Global Warming - It's Our Fault

[InsaneBassninja]

my thoughts are the earth is fine.... were going away pack your bags everone. Also dons't help the suns is causeing all of the warming.

 

[BawanaRik]

They are working to introduce fracking in my state. We have small deposits of natural gas, and very little infrastructure/trained local workforce to handle the work, so in order to attract the attention of the industry, the director of the department of environment and natural resources is proposing that we roll back our environmental regulations further on a practice that hasn't begun or been proven safe in our region. This is a guy who was quoted recently as saying that environmentalists would have us all wearing loincloths and living in lean-to's. In fact, our entire environmental commission has now stated that fracking is guaranteed to be so safe that they have decided to turn down federal grants to test wells in areas that are to be fracked. I am no expert on fracking, but anytime a political hack is carrying water for out-of-state billionaire industrialist polluters, I am immediately skeptical of what they are saying.

Aren't these the same political hacks that were elected by the people , or appointed by said electeds of NC?

 

[DerHoggz]

Aren't these the same political hacks that were elected by the people , or appointed by said electeds of NC?

If so, does that make it OK?

 

[BawanaRik]

If so, does that make it OK?

It makes it the choice of the people.

 

[Unrepresented]

It makes it the choice of the people.

Hooray for fatalism!

 

[NWB]

Aren't these the same political hacks that were elected by the people , or appointed by said electeds of NC?

It was one of the Carolinas, can't recall which, that the elected state legislature wanted to enact a law against studying the potential effects of global warming on the state. They were afraid that the findings would be bad for tourism and development.

 

[Floyd Eye]

You seem to be having a problem producing any legitimate data to show that the chemical changes caused by polluting the earth's atmosphere can IN NO WAY have an effect on the climate. Do you consider yourself to be anti-environmental?

Absolutely. The environment is $*%T. What with all the fracking juice in my water and smog all over the place. Plus some how my stupid neighbor across the street manages to keep his 1961 trailer in livable condition so I gotta look at that monstrosity.

Yeah, screw the environment.

 

[bolophonic]

It makes it the choice of the people.

If there is one thing that I know for sure from reading your posts on here is that you have absolutely no qualifications to discuss the political conditions in my state with enough accuracy for me to bother doing so, if that were even an option.

 

[bolophonic]

Absolutely. The environment is $*%T. What with all the fracking juice in my water and smog all over the place. Plus some how my stupid neighbor across the street manages to keep his 1961 trailer in livable condition so I gotta look at that monstrosity.

Yeah, screw the environment.

My new property has an abandoned looking trailer right on the other side of my fence. I am tempted to ask him how much he wants for it so I can haul it away.

 

[BawanaRik]

Hooray for fatalism!

Fatalism? I have to wonder how you came to that conclusion.

 

[Floyd Eye]

My new property has an abandoned looking trailer right on the other side of my fence. I am tempted to ask him how much he wants for it so I can haul it away.

In the long run that's cheaper than arson.

 

[BawanaRik]

They are working to introduce fracking in my state. We have small deposits of natural gas, and very little infrastructure/trained local workforce to handle the work, so in order to attract the attention of the industry, the director of the department of environment and natural resources is proposing that we roll back our environmental regulations further on a practice that hasn't begun or been proven safe in our region. This is a guy who was quoted recently as saying that environmentalists would have us all wearing loincloths and living in lean-to's. In fact, our entire environmental commission has now stated that fracking is guaranteed to be so safe that they have decided to turn down federal grants to test wells in areas that are to be fracked. I am no expert on fracking, but anytime a political hack is carrying water for out-of-state billionaire industrialist polluters, I am immediately skeptical of what they are saying.

That sounds scary.

What out of state billionaire industrialist polluters? Don't you have any in state?

It's my understanding that they need property owners permission to frack on their land. So you have nothing to worry about

 

[bolophonic]

That sounds scary.

What out of state billionaire industrialist polluters? Don't you have any in state?

It's my understanding that they need property owners permission to frack on their land. So you have nothing to worry about

North Carolina doesn't have a trained workforce that is skilled in fracking. The companies that stand to make the most money from gas exploration are not headquartered here. As for the rights of individual property owners, you might want to brush up on "forced pooling" to start off with.

 

[hbarcat]

In Saudia Arabia, oil companies are taxed at 90% of their profits. And they still drill and pump because 10% still makes them gazillionaires. Here in the U.S., the taxpayers give the oil companies tax subsidies.

I suggest that the best thing to do is end both the confiscatory taxes as well as the subsidies. Let the product compete fairly on the free market

So you're right, there would be an enormous transfer of capital. From an industry that has, for decades, fleeced the citizens of the U.S...to a new generation of entrepreneurs yet to unfold.

Is it wise to give governmental support and immense new capital at taxpayer expense to a brand new energy industry that will be in a position to fleece the citizens of the world?

It's not clear to me how the scientists or nations advocating curbing carbon emissions from fossil fuels would profit from this unless they were also shareholders of these new alternative energy companies.

Any individual, organization or government can profit from an industry by association in numerous ways. You've already pointed out that this is how it works for the fossil fuel industry. It will work exactly the same way for alternative energy. This isn't a prediction - it's already taking place.

I've heard the talking point about how these scientists live a cush lifestyle from doing GW research.

I haven't said that and I find the idea implausible at best.

But even if that were true, it's not the same kind of cash that the oil industry trades in. It's laughable that the "follow the money" maxim is used by AGW crew to indict the integrity of scientists doing the research vs. the clear profit motive of those in the oil industry. And the numerous times AGW "scientists" have been exposed as paid shills for them.

With all due respect, you haven't really been paying attention to anything I've posted if you believe I'm making the case that the scientists doing climatology and other related research are being dishonest or even being biased - regardless of how they get paid.

I think I addressed this point, specifically, by making a distinction between the research scientists doing the peer reviewed studies and the policy makers and activists who are misusing their work.

And your analogy conveniently sets up the "extreme" doctor to play the role of the GW side. Really?

It wasn't "convenient" - I set it up that way on purpose!

I provided this analogy for one reason only - to encourage people to consider the possibility that it isn't only the fossil fuel industry that engages in exaggeration and distortion for selfish reasons.

It amazes me that so many people can congratulate themselves for being sharp enough to see through the propaganda of Big Petroleum, yet they gullibly accept similar propaganda coming from those who stand to make similar fortunes in alternative energy. Ethanol is a perfect illustration of this. The global warming crisis mongers demanded that something be done about GW - immediately - because there was no time to waste.

So the United States started converting a large percentage of its corn crops to make ethanol and blend it in with gasoline. An entire new special interest group sprang up overnight in the U.S. and they are now making billions of dollars a year on an ill conceived scheme that creates more CO2 emissions than it saves while at the same time has decimated the corn export trade that helps to provide inexpensive food to 3rd world countries.

It's the people who are advocating that we blindly trust every alternative energy salesman that comes along and the policy makers who empower them with virtual blank checks cashed on our bank accounts. They would have us trade one overlord for another. Meet the new boss - same as the old boss.

You also seem to have missed the key point I was making. That it might be better to make gradual, common sense changes, based on careful planning and phased in as they become practical, than to make monumental and irreversible, hasty decisions, based on fear and anger.

 

[SolarMan]

So, in conclusion...


...there is only confusion.


(I'm amazed at the brainpower being applied to this topic and yet we are more confused about what it is and what we "should do")


Fear global cooling. Or else.

 

[NWB]

It amazes me that so many people can congratulate themselves for being sharp enough to see through the propaganda of Big Petroleum, yet they gullibly accept similar propaganda coming from those who stand to make similar fortunes in alternative energy. Ethanol is a perfect illustration of this. The global warming crisis mongers demanded that something be done about GW - immediately - because there was no time to waste.

So the United States started converting a large percentage of its corn crops to make ethanol and blend it in with gasoline. An entire new special interest group sprang up overnight in the U.S. and they are now making billions of dollars a year on an ill conceived scheme that creates more CO2 emissions than it saves while at the same time has decimated the corn export trade that helps to provide inexpensive food to 3rd world countries.

It was actually the mule-kick of $148 per barrel oil prices by 2008 that started the ethanol frenzy. With such high oil prices helping to wreck the US economy at that time, ADM, Monsanto, DuPont, etc. were pushing subsidies for corn ethanol as a "solution" to the problem.

 

[GregC]

So, in conclusion...


...there is only confusion.


(I'm amazed at the brainpower being applied to this topic and yet we are more confused about what it is and what we "should do")


Fear global cooling. Or else.

Some are confused, others are not.

The cooling thing's been covered about 5000 times already in this thread.

 

[Unrepresented]

It was actually the mule-kick of $148 per barrel oil prices in 2008 that started the ethanol frenzy. With such high oil prices helping to wreck the US economy at that time, ADM, Monsanto, DuPont, etc. were pushing subsidies for corn ethanol as a "solution" to the problem.

Because investor speculations are a far more sound way of running a market [del]into the ground[/del] than government oversight.

 

[hbarcat]

It was actually the mule-kick of $148 per barrel oil prices in 2008 that started the ethanol frenzy. With such high oil prices helping to wreck the US economy at that time, ADM, Monsanto, DuPont, etc. were pushing subsidies for corn ethanol as a "solution" to the problem.

The ethanol frenzy started well before 2008. It was most definitely motivated in large part by a push from environmentalists to provide an alternative to fossil fuel.

 

[aborgman]

I suggest that the best thing to do is end both the confiscatory taxes as well as the subsidies. Let the product compete fairly on the free market

Sounds great to me, as long as the industry is responsible for covering all of their externalities.

The massive increase in prices from folks no longer being able to ignore large amounts of damage would quickly reduce our fossil fuel usage drastically.