Wow, you really don't know what Chinese motor vehicle efficiency standards are. You seem very uninformed. You don't even realize that refined products will be exported, not used here. http://tarsandsaction.org/spre... And, you seem to be completely baffled about our own CAFE standards, which are rising. The deal you want is already on the books. You are like a guy who has just won the Superbowl saying you want to get ready for the big game.
Mitch McConnell cosponsored a resolution in 1997 demanding commitments from China. http://www.nationalcenter.org/... Now, when President Obama delivers the deal he asked for he backpedals. http://www.nytimes.com/politic... He was for commitments from China before he was against them for sure. Seems like he is a lot like Boehner who can't deliver on deals either.
Because President Obama failed to appoint and administrator for the Economic Regulatory Administration which has responsibility for this area. http://www.law.cornell.edu/usc... So, it ended up, stupidly, in the State Department's lap.
This in an accord to present a united position in Paris in 2015. Apparently, since the Framework Convention on Climate Change has already been ratified, this will just count as an update. http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08...
Kyoto was and effort to keep carbon dioxide from becoming pollution. We've been surprised that climate damage has started sooner than expected. We used to think that 2 C warming was safe. Kyoto was to do the Montreal Protocol one better by getting in front of the problem rather than reacting after the fact. It was not going to work that way unless China had made a commitment at that time. So, really, it is China that has converted carbon dioxide into pollution by its lack of cooperation from that time.
We were not polluting for decades. It is only recently that climate change became dangerous. Until then, carbon dioxide emissions were not dangerous and not pollution.
350.org grew out of StepItUp. StepItUp focused on US policy, and now we have a climate plan to cut emissions 53% by 2050. 350.org aims to get adequate reductions from all emitters to reach a safe concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. Much of the work of 350.org is based in developing countries. You have mischaracterized their goals and methods.
Not really. God having rules and tending not to break them is not a restriction on omnipotence in the sense of 'can't' but rather 'won't.' God also binds Himself in terms of covenants, as for example a promise not to bring on a deluge again that destroys everything. God's rule breaking tends to be for a particular purpose. Raising Lazarus, for example, was meant to inspire faith. But rule breaking is rare and seems to require faith in turn since it is unlikely you can persuade God to do that again in your presence just to check up on His capabilities. So, you must accept the testimony from a long time ago that that miracle occurred.
These comments seem to indicate that the Pope thinks that Evolution and Cosmology don't provide any support for atheism as proposed by Dawkins or Krauss (as reported in a new book by Amir Aczel). Aczel also criticizes their claims, saying they are unscientific. He manages to bring mathematicians Cantor and Gödel into his argument in "Why Science Does Not Disprove God." http://www.amazon.com/Why-Scie...
"The results suggest that previous estimates of the heat stored in the upper 700 meters of the ocean since 1970 have been too low. In the Southern Ocean in particular, they estimate past heat tallies were 48% to 152% too low." Let's start with the 48% number. What do we need to get the new estimate from the old estimate? Multiply the old estimate by 0.48 and add that to the old estimate. Simplified, just multiply the old estimate by (0.48 +1). For the 152% number, it would be a factor of 2.52.
Thermal energy can be added to or released from a system so there is no problem using a negative sign when describing it. But that is not what is going on here.
The first book was set mainly on Mars. The creatures there were essentially innocent with regard to sin. It is an interesting take on the idea of the uniqueness of Christ's sacrifice. There may be only one world, ours that needed such remedial treatment in Lewis' view.
Natural gas does not seem to do all that well below $3/MMBTU so utilities will have to find less costly generation and lower prices if they want to retain their market share. Wind, and soon solar, could pin natural gas down to $3/MMBTU and start to cut its share, so utilities should be looking at these forms of generation to avoid losing custom to DIY.
Slashdot Mirror
Wow, you really don't know what Chinese motor vehicle efficiency standards are. You seem very uninformed. You don't even realize that refined products will be exported, not used here. http://tarsandsaction.org/spre... And, you seem to be completely baffled about our own CAFE standards, which are rising. The deal you want is already on the books. You are like a guy who has just won the Superbowl saying you want to get ready for the big game.
Actually, it was to the beat of a Supreme Court Order. You seem very uniformed on this topic.
Mitch McConnell cosponsored a resolution in 1997 demanding commitments from China. http://www.nationalcenter.org/... Now, when President Obama delivers the deal he asked for he backpedals. http://www.nytimes.com/politic... He was for commitments from China before he was against them for sure. Seems like he is a lot like Boehner who can't deliver on deals either.
Because President Obama failed to appoint and administrator for the Economic Regulatory Administration which has responsibility for this area. http://www.law.cornell.edu/usc... So, it ended up, stupidly, in the State Department's lap.
Review the EPA endangerment finding. You are mistaken.
Read the EPA endangerment finding. Carbon dioxide is indeed a pollutant now.
This in an accord to present a united position in Paris in 2015. Apparently, since the Framework Convention on Climate Change has already been ratified, this will just count as an update. http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08...
You seem very confused on this. Canada has gone rogue on emissions. There must be consequences.
Kyoto was and effort to keep carbon dioxide from becoming pollution. We've been surprised that climate damage has started sooner than expected. We used to think that 2 C warming was safe. Kyoto was to do the Montreal Protocol one better by getting in front of the problem rather than reacting after the fact. It was not going to work that way unless China had made a commitment at that time. So, really, it is China that has converted carbon dioxide into pollution by its lack of cooperation from that time.
There don't seem to be any concrete claims of that thus far. http://www.theguardian.com/wor...
We were not polluting for decades. It is only recently that climate change became dangerous. Until then, carbon dioxide emissions were not dangerous and not pollution.
Here is Secretary Kerry's take: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11... Now, he just needs to deny the Keystone XL pipeline permit.
The US already has legislation, the Clean Air Act. Regulations are already in place, being promulgated or are written and up for public comment.
China maintained a 99 year lease with the UK through a number of revolutions. Thy seem capable of keeping agreements.
You seem to have fallen into error.
350.org grew out of StepItUp. StepItUp focused on US policy, and now we have a climate plan to cut emissions 53% by 2050. 350.org aims to get adequate reductions from all emitters to reach a safe concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. Much of the work of 350.org is based in developing countries. You have mischaracterized their goals and methods.
Not really. God having rules and tending not to break them is not a restriction on omnipotence in the sense of 'can't' but rather 'won't.' God also binds Himself in terms of covenants, as for example a promise not to bring on a deluge again that destroys everything. God's rule breaking tends to be for a particular purpose. Raising Lazarus, for example, was meant to inspire faith. But rule breaking is rare and seems to require faith in turn since it is unlikely you can persuade God to do that again in your presence just to check up on His capabilities. So, you must accept the testimony from a long time ago that that miracle occurred.
These comments seem to indicate that the Pope thinks that Evolution and Cosmology don't provide any support for atheism as proposed by Dawkins or Krauss (as reported in a new book by Amir Aczel). Aczel also criticizes their claims, saying they are unscientific. He manages to bring mathematicians Cantor and Gödel into his argument in "Why Science Does Not Disprove God." http://www.amazon.com/Why-Scie...
"The results suggest that previous estimates of the heat stored in the upper 700 meters of the ocean since 1970 have been too low. In the Southern Ocean in particular, they estimate past heat tallies were 48% to 152% too low." Let's start with the 48% number. What do we need to get the new estimate from the old estimate? Multiply the old estimate by 0.48 and add that to the old estimate. Simplified, just multiply the old estimate by (0.48 +1). For the 152% number, it would be a factor of 2.52.
Thermal energy can be added to or released from a system so there is no problem using a negative sign when describing it. But that is not what is going on here.
More about counting hairs that splitting them. Matt 10:30
Someone commented above about C. S. Lewis, but Madeleine L'Engle has also used ET to examine religious themes. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M...
The first book was set mainly on Mars. The creatures there were essentially innocent with regard to sin. It is an interesting take on the idea of the uniqueness of Christ's sacrifice. There may be only one world, ours that needed such remedial treatment in Lewis' view.
Natural gas does not seem to do all that well below $3/MMBTU so utilities will have to find less costly generation and lower prices if they want to retain their market share. Wind, and soon solar, could pin natural gas down to $3/MMBTU and start to cut its share, so utilities should be looking at these forms of generation to avoid losing custom to DIY.
Isn't that just shifting the depreciation advantage with the hardware?
Under the spreading chestnut tree
I sold you and you sold me
There lie they, and here lie we
Under the spreading chestnut tree