This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Snow [Day / Job]
Obama emerges triumphantly from negotiations in Copenhagen having secured a 2 degree cap on world temperature. Of course, this implies a sea level increase limit of seven to nine meters. Having successfully commanded the tide to remain out, Obama and the United Nations have broken new ground in assuring climate status quo through international agreement. (Oh, and several programs directed at the mass redistribution of wealth to non-democratic kleptocracies were also outlined in the lobby during intermission cocktails).
Enforcement hasn't been discussed yet, but we are confident that a "Weather Czar" will be appointed to gauge world temperature compliance and levy world GDP bonus clawbacks in the event the limit is breached by the planet. Further, though the summit failed to fail to reach a non-binding consensus, it does provide the basis for hope that emissions targets will be re-aligned to newly developed targets for emissions targets. John Kerry expressed confidence that new targets for targets would be realized sometime when it wasn't quite so cold outside, and pointed out that the appointment of a Czar and involvement of the EPA would eliminate the need for any legislative authorization to clawback world bonuses in any year where global temperatures exceeded the mandatory limit. No word yet on how the clawbacks would be used, but speculation includes the Administration's new "polar bears saved or created" programs.
Unfortunately, Obama will be forced to leave the Global Warming Conference due to an imposing winter storm bearing down on the mid-atlantic and due to dump as much as twenty inches of snow in the nation's capitol, which may, in turn, delay the arrival in Washington, D.C. of the largest carbon footprinted transportation logistics infrastructure on the planet. Obama will therefore be unable to attend the final vote on the motion that the next conference will be in the South of France in August.
»
- 6505 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -
Thank you for that.
This is an excerpt from HR 2454, which passed the House and is now before the Senate. The following section (707) is common to both the House and Senate versions and allows the President to co-opt existing statutory authority (though Federal agencies) to enforce the carbon laws contained in HR 2454. Between this and the EPA designation of Carbon as a harmful substance, Copenhagen is a mere side show. Should this be passed in to law the implications are far reaching.
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c111:H.R.2454:
Where does your President get off thinking he has any International jurisdiction in this process??
If I was a carbon lifeform living on the US I would be worried now that you are viewed as Toxic by the EPA.
Someone should tell Barry the simple solution is to set the thermometer of the Sun down 2 degrees.
Barging around like a 2 bit hooker, "negotiating" with China.
Ah, yes, the CHANGELING WE CAN BELIEVE IN.
recently had the earliest snowfall ever on record (i.e. Dec, 4th) here in Houston, TX. and no hurricanes wiped out nearby cities. maybe scientist confused el nino with a longterm trend?
Eggselent, Marla!
And you know what? 10 years from now temperatures will be 2°C lower because we entered the cooling part of the cycle and there's nothing we can do about it. But this pompous idiots will claim they "saved the world".
Indeed they will.
Lets just all watch the satellite UAH MSU temps and laugh as global temps fall over the months and years to come.
http://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2009/07/uah_jun09.png
AMO past warm peak and now trending lower. Check
PDO exiting warm phase entering cold phase. Check
Solar cycle 24 looking to be lowest in 100 years. Check
Solar physicists predictions for Cycle 25 also low. Check
Forget Dalton... Maunder Minimum here we come...
Bingo. The various global circulation modes combined with unusually energetic past couple/few solar cycles have primarily driven whatever warming we've seen in the past few decades. For Mann etal. to be construing this as "anthropogenic" has been testimony to their ignorance of the science and their abomination of the Scientific Method. Meanwhile, I have my snowblower ready to go baby! Bring it. BTW - 1 sun spot in progess. Latest update:
Sunspot number: 20
What is the sunspot number?
Updated 17 Dec 2009
Spotless Days
Current Stretch: 0 days
2009 total: 259 days (74%)
Since 2004: 770 days
Typical Solar Min: 485 days
Nah, the world is never saved.
They'll raise the alarm of a cooling trend which again will be all our fault and if we don't change our sinful ways we'll be in the middle of a new ice age within a single generation.
And so it goes.
..and the politicians will get to say, "Yes we did!"
Is this a &@*!)!$ joke?
Did Obama, and these other jokers, really take part in an agreement to cap further warming to 2 degrees?
If so, does the agreement even remotely suggest the possibility of ANY natural variations in global temperature??
We can only hope. After all if the sun does not cooperate maybe they will dispatch Hillary Clinton to the sun on a diplomatic mission. Hell that doesn't work I'm sure they can roll out plans for a military strike on and occupation of the sun. :)
Will Hillary be taking the Reset Button with her on her trip to the sun?
Let's send them ALL on a mission to the sun. One way. As fast as possible.
+1000
LOL
where U been boy?
I think her wax wings might melt during the trip. We better send Al Gore along to assist.
So this means that with the new ice age approaching, temperature will decline and Obama will be hailed as the true messiah!
The temperature is not as important as those who record it.
Hey, this weekend in DC the guy can show the world that he can walk on frozen water....
What a piece of work Barack Obama is. Seems to gobble up his own shtick hook line and sinker. Er, yes, we are the Ones we've been waiting for....
Our man Barry is becoming a caricature of himself. His Cap and Trade plan will enrich Goldman and their ilk, while killing American jobs (even more).
With the banksters and envirofascists pulling his strings he is becoming a more and more pathetic creature. Not really very Presidential.
Let's clean up the poisonous chemicals from the air and land but be very careful about Carbon Dioxide- the breath of life for our companions, the plants.
Er, yes, we are the Ones we've been waiting for....
I think that sums it up.
Yes, it does. In the appendix, under contingency 23, there is a specific statement that:
Any and all natural warming, that may occur despite man's best efforts, will be met with an instantly called meeting of the world's climatologists to firmly scold the earth for perpetuating a climate which is not only uncontrollable, but makes them look like the idiots these "scientists" are. The scolding, to be written at a conference in Greenland (to further show just how warm the world is getting because man is evil), will be delivered by a man who is considered "above the laws of all earthly movement", or specifically Barack Obama if this other man is unattainable.
Barack is to proceed to the North Pole and speak very sternly to the earth and tell it to start cooling, because it's not using the help man is providing efficiently - just like he did with the banks. If the earth doesn't respond, he does have the option to ask Hillary to join him in the scolding so that no "gender or racial bias" is apparent.
What was also missed, is the appendix contingency 28, which specifically mentions a cooling situation. If, in fact, the earth continues its current cooling trend despite the fake scientific effort to prove otherwise, the scientists have the option to attend another conference in the Bahamas. This meeting will be celebratory in nature, and specifically calls for a boatload of alcohol and hot babes to attend so that these hoary old nutjobs can get loaded and get their rocks off because "we're so damn good at what we do, dontcha know".
that's so funny it made me set up an account
they're saying it'll snow 10 inches here in New York
starting tomorrow and lasting til sunday..they
were not saying that two days ago and some were
not even saying it yesterday
they can't tell what the weather's going to be like
the next day..but in a 100 years it's gonna get hot..
unless we regulate to death our industries and raise
taxes.. brilliant
"polar bears saved or created"...tremendous.
I suggest that the regime include a Troubled Atmosphere Recovery Program (TARP) providing IMF loans to all member countries which must be paid back before carbon credits can be used for any polluting activity above 500,000 ppm CO2.
Him and Al Gore...just fools barking at the moon.
Can't make this stuff up...these two bird brains think they can control the temperature of the planet. HeHeHe.
hilarious marla. u spinning any music this weekend or just going out on a high note?
Reminds me a little of old King Canute.
http://threatchaos.com/images/GregCanute.jpg
This was the idea, yes.
Well done,Marla. U B a tru wordsmith. Master of the phrase. "Wonder boy." Seriously.
Did someone say cocktails? I propose a toast to the biggest clusterfuck known to mankind.
Having successfully commanded the tide to remain out, Obama and the United Nations have broken new ground in assuring climate status quo through international agreement. (Oh, and several programs directed at the mass redistribution of wealth to non-democratic kleptocracies were also outlined in the lobby during intermission cocktails).
-------
Brilliant! What a superb sentence. Made me chuckle visualizing Obama and his UN cronies standing at the altar of their temple, gesturing madly with their arms in pushing motions, willing the oceans to return and spare us the calamity of another Venice.
There is nothing a marketing department loves more than a customer with impossible objectives and endless bank accounts, errrrr, endless debt.
Time for us to all bend over. :(
And don't underestimate the ambiguity in "2 degree cap on world temperature". You can tweek that metric so we're allways getting warmer, say compare summer temp to winter temp. And with all the money we're going to have sucked from us you can guarentee there is plenty of motive to play such games. And we have not vote in any of this now, nor will we have any vote in how the metric is calculated.
A better solution is increase oil prices $100 per year. Just watch how fast fossil fuel disappears and solar, alt energy, renewable energy, replace it. There's going to be pain either way, better the pain be as a short term investment to real solutions than never ending screwing that solves nothing but turn us all into economic slaves. Don't like $100 per year? Fine, pick a good solid painful number and it'll have the same effect at forcing the needed change. In other words, the many solutions that currently exist will become known and the oil scam will end.
I feel warmer inside this Christmas (oops, am I allowed to say this or will it give off too big a footprint?) knowing that Barry is giving to the good little boys and girls around the world all of their wishes. Yes, no wish is too hot for Barry. Nukes for the Iranians; cabinet positions for local terrorists; free union dues; closing of Gitmo to give us the jobs we need right here in Chicago; and of course he didn't forget us for we get lumps and lumps of black coal (as we can't us it anymore) and just so we don't forget his message of redistribution- taxes. Too all a good night. HOO, HOO, HOSED!
You're not in trouble for saying "warmer", you're in trouble for saying Christmas!
Its nothing that can't be undone after all the mofos are thrown out of office.
The US President and other world leaders agree to lower world temperatures by 2 degrees celsius.
Did I just type that? It felt surreal. Almost like I just ate a bag of mushrooms.
That would be a bummer for Obummer if he can't get back to Washington.
when are his masters just going to frame him smoking some crack to boot him out.. you can see its just a matter of time before they are done with him
Ah hello, it's the asset collector again.
I was just wondering if the pentagon is going to release the actual carbon footprint of deploying and maintaining US troops.
Trust me, if you are into this carbon reduction B.S. you'd be shocked at the potential costs involved in maintaining the US .mil complex!!
Will the Obama edict on reducing carbon make the deployment of troops impossible due to cost??
Methinksso.
Don't know about the Pentagon but the White House should set an example and ditch both Air Force One. The new messiah should, like the old One, travel on the back of an ass.
[Not you of course... any DC czar will do gladly.]
Exactly. The fuel economy of the M1 Abrams is measured in gallons (of kerosene) per mile. Every military vehicle is a huge fuel hog, efficiency is the last item on the list.
That's the idea. They want to be bigger and cause more damage and do more stupid stuff. So someone has to get smaller and do the right thing to make up for it.
"The world doesn't owe you a living" - Mark Twain.
I guess someone should have sewed his mouth shut and shoved a baseball bat up his ass and just stared blankly at him while he died to see which day of his death march he changed his mind.
Long ago, the king who ordered his tailor to create him some new clothes, had no idea that it would lead to this.
He then chartered Virgin Galactic to Jupiter, the gas giant, to assist them with their atmospheric inconsistencies.
You have to give him a hand, I mean come on this dude is amazing -- wins a nobel peace price by fighting two wars, lowers the deficit by increasing spending, provides healthcare for all inspite of limited resources, gives our money away to the people that robbed us because it is really for our own good, controls global temperatures like the head of a household controls the thermostat. I don't understand how David Copperfield and David Blaine are still in business? Oh, that's right, Obama creates jobs too! Keep digging Davids, remember this is stimulating the economy, I want this pot hole refilled and dug up again.
+1000
What's your dirt doin' in Boss Kean's ditch?
Here are some facts to ponder.
If the global temperature is rising, then certainly there will be a melting of ice on a large scale. This would imply sea levels are already measurably rising. Because water seeks its own level, and all the oceans of the world are connected, all the seas would rise.
Question: Are the seas rising?
Tide data would show it in all the seas. Fact is, the tides aren't changing from their historical means. No extra water means no warming.
Some contend that the increase of CO2 will cause the oceans to become acidic (acid is such a scare word, isn't it?). But it wouldn't be just the oceans, it would be every body of water exposed to the atmosphere.
Question: Is the pH changing for bodies of water throughout the world?
Data doesn't support it. Furthermore, CO2 is a major component in the food chain of plant life. If CO2 were increasing, we'd see phytoplankton and algae blooms of biblical proportion, which would act as a natural C02 dampener.
http://noconsensus.org/scientists/freeman-dyson.php
Believe the truth, and spread it.
there's more clouds
and yes, the water level is rising it is just all being bottled up by the evil bottled water companies.. water will then be the next bubble
Global Warming is god's gift to politicians. They can have nice meetings and get on CNN, they can chat and promise but if it even exists - were not going to actually do anything about it (really can't) - it's so much easier to fix this perceived problem than all the huge problems that stand before us right now.
If you think it's a problem then become a vegetarian - meat production is one of the major culprits of in the generation of the "greenhouse" gas.
Or perhaps you should eat more meat faster.
Apparently, a lot of folks in this country think science is a joke, yet they love their cell phones, ipods, when the doctor saves their fat ass, because they had a heart attack. And if I have some medical issue, I can ask my doc for a pill. (Of course, this country is too religious, another problem.) But, when it comes to the environment, they have no clue. I think denial is the word. Stupid also comes to mind. Listen you American cretins, this reminds me of the Indiana Jones movie, where the Nazis opened the Ark of the Covenant, and they all died. It amazes just how stupid this country is.
And what's really stupid is to believe in Al Gore.
just because there's fearmongering scammers trying to make a buck doesn't mean it isn't true.. glenn beck tells everyone to buy gold right?? so all the gold bugs here suppose to NOT do that now?
Ex-ACTLY. Trade crowded. Exit stage right.
Crowded trade?
I expect the lifeboats on the Titanic were pretty crowded too, but the contrarian play didn't work out too well on that occassion.
Presumably you prefer some alternative to gold as a place to store wealth securely? Maybe something like Stocks or Treasuries, both of which markets are still functioning today only because of the massive ongoing support provided by the very Treasury and Fed operatives that ZH characterises on a daily basis as clueless morons? Maybe in a '100% safe' FDIC insured (Ha, ha, ha) deposit account? Don't think so.
By contrast, the Precious Metals market is one which these self-same cluless morons are (almost certainly, albeit it's difficult to prove conclusively) doing their level best to suppress and discredit.
If we take it as given that clueless morons will always eventually fail, I would rather have my wealth in the asset class they have been holding down, rather than any of the ones they are propping up.
Sorry, I don't think you get it!
Did I say, I believed in Al. No. I hate the word believe. Al Gore is right, about the science though. Most people in this country are in denial. Those especially who think the world was created, and that it's only around 60,000 years old. I don't like him, Al. And btw, I'm a progressive liberal. Like I said before people like you are doomed.
Since you are intent on bashing religion (despite this site being about economics and markets), I'm going to (as liberals like to say) shove my religion down your throat. Horrors!
Ready..........
Merry Christmas!
Given that all these things you cite were invented in the US, perhaps you should rethink the view of Americans with respect to science. Maybe we think it is junk science (e.g., anthropogenic global warming and Keynesianism) that is the joke. On the other hand, maybe we just don't understand the scientific process where giving hundreds of billions to political cronies, tyrants, and despots will cool the Earth.
Of course, I am just a redneck clinging to my God and my guns. That's probably why I'm not understanding your brilliance.
I'm not an expert, but I have a distinct recollection of the first heart transplant being done in South Africa. Perhaps that did not make it to your "Wave That Flag" edition history book.
I guess you are right. Since heart transplantation is the only possible procedure for a heart attack, Americans must be ignoramuses. Too religious for our own good I guess. </flag waving>
Is evolution also "junk science"? Many Americans also believe that as well, which makes them stupid and there is no way around it. I would be willing to bet the anti-evolution and anti-global warming groups overlap considerably in a venn diagram, just a hunch. Americans simply support science when it jives with their political and religious beliefs. The second it does not, well the science just MUST be wrong! Because everyone knows that religion and political beliefs are totally infallible, unlike crazy science and all those faggot numbers and datas and what nots. My guess is that if the Republican party, in particular, did not think global warming was a nice wedge issue to bloviate about, like abortion or the ten commandments at your courthouse steps, then most of the people who don't "believe" in man-assisted global warming would probably flip their position.
"Because everyone knows that religion and political beliefs are totally infallible, unlike crazy science and all those faggot numbers and datas and what nots."
Considering those "faggot numbers and datas" have now been shown to be manipulated, incomplete, or just plain lied about by scientists with a political axe to grind, your contention that science is infallible is probably not the most advantageous position to take.
"My guess is that if the Republican party, in particular, did not think global warming was a nice wedge issue to bloviate about, like abortion or the ten commandments at your courthouse steps, then most of the people who don't "believe" in man-assisted global warming would probably flip their position."
And my guess is that if the "progressives," in particular, hadn't so incredibly traumatized by the downfall of their beloved Soviet Union, they wouldn't have latched onto "global warming" as a primary avenue to nurture their social-engineering fetish.
Evolution is irrelevant to the argument, unless your argument consists solely of straw men and ad hominem attacks.
I would note, however, a striking similarity in the argumentation used by proponents of evolution and global warming. Refusing to debate arguments (made in goodwill) against a thesis, attacks on the motives, character, and intelligence of those arguing against the evolutionary or global warmist positions rather than debating the substance seems to be the modus operandi.
Saying "the science is settled", putting your fingers in your ears, and going "La-la-la-la...." is not really an argument.
Evolution will remain junk science until it can explain how random mutations lead to such incredibly complex beings. It really sucked for those first monkeys that only had opposable thumbs and were missing the other digits. That first scorpion with the poison sac but no stinger was real non-starter too. I always get a kick out of seeing someone who thinks they are smart, but aren't by half. Which means that I really enjoy you being around.
And, yes, man-caused global warming is junk science, too. How do we know? Because the "scientists" behind it had to fudge the numbers to make their thesis work--the very definition of junk science.
No, a lot of us think politically motivated pseudo-science is a joke. And however "stupid this country is" (a consequence, among other things, of being brainwashed into pledging allegiance to an "indivisible" nation that was founded on the exact opposite principle), it is commendably resistant to the folly of carbon-based life forms declaring war on carbon.
All of the things you've described in the quote involve real science, and that's why they work. They are real science because they are testable and repeatable. The earth's climate on the other hand is a big mystery. We can't even predict tomorrow's weather, much less what will happen years down the road. There is nothing testable or repeatable about claims of anthropogenic global warming; at best, we are making educated guesses.
"Science" has become the new religion. Scientists are its prophets and oracles, and politicians are its priests interpreting the words of the scientist/oracles to promote their own agendas.
Ultimately the real problem is human overpopulation. What purpose do all these people serve? Reduce the human population and all the other problems go away.
Your comment rated a +10 until the last paragraph (assuming you were not being sarcastic). That brought you down to -1000
I don't think it necessarily implies he is advocating genocide.
He could be simply advocating birth control.
Really, whether you're liberal or conservative, you have to accept that there are mathematical limits to the maximum human population. Accepting the need that there must exist some ultimate limit is just common sense.
Perhaps not. If so, withdrawn.
On the other hand, there are mathematical limits to the number of potato chips I can eat too, but that doesn't mean I am anywhere near that limit (regardless of what my wife may say)
No one at ZH seems aware of the limits discovered by mathematical chaos theory. Of specific relevance, and in a nutshell, chaos theory has proven that one cannot predict the weather accurately past about 5 days. This is a phenomenon of random systems, like quadrillions (many more) of atoms of air molecules responding to innumerable forces in the atmosphere. The idea that scientists "know" that "climate change" is a result of man's burning fossil fuels has eventuated from a bunch if climatologists who do not understand math at it's higher levels.
Or.........maybe not so much. Maybe the psuedo-scientist "climatologists"y just took money from the world's plutocrats who needed this convenient myth that almost....almost but not quite....allowed them world rule.
I would recommend that all of you study the basic principles of Thomas Malthus, then relate his principles of population growth and global sustenance to global energy consumption and the finite supply of fossil fuels, and see what you come up with:
(IMHO, politicians are using global warming as a shield to deflect from the ensuing "peak oil" panic, along with creating public outcry to justify funneling public dollars to solve a problem that our beloved leadership has so grossly dropped the ball in handling, primarily due to their hangover after what they wrongly assumed as and endless supply of petrodollars, all before China snuck up and bit them square in the ass. But what the fuck do I know. I still pay my taxes.)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malthusian_growth_model
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/An_Essay_on_the_Principle_of_Population
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malthusian_catastrophe
And for good measure:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confessions_of_an_Economic_Hit_Man
Feliz Navidad, mo' fos'... OUUUT!
I don't know where religion came into the discussion, other than I agree that "Global Warming" adherents act like religious zealots.
And the "finger-on-the-scale" pseudo scientists that beat the drum of Global Warming have now resorted to SHOUTING DOWN all questions about their bogus claims.
It would seem their evidence and calculations are thin gruel indeed.
To: Reductio ad Absurdum-It was Thomas Multhus who postulated that overpopulation would lead to catastrophe (Essay on Population-1798). In fact, as nations grow more prosperous, the birth rate declines. So don't sweat it.
"(Of course, this country is too religious, another problem.)"
I'll grant you that, they mostly voted for the "messiah" didn't they?
Better to let the world burn, eh Marla???
Don't worry, you'll get your wish... there's no way in hell the worlds two biggest polluters will ever meaningfully cut emissions...
Yay!
Suppose, it is God heating up the world. Do you think he will agree to a 2 degree cap?
Articles like this one detract from the good ZH does. When it comes to the issue of global warming, (1) Regardless of one's views, using less fossil fuels is good for the U.S. -- it would decrease smog and lessen our dependence on oil-supplying nations who have other agendas; (2) It's a moot point, anyway -- the solution will be an inevitable breakthrough in the harnessing of solar power; (3) The political aspects of the debate are a giant bore -- funny how views on this scientific matter fall along political party lines. The odds of that occurring without political coercion are about, oh, one in infinity.
Wall Street's machinations are frequently bad for rank-and-file members of society. That is easily demonstrable and requires no forecasts fifty years into the future using the latest scientific technology. When ZH articles such as this one attempt to foist political views on me, I cannot help but treat ZH's economic analysis with a bigger grain of salt.
There are already too many websites telling us it is hot in Death Valley in the summer and cold in Denmark in the winter -- and claiming such readings damn their political opponents. ZH, for the benefit of us all, stick to your knitting.
You me both...
When I first stumbled upon ZH I thought this website was truly a fair and balanced website, giving voice to the other side of the economic argument.
But when a website such as this starts espousing their political views on what should be a purely scientific debate, you start to question all of ZH's content.
I've found that they even censor me sometimes...
ZH, please stick to what your best at...
Bingo I think we have a winner.
It's also of note that both are flagged as junk. Me thinks something cuts too close to the bone.
Have you even read the Climategate emails? Care to explain what your scientific basis is for AGW, and how it wasn't tainted by the tenured con-men?
Do I need to read it? The post was meant as sarcasm (on which point I suppose I could have been a bit clearer on who my comment was directed to… namely not Marla).
In using the term “climategate” you’ve said all I need to hear (which basically boils down to there ain’t jack that anyone is going to say to change your mind). No shit politics enters the picture.
And yeah I know – cows fart, there are sunspots, and the poles were temperate… so what else is it you want to add? We have no effect on the environment. There are more people on the planet than rats and we have no effect -eh? Fly into LAX or PHX and look out the window on the approach maybe you’ll notice a haze… the planet is a confined space so what’s the difference other than scale? Hit the junk flag again if it helps you sleep better tonight.
silence,
Surely you are not extrpolating from a data sample of 2 (and LA and Phoenix at that!). I could look into my ears and assume my whole body is covered with hair and wax but it wouldn't be accurate.
OK, bad example.
I could go to Banff and extrapolate that the whole planet is an amazingly gorgeous collection of mountains and glaciers, but again it would not be accurate.
Is this the quality of science on your side?
Scientific DEBATE ???
Are you delusional my friend???
What scientific debate are you talking about? The High Priest himself... the prophet (and soon to be carbon billionaire) Al Gore long ago said the debate was over. Which it has been.
Why so upset when your "scientific" view has so clearly Won?
You're right Anonymous. This doesn't belong on ZH as there are absolutely no economic impacts to cap & trade or sending $100B down a rathole. None at all
hmmmm... so your in favor of the "extend and pretend" philosophy made famous by our banking/political system eh???
And ya, 100B is peanuts compared to the recent bailouts and wars and the 100 other bullshit projects the government has going on...
"Pretend" that AGW is a scam? Absolutely. All day, every day.
As to $100B, yes it matters. I care about that regardsless of the money wasted on TARP or GM or AIG. I care when the government wastes $100. I care about $100B about a billion times more.
I defy you, based on my ridicule of an absurd and pointless bit of hypocritical grandstanding that had the side effect of giving public airtime to the likes of Hugo Chavez, to identify my (or Zero Hedge's) position on man-made climate change.
Don't tell me that you're actually staying in on a Friday night!?
The party comes to us at Studio Zero.
Nice. So if it's your first night at Studio Zero, do you have to drink?
You're right, "Obama will be forced to leave the Global Warming Conference due to an imposing winter storm bearing down on the mid-atlantic and due to dump as much as twenty inches of snow in the nation's capitol" avoids the causation issue in favor of straight denial.
Were you born this humor impaired, or did it take work? (Not to mention that Obama himself used this excuse). If you cannot see the humor and identify the complete and extensive stupidity of Obama actually intoning these words without projecting some kind of larger political orientation on my satire then there is very little hope for you.
+100.
Amen. I think you hit a nerve with this article. Funny how anyone who denies that the world will end in 7 years due to man-made global warming is suddenly a completely idiotic, Glenn Beck loving, Republican Redneck. This subject could be better than Gold at causing an immediate ZH fracas.
Bravo.
I've been looking for an expert for my SSD appeal. I showed this exchange to my counsellor and she said eggy's third sentence seemed to prove my point that the post, like all comedy, had undertones. She also said ZH could probably help people like us if they would just state their position on man made global warming. I started to laugh then caught myself cause I wasn't sure if she was joking.
My position on global warming is that it promotes the growth of grandstanding asshats.
she also said something about avoidance technique
Funny they can control the climate of the Earth, but we still don't have a pill to increase a woman's sexual desire.
I think their efforts are misplaced.
the key to increasing a womans sexual desire is is is It's on the tip of my tongue
Actually, washing the dishes seems to do the trick for this married man.
depends on the kind of sink for me anyway,
ASS man. that does it for me. deep into this thread, just askin
penetration into the behind, how does that work for the female.. ..
Breaking News From Copenhagen!
http://outsidethe-cardboard-box.tumblr.com/post/286334520/heat-rises-in-copenhagen-as-cap-trade-deemed-too
Super read!
here is a copy of what President Obama refers to as a "Meaningful Breakthrough" otherwise known as the Copenhnagen Accord
(PDF warning) - note the first two pages are blank
http://media.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/special/climate-change/copenhagen...
(as I posted at the top of this thread the real concern is HR 2454 - The American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009)
Go to a ethanol based economy.
Global warming concerns gone.
Job concerns gone.
The money stays here instead of going to different countries.
Ethanol =quick, cheap, simple.
http://www.alcoholcanbeagas.com/node/1298
WRONG! Ethanol is not the answer at all!
The way I look at it, reducing GHC emissions is like taking out an insurance policy. The climate and biosphere are amazingly complex and interconnected systems, and the truth is we can't really know 100% what effects our actions will have. But why take the risk? Especially since scientific inquiry in this area seems to point out some serious potential problems with the way our industrial systems use the atmosphere as a heat dump. How stupid are we going to look as a species if we end up jeopardizing our ability to survive on our own planet for the benefit of a few basis points of GDP growth per year?
Will dealing with GHC emissions collapse civilization? I doubt it. Horrors, it might even drive some real technological and business innovation. It will certainly piss off a lot of well entrenched fossil fuel interests though.
Besides, the nonsense of cap-and-trade is justifiable in my books if it accelerates the development of technologies that ultimately allow energy production to be more distributed, decentralized and democratic. This certainly might not be the goal of the moneyed interests in the near-term who want to trade hot air credits, but they could be opening an energy revolution Pandora's Box that even they won't be able to close. And I think that would be a very good thing.
Well now, Margin Call, taking out an insurance policy enriches the insurance company but does not guarantee you a payout. So.... for national security reasons, economic self-sufficiency reasons, get rid of oil, but do not buy into the drum-beating "earth is warming" pseudo-science.
The earth is a molten mass with a thin crust, influenced by a star (our sun) that is 343,000 times the mass of the earth. People certainly influence the climate of the earth but I doubt that one can easily dismiss the influence of the sun
Good on you, Marla. And you did it with no cameras around "Unprecedented"... heh, heh... Take a bow.
Go to a ethanol based economy.
Global warming concerns gone.
Job concerns gone.
The money stays here instead of going to different countries.
Ethanol =quick, cheap, simple.
http://www.alcoholcanbeagas.com/node/1298
Yes, I'm sure that magic bullet will solve all of our problems in an instant with no side-effects or expenses incurred whatsoever.
While we're at it, I want a magical unicorn that farts gold coins and shits ice cream.
lol, if the rise in sea levels causes an increase in plate movement along subduction zones with a corresponding increase in volcanic eruptions, this Copenhagen business is pointless.
You do realize that "The Day After Tomorrow" was not a documentary, right?
I'll believe in the possibility of rising sea levels when liberals sell their beach houses in Malibu. I don't see that happening yet.
Current sea level rise has occurred at a mean rate of 1.8 mm per year for the past century, and more recently at rates estimated near 2.8 ± 0.4 to 3.1 ± 0.7 mm per year (1993-2003).
Good for you for citing your sources. I can't comment on them for the most part as I don't know the authors. However, I would note that 7 inches of sea level rise (if true) over the last century has not done us any harm.
I would also note that the IPCC does not have a whole lot of credibility since it is inherently political. And the Climategate emails show how various "scientists" have manipulated data for their own ends. That doesn't mean they all did of course, but those shenanigans hurt the credibility of all on that side of the argument.
Much more likely (but not helpful to the political agenda) is that warming and colling may be affected by the sun.
Compare global temps to solar activity....
See the chart at http://www.tmgnow.com/repository/solar/lassen1.htmlby K. Lassen who coincidentally was at the Danish Meteorological Institute in Copenhagen.
Given that we are in a solar minimum (http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2009/01apr_deepsolarminimum.htm) perhaps that explains why global temperatures are colder now than in the last decade.
As counterintuitive as it might seem, global climate may indeed be influenced by Mr. Sun.
"As counterintuitive as it might seem, global climate may indeed be influenced by Mr. Sun."
The key issue here is that the Sun can't be regulated or condemned and mandated against by international circle-jerk panels and self-appointed mini-messiahs looking to "make a difference." So CO2 becomes the bete noir of choice.
LOL
article 1 is paid subscription only, but let's look at article 2.
you have to admire the sheer nerve of these guys: every agw paper i have ever read is based primarily on some inane, unfounded trend extrapolation.
take a look at the graph on p 409, "estimates of the past" versus "projections of the future"
LMAO; so sea levels were static all the way from ~500000000BCE when the oceans first formed, until 1860CE when we first started taking systematic measurements; and now that we're measuring sea levels, they will continue to rise at the exact same rate (and rate of change) from this magical inflection point in 1860CE until 500000000CE when the sun blows up.
wow, this must be what heisenberg was trying to warn us about the act of measuring. LOL
next up, we'll learn how evolution is wrong because, based on trends since 1860, humans aren't evolving and never will in the future.
agw zealots are just a bunch of chopshop heatmapping assholes pumping tzoo at 80 because it'll obviously hit 200 by jul05
ahrrrg, matey.. a bonus far yoo- thar be mar oshun t' swim in
you get the ice cream
Ethanol is fine if you live in Brazil. Sugarcane ferments with much more efficiency than corn. It's just too darn cold in the US for a good ethanol crop.
Wait a minute. If we let global warming get bad enough, we can then grow sugarcane and make ethanol efficient enough to use, solving the global warming problem once and for all. It's like the Obama Administration's plan to spend our way out of the credit crisis.
It's so crazy it just might work
Hey dozer, when you burn fossil fuels to grow ethanol, then you burn ethanol to get energy, what is the end product you're still putting up into the poor little atmosphere?
Hint: one carbon atom combined with two oxygen atoms.
With the now evident loss of ocean heat we arenow into a multi-decadel cooling trend. Pray tell where you are going to grow enough to fuel your car let alone grow enough to feed the population??
If it transpires that the cooling is as severe as the last Minimum then the Canadian and Nth USA food bowls are useless.
So why not let Mother Nature do her thing & the brilliance of Human adaptation put in place the fix that works rather some BS worldwide Socialist theft. How many $$ will end up in off-shore bank accounts will never be known. Did you see the support for Chavez's little rant. The very Capitaist structure he demonises he is quite happy to accept Indulgences from. Ferkin hypocrite.
regards
Funny Australian media are reporting that it was all our PM's doing. Good old KRudd saving the day.
About as meaningful as slowing the rate of increase of grotwh
This "agreement" in non-binding, so its worth less than the paper its printed on. Add to that the fact that this Senate and President are about to spend every cent of political capital they will ever have on the Obamacare vote this weekend and you have a situation where this will never, ever be ratified by Congress.
I wish Berstein and Woodall had taken the same trusting of authority approach to Watergate that Al Gore and company have taken to science. No there is nothing going on at the watergate hotel just us a bunch of scientists telling jokes. No need to check our work because we are scientists we only work in facts. Oh, I get it, as long as the facts don't get in the way of our scientific conclusion. The irony is that any global warming will be solved due to bankruptcy of millions of people unable to heat their homes or pay for their kids iphones and cable tv. Thanks, Al. Really CooL so to speak.
Doesn't anyone else think that the concept of "green energy" is little more than a smoke screen for the fact that we're going to be facing our "peak oil" crisis in the (possible) near future? Given what happened in 1973 with the OPEC oil embargo (oil jumps from $3/barrel to $12/barrel overnight; stagflation ensues; disco music starts to catch on), it's more than understandable how averting a similar panic would be preferable.
http://www.clemson.edu/caah/history/FacultyPages/PamMack/lec124/gasline.gif
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1973_oil_crisis
It also seems to me that for all the groundwork laid into building the perception of global warming (regardless of your personal beliefs), it creates the perfect backdrop for diverting public dollars (the most abundant and easily replenishable) towards engineering viable renewable energy sources moving forwards.
And while I really don't mean to come off as "tin-foil-on-my-head-guy," Reagan did pretty much the same thing with AIDS back in the mid/late-80s (creating the smoke screen of a national health epidemic in order to divert public dollars towards a cure while deflecting animosity from the political right, that is).
Take away what you wish from the "peak oil" argument, it lays forth a pretty compelling story. I think that the only two things open to debate are (1) how much longer before we reach the peak (if we haven't already), and (2) how steep the downslope will be on the back end.
(1) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Ultimatereserveoilprojections.gif
(2) http://www.hubbertpeak.com/images/hubalts.gif
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peak_oil
With respect to how this pertains to the content of ZH, looking back to the economic and political fallout after the OPEC oil embargo of 1973 doesn't come close to cutting it. You may want to start here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WwlNPhn64TA
When you look at the Hubble pics of our Galactic neighbours and understand the power they have to affect our little Rock you start to realise what a Hooch powered mob of Sociopaths now run this Planet.
Malthusian Marxist rubbish masquerading as Scientists.
Was Dumber & Dumber a precient social commentary after all??
regards
We have jumped the shark, this is "Idiocracy" and I don't want to eat at butt f*ckers. Obama had said about Wall Street bonuses, "they just don't get it", well we can say the same for the politicians that vote for this based on the premise of AGW and the global elites rolling into Copenhagen in their private jets and limos. Fucking unbelievable arrogance.
Everyone with a brain knows this is political cover for something else, magical mis-direction. Real pollution (soot) and man made global warming (HAARP) were not even addressed although HAARP weather warfare was in the original Rio Earth Summit.
Here is a list of what this might be about, not mutually exclusive:
I feel like the native american in the 70s commercial with a tear in his eye - Keep america beautiful. We have restricted credit, we have restricted opportunity, we have controlled development, and we have come to be one of the worst ruled, one of the most completely controlled and dominated, governments in the civilized world--no longer a government by free opinion, no longer a government by conviction and the vote of the majority, but a government by the opinion and the duress of small groups of dominant men. - Woodrow Wilson
With my tinfoil hat on, I'd say you were right on the money.
1000+ Damn scary ...if not paranoid. Well written as usual.
my oh my, cannot anyone see the positive side
Thru the Rule of Law it has now been deemd that man can control nature, and I say what on gods green earth is wrong with that.
Nature is such a hassle when you get right down too it.
Celebrate, Celebrate, Dance To The Music, and don't forget, Have Some Cake
A scientist who studied ants said that if all human beings disappeared from the earth, the planet would environmental restore itself in 15 years. However, if ants disappeared, the world would never recover.
Al Gore also said that he created the Internet.
That's debatable. What's not is that if Ants disappeared this guy would be unemployed.
Obama et al could actually LEARN something from King Canute. Canute (Cnut/Knud) was AWARE of the limitations of himself and was trying to SHOW something to his sycophantic courtiers.
http://www.viking.no/e/people/e-knud.htm
DavidC
http://www.examiner.com/examiner/x-7715-Portland-Civil-Rights-Examiner~y...
I recognized the graphs used in that article to be from Monkton's presentations which have been shown to be blatant manipulations of the true data. You guys really need to dig into the credibility of the people you trot out as the truth tellers. Most are on the fringes of the scientific community and are linked to right wing political groups with the backing of big business.
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2009/05/moncktons-deliberate-manipulation/
http://www.desmogblog.com/slamming-the-climate-skeptic-scam
Speaking of the need to dig into the credibility of those you cite, you might want to look at this article on the Financial Post about those that founded RealClimate.org (which you cite above) and how one of their founders (Green Party activist William Connolley) re-wrote over 5000 Wikipedia entries to get rid of comments about the Medieval Warming Period.
http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/fpcomment/archive/2009/12/19/la...
winisk,
i don't see where there are any graphs debunked on your second link, but let's take a look at your first link.
the arguments used to "debunk" the graph in question are:
1) the ipcc projections [for global monthly temperature anomalies] are made up.
a good sound bite but unfortunately no "official" ipcc projection data is cited, so the reader has no way of ascertaining whether the argument is true. the only compared graphs are for CO2 ppm projected vs. observed, but even for these graphs no sources are cited to show that realclimate's "official" ipcc trendlines were derived from the same ipcc study or data set as monckton's "made up" trendlines. the ipcc has released many variant projections: to show that one such projection does not line up with another in no way precludes the other from being an official projection. perhaps monckton DID "make up" his ipcc projections, who knows? but realclimate has certainly not offered an iota of proof to support that claim.
2) the jan02 start date is cherry-picked.
this is true, jan02 is a local maximum and acts to highlight the downtrend. however, realclimate's "ipcc ar4 (1980-2009)" comparative graph also cherry-picks an uptrend, and no explanation is given for why one cherry-picked start date is more valid than another. furthermore, in an attempt to cast doubt on monckton's data, realclimate's "ipcc ar4 (2002-2009)" comparative graph disingenuously conflates a downward sloping line on monckton's graph with an upward sloping line on theirs, even though the two lines are in no way analogous: realclimate's line is "ipcc ensemble and 95% range"; monckton's line is simply a mean value trendline.
again, i'm not defending monckton credibility, just pointing out that, based on the links you provide, your claim that his "presentations... have been shown to be blatant manipulations of the true data" is unsubstantiated.
Truth is 99% of the public can never be sure what is 'true.' When the sun shines we all allow our happiness to drown any semblance of anaylsis. When the tide goes out you realise that all that you perceived to be 'true' may well be bogus for you never took the time to look.
'Global Warming' became 'Climate Change' when the temperatures started to dip from 2001 and I predict this period of gross political science will implode along with our faith in economic mathematics used to paint false pictures of our universe.
Roll on the awakening
First invent the internet then save the planet. Hey come to think of it, how do polar bears get stranded on little icebergs since they are great swimmers and could just swim back to the intact ice?
We are also to believe politicians will amass together and their collective abilities will regulate the global temperature? The same ones who never see real, obvious crises until after the fact?
"(Oh, and several programs directed at the mass redistribution of wealth to non-democratic kleptocracies were also outlined in the lobby during intermission cocktails)."
Words so LOL precious they deserve, if not the Nobel Prize for Truth, then a brief congratulatory nod from one of those whose children's wealth is being so freely redistributed despite a generation's worth of vocal dissent.
Whatever happened to the Russian papers published ca 1997 claiming that the Mars polar icecaps were also receding? Such data would address the question of whether we are seeing changes in the sun's outout.
Anyone who says the science is settled is no scientist. All it takes is one fact that contradicts a theory to change a scientist's mind. Others are not scientists.
A significant event in human history - All those with a God Complex please assemble in Copenhagen immediately to save the planet from the peasants while me make tons of money for ourselves.
Human nature is so predictable.
Marla the fantastic! and Tyler you are too awesome too!!! Thank you both for your words!!!
Happiest of holidays to you and to all cyber friends!!!