I liked the Daily Shows take, spoofing the Fox claims that the snow storm proves Gore was wrong. They showed a graph of the monthly avg temp from July to January proving the earth was not warming.

 Beaker wrote: 
And yet:

 Beaker wrote: 
E: Climate change is nothing compared to
the hot air produced by those who are trying
to deny that it is happening

Two US firms wash their hands of tar sands
Canada’s controversial tar sands industry took its first retail blow Wednesday as two Fortune 500 companies announced plans to eliminate the high-carbon Alberta fuel from its supply chain.

The U.S.-based firms Whole Foods Market Inc. and Bed, Bath and Beyond Inc. both unveiled new fuel policies designed to wean themselves off “higher-than-normal greenhouse gas footprints” inherent in feedstock from the Alberta tar sands.

 HazzeSwede wrote: 
You should run for office.

If the money is right,,I believe in anything !
                   

I don't believe in global warming...



(j/k)

Obama: The making of a 'clean coal' president

President Obama has issued marching orders for the rapid national adoption of "clean coal" technology. Last week, shortly

after his budget address, he ordered a high-level task force to deliver a plan within 180 days determining how

"to overcome barriers to the widespread, cost-effective deployment of CCS within 10 years, with the goal of

bringing 5 to 10 commercial demonstration projects on line by 2016."

Obama's executive office memorandum looks like a big victory for the coal industry, which was already

handed $3.8 billion in last year's stimulus act for carbon capture and storage (CCS) research and

development and deployment. He did not simultaneously order a similar plan for a big roll-out of solar

or wind energy to level the playing field.

Understanding climate change: There's an app for that
Skeptical Science has an iPhone ap that allows you to browse common critiques of climate science and arguments against climate change, and read expert responses. Perfect for both the curious, and the argumentative-on-the-go.

NASHVILLE – "When it comes to your freedom in day-to-day life, environmentalists are the greatest threat to America now and America in the future."

That is the stern warning Junkscience.com publisher and self-described libertarian Steve Milloy told a packed room at the first national Tea Party convention in Nashville. Milloy castigated both Republican and Democrat politicians for their global alarmism, saying those on the "right" have failed Americans because, "Republicans have been terrible when it comes to environmental issues," he said.

"Don't even get me started about the nit-wit governor in California." A resounding applause erupted from a crowd of 600 attendees.

He continued, "By contrast, there's the left. Although the left has think-tanks, they don't really need them. Their thinking was done for them by Karl Marx and hasn't changed much since. … The left rarely thinks; it usually just acts with reckless abandon."

 

The rest is here

 

CLIMATE SERVICE: The Obama administration on Monday proposed creating a new federal agency charged with studying and reporting on climate change, the AP reports. The chiefs of the Commerce Department and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration announced that NOAA will establish the new Climate Service in the vein of its existing National Weather Service and National Ocean Service, centralizing much of the climate research that has until now been conducted by a scattering of different agencies.

The U.S. Climate Service will be "one-stop shopping into a world of climate information," NOAA Administrator Jane Lubchenco said, and while it must first be approved by a congressional committee, officials say it could be in operation by the end of the year. NOAA reported earlier this year that the decade of 2000-2009 was the warmest on record, breaking the previous high set by the 1990s, and much of that warming is widely blamed on human actions, namely the release of greenhouse gases by burning fossil fuels. (Source: Associated Press)

 RichardPrins wrote: 
good one!

Just in: Peter Eigen: How to expose the corrupt

 RichardPrins wrote:


  Richard, I really respect your opinion and appreciate your efforts here and elsewhere. You've certainly helped enlighten me on evolution (example, I read/use eurekalert a ton). My position on politics/government is a direct result of personal experience, first hand, 20 plus years in the trenches. You may (or may not) be surprised how much religion and politics overlap, if you've ever been involved in the operations/planning/accounting/fund raising, you'll know (as opposed to understand) exactly what I mean. (In my political ignorance I was partially responsible for and party to enabling some very bad people acquire money and power, which they used/wielded for their benefit (corruption) at the expense of the common man. That probably helps explain my passion.)

The manipulation of currency and brazen confiscation of wealth by practically all governments is truly mind blowing. (google debt, deficit, unfunded liabilities, money supply (inflation), borrowing, printing, etc.)

I'll touch on climate change, and the credibility/validity of current government/banking solutions, and why it really matters when I get a few minutes.

Regards

Just a note:

"Climate Change" without "Global" might be enough to fool a few simpletons, but not many.  The problem with global warming does not mean that having seasonal cold temperatures automatically means that global warming cannot possibly exist.

If someone can give me a scientifically reproducible explanation as to why the North Pole is more water than ice just recently, please do speak up.  Anyone?

 miamizsun wrote:
I think you're too cynical as far as politics is concerned, but I can understand why. However, not all countries are run as your country is. Some are run far worse, and some are run better. Corruption is a given, and it has the tendency to pop up everywhere. Both in cultural institutions (government/religion, and even science) as well as biological systems. Most systems adapt to combat the cheaters, which I believe is the way to go for any system. It thus adapts, even though you can never get rid of it completely. The agents in these systems are clever and will always find new loopholes to exploit. That doesn't always mean, that the systems should be gotten rid off.

I certainly can relate to skepticism, as well as the anti-authoritarianism, and think accountability is extremely important. But things do change, including more accountability when it comes to religion, and in some countries even when it comes to politics. Some countries are clearly more corrupt than others. You can look up the data on that as well. Loosely there's a cultural element to that as well, and many players are involved.

As for climate change, we can't help but rely on experts, as with any other branch of science, and hope that the peer review system along with the usual checks and balances do their work when it gets published and is scrutinized by others who can actually read the articles in the journals (try reading some articles and see if you understand the jargon and educational assumptions). As such, you could see all the (actual) data yourself, but you wouldn't know what to do with it. It's not a matter of just looking at thermometers. To interpret and process it requires understanding of principles and theories of that particular branch of science. That reminds me of a creationist who demanded in an open forum from a scientist to see the actual tree rings, so he could check for himself. Pictures of them wouldn't suffice. Being a layman and a creationist was sufficient to deny him access to carefully preserved (and protected) data (in this case in a physical form) held in a research institute. There are numerous objects of research which aren't accessible to layman, and for good reason.

That's not to say that transparency about the processes and data involved in science should not be under constant scrutiny. In general, science does pretty good job at doing just that through the peer review process, and in correcting itself when needed. It however, isn't perfect, but then nothing is.

Finally, when it comes to the discussion of climate change, the science and the policies which might follow, are two different fields. It doesn't help conflating them and infusing them with ideology. The generally poor levels of scientific literacy, along with shoddy and insufficient science journalism, makes it very hard for people to gauge what's really going on. Relying on simplified sound bites doesn't help, but often it's about as much as people are willing to invest in those topics. Having a distaste for, or mistrust against science (in some cases cultivated) doesn't help either.

 hippiechick wrote: 

I agree.

I love efficiency, as I've said before, I've reduced my personal carbon footprint by at least 40%. (it is also how I make my living - being efficient)

We (individually and as a group) should be more sustainable, both fiscally and socially. I argue this constantly here.

As for religion, either you have really good reasons to believe what you believe, or you don't. (see my Sam Harris post, etc.)

I catch a lot of flack from all directions (right, left, religious/political) for holding these things to a conversational standard.

Regards

 RichardPrins wrote:
Which problem?
A few thoughts....

Richard, in general, we've got two huge problems in this country (or in the world).

Religious delusion, without going into a rant here and offending the faithful, I think it is safe to say that we agree on this.

And political delusion, thinking that the very people, we elect/select to run our countries are here to help us, when we have overwhelming data pointing out just the opposite.

These often overlap, leveraging our ignorance and stupidity against us. The human mind is easily partitioned as is evidenced by human actions.

I am skeptical by nature of people/leaders with irrational beliefs.

I question people who are, or have been screwing me or others.

Why some automatically trust them, or acknowledge it and give up or feel hopeless/overwhelmed seems to be the norm. I draw a parallel to religion here.

Credibility and accountability are important to me, currently, politics and religion have neither.

Both use each other for gain, but we know that only muddies the water and/or distorts the truth.

As for climate change (and religion), I refuse to relax my standards. I want to see all of the data and want it in an open forum, so at least we can the opportunity for an objective, educated answer.

I've got to run.

Regards