Monday, May 13, 2013
Where I DON'T Agree With the Warmists
a) That the current warming is in any way abnormal or alarming (the Vikings planted crops in Greenland during the Medieval Warm Period, the Romans - during the Roman Warm Period - mined copper, gold, and emeralds higher into the Alps than we ever did, the Sahara was actually wet during the second Holocene Warming Optimum, etc.).............b) That an increase in atmospheric CO2 is always a bad thing (some studies have supported higher crop yields and we all know that CO2 is beneficial for vegetation in general).............c) That global warming is necessarily negative, and that it is worse than global cooling (on this one the evidence is overwhelming - during periods of warming life thrives and during periods of cooling it doesn't).............d) That CO2 is the major driver of global warming (yes, you will get some warming when you increase atmospheric CO2 but the relationship is a logarithmic one and the feedbacks seemingly negative).............e) That government intervention and initiatives will solve the "problem" (agreements such as Kyoto will NOT appreciably make a difference and green energy initiatives such as wind and ethanol aren't really all that damned green).
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
10 comments:
.
"...e) That government intervention and initiatives will solve the "problem" (agreements such as Kyoto will NOT appreciably make a difference and green energy initiatives such as wind and ethanol aren't really all that damned green)."
Government intervention and initiatives in USA and other parts of the world, have helped make significant differences in on-going environmental and other public health problems in the past. In 1969 Cuyahoga River caught fire because of 'unfettered free-enterprise dumping' of pollution. Only through government intervention and initiatives was this problem brought under control/solved. Requiring seat-belts in automobiles/trucks in the 1960s is also an example of government intervention and initiatives successfully helping solve long term public health issues. In Germany an example of government intervention and initiatives successfully helping solve long term public health issues is the clean-up of East German land/air pollution after the fall of the Berlin Wall.
Your mind-numbing sniveling "Where I DON'T Agree With The Warmists" boils down to simple sophistry and denial. Environmental protection efforts around other parts of the world are working and helping clean-up serious problems in India/Japan/China/South America et al.
Ema Nymton
~@:o?
.
I'm not opposed to all government regulations, Ema. I'm not even opposed to a limited EPA but when you have moronic politicians and bureaucrats a) calling one of the major building blocks of life a "poison" and a "pollutant" and b) proposing "solutions" that will do absolutely nothing to reduce CO2 AND will totally wreck the economy then that is nuts.
And you obviously haven't done your homework. Wind energy doesn't reduce our carbon footprint one iota. It has low power density (meaning that it takes up lots of land and causes a major disruption of the environment), is exceedingly resource intensive in terms of steel, concrete, rare earth minerals, and is in constant need of a fossil fuel backup due to its inefficiency. And ethanol. Don't even get me going on ethanol.......That's your precious government intervention, Ema (that and you just might want to compare the air quality in North and South Korea).
Ema: tell me how government efforts such as Kyoto, which had mainland China increase greenhouse gases, make anything any better at all.
Thanks for pointing out the differences in general matters between East Germany and West Germany. East Germany was a typical socialist nation: with very high government control and the very high environmental devastation which tends to be a lot worse the more socialist a country is. Free market West Germany cleaned up the mess the socialists left behind.
East Germany is another good example.
That and the fact that U.S. carbon emissions are actually falling!! http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/20/business/us-example-offers-hope-for-cutting-carbon-emissions.html?_r=0 - Yes, some of that is due to the recession but more of it is probably due to the fact that the market has shifted us much more to a hydrogen economy via natural gas production. Yeah, you heard me correct, Ema, THE MARKET!
I just noticed that Ema presented China as an example of a country with environmental policies the US should emulate....
They'e practically building a new coal-fired power plant every week, for Christ.
.
"They'e practically building a new coal-fired power plant every week, for Christ."
With modern day environmental equipment to capture the generated pollution.
Ema Nymton
~@:o?
.
Sorry, Ema, but a) our coal-fired plants are better (superior scrubbers, etc.) and b) we've been utilizing a lot more natural gas which has a 1:4 carbon to hydrogen ratio (compared to coal which has a 2:1 ratio) AND which is significantly cheaper.
Post a Comment