Global Warming Didn't Exist In The US Until 1979!

[momonkey]

Originally Posted by Kracer

human caused global warming good for a healthy scare and profit It is like doing the right things for the wrong reason.

Disregard of nature will always bite you in the butt. If nothing else but a renewed respect for nature comes from this controversy, then it is good.

Don't believe we, you, me, Al Gore and the 3rd world, will have much impact on global warming. Maybe create some microclimates and local weather changes but the earth has its own very dynamic agenda. From the shifting of continents to the reshift of continents to the growth of glaciers to the recession of glaciers the earth has gone about her business. Because her plan does not take our requirements into consideration we feel we have to step up and take the reins? How pathetic is that perspective.

1st rule of nature is that it is constantly changing.
2nd rule is that Nature is neutral.
3rd is that we have evolved physiologically to fit into a small, 'temporary' niche circling in an eddy on the river of change. If the changes take place faster than we can evolve we go away.

To think humans are the center of the universe, AGAIN, is quite egocentric and insane. Technology may have developed exponentially but our clan has not. You might even argue we mucked with nature and saved too many lives that should have met their Darwinian fate.

Can guarantee one thing, when the angel Gabriel blows his trumpet to signal the end of the world some guy will be selling 'end of the world' tee-shirts on the street corner making a good profit.

But dude, it's not actually getting warmer. That's a scary bedtime story for gullible tree huggers. Water vapor is far more prevalent and a green house gas as well, but no one seem concerned about that.

[thecoalman]

Originally Posted by Truehorn

Wow CBO just let the air out of Boehner's tires. The cost of the climate change legislation is going to range from -$40/ year for the poor to $245/yr for the affluent. That sure makes the Republicans look like fools for running around claiming this will wreck the economy. No wonder the American public threw those idiots out of power last November.

washingtonpost.com

The CBO estimate and I'll quote from a blog post on the CBO page does not take into account all facets of the bill:

The analysis does not include the effects of other aspects of the bill, such as federal efforts to speed the development of new technologies and to increase energy efficiency by specifying standards or subsidizing energy-saving investments.

The reason the estimate has dropped is they are now going to allocate the credits as opposed to auctioning them off which was the original proposal. This was what McCain was proposing during his campaign. You still have the subsidization of renewables and other programs that the auctioning of the credits were supposed to pay.

The windmills and solar facilities you see now are heavily subsidized, they could not be built without it because no investor in his right mind would invest in them without it. I said it before, if it was cost effective investors would be forming a conga line out the door to build them and these mandates would be unnecessary.

[Nomander]

Originally Posted by momonkey

But dude, it's not actually getting warmer. That's a scary bedtime story for gullible tree huggers. Water vapor is far more prevalent and a green house gas as well, but no one seem concerned about that.

They like the researches they behold to are too busy out getting arrested at protest rallies. *chuckle*

[vec101]

Originally Posted by thecoalman

The CBO estimate and I'll quote from a blog post on the CBO page does not take into account all facets of the bill:

The reason the estimate has dropped is they are now going to allocate the credits as opposed to auctioning them off which was the original proposal. This was what McCain was proposing during his campaign. You still have the subsidization of renewables and other programs that the auctioning of the credits were supposed to pay.

The windmills and solar facilities you see now are heavily subsidized, they could not be built without it because no investor in his right mind would invest in them without it. I said it before, if it was cost effective investors would be forming a conga line out the door to build them and these mandates would be unnecessary.

What is REALLY interesting is that this report - which flip-flops from previous CBO reports -- came out 4 days or so before the House is to vote on the Cap & Trade bill.

Hmmmmmmmmmmmm.........

They really do think we are stupid, don't they?

BTW - call, send emails, whatever to your Congress reps about your stand on the Cap & Trade bill. We are holding some last minute rallies.

[momonkey]

Originally Posted by vec101

What is REALLY interesting is that this report - which flip-flops from previous CBO reports -- came out 4 days or so before the House is to vote on the Cap & Trade bill.

Hmmmmmmmmmmmm.........

They really do think we are stupid, don't they?

BTW - call, send emails, whatever to your Congress reps about your stand on the Cap & Trade bill. We are holding some last minute rallies.

Even if they really do allocate the credits now, you know they'll change their tune in time because BO has already said that UHC will be financed with Cap and Trade. BF was on O'Reiley last night claiming UHC will be paid for with cuts from other programs. When was the last time the federal government cut anything besides benefits and missile defense? It's a reverse starve the pig strategy. They'll borrow and spend then force the taxes.