The Great Global Warming Swindle

[ULTRA26 # 1]

Biopropane. Hmmmm Will have to see if they can get it produced anywhere as efficiently as they say. Looks very interesting. This is the first I had heard of this one.
See Ultra, I'm not against EVERYTHING you come up with.

[asch]

The land grab has already begun (under Clinton in the 90s) just ask any former rancher in southern Utah.
Here is what happened to a relative of mine.
Is this it?
Did quick search and found this:
Clinton pulls another western land grab
Human Events, Jan 28, 2000 by Park, Scott
There he goes again: On January 11, President Clinton unilaterally designated vast areas of Arizona and California as new national monuments without consulting Congress or local officials.
Clinton made a similar move on Sept. 18, 1996 when he signed an executive order designating 1.7 million acre of land in southern Utah as the Canyons of the Escalante National Monument. That land contained the nation's largest coal reserves.
Clinton's new land grab is only the latest assault in a federal campaign against real estate in the western United States that has been going on for decades-with a brief hiatus during the Reagan and Bush presidencies. Since 1960, the federal government has taken control of new acreage within the states equal in area to the entire state of Florida. Meanwhile, federal land-holding agencies are charging taxpayers 330% more in constant dollars to "manage" federal lands than they did in 1960.
Because the new lands that Clinton designated as monuments were already under federal control and already subject to federal land-use policies, there was no imminent environmental threat that required them to be permanently set aside in a status that prevents virtually all constructive economic use.
Two other rationales, however, suggest themselves: Clinton wanted to use raw executive power to influence the perception of his legacy among liberal environmentalists, and at the same time he wanted to boost enthusiasm among this group for Vice President Al Gore's struggling presidential campaign.
"The President is establishing a legacy of abuse," Sen. Larry Craig (R.-Idaho) told HUMAN EVENTS. "He started with the Office of the President and is moving on to the law and public process. He is abusing power, because the public has a right to be involved through the hearing process. This is driven by raw politics."
The Antiquities Act, under which Clinton created the new monuments, has been used only three times in the last 30 years. President Carter invoked it once, and now Clinton has employed it twice.
President 'Continues to Usurp'
It might seem odd that Gore, who authored a radical environmentalist call to arms titled Earth in the Balance, and who has championed the Kyoto Global Warming Treaty, should be worried about his support from the environmentalist left. But Friends of the Earth recently endorsed Bill Bradley for the Democratic presidential nomination contest.
Sierra Club political director Dan Weiss told HUMAN EVENTS that his group credits Gore with playing an important role in identifying and designating the land for the new monuments. The Sierra Club has not yet endorsed a presidential candidate, said Weiss, but will look at a candidate's record as well as his positions, in making a selection.
Clinton's January 11 decree created three new national monuments and expanded a fourth:
* Agua Fria National Monument, Ariz.; 71, 100 acres.
* Grand Canyon-Parashant National Monument, Ariz.; 1,014,000 acres.
* California Coastal National Monument, Calif.; covers all the rocks along the entire 814-mile California coast out to a distance of 12 miles.
* Pinnacles National Monument, Calif.; expands existing monument by 7,960 acres.
"The President continues to usurp the power of state legislatures and local officials," said Rep. George Radanovich (R.-Calif), who chairs the Western Caucus. "This circumvention of power by the President must be stopped by the Congress. Local voices deserve to be heard and we have to act in order to prevent the President's continued abuse of power on public lands issues."
Texas Gov. George W. Bush, the frontrunner for the Republican presidential nomination joined in the criticism of Clinton's move. "Governor Bush doesn't believe in the Clinton Administration's top-down dictatorial approach," said campaign aide Scott McClelland. "He believes in creating conservation partnerships between the federal government, states and communities." Sen. John McCain (R.-Ariz.), also running for President, complained during the January 10 Republican presidential debate in Michigan that the administration had taken the action "by fiat, without consulting anyone-not a single person who lives in Arizona."

[CARLSON-JET]

It's probably more like more energy than man has ever produced, let alone one year. But this factoid is a bit of a non sequitur in the GW debate. The GW debate is more about how much of the sun's energy (ie heat) that human produced gasses trap and keep here on earth, rather than how much man or the sun produces. Although solar activity is most likely the largest single factor in climate change. The question is are human produced "greenhouse gasses" a large enough secondary factor to be having a significant influence.
True and valid... Although it does have alot more to do with this thread then say... Canada's health care sytem.
I have to look it up again, but I watched something a year or two ago about some guy who was checking out how the pollution particles were creating more cloud mass and were reflecting the light back out. It was interesting as others were starting to use the same particle/cloud idea to look into instances of warming/cooling in the past. His control area was a string of small islands islands that I can't remember where. Still a very interesting offset theory. Although his model did show somewhat that there still was a small percentage of warming on some islands other islands were actually getting cooler daily temps. As expected, it is hard to reproduce a model of the earths climate accurately.

[SmokinLowriderSS]

True and valid... Although it does have alot more to do with this thread then say... Canada's health care sytem.
I have to look it up again, but I watched something a year or two ago about some guy who was checking out how the pollution particles were creating more cloud mass and were reflecting the light back out. It was interesting as others were starting to use the same particle/cloud idea to look into instances of warming/cooling in the past. His control area was a string of small islands islands that I can't remember where. Still a very interesting offset theory. Although his model did show somewhat that there still was a small percentage of warming on some islands other islands were actually getting cooler daily temps. As expected, it is hard to reproduce a model of the earths climate accurately.
This is/was the basis for the 70's hype of Global Cooling/The Coming Ice Age, "aerosols" (the particles, not the spray cans) causing increased cloud formation
Just stumbled on something I was unaware of, in the "scientific concensus" department. Shortly after the IPCC report, with the non-support of 2500 or so named scientists who had nothing in the report, a petition came out of Oregon, questioning the findings in the report, SIGNED by meterological and climatological scientists. 15,000 to 17,000 of them.
It's things like this that keep me sceptical.
UN-sponsored Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) actually number less than 2000, and only a small fraction -- who were never polled -- can claim to be climate scientists. Many of those are known to be critical of the IPCC report and have now become signers of the Petition.
From the beginning (http://www.capmag.com/article.asp?id=50)

[asch]

What are you so afraid of?
Interesting response considering your position. Question is, what are YOU afraid of?
Me, personally, I'm not afraid really so much as concerned that you and people like you are creating this hype based on junk science and presenting it as truth.
Actually, who I am afraid for are my kids and their kids having to suffer the consequences of the lie. I would like them to enjoy the freedoms I have enjoyed. It amazes how people, especially in the last 40+ years are so willing to hand over their heritage of freedom in return for a mess of pottage. Yes, we have a lot less freedom than we did in years past.
Believe me, the underlying truth to this lie is the giving up of the things we enjoy--our freedom and ultimately our property.
I'm seriously concerned about the government making absolute law(s) based upon this garbage. The government's responsibility is STRICTLY to protect the life, liberty and property of it's citizens. There is nothing in the constitution that's requires or obligates the government to the protection of the environment (The EPA is an UNELECTED agency as is OSHA). Combine this with the tripe philosophies that are being taught in the universities. Do you know Constitutional law is barely taught anymore? It's all case law. That's a tragedy IMO. We're churning out lawyers that don't have a clue as to constitutional law. I digress.
No, I'm not afraid of you or your belief per se. I don't care what you or any of the rest of them believe in. I just don't want laws to be continued to be created based on your belief. As long as it continues, I AM against you.
Do you believe there should be some kind of "Global Warming Act" to force people into complying?
Another thing, by buying into this GW deal, your opening the door, carte blanche, for the government to further legislate your freedom away in ways that are far more devastating than any real or imagined climate change.
So, what are YOU so afraid of that your willing to give up your cars and other things?

[eliminatedsprinter]

Is this it?
Did quick search and found this:
Clinton pulls another western land grab
Human Events, Jan 28, 2000 by Park, Scott
Clinton made a similar move on Sept. 18, 1996 when he signed an executive order designating 1.7 million acre of land in southern Utah as the Canyons of the Escalante National Monument. That land contained the nation's largest coal reserves.
"
I believe his land was stolen under this previous grab. It was near the town of Tropic Utah which is near Bryce Canyon.:idea:

[Old Texan]

We're churning out lawyers that don't have a clue as to constitutional law.
So, what are YOU so afraid of that your willing to give up your cars and other things?
2 things I'd like to add based on the above points.
First to John: If everyone on planet earth gave up driving vehicles that are considered "Fuel Hogs" and everyone gave up boats of say, over 100Hp, would Global Warming end?
My point being what limits must be established to end GW? What will be enough?
Under present trends the GW folks will one day be rationing air and water consumption. We will be forced to regulate how many breaths per hour we are allowed. We will only get say a liter a day to drink and regualr bathing and washing clothes, cars, etc will cease. (actually I beleive the French have allready done away with the bathing part).
To further what asch has stated, why is it wrong to not blindly change and conform to theories that are unconfirmed and much of their presentation, concocted lies. The problem with too much of society is they feel guilt. Guilty they have money, guilty they have nice things, guilty they are more fortunate. This is a lot of what proposed reparations for slavery are based upon. Guilt for the actions of their ancestors. If they don't support GW they feel guilty. Everybody is guilty of f--ing up society and the environment if they don't go along with the rammblings of junk science.
Sorry but I'm not buying into the Hollywood Guilt trip that is so apparent in many of the celebrities rants against the "System". The majority of Liberals today come from this segment of society, the actors, professors, rights activists, and so on. Down deep I question if they really give a shit at all, but are just following their underlying guilt and other self serving ego purposes. Their so called "giving back to the people" BS.
My other point is the way lawyers and doctors are educated. What asch said is true, case law is where the bucks are at. Litigation is how the overabundance of America's lawyers fatten their pockets. Medical schools turn out Drs. more interested in pushing medication than curing the causes of all the "illness flavors of the day". It's ridiculous the ampunt of money thrown at today's Drs by drug companies to promote and prescribe their products. I was in my family Dr's office this past week and there were at least 4 drug peddlers coming and going pushing their new pharmaceutical miracles. I'm curious what the percentage of advertising is devoted to legal and medicinal / drug topics these days. Hell a good portion of the legal ads are about suing the drug companies for side effects. Parasite feeding on parasite.
Law, medicine, and GW have a lot in common, ways to take money out of your pocket. Never take any of them at face value.

[eliminatedsprinter]

2 things I'd like to add based on the above points.
First to John: If everyone on planet earth gave up driving vehicles that are considered "Fuel Hogs" and everyone gave up boats of say, over 100Hp, would Global Warming end?
My point being what limits must be established to end GW? What will be enough?
Under present trends the GW folks will one day be rationing air and water consumption. We will be forced to regulate how many breaths per hour we are allowed. We will only get say a liter a day to drink and regualr bathing and washing clothes, cars, etc will cease. (actually I beleive the French have allready done away with the bathing part).
To further what asch has stated, why is it wrong to not blindly change and conform to theories that are unconfirmed and much of their presentation, concocted lies. The problem with too much of society is they feel guilt. Guilty they have money, guilty they have nice things, guilty they are more fortunate. This is a lot of what proposed reparations for slavery are based upon. Guilt for the actions of their ancestors. If they don't support GW they feel guilty. Everybody is guilty of f--ing up society and the environment if they don't go along with the rammblings of junk science.
Sorry but I'm not buying into the Hollywood Guilt trip that is so apparent in many of the celebrities rants against the "System". The majority of Liberals today come from this segment of society, the actors, professors, rights activists, and so on. Down deep I question if they really give a shit at all, but are just following their underlying guilt and other self serving ego purposes. Their so called "giving back to the people" BS.
My other point is the way lawyers and doctors are educated. What asch said is true, case law is where the bucks are at. Litigation is how the overabundance of America's lawyers fatten their pockets. Medical schools turn out Drs. more interested in pushing medication than curing the causes of all the "illness flavors of the day". It's ridiculous the ampunt of money thrown at today's Drs by drug companies to promote and prescribe their products. I was in my family Dr's office this past week and there were at least 4 drug peddlers coming and going pushing their new pharmaceutical miracles. I'm curious what the percentage of advertising is devoted to legal and medicinal / drug topics these days. Hell a good portion of the legal ads are about suing the drug companies for side effects. Parasite feeding on parasite.
Law, medicine, and GW have a lot in common, ways to take money out of your pocket. Never take any of them at face value.
Our hospital is affilliated with UCLA's medical school and the interns, residents, and fellows, etc, that I have worked with over the last 23 years, are nothing like what you discribe above and everything like what you seem to wish they were like.
Drug Co's parasites?? Oh Lord, Ultra, Poster, and Blown have converted you over to the dark side....:2purples: :wink:

[Old Texan]

Our hospital is affilliated with UCLA's medical school and the interns, residents, and fellows, etc, that I have worked with over the last 23 years, are nothing like what you discribe above and everything like what you seem to wish they were like.
Drug Co's parasites?? Oh Lord, Ultra, Poster, and Blown have converted you over to the dark side....:2purples: :wink:
Sorry, I'm being far to harsh and general in my statement. I speak of a minority of Drs. that seem to have no qualms in prescribing meds for folks with addictions and do belive more meds are better. They are out there. You've been fortunate to be affiliated with a stalwart institution and wouldn't likely see the "quacks". My statement was quick and really based on some personal situations I've witnessed lately.
I can think of at least 4 people I know that are presently hooked on extreme amounts of pain meds, mainly Oxyconden(sp). These people are all suffering depression, physical problems, and family issues due to the excess use of these meds which are prescribed by physicians. All have ceased to be uselful contributors to society and 3 are on government disability. They all seek new physicians that readily prescribe keep them going. How do you descibe Dr.s that allow and contribute to this growing problem in our country? Actually it would be interesting to hear how the "real" Drs. you work with view this growing problem. I'd love to hear their candid opinions, off the record of course.
Oh and I damn sure don't wish Drs to be this way, it's very concerning to me that we have these "quacks" practicing.

[eliminatedsprinter]

Sorry, I'm being far to harsh and general in my statement. I speak of a minority of Drs. that seem to have no qualms in prescribing meds for folks with addictions and do belive more meds are better. They are out there. You've been fortunate to be affiliated with a stalwart institution and wouldn't likely see the "quacks". My statement was quick and really based on some personal situations I've witnessed lately.
I can think of at least 4 people I know that are presently hooked on extreme amounts of pain meds, mainly Oxyconden(sp). These people are all suffering depression, physical problems, and family issues due to the excess use of these meds which are prescribed by physicians. All have ceased to be uselful contributors to society and 3 are on government disability. They all seek new physicians that readily prescribe keep them going. How do you descibe Dr.s that allow and contribute to this growing problem in our country? Actually it would be interesting to hear how the "real" Drs. you work with view this growing problem. I'd love to hear their candid opinions, off the record of course.
Oh and I damn sure don't wish Drs to be this way, it's very concerning to me that we have these "quacks" practicing.
My step father was a world class indocrine phsiologist (PHD not MD) and he used to say..."They don't all get straight A's in med school."
Bottom line is they are human and they can get a bit sloppy. There are flakes in every field, even one that requires as much education as medicine. Plus some of the patients, that are addicts can be very clever about "MD shopping" etc and will flat out lie to (and often threaten) their docs to get what they want...It really takes a sharp (and tough) Doc to handle some of the more clever and or agressive ones...
P.S. It's not really a growng problem. It has been very widespred for a long time. If anything, it is less (in terms of the % of pt's) than it was in the 1950s, 60s, and 70s. It's just that it is much more talked about today than it was. I like the phrase "acute awareness of a chronic problem".
All of the med schools and major medical organizations are emphisizing looking out for this (addiction and or polypharmacy) and ever since the late 1970s the emphisis in medical care has been on more comprehensive interdisiplinary care and minimum medication.