The president decides to stick with 'climatism'

By STEVE GOREHAM

In President Obama’s remarks to the Democratic National Convention in Charlotte, he stated, “… My plan will continue to reduce the carbon pollution that is heating our planet — because climate change is not a hoax. More droughts and floods and wildfires are not a joke. They’re a threat to our children’s future. And in this election you can do something about it.”

The president’s remarks support the ideology of climatism — the belief that manmade greenhouse gases are destroying Earth’s climate.

Today, the world is in the grip of the madness of climatism. Our president and 191 other world leaders of the United Nations continue to pursue futile policies to stop global warming. Universities preach “sustainable development.” Companies tout their “green” programs. Schools teach our children that if we change light bulbs, we can save polar bears. But an increasing body of science shows that the theory of catastrophic manmade warming is nonsense. Climate change is natural, and car emissions are insignificant.

The president did not mention the Keystone Pipeline in his speech. In January 2012, he halted the $7 billion Keystone project on recommendation by the State Department in order to assess potential environmental harm. During the last months of 2011, thousands of protesters gathered in front of the White House to protest the Keystone project. They claimed that the oil the pipeline would transport from Canadian tar sands would cause irreversible global warming. Dr. James Hansen of NASA was one of those arrested at the demonstrations. Media pundits speculated that the president halted the pipeline to strengthen his political support with environmental groups. But could it be that Mr. Obama believes that halting the pipeline was the right policy to save the planet?

Who can blame the president for sticking with the theory of man-made global warming? Most of his leading advisors, including Environmental Protection Agency head Lisa Jackson, Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar, science guru John Holdren and Secretary of Energy Steven Chu, warn that mankind is destroying the climate. The EPA campaign to halt CO2 emissions from power plants, new vehicle mileage standards, subsidies for wind turbines and electric cars, the Solyndra solar cell debacle, the banning of incandescent light bulbs, the looming California high-speed rail boondoggle and ethanol vehicle fuel mandates are all policies driven by climatism.

The president’s use of the term “carbon pollution” is disappointing. Environmentalists inaccurately use this phrase to conjure up images of billowing smoke stacks, and the president has picked this up. The theory of manmade global warming claims that carbon dioxide, not carbon, causes climate change. Carbon dioxide is an invisible gas, while carbon is a black solid. Referring to carbon dioxide as “carbon” is as foolish as calling water “hydrogen” or salt “chlorine.” Compounds have totally different properties than their composing elements. Neither is carbon dioxide pollution. It’s an odorless, harmless gas that green plants need for photosynthesis. Carbon dioxide is a foundation for life on Earth along with oxygen and water.

Carbon dioxide is a trace gas. Only four of every 10,000 air molecules are CO2. It’s estimated that the amount of carbon dioxide that mankind added in all of human history is only a fraction of one of these four molecules. The idea that mankind’s tiny contribution to a trace atmospheric gas can cause hurricanes, tornadoes, droughts, floods and wildfires is not a joke, it’s incredible.

Contrary to much of the recent press, a look at history shows that this summer’s drought was not unprecedented in these United States. The droughts of the 1930s and 1950s lasted longer and experienced higher temperatures. According to the State Climate Extremes Database of the National Climatic Data Center (NCDC), 37 of the 50 state high-temperature records dated prior to 1960, with 22 of these from the decade of the 1930s. Only one state high-temperature record was recorded during the last 16 years. Additional data on droughts and floods from the NCDC show no increasing trend over the last 100 years. Nature drives droughts and floods, not manmade emissions of carbon dioxide.

The president’s statement is remarkable in another way. He implies that we should vote for him because he can control droughts, floods and wildfires to safeguard “our children’s future.”

During a speech in June 2008, he implied that he could slow the rise of the seas. What’s next, regulation of snowfall? If Mr. Obama is re-elected and with bipartisan support in Congress and approval of the United Nations, look for the Snowfall Abatement Act of 2014.

=============================================================

Steve Goreham is executive director of the Climate Science Coalition of America and author of the new book “The Mad, Mad, Mad World of Climatism: Mankind and Climate Change Mania.”

Advertisements

  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
Alvin

Thank you Steve.

Martin457

Let’s go ahead and continue this war on the poor of the world.
The rich will just pay their bills and continue on.
The poor will have to decide how many meals they will have to miss in a month so that they can keep what little food they have from spoiling.
Stupid Mules.

OssQss

In his own words…….
Remember to vote!
If you don’t, you did!

R. Shearer

I prefer the solid transparent form of carbon myself.

Dung

It is sad to see such a prominent world leader demonstrate such a total inability to judge issues rationally and objectively.

Those almost four CO2 molecules per 10,000 air molecules are in dry air, assuming perfect global mixing (although of course certain regions produce most of it).
By contrast, the concentration of water vapor, the main greenhouse gas, varies by about a factor of 1000 (from .4 to 400 parts per 10,000), but on average it’s around 100 molecules per 10,000 (typically ranging 50 to 200 over most of our wet planet). This approximately 25 times more common greenhouse gas essentially swamps the IR reradiative effect of CO2.

Chuck Nolan

Boggles the mind
cn

OssQss

I will ask again,,,,,, how much of the 1.4 degree temperature delta over the last 160 years carry’s attribution towards CO2?
Just sayin ,,,,
I think we have a better chance to determine the impact velocity relating to a strap failure associated with this type of thing, no?
Think about it!

u.k.(us)

Gonna have to do better than that diatribe, to win this one.

Louis

Whatever reason President Obama has for declaring war on “carbon”, it’s not because he’s concerned about “our children’s future.” No one concerned about our children’s future would forge their signatures on over $5 trillion of new debt. Our children will be on the hook for huge debts that benefited Obama cronies but were of little or no benefit to them.

Roger Carr

An expansion on this theme picked up on Bishop Hill, heightening my fear of fools in high places:

But also, it emerged because the possibility of being responsible for saving the planet is far more attractive a proposition to the vacuous politician than is responding to a disconnected constituency’s wants and needs.

Climate Resistance

Jeff D

Martin457 says:
September 28, 2012 at 8:05 pm
Let’s go ahead and continue this war on the poor of the world.
The rich will just pay their bills and continue on.
The poor will have to decide how many meals they will have to miss in a month so that they can keep what little food they have from spoiling.
Stupid Mules.
——————————–
Not really worth a reply but hey i got some free time right now. The US has a meager 5% of the world population and supplies 25% of all the world foreign aid. I and my wife have worked 6 days a week for the last 8 years running a small business and are just barely surviving in an economy that is total crap. You seem to have a real passion for helping the poor of the world. Instead of you wasting your time here might I suggest you donate your life to one of the volunteer groups.
Hell I am tempted to close the business down. I can qualify easily for disability so I can get free food and an Obamaphone and not have to work at all. I don’t get the security of a steady paycheck like the government employees if sales are crap next week I don’t get paid. Just a guess but betting you have never worked and you sure as hell were not self employed.
So yeah, maybe I am a stupid mule but when I get up in the morning and go to work I will have my self respect. Will you?

We all know the reason President Obama added the comments about “climatism” to his acceptance speech – money.
“…A group of Democratic donors have announced they’ll withhold some of their financial support from President Obama’s re-election campaign for not speaking out more about climate change. The group of roughly 100 political donors say Obama should directly address this comment by Republican rival Mitt Romney made last week during his acceptance speech in Tampa – “…President Obama promised to begin to slow the rise of the oceans and to heal the planet. My promise is to help you and your family…”
http://www.alternet.org/environment/democratic-donors-withhold-contributions-over-absence-climate-change-obama-campaign?paging=off
So let’s see – a major candidate sees a possibility of losing campaign money, sees the light, and adds comments to his speech.
Maybe he’s right about one thing: “…in this election you can do something about it…”

Roger Carr

Re-thinking the words in my comment, above (heightening my fear of fools in high places), I realize they were simplistic.
     These are not fools; they are highly sophisticated entrepreneurs in their chosen field, politics.
     My fear should be their selfishness, their total lack of morals and human compassion, and their success in pursuing their twisted dreams of personal power.

Gunga Din

Dung says:
September 28, 2012 at 8:15 pm
It is sad to see such a prominent world leader demonstrate such a total inability to judge issues rationally and objectively.
====================================================================
He’s a politician with an agenda. That agenda is his center reference. CO2 is just a convenient lever.

Martin457

@Jeffd
Although I spent most of my life in maintenance and water treatment, when I went into a couple volunteer groups, they were already filled with those that seeked to benifit themselves from belonging to those groups so, I discontinued that effort.
My current household does qualify for ‘gubmint’ benefits but, I don’t accept handouts.
If the current “Chicken Littles” and their prophets of doom that has plagued humanity ever since civilization has existed would have acceptance for others ways, the world would be a better place. But no. Humanity is to blame for all that ails us and all have to pay and it’s the poor that have to pay the most.
I would much rather somebody win the H-Prize that Bush came up with. Pay for results rather than just give out money to somebody and hope they come up with something that works like Oh-Blah-Blah.
People like you are really annoying in your selfness.
I don’t waste time here, I learn about actual science. Not political crap spewed by “PROPHETS OF DOOM”.

Justthinkin

You know,it’s getting to the point where Obambam and the US should be declared a threat to humanity,

Jeff D. regarding Martin 457’s comment:
“What all the [ideological crusades of the twentieth-century] have in common is their moral exaltation of the anointed above others, who are to have their very different views nullified and superseded by the views of the anointed, imposed via the power of government….[S]everal key elements have been common to most of them:
1. Assertions of a great danger to the whole of society, a danger to which the masses of people are oblivious.
2. An urgent need for action to avert impending catastrophe.
3. A need for government to drastically curtail the dangerous behavior of the many, in response to the prescient conclusions of the few.
4. A disdainful dismissal of arguments to the contrary as either uninformed, irresponsible, or motivated by unworthy purposes.”
The above is from Thomas Sowell’s book The Vision of the Anointed, page 5.

Brian Johnson uk

Don’t mean to be rude but your President is really dumb. He must be surrounded by sycophants.
Mind you we have Cameron who has turned out to be apathetic wimp…..

Gunga Din

Jeff D says:
September 28, 2012 at 9:27 pm
==========================================================
I hate to put it like this, but, “I feel you pain”.
(I know WUWT has a worldwide audience and “liberal” means different things in different countries. I’m using it in the US sense.)
Someone once said, “A liberal is someone who feels a great debt to his fellow man and is determined to pay that debt using your money.”
There’s nothing wrong with wanting to help someone in need (depending on the motive). There is something very wrong with forcing someone else to do it because you think they should and you think they can afford it because they have one dime more than you do.
I’m a government employee. Every month the Union takes some of the money I earned and uses it to support politicians I wouldn’t vote for if they ran unopposed. Direct your ire at the the unions and the politicians, not all of the government employees. We get shafted too.

Roger Carr:
“Re-thinking the words in my comment, above (heightening my fear of fools in high places), I realize they were simplistic.
These are not fools; they are highly sophisticated entrepreneurs in their chosen field, politics.
My fear should be their selfishness, their total lack of morals and human compassion, and their success in pursuing their twisted dreams of personal power”
You see Roger, all politicos are altruistic dispensers of the “public good” and self-interest is in no way involved. Try this:
“[Peter] Stillman … points out that those who see “a strong central government or a strong ruler” as a solution implicitly assume that “the ruler will be a wise and ecologically aware altruist,” even though these same theorists presume that the users of CPRs [common-pool resources] will be myopic, self-interested, and ecologically unaware hedonists.” – Governing the Commons, Elinor Ostrom, page 218

Askwhyisitso?

Now look what he’s, Obama i.e., done. Now our PM Gillard will tells us the Americans are leading the way and we have to follow them, again.
JeffD – Do you have electricity, running water, food and shelter; of course you do. There are people in this world that live in mud huts with none of these things. Do you think your life is really that hard?
It’s not the US or other developed countries that will suffer it is the poor countries that Martin457 was talking about. They need cheap energy to improve their lives and controlling the type of energy that is used controls the country. Are you so blind you cannot see.

Billy

If mr. Obama has the ability to control the weather why did he allow the mid-west drought this summer? Just asking.

Ted

He said his plan will “continue to reduce the carbon” ?
What does he mean by “continue”?
Has it been reduced at all?
I thought that C02 levels were still going up?

alan

The ways of the “Messiah” are inscrutable. Just saying.

It appears we have two Mr. Fix-Its running for president.
Optimism?

Gunga Din

Askwhyisitso? says:
September 28, 2012 at 11:02 pm
Now look what he’s, Obama i.e., done. Now our PM Gillard will tells us the Americans are leading the way and we have to follow them, again.
JeffD – Do you have electricity, running water, food and shelter; of course you do. There are people in this world that live in mud huts with none of these things. Do you think your life is really that hard?
It’s not the US or other developed countries that will suffer it is the poor countries that Martin457 was talking about. They need cheap energy to improve their lives and controlling the type of energy that is used controls the country. Are you so blind you cannot see.
==============================================================
Let me see if I’ve got this straight.
Martin457 was hard to follow. He seemed to be calling JeffD selfish because because JeffD’s (small?) business was suffering because of Obamanonics. He wasn’t thinking of “the poor” because he resented Obamanics trying to make him poor.
Askwhyitisso? says Martin457 wasn’t talking about US government handouts to its own but rather poor countries and JeffD should be happy about being rape… happy about the effect US liberals have had on his business since he can still flush his toilet.
Did I get that right?
Restricting or raising the cost of energy in the US or any other country for artificial reasons (CAGW) won’t do a thing to help the poor in the US or poor countries. CAGW and the UN’s IPCC are what needs to be flushed.
(JeffD is not selfish. He’s just trying to earn an honest living and is frustrated when he sees others leeching off of his efforts.)

Gunga Din

PS Did you ever read the story of “The Little Red Hen”?
ftp://sailor.gutenberg.lib.md.us/gutenberg/1/8/7/3/18735/18735-h/18735-h.htm

Jeff D

Gunga Din says:
————————
Sorry to have lumped all government employees into one. You are correct my apologies.
————————-
Askwhyisitso? says:
————————
I understand the dream you express. However I think that many people in the world or as far as that is concerned just the US really don’t understand how hard the last 4 years have been for small business. Sales have plummeted and operating cost keep increasing. When the economy crashed we saw a 40% drop in sales. After 4 years sales are still off 25%. I have spoken with many small businesses that have seen almost the same drop. My single largest expense are taxes. Last year I paid more in tax then I paid for stock. Small business is the heartbeat of the US economy and I am here to tell you that the heart is about to need a defibrillator just to stay alive.
That was too freaking long.. In short there is no money left.

Wellington

Steve, I believe the correct term is “scientific climatism” to distinguish this robust and mature ideology from early and scientifically deficient “utopian climatism”. There are precedents:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_communism
http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1880/soc-utop/ch01.htm
http://encyclopedia2.thefreedictionary.com/Utopian+Socialism

Brian H

Ted;
Actually, the US’ output has been falling, unlike the EU and China and India, because of the Great Recession and because Frac Gas has made NG its dominant new and replacement power generator fuel, displacing coal (half its energy comes from burning the H bits in CH4). If mankind’s influence on CO2 weren’t trivial, this would be regrettable. (Sea temps control CO2 emissions). CO2 is a massive net benefit, and should be subsidized, if anything.

Askwhyisitso?

Perhaps I tend to always look beyond the boundaries of a single country and I took the comments to be about the world and not just the US. I know you’re doing it hard, a lot harder than we are in Australia. Look on the bright side, Julia Gillard can never be the President of the US.

Edohiguma

It’s all about power. Obama marches in step with Agenda 21 and Rio+20. They all do. All our so called leaders do.

H.R.

Roger Carr says:
September 28, 2012 at 10:02 pm
“Re-thinking the words in my comment, above (heightening my fear of fools in high places), I realize they were simplistic.
These are not fools; they are highly sophisticated entrepreneurs in their chosen field, politics.
My fear should be their selfishness, their total lack of morals and human compassion, and their success in pursuing their twisted dreams of personal power.”

You are correct, sir. Why do candidates spend millions to get elected to jobs that pay $140,000 or so per year?

Aussie Luke Warm

You got Obama. We got Gillard. *sighs* all round.

Barbara

‘Because climate change is not a hoax …’
Interesting that he felt the need to say this.

R. Shearer says:
September 28, 2012 at 8:14 pm
“I prefer the solid transparent form of carbon myself.”
Crystallized carbon is a girls best friend.
Isn’t that a song?

john

Jeff D and everyone else, Jeff referred to the obamaphone. Here it is and be sure to watch the second short clip.
http://dailybail.com/home/obama-has-my-vote-he-gave-me-free-phone.html

Chuck

The Drought, the lack of hurricanes hitting the shores and the warmer climate are due to sunspot levels with in a sunspot cycle, within the century cycle of sunspot activity and that we have had sunspot activity for the last 300 years. How will this work as the conditions we are in last until 2035? Another 4 years of disaster are on their way if he gets back in.

Curiousgeorge

From The Decline and Fall of the American Republic (2010) ; Bruce Ackerman, Sterling Professor of Law and Political Science, Yale.
Sound familiar?
******************************************************************************
The evolving system of presidential nominations will lead to the election of an increasing number of charismatic outsider types who gain office by mobilizing activist support for extremist programs of the left or right; (2) all presidents, whether extremist or mainstream, will rely on media consultants to design streams of sound bites aimed at narrowly segmented micropublics, generating a politics of unreason that will often dominate public debate; (3) they will increasingly govern through their White House staff of superloyalists, issuing executive orders that their staffers will impose on the federal bureaucracy even when they conflict with congressional mandates; (4) they will engage with an increasingly politicized military in ways that may greatly expand their effective power to put their executive orders into force throughout the nation; (5) they will legitimate their unilateral actions through an expansive use of emergency powers, and (6) assert “mandates from the People” to evade or ignore congressional statutes when public opinion polls support decisive action; (7) they will rely on elite lawyers in the executive branch to write up learned opinions that vindicate the Constitutionality of their most blatant power grabs. These opinions will publicly rubber-stamp presidential actions months or years before the Supreme Court gets into the act . . . [w]ith . . . the president’s media machine generating a groundswell of support for his power grab, the Supreme Court may find it prudent to stage a strategic retreat, allowing the president to displace Congress and use his bureaucracy and military authority to establish a new regime of law and order. “

David Ball

It will be interesting to see if Obama blocks the televising of a movie that reveals much about his background and those he surrounds himself with. Obama and Fox have been at odds for some time now. Freedom of speech is something to be taken seriously. It will speak volumes if Fox is not allowed to air Obama2016 on Sunday night. Many say Obama was handed a political bag of crap when he was elected, but 4 years in, it is still not looking good for the average American.
The left in Canada seem to hate Harper, but not one has ever explained why when asked. I got one response on a social network that said he had “beady eyes”. Well, he should be thrown out for that!! (sarc).
Harper has a quiet and decisive strength that impresses me. The old “walk softly and carry a big stick”. Foreign policy, economics, and just the right amount of government. I consider myself fortunate to live in Canada as I look around the world. We are subject to the American economy in Canada, so I am hopeful that the American people think and research their choice for political leadership. It does affect the world and freedom.
Not a time for voter apathy. Not a time for “I don’t like any of the candidates”. Look very closely at your choices and be decisive America. It makes a difference. You make a difference.
My opinion only.

Billy says:
September 28, 2012 at 11:05 pm
If mr. Obama has the ability to control the weather why did he allow the mid-west drought this summer? Just asking.
========================================================
Because he hates people in fly-over country?
People, as much as I despise president Obama, we shouldn’t read to much into this statement. Recall, he was obliged to respond to Romney’s zinger in the RNC.

“Obama promised to begin to slow the rise of the oceans and heal the planet, my promise is to help you and your family.”

—- Mitt Romney
It isn’t so much the words, but the delivery was beautiful. But, other than that response, Obama hasn’t said much about it. He can’t. He knows its a losing issue. In this particular issue (CAGW) we’re winning. The danger is allowing Obama 4 more years. While Obama is woefully ignorant of the CAGW/CC issue (as is most politicians) there are tax aspects that are very appealing to him and many others.

Resourceguy

And if he had a reasonable chance he would make another run at passing the Cap and Trade bill that he was the last to give up on in the face of massive outrage at the grassroots level. The important thing is that attempt would be based purely on donation potential and support and not the truth.

Did you ever wonder how PG&E, San Diego, and SCE are planning on meeting the 33%RES in CA?
Or how much you should pay for a kwh of energy to charge your Leaf, Volt, or Tesla if you wanted to pay your fair share of the costs to provide you the energy.
To answer the first question we have some data:
In order to provide enough financial incentive for investors to build (and/or buy) RE facilities the long term (20 to 25 year MUST TAKE PPA) contracts have Time of Delivery factors built into them. The Time of Delivery (TOD) factors for each of the three ISO’s (PG&E, SCE, San Diego Gas and Electric) are delineated starting on page 18 in Appendix B of this document- http://docs.cpuc.ca.gov/WORD_PDF/FINAL_RESOLUTION/154753.PDF . When Google or NRG invest in RE projects in order to figure out how much they should pay for the facilities they have to determine the cash flow from the project based on the contract details and the expected output from the plant. They do NOT use levelized costs of a theoretical facility they use the specific details of the facility they are buying.
Just for fun lets see how much $ NRG and Google will be getting from the RE projects noted below at super peak times in the summer-
1) the Google funded wind facility up in Oregon that the folks in SCE are going to be using as part of their RE portfolio http://www.environmentalleader.com/2012/09/26/google-funded-845-mw-wind-farm-goes-online/
2) the Agua Caliente PV facility in AZ that will be supporting PG&E’s RE portfolio http://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/First-Solars-250-MW-Agua-Caliente-is-the-Worlds-Largest-Solar-Plant
From the resolution the pull out these TOD factors for “Super Peak Times” in the Summer:
PG&E- 2.38
SCE- 3.13
SD- 2.50
They then multiply the TOD factors times the “market price referent (MPR)” which is $.09274 for a kwh of generation for a 25 year contract with a start date in 2012. Which means ISO’s will be paying the following amounts for the output (generation only) to NRG and Google for the two examples noted above at super peak time in the summer months-
PG&E- 22.1 cents per kwh
SCE- 29.0 cents per kwh
SD- 23.2 cents per kwh
On to the “fair share” to charge your EV question:
Lets say you wanted to charge your Volt, Leaf or Tesla with RE coming from one of these new RE projects at your home or office on Monday afternoon AND you wanted to pay your fair share of the costs of getting the RE energy to your charging station. We need a few estimates for how much it costs for your service provider to transmit the energy from the source of the generation on the high voltage grid and their distribution lines. Our two utility scale RE projects are a tad far away distance wise from the locations that the folks in LA or SF are going to be plugging into their chargers. For the sake of simplicity we can just use the published “average line losses” of 9%+/- for our examples. To cover the line losses we have to multiply the costs per kwh noted above by 9% if we want to pay our fair share which leads us to a cost of RE generation of:
PG&E- 24.1 cents per kwh
SCE- 36.1 cents per kwh
SD- 25.3 cents per kwh
For simplicity sake lets use PG&E published cost allocations for the various buckets they allocate costs into (generation, transmission, distribution, public purpose programs, etc. etc.) so we can figure out how much we should pay to charge our EV during the summer at super peak times. PG&E notes the allocated costs for generation at 46% of the total costs to provide a kwh of energy to your charging station. That means that 54% of the costs are for everything else. All the ISO’s average utility costs per kwh are about 19 cents per kwh these days for the residential market so to get a reasonable estimate of all the distribution, transmission, etc. costs lets multiply the 19 cents by the 0.54 factor to get an estimate of the fair share price we would pay for all the other activities needed to change an EV next week at super peak times: = 10.3 cents per kwh for transmission, distribution, public purpose charges, fees, taxes, etc.
So our Fair share price to pay to charge an EV (based on the details/assumptions noted above) with energy from the two recently brought on line RE projects=
PG&E- 34.4 cents per kwh*
SCE- 46.4 cents per kwh*
SD- 35.6 cents per kwh*
Yes, it does cost someone a few dollars to built and install an AC to DC charging station. If we wanted to pay our fair share of all the costs to charge our EV we should include a cost allocation for the charger. Let’s just skip this allocation and put a small asterisk on our fair share costs noting that we assumed the chargers are free to build, install and maintain.
Google and NRG are going to get their contracted PPA price for the RE. Who pays all the costs to get that energy to your charger/house on the other hand is up for discussion.

starzmom

To Billy–If he can control the weather, and allowed the Midwest drought to happen, it is because we did not vote for him. See any election map. This is a short sighted strategy on his part (but not so short sighted that it will hurt in the upcoming election, at least on this count) because as the Midwest suffers drought, so do food prices go up, hurting his real constituency.

Peter Dunford

Climate is local. The “local” climate can’t be destroyed. Like energy it can change state. But it’s still the climate. It might be mild during an inter-glacial or savagely cold during an ice age. But it’s still “the climate”.

cdquarles

ericgrimsrud, practice what you preach. ‘Fossil’ fuels are not an addiction. The only anthropogenic warming is local warming; but every living thing alters its local environment to enhance its own survival. Single celled life forms have done most of the ‘terraforming’ to this planet and continue to do most of the alteration to it, even now. The biological world works by survival of the fit enough at the point in time and space where it is. What you and others with your worldview are espousing is simple tyranny and massive death of people. Plus, humans and what they do by their arts, is natural too.

Sean

If people do not get off their couches and go to the polls to fire Obama then they deserve to continue to get screwed by his corrupt regime. Obama 2012 = final nail in the coffin.

Thanks Steve!
If the voters don’t stop this agenda, there will be much more hell to pay for the whole world.
Have a look at Europe and the Middle East, different, but both have little freedom.
Both hate the US because we have too much of it.

Cooling in argon produces the slowest heat-transfer rates, followed by nitrogen, then helium and finally hydrogen. All these gas mixtures are popular, but nitrogen is the most attractive from a purely cost standpoint. Theoretically, there is no limit to the improvement in cooling rate that can be obtained by increasing gas velocity and pressure.
Ref: http://www.vacaero.com/Vacuum-Heat-Treating-with-Dan-Herring/Vacuum-Heat-Treating-with-Dan-Herring/technology-trends-in-vacuum-heat-treating-part-1-markets-processes-and-applications.html
I see zero justification for the argument that adding a CO2 molecule to our atmosphere increases the Earth’s surface temperature. At this point in my life, I should not be so surprised by the disconnect between academia and the real world, but I am.