EPA's Lisa Jackson

[future pather]

Lisa explains the EPA's direction under the new administration

Yahoo!

[TRON]

INFO: Global Warming Facts

the absorption rate of CO2 related to Infrared Heat Absorption is logarithmic

Example: paint a pc of glass with a coat of white paint. this first coat will eliminate a large amount of light passing through..now that it is dry, put a second coat over the first...an equal amount of light will not be blocked as in the first coat, but some more light WILL be blocked from passing through...on the third coat even less will be blocked..at some point, maybe the fourth or sixth coat,,, all visible light will be blocked...additional coats of paint will have no effect because there is no more light passing through.
The representation of this is a logarithmic curve that in the top right quadrant of a graph, will initially rise rapidly as it moves to the right over time, but will slow and eventually flatline...
this is an analogy to the way CO2 absorbs infrared heat in our environment. It can only absorb an initial amount then tapers off until it can no longer absorb heat.
We went from 270 Parts per million of CO2 to our current level of 380 Parts Per Million...and we are at the infrared absorption limit already...any more CO2 added to the environment will NOT result in an increase of temperature or heat in our atmosphere.

The effects of CO2 on cloud cover and water vapor in the air are different. NASA observational data (not faulty computer models) is showing that clouds react to do the opposite of what the global warming people say they do.
According to the supporters of the theory that we can create conditions that will result in a catastrophic runaway effect the clouds cause more heat during heating conditions and more cooling during cooling conditions... but the actual result is that clouds serve to regulate and oppose the effects of warming conditions, by cooling the area below.

Observational science is highly favorable over junk science (Computer models) and these models are what the Global Warming panic is based on.
In addition, there was NEVER a consensus of scientists on this issue and still we see a majority of scientists actually stating that there is no supporting evidence to support previous computer models.

Also, Global warming proponents assume something called "Global Average Temperature" which is a faulty measurement used to promote the concept that the earth is warming when actually a mathmatical average of the STATE of a surface is not possible. Only the average of a FIXED QUANTITY is possible. The issue of trying to get a global average temperature to define the climate is very problematic because there are other factors such as, humidity, wind, cloud cover, brightness, darkness, ocean currents, evaporation, rainfall... and the list goes on. a simple measurement of temperature can never be used to gauge the condition of the earths climate

For a more robust understanding of this topic please go to:
http://nicenecouncil.com/media/podca...d_Bad_Ugly.mp3

or checkout: Cornwall Alliance :: Articles :: Important Developments on Global Warming in 2006

[ashtweth]

More woman in control SAWRY, SAD but TRUE

[Joit]

Maybe another 'good' Reason, that they can give you a CO2 Emission Tax?

[future pather]

Hmmm, if I understand correctly you all seem to be promoting business as usual(?)

Or perhaps some of you are jealous thinking you had the corner market on moving to clean energy(?)

Lisa again on Bill Maher:

YouTube - [HQ] Real Time with BIll Maher - 10/02/2009 - PART 1 of 5 // FULL episode

[broli]

All I hear is blablabla % blablabla millions blablabla children blablabla precious capitalism.

I hope anyone who has reached this forum has realized for a long time now that this planet is ran on greed, corruption and control. It's quite fascinating that it's still running actually, but admiring grand failure is not smart.

Most of us know that the "insert name here"-crisis is one big scam. Especially the energy one. If we remain on this course and not forcefully change the world ourselves these idiots at the top will doom us all.

[future pather]

If we remain on this course and not forcefully change the world ourselves these idiots at the top will doom us all.

So anarchy is your only desire?

How would you propose to change things by force as you desire?

[broli]

Massively supporting people in the alternative energy and medicine area would be a good start. We don't need any government to do this. This can be done through donations of all kind, whether it's equipment, man power or monetary (which imo has the lowest value). We could build our own research institutions where everyone who supports open technology development is welcome. This developed technology in turn skips the whole capitalistic method so it can be used by the masses asap.

Am I the only one who gets mad to see potential get wasted. Countless researchers here don't have the right equipment or facility to do REAL science efficiently.

I'm not the best at talking so I usually get carried away by my emotions. I might have come across aggressive but I'm just sick and tired of the current un ending trend we are in, which to me is completely unbelievable.

[future pather]

I'm just trying to cut to the point of what you are getting at.

So far it seems to be: Send me your money!

[broli]

What the...am I talking to a brick wall here? Are you even trying to understand what I'm saying or are you just mad because I didn't praise your EPA topic?

Let the people who do the actual research give their opinion because your closed mind is in the way!

[future pather]

I am letting you.

[broli]

I don't consider myself a researcher. On the other hand there are people here who built things out of toilet paper rolls and tin foil who I believe can achieve much more with the needed resources.

I'm willing to help them in any way I am able to but one man isn't enough. We all have to support each other and preferably in groups under one roof.

I ranked money the last as a means for supporting THEM, so I don't know why you paraphrased that as wanting people to send ME money ONLY.

I thought what I said was the common opinion on this board. Maybe I'm just delusional and the current world is perfectly fine as it is.

[future pather]

time= $

equiptment = $

I am for the advancement of clean technology. I don't care who achieves it.

You send them your $ if you want to. I'll do what I think is best with mine. How about that?

I don't mean any offense to anyone working on their own technology.

But when I see advancement I think it's a good thing and enjoy sharing about it with anyone who sees it the same way.

You get on my thread about that and talk about force and state "We all have to support each other." No one has to support anyone just 'cause you say so.

And, most importantly, my thread isn't about not supporting anyone in the first place.

[broli]

Wow, amazing.

[future pather]

Maybe another 'good' Reason, that they can give you a CO2 Emission Tax?

If by "us" you mean big business . . .she couldn't have been more clear anyone else is not their target.