Troubling Times!

[exlrrp]

Here's exactly what I mean: (from: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...=moreheadlines )
"Warming Is Major Threat To Humans, EPA Warns

By David A. Fahrenthold and Juliet Eilperin
Washington Post Staff Writers
Friday, July 18, 2008; Page A01

Climate change will pose "substantial" threats to human health in the coming decades, the Environmental Protection Agency said yesterday -- issuing its warnings about heat waves, hurricanes and pathogens just days after the agency declined to regulate the pollutants blamed for warming.


In a new report, the EPA said "it is very likely" that more people will die during extremely hot periods in future years -- and that the elderly, the poor and those in inner cities will be most at risk.

Other possible dangers include more powerful hurricanes, shrinking supplies of fresh water in the West, and the increased spread of diseases contracted through food and water, the agency said.

The strong warnings highlighted the contorted position that the EPA has staked out on climate change. --> Last week, the agency decided not to regulate greenhouse gas emissions, at least not until after President Bush's term ends. <--...." (emphasis mine)

So thats where the question stands now: the Bush administration is required BY LAW to regulate green house gases that even their EPA (aka: Political Donut Shop for Incompetent Bush Appointees) says pose "SUBSTANTIAL THREATS." And theyre not doing it!! Not at all, in complete violatuion of their duty under the law.

So why is the BUsh administration dragging its feet, doing everything it can to keep from regulating polluters---AS THE LAW REQUIRES!!?? it can only be that Bush is in the pocket of the polluters---every thing he does is for their benefit. Even his "Clean Skies" act did nothing but relax regulations for polluters. And look how many people in this forum agree with them.

There is NO pollution the BUsh administration would restrct, none whatsoever, they haven't done ANY of it. they have not curtailed one ounce of pollution on their watch EVEN THOUGH THE LAW REQUIRES THEM TO DO SO! (The Clean Air Act) If the BUsh administration doesn't agree with a law, they just ignore it, as they did with the FISA court.

They keep this country no safer from pollution than they did keeping it safe from the 9/11 highjackers.

There's more interesting stuff in this article:
"...A former EPA official told a House panel this week that senior administration officials and several Cabinet members supported regulating the emissions before the White House changed course and barred the EPA from concluding that they endanger public welfare.

"There was a general belief that moving forward with a challenge and establishing a precedent in channeling regulation would serve the country better than leaving the challenge to the next administration," Burnett said in the interview, according to a transcript obtained by The Washington Post. "The chief of staff's office then appears to have changed its mind."

Rep. Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.), who chairs the House panel, said in a statement: "Today typifies the climate-change schizophrenia in the Bush administration. On one hand, government scientists are saying that global warming poses grave threats to our health and our welfare, and, on the other hand, [there] are White House political hacks following the oil industry's bidding to do nothing."

The EPA report yesterday was less notable for its warnings -- similar problems have been predicted by other scientists and by the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change -- than for its source. The Bush administration has resisted the conclusion that increasing temperatures will harm human health, but in yesterday's report, that finding was unmistakable.

"We . . . anticipate substantial human health impacts," the document said....."

And when tbey happen, the Repuglicans will surely blame the Democrats for it, though they completely ignored and circumvented the findings of their own EPA.

[82Rigger]

Glacial recession...temperature increases (or decreases)...rainfall amounts...plant growth...water salinity...

These are all events that we measure on a LINEAR scale.

In our universe happen many events whose impacts are measured, not on a linear scale, but on an exponential scale.

Those who have studied astronomy, physics, and chemistry know this to be true.

Is our planet, like the rest of the universe, subject to events whose impact is measured on an exponential scale?

What think ye?



The story goes that a King was so pleased with one of his palace wise men, who had invented the game of chess, that he offered this wise man a reward of his own choosing.

The wise man told his King that he would like just one grain of rice on the first square of the chess board, double that number of grains of rice on the second square, and so on: double the number of grains of rice on each of the next 62 squares on the chess board.

This seemed to the King to be a ridiculously modest request.

"Why do you wish a few handfuls of rice, when you can have the wealth of the Kingdom, and even more?"

But the wise man insisted, so the King called for his servants to count out the rice, and bring it...

[HARDCORE]

A vast variance of opinion, upon which, we are all staking our very survival as a race!

If we are right - nothing to worry about~ BUT IF WE ARE WRONG, STILL NOTHING TO WORRY ABOUT - “WE CEASE TO EXIST- NOT EVEN A MEMORY UPON A VAST PLAIN OF EXISTENCE!!”

Have you ever given any thought to the thin venire of human survivability that encapsulates our very existence? We are but a microcosm away from oblivion, and when (not if) we are gone, the cosmos will not even remember that we ever existed!

“How mighty we are in our own minds!!”

VERITAS (Truth)

[MORTARDUDE]

Another major man-made climate change advocate recants

http://www.prisonplanet.com/top-rock...l-warming.html

http://www.prisonplanet.com/no-smoking-hot-spot.html

[MORTARDUDE]

Seven graphs that some say refute the global warming theory

http://www.prisonplanet.com/global-w...r-co2-tax.html

[1CAVCCO15MED]

Right wing blog with an article written by an Aussie columnist. He uses graphs to deny global warming that if you actually look at them his own graphs prove him wrong. Did he even look at them? Look at graph #2 He says it shows temperatures going down and the slope is obviously up. Graph #3 is the same thing, he says it shows sea levels falling when the slope is once more up. This is from the guys actually doing the measuring: http://nsidc.org/sotc/sea_level.html

Here is some information from the people actually observing ocean levels: [media]http://www.gloss-sealevel.org/publications/documents/us_gex2007.pdf[/media]

Farming in Greenland is a growth industry. Eskmos on tractors. http://www.spiegel.de/international/...434356,00.html

The second article by the Aussie scientist saying he has seen no carbon signiature for global warming. I have looked for something in the scientific journals that refutes this. I cannot find it.

[1CAVCCO15MED]

One of the things I have noticed in reading articles is that the scientists I can find as skeptics are astrophysicists. They are not exactly spot on for expertise and are not the ones central to the research. I don't think that disqualifies them however.

[Gimpy]

Originally Posted by 1CAVCCO15MED

One of the things I have noticed in reading articles is that the scientists I can find as skeptics are astrophysicists. They are not exactly spot on for expertise and are not the ones central to the research. I don't think that disqualifies them however.

No, but it damn sure "diminishes" their so-called "qualifications" as compared to the scientists who have a much higher degree of "experttise" in this field of endeavor!

Thanks for your your insightful comments and research.


Gimp

[1CAVCCO15MED]

Blogs, blogs, blogs! Left wing and right wing castles in the air, many willing to falsify evidence to prove their point. Structures built out of nothing only being faithful to their narrow ideology. It can be described by two words: Propaganda and paranoia. This is nothing new. That is what most of the things I can find are and like I said they are left or right wing castles in the air.

[82Rigger]

Fred,

It's difficult. It's hard to know who to believe...who to trust.

What I do on important issues is:

1. Look at ALL sides of the issue.

2. Make sure that I'm thinking with the RIGHT side of my brain as well as the LEFT side.

Here are some famous examples of left-side-only brain thinking:




"Madam, God himself could not sink this ship."
- Titanic Steward to embarking passenger Mrs Sylvia Caldwell, April, 1912



"The Seventh can handle anything."
- Gen George A Custer to Maj James Brisbin, May, 1876



"...anyone who believes that Galveston can be seriously harmed by a tropical cyclone is a victim of an absurd delusion. ..."
- Isaac M. Cline, 1889



"My good friends, for the second time in our history, a British Prime Minister has returned from Germany bringing peace with honour.
I believe it is peace for our time...
Go home and get a nice quiet sleep."
- PM Neville Chamberlain, Sept, 1938