From Maryland League for Conservation Voters:
Maryland League of Conservation Voters and Organizing for Action to Deliver Climate Change Denier Award to Rep.Harris
Will discuss his extreme, anti-science views
Maryland League of Conservation Voters and Organizing for Action will deliver a Climate Change Deniers award to Representative Harris on Tuesdav. August 13 at noon in recognition of his extreme anti-science views, which put him at odds with 97 percent of scientists and a majority of the American people. The event is part of a “Day of Action” to hold climate change deniers accountable nationwide.
If it weren’t sad, it would be comical.
Sadly, once again Harford County’s right wing legislators, especially at the state and national levels, prove an embarrassment to the concept of educated and thoughtful leadership necessary for the success of representative democracy.
As an independent and moderate voter, I wish our county executive was not so beholden to developers for financial support, but I’ve consistently voted for him throughout his career. I only hope that in seeking the Republican gubernatorial nomination he avoids currying too much the favor of the far right.
Craig will favor anyone or any cause to continue his agenda. Just depends on which way the wind or polls are blowing on any given day.
97% of the arrogant, know it all, moving Maryland forward as they rob the rest of us blind people. Let them eat cake – and then tax the crap out of them. Socialist scams abound.
97% of what Americans believe in Al Gores retirement plan? Moving Maryland Forward socialists – that grab the power and tax the rest of us into submission, all under the guise of doing what is best for all. The MLCV should give themselves an award for Outstanding Rip Off support – please blow my rain tax away with Martin’s windmills (blowing through the cavernous space between his ears).
A well deserved recognition for my congressman! And, sadly, he probably proudly display it.
I don’t agree with Mr. Harris on a lot of things but climate change scams, like our newly imposed rain tax, health care scams like “affordable ” care act – I support Mr. Harris views in these instances.
Unfortunately, BAGUy, the scientific evidence supporting manmade climate change is overwhelming and studies showing the contrary have been found to be severely flawed. The evidence is there and the agreement within the scientific community is almost unanimous. What further evidence do you need?
I’m not sure what is funnier:
The fact that Harris is a doctor and yet doubts the validity of peer-reviewed scientific studies, or the fact that Harris can have ‘faith’ (i.e. a belief that is not based upon proof) in the existence of a magical man in the sky while doubting a scientific idea supported by empirical evidence. The man is a career politician who cares more about his paycheck than his constituents. The GOP says jump and Harris blindly follows. And don’t get me started on his refusal to support the Violence Against Women Act. The man is a disgrace to our district.
That’s funny, Tommy. Tell me, do you believe in the scientific concept of the “multiverse”?
I do not believe in the existence of a multiverse, but believing in a scientific concept is not the same as believing in the existence of God. Most concepts (including the multiverse) are formulated based on pre-existing scientific theories, concepts, and laws. The scientists behind the modern concept of the multiverse are not making the claim that it DOES exist, they are merely formulating a presumption based upon existing scientific evidence and ideas. Something tells me the same cannot be said for Harris’ belief in a higher power.
…which is the definition of “faith”, and a great many scientists, have such faith in a Supreme Being (NIH Director and Director of the Human Genome Project Dr. Francis Collins being just one such example).
The point is, when viewing the theories surrounding the concept of multiple (or infinite) universes, the idea that there is a “higher power” doesn’t seem so laughable.
I submit to you that the theoretical physicists studying the possibility of a multiverse would find your lack of a belief in the possible existence of a multiverse to be as laughable ignorant as your pooh-pooing of Rep. Harris’ faith.
Here’s something to try: think a little more deeply and understandingly about the value systems of those with whom you disagree, and a little less paternalistic and judgmental about them. Rep. Harris claims no monopoly on either facts or faith, and as Shakespeare said, there are more things in heaven and earth than are dreamt of in your philosophy.
The idea that something can come from nothing, independent of a Supreme Being defies everything we know about science and requires as much faith from an individual as belief in a god. Tinfoil Tommy, from where did the first particle of matter come? Almost all of the great individuals throughout history who have defined scientific laws and principles have been believers in a Supreme Being. The THEORY of evolution is a rather new theory with significant gaps in empirical data and evidence supporting it. There are plenty of scientists/climatologists who have pointed out similar gaps in the data used to suggest humans are responsible for climate change, including the former Delaware State Climatologist who was forced out of his position for daring to question this view. The idea of man-made global warming has much more to do with politics than science, and it is no surprise that many are unwilling or unafraid to point out the huge gaps in the data supporting the concept, given the example that those in power make out of those who do. The emperor has no clothes, but most are too afraid to tell him.
@ Truth Detector
Be careful of confusing theory, the scientific term, with “hunch” or “speculation”, as theory is used in common parlance. The two are radically different concepts. I only mention this because in your post you put the word in upper case, as if we haven’t had the theory of evolution for a century and a half and is there is serious scientific debate about it.
I take no issue with the rest of your posting.
Sorry, Tommy, but that’s just not the case. Though there’s scientific evidence that the climate is changing is undebatable, that’s only because, well, the climate is _always_ changing. It’s the degree to which _man_ has an impact on the climate that is the subject of serious disagreement among scientists–from studies showing flatlined global mean temperatures, to studies showing a lagging effect between temperatures and atmospheric CO2 concentrations.
Here’s what we do know: the astrophysics (ie, the relationship between Earth and its Sun, the action of radiative solar energy hitting our atmosphere, the output of radiative energy from the sun…) plays a much greater role in climate change than what mankind does. Not to mention the geophysical forces here on earth as well.
What’s more, we also know that the “solutions” to anthropogenic climate change will have very little impact on the climate itself–but could have devastating effects on man. It’s a matter of comparing risks–potential problems that might occur should the effects of climate change be disastrous to the effects that will occur should we raise the cost of energy to the point where it wrecks the world economy.
Wealthier nations are healthier nations. Destroying America’s wealth (based in no small measure on our access to inexpensive energy) does the health of mankind little good, nor does it help the environment.
And I’ll leave you with this: when asked about worldwide environmental problems, global environmental scientists ranked climate change as about #20 on the list of priorities. The number one environmental and public health problem was access to clean water.
Let’s focus on that, and the other environmental priorities on that list first, before we decide to wreck our economy and make us incapable to solving those real (and serious) problems.
Your solution to ignore the threat of climate change based on a perceived threat to our economy is backwards and laughable. You must have lived in a previous era when Iron weapons started taking over Bronze age weapons and upset the whole economy of humankind. Fear change or embrace it and adapt. Being willfully stupid will get you no where
…thus ignoring the points I raised by creating a strawman. I’m not ignoring the threat of climate change. The climate changes. Period.
Now, address the issues I raise. The astrophysics. The fact that there are more pressing environmental problems than climate.
You gain nothing by deflecting the issues.
Astrophysics? Really…. care to elaborate Doctor Gal Ore? Do you even know what the definition of Astrophysics is or was that something you read somewhere that sounded cool?
Yes, I do know what astrophysics is. Do you?
Did you read what I wrote above?
If you actually read some of the Geology on the subject you would know that the most likely cause of the Ice Age was a huge Volcanic event in the area known as Siberia which released a lot of CO2 into the atmosphere and simulated the Green House effect.
Obviously not based on what you wrote. Astrophysics is the study of physical properties of celestial objects!
Yes Gal… I did read what you wrote. It was something like this “Astrophysics”. “Astrophysics” “Astrophysics” with little elaboration on what you mean when you say it. That suggests a below juvenile of understanding anything other than how to spell “Astrophysics”
OK, “Because” and “CDev”…
I have a PhD in geochemistry from Maryland, a BS in Geology from MD, and was 3 credits short of a minor in Astrophysics when I was an undergrad.
So I know something of whence I speak when I talk about science. And no, “CDev” astrophysics is NOT just the study of the “physical properties of celestial objects” any more than nuclear physics is merely the study of the physical properties of atoms.
Astrophysics is, at its core, the study of the physics of the universe, and, more specifically, the study of how the various objects in space interact with one another… like how the radiative energy from a solar system’s central star interacts with and impacts the various planetary bodies within that solar system. How orbital mechanics shape the development of a planet. How rotation and axial tilt affect the planet.
So when it comes to a planet’s climate, in addition to the geophysical properties of a planet (and the geochemical properties), the radiative energy from the Sun has an impact. The distance the planet is from that sun has an impact. How that distance may change with the vagaries of that planet’s orbit around that sun has an impact. The changes in the planet’s axial tilt have an impact.
Remember, the Earth is in a “sweet spot” (as any astrophysicist will tell you), not too close and not too far from the sun. Our orbit is not perfectly spherical, and given our rotation (and how we “wobble” over time), that orbit can change slightly.
So a slight change… slightly closer, or slightly further away, can impact the climate. The amount of radiative energy. The degree to which that tilt can change, and how that radiation is absorbed or reflected…
All of these things play a much greater role in climate than mankind.
And that is a good well explained answer. But is there data that backs up your hypothesis. In other words are you claiming this current climate change is a result of an axial tilt and that industrialization of this planet has played no role? I am open to it being a combination of things as most scientist are but Andy Harris claims that the climate is in no way impacted by man!
Because, I love it when you are confronted with facts that you don’t understand and that do not support your position you retreat to fantasy land and spout your lobby’s talking points. Grow up, get some education on the subject and stop looking like an ill-informed moron.
Gal Ore only reiterated what is available in Wikipedia on the subject. The author shows know real knowledge about the impact any “Astrophysics Effect” has on climate change and only postulates it can have a major one without adding any data to support it. She is merely casting doubt about what our finite knowledge tells us about the current situation while offering no real scientific opposing viewpoint to disprove man’s contribution to climate change. The author is a critic not a creator, a brick thrower not a brick layer. They are little more than a spectator in a scene from “History of the World:Part One” where a guy is seen standing next to a cave painting and peeing on it.
Because says:
August 14, 2013 at 1:08 pm
Gal Ore only reiterated what is available in Wikipedia on the subject. The author shows know real knowledge about the impact any “Astrophysics Effect” has on climate change and only postulates it can have a major one without adding any data to support it. She is merely casting doubt about what our finite knowledge tells us about the current situation while offering no real scientific opposing viewpoint to disprove man’s contribution to climate change. The author is a critic not a creator, a brick thrower not a brick layer. They are little more than a spectator in a scene from “History of the World:Part One” where a guy is seen standing next to a cave painting and peeing on it.
—————————-
Love it. “Because” is guilty of precisely the thing he/she accuses me of.
“Because”, if you have something of substance to offer, offer it.
Otherwise, I point people in the direction of the lengthy, deep, and peer-reviewed research into the relationship between the sun and climate.
Gal,
That is how Because argues. See projection of self-loathing.
Gal still waiting on an answer to my questions!
Aha! “Environmental priority – #1: Clean Water!” The tax that the uninformed like to refer to is NOT on RAIN dear fellow citizens. It is on STORM WATER!! This means precipitation dispersed in MASSIVE quantities. Because we have not planned properly to deflect ENORMOUS/ABOVE AVERAGE quantities of rain that washes over impermeable surfaces, these HEAVY downpours (quite a recent phenomenon, huh?) have and will continue to inundate our streams and waterways with massive amounts of runoff (which contains not only silt and topsoil but includes many harmful chemicals that have been sprayed on farms and lawns, as well as exhaust and fumes from various sources that have been released into the atmosphere). Our ecological environment (specifically water) can only take so much abuse. CLEAN WATER becomes less available as we pollute more of it. This may be too much for Harris to absorb but hopefully the rest of you get it.
OK, Elsie, the problem is that, on a national scale, a great many people were forced to pave over otherwise permeable surfaces by various environmental agencies in order to abate for particulate matter (dust) in the air, so these folks are feeling caught in the squeeze.
We have to prioritize – and that’s something I think Rep. Harris DOES get!
What Gal Ore is saying, Elsie, is that the government forced people to do stuff that is now causing an unintended consequence and the government now wants to penalize the same people for doing what the government forced them to do. Is that clear enough for you?
If this is there position, and the State feels that they have control on the rain that intrudes on my airspace, I request that they halt all rain within the bounds of my property. Sound stupid? I sure hope so…now you see how stupid their legislation is!
Fed Up, they don’t care how stupid they look. They just want to do two things. First, collect more taxes and fees in any and every form possible. Second, appease one of their special interest groups.
This is very like the recent gambling legislation. They forced more gambling thru and justified it as new revenue that would support education. They got the additional revenue (see recent news releases from the State that tout very large year over year revenue increases) but none of it is going to education. Those of us who have been in Maryland for awhile knew that it never would go to education but the education lobby swallowed the lie and supported it. One of my messages to HCPS teachers and to Ryan Burbey is to call the governor and his cronies and tell them you want your share of the extra new funds so you can get your raises. They don’t want to hear that because they have to admit that the governor, their buddy, screwed them over. Again.
I know Alex R, but someone had to say it! It should be printed in the front page of every paper to remind everyone out outlandish this is. Beware folks, we are much closer than you’d ever think to a tax on the air you breath. After all, if you have a pulse, you expire CO2 with every breath…that lethal greenhouse gas that Big Gov wants to control.
Aha! “Environmental priority – #1: Clean Water!” The tax that the uninformed like to refer to is NOT on RAIN dear fellow citizens. It is on STORM WATER!! This means precipitation dispersed in MASSIVE quantities. Because we have not planned properly to deflect ENORMOUS/ABOVE AVERAGE quantities of rain that washes over impermeable surfaces, these HEAVY downpours (quite a recent phenomenon, huh?) have and will continue to inundate our streams, waterways and ROADS with massive amounts of runoff (which contains not only silt and topsoil but includes many harmful chemicals that have been sprayed on farms and lawns, as well as exhaust and fumes from various sources that have been released into the atmosphere). Our environment (specifically water) can only take so much abuse. CLEAN WATER becomes less available as we pollute more of it.
Now, Elsie, don’t get your underwear in a wad. You have over-dosed on the Kool Aid of the Gore crowd. The Bay pollution comes from Pennsylvania and other states up stream from us much more than it does from us but not to worry, Elsie, we in Maryland have unlimited funds to clean up their mess while they flip us the bird. As far as climate change is concerned I am LOL that the climate crowd had been forced to change their terminology from ‘global warming’ to ‘climate change’ because they were discredited on global warning. In the end it is all about government control of everything we do say, buy, read, and think so that the special interest crowd can get their way and get their funding.
Andy Harris, you are doing a great job and you can count on my vote and my continued financial support of your campaign.
Judy, thanks for the reminder, I am calling Congressman Harris’ office today to find out where to send a campaign check. I want to make sure he gets re-elected. And, Elsie, every time you post something silly, I am going to increase the amount.
You do that Alex. The Koch brothers want you to. We all want you to. I know I want you to. Because money will clearly lead to his being re-elected. Keep telling yourself that. he really doesn’t have to do anything in congress at all. Just send money.
That’s right; everyone knows STORMWATER doesn’t come from RAIN! It’s just silly to call it a RAIN TAX! STORMWATER comes from… um… no, wait… I know this… don’t tell me… rain?
Stormwater also includes runoff from parking lots, roads, lawns, farms and other sources. Rain is merely the driving force once it hits the ground. Simple minds like simple answers, that way they can react simply instead of being required to think things through. And in case you have a hard time imagining what may be in stormwater, here are just a few examples: volatiles from asphalt roads, oil on parking lots, pesticides on lawns, and fertilizer. Even anti-bacterial soap has a way of persisting underground. I’m sure if you wanted to educate yourselves you could do it. Just clap your hands and it will come to you.
Stormwater is rain. If it doesn’t soak in and becomes surface runoff, the contaminants it MAY carry is the concern. If they wanted another pollution tax that’s what they should have said. I wouldn’t be nearly as irate over yet another tax in Maryland if either:
a. I didn’t see, first hand, the impact of Pennsylvania and New York on the Bay – once you take a look at the acres of crap that periodically pile up against the Conowingo Dam you may never eat anything from the river or bay again. I don’t. They have a system to collect it to haul it away and that’s just the stuff that floats. If they ever stopped the flotsam would stretch as far as the eye can see. Tax Maryland until it’s economy is destroyed and still the polluting by Virginia, Pennsylvania and New York will continue – only faster since they’ll have all your businesses.
b. I didn’t know that every development over the last several decades has had to incorporate stormwater runoff management.
c. I actually had a glimmer of hope that our friends in Annapolis have some intelligent use to put the money towards… because frankly, I only expect them to steal the money to exchange for votes to stay in power. Why don’t they use the casino money for this? Because they already stole that to use somewhere else?
Or d. I didn’t see the absurdity that the person being the greatest steward of Mother Earth will pay just as much as the miscreant that dumps his used oil in the storm drain. Typical, I joke about something and someone has to become insulting…
Elsie, if you truly believe what you have written, then be part of the solution. Dig up your driveway. Downsize your home. Get rid of your cars, and use a bike for transportation. Stop polluting our earth with your extravagant lifestyle.
Truth Detector, You mistake Elsie for someone who might want to be part of the solution rather than a Dem/Lib who wants you to be the solution while they are exempt. Sort of like Al Gore trying to get people to use less energy while he has a huge home, and a huge pool house and a huge pool and a private jet but he is exempt because he is one of Orwell’s more equal animals. Elsie wants to tell you what to do but wants to be exempt herself. Arrogant hypocritical lib.
Thank you Gal Ore for a small piece of sanity among the zeolots. You are absolutely on point – nobody (or very few) believes that the climate isn’t changing – it always has and often with huge swings from warm to cold that have never been observed in human history. The debate that the socialists love to squash is regarding “man’s ability to impact it.” Those who state that “virtually all scientists agree…blah, blah” are political dupes. You only hear about the ones who agree with this narrative from the sources you wish to tune into. Sorry to burst your bubble but this isn’t even close to unanimous, and Gal Ore correctly points out that scientist that are interested in real issues that can be resolved by man don’t even rank man’s impact to climate change in the top 10. Clean water is always at the top of this list. Sadly, another very easy issue to resolve is neglected outright and it kills hundreds of thousands every year – malaria. The radical environmental movement has all but eliminated chemicals such as DDT that would erradicate this massive problem – it worked in Europe and US, and was good enough for us, but Africa and Asia can only use mosquito nets! Thanks Rachel Carson and those who bow at that altar. Politics and science are a dangerous mix, yet you continue to drink that potion. Enjoy your cool glass of water today – millions around the globe will never have that luxury.
Re: “climate change as about #20 on the list of priorities”
Nowhere in my post did I say that climate change should be our #1 priority (nor do I hold this belief). Additionally, Harris is receiving the award because he denies that there is a correlation between carbon emission and global temperatures, not because he views the concept as something to tackle at a later date.
Re: “a lagging effect between temperatures and atmospheric CO2 concentrations”
Neither the article nor I mention CO2 being the sole cause of climate change and the majority of recent, peer-reviewed studies acknowledge this belief. As recently as this year there have been studies that show a correlation between global temperatures and the release of CFC’s and other gases such as methane. The same studies also show the lack of correlation between CO2 and climate change while supporting the idea that combined greenhouse gases (and their reaction to UV rays) are the problem and not solely CO2.
Re: “Wealthier nations are healthier nations.”
Not sure where this came from. I think you are implying that regulating carbon emissions will somehow make our country poorer. All I can say is that the Regulation = Economic Disaster argument is a tired one, as well as one that lacks any strong evidence to support its claim. One study on the subject went so far as to that “credible evidence supporting [this claim] is virtually non-existent.”
I’m not sure what else I can say other than that your argument that CO2 is the cause of global warming is one that many (if not most) climate change scientists agree upon. The studies and evidence are out there and available to the public, as well as Harris, and continuing to deny our affect on the climate is only going to make things more difficult for us in the future.
No, first off, he is receiving this award because two organizations with anti-Harris agendas deceptively say that he is a “climate change denier” – a bald-faced attempt to try to paint those who favor a rational approach to public policy as something akin to Holocaust Deniers. Harris doesn’t deny that the climate does change or is changing right now. The climate is _always_ changing. He states, rightly, that portion of this change that can be attributed to man’s activities remains open to serious scientific debate (which, regardless of the conflated claims of the LCV or OFA is actual fact), and questions whether it, as a public policy problem, rises to the level of priority to which the President or his sycophantic cheerleaders give it.
Either LCV and OFA believes that climate change is both anthropogenic and a first-order environmental policy problem, or they do not. If they do, then it is they who are ignorant of the science. If they do not, then their decision to ridicule Rep. Harris’ is singularly idiotic and opportunistic, since they’re essentially singling him out for not addressing a problem which may not be the most pressing problem in the first place.
Moreover, you misstate, either ignorantly or purposefully, their deeper problem with Rep. Harris, which is his lack of support for legislation which will reduce CARBON emissions. Not CFCs or HCFCs, but CARBON, which as you admit is not the major component of the current theories behind the anthropogenic portion of climate change (which, in the scheme of things, is minor). THEY are concerned about carbon. THEIR award is based on Harris’ (rightful) understanding that CARBON emissions are not the problem.
Now, your woefully inadequate understanding of the economics of regulation is distressing, to say the least. Regulations HAVE an impact on the economy. That is the very ESSENCE of regulation–the idea that, in many cases, we raise the COST of doing an activity in a particular way so that the more costly, but possibly more environmentally responsible way of doing things becomes the more-attractive alternative.
So our regulatory state not costs the economy, directly, nearly $2Trillion annually. That’s not some Koch-industry-funded think tank number. That’s the peer-reviewed number from the US Small Business administration. And we have a new study, also peer-reviewed, that says that the lost opportunity costs from the regulatory state are in the TENS OF TRILLIONS.
If you make energy more expensive, that has an economic impact. That isn’t rocket science, just basic math.
Yet without those regulations we would be a capitalist nirvana, air as clean as Beijing, water as safe to drink as Mexico and sewage disposal as fine as Kolkata! Yes, we can make TRILLIONS if it wasn’t for that pesky environment. All hail the US Chamber of Commerce, the SBA and our lord and savior Aqua Buddha Rand Paul!
Ah, more flawed logic. Nobody is saying get rid of all regulations. My point was that it is flatly wrong to stand there and state that regulations do not have an economic impact. They do. A serious one.
And you can reap the benefits of it Gal or simply whine about the cost of a clean environment because our GDP will suffer. And just what is our GDP compared to the next highest GDP in the world? With great power comes great responsibility. Unless you are a sociopath.
Nice emotional response Five Iron but completely false. This country 15 years ago had zero GHG and carbon reduction initiatives, yet were we in the condition of Mexico City or Beijing? No. For 20 plus years the US has been a world leader in environmental regulation and compliance with those laws. We have had strong enforcement but more importantly, US enterprise gets it – private industry does understand what environmental regulations are and they (for the most part) uphold the required standards and they understand that is good for their business. I’d suggest a visit to one of your quoted garden spots, then consider the discharge water quality standards throughout the US for our wastewater treatment plants (plants that do not exist on a wide scale in many parts of the world). I know, I know…the emotional response feels so much better and it’s so much less work! 😛
For dinner tonight is buritto and nachos. I’ll be farting a lot. Does that effect the ozone layer?
Well, Big Wood, that depends. If you are a Dem/Lib then we all know the gaseous and solid emissions from your colon don’t smell. If you are a Conservative then everything you say, think or do should be unlawful. Bon appetit.
Wow, what was that noxious emission you passed Judy?
Because, that was the truth. You can;t handle the truth.
sometimes noxious emissions stink, sometimes they are lout and other times they are both stinky and loud. Republican’ts are always stinky, gassy bastards and loud. HARRIS has both of these qualities as well as being an ugly m–f-er
It might affect the ozone layer, it will certainly not effect the ozone layer.
What was the flush tax for? I thought recent “scientific studies” showed the bay is healthier now than in the past few decades. We have “scientific studies” that will support any view. Too often people just repeat what they’ve heard over and over on msnbc, history, pbs from folks who get paid by furthering the climate change alarm. A University of Alabama study shows the earth’s temperature has acutally cooled .74F since Mr. Gore released his Incovenient Truth, in 2006. Listen to something long enough without backing it up for yourself and you’ll believe anything. I wish these “scientific studies show” people would actually throw a couple of names out there – so evidence could really be studied and evaluated. Think I’m kidding – read this words and then answer the questiong quickly: Joke, Poke, Smoke, Folk – what is the white part of the egg?>>>>it ain’t yolk!
Here’s an idea. More people equals more pollution. Lets pay people not to have kids ,especially those that can’t afford them or refuse to take care of them. Does anyone believe what Md. does affects the world climate? Maybe if we build some windmills and dig a few more sediment ponds the world will be pristine again or maybe Obama and O’Malley can go live in India and China and sell their rain and gas taxes there.
Spoken like a true Hazzard County Native. is your skin blue and/or do you have six digits on each hand?
Don’t you have a job to be doing?
This whole debate is sad. We always here people talking protecting future generations and what not. However, when it is proven that there is a problem and it is only going to get worse (i.e climate change) we find ways to come up with BS excuses to discredit the information. Investing in clean energy will be good for our economy and will fight climate change. Climate change is real, even my friends that are Republicans recognize this fact. It’s time to do something about it not wait and hear what Rush or BP scientists have to say.
I guess the Last Ice Age (remember that) was caused by those darn gaseous Dinosaurs. All you Al Gore followers its about money and how much the Gorical can make of all his Carbon Credits he owns. The Earth is constantly changing (remember Ice Age) and man has NO impact period.
If you actually read some of the Geology on the subject you would know that the most likely cause of the Ice Age was a huge Volcanic event in the area known as Siberia which released a lot of CO2 into the atmosphere and simulated the Green House effect.
CDEV – the greenhouse effect is the exact opposite of what you state – it is a warming, not a cooling. Your first assertion is correct – a volcanic eruption is one of the theories, but an eruption causes a thick cloud of dark ash that blocks sunlight from reaching the earth’s surface, thus cooling, not warming the zone shrouded in ash. Many modern eruptions have been studied and this is a consistent consequence (eg Pinatubo, Iceland, Etna, Mt. St. Helens and many others). Also, a single eruption has been observed to create an instantaneous impact to the earth’s climate so long as the cloud exists, and it far exceeds anything remotely observed that some tie to “man’s impact to climate.” BTW – I am a geologist, and I did study this stuff for many years.
Yes but the increased CO2 lead to the animal life passing away along with the no light getting through to create the chilling effect.
CO2 is the least of the problems from an eruption. The point of the volcano argument is that the ash blocked the sunlight and significantly decreased the surface temps of Earth. That temperature drop may, in and of itself, have caused reptilian life (dinosaurs) to die en masse. There are also theories about atmospheric causes of the extinction but “ash-like” incidents are much more likely considering the Earth’s history of meteor impacts and significant volcanic activity.
Why do I go on about these sort of scientific details on the Dagger? In this thread, about this story, the point is that politics and powermongers are driving policy, not good science. We are spitting in the wind with the government-driven programs, fees, and taxes. One good volcanic eruption makes every car in North America insignificant. It can make our power plants look like Lego factories and our inflated view of what we humans can or cannot do look conceited and childish. We cannot control a simple rain shower yet somehow, Al Gore has somehow convinced millions that the US government actions will alter global temperatures and weather patterns – when in fact our weather/climate has always changed. Sometimes those changes are subtle, sometimes they’re dramatic. Most have occurred without a single human on the face of the earth.
While I understand your point Fed Up one need to look at Mamouth Mountian CA to see that the CO2 can have an impact.
Saying we have no impact on the world we live in is a pretty foolish position to take. Easy example, the city is 3-5 degrees warmer then the suburbs. Dumping fumes and smoke into the very air we breathe as we bulldoze and pave the forests and plants that purify and produce that very air is not so smart.
Almost as foolish is forcing closed the power plants we need to provide inexpensive energy, and not allowing new ones to be built. Putting our economy in the tank on purpose is pretty stupid. Cheap energy draws business and wealth. Wealthy nations can build and innovate. A nation in a 17 trillion dollar hole is handcuffed.
Can’t believe I agree with my liberal in denial friend Cdev on something.
No two people disagree on everything and again I am a moderate. I see things in shades of Gray!
B – it’s no so much air emissions that cause this localized temperature shift, it is the concrete and asphalt surfaces and structures with little vegetation.
Thank you for clarifying the obvious.
The last Ice Age began a little over 2.6 million years ago. The dinosaurs died out about 65 million years ago. If you’re going to try to use science to justify your assessment of our current situation at least be educated about it.
Yea, I mean, what if we took this time and opportunity, cleaned up our ways and lowered our impact on the the planet, and it turns out we did all this stuff and we really didn’t need to? The horror!
Wouldn’t it be a shame if we just wasted all this time and money making our planet better when we could be spending it on fat cat defense contractors and bueracrats.
How about this, PBC… maybe for every dollar we no longer spent on phantom problems, or dollar misspent on real problems, we could spend those dollars wisely on real problems?
We already know that spending (as a percentage of GDP) is too high. So first off, we could lower that percentage.
Then, with those properly allocated dollars, and those dollars back in the hands of those who earned them and deserve to keep them, those folks can spend those dollars (or save them) in a manner of their own choosing.
How about that radical idea?
Yes, begin with ending subsidies to oil companies and reduce the funding of the Department of Defense to the GDP percentage before we all got scared about Arabs with Knives at the Foot of the Bed.
PBC, or, in your case, a spelling and grammar checker.
Two words: East Anglia.
Ahhh, yes. A “thumbs-down.” With no substantiation. Gotta love the climate change lobby.
It’s almost as much fun as the Evolution deniers who embrace “Astrophysics” and other scientific topics to justify their 9000 year old Earth model
“Not a single person showed up at the Georgetown waterfront Tuesday for a climate change agenda event put on by Organizing for Action, the nonprofit advocacy group born out of President Obama’s 2012 campaign, the NRCC wrote in its blog.” Here’s how excited the liberals are about their own holy grail…well, it used to be their holy grail when Al G. was front and center – not so fashionable anymore.
They are too smart to waste their time on that nonsense. They just want you to pay more of yur money in taxes and fees so they can fund their pet projects and keep themselves in power by giving money to their favorite special interest groups.
yur = your
Sorry, I had Burbey for English.
Burbey didn’t teach English!
Better than giving your money away to your multimillionaire overlords that feed you scraps from their table.
The only education Jaguar Judy gets is from Faux News.
When Obama’s other news outlets start to report on all the news then maybe we will all start to watch them to. Until then you go where the stories are told good or bad. @ Marc_Eaton
Al Gore is laughing all the way to the bank. Anyone been outside today? Nice and cool outside for 8/15/2013. If you tell a liberal that cutting your grass is bad for the environment all of our grass would be tickling our butts. What awards do they give out for killing innocent babies?
Hey Marc, why don’t you come visit the north pole around this time in a few years? You’ll be able to take a boat. Does that seem nice and cool for you?
Santa, keep drinking the libatard kool aide. Climate change is a made up to create money for whack jobs like Gore,and for idiots like OweMalley to raise more taxes on us. I guess you probably love the idea of a rain tax to right? Libatards, God’s way of giving Conservatives something to laugh at. Obama was going to save the world, give us free health care, create jobs, stop the rising of the sea. The Middle East is in turmoil. He is spying on us, selling guns to Mexican drug lords that are killing Americans. Can’t account for his whereabouts during the murder of four Americans that he and Clinton left to die. So far we just have a lot of hot air, he maybe that is the global warming cause….political promises. @Marc_Eaton
Your observations about the weather today are spot on. You and Gal Ore are clearly very very much in the know about events you can see personally but are unable to fathom when it extends beyond you limited perception of the world. Go back to beating up Bane Marc, it’s clear you are here just to foment your own personal brand of hate and ignorance driven by your suffocated understanding of reality. Another Conservative that denies the work of others while boasting about the knowledge contained in slack jaw opportunists that generate ignorance like body odor. The simple fact remains Marc, is you may have been some sort of doggy deputy in the HCSO until you ran afoul of Bane. But you are not a climate scientist, and while Gal Ore claims some knowledge she/he/it still has made no other attack on the published peer reviewed works of others – simply posting mutterings about how stupid other people are for being liberal or what not. Your hate is well documented Marc. Get a hobby. Maybe adopt a humane society puppy. And Gal, Marc and you are the beneficiaries of people that can use multiple wireless devices by coming to this website from different IP addresses and posting either with different names or simply logging in to give thumbs up to your sycophants or thumbs down to the people you disagree with. Ocean levels are rising Marc, the ice field around the North and South Poles are diminishing and you and Gal Ore have done nothing to substantiate your claims that the rest of us have understood for a very long time: Human activity impacts the climate adversely. Maybe you forgot about the destruction of the Ozone layer. I’m sorry, that was history and I know you’re bad at that.
Because paragraphs might be better for folks to read.
However it won’t help rehabilitate your lack of knowledge.
Your point is what other than this vague criticism with no evidence? Willfully stupid is just about as bad as ignorant. Which philosophy do you subscribe to?
Because you aren’t very good and debate or paragraphing.
Because you aren’t very good at debate or paragraphing.
Because or David A Porter which is your name. I retired before your beloved Bane was Sheriff. My running a foul of him took place in 1989 when I caught him in his first of many lies. I use my name and post under that only David A Porter my libatard friend. Water is not rising, for someone who thinks they are so damn smart you are sure fooled easily. Also, I have a hobby, I work part time and the other time I use to annoy people like you. @Marc_Eaton. I have missed you David A Porter, why are you hiding behind a fake name now? Are you at work and posting on here? Another Government Worker working hard.
Oh Marc, maybe he left because of your frequent efforts to reach out to him on Linked In and other social sites because he thought you were an asocial stalker; I mean besides the noxious tendency to follow brother Glenn Beck like some sort of rabid closet “I fear people who do not share my hate”. Oh yeah, that must be it. There’s nothing like a hateful asocial self important ass like yourself to make someone run for the hills when you decide you want to stalk them.
I don’t follow Beck, I am a Rush kinda guy David A Porter. I am glad you still think you are so important that you were stalked. The funny part is other people sent me your information and I found it amusing and scary. Go see a shrink, you were not being stalked David A Porter. It is a phony stalk like your idiot President’s phony Presidency.
More funding for Planned Parenthood.
What award do they give for killing innocent babies? You get to be the darling of the Dem/Lib machine. And, as Judy says, you get more funding.
Libatards will kill an innocent child at the drop of a hat. They will also fight to save an animal from extinction only if it helps their cause. Thou shalt not kill! It can’t get any clearer than that! Your President will even ask God to bless planned parenthood. You are the party of death to humans and to our country.
Donate your Uterus Marc. No one is stopping you from raising an unwanted child. Oh, you just want them inside someone else’ womb? Oh yeah, because once they are hatched it’s time to grill them, fry them, starve them, or throw them away so you don’t have to look at them. Not your problem just your concern right?
Marc donating his uterus is no different then you stepping up and murdering a child like you are supporting.
Because you speak as though a child in the womb of the mother is some kind of parasite or intruder.
And children born to mothers who don’t want them are wasted and doomed.
A famous republican’t politician once said women’s bodies can prevent pregnancy from rape too. Empirical evidence suggests that there is a higher rate of ice melting. Some of it may be cyclical and some of it may change over time, however there is enough evidence to advance green technology and our nation needs the next technological wave either way. I suppose that using lead in vehicles would also cost less but it there is enough evidence to show that lead is harmful to humans bodies. There is enough evidence to suggest reduction in carbon and use more renewable energy sources. There is mounting evidence of stronger tornados, hurricanes, storms, droughts and natural disasters that indicate that the extremes of environmental change will cost us more in the long run if we don’t curb our dependency on oils.
What you’ve said is perfectly wrong and your assumptions lack basis.
Mystic Pizza is correct about the rape statement. There were a few Tea Partiers (I wouldn’t call them Republicans, as it demeans the name) who believe in something called “legitimate rape” as something different than “rape”.
He is correct about ice caps receding. We now have a Northwest Passage that can link the Atlantic and Pacific through the Arctic.
He is correct that a nation that isn’t innovating is dying. This is in regard as to why we need to diversify our energy technology, rather than just relying on what we’ve had for the last century or so.
What, specifically, to you take issue with?
My concern in all of this isn’t climate change, per se, but the increasingly popular notion that Harford County residents need not be concerned about pollution within our own rivers, lakes, and streams because God will sort it out. God will sort it out. Life will continue, although with just fewer of us here if we aren’t aware of these issues and striving to do something about it. I’ve seen populist activists at the BBQ Bash urging us do nothing about these problems and that the concern about runoff and pollution is some kind of left wing conspiracy. Their solution to all things was to do nothing and hope for the best, which is a sort of surrender.
Marc–thou shalt not speak stupid things, may God bless the cheese makers!
don’t give me a thumbs down, it was a great line borrowed from a great movie! where is your sense of humor?
Andy Harris and the Harford GOP get the attention of a London Guardian columnist:
“If you’re looking for a Republican congressman who truly embodies the ethos of the Tea Party, Maryland Representative Andy Harris is a pretty good pick.”
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/aug/15/republicans-big-problem-with-crazy
London Guardian? Whatever! Who cares? But Harris works for me and so I work to get him re-elected. Don’t like it? Too bad. I put up with O’Malley and Mikulski. You put up with Harris.
I will until the Eastern Shore voters grow sick of him and put up a Moderate.
????? ?????????????!100?????!????? ?????, ????? ??, ????? ??? ??????,??????????????? ??!