Think Progress

Pelosi blasts Bush’s new climate plan.

By Nico Pitney on Jun 2nd, 2007 at 10:15 am

Pelosi blasts Bush’s new climate plan.

Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) called President Bush’s new global warming plan a “profound disappointment” on Friday and “said she wants Congress to pass legislation this year to curb greenhouse gas emissions.”

Just returned from a European tour focused on climate change, Pelosi said Bush’s strategy, announced on Thursday, “rehashed stale ideas” and made her question whether the president understands the urgency of global warming.

Watch a report on Pelosi’s trip to Greenland:

[flv http://video.thinkprogress.org/2007/06/pelosiwarming61.320.240.flv]

You can read a full report on Pelosi’s trip HERE.

Comments
106

106 Responses to “Pelosi blasts Bush’s new climate plan.”

Briseadh na Faire says:

As long as impeachment is off the table, what you say, Ms. Pelosi, doesn’t really matter to me. You’re not about to ever hold this president accountable.
June 2nd, 2007 at 10:18 am
unbelievable says:

Nancy is acting more like a leader than Bush ever has. We’d be happyto give her the leadership of the country if she’d just put Impeachment back on the table.

We cannot afford 18 more months of the Bush Regime.

Impeach now!
June 2nd, 2007 at 10:23 am
Vinnie says:

Yes, Nancy and her Dem friends in congress have their weaknesses. However, I am glad on this front that someone is calling George on the BS of a ‘plan’ that he just put forth.
June 2nd, 2007 at 10:29 am
unbelievable says:

Nancy and her Dem friends in congress have their weaknesses.
Comment by Vinnie â€” June 2, 2007 @ 10:29 am

Yeah, Joe Lieberman who threatened to switch caucuses, giving Senate majority to the Republicans if they didn’t pull the timelines out of the current funding of George’s Iraq Invasion…
June 2nd, 2007 at 10:36 am
gummitch says:

But, but, George wants to lead the world on Global Warming! Ha. George is getting a little desperate to find a “legacy” that isn’t a 40 year occupation of another country.

Loser.
June 2nd, 2007 at 10:42 am
Jake says:

For the record, we’ve been in Korea ever since that war too.
June 2nd, 2007 at 10:44 am
Jay Randal says:

Pelosi always talks big and then she caves in to Bush. She did it on Iraq and she will do it on this too.
June 2nd, 2007 at 10:47 am
Jake says:

Hopefully.
June 2nd, 2007 at 10:51 am
Jay Randal says:

So we are supposed to be impressed that Pelosi went to Greenland to look at glaciers and icebergs? The whole trip was paid by taxpayers.
June 2nd, 2007 at 10:52 am
unbelievable says:

She did it on Iraq and she will do it on this too.
Comment by Jay Randal â€” June 2, 2007 @ 10:47 am

She was blackmailed by Lieberman.

He is even quoted in an interview – saying that he would consider caususing with the Republicans to get his way on the funding of the Occupation of Iraq in the Dems didn’t drop the timelines.

Pelosi opposed and then voted against the bill.
June 2nd, 2007 at 10:57 am
labs says:

i don’t agree she’s more of a leader than bush. well, maybe i do come to think of it. she’s leading (selling maybe?) congress and the American people down the proverbial garden path.

nancy is just trying to gain a little face and popular support. until impeachment is back on the table nothing she says is worth the words she uses to say it.
June 2nd, 2007 at 10:59 am
Jay Randal says:

unbelievable > better to kick Lieberman out, than to allow him to manipulate the Democratic party.
June 2nd, 2007 at 11:01 am
Jake says:

LOL For anyone NOT on the “Ignore List” I just want to make sure you aren’t confused — Joe Lieberman is in the SENATE — Nancy Pelosi is in the HOUSE. Next up: Schoolhouse Rocks: I’m Just a Bill.
June 2nd, 2007 at 11:03 am
Jay Randal says:

I believe it would be best to expose all of Joe LIEberman’s corruption to the press, then to force him out of the Senate in disgrace, then to indict him to be the first Senator to go to prison.
June 2nd, 2007 at 11:05 am
unbelievable says:

better to kick Lieberman out, than to allow him to manipulate the Democratic party.
Comment by Jay Randal â€” June 2, 2007 @ 11:01 am

I agree. Unfortunately, Pelosi canonly work with the Congree she has and not the one she wishes she had. And that Congress, for the next two years includes Joe Lieberman in the Senate threatening to switch teams. Unless his own constituents decide to put recall on his table and replace him with Ned Lamont….
June 2nd, 2007 at 11:05 am
Jake says:

From America Rock:

“I’m just a bill.
Yes, I’m only a bill.
And I’m sitting here on Capitol Hill.
Well, it’s a long, long journey
To the capital city.
It’s a long, long wait
While I’m sitting in committee,
But I know I’ll be a law someday
At least I hope and pray that I will,
But today I am still just a bill.”

http://www.schoolhouserock.tv/Bill.html
June 2nd, 2007 at 11:06 am
labs says:

i respectfully disagree on the blackmail.

she is allowing lieberman to blackmail the entire congress. there’s a difference between allowing blackmail and submitting to it.
June 2nd, 2007 at 11:06 am
unbelievable says:

I just want to make sure you arenâ€™t confused â€” Joe Lieberman is in the SENATE â€” Nancy Pelosi is in the HOUSE. Next up: Schoolhouse Rocks: Iâ€™m Just a Bill.
Comment by Jake â€” June 2, 2007 @ 11:03 am

Apparently it is YOU who is confused. If the Senate becomes a majority Republican because Lieberman chooses to causus with them, then that effects what Pelosi can dowith a majority in both houses.

Yes, we know she is a Representative and Lieberman is a Senator, but they both work in Congress – the legislative branch of our government. Feel better?
June 2nd, 2007 at 11:08 am
Jay Randal says:

Jake > you are supposed to enlist today to go to Iraq, so get going to the recruiting office to sign up, and we all wish you well in Baghdad.
June 2nd, 2007 at 11:08 am
Oversight is a Bitch. says:

George “Idiot Boy” Bush’s climate plan: we should maybe think about doing something, but there should be no incentives or penalties if we fail, and nothing should happen until after I leave office. WEAK LEADERSHIP.
June 2nd, 2007 at 11:09 am
labs says:

the point isn’t leiberman, it’s nancy selling out the only trump card in exchange for her title. that’s the disgrace.
June 2nd, 2007 at 11:11 am
unbelievable says:

I believe it would be best to expose all of Joe LIEbermanâ€™s corruption to the press, then to force him out of the Senate in disgrace, then to indict him to be the first Senator to go to prison.
Comment by Jay Randal â€” June 2, 2007 @ 11:05 am

We have become the media in this country. The people who call themselves the media are mostly just entertainers and ratings-whores.

http://electioncentral.tpmcafe.com/blog/electioncentral/2007/may/22/lieberman_again_threatens_to_switch_parties_a_week_after_admitting_hed_promised_not_to
June 2nd, 2007 at 11:13 am
Jake says:

labs:

Being Speaker of the HOUSE, she has zero say over Joe Lieberman (see Schoolhouse Rock above).

Oversight is a Bitch:

The White House position, however, is quite different from your strawman — http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2007/05/20070531-13.html
June 2nd, 2007 at 11:14 am
Jake says:

For the record, I served in the military already — I doubt the Army is accepting 75 year olds (yet).
June 2nd, 2007 at 11:15 am
unbelievable says:

she is allowing lieberman to blackmail the entire congress. thereâ€™s a difference between allowing blackmail and submitting to it.
Comment by labs â€” June 2, 2007 @ 11:06 am

How so? What viable alternatives does she have?
June 2nd, 2007 at 11:16 am
Zooey says:

In JakeWorld, people function in a vacuum, never knowing or acknowledging that other people exist, or that members of separate houses of government might have an effect on one another.

I think this works for Jake, since he seems able to compartmentalize his christianity, morals, and humanity — but it doesn’t work for the rest of us.
June 2nd, 2007 at 11:21 am
Jay Randal says:

Jake > lol I doubt you are 75, because most people that age do not know how to use PCs and come onto blogs like TP. Tell us your real age? Are you 25 or younger?
June 2nd, 2007 at 11:21 am
unbelievable says:

Jake –

The Democrats have a majority in both of the two “parts” of Congress. The House of Representatives (where Pelosi is the Speaker of the House) and the Senate (where Joe Liberman is an Independent who is considered the 51st Democrat because he initially chose to caucus with them).

If Lieberman switches sides, the majority then goes back to the Republicans because the VP, a Republican, is the tie breaker.

Because it takes both houses of Congress to pass legislation, the Representatives must work with the Senators. This is more possible when one part has control over both houses. If the Senate goes Republican, Pelosi would, in effect, be impotent with a Republican Senate.

Do you get it yet?
June 2nd, 2007 at 11:22 am
labs says:

for the record jake…piss off! we were having a discourse that didn’t include you in the first place, exchanging ideas and opinions.
June 2nd, 2007 at 11:22 am
labs says:

i’m frequently wrong unbelieveable, but, i do think that nancy gave it up before that vote when she took impeachment off the table. i believe that.
June 2nd, 2007 at 11:24 am
Vinnie says:

Jake,

Look at post #7. You were either WAY off topic or posting on the wrong thread. And then you want to make a big deal of perhaps one minor error in someone’s post.

Why can’t you stick to the topic? Do you honestly think the George’s plan does anything to help stem the tide of climate change? Or are you one of those deniers who would prefer that we do nothing about the problem?
June 2nd, 2007 at 11:25 am
unbelievable says:

Zoo,

I see the sociology classes are paying off :D

You’re ight – Jake demonstrates the lack of critical thinking skills rampant among his generation – the youngest generation, not the oldest as he claims.
June 2nd, 2007 at 11:25 am
Jay Randal says:

Joe LIEberman blackmails Harry Reid, but Nancy Pelosi just likes to sell out to Bush. She cares more about being Speaker of the House, than doing what is right for our nation. Her husband makes money off the Iraq war like Sen. Feinstein’s hubby does.
June 2nd, 2007 at 11:27 am
labs says:

unfortunately i have errands to run…dang, this was fun! i really would like to get to know unbelievable and the rest of you better!
June 2nd, 2007 at 11:28 am
unbelievable says:

i believe that.
Comment by labs â€” June 2, 2007 @ 11:24 am

Why is that?
June 2nd, 2007 at 11:28 am
Jake says:

For the record, I am 75 years old — I will “prove” that as soon as anyone else here proves their age — I also did not bring up “occupying countries” first.
June 2nd, 2007 at 11:30 am
Jake says:

Bye, labs.
June 2nd, 2007 at 11:30 am
Devil's Advocate says:

Bush’s plan: hot air.

Of course, the U.S. press hailed the Prez’s “conversion” as an earth-shaking event. Those morons will never learn. The European press, however, had a field day with it. Comments ranged from cynical to derisive.
June 2nd, 2007 at 11:31 am
Zooey says:

unfortunately i have errands to runâ€¦dang, this was fun! i really would like to get to know unbelievable and the rest of you better!
Comment by labs

Oy….we’ll be here. TP is like mainlining herion. :D
June 2nd, 2007 at 11:31 am
Buck Fush says:

There are 3 reasons she is not impeaching Bush Cheney yet.

1. We want the repukians to OWN the War in Iraq.
2. We want as many scandles as possible exposed to the repukians
3. We want to destroy the repukian party in the next election

She’s just smart is all, she knows that impeachment would just drag out till he is out of office anyway, and the repukians certainly won’t go along with it, so you might as well just expose as many repukian criminals as possible in that amount of time.

Hating the repukian mafia daily
June 2nd, 2007 at 11:31 am
Buck Fush says:

Jake you are a fake – you are not 75 – Liar
June 2nd, 2007 at 11:31 am
unbelievable says:

And then you want to make a big deal of perhaps one minor error in someoneâ€™s post.

Except that there was no error in my post. Jake just doesn’t understand why and how a Republican Senate would affect Pelosi’s ability to pass Democratic bills.

Or are you one of those deniers who would prefer that we do nothing about the problem?
Comment by Vinnie â€” June 2, 2007 @ 11:25 am

Yes, he would. It’s why he comes here to distract and derail. We choose to use it as an opportunity to educate those who read the comments and are open to learning about our system from people who stayed awake in Political Science in college. :D
June 2nd, 2007 at 11:32 am
Zooey says:

For the record, Jake is not here to contribute to any topic or any conversation — he is here to disrupt.

Please ignore him — completely.
June 2nd, 2007 at 11:32 am
Vinnie says:

Jake,

I could care less how old you are. As I recall, your age was NOT the topic of this thread. Strange how attention-deprived you are that you need to come to a site where you know will be hated by the majority and try to switch every topic to be about you. As I said before:

Why canâ€™t you stick to the topic? Do you honestly think the Georgeâ€™s plan does anything to help stem the tide of climate change? Or are you one of those deniers who would prefer that we do nothing about the problem?
June 2nd, 2007 at 11:33 am
Devil's Advocate says:

# 25 That explains it all: senile dementia.
June 2nd, 2007 at 11:33 am
unbelievable says:

Joe LIEberman blackmails Harry Reid, but Nancy Pelosi just likes to sell out to Bush. Comment by Jay Randal â€” June 2, 2007 @ 11:27 am

You have to prove that. She spoke out and vote AGAINST the Occupation Funding Bill…
June 2nd, 2007 at 11:33 am
Vinnie says:

Unbelievable,

You’re right. I did say ‘perhaps’ one error.

Zooey,

Yes, he’s following the Republican troll mantra – Disrupt, distract, pollute.

As I will say again and again, the fact that so many rightie trolls feel the need to come here is proof of the success of this site. TP ROCKS!!!
June 2nd, 2007 at 11:39 am
Jay Randal says:

unbelievable > Pelosi personally voted against the funding bill, but her job as Speaker of the House is to demand for all the House Democrats to vote against it. She is playing games and as a Democrat I am calling her on it.
June 2nd, 2007 at 11:40 am
unbelievable says:

As I will say again and again, the fact that so many rightie trolls feel the need to come here is proof of the success of this site. TP ROCKS!!!
Comment by Vinnie â€” June 2, 2007 @ 11:39 am

No doubt! :D
June 2nd, 2007 at 11:42 am
Jake says:

Vinnie:

My age was NOT the topic, but someone ELSE claimed I was not 75 and also that I should enlist. So, I didn’t bring it up. I also posted to the official White House position — I do not deny that global warming is taking place — why don’t you review those points and let me know which one(s) you disagree with?
June 2nd, 2007 at 11:42 am
jules says:

No one can get to 75 years of age and have so little knowledge of the world. Unless, of course, they receive all of their information and talking points from limpdick and oliely.
June 2nd, 2007 at 11:45 am
Jay Randal says:

LOL Jake > I told you to enlist, then you claimed you are 75 and too old to fight in Iraq. Nobody that age posts stuff on TP threads backing Bush no matter what stupidity he does.
June 2nd, 2007 at 11:46 am
Vinnie says:

Jake,

Somehow when you come here it always ends up being about you. I wonder why that is.

It would be best for the dignity of this board if we all just took Zooey’s advice and ignored you.
June 2nd, 2007 at 11:55 am
RUCerious says:

Call BS on this war, Nancy, and I’ll start listening to you again.
June 2nd, 2007 at 12:09 pm
Jake says:

That’s fine, Vinnie, if you don’t want to answer my question even though I answered yours. Have a nice life.
June 2nd, 2007 at 12:11 pm
unbelievable says:

Pelosi personally voted against the funding bill, but her job as Speaker of the House is to demand for all the House Democrats to vote against it.
Comment by Jay Randal â€” June 2, 2007 @ 11:40 am

The only person you can control is yourself. I don’t want her controlling people. It’s what I as a liberal stand firmly against. She can make a great argument, lead by example, but at the end of the day, she can’t guide their hands. Hold those who voted for the bill accountable and I will support you for it, but to hold Pelosi accountable for what other people do, I cannot.

I think she is doing a great job under the circumstances and I applaud her for it. It won’t always go in our favor, but she is working far harder for teh American people than the last guy who had her job.
June 2nd, 2007 at 12:23 pm
unbelievable says:

No one can get to 75 years of age and have so little knowledge of the world.
Comment by jules â€” June 2, 2007 @ 11:45 am

Good point…

Hey how are you? Has your daughter graduated yet?
June 2nd, 2007 at 12:25 pm
Jay Randal says:

unbelievable > Speaker of the House’s job is to persuade members to join in voting for or against a bill. Pelosi deserves no praise, but that is your choice if you want to defend her. I call a politician on bullcrap whether a R or D comes after their name. This is WHY Cindy Sheehan has given up on the Democrats in Congress.
June 2nd, 2007 at 12:29 pm
Jay Randal says:

I live in Georgia now, but I am a 4th generation Californian by birth, so I will call Nancy Pelosi on her baloney. This sticking up for one party or the other one must stop.
June 2nd, 2007 at 12:31 pm
labs says:

in answer to your question ub i believe that because nancy did it. i don’t want lockstep anymore than you do, but, in order to be elected speaker she gave impeachment up completely. she said it was off the table as soon as it was announced she had bagged the title.

i’d rather have her than the repuke, but, i have no illusions that a politician is a politician. as i said, i’m frequently wrong, i freely admit that. i’m also highly cynical and a pessimist when it comes to both parties.

and yeah, it is like heroin. LOL
June 2nd, 2007 at 12:33 pm
Jay Randal says:

I have to go water my garden, because global warming has caused the worst drought in recorded history in Georgia. Entire month of May was dry as a bone and June is not looking much better.
June 2nd, 2007 at 12:34 pm
Vinnie says:

Jake,

Because Bush’s plan is nothing but a ‘plan’ to do something in the future. It doesn’t enact any of the concrete measures that have already been proposed.

Read the articles from the European press from this article. They do a good job explaining why people think Bushie’s proposal is bad.

http://thinkprogress.org/2007/06/01/us-v-international-press-on-climate/
June 2nd, 2007 at 12:36 pm
no name says:

I am getting just a little sick of Pelosi’s “blasts”

Sick of it. She can “blast” in her Armani suit all she wants, but when it comes down to the real serious stuff, this botoxed ingenue of the political scene is nothing more than more hype. She lacks the conviction and she lacks the moral conviction to understand what this insane president is doing and act accordingly.

Shem, as well as , I believe, many of the Democrats, are “blasting” and avoiding the real problem they were elected to address. I believe she and the front runners for the next election actually WANT the spoils of this horror of an invasion and occupation. I believe they WANT it. Wow–lookkee there–a 105 acre embassy and seventeen military bases–what could be more perfect for anyone seeking absolute power in our corrupted, immoral and almost sociopathic congress?

Vote for the Democrat!!! Well we did. Seems the Democrats WANT what George Bush has forced upon us. That is why they seem so
spineless–err–they are not spineless–they want the spoils of the war so that the next one who may be fooled into voting for someone they have to “hold their nose” to vote for, will be fooled into believing the two party system is “democratic” It ain’t.

George Bush has lied over and over to the congress, to the people of the United STates-and is responsible for the deaths, the murders, imo, of hundreds of thousands of human beings. It is beyond my comprehension that those so called “honorable” Senators and Representatives, cannot rid this nation of such evil.

They don’t want to.
June 2nd, 2007 at 12:40 pm
Briseadh na Faire says:

What viable alternatives does she have?

Comment by unbelievable â€” June 2, 2007 @ 11:16 am

She can do what is right, regardless of what Senator Liebermann will do.

Liebermann would then have to choose, bolt from the Democratic caucus and give control of the Senate to Republicans, which would then shut down Senate investigations, or stay with the Democratic causus.

Assuming Liebermann chose to switch sides, the nature of the bills passing the Senate will not change.

Democrats still hold a majority in the House, so the nature of bills passing the house will not change.

What will change is public perceptions. The American public will see how one Senator has kept the war going. As long as that Senator is nominally Democratic, the continuance of the war will be blamed on both parties, as it is now. However, by allowing Senator Liebermann to show his true allegiances, the blame for continuing the war will fall, once again, squarely with Republicans.

Pelosi can put impeachment back on the table, push it through the House, and let Joe Liebermann and Senate Republicans stand there and defend War Crimes in the very public impeachment trials of Bush and Cheney. That would do more for Democrats’ political aspirations than continuing to cave in to Bush’s demands.
June 2nd, 2007 at 12:46 pm
unbelievable says:

Speaker of the Houseâ€™s job is to persuade members to join in voting for or against a bill.

Pursuade but not force. She can’t force them to do it.

Pelosi deserves no praise, but that is your choice if you want to defend her. I call a politician on bullcrap whether a R or D comes after their name.

Jay, that’s not fair to suggest I am supporting her because she is a Democrat. I’m an Independent by the way. I lived in San Francisco and for that time she was my Representative. I think she has done an excellent job, has values and integrity and is doing a great job under the circumstances. It’s politics. I couldn’t do it.

This is WHY Cindy Sheehan has given up on the Democrats in Congress.
Comment by Jay Randal â€” June 2, 2007 @ 12:29 pm

They’ve only been in power since January. It’s Bush who made that woman’s life a living hell.
June 2nd, 2007 at 12:49 pm
jules says:

Hey how are you? Has your daughter graduated yet?

Comment by unbelievable â€” June 2, 2007 @ 12:25 pm

I am good. Just finished working out. My daughter graduated last Sat with honors and a member of NHS. I really cannot see how she made it through this year. She is such a great kid. She wants to be a surgeon and work with Doctors without Borders.

School just got out for me yesterday. I cannot tell you how happy I am to end this year. I am hoping “the college years” will be a little easier on her.

Is school over for you yet?
June 2nd, 2007 at 1:04 pm
unbelievable says:

Assuming Liebermann chose to switch sides, the nature of the bills passing the Senate will not change.

Democrats still hold a majority in the House, so the nature of bills passing the house will not change.

It could change things, because you know how the Republicans behave when they are in control.

If the Senate can’t pass bills the House approves it does change things… And that may not be worth the risk.

Gotta run for now… Be back later.
June 2nd, 2007 at 1:06 pm
unbelievable says:

Is school over for you yet?
Comment by jules â€” June 2, 2007 @ 1:04 pm

Congrats on surviving the year (I know it’s been a difficult one for you)! :D

Sounds like your daughter will be a great doctor!

We wrapped up Thursday. Next year will be my last before I go to graduate school. I just decided I needed to set a target now that I’m out of debt and able to start saving.

I have to run to get ready for a friend’s birthday party, but if you’d like email me at davincismadonna@yahoo.com, and I’ll give you my real email address, and we can catch up without filling up the thread :D.

Glad to see you back. Hasn’t been the same without you.
June 2nd, 2007 at 1:11 pm
muckdog says:

Good news!

Global warming debunked.

Phew, we can all rest a little easier now.
June 2nd, 2007 at 1:51 pm
Vinnie says:

AGAIN, the global warming skeptics propose that we do NOTHING about a problem that affects the health of our planet. Apathy is wonderful right?

Let’s take a look at the organizations that have concluded that global warming is a serious threat and that carbon emissions created by man are a main contributor to the problem.

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)

Joint science academiesâ€™ statement 2005

American Meteorological Society

American Geophysical Union

American Institute of Physics

The American Astronomical Society

American Association for the Advancement of Science

Stratigraphy Commission of the Geological Society of London

Geological Society of America

American Association of State Climatologists

Australian Medical Association

American Chemical Society

American Quaternary Association

Engineers Australia (The Institution of Engineers Australia)

Hmmm. Pretty impressive list. Sorry, the Association for British Drivers just doesn’t impress me much. Do you have any scientific organizations you can quote? That seems appropriate since this is an issue that should be discussed by scientists as opposed to a group that just likes to drive a lot.

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_opinion_on_climate_change
June 2nd, 2007 at 2:03 pm
Zooey says:

Comment by Briseadh na Faire â€” June 2, 2007 @ 12:46 pm

This is exactly the problem. If we continue with the staus quo, the Dems will “own” this war.
June 2nd, 2007 at 2:03 pm
Vinnie says:

More from the same article below. Looking at this there were 928 scientific articles and not a one took the position you’re arguing. What’s up with that?

“A 2004 article by geologist and historian of science Naomi Oreskes summarized a study of the scientific literature on climate change.[7] The essay concluded that there is a scientific consensus on the reality of anthropogenic climate change. The author analyzed 928 abstracts of papers from refereed scientific journals between 1993 and 2003, listed with the keywords “global climate change”. Oreskes divided the abstracts into six categories: explicit endorsement of the consensus position, evaluation of impacts, mitigation proposals, methods, paleoclimate analysis, and rejection of the consensus position. 75% of the abstracts were placed in the first three categories, thus either explicitly or implicitly accepting the consensus view; 25% dealt with methods or paleoclimate, thus taking no position on current anthropogenic climate change; none of the abstracts disagreed with the consensus position, which the author found to be “remarkable”. It was also pointed out, “authors evaluating impacts, developing methods, or studying paleoclimatic change might believe that current climate change is natural. However, none of these papers argued that point.”"
June 2nd, 2007 at 2:08 pm
Mr. President says:

Pelosi blast shit-bricks from her a$$
June 2nd, 2007 at 2:18 pm
ValiantVenusGrewFromUranus says:

Good news!
Global warming debunked.
Phew, we can all rest a little easier now.
Comment by muckdog â€” June 2, 2007 @ 1:51 pm

Yeah, and the earth is *FLAT* and 6000 years old!!!

BAAHAHAHA, you’re a st*pid little b!tch!!
June 2nd, 2007 at 2:21 pm
Mr. President says:

Comment by muckdog â€” June 2, 2007 @ 1:51 pm

Oh shnapp!

Global COOLING!!!!

WE DIDN’T LISTEN!!!!

WE, WE DIDN”T LISTEN!!!
June 2nd, 2007 at 2:22 pm
ValiantVenusGrewFromUranus says:

Pelosi blast shit-bricks from her a$$
Comment by Mr. President â€” June 2, 2007 @ 2:18 pm

On what day were you blasted, I mean born – sh*t-brick?
June 2nd, 2007 at 2:22 pm
Mr. President says:

Yeah, and the earth is… 6000 years old!!!
Comment by ValiantVenusGrewFromUranus â€” June 2, 2007 @ 2:21 pm

Well actually, the earth is 6000 years old. At least, from what I understand.
June 2nd, 2007 at 2:23 pm
ValiantVenusGrewFromUranus says:

Well actually, the earth is 6000 years old. At least, from what I understand. Comment by Mr. President â€” June 2, 2007 @ 2:23 pm

BAHAHAHAHA, then you’re a fool… I guess those tree rings that show trees 11,000 years old were “put there” to confuse you? I could go on with the *countless* fossil records, carbon dating, and the rest of *science*, but I know, you prefer to believe a set of “myths”!!! VERY FUNNY!!!!

BAHAHAHAHA, you know wingnut. While being gay (I know your biggest fear) can’t be cured, ignorance, homophobia, and religious extremism can all be treated! Get help, you r*t*rded little f*cker!
June 2nd, 2007 at 2:31 pm
ValiantVenusGrewFromUranus says:

Oh shnapp!
Global COOLING!!!!
WE DIDNâ€™T LISTEN!!!!
WE, WE DIDNâ€T LISTEN!!!
Comment by Mr. President â€” June 2, 2007 @ 2:22 pm

Oh shnapp? Now we know why you’re so homophobic, GUHRLFRIEND!

You mean the one global warming *article*, that was published in a non-peer reviewed *magazine* decades ago? You actually compare that to decades of research and scientific consensus?

Dum bass.
June 2nd, 2007 at 2:33 pm
freedomrings says:

Nancy released green house gasses when she said that, â€œImpeachment was off the table!â€
Nancy released green house gasses when she said that, â€œWe will consider this an olive branchâ€ regarding troop funding.
Nancy released green house gasses going to and coming from Greenland.
Nancy released green house gasses by scolding Bush for not authorizing involvement in a â€œglobal carbon tax!â€
Nancy has a 5000 sq ft home in California & drives a (what looks like) Yukon. Look for yourself here at this linkâ€¦
http://www.nbc11.com/news/11226617/detail.html

Politicians are mostly lawyers. They pass laws that help them first and leave little for the masses. This is why they â€œserveâ€ the public a steamy sh*t sandwich and tell us that it is roast beef! They are protecting those 5000 sq. ft. homes and SUVs. That happens to be only one of her homes.

Nancy isnâ€™t the only carpet bagger in the game but now at least I know that she is as two faced as Bush. These â€œpoliticiansâ€ as they are called need to be downsized and the way to do that for starters is to have a lengthily general strike across the entire USA. Follow this with a taxation strike (after you close all of your bank accounts) and the citizens like you and I will be holding new elections with our peers.

Career politicians and lawyers do not â€œserveâ€ society and are not our â€œpeersâ€ they have their own language for crying out loud. This is generalized for the most part as Iâ€™m sure that there are a few politicians out there that ran for office to â€œserve the public interestâ€ and not dictate what that interest is. Since elected officials serve the voters the good ones will not mind stepping aside so we can clear house and let regular citizens take turns.

We canâ€™t do any worse than we are so I rather see Jane Doe that worked in a store all of her life and managed her family be the Speaker of the House. AZ Ralph who has a store can run for President and we can agree that if he were elected there is little chance he could do worse than 88% want him impeached, Bush!
June 2nd, 2007 at 2:50 pm
Fed the Fcuk Up! says:

Based upon recent historical evidence, Ms. Pelosi’s photo op trip to Greenland means that she is getting ready to do nothing about the environmental crisis. Of course she will then just blame that mean old mr. bush.

Ms. Pelosi has already proven herself to be a lying kunt whose motives are obviously for her self and not for her constituents or country.

These are indisputable facts. Don’t let the Noni charade fool you.
June 2nd, 2007 at 2:52 pm
Lee says:

The naysayers of global warming are the greedy little pricks who stand to lose a percentage if real action is taken to try to curb carbon emissions.

To those a**holes, I’ll use one of Dick Cheney’s favorite quotes:

GO F*CK YOURSELF.
June 2nd, 2007 at 3:00 pm
muckdog says:

Shouldn’t the global warming hypsters be trying to stop water evaporation if they were serious? Or maybe send some buckets of ice to the Sun and try to cool it down?

LMAO.
June 2nd, 2007 at 3:15 pm
marlow says:

Well spoken, #83. Anencephaly is a terrible affliction, but you carry on nonetheless…
June 2nd, 2007 at 3:28 pm
Vinnie says:

Shouldnâ€™t the global warming hypsters be trying to stop water evaporation if they were serious? Or maybe send some buckets of ice to the Sun and try to cool it down?

LMAO.

Comment by muckdog â€” June 2, 2007 @ 3:15 pm

I provided a serious look at the scientific consensus on climate change in post # 71. And this is Muckdog’s reply. Hmmm. I will boldly proffer that you couldn’t argue your way out of a paper bag on this one.
June 2nd, 2007 at 3:38 pm
freedomrings says:

Some facts:
1) Scientists estimate that the Earth’s rotation is slowing at the rate of 2.2 seconds every 100,000 years. The time it takes the Earth to complete one rotation increases 2.2 seconds every 100,000 years. This is a very conservative figure considering the number of adjustments our timekeepers have been forced to make in recent years. If we trace this phenomenon back in time, whatever the correct figure is, at one point in time it may have taken the Earth 12 hours to complete one rotation, (depending on its initial speed of rotation when it was created.) At that time the Earth was spinning at twice the speed it is traveling at the present time.
2) The angular momentum of spinning planet tends to adjust the bulge to fit the changing conditions. A stronger angular momentum due to a faster rotation would increase the bulge while a weaker angular momentum due to a slowing rotation would allow gravity to form into a more perfect sphere. The rotation is constantly slowing however so the angular momentum is always growing weaker. (The bulge does not decrease enough to increase the rotation of the Earth by any significant amount.)
This allows gravity to pull the planet’s shape into an ever more perfect sphere. This action has caused a continual change in the planet’s shape to occur. This change in shape has set up tremendous stresses within the Earth and in its crust as it struggles to fit on the slowly changing mantle.

3) In the past, when the Earth was younger and spinning faster, the stronger angular momentum caused the Earth to assume a more pronounced oblate spheroid shape. (At the present time the planet Saturn is spinning much faster than the Earth and displays this more pronounced oblate spheroid shape.) When the Earth was spinning faster the bulge was much greater than the twenty-seven miles it is today. A 5% increase in the equatorial circumference of the Earth would produce approximately 1200 more miles of surface around the equatorial zone.

4) The SOHO (Solar and Heliospheric Observatory) has produced pictures of the Sun that would amaze most people. Foe a number of years this Sun orbiting station has made it possible to determine that the Sun is at this time â€œextremelyâ€ active.

Soon someone will suggest killing all of the cows since they compete for water, land and grains and they release a green house gas called methane commonly found in FARTS. There are these nearly 7 with a B, Billion things called humans and they fart too.

I posed yesterday and mentioned the Sun activity and was told that that only represented 22% of the warming we see. I never mentioned that the length of a day is increasing (digital clocks replaced mechanical clocks) so this increases the exposure time of the Earth to the sun in a given area. What percentage increase do we get from that then if we are talking about a possible remaining 78%? Since the Earth is moving slower its shape is changing (pasted in above), how much does this shape change effect global weather since it does exist and must amount to some percentage of change?

The simple way to cut emissions would be to kill every 3 people that you see until you no longer see anyone. If we all do that and quickly bury them all Iâ€™ll bet green house emissions drop 25%. The best part will be the reduction in bull s*it emissions from listening to all of the hypocritical ratings of the Greenies who want global government and global carbon taxes then drive their hybrids that carry that big honkin battery.

When you are smug enough to believe that we can prevail over nature as though all it takes is a magic tax or cutting back a bit you are actually dooming billions of other people. Money canâ€™t buy you love or hybrids if you have a blackout or if you turn off the power. Progress by the way for the individual is getting older and older and then dropping dead. Think about it!
June 2nd, 2007 at 4:05 pm
marlow says:

Some facts: beyond the age of thirty, most adults will begin to experience the slow demineralization of their bones. Exercise and good nutrition will help greatly to slow the process, but by the time old age is reached many of us will be fragile, with bones much more likely to fracture in a fall, accident, etc. Now, should I blame this slow process for the femur I fractured while skiing, or the large pine tree my leg struck while I was hurtling through the air at about forty miles an hour? Let’s dispense with this talk of the smugness of believing we can prevail over nature; we’ve already done that by dumping BILLIONS of tons of CO2 into the atmosphere, mostly in the U.S. and Europe. The smugness spoken about happened then, when we believed we could cut down entire forests, burn everything, pollute everything, and there would be no consequences.
June 2nd, 2007 at 4:29 pm
freedomrings says:

Letâ€™s dispense with this talk of the smugness

Comment by marlow â€” June 2, 2007 @ 4:29 pm

So now you want to tell me what I can talk about? Your femur broke because you are smug! Skiing is a diversion that causes damage to mountains and creates injuries. The pine tree or old age did not cause anything. You skiing did! The smugness creeps in with the nonsense analogy you made!
June 2nd, 2007 at 4:37 pm
marlow says:

Yes, your environmental sensibilities stand out clearly, freedom, and thanks for emphasizing my point. My action did cause my broken leg at age 35, not the incipient demineralization of my bones, and I would look pretty stupid to have blamed it on such. Actually, at the time I was scared Sh*tless, but you are right that the creation of a ski resort generally involves the cutting down of lots of trees and can be seen as harmful to the environment. So can burning down half the Amazon Basin. And you contend that it is “smug” to attempt to correct and reverse generations of planet altering stupidity? Show us the peer-reviewed journal which lays out the evidence that global warming is due to the slowing of Earth’s rotation, not the billions of tons of CO2 released into the atmosphere over the past 2-3 centuries.
June 2nd, 2007 at 4:53 pm
freedomrings says:

Comment by marlow â€” June 2, 2007 @ 4:53 pm

I donâ€™t see the post I posted? No matter. It isnâ€™t smug to want to save the Earth. It is unlikely that the Earth will be saved though. What is smug is that you skipped right over some big facts and then landed on your femur. Did you know that the UN wants to kill all of the cows? Think about that for a moment. Did you know that the UN wants sterilization for the masses? Then do searches on Google for “length of time in a day increases” since that is why you have your own computer that cost the world 12 barrels of oil like mine!
June 2nd, 2007 at 5:13 pm
Vinnie says:

Nice try Onion Rings. First, your pseudo-scientific rant is not even worth refuting.

Secondly, I love how people POST here about how their posts are being deleted. Your lengthy post served to do nothing but pollute this thread. If you want to see posts being deleted go over to right-wing blog sites such as redstate.com and post something liberal. They will boot you off. TP is the site where politics can be openly discussed. Don’t you just love it? Sounds like you’re becoming a regular around here.
June 2nd, 2007 at 7:00 pm
freedomrings says:

sl/certs/ca-bundle.crt
June 2nd, 2007 at 7:09 pm
freedomrings says:

Comment by Vinnie â€” June 2, 2007 @ 7:00 pm

What is your point then?

Regarding the posts I seem to now be missing 2. If they arenâ€™t getting deleted where are they then since you know everything? I mean are you telling me you can see
June 2nd, 2007 at 7:21 pm
marlow says:

Nothing’s perfect, freedom, and it would be “smug” to think it should be. I found myself unable to get anything on here for weeks once…
June 2nd, 2007 at 7:29 pm
freedomrings says:

Nothingâ€™s perfect, freedom, and it would be â€œsmugâ€ to think it should be. I found myself unable to get anything on here for weeks onceâ€¦

Comment by marlow â€” June 2, 2007 @ 7:29 pm

Here I click submit/post and on the server my message enters a database. When I browse this page it uses a get and the page is refreshed.

Some of my posts are not showing up. What is up with that? It has nothing to do with you being smug enough to blame a pine tree for breaking your leg!
June 2nd, 2007 at 8:03 pm
Vinnie says:

My point is that you’re implying you’re being censored while at the same time being allowed to make lengthy posts. You can’t have it both ways.

Only on right-wing sites like redstate.com do they kick people off for their points of view. Think Progress believes in free speech and allows everyone to post their views. The site has proven so successful that it even attracts a number of right-wing posters like yourself.
June 2nd, 2007 at 8:11 pm
marlow says:

There you go freedom, looks like your post held, so you can take off the tinfoil hat. I don’t blame the tree for breaking my leg, by the way, I blame the choices I made that led me to fly through the air into the tree. The point I was attempting to make was one of relative causality. At age 35 my bones may have started the process of demineralization, but this could not be responsible for my injury when a much more obvious cause was present. The earth may be slowing and this may indeed play some role in GW, but it would pale in comparison to the effects of centuries of human-induced destruction of the planet’s chemical, geologic, and biological systems which have been documented now for decades.
June 2nd, 2007 at 9:21 pm
DreamCrusher says:

I saw the climate changing right before my eyes! Ice was melting! Ice was breaking off! This is unprecedented as I know because I’m 1000 years old and have been around to witness the climate change!

The only “urgency” that exists is the rush to tax the hell out of energy usage before the climate turns around on its own to debunk the Al Gore Orthodoxy.
June 3rd, 2007 at 8:13 am
freedomrings says:

There you go freedom, looks like your post held, so you can take off the tinfoil hat
Comment by marlow â€” June 2, 2007 @ 9:21 pm

2 of my posts are gone. I point that out and then there are accusations and ridiculous comments. No tin hats and my views that you say are being posted are missing. Now I was reading other threads here and there are posts that are at least twice as long as any of mine so far. The nerve of â€œComment by Vinnie â€” June 2, 2007 @ 8:11 pm â€ for calling me a liar.
One post lists all of the other profane, rude and insulting remarks I could locate on this thread alone. I posted it and it was there and now it is gone. The other is a reply to â€œComment by marlow â€” June 2, 2007 @ 4:29 pm â€œ. I posted them and then checked and they were listed at one point and now they are gone.
June 3rd, 2007 at 8:14 am
freedomrings says:

I saw the climate changing right before my eyes! Ice was melting! Ice was breaking off! This is unprecedented as I know because Iâ€™m 1000 years old and have been around to witness the climate change!

The only â€œurgencyâ€ that exists is the rush to tax the hell out of energy usage before the climate turns around on its own to debunk the Al Gore Orthodoxy.

Comment by DreamCrusher â€” June 3, 2007 @ 8:13 am

I love astronomy. There are people that want me to believe that Neil Armstrong never walked on the Moon. Imagine that, people insist the Neil Armstrong is nothing but a second rate actor. For me it would be impossible to accept those claims and assertions that the lunar landing was faked since the so called proof supplied by NASA debunkers is a hoax and theatrics.

A few posts ago I mentioned SOHO (Solar and Heliospheric Observatory) that was launched on December 2, 1995. It began sending images in 1996 and is still very much in operation today. Over time short term trends can be detected that give us information about the Sun and its direct effects in the solar system. Images like this one showing activity over timeâ€¦
http://sohowww.nascom.nasa.gov/gallery/images/large/tricomp_prev.jpg
and this one showing a CMEâ€¦
http://sohowww.nascom.nasa.gov/gallery/images/large/suncombo1_prev.jpg
and this one snowing another CMEâ€¦
http://sohowww.nascom.nasa.gov/gallery/images/large/c2eitcomp_prev.jpg
and this one showing yet another CMEâ€¦
http://sohowww.nascom.nasa.gov/gallery/images/large/agueit_prev.jpg
then there are videos like this one showing a CFEâ€¦
http://sohowww.nascom.nasa.gov/gallery/Movies/Lightbulb/eit195.mpg
and this one comparing of solar activity in 1996 to 1999 activityâ€¦
http://sohowww.nascom.nasa.gov/gallery/Movies/EIT_9699/EIT_9699.mpg
Images and films like these show that the Sun is not just a static object that we can take for granted. It is the driving force of life on Earth. Clearly posters can understand that the more active the Sun becomes the more radiation of various types bombards us each and every day. The opposite is true when Sun is less active.

The period that the Sun is in, is coined â€œThe Solar Maxâ€ and we are at the tail end of this period according to the images and video. That being said there is nothing to prevent a long term activity increase or a long term decline. The fact that SOHO has only been transmitting data for ten years give or take is a limiting factor to long term trends and observations.

Scientists and bloggers have numerous views about all sorts of things. Here is an excerpt from a BBC articleâ€¦
Belgian scientists have identified a hitherto unsuspected benefit of global warming – more time for all of us. They say increasing levels of carbon dioxide (CO2) in the atmosphere will slow the Earth’s rotation. This will make every day a little longer than it is already. But for the next century the increase will be so small that if you blink, you’ll miss it.
The scientists, from Belgium’s Royal Observatory and the Catholic University of Louvain, report their work in this month’s issue of the journal Geophysical Research Letters. They used computer models to analyze the effect of adding 1% more CO2 to the atmosphere annually. This would mean a doubling of the CO2 concentration after 70 years. The researchers say this rate of increase is a common scenario on the basis of current human activity.
No contrast that statement to this one in an excerpt from Donald L. Hamilton, author of â€œThe MIND of Mankindâ€ â€¦
It is well known that the rotation of planet Earth is gradually slowing. For four and one half billion years, its entire lifetime, its rate of rotation has been gradually slowing. As the Earth loses its kinetic energy due to all forms of friction acting on it; tides, galactic space dust, solar wind, space weather, geomagnetic storms, etc., like any flywheel, it will slow down. (The space surrounding the planet is far from empty).

What we have here is like talking about what came first the chicken or the egg. Both articles agree that the Earth is slowing down and that though it is small change from our point of view, the length of a day is increasing. The first article states that global warming is slowing the Earth and the second states that this is a normal process based on physics. The second article does include the Earthâ€™s atmosphere as a relevant factor. A point to note is that given the physics of the rotation of bodies in space CMEâ€™s from the Sun also create friction that ultimately slows the rotation of the Earth.

The first article tends to blame the slowing rotation of the Earth on pollution from humans. We have only been in the â€œindustrial ageâ€ for about 150 years compared to the billions of years that the Earth has been rotating. If we go 4.6 billion years to the rear an Earth day would be only 14 hours long and the climate then was completely different then it is now. The second article calls the loss of rotation velocity inevitable.

Now if we want to talk about our situation we had better bring all of the facts to the table. It is a fact that the Sun is in a Solar Max state and we canâ€™t hope to change that. It is a fact that the Earthâ€™s spin is developing a case of arthritis and both of those articles tend to support that there is no getting around the fact. Both of those articles support the claim that less spin velocity causes more emissions. That assertion is the most problematic. It implies that humans will have to adapt physically or perish since no matter what we do the Earth will slow down.

There are many issues we face that like it or not are beyond our ability to change. To believe that the moon has no effect on the tidal action of the Earth would be unreasonable and to believe that the moon is static in orbit is also unreasonable since the distance to the moon is on the increase. Tidal action is on the decrease and that effect is to be expected as the moon moves further and further out of orbit. This lunar observation supports the statement that all bodies in space are subject to the same arthritic condition of grinding down.

I tend to think of life like this Police song called â€œWhen the world is running downâ€
When I feel lonely here
Don’t waste my time with tears
I run ‘Deep Throat’ again
It ran for years and years
Don’t like the food I eat
The cans are running out
Same food for years and years
I hate the food I eat

When the world is running down
You make the best of what’s still around
When the world is running down
You make the best of what’s still around

Well I want to say that humans are going to devolve like it or not. I think the insanity of paying a carbon tax demonstrates that humans are tilting back to superstitious thinking. The same thinking caused the Aztecâ€™s to resort to human sacrifice and cannibalism. The carpetbaggers want your heart sacrifices and it helps them to retain their status. In the end fear is always the motivation behind any mass solution.

Facts like the increase of solar activity, decrease in the Earthâ€™s rotation velocity, increase in the distance to the moon and the Earth changing shape are all factors that influence global systems like weather and ocean currents. We have bigger problems than global weather. Global stupidity (I assume this is part of de-evolution) in operation allows people to think that switching from a Hummer to a Prius is going to change anything.

Hummers and Priuses come from the same places. Big factories! The materials to make these machines (cars) with, comes from the same old place. The Earth! There is no strip mining without strip mining. That is to say that you canâ€™t mine material without a mine. So the thinking that the solution to global warming is being Green is nothing but the same old stuff like mining and factories with the addition of a Carbon Tax, given time that would devolve to actual human sacrifices.

We should just get it over with in my opinion. Full out global annihilation and let the better man win. The idea that my thoughts here are tin hat thinking proves that there are far too many cooks making the dinner. I can tell from the nasty attitudes that Iâ€™m catching here that the solution to global warming is the same as the one to peak oil and peak food and peak water and peak land andâ€¦

That solution is war, starvation, suffering and disease! This last part is my â€œopinionâ€ but it looks like it is an option given the circumstances.
June 3rd, 2007 at 11:34 am
freedomrings says:

I give up something is messed up now both posts I just made appeared? I can’t edit anything and I don’t know if a post is posted. They should show up pretty quickly?

Can someone here topic aside explain what is going on with the posts. I post on lots of blogs and message boards and this is the first time that I have run into strangeness like this. What gives?
June 3rd, 2007 at 11:57 am
marlow says:

I don’t know, freedom, but I’ll go so far as to tell you I sympathize. Posts get lost here and they happen to everyone. Find zooey and ask her… Like I said I had a period of weeks where I couldn’t seem to get anything on. If you read here long enough you’ll find plenty of pissed off “lefties” that lost their posts.
June 3rd, 2007 at 2:57 pm
marlow says:

That’s the way you’re going to spin it now, “crusher”? Decades of hard scientific research peer-reviewed and published is now the ” Al Gore Orthodoxy”? Very cute. Stupid, but cute.
June 3rd, 2007 at 3:05 pm
freedomrings says:

Thatâ€™s the way youâ€™re going to spin it now, â€œcrusherâ€? Decades of hard scientific research peer-reviewed and published is now the â€ Al Gore Orthodoxyâ€? Very cute. Stupid, but cute.

Comment by marlow â€” June 3, 2007 @ 3:05 pm

DreamCrusherâ€™s impersonation of Nancy is accurate. Honestly, for her Greenland was a nature retreat. She already knew what to expect before she went there since her response represents the standard programming that Carbon Taxers are trained to parrot. Consider her new position on the troops. War creates ample amounts of green house gasses not to mention the depleted uranium contamination. All of the ships, aircraft, tanks and hummers burn it up.

I could be wrong (I think the number is higher during wartime) but donâ€™t US Naval Battle Groups consume 6 million barrels of oil a day. We have two battle groups there and more around the globe. Look at the video clip I posted at #80 on this thread. Notice that home she has (she has a few more) there and consider how fair the carbon tax would be to the poor. Look at what she drives and consider that she needs a security detachment.

If she decided to side with the majority (of voters) the troops would be on their way home now. This congress is just as screwed up as the 109th. The bottom line is no matter what happens, Congress Persons and the other governmental big wigs are all protecting themselves, since both sides want the same oil in i-Wreck.

Consider that if you pay the additional $12.00 as is the choice on my electric bill now where does this â€œgreen powerâ€ come from? It doesnâ€™t come from any place that I can see. Same old coal plants, same old oil plants, same old natural gas plants and the same old nuclear reactors. The whole thing is based on fear (of global warming) and guilt (for not admitting it is your fault) so the non believers can be converted and if not labeled as eco-terrorists.

Consider how we die for a moment. You have to be buried or cremated. Someone usually gets stuck with a $5,000.00 funeral bill too. So the body is embalmed and the casket is placed in a liner. None of the goo that is you makes it back to the environment that you barrowed it from. Peopleâ€™s remains need to be composted and even then the food supply will be too tight.

You canâ€™t make any car at all without steel, aluminum, plastic and other synthetics and there is no way around that reality. Making a car (even a hybrid) requires thousands of barrels of oil. Making all of the machines that make the cars requires even more energy. All of this technology requires mucho energy. That is the cost of an industrialized world. Backpacks that can power your laptop are a slap in the face when you realize exactly how not green they really are.

Laptops require many barrels of oil to build (pay attention). Computers all have a processor like mine here has an AMD. Processors are a marvel when you consider how miniaturized they are. Processors have to be â€œmass producedâ€ to be affordable. Intel could not make only a few processors since the R&D alone requires the entire power of Intel.

PLASTIC 101: The plastic manufacturing process begins by heating the hydrocarbons in a “cracking process.” Here, in the presence of a catalyst, larger molecules are broken down into smaller ones such as ethylene (ethane) C2H4, propylene (propane) C3H6, and butane C4H8 and other hydrocarbons. The yield of ethylene is controlled by the cracking temperature and is more than 30% at 850Â°C and such products as styrene and vinyl chloride can be produced in subsequent reactions. These are then the starting materials for several other types of plastics. Therefore, this process results in the conversion of the natural gas or crude oil components into monomers such as ethylene, propylene, butane and styrene.
Those laptops require oil and natural gas for the plastic components and to mine iron ore and to make aluminum and to make processors. The scale of the material and energy demand is fantastic. I didnâ€™t even mention the materials to make the actual back pack.
June 3rd, 2007 at 6:24 pm
darth vader says:

#10 jay randal – yep i think were are supposed to be impressed with pelosi’s trip in much the same way as smokin’ joe went shopping in baghdad wearing his blue shirt and german army hat – i think she should have gone with him – seems like an awful lot of greenhouse gases emitted there on a daily basis
June 3rd, 2007 at 8:42 pm

Pelosi blasts Bush’s new climate plan.

Pelosi blasts Bush’s new climate plan.

106 Responses to “Pelosi blasts Bush’s new climate plan.”

Blogroll