Global Warming

“Welllll Y2 Get another study and show they are WRONG. See that is SCIENCE...disprove the theory with studies and testing....”

“Y2, when will you decide to open your mind to other peoples opinions. You can not simply lump everyone together as saying they deny global warming. Most people say that science can not accurately predict what the earth is going to do - warm, cool or stay the same - especially when said science ignores every contrary fact in the hunt for proof of man-made global warming. Anyone with a brain knows that the earth warms and cools, its been doing that long before man has been around and it has been doing it while we have been around. We aren't going to stop it. We must put our efforts toward adapting to it.

What is your opinion of nuclear energy, the number one way of immediately offsetting the CO2 output of humanity?”

“The number of deaths had fallen sharply because of better warning systems, improved flood defences and other measures. Poor countries remained most vulnerable.

last edited: 12/03/07 9:26:19 AM”
Y2
9:24:45 AM
12/03/07

There is your answer. technology reduced the deaths. It will be technology that always saves us when the earth cools or if it warms. In the year 2050 there is expected to be 10 billion people on this planet. Most of them will live in countries that have no restrictions under the kyoto agreement.

I ask again, what is your position on nuclear energy?”

“Hyway...if it makes someone Wealthy the socialists will oppose it.”

“You weren't one of the three anyway Hyway. I've generalized in the posts above, but it nails some of the more active posters here.

I agree with you, technology is the answer - but that doesn't mean we should do nothing until someone comes up with the magic pill. We should be doing what we can to conserve in the meantime, and start looking to develop more alternative energy sources as we go.

And i'm fine with nuclear energy, but that should only be part of a comprehensive energy policy with multiple generation sources, generally pushing towards more renewables.”

“y2 - why don't you name the 3 posters that watch Fox News and listen to Rush and his ilk. I'm interested in knowing how you know this.”

“agreed, but the something we do should be the right thing. Not just something to look like we are doing something. Crippling our industries at a time when they are facing fierce competition from china, india and other developing nations isn't the right solution.”

“I want to know how come all the folks who rail against Fox/Limbaugh seem to know so much about what happens on either program.”

“the three are Sarge, XL and SS. Perhaps Sarge isn't in the audience for these.

I wasn't really looking to be that specific anyway though. There's a whole source of sources which do the same thing now, be they on the internet, radio or tv.

Perhaps it's just a coincidence that Sarge just repeatedly expresses the same or similar views, use the same tactics, ends up at the same 'talking points'. If so perhaps you should be looking for a lucrative move to the media.

And I've not really seen these shows much. I've certainly rarely heard Rush. One I end up hearing now and again is Laura Ingraham(sp?) and it's the same format. They prattle on endlessly about what the liberals are doing.

This is the common thread in many of the topics - obsessed with 'Liberals'. Instead of expressing their own views they just relentlessly obsess on what the 'libbies' are doing.

Hyway - but in a time of rising energy prices developing alternative sources is not 'cripping' our industry - it's giving them a competitive advantage over countries which also have a narrow range of energy sources of their own.

I think we're giving short-term interests far too much weight over longer-term stability and success. We need some foresight and vision here and it's completely lacking - together with real leadership on the issue.
last edited: 12/03/07 7:28:40 AM”

“Perhaps it's just a coincidence that Sarge just repeatedly expresses the same or similar views

Or perhaps when conservatives tell you that they think for themselves, and their ideas bubble their way up through the media, you shouldn't so quickly dismiss them. It makes you look ignorant.”

“Boy the libbies in Venezuela and Russia sure backed those right wing conservatives to the hilt-Hugo and Vladie must be two of the three on Y2s' list that listen to Rush?”

“http://apnews.myway.com/article/20071203/D8T9VPUG0.html

The early snow this year generated by global warming has taken over a dozen lives already.

I hate the global warming.”

“There are certainly conservatives who think for themselves and reach their own opinions in their own way - you just don't seem to be one of them Sarge.

Or like I said, perhaps it's all just a coincidence that you end up saying the same things as the major right-wing media outlets. Maybe I'm just misunderestimating you.”

“y2, we aren't in disagreement. One of us has a misunderstanding what carbon credits and such are used for. Its probably me. I was under the impression that they are designed to encourage businesses in developed countries to move or expand their operations into third world countries in order to gain carbon reduction credits. I don't see how that helps the American worker.

I'd rather get industry wide tax credits to companies working in the alternative energy fields. Less bureaucratic oversight than selecting individual firms to receive grants (which would probably go the companies with the best lobbying group). If a company develops a viable system, then the market will reward them. If someone is working on bad science then that too will shine through and they will eventually move onto good science or go under.”

“Carbon credits always seem to be as a way to cheat your way around cutting emissions.

I think that's a good idea. I'd also look to subsidize some energy conservation measures for households at sources.

One thing I particularly like the idea of is getting a smart meter in every household. I think when people see what the direct cost of leaving a TV on standby overnight is, what an old appliance costs to run and so-on, we will see some considerable conservation gains being made.”

“y2 - either way, you're a complete idiot.

Conservative views, by definition, have been around a long time. Way before cable and Rush.”

“y2 - Until a few months ago, I didn't receive Fox News. I watched it once since ... during the incident when the bridge collapsed. Sounds to me like you watch it more than I do.

I don't have a radio from 12-3. I don't listen to Rush, other than hearing an occassional morning update segment (about 30 seconds), as an advertisement for his show. Plus, I can't stand listening to him for more than about 5 minutes, from past experience. Sounds to me like you listen to him more than I do.
last edited: 12/03/07 7:59:47 AM”

“Exactly Y2, less bull#&%!$ about carbon footprints, global emissions and demonizing businesses and more rewarding of energy saving initiatives and the American people will respond. And stop demonizing nuclear energy. Start building more plants along with wind farms and start closing the coal mines.”

“It's been demonstrated time and again that people who primarily get their information from Fox don't have a firm grip on reality. � You're better off watching "The Daily Show" for chrissakes.

But there's definitely a market for unreality out there. ��No doubt about it.


This cracked me up ---

Fox announces new 'Nothing But The Truth' lie detector game show

Hopefully there will be a "celebrity" version with the Fox "news people" as contestants.”

“once again, tilt brings nothing to the table.”

“hyway treats tables poorly”

“I'm looking for some square pegs to try to pound into some round holes. Can someone help me with that? Tilt? Y2? Anyone?”

“The Daily Show's not real?”

“Your square head and let's see round hole??”

“Ooh, Burned! Dammit salebored, that was a good one!

Okay, you receive one day without being picked on---by me at least, lol.”

“No really.

George and Rupert have hung you out to dry on the climate change issue.

Not that George will support anything to mitigate it in any way (he hasn't forgotten which side of the bread his butter is on) --- but he does pay lip-service to the fact that it's happening and that it's man-made.

And not that the editorial comments of Fox talking heads will change (they know who pays the bills also) ---- but Rupert will try to play both sides of the street as long as he can.

It's like the steady stream of so-called Family Values people on one Fox outlet in contrast to the sleazy programming on the others. � Rupert is simply selling to different audiences..... but these people don't seem to catch on.

But if you would cite Fox as a source for anything, objective reality doesn't matter to you. �Fit the reporting to the policy --- that's the way it works, right?

That may fly for a few election cycles, but eventually you hit the wall..... as recent history illustrates.”

“But if you would cite Fox as a source for anything, objective reality doesn't matter to you. Fit the reporting to the policy --- that's the way it works, right?
Tilt
12:38:12 PM
12/03/07”

“once again tilt doesn't bring anything to the table. He doesn't county with facts or even any educated guesses. He just rants about how everyone that doesn't agree with him is a robot.”

“It appears someone went into a coma when the election results came in last year.”

“Cleaning the ants from my keybored
last edited: 12/03/07 1:15:25 PM”

“So tilty...what do you think the results of the more recent elections (say Louisianna for instance) say?”

“They say we are right and you are wrong. End of story, please vacate the thread as soon as possible. Thank you.


:-)”

“My favorite Corporation says,”

“the election results says nothing about anything accept the war in Iraq. I bet on the list of concerns for the American voter whether or not global warming is manmade comes in below setting a national speed limit or something else that no one cares about.”

“fear

here

and

here





and here”

“The big issue is whatever Katie Couric and the NYT set it to be. If it weren't the war, it would be the earf, if not the earf, it would be starvation, or some such thing. The reality is ....... Katie Couric and the NYT don't know what they're talking about.”

“But they do know what they read on the teleprompter”

“The top issues this year will the war in Iraq, the economy/jobs, and healthcare. After that comes improving schools, building roads and reducing crime. Somewhere way down the line the environment/global warming comes in.

If the republicans lose in the 2008 elections it won't be because of global warming. I wish the democrats would make an issue of it. Let the truth about carbon credits come out and they'd lose the support of the unions, joe six-pack and everybody else who hates to see American jobs go overseas.”

“Hy, the licans will lose whether they or the ocrats get elected. Too many years of the worst policies will put this country into a tail spin that can only be stopped by drastically cutting back the things that gov. is doing it should never have begun. Every fallen civilization has collasped for the very same reasons.”

“Web search "starve the beast" sometime.

Perhaps that was Bush's actual reason for starting the war.”

“The war was to distract attention from the corp. grab of control over not only this country ,but all of it's foreign dealings. Perfect system perfect world, brothers to the end , yes I know.”

“If so the good for him. Starve the beast is what we need indeed. And for that, I am voting for Ron Paul.”

“
CQ TODAY MIDDAY UPDATE
Dec. 5, 2007 � 2:08 p.m.

Senate Panel Begins Marathon Climate Change Markup

The Senate Environment and Public Works Committee began a marathon session Wednesday to draft global warming legislation, with Republicans offering numerous amendments aimed at the bill�s economic impact.

Joseph I. Lieberman , I-Conn., and John W. Warner , R-Va., are sponsoring the bill to cap emissions of greenhouse gases and set up a market-based trading system for businesses to meet the cap.

�When we pass this bill favorably out of this committee, the momentum will be on the side of getting something done,� Lieberman said.

The committee was expected to approve the bill, but it faced lengthy debate and an uncertain future in the full Senate. Nearly 200 amendments were filed in committee.

Most panel Republicans other than Warner are likely to vote against the bill. They were offering amendments intended to highlight how the legislation could affect U.S. jobs and low-income energy consumers. Most will fail, but Republicans want to put Democrats on the record in order to lay the groundwork for floor debate.

An amendment by Larry E. Craig , R-Idaho, would sunset the bill if China and India do not adopt similar measures within 10 years, or if the bill does not meet conditions for cost-effectiveness. It failed, 8-11.

Craig echoed the criticism from many Republicans that the bill would have minimal effect if the rest of the world did not come on board. But supporters of the bill said the United States should set an example. �If we don�t act, China and India will simply hide behind America�s skirts of inaction and take no steps of their own,� Warner said.

”

“I so wish this would become an election issue. The democrats would be steamrolled by the majority of their base. Like China needs a reason not to do what it doesn't want to do.”

“
Published online 5 December 2007 | Nature 450, 782-785 (2007) | doi:10.1038/450782a

News Feature

Earth Monitoring: Not enough eyes on the prize

The capacity of the United States to monitor Earth's vital signs is being stymied by tight budgets and poor coordination.

”

“Don't we already know enough to forecast the climate 50 years from now or is there still not enough data to make an accurate assessment?”

“Hopefully soon they'll act to pass meaningful (and expensive) legislation to stop all the witches, ghosts, and fairies too. Or at least tax the snot out of them.”

“Global Warming Vote on Snowy Day in Washington

As two inches of snow accumulated outside the U.S. Capitol, the Senate�s Environment and Public Works (EPW) Committee debated �historic� global warming legislation sponsored by Sens. John Warner (R.-Va.) and Joe Lieberman (I.-Conn.).

...

That would work out to $494 a year from every man, woman and child � more than 303 million Americans � a significant burden on the U.S. economy.


http://www.businessandmedia.org/articles/2007/20071205155935.aspx”