Assuming votes are counted.
Comment on Capitalism vs. the Climate by Oliver K. Manuel
↧
↧
Comment on Capitalism vs. the Climate by GaryM
No, James Hansen and his progressive congressional patrons started the whole global warming movement. It was political, and progressive, from the start. Other “climate scientists” just jumped on the funding train as it left the station. Confirmation bias and their own predilection for progressivism did the rest.
↧
Comment on Congressional Climate Briefing to Push “End of Climate Change Skepticism” by timg56
Ferd,
Actually it does not require, nor is it being proposed, the breaking of social contracts with people that in good faith contributed. every plan to reduce SS starts with adjusting the rules for those just now in the early stages of contributing. And lets say they raise the age from 65 to 67 or 70? I’m much closer to the retirement age than I am to the just now contributing stage and I do not see such an action as breaking faith or a contract. But then I’m one of those perverted, disfunctional types who doesn’t believe it is the government’s job to take care of me.
↧
Comment on Capitalism vs. the Climate by randomengineer
Rubbish. For an example read Lucifer’s Hammer which although a novel makes the argument well enough — take away the tech and the societal niceties and we humans will have slaves and none of the more PC women’s lib (125 lb firefighters) etc as per what we humans can afford to do at the time. Change in condition isn’t fungible with the notion of change in human nature.
↧
Comment on Capitalism vs. the Climate by randomengineer
That’s because you haven’t done these things. You throw beer cans from a pickup bed, and you use at least a .38. Get it right. Geeez.
↧
↧
Comment on Capitalism vs. the Climate by andrew adams
Anteros,
It’s not true that no fossil fuel has remained unburnt over the last 23 years; clearly attempts to reduce emissions have not been nearly as successful as many of us have hoped but they have not been a complete failure either. Whether it will ultimately be politically possible to leave significant amounts of fossil fuel in the ground is open to debate – it is certainly very difficult, but not IHO impossible. However it’s certainly possible to disagree but still think that AGW is a real threat, it is just necessary in that case to consider what alternate actions will be required. Actually I would find this much more alarming rather than less.
As for the “assymetry” to speak of, you’re just plain wrong – at least in the direction you think it lies. It is simply untrue that my or MT’s positions are arrived at without the assistance of reason. It’s arrived at from considering an extremely extensive body of scientific research which overwhelmingly points to that conclusion. Maybe you have looked at it and come to a different conclusion, well I’m not going to try to persuade you you’re wrong – I think we both agree little will be achieved.
↧
Comment on Capitalism vs. the Climate by manacker
John Whitman
Got another “laying aside” for you:
Laying aside, for a moment to consider something else, my understanding that there have been no specific proposals to reduce human GHG emissions, which can be shown to have any perceptible theoretical impact on our planet’s climate
Max
↧
Comment on Ludecke et al. respond: Part II by steven
The energy can’t be eliminated. It is either going into the oceans at the flow rate expected or it isn’t.
↧
Comment on Capitalism vs. the Climate by kim
Clean togas all around. Those are not stains on them, they are stripes, earned ones.
=========
↧
↧
Comment on Capitalism vs. the Climate by GaryM
Chinese leaders are doing the same thing Goirbachev did with perestroika. And it will end the same way. Must I re-post the link to the massive ghost cities that the brilliant Chinese leaders have constructed?
When you start out with over a billion people living on less than $1,000 per year, and try to micro manage a new pseudo-capitalist economy, well, no one has done it successfully yet. And the signs are the Chinese are not faring any better than the Russians did.
They are already experiencing large scale civil unrest throughout the country, even int the fairly centralized prosperous areas. Economic freedom is necessary for a successful economy. Economic freedom leads inevitably to the desire for political freedom. (Just ask Gorbachev.)
When their economic bubble bursts it is going to make our depression look like economic heaven.
↧
Comment on Capitalism vs. the Climate by M. carey
I never thought of it that way. What a clever scheme ! We see to it that future generations will be doing something for us without us doing anything for them.
↧
Comment on Capitalism vs. the Climate by GaryM
We should all chip in and buy Joshua some reading glasses.
Or are just being pedantic constantly trying to conflate CAGW with AGW?
↧
Comment on Capitalism vs. the Climate by manacker
Naomi did an even better job that Donna in getting all kinds of folks to come out from under their rocks and expose themselves to the light.
But (on second thought) it’s really Judith that did it…
Max
↧
↧
Comment on Capitalism vs. the Climate by Speed
<a href="http://www.freakonomics.com/2011/11/16/agnostic-carnivores-and-global-warming-why-enviros-go-after-coal-and-not-cows/" rel="nofollow">Agnostic Carnivores and Global Warming: Why Enviros Go After Coal and Not Cows</a>
<blockquote>
Forget ending dirty coal or natural gas pipelines. As the <a href="http://www.worldpreservationfoundation.org/Downloads/ReducingShorterLivedClimateForcersThroughDietaryChange.pdf" rel="nofollow">WPF report</a> shows, veganism offers the single most effective path to reducing global climate change.
For all the passion fueling his efforts, though, there’s something weirdly amiss in [McKibbon's] approach to reducing greenhouse gas emissions: neither he nor 350.org will actively promote a vegan diet.
</blockquote>
↧
Comment on Capitalism vs. the Climate by kim
To me, it is amazing that the western partner there could pick up the eastern spouse, rehabilitate it at such huge expense, and the pair still be the powerhouse of European finance et industrie.
Could it happen in Korea? You betcha. What’s that economic model now, again?
============
↧
Comment on Research ethics training by David Young
M Carey, You are so full of it. McIntyre’s detailed and careful dissection of the Mann investigation is so obviously correct. I note that you lurk and try to insert comments when no one is watching. I won’t let this one go. Penn State did not even investigate the allogations against Mann and instead simply said: He is respected by his peers, therefore he could not have been guilty of misconduct. This is just nonsense.
↧
Comment on Research ethics training by Labmunkey
Exactly. The emails, files and data you generate at work are NOT YOUR PROPERTY. They are the property of your work/institution/funding body.
Everything in those emails is able to be, and IS read by your IT team. It is archived. It is backed up (unless you work for the CRU).
You can be disciplined, fired and PROSECUTED for ANYTHING you put in your emails. Whether they were meant for personal use or not.
This is in the end user agreement everyone signs when you start a new job. I suggest people read it more carefully in the future.
↧
↧
Comment on Research ethics training by Labmunkey
Repeated investigations that didn’t actually look into the emails, the data or ANY of the accusations raised.
Yup. I’m convinced.
↧
Comment on Letter to the dragon slayers by Pete Ridley
Hi Professor Curry, I see that you have a mention in the Climategate 2.0 E-mail release. “ .. Mann: I gave up on Judith Curry a while ago. I don’t know what she think’s she’sdoing, but its not helping the cause .. ” (http://wattsupwiththat.com/).
This release couldn’t have come at a better time, just ahead of the UN’s COP17 disaster in Durban.
It is claimed that in those newly released E-mails Dr. Mann repeatedly makes reference to “the cause” which presumably is referring to ensuring as far as possible that his “Hockey Team” wins.
Best regards, Pete Ridley
↧
Comment on Research ethics training by Labmunkey
Additionally. IN the 2 years (?) since climate gate NO EVIDENCE of a hack has been found.
I agree with RE, a hacker would have destroyed the servers, this was no hack.
↧
More Pages to Explore .....
