Reply With QuoteOh fer ****s sake!
Stop with the facts already, you're going to hurt someones "ffeeeeeeeeelllings".
Activists trying to "protect the environment from man", have a long history of not letting the truth or facts stand in the way of their agenda.
The previous successful "Environment rescue" emergency.
The Northern Spotted Owl. (I'll bet it tastes like chicken on the grille)
Spotted owls, we were told a decade ago, were disappearing because big bad timber companies were cutting down "old growth" forests. So the environmental movement rushed to the forests, hugged the trees and issued news releases to decry the evils of the logging industry. Save the owl. Save the trees. Kill the timber industry.
Yep, timber industry killed.
U.S. timber sales were reduced by 80-90%, forcing saw mills to close, loggers to go broke and whole towns which depended on the industry to literally disappear.
We now have more trees growing than we did in 1776, yet we buy timber from overseas sources now.
New federal report: "Oops"!!!
"The draft recovery plan recognizes the primary threat to northern spotted owls as competition with barred owls." According to the report, barred owls are less selective about the habitat they use and the prey they feed upon and are out competing northern spotted owls for habitat and food, causing its decline.
It was no secret that the spotted owl didn't need "old growth forests" to survive, since spotted owls were found living under bridges and in McDonald signs. What it needed was a good food source like any other species. Now we know it was undercut by another owl - a completely natural occurrence.
Now, let's look at a woman who is STILL causing the death of MILLIONS of children every year.
Rachel Carson's Genocide
The crusade against DDT began with Carson's antipesticide diatribe "Silent Spring," published in 1962 at the height of the worldwide antimalaria campaign. The widespread spraying of DDT had caused a spectacular drop in malaria incidence--Sri Lanka, for example, reported 2.8 million malaria victims in 1948, but by 1963 it had only 17. Yet Carson's book made no mention of this. It said nothing of DDT's crucial role in eradicating malaria in industrialized countries, or of the tens of millions of lives saved by its use.
Instead, Carson filled her book with misinformation--alleging, among other claims, that DDT causes cancer.
Almost 60 years have passed since the malaria-spraying campaigns began--with hundreds of millions of people exposed to large concentrations of DDT--yet, according to international health scholar Amir Attaran, the scientific literature "has not even one peer reviewed, independently replicated study linking exposure to DDT with any adverse health outcome." Indeed, in a 1956 study, human volunteers ate DDT every day for over two years with no ill effects then or since.
Abundant scientific evidence supporting the safety and importance of DDT was presented during seven months of testimony before the newly formed EPA in 1971. The presiding judge ruled unequivocally against a ban. But the public furor against DDT--fueled by "Silent Spring" and the growing environmental movement--was so great that a ban was imposed anyway. The EPA administrator, who hadn't even bothered to attend the hearings, overruled his own judge and imposed the ban in defiance of the facts and evidence. And the 1972 ban in the United States led to an effective worldwide ban, as countries dependent on U.S.-funded aid agencies curtailed their DDT use to comply with those agencies' demands.
In the few minutes it has taken you to read this article, over a thousand people have contracted malaria and half a dozen have died.
Now, "Global Warming" means only to "fix" something the environmentalists say man has caused........ again ......... just like the previous "fixes" of "mankind's messes".
They certainly would EVER lie to us. :idea: :idea: :idea:
What is the cost THIS TIME?
Just Money? (whose)
Just Jobs? (again, whose)
Lives?????? (whose, this time)
Oh fer ****s sake!
Stop with the facts already, you're going to hurt someones "ffeeeeeeeeelllings".
From someone who did his own homework.
"Investigated" the history of global climate change hysteria in the U.S.A.
SENATE FLOOR SPEECH DELIVERED MONDAY SEPTEMBER 25, 2006
Exerpts.
I am going to speak today about the most media-hyped environmental issue of all time, global warming. I have spoken more about global warming than any other politician in Washington today. My speech will be a bit different from the previous seven floor speeches, as I focus not only on the science, but on the medias coverage of climate change.
Since 1895, the media has alternated between global cooling and warming scares during four separate and sometimes overlapping time periods.
From 1895 until the 1930s the media peddled a coming ice age.
From the late 1920s until the 1960s they warned of global warming.
From the 1950s until the 1970s they warned us again of a coming ice age.
This makes modern global warming the fourth estates fourth attempt to promote opposing climate change fears during the last 100 years.
Last year, the vice president of Londons Royal Society sent a chilling letter to the media encouraging them to stifle the voices of scientists skeptical of climate alarmism.
The National Academy of Sciences report reaffirmed the existence of the Medieval Warm Period from about 900 AD to 1300 AD and the Little Ice Age from about 1500 to 1850. Both of these periods occurred long before the invention of the SUV or human industrial activity could have possibly impacted the Earths climate. In fact, scientists believe the Earth was warmer than today during the Medieval Warm Period, when the Vikings grew crops in Greenland.
Climate alarmists have been attempting to erase the inconvenient Medieval Warm Period from the Earths climate history for at least a decade. David Deming, an assistant professor at the University of Oklahomas College of Geosciences, can testify first hand about this effort. Dr. Deming was welcomed into the close-knit group of global warming believers after he published a paper in 1995 that noted some warming in the 20th century. Deming says he was subsequently contacted by a prominent global warming alarmist and told point blank We have to get rid of the Medieval Warm Period. When the Hockey Stick first appeared in 1998, it did just that.
What the climate alarmists and their advocates in the media have continued to ignore is the fact that the Little Ice Age, which resulted in harsh winters which froze New York Harbor and caused untold deaths, ended about 1850. So trying to prove man-made global warming by comparing the well-known fact that today's temperatures are warmer than during the Little Ice Age is akin to comparing summer to winter to show a catastrophic temperature trend.
Alarmists fail to adequately explain why temperatures began warming at the end of the Little Ice Age in about 1850, long before man-made CO2 emissions could have impacted the climate.
Then about 1940, just as man-made CO2 emissions rose sharply, the temperatures began a decline that lasted until the 1970s, prompting the media and many scientists to fear a coming ice age.
Let me repeat, temperatures got colder after C02 emissions exploded.
Here is a quote from Newsweek magazine:
There are ominous signs that the Earths weather patterns have begun to change dramatically and that these changes may portend a drastic decline in food production with serious political implications for just about every nation on Earth.
A headline in the New York Times reads:
Climate Changes Endanger Worlds Food Output.
Here is a quote from 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.
All of this sounds very ominous. That is, until you realize that the three quotes I just read were from articles in 1975 editions of Newsweek Magazine and The New York Times, and Time Magazine in 1974. http://time-proxy.yaga.com/time/arch...944914,00.html
Time Magazine has also reported on global warming:
[Those] who claim that winters were harder when they were boys are quite right weathermen have no doubt that the world at least for the time being is growing warmer.
Time Magazine was not a recent quote; it was from January 2, 1939.
Yes, in 1939. Nine years before Vice President Gore was born and over three decades before Time Magazine began hyping a coming ice age and almost five decades before they returned to hyping global warming.
Time Magazine in 1951 pointed to receding permafrost in Russia as proof that the planet was warming.
In 1952, the New York Times noted that the trump card of global warming has been the melting glaciers.
Geologists Think the World May be Frozen Up Again.
That sentence appeared over 100 years ago in the February 24, 1895 edition of the New York Times.
Let me repeat. 1895, not 1995.
A front page article in the October 7, 1912 New York Times declared that a prominent professor Warns Us of an Encroaching Ice Age.
The very same day in 1912, the Los Angeles Times ran an article warning that the Human race will have to fight for its existence against cold.
An August 10, 1923 Washington Post article declared: Ice Age Coming Here.
America in Longest Warm Spell Since 1776; Temperature Line Records a 25-year Rise stated an article in the New York Times on March 27, 1933.
The media of yesteryear was also not above injecting large amounts of fear and alarmism into their climate articles.
An August 9, 1923 front page article in the Chicago Tribune declared:
Scientist Says Arctic Ice Will Wipe Out Canada.
The article quoted a Yale University professor who predicted that large parts of Europe and Asia would be wiped out and Switzerland would be entirely obliterated.
A December 29, 1974 New York Times article on global cooling reported that climatologists believed the facts of the present climate change are such that the most optimistic experts would assign near certainty to major crop failure in a decade.
Oh there is sooooooooo much more of it out there. :idea:
If people would just WAKE UP before they smell the coffee, they would find it smells like bad whitefish after a few days in the sun. :idea: :idea:
It astounds me that anyone could fall for the global warming hype. All one needs to do is even a minimum amount of research and the whole theory is blown out of the water.
The good news is I think many Americans are starting to wise up. The more they wise up, the more insane the global warming crowd gets.
It astounds me that anyone could fall for the global warming hype. All one needs to do is even a minimum amount of research and the whole theory is blown out of the water.
The good news is I think many Americans are starting to wise up. The more they wise up, the more insane the global warming crowd gets.
Al and Mikey have their audience that is incapable of wising up. They live to feed off doom and gloom, complaining about the rooster that crows at daylight and the bats and bugs that come out at sunset.
Ignorance never sleeps......
in a study of more than 900 years of conflict in eastern China, a team of researcheres has tested the hypothesis that cold spells fuel the social instability that leads to war.
all four decades of "very high" warfare as well as most periods of "high" conflict coincided with cold phases.
At the beginning of the second cold era, heavy rains and severe floods devastated agricultural production and during the subsequent famine people were forced to eat tree bark and even seeds from the excrement from wild geese.
The shortages fueled peasant unrest, which destabilized regimes and led to conflict.
Maybe MGW can help start a new era of peace on earth!
CC
We won't be around to see it but just imagine the next ice age. We will have to invade South America and Europe, Africa.
Carnage would be the only way to describe what it will be like.:sqeyes:
To combat global warming the gov't could either levy a tax on carbon or put a ceiling on greenhouse gas emissions and allocate or auction the emission rights. Both options would raise prices to consumers.
Carbon Tax:
a $15 tax on each ton of CO2 emitted would add an estimated:
- 14 cents to a gallon of gas
- $1.63 to a kilowatt hour of electricity
- $28.50 to a ton of coal
- $6.48 to a barrel of crude oil
Cap and trade
What a 15% cut in CO2 emissions would cost by income class:
poorest $677 3.3% as pct of income
second $883 2.9
middle $1,161 2.8
fourth $1,500 2.7
Richest $2,177 1.7
So once again, we're gonna find a way to get you to pay for something that might not even exist....makes the issue easier to understand now doesn't it?:idea:
CC
To combat global warming the gov't could either levy a tax on carbon or put a ceiling on greenhouse gas emissions and allocate or auction the emission rights. Both options would raise prices to consumers.
Carbon Tax:
a $15 tax on each ton of CO2 emitted would add an estimated:
- 14 cents to a gallon of gas
- $1.63 to a kilowatt hour of electricity
- $28.50 to a ton of coal
- $6.48 to a barrel of crude oil
Cap and trade
What a 15% cut in CO2 emissions would cost by income class:
poorest $677 3.3% as pct of income
second $883 2.9
middle $1,161 2.8
fourth $1,500 2.7
Richest $2,177 1.7
So once again, we're gonna find a way to get you to pay for something that might not even exist....makes the issue easier to understand now doesn't it?:idea:
CC
And what will become of the money? Fund research by granting endowments to every nutbag political crony with a bright new idea on alternative energy.
How they love to get in people's pockets, it gives them such a warm fuzzy feeling to protect the planet from all the evil inhabitants. "They" being the Liberal Moronic Hierarchy.
Posting Permissions