tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5463472772679876402.post1944881391238898048..comments2024-03-17T05:26:42.972-04:00Comments on Spencerblog: Carbon Is Our FriendSpencerbloghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09091827187116268547noreply@blogger.comBlogger41125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5463472772679876402.post-37342518793301147112009-10-16T08:14:23.777-04:002009-10-16T08:14:23.777-04:00Bob,
I figured, but I wanted you to get the chance...Bob,<br />I figured, but I wanted you to get the chance to hit the 40th comment.<br /><br />Going up to Penn State this weekend. 3 inches of snow last night, a record for the earliest snowfall.<br />Sure hoping for some global warming by game time, so everybody keep breathing.jakenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5463472772679876402.post-34841256089565144012009-10-15T21:16:52.613-04:002009-10-15T21:16:52.613-04:00Jake - Not at all. I was just yanking your chain.Jake - Not at all. I was just yanking your chain.Bobnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5463472772679876402.post-40880835853744682072009-10-15T16:26:03.300-04:002009-10-15T16:26:03.300-04:00Bob,
We were talking about the global warming scam...Bob,<br />We were talking about the global warming scam, though political agendas are certainly driving the Democrat health care legislation and their disingenuous pro-abortion and extension-of-coverage-to-immigrants plans.<br />I don't recall it was the hope of Obama supporters that he match President Bush tit for tat. The soaring rhetoric of this supposed transformational figure (creepy--like water into wine?) led 53% of the voters to believe he was going to govern with a higher purpose than mere partisanship.<br />Now, sadly, it's apparent he's just another glib politician who says one thing to get elected and then emulates his predecessor, albeit to his side of the aisle, once he gets in office.<br />You must be so disillusioned at this betrayal.<br />You have my deepest sympathies.jakenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5463472772679876402.post-76102953908250100192009-10-15T13:36:26.818-04:002009-10-15T13:36:26.818-04:00Jake - You said "Manufactured crises to servi...Jake - You said "Manufactured crises to service a political agenda do not benefit the American people." Good Point. Like the Iraqi mushroom cloud.Bobnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5463472772679876402.post-15887965183548483582009-10-15T12:00:31.801-04:002009-10-15T12:00:31.801-04:00Good close, Bob.
It's logical to assume that a...Good close, Bob.<br />It's logical to assume that anyone who participates in these types of blog debates is opinionated and positively engaged in current events.<br />I'm confident that the extreme scenarios driving the global warming hysteria are not true. Extreme scenarios seldom are.<br />I resent being told that the debate is over, a consensus has been reached and anybody who disagrees is just ignorant.<br />Hopefully, the many thousands of qualified voices offering alternate views to these doomsday predictions will be heard and provide balance to the public discourse.<br />Manufactured crises to service a political agenda do not benefit the American people.jakenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5463472772679876402.post-3967520356198547402009-10-15T08:53:57.163-04:002009-10-15T08:53:57.163-04:00Jake - I'm still not convinced. You've use...Jake - I'm still not convinced. You've used Steward as an example of the direction that we should be moving in, and yet you avoid answering my question about Stewards claim that we need to pump more CO2 into the air. But before Gil sends "Carbon is out friend" into that great archive in the polluted sky, let me say this.<br />I hope I'm wrong, and I hope you're right.Bobnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5463472772679876402.post-60475819782092324242009-10-14T18:35:03.190-04:002009-10-14T18:35:03.190-04:00Actually, Bob, I married the Professor's nutty...Actually, Bob, I married the Professor's nutty daughter, but thanks for asking.<br /><br />Great article sent to me with my daily Rasmussen Report, "What Happened to Global Warming?" by Debra J Saunders.<br /><br />BBC Climate Correspondent, Paul Hudson, reported the warmest year recorded globally, "was not in 2007 or 2008, but 1998. For the last 11 years, we have not observed any increase in global temperatures."<br /><br />Western Washington University geologist Donald J Easterbrook presented research that Pacific decadal oscillation (POD) caused warmer temperatures in the 1980's and 90's. With Pacific sea surface temperatures cooling, Easterbrook expects 30 years of global cooling.<br /><br />EPA analyst Alan Carlin, an MIT-trained economist with a degree in physics, referred to "solar variability" and Easterbrook's work in warning that politics had prompted the EPA and other countries to pay "too little attention to the science of global warming." At first, EPA buried Carlin's paper, but then permitted him to post it on his personal website.<br /><br />The article discusses other scientists speaking up, like solar scientist Piers Corbyn presenting evidence that solar charged particles have a big impact on global temperatures, and University of Alabama-Huntsville Earth System Science Center Director John Christy's testimony before the House Ways and Means Committee rejecting any disaster scenarios. "The real atmosphere has many ways to respond to the changes that the extra CO2 is forcing upon it."<br /><br />Saunders hopes the days of stifling debate and bullying dissenters are finally over.<br />So do I.jakenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5463472772679876402.post-68837568751947901732009-10-14T09:33:53.104-04:002009-10-14T09:33:53.104-04:00Jake - And maybe you can take the Nutty Professor ...Jake - And maybe you can take the Nutty Professor as your date.Bobnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5463472772679876402.post-77112085862333628772009-10-13T23:58:05.655-04:002009-10-13T23:58:05.655-04:00This Sunday, October 18th, 2009 is the world premi...This Sunday, October 18th, 2009 is the world premiere if the new documentary,"Not Evil Just Wrong". 3 years in the making with a budget of over $1 million, the filmmakers takes on "Al Gore's agenda of environmental extremism."<br /><br />You can go to www.noteviljustwrong.com for the marketing information for this film. It's pretty strong stuff for an issue where the Democrats keep telling us the debate is over.<br />Interestingly, these are Irish filmmakers, so you can't even blame it on the crazy US guns and religion conservatives. <br />Their movie website states that over 31,000 scientists say Al Gore is wrong. With this global warming recount, it looks like he's about to lose another election.<br /><br />Gil, I know it's probably too late for us to be a part of the world's largest simultaneous film premiere party in history this Sunday, but maybe we could schedule a showing at a watering hole with a big screen TV down the road.jakenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5463472772679876402.post-43845674265275965612009-10-13T14:12:03.642-04:002009-10-13T14:12:03.642-04:00Jake - Your hypocracy is showing.Jake - Your hypocracy is showing.Bobnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5463472772679876402.post-69714393423341302022009-10-13T12:59:28.136-04:002009-10-13T12:59:28.136-04:00I thought you conservatives were pro-business (exc...I thought you conservatives were pro-business (except for American made cars).<br /><br />What's good for GE (in this case) is also good for the country. Clean/green energy is the future. The question is: do we summon the future or try to delay it?<br />The party-of-NO is still trying to build a bridge to the 19th century.<br /><br />We didn't see you crying when war was good for KBR/Halliburton, and bad for everyone else. GE also makes military satellites. Is it bad when the US wants more surveillance capability and GE writes a memo encouraging that?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5463472772679876402.post-83455954444367901592009-10-13T10:27:04.143-04:002009-10-13T10:27:04.143-04:00Thank God the Phillies gave us a helluva lot bette...Thank God the Phillies gave us a helluva lot better comeback than Anon-diano's semantic quibbles. And they even wear their names on the back of their shirts.<br /><br />The integrity crisis is really heating up. Maybe that's what's fueling the alleged global warming:<br /><br />The Boxer-Kerry cap-and-tax bill would prove to be a huge financial windfall for General Electric. Section 821(c) requires airlines and the military to purchase more costly "green" engines, coincidentally designed to GE's specifications. That's worth about $12 Billion in annual revenue.<br /><br />The self proclaimed "most ethical and transparent Administration in history" apparently fails to see the conflict with $400 Million in lobbying dollars to Democrats and GE CEO Jeff Immelt serving as a member of Obama's Economic Recovery Advisory Council.<br /><br />This is not a figment of the Limbaugh/Beck entertainment media, as Bob will assuredly claim, but rather the position taken by GE's political action committee (GEPAC).<br /><br />In an 8/19/09 fundraising letter to employees, GEPAC said, "the intersection between GE's interests and government action is clearer than ever...we must make sure that candidates who share GE's values and goals get elected to office...we were able to work closely with key authors of the climate and energy bill...If this bill is enacted into law it would benefit many GE businesses."<br /><br />Whew! Talk about a smoking gun. If that information doesn't convince you that global warming is a scam, then perhaps the liberal agenda has compromised American ideals sufficient to allow this partisan legislative hijack to be accomplished.jakenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5463472772679876402.post-17861644018946065082009-10-12T21:46:28.617-04:002009-10-12T21:46:28.617-04:00Jake,
You keep getting funnier and funnier.
&quo...Jake,<br /> You keep getting funnier and funnier.<br />"Misrepresentation and misinformation are the left's tools to promote this global warming scam. Obviously, they want no debate on conclusions based upon political rather than scientific goals."<br /><br /> With all the horse manure the Right is shoveling on this, you couldn't be more wrong. You also aren't making sense, as you just unintentionally complimented the Left.<br />You said the Left wants no debate on conclusions based upon political goals, rather preferring scientific goals in the debate. Thanks!!<br /><br />Actually, the goal of science is to explore, understand and predict in the search for truth. There's no debate about the goals. Also, scientists are the one that determine the conclusions through and debate and experimentation.<br /><br />The politicians on the Right need to start listening to the scientific consensus. They can start with the evolution and the age of the Earth. Then they can move up to climate change.<br /><br />Anyway, thanks for the laugh.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5463472772679876402.post-83529260299347982652009-10-12T19:15:17.832-04:002009-10-12T19:15:17.832-04:00Here's the Fox interview.
http://www.youtube.c...Here's the Fox interview.<br />http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=czDVebSX73A<br /><br />Steward says we need to pump more CO2 into the atmosphere. Don't take my word for it. See it for yourself! Hear it for yourself!<br /><br />This is the guy that our miasma shrouded friend, Jake, cites as an example of a common sense environmentalist. This is nothing short of laughable! Answer the question Jake. Do you agree with your expert? Should we start pumping out even more CO2?<br /><br />Definition of smog - smoke or other atmospheric pollutants combined with fog in an unhealthy or irritating mixture.Bobnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5463472772679876402.post-42367799503163752922009-10-12T12:32:33.324-04:002009-10-12T12:32:33.324-04:00I'm pretty sure that's not what I said, Bo...I'm pretty sure that's not what I said, Bob. I trust our loyal readers will see through your partisan bluster.<br /><br />Misrepresentation and misinformation are the left's tools to promote this global warming scam. Obviously, they want no debate on conclusions based upon political rather than scientific goals.<br /><br />For instance, Bob calls carbon dioxide "smog". Up until this point, smog has always been identified as nitrous oxides, tropospheric ozone, sulfur dioxide and carbon monoxide.<br /><br />With this global warming crisis, the political opportunists have seized upon the specious strategy of labeling carbon dioxide a pollutant, enabling the Democrats to posture as environmentalists while broadening their regulatory and economic influence.<br /><br />Our dear friend, Bob, who by all accounts spews this carbon dioxide vigorously and without remorse, has been taken in by this global warming scam, without even stopping to think about its entirely absurd premise.jakenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5463472772679876402.post-55657520766288293622009-10-12T11:32:31.610-04:002009-10-12T11:32:31.610-04:00Jake-
You ignored the fact that we've got 80...Jake-<br /> You ignored the fact that we've got 800,000 years of ice core samples that already have been used in the global warming debate, by Al Gore and others. The new data, peering back further, reinforces the existing arguments.<br /><br /> The real scientific debate has to do with details of how big and how soon the main warming will occur.<br />This week, scientists studying the nitrogen-cycle predict that lack of plant nutrients will make it harder for plants to keep up, and thus CO2 levels will be worse than previously expected.<br /><a href="http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/10/091009204032.htm" rel="nofollow">Nitrogen Cycle: Key Ingredient In Climate Model Refines Global Predictions</a>Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5463472772679876402.post-54122730062555594112009-10-11T21:55:43.972-04:002009-10-11T21:55:43.972-04:00Jake - Thanks my friend. Your refusal to answer my...Jake - Thanks my friend. Your refusal to answer my question about Stewards claim that we need to pump more CO2 into the environment is very telling. You obviosly have doubts about Steward too.Bobnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5463472772679876402.post-50452763489010969522009-10-11T19:46:06.026-04:002009-10-11T19:46:06.026-04:00Bob,
Steward is a pretty accomplished guy. His ext...Bob,<br />Steward is a pretty accomplished guy. His extraordinary background suggests his ideas are worthy contributions to the global warming debate. Certainly his unprecedented thinking is a thousand times more credible than Al Gore's doomsday clock, which stands at 6 years, 3 months, 15 days, 19 hours.<br /><br />Anon-diano wants to dismiss Steward's commitment to wetlands preservation. I always understood wetlands to be critical barometers of environmental sustainability.<br />It's surprising that Anon-diano, who affects such sophistication, has so little appreciation for a devoted scientist and genuine intellectual.<br /><br />To answer you, Bob, my insistent friend, I don't think any of us are qualified to judge Steward's ideas. It's up to his scientific peers to review and test his ideas. I look forward to their efforts.jakenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5463472772679876402.post-45899210592197797922009-10-11T18:55:47.941-04:002009-10-11T18:55:47.941-04:00Anon-diano says:
"These are people doing REAL...Anon-diano says:<br />"These are people doing REAL (his emphasis) scientific research, without agenda,". <br />This article was dated 10/09/09.<br />Why have Al Gore and all his sycophants tried to end the global warming debate for 2 or 3 years now if this decisive information just came out 2 days ago?<br />Interestingly, these people doing REAL scientific research (who decides which is which?) also had an article dated 7/15/09 titled 'Global Warming: Scientists' Best Predictions May Be Wrong'. It explains the difficulty in understanding the complex relationships between climate, temperature and carbon dioxide.<br />Sounds about right. Thank you Anon-diano for directing us to an article that reinforces what I have been saying all along.<br />There is not enough solid, peer-reviewed science to justify legislation that would essentially result in government takeover of a large portion of the nation's economy.jakenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5463472772679876402.post-20949849733482545962009-10-11T17:05:47.092-04:002009-10-11T17:05:47.092-04:00Jake-
This is one of the funniest things you'...Jake-<br /> This is one of the funniest things you've written:<br /> "The global warming opportunists like Al Gore have bullied the mainstream media into ignoring the thousands of complex and interconnected elements that contribute to our planet's climate."<br /><br />1) The people that recognize global warming ARE the ones looking at the interconnections and making billions of measurements from around the globe: land, sea, air and from space.<br />2) YOU are the one that tries to select a single year, city or even a single day's weather as "proof" against global warming.<br /><br />3) Gore has made no such time line. However, if conditions proceed unchecked, there will be a tipping point beyond which we won't be able to turn back before catastrophic coastal floods and mid-western droughts are unstoppable.<br /><br />4) Cap and trade worked for reducing sulfur and acid rain, despite the same dire predictions by industry.<br /><br />5) The "war on terror" was a Republican crisis that was handled by more government police-state powers and policies, as well as unfunded mandates on local communities. <br /><br />6) For Katrina, we had "less government" and more needless death.<br /><br />7) The economic crisis was the direct result of deregulation of the financial sector.<br /><br />8) Polling data also shows that the Republicans are less trusted when it come to issues like corruption.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5463472772679876402.post-18554279630620275532009-10-11T16:01:11.244-04:002009-10-11T16:01:11.244-04:00Jake - You brought up Steward. So answer the quest...Jake - You brought up Steward. So answer the question. Do you agree with Steward that we need more CO2 and that more CO2 would be good for the planet? Your attempt at misdirecting isn't working Jake. Now keep your eye on the ball. Whats your answer?Bobnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5463472772679876402.post-17870932293091895162009-10-11T13:33:34.249-04:002009-10-11T13:33:34.249-04:00Bob-
The latest science:
Last Time Carbon Dioxi...Bob-<br /> The latest science:<br /> <a href="http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/10/091008152242.htm" rel="nofollow">Last Time Carbon Dioxide Levels Were This High: 15 Million Years Ago</a><br /><br /> These are people doing REAL scientific research, without agenda, to determine the conditions that have existed in past eras. These are people making measurements.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5463472772679876402.post-29088270136626835972009-10-11T10:45:16.691-04:002009-10-11T10:45:16.691-04:00The global warming opportunists like Al Gore have ...The global warming opportunists like Al Gore have bullied the mainstream media into ignoring the thousands of complex and interconnected elements that contribute to our planet's climate.<br />It's a far sexier story to peddle the oversimplification that man has created a "doomsday crisis".<br />Do you really believe Al Gore's ludicrous notion that the world is going to end in 6 years, 3 months, 16 days,and 5 hours unless we act?<br />Do you really believe the even more ludicrous notion that John Kerry and Barbara Boxer's cap-and-tax legislation would solve this global warming crisis, if it happened to exist?<br />How is it that every Democrat crisis calls for the solution of more government control over our lives and the economy?<br />If these many crises were actually real, don't you think the law of averages would come up with one solution to a crisis that required a smaller government, less regulation, and more personal freedom. Somehow that never happens, though.<br /><br />Here's an idea -- let's promote an integrity crisis. With Geithner, Rangel, Jarrett, Dodds, Blagojevich, Rezko, Richardson, Browner, Holder, Reid, Pelosi, Schumer, etc., we have plenty to fix.<br />The latest Rassmussen poll says 83% of Americans believe government ethics and corruption is a key electoral issue, so it even has broader support than this global warming scam.jakenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5463472772679876402.post-22181777530299566802009-10-11T01:30:26.117-04:002009-10-11T01:30:26.117-04:00Jake - I saw the Steward interview on Fox. Now com...Jake - I saw the Steward interview on Fox. Now come on Jake. Do you really agree with Steward? Do you really believe the world needs more carbon emissions? What is it Jake? Yes or No?Bobnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5463472772679876402.post-37308789882706140512009-10-10T18:22:22.041-04:002009-10-10T18:22:22.041-04:00Jake-
I'll stick with my own church and avoi...Jake-<br /> I'll stick with my own church and avoid whatever cult informs your views. You seem to confuse me with several of the other anonymous people here, and lump together any of us that oppose your backward views.<br /> Wetlands protection and writing a fad diet book are hardly qualifications for expertise on climate change.<br /><br />Other than his obvious vested interest to shill for the oil companies, the core of the argument against him is NOT personal, but scientific. His ideas have been debunked and shown to contradict the actual science in this field.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com