Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 61 to 90 of 133

Thread: Paper "debunking" global warming discredited; editor-in-chief resigns.

  1. #61
    Senior Member Array title="steeldawg is a jewel in the rough">

    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    4,533

    Re: Paper "debunking" global warming discredited; editor-in-chief resigns.

    Quote Originally Posted by 43Hitman View Post
    Grants just don't come from the US man. They come from the global community in regards to research. The same players are in all aspects of our world. Just look at who is on the CFR, and other global organizations. There is profit to be made from climate change, and don't be so naive to believe that the world players aren't willing to cash in on it.
    Lol, im being naive because i dont subscribe to this conspiracy theory. Is it really such a bad thing for us to move towards cleaner energy and towards minimizing the pollutants we put into the air?

  2. #62
    Senior Member Array title="43Hitman has a reputation beyond repute">
    3 Reel Treasure Slots Champion!

    Join Date
    May 2010
    Gender
    Posts
    7,211

    Re: Paper "debunking" global warming discredited; editor-in-chief resigns.

    Quote Originally Posted by steeldawg View Post
    Lol, im being naive because i dont subscribe to this conspiracy theory. Is it really such a bad thing for us to move towards cleaner energy and towards minimizing the pollutants we put into the air?
    Nope its not a bad idea at all. But not at the expense of redistributing our money to corrupt governments. Laugh all you want, but maybe instead of laughing you should take the time and do some research and see what some of the the other dissenting experts opinions are. Because countries like China don't give a damn and do a lot more harm than we ever have to the environment. Are you really willing to pay much more at the pump and at the grocery store to make the air .000001 % better?

  3. #63
    Senior Member Array title="steeldawg is a jewel in the rough">

    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    4,533

    Re: Paper "debunking" global warming discredited; editor-in-chief resigns.

    Quote Originally Posted by 43Hitman View Post
    Nope its not a bad idea at all. But not at the expense of redistributing our money to corrupt governments. Laugh all you want, but maybe instead of laughing you should take the time and do some research and see what some of the the other dissenting experts opinions are. Because countries like China don't give a damn and do a lot more harm than we ever have to the environment. Are you really willing to pay much more at the pump and at the grocery store to make the air .000001 % better?
    China is actually leading the way in cleaner energy efforts. Also, No scientific body of national or international standing has maintained a dissenting opinion; the last was the American Association of Petroleum Geologists, which in 2007 updated its 1999 statement rejecting the likelihood of human influence on recent climate with its current non-committal position. Some other organizations, primarily those focusing on geology, also hold non-committal positions (wiki). Academies of Science[edit] Joint science academies' statementsSince 2001, 32 national science academies have come together to issue joint declarations confirming anthropogenic global warming, and urging the nations of the world to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases. The signatories of these statements have been the national science academies:

    of Australia,
    of Belgium,
    of Brazil,
    of Cameroon,
    Royal Society of Canada,
    of the Caribbean,
    of China,
    Institut de France,
    of Ghana,
    Leopoldina of Germany,
    of Indonesia,
    of Ireland,
    Accademia nazionale delle scienze of Italy,
    of India,
    of Japan,
    of Kenya,
    of Madagascar,
    of Malaysia,
    of Mexico,
    of Nigeria,
    Royal Society of New Zealand,
    Russian Academy of Sciences,
    of Senegal,
    of South Africa,
    of Sudan,
    Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences,
    of Tanzania,
    of Turkey,
    of Uganda,
    The Royal Society of the United Kingdom,
    of the United States,
    of Zambia,
    and of Zimbabwe.
    (also from wiki).

  4. #64
    Senior Member Array title="43Hitman has a reputation beyond repute">
    3 Reel Treasure Slots Champion!

    Join Date
    May 2010
    Gender
    Posts
    7,211

    Re: Paper "debunking" global warming discredited; editor-in-chief resigns.

    Quote Originally Posted by Steeldawg
    China is actually leading the way in cleaner energy efforts.
    Citation please.

  5. #65
    Senior Member Array title="steeldawg is a jewel in the rough">

    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    4,533

    Re: Paper "debunking" global warming discredited; editor-in-chief resigns.

    Quote Originally Posted by 43Hitman View Post
    Citation please.
    http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/31/bu..../31renew.html
    http://www.businessweek.com/ap/finan.../D9ELG23O0.htm
    http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/opinion...nt_9648147.htm
    http://www.lexisnexis.com/.../pew-re...clean-energy-s...

    There are alot more also i dont know if im posting links correctly on here but if you google "china leading clean energy spending" you get them.

  6. #66
    Senior Member Array title="pepsyman1 has much to be proud of"> pepsyman1's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Marlton, NJ
    Gender
    Posts
    3,671

    Re: Paper "debunking" global warming discredited; editor-in-chief resigns.

    Listen, I'm not saying we don't need to do something about greenhouse gases and pollution. I'm not saying that the planet didn't get warmer over the last 100 years. My problems is that there has been a concerted effort to make OUR effect on the climate look far larger than it actually is and it has been done to incite panic and create financial opportunities. If you look at the early part of this thread Vis and I were going back and forth with charts and figures and you know what? You can look through the data and make a strong argument for any theory you want... you can't find a graph or a chart put together by a major organization that will show examples of your argument.

    Do I think green house gases and pollution are affecting the environment? yes the rain forests? yes Do I think that if EVERY car in the world was electric that it would have an effect on how much ice the polars bears have to walk on? NO Do I think people like Al Gore have maximized their opportunity to capitalize on that panic? yes...he's worth half a billion dollars now because of it. Do I think this whole discussion got put into dispute because major scientific institutions in the UK and New Zealand were caught in some falsehoods in regards to some of their data? shit yes.

  7. #67
    Senior Member Array title="pepsyman1 has much to be proud of"> pepsyman1's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Marlton, NJ
    Gender
    Posts
    3,671

    Re: Paper "debunking" global warming discredited; editor-in-chief resigns.

    BTW Steeldawg... China might be spending the most on "green energy" but they also passed the US in 2007 as the country that produces the MOST green house gases and it has been growing RAPIDLY in China over the last decade. Green energy has become a big economic buzzword and just because they are spending money on it doesn't mean they are accomplishing anything with it other than economic growth.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...xide_emissions

  8. #68

    Re: Paper "debunking" global warming discredited; editor-in-chief resigns.

    Quote Originally Posted by steeldawg View Post
    Lol, im being naive because i dont subscribe to this conspiracy theory. Is it really such a bad thing for us to move towards cleaner energy and towards minimizing the pollutants we put into the air?
    It's not a conspiracy theory. I don't think a bunch of scientists are getting together to "conspire" in global warming. It's a "Group Think" or "Mob Rule" mentality. The exact same thing has happened in my field of study. Julias Wellhausen consolidated a theory that became the over-riding mandate for anyone in Old Testament Scholarship. Archaeology, Heck, even the use of Psycholinguisits has somewhat been overshadowed by this sole mandate. It wasn't until a massive new movement was brought forth by a question at an SBL meeting (Society of Biblical Literature, it's a massive professioal society for everyone who deal with any element of the Ancient Near East-including archaeology, crossovers with anthropology, medical anthropology, Assyriology, Egyptology, etc. etc.) concerning a new approach to methodological studies of the biblical text that this over-riding mandate has been critically re-assessed and found to be flawed in a number of areas. In short, the OT academic community was doing the same thing that the biologist and climatologist academic communities are doing now. They're acting and researching in a myopic fashion.

    Funny thing, you should hear the calls for the OT world to come back to a common foundation of understanding. People actually mourn that it is gone, and no. It has nothing to with "fundamentalism" or "faith." Wellhausen theory actually states that most of the first five books were written quite late from sources edited together, and that there was no Jewish "Law" before the Babylonian captivity. Anyway, that is the same thing that I see happening here now. People are up in arms, yelling and screaming about anyone who challenges the "established norm." It just takes quick gander at the way they are labeled to understand that it isn't just about science.


  9. #69
    Senior Member Array title="43Hitman has a reputation beyond repute">
    3 Reel Treasure Slots Champion!

    Join Date
    May 2010
    Gender
    Posts
    7,211

    Re: Paper "debunking" global warming discredited; editor-in-chief resigns.

    Quote Originally Posted by pepsyman1 View Post
    BTW Steeldawg... China might be spending the most on "green energy" but they also passed the US in 2007 as the country that produces the MOST green house gases and it has been growing RAPIDLY in China over the last decade. Green energy has become a big economic buzzword and just because they are spending money on it doesn't mean they are accomplishing anything with it other than economic growth.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...xide_emissions
    Yeah, that's really my point in all of this. In my opinion this is nothing more than a money grab on a global scale. Who really pays for these new mandates? The rich? Hell no. We pay for it in much higher gas prices, electric bills, groceries, and anything that has to be trucked or shipped across the country, which is essentially everything. When Al Gore has made enough money off of this to start his own cable tv channel and news network there is something fishy about that. He's biased and therefore can't be trusted to do or say what is in the best interest of us, the people. Also, I'm pretty sure that Obama owns or has a large stock in a carbon bank, which stands to make billions off of this scam.

    Also, why is everyone so quick to just tax the hell out of anything bad for our environment with no solution to alleviate those pains with alternative energy that is cost effective? Im all for finding better way to get around, but don't y'all think its wise to first have cost efficient energy sources online before we get rid of everything else?
    Last edited by 43Hitman; 09-05-2011 at 09:14 PM. Reason: typo's

  10. #70
    Senior Member Array title="steeldawg is a jewel in the rough">

    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    4,533

    Re: Paper "debunking" global warming discredited; editor-in-chief resigns.

    Quote Originally Posted by pepsyman1 View Post
    BTW Steeldawg... China might be spending the most on "green energy" but they also passed the US in 2007 as the country that produces the MOST green house gases and it has been growing RAPIDLY in China over the last decade. Green energy has become a big economic buzzword and just because they are spending money on it doesn't mean they are accomplishing anything with it other than economic growth.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...xide_emissions
    yes they are but the comment was countries like china dont give a damn. China has achieved some improvements in environmental protection during the recent years. According to the World Bank, 'China is one of a few countries in the world that have been rapidly increasing their forest cover. It is managing to reduce air and water pollution.'[8]

    As part of US $498 billion economic stimulus package of November 2008 (the largest in China's history), the government plans to enhance sewage and rubbish treatment facilities and prevent water pollution, accelerate green belt and natural forest planting programs, and increase energy conservation initiatives and pollution control projects.[9]

    With $34.6 billion invested in clean technology in 2009, China is the world's leading investor in renewable energy technologies.[10][11] China produces more wind turbines and solar panels each year than any other country.[12] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environ...ublic_of_China

    So yes they are the world leader but with all the industry and population size thats really not shocking. I mean they account for 22% of the worlds carbon emissions we account for 20% ....yet their economy is growing and ours is not . you said they are accomplishing nothing but economic growth, if man made global warming is false then where is the downside? I would rather my tax dollars to go to something that will create economic growth (clean energy), rather than where ever they go now.

  11. #71
    Senior Member Array title="43Hitman has a reputation beyond repute">
    3 Reel Treasure Slots Champion!

    Join Date
    May 2010
    Gender
    Posts
    7,211

    Re: Paper "debunking" global warming discredited; editor-in-chief resigns.

    Just look at what Spain has done to there economy by going 'green'.

    Obama's 'Green' energy program an epic fail in Spain

    Rick Moran

    President Obama has admitted that his plan to convert American electrical power into clean, renewable energy sources is modeled on a program that has been in place in Spain for years.

    Now a Spanish newspaper has uncovered the truth that the authorities in Spain has been withholding from the people; that their attempts to "go green" have met with titanic failure.

    A translation of the story is supplied by Chris Horner writing in Pajamas Media:
    The president of the United States, Barack Obama, does not appear to have chosen well in basing his "green economy" on Spain's. After the government of Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero demonized a study by various experts on the economic downsides of renewable energies, it just leaked an internal document from the Spanish cabinet which is even more negative.Among the findings, paraphrased from the right sidebar:
    * Green energy is 120 percent more expensive, simply due to the extra costs of solar and wind, and the evolution of the market is not going to bring down those costs any time soon.
    * The clean energy sector is slated to receive 126 billion euros in the next 25 years, but no one knows where the money is going to come from . In 2009, the subsidies were worth 5 billion euros.
    * Photovoltaic solar power accounts for 53 percent of the extra cost of renewables, whereas it produces only 11 percent of Spain's renewable energy.
    * Each "green job" comes at the expense of 2.2 traditional jobs.
    Every single advantage that the president has touted green sources of energy giving us has proved to be false.
    Interesting that no mainstream media outlet except the Washington Examiner is covering this story - a story that proves that the tens of billions of dollars in the stim bill earmarked for green energy projects are not only a colossal waste of money, but will actually hurt the economy.


    http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2010/05/obamas_green_energy_program_an.html

  12. #72
    Senior Member Array title="43Hitman has a reputation beyond repute">
    3 Reel Treasure Slots Champion!

    Join Date
    May 2010
    Gender
    Posts
    7,211

    Re: Paper "debunking" global warming discredited; editor-in-chief resigns.


    The Unseen Consequences of "Green Jobs"

    Will investing in clean energy harm the economy?

    Ronald Bailey | February 8, 2011

    In his State of the Union speech a couple of weeks ago, President Barack Obama planned to “win the future” by, among many other things, having the federal government “invest” in “clean energy technology—an investment that will strengthen our security, protect our planet, and create countless new jobs for our people.” But will investing in clean energy actually produce countless new jobs?
    A couple of weeks ago, the California think tank Next 10 asserted in its 2011 Many Shades of Green report that employment in the state’s green core economy grew at 3 percent between 2008 and 2009. Employment in the rest of the economy, meanwhile, grew at just 1 percent. The report defines the "green core economy" as businesses that generate clean energy, conserve energy, or reduce and recycle wastes.
    read more @ http://reason.com/archives/2011/02/0...unseen-layoffs

  13. #73
    Senior Member Array title="43Hitman has a reputation beyond repute">
    3 Reel Treasure Slots Champion!

    Join Date
    May 2010
    Gender
    Posts
    7,211

    Re: Paper "debunking" global warming discredited; editor-in-chief resigns.

    Cato Policy Report, March/April 2011 The High Cost of "Green Jobs" and Green Energy

    Green jobs. Politicians, activists, and green energy entrepreneurs promise they will revitalize the economy, banish unemployment, free the United States from dependency on foreign oil, and make us all happier, healthier, and richer. But only if, advocates quickly note, the federal government makes a big enough commitment — in the form of mandates, regulations, and subsidies.
    It sounds too good to be true. And it is. In The False Promise of Green Energy, economic and legal scholars Andrew Morriss, William T. Bogart, Roger E. Meiners, and Andrew Dorchak show how "the concrete results of following these policies will be a decline in living standards around the globe, including for the world's poorest; changes in lifestyle that Americans do not want; and a weakening of the technological progress that market forces have delivered, preventing us from finding real solutions to the real problems we face."
    Many of those lifestyle changes will come from suddenly spending far more on energy than we'd like. Green technologies mean diverting production from cheap sources, such as coal and oil, to more expensive, highly subsidized ones, like wind and solar. These price spikes won't be limited to our electricity bills either, the authors argue. "Anything that increases the price of energy will also increase the price of goods that use energy indirectly."
    The better solution to improving America's energy economy, the book shows, is to let the market work by putting power in the hands of consumers. But "many environmental pressure groups don't want to leave conservation to individuals, preferring government mandates to change energy use." In other words, green-job proponents know they're pushing a bad product.
    read more @ http://www.cato.org/pubs/policy_repo...cpr33n2-6.html

  14. #74
    Senior Member Array title="steeldawg is a jewel in the rough">

    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    4,533

    Re: Paper "debunking" global warming discredited; editor-in-chief resigns.

    Quote Originally Posted by 43Hitman View Post
    Just look at what Spain has done to there economy by going 'green'.



    [/SIZE][/FONT]http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2010/05/obamas_green_energy_program_an.html
    http://www.americanprogress.org/issu...all_tales.html

  15. #75
    Senior Member Array title="43Hitman has a reputation beyond repute">
    3 Reel Treasure Slots Champion!

    Join Date
    May 2010
    Gender
    Posts
    7,211

    Re: Paper "debunking" global warming discredited; editor-in-chief resigns.

    sorry I can't get that link to load. Could you quote the juicy part please.

  16. #76
    Senior Member Array title="pepsyman1 has much to be proud of"> pepsyman1's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Marlton, NJ
    Gender
    Posts
    3,671

    Re: Paper "debunking" global warming discredited; editor-in-chief resigns.

    Hitman...you hit the nail on the head and this is where I originally stepped into this conversation. Alternate energy usage won't really take off until the cost of development and use is comparable with the sources we use now. If we found out tomorrow that there were huge oil reserves in say Utah and New Mexico that would singlehandedly take care of our oil needs in the US for the next 200 years and the cost of a gallon of gas suddenly dropped to $1.50 a gallon the sale of electric/hybrid cars would come to a screeching halt here in the US. Why? simple...the cost of those vehicles to develop and build is much higher than the technology we have..in other words, less profitable. If we suddenly found out that the world would most likely be out of oil by 2016 there would be electric cars and batteries coming out left and right because oil would become prohibitively expensive.

  17. #77
    Geek God Array title="X-Terminator has a reputation beyond repute"> X-Terminator's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2010
    Gender
    Posts
    9,152

    Re: Paper "debunking" global warming discredited; editor-in-chief resigns.

    Quote Originally Posted by pepsyman1 View Post
    Hitman...you hit the nail on the head and this is where I originally stepped into this conversation. Alternate energy usage won't really take off until the cost of development and use is comparable with the sources we use now. If we found out tomorrow that there were huge oil reserves in say Utah and New Mexico that would singlehandedly take care of our oil needs in the US for the next 200 years and the cost of a gallon of gas suddenly dropped to $1.50 a gallon the sale of electric/hybrid cars would come to a screeching halt here in the US. Why? simple...the cost of those vehicles to develop and build is much higher than the technology we have..in other words, less profitable. If we suddenly found out that the world would most likely be out of oil by 2016 there would be electric cars and batteries coming out left and right because oil would become prohibitively expensive.
    It wouldn't have to come to a screeching halt. Renewables can still be developed even if that happened. The main fallout from such a scenario is that we would no longer have to rely on foreign oil. In fact, that is the main point of the development of "green" energy and one I have consistently supported. We have the technology right now to reliably bring more renewable energy sources to market. All they need is the investment. And as more power plants come online and competition grows, the price per kWh will ultimately drop.








  18. #78
    Senior Member Array title="The WH will become famous soon enough"> The WH's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Vinninga, Sweden and Butler, PA
    Gender
    Posts
    1,296

    Re: Paper "debunking" global warming discredited; editor-in-chief resigns.

    Oil Company Lobbyists are to Green technology advancement what Catholocism was to scientific advancement in the medieval times.

  19. #79
    Klaatu barada nikto Array title="suitanim has a brilliant future"> suitanim's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    6,872

    Re: Paper "debunking" global warming discredited; editor-in-chief resigns.

    Quote Originally Posted by The WH View Post
    Oil Company Lobbyists are to Green technology advancement what Catholocism was to scientific advancement in the medieval times.
    Disagree. It's in their very best interests to get in on the ground floor of "What's next". They aren't stupid. They know that. But we aren't going to run out of fossil fuels for a LONG, LONG time. What they'll do is advance green tech at their pace with advanced and advancing countries, and hedge their bets by satiating the unquenchable thirst of emerging economies with old fossil fuels.

    They know (although I'm not sure it's been discussed here) that oil creates unstable Countries (No taxation without representation doesn't mean much to either the people or the government of an oil rich Country), and the environment also wreaks havoc on their own ability to mine/harvest fossil fuels. Just look at the double hammer of Irene/Lee and how it effected oil production over the last few weeks. Everyone always wants to say "Well, oil companies just want to destroy the environment and they'll lie and cheat and steal to save a buck along the way".

    Nonsense. You think they don't feel the hurt from the droughts in Texas? The hurricanes in the Gulf? You don't think they pay attention to whether or not global warming is real? Of course they do! It effects their business. They weigh the costs of uber over regulation versus POSSIBLE climate change effects on their ability to deliver the goods.

    Bottom line, as almost always, we're sitting here discussing chess in checkers terms. It's incredibly complex. It demands very complex debate.
    Fire Goodell

  20. #80
    Senior Member Array title="The WH will become famous soon enough"> The WH's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Vinninga, Sweden and Butler, PA
    Gender
    Posts
    1,296

    Re: Paper "debunking" global warming discredited; editor-in-chief resigns.

    Of course we're discussing chess in checkers terms...we are a large group of people ranging in knowledge and intelligence of a large amount of topics. If we were all experts on every subject...we sure as heck shouldn't be wasting our time talking about them here when their is a world to make a better place. Best thing we can do is just continue with our own status quo, get called out on our bullshit, learn a thing or two, link a few sites to share knowledge with those lacking in undestanding, and have a cup of coffee.

  21. #81
    Senior Member Array title="pepsyman1 has much to be proud of"> pepsyman1's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Marlton, NJ
    Gender
    Posts
    3,671

    Re: Paper "debunking" global warming discredited; editor-in-chief resigns.

    Quote Originally Posted by X-Terminator View Post
    It wouldn't have to come to a screeching halt. Renewables can still be developed even if that happened. The main fallout from such a scenario is that we would no longer have to rely on foreign oil. In fact, that is the main point of the development of "green" energy and one I have consistently supported. We have the technology right now to reliably bring more renewable energy sources to market. All they need is the investment. And as more power plants come online and competition grows, the price per kWh will ultimately drop.
    THAT is exactly it. Right now companies don't want to spend that kind of money...companies are in the business of making profits and until the need is truly great the cost of that development is so great they don't want to expend those kinds of resources. They make far more money right now by trying to squeeze what they can from the existing fuels we have. Now at some point either of two things will happen: the resources we have will reach a point of scarcity that companies will NEED to come up with alternatives at a much more focused pace OR the government will step in and subsidize them to bring the technology to market, even if it's at a loss. (Look at the whole ethanol scam...farmers are getting PAID extra to produce for it's productions, the fuel costs more to produce than the regular gas it replaces AND gets worse mileage in cars)

  22. #82
    Senior Member Array title="43Hitman has a reputation beyond repute">
    3 Reel Treasure Slots Champion!

    Join Date
    May 2010
    Gender
    Posts
    7,211

    Re: Paper "debunking" global warming discredited; editor-in-chief resigns.

    Quote Originally Posted by pepsyman1 View Post
    THAT is exactly it. Right now companies don't want to spend that kind of money...companies are in the business of making profits and until the need is truly great the cost of that development is so great they don't want to expend those kinds of resources. They make far more money right now by trying to squeeze what they can from the existing fuels we have. Now at some point either of two things will happen: the resources we have will reach a point of scarcity that companies will NEED to come up with alternatives at a much more focused pace OR the government will step in and subsidize them to bring the technology to market, even if it's at a loss. (Look at the whole ethanol scam...farmers are getting PAID extra to produce for it's productions, the fuel costs more to produce than the regular gas it replaces AND gets worse mileage in cars)
    And the fuel burnt with ethanol is worse for the environment than the old regular fuel we used to use. Go figure, its more costly and worse for the environment. Our govt' at work.

  23. #83
    Senior Member Array title="zulater has a reputation beyond repute"> zulater's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Fair Hill Md.
    Posts
    15,903

    Re: Paper "debunking" global warming discredited; editor-in-chief resigns.

    Personally I worry more about the pollutants that we pump into our waterways than fossil fuel emissions, and feel that the damage being done there is being largely ignored, though much more harmful and less easily reversed.
    "A man's got to know his limitations."

  24. #84
    Klaatu barada nikto Array title="suitanim has a brilliant future"> suitanim's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    6,872

    Re: Paper "debunking" global warming discredited; editor-in-chief resigns.

    Speaking of investment...Obama's pet green cause went belly-up even after he lent them half a billion dollars.

    http://biggovernment.com/sright/2011...-federal-loan/

    If the government pays a company to build something and then pays a customer to buy it, then a market doesn’t really exist, and neither does an economy. But that is what the president has tried to do for the first three years of his presidency. And the dismal job situation (as well as the stagnant housing market) is proof that a government can’t bribe consumers to purchase something they don’t want.

    But maybe this “green jobs” thing has more to do with the past than it does with winning the future. Solyndra promised to be an example of the politics and economy of the future, but instead might become the best example of the oldest tradition in politics: A political gift paid with your money in exchange for big campaign donation.

    How pathetic that Obama, the man who represented a change in politics to so many, winds up being as new and cutting edge as 19th century’s Boss Tweed.
    Fire Goodell

  25. #85
    The Oncoming Storm Array title="Vis will become famous soon enough"> Vis's Avatar

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Gender
    Posts
    1,487

    Re: Paper "debunking" global warming discredited; editor-in-chief resigns.


  26. #86
    Senior Member Array title="43Hitman has a reputation beyond repute">
    3 Reel Treasure Slots Champion!

    Join Date
    May 2010
    Gender
    Posts
    7,211

    Re: Paper "debunking" global warming discredited; editor-in-chief resigns.

    Just curious Vis, how does the above add to the discussion?

  27. #87
    The Oncoming Storm Array title="Vis will become famous soon enough"> Vis's Avatar

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Gender
    Posts
    1,487

    Re: Paper "debunking" global warming discredited; editor-in-chief resigns.

    Quote Originally Posted by 43Hitman View Post
    Just curious Vis, how does the above add to the discussion?
    The age of the earth and the changing climate are on the same scientific footing.

  28. #88
    Senior Member Array title="pepsyman1 has much to be proud of"> pepsyman1's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Marlton, NJ
    Gender
    Posts
    3,671

    Re: Paper "debunking" global warming discredited; editor-in-chief resigns.

    Quote Originally Posted by Vis View Post
    The age of the earth and the changing climate are on the same scientific footing.
    Yeah, it's bllions of years old and the climate has been cycling up and down as regularly as the sunshine

  29. #89
    The Oncoming Storm Array title="Vis will become famous soon enough"> Vis's Avatar

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Gender
    Posts
    1,487

    Re: Paper "debunking" global warming discredited; editor-in-chief resigns.

    Quote Originally Posted by pepsyman1 View Post
    Yeah, it's bllions of years old and the climate has been cycling up and down as regularly as the sunshine
    Are you a US Senator?

  30. #90
    World Champion Array title="Just George is on a distinguished road"> Just George's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    The World
    Gender
    Posts
    627

    Re: Paper "debunking" global warming discredited; editor-in-chief resigns.

    REAL TRUTH BEHIND EU CON OVER ENERGY-SAVING BULBS
    "BANNING the humble 60-watt light bulb to make way for so-called energy-saving ones and “help save the planet” was last night exposed as an elaborate EU con.

    Tests show ­production and disposal of the new bulbs uses up more energy than ­traditional lights."
    http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/...y-saving-bulbs

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •