Political Wrinkles  

Go Back   Political Wrinkles > General Discussion > Climate Change & The Environment
Register FAQDonate PW Store PW Trivia Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Climate Change & The Environment Discuss EPA Head wants to debate C.C. on TV at the General Discussion; Originally Posted by ShivaTD This has already been addressed on television. https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q...=0&FORM=VDQVAP The Koch Brothers funded a red team - ...

Reply
 
Share LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11 (permalink)  
Old 07-13-2017, 08:55 AM
PW Enlightenment
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,747
Thanks: 7,308
Thanked 6,169 Times in 3,750 Posts
Default Re: EPA Head wants to debate C.C. on TV

Quote:
Originally Posted by ShivaTD View Post
This has already been addressed on television.

https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q...=0&FORM=VDQVAP

The Koch Brothers funded a red team - blue team study conducted at the UC Berkley and to their dismay the red team (AGW skeptics) were firmly convinced the planet is getting warmer at the projected rates by the climate change models establishing that the scientific models are highly accurate, and that man is responsible for the climate change.

This is the same conclusion that 97% of all climatologists have reached. The 3% of scientists that don't agree with AGW are not challenging AGW in the scientific community but instead are just unwilling to agree with it.

Unless there is some science shattering revelation that changes the laws of physics the scientific acceptance of anthropogenic global warming theory (AGW) is virtually absolute leaving no further room for debate outside of the scientific community where no one is actually challenging the climate models.

The only question is what is the US, the single largest producer of CO2 pollution of any nation since the 1950's and the highest per capita CO2 polluter of all major nations today, going to do to curb our atmospheric pollution?

This has nothing to do with any other nation. it's a United States issue. The excess CO2 (i.e. CO2 in excess of what the plant life of the United States can recycle back into a solid state) we're allowing is a violation of the Natural Rights of the people of all other nations on the planet.

Ironically "green jobs" are the fastest growing economic group in the United States. It's at an 18% growth rate and this year should add over 600,000 manufacturing and service sector jobs. We can compare this to the declining number of all jobs related to the coal industry where about 50,000 are involved in mining of coal with another 60,000 in other coal related jobs such as transportation and energy production at coal fired power plants. The number of coal jobs is not declining because of regulations adversely affecting the burning of coal but instead is being driven by economic forces because natural gas is much less expensive to use as a fuel.

"Going Green" by dramatically reducing the CO2 pollution by the United States is where the light shines because "Green" is not just the color of a better environment it's also the color of money.
The US is not the largest producer of greenhouse gasses, including CO2. China is. And Europe is catching up. I realize you included the modifier 50 years back. Which means we are actually doing better than many nations.

An example of liars figuring.,

So still the question, if it's so cut and dried and settled science, why would the grant getters resist national debate? Unless it isn't.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to jimbo For This Useful Post:
  #12 (permalink)  
Old 07-15-2017, 12:32 AM
mlurp's Avatar
PW Enlightenment
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Flatlands
Gender: Male
Posts: 36,290
Thanks: 18,060
Thanked 10,347 Times in 8,073 Posts
Default Re: EPA Head wants to debate C.C. on TV

Actually I read today that since the Industrial age began the world temperature has risen one degree, but that might have been fake news..
__________________



_ ... _ Improvise-Adapt-Over Come ... _ ...
Reply With Quote
  #13 (permalink)  
Old 07-15-2017, 01:14 AM
ShivaTD's Avatar
Progressive Libertarian
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Immigrant to Arizona
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,910
Thanks: 1,422
Thanked 2,092 Times in 1,647 Posts
Default Re: EPA Head wants to debate C.C. on TV

Quote:
Originally Posted by jimbo View Post
The US is not the largest producer of greenhouse gasses, including CO2. China is.
China only produces more CO2 than the US by a single measurement category (total annual CO2 production) and the US lead in that category until about 2003.

Other measurement categories that are of more significance are historical CO2 production and per capita CO2 production.

Based upon historical CO2 production just since 1965 the United States has produced 2.25-times more CO2 when compared to China.

Measured on a per capita basis, the most accurate measurement of CO2 production, the US is currently producing 2.1 times more CO2 when compared to China today.

Unfortunately. because I believe in natural law based upon the survival of the (human) species, I believe the most important scientific data that can't be manipulated politically isn't being furnished. That's the data by country that quantifies the ability of nature within the territorial borders of a country to recycle the CO2, a pollutant, back into it's separate components of oxygen for the atmosphere and carbon back into a solid state where neither of the two components are pollutants.

No person or nation has a "Right to Pollute" but nature does allow some pollution based upon nature's ability to recycle a pollutant back into a non-polluting state. With CO2 is nature's ability to recycle CO2 by separating it's two components back into pure oxygen and solidified carbon.

Based upon countries the country only has a right to create the CO2 that nature within the country can recycle back into it's non-polluting natural state. If any country exceeds this amount then it's generating excess CO2 that violating the Rights of the People of other countries.

I have no idea how much CO2 the plant life in the United States can break back down into oxygen and solid carbon but we do know that the US produced about 15 billion tonnes of CO2 in 2015 and that was many, many times more CO2 that the plant life could recycle. If we were to assume that the plant life in the US could recycle a billion tonnes of CO2 annually we'd have to cut our CO2 emissions by 80% just to prevent the US from violating the natural rights of other people around the world.

It's the countries of the world, including the US and China, that are violating the natural rights of people in other nations by producing more CO2 than nature allows based upon the territorial borders of the nations.

To me it's the violation of the rights of others established by natural law that is the concern. If nations including the United States weren't violating the Rights of Others by producing more CO2 than the natural processes of the nation allows we wouldn't be experiencing manmade global warming.
__________________
President Lincoln issued 64 pardons for war-related offences; 22 for conspiracy, 17 for treason, 12 for rebellion, 9 for holding an office under the Confederacy, and 4 for serving with the rebels.

The American Civil War was a White (WASP Male) Supremacist insurrection against the Constitutional government of the United States. Every American that served the Confederate cause was a TRAITOR and every White Supremacist today is a Traitor and a Terrorist.
Reply With Quote
  #14 (permalink)  
Old 07-15-2017, 07:57 AM
PW Enlightenment
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,747
Thanks: 7,308
Thanked 6,169 Times in 3,750 Posts
Default Re: EPA Head wants to debate C.C. on TV

Quote:
Originally Posted by mlurp View Post
Actually I read today that since the Industrial age began the world temperature has risen one degree, but that might have been fake news..
That could well be true. a one degree +/- variation in average temperature over a hundred years is well within mean past variation changes.

It also depends on how and where the temperature was recorded.

1 degree does not a crisis make.
Reply With Quote
  #15 (permalink)  
Old 07-15-2017, 08:05 AM
PW Enlightenment
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,747
Thanks: 7,308
Thanked 6,169 Times in 3,750 Posts
Default Re: EPA Head wants to debate C.C. on TV

Quote:
Originally Posted by ShivaTD;898488[B
]China only produces more CO2 than the US by a single measurement category (total annual CO2 production)[/B] and the US lead in that category until about 2003.

Other measurement categories that are of more significance are historical CO2 production and per capita CO2 production.

Based upon historical CO2 production just since 1965 the United States has produced 2.25-times more CO2 when compared to China.

Measured on a per capita basis, the most accurate measurement of CO2 production, the US is currently producing 2.1 times more CO2 when compared to China today.

Unfortunately. because I believe in natural law based upon the survival of the (human) species, I believe the most important scientific data that can't be manipulated politically isn't being furnished. That's the data by country that quantifies the ability of nature within the territorial borders of a country to recycle the CO2, a pollutant, back into it's separate components of oxygen for the atmosphere and carbon back into a solid state where neither of the two components are pollutants.

No person or nation has a "Right to Pollute" but nature does allow some pollution based upon nature's ability to recycle a pollutant back into a non-polluting state. With CO2 is nature's ability to recycle CO2 by separating it's two components back into pure oxygen and solidified carbon.

Based upon countries the country only has a right to create the CO2 that nature within the country can recycle back into it's non-polluting natural state. If any country exceeds this amount then it's generating excess CO2 that violating the Rights of the People of other countries.

I have no idea how much CO2 the plant life in the United States can break back down into oxygen and solid carbon but we do know that the US produced about 15 billion tonnes of CO2 in 2015 and that was many, many times more CO2 that the plant life could recycle. If we were to assume that the plant life in the US could recycle a billion tonnes of CO2 annually we'd have to cut our CO2 emissions by 80% just to prevent the US from violating the natural rights of other people around the world.

It's the countries of the world, including the US and China, that are violating the natural rights of people in other nations by producing more CO2 than nature allows based upon the territorial borders of the nations.

To me it's the violation of the rights of others established by natural law that is the concern. If nations including the United States weren't violating the Rights of Others by producing more CO2 than the natural processes of the nation allows we wouldn't be experiencing manmade global warming.
Which makes your statement false.

The rest of this post is just a rambling attempt at a walk back.

What the hell is violation of the rights of others established by natural law which nature allows?
Reply With Quote
  #16 (permalink)  
Old 07-15-2017, 10:44 PM
mlurp's Avatar
PW Enlightenment
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Flatlands
Gender: Male
Posts: 36,290
Thanks: 18,060
Thanked 10,347 Times in 8,073 Posts
Default Re: EPA Head wants to debate C.C. on TV

Quote:
Originally Posted by jimbo View Post
That could well be true. a one degree +/- variation in average temperature over a hundred years is well within mean past variation changes.

It also depends on how and where the temperature was recorded.

1 degree does not a crisis make.
And I heard tonight on the NBC News Hour that passenger planes can't fly once the average air temp is 118 degrees or above that..

A good part of the world that fly is near that now at 116 degrees. So it will become a crisis soon. See we have yet to realize just how many things are affected by warming temp.

A simple search does the trick jimbo.. Try that over your present knowledge..

Quote:
There's a scientific reason why hot weather has grounded planes at Phoenix airport

Extreme heat at Phoenix airport is grounding planes.
Flights on smaller planes are particularly affected.
Hot weather makes air thinner, requiring more room to take off.

http://www.cnbc.com/2017/06/20/there...x-airport.html

Check Other Sites

https://nortonsafe.search.ask.com/we...ctype=&tpr=121

Here is just a few. They dwell on the human body but does mention a few other items.

Quote:
As temps rise what items are affected by the heat
https://nortonsafe.search.ask.com/we...ctype=&tpr=121
__________________



_ ... _ Improvise-Adapt-Over Come ... _ ...
Reply With Quote
  #17 (permalink)  
Old 07-15-2017, 11:02 PM
Surly's Avatar
PW Enlightenment
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Midwest
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,108
Thanks: 2,314
Thanked 2,595 Times in 2,006 Posts
Default Re: EPA Head wants to debate C.C. on TV

I flew out of LV once I know it was 110F or more. I cant remember what year it was. I never thought about the plane not taking off.
__________________
Originally Posted by MrLiberty View Post
Geez surly, are you that blind or just that dumb.
Reply With Quote
  #18 (permalink)  
Old 07-16-2017, 01:18 PM
mlurp's Avatar
PW Enlightenment
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Flatlands
Gender: Male
Posts: 36,290
Thanks: 18,060
Thanked 10,347 Times in 8,073 Posts
Default Re: EPA Head wants to debate C.C. on TV

Quote:
Originally Posted by Surly View Post
I flew out of LV once I know it was 110F or more. I cant remember what year it was. I never thought about the plane not taking off.



well the next time you fly in hot weather I bet you'll think about Surly.
__________________



_ ... _ Improvise-Adapt-Over Come ... _ ...
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to mlurp For This Useful Post:
  #19 (permalink)  
Old 07-16-2017, 01:24 PM
mlurp's Avatar
PW Enlightenment
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Flatlands
Gender: Male
Posts: 36,290
Thanks: 18,060
Thanked 10,347 Times in 8,073 Posts
Default Re: EPA Head wants to debate C.C. on TV

And to make sure Surly and other do think about it I will add this;


Quote:
Climate change is affecting all life on Earth – and that’s not good news for humanity

UF assistant professor Brett Scheffers discusses his recent study, in conjunction with more than a dozen authors from other universities and nongovernmental organizations, that shows the footprint of climate change already is vast as species try to adapt to rising temperatures.

More than a dozen authors from different universities and nongovernmental organizations around the world have concluded, based on an analysis of hundreds of studies, that almost every aspect of life on Earth has been affected by climate change.

In more scientific parlance, we found in a paper published in Science that genes, species and ecosystems now show clear signs of impact. These responses to climate change include species’ genome (genetics), their shapes, colors and sizes (morphology), their abundance, where they live and how they interact with each other (distribution). The influence of climate change can now be detected on the smallest, most cryptic processes all the way up to entire communities and ecosystems.

Some species are already beginning to adapt. The color of some animals, such as butterflies, is changing because dark-colored butterflies heat up faster than light-colored butterflies, which have an edge in warmer temperatures. Salamanders in eastern North America and cold-water fish are shrinking in size because being small is more favorable when it is hot than when it is cold. In fact, there are now dozens of examples globally of cold-loving species contracting and warm-loving species expanding their ranges in response to changes in climate.

All of these changes may seem small, even trivial, but when every species is affected in different ways these changes add up quickly and entire ecosystem collapse is possible. This is not theoretical: Scientists have observed that the cold-loving kelp forests of southern Australia, Japan and the northwest coast of the U.S. have not only collapsed from warming but their reestablishment has been halted by replacement species better adapted to warmer waters.

Flood of insights from ancient flea eggs..

...................................... Continued At Site
http://news.ufl.edu/articles/2016/11...r-humanity.php


Plus do check out the Search Page for Other Related News on C.C., as the Search Was Broad

https://nortonsafe.search.ask.com/we...ctype=&tpr=121
__________________



_ ... _ Improvise-Adapt-Over Come ... _ ...
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to mlurp For This Useful Post:
  #20 (permalink)  
Old 07-16-2017, 07:41 PM
300 H and H's Avatar
newer isn't always better
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Western Iowa
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,189
Thanks: 7,335
Thanked 3,971 Times in 2,564 Posts
Default Re: EPA Head wants to debate C.C. on TV

I have to ask and wonder why if this were such truth, climate change, how the he11 did it become a partisan political issue?

For me that is an easy one. Politicians lie.

Regards, Kirk
__________________
NRA member since 1973, life member since 1986.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
debate, epa, head, wants

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:52 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.2.0