In today's Seattle Times, "Gregoire's green road map":
[Mrs.] Gregoire's pronouncements [on climate change] were spurred by an international scientific consensus on the existence of global warming and the link to human causes.In today's Sunday Times, "An experiment that hints we are wrong on climate change":
When politicians and journalists declare that the science of global warming is settled, they show a regrettable ignorance about how science works.The columnist, veteran science writer Nigel Calder, says "the orthodoxy must be challenged" and discusses the work of climatologist Henrik Svensmark, who argues that solar activity has far more impact on climate than "greenhouse" gases.
Canada's National Post also has a series about mainstream scientists who dispute the global warming orthodoxy.
Posted by Stefan Sharkansky at February 11, 2007 03:57 PM | Email ThisSeatac cabs (STITA) cabs can only take fares from the airport, the other cab companies can only take fares to the airport. That means that the cabs must dead head one way of the trip with around 8000 cab trips to and from the airport that means 8000 trips with no passengers. At an guesstimated 10 miles per trip that's 80,000 miles a day, given must cabs run Crown Vics at about 15 mpg that is 5334 gallons a day or nearly 2 million gallons a year.
Let cabs run both ways.
Drop the recently adopted CA emission laws banning light diesel vehicles. New tech diesel is cleaner than CA emission law and with bio-diesel, which is being pushed in WA, cleaner still.
Just a couple simple practical suggestions to test whether they are serious about emissions or it is a political power play. So far all indication are Global Warming is about power politics not reducing emissions.
Posted by: JCM on February 11, 2007 03:50 PMWhen are people in a position of authority (in this case Gregoire) going to learn that just because there is a so called scientific consensus it does not make something a fact. Like I have said before, a few hundred years ago the scientific consensus of the time was that the earth was flat and a few hundred years before that the scientific consensus was that the Earth was the center of the universe and present day through actual scientific theories being proven with scientific fact to be true we know unequivocally that the Earth is round and it is the third planet from the Sun with the Sun being the center of the universe.
Posted by: TrueSoldier on February 11, 2007 04:13 PMCosmic Rays Blamed For Global Warming
Posted by: Obi-Wan on February 11, 2007 05:21 PMThis is silly. The sun has a pretty big impact on the Earth's climate, of course, because without the sun the Earth would have no impact on our climate. The cosmic rays may have some impact on the climate, too.
But there is considerable evidence that the Earth's primate pest -- that is, humankind -- has a pretty big impact on the climate, too. Pumping millions of tons of pollution the atmosphere while destroying entire ecosystems must have pretty drastic impacts upon the climate.
Americans are not inclined to take responsibility for anything. Americans are morbidly obese but they want to blame the fast food restaurants (You fed me this fatty food and that is why I am fat!).
Americans won't make any sacrifices on behalf of the health of the planet nor even the health of the nation. Americans are oil-addicts, electricity-addicts, and (more often than not) drug-addicts as well.
In other words: The United States of Americs is a sick nation. Beyond that, the United States of America is a terminally ill nation.
The United States of America is a country which is poised to collapse. America is losing a war in the Middle East, America is depleting its own resources at a tremendous rate, and America is burdened by debts & deficits which would have sunk any other nation by this point.
You people won't believe until the catastrophe comes. Then you will blame someone else for all the suffering which results.
Posted by: David Mathews on February 11, 2007 05:57 PM> The sun has a pretty big impact on the Earth's climate, of course, because without the sun the Earth would have no impact on our climate.
should read:
"The sun has a pretty big impact on the Earth's climate, of course, because without the sun the Earth would have no climate.
Posted by: David Mathews on February 11, 2007 06:00 PMGlobal Warming deserves nothing more than mockery. And I encourage the socialist left looking for control of man, the environmentalist left looking out for nature, and the nihilist left that just hate man in general to keep up the Global Warming hysteria.
The more that there's a continual hysterical drumbeat, the more that the average Joe will remember the hype and hysteria when nothing comes to pass but the parting of more tax dollars from his income, larger government and less freedom.
Keep it up Stefan, I'm thoroughly enjoying the moonbat parade you've helped coax out of their hovels.
Posted by: Jeff B. on February 11, 2007 06:45 PMThe evidence that the earth has recently been warming a bit is pretty conclusive. And the miles of ice-cores from the Greenland and Antarctic ice caps pretty clearly show that atmospheric CO2 levels are higher now than they have been in perhaps several 100 thousand years.
But just what all the cause(S) of that CO2 level rise are; and especially what percentage each of the potential causal factors are contributing; ah: THAT is a whole 'nother story if not many stores....
SIDEBAR: Just to hopefully save another ''David Matthews'' post, let me stipulate that human activity is putting a lot of CO2 into the atmosphere. But it's not the ONLY thing adding to and bearing on greenhouse gases.
Eco-extremist extrapolation of what are peer-reviewed scientific facts to further their left-wing, big-government ''nanny-state'' agenda apparently knows no bounds. IMO one of the best examples of the ''feel good'' eco-politics that are so popular in many quarters these days:
They say we have to take draconian measures to massively cut back on CO2 emissions in this country even though China, India, et. al. are massively charging ahead with coal plants; to set a good ''example'' for those other nations, so that they will....... WHAT, I would ask; and after HOW LONG ??; i.e.:
China has 3000+ years of history, of ruthlessly acting (when they were able) in what they consider their own best interests. And the lefties try to sell us on the idea that just because we set a ''good'' example, China will quickly see the light and make massive and very disrupting changes to their super-heated economy just because it would be ''nice'' of them to do that ??.. Give me a break:
If the eco-politcal crowd was even half-rational, they would at least say something on the order of:
''We will start doing A, B, and C for D, E, and F years. If India and China do not also implement similar significant changes by the end of that period, we will bag it.''
But since said eco-political crowd is NOT rational, they are apparently willing to put this nation at a PERMANENT and huge competitive disadvantage versus China, et. al.
Also if the lefties were really serious:
They would be the strongest supporters of the very promising ''4th-Generation'' fast-neutron reactor technology (see Scientifc American December 2005 and July 2006 for several terrifc articles), which pretty much solves the long-term waste problem, is not susceptible to the ''melt-down'' a.k.a. China Syndrome, and would extend the limited uranium fuel supply for at least 100s of years. We would probably be there already, if President Carter hadn't made some of his disasterous nuclear energy decisions.
I didn't know that America's environmental policy was under the leadership of China. Evidently the conservatives have realized that China is now the world's Superpower economically and therefore America should follow China's lead.
If China ever gained an advantage over America that would lead to further decline in America's status as the world's greatest economy. The transition is already occurring so Americans cannot afford to cease polluting the world.
But China certainly isn't going to reduce its pollution if America will not lead. China can use the same excuses to reach the same conclusion.
Humans won't stop polluting the Earth until America's and China's economies collapse. That's why humankind's future is bleak.
Posted by: David Mathews on February 12, 2007 04:21 AMDo us all a favor and convert yourself to future oil reserves, ASAP. You will make more of a contribution to the world as a few ounces of fuel than by spouting insane, evil ideas.
Thank you.
Posted by: Steve on February 12, 2007 02:37 PM