Well, it's their decision. Maybe they like a bigger house or yard. Maybe the generally lower crime rates attract them to the burbs. Whatever it is, they make the decision because it's their decision to make.
Your solutions are about changing people's lifestyles. People, including me, will tell you to fuck off and die.
"My" solution is about harnessing nuclear energy for electricity and also the production of hydrogen to fuel vehicles. You get that figured out and you've killed two birds with one technology, so to speak.
As a scientist, I'm frustrated by the apparent fact that most people don't care about the science.
When people care about something, they become involved. When they become involved, they ask questions. Sometimes the answers make sense, sometimes they don't. When they don't, they'll call you on it, whether it's valid or invalid. And what do they get in return?
"You are not qualified" "You are a denier" "Shill" etc.
For me, I have a real problem wit the whole temperature reconstruction based on tree rings. First, the divergence issue that started in the fifties. No one has an explanation for it. If the trees and temps don't jive now, then why is it valid to say they jived a thousand years ago? Any reasonable person would think that would invalidate the entire correlation between tree rings and temps because you don't know when else there was a divergence.
And even without that issue, there is the paucity of actual data itself. If tree rings ARE valid temp indicators then they should have tens of thousands of samples from throughout the world. As far as I can tell there are not that many samples. Since these provide pretty much the entire context from which we evaluate todays temps, it makes no sense to rely on such few samples.
They don't count because they are all about changing lifestyles. They are about control. They are about punishment. They are about spending more for less.
We need massive research funding to develop game-changing technologies.
And that's where Hansen and the other scientists who are currently wasting their political capital on carbon trading/caps etc. com e in.
Regarding the power plants...Do we have a billion fossil fuel power plants going now? I don't think so. So that 15 terawatt figure must include the energy provided by gasoline and diesel to run vehicles.
Well, apparently, looking at the polls, Fear and doomsday has not worked.
Also, you assume that the nascent nuclear industry (technology wise it is just learning to walk) will not mature. It is not unreasonable to expect far greater efficiency and power output.
Last, if replacing all the fossil fuel power plants with nuclear, which are blamed for the majority of CO2 production, what on else earth do you imagine could be done about it?
I guess you could say that Hansen is a is just a Climate Scientist and not a Petroleum Engineer. So he's really not qualified to have an opinion on gas from the oil sands.
Hansen would be garner more support from a wider base and generally more acceptance if instead of trying to stop people from doing things he encouraged them to do something...such as invest in nuclear power.
If the AGW crowd expended only half as much energy advocating and educating the public about nuclear power, and how it could solve the AGW problem, as they do with silly stunts and way over the top scenarios (50 feet higher eh?), it would be a win win. CO2 would be cut and we could tell the Oil Tyrants to fuck off and die.
I know that Hansen supports nuclear, including Breeder reactors for waste recycling, but he's not very vocal about it.
People respond better when you come to them with a solution rather than admonishments, guilt and doomsday predictions.
It passes regulations, levies fees and generally soaks up a lot of money for no good reason.
It educates absolutely no one and should be done away with. It is useless. It's nothing but a feel good program created so that politicians can say they care about education.
I guess they can't cash their checks then can they? Oh, that's right, they are paid in cash, under the table. Which means they are probably illegals and shouldn't be voting anyway (not that that stops some).
It's all bullshit. Completely made up crap to further voter fraud.
cash a check get a library card establish utilities get a job get a passport get a loan get a bank account drive a car not sure, but probably to get any kind of social services.
Getting an ID is no burden. In states with Voter ID laws (most of which has been upheld) you can get a ID for free.
You need a photo ID to participate in almost all aspects of society.
It is simply a red herring to claim is is a poll tax or a burden.
The real motive for opposition to this is that there is lots of fraud going on now that is ignored. How many times do you read about more people voting in a precinct than are registered? That is a common story during elections. Never are investigations. In fact you can't because all the ballots are anonymous. A person could go around and vote many times and there is simply no way to detect it short of examining every signature in the logs to look for the same hand writing. There is nothing at all on the ballot to link it back to anyone. So the canard about no evidence of fraud is true in a sense because there is no possible way to gather it. It can only be inferred by the fact 10,000 people voted in a precinct where 5000 people are registered.
James O'Keefe and crew have shown how ridiculously simply it is to walk in and get someone's ballot. At the very least people should be as alarmed about that as they are paranoid about electronic voting machines being hacked.
Slashdot Mirror
The AGW crowd is ill served by screeching, wild-eyed nut jobs.
I'll just get a head start here and tell you to fuck off and die now and beat the rush.
Well, it's their decision. Maybe they like a bigger house or yard. Maybe the generally lower crime rates attract them to the burbs. Whatever it is, they make the decision because it's their decision to make.
I'll type slower this time.
Your solutions are about changing people's lifestyles. People, including me, will tell you to fuck off and die.
"My" solution is about harnessing nuclear energy for electricity and also the production of hydrogen to fuel vehicles. You get that figured out and you've killed two birds with one technology, so to speak.
As a scientist, I'm frustrated by the apparent fact that most people don't care about the science.
When people care about something, they become involved. When they become involved, they ask questions. Sometimes the answers make sense, sometimes they don't. When they don't, they'll call you on it, whether it's valid or invalid. And what do they get in return?
"You are not qualified"
"You are a denier"
"Shill"
etc.
For me, I have a real problem wit the whole temperature reconstruction based on tree rings. First, the divergence issue that started in the fifties. No one has an explanation for it. If the trees and temps don't jive now, then why is it valid to say they jived a thousand years ago? Any reasonable person would think that would invalidate the entire correlation between tree rings and temps because you don't know when else there was a divergence.
And even without that issue, there is the paucity of actual data itself. If tree rings ARE valid temp indicators then they should have tens of thousands of samples from throughout the world. As far as I can tell there are not that many samples. Since these provide pretty much the entire context from which we evaluate todays temps, it makes no sense to rely on such few samples.
They don't count because they are all about changing lifestyles.
They are about control.
They are about punishment.
They are about spending more for less.
We need massive research funding to develop game-changing technologies.
And that's where Hansen and the other scientists who are currently wasting their political capital on carbon trading/caps etc. com e in.
Regarding the power plants...Do we have a billion fossil fuel power plants going now? I don't think so. So that 15 terawatt figure must include the energy provided by gasoline and diesel to run vehicles.
Fusion. I'm all for it. Hope I live to see it (and I have at least 50 years to go).
Well, apparently, looking at the polls, Fear and doomsday has not worked.
Also, you assume that the nascent nuclear industry (technology wise it is just learning to walk) will not mature. It is not unreasonable to expect far greater efficiency and power output.
Last, if replacing all the fossil fuel power plants with nuclear, which are blamed for the majority of CO2 production, what on else earth do you imagine could be done about it?
Ha!
I guess you could say that Hansen is a is just a Climate Scientist and not a Petroleum Engineer. So he's really not qualified to have an opinion on gas from the oil sands.
You are the reason people push back and you provide the fodder needed for people to say AGW is all about Control.
You don't like people's lifestyles and you want to change them..that's Controlling and AGW is the club you are using to achieve it.
I guarantee you, you will get a great big Fuck You from the majority of people when you take this approach. You will from me anyway.
Hansen would be garner more support from a wider base and generally more acceptance if instead of trying to stop people from doing things he encouraged them to do something...such as invest in nuclear power.
If the AGW crowd expended only half as much energy advocating and educating the public about nuclear power, and how it could solve the AGW problem, as they do with silly stunts and way over the top scenarios (50 feet higher eh?), it would be a win win. CO2 would be cut and we could tell the Oil Tyrants to fuck off and die.
I know that Hansen supports nuclear, including Breeder reactors for waste recycling, but he's not very vocal about it.
People respond better when you come to them with a solution rather than admonishments, guilt and doomsday predictions.
To raise taxes. A simple majority can spend it any way they want.
It passes regulations, levies fees and generally soaks up a lot of money for no good reason.
It educates absolutely no one and should be done away with. It is useless. It's nothing but a feel good program created so that politicians can say they care about education.
I never understood the "teach to the test" complaint. The test is on the subject matter that they should be teaching in the first place.
About all they can do specific to the test is generic test taking strategies.
Twenty seconds...that's too much for you to suffer through?
Fuck, get a drink or take a piss. You probably won't have time to do either.
If this is the level of inconvenience that would cause anyone to get upset, they need to see a shrink because they have issues.
Filibuster, or withhold it at the leadership level, same fucking thing asshole.
If you are going to be a fuck, at least be a bipartisan fuck.
Now, back into your OWS hovel of cardboard and rat shit.
I guess they can't cash their checks then can they? Oh, that's right, they are paid in cash, under the table. Which means they are probably illegals and shouldn't be voting anyway (not that that stops some).
It's all bullshit. Completely made up crap to further voter fraud.
So what? The Dems want to pay for it by killing jobs by taxing small business. I suppose you left that out of YOUR story line.
Of course you completely left out the fact that it's the Dems fucking fault this is even an issue.
Bullshit. You are full of it.
"demonizing adjectives" - I remember the Contract with America, which most thinking people thought was past due.
I remember Clinton not remembering a damned thing.
I remember what the meaning of "is" is.
I remember the wholesale firing of the travel office personnel for some made up reason...for Hilary's cronyism.
Were you even alive then?
I kind of figured my post betrayed my true feelings.
"War on Women"? How about "Mean Spirited"? Here's one, "For the Children".
Give me a break. The Dems are Masters of the demagogic and disingenuous one liners,
cash a check
get a library card
establish utilities
get a job
get a passport
get a loan
get a bank account
drive a car
not sure, but probably to get any kind of social services.
All bullshit.
Getting an ID is no burden. In states with Voter ID laws (most of which has been upheld) you can get a ID for free.
You need a photo ID to participate in almost all aspects of society.
It is simply a red herring to claim is is a poll tax or a burden.
The real motive for opposition to this is that there is lots of fraud going on now that is ignored. How many times do you read about more people voting in a precinct than are registered? That is a common story during elections. Never are investigations. In fact you can't because all the ballots are anonymous. A person could go around and vote many times and there is simply no way to detect it short of examining every signature in the logs to look for the same hand writing. There is nothing at all on the ballot to link it back to anyone. So the canard about no evidence of fraud is true in a sense because there is no possible way to gather it. It can only be inferred by the fact 10,000 people voted in a precinct where 5000 people are registered.
James O'Keefe and crew have shown how ridiculously simply it is to walk in and get someone's ballot. At the very least people should be as alarmed about that as they are paranoid about electronic voting machines being hacked.