WSJ - Global warming proving to be a fraud

[Jerk]

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124597505076157449.html

Steve Fielding recently asked the Obama administration to reassure him on the science of man-made global warming. When the administration proved unhelpful, Mr. Fielding decided to vote against climate-change legislation.

If you haven't heard of this politician, it's because he's a member of the Australian Senate. As the U.S. House of Representatives prepares to pass a climate-change bill, the Australian Parliament is preparing to kill its own country's carbon-emissions scheme. Why? A growing number of Australian politicians, scientists and citizens once again doubt the science of human-caused global warming.

Among the many reasons President Barack Obama and the Democratic majority are so intent on quickly jamming a cap-and-trade system through Congress is because the global warming tide is again shifting. It turns out Al Gore and the United Nations (with an assist from the media), did a little too vociferous a job smearing anyone who disagreed with them as "deniers." The backlash has brought the scientific debate roaring back to life in Australia, Europe, Japan and even, if less reported, the U.S.

In April, the Polish Academy of Sciences published a document challenging man-made global warming. In the Czech Republic, where President Vaclav Klaus remains a leading skeptic, today only 11% of the population believes humans play a role. In France, President Nicolas Sarkozy wants to tap Claude Allegre to lead the country's new ministry of industry and innovation. Twenty years ago Mr. Allegre was among the first to trill about man-made global warming, but the geochemist has since recanted. New Zealand last year elected a new government, which immediately suspended the country's weeks-old cap-and-trade program.

The number of skeptics, far from shrinking, is swelling. Oklahoma Sen. Jim Inhofe now counts more than 700 scientists who disagree with the U.N. -- 13 times the number who authored the U.N.'s 2007 climate summary for policymakers. Joanne Simpson, the world's first woman to receive a Ph.D. in meteorology, expressed relief upon her retirement last year that she was finally free to speak "frankly" of her nonbelief. Dr. Kiminori Itoh, a Japanese environmental physical chemist who contributed to a U.N. climate report, dubs man-made warming "the worst scientific scandal in history." Norway's Ivar Giaever, Nobel Prize winner for physics, decries it as the "new religion." A group of 54 noted physicists, led by Princeton's Will Happer, is demanding the American Physical Society revise its position that the science is settled. (Both Nature and Science magazines have refused to run the physicists' open letter.)

The collapse of the "consensus" has been driven by reality. The inconvenient truth is that the earth's temperatures have flat-lined since 2001, despite growing concentrations of C02. Peer-reviewed research has debunked doomsday scenarios about the polar ice caps, hurricanes, malaria, extinctions, rising oceans. A global financial crisis has politicians taking a harder look at the science that would require them to hamstring their economies to rein in carbon.

Credit for Australia's own era of renewed enlightenment goes to Dr. Ian Plimer, a well-known Australian geologist. Earlier this year he published "Heaven and Earth," a damning critique of the "evidence" underpinning man-made global warming. The book is already in its fifth printing. So compelling is it that Paul Sheehan, a noted Australian columnist -- and ardent global warming believer -- in April humbly pronounced it "an evidence-based attack on conformity and orthodoxy, including my own, and a reminder to respect informed dissent and beware of ideology subverting evidence." Australian polls have shown a sharp uptick in public skepticism; the press is back to questioning scientific dogma; blogs are having a field day.

The rise in skepticism also came as Prime Minister Kevin Rudd, elected like Mr. Obama on promises to combat global warming, was attempting his own emissions-reduction scheme. His administration was forced to delay the implementation of the program until at least 2011, just to get the legislation through Australia's House. The Senate was not so easily swayed.

Mr. Fielding, a crucial vote on the bill, was so alarmed by the renewed science debate that he made a fact-finding trip to the U.S., attending the Heartland Institute's annual conference for climate skeptics. He also visited with Joseph Aldy, Mr. Obama's special assistant on energy and the environment, where he challenged the Obama team to address his doubts. They apparently didn't.

This week Mr. Fielding issued a statement: He would not be voting for the bill. He would not risk job losses on "unconvincing green science." The bill is set to founder as the Australian parliament breaks for the winter.

Republicans in the U.S. have, in recent years, turned ever more to the cost arguments against climate legislation. That's made sense in light of the economic crisis. If Speaker Nancy Pelosi fails to push through her bill, it will be because rural and Blue Dog Democrats fret about the economic ramifications. Yet if the rest of the world is any indication, now might be the time for U.S. politicians to re-engage on the science. One thing for sure: They won't be alone.

[King Crimson]

[B]beware of ideology subverting evidence.

well, the article cites public skepticism which isn't evidence of anything other than public opinion which is most often created for a strategic purpose. additionally, if Inhofe is the "authority" here one reads a heavy, often comical partisan overlay. and, finally, to the quote above: do you not post this because for you it's "truth value" is mostly a function of the fact you agree with it (or want this version of climate change to be true)?

which is somehow not a function of an ideological over-determination?

[Turd_Ferguson]

well, the article cites public skepticism which isn't evidence of anything other than public opinion which is most often created for a strategic purpose. additionally, if Inhofe is the "authority" here one reads a heavy, often comical partisan overlay. and, finally, to the quote above: do you not post this because for you it's "truth value" is mostly a function of the fact you agree with it (or want this version of climate change to be true)?

which is somehow not a function of an ideological over-determination?You lost me at "Well".

[mikeelikee]

And the "cap and tax" bill barely passed the House yesterday, with the Manchurian President having to twist numerous Dem arms to eke out a majority. This thing doesn't stand a chance in the Senate. Heck, the empirical evidence now reflects that the globe has been cooling over the last 10 years!

This is not about environmental purity....this is about power and control.

[yermom]

so when is the right time to move away from oil and pollution?

when Oklahoma City looks like Mexico City? when gas is $5 a gallon?

at some point you have to pull the band-aid off, it's gonna hurt a little

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

so when is the right time to move away from oil and pollution?

when Oklahoma City looks like Mexico City? when gas is $5 a gallon?

at some point you have to pull the band-aid off, it's gonna hurt a littleYou 've got a good brain. Use it. You will get over the humiliation and regret soon enough.

[yermom]

how much of the pushback against man-made climate change is from people worried about losing money?

i can agree with the sentiment that they are spreading the message with some hyperbole and fear, but who doesn't?

our lifestyles are largely not sustainable. would you rather recognize it before or after you are forced to change?

[sitzpinkler]

You 've got a good brain.

Apparently, you do not. :P :pop:

[OU_Sooners75]

at some point you have to pull the band-aid off, it's gonna hurt a little

Yeah, at some point you do have to pull that band-aid off.

However, you do not have to do it at the cost of people losing jobs and taxing me and everyone else that uses energy.

As a registered democrat, I am appalleled by how stupid the far left really is. I used to think that the democrats were better than this...but of course this was before they gained damn near absolute power in congress.

I will say this much, if these people cannot change their abusive ways with said power, then I will vote for the other side of the aisle.

This crap is just getting out of hand. Nancy Pelosi needs to leave the congress.

[yermom]

other than taxes, how are we supposed to pay off our debt?

are there no jobs in alternative energy?

it's not like someone is putting a gun to our heads. if this turns out to be too much, people will get ****canned and we'll start over.

[crawfish]

how much of the pushback against man-made climate change is from people worried about losing money?

Probably about the same as the initial push is from people looking for an opportunity to gain money.

[olevetonahill]

I dont know if this warming thing is Caused by Man or not
But I do know its HOT

[yermom]

Probably about the same as the initial push is from people looking for an opportunity to gain money.

i don't think i can buy that

[OU_Sooners75]

other than taxes, how are we supposed to pay off our debt?

are there no jobs in alternative energy?

it's not like someone is putting a gun to our heads. if this turns out to be too much, people will get ****canned and we'll start over.

1. Stop spending trillions of $$$ bailing out businesses!
2. Cut big government.
3. The rise of taxes is not what worries me...it is how much they plan on raising them in this bill.
4. The rich can afford more taxes....why hit the middle class?

[mikeelikee]

I dont know if this warming thing is Caused by Man or not
But I do know its HOT

Yes, it is hot. It's called Summer!

The science is NOT settled, despite what that noted and incredibly-credentialed scientist Algore spews.

[mikeelikee]

i don't think i can buy that


Gore makes $200,000 per speech. Wake up!

[yermom]

Gore isn't the only one, he's just the highest profiled one

and he's a politician not a scientist

i can accept that climate change may not be man made, but i still don't think the desired changes are a bad idea in general

[OU_Sooners75]

Gore makes $200,000 per speech. Wake up!

Al Gore is just one piece of the delusional puzzle.

But, for Al Gore to be the leader of the green movement, why does he:

1. Up until 2003, Al Gore received royalties from a Zinc Mine, depsite his stance on global warming.
2. His biggest means of travel cross country and through the world is by private jet.
3. His lectures on excessive comsumption goes against his very lifestyle. He and his wife own and live in two difference properties, equalling over 14,000 square ft. Al Gore also own a third home.
4. There is no evidence that Al Gore has signed up to use green energy at either of his residences, or his third property.
5. Al Gore owns a huge chunk of Occidental (Oxy) Petroleum stock. Oxy has been mired in controversy over oil drilling in ecologically sensitive areas.

He does drive a hybrid at least.

[Octavian]

As a registered democrat, I am appalleled by how stupid the far left really is. I used to think that the democrats were better than this...but of course this was before they gained damn near absolute power in congress.

I will say this much, if these people cannot change their abusive ways with said power, then I will vote for the other side of the aisle.


+1


I'm actually pretty embarrassed about my own views over the last several years....and I know which way I'm voting next year.


I'm reminded of the Mark Twain quote about fathers becoming smarter as sons grow up....

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

+1


I'm actually pretty embarrassed about my own views over the last several years....and I know which way I'm voting next year.


I'm reminded of the Mark Twain quote about fathers becoming smarter as sons grow up....Maybe you can ruboff(figuratively, of course) on yermom some. He's capable of it.

[yermom]

and how should i change?

i am open to a rational discussion. i don't follow a party line. i just call BS when i see it. i don't know enough about the inner workings of Obamas plans, but i'm not ready to call them a failure just yet

[OU_Sooners75]

Yermom, it is not about him failing or thinking that his plans are failures...

It has a lot to do with him gaining a backbone and sticking to his plans and not the plans of Pelosi or Reed.

Both of those individuals have set out and shown what type of "leaders" they truly are...and neither are amounting to more than a big pile of pig ****.

[swardboy]

We can't rationally discuss this issue here....biased worldviews preclude that.

http://www.globalwarminghoax.com/news.php

[yermom]

that's like telling someone to watch Fox to get a fair and balanced account of current events

[KC//CRIMSON]

Faux News

[SoonerBorn68]

Communist News Network

Another oBama Commercial

National Barak Channel


:rolleyes:

[KC//CRIMSON]

You forgot....

Always Been Commie
Nothing But Commie
Commie Broadcast Station

roll eyes, bla...bla...bla...

[KABOOKIE]

You forgot....

Always Been Commie
Nothing But Commie
Commie Broadcast Station

roll eyes, bla...bla...bla...

Yeah, but that didn't stop you from throwing out the Faux News. :rolleyes:

[KC//CRIMSON]

Yeah, but that didn't stop you from throwing out the Faux News. :rolleyes:

because that's what commies do.....

[Crucifax Autumn]

I'm gonna start referring to this forum as the ComNazi Oval

[Harry Beanbag]

I'm gonna start referring to this forum as the ComNazi Oval

How about just plain ol' ****** Bag Central, DBC.

[SoonerProphet]

http://lewrockwell.com/orig9/deming3.html

[yermom]

ah, David Deming

i'd bet you dollars to donuts he's a petroleum shill

the thread about him and OU was epic back in the day

[Fraggle145]

ah, David Deming

i'd bet you dollars to donuts he's a petroleum shill

the thread about him and OU was epic back in the day

Actually there are at least 3 threads about him.

[Jello Biafra]

He does drive a hybrid at least.

because it gets him more male stripping asss...

[Oldnslo]

so when is the right time to move away from oil and pollution?

when Oklahoma City looks like Mexico City? when gas is $5 a gallon?

at some point you have to pull the band-aid off, it's gonna hurt a little

Stephen Leeb and I agree with you, but the oil question isn't the same as the global warming one.

[Harry Beanbag]

when Oklahoma City looks like Mexico City?


I'm not sure I understand what this means.

[yermom]

Mexico City is pretty widely regarded as one of the most polluted cities

[yermom]

Stephen Leeb and I agree with you, but the oil question isn't the same as the global warming one.

i think they are loosely related. being "green" doesn't have to relate to global warming, it's just the current fear of choice that apparently is the most convincing at the moment

kinda like WMDs in Iraq ;)

[Harry Beanbag]

Mexico City is pretty widely regarded as one of the most polluted cities

I know. I thought you might be insinuating that, just not sure how you can do it with a straight keyboard.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

I'm not sure I understand what this means.haha

[yermom]

I know. I thought you might be insinuating that, just not sure how you can do it with a straight keyboard.

it's just a question. what is the breaking point? when should we do something?

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

Originally Posted by yermom
"when Oklahoma City looks like Mexico City? "
Hey, Phoenix already does...they are actually Mexican citizens, and we don't even know their(real)names.

[yermom]

i could give a crap about the ethnicity of the inhabitants. perhaps you should start another thread about your xenophobia

[MojoRisen]

I once did a science project in school on global warming, had my globe - one covered in a crystal like substance and one that was not, and the one with crystal like substance caught on fire. I got a C

But before all that happened an old man came up to me and said that killing trees does nothig for global warming. We get 90% of our oxygen from plankton and algae in the Ocean - and all we have to do is kill more whales.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

i could give a crap about the ethnicity of the inhabitants. perhaps you should start another thread about your xenophobiaWho said anything about ethnicity? It's citizenship, tiger. It's related, 'cause it's just another part of the fraud...and, you know it!

[Fraggle145]

I once did a science project in school on global warming, had my globe - one covered in a crystal like substance and one that was not, and the one with crystal like substance caught on fire. I got a C

But before all that happened an old man came up to me and said that killing trees does nothig for global warming. We get 90% of our oxygen from plankton and algae in the Ocean - and all we have to do is kill more whales.

That old man didnt know wtf he was talking about. We only get oxygen from algae specifically and plants in general during the day.

At night everything respires with no Oxygen return and a Co2 builds up because photosynthesis isnt possible. As the growing season in a lake progresses we get more and more distasteful algae that fish and the zooplankton dont eat. Some of it is even bacterial. This causes blooms of bacteria to form eating the algae. And most bacteria dont photosynthsize and are just respiring. This can cause death to all sorts of aquatic life (especially in lakes and estuaries) because both the algae and the bacteria basically suck up all of the oxygen during the night.

So that is all a balance. The miracle algae cures for creating O2 etc... still have a long way to go.

[MojoRisen]

Yeah but he was a major donor and busted my chops in front of the science teacher. They should have recognized that the arosol and emissions were causing the crystalization of the atmosphere and the conclusion that my globe caught on fire should be enough to conclude global warming. C nonetheless.

Except there aint nothing we goin to do to stop china from having an industrial age - and at such a large magnitude ours will pale n comparison. So to damage our ability to build arms and maintain economic growth is suicide at minimum.

[Harry Beanbag]

it's just a question. what is the breaking point? when should we do something?


You can't honestly think Oklahoma City, or any other American city for that matter, is on the road to looking like Mexico City pollution wise. It does not compute and completely invalidates any point you are trying to make.

[sooner_born_1960]

Perpetuating a myth is no way to go about engineering change.

[yermom]

You can't honestly think Oklahoma City, or any other American city for that matter, is on the road to looking like Mexico City pollution wise. It does not compute and completely invalidates any point you are trying to make.

in five years, probably not

what about in 20? 50?

what about LA?

[Harry Beanbag]

what about LA?


From what I've read, air quality in Los Angeles is better now than it's been in 60+ years.

[MojoRisen]

I guess all the wind is going to blow over here from China and India at some point.

All for Technology, but not at a cost of taxing every single american on a resource that we have to pay for no matter what. That is not a luxary tax it is a frigin huge tax... Not to mention putting peeps out of business to force them to the lib way of thinking.

Tyrants - Overlords - Socialist

Frieghtning at this point ....

[TMcGee86]

Al Gore is just one piece of the delusional puzzle.

But, for Al Gore to be the leader of the green movement, why does he:

1. Up until 2003, Al Gore received royalties from a Zinc Mine, depsite his stance on global warming.
2. His biggest means of travel cross country and through the world is by private jet.
3. His lectures on excessive comsumption goes against his very lifestyle. He and his wife own and live in two difference properties, equalling over 14,000 square ft. Al Gore also own a third home.
4. There is no evidence that Al Gore has signed up to use green energy at either of his residences, or his third property.
5. Al Gore owns a huge chunk of Occidental (Oxy) Petroleum stock. Oxy has been mired in controversy over oil drilling in ecologically sensitive areas.

He does drive a hybrid at least.

:les: HE BUYS CARBON CREDITS!!11!

[Fraggle145]

I guess all the wind is going to blow over here from China and India at some point.

All for Technology, but not at a cost of taxing every single american on a resource that we have to pay for no matter what. That is not a luxary tax it is a frigin huge tax... Not to mention putting peeps out of business to force them to the lib way of thinking.

Tyrants - Overlords - Socialist

Frieghtning at this point ....

Yep too bad we are already dealing with the dirty plume from Tejas' dirty *** power plants. Something like 10 of the 15 worst for mercury, and pretty bad for CO2 as well.

[OklahomaTuba]

American refineries, power, chemical & manufacturing plants are much cleaner than Mexico's.

Remember that when The Squanderer in Chief forces the domestic manufacturing plants to close and lay off their workers and move our energy production across the boarder and beyond.

But I'm sure every good little gaia worshiping liberal has already thought of the impact of that, right?

[MojoRisen]

Why don't we just legalize weed, work on emissions and everyone will be happy. NO?

[Fraggle145]

American refineries, power, chemical & manufacturing plants are much cleaner than Mexico's.

Remember that when The Squanderer in Chief forces the domestic manufacturing plants to close and lay off their workers and move our energy production across the boarder and beyond.

But I'm sure every good little gaia worshiping liberal has already thought of the impact of that, right?

RAWR! SQUANDERRRR!!! IM SO CLEVER! RAWR RAWR!!

[MojoRisen]

Just give Beavis some taxed weed, all is well in America.

14 billion dollar under ground economy in Hawaii alone as it is. Let alone putting a big dent in the Mexican Overloards who are stealing our industrial capabilities with zero emissions controll.

Imagine off setting our debt in 10 years by legalization of something over 70 million Americans admit to using already.

[yermom]

i don't think that's going to really make that much money from the tax side. it would save a lot of money from the DEA, etc... and make some room in prisons though

people brew their own beer, i think they might grow their own weed

[MojoRisen]

Well that is true, however I do believe it is a Trillion dollar a year insdustry alone and not all people who toke grow.

Not to mention all the use you can get out of Hemp if grown say on a scale of Liqour and Beer distribution - let alone the prospect of future exports for pioneering the legalization.

30% luxary tax on weed could be 300 Billion a year from nothing and lower the cost to the consumer all at once.

[OklahomaTuba]

Never mind what it would do to American productivity, insurance rates, crime, drop-out rates in schools and all the other nice little side effects that come from abusing weed.

Of course, if we don't have those dirty earth killing activities like jobs and farming and stuff anymore, I guess it doesn't really matter.

[MojoRisen]

I'll take that, however I think Proabition had a worse effect on crime than legalization. I think if you have an age limit on it, in the end it would brand it better and people could easily see who is using.

By the way, in the state of Democrat/Socialization Virginia. All Shell Gas stations make you scan the back of your ID if you are buying Beer or Cigarettes. Little freaky if you ask me, not interested in the state having my beer preferences on file.

[OklahomaTuba]

I'll take that, however I think Proabition had a worse effect on crime than legalization.
How so?? We can't know that because its never been legalized.

And the places that have legalized seem to be backing away from it, so maybe they know something we don't?? Not sure it's worth finding out to tell you the truth.

We don't need a lost generation of kids thanks to a ready supply of drugs flooding the place, and that is exactly what would happen.

[MojoRisen]

Well, I said weed, not herion, or the other stuff Amsterdam is letting people smoke like Crack.

70 million Americans already admit use of weed - Liqour legalization isn't so much safer or beyond legalization of weed. Trust me

Plus there is alternative use of Hemp that we already do use. Government can regulate it and our exports would increase. Since they are already growing hemp, me thinks they are planning on legalization as an option.

With the amount of kids already having it readily available to them, branding it and making an age limit on it and taxing it would only help us in my opinion and create more money for treating habitual offenders.

Now, I much prefer a luxuary tax - to this crap that is getting pushed at us on energy at an epic proportion....

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

RAWR! SQUANDERRRR!!! IM SO...RAWR RAWR!!That's it. Your cleverhoodedness is improving, Frag!

[yermom]

Well, I said weed, not herion, or the other stuff Amsterdam is letting people smoke like Crack.

70 million Americans already admit use of weed - Liqour legalization isn't so much safer or beyond legalization of weed. Trust me

Plus there is alternative use of Hemp that we already do use. Government can regulate it and our exports would increase. Since they are already growing hemp, me thinks they are planning on legalization as an option.

With the amount of kids already having it readily available to them, branding it and making an age limit on it and taxing it would only help us in my opinion and create more money for treating habitual offenders.

Now, I much prefer a luxuary tax - to this crap that is getting pushed at us on energy at an epic proportion....

i've heard multiple reports lately of kids saying it's easier to get weed than alcohol

i'm not saying i condone kids or even adults to use either very often, but it's a silly law, and from what i hear was mostly because the paper industry didn't want hemp cutting into their business back in the day

[MojoRisen]

Likely, and the invention of Jazz didn't come from Jack daniels in the 20s.

[crawfish]

i don't think i can buy that

I think a lot of support is from countries who stand making economic gains if the US is put at a disadvantage. Which is nearly every other country, because U.S. businesses will suffer more than any other if significant restrictions are put in place.

[MojoRisen]

Ok, so being the leader in emission controls to the point of taxing every American 100$ a month on energy only to drive companies to the point of bankruptcy isn't a double edge sword and potentially social-izm. Let alone making themselves exempt from the healthcare the rest of Americans will have to use isn't the izm? They already bankrupt the housing industry and took over, it would only be a matter of time before they take complete control of energy and dictate to us the cost and exportation. Too me that is beyond Protectionist - if they can claim there own Health care and pass off on us a system that sucks- they would do the same with energy.

The only country/citizens that stands to loose on our emissions leadership is Americans.

Unless we can compete with our hybrids vs what Indian is pumping out at 1200$ a car. Just wait until every dude and gal in India has a freaking car which is likely going to happen here very soon.

Do you think screwing a few companies in America are going to off set what 500 Million new cars in india will? Let alone if they decide to export - we are loosing this battle - and being stupid ain't going to solve it. Prentetious/Stoopid whatever....

[Fraggle145]

We don't need a lost generation of kids thanks to a ready supply of drugs flooding the place, and that is exactly what would happen.

What do you call alcohol? is it a drug? Is it in ready supply? Do we have a lost generation to alcohol?

[Fraggle145]

Ok, so being the leader in emission controls to the point of taxing every American 100$ a month on energy only to drive companies to the point of bankruptcy isn't a double edge sword and potentially social-izm. Let alone making themselves exempt from the healthcare the rest of Americans will have to use isn't the izm? They already bankrupt the housing industry and took over, it would only be a matter of time before they take complete control of energy and dictate to us the cost and exportation. Too me that is beyond Protectionist - if they can claim there own Health care and pass off on us a system that sucks- they would do the same with energy.

The only country/citizens that stands to loose on our emissions leadership is Americans.

Unless we can compete with our hybrids vs what Indian is pumping out at 1200$ a car. Just wait until every dude and gal in India has a freaking car which is likely going to happen here very soon.

Do you think screwing a few companies in America are going to off set what 500 Million new cars in india will? Let alone if they decide to export - we are loosing this battle - and being stupid ain't going to solve it. Prentetious/Stoopid whatever....

Cant we do better than "See the they are doing it too!!" argument?

Does that make it the better or right way to do things?

[MojoRisen]

Logic and timing are relevant, we have to have alternatives than to be a leader in a war we will never win... Never

Not only are they doing it too, it is going to advance well beyond anything we did in the industrial age 1000 times fold. It ls like taking a cruise with a bunch of kids and giving them play money because we were going to let them gamble with our immediate and distant future. But oh yeah it is idealogical and we can fix it next term. Meanwhile people suffer - literally. I don't see it man.

[Dio]

We don't need a lost generation of kids thanks to a ready supply of drugs flooding the place, and that is exactly what would happen.

We don't have that now?

I don't trust the gov't OR corporations, but I'd rather have them in control of this than gangs and drug lords.

[Turd_Ferguson]

What do you call alcohol? is it a drug? Is it in ready supply? Do we have a lost generation to alcohol?:O

[MojoRisen]

Winston Churchill wouldn't say that! He would say mam I may be drunk, but in the morning I will be sober and you will still be ugly.

[bluedogok]

You can't honestly think Oklahoma City, or any other American city for that matter, is on the road to looking like Mexico City pollution wise. It does not compute and completely invalidates any point you are trying to make.


in five years, probably not

what about in 20? 50?

what about LA?
Geography plays a big part in the smog of Mexico City, it sits in a valley in a mountain range much like Denver, the wind can't blow the stuff out of there like it can in this part of the country. Countries like Mexico (and China, India, etc.) have never much cared about what constitutes pollution or not, they are going to continue to pollute and US corporations will move more and more manufacturing/production there as the restrictions and cost of doing business goes up.

Most people in the US don't want to pay more for what they buy even if it is "good for the environment", most would rather save 10 cents and buy something made in Mexico or China than they would a similar item made in the US under EPA regulations. THAT is a fact of life now.

[MojoRisen]

Let's think bigger, technology to clean air would be interesting. Not what limits what makes it dirty.... when that will never happen in our lifetime or the next few.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

Geography plays a big part in the smog of Mexico City, it sits in a valley in a mountain range much like Denver, the wind can't blow the stuff out of there like it can in this part of the country. Countries like Mexico (and China, India, etc.) have never much cared about what constitutes pollution or not, they are going to continue to pollute and US corporations will move more and more manufacturing/production there as the restrictions and cost of doing business goes up.

Most people in the US don't want to pay more for what they buy even if it is "good for the environment", most would rather save 10 cents and buy something made in Mexico or China than they would a similar item made in the US under EPA regulations. THAT is a fact of life now.Them Gayston hippies h'ain't drove all the sense outaya, yet, anyways. Hook 'em

[JohnnyMack]

Global Warming is bull****. I liken what humans are doing to the earth to an ant ****ing an elephant and asking, "does it hurt?"

I think the U.S. has for the better part of four decades been hamstrung in its efforts to develop real, meaningful alternatives to carbon based fuel sources. You have one side (the oil & gas industry) wanting things to stay just the way they are because that's what puts food on their table. You have the other side perpetually fighting against the logical next generation fuel source which is nuclear power.

I think the government should ease its restrictions on the development of nuclear power as an alternative to carbon based power. I think the oil & gas industry could use some real competition. Of course the O&G lobby will do everything it can to fight it, it's only logical they would.

I'd rather see the oil & gas industry die a slow, pathetic death because someone builds a better mouse trap, not because I think they're going to destroy the world.

[bluedogok]

I'd rather see the oil & gas industry die a slow, pathetic death because someone builds a better mouse trap, not because I think they're going to destroy the world.
The oil companies are some of the ones doing the most research into alternative energies, they know the first one that brings viable technologies that can work on a mass scale will be sitting in the prime spot to exploit the market. Yeah, they are fighting for their current survival while trying to develop the next tech along the way. As soon as it becomes a priority there will be more jump on the train and might beat them to market.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

The oil companies are some of the ones doing the most research into alternative energies, they know the first one that brings viable technologies that can work on a mass scale will be sitting in the prime spot to exploit the market. Yeah, they are fighting for their current survival while trying to develop the next tech along the way. As soon as it becomes a priority there will be more jump on the train and might beat them to market.Who could believe THAT? Those are the bad guys!:O

[TopDawg]

Global Warming is bull****. I liken what humans are doing to the earth to an ant ****ing an elephant and asking, "does it hurt?"

This is exactly what we need...more metaphor-based politics!

I liken what the government is proposing to do to Americans via taxes to an ant ****ing an elephant and asking "does it hurt?"

Score another one for brilliant debate tactics!!!

[JohnnyMack]

I DO NOT BELIEVE IN GLOBAL WARMING.

THE END.

[Oldnslo]

I DO NOT BELIEVE IN GLOBAL WARMING.

THE END.

I believe that the Earth experiences fluctuations in its average temperatures. I believe that if human activity impacts these fluctuations, said impact is insignificant.

[JohnnyMack]

I believe that the Earth experiences fluctuations in its average temperatures. I believe that if human activity impacts these fluctuations, said impact is insignificant.

Ohh look at you with your fancy lawyer talk. So fancy.

But yeah. That's what I was trying to say, but I have a public school education.

[Oldnslo]

Ohh look at you with your fancy lawyer talk. So fancy.

But yeah. That's what I was trying to say, but I have a public school education.

Not only did I go to public school, I went to some of the worst in the United States. Phoebe Hearst elementary in New Orleans in the mid-70's was a great place to go for a race-based gang fight. Not so much for readin', writin' or 'rithmatic.

I was just trying to agree with you.

[TopDawg]

I believe that humans can have a major impact on the environment, which includes the warming of the globe.

I believe that the impact any one human has on the globe is usually very insignificant, but collectively can be damaging.

I believe there is a tipping point with our environment. I don't know where that tipping point is, but it could be that an insignificant human impact could get us to that tipping point and set off a bad chain reaction.

I believe there are very compelling reasons to reevaluate our energy supplies and demand/consumption beyond just the possible warming of the globe.

[yermom]

Geography plays a big part in the smog of Mexico City, it sits in a valley in a mountain range much like Denver, the wind can't blow the stuff out of there like it can in this part of the country. Countries like Mexico (and China, India, etc.) have never much cared about what constitutes pollution or not, they are going to continue to pollute and US corporations will move more and more manufacturing/production there as the restrictions and cost of doing business goes up.

Most people in the US don't want to pay more for what they buy even if it is "good for the environment", most would rather save 10 cents and buy something made in Mexico or China than they would a similar item made in the US under EPA regulations. THAT is a fact of life now.

this is yet another reason to buy less crap from Mexico and China...

i used Mexico City as an example, it could have been Pittsburgh, Bakersfield, LA, etc...

all i'm saying is that environmental concerns go beyond global warming, that just happens to be the hot button issue.

that and the motivation to discredit it comes more from not wanting to go through the trouble of being environmentally conscious than being scientific

[OklahomaTuba]

I believe there are very compelling reasons to reevaluate our energy supplies and demand/consumption beyond just the possible warming of the globe.
Most people agree with this TD.

Unfortunately, the fear-mongering, scare tactics and hypocrisy of the folks peddling this global warming alarmism are starting to wear thin and turn people off.

Of course, the fact that the science behind the whole global warming argument is sketchy at best doesn't help matters either.

In any case, taxing the hell out of us all isn't going to stop the weather from changing.

[OklahomaTuba]

i used Mexico City as an example, it could have been Pittsburgh, Bakersfield, LA, etc...

Ever been to Mexico City???

If you're comparing Mexico City to Pittsburgh, then obviously not. Its not even close to how bad the pollution is down there.

They don't even flare gas at some refineries in Mexico a lot of the time its so bad.

Good thing the libz will be forcing our energy production down there! The urf will be a much, much better place indeed.

[TopDawg]

Most people agree with this TD.

Unfortunately, the fear-mongering, scare tactics and hypocrisy of the folks peddling this global warming alarmism are starting to wear thin and turn people off.

Well, I certainly know what it's like to be turned off of a position I find tenable because the people yelling loudest for it are generally fear-mongers, scare-tacticians and hypocrites.


Of course, the fact that the science behind the whole global warming argument is sketchy at best doesn't help matters either.

Are you saying only one side of the issue uses sketchy science? I mean both sides are trying to prove something scientifically, right? Is only one of them using "approved" methods?


In any case, taxing the hell out of us all isn't going to stop the weather from changing.

Well, the weather surely will continue to change. You're right about that. And while taxes alone won't do much, it's possible that taxes could influence behavioral changes that could stop...or at least significantly slow down...damage to the environment. Of course the taxes must be well-thought out, and this shouldn't be seen as an endorsement of the taxes that have been proposed (I haven't reviewed them much myself) as much of a rejection of the idea that "taxes won't work."

[Fraggle145]

that and the motivation to discredit it comes more from not wanting to go through the trouble of being environmentally conscious than being scientific

This.

[yermom]

i'm comparing OKC in the future to some city that is acknowledged to have a pollution issue now

it doesn't really change the question. how bad does it have to be before it's worth making changes?

[JohnnyMack]

all i'm saying is that environmental concerns go beyond global warming, that just happens to be the hot button issue.

that and the motivation to discredit it comes more from not wanting to go through the trouble of being environmentally conscious than being scientific

I think that protecting the environment and global warming are not the same thing. While I think we should make an effort at not destroying the planet (kind of in our best interest, no?), I don't think we (humans) have been the cause of temperature increase on the planet.

[NormanPride]

I just think green homes and cars look cool. But I'm a nerd that likes gizmos.

[1890MilesToNorman]

Local observations on 6/30/09. 61 friggin degrees and ain't seen the sun in a month. Bumpkus

[Harry Beanbag]

i'm comparing OKC in the future to some city that is acknowledged to have a pollution issue now

it doesn't really change the question. how bad does it have to be before it's worth making changes?


I'm still confused by this tact you're on. You act like we're on the dawn of the industrial revolution or something. We've been burning fossil fuels for what, 100 years now give or take? From what I've read and learned over the years, the United States has taken steps to reduce emissions and air quality has improved significantly since 1970. It's not getting worse like you seem to be stating. If you want to talk about other parts of world that's fair game, but they aren't under United States law.

[yermom]

all i'm saying is that reducing carbon emissions (and weaning off of oil) is probably a good idea, regardless of whether or not global warming is occurring due to man-made reasons

and that i've yet to hear someone discount accepted science theories without an axe to grind

[OklahomaTuba]

And while taxes alone won't do much, it's possible that taxes could influence behavioral changes that could stop...or at least significantly slow down...damage to the environment.

well, increase the price of anything and it will affect behavior change.

However, one of these behavior changes is the loss of jobs that will move overseas or to Mexico due to more taxes and regulation.

Is that what you really think we need right now??? Fewer jobs and higher energy prices???

I think the current proposal, if passed, could turn this recession and any possible recovery into the next great depression. Its the equivalent to the tax increases and tarrif imposed after the crash of 1929, only worse.

[Vaevictis]

The sad thing is that people think that this is a binary system -- that you either have to go whole hog, or you can't care about it at all. And that making a difference in this regard necessarily means spending more money.

Since 2003, 100% of my home power requirements are met by or offset by wind power purchases from OG&E. My average additional cost is -$3.20, which means I've saved about $300.

I purchased a Camry Hybrid in 2006. In three years, I've driven 33k miles. It cost about $2000 more than my alternative vehicle, and gets 35mpg compared to the alternative's 22mpg. I've saved about 560 gallons of gas in that time, resulting in about a $700 cost differential to date -- which gets smaller with each mile I drive. Add in the tax credit received for purchasing this, and I'm about $1300 ahead.

So, by converting to wind power and a PZEV hybrid vehicle, I've drastically reduced the amount of pollution I've put into the environment... and I've kept $1600 more in my pocket. If you ignore the tax credit, I'm out of pocket $300, a number which will turn negative in a matter of months.

Being green doesn't have to be expensive.

[NormanPride]

But it makes you a limp-wristed lefty. So there's that.

[Harry Beanbag]

all i'm saying is that reducing carbon emissions (and weaning off of oil) is probably a good idea, regardless of whether or not global warming is occurring due to man-made reasons

And there's not a thing wrong with this statement. False, ambiguous, futuristic fearmongering isn't going to improve it.

[Collier11]

Ive always thought and stated my opinion that Global warming is probably true to an extent, but to what extent? It is a natural cycle that has been repeated over and over, just a way for Al Gore and the like to make money and act like they give a shizz. I def think it is overstated and is more of a scare tactic than anything

[Sooner_Havok]

Ive always thought and stated my opinion that Global warming is probably true to an extent, but to what extent? It is a natural cycle that has been repeated over and over, just a way for Al Gore and the like to make money and act like they give a shizz. I def think it is overstated and is more of a scare tactic than anything

Just saying, sometimes scaring people is the best way to do things. I mean look what refer madness did to a whole generations views on marijuana.

What is scarier,

GLOBAL WARMING WILL END THE WORLD!!!!1

----or----

WE HAVE REACHED PEAK OIL!!!!!1


again, just saying...

[Collier11]

you have a point but to what extent? Al gore goes off and wins a BS Oscar and a BS Nobel on fabricated evidence all while he is running the biggest electric using house in the state of Tenn? The world is coming to an end and save the polar bears but...in 1000 yrs we mean.

[Sooner_Havok]

you have a point but to what extent? Al gore goes off and wins a BS Oscar and a BS Nobel on fabricated evidence all while he is running the biggest electric using house in the state of Tenn? The world is coming to an end and save the polar bears but...in 1000 yrs we mean.

Well, if we haven't reached peak oil yet, I am willing to bet we will hit it sooner than 500 years.

[OklahomaTuba]

peak oil is a whole other issue. And one I sorta of agree with to a point (peak EASY oil, not peak TOTAL oil).

[Collier11]

agreed that they are diff subject

[Sooner_Havok]

agreed that they are diff subject

Pot and public safety are different subjects to. Look, I happen to believe in Global warming, but even if I found out it was bunk, I would still agree with measures for weaning ourselves of oil. And if scaring the f*** out of the general public is the best way to gain support, so be it. Wouldn't be the first time Americans were scared into doing the right thing, and god knows it won't be the last.

[OklahomaTuba]

Look, I happen to believe in Global warming, but even if I found out it was bunk, I would still agree with measures for weaning ourselves of oil. And if scaring the f*** out of the general public is the best way to gain support, so be it.
Well, at least you're honest about the fear mongering part of it.

But getting off oil isn't going solve much. Even if every car is a cute little plug-in prius, we still gotta get that electricity from somewhere and the material for the batteries.

Seen the damage done to extract lithium and coal?? Its not pretty.

And since all the envirowackos won't let us build nukes, then I guess we are pretty much screwed until someone develops cold fusion.

[Fraggle145]

And since all the envirowackos won't let us build nukes, then I guess we are pretty much screwed until someone develops cold fusion.

Those are the dumbass envirowackos.

[TopDawg]

I think the current proposal, if passed, could turn this recession and any possible recovery into the next great depression. Its the equivalent to the tax increases and tarrif imposed after the crash of 1929, only worse.

Would this be considered fear-mongering or a scare tactic? ;)

[yermom]

when Republicans do it, it's patriotism

[Sooner_Havok]

when Republicans do it, it's patriotism

heh

[mikeelikee]

During a program I was watching this weekend, I saw a heart-wrenching, approximately 3-minute "infomercial" featuring Noah Wylie practically in tears, bemoaning the impending extinction of the darling polar bears.

Just one problem...the polar bear population is exploding! It is estimated to have quadrupled in the past 10-12 years. Nice try, Noah. You ARE a fine actor!

[bluedogok]

Local observations on 6/30/09. 61 friggin degrees and ain't seen the sun in a month. Bumpkus
Well, we've had the "warming" down here, three straight weeks of 100+ temps with a new record almost everyday (in the 105-107 range) until today when we actually had some rain for the first time in a month and held the temp down to 91. Lake Travis is 30 feet low, one boat ramp left open at this time. After all, we went to Galveston/Houston to "cool off" over the weekend.


But getting off oil isn't going solve much. Yep, but as transportation fuel it will help but in no way will it "solve" the nee for oil because almost everything made has some component requiring oil for manufacture, starting with plastics.

[tommieharris91]

Would this be considered fear-mongering or a scare tactic? ;)

Neither. Tuba has this one right. http://palmgoon.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/05/the_more_you_know2.jpg

[jkjsooner]

Since 2003, 100% of my home power requirements are met by or offset by wind power purchases from OG&E. My average additional cost is -$3.20, which means I've saved about $300.



I'm glad that makes you feel good but I really question the legitimacy of some of this. Do the utility companies actually add more turbines to make up the difference or are they just using existing infrastructure (or already planned infrastructure) and assigning it to you?

In addition, if everyone started ordering electricity generated by renewable sources would we be able to supply this within the cost structure you are currently paying. I seriously doubt it.

I do think you're doing a great thing but in some respects these things are just playing games too.

[jkjsooner]

And since all the envirowackos won't let us build nukes, then I guess we are pretty much screwed until someone develops cold fusion.

You're falling into the trap of assuming that every environmentalist speaks for every other environmentalist. There are wacko environmentalists and there are sensible environmentalists.

Don't dismiss all environmental concerns just because some wacko wants to save an owl.

[StoopTroup]

The sad thing is that people think that this is a binary system -- that you either have to go whole hog, or you can't care about it at all. And that making a difference in this regard necessarily means spending more money.

Since 2003, 100% of my home power requirements are met by or offset by wind power purchases from OG&E. My average additional cost is -$3.20, which means I've saved about $300.

I purchased a Camry Hybrid in 2006. In three years, I've driven 33k miles. It cost about $2000 more than my alternative vehicle, and gets 35mpg compared to the alternative's 22mpg. I've saved about 560 gallons of gas in that time, resulting in about a $700 cost differential to date -- which gets smaller with each mile I drive. Add in the tax credit received for purchasing this, and I'm about $1300 ahead.

So, by converting to wind power and a PZEV hybrid vehicle, I've drastically reduced the amount of pollution I've put into the environment... and I've kept $1600 more in my pocket. If you ignore the tax credit, I'm out of pocket $300, a number which will turn negative in a matter of months.

Being green doesn't have to be expensive.

How much money will you save after you have to replace your hybrid with another hybrid?

[StoopTroup]

Man I'd like one of these gas guzzlers. :D

r3VHlOvE2pI

[Vaevictis]

How much money will you save after you have to replace your hybrid with another hybrid?

So far, it looks something like this -- and I'm adding maintenance savings ($200) which I forgot to put in my previous figures:

Assume lifespan of six years:

Initial outlay: $2000 in 2006
In 2012, value of $2000 invested in 2006 @ 5%*: $2680.
First three years savings: $1900
Extrapolated additional three years savings**: $1900

Total savings, 2012 dollars, estimate***: $4305

So, in a real sense, I saved $1625 2012 dollars on the transaction, if we assume that I can invest at 5% throughout the period.

This does not include the tax credit, which is gravy. If the you include the tax credit, I save almost the full $4300 of 2012 dollars.

As far as how much will I have saved if I buy another hybrid in 2012, it's going to depend on the facts at the time. What does the cost of gas look like? What does the cost of the hybrid option look like? etc, etc.

If we assume that all factors are substantially the same, then I can keep saving $1625 future dollars with every purchase.

Additionally, if you finance that $2000, the numbers change somewhat, but not enough to tip the scale in favor of not buying the hybrid.

-----------------------------------------------------------------

* Essentially, I'm rolling forward to future value. For simplicity's sake, assume I invested that money at a risk-free rate of 5%; $2680 is what I'll have in 2012 as a result of that.
** There is a risk in this extrapolation. If the hybrid parts fail in a non-warrantied way by year six, and I have to pay for repairs, I have to subtract from this number. I doubt this will happen because all of the hybrid parts are warrantied for 7 years.
*** Average savings $633 per year. To compare apples to apples to the number in (*), assume I invest these at a risk-free rate of 5% for 5, 4, 3, 2, 1, and 0 years for each $633 saved for a year. Net result of that is $4305.

[Vaevictis]

Note that this analysis doesn't include the difference in sale price of the two vehicles in year six. That said, reports I've read indicate that hybrid vehicles retain their value better than non-hybrids, so I expect it ends up tilting the analysis even further in the hybrid's favor.

For what it's worth, a quick Kelly Blue Book private party value puts a similarly equipped Camry at $17,000 and the hybrid equivalent at $19,000.

So yeah, I think it's pretty clear-cut that the hybrid can and does save you money -- at least over a six year period.

Even over a three year period, actually -- I could sell it right now, and the savings relative to a non-hybrid would be about $1700 in 2009 dollars. (Not including tax credit -- if you include the tax credit I received, it's higher.)

[StoopTroup]

So far, it looks something like this -- and I'm adding maintenance savings ($200) which I forgot to put in my previous figures:

Assume lifespan of six years:

Initial outlay: $2000 in 2006
In 2012, value of $2000 invested in 2006 @ 5%*: $2680.
First three years savings: $1900
Extrapolated additional three years savings**: $1900

Total savings, 2012 dollars, estimate***: $4305

So, in a real sense, I saved $1625 2012 dollars on the transaction, if we assume that I can invest at 5% throughout the period.

This does not include the tax credit, which is gravy. If the you include the tax credit, I save almost the full $4300 of 2012 dollars.

As far as how much will I have saved if I buy another hybrid in 2012, it's going to depend on the facts at the time. What does the cost of gas look like? What does the cost of the hybrid option look like? etc, etc.

If we assume that all factors are substantially the same, then I can keep saving $1625 future dollars with every purchase.

Additionally, if you finance that $2000, the numbers change somewhat, but not enough to tip the scale in favor of not buying the hybrid.

-----------------------------------------------------------------

* Essentially, I'm rolling forward to future value. For simplicity's sake, assume I invested that money at a risk-free rate of 5%; $2680 is what I'll have in 2012 as a result of that.
** There is a risk in this extrapolation. If the hybrid parts fail in a non-warrantied way by year six, and I have to pay for repairs, I have to subtract from this number. I doubt this will happen because all of the hybrid parts are warrantied for 7 years.
*** Average savings $633 per year. To compare apples to apples to the number in (*), assume I invest these at a risk-free rate of 5% for 5, 4, 3, 2, 1, and 0 years for each $633 saved for a year. Net result of that is $4305.

You could have just spent that time you wasted explaining all that to me with a woman. :D ;)

[Vaevictis]

My wife would probably get annoyed if I did that.

[TopDawg]

Neither. Tuba has this one right.

By saying that he "thinks" it "could" result in what he explained, yes, he's right.

Just like me saying that I think you could understand the point of my post if you put some thought into it, is also right. It doesn't mean it'll happen, but I think it could. ;)

[StoopTroup]

My wife would probably get annoyed if I did that.

LMAO!