Today's P-I reports that "Plans to combat global warming heat up"
"Global warming will be the defining issue for humankind in the 21st century," Sims said.Mrs. Gregoire has also joined the fight against global warming. And just in the nick of time. Climate change is real, as they're learning in New York:
We are also looking at a shift of our climate pattern. In the past two weeks, we have seen unseasonably cold temperatures.Meanwhile, Nancy Pelosi has her own approach for fighting global warming. Posted by Stefan Sharkansky at February 08, 2007 11:33 AM | Email This
I remember some back in '77 or '78 scientists were predicting a new ice age, yet the world continued spinning around the Sun and wobbling on its axis to create the Seasons. Now scientists are saying we're warming up. Probably so, but we can't do much about it.
All the hubbub is just people running off at the mouth because they have nothing better to do.
Posted by: Libertarian on February 8, 2007 11:26 AMIf the mainstream media reported the truth about phonies like Pelosi and Gregoire they would never win another election.
Posted by: Bill Cruchon on February 8, 2007 11:29 AMTruth is, a plane like Hastert flew isn't good enough for the Queen and her entourage. Gotta have extra bathroon space, you know, the First Female Speaker Of The House, and all that clap...
Posted by: Interested Observer on February 8, 2007 11:36 AMClose. July 29, 1974. Cover story of Time magazine.
"As they review the bizarre and unpredictable weather pattern of the past several years, a growing number of scientists are beginning to suspect that many seemingly contradictory meteorological fluctuations are actually part of a global climatic upheaval. However widely the weather varies from place to place and time to time, when meteorologists take an average of temperatures around the globe they find that the atmosphere has been growing gradually cooler for the past three decades. The trend shows no indication of reversing. Climatological Cassandras are becoming increasingly apprehensive, for the weather aberrations they are studying may be the harbinger of another ice age."
Exchange the words cooler with warmer and you have today's 'debate'. It's silly.
Posted by: jimg on February 8, 2007 11:43 AMTimothy Ball a climatologist weighs in.
Posted by: JCM on February 8, 2007 11:48 AMWhen the doom and gloom fails to materialize, the left will be marginalized. That's why we should all encourage them to get on top of their Escalades and Gulfstream Jets and shout as loud as they can about the coming doom and gloom.
Posted by: Jeff B. on February 8, 2007 12:41 PMNo wonder the debate is over! How many people want to put their job on the line when its so much easier to go with the flow?
Posted by: BornRight on February 8, 2007 04:19 PMLet's cut the waste!
> I wonder if David will have anything to say about global warming when he gets back from his conjugal manatee visit?
Needless to say, Debbie, the manatee is better looking & less obese than you. Quite attractive lady ... unlike the vast majority of American women who seem to want to imitate the manatee's girth.
Hello Jeffro,
> Hmm- Either David is back on his meds, sleeping it off, incarcerated, or can't find an available computer at his library branch, but I'm glad he's a no-show.
No. I am just waiting for the conservatives here to say something interesting. I'd much prefer to here the conservatives say something informative but that is too much to ask from a bunch of uninformed scientifically-illiterate types.
Did you want to argue?
"Yet they say: 'Why are not Sings sent down to him from the Lord?' Say: 'The Signs are indeed with Allah: and I am indeed a clear Warner.'"
(The Qur'an Surah 29 Al Anakbut:50)
"Perhaps we'll claim that by our wealth we live, and living, gather merit, dissipating evil. But if we're ruthless for the sake of gain, it's evil we will gather, dissipating merit!
"What use then will our lives have been what all is so degenerate and spoiled? What use is there in living such a life when evil is the only consequence?"
(Shantideva, The Way of the Bodhisattva)
Thank God for atheism! Thank God for Buddhism! Thank God for Islam!
I love all of the Scriptures and every living thing.
Posted by: David Mathews on February 8, 2007 07:04 PM
"Do not store up for yourself treasures on earth, where moth and rust destroy, and where theives break in and steal. But store up for yourself treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust destroys, and where thieves do not break in and steal; for where your treasure is, there your heart will be also."
(Matthew 6:19-21)
I should teach these Christians Christianity. Christians are the one group of people who appear the most allergic to Jesus' message.
Jesus had no possessions. Jesus had no wealth. Jesus gave everything that He acquired to the impoverished people of His own day. Jesus sacrifices His life willingly. Jesus loved His enemies until death.
Jesus loves all people. Jesus saves all people. Jesus loves the Muslims. Jesus saves the atheists.
But Jesus isn't so impressed by either Christians or Christianity. Jesus is not a citizen of the United States of America, nor is He a patriot. Jesus is not a Republican nor is He a Democrat.
Jesus isn't impressed by your possessions, income, wealth, or social standing. Jesus doesn't love Americans any more than He loves Nigerians. Jesus doesn't care for the people of America any more than He cares for the people of Iran.
Jesus is as comfortable among the Hindus as He is among the Muslims and among the Jews and among the Catholics and among the Christians. Jesus simply doesn't care about anyone's religion, nationality, culture or sexual orientation. Jesus doesn't care what you believe nor is He concerned about what you don't believe.
Those who destroy & pollute the Earth are blaspheming Jesus because He created this Earth and filled it with an abundant diversity of life for His own good pleasure and not for human consumption and destuction. God did not create the Earth to serve as humankind's sewer.
This is a short lesson regarding Christianity addressed to the Christians. If your preacher isn't teaching you this message that just means that your preacher isn't acquainted with Jesus.
You're preaching to the wrong crowd. WANT TO LEAD, GET YOUR SIDE TO LEAD BY EXAMPLE.
Posted by: gs on February 8, 2007 08:28 PM> Heh earth to Dave, give a call to Al Gore and let him know that every time he gasses up his 20,000 gallon private jet, or heats his 4 massive homes, that he has zero credibilty with this crowd, we ain't getting out of our SUV for him.
I don't care about Al Gore. This issue is more important than any one person. If you want to criticize the lifestyles of Al Gore and Nancy Pelosi, go ahead. You won't hear any objections from me.
> You're preaching to the wrong crowd. WANT TO LEAD, GET YOUR SIDE TO LEAD BY EXAMPLE.
I am here to preach. That is why I am quoting the Scriptures. I am doing it for you. I am preaching to you.
Here's another Scripture from the preacher:
"The mutual rivalry for piling up (the good things ot this world) diverts you (from the more serious things), until ye visit the graves.
"But nay, ye soon shall know (the reality). Again ye soon shall know!
"Nay, were ye to know with certainty of mind, (ye would beware!) ye shall certainly see Hellfire!
"Again, ye shall see it with certainty of sight! Then, shall ye be questioned that Day about the joy (Ye indulged in!)"
(The Qur'an, Surah 102 Al Takathur)
We can talk about religion. We can talk about Christianity. We can talk theology.
We can argue about science. Whatever suits you best.
Posted by: David Mathews on February 8, 2007 08:42 PMOf course Gregoire, Sims et al. will throw up their hands in protest saying that no one will die if their draconian policies are passed. But this is exactly what will happen and in far greater numbers than a rise in sea level of a foot or two.
Posted by: Bill K. on February 8, 2007 09:22 PM> The environmentalists and their ... have only one ultimate solution for the phony global warming "crisis" which is for man to die and in great numbers.
There are plenty of people dying in Africa right now, Bill. The conservatives don't seem to care too much about millions of Africans dying.
Nor, for that matter, do these conservative Christians seem to care too much about Iraqi civilians dying every day because of George W. Bush's crime against Iraq.
Do the conservatives care about Muslims dying?
I don't think that these conservatives really care about people dying. These conservatives are concerned only about their own wealth, prosperity, luxury, convenience, and personal sense of world-dominance.
You conservatives are not really opposed to people dying, are you? As long as all of the suffering & dying is occurring in the Third World, you are perfectly ok with billions of people dying (on your behalf).
You care only about your own self & your own obese belly & satisfying your own insatiable appetites for more of everything. That is what you really care about and nothing else.
Posted by: David Mathews on February 8, 2007 10:30 PM"I'd much prefer to here the conservatives say something informative but that is too much to ask from a bunch of uninformed scientifically-illiterate types."
I'd suggest that if you are going to accuse others of being illiterate, that you ought to at least learn the difference between the words HERE and HEAR.
> I'd suggest that if you are going to accuse others of being illiterate, that you ought to at least learn the difference between the words HERE and HEAR.
Uh, pbj, there's a difference between scientifically-literate and literate.
Posted by: David Mathews on February 9, 2007 03:52 AM
Exxon Mobil has no more doubts on warming
By KRISTEN HAYS
Copyright 2007 Houston Chronicle
Exxon Mobil has no more doubts on warming
Pond of oil in ground has anger bubbling Big Oil behemoth Exxon Mobil Corp. has dropped any pretense of questioning whether global warming is real. Now the company is seeking to position itself as an active player in efforts to lower greenhouse gases.
"The appropriate debate isn't on whether climate is changing, but rather should be on what we should be doing about it," Kenneth Cohen, Exxon's vice president of public affairs, told reporters on a conference call Thursday.
The call came less than a week after an international panel of hundreds of scientists said new research showed global warming was "unequivocal" and that human activity was primarily responsible for the most significant factor in temperature change -- greenhouse gases.
"Climate is changing. It's a serious issue. The evidence is there," Cohen said on the call, which was arranged in part to allow Exxon to state its position on the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's report.
When pressed, Cohen said "there is no question that human activity is the source of carbon dioxide emissions," and emphasized that Exxon is working with various policy groups and universities to find ways to produce energy while lowering greenhouse gases.
****
I guess that with Exxon-Mobil's admission the Global Warming debate is over. Global Warming is real and a product of humankind's pollution of the Earth.
Now what are you willing to sacrifice on behalf of ceasing your planet-destroying activities?
Posted by: David Mathews on February 9, 2007 05:09 AMIf there was a medieval warming period 1000 years ago, and temperatures were warmer than they are now, such that Greenland was lush farmland, and England wineries were prosperous, then why are we so worried about the globe warming up like it was 1000 years ago? Why would it result in massive casualties?
And also, what caused the last medieval warming period?
Posted by: justsumguy on February 9, 2007 08:22 AMALL (not "most) scientists agree.
There aren't folks making $$ on pushing this issue
Mr Gore, MS Lollapelosi et al stop driving SUVs, flying around in big planes and living the life of the rich and famous (yet tell me and you how to live our lives.)
HEY! What ever happened to the Ice Age we were supposed to have?
Posted by: Jack Burton on February 9, 2007 09:49 AMThe sad part is that after you and I pony up huge increases in our utility rates so this money can be shipped to who knows where, we will not have made any impact on global warming what so ever except we may have to live in a cold house all winter because we can't afford heat. I don't know if you lost power in this year's storms, but I did and I know first hand that living without power is not planned for my future!
Posted by: BornRight on February 9, 2007 12:58 PMI noticed in your tired litany of people dying around the world you do not dispute that the solution to the global warming scam, if consistently applied, will result in an anti-industrial revolution that will cause deaths in the hundreds of millions. There is no way a pre-industrial society could support the populations of today.
So you are on the horns of a dilemma. Either you advocate mass death in a doomed attempt keep the temperature from creeping a degree or two or you accept some sort of transparent flimflam that will do absolutely nothing but annoy the hell out of everyone. What is it to be Dave?
Posted by: Bill K. on February 9, 2007 10:45 PM> So you are on the horns of a dilemma. Either you advocate mass death in a doomed attempt keep the temperature from creeping a degree or two or you accept some sort of transparent flimflam that will do absolutely nothing but annoy the hell out of everyone. What is it to be Dave?
You forget a third option:
Americans can become so poor as to merit the sympathy of Bangladeshis.
I am in favor of American impoverishment for the sake of the global environment. The United States of America is the world's #1 polluter and #1 gluttonous consumer and #1 military spender. These three constitutes America's greatest Crime Against Humanity and they must stop.
So, in order to save the environment I advocate sacrificing the American economy. Americans must become poor, hungry, and walk instead of drive.
Those who object to Americans "poor, hungry, and walk instead of drive" should keep in mind that the only alternative involves massive suffering and death.
It is better to become poor than it is to die.
Do you agree with this principle?
Posted by: David Mathews on February 10, 2007 05:02 AMSo, in order to save the environment I advocate sacrificing the American economy. Americans must become poor, hungry, and walk instead of drive."
OK, David, you've convinced me. Now, if you really believe what you say, I challenge you to walk your talk. You first. Lead by example. I've seen your website. If all of those pretty pictures are from you and your travels, you should immediately kill yourself as penance for all the natural resources you destroyed in making those trips. You can avoid this fate by proving that you actually walked out to Yosemite or Byrce Canyon or Yellowstone from Florida.
If that's too harsh, here's a simpler suggestion. The computer you use to post online takes a lot of natural resources. Chemicals to make the plastic, rare earths and metals that are toxic to make ICs and the printed circuit cards, glass and plastic to make the monitor, electricity to power it, fiber optic and phone lines laid across thousands of miles to connect to the web. Give those up. Now. And if we see another post from you, it will be evidence that you won't take up the challenge to walk your talk. If you want impoverishment, start with yourself. Impoverished people don't have computers, or do cross-country travels. Or is it a case of "impoverishment for thee but not me"?
Posted by: Interested Observer on February 10, 2007 06:24 AM> If that's too harsh, here's a simpler suggestion. The computer you use to post online takes a lot of natural resources. Chemicals to make the plastic, rare earths and metals that are toxic to make ICs and the printed circuit cards, glass and plastic to make the monitor, electricity to power it, fiber optic and phone lines laid across thousands of miles to connect to the web. Give those up. Now. And if we see another post from you, it will be evidence that you won't take up the challenge to walk your talk. If you want impoverishment, start with yourself. Impoverished people don't have computers, or do cross-country travels. Or is it a case of "impoverishment for thee but not me"?
No. You are mistaken, Interested Observer.
I am not advocating poverty as a solution for individual Americans. Such a sacrifice is worthwhile and honorable and praiseworthy, but that simply is not enough.
I am advocating poverty for the entire nation. The United States of America must choose poverty or suffer something much worse than poverty.
Since it is evident that Americans will not make any sacrifices, I conclude that Americans will get both poverty and something much worse than poverty.
The present generation is stealing from the future and ruining the world. The party will coninue until it cannot continue any longer.
Too bad for future generations of Americans who will face the prospects of living without cars, computers or food.
Posted by: David Mathews on February 10, 2007 07:07 AMBut you won't. You don't walk your talk. You obviously enjoy your far-flung travels too much, using up all that fossil fuel, polluting the environment, destroying the Earth. Likewise your computer. You won't give that up, either (unless everyone else does). At least we can all see where you stand. You were challenged to put up or shut up. You didn't put up. Will you have the courage to shut up? I didn't think so. Well, just as I thought, you're a phony.
Posted by: Interested Observer on February 10, 2007 04:53 PM> Will you have the courage to shut up?
This sort of advice reminds me of a scripture:
"And when they had summoned them, they commanded them not to speak or teach at all in the name of Jesus. But Peter and John answered and said to them, 'Whether it is right in the sight of God to give heed to you rather than God, you be the judge; for we cannot stop speaking about what we have seen and heard.'"
(Acts 4:18-20)
I will say what I am obligated to say. The United States of America needs to make some sacrifices, but it will not, hence it will suffer the consequences. Too bad for Americans but the punishment will fit the crime.
Posted by: David Mathews on February 10, 2007 05:05 PMIt's obvious that you and the environmentalist movement have not the slightest interest in any energy sources even if they produce no "green house" gases like nuclear, solar, wind or hydro. Thank you for making this point crystal clear. You and the enviromnentalists want to inflict suffering and death for their own sake. This is utter nihilism. I daresay some people in the environmental movement will not be too pleased with you for revealing their true agenda.
You deliberately want to plunge this country into total poverty because in your zero sum model the wealth of this country could only come from plundering other countries. This is completely absurd. I suppose the idea that wealth can be created instead of plundered is completely alien to you. The "gross domestic product" of the entire world has increased by many orders of magnitude since this country was founded. Where did that wealth come from? How have India and China become more prosperous? Are they robbing from their neighbors too?
And speaking of China the last person I read about that had as diabolical a plan for their country was Mao Tse-Tung. Mao deliberately plunged China into extreme poverty and the greatest famine in history that killed 38 million people. He did this to totally dominate the Chinese people and eventually the world he hoped. Are you plotting your own Great Leap Forward?
Posted by: Bill K. on February 10, 2007 09:48 PM> You deliberately want to plunge this country into total poverty because in your zero sum model the wealth of this country could only come from plundering other countries. This is completely absurd. I suppose the idea that wealth can be created instead of plundered is completely alien to you. The "gross domestic product" of the entire world has increased by many orders of magnitude since this country was founded. Where did that wealth come from? How have India and China become more prosperous? Are they robbing from their neighbors too?
Wealth generation is a "zero sum game" according to the laws of thermodynamics. The "zero sum game" takes two forms: (1). The wealthy increase their wealth at the expense of the impoverished, and (2). Humankind increases its wealth at the expense of Nature (by destroying nature).
Humans cannot create anything ex nihilo. Only God can accomplish that task.
When you say that the GDP has increased since this country was founded what you neglect to notice is that our country is immensely poorer by virtue of exhausting its natural resources since that time. The GDP only measures the flow of money it does not take into account the negative side of the ledger (i.e., resource depletion and pollution).
Capitalism is an economic system which can, and will, collapse. The consequences will be dreadful to Americans and everyone.
Posted by: David Mathews on February 11, 2007 04:37 AMWell, that sort of reminds me of a Scripture:
Faith without works is dead.
See, I can cherry-pick and take verses out of context as well as you can. Since you obviously will not walk your faith or put into action your words, all we can conclude is that you are of those the Lord called "hypocrites" or maybe "O generation of vipers, how can ye, being evil, speak good things?"
Posted by: Interested Observer on February 11, 2007 10:24 AMThanks for quoting Scripture. I appreciate anyone who can quote the Scriptures. That's why I read the Bible and the Qur'an and the Upanishads and the Bhagavad Gita and the Dhammapada. I love all of the Scriptures.
Posted by: David Mathews on February 11, 2007 05:47 PM"Wealth generation is a "zero sum game" according to the laws of thermodynamics. The "zero sum game" takes two forms: (1). The wealthy increase their wealth at the expense of the impoverished, and (2). Humankind increases its wealth at the expense of Nature (by destroying nature)."
This is just too delicious to pass up. To deny that the overall well being of man has not improved since the industrial revolution is refusing to see the obvious. Everywhere that capitalism, even in a diluted form, has been given a chance the well being of the populace has increased. North Korea and South Korea provide almost a perfect laboratory for life under socialism and life under capitalism. And you are misapplying the Laws of Thermodynamics. For all practical purposes the earth is not a closed system.
"Humans cannot create anything ex nihilo. Only God can accomplish that task."
Sheer nonsense! How do you think a car or a jet or a computer is made? Did your god make these?
Of course man starts with raw materials. He did not make these and neither did your presumed god. Something does not come from nothing.
Think of the effort to make any one of these products. There is a long, long chain of productive effort back to the raw elements like iron oxide, silicon and oil. Contrary to your assertion that we are running out of "natural resources" we are finding more every day. The entire earth is one big ball of "natural resouces" waiting to be exploited. I know this offends your nature worship but you, me and billions of others would not be here today if it was not for industrial civilization.
Posted by: Bill K. on February 13, 2007 11:26 PM