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
37 days ago.
by slinky
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

harryanderson

I’m not in favor of EPA, or any other government body, regulating CO2. I’d prefer that individuals take responsibility for their own actions, including CO2 emissions, and not wait for government to act. I don’t want to give more power to the state.

Happily, 54% of conservative Republicans are ready to accept the science of global warming and address it. And these lead some traditionally conservative organizations, including Exxon, Shell, BP, the British Conservative Party, and the US Military.

Sadly, Congress refuses to accept and act. By so doing, they cede power to the executive.

Please write your Republican representatives in Congress and let them know they’re out of step with their constituents on global warming.

Posted 434 days ago.

harryanderson

It seems every Republican in Congress wants to stop the EPA from regulating CO2 emissions.

However, the Yale Project on Climate Change Communication reports that Republicans in general don’t support the global warming policies of the Congressional leaders.

56% of Republicans “support regulating CO2 as a pollutant.” This includes 54% of conservative Republicans.

44% of Republicans “support setting STRICT CO2 emission limits on EXISTING coal-fired power plants.” (emphasis added)

htt p://environment.yale.ed u/climate-communication/article/not-all-republicans-think-alike-about-global-warming/

Since Republicans in general are about evenly split on regulating CO2, one would think the leaders in Congress would engage in lively debate on this issue. Not so. Congressional Republicans’ policy doesn’t reflect the thinking of their constituents.

Posted 434 days ago.

Kunectdots

Stillhere - I still question how all the C8 got into the local aquifer over the years. IF it is from a process of being purposefully pumped into the ground via "test well" operations, the offender NEEDS TO HAVE their deep pockets explored and somebody should possibly be looking out from behind bars (IMO). THAT would be motive to put your past behind you and "slowly withdrawing from the area".

You are aware, when an offense is egregiously irresponsible and involves massive amounts of ($)damages($), a competent attorney (law firm) can be in position to partially shield the offending party by portraying themselves as representing the plaintiff and moderating the total damage's appearance to the public... for a ($)price($), off course?

Posted 436 days ago.

absolem

moderation...the post immediately preceeding my comment that you question.

Posted 436 days ago.

Kunectdots

NOW, the operators of the brine injection wells at Torch, Ohio are seeking permission to establish a 4th well. If I were an attorney representing DuPont in ongoing litigation concerning the ill-effects of C8 on humans, I'd be ALL IN FAVOR of as many brine wells established downriver as possible. Future disease development will be hard to blame upon DuPont's negligence if other poisons are being pumped into the aquifers by brine disposal units.

Posted 437 days ago.

harryanderson

The British Conservative Party’s decision marks an important step against the propaganda campaign to discredit climate scientists’ work.

Posted 437 days ago.

harryanderson

I hope that our leaders follow the UK’s example and work across party lines to address the anthropogenic global warming threat and other problems. If we don’t, we won’t make it. A house divided against itself cannot stand.

Posted 437 days ago.

harryanderson

Major-party leaders in our closest ally, Britain, have agreed not to politicize the conclusion of almost all climate scientists.

Conservative Party leader (and Prime Minister) David Cameron has agreed to fight climate change with the leaders of the two major opposition parties.

“David Cameron, Nick Clegg and Ed Miliband have signed a joint pledge to tackle climate change, which they say will protect the UK’s national security and economic prosperity. The agreement of the three party leaders is highly unusual and comes amid a general election campaign that is becoming increasingly bitter.”

htt p://ww w.theguardian.co m/environment/2015/feb/14/cameron-clegg-and-miliband-sign-joint-climate-pledge

I applaud this move. The risk associated with anthropogenic climate change should be a scientific, not a political, issue.

Posted 437 days ago.

moderation

Which one, absolem?

Posted 437 days ago.

absolem

i tend to believe that most rational people will agree with your post.

Posted 439 days ago.

Kunectdots

absolem - When it comes to science, my belief has always been that if anything can be conceived as a reasonable possibility, someone with the wherewithal IS going to attempt it eventually, laws created against it's development be d-amned.

If it is a concept offering both beneficial and detrimental possibilities, the detrimental side will take form, surreptitiously, when the right people figure it will benefit their cause(s).

Posted 440 days ago.

absolem

he said. Other funders included Nasa, the US Department of Energy, and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. The use of the weather as a weapon was banned in 1978 under the Environmental Modification Convention (Enmod). the above is a partial representation of the article. this goes along with the concern expressed by some about the HAARP program. it would be interesting to see how the program is reconciled against the aforementioned law banning use of weather as a weapon. Kunectdots...you may not be as out there as some claim. the strange stops being strange when it is proven real.

Posted 440 days ago.

absolem

from The Guardian: "A senior US scientist has expressed concern that the intelligence services are funding climate change research to learn if new technologies could be used as potential weapons. Alan Robock, a climate scientist at Rutgers University in New Jersey, has called on secretive government agencies to be open about their interest in radical work that explores how to alter the world’s climate. Last week, the National Academy of Sciences published a two-volume report on different approaches to tackling climate change. One focused on means to remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, the other on ways to change clouds or the Earth’s surface to make them reflect more sunlight out to space.The $600,000 report was part-funded by the US intelligence services, but Robock said the CIA and other agencies had not fully explained their interest in the work. “The CIA was a major funder of the National Academies report so that makes me really worried who is going to be in control,”

Posted 440 days ago.

Kunectdots

Stillhere - I HEAR YA, BROTHER! Imagine, on a day like this, if we had no energy entrepreneurs, exploring for fuel sources on private properties. With a scab on society, like our present glorious leader trying to limit the fossil fuel powered industries of the U.S., we'd all be waiting for his vaunted solar panels to generate some electricity to warm us. Looks kinda cloudy out there, BARACK!

Better have plenty of blankets laid-up for any future Executive Order barrages. Obummer, unfortunately, will be with us through another one and a half winters.

Posted 440 days ago.

Kunectdots

HarryAnderson - I think these people may have a little bit more going on than you or Al Gore can imagine, although I bet Al is a little more 'connected' than you are.

HAARP; "The Military's Pandora's Box"

h ttp://haarp.n et/

Posted 441 days ago.

Kunectdots

COME ON HARRYANDERSON! Where's your rebuttal?

Excellent exposure on the subject of Weather Modification available on the following site.

If man is now on the cusp of controlling the weather, doesn't the "Chicken Little" fear of Climate Change/ Global Warming seem, at least, naïve?

More attention to the HAARP Project and less given to Obama's and Gore's opinions would seem to be in order.

"Weather Warfare" is a 5 part series available for viewing at;

h ttps://w ww.youtube.c om/watch?v=0aDNajyqM10&list=PLE13D989BF504681B&index=2

Posted 444 days ago.

Kunectdots

Stillhere - I assume other readers here ARE competent enough to note that you quoted the Associated Press (AP) and ohweirdone turned it into Fox News as being your source, AGAIN.

WHY DOES he put such a concerted effort forward to publically demonstrate he's a moron?

Posted 444 days ago.

Kunectdots

But STILL, this nonsense will be a continuing politically-driven force, steered by Obama and Obamanites toward greater governmental control of the people. You know, just like ObamaCare.

Posted 444 days ago.

Kunectdots

294 previous comments posted here concerning "man-made climate change", when in fact the majority of the dramatic changes may INDEED BE intentional "man-made climate" manipulation shows your wrong when you post "nobody cares".

Posted 445 days ago.

Kunectdots

HAARP got your tongues?

Posted 446 days ago.
 
 
 
 

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

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