Thanks for the MSNBC perspective, willy. Will probably reach a bigger audience here than it got on cable. Is this their new survival strategy?
Comment on Climate change as a political process by Don Monfort
↧
↧
Comment on Week in review by David L. Hagen
AK re "If permitting time can be eliminated"
As I said!
For the epitome of political delays see:
<a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/02/09/us-usa-nuclear-nrc-idUSTRE8182J720120209" rel="nofollow">U.S. approves first new nuclear plant in a generation</a>
<blockquote>U.S. regulators on Thursday approved plans to build the first new nuclear power plant in<b> more than 30 years</b>, . . .No nuclear power plants have been licensed in the United States since the partial meltdown of the reactor core of the Three Mile Island plant in Pennsylvania in 1979. After the accident, the NRC adopted more stringent safety standards, which caused construction costs for nuclear plants to skyrocket and <b>stopped dozens of planned plants in their tracks</b>.</blockquote>
↧
Comment on Climate change as a political process by The Great Blizzard Of 2015 Climate Policy Lessons: When Bad Predictions Equals Bad Policy The People Pay The Price | Power To The People
[…] disrupted, more poverty is created and billions of dollars are blown on useless green energy. Judith Curry has a good description of what happens when Climate and bad Weather predictions make for bad […]
↧
Comment on Climate change as a political process by JeffN
“The Demo brand is getting repaired by lowering gas prices and the perception that the economy is improving.”
Agreed. In other words, the Demo brand won’t be pushing anything that results in higher gas and electricity prices. They are walking away from the debate. Nice to see bi-partisanship on AGW :)
↧
Comment on Week in review by Matthew R Marler
Eric: <i>I prefer to look at real world data which shows during the Obama administration no large increases in the cost of energy. </i>
could you list the initiatives of the Obama administration that promoted the reduction in energy costs? Their stated goal was to raise the cost of energy to be more like the costs in Europe.
↧
↧
Comment on Climate change as a political process by John Smith (it's my real name)
Gary M
I started to click in approval of your response to pope above
glad I saw this first
“default progressive”
“eyes opened on ‘climate change’ ”
describes me
ouch
I can take it
though painful, well said
↧
Comment on Climate change as a political process by ordvic
Blanco refused to act … Govenor’s indecision cost precious time
↧
Comment on Climate change as a political process by R Graf
Humility = key.
Openness for revelation’s quash — a necessary price for validity.
↧
Comment on Week in review by timg56
Well said Craig.
Which begs the question – How does one reach common ground with someone whose believe system is not rooted in the real world, but in one they wish would exist?
↧
↧
Comment on Climate change as a political process by JustinWonder
RiH008
“…what do you expect people to do the next time politicians tell us the sky is falling and you need to pay-up and this will hurt? ”
Yes, though this knowledge is already stored in the language in the expression “the sky is falling”. We also have that info encapsulated in the story “The Boy Who Cried Wolf”. This is not new, it is just being expressed in academic speech via a credible, to some, vehicle – a PhD dissertation. The amusing, yet frustrating, thing is that people inside this inner circle seem not to understand how it is perceived from the outside. We all have our biasis, and our blind spots.
↧
Comment on Week in review by Don Monfort
Poor Eric. You are not going to get drastic CO2 mitigation by hollering that the climate changes and those frustrating your efforts are climate change deniers. It’s not working. There are at least 7 billion people in the world who are not losing sleep over climate change. We are not feeling the heat. The pause is killing the cause. Aided by the ineptness and the transparent dishonesty of the alarmist crowd.
↧
Comment on Climate change as a political process by RiHo08
Stephen Segrest
Katrina came ashore as a Category 3. 1800+ people died. The dikes broke. Federal monies given to the local councils (parishes) to maintain the dikes was siphoned off to feel good social programs. The mayor instituted NO emergency plan nor did he have one formulated. The Big Easy had no appetite for planning or getting busy, just give us the money and we’ll figure out what to do with it. And so they did. There is such a thing as prudence, in your speech, in your thinking, in your interaction with others, in handling of your finances. There are times to yell “fire.” When you are wrong, THEN you are accountable and you should think of what you did wrong. When you put all your eggs into the “model” basket, then expect to be held accountable; i.e., get fired.
Bye Bye Gavin. Bye Bye Barak.
↧
Comment on Snowpocalypse – not by rhhardin
I have put 350,000 miles on a bicycle, by the way. They work fine on roads. It took a few years but that’s the miles.
What you don’t want is other bike riders. Motorists are very friendly if you’re the first and only bicyclist they see.
↧
↧
Comment on Snowpocalypse – not by Rob Starkey
CNN has spreading the propaganda today putting panelist on who say science knows that storms will be more severe due to human released CO2.
↧
Comment on Snowpocalypse – not by curryja
Prescient . . . next post up is ‘tactical adaptation’ using weather forecasts
↧
Comment on Snowpocalypse – not by tonyb
Roger
If someone’s climate perspective started circa 1980 it is almost certain that you will find current events are unprecedented.
In the wider historical context however modern events invariably turn out to be merely part of recurring ‘patterns’.
tonyb
↧
Comment on Snowpocalypse – not by jim2
The 10:1 ratio of mass and no protection is one good reason to keep cars and bike separated.
↧
↧
Comment on Snowpocalypse – not by tonyb
kim
Are you referring here to that period of very few hurricanes in Atlanta during the civil war that was catalogued in ‘Gone with the Wind?’
tonyb
↧
Comment on Snowpocalypse – not by nickels
Not surprised that a dim wit (Cuomo) who wants to legislate intimate relations (yes means yes) would make dim witted statements about the weather and climate. Power, charisma and brains dont seem to mix.
↧
Comment on Snowpocalypse – not by Joshua
Seems to me that all the finger-pointing is just more sameolsameol. You go to war with the army you have.
We rely on forecasts because in the end, it’s better than not relying on forecasts.
Sometimes forecasts are going to be wrong. That’s why they call them forecasts, not hindcasts.
I can forecast that in the future, we will see partisans exploit forecasts so as to advance agendas – such as how “Dem politicos” are bad people.
Anyway…
But one model did get the forecast right. The revamped GFS model, which uses the latest technologies but is relatively untested, showed divergent results. It showed a distinctively more eastern track for the storm and has gotten snowfall totals and wind speeds right, so far. It also accurately predicted only 6-8 inches of snow for New York.
An old version of GFS was scrapped by the meteorological community because they found it had software hiccups, many “biases,” and ultimately, failed to provide accurate data for Hurricane Sandy in 2012. This prompted the federal government to fund a major upgrade to the system, which was just put online this month.
↧
More Pages to Explore .....
