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
- Skeptic on Jail consultants straining patience
- Chas on Health care reform would save state money
- cosmos_originally on Open thread 11/22
- Politico on Health care reform would save state money
- Politico on So they said
- Pleefer on Open thread 11/22
- cosmos_originally on Open thread 11/22
- Phantom on Open thread 11/22
- Phantom on Open thread 11/22
- Rage on Open thread 11/22
176 Comments
Did anyone notice the Crowson cartoon on the EAGLE’s editorial/opinion page yesterday? Good likeness of Sam Brownback jumping over the snoozing Gov. Parkinson.
I don’t agree with Parkinson on all his decisions but he is certainly preferable to the “inside the beltway” erratic Brownback.
Thanks Mr. Crowson for your cogent comments in cartoon form.
Brownback will do whatever the corporate lobbyists in D.C. want him to do. When Kansas elects Brownback we won’t have a governor representing us.
Polar bear expert barred from conference by Warmists
No dissent from the Warmist Gospel allowed: Mitchell Taylor, who has studied the bears for 30 years, was told his views ‘are extremely unhelpful’
Over the coming days a curiously revealing event will be taking place in Copenhagen. Top of the agenda at a meeting of the Polar Bear Specialist Group (set up under the International Union for the Conservation of Nature/Species Survival Commission) will be the need to produce a suitably scary report on how polar bears are being threatened with extinction by man-made global warming.
This is one of a steady drizzle of events planned to stoke up alarm in the run-up to the UN’s major conference on climate change in Copenhagen next December. But one of the world’s leading experts on polar bears has been told to stay away from this week’s meeting, specifically because his views on global warming do not accord with those of the rest of the group.
Dr Mitchell Taylor has been researching the status and management of polar bears in Canada and around the Arctic Circle for 30 years, as both an academic and a government employee. More than once since 2006 he has made headlines by insisting that polar bear numbers, far from decreasing, are much higher than they were 30 years ago. Of the 19 different bear populations, almost all are increasing or at optimum levels, only two have for local reasons modestly declined.
Dr Taylor agrees that the Arctic has been warming over the last 30 years. But he ascribes this not to rising levels of CO2 – as is dictated by the computer models of the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and believed by his PBSG colleagues – but to currents bringing warm water into the Arctic from the Pacific and the effect of winds blowing in from the Bering Sea.
He has also observed, however, how the melting of Arctic ice, supposedly threatening the survival of the bears, has rocketed to the top of the warmists’ agenda as their most iconic single cause. The famous photograph of two bears standing forlornly on a melting iceberg was produced thousands of times by Al Gore, the WWF and others as an emblem of how the bears faced extinction – until last year the photographer, Amanda Byrd, revealed that the bears, just off the Alaska coast, were in no danger. Her picture had nothing to do with global warming and was only taken because the wind-sculpted ice they were standing on made such a striking image.
Dr Taylor had obtained funding to attend this week’s meeting of the PBSG, but this was voted down by its members because of his views on global warming. The chairman, Dr Andy Derocher, a former university pupil of Dr Taylor’s, frankly explained in an email (which I was not sent by Dr Taylor) that his rejection had nothing to do with his undoubted expertise on polar bears: “it was the position you’ve taken on global warming that brought opposition”.
Dr Taylor was told that his views running “counter to human-induced climate change are extremely unhelpful”. His signing of the Manhattan Declaration – a statement by 500 scientists that the causes of climate change are not CO2 but natural, such as changes in the radiation of the sun and ocean currents – was “inconsistent with the position taken by the PBSG”.
So, as the great Copenhagen bandwagon rolls on, stand by this week for reports along the lines of “scientists say polar bears are threatened with extinction by vanishing Arctic ice”. But also check out Anthony Watt’s Watts Up With That website for the latest news of what is actually happening in the Arctic. The average temperature at midsummer is still below zero, the latest date that this has happened in 50 years of record-keeping. After last year’s recovery from its September 2007 low, this year’s ice melt is likely to be substantially less than for some time. The bears are doing fine.
SOURCE
http://www.telegraph.co.uk
As the unemplyment figures rise, the price of gasoline rises, as inflation rises and when the rolling blackouts start remember, it was to save the polar bears!
(Oh, and by the way, don’t worry about Michelle, her butt will keep getting bigger!)
Meanwhile, the revolution begins!
http://www.republicmagazine.com/montana-governor-signs-revolutionary-new-gun-law/
“but to currents bringing warm water into the Arctic from the Pacific and the effect of winds blowing in from the Bering Sea.”
If the conveyor belt is changing it is something that needs to be closely monitored because there is a good chance it’s caused by climate changes. And the impact of a halting/reversed conveyor belt would be catastrophic. It does concern me that Dr. Taylor doesn’t acknowledge this connection.
I will sadly agree about the polar bear thing…The public doesn’t have the attention span to pay attention to calcified organisms and their bottom-up effects on the entire ecosystem…but things like penguins and polar bears and dolphins will always be rallying issues.
As someone who studies the less-cute things, the propaganda makes me irritated. Well, I don’t know if it can be properly called propaganda since it it’s not made up and pulled out of nowhere, but is definitely packaged up/dumbed down into something shiny for the lazy public.
To quote Dr. Taylor, “This complexity is why so many people find the truth less entertaining than a good story. It is entirely appropriate to be concerned about climate change, but it is just silly to predict the demise of polar bears in 25 years based on media-assisted hysteria.”
I think this is a reasonable position–he doesn’t like polar bear research being exploited to gain support from the laypeople. But he is not a global warming denier.
HLP – but see, Cos told me the whole wide world will do cap & tax soon (I laughed, saying “why because they put it in the bill..well whatya know!), because the House put it in the Bill that if they don’t…dadbernit, we’ll put tariffs on their imports here…tryin’ to think…where have I heard of that BRILLIANCE before…oh, that’s right, SMOOT-HAWLEY! Hope & Change really is about replaying all of our worst mistakes in history! Hoover/FDR fired up the printing presses…huh, Bush/Obama same thing. Hoover/FDR restricted production & forced high wages (Wagner Act)…huh, cap&tax meant to restrict production/card check meant to force high wages. A brilliant FDR quote: “A mere builder of more industrial plants a creator of more railroad systems, and organizer of more corporations, is as likely to be a danger as a help. Our task is not..necessarily producing more goods. It is the soberer, less dramatic business of administering resources and plants already in hand.” Musta missed that clause in the Constitution like I missed the “redistribution” clause that apprently is govt’s job.
Where are the Treas Sec’s like Henry Morgenthau who wrote in 1939: “We have tried spending money. We are spending more than we have ever spent before and it does not work. And I have just one interest, and if I am wrong, somebody else can have my job. I want to see this country prosperous. I want to see people get a job. I want to see people get enough to eat. We have never made good on our promises. I say after 8 years of this Administration, we have just as much unemployment as when we started…and an enormous debt to boot!”
In solemn reflection of the untimely passing of Billy Mays, I propose we honor his memory by joining hands and observing a moment of shouting.
Good one, HLP.. let’s run things like it’s 1939 again! Or then again we could recognize the world’s economy has changed somewhat in the past 70 years…
Maybe Hank wants more companies to use virtual offices?
http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2009/06/open-thread-625-3/#comment-610868
Monkeyhawk
Posted June 29, 2009 at 9:14 am | Permalink
In solemn reflection of the untimely passing of Billy Mays, I propose we honor his memory by joining hands and observing a moment of shouting
_______________________
And in other news, Fox reports that Michael Jackson is still dead.
HLP posted June 29, 2009 at 6:49 am
After last year’s recovery from its September 2007 low, this year’s ice melt is likely to be substantially less than for some time.
—————-
Really? Thin ice melts easier/faster.
http://www.nsidc.org/data/seaice_index/images/daily_images/N_timeseries.png
On this date, June 29th, record setting temperatures for Wichita Kansas
High: 105 °F (1998)
Low: 54 °F (1923)
“As someone who studies the less-cute things, the propaganda makes me irritated. Well, I don’t know if it can be properly called propaganda since it it’s not made up and pulled out of nowhere, but is definitely packaged up/dumbed down into something shiny for the lazy public.”
I love the lefts description of a ‘dumbed down’ population. This same group of leftists thinks that raising fuel costs which will increase production costs which will increase product cost which will decrease spending potential by the poorest among us won’t cause inflation, loss of jobs, businesses leaving the USofA, inflation, etc…
Yep the dumbest among us…
Wahine_Tara posted June 29, 2009 at 7:22 am
But he is not a global warming denier.
—————-
Actually, Mitchell Taylor is an AGW denier — he is part of the Heartland Institute group.
okobserver posted June 29, 2009 at 10:10 am
Yep the dumbest among us…
———————
That’d be okobserver. She forgot that higher fuel costs encourages higher energy efficiency and alternatives, which eventually lowers costs.
So cosmos,
What sciences courses did you take in college?
Physics? Biology? Chemistry? Bio-Chemistry? Meteorology?
Surely cosmos, you won’t keep avoiding answering this question.
“Yep the dumbest among us…”
Dearie? 3 watt?
That would be you.
Cosmos,
You mean DR Mitchell Taylor?
monkeyhawk: Mays had a seemingly eerie replication of the Brit actress who died after a fall on the ski slopes in Quebec. She too rejected immediate help, started to complain after a while and was dead shortly thereafter. I wonder if Fox is going to blame the US healthcare system for the death of Mays?
Here’s a video with Dr. Mitchell Taylor speaking, in one wants to know the causes of Polar bear deaths.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I63Dl14Pemc
It’s just so much trouble and inconvenient for AGW
‘Warmers’ to use real scientific, biological data gathered to make accurate statements.
HLP: The only ones who should worry about the loss of hunting areas for the polar bear in the artic are the black bears. The much bigger polar bears will simply revert to foraging on land (from whence they came) and drive out the smaller, black bears. We must start a fan club for the black bear, they may be in trouble!
DavidB wrote: “Good one, HLP.. let’s run things like it’s 1939 again! Or then again we could recognize the world’s economy has changed somewhat in the past 70 years…”
Since I, not HLP, was the only one that wrote about the ironies of policies that failed in the 30’s/40’s as compared to expecting them to be “hope & change” now…please, give me some examples of where this brilliant strategy (raise taxes, fix wages, print money, increase deficits, break contracts, etc), as you seem to be supporting, has worked…ever…in any country on the planet…
HLP posted June 29, 2009 at 6:49 am
“. . . Mitchell Taylor, who has studied the bears for 30 years, . . .”
HLP posted June 29, 2009 at 6:49 am
Dr Mitchell Taylor has been researching the status and management of polar bears in Canada and around the Arctic Circle for 30 years, as both an academic and a government employee.
cosmos hates acknowledging real scientists with credibility and who aren’t tied to the politically driven IPCC.
Madoff will die in prison, 150 years
“Dr Taylor agrees that the Arctic has been warming over the last 30 years. But he ascribes this not to rising levels of CO2 – as is dictated by the computer models of the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and believed by his PBSG colleagues – but to currents bringing warm water into the Arctic from the Pacific and the effect of winds blowing in from the Bering Sea.”
I see. So “Dr.” Taylor admits that there IS warming.
But likely gets paid to quibble about the cause.
Regular hates acknowledging real scientists with credentials, credibility, and experience, who do not spew Regular’s unsupportable claims.
http://www.ipcc.ch/ipccreports/ar4-wg1.htm
Annexes: (1)Glossary, (2)Authors, (3)Reviewers, (4)Acronyms
See also the scientists listed in the reference papers at the end of the chapters.
So cosmos,
When are you going to present what science courses you took in college?
Are you like the GORACLE, who had failing grades in the very few sciences courses he took then suddenly becomes an expert?
“Are you like the GORACLE,”
I THINK our resident welfare recipient and blog pariah MEANS Vice President, popularly elected President, leader in making the internet accessible to the public, and Nobel Prize winner, Al Gore.
Titles don’t make scientists Junior, hard work, education and real scientific data does.
Not the cooked data that the IPCC spews forth from Computer Climate Models and is spewed forth by ‘carnival hucksters’ like the GORACLE.
Regular,
Thank you for proving that my earlier post was accurate.
http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2009/06/open-thread-629-3/comment-page-1/#comment-612260
Energy Myths and Realities
Talk to graduands by by Keith O. Rattie, CEO of Questar, a Utah gas company
Good morning, everyone. I’m honored to join you today.
My perspective on global warming changed when I began to understand the limitations of the computer models that scientists have built to predict future warming. If the only variable driving the earth’s climate were manmade CO2 then there’d be no debate – global average temperatures would increase by a harmless one degree over the next 100 years. But the earth’s climate is what engineers call a “non-linear, dynamic system”. The models have dozens of inputs. Many are little more than the opinion of the scientist – in some cases, just a guess. The sun, for example, is by far the biggest driver of the earth’s climate. But the intensity of solar radiation from the sun varies over time in ways that can’t be accurately modeled. Another example, water vapor is a far more potent greenhouse gas than CO2. [The media now calls CO2 a "pollutant". If CO2 is a "pollutant" then water vapor is also a "pollutant" – that's absurd, but I digress]. Some scientists believe clouds amplify human CO2 forcing, others believe precipitation acts as the earth’s thermostat. But scientists do not agree on how to model clouds, precipitation, and evaporation, thus there’s no consensus on this fundamental issue.
But the reality for American consumers is that whether you buy that the science is settled or not, the political science is settled. With the media cheering them on, Congress has promised to “do something”. CO2 regulation is coming, whether it will do any good or not. Indeed, President Obama’s hope of shrinking the now the massive federal budget deficit depends on vast new revenues from a tax on carbon energy – so called “cap and trade”. Harry Reid has promised cap and trade legislation by August.
Under cap-and-trade, the government would try to create a market for CO2 by selling credits to companies that emit CO2. They would set a cap for the maximum amount of CO2 emissions. Over time, the cap would ratchet down. In theory, this will force companies to invest in lower-carbon technologies, thus reducing emissions to avoid the cost of buying credits from other companies that have already met their emissions goals. The costs of the credits would be passed on to consumers. Because virtually everything we do and consume in modern life has a carbon footprint the cost of just about everything will go up. This in theory will cause each of us to choose products that have a lower carbon footprint. Any way you slice it, cap and trade is a tax on the way we live our lives – one designed to produce a windfall for government.
The long term goal with cap and trade is ‘80 by 50?– an 80% reduction in CO2 emissions by 2050. Let’s do the easy math on what ‘80 by 50? means to you, using Utah as an example. Utah’s carbon footprint today is about 66 MM tons of CO2 per year. Utah’s population today is 2.6 MM. You divide those two numbers, and the average Utahan today has a carbon footprint of about 25 tons of CO2 per year. An 80% reduction in Utah’s carbon footprint by 2050 implies a reduction from 66 MM tons today to about 13 MM tons per year by 2050. But Utah’s population is growing at over 2% per year, so by 2050 there will be about 6 MM people living in this state. 13 MM tons divided by 6 MM people = 2.2 tons per person per year. Under ‘80 by 50? by the time you folks reach my age you’ll have to live your lives with an annual carbon allowance of no more than 2.2 tons of CO2 per year.
Question: when was the last time Utah’s carbon footprint was as low as 2.2 tons per person per year? Answer: probably not since Brigham Young and the Mormon pioneers first entered the Salt Lake Valley (1847). You reach a similar conclusion when you do the math on ‘80 by 50? for the entire U.S. ‘80 by 50? would require a reduction in America’s CO2 emissions from about 20 tons per person per year today, to about 2 tons per person per year in 2050. When was the last time America’s carbon footprint was as low as 2 tons per person per year? Probably not since the Pilgrims arrived at Plymouth Rock in 1620.
In short, ‘80 by 50? means that by the time you folks reach my age, you won’t be allowed to use anything made with – or made possible by – fossil fuels.
So I want to focus you on this critical question: “How on God’s green earth – pun intended – are you going to do what my generation said we’d do but didn’t – and that’s wean yourselves from fossil fuels in just four decades?” that’s a question that each of you, and indeed, all Americans need to ask now – because when it comes to “how” there clearly is no consensus. Simply put, with today’s energy technologies, we can’t get there from here.
The hallmark of this dilemma is our inability to reconcile our prosperity and our way of life with our environmental ideals. We like our cars. We like our freedom to “move about the country” – drive to work, fly to conferences, visit distant friends and family. We aspire to own the biggest house we can afford. We like to keep our homes and offices warm in the winter, cool in the summer. We like devices that use electricity – computers, flat screen TVs, cell phones, the Internet, and many other conveniences of modern life that come with a power cord. We like food that’s low cost, high quality, and free of bugs – which means farmers must use fertilizers and pesticides made from fossil fuels. We like things made of plastic and clothes made with synthetic fibers – and all of these things depend on abundant, affordable, growing supplies of energy.
And guess what? We share this planet with 6.2 billion other people who all want the same things.
America’s energy use has been growing at 1-2% per year, driven by population growth and prosperity. But while our way of life depends on ever-increasing amounts of energy, we’re downright schizophrenic when it comes to the things that energy companies must do to deliver the energy that makes modern life possible.
We want energy security – we don’t like being dependent on foreign oil. But we also don’t like drilling in the U.S. Millions of acres of prospective onshore public lands here in the Rockies plus the entire east and west coast of the U.S. are off-limits to drilling for a variety of reasons. We hate paying $2 per gallon for gasoline – but not as much as we hate the refineries that turn unusable crude oil into gasoline. We haven’t allowed anyone to build a new refinery in the U.S. in over 30 years. We expect the lights to come on when we flip the switch, but we don’t like coal, the source of 40% of our electricity – it’s dirty and mining scars the earth. We also don’t like nuclear power, the source of nearly 20% of our electricity – it’s clean, France likes it, but we’re afraid of it. Hydropower is clean and renewable. But it too has been blacklisted – dams hurt fish.
We don’t want pollution of any kind, in any amount, but we also don’t want to be asked: “how much are we willing to pay for environmental perfection?” When it comes to global warming, Time magazine tells us to “be worried, be very worried” – and we say we are – but we don’t act that way. Let me suggest that our conversation about how to reduce CO2 emissions must begin with a few “inconvenient” realities.
Reality 1: Worldwide demand for energy will grow by 30-50% over the next two decades – and more than double by the time you’re my age. Simply put, America and the rest of the world will need all the energy that markets can deliver.
Reality 2: There are no near-term alternatives to oil, natural gas, and coal. Like it or not, the world runs on fossil fuels, and it will for decades to come. The U.S. government’s own forecast shows that fossil fuels will supply about 85% of world energy demand in 2030 – roughly the same as today. Yes, someday the world may run on alternatives. But that day is still a long way off. It’s not about will. It’s not about who’s in the White House. It’s about thermodynamics and economics.
Now, I was told back in the 1970s what you’re being told today: that wind and solar power are ‘alternatives’ to fossil fuels. A more honest description would be ’supplements’. Taken together, wind and solar power today account for just one-sixth of 1% of America’s annual energy usage. Let me repeat that statistic – one-sixth of 1%.
Undaunted by this, President Obama proposes to double wind and solar power consumption in this country by the end of his first term. Great – that means the line on this pie chart would become a slightly thicker line in four years. I would point out that wind and solar power doubled in just the last three years of the Bush administration. Granted, W. started from a smaller baseline, so doubling again over the next four years will be a taller order. But if President Obama’s goal is achieved, wind and solar together will grow from one-sixth of 1% to one-third of 1% of total primary energy use – and that assumes U.S. energy consumption remains flat, which of course it will not.
The problems with wind and solar power become apparent when you look at their footprint. To generate electricity comparable to a 1,000 MW gas-fired power plant you’d have to build a wind farm with at least 500 very tall windmills occupying more than 30,000 acres of land. Then there’s solar power. I’m holding a Denver Post article that tells the story of an 8.2 MW solar-power plant built on 82 acres in Colorado. The Post proudly hails it “America’s most productive utility-scale solar electricity plant”. But when you account for the fact that the sun doesn’t always shine, you’d need over 250 of these plants, on over 20,000 acres to replace just one 1,000 MW gas-fired power plant that can be built on less than 40 acres.
The Salt Lake Tribune recently celebrated the startup of a 14 MW geothermal plant near Beaver, Utah. that’s wonderful! But the Tribune failed to put 14 MW into perspective. Utah has over 7,000 MW of installed generating capacity, primarily coal. America has about 1,000,000 MW of installed capacity. Because U.S. demand for electricity has been growing at 1-2 % per year, on average we’ve been adding 10-20,000 MW of new capacity every year to keep pace with growth. Around the world coal demand is booming – 200,000 MW of new coal capacity is under construction, over 30,000 MW in China alone. In fact, there are 30 coal plants under construction in the U.S. today that when complete will burn about 70 million tons of coal per year.
Why has my generation failed to develop wind and solar? Because our energy choices are ruthlessly ruled, not by political judgments, but by the immutable laws of thermodynamics. In engineer-speak, turning diffused sources of energy such as photons in sunlight or the kinetic energy in wind requires massive investment to concentrate that energy into a form that’s usable on any meaningful scale. What’s more, the wind doesn’t always blow and the sun doesn’t always shine. Unless or until there’s a major breakthrough in high-density electricity storage – a problem that has confounded scientists for more than 100 years – wind and solar can never be relied upon to provide base load power.
But it’s not just thermodynamics. It’s economics. Over the past 150 years America has invested trillions of dollars in our existing energy systems – power plants, the grid, steam and gas turbines, railroads, pipelines, distribution, refineries, service stations, home heating, boilers, cars, trucks and planes, etc. Changing that infrastructure to a system based on renewable energy will take decades and massive new investment.
To be clear, we need all the wind and solar power the markets can deliver at prices we can afford. But please, let’s get real – wind and solar are not “alternatives” to fossil fuels.
Reality 3: You can argue about whether global warming is a serious problem or not, but there’s no argument about the consequences of cap and trade regulation – it’s going to drive the cost of energy painfully higher. that’s the whole point of cap and trade – to drive up the cost of fossil energy so that otherwise uneconomic “alternatives” can compete. Some put the total cost of cap and trade to U.S. consumers at $2 trillion over the next decade and $6 trillion between now and 2050 – not to mention the net loss of jobs in energy-intensive industries that must compete in global markets.
Given this staggering cost, I hope you’ll ask: will cap and trade work? If Europe’s experience with cap and trade is an indication, the answer is “no”.
With much fanfare, the European Union (EU) adopted a cap and trade scheme in an effort to meet their Kyoto commitments to cut CO2 emissions to below 1990 levels by 2012. How are they doing? So far, all but one EU country is getting an “F”. Since 2000 Europe’s CO2 emissions per unit of GDP have grown faster than the U.S.! The U.S. of course did not implement Kyoto – nor did over 150 other countries. There’s a good reason why most of the world rejected Kyoto: with today’s energy technologies there’s no way to sever the link between CO2 emissions and modern life. Europe’s cap and trade scheme was designed to fail – and it’s working as designed….
Reality 4: Even if America does cut CO2 emissions, those same computer models that predict manmade warming over the next century also predict that Kyoto-type CO2 cuts would have no discernible impact on global temperatures for decades, if ever. When was the last time you read that in the paper? We’ve been told that Kyoto was “just a first step.” Your generation may want to ask: “what’s the second step?”
That begs another question: “how much are Americans willing to pay for ‘a first step’ that has no discernible effect on global climate?” The answer here in Utah is: not much, according to a poll conducted by Dan Jones & Associates published in the Deseret News. 63% of those surveyed said they worry about global warming. But when asked how much they’d be willing to see their electricity bills go up to help cut CO2 emissions, only half were willing to pay more for electricity. Only 18% were willing to see their power bill go up by 10% or more. Only 3% were willing to see their power bill go up by 20%…..
Let me close by returning to the lessons my generation learned from the 1970s energy crisis. We learned that energy choices favored by politicians but not confirmed by markets are destined to fail. If history has taught us anything it’s that we should resist the temptation to ask politicians to substitute their judgments for that of the market, and let markets determine how much energy gets used, what types of energy get used, where, how and by whom energy gets used. In truth, no source of energy is perfect, thus only markets can weigh the pros and cons of each source. Government’s role is to set reasonable standards for environmental performance, and make sure markets work.
I’ve covered a lot of ground this morning. I hope I’ve challenged your thinking about your energy future. Mostly, I hope you continue to enjoy freedom, prosperity – and abundant supplies of energy at prices you can afford!
More HERE:
http://www.clearlydeparted.com/environment/energy-myths-realities-keith-rattie-ceo-questar.html
Reg — Your rant on Cosmos is approaching harassment… As you are fond of saying, it is an anonymous blog… :-)
#
Chas
Posted June 29, 2009 at 10:58 am | Permalink
Reg — Your rant on Cosmos is approaching harassment… As you are fond of saying, it is an anonymous blog… :-)
==================
No Chas, I just hate preaching from people who don’t have a clue about science and rely on politically driven blogs to make a determination.
If it wasn’t for realclimate and desmogblog, cosmos wouldn’t have a brain to think with.
Regurgitating what someone else writes as an opinion is not science, it is an opinion.
Ever wonder why the global thermometer that the IPCC relies on appears to ignore the temperatures in Winter? Don’t believe me, ask the IPCC what an artificial global temperature of 58 degrees Fahrenheit has to do with the temperature in Antarctica where the temperature in most place never gets above -20 degrees Fahrenheit.
HLP posted June 29, 2009 at 10:58 am
Talk to graduands by by Keith O. Rattie, CEO of Questar, a Utah gas company
. . .
If the only variable driving the earth’s climate were manmade CO2 then there’d be no debate . . .
———————-
So since “manmade CO2″ is not the only variable, we should ignore the increase in radiative forcing it causes?
I guess that makes sense to an ex-Navy “liason”(sic), who seems to believe that a virtual office is not a virtual office because it has an address.
Regular,
Thank you for again proving (at 11:04 am) that my earlier post was accurate.
http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2009/06/open-thread-629-3/comment-page-1/#comment-612260
cosmos spews:
I guess that makes sense to an ex-Navy “liason”(sic), who seems to believe that a virtual office is not a virtual office because it has an address.
According to laws for nations and laws of physics, virtual offices must have an address or they can’t exist.
Whether it be an IP address or a postal address that houses the servers, an address is required.
Virtual existence requires a foothold in physical reality.
cosmos believes that computer climate models that use virtual ‘cooked’ average temperatures and ‘cooked’ co2 models are based in physical reality. Too bad for cosmos that humans don’t live inside a computer.
cosmos_originally
Posted June 29, 2009 at 11:10 am | Permalink
Regular,
Thank you for again proving (at 11:04 am) that my earlier post was accurate.
————————-
I never proved your post was accurate cosmos. Why did your parents raise such a liar such as yourself?
So cosmos, what science courses did you take in college?
Physics? Meteorology? Bio-Chemistry? Geology?
Surely cosmos, you can relate your background to let everyone know why your qualifications are much greater than everyone elses.
okobserver
Posted June 29, 2009 at 10:10 am | Permalink
I love the lefts description of a ‘dumbed down’ population.
_________________________
Yeah, that’s about as irritating as certian bloggers who refer to people who don’t agree with them as “sheeple”.
“…global temperature of 58 degrees Fahrenheit…”
Hmmm… 58 deg. F is GLOBAL…
And, -20 deg. F in Antarctica is REGIONAL…
Sounds like 58 global would be fairly accurate… if you factor in the Arctic temps, antarctic temps, and all of those others that go above 80 deg. F year round… Yea, 58 deg. F is reasonable…
BTW, I dont have to read realclimate or desmogblog to figure that out… just common sense… and some basic math… LOL
Regular posted June 29, 2009 at 11:13 am
cosmos spews:
I guess that makes sense to an ex-Navy “liason”(sic), who seems to believe that a virtual office is not a virtual office because it has an address.
According to laws for nations and laws of physics, virtual offices must have an address or they can’t exist.
Whether it be an IP address or a postal address that houses the servers, an address is required.
Virtual existence requires a foothold in physical reality.
———————-
Regular, explain that to your AGW science denier friend Hank, not to me
HLP posted June 25, 2009 at 10:03 pm
http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2009/06/open-thread-625-3/#comment-610840
SOURCE
Space and Science Research Center
4700 Millenia Blvd. Ste. 175
Orlando, FL 32839
. . .
____________________________
But,. . .but,. . .
The ‘virtual office’ appears to have an address!
kool-aid drinker
Regular,
Thank you for again proving (last paragraph, at 11:13 am) that my earlier post was accurate.
http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2009/06/open-thread-629-3/comment-page-1/#comment-612260
I read a study about three months ago, the ice in the arctic sea ice is recovering.
I think we should stop using the term global warming, and replace it with a more logical term. Like “Human Affected Environmental Changes”.
Dear Hank,
Does this address look familiar?
http://www.intelligentoffice.com/
(see locations)
Orlando (Millenia)
4700 Millenia Blvd., Suite 175
Orlando, FL 32839
Barnie. . .
http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2009/06/open-thread-629-3/comment-page-1/#comment-612228
XXX when people blindly follow a path that has proven to be wrong then I can only call them sheeple. I did notice last week that some in the news have now borrowed my phrase and are calling those who don’t question what Obama is doing – sheeple.
It is a natural observation.
You might be old enough to remember the gas lines of the ’70s. I am. We were in lines several blocks long to buy enough gas to get home from Cleveland, Ohio to Oklahoma.
This is a bogus bill with no purpose but to fleece the populus. I recognize that. I also recognize that the stimulus bill that we just had to have hasn’t created one job yet. If the dems are blind to that then what would you call them.
Had Rush on in the car while ago and he said something about this 1200 page bill was never even written and in the well of the house as required by law. I am researching this but if true – sheeple isn’t tough enough.
Jun 29, 2009 7:18 am US/Central Six Men Shot Dead In 24 Hours In Chicago
Several Others Shot Or Stabbed And Wounded
CHICAGO
Shot By Police In Englewood Neighborhood
(6/28/2009)
Boy, 9, Shot In Rogers Park Walking With Family
(6/27/2009)
5 Men Killed By Gunfire Overnight
(6/27/2009)
Shootings claimed the lives of six men in the city in a bloody and violent 24 hours over the weekend.
————–
How is that gun control in Chicago working?
http://cbs2chicago.com/local/chicago.weekend.violence.2.1063832.html
Sounds like 58 global would be fairly accurate… if you factor in the Arctic temps, antarctic temps, and all of those others that go above 80 deg. F year round… Yea, 58 deg. F is reasonable…
————-
Chas so I am leaving Kansas today and going to Colorado where the temp is in the seventies. If it is 95 when I leave here and 75 when I get their the mean temp is 85. How is this relevant and how can it be used in a logical scientific finding?
Just wondering? What constitutes ‘global’?
okobserver
Posted June 29, 2009 at 11:53 am | Permalink
XXX when people blindly follow a path that has proven to be wrong then I can only call them sheeple. I did notice last week that some in the news have now borrowed my phrase and are calling those who don’t question what Obama is doing – sheeple.
__________________________
Okobserver,
“when people blindly follow a path that has proven to be wrong”
Proven? By who? By what standard?
It’s so much easier to demean than to discuss.
cosmos continued use of ambiguity couched in the anonymity of Internet courage suits him just fine.
Faceless and without qualification cosmos represents the mold and mildew of our society. Growing in dark places, causing damage and responsible to no one.
Bernie goes down, joins the infamous Kenney Boy in infamy. A bush era of deregulation, no supervision is winding down. Thank God.
Okie —
Which part of GLOBAL do you not comprehend??
Chas posted June 29, 2009 at 11:37 am
BTW, I dont have to read realclimate or desmogblog to figure that out… just common sense… and some basic math… LOL
————
Chas,
Regular seems to believe that temperature data over specified areas is just meaningless random numbers, like phone numbers in a telephone book.
Bernie still has a victory in that he’s been able to shield his family, and leave them some of the loot.
But this ain’t over.
More reason to call Obama followers ’sheeple’.
Then there’s the case of the now-famous chart, prepared in January by the Obama transition team to forecast employment rates with and without a stimulus bill in place.
Obama’s economic advisers saw unemployment cresting at just below 8 percent with the stimulus in place; without it, they forecast the national rate topping out around 9 percent.
The stimulus, of course, did pass, though the national unemployment rate is now 9.4 percent. Two weeks ago, President Obama predicted that unemployment will top 10 percent this year.
———-
http://blogs.abcnews.com/thenote/2009/06/moving-the-stimulus-goalposts.html
By Jeff Gerth and Brady Dennis
ProPublica and Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, June 29, 2009
General Electric, the world’s largest industrial company, has quietly become the biggest beneficiary of one of the government’s key rescue programs for banks.
At the same time, GE has avoided many of the restrictions facing other financial giants getting help from the government.
The company did not initially qualify for the program, under which the government sought to unfreeze credit markets by guaranteeing debt sold by banking firms. But regulators soon loosened the eligibility requirements, in part because of behind-the-scenes appeals from GE.
As a result, GE has joined major banks collectively saving billions of dollars by raising money for their operations at lower interest rates. Public records show that GE Capital, the company’s massive financing arm, has issued nearly a quarter of the $340 billion in debt backed by the program, which is known as the Temporary Liquidity Guarantee Program, or TLGP. The government’s actions have been “powerful and helpful” to the company, GE chief executive Jeffrey Immelt acknowledged in December.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/06/28/AR2009062802955_pf.html
——-
Where is the outrage from the left on this massive transfer of taxes to ‘a bigggg corporation’.
Sheeple seem appropriate XXX. Sorry.
1967- Nukes are going to cause a “chain reaction” and destroy the earth.
1969- California to fall into ocean and kill the earth.
1972- Rainforrests dissapearing, earth will die.
1976- Acid rain is going to kill the earth.
1980- Large meteor will hit and destroy the earth.
1985- Ozone layer being destroyed is going to kill the earth.
2002- Global warming is going to destroy the earth.
Looks like the scientist are right at least as many times as Elizabeth Baron.
GE will also benefit from Cap and trade with their production of light bulbs and wind turbans.
GE will be the BMW of the American Third Reich.
“donndublin” has a homonym problem –
“GE will also benefit from Cap and trade with their production of…wind turbans.”
Think your propeller beanie qualifies?
As reported earlier in this series of articles (see here, here and here), EPA analyst Alan Carlin wrote a report in March that urged the EPA to conduct further review of evidence on the science of global warming. Some of the specific scientific issues he mentioned are indeed being debated within the scientific community, including what is actually happening to the ice covering Greenland, whether or not hurricanes are becoming more frequent or stronger, if IPCC calculations of CO2 emissions and concentration are accurate, and, of course whether or not temperatures are really climbing. You will not have to search very far to find active discussion of each of these points on the Internet.
But even if all of these points are eventually settled in favor of the ‘Al Gore James Hansen activist’ crowd that Carlin called ‘warmists,’ the other issue he gives for reconsideration outweighs the rest–that the science the EPA relied on for determining the validity of global warming and climate change essentially is limited to what was published before 2005. This is because the EPA is primarily relying on a report from the IPCC called AR4, which reviewed relevant scientific publications and had a cut-off date of 2005 for documents to review……
So Alan Carlin’s advice to the EPA, that they should consider more recent evidence, is most probably correct. That doesn’t mean it would be easy for the EPA to do. But certainly it would be easier than regulating CO2 without the correct information. For the EPA to stonewall Carlin’s report–essentially saying that the science was ’settled’ as the warmists love to claim (since when did a participant in a debate get to decide when the debate is over?), they must accept that some day they will appear in a court (probably many courts) and will have to explain why they ignored 70% of the available science in reaching their decision.
http://www.examiner.com/x-9111-SF-Environmental-Policy-Examiner~y2009m6d27-Why-the-EPA-should-have-listened-to-Alan-Carlin
________________
The AGW alarmists ignore anything after 2005. Algore and the alarmists just cover their ears and sing la la la la all the way to the bank.
“Just wondering? What constitutes ‘global’?”
_______________
Physical, mathematical and observational grounds are employed to show that there is no physically meaningful global temperature for the Earth in the context of the issue of global warming. While it is always possible to construct statistics for any given set of local temperature data, an infinite range of such statistics is mathematically permissible if physical principles provide no explicit basis for choosing among them. Distinct and equally valid statistical rules can and do show opposite trends when applied to the results of computations from physical models and real data in the atmosphere. A given temperature field can be interpreted as both “warming” and “cooling” simultaneously,
making the concept of warming in the context of the issue of global warming physically
ill-posed.
http://www.uoguelph.ca/~rmckitri/research/globaltemp/GlobTemp.JNET.pdf
So cosmos, what science courses did you take in college?
Physics? Meteorology? Bio-Chemistry? Geology?
Surely cosmos, you can relate your background to let everyone know why your qualifications are much greater than everyone elses.
__________________
Reg, It’s obvious that he studied neither of these subjects. I believe he took a few Free University courses in AGW. Too bad his whole education is been proven to be null and void.
What a waste.
#
Monkeyhawk
Posted June 29, 2009 at 12:51 pm | Permalink
“donndublin” has a homonym problem –
“GE will also benefit from Cap and trade with their production of…wind turbans.”
Think your propeller beanie qualifies?
________________
Own any GE stock chimphock?
#
cosmos_originally
Posted June 29, 2009 at 12:07 pm | Permalink
Chas posted June 29, 2009 at 11:37 am
BTW, I dont have to read realclimate or desmogblog to figure that out… just common sense… and some basic math… LOL
————
Chas,
Regular seems to believe that temperature data over specified areas is just meaningless random numbers, like phone numbers in a telephone book.
===================================
cosmos believes that one can throw out latitude, longitude, elevation, climate regions, wind patterns, rain fall, positioning to the sun and come up with an average temperature.
cosmos, what’s the average temperature in Wichita a 8 a.m., 12 p.m. 6 p.m.?
cosmos, what’s the average temperature in Point Barrow, Alaska at those same times.
If you get an average for both, let me know how that average temperature affects the temperature in Moscow, Russia.
cosmos, build me a space suit that can withstand the average temperature on the Moon.
cosmos, construct a house in Juneau, Alaska that meets average Global temperature requirements. Then, stay in that house during the months of January through March.
Iran conducts a ‘partial recount’ and declares a winner, where have I seen that before? Oh, yea, right in the good ol’ USA!
#
Chas
Posted June 29, 2009 at 11:37 am | Permalink
“…global temperature of 58 degrees Fahrenheit…”
Hmmm… 58 deg. F is GLOBAL…
And, -20 deg. F in Antarctica is REGIONAL…
Sounds like 58 global would be fairly accurate… if you factor in the Arctic temps, antarctic temps, and all of those others that go above 80 deg. F year round… Yea, 58 deg. F is reasonable…
BTW, I dont have to read realclimate or desmogblog to figure that out… just common sense… and some basic math… LOL
______________
Anyone who equates voting FOR a bill that’s not read to voting AGIANST it, surely is logic challenged.
BTW charlie boy. The next time you need a car, I have a used car I’ll sell you for $10,000. You don’t need to kick the tires, take it a mechanic or even see how many miles are on it. It really don’t matter, Right??
50% of the posters here are are below average..
Why discuss the gw argument, that argument is over, guess which side won?
50% of the posters here are are below average..
True enough for the Con side, but I think there’s a much slimmer % of dems. below average that post here.
Phantom,
There were many recounts both by private companies and official government here in America.
All showed Bush as the winner.
Nevermind that in our system it wasn’t the theocraticaly ran dictatorship which picked those who could run.
Or who presided over the results.
The differences are too numerous to count and yet you choose to make such a comparison?
cosMo and Char are deniers of The Second Law of Thermodynamics.
#
DavidB
Posted June 29, 2009 at 1:19 pm | Permalink
50% of the posters here are are below average..
#
Phantom
Posted June 29, 2009 at 1:20 pm | Permalink
Why discuss the gw argument, that argument is over, guess which side won?
__________________
Phantom has the same IQ as the “average global temperature” which according to chas is 58F.
That makes me a genius.
Phantom probably thinks the average IQ is 50 so he’s pounding his chest.
Donny boy,
Your IQ is the same as your hat size. Fortunately you have a somewhat swelled head; brings you up to 7-7/8ths.
donndublin posted June 29, 2009 at 12:53 pm
As reported earlier in this series of articles (see here, here and here), EPA analyst Alan Carlin wrote . . .
————
donndublin continues to spread goat droppings. . .
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2009/06/bubkes/langswitch_lang/no
Regular, at 1:15 and 1:16 pm, continues to prove that he is unable to understand climate science.
Cosmos is not a Mutton Buster.
#
cosmos_originally
Posted June 29, 2009 at 1:49 pm | Permalink
Regular, at 1:15 and 1:16 pm, continues to prove that he is unable to understand climate science.
===================
cosmos, don’t you know how to discuss a subject without using your canned phrases?
What a loser.
“I also recognize that the stimulus bill that we just had to have hasn’t created one job yet.”
Incorrect.. this project is employing people today in Overland Park.
http://www.nbcactionnews.com/news/local/story/Joe-Biden-Touts-Recovery-Plan-in-Overland-Park/ESigokbofEmdPHHpFsWc5g.cspx
DavidB
Posted June 29, 2009 at 2:07 pm | Permalink
“I also recognize that the stimulus bill that we just had to have hasn’t created one job yet.”
Incorrect.. this project is employing people today in Overland Park.
====================
Yeah, How man does that Highway construction company employ? 25? 50? 100?
What a deal for 800 billion dollars.
Glory Be!
Regular,
I simply made an accurate comment about your 1:15 and 1:16 pm posts.
Now, agreeing that okob was wrong.. Regular picks up the baton and runs crying that not ENOUGH jobs were created…
It’s a $82 million project. Suppliers earn, retailers earn, lunch restaurants earn, and on and on…
And in the end, Overland park will have a better, more efficient and safer roadway.
OK David my bad. We have gained maybe 100 jobs and thats being generous. We have lost several hundred thousands of job since then.
If I do the math it doesn’t look good for the Bo man and his stimulus plan.
Do you disagree with this math.
#
cosmos_originally
Posted June 29, 2009 at 2:20 pm | Permalink
Regular,
I simply made an accurate comment about your 1:15 and 1:16 pm posts.
———————
Accurate doesn’t describe the comments you make.
I would use the words fallacious, delusive, unreasoned to describe your comments on others and their comments.
I am sure your math shows that a national payout of $50 billion have created 100 jobs… in 50 states.. let’s average it out: $1 billion in each of 50 states and 2 jobs per state, so half a billion per job, you reckon??? heehee.
At this rate, another 200 jobs will be created when the rest of the Recovery Act funds are paid out….
Thanks for your input! Enlightening!
And that’s PRESIDENT BO MAN to you, missy!!! ;- )
Sorry David I usually refer to him as Prez Boman. That was disrespect on my part and I do respect the office.
I even like Prez Boman but I don’t like his policies and feel that are taking this country in the wrong direction. Overwhelming debt!
Wow.
Jobs saved or created?
I buy saved jobs. Construction companies more than likely don’t have too many private sector jobs to bid these days.
Created, I’m sceptical.
Regular,
No. . . I simply made an accurate comment about your 1:15 and 1:16 pm posts.
cosmos is an idiot.
I made an accurate statement at 3:01 pm.
Oh this is easy cosmos, I’ll think I’ll use it.
okobserver: Chicago has about 800+ murders a year, Toronto about the same size, has 50-60. Detroit has about 400+ murders a year, Montreal 20-40. Quebec City with a population of 750,000 didn’t have any murders in 2007. I figure gun control has something to to with it, the Chicago thing is too late, the place is liberally sprinkled with weapons.
Chicago has about 800+ murders a year, Toronto about the same size, has 50-60. Detroit has about 400+ murders a year, Montreal 20-40. Quebec City with a population of 750,000 didn’t have any murders in 2007.
====================================
What is the Black population in those Canadian cities?
How does that compare with Chicago and Detroit?
It is like a snowy Harlem up there.
Sursum that is about the most illogical statement you have ever made. You mean to tell me that when guns were made illegal that criminals didn’t turn in their guns. You have got to be kidding me. Criminals that don’t obey laws.
Well all I can say is ‘there should be a law’ against that.
Toronto – 8.4 per cent of the population is Black
Chicago – 36.77% of the population is Black
Maybe I missed something upthread, but it seems like what you are trying to communicate is that ‘guns don’t kill people, blacks kill people’, right?
Regular,
That’s a good idea to continue making your unsupportable attacks on the worlds top climate scientists, and me.
Regular obviously can’t defend his own ridiculous comments.
Maybe I missed something upthread, but it seems like what you are trying to communicate is that ‘Canadians don’t kill people, Americans kill people’, right?
cosmos_originally
Posted June 29, 2009 at 3:34 pm | Permalink
Regular,
That’s a good idea to continue making your unsupportable attacks on the worlds top climate scientists, and me.
————————
cosmos ranks himself up with the World’s Top Scientists.
What an ego…
Iraqis are so disappointed by America’s leaving Baghdad they have resorted to mourning. When I mean mourning I mean they were cheering and dancing in the streets.
http://rawstory.com/08/news/2009/06/29/iraqis-rejoice-as-us-troops-leave-baghdad/
I’m supposing only the neo-cons are surprised by the fact that foreign countries don’t like to be occupied by imperialist nations that have slaughtered hundreds of thousands of civilians for the sake of corporate interests.
It sounds to be like they are celebrating getting their shi+e together.
“It is a step we hope to follow up by other steps to achieve independence and stability of the country, and it is a real test of the efficiency of the security forces to shoulder their responsibilities,” he told AFP
Who do they have to thank for those?
“Iraq will after this day be just like many other Arab countries where there is the presence of foreign troops organised according to agreements signed between the country and the government of those forces.”
And that?
Great day to be an American.
#
cosmos_originally
Posted June 29, 2009 at 1:46 pm | Permalink
donndublin posted June 29, 2009 at 12:53 pm
As reported earlier in this series of articles (see here, here and here), EPA analyst Alan Carlin wrote . . .
————
donndublin continues to spread goat droppings. . .
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2009/06/bubkes/langswitch_lang/no
________________
cosMo continues to spread lies from a proven liar Michael Mann and his fraudulent “hockey stick graph”.
That makes you a liar too cosMo. I suppose that what they teach is propaganda school.
“I love the lefts description of a ‘dumbed down’ population. This same group of leftists thinks that raising fuel costs which will increase production costs which will increase product cost which will decrease spending potential by the poorest among us won’t cause inflation, loss of jobs, businesses leaving the USofA, inflation, etc…”
Perfect example of the dumbed down public: A few months ago I tried to start a discussion on ocean acidification. But it involves, you know, chemistry and complex relationships and all sorts of hard stuff, and so the only person to respond was Regular (a very noble attempt, but it’s hard to get familiar with it from a few websites). It didn’t involve buzzwords and catchphrases and a lot of talk-radio hosts don’t talk about it and so the public doesn’t care even though it’s a real consequence of CO2.
So yeah, dumbed down public is pretty accurate. If it doesn’t come from Al or Rush it’s not worth reading about because it might be a little more challenging to grasp than “Hey it was 74 degrees yesterday take THAT global warming nuts!” or “But the polar bears are dying!”
Perfect example of what rising fuel costs do to consumption: The decline of SUV purchases when gas was sky-high. So yeah, gas taxes are a terrific idea but too unpopular to ever happen.
Perfect example of dumbed down public: Gas prices go back down and people go back to their habits.
I love it when you type science, Tara.
Do it some more.
(I am sorry the Oceans just aren’t a priority in Kansas)
You know, if you don’t want to read the literature even a Scientific American would do the job of informing people of the basics.
Talk radio and political blogs are not stellar source of scientific research, because anyone can take one sentence in a discussion or intro of a journal article and twist it any which way to further their cause.
Scientific literacy is something that Americans lack on the whole, which is why we can only get people to care about polar bears.
My only experiences with Oceans has been visits to the Gulf of Mexico.
Most times the water and beaches were full of jellyfish….Not very welcoming.
Tara if I recall you are a marine biologist, have you ever seen a Coelacanth?
Has one ever been caught around Hawaii?
ANTI
Posted June 29, 2009 at 4:36 pm | Permalink
I love it when you type science, Tara.
Do it some more.
(I am sorry the Oceans just aren’t a priority in Kansas)
—————————————————-
They should be though. Did you happen to catch the program Black Blizzard on the history channel?
donndublin,
So Alan Carlin is not an economist?
And why don’t you prove that the points raised in the RC post are false and/or inaccurate, instead of calling them liars?
Regular
Posted June 29, 2009 at 3:42 pm | Permalink
cosmos_originally
Posted June 29, 2009 at 3:34 pm | Permalink
Regular,
That’s a good idea to continue making your unsupportable attacks on the worlds top climate scientists, and me.
————————
cosmos ranks himself up with the World’s Top Scientists.
What an ego…
_____________________________________
But then cosmos doesn’t pretend to be a disabled vet who collects a government check every month instead of being a productive member of society.
Sucks to be a Republican socialist leech.
Black Blizzard
==================
No Mr. Kia, I haven’t seen the program.
I think the oceans should be managed wisely if for no other reason than they are a huge food source for humanity that should be managed in order to protect the supply.
The Modesto, CA City School Board last Monday voted to allow junior high and high school students to leave campus during the school day for confidential medical services such as abortions, without the consent or knowledge of their parents.
3 of the 4 people who testified in favor of excluding parents from consent or knowledge were from criminal, racist Planned Parenthood abortion mills.
Besides abortion, medical treatment for the ravages of rape, venereal disease, and drug abuse could also be hidden from parents.
Another vote of the board is scheduled for July 13.
- – -
“If you like me, go see Fred Travalena. He does me great.”
. . . Hollywood movie star and singer Frank Sinatra
. . .
Christian pro-life comedian and impressionist Fred Tavalena, 66, of Encino, CA, a.k.a. “Mr. Everybody” a.k.a. “The Man of a Thousand Faces,” a Vegas headliner, died Sunday of non-Hodgkins lymphoma.
See his pro-life page
http://babiesareimportant.com/
- – -
A Columbus, OH mail carrier found a newborn girl abandoned on the front porch of an abandoned house Saturday, less than half a mile from a fire station where the infant could have been safely, legally, and discreetly abandoned instead. The girl was treated in stable condition at Children’s Hospital. Police will seek the mother for prosecution.
It was educational.
It’s about the Dust Bowl of course and the myriad of the causes for it.
In addition to poor farming practices, the dry conditions (drought) was in part to warming of the Atlantic.
I’m not sure what CO2 emmissions were like around 1932.
ANTI, I’ve given up on making people care about the oceans when their livelihood is not directly dependent on it (everyone’s is dependent on it in some way, though, but that’s for another day).
My comments were in response to OK’s all-too-common reaction to my observation of the dumbed-down public.
I cannot even trust things like polar bear research without scrutinizing the literature myself, because we now have a charge to make green popular in order to get any support behind green initiatives. I mean, I could see how this might lead to overdrawn conclusions from limited data sets.
I’m not accusing anyone of doing this, but I can see the potential if the only way to slow global warming is to make it palatable to a public that’s not really into science. I could imagine the urgency to get something done, even if it means being less conservative about conclusive claims than a researcher should be.
Does that make sense? It makes sense in my head.
That’s it for my bitter rant of the day :D
My solution: Cut the public out of it entirely and leave it to publicly funded researchers and economists.
Not serious.
Well, not entirely serious…
#
satatom
Posted June 29, 2009 at 4:51 pm | Permalink
But then cosmos doesn’t pretend to be a disabled vet who collects a government check every month instead of being a productive member of society.
Sucks to be a Republican socialist leech.
============================
As challenged to other airhead Liberals – Anytime you want to see my Military ID and my V.A. card – along with my disability rating, we can meet up and I’ll show you.
I know you won’t show or can’t show, because you are just another hider nic of one of the Libs here. :)
http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/06/28/scary-picture/
I wonder how the Global Warming deniers can explain this picture.
1979 sat image versus 2007 sat image same day, same month.
About 1/3rd less Artic ice . . .
Tara – do you have any good links to oceanic acidity 101 (yeah, I’m too lazy to read 20 articles to weed out any shred of truth)? If I’m not mistaken, isn’t one of it’s effects the blanching/death of coral reefs? Just curious about your thoughts as well, on the C02 sequestration idea of placing iron filings in the ocean to create algae blooms…assuming that would impact furthe the acidity issue you’re speaking of.
Well, well, well, I have been waiting all these years for the left coast to drop off into the Pacific Ocean as the aftermath of a huge quake along continental plates.
Instead, the left coast has dropped into a basketcase of bankruptcy. The ultimate welfare state. Democrats and republicans on their knees begging – sometimes demanding the federal government bail them out.
“More Porridge Please.”
The huge social experiment of the last half century has failed. Collapsed under it’s own socialist weight – California has failed.
Broke and broken.
California has always led in the social experiment – daring to reach out as the nations great wealthfare state – is now hopelessly in need of welfare itself.
And what of the other “progressive” states, which have tried to follow the California lead? They too are failing – blue as a blue state can be – broke as a socialist chump can be.
But look at the six states without even a state income tax – look at the red republic’s still standing strong and tall on their own two feet.
The saying goes, “As California goes, so goes the nation.”
And guess what? The facts are in, the social experiment failed. Libs will dream on and force the experiment further.
And the entire nation will rot away.
#
cosmos_originally
Posted June 29, 2009 at 4:50 pm | Permalink
donndublin,
So Alan Carlin is not an economist?
And why don’t you prove that the points raised in the RC post are false and/or inaccurate, instead of calling them liars?
________________
cosMo, Carlin also has a degree in physics just like Mann. Carlin has been with the EPA for over 30 years and his work has been peer reviewed by scientists.
Mann on the other hand refuses to release his formulas about the “hockey stick graph”.
http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2009/06/26/politics/politicalhotsheet/entry5117890.shtml
Any why don’t you and RC prove that the points raised by Carlin are false and/or inaccurate, instead of personally attacking his credentials and suppressing his comments.
What are they afraid of? It’s obvious the AGW alarmists are more concerned about politics than science.
“But look at the six states without even a state income tax – look at the red republic’s still standing strong and tall on their own two feet.”
Uh huh.
Anybody wanna live there? Aside from rich, greedy people?
The better question Capn is to ask where the 1979 photograph came from. Sophisticated imagery wasn’t available until 1999.
The satellites Terra was launched in 1999 and the Aura in launched 2004.
So what flying butt monkeys did they use to take the 1979 satellite photos that had the exact instrumentation, orbital path and interpretative computer imagery?
Hmmm? :)
crapon- where have you been for the last year?
http://www.dailytech.com/Sea+Ice+Ends+Year+at+Same+Level+as+1979/article13834.htm
Thanks for proving my point about how the alarmists want to cut off the debate before all the data is in.
Regular
Posted June 29, 2009 at 5:07 pm | Permalink
#
satatom
Posted June 29, 2009 at 4:51 pm | Permalink
But then cosmos doesn’t pretend to be a disabled vet who collects a government check every month instead of being a productive member of society.
Sucks to be a Republican socialist leech.
============================
As challenged to other airhead Liberals – Anytime you want to see my Military ID and my V.A. card – along with my disability rating, we can meet up and I’ll show you.
I know you won’t show or can’t show, because you are just another hider nic of one of the Libs here. :)
_______________________________________
Prove what? That you’re a Republican socialist that collects a government check for doing NOTHING rather than work?
You admitted that already with your post.
Leech.
From Donn’s article:
Each year, millions of square kilometers of sea ice melt and refreeze. However, the mean ice anomaly — defined as the seasonally-adjusted difference between the current value and the average from 1979-2000, varies much more slowly. That anomaly now stands at just under zero, a value identical to one recorded at the end of 1979, the year satellite record-keeping began.
Well that answered two questions – mine about the satellites and the dubious post the Capn made. :D
#
satatom
Posted June 29, 2009 at 5:29 pm | Permalink
Prove what? That you’re a Republican socialist that collects a government check for doing NOTHING rather than work?
You admitted that already with your post.
—————————
Go mow another lawn or flip another burger, your rend is coming up. :)
Leech.
DFB,
There’s two resources that seem to be a good, free easy to grasp starting point. One is the OA page from NOAA here: http://www.pmel.noaa.gov/co2/OA/. Start with “What is Ocean Acidification?”
The other is a scientific american article article called “The Dangers of Ocean Acidification”. If you set up a dummy email account I can email the pdf because it is copyrighted and I can’t find it for free on the web.
Two other important concepts to grasp are summarized on Wikipedia: The saturation horizon and also calcification.
But perhaps the very best resource for learning about these things from scratch is a chapter from a marine ecology textbook. There are plenty available at the local library, and they are written to teach people who are completely new to the subject.
Good luck and please contact me if you need any clarification.
#
CapnAmerica
Posted June 29, 2009 at 5:11 pm | Permalink
http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/06/28/scary-picture/
I wonder how the Global Warming deniers can explain this picture.
1979 sat image versus 2007 sat image same day, same month.
About 1/3rd less Artic ice . . .
________________
More junk (non)science from a left wing columnist.
Democrats in congress are now calling California the next Katrina.
It wasn’t an earthquake. It wasn’t even a hurricane which caused the California disaster. Instead, it was the failure of socialism which has collapsed under it’s own debt.
How big would the pipette have to be in order to titrate the World’s oceans to an acidic level? :D
“Anybody wanna live there? Aside from rich, greedy people?”
Bluejay you post without knowing the background.
Californians are fleeing the state – for next door Nevada which has no state income tax.
New Yorkers are fleeing for no tax and low tax surrounding states.
And it is the the rich and greedy with moving vans out BJ. It’s the common people. The rich can weather the storm. Remember?
And it is NOT the the rich and greedy with moving vans…
How big would the pipette have to be in order to titrate the World’s oceans to an acidic level? :)
I know you are more scientifically literate than you let on.
So you know that, strictly speaking, the ocean will never become “acidic” but “less basic”.
And you know that pH is on a log scale so a one-tenth drop is a big deal.
Why must you antagonize me??
#
Wahine_Tara
Posted June 29, 2009 at 5:41 pm | Permalink
How big would the pipette have to be in order to titrate the World’s oceans to an acidic level? :)
I know you are more scientifically literate than you let on.
So you know that, strictly speaking, the ocean will never become “acidic” but “less basic”.
And you know that pH is on a log scale so a one-tenth drop is a big deal.
Why must you antagonize me??
===============================
Everyone needs an ‘antagonizer’ in their life. Think of me of as that annoying Uncle. :)
“Remember that wonderful picture of stranded polar bears on an ice floe that were used by folks like soon-to-be-Dr. Al Gore to demonstrate how dire the man-made global warming issue is?
Well, ABC television in Australia, on a show called “Media Watch,” recently debunked the entire issue (video available here, h/t NB member dscott).
It turns out — as NewBuster Jake Gontesky reported on March 20 — the picture was taken in August, “when every year the fringes of the Arctic ice cap melt regardless of the wider effects of global warming.”
The photographer, Australian marine biology student Amanda Byrd, didn’t think the bears were in any jeopardy:
They did not appear to be in danger…I did not see the bears get on the ice, and I did not see them get off. I cannot say either way if they were stranded or not.
Denis Simard of Environment Canada agreed:
You have to keep in mind that the bears are not in danger at all. This is a perfect picture for climate change…you have the impression they are in the middle of the ocean and they are going to die…But they were not that far from the coast, and it was possible for them to swim…They are still alive and having fun.”
Liars still use the photo to support their GW tax.
Obama supports gun boat diplomacy in Honduras where the people throw out a president trying to undo the constitution.
Yet, in Iran, where millions protest the dictatorship of a religious leader – Obama refuses to show support for the people.
Thanks for that link, Donn.
It’d be a lot more convincing with actual photos though, wouldn’t it?
Got any of those?
Regular says, “Well that answered two questions – mine about the satellites . . .”
Regular didn’t ask a question so much as make a statement that sat imagery was available until after the 1979 date of the photo.
Just say “I was Regular.”
C’mon, be the first CON here to go on record as honest.
Oops . . . I meant of course “I was wrong,” although “I was Regular” is practically a synonym.
Does that make sense? – Tara
====================
Yes.
That darn vista premium doesn’t even allow you to use your own fax modem to send faxes! I still have my old computer with windows xp, think I’ll just hook it up to a network and use it for faxes, or maybe I could just take the hard drive out of it and put in my new inspiron and use that drive for faxing. Would that work?
Get a Mac!
BTW:
Iraqi forces assumed formal control of Baghdad and other cities Tuesday after American troops handed over security in urban areas in a defining step toward ending the U.S. combat role in the country. A countdown clock broadcast on Iraqi TV ticked to zero as the midnight deadline passed for U.S. combat troops to finish their pullback to bases outside cities.
“The withdrawal of American troops is completed now from all cities after everything they sacrificed for the sake of security,” said Sadiq al-Rikabi, a senior adviser to Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki. “We are now celebrating the restoration of sovereignty.”
“Obama refuses to show support for the people”
What BS. What he is not doing is making counterproductive statements which would both embolden the regime and hurt the cause for freedom in Iran.
More sea ice pictures
http://igloo.atmos.uiuc.edu/cgi-bin/test/print.sh?fm=12&fd=31&fy=1979&sm=12&sd=31&sy=2008
SHows a definite loss, but far less dramatic than the one submitted upthread, , as far as I can tell
ANTI
Posted June 29, 2009 at 3:05 pm | Permalink
Chicago has about 800+ murders a year, Toronto about the same size, has 50-60. Detroit has about 400+ murders a year, Montreal 20-40. Quebec City with a population of 750,000 didn’t have any murders in 2007.
====================================
What is the Black population in those Canadian cities?
How does that compare with Chicago and Detroit?
==============================================
The Blatant Racism just keeps rolling…. Are you really PROUD of yourself, ANTI???
Have you no sense of SHAME for your own comments like this??? You are a major source for the definition of “scum bucket”
#
Chas
Posted June 29, 2009 at 8:04 pm | Permalink
ANTI
Posted June 29, 2009 at 3:05 pm | Permalink
Chicago has about 800+ murders a year, Toronto about the same size, has 50-60. Detroit has about 400+ murders a year, Montreal 20-40. Quebec City with a population of 750,000 didn’t have any murders in 2007.
====================================
What is the Black population in those Canadian cities?
How does that compare with Chicago and Detroit?
==============================================
The Blatant Racism just keeps rolling…. Are you really PROUD of yourself, ANTI???
Have you no sense of SHAME for your own comments like this??? You are a major source for the definition of “scum bucket”
=============================
What then do you suggest why there is a lower murder rate in similarly sized cities?
Or is it you just like to make yourself look good to somebody (nobody knows who) that you can cry racism where none exists.
Mature people can discuss race and not get all puffed about it.
Get it?
:D
#
Chas
Posted June 29, 2009 at 8:04 pm | Permalink
ANTI
Posted June 29, 2009 at 3:05 pm | Permalink
Chicago has about 800+ murders a year, Toronto about the same size, has 50-60. Detroit has about 400+ murders a year, Montreal 20-40. Quebec City with a population of 750,000 didn’t have any murders in 2007.
====================================
What is the Black population in those Canadian cities?
How does that compare with Chicago and Detroit?
==============================================
The Blatant Racism just keeps rolling…. Are you really PROUD of yourself, ANTI???
Have you no sense of SHAME for your own comments like this??? You are a major source for the definition of “scum bucket”
====================================
Chas has no understanding of correlation or statistics.
Chas,
Numbers know no race.
I just caught up on my weekend Tivo stuff.
I think we can now safely assume the girl is Paul McCartney’s.
Chas?
good night; good luck; god bless —
whatever you conceive god to be!!
blessings all!!
blessings on this great nation!!
so mote it be!!
I gotta think the cause of crime is disenfanchisement, abject poverty and hoplessness over many generations. In LA crime stats are Latino with the same basis for where extreme poverty and extreme wealth exist side by side,the higher the crime rate. The matter is not racist it is economics, for the rate in the US is nothing compared to the developing world, expecially South and Central America, Africa and the Carribean. Russia has a rate more than 3 times that of the US, while the more developed countries are 1/2 or less our rate. I think it is despair not skin color, plus the availability of guns to vent their rage. Murder rates per 100,000 in US cities show Detroit@ 47.3, Baltimore @43.3, Philly @27.7, Chicago @ 16.4, Dallas @15.0, Boston @13.3, San Francisco @11.5, San Anatonio @9.2, NYC @7.3, San Diego @ 5.4, Seattle @5.1, Honolulu @1.9 and Toronto @1.5 I can’t speak for Toronto but I submit the decline in murder rates noted reflects the decline in poverty rates of the areas. The Toronto number I still put down to lack of guns on the street, for I don’t think it is any “richer” on average than Dallas, NYC, San Diego or Seattle.
#
Chas
Posted June 29, 2009 at 9:48 pm | Permalink
good night; good luck; god bless —
whatever you conceive god to be!!
blessings all!!
blessings on this great nation!!
so mote it be!!
-==========================
Should I wait for the standard 3 post after?
Here Poster Boy ®, this will give you something to do, other then bloggin all day:
http://www.kansas.com/952/story/871701.html
Tootsie TLC: Time for a home pedi
Must be early Church in the morning.
Another 45 minutes of work to do…..
The Pandemic Plague Mutates, and Global Warming Might Be Solved Afterall!!!! Billions to die!!!!
Libs celebrate!
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,529467,00.html?test=latestnews
Drug-Resistant Swine Flu Turns Up in Denmark
Monday, June 29, 2009
Now how can Government be so incompetent to lose the tapes from what may be the most historic achievement of mankind – landing on the moon?
Can’t trust Government I guess. If they can f this up, imaginie what they will do for health care & energy!
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,529476,00.html?test=latestnews
Missing Moon-Landing Videotapes May Have Been Found
Yes, Libs worry about ‘militarizing the region’ when the Government attempts to defend America’s border.
It’s so tough for Libs to defend America! They struggle with this concept for some effing reason.
(Oh, and Obama would be continuing yet another Bush plan. Huh.)
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/06/29/obama-plan-seek-national-guard-volunteers-protect-border/
Obama Plan Would Seek 1,500 National Guard Volunteers to Protect Border
The plan is a stopgap measure being worked out between the Defense Department and the Homeland Security Department, and comes despite Pentagon concerns about committing more troops to the border — a move some officials worry will be seen as militarizing the region.
Obama & Chavez on Same Side: 2 Headlines on Foxnews
Chavez Threatens Action Over Honduras Coup
Obama: Ouster of Honduras President Was an Illegal Coup
President Obama says the United States still considers Manuel Zelaya to be the president of Honduras.
Heh. My kid found this one.
Sad, but probably true.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eWEjvCRPrCo
Obama breaths air. Chavez breaths air.
OMG! Obama is Chavez.
BlueJay
Posted June 29, 2009 at 10:29 pm | Permalink
Heh. My kid found this one.
Sad, but probably true.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eWEjvCRPrCo
——————–
Internet is for Porn?
Now we know what Poster Boy® and his son do for fun.
Say Boxlock, lookin at a mountain gun for bears, comparing the S&W to the Ruger:
S&W
http://www.smith-wesson.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/ProductDisplay?storeId=10001&catalogId=10001&langId=-1&productId=44954&tabselected=over&isFirearm=Y&parent_category_rn=
Ruger
http://www.ruger-firearms.com/Firearms/FAProdView?model=5505&return=Y
Can’t decide which to get yet.
Like the ammo flexibility of the 460. The 454 is 10 oz ligher, and 6 vs 5 rounds capacity.
Oh, and the Ruger is about $300 cheaper.
Get a sense of humor “Jim”.
PS Made ya look.
The Federal Ballistics show the difference in power. Dirty Harry’s 44 Magnum is no longer the most powerful handgun in the world.
C44B 44 Rem. Magnum
Muzzle Energy 852 Velocity 1460
P454XB1 454 Casull
Muzzle Energy 1299 Velocity 1530
P460XB1 460 S&W
Muzzle Energy 1978 Velocity 1800
P500XB1 500 S&W
Muzzle Energy 1660 Velocity 1682
Winchester Ballistics:
S44PTHP 44 Rem. Magnum
Muzzle Energy 867 Velocity 1250
S454PTHP 454 Casull
Muzzle Energy 1870 Velocity 1800
SPG460SW 460 S&W
Muzzle Energy 2309 Velocity 2000
S500PTHP 500 S&W
Muzzle Energy 2877 Velocity 1800
Jim,
Either would be simply great. As you well know both are both excellent manufacturers and will last a lifetime.
Get which feels best in you hand if you can find each to try.
I can tell you this….I’d be shooting 45 Colt more than the magnums, reserving those just for wilderness defense. I admit, I like big sub-sonic loads for fun.
Al-quida wants the Americans out of the Mid-east, Most Americans want Americans out of the Mid-east, ergo Most Americans are Al-Quida.
Boxlock20
Posted June 30, 2009 at 7:14 am | Permalink
Jim,
Either would be simply great. As you well know both are both excellent manufacturers and will last a lifetime.
Get which feels best in you hand if you can find each to try.
I can tell you this….I’d be shooting 45 Colt more than the magnums, reserving those just for wilderness defense. I admit, I like big sub-sonic loads for fun.
———————–
I think you also carried the G23 in the mountains. It’s better then nothing, but I want something a little heftier.