hires Dentists to Do Heart Surgery,” Jan. 30, 2012:
“After reportedly rejecting a climate change essay by 255 members of the National Academy of Sciences in 2010, the Wall Street Journal has published a flawed op-ed by 16 scientists and engineers instructing public officials not to fight manmade global warming. But most of these individuals do not actually conduct climate research, and their credibility is further undermined by the misleading and unscientific arguments presented in the op-ed.”
As I had previously noted in my own search a year ago, one of the leading lights in this drama, Claude Allegre, in 1996 opposed the removal of carcinogenic asbestos from the Jussieu University campus in Paris, describing it as harmless and dismissing concerns about it as a form of “psychosis created by leftists.” The campus’ asbestos is deemed to have killed 22 people and caused serious health problems in 130 others.
• “Climate Denial Crock of the Week,” with Peter Sinclair. “The Wall Street 16 — Hapless Happer Leads Clueless Geriatrics in WSJ Fiasco,” Jan. 31, 2012:
“Last week, the once-proud Wall Street Journal, now a wholly owned mouthpiece of the Rupert Murdoch empire, the dead-tree equivalent of Fox News, published yet another in a long line of turgid propaganda pieces denying the threat posed by climate change …
“Most notable among the signatories, besides their almost to-a-person lack of climate science expertise and their heavy ties to the fossil fuel industry, was an over-representation by the geriatric, the retired, and the gone-emeritus. The title might just as well have been, ‘I’m not Panicking about Global Warming, Because I’ve Got Mine, and I’ll Be Dead When it All Goes Down, Suckers.’”
Consider the following:
The Wall Street Journal op-ed argues that policymakers shouldn’t be concerned about global warming. It claims: “Perhaps the most inconvenient fact is the lack of global warming for well over 10 years now.”
Yet Discovery News reported on Nov. 29, in “The Last Decade Was The Warmest On Record,” that 13 of the warmest years recorded have occurred within the last decade and a half, according to the UN’s World Meteorological Organization. Furthermore, “The 2002-2011 period equals 2001-2010 as the warmest decade since 1850, the report said. 2011 ranks as the 10th warmest year since 1850, when accurate measurements began.”
This from the Associated Press, October 2011: “A prominent physicist and skeptic of global warming spent two years trying to find out if mainstream climate scientists were wrong. In the end, he determined they were right: Temperatures really are rising rapidly.
“The study of the world’s surface temperatures by Richard Muller was partially bankrolled by a foundation connected to global warming deniers. He pursued long-held skeptic theories in analyzing the data.
“Yet he found that the land is 1.6 degrees warmer than in the 1950s. Those numbers from Muller, who works at the University of California-Berkeley and Lawrence Berkeley National Lab, match those by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and NASA.”
And more:
PLANET SAVE, Sept. 21, 2012: “Arctic Sea Ice May Disappear Within 4 Years”:
“The complete collapse of Arctic sea ice during the summer months may happen within four years, according to one of the world’s leading sea ice researchers. The Arctic sea ice is very rapidly disappearing, much faster than climate models have predicted. It reached its lowest-ever recorded extent earlier this summer, weeks before the melt season was even over.”
From The Guardian, Sept. 17, 2012: In an email, Professor Peter Wadhams of Cambridge University says: “Climate change is no longer something we can aim to do something about in a few decades’ time, and that we must not only urgently reduce CO2 emissions but must urgently examine other ways of slowing global warming.” According to Wadhams, the implications of this are “terrible,” primarily because of the domino effect this will have, accelerating the Arctic death spiral. “As the sea ice retreats in summer, the ocean warms up (to 7C in 2011) and this warms the seabed too. The continental shelves of the Arctic are composed of offshore permafrost, frozen sediment left over from the last ice age. As the water warms, the permafrost melts and releases huge quantities of trapped methane, a very powerful greenhouse gas, so this will give a big boost to global warming.”
October 2012 was, according to NOAA, the 332nd month in a row with above-average temperatures worldwide. Recorded temperatures across land and ocean surfaces were 1.13 degrees higher than the 20th-century average. Put another way, if you are 27 years of age or younger, you have never lived through a month that was colder than normal.
Finally, “World Bank Report Warns ‘Catastrophic Consequences’ of Global Warming,” Common Dreams, Nov. 19, 2012:
“The World Bank is the latest organization to raise alarm against the undeniable threat of climate change. Launched Monday, ‘Turn Down the Heat: Why a 4°C Warmer World Must be Avoided,’ details the catastrophic consequences, specifically within developing nations, of ignoring the global warming crisis. The analysis, conducted by the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research, focuses on a revised point-of-no-return temperature rise of 4°C (7.24°F) by the end of the century, a threshold, according to the report, that will likely ‘trigger widespread crop failures and malnutrition and dislocate large numbers of people from land inundated by rising seas.’”
Final note: The tiny assortment above is representative of thousands of similar foreboding pieces. But rest easy, the Wall Street Journal is covering our nethers.
Jerome Page is a Benicia resident.
Sharing is caring!
Thanks, Jerome, I have never been a WSJ reader and will certainly NOT start now…having spent 6 years acquiring an AA, BS, and Masters in Mechanical Engineering Design from DVC and UC Berkeley eons ago, I am in no way eager to listen to the science-deniers who all feed at the petrochemical fuel trough..so sad our species still appears to have dinosaur exhaust for brains in such enormous quantities. May intelligence prevail despite the large stacking of money upon the trail to progress…Peter Bray, Benicia, CA
Wow, most mechanical engineers I know are all deniers. Whats wrong with you?
I never let an early education limit me from learning more and forever…See my websites sometime:
http://www.peterbray.org/pedro
pb
Hell even NASA says that the evidence does not support the global warming theory and alarm. It is a solution in search of a problem, while whack jobs like Al Gore and his cronies get rich off of selling it. It’s a hoax!
Note to JLB: anyone who mentions “Al Gore” and “global warming” in the same remark immediately loses any credibility. The conversation has moved way beyond that. He no longer matters. Old history. It is kind of like talking about the New York Yankees when Joe DiMaggio and Mickey Mantle were around — a bit outdated. Very little, if anything, to do with the current situation.
Thanks, Mr. Page, for another well reasoned article on this subject matter.
A recent article that I posted titled :” Schizophrenics, Psychopaths Holding America Hostage.” By Dr. Brian Moench. See-Truthout/Op-Ed.. Dec. 5, 2012. Is indicative of a certain mind-set.
” The American Republican Party and the Fox News/right wing entertainment complex are the only organizations in the world that deny the validity and reality of science. And because the Republicans control the US House of Representatives, there is no hope any legislation will be passed to address the climate crisis. (Key point) Inability to discern reality is the hallmark of schizophrenia.”
Below more information/reality for the community to consider.
http://www.jamespowell.org/
I sure am glad the Republicans control the house and not the Liberals
Too bad you don’t know why you’re glad about that, B.L.
I know what you mean, thank God for the Republicans.
Republicans don’t control squat, let alone each other…pb
Our Citizen Research Reporter just qualified.
Whoever you are, “JLB”, you’re a victim of the counter hoax. Al Gore was never a whack job. The fact that he invested in some green technologies does not invalidate his study or conclusions. That his reportage and movie may have helped his investments, if in fact they did, cannot reduce his concerns to venality like those people who have washed your brains of clear perception and good sense.
I lost respect for WSJ a long time ago, due to writers like John Fund. After Murdoch got hold of that rag, I have only a remotely “academic” interest in its contents. It’s about as reliable an index of earthly, human concerns as that freaking FOX News & Comment.
Excellent work, again, Mr. Page! Thank you.
I wish to make a few observations.
First, a statement of fact! Carbon dioxide is a natural gas produced by all living things.
Second, there is no evidence that carbon dioxide has ever determined global temperatures looking at all known historical records extending back thousands of years and longer.
Third, the most fundamental argument by the “global warming” harbingers is that increases in carbon dioxide made by man affect temperatures here on earth, couldn’t be farther from the truth. In fact, just the opposite is true. Scientists that have tracked this information point out that as global temperature rises and falls, levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere rise and fall accordingly. There is approximately an 800 year lag period on these events. To look at a period of history that many of us have experienced, temperature on our planet have increased about ½ degree over the past 100 years, most of which occurred prior to 1940 during a period of relatively minor industrial productivity. After 1940 there was a period of 40 years when temperatures fell (during the height of the industrial age) prompting many to predict the entrance of a new ice age. And then, from about 1975 to today, we have seen world temperatures rise leading many ill-informed people to spend billions on “climate action” plans and ill-informed legislatures to enact many different kinds of legislation to control human production of carbon dioxide.
Fourth, thankfully, heat is trapped in the troposphere about 10 miles up where the clouds and greenhouse gases trap the suns rays bouncing off the earth’s surface.
Fifth, changes in global weather have nothing to do with carbon dioxide manufactured by man! The small portion of the world’s carbon dioxide produced by man is a small fraction of the composition of our air. Carbon Dioxide as a whole is measured in the tens of parts per million in the earth’s atmosphere. Other gases, hydrogen, oxygen, argon, etc. by far and away, make up our air. To put this in perspective, there is far more carbon dioxide created by volcanoes than all the carbon dioxide produced by factories and cars in the world. Aside from volcanoes, carbon dioxide from animals and bacteria, approximately 150 gigatons of it, dwarfs the 6 1/2 tons produced by man. And that doesn’t include the biggest source of carbon dioxide created by dying vegetation. The biggest source of carbon dioxide comes by way of our oceans. The oceans are able to absorb carbon dioxide when temperatures are cold and when temperatures increase, the oceans expel the trapped carbon dioxide. This process, of course, takes hundreds of years to occur because the oceans are so massive and deep.
Six, there have been times in the world’s history when we have had 10 times the levels of carbon dioxide in the air than today and we are still here! This incredible hoax that people are foisting on the world public is keeping 3rd world countries from developing industries to help them build their financial infrastructure to provide basic necessities for their populations — among other issues like the World Bank and IMF that consist of corporate and banking billionaires that don’t care one iota if people are starving as long as they maintain their wealth and billions! Regardless, the global warming folks are simply wrong about “man-made global warming” and need to get off that kick. It is not doing anybody any good. There are an equal number of thousands of scientists that do not accept that man-made carbon has anything to do with global warming.
Seven, finally, I do agree that we need to reduce our use of limited fossil fuel and save them for future generations and stop the corporate and banking billionaires from making HUGE profits from selling something that belongs to all of us.
Mr. Ernst, you simply don’t know what you’re talking about. (1) No one ever claimed co2 was “unnatural.’ (2) You seem confused about the nature of “historical” records compared to physical evidences of the geological “past.” (3) I deeply doubt your information and its sources. You should reveal them. To say “Scientists have tracked” just doesn’t cut it. (4) Alas, not all the heat stays up there, does it. (5) Where do you get “6 1/2 tons” of co2 “produced by man?” That’s an impossibly small amount, direct and indirect. (6) False. Never in the period of recorded history have there been ten times the ratio of co2 now in earth’s atmosphere. (7) I’m glad you end with a sociable conclusion. Opposition to “dollar-ocracy” is not “socialism.”
Mr. Shelby, (1) How did you become such an expert to tell me, or anybody, we “don’t know what we’re talking about”? (2) I am not confused in the least, regarding physical evidences of the geological “past” compared to “historical” records (3) I completely doubt your information and the information presented by all the “global warming” minions – you, Mr. Bray, Mr. Page, Mr. Gregory, etc. There may be “global warming” at times and at times there is “global cooling”. My sources are just as valid as your sources, if not more valid than those that proport this “global warming” caused by man-made production of co2, science fiction! (4) I haven’t seen any machine in your backyard that measures the co2 produced by any source, (5) Again, who are you to say that anything the scientists state is “False”, How many millions of years have you been around? (6) There’s nothing wrong with a little “socialism”. As far as I can tell, overall, it works as well, if not better than “capitalism”. (7) You might want to look at the records of solar activity! Solar activity tracks very nicely with “global warming” and “global cooling” trends.
(1) Your mere noises of denial do not convince. Compared to you, I’m “expert” because I was trained in scientific reasoning, logic & semantics, analysis of rhetorical speech, etc. (2) If you’re not confused in those matters, why do you write as is you were? (3) By “minions” you suggest that you actually believe there are no disinterested parties to scientific study and thought. Everyone has to “subservient” to some “authority” who governs their perception and thinking, perhaps because their paid-off to spread that authority’s improper propaganda. Boy, are you wrong. BTW, you’re still hiding your “sources.” (4) I see no machine anywhere that suggests your intelligence is more than minuscule. (5) “The Scientists” you selectively worship aren’t wrong because I say so, but because they misunderstand or misrepresent the evidence. (6) Here, you ran off over the center field fence. Irrelevant to your “sometime,” ten-fold concentration of CO2. (7) Properly scientific investigators have already cancelled out the effects of solar variation and solar-system cycles.
Again, Mr. Ernst, for all your earnestness, you just don’t know enough about these matters. You are blocked by ideological bias. Neither you nor Bob Livesay has any place in these comment threads or any worthwhile contribution to make. Democratically, as liberals, we must let you yammer any nonsense you wish to inflict..
Let me try to figure this out. Fox News and the WSJ are not good news sources. So I guess MSNBC, CNN, ABC, CBS and NBC are the sources that we should rely on. Now I do not find that very open minded. In fact I find it very closed minded and biased thinking. I happen to take the WSJ and watch all news sources if I have the time. I do believe most adult thinkers can figure out was is important and factual to them. It might even be NPR. Ask Juan Williams about that.
A wise person would indeed consult other sources than Fox and WSJ, since they are owned by the same person and are more about opinions than actual news.
Pete that is just your and other Liberals opinion.
Will: Well stated, some groups cling to dinosaur dust as fuel for their aspirations and beliefs. In the end they have…dinosaur dust…pb
Mr. Livesay: Where would you be without Liberals to joust with? Enjoy your day! Happy New Year to you too!–Pedro Bray
Same place you would be Pedro. Enjoying myself, family, hobbies and irritating the Liberals. Easy to do in this town. Boy am I having fun. Remember Pedro it is easy to strike out at a Conservative in Benicia. You will get all the positive attention you or any Liberal needs to keep at it. Happy New Year from Mr. Conservative
But, B.L., think how much more fun it would be for you to succeed and actually triumph over us folks of liberal education. Have a happy new year in service of the con!
As you know Shelby I have done it well. You folks are still listening and commenting. Thank you.
If that’s all you aimed to accomplish, then you are a successful con-artist, especially upon yourself.
Explain your comment. “More about Opinons than factual news”.. It does not appear you are very diverse in your news watching or fact sources. Tell what they are so I can better understand your biased views.
Mr. Shelby. I am not confused in the least. My facts presented are very accurate and true. Enough said!
Spoken like a hard-shelled schizophrenic, Mr. Ernst, propounding views as obdurate as ill-supported.
I don’t think childish name-calling and false accusations are very appropriate. I recommend
that you avoid the science fiction and stick to the facts — don’t attempt to downgrade the authors of this blog, Sir!
Well stated, Bob Shelby.
Prove to me or anyone else that you are an “author,” on this blog or anywhere else.
Fact: The most fundamental argument by the “global warming” harbingers is that increases in co2 made by man affect temperatures here on earth, couldn’t be farther from the truth. In fact, just the opposite is true. Scientists that have tracked this information point out that as global temperatures rise and fall, levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere rise and fall accordingly. There is approximately an 800 year lag period on these events. To look at a period of history that many of us have experiencedtemperatures on our planet have increased about ½ degree Farenheit over the past 100 years, most of which occurred prior to 1940 during a period of relatively minor industrial productivity. After 1940 there was a period of 40 years when temperatures fell (during the height of production of co2) prompting many to predict the entrance of a new ice age (I’m certain that you, Mr. Shelby, Mr. Page, Mr. Gregory, and Mr. Bray experienced that time period — I wonder if you cried out about man-made co2 and global warming then?). And then, from about 1975 to today, we have seen world temperatures rise leading many ill-informed people to spend billions on “climate action” plans and ill-informed legislatures to enact many different kinds of ridiculous legislation to control human production of carbon dioxide.
The trouble with the 800 year lag thing is that some ice cores record a lag while others record CO2 rising BEFORE termpature. If some the ice cores record cO2 changes before temperature and other ice core following temperature changes, than obviously ice cores are completely unreliable.
Jf ernst ” I completely doubt your information and the information presented by all the “global warming” minions.”
I have been called many things in my very long term–never a minion! Not certain whether to be insulted or comforted.
Question of jf—or is it Rick? You have made a great many generalizations concerning this very complex question. I wonder if it might be possible for you to give us scientific citations, including authorities, for your observations. I am not challenging your beliefs here–merely seeking some basis in scientific research for pursuing the pathways you are suggesting be followed. I would be interested. Although I do have a degree in science, I am clearly not an expert in this field. What I write is drawn from my reading and research into the views of those who are. But I am always open to more.
I don’t see any scientific citations, aurhorities or observations in your article. Perhaps if you provide something of substance, I can provide my sources. What I write is drawn from my reading and reasearch into the view of scientific experts who all agree that global warming because of man-made co2 is a hoax.
Mr. Ernst, et al,
I suggest you hippety-hop over to C-Span and checkout what Dr. James Hansen has been saying about Climate Change for quite some time:
http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/JamesHa
If you want to refute that, then you might also enjoy buying the 8 million buggy whips I have been saving for reselling at a major profit when Peak Oil is fully over and we revert to the boiling waters of the Equator and sand traps for golfers in the Arctic—Good luck with your counter research…pb
Mr. Bray,
Buggy whips? Boiling waters? Sand traps in the Arctic? Where have you been? I don’t think trying to create panic in the minds of the world population, much less the American public, is very productive other than making a lot of money for a few scientists, like Dr. Hansen!
Yes the dollars are flowing in academia, all right. Not like those poor folks backed by industry, struggling to get by, interested only in good science.
True, some industry employees make seven figures, like Hansen for example.
A minion is defined as a “subordinate of a person in power” or “a favored or highly regarded person.” I don’t understand why you would be insulted or comforted? No insult or comfort is offered. Only factual evidence that man-made global warming is a hoax!
Will. Thanks so much for that rich source. I found it fascinating. Jerry
On this same subject, back in July, I posed the following question to Mr. Page:
“temperature fluctuations going back 5,000 years… shows temperatures both higher than those existing today as well as repeated periods of low temperature extremes.
How can we be 100% certain that the changes in temperature trends today are not a repeat of a pattern which has a 5,000 year (and more) history?
The question was never answered, though Mr. Page responded by hiding behind a failed attempt to counter the arguments made during the follow up discussion, which also provided data going back far longer that 5,000 years.
As of today, the question remains unanswered
Why should Jerry Page waste his time on you? You — and your ilk — and I know how much you hate that word — will never accept the evidence that refutes your benighted views. So keep denying reality, and we’ll keep pushing forward. We’re winning the argument. The American public is smarter than the conservative boil on its underside.
http://www.motherjones.com/blue-marble/2012/10/americans-are-finally-warming-climate-change
Real American? Ha!
1. There are many of my “ilk” speaking out against the hoax of man-made global warming!
2. You are loosing the argument! The facts don’t add up and never have!
3. The American public is smart! Most people don’t believe in the science fiction of global warming!
I just posted a link showing otherwise. Thank god you are no longer in city government.
Also, this was directed at DDL, so go back to your basement.
Mr. “Real” American? Ha! Well, at least I volunteered for my City. That’s more than I can say about you and your cohorts!
Setting your city back immeasurably. Keep on keeping on, Rick. And I’m not a mister.
I do know you claim you are female or Mrs. Mike of Mike fame. Prove it by telling us your name. Just what did Rick do to set the city back immeasurably? That is a very strong statement that must be backed up. But he/she, Mr./Mrs. Mike or Real American you will not nor do you have the courage to tell us your name.
Rick,
Congratulations on being made a member of the “ilk” club, though Shelby is usually the Grand Marshall for the club, I think RA may rate as an honrable mention.
Mother Jones? LOL
The last time you stooped that low for a reputable source you were arguing against using guns to stop mass killings with an article that had more holes in it than a colander.
It’s a Yale survey. Try this on for size, genius.
http://articles.latimes.com/2012/oct/18/science/la-sci-sn-climate-change-poll-20121018
Are you sure it was not Yale Lock and not the University of the same name. Sounds to me like Yale Lock. I know what the article says but do you lead head.
Did you graduate from grade school, or were you given a pass so you could work on the farm?
Sold the farm and most of the land not long ago. Retained some for myself. What a life. I do need a not so smart driver. Care to apply. No benefits.
No thanks. I need to find a Port reduction recipe to go with the foie gras course for this evening’s celebratory events.
Wonderful stuff that Foie Gras is!
Elitist.
Elitist?
Not at all. We are serving the Foie Gras with a 1982 Ch. Suduiraut, an excellent Premier cru Class Sauternes one that I have cellered for over 25 years and have just a few bottles left. If I was truly an elitst I would serve it only with a fully matured Yquem.
It should make a nice first course with our Kobe beef filets.
I cannot hope to match your passion for this subject. Have a wonderful new year.
And you do the same.
Yes! I would like to hear an answer to this same question: “temperature fluctuations going back 5,000 years… shows temperatures both higher than those existing today as well as repeated periods of low temperature extremes. How can we be 100% certain that the changes in temperature trends today are not a repeat of a pattern which has a 5,000 year (and more) history?”
The greenies are 100% certain because Al Gore said so in his movie. So there.
Anybody still quoting Gore plus or minus is living in a time warp…find a contemporary horse to ride and beat–Gore is old bread—pb
I don’t blame you for being embarrassed by Al Gore, he was (amongst a host of other embarrassments) incorrectly deified by the environmentalist movement (and by their supporters) even though he was wrong on so many things.
Al would have made a great president. I don’t blame connies for pretending Dubya never existed, he was an embarrassment on a scale too great for your collective imagination.
RA said: Al would have made a great president.
ROFLMAO.
Now that has to be the funniest thing I have heard in quite some time. One might actually think you were serious with that comment.
BTW, if Gore had any reasonable knowledge of political history, he probably would have become President in 2004, instead of becoming a cry baby-whiner-Mega millionaire-MCGW huckster-sexual predator-divorcee.
Did he ever offer give his Oscar for best Power Point Presentation back?
See, you DO know how web acronyms work! You just used the most inane, overused one of all!
In any case, I was serious. I’m a serious person. Al would have been terrific, especially in light of the debacle that was the barely sentient cowboy installed by the Supreme Court.
And if you had any knowledge of political history, or political reality, you’d know that the days of failed nominees being nominated again are over forever. Something Al recognized. But then we know you lack knowledge of both those things, and a great deal more besides.
I am, however, looking forward to the second part of your book report.
installed by the Supreme Court.
schadenfreude
I love it when people still cry about 2000 election, shows how low the Gore supporters were willing to go to steal another election. Really ticks them off that the Republicans finally stood up, instead of bending over.
There you go again, putting country second. But I’m getting my share of schadenfreude these days watching your ilk whine and infight and rush headlong out of the realm of relevance, so I won’t begrudge you your memories. Cherish them like you cherish your foie gras and your inaccurate, uneducated view of history.
Dubya didn’t have the brains or qualifications to open, let alone, operate a car wash…and Cheney still has the morals of a slug…Those two are living proof that money can buy a well-named dummy to sit on a lap of a senior insider and do nothing but destroy sections of the world for their well-moneyed cronies…pb
I’m not nor ever was EMBARASSED by Gore, I think he was a bent quarter to start with…had the personality of a dried fig…politicians don’t impress or embarass me, I suspect they enter public office for hopefully good reasons, but they are NOT necessarily bright or creative people…they may be benevolent or public-service-oriented, but soon the “System” consumes them and they become robotic-do-nothings enjoying their income, privilege, and benefits until they have to prove their worth and get re-elected for what marginal crap they may have supported—both parties are just as mediocre and pathetic..there are some pearls here and there among the useless leftovers and bloated, belching, shallow egos, but few…perhaps the women will take over and the useless males will petrify or fully atrophy in the halls of Congress and become firewood for a Spare-The-Air Day in their own states……pb
Jerry, here are a few sources willing to speak out against man-made global warming. Many won’t speak out because they will be labeled “heretics”! Professor Tim Ball, Deptartment of Climatology, University of Winnipeg; Professor Nir Shaviv, Institute of Physics, University of Jerusalem, who stated “There have been times in history when the earth’s atmostphere had 10 times the amount of co2 as it currently exists with no affect.”; Professor Ian Clark, Dept. of Earth Sciences, University of Ottawa; Dr. Piers Corbyn, Climate Forecaster, Weather Action; Professor Philip Stott, Department of Biogeography, University of London, who stated “It (man-made global warming) has become a great industry in itself!”; Professor Paul Ritter, IPCC & Pasteur Institute, Paris; Professor Richard Lindzin, IPCC & M.I.T. who stated, “We have a vested interest in creating panic so that money will flow to climate science”; Patrick Moore, co-founder, Greenpeace, who stated “The tragecy of the situation is that the environmental movement has become the strongest voice in preventing development in developing 3rd world countries.”; Nigel Calder, Editor, New Scientist Magazine, who stated “The whole global warming business has become like a religion”; Dr. Roy Spencer, Weather Satellite Team Leader, NASA; Professor Michael , Dept of Environmental Sciences, University of Virginia, who stated, “The fact of the matter is that 10s of thousands of jobs depend on global warming right now. It’s a big business”!
Jerry, I’ll wager that your next argument will be that the IPCC states that man-made co2 is causing global warming! IPCC is a organization of the United Nations (and I believe little, if anything, the United Nations says) which, indeed, is a very political group that lists 2,500 “top scientist” on their list of those that agree with man-made global warming; however, many of those 2,500 disagree with that assessment and have asked IPCC to remove their name from the list. And, many of the 2,500 are not scientists but are people that review information published by scientists who are very skeptical of the entire position because the facts “don’t add up”!
Rick,
The citation of sources, supporting your valid statements, will never satisfy those who are convinced of Man Caused Global Warming (MCGW), they will always make the claim that such sources are influenced by those from whom they depend on to make a living, simultaneously they will argue that their sources are wholly uninfluenced by the same motivation.
They will also pick one, or possibly more people, from the list and cite an error once made as absolute proof that all efforts made after are to be discounted.
Those who believe in MCGW believe it with the same passion and fervor as fundamentalist Christians believe in God, no logic will dissuade either group, no evidence, counter to their positions will be seriously considered.
But, such truisms should not discourage your noble attempts to provide contrary evidence.
Nor will the citation of sources, backed by good science, satisfy you head-in-the-sand types. But as I posted above, we’re winning the argument. The truth will out.
I can understand someone like poor Rick, with only half a working brain, falling for this sort of nonsense. But Dennis, with your pretensions to intellectualism, I expected better. Can’t you rise above the entrenched folly of your ideology just this once?
Exactly! Well said, DDL! Perhaps Jerry can answer some questions, probably not, but Mr. “Real” American can take his science fiction elsewhere!
Who is Tim Ball?
Source: De Smog Blog: Clearing the PR Pollution that Clouds Climate Science
http://www.desmogblog.com/decline-tim-ball-denier-champion-reduced-railing-real-scientists
Wow, a link to desmog blog like it was an authority. Ouch.
I was banned from Desmog blog and rather quickly I might ad. Wahoo!
The names of eight of the ten sources given by Mr. Ernst in his (above) post are listed as being interviewed for the movie : “The Great Global Warming Swindle.”
Link to their names for a better understanding of who these people really represent!
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=The_Great_Global_Warming_Swindle
Will, your comment was simultaneously; predicted, hypocritical and simply guilt by association. Would that you could apply the same level of scrutiny and standards to both sides of the equation, but that would be asking for fairness from your side, something that long ago fell by the wayside.
Pot, kettle, black.
Actually not, as I have said before, I am a reformed Democrat.
Malformed more like it.
Bazing!!
I do not always agree with Rick Ernst. But this time I do. He has the usual suspects on the run. Using name calling and silly school yard statements. Back them against the dodgeball wall and they cry foul and will not play any more. Just make foolish name calling statements. Take notice of Shelby, Unreal American and Bray. Rick is not backing down. It is you folks that are reducing yourself to child like comments.
There’s Bob resorting to the old playbook: We’re losing so I’ll say we’re winning. Nice try, Befuddled Bob. Jerry outsmarts and outclasses you all.
Stop it Unreal American you are in over your head.
Stop it Befuddled Blob you are a fool. Benicia’s court jester. A laughingstock. A punchline.
Bob, in what areas don’t you agree with Rick, and why?
Do some research and you will know. You do follow everything I write. Your responces are very usal from the city Unreal American. I love to read your comments back as you choke on my comments while eating your milk toast. Good try Casper.
few sensible bolks “follow” your writings, Livesay — you just stick ’em in under eveyone’s noses.
Well, let me see. Since leaving this morning, Benicia, Venice and London are underwater (again, no evidence that there has been any rise in global water levels), “not a mister” “real” american has called Mr. Livesay a “Befuddled Blob you are a fool. Benicia’s court jester. A laughingstock. A punchline.”, has made a number of outlandish statements such as “I’ll say we’re winning…,Befuddled Bob. Jerry outsmarts and outclasses you all”, and “you head-in-the-sand types…I can understand someone like poor Rick, with only half a working brain, falling for this sort of nonsense. But Dennis, with your pretensions to intellectualism, I expected better. Can’t you rise above the entrenched folly of your ideology just this once?”, went so low as to call DDL an “Elitist”, and asked Mr. Livesay “Did you graduate from grade school, or were you given a pass so you could work on the farm?” Excellent debate technique Mz. “real” american. Did somebody give you that moniker or did you create it for yourself? I think there are 400 million True Americans that may be insulted and have an issue with that! Again, I don’t think name calling is the issue. The total lack of any evidence that man-made co2 is the cause of global warming is the issue. I have stated my position and provided numerous experts to back up my thoughts. Please research the matter yourself, if you care to! Otherwise, keep your name-calling to yourself, please! That practice has nothing to do with the issue!
On to more important matters such as “Who blew up the World Trade Center Buildings?”
U.S. population as of 12:54 p.m. today: 315,089,276 … not quite 400,000,000.
http://www.census.gov/main/www/popclock.html
This is eerily similar to your dispute with Bob over the city manager’s salary. In short, you have a math problem.
“On to more important matters such as ‘Who blew up the World Trade Center Buildings?'”
AND a reality problem …
Again, the issue is global warming, NOT the hugely overpaid manager’s salary! You need to stick to the issue or bow out! Or, is it curtsy out?
Well, I can see that there is no discussion of importance with you, whoever you are, so, I will bow out. I’m finished with this blog! I’ve made my point and provided references. You, have called me, and others names and have not added one iota to this conversation. It’s a total and complete waste of mine, and others, time! Gosh, have a good day!
Hmmm … Dare I say Mr. Ernst is … “Feeling the heat”? Ha!
Not me! It’s too cold outside and here in my basement!
Well Unreal UnAmerican or is it Mike or Mr and Mrs Mike. It does not matter. You just got called out and had your clock cleaned by Rick Ernst. I suggest you cuddle up with your dolls and enjoy the New Year. Happy New Year.
Ha ha! Just saying it doesn’t make it so Blob.
By the way do you agree with Rick’s assertion that 9/11 was an inside job?
jfernst stated: Excellent debate technique Mz. “real” american.
It is an old, tried and true technique; one used when the repertoire of intelligent comments has been depleted, which does not take very long to be honest. It is method used to distract the discussion by directing the focus on the poster and not the issue. It rarely works and only makes the poster look small and petty, but does try to boost a sagging ego by confirming one’s misguided self importance.
It really is rather pathetic actually.
Next look for the spelling or grammar nazi to emerge, as the quiver is empty.
The quiver is empty, and Ernst is a porcupine. Good night!
So who can’t handle the heat?
Ernst, please explain why many low islands in the Pacific and Indian Ocean are at risk of submersion by encroaching sea-water?
None of them are at risk of submersion. The sea-water is not encroaching! Please don’t ask me these idiotic questions!
JFernst, At least try to support your arguments. You could have claimed that the islands are potentially sinking by means of subduction, rather than sea water rise. Instead you claim “None of them are at risk of submersion.”, when the evidence that they indeed are, is irrefutable.
I fully refute any evidence that carbon dioxide has ever determined global temperatures looking at all known historical records extending back thousands of years and longer. Again, there is no sea-water encroaching, no islands submersing, due to man-made co2. None!
Yeah, you already said that. Several times in fact. I was just trying to help you out. Sorry guy! Have a great New Year!
As of September 2012, Arctic sea ice has melted to its lowest level since record-keeping began in 1979.
There have been exactly zero months, since February 1985, with average temperatures below those for the entire 20th century.
And, you’re point? 33 years? In the past million years, or even 10,000 years, you don’t think the Arctic sea ice has melted? The global temperature has gone up and it has gone down. The earth has been much hotter than it is today and much colder. It’s a fact of life brought on obviously by solar activity. Again, what is your point?
“It’s a fact of life (sic) brought on obviously by solar activity.”
During the period from 1970–1999 solar influence on climate cannot have been dominant. In particular, the Sun cannot have contributed more than 30% to the steep temperature increase that has taken place since then.
(JOURNAL OF GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH, VOL. 108, 1200, 8 PP., 2003)
Believe what you may! I don’t believe this science fiction or any other milarky about global warming caused by man-made co2. There is no record EVER of that man-made co2 has caused any changes in climate over the last million or so years, long before you were born! So, we are obviously at a standstill. You don’t believe me and I, certainly, do not believe you or your friends!
Once again, the most fundamental argument by the “global warming” harbingers is that increases in carbon dioxide made by man affect temperatures here on earth, couldn’t be farther from the truth. In fact, just the opposite is true. Scientists that have tracked this information point out that as global temperature rises and falls, levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere rise and fall accordingly. There is approximately an 800 year lag period on these events. To look at a period of history that many of us have experienced, temperature on our planet have increased about ½ degree over the past 100 years, most of which occurred prior to 1940 during a period of relatively minor industrial productivity. After 1940 there was a period of 40 years when temperatures fell (during the height of the industrial age) prompting many to predict the entrance of a new ice age. And then, from about 1975 to today, we have seen world temperatures rise slightly leading many ill-informed people to spend billions on “climate action” plans and ill-informed legislatures to enact many different kinds of legislation to control human production of carbon dioxide. There has been no increase in the water table caused by global warming. I think the ongoing spilling of oil from an offshore oilwell in the Gulf of Mexico is more important. BP is criminal in their ongoing cover-up of the damaged caused by their company! There are a host of much more important problems than the prevarication of man-made co2 causing global warming!
This is quite an interesting, if not indeed startling, set of exchanges. I confess to complete bewilderment about a couple of your statements Rick. To wit:
“I don’t see any scientific citations, aurhorities or observations in your article. Perhaps if you provide something of substance, I can provide my sources. What I write is drawn from my reading and reasearch into the view of scientific experts who all agree that global warming because of man-made co2 is a hoax….The total lack of any evidence that man-made co2 is the cause of global warming is the issue. I have stated my position and provided numerous experts to back up my thoughts.”
One response might be to suggest you check out Will’s citations regarding your experts. But I won’t dwell on that. In addition to several references above, I have now published dozens of columns on global warming incorporating hundreds of reports and analyses of basic research. Apparently you regard that as lacking in substance. And re-entering that 20 or 30 thousand words here presents some difficulty. I can but plead confusion as to what would meet your standards. However, a perusal of your experts and their connections suggests that the Heartland Institute might provide me with the kind of authority you would find persuasive and clearly I would never clear their high bar.
I can but hope that Peter, Will, Real American et al, will be able to resurrect what tattered remnants of my integrity are salvageable after this explosive expose’…
Jerry, no reason to be bewildered. People ask me to cite sources and yet, seldom cite sources themselves. Regardless, Let me say that you are never going to convince me that man-made co2 affects global weather! And, of course, I am not going to convince you that man-made co2 has never affected weather, global warming, rising oceans, etc. I have spent countless hours and read and watched countless authoritative sources and have accepted that co2 is not the source of global warming. On the contrary, it is very apparent to me that solar activity is the SOLE source that affects weather. So, it is apparent to me that we are at a standstill. I will follow your articles more and respond more actively with my authoritative resources. You and your buddies can attempt to degrade my sources but it will NEVER change my mind. In my opinion, the entire man-made co2 causing global warming is clearly a swindle that is supported by over-zealous political and environmental activist crying “Wolf!” The panic has created a source of funding for research and many scientist are using that money and ensuring that any research they do refers to global warming and the possible affects on earth.
These blogs always go off on tangents that have nothing to do with the topic at hand. Perhaps that’s what blogs do, but, I find it frustrating and the people that go off on tangents as repugnant.
Good luck with your research. I hope someday you’ll find a resource that will show you the error of your believes regarding this topic! Best wishes to you and Barbara and Happy New Year!
Dear all:
These exchanges start off like a science class and then degrade to a preteen slumber party pillow fight with the most nutcase statements I have ever heard. Just go study what Dr. James Hansen of NASA has been expounding for years and then take any science class at a local junior college for Christ Sakes…the moronics of these exchanges is disgusting—I delete a full half of them, and then tune in and delete another 20 more…you clowns should be ashamed of yourselves…no wonder Bush and Cheney could get “appointed” to their Administration in 2000, and get “re-elected” in 2004…and assault weapons with high-count magazine clips are still accessible in the US—Warring piss ants show higher cerebral capacities surrounding their most recently discovered “porcelain lake” and then contemplate how to get nearer to the “freshwater”—Good luck in Science 101…pb
Mr. Page, I suspect these people but poorly understand nuance and irony when they encounter them, let alone scientific method with its testing, evaluation and validation of findings. They should stick to law where argued conclusions don’t have to be true, just persuasive to a few, carefully selected jurists.
Rick—Just a note or two concerning several members of your expert panel. (Just had a few minutes to tuck into this foray, but enough, I think to make a point.) By the way, I think you have misunderstood my bewilderment, since I am reasonably certain that providing sources and extracts of basic research has been fundamental to my approach to posting.
Patrick Moore, while an early member frequently portrays himself as a founder or co-founder of Greenpeace (not true), and many news outlets have repeated this characterization. Moore, a paid spokesman for the nuclear industry, frequently cites that long-ago affiliation with Greenpeace to gain legitimacy in the media. For more than 20 years, Mr. Moore has been a paid spokesman for a variety of polluting industries, including the timber, mining, chemical and the aquaculture industries. In 2004, Mr. Moore published an article in the International Atomic Energy Agency’s (IAEA) journal entitled “Nuclear Re-think.” According to Mr. Moore, “Three Mile Island was a success story
In 1970, Nigel Calder participated in the original Earth Day by proclaiming “The threat of a new ice age must now stand alongside nuclear war as a likely source of wholesale death and misery for mankind.” Calder is a long-standing sceptic of global warming. As early as 1980, he predicted that within 20 years “the much-advertised heating of the earth by the man-made carbon-dioxide ‘greenhouse’ [will fail] to occur; instead, there [will be] renewed concern about cooling and an impending ice age”.
Tim Ball was a former professor of geography at the University of Winnipeg from 1988 to 1996. He has been “scientific advisor” to the (Exxon-funded) Friends of Science (FoS) which was revealed to have received significant funding from the oil industry. In a lawsuit with the Calgary Herald, he claimed as well to have been a professor (again of climatology) at the University of Winnipeg for 32 years, while he confirmed in his own Statement of Claim in a pending lawsuit that he was a professor (of geography, never climatology) for just eight years. (DESMOGBLOG.COM)
Dr. Ball claims never to have been paid by oil and gas interests, but a Globe and Mail story in which Dr. Barry Cooper, the man behind Ball’s former industry front group, the Friends of Science, offers this clumsy admission: “[The money’s] not exclusively from the oil and gas industry,” says Prof. Cooper. “It’s also from foundations and individuals. I can’t tell you the names of those companies.”…
Time moves on and I think that closes me out of this conversation. And about time! It’s ten minutes till 2013
As I have followed this exchange something sticks out like a sore thumb. Do not doubt “Global Warming” or “Climate Change”. That is fine but when someone like Rick Ernst presents his side with sources two of the most rude people I have everry encounter go into an attack mode of name calling and personal attacks. Not just on Rick. Try DDL, Bob Livesay also. All they do is bring out who they are except in the case of the local “Cowardly Lioness”. Yes no name “Mrs. Real American”. I do expect it fre4om these two. They do it all the time. DDL and Bob Livesay really get under their skin. But Rick Ernst said nothing personal and did as they requested. You know sources. It is OK to take the side of these two but not in the fashion that these two live on and in the Lioness case hide under. At least Robert Shelby does identify himself. These name calling and personal attacks have nothing to do with the article that Mr. Page wrote. Notice how professional Mr. Page was in his response. He gains a lot of respect from that. Also so does Rick Ernst on his comments and responces. He ignores the nasty personal and name calling attacks with very little responce to them. Sticks to the subjuest. Guess what? Not in the case of these two attack people. They try to disgrace Rick with uncalled for remarks. I know the local folks are on to Shelby. That appears to not bother him. I actually think it concerns him a great deal.. The “Lioness” has at present no worry. Just hide and fire away. Lioness you may be surprised how many folks think you are Mike or Mrs. Mike the spoke person for Mike. Do you not think it is about time you came out and identified yourself. I do not think you will. I do expect these two angry attack people will not stop. Just watch the comments back on this comment. It will tell you what they really are. Just one-sided biased people that will attack in a very nasty way any thing that is counter to their one-side views. I do hope all had a Wonderful New Years. I do believe DDL and his elitist party must have been grand. Sounds to me like a true American spirit of New Years. Maybe some time in the near future DDL, Pugh, Robinson, Livesay, Ernst, Shelby, Bray, Will and the Lioness could get together and have an open discussion. Have Marc Either as the moderater. Are any of you up to it. I sure am.
One of the best and most comprehensive articles I’ve seen in my layman’s research on climate change is–(with all due respect to Professor Page, and his series of thought provoking pieces on this subject matter)
” How we know Global Warming is Real and Human Caused.”By Dr. Donald Prothero.
A couple of key extracts from the article to entice the reader/community to to proceed to the scientific truth.
“The climate change deniers have a lot in common with creationists and other anti-science movements.”
” Reality must take precedence over Public Relations, for Nature cannot be fooled.”
–Richard Feynman
http://www.skeptic.com/eskeptic/12-02-08/#feature
Again, how do you explain the period of 40 years, from 1940 to 1980, when temperatures fell (during the height of the industrial production of man-made co2) prompting many to predict the entrance of a new ice age? You keep throwing this mud against the wall hoping it will stick, but you don’t answer any of my questions, or DDL’s questions for that matter. Are we supposed to accept all of your statements without question? I don’t think so!
Where did you get your figures? If you do not cite a specific source we will assume you are making them up. That’s how it works. Cite sources or STFU.
RA shouted:Cite sources or STFU.
My, my, my, such a potty mouth. So much for the ‘Happy New Year’.
Not a shout. A web acronym. Big difference.
DDL, I didn’t think a response was merited. I’m done responding to real unamerican!
DDL I do think your reponse was needed. I do understand how Rick feels also. “The Cowardly Lioness” is all about name calling and very uncalled for nasty remarks. “The Cowardly Lioness” will never change. So what does Bob Livesay do? Everything I can to bring out the hatred, anger, nasty remarks in the Lioness. Guess what is does work and we all know now what we are dealing with. The Lioness will continue with that approach. Just watch what the Lioness will now say about me. I hear it coming. He He He. I also think the comments between Petersen and Rick can be productive as long as they are on topic. Both seem to have good knowledge on the subject. But also remember so does DDL.
But also remember so does Jerome Page.
Jerome Page is the author of the article. I do believe his name need not be mentioned.
Jerome Page is the author of this oped. I do believe his name must be mentioned.
You just did.
He deserves double mention.
Off topic, but worth noting:
“With no bipartisan agreement about the debt ceiling, spending cuts and tax increases in sight, Boehner reportedly pointed at Reid and said, “Go f**k yourself.”
“What are you talking about?” Reid asked.
And Boehner again said, “Go f**k yourself.”
Our representatives in Congress aren’t worth bat spit! I’ve never seen such a dysfunctional collection of misfits!—pb
I assume Pedro you are talking about both sides . President Obama just blew one past you and never said a word. The 2 % S/S payroll tax which made it just like it was in 2010. Now 6.2% not 4.2% for employees. That amount will be taxed on every payroll employee in this country up to $113,700. Hows it that for the middle class that the President so dearly says he is protecting. You kinow protecting 98% of the middle class with no tax increase. Make a thou a week and see your check decrease by $20 or over $1000.00 a year. I do believe he just told a big fat lie folks that elected him. Just watch as all payroll departments are flooded to ask the question why. They will demaqnd the money back because the President said he was stopping the increase on their taxes. They may just learn a lesson about their beloved President. We will see. This in going to have a big effect on the recovery efforts. Very sneaky of the President.
Yeah Republicans fought real hard to keep that payroll tax deduction in place. So hard they forgot to mention it once.
Remember two Icon it was the President who was leading. Yes he did lead to higher taxes for the middle income. Two Icon the President had the inside track all the way and he failed all you Liberals. How shameful.
Remember One Note the president may have failed liberals, which I dispute, but Republicans continue to fail the country. Far more shameful.
Correct, Mr. Livesay, neither party in Congress is worth squat in my book–the SS payroll tax increase helps keep the SS system fluid…as compared to the corruption of capitalistic maggots who sock Medicare for all the useless surgeries and lab tests that no one needs…we are a mediocre species of piss-ants, who think that assault rifles and drive-by shootings will recapture street equality and trivial egos for everyone–totally dysfunctional like their Congress members…I am NOT impressed, and if a Second Noah is building his boat, maybe he needs some help, and I’ll hurry his Departure, polar bears, women and children on board first, let the males debate squat until after the sun don’t shine no mo’—…pb
To Thomas:
RA’s words seem appropriate:
If you do not cite a specific source we will assume you are making them up. That’s how it works. Cite sources or STFU.
But, I will assume that Boehner’s comment is true and it may be an indicator that Boehner may have finally grown a much needed pair.
“The mid-century cooling appears to have been largely due to a high concentration of sulphate aerosols in the atmosphere, emitted by industrial activities and volcanic eruptions. Sulphate aerosols have a cooling effect on the climate because they scatter light from the Sun, reflecting its energy back out into space.”
16 May 2007 by Catherine Brahic
I’m sure you folks have an answer for everything! But, your answers do not convince. The earth’s climate is always changing. In earth’s history there have been countless periods when earth’s temperatures were much warmer and much cooler than today — when much of the world was covered with tropical forests or vast ice sheets! The climate has always changed, and changed without the help of us humans. We can trace the current warming trend starting 200 years ago following a period of cold temperatures known as “The little Ice Age” from 1400 to 1800. Prior to the Little Ice Age, we find the “Medieval Warm Period” when we find great wealth from agriculture. And going back a little further we find, what climatologist call, the “Holocene Maximum” period where temperatures were much warmer than today for a period of 3,000 years well before man-made co2 came into the picture. The polar bears obviously survived these warm periods. They seem to be quite adaptable. I would like to see your answers for these periods of global cooling and warming!
The problem is that none of us are climatologists, or scientists, or researchers, or educators. We are all taking what others have written and interpreting it through our colored glasses. it’s up to the public to believe or not believe what they wish. There is little evidence either way. Benicia is NOT under water! It’s been cold all winter long. There’s obviously very little indication of global warming. So, I for one, do not believe the global warming fearmongers. Obviously some of you do, which, is fine! I respect your opinion as I expect you to respect my opinion! Best wishes and, please have a great 2013!
Is it possible to bring ocean acidification in to the discussion? It is the name given to the ongoing decrease in the pH of the Earth’s oceans, caused by the uptake of anthropogenic carbon dioxide (CO2) from the atmosphere.
A new computer model developed in Switzerland shows that the pH of the ocean waters off the west coast of the US will fall over the next four decades faster than previously thought. The region studied is on the eastern boundary of an upwelling zone, and is important for commercial fishing and for its diversity in marine life.
Read more at: http://phys.org/news/2012-06-ocean-ph-falling-rapidly.html#jCp
Mr. Petersen, you can bring up anything you want! Regarding commercial fishing, I think the world’s oceans will be fully depleted of fish in four decades. The billionaire filth are fishing it to extinction. Major food fish have been depleted by at least 80%, just 20% to go. They have to get that last buck out of the ocean. Huge nets being dragged on the ocean floor killing everything in it’s way, long line fishing, millions of gallons of oil spilt in the Gulf of Mexico. I think these are major problems.
Regarding co2 in the ocean, when temperatures rise, the oceans expel co2, when temperatures cool, the oceans absorb co2. It’s an ongoing and natural process. I don’t think there’s much to talk about here!
“Climate models are only as good as the assumptions that go into them. And there are hundreds of assumptions. All it takes is one assumption to be incorrect and the entire projection is thrown off!”
–Dr. Roy Spencer, award winning weather satellite team leader, NASA
Lioness I notice you have different icon. What is up? Mr. Page is mentioned every week. I do believe we know where he stands Lioness.
You could learn something if you paid more attention to him, Scarecrow.
“Final note: The tiny assortment above is representative of thousands of similar foreboding pieces. ”
Whoa, thank God for those thousands of similar foreboding pieces. For a minute I thought CAGW was a thing of the past, I was getting worried there. Phew!
CAGW is alive and well! Wahoo!!
Good to know Klem that you were moved, and how much. Helps to sustain me. Wish I had (realistically) said tens of thousands; you’d be in an ecstatic frenzy.
Fascinating material on acidification, Thomas. It must clearly be incorporated in the discussion. The mysteries of where that kind of causal relationship will take—or drive—us should give pause, but good luck with that faint hope.
Rick: “The problem is that none of us are climatologists, or scientists, or researchers, or educators. We are all taking what others have written and interpreting it through our colored glasses. it’s up to the public to believe or not believe what they wish. There is little evidence either way.” I find this exceedingly puzzling, since you have asserted vehemently above that the evidence is clear, that you have studied it carefully, have it in hand and that it completely negates my sources
Jerry! I’m sorry you are so “exceedingly” puzzled! There is nothing puzzling about my comments. The entire man-made global warming argument is false and is not based in any way shape or form on any known scientific analysis or study. The “experts” have ignored all scientific studies that show a demonstrated and very close relationship between solar activity and global temperatures. The earth has sustained periods much hotter than today and much colder than today. The polar bears have survived a period in time of several thousand years when temperatures were considerably hotter than today.
This whole co2 argument started 25 years ago when Margaret Thatcher tried to break the coal-worker and oil-worker unions in England. She wanted to push nuclear power in England. When somebody suggested that co2 MIGHT produce global warming, she jumped at it and the British government threw millions at it trying to prove the “theory”. It has never been proved! Again, the scientist completely ignored the years of scientific study showing the correlation between solar activity and global temperature. In 1990, the United States spent $170 million on scientific research related to global warming. Today, we are spending $4 BILLION on the topic to no avail. There are 10s of thousands of jobs dependent on this money! There is no question that scientists, university professors, newspeople, and anybody connected to the global warming topic are going to try to persuade the world’s population that their study merits the money available for such research. Personally, I think it’s a waste of money that could be used for far better study!
But, as I said, you have convinced your “supporters” of your views as I have convinced my “supporters” of my point of view. I am NOT changing my position. I assume you aren’t changing yours! I can accept that! The polar bears have survived! Benicia is not 20 feet under water and won’t be because of man-made co2. Everything is going quite normally!
What is a problem is the amount of toxins that BIG oil and BIG chemical companies and BIG Pharma and BIG Farming corporations are putting into the air, water and food! This needs to stop, but, they have the politicians in their pockets (democrats and republicans) who are in a made food frenzy trying to get their share! Their lobbyists have handed out BILLIONS of dollars to our represntatives and senators in an effort to subvert our democratic system and they have succeeded. Even our president accepted $280 million dollars from wall street firms in his first election for Christ’s sake! He probably accepted even more for this last election against a very rich opponent! It is terribly expensive to run for a federal office and these folks need the money! But, the system ties them to their contributors in an horrible fashion so that votes are swayed in favor of the wall street billionaires! The Koch Bros. alone, worth $44 BILLION, are a prime example — the worst polluters in the world! I have no answers for the problems in Washington. I don’t have billions to solve the problem, perhaps you do!
Regardless, again, I’ll wish you and Barbara a Happy New Year!
“But, as I said, you have convinced your “supporters” of your views as I have convinced my “supporters” of my point of view. I am NOT changing my position.”
A couple things: 1. whoever supports your view, Rick, I’d wager wasn’t convinced by you. They bought into the crazy a long time ago. Kind of like the truther movement, you just can’t talk sense into em. 2. If you won’t change your position no matter what, then what’s the point in talking to you? And what’s that say about you?
Just thought I’d chime in.
Frank Buck can you change your position? If you can not what does that say about you. Did you buy into the crazy a long time ago? Why just they and not them. So Frank what is the point of talking to you? Or does Rick have to change his. It appears you both have done your homework and are convinced your side is correct. I find nothing wrong with that.
Wasn’t talking to you, Bob. You don’ t know anything about me or my opinion. I’m talking to Rick, who’s spending a lot of time on here saying no one can change his mind. Well then, why talk about it?
RA stated: There you go again, putting country second
That is OK, I would rather side with the majority in that 7-2 SCOTUS descision, the one which helped seal the fate of Man-bear-pig AL.
5-4. Your accuracy problem again.
There were two decisions, one was 5-4 regarding the time frame of the recounts, the other was 7-2 regarding the equal protection clause, which is the one to which I referred.
Equal protection is guaranteed by the Constitution, time frames for recounts are determined by the state.
I will refrain from commenting negatively on your lack of historical knowledge on the subject, would that you could be as gracious.
Not well conveyed in the previous post. Your poor writing skills again.
A right cross to the head. That hurts. Maybe that will rattle your brain and hopefully you speak with more info in the future. I love it when someone finds your facts off center. I have no problem with folks not getting the facts right down to the nitty gritty. But I do have a problem with the Lioness or he/she deliberate attacks on others of a different political side. Think before you give away your lack of a good defense.
Great metaphor, Bob. Sounds like disagreements in your household can get real nasty. Feel sorry for your wife.
Why would you bring up the decision when you had such poor knowledge of the decision.
He brought it up. I’m sorry. Please don’t hit me.
Just say your comment was wrong. You got caught and do not like it. You may want to read your partners comments before commenting. It does appear you do comment under two icons. Could that be he/she.
Shows how much you know. The icon thing was because I mistyped my email address and the moderator had to approve the comment.
I wasn’t wrong. DDL failed to clarify what he was talking about. A common failing in his writings. But to answer your previous question, do you always have perfect absolute knowledge of the things you bring up in conversation? Go ahead, lie to me and say yes.
RA stated: DDL failed to clarify what he was talking about.
That is simply not true RA and you know it.
Specifically I said:the majority in that 7-2 SCOTUS descision
You tried to correct me by saying the decision was 5-4. If you did not know what I was talking about, how could you accuse me of being wrong, by giving 5-4 as the correct decision count? You knew I was talking about Bush v Gore, and you simply were unaware that there were two decisions made that day, a common error made by the Gore supporters, as that feeds the premise that it was the “conservative” court that ruled in Bush’s favor and a 7-2 decision goes against that thinking.
Everyone makes mistakes, but people with integrity admit when they do, something which I have done in the past, as well as something you simply refuse to do.
What’s most interesting is how you have jumped all over this while ignoring most of the larger critiques leveled at your ridiculous interpretation of events, both in recent and older history. And you have your silverhaired lapdog to help you out. Pathetic. Tell him to take his woman-beating metaphors elsewhere, unless you want to be lumped in with him as a domestic abuser.
I am not sure what you refer to when you say “larger critiques” as I have not seen a single reference made with links given to sources which refuted anything I have said.
As a rule of thumb, I am not going to respond to gross generalizations regarding my accuracy on any subject, but will gladly respond to any specifics.
As far as wife beating goes, I think you once again have leaped to an erroneous assumption, which makes two on this thread alone.
The Lioness is getting angrier and angrier. I am not sure what gets you in these situations. But wife beating? Lie? Blaming others for your own failures. Lioness you had the opportunity to explain that there was two decisions. You did not and everyone thought you only thought there was one. Now is that DDL’s fault? I think not. You could have explained the icon thing a while back. You chose to ignore it. Now you say I do not know what I am talking about. I think your explanation was very good. But to jumb on others for your failure is very childish. I love this one Silverhaired Lapdog”. Domestic abuser. Now Lioness just where did you get the evidence that I am that. Very strong statement acussing someone of being a wife beater. I do see the Lioness running for cover like a very scared kitten. Meow, Meow
Well there goes your last shred of dignity Bob.
That boat has long since sailed.
Is that the best you got? Meow?