Balancing The Climate Books

ScreenHunter_319 Jun. 25 17.00

Twitter / climatebrad: As @BarackObama said, all weather …

About stevengoddard

Just having fun
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

27 Responses to Balancing The Climate Books

  1. Andy Oz says:

    Like all religions, they are just not good with money.
    “All powerful, all knowing, all seeing, but just can’t handle money!” – George Carlin
    As soon as money is brought up, you know it’s a bullsh!t story.

  2. Andy DC says:

    They have swallowed the Kool Aid along with their fearless leader. It’s too late to save them now.

  3. Marian says:

    Weather influenced by air pollution. Well. It appears more air pollutions reduces certain extreme weather according to some new studies.

    The 1970s clean air act made things worse. We have heard it being blamed for increasing global Warming a few years back by some environmental scientists.

    Even Charlatan James Hansen the death trains of coal man. Was trying to claim the slowdown in warming was from Chinese emissions.

    So it’s time the White House changed it tunes. Since more ore less emissions it appears isn’t really going to change anything. 😉

  4. Raindog says:

    well, pollution is pollution and polluters should bear the full costs of rectifying their wastes whether or not it affects global temperatures. Go to Beijing and tell me pollution is fine.

    The principles of liberty say you are free to do whatever you like as long as it doesn’t infringe on my rights. Dumping mercury on your land and having it seep to mine is the same as dumping it on my land and burning sarin nerve gas on your land effects my ability to live.

    • CO2 is an essential building block of life. Only a complete moron would compare it to sarin gas.

      • Raindog says:

        I didn’t compare CO2 to nerve gas. I compared pollution, which is not CO2, but is something that some say is not harmful, to something that everyone would agree is harmful. The effects of industrial pollution cause more harm than CO2 ever can, obviously.

    • gator69 says:

      Your stupidity is killing millions. What should you pay for that?

    • tckev says:

      The Greenies insisted and got those stupid compact florescent bulbs to replace incandescent bulbs. Well every one of them has Mercury in them as well as a mix of other noxious metal salts. Soon they will be filling up land fills and seeping their toxic mess into your water courses.
      Greenie power the party of ill-considered consequences.

      • Raindog says:

        It should be obvious that CFL bulbs were just a plot to make money. They contain mercury, produce poor quality light in about half their advertised output and last up to 10 times less than their advertised life.

        In addition, the mere production of them consumes a lot more energy than an incandescent bulb. The only bulb worthwhile besides incandescent are some of the new LED bulbs.

        • tckev says:

          And production of LEDs entails what in term of energy and very dangerous chemicals. Remember we are talking about production of 100s of millions.
          And for what(?) to replace a tungsten element bulbs that were(are) cheap to produce easily recyclable and largely nonpolluting in both manufacture and at the end of its life.

          The CFL are a huge hazard awaiting its day

    • Mike says:

      Smog is an abused word, much like weather and climate. It’s got nothing to do with the ppm of CO2. Smog is not even pollution per se, smog is just higher concentrations of certain existing gases and particulate due to a lack of ventilation on a grand scale.

      In Beijing for example the lack of wind and rain to a lesser degree, is allowing exhaust emissions build up from two stroke engines, diesel buses and cars idling. Humans can normally tolerate the emissions of engines and soot. But due to the lack of ventilation(wind) it’s a bit like going into your garage and standing with your engine running and the door closed. Not recommended.

      On the other hand the smog in Singapore at present is caused by fires in neighbouring Indonesia. The fires produce rich nutrients for the soil so that smog is technically very beneficial for the planet. It’s the smoke(soot content) can affect people (irritate lungs).

      Smog will always be a natural occurence as long as you have cities that have virtually zero wind for prolonged periods.There are simply two choices to combat smog.

      1. The cheap option. Outdoors the individual can use breathing masks that filters the emissions.

      2. Urban planners, scientists need to come up with mega projects that can ventilate and dampen down particulates to desired levels. Seems unlikey.

      Yet scientists talk about reducing CO2 by using carbon sequestration on a global scale so increasing wind speed / ventilation in cities like Beijing must be doable.

    • Marian says:

      Unfortunately when it comes to mercury. Yes it’s toxic and yes it’s poisonous.

      Problem is Mother Nature emits mercury also. If you’re a nation of volcanic origin. Then you will have natural higher level of mercury. NZ is one such country.The ocean sea bed has more of a concentration of it.

      Every Volcanic eruption emits mercury!!

      I find it blatant hypocrisy from Greenie environmentalists who camapaigned against reducing mercury in landfills from say batteries. And promote mercury based products. I.E lightbulbs to save the planet from AGW/CC. When those lightbulbs in the end still go into landfill!!

      • Raindog says:

        You’re absolutely correct. Volcanic emissions are exactly the same as my neighbor gathering all the mercury and (lets add this in for fun) lead he can find and dumping it in an area where rainwater will bring it all down to my ponds. I agree 100%. He should also be able to start fires on his property in a way that it will spread to my property, as it is his right to burn all of his property if he wants to.

  5. slimething says:

    Raindog is going to make nature pay for dumping mercury on his land?

    • Latitude says:

      raindog….is skypony in disguise

    • Raindog says:

      Apparently everyone on here has the reading comprehension of a down syndromed toddler. My original post never once mentioned CO2. It mentioned pollution. Perhaps everyone suffered a Freudian slip and they believe CO2 to be a pollutant.

      To clarify, I meant the type of pollution that now requires constant monitoring by duPont in their Antioch plant because their chemicals that are extremely toxic to life are moving towards the underground water source that supplies clean water to hundreds of thousands of people, and when it does reach it, it can make those people extremely sick.

      I also meant pollutants like the mercury that was applied by the ton to almost every gold mine in the west during the gold rush and that now makes fish from those areas unsafe to eat. Mining companies know now the dangers, but did not 100 years ago, but now we are the ones left with the burden of cleanup.

      Look at LA in the 70’s. It’s has vastly superior air quality today. It used to look like beijing does today.

      Again, I made no mention of CO2 in my original post. Poor reading comprehension apparently is a required prerequisite for posting things here…

      • Perhaps you shouldn’t have posted on a CO2 thread?

      • Latitude says:

        raindog, what exactly do you think Brad Johnson was referring to when he paraphrased Obama?

      • “…Perhaps everyone suffered a Freudian slip and they believe CO2 to be a pollutant…”

        I guess the SCOTUS is included in the “…down syndromed toddler…” column, then:

        “…Massachusetts v. Environmental Protection Agency, 549 U.S. 497 (2007), is a U.S. Supreme Court case decided 5-4 in which twelve states and several cities of the United States brought suit against the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to force that federal agency to regulate carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases (GHGs) as pollutants…”

  6. Curt says:

    Should farmers and foresters be forced to pay large CO2 emitters for the increased growth they get from enhanced CO2 levels?

  7. Since I expel CO2 with every breath, I’m willing to capture and sequester those particular CO2 molecules that can be traced back to me.

    But, since CO2 is considered “well mixed”, I might accidentally capture a few Chinese molecules along with them – and that might just start an international incident.

    /sarc, just in case…

  8. gofer says:

    When they start out with a lie, buy referring to it as “carbon” and not carbon dioxide, there is no reason to believe other lies will not follow. “Carbon” just sounds dirty and people think of soot. This is massively misleading and they can’t even be honest about the very basics.

  9. Chris BC says:

    Steve, I am very disappointed that there wasn’t a third reply tweet mentioning the ever extending record between major U.S. hurricanes…

  10. Nia says:

    oh man, your tweets are sooooo re-tweet worthy

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s