Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/22
- Boxlock20 on Open thread 11/22
- satatom on Open thread 11/22
- JimJohnson on Open thread 11/22
- Regular on Open thread 11/22
- Regular on Open thread 11/22
- DavidB on Health care reform would save state money
- DavidB on Minority status in Senate; majority approval at home
- JimJohnson on Open thread 11/22
- American_Way on Open thread 11/22
148 Comments
I was wondering this morning, just after waking up, how Jonathan and Martha Kent disciplined Clark when he was a toddler.
Probably backed the Buick over him a couple of times.
Bush do PM’s questions? No way, says White House.
http://rawstory.com/news/afp/Bush_do_PM_s_questions_No_way_says__06032008.html
===============================================
Tell me that wouldn’t be fun to watch.
U.S. Army says Sun, Not Man, Is Causing Climate Change
The Army is weighing in on the global warming debate, claiming that climate change is not man-made. Instead, Dr. Bruce West, with the Army Research Office, argues that “changes in the earth’s average surface temperature are directly linked to … the short-term statistical fluctuations in the Sun’s irradiance and the longer-term solar cycles.”
In an advisory to bloggers entitled “Global Warming: Fact of Fiction [sic],” an Army public affairs official promoted a conference call with West about “the causes of global warming, and how it may not be caused by the common indicates [sic] some scientists and the media are indicating.”
In the March, 2008 issue of Physics Today, West, the chief scientist of the Army Research Office’s mathematical and information science directorate, wrote that “the Sun’s turbulent dynamics” are linked with the Earth’s complex ecosystem. These connections are what is heating up the planet. “The Sun could account for as much as 69 percent of the increase in Earth’s average temperature,” West noted.
It’s a position that puts West at odds with nearly every major scientific organization on the planet. “The American Meteorological Society, the American Geophysical Union, and the American Association for the Advancement of Science all have issued statements in recent years concluding that the evidence for human modification of climate is compelling,” Science magazine observes. So has the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), which shared the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize with Al Gore, for their work on global warming.
West acknowledges that the IPCC and other scientific groups have “conclude[d] that the contribution of solar variability to global warming is negligible.” He argues that these groups have done a poor job modeling the Sun’s impact, however, and that’s why they have “significantly over-estimated” the “anthropogenic contribution to global warming.”
In recent days, the science and politics of climate change have once again taken center stage. NASA’s Inspector General just issued a report, acknowledging that political appointees “reduced, marginalized or mischaracterized climate change science made available to the general public.” Yesterday, the Senate began debating a bill that would cap carbon dioxide emissions — considered one of the leading causes of man-made global warming.
YOUR GUIDE TO U.S. SENATE CLIMATE-BILL SLUGFEST
The big day’s here. Months of anticipation about a U.S. policy switch on global warming will culminate in today’s Senate debate over the Lieberman-Warner bill, which would impose a cap on U.S. greenhouse-gas emissions starting in 2012. Culminate is too strong a word, since virtually no one expects Congress to pass any climate legislation this year. Still, the political theater, due to start late this afternoon, will make interesting watching – and there’s no Monday Night Football tonight anyway. So here are a few things to keep in mind as the show begins:
This fight is brown vs. green, not red vs. blue. “Where you stand depends on where you sit,” goes an old saw about politics. That’s particularly true about the politics of energy and the environment, where allegiances are less about party affiliation and more about regional fuel supplies. So, expect coal-state senators, whether Democrat or Republican, to push to ensure that no climate bill hits their constituents too hard. And expect senators from states with cleaner electricity mixes – say, California’s Barbara Boxer- to push for constraints that would benefit their natural-gas-fired hometown teams.
Everyone at the table wants a bigger slice of the pie. That this bill will affect essentially everyone in the economy is clear from its list of whom it will give handouts – federal emission “allowances.” Everyone from power companies to oil companies to hybrid-truck operators to Native American tribes is inscribed in the bill as a recipient of these permits to pollute, which they can either use or sell. Each is gunning to boost his or her take.
The tradeoff: the economy or the environment? There’s no free lunch. A bigger emissions cut will cost more than a smaller cut. It will raise energy prices more, it will require more-expensive technology, it will deepen concerns about U.S. economic competitiveness against developing countries, like China, that haven’t committed to emission caps. There are myriad studies about how much all this will cost the economy, but fundamentally the debate here is over where to draw this line. Should the bill err on the side of giving companies carbon-price certainty, as carbon-tax proponents want, or on the side of slashing emissions hard, as environmental groups want? Complex price-control mechanisms in the Boxer amendment to the bill attempt to strike a balance. Expect big pressure to shift it.
Nothing much will happen. With gasoline prices nearing $4 a gallon as the summer driving season approaches, and with a presidential election five months away, essentially nobody expects the Senate now to actually pass climate legislation, because doing so would push up the energy prices that voters pay. This week’s fight on the Hill is about establishing talking points for the election – and battle lines for the real policy fight expected in 2009 or 2010. There will be lots of atmospherics this week, but they’ll probably have little effect on the atmosphere.
http://blogs.wsj.com/environmentalcapital/2008/06/02/showtime-your-guide-to-todays-senate-climate-bill-slugfest/
Science DENIER alert!
Science DENIER alert!
Science DENIER alert!
………old man price is in the room
scroll over territory.
Thankfully, it appears that Senator Kennedy sailed through his operation earlier this week:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,362421,00.html
From reading this story, it is abundantly clear that medical advancements have come a long, long way since my father died of a similar tumor in 1972. 36 years ago, the surgeons could do nothing: They performed surgery, merely examined the tumor, and ceased their efforts at that point. According to Wichita physicians at the time, the tumor was “too massive” to work with.
The details of this situation were kept hidden from me; I was only 13 at the time. Moreover, puberty had hit full-force that spring of ‘72, and I remember being more consumed with that seismic event than with my father’s travails.
But I do remember that he endured a brief bout with radiation and/or chemotherapy – and his sufferings were considerable. After a few days of this anguish, it was decided that we cease all treatments. It simply wasn’t worth it. Not in hopeless, terminal cases such as his.
As I have shared previously, death was an angel of mercy when it occurred that July morning 36 years ago. Let us hope that, with vastly improved pain medications, new elixirs to treat nausea, and the best physicians that Senator Kennedy’s funds can likely afford, that Kennedy’s situation is more favorable than my father’s.
It is also to be expected that his eventual death, when it occurs, won’t be a carnival of the farcical and superficial. When my father died, our regular (Methodist) pastor was out of town or on vacation, I can’t remember which. So a guest minister, who had never met my father, officiated.
My late sister and my brother sat next to me, and when the eulogy began, the eyebrows furled. A remote, alcoholic, wholly uncommunicative father was rhapsodized in the glowing, glistening soliloquies normally utilized for saints and war heroes.
At thirteen, I was too young to grasp the absurdity – and the import – therein. I’m no longer thirteen, of course. And I’ve read extensively on the Kennedy family. Somehow, I don’t believe the Senator’s eventual tributes will leave his children incredulous and disdainful.
I don’t believe his children will ever hear that “it was common knowledge that Teddy didn’t care about his wife and kids.” I’ve heard that statement. I know it’s “not my fault” – at least that’s what the psychobabble in “Good Will Hunting” attested. But it makes little difference.
Still and all, I wouldn’t wish my father’s terminal illness on either him or Senator Kennedy. Cancer can be the harshest punisher; when perpetual peace arrives, the greatest relief can be realized.
“FilmFan” –
I wouldn’t wish cancer on anyone, either.
(Although, were it to strike some of the Cons who post in this forum, brain surgery would be a minor operation.)
;-)
Apophis
“Science DENIER alert!”
No, JUNK Science Denier.
scroll over territory.
No, kidding, Mary. If it continues, there won’t be anything left to read here, and we can all get our lives back to normal.
My late sister and my brother sat next to me, and when the eulogy began, the eyebrows furled. A remote, alcoholic, wholly uncommunicative father was rhapsodized in the glowing, glistening soliloquies normally utilized for saints and war heroes.
I’ve seen that happen quite often, FF. I nearly laughed out loud at a funeral years ago because of that happening.
Wichita’s Water Rates Receive National Attention
Date: June 3, 2008
Contact: Angela Cato, Communications Specialist
: ACato@wichita.gov
: (316) 268-4504
Black & Veatch 2007 Water/Wastewater Rate Survey coming soon
The City of Wichita may rank 50th on the U.S. Census Bureau’s list of most populated cities, but its low water utilities rates continue to put it in the top 10 in the nation. According to a recent survey released by Black & Veatch, Wichita’s water/sewer customers consistently pay less than their counterparts in most areas of the country.
“Wichita’s favorable rankings are directly tied to the city’s understanding that a competitive price of water utilities plays a very important role in attracting residents and businesses,” said Director of Utilities David Warren. “The Wichita City Council combines an emphasis on quality with sound business principles to guide the Water Utilities operation.”
Black & Veatch, a global engineering, consulting and construction company, contacted each of the top 50 populated cities to compile the survey, which is broken down into four monthly water usage levels: 7,500 gallons, 15,000 gallons, 100,000 gallons and 10 million gallons. In the 7,500-gallon category, Wichita ranked sixth in the country, ahead of such municipalities as Kansas City, Oklahoma City, Nashville and Colorado Springs. In fact, the difference between Wichita’s rates and those of the No. 1 finisher, Memphis, was less than $13. On the other end of the scale, Wichita’s rates were nearly $80 less than No. 50 Seattle.
In the next category, 15,000 gallons, Wichita ranked 10th least expensive. According to the Wichita Water Utilities department, the average citizen uses 7,500 gallons of water per month if he/she lives in a home with a family of four in the winter months when lawn irrigation isn’t a factor. The larger amount of 15,000 gallons applies to the same family during summer months when usage is higher due to lawn irrigation and swimming pools.
In the remaining categories, 100,000- and 10 million-gallon usage, Wichita’s rates placed it fifth and sixth, respectively. Wichita Water Utilities estimates the average business uses 100,000 gallons a water per month; Wichita’s largest employers use 10 million gallons of water per month.
The Black & Veatch 2007 Water/Wastewater Rate Survey will soon be posted in its entirety online at http://www.wichita.gov.
If it were due to an increase in solar output the stratosphere would be warming even more. The opposite is true – the stratosphere is actually cooling:
http://www.wunderground.com/education/strato_cooling.asp
But that is all moot now because solar output is down. And so are temperatures. Coincidence?
AGW theory came to the forefront during a period of warming. My guess is that it will gradually fade from the stage in the face of steady or falling global temperatures.
We all should hope the current solar minimum changes soon. Any sunspots yet?
http://www.spaceweather.com/
LOL I sometimes imagine standing on the high ground looking at the people standing neck deep in the water. Their arguing:
“It was man made!”
“No it was nature made!”.
“It was man Made!”
“No it was nature made!”.
meanwhile the rest of us are calling down saying “Hey here is your Darwin award!”.
Stratospheric Cooling?
One of the more interesting “Sky Is Falling” postulations made in recent years has been the claim that the apparently cooling stratosphere is masking observation of anticipated warming in the troposphere. Quaintly, such claimants point to satellite MSU (Microwave Sounding Unit) stratosphere data suggesting such cooling to try to invalidate satellite MSU troposphere data, data which obstinately declines to demonstrate the trend Big Warming requires to maintain the scare and nurture the cash cow.
One of the reasons suggested for stratospheric cooling is that more infrared (re-)radiation from the Earth is being trapped by increasing atmospheric carbon dioxide and is thus unavailable to warm the stratosphere (you are required to ignore any thought of saturation to believe this). Another, more plausible explanation would be reduced stratospheric ozone (ozone is a greenhouse gas) from whatever cause and the stratosphere is thus capturing less energy and cooling. Possible reasons for ‘loss’ of ozone are not addressed here but no, we are not staunch supporters of the Montreal Protocol either.
Typically, the cry at JunkScience.com is “Show me the data!” and, happily for our band of wandering skeptics, the required data is readily available here. Since most people exhibit signs of distress when faced with tabular data we have provided a representation in graphical format (linked from the thumbnail below). Two startling anomalies are obvious in the data, the stratospheric response to explosive volcanic eruptions of El Chichon in 1982 and Mt. Pinatubo in 1991. Although they are of limited value we know that people will ask, especially as they are not marked on the graph so, entire series trend value: y = -0.0038x + 0.5538 and first split 12/78 – 12/93 trend value: y = -0.0021x + 0.4581.
We’ve all heard the claims (repeatedly) that the Earth is currently hot and getting hotter. In fact, a quick sort on the GISTEMP near-surface amalgam shows the top 7 global mean temperatures since 1880 have occurred in the period following our Pinatubo shading. Logically then, if “global warming” (enhanced greenhouse) causes stratospheric cooling and 7 of the 11 years in our final trend split are the hottest years, at least since 1880, we expect to see stratospheric temperatures cooling, no? Let’s look at the graph…
… uh-oh – that’s not Big Warming’s desired result is it. What could have gone “wrong?”
Perhaps the near-surface record is now so UHIE-corrupted that the planet wasn’t really that warm? Possible but they won’t go there because that would trample the enhanced greenhouse thing about increased infrared capture in the troposphere denying the stratosphere and causing cooling there (which is masking the warming in the tropospheric record – right?).
Recovery in the stratospheric ozone? Nope, that would upset too many fellow travelers because there’d be no need to continue attacking chlorine/bromine compounds as alleged ODS (Ozone Depleting Substances) – imagine a world where you couldn’t get rid of so useful a compound as methyl bromide – unthinkable!
Hmm… a tough one. Big Warming seems to have [another] problem.
How long, do you suppose, before they come up with the old shell game: stratospheric cooling being masked by tropospheric warming?
No? Why not? Big Warming, the three-M coalition of Misanthropists, Miscreants and Misguided are certainly masters of the art of circular reasoning. The troposphere is really warming, despite what your lying eyes and empirical data tell you, it’s just being masked by the cooling stratosphere – which you could see to be cooling except that cooling is being masked by tropospheric warming. Quod erat demonstrandum.
More for amusement than anything the two tracks prove, here then is the combination showing both the lower troposphere and lower stratosphere along with a few important influences noted.
Presenting data in this fashion does not help Big Warming’s campaign since, absent obvious external factors, one track neither consistently mirrors nor mimics the other – not what we might expect if warming one cools the other.
We might surmise that components of Mt. Pinatubo debris increased ozone destruction, contributing significantly to stratospheric cooling as the atmosphere cleared following that event. It is interesting that there appears to be two step reductions in stratospheric temperature following both the explosive volcanic events that caused initial warming – that would not appear consistent with enhanced greenhouse-induced cooling since increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide has been more or less consistent over the period. We might surmise a lot of things but we find no support for Big Warming’s contention though.
Obviously we’re still having trouble with the “it’d be hotter if it wasn’t cooled” thing.
graphs and charts available on Stratospheric cooling for your lying eyes on Junkscience.com
“Environmentalists are Gaia’s priests, instructing us in her proper service and casting out those who refuse to genuflect… And having proclaimed the ultimate commandment—carbon chastity—they are preparing the supporting canonical legislation that will tell you how much you can travel, what kind of light you will read by, and at what temperature you may set your bedroom thermostat.” —Charles Krauthammer
“The true villain in our having to cough up $60, $70 or $80 to fill our gas tanks is the U.S. Congress caught in the grip of environmental extremists. But if reality is too difficult to swallow, we can continue to blame and support the congressional attack on oil executives, turn food into oil and think of other crackpot ‘solutions’.” —Walter Williams
“Where does the Constitution give Congress—even a liberal Democrat Congress—authority to even think about nationalizing, or socializing the oil companies?” —Henry Lamb
I don’t wish to give Randall Terry any more of the attention which he craves. However….if anyone has any doubts about his sordid past, dig this particular URL:
http://mediamatters.org/items/200503220001
And that’s not even the whole of it.
As a post-abortive woman, I’ve probably got my own reasons for believing the man is an ode to cannibalization. SELF-cannibalization. Succinctly, I don’t think he’s going to prevail in this insipid lawsuit he’s got goin’ on. Bluntly, he’s squandered his moral capital with a whole lotta people – and peeps, as it were.
As a P.A.W. (get your minds outta the gutters, perverts) – this little slice of Terry his-TERRY makes me flesh curdle: Evidently, before the all-knowing abortion avatar converted to the Church of Rome, he was invited to address a group of Catholic parishioners some years ago. The dude and his girlish, homely figure strides to the podium, flings his outstretched palms to the masses (continuing his habit of equating himself with Christ and all the martyrs), and boldly intones the following phelgm offering:
“Now, if any of you ladies have ever had an a-b-or-tion, don’t worry. I do not comdemn you.”
The same dude who stated that “hatred is good” and that “we will execute abortionists” had these words of godlike glory. And they still makes me puke.
For one thing – Mr. Terry probably needs to know that a lot of us aren’t waiting for his “mercy” – or his opprobrium, either. He is not God. He is not a priest in the confessional. He is not my own impregnator (thank Christ on that one) who couldn’t have cared less about “having a say” in my situation, except to drunkenly scream at me to “have the doctor take care of me.” Candidly, I don’t give a cold, crusty crap what Randall Frigging Terry thinks. And I never will.
I just don’t think Terry is going to fare very well here. He still comports himself like the former used car salesman he once was. He still deems himself a godly goliath. He still sinks to braggadocio and sophomorism. (I’ve read his latest spewings on his new website – same old stuff, same old worn-out codpiecery….)
Newman, conversely, speaks very well – and calmly. Evidently, he does not treat his staff with insidious disrespect. These facts can count for very little – if the evidence is clear and unambiguous. But in deeply fraught situations, these things can come back to haunt even the most self-important.
That’s probably another reason why I don’t give two crowing cojones what Mr. Terry thinks.
Cooling a bit – from a very high level. But still way above averages:
“April 2008 was the 13th warmest April for the the globe on record, according to statistics released by the National Climatic Data Center. The January-April year-to-date period ranked twelfth warmest.”
And the slight reprieve is not due to less sun but to La Nina:
“A weak La Niña event continues to cool ocean waters in the central and eastern equatorial Pacific.”
http://www.wunderground.com/climate/
How weak is the La Nina if it can cool entire oceans Ben? :)
13th warming on record? You do know that the ‘on record’ temperatures aren’t even worthy of a snapshot mention on the timescale of climatology. You’re not saying much there Ben.
How much warming over a century- 1.4F? Can’t you feel the sweat dripping from your brow?
Our Own Oil Cartel
“Contemplate this the next time you spend $60 or more filling up your tinny little car with gasoline made from imported oil: The U.S. government knows where it can get its hands on more untapped petroleum than exists in the proven reserves of Iran or Iraq, which have 136 billion barrels and 115 billion barrels, respectively. ”
You elected Congress. It paid you back with $4.00-per-gallon gas.
http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewCommentary.asp?Page=/Commentary/archive/200806/COM20080604c.html
Box
And that doesnt count all of the new stuff that may be under North Dakota, Montana, and southern Canada.
It’s possible that there’s more oil in North Dakota than there ever was under Saudi Arabia.
Think of that when you pay out the bung at the pump next time. Thank the enviro-wacko’s.
OMG, just when you think some posters cant be MORE stupid…
“You elected Congress. It paid you back with $4.00-per-gallon gas.”
Heheh. And I guess putting two career oil men in as preznit and vice preznit had NOTHING to do with it?
Seems like oil prices were steadily on the rise under bushco, LONG before this congress took over.
But hey, dont let the facts get in the way of a good rant…
“Think of that when you pay out the bung at the pump next time. Thank the enviro-wacko’s.”
NO… thank bushco.
Heckler
Posted June 4, 2008 at 10:35 am | Permalink
Box
And that doesnt count all of the new stuff that may be under North Dakota, Montana, and southern Canada.
It’s possible that there’s more oil in North Dakota than there ever was under Saudi Arabia.
Think of that when you pay out the bung at the pump next time. Thank the enviro-wacko’s.
———————-
And to quote Newt Gingrich:
DRILL HERE
DRILL NOW
PAY LESS
kfg
Congress is the one who restricts where we drill, not the President.
kfg
Except in Clintons case, Congress passed a bill to allow drilling in Anwar and Clinton vetoed it.
UN: Israeli Settlement Expansion Violates Int’l Law
UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon has accused Israel of violating international law by planning to build 800 new homes in a settlement outside East Jerusalem. Ban Ki-moon said, “Continuing settlement activity contravenes both international law and Israel’s obligations under the Road Map.”
http://www.democracynow.org/2008/6/4/headlines#1
Report: US Forces Believe Omar Khadr Is “Good Kid”
Two new reports by the Canadian government have revealed new details about Omar Khadr, the Canadian citizen who has spent a quarter of his life held at Guantanamo. The US soldiers holding Khadr believe he is a “good kid” who is a “likeable, funny and intelligent young man.” The US soldiers holding Khadr believe he risks becoming a radical if he continues to be held at Guantanamo. Khadr was fifteen when he was captured in Afghanistan.
http://www.democracynow.org/2008/6/4/headlines#1
Waxman Requests FBI Documents Over CIA Leak Case
And in news from Washington, Congressman Henry Waxman is requesting the FBI turn over more documents connected to the outing of CIA agent Valerie Plame. Waxman sent a letter to the Justice Department after learning that Vice President Dick Cheney’s former chief of staff Lewis “Scooter” Libby told the FBI that it’s possible he was instructed by Cheney to disseminate information to the press about Plame, the wife of Bush administration war critic Joseph Wilson. Former White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan has also revealed more information about the cover-up. He recently said that President Bush and Vice President Cheney “directed me to go out there and exonerate Scooter Libby.” Waxman said, “It would be a major breach of trust if the vice president personally directed Mr. McClellan to mislead the public.”
http://www.democracynow.org/2008/6/4/headlines#1
OMG, well like I said, you put two oil men in the white house and give them a republican controlled congress for six years, and some how it is the democrats’ fault?
Who wants to bet heckie is an eighteen percenter?
“Congress is the one who restricts where we drill, not the President.”
Who denied drilling off the Gulf Coast of Florida?
And there ain’t enough oil in ANWR to last six months………………………
“We’ve been drilling out there for 70 years,” said Schweitzer of the Bakken area. “People there like new oil production. In fact, the city of Sydney [the county seat] wants to build a refinery. Where else in America do you have a community that says, ‘we want to build a refinery in our backyard?’ ”
http://www.nypost.com/seven/05292008/business/montana_governor_is_sitting_on_an_oil_mi_113005.htm
Very promising. The refinery is even better news.
Not true WS, unless you mean run the whole country on that oil from ANWR, which is, of course, impossible. But it could makeup 10% or so of our supply for a good decade, probably longer. That’s a lot of oil
“Not true WS, unless you mean run the whole country on that oil from ANWR, which is, of course, impossible.”
About six months to a year at current consumption rates.
Hardly worth the environmental risk.
There is a Hell of a lot more oil off the Gulf Coast of Florida, but we don’t drill there because Jeb was concerned about environmental damage and the impact on tourism and George agreed.
Question – why is environmental damage a concern in Florida but not Alaska?
Very promising
My bad. If cap/trade passes, they could pump out 100,000 bbl per day and we will still have $10.00 gas.
And, folks, that is congress doing it.
Cuba will be drilling off the coast of Florida soon with the assistance of China.
Perhaps we can buy oil from China and Cuba as well? :)
“Cuba will be drilling off the coast of Florida soon with the assistance of China.”
Any back-up for that claim? I’ve seen it a lot on right-wing blogs etc but never any verification.
It is always funny watching how the Liberals would bury their heads in the sand rather than engage in a debate.
They pronounce AGW as if it were the Gospel and anyone who dares question it is not even worth their time.
That is not science. That is not rational discussion. That is ignorant faith right there.
WS Clark,
I say drill in both spots. Keep drilling. So what if ANWR is limited?
If we never drill anywhere at all then we will not get any more oil at all.
If ANWR can give us 1 million barrels a day for the next 10 years then that is a good start.
bth
Posted June 4, 2008 at 11:52 am | Permalink
“Cuba will be drilling off the coast of Florida soon with the assistance of China.”
Any back-up for that claim? I’ve seen it a lot on right-wing blogs etc but never any verification.
==============================================
Yeah Ben,
Here’s another link to a ‘right wing blog’ that’s reporting on the Cuba/China adventure in oil drilling. :roll:
China, Cuba reported in Gulf oil partnership
U.S. firms stand by, prohibited from bidding on contracts; lawmakers propose opening up U.S. coast for drilling.
May 9, 2006: 10:12 AM EDT
http://money.cnn.com/2006/05/09/news/economy/oil_cuba/index.htm
I guess we really should defer to Nathan.
“That is ignorant faith right there.”
He really is the expert on THAT subject.
How to say this without hurting feelings…
Nah, don’t care.
I’m GLAD Nathan and Regular deny global warming.
They are demonstrable kooks. SO when they raise their voice to deny global warming?
Denying global warming looks appropriately rediculous.
No one denies Climate Change Junior. We are contesting of how it is caused.
Please pay attention and notice the difference.
“If ANWR can give us 1 million barrels a day for the next 10 years then that is a good start.”
Where did you pull that number from?
And did you pressure the Republicans when they controlled all three branches of government to drill off the Coast of Florida?
If not, your argument is rather hallow.
DRILL HERE
DRILL NOW
PAY LESS
11.8 billion barrels at least as little as 4.3 billion…
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arctic_Refuge_drilling_controversy
365 days in a year x 1 million barrels = 365 million barrels a year.
11.8 billion / 365 million = 32.3
4.3 billion / 365 million = 11.7
So ANWR could give us at least 1 million barrels a day for at least 11.7 years or up to 32 years.
Or that could be 2 million barrels a day for 5 to 15 years.
That is a significant amount of oil.
I have taken the Math for Marines MCI…. LOL
This evening marks the 40th anniversary of the assassination of RFK. Moments before midnight, on June 4, 1968, the Democratic hopeful and his supporters were deliriously celebrating his California victory. “It’s on to Chicago, and let’s win there!” RFK exulted before passing into history.
The candidate lingered for slightly more than 24 hours, and died early in the morning of 6/6/68. As I was only nine years old at the time, I didn’t yet know about grief and loss. I knew it was an unfathomable tragedy, remembering JFK’s death a half-decade earlier, but I didn’t personally, truly know its import.
If anyone wishes to more fully understand the calamity of RFK’s senseless murder, rent the DVD “Bobby” – Emilio Estevez’s excellent film. The director’s use of archival RFK footage (and speeches) amidst the present-day re-enactment is vivid and stirring.
And uncanny.
In 1968, the nation was torn over war policies (Vietnam). Forty years later, we’re enmeshed in the quagmire that is Iraq. To many (especially the young), Bobby represented youth, idealism, compassion…..and change.
It is clear, from Obama’s victory last night, that many people look upon him with similar hopes.
But far more than the loss of a presidential hopeful, however, RFK’s brutal death was an unspeakable agony for his family. He left eleven children and a widow who dearly needed his guidance, leadership and love.
To his credit, and utilizing terrifying courage, it was Senator Ted Kennedy who lobbied successfully against the death penalty for Sirhan Sirhan in 1969. That’s probably the attributes we should remember as the Senator faces the difficulties and challenges that lie ahead.
WS Clark,
What does drilling off the coast of Florida have to do with ANWR?
Nothing.
It is a Red Herring to the discussion. Either drilling in ANWR is a good idea and you support it or it isn’t.
If this kook bill they are discussing today is voted in just kiss our economy goodbye. Do you have to have a brain removal to become a democrat on are you just born that way.
If the GWers get their way we will alter our economy to the point where we can’t compete in the world economy. Why would someone buy our widget for $20 when they can buy one made in China without the mandates our mfgers work under for $1?
Wake up people before we elect Carter II and wreck the economy for decades.
I say let the GWers worship at he alter of algore and GW and leave the rest of us alone.
Have you sought forgivenss (err I mean Goregiveness) from the Goracle?
I Have.
http://goracle.org/goregiveness.php
Nathan thanks for the link. I have forwarded it on to my entire family as they are also GW deniers. I am now saving my money to buy enough carbon credits from Al so I can once again sleep nights.
okobserver
Posted June 4, 2008 at 12:57 pm |
“I am now saving my money to buy enough carbon credits from Al so I can once again sleep nights.”
Oh my gosh, I’m already falling behind.
I need to buy carbon credits too, so I can run my air conditioner at night and sleep.
Thanks Nathaniel and okobserver for the tip, I need to get ‘crackin’ and send all my money to Algore.
Nathaniel posted June 4, 2008 at 11:54 am
“They pronounce AGW as if it were the Gospel and anyone who dares question it is not even worth their time.
That is not science. That is not rational discussion. That is ignorant faith right there.”
———-
Nathaniel gets his “science”(sic) from a lying agricultural economist.
Nathaniel’s “rational discussion” is falsely calling me a liar for pointing out Avery’s lies, and then running away.
http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2007/09/open-thread-915/#comment-186064
I challenged Nathaniel re Avery at the top, and several other places in the Sep 18 2007 ‘Open’.
And gave him more info about Avery’s lies.
http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2007/09/open-thread-918/#comment-184558
Nathaniel seemed to have read those posts, because he asked me a dumb question — but refused to reply to my challenge.
Cosmos,
I have asked for goregiveness. I have been to the Goracle. All is well now my brother.
Give up boy,
The cosmos now has his responses macroed. All he has to do is hit F1 and he cycles through the approved left wing responses.
For those of you that are really interested in carbon offsets:
FreeCarbonOffsets.com
Certificates suitable for framing!
(and not one cent of your money goes to heat Algore’s swimming pool!)
Nathaniel,
So you are admitting that you believe obvious lies from an agricultural economist are credible science?
“The cosmos now has his responses macroed”
Dear Hank Price,
Your son has run away from my questions so many times, I started saving posts in text files.
Nathaniel’s “rational discussion” = running away and/or insults.
Cosmos,
All you do is keep asking me the same loaded questions over and over again with the same mischaraterizations of my statements over and over again.
I keep telling you this… well… over and over again.
When you can figure out how to ask a question without loading it with a bunch of false premises then I will answer it.
When you can figure out how to respond to someones post without twisting their words, I will respond to you.
Cosmos I think you too should ask for goregiveness. As green as you are it won’t be green enough. Thanks Hank for the certificate link. I am ordering mine right away. I plan to scan it in so I can send it out to the next person who questions my greeness.
Thanks HLP, I signed up for 1000 carbon credits, hope that’s enough to run the air conditioner tonight. I don’t want to have to get up in the middle of the night and buy more to make it to morning.
I am so relieved and no longer feel soooo guilty for simply being on this Earth and living. The dastardly creature that I am releasing carbon to stay cool in this AGW ravaged world (or keeping from freezing whatever the case may be), or releasing carbon with every breath, or driving to work to earn enough to feed my family. And to think I have Algore and cosmos to thank for bringing this to my attention.
What oh what would we do without them???
”’Certificate of Carbon Offsets”’
Let it be known that
Boxlock
Is the owner of Carbon Offsets, in the amount of
1000
Awarded on June 4, 2008,
courtesy of FreeCarbonOffsets.com (certificate #: 9283)
“What does drilling off the coast of Florida have to do with ANWR? Nothing.”
Everything. If it is appropriate to deny drilling off the Gulf Coast of Florida due to environmental concerns, then it is equally appropriate to deny drilling in ANWR for the same reasons.
WS Clark,
Then lets drill in both. Problem solved.
Will you support that?
Nathaniel,
You posted the press release for Avery’s book.
And you posted:
“I beleive the HUNDREDS of credible peer reviewed scientists who do not believe the so called ‘concensus’”
Simple, unloaded questions
1) Can you provide a list of those scientists?
2) Do they have credible peer-reviewed papers refuting AGW? Or do they simply “believe”?
“If ANWR can give us 1 million barrels a day for the next 10 years then that is a good start.”
So they’ve given up the idea of selling any oil collected in ANWR to China? I only ask because that was the original intent. And if they have “given it up”, can I be sure that they won’t change their mind again in the future?
Predestined,
I dont care if we sell the oil to buy more oil or use it ourselves.
Just drill for more oil.
What does it matter?
“Will you support that?”
No.
Drill off Florida where the environmental risk is negligible, but not in ANWR where the eco-system is much more fragile and irreparable. Further, there is much more readily accessible oil in the Gulf, whereas there is little oil in ANWR.
Conservation alone would give us greater supplies of oil than would drilling in ANWR.
Nathan,
I just feel if we need it so badly to drill in an area where wildlife and the land would be brutalized, then we should be thinking of using it for ourselves. Selfish? Yeah. But raping the land bothers me. I’ve seen what a drilling company can do to a quarter of farm land, even when there’s no oil found. It isn’t pretty, and the damage lasts for several years.
Another question comes to mind. Do we have the refinery capacity? I’m not sure that’s a major concern, but I’m curious. We’ve been hurt in the past few years when refineries were damaged. Financially, I mean. If it causes that much loss in production, shouldn’t we be looking at alternative energy? Simple common sense says we can’t keep on as we have been.
Predestined,
We can drill for oil in ANWR without raping the environment.
Talk about being brainwashed with propaganda words…
WS Clark,
10 billion barrels of oil is not negligible.
“We can drill for oil in ANWR without raping the environment.”
Perhaps, but one slip and a fragile eco-system is destroyed for decades, whereas drilling off the Florida coast is damn near a non-issue.
So, are you condemning the Bush Brothers for denying drilling permits off the Coast?
Until you condemn the Bush Brothers for denying permits, Price, your argument is meaningless.
WS Clark,
Give me a break. “One slip….” LOL
My Lord man, we have been drilling for oil for the last centry all over the world.
What is this “one slip” that you think could destroy the eco-system for decades?
What makes that eco system so fragile?
You sound like some little brainwashed 5th grader from Earth Day activities at grade school.
Nathaniel posted June 4, 2008 at 11:56 am
“If ANWR can give us 1 million barrels a day for the next 10 years then that is a good start.
“If” — The Refuge geology is different than Prudhoe Bay, and may be like Badami. The Refuge is a high-risk, high-cost, unknown frontier.
“the next 10 years”?
Nathaniel does not seem to know that it will take a decade or longer to get the first trickle of oil. And another 10, 15, or ?? to slowly ramp up production, that might, if very lucky peak at 1 million bbls/day.
And then it runs dry, like Prudhoe, and like all our other fields.
Refuge oil probably would not even replace other declining domestic oil.
Future warming in Alaska may require a very expensive rebuild of TAPS.
Higher energy efficiency is guaranteed to “produce” more than the Refuge — and faster, cheaper, and cleaner.
WS Clark,
My argument is meaningless??
You are the one introducing irrelevant facts to the discussion and setting false conditions here.
First you say that if we don’t drill off of Florida then that is reason not to drill in ANWR.
Now you say that we shouldn’t drill in ANWR, but drill in Florida.
Are you really that dumb or do you just think that no one will notice how retarded your argument is?
“You sound like some little brainwashed 5th grader from Earth Day activities at grade school”
Well, Mr. Social Skills, there is no brainwashing here – my brain is doing just fine, but thanks for asking.
“My Lord man, we have been drilling for oil for the last centry all over the world.”
And completely without incident, right, Price?
Wrong.
“What makes that eco system so fragile?”
Sigh, look it up, the artic tundra is probably the most fragile environment in the world. It has nearly no ability to recover from a catastrophic episode.
So, Price, are you condemning the Bush Brother’s denial of drilling permits off the Florida coast?
I didn’t think so.
“First you say that if we don’t drill off of Florida then that is reason not to drill in ANWR.”
No, that is not what I said, I asked why environmental concerns were acceptable reasons for not drilling off Florida, but they were unacceptable regarding ANWR.
“Are you really that dumb or do you just think that no one will notice how retarded your argument is?”
As usual, Mr. Social Skills steps up to show us just how lacking he truly is.
Cosmos,
And if we would have started this project 10 years ago we could be seeing the rewards of more oil.
Now you use the fact that it will take up to 10 years to get the oil as an argument against it?
What kind of wacko liberal world do you live in?
First you liberals refuse to drill for over a decade and then you use the time it will take to get the drilling started as an argument against doing it.
The stupidity here is almost insufferable!
All of you experts need to listen to the gov of Alaska. She says drill. No danger to the non-endangered polar bear. She lives there she should know. Lets let China come in and drill for our oil. They already are. But as a nation lets set on our hands like we have been doing since the seventies. Don’t drill, don’t refine, as a nation give over our title as the economic leader to nations not afraid to drill, to refine and aren’t handcuffed by the GWers. Cosmos as a frequent expert on this blog, I really have to know, are you peer revied?
As for the billions of barrels of oil in ANWR listen to the geologists and not the GW’s and treehuggers. They are peer reviewed.
WS Clark,
I don’t care about my social skills when I am talking with the likes of you or several other posters here.
WS opines:
———
“Sigh, look it up, the artic tundra is probably the most fragile environment in the world. It has nearly no ability to recover from a catastrophic episode.”
——-
And you know this because. Another one of those off the top of grey old head statements.
Nathaniel posted June 4, 2008 at 2:58 pm
“We can drill for oil in ANWR without raping the environment.
Talk about being brainwashed with propaganda words…”
—–
Nathaniel,
The sources for this document include the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the City of Nuiqsut Council, and the BLM.
Do you believe those sources have provided “propaganda words”?
“The “smallest footprint ever” Alpine oil field touted by pro-drillers. 5 more drill sites were approved on Dec. 4, 2004 — and they want “… 24 more production drill sites, 122 more miles of roads, 7 more airports, 150 miles of pipeline, and 1262 more acres of tundra smothered by gravel.”
http://www.wilderness.org/Library/Documents/upload/AlpineNoEnvironmentalShowpiece.pdf
‘Potential Impacts of Oil and Gas Development on Refuge Resources’
http://arctic.fws.gov/issues1.htm#section4
Maps showing concentrated calving moved to the south, away from oil development, plus info re avoiding roads, etc.
‘Section 4: The Central Arctic Caribou Herd’
http://www.absc.usgs.gov/1002/section4part1.htm
“Our data, in fact, indicate that productivity can and will decline if the cumulative loss of preferred habitat, when superimposed on natural forces, is sufficient to compromise nutrition.”
A speculative map of what the 2,000-acre “limit” allows,
http://www.inforain.org/Northslope/anwr_3.html
Nathaniel posted June 4, 2008 at 3:14 pm
“First you liberals refuse to drill for over a decade and then you use the time it will take to get the drilling started as an argument against doing it.”
False. Please try to pay attention.
I pointed out that Nathaniel made a very inaccurate statement:
“… 1 million barrels a day for the next 10 years then that is a good start.
And I “argued” for the much better solution,
“Higher energy efficiency is guaranteed to “produce” more than the Refuge — and faster, cheaper, and cleaner.”
“I don’t care about my social skills when I am talking with the likes of you or several other posters here.”
That is quite obvious.
“Another one of those off the top of grey old head statements.”
Why don’t you check it out, Okie-Dope?
Loser.
“First you liberals refuse to drill for over a decade and then you use the time it will take to get the drilling started as an argument against doing it.”
They do that with the Death Penalty, also.
Fight and fight to save the lives of the Carr brothers, then complain it costs too much.
Libs: Lovers of the Carr brothers.
WS Clark,
You have and continue to be one of the biggest problem posters on this blog as well as the other one.
You are one of the most crude and vulgar people here.
You routinely do little more than try to cause trouble and pick fights.
You add very little here and when you first started posting couldn’t add much more than STFU to every post.
It is rather asinine that you of all people would ever even try to point out that someone is lacking in social skills.
I might call you dumb, ignorant, or stupid for the…well…dumb ignorant and stupid things you say, but I will never be as vulgar or crude or as big of a liar as you are here.
Please stop pretending like saying I don’t have any social skills is anything more than your latest sound bite of the week.
You and I both know you don’t care. Figuring that I am the only one of the two of us who really does care, that is why you think using that as an insult towards me actually works.
Conservation first; use less oil as a nation; match or beat European gas mileage levels, then drill.
What is so hard about that? You’d think these guys are married to the oil companies. Oil is just a commodity. These guys seem more passionate about defending oil companies than they are about defending America.
To use Ralph Nader’s term, they have been “corporatized.”
Okay… everyone who believes that we should drill in the Arctic Refuge, because it will be a secure, reliable, domestic source raise your hand.
A drunk with a hunting rifle shutdown TAPS, during heightened security (note the date).
‘Alaska clean-up ‘could take years’
Sunday, 7 October, 2001
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/1584553.stm
A mid-winter shutdown for too long could congeal the heated oil, and a restart would be impossible until the oil warmed the next summer.
The U.S. Army has said that TAPS is “indefensible”.
Read ‘Fool’s Gold in Alaska—annotated’ at
http://old.rmi.org/sitepages/pid171.php
for more on the Arctic Refuge issue.
“These guys seem more passionate about defending oil companies than they are about defending America.”
It could be said that you can’t defend this country without oil. Isn’t that what happened to Japan and Germany?
“You have and continue to be one of the biggest problem posters on this blog as well as the other one.”
Thank you.
“You are one of the most crude and vulgar people here.”
Thank you again, and I might I say, you’re an asshole.
“You routinely do little more than try to cause trouble and pick fights.”
Wrong, but thank you for playing the game.
“You add very little here and when you first started posting couldn’t add much more than STFU to every post.”
Thank you, I try to do my part.
“It is rather asinine that you of all people would ever even try to point out that someone is lacking in social skills.”
But I do thank God everyday that I am not you – does that count?
“I might call you dumb, ignorant, or stupid for the…well…dumb ignorant and stupid things you say, but I will never be as vulgar or crude or as big of a liar as you are here.”
Copy and paste a lie that I have told – I’ll wait – I ain’t gonna die soon, much to your chagrin.
“Please stop pretending like saying I don’t have any social skills is anything more than your latest sound bite of the week.”
I have a few more sound bytes – wanna try them on for size?
“You and I both know you don’t care”
About you? Certainly not, I think that you are a right wing, holy-roller idiot that will probably be a cherry boy until the day you die.
Did you have a point in all that crap? I have to confess, there was a lot of dung there that was totally meaningless.
Hey, by the way, do you have a few good “Jew” or ” colored folk” jokes for us that you learned from your Dad?
Nathaniel,
I’m still waiting for your answers…
You posted:
“I beleive the HUNDREDS of credible peer reviewed scientists who do not believe the so called ‘concensus’”
Simple, unloaded questions
1) Can you provide a list of those scientists?
2) Do they have credible peer-reviewed papers refuting AGW? Or do they simply “believe”?
Nathan the only thing you CARE about is Nathan —- you are as bad as any one else here when it comes to hurling insults and vulgar innuendoes, and you your Dad and RFegular are usually the firstr of the day to digress from discussion to argument / name calling —- then you want us to believe you are a Marine — like I;ve said before —- you’re a weekender — a pretender …..
We can drill for oil in ANWR without raping the environment.
I know people (personally) in Alaska who would disagree. And is it ALL about polar bears? I think not. Gov. Palin is a Republican. ‘Nuff said?
Alaskans get checks from oil revenues, so they have a biased opinion.
Good points, DavidB.
BTW, you all are aware that MAJOR storms, including tornadoes, are forecast for tomorrow, don’t you?
I finally bought myself a storm alert radio. Okay, it isn’t KFDI’s $60 model, but it’ll let me know when to kiss my @ss goodbye. :)
Take care and pay attention tomorrow, WEBloggers.
Pre
You would be correct. Any oil recovered in ANWR would be sold to another country. Probably Japan.
There isn’t enough capacity in ANWR to affect the world price of oil a fraction though.
“Nathaniel” sitteth upon the right hand of God and proclaims –
“You are one of the most crude and vulgar people here…”
And asserts–
“…I will never be as vulgar or crude or as big of a liar as you are here.”
Nope, “Nathaniel.” You’re too busy passing judgment on those you deem to be “not Christian” and projecting scurrilous accusations of pedophilia on others.
No, you will never be “as vulgar, crude, or as big a liar.” You’ve long ago proven yourself to be far more vulgar, far more crude, and a liar far beyond any level “WSClark” could aspire to.
Conservation can’t make us energy independent. Wind and solar can’t either. We need more energy. Only one way to go. Start building the nukes, and drill here, drill now.
LR2R, you are an insufferable liar.
“. . . and you your Dad and RFegular are usually the firstr of the day to digress from discussion to argument / name calling —-”
I very, very seldom call anybody a name unless they start it. Even then most of the time I just ignore it.
Find on any thread where I called someone a name that didn’t first post something rude or stupid about me. You can’t.
I haven’t called any one a name on this open thread today. I called CF2K a nitwit on the Obama thread but he called me a ‘perfect ashole’ first!
Nope I’m sorry LR2, you’re a liar.
The same holds true for Nathan, hell, Steven starts calling him names before he een gets up oin the morning!
As far as Regular goes, most of his posts are very thoughtful and bring intelligent debate to the discussion. He just doesn’t take any shit from nitwits like you. Start a shit fight with him and expect to be buried!
“Start a shit fight with him and expect to be buried!”
Because, as we all know, McCluer is full of a lot of shit and has plenty of ammunition.
“Nope I’m sorry LR2, you’re a liar. The same holds true for Nathan”
Well, thank God for truth in advertising.
From Fox Producer Marla Cichowski
24 Counts Rezko Guilty on all mail fraud counts
Read more on the Obama Rezko Connection
The Rezko Connection: Obama’s Achilles Heel?
http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/Story?id=4111483
“WSClark” responds –
“Because, as we all know, McCluer is full of a lot of s#it and has plenty of ammunition.”
Too easy.
I see that LR2 is doing his usual drive-by.
Lumped in with Hank and Nathan…
Glad I’m in good company. Can’t think of better people to be with, in civilian life, in combat, in the church or just out on life’s playground. :)
Thanks Regular!
It’s amazing at the vitriol and name calling initiated by the libs on this BLOG! Then they have the gall to act so hurt if they get a little of their own medicine!
outlander posted June 4, 2008 at 4:44 pm
“Conservation can’t make us energy independent. Wind and solar can’t either. We need more energy. Only one way to go. Start building the nukes, and drill here, drill now.”
———-
Did Prudhoe Bay make us “energy independent”?
It takes an investment of only about $15 to save each barrel of oil with higher energy efficiency. Why do you want to pay $100+ for a barrel of oil, when it only costs $15 to eliminate the need to buy it?
Nuclear power plants are much more expensive than higher energy efficiency. Do you want higher utility bills?
Obscene profits? Congress should leave their investigations of oil company executives, TV evangelists, and sports figures for a while, and conduct a thorough investigation of Planned Parenthood’s obscene abortion mill profits, amidst accusations, allegations, criminal prosecutions, and lawsuits flying nationwide regarding Planned Parenthood’s reported rampant criminality, flagrant violations of state and federal laws and medical regulations, botched abortions, shielding rapists, and racist targeting of minorities for population reduction.
The results would surely mandate a complete stoppage of all taxpayer funding, as well as prison sentences for abortionist quacks – and maybe even prison sentences for baby-hating bureaucrats involved in the conspiratorial cover-ups.
- – -
A 12-year-old 6th-grader in Hutchinson, MN was told by his baby-hating principal Todd Grina (email toddg@hutch.k12.mn.us , phone 320-234-2631) and teachers not to wear pro-life T-shirts, publicly singled out for ridicule in front of his classmates, removed from class, sent to the principal’s office, forced to turn his pro-life T-shirt inside out, threatened with suspension, and reprimanded a dozen times in a month. The boy had intended to wear pro-life T-shirts for one month, in honor of April 29, National Pro-Life T-Shirt Day.
The Thomas More Law Center has filed a lawsuit against the Hutchinson school district on behalf of the boy and the First Amendment to the Constitution of the USofA.
cosmos, I could be a little more efficient, but not much (well, except for the Hummer and F-350). I suppose most folks are in that boat. Soon the conservation savings will max out and there we will be, still dependent on foreign energy sources and still short on energy.
Nope, we need to squeeze what we can out of wind and solar and get started on nukes now, along with drilling for our own sources of awl.
I was kidding about the Hummer and the F-350.
“I was kidding about the Hummer and the F-350.”
Oh come on outlander, you had me ‘goin’ there. Thinking…’this be the man’!!! Ha!
Oh well, I still like your posts.
outlander,
The Hummer and F-350 is the point.
If everyone just kept their tires properly inflated, it would “produce” about the same amount as the Arctic Refuge.
Plus they’d spend less at the gas pump, and the tires would last longer.
Yes, cosmos. “IF”.
“IF” doesn’t keep the car filled up.
Yeah… it’s way too much work to check the tire pressures now and then, so you can buy less $4 a gallon gas. /sarcasm off
All of the documentation I have ever read about the “oil in ANWR,” says that it will NOT be used for domestic purposese… It will go to Japan… or some other foreign nation… What the hell good will it do our oil drilling companies to spend all of the energy, and funds, to move into ANWR, and drill for oil that will, in 10 years, just be shipped off to Japan??? Hmmmm????
If everyone just kept their tires properly inflated, it would “produce” about the same amount as the Arctic Refuge.
—————
What are the odds of that happening? Slim and none and Slim, of course, left town. So deal with reality cosmos. We need more energy. The world is never going to consist of little cosmoses’ trying to squeeze every gallon of gas and keeping their thermostats at 85 in the summer and 65 in the winter.
South Dakota residents have voted for the zoning of America’s first new oil refinery in over 30 years.
You will be able to recognize the enemies of our economy in Congress, by noting the ones who oppose and delay this project, which brings a $10 billion investment and 4500 construction jobs and 1826 permanent jobs to the Midwest. Along with other tree-hugger and NIMBY obstructions, a lawsuit is filed against Union County, SD over the zoning procedures and opposing Hyperion as it applies for a bevy of state and federal permits.
- – -
Could we at least drill for more oil in the USofA, where we could tap into more oil than the Middle East? Probably not, until we elect congressmen with spine enough to clean up tree-hugger restrictions like the National Environmental Policy Act, Clean Water Act, Clean Air Act, Endangered Species Act and National Historic Preservation Act.
“All of the documentation I have ever read about the “oil in ANWR,” says that it will NOT be used for domestic purposese… It will go to Japan… or some other foreign nation…”
——————-
Don’t be stupid Chas.
America wastes TOOOOOO much outlander.
Is that what you’re defending?
Of course not JR. I’m saying that relying on conservation as the national energy plan is silly. Environmentalists (I am one) wackos (I’m not)don’t want nukes, they don’t want oil drilling, they don’t want coal plants, they want everyone to drive a Chevette if you have to have a car, etc…
In other words, they want us to make major changes in our lifestyle, so they throw up roadblocks to energy independence and production.
outlander posts,
“Environmentalists (I am one) wackos (I’m not)don’t want nukes, they don’t want oil drilling, they don’t want coal plants, they want everyone to drive a Chevette if you have to have a car, etc…
In other words, they want us to make major changes in our lifestyle, so they throw up roadblocks to energy independence and production.”
Exactly, and they want that because they want to bring everyone down to their level. They can’t stand the thought someone might achieve more than they because those people are willing to work to achieve it.
Look at the last time they listen to environmental wackos like the Sierra Club. It killed hundreds in New Orleans.
:cool:
“outlander” whines –
“Environmentalists… want us to make major changes in our lifestyle….”
Yeah. Sort of like what Henry Ford had in mind a hundred years ago.
Guess what?
Making “major changes in our lifestyle” isn’t all that “major” at all.
Defenders of fossil fuel corporations can’t seem to imagine a world where people can possibly get by without Hummers. A hundred years ago they’d have quashed Henry Ford because his invention was gonna ruin the buggy-whip industry.
Nearly two hundred years ago, railroad technology wanted to make major changes in stagecoach-based lifestyles. Fifty years ago, jet airliners made “major changes” in the railroad-based transportation industry.
Twenty years ago a lot of people smirked at the guy who didn’t go anywhere without his paleo-cellphone which was the size (and almost the weight) of a brick. People like him wanted “us to make major changes in our lifestyle.”
Guess what, “outlander.” Lifestyles change. Necessity isn’t just the mother of invention, it’s a Mother.
And it gives birth to changes in lifestyle.
And this is an indication of how CONservative thought always gets things wrong. Just like the evolution-deniers (who must assume “Adam” looked like George Clooney and Eve was a dead-ringer for Karen Elson) think humanity has always been the stellar examples we all prove ourselves to be daily on WE Blog, the Cons think the only choice for energy is burning up dead dinosaurs (you know, those critters that were on Noah’s Ark. or not).
Poor ol’ “outlander” can’t conceive of a future where he’ll have to “make major changes in [his] lifestyle.”
Your own parents worked hard to “make major changes in [your] lifestyle” when they potty-trained you.
(Or maybe not.)
Monkey,
You are absolutely free to make any kind of change in your lifestyle you so choose.
But you better stay the hell out of my life and not tell me I can’t do this or that with what I create and earn.
That’s the rub, you want to control everyones life, like I said, because you can’t stand to think anyone might end up with more of anything including freedom because they fought for it, worked for it, and earned it themselves.
What a enema bag you are most of the time.
outlander” whines –
“Environmentalists… want us to make major changes in our lifestyle….”
Yeah. Sort of like what Henry Ford had in mind a hundred years ago.
————–
MonkeyHawk, thank you for re-enforcing my point. Of course your help is not needed.
Of course you started with a dishonest misquote. I said environmentalist WACKOS. Because I myself am an environmentalist.
How did you re-enforce my point? Glad you asked. You did it by defending the wackos who want to turn back the clock on our lifestyle. And by illustrating your point with technological advances, which is, of course, the opposite of what the environmentalist wackos want.
And doing it in your usual insufferably snobbish manner.
That’s why we love you. You make us look good.
outlander posted June 4, 2008 at 6:52 pm
“What are the odds of that happening? Slim and none and Slim, of course, left town. So deal with reality cosmos. We need more energy.”
Deal with reality yourself, outlander.
The U.S. has only about 2% of the worlds oil reserves.
We have depleted our reserves much faster than most other countries.
We could double the mpg of most vehicles with current technology and materials.
We could quadruple mpg with advanced materials.
Higher energy efficiency has many advantages over the status quo of just depleting the last reserves of our oil.
And I’d rather invest $15 to save a barrel, than pay $100+ to buy it.
“But you better stay the hell out of my life and not tell me I can’t do this or that with what I create and earn.”
If I see you or someone like you driving a Hummer?
I WILL ask them if they are ok with US servicemen and women dying for their right to excess.
And that’s if they are around the vehicle.
It it’s unattended….well….
Boxlock spews forth >>>>
“…But you better stay the hell out of my life and not tell me I can’t do this or that with what I create and earn. That’s the rub, you want to control everyones life,…”
Would that be sort of what YOU want to do with gays, or those with whom you disagree on a whole host of subjects?? Hmmm????
Saves lives, saves gas, saves money, and no compromises on quality.
http://www.suvsolutions.org/
BTW, Monkey — Jonathan and Martha Kent might have more realistically run over young Clark with the family Packard, than with a Buick… They were huge cars, and very heavy… But, then again, with Clark, it wouldnt have made a lot of difference…
Cosmos, I know one Chevy Dealer who says the new Chevy Tahoe SUV hybrid is one sweet vehicle!! Also pretty good on Gas mpg, for a SUV, that is…
Chas posts;
“Would that be sort of what YOU want to do with gays,…”
Chas…duh! No, I’m not the one trying to change things, like the definition of marriage that has been as is for thousands of years.
Wake up or go to bed.
BlueJay posts;
” And that’s if they are around the vehicle.
It it’s unattended….well….”
Doesn’t that sound just like the petty little criminal coward you are too.
Do one thing to a man’s face and another behind their back.
But you wouldn’t have the courage to say anything to them face to face in truth.
You know it, I know it, and everyone knows it.
Coward.
“…the definition of marriage that has been as is for thousands of years.”
Do you like getting dizzy from all of your phony, lying spinning??? That is simply a totally FALSE statement!!! You really need some serious history study, to set your mind on track… Not flaming… just the facts, ma’am… just the facts…
“…you want to control everyones life,…” >>>>
And YES Boxlock, you ANTI-GAY marriage people DO in reality, want to control everyone’s life, if they dont agree with your narrow minded views… And that TOO, is just the facts!! Why dont you just admit to what you are, and be done with it??
Sure would make for a lot less worthless dialogue…
Your WeltAnshaung is VERY small indeed, Boxlock… VERY small….
Perhaps a world view is not so important in the larger scheme of things.
Good night; Good luck; God bless –
Whatever you conceive God to be!!
Blessings ALL!!
So mote it be!!
Nathaniel,
We are still waiting for your answers…
You posted:
“I beleive the HUNDREDS of credible peer reviewed scientists who do not believe the so called ‘concensus’”
Simple, unloaded questions,
1) Who are those “HUNDREDS” of scientists? Some names please.
2) Do they have peer-reviewed papers refuting AGW? Or do they simply “believe”?
Cosmos,
Do you have a mouse in your pocket?
Who is this “we” that is waiting for me to answer?
You have been holding onto this for how long now?
Get a life man. Get a life.
I am sure the Goracle will not notice. He really isn’t all powerful, even though you might think so…
Nathaniel posted June 5, 2008 at 12:26 am
“Who is this “we” that is waiting for me to answer?”
Me, and some friends and colleagues, who have been laughing at your posts.
We thank you for the laughs.
And I thank you Nathaniel, for proving my 1:54 pm post was accurate.
“Nathaniel’s “rational discussion” = running away and/or insults.”
Cosmos,
I stopped trying to have a “rational” discussion with you long ago.
If my response to you takes actually looking up some facts or actual work on my part, I don’t waste me time. It is not worth it.
Anything I have ever posted you have never responded to honestly.
So why would I waste my time trying to do so now?
Because you do not have anything better to do Nathan?
Hey I at least have an excuse. I’m a single dad.
cosmos?
I’ve met Nathan and several times.
He is bookish and has a weird light in his eyes.
THIS is who you think Obama can work with?
And I thank you AGAIN, Nathaniel, for proving my 1:54 pm post was accurate.
“Nathaniel’s “rational discussion” = running away and/or insults.”
My earlier post,
Nathaniel,
We are still waiting for your answers…
Nathaniel posted:
“I beleive the HUNDREDS of credible peer reviewed scientists who do not believe the so called ‘concensus’”
Simple, unloaded questions,
1) Who are those “HUNDREDS” of scientists? Some names please.
2) Do they have peer-reviewed papers refuting AGW? Or do they simply “believe”?
——-
Nathaniel’s response?
“If my response to you takes actually looking up some facts or actual work on my part, I don’t waste me time.”
Once again evolution observed:
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2008/05/080520-fish-evolution.html
Naturally this will upset scientifically illiterate creationists who think economists are scientific mavens.
I just got this e-mail –
Dear [MonkeyHawk],
I wanted you to be one of the first to know: on Saturday, I will hold an event in Washington D.C. to thank everyone who has supported my campaign. Over the course of the last 16 months, I have been privileged and touched to witness the incredible dedication and sacrifice of so many people working for our campaign. Every minute you put into helping us win, every dollar you gave to keep up the fight meant more to me than I can ever possibly tell you.
On Saturday, I will extend my congratulations to Senator Obama and my support for his candidacy. This has been a long and hard-fought campaign, but as I have always said, my differences with Senator Obama are small compared to the differences we have with Senator McCain and the Republicans.
I have said throughout the campaign that I would strongly support Senator Obama if he were the Democratic Party’s nominee, and I intend to deliver on that promise.
When I decided to run for president, I knew exactly why I was getting into this race: to work hard every day for the millions of Americans who need a voice in the White House.
I made you — and everyone who supported me — a promise: to stand up for our shared values and to never back down. I’m going to keep that promise today, tomorrow, and for the rest of my life.
I will be speaking on Saturday about how together we can rally the party behind Senator Obama. The stakes are too high and the task before us too important to do otherwise.
I know as I continue my lifelong work for a stronger America and a better world, I will turn to you for the support, the strength, and the commitment that you have shown me in the past 16 months. And I will always keep faith with the issues and causes that are important to you.
In the past few days, you have shown that support once again with hundreds of thousands of messages to the campaign, and again, I am touched by your thoughtfulness and kindness.
I can never possibly express my gratitude, so let me say simply, thank you.
Sincerely,
Hillary Rodham Clinton
Barack “the goon” obama can kiss my ass.
I am determined that his blitzkrieg to office end for him and his wife in spectacular and crushing failure.
BlueJay, you need to get over your silly self. You need to learn about the “Team” concept. It’s not about you, it’s about the nation.
Hillary fought a good fight, but now it’s over. She’ll do the right thing. Too bad you can’t make the same claim.
2 Trackbacks
credit limit colorado springs…
All I can say is WOW! Extremely nice layouts, awesome graphics and great articles. No matter how many times I come here, I am still impressed by the very professional appearance. Congratulations on a job well done Free Mp3 Download….
Space Star Wars Episode 3 Planet Mars…
I didn’t agree with you first, but last paragraph makes sense for me…