Global Warming Report for Feb 3, 2011 and NFL laughed at

[cecilia]

Like Bristol Palin and inner city junkie moms.

Wow, you are slamming Bristol Palin because you don't like her mom's politics? Being an unwed 17 year old mother when her baby was born is hardly cause to put her in the same league as inner city junkie moms. At least Bristol didn't take the left's way out and simply discard (kill) the child.

The sad fact is that Bristol has a moron for a mother. I feel very sorry for her.

and abortions are not some political statement. The reasons are astoundingly complicated. Each case is different. what I hate about the fake religious right is that they think they have the right to JUDGE someone when they have absolutely no idea what the circumstances were.

Bristols choice to give birth is not some vastly superior action, it was just something she is willing to live with. Her life, her body, her choice.

What I hate is her dumb bitch of a mother didn't teach Bristol how to use a condom so that the odds of having to make that choice are greatly reduced. And then her dumb bitch of a mother USES her own daughter for political gain.

Bristols dilemma should have been utterly private. Instead it was shoved in everyone's face. What kind of a lowlife parades her pregnant daughter around like a circus performer?

 

[faethor]

Like Bristol Palin and inner city junkie moms.

Wow, you are slamming Bristol Palin because you don't like her mom's politics? Being an unwed 17 year old mother when her baby was born is hardly cause to put her in the same league as inner city junkie moms. At least Bristol didn't take the left's way out and simply discard (kill) the child.

Yes Yes we all know the left hates children before they are born. Then afterwards they go on to fund schools, food, and want unwed single mothers to improve their lot as this improves the future of the child.. While the right loves children before they are born. Then afterwards tries their best to defund food and defunds schools. In turn the right pushes ignorance education which increases STD's and unwed pregnancies so it can do it all again.

This has to do how with Global Warming? Oh yeah not at all.

 

[FluffyMcDeath]

Like Bristol Palin and inner city junkie moms.

Wow, you are slamming Bristol Palin because you don't like her mom's politics? Being an unwed 17 year old mother when her baby was born is hardly cause to put her in the same league as inner city junkie moms. At least Bristol didn't take the left's way out and simply discard (kill) the child.

Two examples does not make one example. And does not mean equal. There are plenty of junkie moms who don't take the easy way out and kill their babies - that's why they're moms. The algebra isn't too complex, is it?

But it's nice to know that there are plenty of people who will rush to defend rich white teenage girls who get knocked up out of wedlock. Can we hear some support for the poor black ones?

 

[FluffyMcDeath]

While the right loves children before they are born. Then afterwards tries their best to defund food and defunds schools.

This is farming. The idea is to make sure there are a lot of people but to also make sure that they are poor, ignorant and desperate. This livestock can then be put to work at minimal cost. They aren't as strong as mules but they are much more versatile and slightly smarter (which is why it's important that they don't know anything).

 

[Robert]

While the right loves children before they are born. Then afterwards tries their best to defund food and defunds schools.

This is farming. The idea is to make sure there are a lot of people but to also make sure that they are poor, ignorant and desperate. This livestock can then be put to work at minimal cost. They aren't as strong as mules but they are much more versatile and slightly smarter (which is why it's important that they don't know anything).

"For if one had a hundred thousand acres of Land, and as many pounds in money, and as many cattle, without a labourer, what would the rich man be but a labourer?"

 

[faethor]

Politically fighting about the existence of GW is costing the USA. Recently, the GOP recommended cutting the EPA by $1.6Billion (budget crunch ya know). They left untouched $4Billion that goes to oil and gas industries subsidies. More money was requested to be cut from renewable energy programs. By keeping the 'debate' of Global Warming alive these sort of things are shifting the focus and hurting the USA.

Oil and gas are a mature industry with the largest financial profits in the history of the world. It makes very little sense to give the most profitable more money. The government should be stimulating fledgling products and helping to increase market competition.

Renewable Energy is an emerging market. China is now leading the way of wind and solar production. They are growing at about 100K jobs a year. They are bickering about GW. They're seizing a growing market that we're leaving ourselves out of. Doing this means future jobs and profits won't be coming here. Since summer 2010 we've seen unemployment drop from 10% to closer to 9%. Sure 100K doesn't sound like much but that would have moved that 1% change closer to a 1.25% change. 25% faster unemployment growth? Sounds like a wind to me.

There clearly are other problems than GW with coal and oil. Both technologies are very polluting. The pollution costs are expensive. Coal, for example, is a polluter of ground and water with heavy metals. Instead of cleaning up the problem we let the pollution lay and issue restrictions on fish consumption. (just poison your kids a little) And costs for clean up may frequently be born by the government (Superfund anyone) instead of the industry. Coal and gas costs are truly higher than what we pay. It's just we pay some of our gas costs as increased taxes.

Coal and oil aren't sustainable. There's a rate of production by the planet. It's clear that we're outstripping the planet's ability to produce oil in our current usage. This is why we need to go ever deeper for oil. We need to get to untapped regions that haven't bubbled up close enough to the surface yet. Being less responsibile now likely will have costs to our great grandchildren. (We're just lucky enough to not be around to hear them complain.)

And of course not owning the majority of our own production. US money and therefore some political control in the hands of foreign nations. Anyone remember the oil crisis that started in 1973? Remaining on oil keeps this foreign control in place. Moving to renewable but allowing the market to be in China's hands will continue to keep foreign control of our energy in place. We need to own the renewable market.


The last point I make is one of market diversification. I think most people accept that market competition helps to establish prices. The more competition, in the ideal, the lower the price. Renewable energy coming into play would bring competition to the table. Going more renewable will reduce the rate which we buy oil which should help in turn lower oil prices to make it more attractive to use.

In summary, significantly reduce (if not remove) subsidies to a mature industry and mature marketplace. Turn that money over to fledging markets to promote job growth and competition. This is a win...

And bringing it back if GW is true this would help to reduce emissions and slow the rate of change. And if GW isn't true and what we're doing has no impact then this will have no impact too. I'd say if I do X and my options are no impact to a win then I'd give it a shot.


While the understanding of Climate Science is clear it's time to move the political bickering along. There are other factors being dropped and impacted due to a focus on a single issue. GW is one part of a bigger discussion of what and how to improve the finances, jobs, environment, and self sustainability of our nation as a whole.

 

[FluffyMcDeath]

Oil and gas are a mature industry with the largest financial profits in the history of the world.

The oil and gas industry are also an American industry. They are a strategic industry and part of the system of control over the rest of the world. That is why it is so important for the US to militarily control oil production and transportation by taking (when they can't buy) control of oil rich regions and good pipeline routes. While there is oil and the US controls most oil it is important to prevent other countries from becoming independent of oil. If countries become independent of oil then they become independent of the US dollar too (which they will no longer need to buy oil with) and that would collapse the US's ability to tax the production of the rest of the world. Don't confuse the US with Americans because Americans are merely the livestock of the US. The only part of the US that really counts is that people who make the decisions and profit from those decisions. Joe American isn't one of those people and for the most part what he thinks is irrelevant and if he tries to speak up he will be ... discouraged from doing so again.

China has been furnishing itself with oil by using US dollars it has in reserve to settle up the US debts of regions that have oil. This is doubly devious because a) the dollars are losing real value so it's less worth converting them into a commodity rather than a controlling interest and b) they are replacing debt to the US through the US dollar into debt to China i.e. from control by the US to control by China.

While china needs power and has acquired some oil from around the world they merely need oil as a commodity for the energy content it has and not as an instrument of power. Therefore China has no reason not to develop other energy sources, rather they have a motivation to - much to the chagrin of the US.

What would be quite revolutionary would be if China would put in the billions of dollars and effort to make fusion work. Whoever can produce this know-how would have virtually endless energy but it would not be strategically smart to develop it before your rivals had slipped in their industrial capabilities below the level required to copy you. Then the rest of the world would be dependent on your fusion as they would be technically and logistically incapable of producing their own.

 

[FluffyMcDeath]

Maybe I mentioned this already but ... it's all about to be moot.

Oil demand will shortly outstrip production and, worse, production will begin to fall. If Saudi Arabia can't pump enough oil to keep prices down there is no other producer than can step into its shoes. As we slide down the back side of the oil curve we will run out of that plentiful cheap energy that has allowed us to feed so many people and we will also be running out of the energy we need to use to build new energy infrastructure and to deal with the global problems we have already created. We need solutions in a hurry - we need them before we are too depleted to create them.

 

[cecilia]

Renewable Energy is an emerging market. China is now leading the way of wind and solar production. They are growing at about 100K jobs a year

and if those morons in congress don't step up America will be left behind and that will seal the doom bush and his drunk vp cheney started. I know every nation leaves it's Number One Spot at some point but I would at least like the USA to go with some dignity rather than being kicked to the curb like a besotted bitch

 

[faethor]

While the right loves children before they are born. Then afterwards tries their best to defund food and defunds schools.

This is farming. The idea is to make sure there are a lot of people but to also make sure that they are poor, ignorant and desperate. This livestock can then be put to work at minimal cost. They aren't as strong as mules but they are much more versatile and slightly smarter (which is why it's important that they don't know anything).

Republicans cut Pell Grants 15%, military 0% and might actually see an increase. LINK I suppose if the lowest income are less educated there is therefore more canon fodder.

 

[FluffyMcDeath]

I suppose if the lowest income are less educated there is therefore more canon fodder.

That's part of the program, yes. For a while there the military was having trouble recruiting people willing to go shoot Iraqis (despite lots of positive PR) but the poor economy has really helped.

Back in the 80's Maggie Thatcher trashed Britain but was able to mop up a bunch of the unemployed by sticking them on a ship to fight for a sheep farm off the coast of Argentina.

Of course, the bigger your economic crash the bigger the war you need to have to fix it.

 

[faethor]

I'm probably the only one on Whzzat today not dealing with sub-zero temps and blizzards. I hope you are all enjoying this global warming and "warmest winter on record" crap.

Winter (12/21-3/20) isn't over. The warmth appears to be back. We had 49 states with snow cover. Within 3 days the area covered by snow fell by over 50%. Here in Minnesota we have been a degree or two under our highest record measured. Between Sunday and Monday we lost over 5" of snow, a new record of most snow melted within 24 hours. Last March was our first snowless March. We appear to be headed in that direction.

http://nation.foxnews.com/global-warming/2011/02/03/america-crushed-snow-and-ice-global-warming

Don't forget Fox has been demonstrated to have a political agenda against GW. Their journalists have been, and I'd wouldn't be suprised to hears still are, under orders to IMMEDIATELY note on any claim of warming by guests that such theories are based on data that some critics have called into question. The edict was from managing editor Bill Simmons. Seems to me anything from Fox is tainted as their troops are ordered to deny. Next up on Fox heliocentricity must be questioned as those theories are based on data some critics have called into question.

 

[FluffyMcDeath]

I'm probably the only one on Whzzat today not dealing with sub-zero temps and blizzards.

Winter (12/21-3/20) isn't over. The warmth appears to be back.

I've been driving with the top down all winter except when it's been raining.

Don't forget Fox has been demonstrated to have a political agenda against GW. Their journalists have been, and I'd wouldn't be suprised to hears still are, under orders to IMMEDIATELY note on any claim of warming by guests that such theories are based on data that some critics have called into question.

Or they add the word "discredited" whenever they can, like the "discredited" Lancet report on excess deaths in Iraq. And don't forget the "it's only a" theory of evolution.

 

[cecilia]

yesterday after at least a month and half of hellish winter it was 50°
of course it was in the 20's at night

Global change is more about Extremes. we've been seeing that for a few years now. Have people forgotten the winter (2 years ago?) when Europe had all those frozen rivers?? Rivers that had not frozen before.

Having gone through this winter (which I hope ends soon), I think some people forget the actual cost of this. Wear and tear on the roads, the cars, buses, the subways, your homes, my mental health (ok, that doesn't cost anything) :mrgreen:

but after this winter the construction industry is going to reap the rewards. I hope people can afford it.

 

[redrumloa]

Global change is more about Extremes. we've been seeing that for a few years now. Have people forgotten the winter (2 years ago?) when Europe had all those frozen rivers?? Rivers that had not frozen before.

Throughout the ages the Thames has been locked in Winter's icy grip on countless occasions. In olden time when its bed was much wider, ice would form at the sides, and as the frost increased, would extend from bank to bank.

In 1063 it is recorded that it was frozen over for fourteen weeks, and again in 1076. In 1434 it was frozen over below London Bridge, as far down as Gravesend, and the frost lasted from November 24th to February 10th.

In 1515 the ice on the river was strong enough to bear carriages, and many passed over between Lambeth and Westminster, but unfortunately it is not said what sort of carriages - coaches did not come into use until a later date.

 

[faethor]

Don't forget Fox has been demonstrated to have a political agenda against GW. Their journalists have been, and I'd wouldn't be suprised to hears still are, under orders to IMMEDIATELY note on any claim of warming by guests that such theories are based on data that some critics have called into question.

Or they add the word "discredited" whenever they can, like the "discredited" Lancet report on excess deaths in Iraq. And don't forget the "it's only a" theory of evolution.

And this is a very good point on how people think about these sort of things. The masses have little to no scientific training. In the USA a vocal and large minority (25-40% depending on which survey you want) accept the Bible as a literal document. One where evolution didn't happen because the Bible says otherwise. Feeding this into Climate Change the Bible has a big story about Climate Change. It's called Noah's Flood. God, (who appears to be really pissy that he gave man freewill and man actually used it), decided men were so horrid that he'd destroy 99.99% of all life on the planet and save a few animals on a boat. At the end he promised to never do this again. The literalists see GW with 'bad things' as not as bad and never could be as bad as the time of Noah. Therefore we'll all be okay. Now throw this into about 50% of the people in the USA don't trust the scientists and I think you can see why. The vast major of untrust comes from those that trust the Bible first. Evolution is wrong... and so is GW.. .Cuz the Bible says so.

In closing I quote : "Truth is always blasphemy"

Going outside today to enjoy the temps in Feb that we don't typically see until the end of April.

 

[cecilia]

Throughout the ages the Thames.....

I wasn't referring to England, there were rivers in Europe that were frozen. forgot the names right now but I remember the pictures

 

[faethor]

And this is a very good point on how people think about these sort of things. The masses have little to no scientific training. In the USA a vocal and large minority (25-40% depending on which survey you want) accept the Bible as a literal document. One where evolution didn't happen because the Bible says otherwise. Feeding this into Climate Change the Bible has a big story about Climate Change. It's called Noah's Flood. God, (who appears to be really pissy that he gave man freewill and man actually used it), decided men were so horrid that he'd destroy 99.99% of all life on the planet and save a few animals on a boat. At the end he promised to never do this again. The literalists see GW with 'bad things' as not as bad and never could be as bad as the time of Noah. Therefore we'll all be okay. Now throw this into about 50% of the people in the USA don't trust the scientists and I think you can see why. The vast major of untrust comes from those that trust the Bible first. Evolution is wrong... and so is GW.. .Cuz the Bible says so.

Minnesota law maker says God will provide so no fear about using coal. Serendipity baby...