Global warming?

[classicman]

Copenhagen Summit Turned Junket?
(CBS) Few would argue with the U.S. having a presence at the Copenhagen Climate Summit. But wait until you hear what we found about how many in Congress got all-expense paid trips to Denmark on your dime.

Cameras spotted House Speaker Nancy Pelosi at the summit. She called the shots on who got to go.

They were joined by 18 colleagues: Democrats: Waxman, Miller, Markey, Gordon, Levin, Blumenauer, DeGette, Inslee, Ryan, Butterfield, Cleaver, Giffords, and Republicans: Barton, Upton, Moore Capito, Sullivan, Blackburn and Sensenbrenner.

That's not the half of it. But finding out more was a bit like trying to get the keys to Ft. Knox. Many referred us to Speaker Pelosi who wouldn't agree to an interview. Her office said it "will comply with disclosure requirements" but wouldn't give us cost estimates or even tell us where they all stayed.

"They're going because it's the biggest party of the year," Sen. Inhofe said. "The worst thing that happened there is they ran out of caviar."

Our investigation found that the congressional delegation was so large, it needed three military jets: two 737's and a Gulfstream Five -- up to 64 passengers -- traveling in luxurious comfort.

Along with those who flew commercial, we counted at least 101 Congress-related attendees. All for a summit that failed to deliver a global climate deal.

As a perk, some took spouses, since they could snag an open seat on a military jet or share a room at no extra cost to taxpayers.

Steve Ellis of Taxpayers for Common Sense, wasn't against a U.S. presence. But he said, "Every penny counts. Congress should be shaking the couch cushions looking for change, rather than spending cash for everybody to go to Copenhagen."

Nobody we asked would defend the super-sized Congressional presence on camera. One Democrat said it showed the world the U.S. is serious about climate change.

And all those attendees who went to the summit rather than hooking up by teleconference? They produced enough climate-stunting carbon dioxide to fill 10,000 Olympic swimming pools

Link

Congressional Expense Report

[xoxoxoBruce]

Shit, there was something on the order of 30,000 people there, and that's all the showing we could muster? No wonder we couldn't get any respect.

[TheMercenary]

This subject has been in the news a lot lately. I don't think it helps their cause.

Climate chief was told of false glacier claims before Copenhagen

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/new...cle7009081.ece

Regardless of whether you accept anthropogenic climate change or not, this is the result of a decade or more of doing little or nothing to develop renewable energy technologies:

China Leading Race to Make Clean Energy

China vaulted past competitors in Denmark, Germany, Spain and the United States last year to become the world’s largest maker of wind turbines, and is poised to expand even further this year.

China has also leapfrogged the West in the last two years to emerge as the world’s largest manufacturer of solar panels. And the country is pushing equally hard to build nuclear reactors and the most efficient types of coal power plants.

These efforts to dominate the global manufacture of renewable energy technologies raise the prospect that the West may someday trade its dependence on oil from the Mideast for a reliance on solar panels, wind turbines and other gear manufactured in China.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/31/bu...1renew.html?hp

[classicman]

I read that same article. Doesn't look good for the West does it?

Originally Posted by classicman

I read that same article. Doesn't look good for the West does it?

That is why I have said repeatedly to get the extremists on both sides out of the discussion and begin to make a significant government commitment to alternative energy development that is both economically and environmentally sustainable and in our long term interest.

[xoxoxoBruce]

We're doing a great job.

[classicman]

Originally Posted by Redux

That is why I have said repeatedly to get the extremists on both sides out of the discussion

Problem is it seems like thats who is in charge . . . on both sides.

[xoxoxoBruce]

I don't know if they're in charge, but they make better headlines, so they get the press coverage.

[TheMercenary]

UN climate change panel based claims on student dissertation and magazine article

The United Nations' expert panel on climate change based claims about ice disappearing from the world's mountain tops on a student's dissertation and an article in a mountaineering magazine.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/env...e-article.html

[tw]

Originally Posted by TheMercenary

The United Nations' expert panel on climate change based claims about ice disappearing from the world's mountain tops on a student's dissertation and an article in a mountaineering magazine.]

Same half truths and misinformation that proved Saddam had WMDs. And from the same political agenda.

Clearly the diminishing Arctic ice is a Jewish conspiracy. Posting a political agenda and overt lies worked for Hitler. When do you blame the Jews? Oh. The political agenda did not yet instruct what to believe? Why did White House lawyers rewrite science? Because the political agenda must tell some how to think. Global warming is a problem created by man - as was air pollution, acid rain, ozone depletion, dead zones, collapse of so many fisheries, and other environmental problems. All directly traceable to mankind. Some solved only because science - not politics - created solutions.

Tsonis' simulation was promoted here by these same "global warming deniers" because lying to promote a political agenda is routine. Same people who lied about Saddam’s WMDs also deny global warming – because that is what the political agenda says. An agenda that would blame it on the Jews told to believe it. Same agenda with so much contempt for the American soldier as to promote “Mission Accomplished”. Only the political agenda – not science – is important.

Why were lies about Tsonis simulation posted here and promoted by the political agenda? What happened to those White House lawyers since rewriting science papers?

[TheMercenary]

Someone please call Al Gore. We need a new internet.

[tw]

Originally Posted by TheMercenary

Someone please call Al Gore. We need a new internet.

Internet is working just fine. It even expose myths and overt lies about Tsonis simulation. And did so without contributing to global warming. Putting a chill on the political agenda - a good thing.

[classicman]

In a scientific paper, each statement of fact will have a reference to the study that substantiated it. Typically a scientific paper will have dozens of references, perhaps fifty, whilst a larger document, such as this report, may have many hundred. Of these, some may be non-peer reviewed, e.g. personal communications between scientists, abstracts from conferences, unpublished data, etc. Theses are given a form of peer-review (I know my doctoral thesis was) and are legitimate references, indeed in my field the theses of one of the earlier scientists was practically required reading. Remember that Nobel prize winning work has been published in theses before.

The point is that none of these more "questionable" references are alone used to support a conclusion, they are merely part of a larger web of information. It seems people are overly keen to seek error here.

Frankly, I'm a scientist that is more sceptical about the political agenda of both climate change advocates and sceptics than the science around the subject. As far as I can tell, the science is largely sound, whilst my faith in the good intentions of politicians is not.
Dr. Philip Thomas

[xoxoxoBruce]

Originally Posted by tw

Global warming is a problem created by man...

Now that I agree with.