I'm looking forward to the up coming election because I have a grudge against Harper for hypocritically using the Senate (an institution which he has frequently ridiculed as 'undemocratic') to kill the Climate Change bill (C-311) which had already passed the House.
I figured the Howard Hughes Medical Institute, if they are anything like their founder, would be more interested in producing new ways to kill microbes rather than study them!
Yeah sounds all fine, until every farmer is using their land for fuel and not food.
Why would every farmer switch to growing fuel instead of food? Sure, some farmers will switch to growing fuel crops instead of food but the prices will reach a new equilibrium where it will be profitable for some to grow fuel and others to grow food.
Maybe you get 100% efficiency in the winter, by using an incandescent, but in the summer the incandescent bulb is working against your air conditioner.
I hear this comment all the time about how group X is going to dominate society because they're breeding faster:
My complaint is that humans, and to a lesser extent other mammals, have a very different definition of reproductive success that involves having few offspring and intensively investing resources in them.
From a practical perspective (if Joule Unlimited's technology is sound):
There will probably be tax breaks for land used in producing carbon neutral fuel.
It's also worth pointing out that, in a cap-and-trade system, environmental organizations can buy up carbon credits from the market to encourage industry to reduce emissions more quickly.
There have been decades of research into the links between smoking and cancer.
Some have even studied the links between second-hand smoke and cancer.
I invite you to go look it up.
Are you sure you were listening to Jesus, or are you maybe getting him confused with Glenn Beck?
I'm pretty sure Christ's first priority was making sure that the poor are looked after (even if that means using tax dollars to do so).
Once there are no poor people dying of starvation, exposure, and preventable disease I'm sure he'd approve of looking for better ways to look after their needs.
I think it is worth while to point out that, of the 5 independent investigations that were launched as a result of the so-called "Climategate", all 5 have exonerated the Climatologists under investigation. None of the 5 were able to find any evidence of scientific malpractice. I'd call that, coupled with the endorsement of the G-7 national academies of science, a pretty unequivocal vindication of the science of Global Climate Change.
The proxy data, in the form of antarctic ice cores, goes back over 400,000 years.
Admittedly we would love to have millions of years worth of data and from around the world, but that is (as far as we know) just not possible.
The best we have is proxy data for climate, which isn't perfect, then again, fossils are only proxy data for dinosaurs.
You make those accusations but there have been 3 independent investigations into the integrity of Climatologists (as a result of the so-called 'Climategate') later and still there is no evidence of scientific malpractice.
If you believe, honestly and sincerely as many Republicans do, that the Healthcare Reform Law contains "death panels" and is going to "kill your grandmother" then you must believe that the "Soap, Ballot, and Jury" boxes have already failed. How could a person believe that a well functioning government that continues to serve the will of the people would pass such a law?
The violent rhetoric in American society comes, almost exclusively, from the right-wing:
George Bush received about 8 death threats a day. Barack Obama receives about 30 death threats a day.
Think about it.
I'd like to share a few quotes about the Muir Russell report which was, IMO, the most important investigation into the so-called "Climategate":
"Sir Muir Russell, the senior civil servant who led a six-month inquiry into the affair, said the "rigour and honesty" of the scientists at the world-leading Climatic Research Unit (CRU) at the University of East Anglia (UEA) are not in doubt. They did not subvert the peer review process to censor criticism as alleged, the panel found, while key data needed to reproduce their findings was freely available to any "competent" researcher."
[Russell:] "The honesty and rigour of CRU as scientists are not in doubt... We have not found any evidence of behaviour that might undermine the conclusions of the IPCC assessments."
Source (emphasis mine).
The worst behaviour Russell was able to substantiate was that the Climatologists weren't very enthusiastic about FOI requests. Oooooooh, big deal! Some conspiracy!
Slashdot Mirror
I'm looking forward to the up coming election because I have a grudge against Harper for hypocritically using the Senate (an institution which he has frequently ridiculed as 'undemocratic') to kill the Climate Change bill (C-311) which had already passed the House.
I figured the Howard Hughes Medical Institute, if they are anything like their founder, would be more interested in producing new ways to kill microbes rather than study them!
Why can't one of the cost cutting measures (since we're all so worried about pinching pennies) be ending the war on drugs?
Yeah sounds all fine, until every farmer is using their land for fuel and not food.
Why would every farmer switch to growing fuel instead of food?
Sure, some farmers will switch to growing fuel crops instead of food but the prices will reach a new equilibrium where it will be profitable for some to grow fuel and others to grow food.
That's a really weak argument. For every conspiracy theory that turns out to be true there is at least a dozen that are false.
Maybe you get 100% efficiency in the winter, by using an incandescent, but in the summer the incandescent bulb is working against your air conditioner.
Oh I totally agree:
AlGore! AlGore! AlGore!
Comcast: "You sure do got a purty mouth..."
I hear this comment all the time about how group X is going to dominate society because they're breeding faster:
My complaint is that humans, and to a lesser extent other mammals, have a very different definition of reproductive success that involves having few offspring and intensively investing resources in them.
From a practical perspective (if Joule Unlimited's technology is sound):
There will probably be tax breaks for land used in producing carbon neutral fuel.
As to the idea that regs cut both ways, when have regs ever not favored the big player over the small player in a given market?
Anti-trust/anti-monopoly regulations come to mind.
When has the market, regulated or not, ever favored the small player?
It's also worth pointing out that, in a cap-and-trade system, environmental organizations can buy up carbon credits from the market to encourage industry to reduce emissions more quickly.
There have been decades of research into the links between smoking and cancer.
Some have even studied the links between second-hand smoke and cancer.
I invite you to go look it up.
The problem with your analogy is that the other doctors, who disagree with the diagnosis, are paid spokesmen of the tobacco industry.
Are you sure you were listening to Jesus, or are you maybe getting him confused with Glenn Beck?
I'm pretty sure Christ's first priority was making sure that the poor are looked after (even if that means using tax dollars to do so).
Once there are no poor people dying of starvation, exposure, and preventable disease I'm sure he'd approve of looking for better ways to look after their needs.
I bet middle class families could get a tax cut if the rich tax dodgers would pay their fair share.
I think it is worth while to point out that, of the 5 independent investigations that were launched as a result of the so-called "Climategate", all 5 have exonerated the Climatologists under investigation. None of the 5 were able to find any evidence of scientific malpractice. I'd call that, coupled with the endorsement of the G-7 national academies of science, a pretty unequivocal vindication of the science of Global Climate Change.
The proxy data, in the form of antarctic ice cores, goes back over 400,000 years.
Admittedly we would love to have millions of years worth of data and from around the world, but that is (as far as we know) just not possible.
The best we have is proxy data for climate, which isn't perfect, then again, fossils are only proxy data for dinosaurs.
You make those accusations but there have been 3 independent investigations into the integrity of Climatologists (as a result of the so-called 'Climategate') later and still there is no evidence of scientific malpractice.
If you believe, honestly and sincerely as many Republicans do, that the Healthcare Reform Law contains "death panels" and is going to "kill your grandmother" then you must believe that the "Soap, Ballot, and Jury" boxes have already failed. How could a person believe that a well functioning government that continues to serve the will of the people would pass such a law?
The violent rhetoric in American society comes, almost exclusively, from the right-wing:
George Bush received about 8 death threats a day.
Barack Obama receives about 30 death threats a day.
Think about it.
"Sir Muir Russell, the senior civil servant who led a six-month inquiry into the affair, said the "rigour and honesty" of the scientists at the world-leading Climatic Research Unit (CRU) at the University of East Anglia (UEA) are not in doubt. They did not subvert the peer review process to censor criticism as alleged, the panel found, while key data needed to reproduce their findings was freely available to any "competent" researcher."
[Russell:] "The honesty and rigour of CRU as scientists are not in doubt ... We have not found any evidence of behaviour that might undermine the conclusions of the IPCC assessments."
Source (emphasis mine). The worst behaviour Russell was able to substantiate was that the Climatologists weren't very enthusiastic about FOI requests. Oooooooh, big deal! Some conspiracy!
What I find amazing is how the Climate Change 'truthers' still attempt to smear the reputation climate science with accusations of hoax/fraud. The fact that they still make these baseless accusations even after 3 independent investigations have failed to turn up any evidence of scientific malpractice is pretty damning I'd say.
As soon as my current fleet of CFLs burn out I plan to replace them with LEDs because of the lower Mercury content.