A CONSERVATIVE MANIFESTO: On Environment

[Натан Мэвэ]

"Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. Wedidn't pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be foughtfor, protected, and handed on for them to do the same, or one day wewill spend our sunset years telling our children and our children'schildren what it was once like in the United States where men were free."
-- Ronald Reagan

[Мария]

I feel like we are on a precipice of losing that freedom.
America is such an anomaly in the world of slavery and tyranny.

[Светлана Гэмм]

I am really really tempted to say something bad, but I will be a good girl and wait for Maria or Natan to respond to the Red Diper Doper babies' insults..(tr)

[Mike]

there is not response needed :)
other then what is "red diper doper"?
the posts here are totally and completely insane... there is really no other logical statement that i can make.

[Лина]

what is "red diper doper
----------------------------------------
a commie druggie

[Лина]

red diaper doper baby
The children of leftist intellectual baby boomers, raised from birth on Marxism and a drug tolerant environment, and now in places of political and intellectual influence.
Red diaper doper baby politicians who want to legalize marijuana and tax the successful to support the unproductive.

***********.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=red+diaper+doper+baby

.
Do you people have any thoughts of your own?

[Mike]

oh wow, i learned a new phrase :) it's a good day.
and Svetlana found a new name for me, i am collecting those.

[Светлана Гэмм]

Михаил,as a mathematician, how would YOU explain the reason behind the left's push for the radical expensive GW agenda, if the science is not settled, other than the desire to redistribute the wealth and control our lives?

[Mike]

We must resist these environmental kooks because the future theyadvocate is a society resembling totalitarian concentration camp.
THIS is clearly the reason.. i mean come on, it's obvious :)

[Светлана Гэмм]

well, it's very debatable because some of the ideas coming from the radical enviromentalists do sound like they want a lot of control - telling people how much toilet paper to use would be one of them..
will you answer my question or you need to look at your chart? ;-)

[Mike]

this is going to be another argument that goes nowhere, but i will bite
1) There is a lot more to environmentalism then GW. Remember shrinking ozon layer? Remember acid rains that we had before, has been practically solved in US with the clean air act.
2) I like the fact that i can run in Central park and along West side path in NYC without suffocating from emission fumes, like in Moscow or Buenos Aires or most other large cities where they don't have good emission standards
3) I enjoy going to the lakes and being able to swim and fish in them due to the environmental standards that we have
4) I like snorkeling in coral riffs that are protected by the environmentalists
Now, on GW, there seems to be little doubt that we do have some affect on global weather patterns. I don't buy into the Al Gore propaganda much more then i buy into the loony statements made in this topic.

[Mike]

resembling totalitarian concentration camp

this part is NOT debatable, it's loony, crazy, insane, i don't know what the correct medical term is for it. I mean you have to be on some hard drugs to come up with this idiocy.

[Mike]

Because they believe in it, in the same irrational way that you believe in god. They believe that the world is getting hotter and that it will cause cataclysmic events should we allow this to happen.
this is my opinion of course.

[Светлана Гэмм]

1. what is percentage of CO2 in the atmosphere?
2. the amount of CO2 was higher during WWII and T was lower..
3. and what about the Medieval Warm period when the Earth was even warmer, and the climate scientists have been supressing that fact..
btw, I am very rational in my believe in God, because if you don't, you start irrationally believe in GW and its effects or charts...;-)
haven't we already been through global cooling, ice age, etc. in the 70s?

[Светлана Гэмм]

this part is NOT debatable, it's loony, crazy, insane, i don't knowwhat the correct medical term is for it. I mean you have to be on somehard drugs to come up with this idiocy.
I mean, on behalf of or for the sake of the atheists, I am asking you, please stay civil...
if they will tax and control
-the food you eat
-the cars you drive
-the millage you are allowed to drive
-businesses you can open/grow/use
-th amount of electricity you can use
-amount of water
-some are advocating the population control (tell you how many kids you can have)..
how would you call this kind of society? *-)

[Mike]

i know all the arguments for an against the GW, i don't know if we are causing it or not..
it seems like there is a lot of good and bad science on both sides of the debate.
i mean we clearly exhaust a lot of CO2, and at the increasing rate, CO2 clearly goes up into atmosphere, CO2 is clearly a greenhouse gas.
Those things are facts not subject to interpretation.
everything else is.

[Mike]

oh my god, they are already taxing every thing thing we consume.. we must be living in a concentration camp.. help help!!! :)

[Светлана Гэмм]

well, who said I (we) like it or agree with(being taxed)? and you see no problem in continuing in the same fashion for the sake of something that has not been completely proven? I mean there has to be a line where we stop, and a good reason besides the hysteria and political agenda..

[Светлана Гэмм]

no, but we are cautious of our freedoms...and what it may lead to..
and btw, if libs and Al Gore truly believe in GW, how come they are not living the lives they are advocating and live in luxury homes, fly private planes, etc..
there are good solutions, that would protect the environment, won't ruin the economy, won't cost trillions of dollars, but libs don't want to hear about it..
********tinyurl.com/y8pgeku
the Senate testimony by a scientist..Europeans' C&T has failed, they have not been able to reduce their CO2..why our dems don't listen?
and I don't anyone to pay for my believes, they do..

[Mike]

i am not sure what you are arguing with?
You want to convince me that Gore wants to put everyone in a concentration camp?

[Светлана Гэмм]

I am not really arguing...just saying what I think about it...
I do believe that dems love controlling our lives, love telling people what to do, love spending our money because they assume they know better...so they resort to lies, half-truths to manipulaten the public opinion..

[Mike]

eeeh.. i have no idea why i used this format, so used to slashdot :).
i meant substitute "dems" with "politicians" of course

[Лина]

-some are advocating the population control (tell you how many kids you can have)..
-----------------------------------------------------------
not such a bad idea, especially if you look at what's happening in India. They are also an excellent example of environmental degradation resulting from lack of regulations.
.
you'd be the first to complain about welfare moms with 10 kids.

[Светлана Гэмм]

too late to take it backnow :-P but to me dems don't mind taking your individual freedoms as long as it accomplishes their goals for the "greater good"...all the same approach to every problem - more taxes, regulation, government programs...not even funny..
when it moves - tax it
when it keeps moving - regulate it
when it stops - subsidize it

[Лина]

the dems take your freedoms? really? where have you been the last 8 years?
1. Warrantless Wiretapping — In December 2005, the New York Times reported the National Security Agency was tapping into telephone calls of Americans without a warrant, in violation of federal statutes and the Constitution.

2. Torture, Kidnapping and Detention — In the years since 9/11, our government has illegally kidnapped, detained and tortured numerous prisoners. The government continues to claim that it has the power to designate anyone, including Americans as "enemy combatants" without charge.

Attacks on Academic Freedom — The Bush administration has used a provision in the Patriot Act to engage in a policy of "censorship at the border" to keep scholars with perceived political views the administration does not like out of the United States.

[Лина]

when it stops - subsidize it
---------------------------------------------------
were you referring to GW's 2002 $190 billion farm subsidy bill?

[Натан Мэвэ]

Михаил (Mike) Рабинович deliberately misrepresented what I said, in addition to accusing me of being out of my mind, on drugs, and so on.
No, I never claimed that Al Gore and his ilk wants to put us all into a concentration camp. These people are just rubes, fools really, who use GW as means to push their political agenda, without a clue as to what this will turn into once the GOVERNMENT is given even larger power to regulate and control our lives in every way imaginable.
They no more know what they're doing than 19th century western European and Russian intellectuals who advocated communist ideas, as great and advanced as people thought these were at the time. The consequences of these theories lead to horrible results a few decades later.
When people cede their rights to the GOVERNMENT, this inevitably leads to tyranny down the road. Maybe not right away and maybe not for us. But certainly for our children.

[Натан Мэвэ]

"When the people are afraid of their government - it is tyranny, when government is afraid of the people - it is liberty." -- Thomas Jefferson.

[Натан Мэвэ]

Our rights as Americans have been encroached upon by the Federal Government and politicians in both parties for the better part of the 20th century. This process has intensified significantly lately - in the last few decades with a small, partial rollback of this encroachment only during 8 years of Ronald Reagan presidency.
The aggressive environmentalism, as advocated by Al Gore, is just one manifestation of this encroachment. The founders of this republic have never intended for the Federal Government to be of such scope, size and wield such powers as it does currently. Please read the Federalist Papers and the Constitution to understand that limited Federal Government with powers ONLY enumerated in the Constitution is at the heart of and is the essence of this great republic.

[Натан Мэвэ]

Ira, you're asking how the Government is encroaching on my rights? Here is just one example.
Approximately 60% of every dollar I earn I pay in taxes. Most of those taxes did not exist 70-80 years ago. And no, I am not a "fat cat" working on Wall St. I am what they call "middle class".
The size of the Federal Government is largest it's ever been. Millions of people are working for it. This vast bureaucracy currently consumes almost 20% of GDP and is slated to grow to 28% if Federal Government takes over health care.
And what have we got to show for it? Almost $14 trillion in debt and rising. Which is the debt my children and grandchildren will have to pay, thus significantly diminishing their standard of living. And you are telling me that my rights have not being diminished? You must be joking!!!!

[Натан Мэвэ]

Here is another example where the Federal Government will abuse its power if we allow it: under the currently proposed Healthcare bill everyone will be REQUIRED to purchase health insurance.
If one makes a reasonable assumption that health insurance is just a product or service like any other, where in the Constitution is it written that the Federal Government can compel its citizens to purchase any product simply as a function of being a citizen???

[Натан Мэвэ]

My contention is that under current administration the rush to expand the scope, size and power of the Federal Government has accelerated significantly. It is readily apparent in administration's agenda, whether it is related to environment, economy, healthcare.
This tendency to expand the Federal Government has been ongoing non-stop - for the last 20 years, by both Republican and Democrat administration.

[Натан Мэвэ]

Ira, I've written my note before I got a chance to read your other comment. You have to understand that while I am writing I can't refresh the screen to see what you may have as the latest post. If that offends you - sorry. You don't have to reply.

[Натан Мэвэ]

You're asking "what do you suggest?"
For you I recommend a book by Mark Levin (radio host here in New York on 770, WABC - 6:00-9:00 pm) "Liberty and Tyranny". The first post in this forum was copied from that book.
A great read for anyone who likes to think for themselves and wants to understand where as a country we come from, where we are right now and what needs to be done to keep it the greatest country in the world.

[Khramaya]

for all my conservative friends - strongly recommend a chapter on petropolitics and geopolitics in Thomas Friedman's book "Hot, flat, and crowded".
Even if he is half right, we are for some very unpleasant surprises - and very, very soon...
it is an excellent, researched and sobering book

[Светлана Гэмм]

what credentials does Thomas Friedman have in climate science?
if you trully want to hear the other arguments, you have to read those who are scientists..not politicized journalists...read the link I provided earlier..it has the proposed solutions/actions we should take, but not as radical or/and expensive..

[Мария]

If this is not a classical example of "brainwashed" I don' know what is.......
You:-D

[Мария]

I wish I could chat today, but have to go now -off to Tahoe to ski in the snow ( !) and enjoy the really nice climate change over there.
All you brainwashed Global Warmers -relax. The end is not near. Do not trust Goracle. ;-)
(v)

[Мария]

On a more serious note -because there is nothing funny about corruption in the science - read this article from WSJ:
How to Manufacture a Climate Consensus.
And based on this fudged data, the UN bureaucrats are trying to redistribute mostly American money to the third world countries ruled by despots and tyrants.:-S
(BTW, one of the corrupted "scientists " is from Boulder,Co).
********tinyurl.com/ykvrdou

[Алексей Пэтк]

Which climate change data is fudged? Please reference a scientific paper, not a FOX news/WSJ article.

[Mike]

GW is a sore subject clearly,
but what about all the other aspects of environmentalism?
what about land, air and water pollution, the government should not regulate those either?

[Светлана Гэмм]

let me see...
who was the president who created the EPA? - Nixon
who signed the Clean Air Act of 1990 - George H W
environmentalists and scientists should not politicize the subject..
some are very extreme and radical, even militant..would not allow things that have been proven safe like nuclear power and drilling..

[Mike]

so, greenhouse gasses control is what makes us a concentration camp, other gases can be controlled?
wasn't clear air act a 'cap and trade' act?

[Алексей Пэтк]

Unfortunately, I cannot open the whole article. Thus, can only base what I see in a given interpretation of such:
1. Showing that one of the groups has a bias in their dataset dos not constitute a conspiracy or data fudging, but can be a result of multiple factors (apparatus systematic error, bugs in the code, etc.)
2. Having this paper published in a journal shows the ABSENCE of a "scientific conspiracy." On the contrary, it shows an open discussion among scientific groups.

[Светлана Гэмм]

Рабинович, I know you undergo transformations from one group to another..if I remember correctly not that long ago you were not supportive of Cap and Trade..what's changed?..explain why support it now if you do..
don't you know that the pollutants identified in the Clean Air act are dangerous to human health?..is CO2 dangerous to health?...according to the newly appointed politicized EPA officials, it is...and they are grabbing the power to regulate it without the science establishing it...or do you know otherwise??
you do know that in the email climategate, the lead climatologists were trying to prevent the opposing voices from publishing the peer-reviewed journals...how do you explain it?

[Mike]

Geller, i am against cap and trade.. at least at this point..
i think there is a VAST distance between being against that act and believing that environmental movement wants to put us into concentration camps.

[Светлана Гэмм]

if you understand everything literally then you may think that's our perception (regarding the concentration camps)...re-read Natan's explanation..
I am against government encroaching on our rights without any bases...I support sound environmental regulations based on established facts...not using pseudo-science for power grab..

[Mike]

We must resist these environmental kooks because the future theyadvocate is a society resembling totalitarian concentration camp.

Are there 2 ways of understanding this?

[Светлана Гэмм]

Totalitarian regimes or movements maintain themselves in political power by means of an official all-embracing ideology and propaganda disseminated through the state-controlled mass media, a single party that controls the state, personality cults, control over the economy, regulation and restriction of free discussion and criticism, the use of mass surveillance, and widespread use of state terrorism.
yeah, if our government embraces dishonest scientists and activists who manipulate facts and want to regulate our choices using the propoganda...then I agree with Natan...the key word is RESEMBLING

[Натан Мэвэ]

Михаил (Mike) Рабинович
What is the most prevalent "greenhouse gas" on the planet? No, it is not CO2. Not even close. 96% comprising green house gases is water vapor. Yet one more fact exposing this whole notion of "man made global warming" as a power grabbing scam. Look it up.

[Натан Мэвэ]

If you don't think that the ultimate goal of the enviro-fascists is total control of an individual and his rights ask yourself this:
Did the wide-eyed Russian revolutionaries, fighting and dying for the "oppressed" and high minded slogans about "freedom", "equality" and "brotherhood", could they really imagine in their worst nightmares that only 20 years later - a span of only one generation, their "worker's paradise" will turn into a network of stalinist concentration camps.
Never underestimate the power of out of control regime to rapidly turn into a police state and proceed to subjugate its citizenry.

[Mike]

Natan (Натан) Levert (Леверт),
96%?? Please site your sources..it's around 80% in u include clouds.

[Мария]

Which climate change data is fudged? Please reference a scientific paper, not a FOX news/WSJ article.
Aleksei, are you serious? How can you be so un-informed of what is going on around????????????????????????? This news is sooooo huge, and you are not even aware of it????
Classic case of mass media fooling the masses by withholding critical information from the masses. (md)
DOn't you realize that the scientific papers on climate research can not be trusted anymore? The thugs at the East Anglia Institute and the Boulder Atmospheric research center completely discredited the climate science? It will never be the same again.

[Mike]

CRU hack has been covered in media by even the most liberal shows, like Jon Strewart.

[Натан Мэвэ]

Михаил (Mike) Рабинович:
You asked for it - here it is. For anyone to see.
***********.geocraft.com/WVFossils/greenhouse_data.html
Make your own conclusions...
Of course, you're free to ignore the other side of this argument and continue worshiping at the altar of Al Gore and his "Church" of man caused global warming.

[Mike]

Natan (Натан) Levert (Леверт), you are clearly not reading what i am writing, but only what you think i am writing :).
Anyway, i took a look at your sited article..
Lets check their first source, table (1) which they claim comes from a department of energy, yet when i follow the link they provide:
********cdiac.esd.ornl.gov/pns/current_ghg.html
it does not state anything about "natural" CO2 additions.
So, maybe it was updated, as the link sited 2000 version of the page, so i got that from archive.org
********web.archive.org/web/20010208121326/********cdiac.esd.ornl.gov/pns/current_ghg.html
still nothing of that sort.
SO, let me ask you, how did they come up with that?

[Алексей Пэтк]

Once again, Maria, I asked for an article, not a news story. Did you read those CRU e-mails by yourself -- not the (carefully-selected) exerpts from the FOX News?
Here is one opinion which I find close to mine: ***********.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2009/11/the-cru-hack/
Please read the paragraph about the "trick" that mass media has been over-hyped about recently.
I don't want to defend those folks at CRU, I don't know them. But somehow I don't believe that they are there to get us all. What would they get in return -- what is the primary motivation to mislead the whole planet? And do you think that other groups at other Universities would not have their own data to cross-check?
You know, if in my private e-mails, I refer to some researcher as an idiot and his/her paper as crap, it does not mean that I'm there to suppress his/her ideas. Doesn't that make sense?

[Гера Така]

Alex,

As a man of science, please, explain to me (as I am not an expert, but a person with my own opinion) - how come in this "theory of climate change" there is nothing about the impact of one of the most important factors for this unique place in the Universe (Planet Earth)- The Sun???

What about it? No Sun in the theory????

[Алексей Пэт]

Gera, solar irradiation certainly has to be taken into account. It is -- and not only in theory -- NASA has dedicated devices on satellites tracking solar activity. For example, TIM on a mission Glory: ********glory.giss.nasa.gov/tim/
Here is more on this topic: ***********.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/03/090328163643.htm

[Гера Така]

So,
The solar activities , the Sun itself - is a major contributor to the fact that the life on Earth exists to begin with.


How are they planning to regulate the Sun?
Are they planning to establish the emergency fund, in case the next flare will happen? and they can save the Earth with their newly invented regulatory ideas???

Oh, wait a minute, they, eitheralmost dismiss it, or say it needs to be monitored.


So back to square one. Go monitor and come back when you have real facts...
This planet was hot, and then it was cold... and humans are merely guests in the shorter period of time.


Cheers.(D)

[Алексей Пэтк]

Gera, you don't need to regulate the Sun. I'm not a climate scientist, but, simplistically, the whole thing is based on energy conservation:
{Amount of energy received from Sun's radiation} + {Energy generated on Earth} = {Change in Earth's internal energy} + {Energy re-radiated into space}.
{Amount of energy received from Sun's radiation} and {Energy re-radiated into space} is received from satellites and/or computed. {Energy generate on Earth} is small compared to other terms.
We are after the {Change in Earth's internal energy}, which depends on how much energy is trapped in Earth's atmosphere. This, in turn, depends on chemical composition of said atmosphere. For instance, water vapor "traps" solar energy and makes it nice and comfortable for us to live here.
If more energy is trapped, temperature will rise and makes it not so comfortable.
Why do you need to regulate the Sun?

[Mike]

Aleksey, what Gera meant ( i think ) i that change in solar activity causes changes of earth temperature. So, even with constant greenhouse gases if solar activity is higher temperature would move higher.

[Гера Така]

The uniqueness of this planet is in the comparative sizes of the Sun and the Earth and the orbit established between them.
Nobody can regulate the Sun! The climate and oxygen level established specifically by the point I made above. The Sun is a mother of a photosynthesis, which the life giving chemical process.
CO2 is not a pollution as claimed by this newly invented "science" (trapping the energy and causing the temperature to rise!!!) what a bull!!!
CO2 is energy for your greens on this planet. Where are you? The Tree hugging people??? No CO2 --> no trees.


... and here is my philisophical point out cry:
so what if the temp will be warmer? So f... what?
All Arabs and African are planning to move to Europe and States anyway!

Meanwhile --> it is a cold and mean winter ... again... and as usual.


WINTER -- Cold!!!


Cheers...(D)

[Алексей Пэт]

Mike, but those changes are monitored by either satellites or proxy methods -- and therefore are taken into account. At least to the best way they can be, I hope.

[Светлана Гэмм]

btw, those emails are NOT private and should NOT be erased under the Freedom of Information act..Mann directing his subordinates to do it just indicates they have not been following the act..
NASA is being sued for withholding date for three years already..

[Алексей Пэтк]

so what if the temp will be warmer? So f... what?
Well, it depends by how much. There are several very nasty consequences that I can see:
1. If polar cups partially melt, that would change salinity of water. This, in turn, would change patterns of ocean currents. In particular, it can stop Golf-stream wil stop circulating and Europe will see much lower winter temperatures, changing agriculture.
Also, at some point melting the polar cups will lead to flooding of some of the cities.
2. Gulf of Mexico will be warmer leading to more frequent and stronger hurricanes -- too bad for Texas, and neighboring Southern states -- in particular, for the oil industry there.
3. At some point in the future the methane trapped in the ocean floor will get untapped and then we will really be in trouble.
And I'm not talking about tropical diseases coming our way...

[Алексей Пэт]

1. CRU is located in Great Britain, which means that Freedom of Information Act does not apply there.
2. Generally, e-mails, as any letters, are considered private.

[Mike]

Emails that send to/from work email address are not private, but in fact if you are an organization funded by the government those communications are public and are subject to FOIA.

[Mike]

Gera, errr.. was this for real? :)
Oxygen is also energy, for people.. but also a poison when it's in excess.

[Mike]

but what i list the most about the so-called "conservative manifesto on environment" is that it really did not say ANYTHING about the environment :).

[Светлана Гэмм]

********pajamasmedia.com/blog/three-things-you-absolutely-must-know-about-climategate/
this is an analysis of the hacked e-mails with the links to the actual e-mails..they have freedom of information act in Britain too..
********icecap.us/docs/change/GlobalWarming&HurricanePaper.pdf
GLOBAL WARMING AND HURRICANES
William M. Gray *
Colorado State University, Fort Collins, Colorado
one of the best meteorologists we have in country..of course, he is not popular in the GW community anymore since he doesn't buy in the scare..

[Гера Така]

Oxygen is also energy, for people.. but also a poison when it's in excess.


Are you serious???

How canwe make more oxygen?
This something new!
I thought we are in danger from the access of the greenhose gases....

[Mike]

Gera, this was an analogy to your CO2 statement.. where you said that CO2 is food for plants.
CO2 is in fact used by plants, but it's also a greenhouse gas.
Are you in fact arguing that CO2 is an greenhouse gas? :)

[Mike]

Svetlana, this was actually a reasonably good paper that you sited, unlike that drek provided by Nathan :).
The problem with weather modeling is that it's non-deterministic ( stochastic ) and we have no good way for modeling is conclusively.
Even IPCC statement does not say that anthropogenic global warming is a certainty, i believe they give it a 90% chance.
People like Al Gore don't help the cause of GW supporters too much, as his statement and movie are total bullshit.

[Гера Така]

No, What I am saying -> CO2 is not a pollution, and is not a danger to the planet.
Al Gore and his political agenda is!!!
Government agency with their un necessary regulations is!!!!
Obama and Clinton withspending of our money is!!!

[Лина]

CO2 is not a pollution, and is not a danger to the planet.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Ithought increased concentrations of it could be toxic... how do you define danger?

[Гера Така]

Concentration of any ... thing could be toxic.
Too much sugar or salt in your diet is dangerous for one's heath.
It does not mean we have to do what these "experts" are telling us to do!

[Mike]

actually it can be toxic in very high doses ( same as oxygen ) or almost anything in high doses.

[Гера Така]

CO2 is a green house gas.
But is not a pollution.
The air is a mixture consisting of oxygen, nitrogen and other gases. The higher concentration of any one of them could be detrimental... It does not mean we should forbid the use of Nitrogen, for example.

[Mike]

who says it's pollution??
It's a greenhouse gas, and it increased markedly over the last 50 years.
as greenhouse gas it's possible that it causes Global Warming.
GW may cause bad shit to happen.

[Гера Така]

EPA just said so!
May or may not - is a subject of the debate, not legislation.
Cut on sugar and salt on your own, and do not wait for government to tell you that, or bad things may happen to you.

[Светлана Гэмм]

***********.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/1806245/posts
<font size="+1" color="black">The Real History of Carbon Dioxide Levels

there were also very high levels in 1825, 1857, 1945...

[Светлана Гэмм]

as greenhouse gas it's possible that it causes Global Warming.
GW may cause bad shit to happen.
those are only hypothesis..it has not been established..

[Гера Така]

What?!
1825!!!!
I do not believe it!!! There was no cars then! It must be a joke!!! The data cannot be credible!!!
Did anybody check the air quality over Europe when the city of Pompey was covered with ashes after the volcano eruption???
I guess - the "science" was not around then... he he.

[Светлана Гэмм]

***********.nipccreport.org/chapter1.html
***********.heartland.org/publications/NIPCC%20report/PDFs/Chapter%201.pdf

Global Climate Models and Their Limitations

[Светлана Гэмм]

in a holiday spirit, Mike, to cheer you up just in case ;-) here
What matters more, it seems, is graduates' personal drive. In a surprising twist, a stronger predictor of income is the caliber of the schools that reject you. Researchers found students who applied to several elite schools but didn't attend them—presumably because many were rejected—are more likely to earn high incomes later than students who actually attended elite schools. In a summary of the findings, the Bureau says that "evidently, students' motivation, ambition and desire to learn have a much stronger effect on their subsequent success than average academic ability of their classmates."
********online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703438404574597952027438622.html

[Khramaya]

Alexei, what do you think of Myhrvold's idea -pumping sulfur particles into the stratosphere? It sounds crazy, but this guy is super smart...

[Алексей Пэтк]

Julia, I don't know much about that idea - only what I read about that in popular press. While sulfate aerosols do indeed posses sun-blocking capacity, they are also known to deplete ozone layer. I don't know if this effect is significant for stratospheric implantation, but I'd be careful not to trade warming to ozone depletion.
Also, what comes up must eventually come down -- and having sulfur rain does not sound very appealing. Also, I don't know if one can produce a homogeneous layer of that stuff...
So, it does not sound very appealing to me, but what do I know...

[Khramaya]

yes,this is what I thought - acid rains again...
well, what he is saying you need actually a relatively small amount of sulfur, so the risk-benefit seemed good.
I admire the most this guy's imagination...

[Алексей Пэтк]

That could be, as I said, I don't know much about that stuff.
Speaking of sulfur, btw. If historical CO_2 spikes have natural (volcanic) origin, there must be a correlation between the spikes of sulfuric concentrations in 1825, etc. The abstract that tells about historical spikes in CO2 does not look into that (or I missed it while scanning that website).

[Khramaya]

Alex, not sure you read this whole column, but I posted somewhere earlier that Friedman"s "Hot, flat and crowded" provides analysis of politics of oil and politics of climate, as well as ties all of it with the rise of fundamentalism - excellent analysis.
Petropolitics , geopolitics...power-all connected. And his proposed solutions are also totally sane.

[Светлана Гэмм]

Julia, what do you personally think about GW?
did you personally read the hacked emails? and if they raise questions about the data we've been relying on to determine if there has actually been warming, what's your opinion on why our government refuses to investigate it??

[Khramaya]

Sveta, i read info on climate all the time...
all the fuss about those e-mails is blown out of proportion and some stuff is just taken out of context.
but we obviously read different publications. We at home read about 3 science journals, and as far as journalists - this is where we differ.
But, GW aside, I think even conservatives will like Friedman's musings on petropolitics and the dangers of radical Islam. And his solutions are not "government involvement", but innovation, economic development, education, developing own energy independence - not too many people would disagree with this.

[Светлана Гэмм]

if you had read the emails yourselves, not the apologies, you would've definitely realized there were a lot of unethical things taken place that definitely trigger an investigation before we decide to take dramatic actions..unless you are religious about GW..(ch)
comparing terrorism to GW (ch) we HAVE been attacked..we don't need prove..
found this site describing different climate periods with temp, co2 levels..
***********.geocraft.com/WVFossils/Carboniferous_climate.html

[Натан Мэвэ]

I am glad that this thread had become such a vigorously debated topic. Where I stand on this issue I think everyone knows - from my own posts. I don't presume to convince anyone or win them over to our side. Only to urge them to think for themselves, as oppose to regurgitating liberal-progressive dogma and DNC talking points.
To that end I will try to open other similar threads - all excerpts from Mark Levin's "A Conservative Manifesto" - from his latest book "Liberty and Tyranny", a highly recommended book and a great present during this Holiday Season. (Y) (Y) (Y)

[Mike]

There is a very good book i just finished reading - "Physics for future presidents" it talked about GW among other things. A very good, unbiased approach, cuts thru a bunch of political bullshit.

[Мария]

Here is what Dr. Fred Singer, one of the leading climate researchers who does not buy the MAN-made GW idea says:
- Climate change is a major political issue with many conflicting claims of causes and possible solutions. We attempt to separate what is scientifically known from what is not, and what is economically practical from what is not.
- Climate is always changing. For the last 2 million years , nearly 20 ice age periods have dominated the Earth's climate, interrupted by warm periods lasting 10,000 years or so. During the current warm period the climate has been both warmer and cooler that today. For 3000 it was about 5 dgerees F warmer.
-GW is real. But not in a way indicating CO2 is the cause.
30 years of satellite observation show a warming in the northern part of the globe, little warming in the tropics and the southers portion -and distinct cooling of Antarctica. Global warming stopped a decade ago.

[Мария]

-There is no climate crisis. There is no scientific basis for concluding the climate is doing anything unprecedented or dangerous.
-Many well -meaning politicians are in the grips of a mania led by political, not scientific studies.These studies ignore past warming and cooling periods. Science must never aignore physical evidence. Politicians believing there political documents believe they can control climate by controlling human activity.
-Several distinguished scientists formed the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC) to study these reports. The 2008 NIPCC report concluded that the government reports and their models are biased, obsolete and wrong and that nature, not human activity, rules the climate
***.nipccreport.org

[Алексей Пэтк]

one of the leading climate researchers
I don't want to comment, just to ask a question: how do non-scientists define a "leading researcher"? What criteria do you use? I am honestly curious here.

[Светлана Гэмм]

weird question from a scientist..I mean if someone who wants to know, they can just look it up..I guess it's a person who conducts research, analyzes data, publishes papers, also has experience in Environmental Science and Climatology...imo..
********en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fred_Singer

[Алексей Пэтк]

Well, the emphasis was on "leading" -- any researcher "conducts research, analyzes data, publishes papers, also has experience in ...". Also, how do you know that the research conducted by the said researcher is not bogus? Wikipedia?
In application to GW -- say, a researcher A says that it exists, while the researcher B says it does not -- who would you believe?
I'm actually interested in that question in general -- for example, there was (is) a guy named Walter Wagner who said that LHC would create black holes that will end life on Earth... and I say "no" -- who would you believe?

[Светлана Гэмм]

the problem HAS been (and it's becoming even more obvious) the GW crowd has been trying to discredit people with opposing views and preventing them from making THEIR views known (by stopping them from publishing their findings in respected publications..
many scientists who don't subscribe to their model of GW have been complaining of being marginalized and ostracized in the scientific community...this is crazy..I want an honest debate among scientists..

[Mike]

Aleksey, on LHC i believe there is a non-zero probability of creation of black holes that would start consuming matter around it. At least that was my understanding..
As of leading scientist - i believe a definition would fit someone who publishes a lot of stuff on the subject in peer-reviewed magazines... i am not sure what's the definition of "a lot".

[Алексей Пэтк]

Ok, but what if researcher A and researcher B both publish a lot in research journals? Who would you believe?
I understand that many would not care about a discussion of black hole production at the LHC (or Rezus-monkey mating patterns) -- but this question has some relevance for GW discussion.
BTW, I'm happy to defend my point of view regarding black holes at the LHC and the end of times associated with that.

[Mike]

Aleksey, u don't believe nobody, you put them in a cage and have them fight it out.. i mean it's obvious :)

[Алексей Пэтк]

Regarding the honest debate -- how does it suppose to go? Normally, people do research and publish their result in scientific papers. Or not publish -- if the results do not hold up to scientific scrutiny. It is called "peer review" -- and it is part of honest scientific debate. There are also conferences, where people report their results.
It is usually considered a bad taste to go to press when your papers are rejected from the professional journals. Well, maybe not in GW discussion. But there are many crackpots (at least in my field) that send their papers to the professional journals. I deal with that as a reviewer and as an editor. In many cases, those people say that "scientists want to suppress new ideas" -- and in all cases their "theories" don't hold up because of elementary mistakes!

[Алексей Пэтк]

Mike, I think you are on to something! Darwinian solution! Oh, wait a minute... :-)

[Натан Мэвэ]

This healthy skepticism is applicable to science and scientific discoveries in general, as it should be. So based just on such skepticism and history of scientific discoveries and how frequently many scientists were wrong with their "sure thing" findings it is preposterous to claim that GW caused by humans is "a settled science" as the inventor of the Internet claims.
Albert Einstein's General Theory of Relativity was challenged and not conclusively proven for over 15 years - from when he first proposed it in 1908 until 1922, when examination of total Solar Eclipse proved that gravity manifests itself through curvature of timespace.

[Мария]

Unfortunately, the peer-reviewed climate journals are compromised now. They do not have the authority anymore to say who is leading researcher and who is not. They crewed themselves up.
So, not publishing there does not make a skeptic scientist's research less valid.
The non-political scientists keep working on the climate research and they reached the conclusion that it is NATURAL and is not related to MAN activity on Earth.
The issue here is the politics of taxation in the name of saving the Earth. If man is not responsible for the climate change -there will be no excuse to tax people.
What's not clear here?
The EPA ruling that CO2 is toxic -это такой маразм, что просто слов нет.
I'm sure when the political power moves to the other side, the CO2 will become what it should be - an indispensible ingridient of life.
We can regulate some tetrafluorodiethylpolyvinylbnezoyl because it's not natural, but we should not mess with CO2.

[Mike]

they reached the conclusion
THEY did? :) When will the lunacy stop? There is not definitive conclusion right now and it's not even possible with a current state of technology. There is not one serious researcher that denies that fact that men have had an affect on our climate, the question is only how much.. Is it .05C different or 2C difference.

[Алексей Пэтк]

The non-political scientists keep working on the climate research andthey reached the conclusion that it is NATURAL and is not related toMAN activity on Earth.
How do you know that they are non-political? And how do you know they all conclude that it is natural??? I mean, are there no non-political ones who say that it is man-made??? Just curious...
And again, Geophysical Review Letter publishes papers in climate and in geophysics. Is it compromised as a peer-reviewed journal? Do you have authority and credentials to claim that?

[Светлана Гэмм]

I mean..people who uses the words lunacy definitely don't qualify in the scientific debate..not even published in the peer-reviewed journal, doesn't matter if Al Gore says so..but I would put him in a cage for sure..:-|

[Алексей Пэт]

Albert Einstein's General Theory of Relativity was challenged and notconclusively proven for over 15 years - from when he first proposed itin 1908 until 1922, when examination of total Solar Eclipse proved thatgravity manifests itself through curvature of time space.
So, when do you decide that it is "conclusively proven"? What is your scientific criterion? :-)
BTW, General Relativity was introduced in 1915 in the presentation to the Prussian Academy of Sciences -- not in 1908.

[Mike]

Svetlana, i just call it as i see it :) i am sure u read many scientific journals for breakfast though.. so mad props to you ( yeah i know, i am not supposed to say mad props either ).

[Светлана Гэмм]

This is an advance since the TAR’s conclusion that “most of
the observed warming over the last 50 years is likely
to have been due to the increase in greenhouse gas
concentrations”. Discernible human influences
now extend to other aspects of climate, including
ocean warming, continental-average temperatures,
temperature extremes and wind patterns
********ipcc-wg1.ucar.edu/wg1/Report/AR4WG1_Print_SPM.pdf
this is from the IPCC website..does it sound they have not established it? what does "very likely mean to you"?
Мишань, if I "call it as I see it" after every post you type, тут бы мат столбом стоял..;-) but I choose to be civil..*-) (v)

[Светлана Гэмм]

here is another one..
Both past and future anthropogenic carbon dioxide
emissions will continue to contribute to warming and
sea level rise for more than a millennium, due to the
time scales required for removal of this gas from the
atmosphere...
to me it sounds pretty established...

[Mike]

Likely = 90% chance in science speak.
Very likely = 95% chance
Link the second article.

[Светлана Гэмм]

ok, now I want to hear your opinion on GW, what causes it, what are the chances it's man-made,..AND
if you were president, what would YOU do except resigning..(ch)

[Mike]

well..
1) it's a fact that co2 is a greenhouse gas
2) it's a fact that we pump out a lot of it into the air
From that we know that there is at least some correlation between increase in greenhouse gasses and increased temperature ( unless there is some negative feedback somewhere else, like cloud formation due to higher temperature, which causes cooling ).
3) as we move off oil in the next 30 years or so the next cheap alternative is coal, processing of which exhaust significantly more co2 and that can make it worse
In my "pulling from my ass estimate" there is maybe 10-20% chance that we will have some major issues due to GW.
I would say it justifies at least some kind of precautionary measures.
investment is nuclear, solar, wind, geothermal, etc sound like a great idea.

[Алексей Пэт]

Go nuclear!
BTW, is Westinghouse the only company that makes reactors? Need to buy some stock...

[Khramaya]

that's right, on this note, what companies should we invest into right now?:-D
solar? wind? nuclear? all of those -a little bit?

[Светлана Гэмм]

I agree with all points, as much as you don't want to, you sound like a good republican..we all want clean environment, we all want to avoid catastrophes, it's not our fault environmentalists and some scientists have politicized the issue..and dems are embracing them because it's their favorite things for the government to do something - TAX!!
and nuclear is an important piece of the puzzle that would be a bridge before other alternatives become available and practical, but here is why I have lots of issues with wacko environmentalists and DEMS, they don't let us do it, and have dem politician in their pocket..

[Mike]

on investments:
wind & solar can't exist without subsidies right now, the efficiency is just not there.. maybe in 10-20 years they can complete, meanwhile if cap&trade passes they should be a good buy. In solar FSLR ( first solar ) is the company with the best technology.
Wind will not happen until our grid is totally re-done, which should happen anyway, but i don't see us having money to spend on it within 10 years or so.
Geothermal actually sounds cool and sexy, but i don't know who does it in scale.
Nuclear in US faces "not in my backyard" idiocy of the politicians.
But in any case, utilities like Con Edison are a good conservative investment and they have 5-6% yield.
With $ staging a major come back high yield $ stocks could be big winners

[Алексей Пэтк]

First Solar is expensive (what is it now, $150/share?) -- if I had that money, I'd have bought Apple instead. I had some Evergreen Solar shares -- they did not go up at all. Bad investment.
Are there Canadian companies that make CANDU (Canadian nuclear reactors)?

[Мария]

There is not one serious researcher that denies that fact that men havehad an affect on our climate, the question is only how much..
This is not true. No serious non-politicized scientist supports such an arrogant notion. Man is too insignificant to significantly affect Earth's climate.
Which researchers are not politicized ? Those who have ethics and integrity. Obviously, those at East Anglia Institute, NASA, Boulder are not among them.

[Алексей Пэтк]

Which researchers are not politicized ? Those who have ethics and integrity.
I see it clearly now: ethics and integrity are defining characteristics of non-politicized researchers. Thus, the non-politicized researchers are the ones who have ethics and integrity! It is so simple!
So, which researchers at Boulder are non-ethical: NIST, University of Colorado or both? And why?

[Алексей Пэтк]

Thorium as the next nuclear fuel!
***********.wired.com/magazine/2009/12/ff_new_nukes/

[Мария]

So, which researchers at Boulder are non-ethical: NIST, University of Colorado or both? And why?
Tom Wigley of the Boulder Atmospheric Research Center is the one without ethics and integrity.

[Светлана Гэмм]

problem with citing credible sources is that they are mostly by subscription..
but you do agree that the IPCC exacerates the claim..your modest estimate of 10-20% chance is a far cry from their 90%..
and your position on Obama refusal to investigate the scandal behind the e-mails??

[Mike]

good article, will study it more when i have time, but i like this:
The computer climate models upon which “human-caused global warming” is based have substantial uncertainties and are markedly unreliable.

[Светлана Гэмм]

***********.youtube.com/watch?v=cbvVh26Uo3A
speaking of saving the Planet..no one says better than George Carlin..:-D :-D :-D

[Натан Мэвэ]

"what do you think of Senator Lindsey Graham?"
Sounds like a separate topic for a separate discussion....

[Алексей Пэтк]

Not really -- I would like to hear what you think about his conservative values and ethics in this topic. There is a relation.

[Мария]

Lindsey Graham is a chameleon. Sometimes he is conservative, sometimes -liberal.

[Олег Сах]

Finally I have a chance to put my 5 cents in.
What a lot of people miss in this discussion is the fact that environmentalism has been used as an anti-capitalistic weapon by watermelons (green on the outside, red on the inside) for years. Nathan has a point: many an idea that were thunk up as the way of bettering the society brought destruction and death. It is not hard to imagine the coalition of "green" governments halting agricultural production in favor of "greener", more "earth-friendly" methods and starting world wide famine by doing that. No need to even become a totalitarian regime. Just keep appealing to populace who will keep electing Obama-like pawns.

[Мария]

They enviro-wackos are already hurting the hungry in Africa by trying to ban genetically modified crops.

[Мария]

They also are the cause of millions of deaths every year from malaria for one single reason - they banned DDT. The most effective ingredient capable of destroying the anopheles mosquito.
These idiots used the same junk science to ban DDT as they were trying to use to ban CO2. But thanks to the internet, their plot was discovered.
You see, the progressives have to always lie. They can't operate in honest terms.

[Гера Така]

environmentalism has been used as an anti-capitalistic weapon by watermelons (green on the outside, red on the inside)
I just love this!!!(v)

[Mike]

any movement taken to extreme create a bunch of wackos.. it does not mean there is a flaw in the movement, but in people.
environmental standards is why we can run in NYC without suffocating, unlike big cities in other countries ( for example )

[Гера Така]

The Elephant in the Room.
Book on Sale.
***********.amazon.com/gp/product/0195332601/ref=pd_lpo_k2_dp_sr_1?pf_rd_p=486539851&pf_rd_s=lpo-top-stripe-1&pf_rd_t=201&pf_rd_i=0195187172&pf_rd_m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&pf_rd_r=0XS3GHSWKYWMC96DYW3R

[Олег Сах]

Mike, if you haven't miss out on banya yesterday, you would have meet my commie friend. You don't understand. They are not bunch of wackos who produce clean air as a side effect of their wackiness. They were put on this earth to redistribute wealth. Taxation, expropriation, environmental заламывание рук, all the methods are good to take from the haves and give to have nots. And they got you - moderate "independent" to think that all they care about is clean air in Central Park. The idea is to make a capitalist pay for the right to make money. They are not new to this struggle. They used anti-trust laws, Unions and now this environmental talk to put Big Business on its knees. We lost all of our heavy industry due to environmental laws. We lost Big Three due to Unions choke hold. They will not stop until the rich guy thinks twice before making a next million.

[Мария]

EPA used to be a useful body in regulating toxic by-products of certain industries. I do not argue against regulating carbon monoxide in our air or dioxins in our water supply. No normal citizen would object to these needed measures because they protect all of us from real danger of poisoning. That's a very justified function of government -to protect us from real danger.
But they (enviro-statists) take it a lot farther now. They create junk and corrupted science to lie to us about non-existent dangers from which they want to "protect "us ( meaning they have to heavily tax us frist).
Enviro-statists must lie all the time to progress their agenda.

[Mike]

wow.. Oleg, you are not paranoid if "they" are really out to get you, huh?
what is wrong with anti-trust laws? If anything they are not strict enough, too many industries are shielded from them.
Have you ever been to Moscow, Buenas Aires, Beijing, etc? Those cities stick, why do you think NY does not?
Here, in Syracuse we have lake Onondaga.. which is one of the most polluted lakes in the country. You can't fish or swim it in now, people living around it had to fill their water wells. At some point this was one of the most beautiful and cleanest lakes. The water was light green and you could see the bottom at 200ft.
Allied ( which later became Honeywell) dumped tons of mercury into it, Solvey process dumped ammonia, a bunch of other businesses under protection of local politicians had their waste dumped into the lake.
In economics it's called "externality".. there were no costs to the companies to dump their waste into the lake vs properly dispose of it.

[Mike]

the only way to fight it is to internalize the externality.
you dump poison into the water - CEO and board of directors should go to jail and the company must be forced to clean up.
This is where you introduce internal costs to the externality.
Unfortunately our lost are too soft, after decades of litigation (!!!!) they finally forced Honeywell to spend 450mil to clean up the lake and no, nobody went to jail.

[Mike]

Oleg,
now, does the right to make money also mean you have a right to externalize all the costs as long as you can get away with it?

[Мария]

And why do you think the CEO did not go to jail for illegally dumping to the lake?

[Мария]

after decades of litigation (!!!!) they finally forced Honeywell tospend 450mil to clean up the lake and no, nobody went to jail.
So, this whole thing happened decades ago? Like, how many decades? Before the EPA was created by Nixon or after?

[Олег Сах]

Майк, это называется "сказка про белого бычка". А я тебе могу рассказать о том как сотни тысяч машин стоят в пробках от светофора до светофора на West Side Highway, выкидывая в воздух газы засоряющие воздух и воду. Вместо того чтобы нестись по elevated highway, который не построили потому что вибрация могла повредить нересту stripe bass, которого в те времена в тех местах Гудзона и в помине не было. Environazis rejoyce!

[Олег Сах]

Oleg,
now, does the right to make money also mean you have a right to externalize all the costs as long as you can get away with it?
Mike, profit driven economy will cut all the trees in Central Park and will sell it to homeowners in Paramus, NJ as firewood if it will make $ sense.
The society's (gov't's) purpose is to protect people, land, air, etc. It's just once the left hears an example like you gave us they jump on any factory, producing any kind of waste. Even if it's fertilizer.

[Mike]

Oleg, again everything is good "in the middle" and gets crazy "on the edges".. so what?
Does it mean we don't need EPA, or environmental laws, and allow anyone contaminate our land water and air?

[Mike]

Maria, this was happening for about 100 years until 1982..
Back at the time we did not have any crazy environmental movements :)

[Гера Така]

We do not need EPA.
Their original function was defined as to make US energy independent.

They have failed!

[Мария]

Does it mean we don't need EPA, or environmental laws, and allow anyone contaminate our land water and air?
And who says that?

[Mike]

Maria, please read the first post of this so-called "manifesto".. nowhere does it mention anything about protecting the environment.

[Светлана Гэмм]

Mike, it's been said time and time again - we all want clean water, lakes, air, etc...we don't like it when it's taken to the extreme and some politicians choose to listen to it..thus, holding the progress hostage...

[Mike]

i am all for not taking things to extreme...
just this manifesto is bullshit... that's all..

[Гера Така]

I guess I was wrong!
EPA - seem to exist to stop the economic growth and development.


Roles and Functions of the EPA
The principal roles and functions of the EPA would include:
The establishment and enforcement of environmental protection standards consistent with national environmental goals.The conduct of research on the adverse effects of pollution and onmethods and equipment for controlling it, the gathering of informationon pollution, and the use of this information in strengtheningenvironmental protection programs and recommending policy changes.Assisting others, through grants, technical assistance and other means in arresting pollution of the environment.Assisting the Council on Environmental Quality in developing andrecommending to the President new policies for the protection of theenvironment.

[Светлана Гэмм]

so, what's your non-bull shit solution to get rid of the extreme in the environmental movement and make our politicians not buy into their bull?

[Алексей Пэтк]

Well, there are extremes on both sides (and they all got their lobby working hard) -- those who claim that we need to live in the trees and those that would sell you clean air (well, that would be good business too) in two-three hundred years. Why do you always single out the tree-huggers?
We got rivers here in Michigan poisoned by dioxin -- and if not for a lengthy litigation (which ended this year), they would still be like that.

[Мария]

Environment
Eliminate the special tax-exempt status granted to environmental groups, since they are not nonpartisan charitable foundations.
What's bullshit about it? I am all for eliminating special tax-exempt status to Sierra club. They do so much damage to our country.
However, there might be a problem implemetnting it: you can't strip religious groups of tax-exemption. So, it have to stay.

[Мария]

2. Eliminatespecial statutory authority granting environmental groups standing tobring lawsuits on behalf of the public, since their main purpose is topursue the Statist’s agenda through litigation.

That would be a very welcome development as well.
For example, the Katrina disaster would not have been the magnitude is was if not for the Sierra club. They completely blocked through litigation all the efforts to reinforce the now infamous levis in New Orleans.
The Federal money were there for the project, but the Sierra club stopped it.

[Мария]

3. Fightall efforts to use environmental regulations to set governmentalindustrial policies and diminish the nation’s standard of living, suchas “cap-and-trade” to regulate “man-made climate change”.
MIke, what do you object about this point of the manifesto?
We now all learned about the corrupted junk science behind the "cap and trade" legislation.

[Khramaya]

You know, guys, I have no idea how many of you deal with the EPA and other organizations of this sort regularly. We do. EPA, OSHA, JACHO, etc, etc.... None of them have nothing to do with any "right" or "left" agenda. All of them are a necessary evil. Poorly run, full of BS, maddeningly idiotic, waste of our taxpayers money - but necessary nonetheless. Because without those organizations the whole industrial landscape would be a wild, wild West. Just like Mike and Alexei described. There are not that many chemical manufacturers who would, like my husband, spend years to assure their plants have not a single leak, not even neutral. It takes time, money, manpower and special idealism. So we do need these regulations. How it's done - it's the whole other story....

[Мария]

We deal with all that crap, JACHO, especially, all the time. It's 85% load of crap. 15% -needed stuff.
And on the big scheme, it's not as benign as you see it Julia. The really vicious progressives are pushing their anti-capitalist agenda via EPA. Who goes to work there? Look at the individuals... I doubt it's the successful business people. It's the people with social agenda. It's been well documented.
Just buy and read Mark Levin's book for starters.

[Мария]

And of course we need reasonable regulations to protect us from real poisons. It's OBVIOUS!!!

[Алексей Пэтк]

And of course we need reasonable regulations to protect us from real poisons. It's OBVIOUS!!!
Yes, indeed. The devil, of course, is in the details. What are those "real poisons"? Are they classified in some book that everyone agrees to be a credible and established source?
I recall some time ago executives from tobacco companies testified that "cigarettes are not addictive". Tobacco does contain poison (nicotine) -- so did they lie? One can argue that the amount of nicotine is small, so what? Well, maybe the amount of dioxine in our rivers is also small, so the poison is not "poisonous", right?
P.S. I don't endorse govt pounding on tobacco companies -- everyone chooses their own poison -- but it is an example of how "obvious" regulations can be.

[Мария]

The detail are very important. You treat every one of them with a lot of scrutiny. Because the regulations have real life implications for millions of people.
Take for instance a ridiculous laww that congress passed this year: it requires all children toy and clothes makers to undergo extensive testing for every little thing and detail in their inventory which may contain lead. Many part do contain small amounts of lead which is not bio-available in any way and does not reprersent any danger. Nevertheless, догматы под чутким руководством мадам Пелози, passed draconian new law. Since then, thousands of small business went bancropt because they could not afford to send all their inventory to the testing centers.
Case of complete bureaucratic idiocy .:-S
And these people will be in charge of our health soon.:-|

[Mike]

Maria, i object to the fact that the "environment manifesto" does not talk about the environment, just a bunch of political slogans.

[Светлана Гэмм]

Overruled! (ch)
Встречаются двое глухих. Один с веником, тазиком в баню идёт. Другой его спрашивает
- Ты в баню?
- Нет, я в баню иду
- Аа, а я думал ты в баню!
- Нет, что ты, я в баню.

[Гера Така]

Mike either ignores (the Elephant in the room) or does not understands:
Today's Environmentalism is a political movement with the goal to achieve a total control over all aspects of our lives... fascism.

[Mike]

Alexey, you know if we took Julia Morchiladze and put her in a cage with Gera it would make for a fun time :).
Now the Pacquiao Mayweather fight is off this could be a big draw in vegas

[Светлана Гэмм]

now I am seriously considering getting Glenn Beck's book "Arguing with idiots"...(sr)
No enviro-wacko concerned citizen here addressed the question of why Obama and his EPA are refusing to investigate the scientists behind the GW science, when there is a very good reason to, instead, his administration wants to proceed with the legislation that will impact the economy and our lives, but they expect us to embrace our government's "good intentions" without seeing anything wrong with them doing it based on false pretenses...you want to live in a cage? fine!..we don't..and also don't want to pay for it..

[Светлана Гэмм]

***********.youtube.com/watch?v=HpaGuJLRZyI
***********.youtube.com/watch?v=p-I5Ik6s0K4&feature=related
***********.youtube.com/watch?v=Mo2rMj8KVtQ&feature=related
***********.youtube.com/watch?v=K2PvLKKvfyo&feature=related

[Лина]

now I am seriously considering getting Glenn Beck's book "Arguing with idiots"...
---------------------------------------------------------
Glenn Beck knows everything about being an idiot, makes perfect sense that he would write a book on the subject.

[Mike]

i am not an environmental engineer :)
but i am sure Gera will tell us it's all made up by the crazy Sierra club and the problem does not even exist.

[Светлана Гэмм]

yeah, it looks like the problem really exists..*-)so I don't want to be called a Great Pacific Garbage Patch denier..(tr)
but I think Californians should pay for it - I don't even go on that part of the World - plus they are very environmentally conscious..so let them walk the walk too..(ch)

[Гера Така]

Mike does not want to solve it.
Mike want our Government to solve it.
With it he agrees to give our (some at first) civil liberties in exchange for big daddy's promise to have everything hush hush.
If Mike wanted to really fix it, he would feed the wales, clean the ocean, love the birds... instead of preaching about it.

[Mike]

Гера, да бля, я с сачком пойду эту гадость из воды вылавливать :).
Or we can all seat in a circle and say a prayer, so that Jesus comes and performs a miracle ..
Gera, how do you solve problems when individuals or corporations have no vested interest in solving?

[Гера Така]

You are an individual! Like Dr. Laura said - If you care - you go and do it! if it is on your back yard - go fix it.

[Mike]

Gera, Dr Laura.. is she the same kinda Dr as Dr Dre?
How does she recommend fixing GLOBAL issues? Like the link i pasted below?

[Светлана Гэмм]

Gera, I think Mike misses Morchiladze..he wants you to replace her for him..(ch)
Mike, they are recruiting volunteers for the clean up..you and Ira D. can even go together!..I am serious!..(H)

[Mike]

How about people who fuck it up fix it?
You sample the junk, identify the source and assess levies against those who pollute?
Like in this case i believe a big share is cruise ships.

[Гера Така]

That is one area we did not cover yet!!!
Lets legislate against the cruise ships and Tourist Industry.

[Светлана Гэмм]

An estimated 80% of the garbage comes from land-based sources, and 20% from ships
you see - you would have to go regardless..but we let you pick your buddy..you can still opt for LT...;-)

[Гера Така]

Mike,
One more time - do not tell us to fix Global issues... there are other important things in this life and on this very planet.
Just fix your back yard if you dare to try!

[Mike]

20% is a big share.. so they can pay 20% of the costs, i am sure it's not that difficult to identify the companies/industries that dumped the rest of this stuff into water.
Or we can just do nothing, and wait for this to take over the entire ocean. :)

[Mike]

Gera, i am sorry, but can you stop speaking on other peoples phrases and slogans? It's really annoying, and i have no idea what it means in this case.

[Гера Така]

Гера, да бля, я с сачком пойду эту гадость из воды вылавливать :-).
It means - do what you just said you will do!

[Mike]

I thought i meant it as a joke, but hey, let me call "dr" laura and see what she has to say about this.. ;-)

[Светлана Гэмм]

20% from ships
who told you it's not the environmentalists people vacationing on cruiseships were dumping their trash into the ocean?
I am not saying do nothing..I am saying you go clean it up, and meanwhile we be praying for your save return on land..:-D

[Гера Така]

So, you are saying the environment of your back yard - is a joke to you!
But should be a major concern for me!!!
How typical!!!! (N)

[Mike]

Gera, Svetlana what do you mean by this?
You mean literally? :-D
Maybe it's Monday and i am just being a bit slow, or you 2 make even less sense then usual.

[Светлана Гэмм]

Mike, it's the effect or the side effect of us chatting with you for a long time..;-)

[Гера Така]

AGA!!!!
If you are preaching to the choir you should lead by showing the example!!!
... and we will pray for your safe return.

[Mike]

Gera, ok i do think you mean it literally :)
Btw, i had to look up who the hell dr laura was, and she did turn out to be the same kinda "dr" as "dr"dre :)

[Гера Така]

Dr. Laura is a TV/Radio personality, who helps people like you to mature.
Call her.

[Mike]

lol, at least there are no porno pics of me on the internet :)
maybe this is what i am missing to mature..
there is also Dr. Phil.. do you listen to him too?
I also remember Dr Albom (spelling?)

[Светлана Гэмм]

lol, at least there are no porno pics of me on the internet
Mike, look at your personal pics again...maybe there is something you don't want the World to know about you..:-D

[Mike]

another cryptic message..
maybe i should leak some porn images of myself, become Dr Mike and get a show on the radio as well.. become a "new born jew" or whatever they call it these days..
hmm... this could be an exciting new career i was contemplating.

[Светлана Гэмм]

leak?? you mean there is one existing...hmm..if it exists, I am sure someone already leaked it!! :-O (hu) hurry!!
:-D :-D :-D

[Mike]

i just have to think of a porno name for myself..
btw, what was Dr Lauras porno name?

[Светлана Гэмм]

i just have to think of a porno name for myself..
Mike, I have couple for you - Al Gore-целитель или Всезнайка на одно..;-) :-D я еще подумаю и напишу (ch)

[Лина]

Svetlana, how about you leave my name out of your personal conversations and just continue to shamelessly begging MR for his... ok, lets call itattention.
What's your porn name - Mrs. Ed?

[Светлана Гэмм]

:-( Mike, you will have to go clean it up on your own..I don't think she was too excited to join you..oh well! I tried to arrange company for you..(tr)

[Лина]

I don't have a problem cleaning up the environment, even alongside MR... I just don't want to have you fight you for it.

[Светлана Гэмм]

oh no,no,no...no figting..I just know you two are dear friends, and since I am not sure how long this expedition may last, I would not want Mike to be by himself..just trying to be hepful..(ch)

[Лина]

Svetlana, how many times a day do you mention Mike's name? I bet even your husband doesnt get as much attention from you.

[Светлана Гэмм]

hugging a tree? never heard it called that before.
I am sure you still have time to experience it too..;-) for some it comes very late in life..unfortunately..*-)

[Лина]

don't you worry about me... I'm not the one shamelessly flinging myself at random forumers :)

[Светлана Гэмм]

well, you just know you don't even have a chance..:-P even here..:'(
:-D :-D :-D

[Лина]

fake? this is my real name. you have a problem with my kindergarten pic? many people seem to like it.

[Светлана Гэмм]

you mean your real "porno name"? (dt)
btw, there is a question for you in the other topic..you giving me attention creeps me out..:-S sorry..

[Лина]

I believe, you're the one who keeps on mentioning my name, or is that just some strange form of turrets? in which case, I am sorry.

[Натан Мэвэ]

Ok, folks. I believe it's time to curtail this shouting match and return to the title of this thread.....

[Светлана Гэмм]

..looks like Mike prefers the shouting match..to the environment...(tr) that's what I suspected all along..*-)

[Mike]

Svetlana, please point me in the manifesto 1 sentence that talks about the environment.

[Светлана Гэмм]

Mike, I would...but some may take it the wrong way..so I don't want to create the wrong impression..(ch)
but on a serious note, the part that Nathan posted here from the book is just the conservatives' approach with the extreme environmentalism, not the common sense one...the one that's based on emotions, not actual science, the one that's used to scare and manipulate the public..
I do support free-market environmentalism...

[Светлана Гэмм]

Free-market environmentalism is a position that argues that the free market, property rights, and tort law provide the best tools to preserve the health and sustainability of the environment. This is in contrast to the most common modern approach of proactive environmental legislation.

[Светлана Гэмм]

Environmental problems stem from the absence orincompleteness of these characteristics of property rights. When rightsto resources are defined and easily defended against invasion, allindividuals or corporations,whether potential polluters or potential victims, have an incentive toavoid pollution problems. When air or water pollution damages aprivately owned asset, the owner whose wealth is threatened will gainby seeing—in court if necessary—that the threat is abated. In Englandand Scotland, for example, unlike in the United States, the right tofish for sport and commerce is a privately owned, transferable right.This means that owners of fishing rights can obtain damages andinjunctions against polluters of streams. Owners of these rightsvigorously defend them, even though the owners are often small anglers’clubs with modest means. Fishers clearly gain, but there is a cost tothem also.

[Натан Мэвэ]

At the beginning of this thread I posted an excerpt from Mark Levin's book "Liberty and Tyranny". This excerpt is part of the "Conservative Manifesto" listed at the end of the book.
But there is an entire chapter on the environment - titled "On Enviro-Statism".
You are welcome to read up on it. You may actually learn something. And in some case it may actually change your mind.
P.S. Lina, please ignore the last sentence. It was not addressed to you.

[Mike]

Svetlana, what about "shared" resources, like air, oceans, land beneath the surface, etc? How does it deal with those?

[Лина]

comeback? was that comment meant to offend me?
going forward, could you point out which parts of your posts I should ignore... although, you really don't have to, as I tend to pretty much ignore most of them.

[Натан Мэвэ]

Typical logic (or lack thereof) of a liberal. If you're ignoring my comments (as you say you do) then you wouldn't be responding to them now, would you?
You don't need to answer that. It was a rhetorical question.

[Лина]

typical reading comprehension skills of a conservative.
although, you really don't have to, as I tend to pretty much ignore most of them.
for those who are still waiting for their hooked on phonics cd to arrive - most is not the same as all.

[Светлана Гэмм]

***********.cato.org/pubs/journal/cj22n1/cj22n1-12.pdf
Mike, it's a comprehensive approach - with regulations, property rights, capping/trading pollutions ..the goal is not to find the perfect solution, but a workable one...

[Светлана Гэмм]

The new study, published in the online journal Geophysical ResearchLetters, does not deny that increasing amounts of CO2 have beengenerated as the world has industrialized, eradicated disease, producedagricultural abundance and improved man's standard of living. It doesshow that only 45% of man's emissions, not 100% as warmers claim, staysin the atmosphere, and that includes the carbon emissions of theprivate jets that flew to Copenhagen last month and the limos thatdrove the occupants around.

The rest is absorbed by nature, and that percentage hasn't changedsince 1850. Knorr arrived at that figure by relying solely onmeasurements and statistical data, including historical recordsextracted from Antarctic ice. He did not rely, as the CRU did, on badlywritten computer models with built-in fudge factors to direct the datato a foregone conclusion.

[Светлана Гэмм]

Another result of this study, reports Anthony Watts atWattsUpWithThat.com, is that emissions from deforestation, caused inlarge part by the clearing of forest land to grow allegedlyplanet-saving biofuels, may have been grossly overestimated. Thisfinding agrees with results published in November in the journal NatureGeoscience by a team led by Guido van der Werf from VU University inAmsterdam. It reanalyzed deforestation data and concluded thatresulting emissions have been overestimated by a factor of two.

[Мария]

Another Day, Another Inconvenient IPCC Error (:-$ )

RadioNetherlands Worldwide:
A United Nations report wrongly claimed that more than half of the Netherlands is currently below sea level.

Infact, just 20 percent of the country consists of polders that arepumped dry, and which are at risk of flooding if global warming causesrising sea levels. Dutch Environment Minister Jacqueline Cramer hasordered a thorough investigation into the quality of the climatereports which she uses to base her policies on.
Climate-sceptic MPs were quick to react. Conservative MP HelmaNepperus and Richard de Mos from the right-wing Freedom Party want theminister to explain to parliament how these figures were used to decideon national climate policy. "This may invalidate all claims that thelast decades were the hottest ever," Mr De Mos said.
The incorrect figures which date back to 2007 were revealed on Wednesday by the weekly Vrij Nederland.

[Мария]

he Dutch Environmental Assessment Agency told reporters that the UN'sIntergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) added together twofigures supplied by the agency: the area of the Netherlands which isbelow sea-level and the area which is susceptible to flooding. In fact,these areas overlap, so the figures should not have been combined toproduce the 55 percent quoted by the IPCC.The discovery comes just a week after a prediction about glaciers inthe Himalayas proved wrong. Rather than disappearing by 2035, as IPCCreports claim, the original research underlying the report predictedthe mountain ice would last until 2350. ( ошибочка вышла, уж извиняйте:-$ )

[Гера Така]

These are the paople who would like to institute the World policing agency to check everybody's pollution and energy consumption.(N)

We should come out from UN.(v)

[Олег Сах]

3. By the time Joe Shmoe hears it from Jay Leno, it's a funny episode of old white folks harassing the youth. The same principle is being used to make us believe anything that we are being told. From Sara Palin seeing Russia from her house, to Reagan being racist to Bush starting wars for oil.
STATISTS amount to 3 to 5 per cent of the general population, the problem is - they amount to 85 to 90 per cent of the people shaping up our thoughts. Ellsworth Toohey comes to mind. So, unless a regular person starts to question everything that he heard on the news, we will have statists telling us to pay more taxes and be quiet, because "hockey mom" will become a president and will start a nuclear war with Canada over lipstick or something.

[Олег Сах]

2a. If I observe a project resident robbing an old lady, who fought him off by hitting him on the head with a cane, I will use the first words that will come to my mind. If another project resident will observe the same robbery and subsequent arrest he will use totally different aspects. If a person fresh out of liberal school of journalism, who grew up in white suburbs of Boston, gets on the scene after it happened, she might use all of her journalistic skill to offer the story as an episode of a class war.

[Олег Сах]

2. Research any piece of news. From any source (except Fox, in some cases) local, international, whatever. The wording will be the same from publication to publication, the reporter might change some of AP's sentences but the substance will be the same. Whichever spin the first reporting agency would like to put, it will be repeated by any media outlet that picks up the story. Since distribution of information is being monopolized by a small group of people, the regular person's view is largely based on the view of the first witness and his/her bias.

[Олег Сах]

1. I bought two books around the same time. Conservative Manifesto & A Slobbering Love Affair: The True (And Pathetic) Story of the Torrid Romance Between Barack Obama and the Mainstream Media . Although they are two totally different books, I have found the latter to be of more use. I'll explain.
If you take an intelligent, somewhat educated, reasonable person, gain their attention and recite most of the ideas of Conservative Manifesto I bet the bottom dollar that 80% will agree with its ideas wholeheartedly. If not a 100%. The problem is that general public does not have time or desire to research state of affairs on their own. They base their view of the world on what they know. What do they know? Where do we get our information? From media. No one reads every speech that every politician gave. No one reads every piece of legislature.

[Натан Мэвэ]

Media-Universities Professoriat-Public Employee Unions is the true "Axis of Evil". And far more dangerous to the survival of this republic.
Between them they control most important aspects of the political system and process: What we learn, what we know and what we elect.

[Светлана Гэмм]

Do Green Products Make Us Better People is published in the latest edition of the journal Psychological Science. Its authors, Canadian psychologists Nina Mazar and Chen-Bo Zhong, argue that people who wear what they call the "halo of green consumerism" are less likely to be kind to others, and more likely to cheat and steal. "Virtuous acts can license subsequent asocial and unethical behaviours," they write.
The pair found that those in their study who bought green products appeared less willing to share with others a set amount of money than those who bought conventional products. When the green consumers were given the chance to boost their money by cheating on a computer game and then given the opportunity to lie about it – in other words, steal – they did, while the conventional consumers did not.

[Светлана Гэмм]

Later,in an honour system in which participants were asked to take money froman envelope to pay themselves their spoils, the greens were six timesmore likely to steal than the conventionals.
***********.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/mar/15/green-consumers-more-likely-steal
I thought it was very interesting.. if people on the left are more pre-occupied with the environment, can we extropolate the funding of the study as that people on the left are more likely not to practice traditional values such as love your neighbor (literally -sharing, not advocating it through gov't) and thy shall not steal? (dt)

[Лина]

can we extropolate the funding of the study as that people on the left are more likely not to practice traditional values such as love your neighbor (literally -sharing, not advocating it through gov't) and thy shall not steal?
--------------------------------------------------------------------
the only thing we can extrapolate is that logic has never been your strong suit...

[Лина]

According to a study, when people feel they have been morally virtuous by... (how does this not scream bible thumping conservative?) it leads to the "licensing [of] selfish and morally questionable behaviour", otherwise known as "moral balancing" or "compensatory ethics".
"Virtuous acts can license subsequent asocial and unethical behaviours,"

[Светлана Гэмм]

:-) well, из песни слов не выкинешь - a study is a study (ch) понимаю не приятно, но факт..(ch)

[Лина]

I didn't see any study... but the article clearly states: "when people feel they have been morally virtuous it leads to the "licensing [of] selfish and morally questionable behaviour", otherwise known as "moral balancing" or "compensatory ethics". Which I guess explains Larry Craig's bathroom behavior...

[Светлана Гэмм]

I was referring to the study about people buying green-products..(ch)
but anyhow, it could be because they already feel like they are doing something for the humanity by being environmentally conscious, so sharing and not stealing are not their priorities..I guess..and I understand it's not all people that buy green products..
;-) no need to get defensive..

[Лина]

Experiment 1: Impressions of Green Consumers
Fifty-nine students (32 female) from the University of Toronto volunteered for a 5-
minute survey.
.
Experiment 2: Priming and Licensing
One hundred fifty-six students (95 female) from the University of Toronto volunteered
for an hour-long experiment in exchange for class credit.
.
Experiment 3: Licensing Lying and Stealing

Ninety undergraduate students (56 female) from the University of Toronto volunteered
for this experiment in exchange for five Canadian Dollars
.
that's quite a study... *-)

[Лина]

why would anyone who does something that benefits them and their children feel morally superior? that's the dumbest thing I ever heard.

[Khramaya]

I buy some good "green" detergents and cleaning products for one simple reason: they smell good.
Let's do some studies on this:-D

[Светлана Гэмм]

and how are the studies on the phycological behavior should be designed? (ch)
********pss.sagepub.com/content/early/2010/03/01/0956797610363538.full

[Светлана Гэмм]

***********.youtube.com/watch?v=fGaHiWDZRNY
funny we don't hear from Al Gore anymore..*-) (dt)

[O Y]

(L) Today is The World Healing Day!!!!(L)
***********.worldhealingday.org/ Please be a part of it!!!!!
The Global Consciousness Project, born out of research at Princeton University found that during times of great tragedy human consciousness focuses to such a degree that it actually affected their computers physically all around the world.
What if human consciousness was focused on a healing intention, together, for a 24 hour period?(L) (L) (L)

[Гера Така]

Would this apply to all of the active terrorist in the World or only to the law abiding tax paying citizens of the USA?