Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | Facebook | Twitter | All Access E-Edition | Home RSS
 
 
 
Latest Post:
Started By:
Rank:
Category
2 hours ago.
by Stillhere
harryanderson
#1

Thankfully, the anti-science propaganda campaign surrounding man-made climate change seems to have lost some of its effect.

Are you seeing storm clouds on the horizon? Two recent studies suggest that the latest anti-science campaign is following its forerunners--the propaganda campaigns attempting to refute science that tobacco causes cancer, that CFC's caused the hole in the ozone layer, and so on—into oblivion. Global warming denial seems to have climbed to a peak in 2010, and global warming acceptance is now climbing. This bodes well for rational public policy.

 
 

Member Comments

Stillhere

That really is the case for a smaller federal Govt, we have far more control of or city county and state govts then we ever will the behemoth in Washington. Liberal socialists don't much like that idea I realize.

Posted 22 days ago.

Stillhere

I am quite convinced that Republicans are not much different than Democrats these days but if it serves any purpose, it will be to show that they CAN be voted out of sweet chairmanships and committee positions.

Posted 22 days ago.

Stillhere

I guess I am guilty too, Tuesday I will pull a straight REP ticket, something I don't normally do, but I want to send a message as useless as it might be.

Posted 22 days ago.

Stillhere

We practice OPPPOSITION POLITICS these days, just look at the adds. No one is voting FOR anything or anyone rather they are voting against something or someone. Few if any political adds focus on the candidate that pays for them, cue the scary music, MYTHRAVERE is a bad guy, he kicks cats and doesn't rewind video tapes.

Posted 22 days ago.

Stillhere

Its convenient to disparage those that you disagree with as cultural warriors etc and those on your side as wise and altruistic.

But anyway, glad you have your opinion, and thanks again for sharing.

Posted 22 days ago.

Stillhere

CO2 is not a Greenhouse Gas that Raises Global temperature. Period! by Dr. Tim Ball

There you go now you KNOW ONE that says so

Posted 22 days ago.

harryanderson

Yes, I'm convinced that CO2 is a greenhouse gas, since I know of no climate scientist who denies it.

The only ones I know of who deny it are politicians and cultural warriors, but I don't value their their opinions on science very highly.

Posted 22 days ago.

Stillhere

OK Harry, we will jot you down as one who IS convinced, thanks for your opinion

Posted 22 days ago.

harryanderson

"There seems to be a connection between warmer cycles and CO2 but I am not convinced is there is a cause and effect."

Every climate scientist I know of agrees there is a cause and effect relationship. Even those who disagree with the majority position--like Judith Curry and Richard Lindzen--agree the atmospheric CO2 traps heat. They disagree on the magnitude of the effect, not that an effect exists.

Posted 22 days ago.

harryanderson

Sure we need a mature, responsible electorate. We need voters who are inoculated against power-mad propagandists who try to make every issue into a political and cultural war.

Look at climate science. Cultural polarization keeps people from agreeing on a basic fact: one I have never seen an actual climate scientist dispute.

It's mad, and it's destroying our country. If we don't come to our senses, we're headed for another civil war.

Posted 22 days ago.

Stillhere

There seems to be a connection between warmer cycles and CO2 but I am not convinced is there is a cause and effect.

Posted 22 days ago.

Stillhere

I can say this about co2, it's a natural trace gas that is essential to life on earth.

Posted 22 days ago.

Stillhere

Myth I dont think that's a good idea, shall we put the head of Exxon in charge of the dept of energy? What we need is a mature responsible electorate that knows more about the constitution than the Kardashians.

Posted 22 days ago.

harryanderson

So, Stillhere, do you agree that CO2 is a greenhouse gas that prevents heat from escaping a system like the earth?

Posted 22 days ago.

mythravere

If I had my way people would be "elected" on merit and qualifications alone with special attention paid to possible conflicts of interest that they might bring into play if they were given a position in government.

Like having former members of the large financial institutions running the government department that oversees said institutions.

I can't really do justice to what I have in mind on here. It would take pages of posts to layout what I am thinking.

Posted 22 days ago.

mythravere

If I had my way I'd throw everyone in an elected position out of government. Then I'd set the system up where basically government positions would be filled by a sort of selected service type of system.

A person with say an education background and of the right experience would be asked if they want a four year term as say head of the government education dept.

The main point is to put a full stop to those that seek power in political form.

Anyone looking for power is not to be trusted.

We can see very well that special interests have a chokehold on almost every aspect of government.

In my opinion that is the existential threat that this nation faces.

Posted 22 days ago.

mythravere

"Could be to further slide into the BIG GOVT socialist system. (anti capitalism)"

As far as that goes. I am more concerned with a government that flat out doesn't work at all.

And with our country becoming more and more divided over partisan issues that disfunction is just going to get worse.

There are things that we need to get done. Failing infrastructure for example. But those things aren't even on anyones radar because everyone is fighting over hot button issues.

Posted 22 days ago.

mythravere

My problem with the "green" movement is that a lot of what it proposes as solutions to climate change are just wishful overly optimistic thinking.

Thinking that im my opinion doesn't jive with reality.

Take nuclear power for example. Other than fossil fuels its the only current energy source we have that can provide large amounts of energy in a small footprint.

Wind,solar and hydropower on the other hand have to have massive footprints to come even close to providing the power output that fossil fuels and nuclear can provide.

Posted 22 days ago.

mythravere

As far as the what the ultimate goal of those who push this issue are though?

It could be out of concern. But it could also be out of having a new profitable market in sight.

I always joked with my parents that if the powers that be could they'd charge us for the air we breath.

On the flip side. Those who have interests laying in fossil fuels see any shift away from the energy resources they provide as a threat. And they respond by throwing doubt into the debate. Which is ok as long as its well founded.

Like asking whether or not renewable energy can actually work for us. What will the costs be etc.

Posted 22 days ago.

mythravere

Here's my problem with this and really any issue.

The special interests that muddy up the truth on the issues that we face.

That pertains to everyone on each either of the issue. Then you have the emotional component and that just muddies things up even more.

Posted 22 days ago.
 
 
 
 

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
*Password:
Remember my email address.
or