More good news on the Climate Change front

[Freewill]

for ideological and financial reasons

no offense my friend but that is not an answer, well a good answer.

it is really not anymore complicated then that

the well connected use the ideological stooges

to their advantage it is repeated over and over

not just in global warming but in many areas

OK, let me put it this way, what do you feel is their ideology is motivating them? In other words do you think it is just about control? If you do then where are they trying to control the US? What good would it be to just tear down the fabric of America just for control?

Do you feel their ideology is their desire to move to a Euro-socialist type government? Even though there is none better in Europe? Why would they wish to do so?

 

[jon_berzerk]

no offense my friend but that is not an answer, well a good answer.

it is really not anymore complicated then that

the well connected use the ideological stooges

to their advantage it is repeated over and over

not just in global warming but in many areas

OK, let me put it this way, what do you feel is their ideology is motivating them? In other words do you think it is just about control? If you do then where are they trying to control the US? What good would it be to just tear down the fabric of America just for control?

Do you feel their ideology is their desire to move to a Euro-socialist type government? Even though there is none better in Europe? Why would they wish to do so?

i will have to get back to ya on that

but good questions none the less

 

[Redfish]

no offense my friend but that is not an answer, well a good answer.

it is really not anymore complicated then that

the well connected use the ideological stooges

to their advantage it is repeated over and over

not just in global warming but in many areas

OK, let me put it this way, what do you feel is their ideology is motivating them? In other words do you think it is just about control? If you do then where are they trying to control the US? What good would it be to just tear down the fabric of America just for control?

Do you feel their ideology is their desire to move to a Euro-socialist type government? Even though there is none better in Europe? Why would they wish to do so?

liberals believe that they know how we should live better than we do ourselves. They hate self determination because they cannot control it. If they can remotely control your thermostat in your home, dictate what car you drive and how many miles you are allowed, then they can achieve their goal of socialist collectivist domination.

Remember, liberals have a defective gene. Their agenda is not rational. Their thought processes are not rational.

You are trying to apply rational logical thought to a liberal agenda----that is impossible.

 

[Freewill]

it is really not anymore complicated then that

the well connected use the ideological stooges

to their advantage it is repeated over and over

not just in global warming but in many areas

OK, let me put it this way, what do you feel is their ideology is motivating them? In other words do you think it is just about control? If you do then where are they trying to control the US? What good would it be to just tear down the fabric of America just for control?

Do you feel their ideology is their desire to move to a Euro-socialist type government? Even though there is none better in Europe? Why would they wish to do so?

liberals believe that they know how we should live better than we do ourselves. They hate self determination because they cannot control it. If they can remotely control your thermostat in your home, dictate what car you drive and how many miles you are allowed, then they can achieve their goal of socialist collectivist domination.

Remember, liberals have a defective gene. Their agenda is not rational. Their thought processes are not rational.

You are trying to apply rational logical thought to a liberal agenda----that is impossible.

Not understand the opposition leads to defeat. I really think that the liberal's intent is right, they say they want to help people, but as with all things liberal the end result is the opposite of their stated intent and the liberals are too stubborn to realize the failure of their ideology.

 

[RDD_1210]

It's funny to watch in 2014 people are still so resistant to using their brains for critical thought and logical reasoning.

What's more likely, that every single major scientific organization and academic body is in on a global conspiracy or a bunch of inbred rednecks are too dumb to realize that climate change denier propaganda is pushed by oil companies that have a vested interest in seeing alternative energy sources squashed so that their bottom line isn't impacted.

Which is more likely?

 

[Redfish]

OK, let me put it this way, what do you feel is their ideology is motivating them? In other words do you think it is just about control? If you do then where are they trying to control the US? What good would it be to just tear down the fabric of America just for control?

Do you feel their ideology is their desire to move to a Euro-socialist type government? Even though there is none better in Europe? Why would they wish to do so?

liberals believe that they know how we should live better than we do ourselves. They hate self determination because they cannot control it. If they can remotely control your thermostat in your home, dictate what car you drive and how many miles you are allowed, then they can achieve their goal of socialist collectivist domination.

Remember, liberals have a defective gene. Their agenda is not rational. Their thought processes are not rational.

You are trying to apply rational logical thought to a liberal agenda----that is impossible.

Not understand the opposition leads to defeat. I really think that the liberal's intent is right, they say they want to help people, but as with all things liberal the end result is the opposite of their stated intent and the liberals are too stubborn to realize the failure of their ideology.

OK, same message, you just said it in a nicer way

 

[Redfish]

It's funny to watch in 2014 people are still so resistant to using their brains for critical thought and logical reasoning.

What's more likely, that every single major scientific organization and academic body is in on a global conspiracy or a bunch of inbred rednecks are too dumb to realize that climate change denier propaganda is pushed by oil companies that have a vested interest in seeing alternative energy sources squashed so that their bottom line isn't impacted.

Which is more likely?

Total horseshit. We should be looking into all alternative forms of energy. No one, even the oil companies, has ever said otherwise.

But until we find something that will power our millions of cars, trucks, buses, trains, and planes, we need oil. This country has plenty of untapped oil, its foolish not to use it.

 

[zeke]

Here are three articles that should put to debate into perspective. I am willing to give the CC fearist the benefit of the doubt and say they were just honestly wrong. But now it is time to wake up.

Government Data Show U.S. in Decade-Long Cooling

Government Data Show U.S. in Decade-Long Cooling - Forbes

Responding to widespread criticism that its temperature station readings were corrupted by poor siting issues and suspect adjustments, NOAA established a network of 114 pristinely sited temperature stations spread out fairly uniformly throughout the United States. Because the network, known as the U.S. Climate Reference Network (USCRN), is so uniformly and pristinely situated, the temperature data require no adjustments to provide an accurate nationwide temperature record. USCRN began compiling temperature data in January 2005. Now, nearly a decade later, NOAA has finally made the USCRN temperature readings available.

According to the USCRN temperature readings, U.S. temperatures are not rising at all – at least not since the network became operational 10 years ago. Instead, the United States has cooled by approximately 0.4 degrees Celsius, which is more than half of the claimed global warming of the twentieth century.

Global warming computer models confounded as Antarctic sea ice hits new record high with 2.1million square miles more than is usual for time of year

Read more: Global warming latest: Amount of Antarctic sea ice hits new record high | Mail Online
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

Misconceptions helped kill Australian carbon tax

Misconceptions helped kill Australian carbon tax

As Obama has sought support for the Environmental Protection Agency's proposed carbon rules, he has noted the political perils.

"If we're blithe about saying this is the defining issue of our time but we don't address people's legitimate economic concerns, then even if they are concerned about climate change they may not support efforts to do something about it," he told the League of Conservation Voters last month.

Australia's tax faces its demise as support for change appears to be rebounding. Forty-five percent of respondents in this year's Lowy poll see global warming as a "serious and pressing problem," up 5 percentage points from 2013 — Australia's hottest year on record.

Meanwhile, Australians are limiting pollution themselves. Australia's power consumption declined for the first time in 2010, and has fallen every year since. Its greenhouse gas emissions dropped a record 0.8 percent from 2012 to 2013.

One reason for the change, according to an Australian Institute think tank report, was all the carbon tax attention. It made many Australians realize how much they were spending on electricity.

global warming is not about the climate

it is about control

What, in your opinion, is their goal of this control? Is it, as I suspect, that they just need to be right? That they need to tell everyone what to do and what to think thus increasing their self worth? If there is an agenda what do you think it might be? Honestly not echo chamber BS.

Heaven forbid that the believers in GW want to leave a habitable planet for the next 100 generations. Heaven forbid. How dare they.

 

[RDD_1210]

It's funny to watch in 2014 people are still so resistant to using their brains for critical thought and logical reasoning.

What's more likely, that every single major scientific organization and academic body is in on a global conspiracy or a bunch of inbred rednecks are too dumb to realize that climate change denier propaganda is pushed by oil companies that have a vested interest in seeing alternative energy sources squashed so that their bottom line isn't impacted.

Which is more likely?

Total horseshit. We should be looking into all alternative forms of energy. No one, even the oil companies, has ever said otherwise.

But until we find something that will power our millions of cars, trucks, buses, trains, and planes, we need oil. This country has plenty of untapped oil, its foolish not to use it.

Who is suggesting we abandon all oil usage today?

 

[Freewill]

global warming is not about the climate

it is about control

What, in your opinion, is their goal of this control? Is it, as I suspect, that they just need to be right? That they need to tell everyone what to do and what to think thus increasing their self worth? If there is an agenda what do you think it might be? Honestly not echo chamber BS.

Heaven forbid that the believers in GW want to leave a habitable planet for the next 100 generations. Heaven forbid. How dare they.

Everyone want that same thing.

 

[Freewill]

It's funny to watch in 2014 people are still so resistant to using their brains for critical thought and logical reasoning.

What's more likely, that every single major scientific organization and academic body is in on a global conspiracy or a bunch of inbred rednecks are too dumb to realize that climate change denier propaganda is pushed by oil companies that have a vested interest in seeing alternative energy sources squashed so that their bottom line isn't impacted.

Which is more likely?

Total horseshit. We should be looking into all alternative forms of energy. No one, even the oil companies, has ever said otherwise.

But until we find something that will power our millions of cars, trucks, buses, trains, and planes, we need oil. This country has plenty of untapped oil, its foolish not to use it.

Who is suggesting we abandon all oil usage today?

I think that "all" is a bit much but certainly much less is a goal. Now I assume you will come back asking how they are limiting the use. Well prices is how. Obama himself said that he wanted higher prices only not so quickly. Higher prices does one thing, reduces the use by the poor and the middle class. The rich they don't care at all.

 

[Redfish]

global warming is not about the climate

it is about control

What, in your opinion, is their goal of this control? Is it, as I suspect, that they just need to be right? That they need to tell everyone what to do and what to think thus increasing their self worth? If there is an agenda what do you think it might be? Honestly not echo chamber BS.

Heaven forbid that the believers in GW want to leave a habitable planet for the next 100 generations. Heaven forbid. How dare they.

We all agree on that. Why not find non-polluting ways to use our plentiful fossil fuels until viable alternatives are found?

 

[RDD_1210]

Total horseshit. We should be looking into all alternative forms of energy. No one, even the oil companies, has ever said otherwise.

But until we find something that will power our millions of cars, trucks, buses, trains, and planes, we need oil. This country has plenty of untapped oil, its foolish not to use it.

Who is suggesting we abandon all oil usage today?

I think that "all" is a bit much but certainly much less is a goal. Now I assume you will come back asking how they are limiting the use. Well prices is how. Obama himself said that he wanted higher prices only not so quickly. Higher prices does one thing, reduces the use by the poor and the middle class. The rich they don't care at all.

And how does any of that change what I said originally? The science and all common sense all point to the fact that our habits need to change if we want a clean & inhabitable place to live for our children and grandchildrens generations.

 

[Redfish]

It's funny to watch in 2014 people are still so resistant to using their brains for critical thought and logical reasoning.

What's more likely, that every single major scientific organization and academic body is in on a global conspiracy or a bunch of inbred rednecks are too dumb to realize that climate change denier propaganda is pushed by oil companies that have a vested interest in seeing alternative energy sources squashed so that their bottom line isn't impacted.

Which is more likely?

Total horseshit. We should be looking into all alternative forms of energy. No one, even the oil companies, has ever said otherwise.

But until we find something that will power our millions of cars, trucks, buses, trains, and planes, we need oil. This country has plenty of untapped oil, its foolish not to use it.

Who is suggesting we abandon all oil usage today?

not abandon, but curtail usage by driving up the prices. Obama has said that several times "your power bills will skyrocket". Do you think that skyrocketing energy prices would be good for our economy?

 

[Freewill]

Who is suggesting we abandon all oil usage today?

I think that "all" is a bit much but certainly much less is a goal. Now I assume you will come back asking how they are limiting the use. Well prices is how. Obama himself said that he wanted higher prices only not so quickly. Higher prices does one thing, reduces the use by the poor and the middle class. The rich they don't care at all.

And how does any of that change what I said originally? The science and all common sense all point to the fact that our habits need to change if we want a clean & inhabitable place to live for our children and grandchildrens generations.

Your implication is that is not the case today. The air is cleaner, then 40 years ago. The water is cleaner then 40 years ago. Nothing is pristine as it was 10000 years ago but there are trade offs. If you want to drive then you are polluting no matter how little and no matter what you drive.

 

[M.D. Rawlings]

I have no interest in tearing down America.

Do you believe me?

No.

 

[Redfish]

Who is suggesting we abandon all oil usage today?

I think that "all" is a bit much but certainly much less is a goal. Now I assume you will come back asking how they are limiting the use. Well prices is how. Obama himself said that he wanted higher prices only not so quickly. Higher prices does one thing, reduces the use by the poor and the middle class. The rich they don't care at all.

And how does any of that change what I said originally? The science and all common sense all point to the fact that our habits need to change if we want a clean & inhabitable place to live for our children and grandchildrens generations.

We can use fossil fuels and leave a habitable planet. Tremendous progress has already been made. Why not take an "all of the above" approach to energy? safe fossil fuels, solar, wind, hydro, nuclear, et al

 

[Freewill]

What, in your opinion, is their goal of this control? Is it, as I suspect, that they just need to be right? That they need to tell everyone what to do and what to think thus increasing their self worth? If there is an agenda what do you think it might be? Honestly not echo chamber BS.

Heaven forbid that the believers in GW want to leave a habitable planet for the next 100 generations. Heaven forbid. How dare they.

We all agree on that. Why not find non-polluting ways to use our plentiful fossil fuels until viable alternatives are found?

Are we not doing that today? My cars are emission inspected every year, are yours? And guess what, after 25 years of emission inspecting my car, and not the ones in the next county, air quality has not improve on bit because of the inspection.

 

[ClosedCaption]

My agenda.....in regards to the climate change issue?

that is the subject

I don't have one. I look at the subject like this.

Clean air and water is better than dirty air and water.
Not being dependent on a finite energy sources is better than being so dependent.

Therefore, I am in favor of policies that promote clean air and water....and that lead to the effective development of renewable energy sources. These things happen to be in line with what science is recommending we do to address climate change.

This reasoned approach only appears like an agenda to nutjobs who are hopelessly mired in the political echo chamber and see such positive things as a power grab.

^^This

 

[Redfish]

Heaven forbid that the believers in GW want to leave a habitable planet for the next 100 generations. Heaven forbid. How dare they.

We all agree on that. Why not find non-polluting ways to use our plentiful fossil fuels until viable alternatives are found?

Are we not doing that today? My cars are emission inspected every year, are yours? And guess what, after 25 years of emission inspecting my car, and not the ones in the next county, air quality has not improve on bit because of the inspection.

my point exactly, but you are wrong about air quality improvements. It has improved greatly in the last 25 years.