Express your nature.

Upload, Share, and Be Recognized.

Join with Facebook
or join manually
X
Comments:

Old Comments:

2009-07-04 13:46:23
You hit the nail on the head" believe. At some point, we all have to step out on faith, because it will be years before any "theory" is proven. I think the middle-road alternative would be to encourage conservation and lowering of emissions without a massive, economy-killing, government-run Cap & Trade law. You say "follow the energy company money", but follow the Cap 'N Trade money, too... seriously, read the Cap & Trade Bill, and you'll see that it's not about anything but more government control. Why runs jobs out of America to countries with zero environmental controls? As a geology guy, I know that sea levels have varied over the epochs. One of the reasons that the migration routes and accompanying artifact evidence of the Indian's ancestors from Siberia have never been found is that they followed the coastlines, now under several hundred feet of water. We've found charcoal and bone deposits on the old Columbia River alluvial that now lies just off the coast of Oregon. There are old coral reefs in inland, central Florida that are not over 40-thousand years old. Where your house sits has been under water before and it will be again, but we won't live to see it. I don't deny that the planet is warming or cooling, as it is a continual process, like every other life cycle of the planet. It's just that "carbon studies" are based on contemporary assumptions, so the "science" is flawed for anything except a guess. Much of the Permian Basin's oil and gas are probably related to periodic, huge flora-blooms in the ancient Permian and Devonian seas caused by excessive carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. Carbon dioxide is plant food! That's why decaying plants give of carbon dioxide. No matter is destroyed; it just changes state. This carbon has been here since the planet was born and has "recycled" countless times! You and I are made of recycled materials whose origins are lost in the annals of time. The University of Milwaukee now has an interesting theory that the deep ocean conveyor regulates the cooling and warming cycles, based on the variances in salinity and temperature of the water caused by, among other things, arctic and antarctic ice melt. I'm still waiting for my copy of that. Back to the important stuff... your string ball may be larger, but I know I'm king of the rubber band ball!
2009-07-04 07:54:15
First, I've never read Al Gore's book nor seen his movie. My interest in this matter stems from the fact that the land my house sits on is 12 feet above sea level and about ten blocks from the Gulf of Mexico on one side and about that distance from the largest bay on the Texas coast on the other. I take global warming very seriously and have been doing research and investigation of the subject for years, hoping to find some good reasons to doubt the scientific consensus. But the more deeply I looked and the more I read, the clearer it became that the planet IS warming up, and it's doing so quickly, and that most scientists and scientific organizations believe human activity is at the very least accelerating what may be natural climate change. Another thing I've learned is that there is a virtual industry of global warming deniers. I know who Richard Lindzen is, and who Fred Seitz is, and I've heard their arguments. I also know that you don't have to look very deeply to find that they, and virtually all other AGW deniers are on the payrolls of major oil or coal interests or work for organizations funded by those industries. I've also seen the data from the CO2 Data Analysis Center, where I learned, among other things, how much global per-capita CO2 emmissions ( primarily from fossil fuel burning ) have risen since the middle of the 18th century. In 1751, whentthe Industrial Revolution was just beginning, it was 3 metric tons per capita..by 1800 it had reached 8 metric tons per capita..by 1900 it was 534 metric tons per capita, and by 2000 was 6735 metric tons per capita. And it's still rising. Finally, let me say I'm not trying to argue with you or convince you of anything..that would be like arguing about evolution with my East Texas Hardshell Baptist kinfolks. They're really good, decent people, but their minds are made up on that subject. My sole purpose in all this is to not allow your assertions that AGW is a myth go unchallenged. I've never brought this subject up here, and have never instigated a discussion of it. But I will not let conservatives, whose opposition to doing anything about global warming is based more on ideaology than scientific opinion, make statements like the one you made which began this discussion without calling your hand. And I'd love to see your ball of string...but I betcha mine is bigger !
2009-07-03 20:02:11
You are the king of deflecting an argument and a one-trick pony. Drop the coal-oil-Halliburton mantra and follow the money and follow the facts about the science and the politics behind it. How many scientists have reversed their belief in anthropogenic global warming? Hundreds, if not thousands. Hell, I believed in it until it became clear how politicized the "science", largely controlled by the UN, has become. When I saw things like the 2007 carbon dioxide study disregarded, because it does not validate AGW, I started digging deeper. I'm a geologist by training, and when you look at how many thousands of times the Earth has warmed and cooled, it just starts to seem unbelievable. Then, just look at the errors or outright exaggerations in Gore's book and movie, and ask yourself why so many people are so tied to this "theory". Gore has made over 100-million on it (and he still drives an SUV and flies in a G7!) Avail yourself of the other side, as educated people normally do. Carbon dioxide accounts for a mere .038 percent of the atmosphere. According to the Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center, a research wing of the Department of Energy, only 3.2 percent of that thin atmospheric component is created by anthropogenic emissions. 3.2 percent of a total .038 percent! The earth's temperature has risen 1 degree over the past 150 years, and most of that occurred prior to the 1940s. The 1930s was the hottest decade on record, with 22 of the current 50 states having established their all-time high temperatures in that time. There has been no warming of the earth's climate since 1998, and in the past 18-24 months there has been a slight cooling. I was in Detroit this morning, and it was 54 degrees! Hell, even the believers can't say "global warming" with a straight face any more... it's now "climate change"! Anthropogenic global warming is a myth, there's no need for the American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009. Climate change is simply an excuse for another massive government attempt at control and giveaways. Congress even votes on the bill, without reading it! They got the darn thing at 302 a.m. and the 300+ page "addendum", later and voted the next afternoon! Open and transparent? Riiiiiight... For example, buried on pages 1014-1016 of the bill is the "Monthly Energy Refund." According to this plan, for those with a gross income that "does not exceed 150 percent of the poverty line...a direct deposit," of an undisclosed amount of money, will be sent "into the eligible household's designated bank account..." On pages 502-503 we find the "Low Income Community Energy Efficiency Program," whereby grants will be issued "to increase the flow of capital and benefits to low income communities, minority-owned and woman-owned businesses and entrepreneurs..." Then, there's the part that says that any worker who loses their job because their employer cannot compete with the additional "carbon tax" added on, will get up to 156 weeks of 70% of their salary. Plus, they can claim up to 1500 dollars in both "job hunting" and "moving fees". So, now we will see jobs go to India and China where there are no pollution controls. These people don't care about the environment or the climate... it's about money, control and power. Go read the bill and then discuss it intelligently. By the way, my family drives 4, 5-speed Honda Accords and Civics. I put insulating storm windows on my house in 1998 and helped start my local recycling program in 1989! Yes, I am a conservative! Come by and I'll show you my giant ball of twine!
2009-07-02 23:20:21
For years the coal and petroleum industries and their spokesmen claimed the science behind global warming was bogus..bad science, they said..faulty analysis, they claimed...then, when the evidence that the planet is, in fact, warming up, became so overwhelming that that became an untenable position, those same folks said, okay, the planet may be warming, but it doesn't have anything to do with energy consumption...So now we're in the position of having to decide who to believe...maybe Einzel is right...maybe there is a vast, world-wide conspiracy between and among the most prominent scientists...maybe it's an insidious plot by a bunch of tree-hugging lefties who want us all to ride bikes and eat brown rice and live in teepees...that's one possibility...the other possibility is that there is a vast and well-funded campaign by the coal and oil industries to spread dis-information and make people think everything is just fine and that we really don't have to worry about cleaning up our act...So just ask yourself, folks, which of those scenarios is the most likely? The worlds 'conservative' and 'conservation' share a common Latin root, a word which means to guard,or to protect...it's always struck me as ironic that so many people who believe themselves to be and who call themselves conservatives are so willing to squander,pollute, despoil and destroy the natural beauty of the world for short-term financial gain and personal profit...
2009-07-02 17:05:31
I think it's a nice picture.
2009-07-02 15:33:59
So, what about the 2007 Carbon Studies that were supposed to prove global warming was related to carbon dioxide but proved just the opposite? Refute all you want, but "peer" review where AGW is concerned means "certain peers" only, and the "grants" always seem to flow towards the prevailing opinion. AGW is a religion in its intolerance of dissent, and when you play the Rush-Exxon-Black Helicopter straw man you help stifle real, meaningful dialogue. Let's see... that's called... intolerance! That's it! The antithesis of education and research. Remember, at one time the "preponderance" of scientific evidence "proved" the Earth was flat. All the great academics and institutions supported that "fact", and those who didn't were heretics who cavorted with the devil and drank the blood of children. History, just like the endless warming-cooling cycles of the Earth, just keeps repeating, despite and in spite of man's best efforts. If you really want to control the 97% of the carbon that the planet itself creates, you will need to stop respiration, oxidation and decay in the world's oceans, forests and amongst its billions of species of living organisms. Tax that, Congressional fools!
2009-07-01 23:01:50
This issue doesn't really have anything to do with religious faith or whether Al Gore or anyone else is a hypocrit...the issue is the validity of scientific data that suggest there is a global warming signal emerging from the 'noise' of natural climate variability, and if that data is, in fact, valid, then to what exetent, if any, is human activity responsible .. ..My suggestion to those folks who have doubts one way or another on the issue of climate change is to not pay too much attention to opinionated old farts from Texas like me an ol' Einzel...not would I put much stock in the opinions of radio talk show hosts of whatever political persuasion...if you are genuinely interested in understanding this issue go directly to the web sites of the various national and international professional scientific organizations, and particularly those whose areas of research and expertise pertain directly to climate...all those organizatons have position papers on climate change based on peer-reviewed research.....after you've informed yourself you can then decide whether you want to accept the preponderance of professional scientific opinion, or whether to accept the opinions of Rush Limbaugh, the Bush administration, and the executives of Exxon Mobile corporation ....
2009-07-01 15:28:07
No, actually, you prove my point! When anyone attacks this new religious dogma, they are immediately scorned and held up to ridicule. Like in the middle ages, "intellect" and "education" have become stagnant and fixed within an immovable bed of political and ideological intrigue, carefully supported by those with money and power. When data supports, it is good. When it denies, it is bad, regardless of the credentials of those who dare to question. The only difference between now and then is that dissenters were burned at the stake. Now, it is done in more subtle, insidious ways. Like I've said before, if you believe it, change your lifestyle. Put your money where your mouth is, like a true zealot and buy carbon credits. That is available right now. Stop driving, get rid of your central air and heat and set an example for those not as intelligent and believing. Al Gore needs to park his G-7, sell his 20,000 square foot house and live in a tent on his property. He needs to give his millions to the poor who are most at risk in a threatened world. But, as usual, it's do a we say and not as we do!! Since anthropogenic global warming is essentially a new religion, I call those people... hypocrites! Also, did you ever think that the Neanderthal man was killed off by global warming? Maybe it had to do with his taming of fire. Maybe he had his own cult of AGW believers, and they destroyed their society through carbon offsets and other nonsense!! Hey, that makes as much sense as anything else!
2009-07-01 12:51:18
Perhaps what Einzel meant to say is that to deny anthropogenic global warming is the 21st century equivalent of maintaining that the earth is the fixed center of the universe...the masses, supported by the Church, believed the earth to be the immovable center of all creation long after every educated person in Europe understood that the earth revolves around the sun....
2009-07-01 12:11:18
To deny anthropogenic global warming is the 21st century equivalent of denying that the Earth is flat.
2009-01-02 08:43:39
Image of Global Warming "Mottainai" The waste steam co-generation system is considered a promising technology to generate electricity and hot water with high efficiency and low environmental impact. Don't you think? "Mottainai" is a Japanese term, that has become a catchphrase for Kenyan environmentalist Wangari Maathai, equating it roughly to the English phrase "Reduce, Reuse, Recycle". In the past, "Mottainai" has had various meanings, including, "it was inconvenient" and "more than my situation". However, today Mottainai has a meaning, roughly translated as "The value such as the thing, the people, and phenomena cannot finish being made the best use of enough and it is useless". Wangari Maathai visited Japan for an event related to the Kyoto Protocol in 2005. At this time, she learnt this word through newspaper coverage of the event. She was impressed by the depth of similarity between the Japanese meaning of the world and equivalent concepts in English and Swahili, about how a person has a responsibility to respect the earth through frugality and conservation in behavior. Since her learning of the word, she has attempted to enter it into the international lexicon, as a symbol of the truly global and ancient nature of environmental respect. She has used the word in numerous speeches on her current world lecture tour, and while speaking before the United Nations, has made the General Assembly repeat it in chorus. (From Wikipedia)