AL Gore says the snowstorms are caused by man-made global warming

[Pony Boy]

AL GORE: THE SNOWSTORMS ARE CAUSED BY THE 'WARMING'...

Last week on his show Bill O’Reilly asked, “Why has southern New York turned into the tundra?” and then said he had a call into Al Gore for the answer.


Al Gore said "I appreciate the question" and this was his answer.

As it turns out, the scientific community has been addressing this particular question for some time now and they say that increased heavy snowfalls are completely consistent with what they have been predicting as a consequence of man-made global warming:

“In fact, scientists have been warning for at least two decades that global warming could make snowstorms more severe. Snow has two simple ingredients: cold and moisture. Warmer air collects moisture like a sponge until it hits a patch of cold air. When temperatures dip below freezing, a lot of moisture creates a lot of snow.”

“A rise in global temperature can create all sorts of havoc, ranging from hotter dry spells to colder winters, along with increasingly violent storms, flooding, forest fires and loss of endangered species.”

http://blog.algore.com/2011/02/an_answer_for_bill.html

[Rohirrim]

Climate and weather are two different things.

[DBruleU]

He also said that hot summers are caused by global warming...thus everything that happens all the time is caused by man made global warming.

[spdirty]

The only thing that can save us now is a carbon tax. And carbon credits. And the Chevy Volt. And buying green solar panels and green appliances from Algore's and W*gs approved suppliers.

We do all that, and we might have a chance to stop the evil global warming before its too late.

[DBruleU]

And ride your bike to work. W*gs always made sure he rode his bike up Baseline to work every day. Wonder how that works in this frigid cold.

[TonyR]

Do any of you deniers have any scientific evidence to refute what Gore said? Or are you just going to keep trying to out funny each other? Maybe he's full of crap, what do I know. But I've yet to see any of you post anything that even begins to refute what he said.

[W*GS]

Red meat for the deniers.

Gore is right.

But the deniers can't address the science, so they make personal attacks. See Pony Boy, spdirty, and DBruleU for examples.

[Smiling Assassin27]

AL GORE: THE SNOWSTORMS ARE CAUSED BY THE 'WARMING'...

Last week on his show Bill O’Reilly asked, “Why has southern New York turned into the tundra?” and then said he had a call into Al Gore for the answer.


Al Gore said "I appreciate the question" and this was his answer.

As it turns out, the scientific community has been addressing this particular question for some time now and they say that increased heavy snowfalls are completely consistent with what they have been predicting as a consequence of man-made global warming:

“In fact, scientists have been warning for at least two decades that global warming could make snowstorms more severe. Snow has two simple ingredients: cold and moisture. Warmer air collects moisture like a sponge until it hits a patch of cold air. When temperatures dip below freezing, a lot of moisture creates a lot of snow.”

“A rise in global temperature can create all sorts of havoc, ranging from hotter dry spells to colder winters, along with increasingly violent storms, flooding, forest fires and loss of endangered species.”

http://blog.algore.com/2011/02/an_answer_for_bill.html

'All sorts of havoc'...VERY scientific, Al. ROFL! So Al links to a blurb from a one Clarence Paige. Who's he?

Clarence Page (born 2 June 1947) is an American journalist, syndicated columnist, and senior member of The Chicago Tribune editorial board.[1]



Not exactly the climatological backup I was hoping for. Face it, Al just hopes you and I are incapable of a)reading; b)thinking' and c) sticking our heads out our windows to notice the vast sheet of ice across America caused by the vast heatwave across America. It's OK Al, we know...Hilarious!

[Rigs11]

they should change the term global warming to something else. The brilliant righties can't wrap their heads around the notion that with global warming, some areas will actually get colder.

[spdirty]

they should change the term global warming to something else. The brilliant righties can't wrap their heads around the notion that with global warming, some areas will actually get colder.

They already did. Global Climate Change. Try as they might, didn't stick.

[Pony Boy]

Red meat for the deniers.

Gore is right.

But the deniers can't address the science, so they make personal attacks. See Pony Boy, spdirty, and DBruleU for examples.

Your buddy Al summed it up it a nice tidy nut shell "Warmer air collects moisture like a sponge until it hits a patch of cold air. When temperatures dip below freezing, a lot of moisture creates a lot of snow.” yep, nothing scientific facts ..... the sky is a giant sponge...Hilarious!

[W*GS]

Your buddy Al summed it up it a nice tidy nut shell "Warmer air collects moisture like a sponge until it hits a patch of cold air. When temperatures dip below freezing, a lot of moisture creates a lot of snow.” yep, nothing scientific facts ..... the sky is a giant sponge...Hilarious!

Warm air can hold more water vapor than cold air. Duh.

'Course, expecting deniers to understand the truth, when their crap is nothing but lies, is expecting far too much.

[Pony Boy]

they should change the term global warming to something else. The brilliant righties can't wrap their heads around the notion that with global warming, some areas will actually get colder.

I liked the name used in the 70's before global warming, "inadvertent climate modification"

but when some areas get warmer and other areas get colder, I like the name "The Yin/Yang Effect" or "Rigs/W*GS Effect" LOL

[Pony Boy]

Man-Made-Warm air can hold more water vapor than cold air. Duh.

'Course, expecting deniers to understand the truth, when their crap is nothing but lies, is expecting far too much.

Fixed it for ya....

[bronco militia]

when the **** is global warming coming back to the USA??!?!

it's ****ing cold

[Rohirrim]

One of the reasons for the uprisings we are seeing in Tunisia, Egypt and Yemen is the price of food going up too high due to shortages. This is only the beginning. As the weather is altered more and more around the globe, more and more crop failures will occur. And that doesn't even bring into account the predicted water shortages we can expect. Like that old Chinese curse: May you live in interesting times. ;D

[Pony Boy]

Yesterday was a record snow fall where I live but at least now I understand why?

[Missouribronc]

Yesterday was a record snow fall where I live but at least now I understand why?

A record snow fall for recorded history, which is like, what, 200-300 years, depending on which part of the country you live in...

[Rohirrim]

Previous generations could expect to see a major weather event two or three times in their lifetimes. We are seeing them every year. I'm guessing that the typhoon hitting Australia right now is the largest on record for them.

[Rohirrim]

Too bad this issue has become so politically polarized in our country. Of course, there are very powerful, and wealthy, individuals who want to stop any effort we might make to reduce various forms of pollution which would negatively effect their financial empires.

It's like the story of the blue-fin tuna. We are driving the species to extinction, but the fewer there are, the higher up the price for them goes, and the more intensely they are fished. It's a death spiral. And all the fishermen and sushi eaters point to each other and say, "If you stop first, then I'll stop." Of course, nobody stops. We would all have to agree to be driven by something other than money, or something other than our short-term desires. Ask the people on Easter Island how that worked out.

[Rohirrim]

Amazing NASA pics of the storm currently moving across the country:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/02/01/midwest-snowstorm-weather-_n_817070.html

[Rigs11]

funny that the rightards believe 100% percent that jesus was a white dude with a beard, yet there is no way that we can possibly affect our climate by spewing tons of crap into the atmosphere.Hilarious!

[ant1999e]

One of the reasons for the uprisings we are seeing in Tunisia, Egypt and Yemen is the price of food going up too high due to shortages. This is only the beginning. As the weather is altered more and more around the globe, more and more crop failures will occur. And that doesn't even bring into account the predicted water shortages we can expect. Like that old Chinese curse: May you live in interesting times. ;D

Now I've heard it all. Global Warming is to blame for the protests in Egypt. Hilarious!
I think global warming causes all these libs to be dumb asses.

[Rohirrim]

This summer’s extreme global weather raised fears of a “Coming Food Crisis,” as CAP’s John D. Podesta and Jake Caldwell warned in Foreign Policy: “Global food security is stretched to the breaking point, and Russia’s fires and Pakistan’s floods are making a bad situation worse.” Earlier this month I discussed how, in fact, “Extreme weather events helped drive food prices to record highs.” Back then, experts were worried about food riots. Now they are happening.
http://www.npr.org/2011/01/30/133331809/rising-food-prices-can-topple-governments-too

---------

Rising prices are "leading to riots, demonstrations and political instability," New York University economics professor Nouriel Roubini said during a panel discussion. "It's really something that can topple regimes, as we have seen in the Middle East."

----------------------

In large part, the food-price crisis reflects the simple law of supply and demand. The supply of food has been diminished by bad weather in many crucial crop-growing areas of the world. Russia, Ukraine and Argentina have had severe droughts, while Pakistan and Australia have had massive flooding.

[Fedaykin]

Snowstorms require energy. More energy, more and bigger snowstorms.

[Rohirrim]

The United Nations’ top food agency announced yesterday that world food prices hit a record high last month, igniting concerns among agricultural experts who are thinking back to the food riots that gripped developing countries just three years ago.

“It’s a worrisome situation with prices this high,” said Dan Gustafson, the director of the U.N. Food and Agriculture Organization’s Washington, D.C., office. “The year ahead is what I think is the real concern at this point. … It’s not by any means inevitable that prices will come down,” he said….

FAO attributes the upswing in prices to factors including the crop failures caused by a string of extreme weather events and high crop demands from an ever-increased global population. Many experts have linked the series of floods and fires with climate change.


http://climateprogress.org/2011/01/06/extreme-weather-events-helps-drive-food-prices-to-record-highs/

[Rigs11]

yeah because food shortages in the world are not happening, and if people can't eat there is no way in hell they would ever protest the government...::)

[Fedaykin]

Your buddy Al summed it up it a nice tidy nut shell "Warmer air collects moisture like a sponge until it hits a patch of cold air. When temperatures dip below freezing, a lot of moisture creates a lot of snow.” yep, nothing scientific facts ..... the sky is a giant sponge...Hilarious!

Are you really so daft you can't follow a simple metaphor?

[Garcia Bronco]

Do any of you deniers have any scientific evidence to refute what Gore said? Or are you just going to keep trying to out funny each other? Maybe he's full of crap, what do I know. But I've yet to see any of you post anything that even begins to refute what he said.

The burden of proof is on him. He's the one making the claim.

I will say that from an empircal perspective we don't have a enough information to claim anything.

[DenverBrit]

If you shake the planet..........

http://www.popdarts.com/Comments/Special_Graphic_Glitters/Christmas_Snowglobes/images/snowglobes-christmas-01.gif

[Dr. Broncenstein]

Global warming concerns from a guy who flies by private jet. Cool story bro.

[epicSocialism4tw]

If you shake the planet..........

http://www.popdarts.com/Comments/Special_Graphic_Glitters/Christmas_Snowglobes/images/snowglobes-christmas-01.gif

ROFL!

Global warming science...snow globes.

And I thought the national enquirer referencing was bad. Hilarious!

[DenverBrit]

ROFL!

Global warming science...snow globes.

And I thought the national enquirer referencing was bad. Hilarious!

LOL You were right.

[TonyR]

The burden of proof is on him. He's the one making the claim.

A simple Google search will reveal to you hundreds of articles suggesting that what Gore is saying is true. Here are a few examples.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/26/opinion/26cohen.html?_r=1&src=mv&ref=general

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/dec/20/uk-snow-global-warming

http://blogs.forbes.com/matthewherper/2010/12/27/is-global-warming-making-it-snow/?boxes=businesschannelsections

[W*GS]

I will say that from an empircal perspective we don't have a enough information to claim anything.

That's a flaw with your brain, not what we know about the climate system.

Confound yourself.

[cutthemdown]

Basically they are predicting in drastic weather is caused by global warming. What a joke. Like we never had storms like this before? Hell we had a storm in calif 100 yrs ago where it rained for the better part of 30 days straight. If it happens now though its global warming.

Snow is good its makes it easy to collect the water. Since global warming also causes drought i suggest saving it.

[cutthemdown]

The only way to reduce co2 output is to reduce people. Maybe they just want you to believe there is a food shortage so they can starve 7-800 million or so?

[cutthemdown]

A simple Google search will reveal to you hundreds of articles suggesting that what Gore is saying is true. Here are a few examples.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/26/opinion/26cohen.html?_r=1&src=mv&ref=general

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/dec/20/uk-snow-global-warming

http://blogs.forbes.com/matthewherper/2010/12/27/is-global-warming-making-it-snow/?boxes=businesschannelsections

No doubt the bases are covered. Scientists going for grants on global warming all the way to retirement.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Global warming concerns from a guy who flies by private jet. Cool story bro.

So his arguments can't be valid unless he commutes by covered wagon?

Gotta love that rightard "logic." :D

[TonyR]

No doubt the bases are covered. Scientists going for grants on global warming all the way to retirement.

LOL I love when people make this argument. We're to believe that the scientific community is better funded to promote an agenda than behemoth corporations are to promote the opposing agenda. Come on, get real.

[frerottenextelway]

Basically they are predicting in drastic weather is caused by global warming. What a joke. Like we never had storms like this before? Hell we had a storm in calif 100 yrs ago where it rained for the better part of 30 days straight. If it happens now though its global warming.

Snow is good its makes it easy to collect the water. Since global warming also causes drought i suggest saving it.

Global warming causes an increased chance of drastic weather, which is very different than saying a specific case of drastic weather was caused by global warming.

Gore sometimes does a poor job of separating the two, tho with how retarded people are I can sympathize with him simplifying it.

[TonyR]

What a joke.

You mean like more of a joke than you thinking you know more than thousands of scientists who study this stuff for a living?

[Dr. Broncenstein]

So his arguments can't be valid unless he commutes by covered wagon?

Gotta love that rightard "logic." :D

No. His arguments are invalid when he demands that everyone else reduce their carbon footprint from the comfort of his mansion / private jet / limousine / heated pool.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

No. His arguments are invalid when he demands that everyone else reduce their carbon footprint from the comfort of his mansion / private jet / limousine / heated pool.

Class warfare! tsk tsk

[Spider]

Holy Shiat you bedwetters , look at this last ****ing week , almost 60's then in less then a day sub zero weather .........
what in the hell is up with that ?

[Spider]

sunday I had the A/C in my truck , to ice forming on my eye brows , eyelids , and gotee on monday...We wont talk about the hell hole known as Grover and me climbing up 25 foot tanks with a 50 pound hose to pull over the top cause the valves are froze shut
...........

[baja]

Not snowing in Baja. Not flooding in Baja We can grow enough to feed the population if people keep leaving due to lack of work because of dying tourism. No Home Land Security looking up your as here. Not raining either so there is that.

[Spider]

on the plus side I am still a bad ass , guys half my age were wimping out ...... 11 below today in grover felt like a heat wave ......

[baja]

The United Nations’ top food agency announced yesterday that world food prices hit a record high last month, igniting concerns among agricultural experts who are thinking back to the food riots that gripped developing countries just three years ago.

“It’s a worrisome situation with prices this high,” said Dan Gustafson, the director of the U.N. Food and Agriculture Organization’s Washington, D.C., office. “The year ahead is what I think is the real concern at this point. … It’s not by any means inevitable that prices will come down,” he said….

FAO attributes the upswing in prices to factors including the crop failures caused by a string of extreme weather events and high crop demands from an ever-increased global population. Many experts have linked the series of floods and fires with climate change.


http://climateprogress.org/2011/01/06/extreme-weather-events-helps-drive-food-prices-to-record-highs/

Wait until oil is two hundred dollars a barrel....

Nobody is talking about the elephant in the midle of the room - peak oil.

http://www.disclose.tv/action/viewvideo/50078/Collapse__part_1_/

http://www.veoh.com/browse/videos/category/educational_and_howto/watch/v20073206BFdxe5c6

http://www.endofsuburbia.com/

[Spider]

Wait until oil is two hundred dollars a barrel....

Nobody is talking about the elephant in the midle of the room - peak oil.

http://www.disclose.tv/action/viewvideo/50078/Collapse__part_1_/

http://www.veoh.com/browse/videos/category/educational_and_howto/watch/v20073206BFdxe5c6

http://www.endofsuburbia.com/

Peak oil is a ****ing lie

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Wait until oil is two hundred dollars a barrel....



Just the thought is enough to give every Bush supporter a boner.

[baja]

Peak oil is a ****ing lie

I know you believe that Spider but consider this, they are not making any more oil and the consumption is increasing at an alarming rate. The equation is this; Fixed amount of oil + dramatically increased consumption = a bell curve with a decline side. The only debate is when peak oil will arrive Spider that's just common sense.

The problems with peak oil is not running out of oil it's the cost of recovery that will cause unimaginable grief. It used to be the return on an oil well was about 40 to 1 today it's about 3 to 1 if my memory serves me.

[baja]

The only way to reduce co2 output is to reduce people. Maybe they just want you to believe there is a food shortage so they can starve 7-800 million or so?

True and the underlying driving force behind all conspiracy theories. Optimum global population is 600,000,000. That's a lot of extra carcasses to get rid of.

[Spider]

I know you believe that Spider but consider this, they are not making any more oil and the consumption is increasing at an alarming rate. The equation is this; Fixed amount of oil + dramatically increased consumption = a bell curve with a decline side. The only debate is when peak oil will arrive Spider that's just common sense.

The problems with peak oil is not running out of oil it's the cost of recovery that will cause unimaginable grief. It used to be the return on an oil well was about 40 to 1 today it's about 3 to 1 if my memory serves me.

sorry , but just like in 2002 . peak oil then was a myth , just like now

[baja]

sorry , but just like in 2002 . peak oil then was a myth , just like now

So oil will never become scarce?

[Missouribronc]

4.6 billion years and the last 20 are destroying the planet?

Is there actual proof that there is extreme warming or change in the last 20 years in comparison to the 4.6 billion years before?

[Missouribronc]

Just the thought is enough to give every Bush supporter a boner.

What does Bush have to do with any of this? Why do people insist on drawing lines in the sand? There are in betweens and compromises. Our nation was built on compromise. Its idiots like LABF and drama llama that are tearing this country apart. Compromise, meet in the middle, quit nwith the idiotic rhetoric...

[Fedaykin]

4.6 billion years and the last 20 are destroying the planet?

Is there actual proof that there is extreme warming or change in the last 20 years in comparison to the 4.6 billion years before?

The planet will be fine. It's the people that are ****ed.

[baja]

The planet will be fine. It's the people that are ****ed.

Wag the dog.

[Spider]

4.6 billion years and the last 20 are destroying the planet?

Is there actual proof that there is extreme warming or change in the last 20 years in comparison to the 4.6 billion years before?

I believe this , it isnt so much time , but increased population . more people using resources . more wetlands developed so Johnny white collar worker and Susie homemaker can buy a house they cant afford to live in the Burbs ......

[Spider]

So oil will never become scarce?

Perhaps , but not in our foreseeable future .... I am working around natty gas wells , that are producing oil .In grover Colorado alone well over 5,200 bbls per day ....and that is from the natty gas wells , that produce oil to ...... we dont have a freaking clue as to how much oil is in the ground , we do know with Shale oil ( 12.00 a barrel to drill) is in dayum good supply

[JJJ]

Wait until oil is two hundred dollars a barrel....

Nobody is talking about the elephant in the midle of the room - peak oil.

http://www.disclose.tv/action/viewvideo/50078/Collapse__part_1_/

http://www.veoh.com/browse/videos/category/educational_and_howto/watch/v20073206BFdxe5c6

http://www.endofsuburbia.com/

Does anyone seriously believe we are even coming close to running out of oil? Wise up. The stuff is still cheaper than bottled water for a reason.

We have serious pollution problems due to too many people in the world but we are certainly not running out of oil for several hundred years, if then.

We have the same amount of known oil reserves as we had in 1970. I guarantee you 40 years from now the number will be the same. It will become more expensive to drill but that is the extent of the problem. And that really is not much of a problem.

Gas prices in the US can go up 4 times their current price and it changes nothing in our economy. See Europe.

[TailgateNut]

AL GORE: THE SNOWSTORMS ARE CAUSED BY THE 'WARMING'...

Last week on his show Bill O’Reilly asked, “Why has southern New York turned into the tundra?” and then said he had a call into Al Gore for the answer.


Al Gore said "I appreciate the question" and this was his answer.

As it turns out, the scientific community has been addressing this particular question for some time now and they say that increased heavy snowfalls are completely consistent with what they have been predicting as a consequence of man-made global warming:

“In fact, scientists have been warning for at least two decades that global warming could make snowstorms more severe. Snow has two simple ingredients: cold and moisture. Warmer air collects moisture like a sponge until it hits a patch of cold air. When temperatures dip below freezing, a lot of moisture creates a lot of snow.”

“A rise in global temperature can create all sorts of havoc, ranging from hotter dry spells to colder winters, along with increasingly violent storms, flooding, forest fires and loss of endangered species.”

http://blog.algore.com/2011/02/an_answer_for_bill.html


That part is to complicated for your single celled brain to comprehend. Who would have thunk it?

[TailgateNut]

Does anyone seriously believe we are even coming close to running out of oil? Wise up. The stuff is still cheaper than bottled water for a reason. We have serious pollution problems due to too many people in the world but we are certainly not running out of oil for several hundred years, if then.

We have the same amount of known oil reserves as we had in 1970. I guarantee you 40 years from now the number will be the same. It will become more expensive to drill but that is the extent of the problem. And that really is not much of a problem.

Gas prices in the US can go up 4 times their current price and it changes nothing in our economy. See Europe.

LOL

[JJJ]

Global warming painted as a crisis is complete hoohockey.

It is like 100th on the list of things to worry about even if it exists, which is still very much in doubt.

Man-made global warming is the noise on top of the noise of the climate data. Statistical irrelevant.

18k years ago there was a mile of ice sitting on top of Manhattan.

[JJJ]

LOL

Price comparison
Waters Price/quart
Evian $1.70
Arrowhead $0.79
Dasani $1.32
Deep Rock $0.94
Rimrock $0.94
Aquafina $1.22
Food Club $0.56
Dannon $0.82
Fiji $1.32
O2 $1.58

Western Colorado http://www.hotchkiss.k12.co.us/hhs/english/webfolios/2001/trice/tech.htm

You will have to use your brain to multiply these numbers by four to get the price per gallon but I think even you can handle this task.

As for oil reserves:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:OPEC_declared_reserves_1980-now_BP.svg

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

What does Bush have to do with any of this? ...

I said Bush supporters (read: those people who defended and cheered Bush and his oil buddies while all the president's oil men raped us at the pump.)

Distinctions: They are a b*tch, eh?

[Spider]

Does anyone seriously believe we are even coming close to running out of oil? this is a first , you said something right ......

We have serious pollution problems due to too many people in the world but we are certainly not running out of oil for several hundred years, if then. hence climate change

We have the same amount of known oil reserves as we had in 1970. I guarantee you 40 years from now the number will be the same. It will become more expensive to drill but that is the extent of the problem. And that really is not much of a problem. will become somewhat more expensive
what was worse was drilling a dry hole , but with tech we have now , drilling dry holes dont happen
Gas prices in the US can go up 4 times their current price and it changes nothing in our economy. See Europe.
I knew you saying something right would come to an end , getting from
one end of Europe to the other is hellva alot different then going crossed North America

[That One Guy]

The United Nations’ top food agency announced yesterday that world food prices hit a record high last month, igniting concerns among agricultural experts who are thinking back to the food riots that gripped developing countries just three years ago.

“It’s a worrisome situation with prices this high,” said Dan Gustafson, the director of the U.N. Food and Agriculture Organization’s Washington, D.C., office. “The year ahead is what I think is the real concern at this point. … It’s not by any means inevitable that prices will come down,” he said….

FAO attributes the upswing in prices to factors including the crop failures caused by a string of extreme weather events and high crop demands from an ever-increased global population. Many experts have linked the series of floods and fires with climate change.


http://climateprogress.org/2011/01/06/extreme-weather-events-helps-drive-food-prices-to-record-highs/

No f'king way?! When you try to grow a massive civilization in the middle of a desert and depend on other people for food, things sometimes go wrong? Let em starve and they'll quit having ****ty civilizations and fighting wars non-stop.

When you talk peak population capacity, that doesn't allow for random **** to happen without tragedy. If we keep packing more densely, expect stuff to go wrong.

The second side of supply and demand. Supply shrinks - problems. Demand keeps going up - problems.

[Spider]

Global warming painted as a crisis is complete hoohockey.

It is like 100th on the list of things to worry about even if it exists, which is still very much in doubt.

Man-made global warming is the noise on top of the noise of the climate data. Statistical irrelevant.

18k years ago there was a mile of ice sitting on top of Manhattan.

LOL how in the hell can you make these 2 statements in one thread ?

We have serious pollution problems due to too many people in the world .

[Spider]

Price comparison
Waters Price/quart
Evian $1.70
Arrowhead $0.79
Dasani $1.32
Deep Rock $0.94
Rimrock $0.94
Aquafina $1.22
Food Club $0.56
Dannon $0.82
Fiji $1.32
O2 $1.58

Western Colorado http://www.hotchkiss.k12.co.us/hhs/english/webfolios/2001/trice/tech.htm News flash kiddo , these things we dont need , and you dont buy hundreds of gallons of water to transport goods across the country ..... you dont buy gallons of water for your car to commute 50 miles to work ..... getting the picture yet or do I need to use crayons ?

[W*GS]

4.6 billion years and the last 20 are destroying the planet?

Who has ever said that the planet will be "destroyed"?

Is there actual proof that there is extreme warming or change in the last 20 years in comparison to the 4.6 billion years before?

It's not 4.6 billion years that's the valid comparison. It's whether or not ~7 billion of us can adapt to the changes we've made to the climate system. For the last 10,000 years or so (since civilization began), it's been quite stable. That is increasingly no longer true.

[W*GS]

Optimum global population is 600,000,000.

According to whom and by what analyses?

[W*GS]

No doubt the bases are covered. Scientists going for grants on global warming all the way to retirement.

Science isn't the field to get rich in.

[baja]

According to whom and by what analyses?

This is the number thrown around by conspiracy theorists that the Rothchilds and other families said to be the controllers of the world for over 100 years have as a target number.

[W*GS]

This is the number thrown around by conspiracy theorists that the Rothchilds and other families said to be the controllers of the world for over 100 years have as a target number.

In other words, BS.

Why would this evil cabal want to rule over fewer people?

[baja]

In other words, BS.

Why would this evil cabal want to rule over fewer people?

Because that is all that is necessary to maintain the elites in the life style they desire and over population is a real threat to their existence. The want vast areas returned to there natural state and they can control 600 million where they can not control 7 billion. Longevity technology is coming and the population must be culled before it is available. Also there is pandemics that would threaten all humans and a drastically smaller population will decrease the threat of that.

[cutthemdown]

True and the underlying driving force behind all conspiracy theories. Optimum global population is 600,000,000. That's a lot of extra carcasses to get rid of.

I doubt it will be people in the rich countries. If your in Egypt though you may be screwed.

[W*GS]

Thanks for allowing us the peek into your fears. Sheesh.

[baja]

Thanks for allowing us the peek into your fears. Sheesh.

who are you referring to?

If it's me what are you assuming my fear is?

[Pony Boy]

Obama issues global warming rules in January, gives GE an exemption in February

Last month, the Obama EPA began enforcing new rules regulating the greenhouse gas emissions from any new or expanded power plants.

This week, the EPA issued its first exemption, Environment & Energy News reports.

According to a declaration by air chief Gina McCarthy, officials reviewed EPA policies and decided it was appropriate to "grandfather" projects such as the Avenal Power Center, a proposed 600-megawatt power plant in the San Joaquin Valley, so they are exempted from rules such as new air quality standards for smog-forming nitrogen dioxide (NO2).

Maybe GE CEO Jeff Immelt's closeness to President Obama, and his broad support for Obama's agenda, had nothing to do with this exemption. But we have no way of knowing that, and given the administration's record of regularly misleading Americans regarding lobbyists, frankly, I wouldn't trust the White House if they told me there was no connection.

http://washingtonexaminer.com/blogs/beltway-confidential/2011/02/obama-issues-global-warming-rules-january-gives-ge-exemption-febr

[Missouribronc]

It's not 4.6 billion years that's the valid comparison. It's whether or not ~7 billion of us can adapt to the changes we've made to the climate system. For the last 10,000 years or so (since civilization began), it's been quite stable. That is increasingly no longer true.

OK...so we've had a stable climate for 10,000 years, yet over the course of 4.6 billion years we've had a lot of stable periods in climate. Is it possible that this was just a stable period, and we are at the beginning of a change in climate that isn't caused by man, but more because of overall, natural cycles?

You're right, if it is a climate change, we will have to learn to adapt, but because it's changing doesn't necessarily mean that humans did it.

I still haven't heard the answer to my question, how much "carbon emissions" were produced by the U.S. in the late 1800s and early 1900s...

[JJJ]

LOL how in the hell can you make these 2 statements in one thread ?

Because pollution and global warming are two completely different things that have little or nothing to do with each other.

One is a fact the other is a hypothesis.

CO2, the apparrent basis for this hypothesis, is not a pollutant.

[Mile High Shack]

See, I'm not so sure that some of it isn't man made, but natural cycles of the earth and we are just caught in the middle of something larger we can't control and it drives us nuts b/c we think we should have the answers for everything

[JJJ]

News flash kiddo , these things we dont need , and you dont buy hundreds of gallons of water to transport goods across the country ..... you dont buy gallons of water for your car to commute 50 miles to work ..... getting the picture yet or do I need to use crayons ?

No doubt you have many crayons handy. Which color do you use for filling out your tax form there Spidey?

[Spider]

Because pollution and global warming are two completely different things that have little or nothing to do with each other.

One is a fact the other is a hypothesis.

CO2, the apparrent basis for this hypothesis, is not a pollutant.

your full of ****

[Spider]

No doubt you have many crayons handy. Which color do you use for filling out your tax form there Spidey?

is this your way of asking for Pink ?

[Spider]

See, I'm not so sure that some of it isn't man made, but natural cycles of the earth and we are just caught in the middle of something larger we can't control and it drives us nuts b/c we think we should have the answers for everything
I agree , could be a natural cycle , sped up by man , or all the building , pollutants , etc could be havin more of an effect then we know

[Mile High Shack]

I agree , could be a natural cycle , sped up by man , or all the building , pollutants , etc could be havin more of an effect then we know

I suppose that is the unknown, we don't know, but there is no doubt the temperature is going up at least I think most of us can agree on that

[Spider]

I suppose that is the unknown, we don't know, but there is no doubt the temperature is going up at least I think most of us can agree on that

man I wish people could see the vapors that come off an oil production tank ,I dont know whats all in the vapors , but you better vent the tank before you open the thief hatch

[W*GS]

OK...so we've had a stable climate for 10,000 years, yet over the course of 4.6 billion years we've had a lot of stable periods in climate.

But in none of those other periods were ~7 billion people around. That's the key element.

Is it possible that this was just a stable period, and we are at the beginning of a change in climate that isn't caused by man, but more because of overall, natural cycles?

The time scale of those cycles is much longer than the time scale (less than a century) in which we have already observed climate change. Much research has been done into determining the natural and anthropogenic components of the current climate change, and natural factors have been found wanting. We cannot describe the observations we've made without an anthropogenic component.

You're right, if it is a climate change, we will have to learn to adapt, but because it's changing doesn't necessarily mean that humans did it.

True. That's why scientists have engaged in detection and attribution (D&A) for some decades now. Yep, it's us that's doing it.

I still haven't heard the answer to my question, how much "carbon emissions" were produced by the U.S. in the late 1800s and early 1900s...

http://cdiac.ornl.gov/ftp/trends/co2_emis/usa.dat

[JJJ]

I suppose that is the unknown, we don't know, but there is no doubt the temperature is going up at least I think most of us can agree on that

Agreed. It has been going up for the last 18,000 years.

[W*GS]

I suppose that is the unknown, we don't know, but there is no doubt the temperature is going up at least I think most of us can agree on that

Some hardcore deniers think that the observed temperature change is due only to station siting factors, urban heat island effect, and the like. Some even claim that the entire record has been manipulated and is the result of fraud. No joke.

[Rohirrim]

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bb/1000_Year_Temperature_Comparison.png/300px-1000_Year_Temperature_Comparison.png

That spike at the end sure does correlate nicely with the onset of the Industrial Revolution, coincidentally.

[W*GS]

Agreed. It has been going up for the last 18,000 years.

Well, no. Not at the current rate.

[Spider]

http://cdiac.ornl.gov/ftp/trends/co2_emis/usa.dat

dayum ....... But none of that has anything to do with Climate change , ask the expert JJJ ........ :wiggle:

[Rohirrim]

Ever seen one of these?

http://images.meredith.com/bhg/images/plant/p_jugcover_092804.jpg

In Spring, you just take a milk jug, like this, and put it over your tomato plants. It guards against a late freeze. The plant emits CO2 which, under the available sunlight, heats up the inside of the jug so the plant doesn't freeze. It also keeps in moisture. It's like a mini-greenhouse.

[JJJ]

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bb/1000_Year_Temperature_Comparison.png/300px-1000_Year_Temperature_Comparison.png

That spike at the end sure does correlate nicely with the onset of the Industrial Revolution, coincidentally.

Please explain to me why it went down a full degree between 1000 and 1600. What exactly does that trend correlate to?

[JJJ]

Ever seen one of these?

http://images.meredith.com/bhg/images/plant/p_jugcover_092804.jpg

In Spring, you just take a milk jug, like this, and put it over your tomato plants. It guards against a late freeze. The plant emits CO2 which, under the available sunlight, heats up the inside of the jug so the plant doesn't freeze. It also keeps in moisture. It's like a mini-greenhouse.

:rofl: It would heat up regardless if your little plant is in there or not.

People usually use these to grow plants starting from seeds.

[W*GS]

Please explain to me why it went down a full degree between 1000 and 1600. What exactly does that trend correlate to?

Here's a better and more recent figure:

http://ourchangingclimate.files.wordpress.com/2011/02/past-and-future-temps-copenh-diagn-2009.png

[Spider]

:rofl: It would heat up regardless if your little plant is in there or not.

People usually use these to grow plants starting from seeds.

I cant help but notice you skipped right over W*GS and his chart ......... I isolated the good stuff for ya ..... I know add is a biatch

[JJJ]

I cant help but notice you skipped right over W*GS and his chart ......... I isolated the good stuff for ya ..... I know add is a biatch

I trust you have much experience with ADD so I will not question you there.

As for the charts let's start with the obvious.

Do you see any differences between Wiggles' chart and Rohirrim's?

And I am not talking about the made-up part on the right of Wiggles chart, but the data between 1000 and 1600. There is about a 2x difference in the amount of temperature decrease during that period in the charts. Please explain this difference.

Tell me which one of these charts is the correct one?

[W*GS]

Tell me which one of these charts is the correct one?

Mine. It's based on more recent work.

You just can't handle the fact that the climate system is going outside the bounds it's been in for a very long time, because of us.

[JJJ]

Mine. It's based on more recent work.

You just can't handle the fact that the climate system is going outside the bounds it's been in for a very long time, because of us.

Normally I would say, you really can't make this **** up. But in this case it is obvious that you actually have.

When you guys finally hit a full degree of temperature increase change in about 40 years let me know will you. We got about 99 other problems much more pressing to address while you guys manipulate your little charts.

[Fedaykin]

A note about the "hocky stick" chart. A lot of deniers, like JJJ, like to point out that the temperature does change over time even significantly. No one disputes that, but that's not the issue with GCC.

The real problem is not the absolute temperature change, it's the rate of change that is problematic. The global temperature is experiencing and unprecedented rate of change. The hocky stick graph puts it front and center but the deniers, in my experience, don't understand math enough to grasp what that means.

[W*GS]

Normally I would say, you really can't make this **** up. But in this case it is obvious that you actually have.

Now you know why you're properly labeled a denier. You deny anthropogenic climate change.

When you guys finally hit a full degree of temperature increase change in about 40 years let me know will you.

Take a look at what happens to extremes when the mean changes, even a little. For a very simple example, draw a bell curve and then shift the mean a few percent. The tail of the end towards which the shift occurred just got a whole bunch fatter - not a few percent, but possibly orders of magnitude more likely. That's the problem.

We got about 99 other problems much more pressing to address while you guys manipulate your little charts.

Yep, a denier through-and-through.

[Arkie]

New oil discoveries peaked in the 1960s. Global output of traditional crude peaked around 2005-2006.

[JJJ]

New oil discoveries peaked in the 1960s. Global output of traditional crude peaked around 2005-2006.

Yeah, I don't think so.

28028

http://static.seekingalpha.com/uploads/2011/1/16/saupload_global_crude_oil_supply_2002_2010_4_by_6. jpg

[Arkie]

Expensive alternate oil and oil-equivalent sources, like tar sands, deep ocean oil wells, and bio fuels have taken up the slack for the time being, but these are limited resources and their utilization is not growing as quickly as anticipated to fill in the gap caused by the shrinking output from the world's mature oil fields. In 2008 the International Energy Agency (IEA) estimated that decline at a rate of the world's mature oil fields at 9.1% annually, with a drop to "only" 6.4% if huge capital investments are made to implement "Enhanced Oil Recovery" technologies on a massive scale.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/matthew-stein/the-perfect-storm-six-tre_b_582779.html

[JJJ]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/matthew-stein/the-perfect-storm-six-tre_b_582779.html

Dude, it is the Huffington Post.

The known oil reserves have not changed for 50 years. 50 years from now they will still be the same. It is just a question of money.

[Arkie]

The simple facts are the amount of oil in the world is decreasing while the population is increasing exponentially.

[Spider]

I trust you have much experience with ADD so I will not question you there.

As for the charts let's start with the obvious.

Do you see any differences between Wiggles' chart and Rohirrim's?

And I am not talking about the made-up part on the right of Wiggles chart, but the data between 1000 and 1600. There is about a 2x difference in the amount of temperature decrease during that period in the charts. Please explain this difference.

Tell me which one of these charts is the correct one?
LOL , thats it ? ........
when it comes to Climate Change and the climate , listen to W*GS , and dont think for 1 second me and W*GS agree on alot of things , but when it comes to this stuff I shut the **** up and listen to him , thats how you gain knowledge , take in all points weight it , I havent found W*GS to be wrong on this once ........ Problem with people like you , you got google , you become an automatic expert ...... Some times it is best to shut the **** up and listen

[Spider]

The simple facts are the amount of oil in the world is decreasing while the population is increasing exponentially.

Sorry my man , but that isnt a simple fact , what is a simple fact is , Oil is harder to recover , but we have no Idea whats where and how much .....

[baja]

The simple facts are the amount of oil in the world is decreasing while the population is increasing exponentially.

I pointed this out earlier I can't imagine anything getting much simpler.

[TonyR]

Dude, it is the Huffington Post.


Did you happen to note who the author of the article was? Or do you prefer to stew in your own ignorance? Guy's an MIT grad. He takes sh*ts that are smarter than you.

[JJJ]

Did you happen to note who the author of the article was? Or do you prefer to stew in your own ignorance? Guy's an MIT grad. He takes sh*ts that are smarter than you.

Do you think degrees really are an indicator of how smart someone is and gives them instant credibility?

I don't.

[JJJ]

Mine. It's based on more recent work.

You just can't handle the fact that the climate system is going outside the bounds it's been in for a very long time, because of us.

So you can just in one sentence justify dumping one set of data and switching to another which eliminates half of the temperature change during 1000 to 1600 simply because it is newer and by your definition better.

No explanation.

No credible or plausible discussion of why the other data is flawed and should not be trusted or used.

It just shows you how volatile your supposedly undeniable data really is. You can't even agree on what the standard deviation is of your baseline data. So which bell curve would you like to use?

You showed two charts and there are 7 curves to choose from. I bet your curve is probably formulated from averaging the seven curves in Rohirrims data or something equally as ridiculous.

Who knows, you pulled the data out of your ass and no reference was cited. Careful or Requiem will accuse you of plagarism.

I am still waiting for any explanation from any of you for the mechanism that caused it to apparrently get very much colder from 1000 to 1600 but that appears to be too much of a challenge for you.

[JJJ]

LOL , thats it ? ........
when it comes to Climate Change and the climate , listen to W*GS , and dont think for 1 second me and W*GS agree on alot of things , but when it comes to this stuff I shut the **** up and listen to him , thats how you gain knowledge , take in all points weight it , I havent found W*GS to be wrong on this once ........ Problem with people like you , you got google , you become an automatic expert ...... Some times it is best to shut the **** up and listen

Great, I await his answers and look forward to you fulfilling your promise in the last sentence.

But Wiggles isn't a scientist. He is a programmer pretending to be one on the internet. He really has very little scientific objectivity and clearly operates with an agenda on this topic so I will remain quite skeptical if you don't mind.

[JJJ]

Did you happen to note who the author of the article was? Or do you prefer to stew in your own ignorance? Guy's an MIT grad. He takes sh*ts that are smarter than you.

:rofl: Here is your credible source.

Why I wrote When Technology Fails
By Matthew Stein, P.E., Author of When Technology Fails: A Manual for Self-Reliance and Planetary Survival, ISBN #978-1933392837, published by Chelsea Green Publishing, White River Junction, VT (800) 639-4099 http://www.chelseagreen.com

You might wonder what an MIT engineer is doing writing about the failure of technology. I doubt that we will see technology fail in one single blow, but believe that we will see increasing environmental and political instabilities that will cause disruptions in the flow of electricity and goods to large numbers of people. I do not consider myself a survivalist and had never considered writing a book even remotely like this until I “received” a complete title, scope and holographic outline for this book in an instantaneous flash while meditating just before Thanksgiving of 1997. At this time, I had never heard of Y2k, the stock market was booming, Israel was relatively peaceful, and 9/11 was just a number you called when you were in trouble. I have often used meditative techniques to gain valuable (and sometimes patentable) solutions to difficult design problems, but never before have I received a complete and fully developed idea for something that had not already been subject to the conscious focus of my mind.


I am definitely not smart enough to figure out the entire outline for this book in an instant. Just writing a college term paper was a major ordeal for me. I do believe that the inspiration for this book came from a higher source, but that source did not tell me whom it was (I can't claim it was Jesus, Buddha, or God himself). If it was truly divine inspiration that guided me to write this book, one wonders what is in store for mankind in the next decade. The same source that guided me to write this book indicated that many people would need this information in the coming years.

Matthew Stein, PE
http://www.whentechfails.com/node/5

[epicSocialism4tw]

:rofl: Here is your credible source.

Why I wrote When Technology Fails
By Matthew Stein, P.E., Author of When Technology Fails: A Manual for Self-Reliance and Planetary Survival, ISBN #978-1933392837, published by Chelsea Green Publishing, White River Junction, VT (800) 639-4099 http://www.chelseagreen.com

You might wonder what an MIT engineer is doing writing about the failure of technology. I doubt that we will see technology fail in one single blow, but believe that we will see increasing environmental and political instabilities that will cause disruptions in the flow of electricity and goods to large numbers of people. I do not consider myself a survivalist and had never considered writing a book even remotely like this until I “received” a complete title, scope and holographic outline for this book in an instantaneous flash while meditating just before Thanksgiving of 1997. At this time, I had never heard of Y2k, the stock market was booming, Israel was relatively peaceful, and 9/11 was just a number you called when you were in trouble. I have often used meditative techniques to gain valuable (and sometimes patentable) solutions to difficult design problems, but never before have I received a complete and fully developed idea for something that had not already been subject to the conscious focus of my mind.


I am definitely not smart enough to figure out the entire outline for this book in an instant. Just writing a college term paper was a major ordeal for me. I do believe that the inspiration for this book came from a higher source, but that source did not tell me whom it was (I can't claim it was Jesus, Buddha, or God himself). If it was truly divine inspiration that guided me to write this book, one wonders what is in store for mankind in the next decade. The same source that guided me to write this book indicated that many people would need this information in the coming years.

Matthew Stein, PE
http://www.whentechfails.com/node/5

Well, um...thats embarrassing.

[Spider]

Great, I await his answers and look forward to you fulfilling your promise in the last sentence. well hold your breath , I will be sure to get right on it , I promise ........ No really

But Wiggles isn't a scientist. He is a programmer pretending to be one on the internet. who cares , you are some kind of repair man living in Switzerland is it ? using google to become an automatic expert He really has very little scientific objectivity and clearly operates with an agenda on this topic LOL and you dont ? so I will remain quite skeptical if you don't mind.

LOL dont mind at all , I enjoy harassing you

[W*GS]

So you can just in one sentence justify dumping one set of data and switching to another which eliminates half of the temperature change during 1000 to 1600 simply because it is newer and by your definition better.

No explanation.

No credible or plausible discussion of why the other data is flawed and should not be trusted or used.

It just shows you how volatile your supposedly undeniable data really is. You can't even agree on what the standard deviation is of your baseline data. So which bell curve would you like to use?

You showed two charts and there are 7 curves to choose from. I bet your curve is probably formulated from averaging the seven curves in Rohirrims data or something equally as ridiculous.

Who knows, you pulled the data out of your ass and no reference was cited. Careful or Requiem will accuse you of plagarism.

I am still waiting for any explanation from any of you for the mechanism that caused it to apparrently get very much colder from 1000 to 1600 but that appears to be too much of a challenge for you.

Do me a favor and do some ****ing reading:

P.D. Jones, K.R. Briffa, T.P. Barnett, and S.F.B. Tett (1998). , The Holocene, 8: 455-471.
M.E. Mann, R.S. Bradley, and M.K. Hughes (1999). , Geophysical Research Letters, 26(6): 759-762.
Crowley and Lowery (2000). , Ambio, 29: 51-54. Modified as published in Crowley (2000). , Science, 289: 270-277.
K.R. Briffa, T.J. Osborn, F.H. Schweingruber, I.C. Harris, P.D. Jones, S.G. Shiyatov, S.G. and E.A. Vaganov (2001). , J. Geophys. Res., 106: 2929-2941.
J. Esper, E.R. Cook, and F.H. Schweingruber (2002). , Science, 295(5563): 2250-2253.
M.E. Mann and P.D. Jones (2003). , Geophysical Research Letters, 30(15): 1820. doi:10.1029/2003GL017814.
P.D. Jones and M.E. Mann (2004). , Reviews of Geophysics, 42: RG2002. doi:10.1029/2003RG000143
S. Huang (2004). , Geophys. Res Lett., 31: L13205. doi:10.1029/2004GL019781
A. Moberg, D.M. Sonechkin, K. Holmgren, N.M. Datsenko and W. Karlén (2005). , Nature, 443: 613-617. doi:10.1038/nature03265
J.H. Oerlemans (2005). , Science, 308: 675-677. doi:10.1126/science.1107046
Mann, M. E. et al., (2008) Proxy-Based Reconstructions of Hemispheric and Global Surface Temperature Variations over the Past Two Millennia. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 105, 13252-13257.

and

http://www.copenhagendiagnosis.org

Learn so you can stop making an ass of yourself.

[W*GS]

Great, I await his answers

You got 'em. Now STFU.

But Wiggles isn't a scientist. He is a programmer pretending to be one on the internet. He really has very little scientific objectivity and clearly operates with an agenda on this topic so I will remain quite skeptical if you don't mind.

My "agenda" is reality. WTF is yours?

[Rohirrim]

Do you think degrees really are an indicator of how smart someone is and gives them instant credibility?

I don't.

Of course you don't. Like all fascist movements, one of the first things the neocons, I should say, neofascists went on the attack against was higher education and those who reside there. To the Right, there can be no worse blot on a persons character than to be from Harvard, or MIT, or CalTech, or Princeton, etc. Hell, that's worse than being a socialist, or gay.

[Rohirrim]

:rofl: Here is your credible source.

Why I wrote When Technology Fails
By Matthew Stein, P.E., Author of When Technology Fails: A Manual for Self-Reliance and Planetary Survival, ISBN #978-1933392837, published by Chelsea Green Publishing, White River Junction, VT (800) 639-4099 http://www.chelseagreen.com

You might wonder what an MIT engineer is doing writing about the failure of technology. I doubt that we will see technology fail in one single blow, but believe that we will see increasing environmental and political instabilities that will cause disruptions in the flow of electricity and goods to large numbers of people. I do not consider myself a survivalist and had never considered writing a book even remotely like this until I “received” a complete title, scope and holographic outline for this book in an instantaneous flash while meditating just before Thanksgiving of 1997. At this time, I had never heard of Y2k, the stock market was booming, Israel was relatively peaceful, and 9/11 was just a number you called when you were in trouble. I have often used meditative techniques to gain valuable (and sometimes patentable) solutions to difficult design problems, but never before have I received a complete and fully developed idea for something that had not already been subject to the conscious focus of my mind.


I am definitely not smart enough to figure out the entire outline for this book in an instant. Just writing a college term paper was a major ordeal for me. I do believe that the inspiration for this book came from a higher source, but that source did not tell me whom it was (I can't claim it was Jesus, Buddha, or God himself). If it was truly divine inspiration that guided me to write this book, one wonders what is in store for mankind in the next decade. The same source that guided me to write this book indicated that many people would need this information in the coming years.

Matthew Stein, PE
http://www.whentechfails.com/node/5

How odd. So the guy refers to a "muse" (a concept as old as the Greeks) and that allows you to discount, and debase his opinion? But if some rightard claims that God told him (or her) to run for office, or pass a law, or fight some law, (like Bachmann is so fond of saying), you'd be perfectly all right with it? Hypocrites. For your information, some of the greatest thinkers and scientists in human history have attributed their amazing discoveries, inventions and insights to a burst of inspiration wholly outside themselves.

[TonyR]

Do you think degrees really are an indicator of how smart someone is and gives them instant credibility?

I don't.

Perhaps you don't know much about MIT but a degree from there is a fairly strong indicator of intelligence. What's more troubling is that you dimiss the credibility of an article because of the site it's on, as if HuffPo is some extremist, fringe web site. I can perhaps excuse such a reaction to DailyKos or the like, but HuffPo? Lame. I expect better from you.

[Pony Boy]

Of course you don't. Like all fascist movements, one of the first things the neocons, I should say, neofascists went on the attack against was higher education and those who reside there. To the Right, there can be no worse blot on a persons character than to be from Harvard, or MIT, or CalTech, or Princeton, etc. Hell, that's worse than being a socialist, or gay.

Your just biased just because your avatar and Al Gore were roommates at Harvard....:~ohyah!:

[Rohirrim]

Your just biased just because your avatar and Al Gore were roommates at Harvard....:~ohyah!:

True. I had forgotten about that. Tommy Lee is one of my favorite actors of all times. I thought his performance in No Country for Old Men was one of the best I've ever seen.

[Pony Boy]

True. I had forgotten about that. Tommy Lee is one of my favorite actors of all times. I thought his performance in No Country for Old Men was one of the best I've ever seen.

Nope, for me it was Woodrow McCall, it's my all time favorite. Most people don't know Tommy Lee was an offensive tackle all-ivy league.

[baja]

True. I had forgotten about that. Tommy Lee is one of my favorite actors of all times. I thought his performance in No Country for Old Men was one of the best I've ever seen.

He was second to this guy in that same film.

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2007/11/08/arts/09count600.jpg

[Pony Boy]

He was second to this guy in that same film.

http://ia.media-imdb.com/images/M/MV5BMjAxOTU1NzgyMl5BMl5BanBnXkFtZTYwNzM0MTM3._V1._ CR0,0,450,450_SS99_.jpg

Picture didn't come through for me but I bet it was Guss.....

[baja]

Picture didn't come through for me but I bet it was Guss.....

Right you are.

His performance sends chills down my spine just thinking about it.

[TonyR]

His performance sends chills down my spine just thinking about it.

You can't stop what's coming.

[epicSocialism4tw]

He was second to this guy in that same film.

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2007/11/08/arts/09count600.jpg

Great movie.

I love movies like that where the central themes and messages are subtle.

[baja]

What in your opinion was the subtle message of this film?

[baja]

that compressed air cow killer was haunting. The scene where he was in the cop car and pulled over the citizen and got him to submit to the piston was the same feeling as the shark in Jaws eating the human meat.

[epicSocialism4tw]

What in your opinion was the subtle message of this film?

At its core, its a classic "confronting evil" story filtered through the changing nature of law and justice in the border drug trade. It asks many fundamental questions without saying very much. It presents the extreme of evil (Javier Bardem), the man whose life it ruins (Josh Brolin), and the man who has grappled with it until it has worn him down (Jones).

[Rohirrim]

Wendell: [Viewing the desert crime scene] It's a mess, ain't it, Sheriff?
Ed Tom Bell: If it ain't, it'll do till the mess gets here.

[Rohirrim]

Nope, for me it was Woodrow McCall, it's my all time favorite. Most people don't know Tommy Lee was an offensive tackle all-ivy league.

I watch Lonesome Dove once a year. Hell of a party. :~ohyah!:

[JJJ]

True. I had forgotten about that. Tommy Lee is one of my favorite actors of all times. I thought his performance in No Country for Old Men was one of the best I've ever seen.

We have actually found something we can agree on. The guy is absolutely brilliant. Him and Bobby Duvall, it really doesn't get any better than those two.

[cutthemdown]

At its core, its a classic "confronting evil" story filtered through the changing nature of law and justice in the border drug trade. It asks many fundamental questions without saying very much. It presents the extreme of evil (Javier Bardem), the man whose life it ruins (Josh Brolin), and the man who has grappled with it until it has worn him down (Jones).

You missed greed. He put money in front of his wife and they both paid the price.

[baja]

At its core, its a classic "confronting evil" story filtered through the changing nature of law and justice in the border drug trade. It asks many fundamental questions without saying very much. It presents the extreme of evil (Javier Bardem), the man whose life it ruins (Josh Brolin), and the man who has grappled with it until it has worn him down (Jones).

You could include;

Compassion does not always reward you. (Going back to give the man water).

Evil without conscience is hard to defeat. (fearless, heartless and unstoppable Javier Bardem).

Evil trumps ego. Javier Bardem easily kills Carson Wells

Life is not fair (wife)

[baja]

Oh and life in these United States is not what you grandfather knew.

[Pony Boy]

Oh and life in these United States is not what you grandfather knew.

We are getting a glimpse here, no bread or eggs on the grocery store shelves, milk only sold to family’s with kids, premium gas is all that available at the pumps. Diesel will be gone soon. (N.E Oklahoma/Arkansas border).

[JJJ]

Perhaps you don't know much about MIT but a degree from there is a fairly strong indicator of intelligence.What's more troubling is that you dimiss the credibility of an article because of the site it's on, as if HuffPo is some extremist, fringe web site. I can perhaps excuse such a reaction to DailyKos or the like, but HuffPo? Lame. I expect better from you.

Its been awhile since I have been there. Used to work with the professors in their biotechnology research labratory for engineering of optical biochips for DNA sequencing. Cool stuff, some of these have the entire human genome on a single chip the size of your thumbnail with almost 2m genetic markers.

Contrary to what Rho says I got absolutely nothing against higher education. I have three degrees myself. The problem is those professors get tenure and it becomes real easy to become a liberal lefty when you have essentially lifetime job security.

90% of the Phd's in universities are lefties. 70% of them working in the real world are righties. Competition and true business experience makes you appreciate conservative values.

For the record I have worked with a lot of really dumbass Phd's who were lucky enough if they could remember leftie loosey and rightsie tightsie. There are many Phd's that are just mind-numbingly dumb.

I have worked with operators on the production floor who were much smarter than many of the Phd's I have worked with. Degrees are no measure of the man.

[Requiem]

You should check into AGW and see how that impacts what you're discussing, PonyBoy.

[Mile High Shack]

We are getting a glimpse here, no bread or eggs on the grocery store shelves, milk only sold to family’s with kids, premium gas is all that available at the pumps. Diesel will be gone soon. (N.E Oklahoma/Arkansas border).

that's only b/c of the snow storm

[Pony Boy]

that's only b/c of the snow storm

The statement was made in reference to Baja’s post about the hard times our grandfathers went through. We are lucky that we will never see times like that again in our lifetime, unless global-warming causes it to snow more this weekend. ;D

[Spider]

Nope, for me it was Woodrow McCall, it's my all time favorite. Most people don't know Tommy Lee was an offensive tackle all-ivy league.

Love that show ....... though Robert Duvall stole the show , I also like the the one with James Gardener , as Woodrow

[TonyR]

90% of the Phd's in universities are lefties. 70% of them working in the real world are righties.

Where did you get those fancy stats?!?



Competition and true business experience makes you appreciate conservative values.

The richest one percent of this country owns half our country's wealth, five trillion dollars. One third of that comes from hard work, two thirds comes from inheritance, interest on interest accumulating to widows and idiot sons and what I do, stock and real estate speculation. It's bull****. You got ninety percent of the American public out there with little or no net worth. I create nothing. I own. We make the rules, pal. The news, war, peace, famine, upheaval, the price per paper clip. We pick that rabbit out of the hat while everybody sits out there wondering how the hell we did it. Now you're not naive enough to think we're living in a democracy, are you buddy? It's the free market. And you're a part of it. You've got that killer instinct. Stick around pal, I've still got a lot to teach you. -- Gordon Gekko

[JJJ]

Where did you get those fancy stats?!?


The richest one percent of this country owns half our country's wealth, five trillion dollars. One third of that comes from hard work, two thirds comes from inheritance, interest on interest accumulating to widows and idiot sons and what I do, stock and real estate speculation. It's bull****. You got ninety percent of the American public out there with little or no net worth. I create nothing. I own. We make the rules, pal. The news, war, peace, famine, upheaval, the price per paper clip. We pick that rabbit out of the hat while everybody sits out there wondering how the hell we did it. Now you're not naive enough to think we're living in a democracy, are you buddy? It's the free market. And you're a part of it. You've got that killer instinct. Stick around pal, I've still got a lot to teach you. -- Gordon Gekko

Those are my estimates from experience. You can make up your own too if you like.

You do realize Gordon Gekko is a character in a Hollywood movie and not a real person right?

Seems he has a few made-up stats of his own. See article below.

When did the American youth turn into such a big set of whinebags?

Strap on a new pair and go get yours.

No place on earth, except now perhaps China and India, can a person from absolutely no social or economic status with absolutely no inherentence or birthright become so rich so quickly than in America through their own efforts. It really is quite unique in human history.

If the side effect from that is we have to live with some rich sons and daughters who didn't work for their money, so be it. That my friend is simply one of the prices of freedom.

The government inherenting a rich person's money is far more unfair than his son's and daughters.

And as you see some people like Warren Buffet, the smart ones sometimes don't pass on their fortunes so easily to their family. Silver spooners bear their own cross anyways, having to go through life seen as lucky and probably lazy. Drugs and alcohol are their side effects normally.

The stupid eventually lose or waste their money somehow anyway. See how well professional athletes keep their fortunes.

A couple interesting articles

http://blogs.wsj.com/wealth/2008/01/14/the-decline-of-inherited-money/

The Decline of Inherited Money
January 14, 2008, 2:41 PM ET

By Robert Frank
My Krugman post brought a lot of emails asking about my assertion that “the vast majority of today’s rich didn’t inherit their money, but made it themselves.”

For the sake of brevity, I didn’t cite the research behind the statement. But since many of you have asked, and we aim to please here at the Wealth Report, here are my three main data points:

1. According to a study of Federal Reserve data conducted by NYU professor Edward Wolff, for the nation’s richest 1%, inherited wealth accounted for only 9% of their net worth in 2001, down from 23% in 1989. (The 2001 number was the latest available.)

2. According to a study by Prince & Associates, less than 10% of today’s multi-millionaires cited “inheritance” as their source of wealth.

3. A study by Spectrem Group found that among today’s millionaires, inherited wealth accounted for just 2% of their total sources of wealth.

Each of these stats measures slightly different things, yet they all come to the same basic conclusion: Inheritance is not the main driver of today’s wealth. The reason we’ve had a doubling in the number of millionaires and billionaires over the past decade (even adjusted for inflation) is that more of the non-wealthy have become wealthy.

So it’s not just that the same old rich folks are getting richer. The more-important shift is that the rich are getting more numerous.



http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune_archive/2003/11/24/353786/index.htm

[W*GS]

Got your homework done yet, JJJ?

I'll expect summaries of those papers and the research before you open your piehole about manmade climate change again.

[TonyR]

Those are my estimates from experience. You can make up your own too if you like.


Okay, it's good to see that you're willing to admit that you made up numbers to support your position.

[JJJ]

Got your homework done yet, JJJ?

I'll expect summaries of those papers and the research before you open your piehole about manmade climate change again.

Of course not. I have clicked on enough of your links to know you got nothing.

Your link to Michael Mann's circle jerk of hockey stick believers is all I need to know about the likely quality of the silly papers embedded in your post. The Climategaters have brought science to a new low.

[W*GS]

Okay, it's good to see that you're willing to admit that you made up numbers to support your position.

And he has the gall to call into question the science behind global warming. He makes up ****, then projects that onto others.

[JJJ]

Okay, it's good to see that you're willing to admit that you made up numbers to support your position.

I didn't make them up, I estimated them. There is a difference you know. In the context of my post it seemed pretty obvious that was what it was even to the casual reader.

I did enjoy you referencing Gordon Gecko as a rebuttal to my lack of researchable data though. That was worth a good chuckle I must admit.

[Spider]

Okay, it's good to see that you're willing to admit that you made up numbers to support your position.

LOL

[W*GS]

Of course not. I have clicked on enough of your links to know you got nothing.

So prove it. Don't make up stuff like is your schtick. If it's "nothing", the exercise ought to be trivial.

Your link to Michael Mann's circle jerk of hockey stick believers is all I need to know about the likely quality of the silly papers embedded in your post. The Climategaters have brought science to a new low.

Spoken like a true denier.

How much do you have to pay Anthony Watts to swallow his spew?