Ducking Climate Warming Evidence

The EPA is legally obligated under the Clean Air Act and the Supreme Court’s 2007 “Mass vs. EPA” ruling to limit global warming emissions.

http://consortiumnews.com/2012/02/06/ducking-...

SpaceBlues wrote:

The EPA is legally obligated under the Clean Air Act and the Supreme Court’s 2007 “Mass vs. EPA” ruling to limit global warming emissions.
http://consortiumnews.com/2012/02/06/ducking-...

Unfortunately, enforcing any of that depends on the present Supremes, who are denying this problem just as the men who appointed them did.

Northie wrote:

<quoted text>
Unfortunately, enforcing any of that depends on the present Supremes, who are denying this problem just as the men who appointed them did.

Well, let's review:

At its discretion, and within certain guidelines established by Congress, the Supreme Court each year hears a limited number of the cases it is asked to decide. Those cases may begin in the federal or state courts, and they usually involve important questions about the Constitution or federal law.

http://www.uscourts.gov/FederalCourts/Underst...

Contrary to press misunderstandings all my life, I'm clear about the Supremes. Enforcement of the law is carried out by the Feds.

I guess its kinda like the democrats who dont have the faintist idea about the seriousness of the $16 trillion debt crisis that the U.S. has.It doesn*t seem to bother them at all.

You econuts just going to give up your little scam, are you?

Ah, the libtard politicos have milked the "green technology" global warming shit to death, time to take their ill-gotten gains home and continue burning fossil fuels.

Who wrote:

You econuts just going to give up your little scam, are you?

There is compelling, comprehensive, and consistent objective evidence that humans are changing the climate in ways that threaten our societies and the ecosystems on which we depend.

http://www.sciencemag.org/content/328/5979/68...

SpaceBlues wrote:

<quoted text>There is compelling, comprehensive, and consistent objective evidence that humans are changing the climate in ways that threaten our societies and the ecosystems on which we depend.
http://www.sciencemag.org/content/328/5979/68...

The same way one volcanic eruption does?

here is a question for all of you "scientists" out there who believe in man-made global warming: how much money will it require to slow it down? and what do you say to those who die because of funds diverted from programs that arguably would have saved them??? i.e., malaria, food relief, AIDS, etc. and with a 16 trillion dollar debt, what politician will run on a platform that spends billions on this??? in the past when the earth warmed, we simply evolved....

GoodNewz wrote:

here is a question for all of you "scientists" out there who believe in man-made global warming: how much money will it require to slow it down? and what do you say to those who die because of funds diverted from programs that arguably would have saved them??? i.e., malaria, food relief, AIDS, etc. and with a 16 trillion dollar debt, what politician will run on a platform that spends billions on this??? in the past when the earth warmed, we simply evolved....

Good points and I was told that we can't do much about it anyway. 90% of the global warming that we are going to get is already in the pipeline and we are getting it no matter what. Perhaps energy should be spend thinking about how we are going to deal with it since you can't stop it.

Show me something that will work before you make me do something, I say you can't , especially when the rest of the world has to go along with it too. Nothing but a bunch of liberals trying to scare us into shooting ourselves in the foot.

didnt nasa just cofirm the planet has been cooling now for the last 10 years?? there is no climate warming... its a socialist scam... as the un admitted.. its about redistribution of wealth..

wake up

wellreadcam wrote:

didnt nasa just cofirm the planet has been cooling now for the last 10 years?? there is no climate warming... its a socialist scam... as the un admitted.. its about redistribution of wealth..
wake up

Yep.. and Algore scammed us out of hundreds of millions!! We rejected him so now he figures he's getting the last laugh! Problem is, he is getting the last laugh... all the way to the bank!

we had an idiot here claiming back in the early 2000s that all our dams in eastern australia will be out of water... we have so much water now we must release most of it... funny we have not heard from him in a while

Never had such a warm winter in Michigan. I can't believe I'm using the AC in my car sometimes, in JANUARY/FEBRUARY. Record snows in Italy. The jet stream is all F'd up. We are human guinea pigs!

GoodNewz wrote:

here is a question for all of you "scientists" out there who believe in man-made global warming: how much money will it require to slow it down? and what do you say to those who die because of funds diverted from programs that arguably would have saved them??? i.e., malaria, food relief, AIDS, etc. and with a 16 trillion dollar debt, what politician will run on a platform that spends billions on this??? in the past when the earth warmed, we simply evolved....

it's is NO scienteeth in Topix!!! Cold War Part:)II ;-000

Robert wrote:

<quoted text>
Good points and I was told that we can't do much about it anyway. 90% of the global warming that we are going to get is already in the pipeline and we are getting it no matter what. Perhaps energy should be spend thinking about how we are going to deal with it since you can't stop it.

No, 90% of of the warming were are going to get is NOT already in the pipeline. Try 20-30%--and that's 20-30% of the warming within just this century.

To date, we are probably committed to warming of 2 degrees celsius, which will be a disaster--but nothing like the catastrophe we'll see if the climate warms by 6 degrees celsius, which would crash the economy, kill millions and wipe out a large chunk of the Earth's life. According the the historically too-conservative IPCC, that is the upper range of what the Earth could see this century unless we drastically cut carbon pollution soon.

The good news is that cutting carbon pollution is extremely cheap if we act soon. So why don't we?

Northie wrote:

<quoted text>
No, 90% of of the warming were are going to get is NOT already in the pipeline. Try 20-30%--and that's 20-30% of the warming within just this century.
To date, we are probably committed to warming of 2 degrees celsius, which will be a disaster--but nothing like the catastrophe we'll see if the climate warms by 6 degrees celsius, which would crash the economy, kill millions and wipe out a large chunk of the Earth's life. According the the historically too-conservative IPCC, that is the upper range of what the Earth could see this century unless we drastically cut carbon pollution soon.
The good news is that cutting carbon pollution is extremely cheap if we act soon. So why don't we?

crash the economy, kill millions, wipe out a large chunk of earth's life. this is all based on what, your assumptions? sounds like friends of the earth talking points. and what is your definition of "extremely cheap"?

Global warming is an exposed global HOAX!!

CBOW wrote:

<quoted text>
The same way one volcanic eruption does?

No. Volcanic eruptions are much too localized and even the BIG ones with global aerosols are short term.

http://arxiv.org/ftp/physics/papers/0509/0509...

Northie wrote:

The good news is that cutting carbon pollution is extremely cheap if we act soon.

Actually, the first cuts to carbon pollution keep money in your pocket. Conservation...do what you need to do, but with an eye to use less.

Those who Waste the most..... are in the enviable position to vastly save the most money! Someone getting 10mpg, would burn 100,000 gallons in 1 million miles of driving. Someone obtaining 30mpg, would burn 33,333 gallons in 1 million miles of driving.

If the 30mpg driver was able to obtain 50mpg, he would burn 20,000 gallons, saving 13,333 gallons. At $4/gal., he would save $53,000+. If the 10mpg driver was able to obtain 50mpg, he would save..... 80,000 gallons & would keep $320,000 in his pocket!

All that savings is WITHOUT driving any less. To drive less, combining trips, schedule trips with neighbors, would mean much more savings.

Billions of gallons of fuel are wasted just with underinflated tires, causing engines to work harder. Longer traveling bicyclists note their increased efforts with underinflated tires, & carefully keep their tires inflated properly.... even add a little more pressure.

Use 100% gasoline, instead of 10% ethanol blends, & most people will save MORE than the gov't considered 2% to 4% gains. Many people believe they save well over 10% in mpg. Switching to 100% gasoline, our 3 cars have raised mpg by 7+%, 7+% & 4+%. Go to pure-gas.org for maps & addresses to the minority of gas stations that still sell 100% gasoline. Some states have no 100% gasoline stations. But some people on their state's border, may find 100% gasoline across the border in other states. Southern United States has the densest concentration of 100% gasoline stations.

So save fuel. Little loss in your lifestyle will occur. Many people will discover their lifestyles will be better.