Energy con game
Radical environmentalists and their political allies in Washington are currently doing America an almost unbelievable disservice: They want the average citizen to believe that our economy will soon run on windmills, solar cells and inefficient corn alcohol.
Sadly, most folks haven’t taken time to examine the hard truth that our interstate commerce, air transportation and the U.S. military are almost totally dependant upon diesel and jet fuels — “Green” alternatives simply don’t work in jet planes or 18-wheelers! In the increasingly likely event of an extended Iranian shutdown of the Straits of Hormuz, America’s domestic economy would grind to a halt within weeks, despite our highly limited reserve supplies.
What’s the only alternative? Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama recently proposed using our vast coal resources — which are sufficient to supply America’s energy needs for at least three hundred years — to manufacture cheap and clean diesel and jet fuel with presently available technology, but his party’s enviro-activist wing shut him up very quickly. America’s totalitarian enemies are rightly laughing themselves hoarse at our ridiculous spectacle of a supposedly mature country sacrificing its future self-sufficiency and personal freedoms on a questionable altar of this new but quite obviously flawed version of political correctness. How sad for our future generations.
This letter has not been edited.
Ahh, yes. The "Dirty F'cking Hippie" argument. A classic!
Posted by on September 6, 2007 02:22 PMI guess then we should invade Iran and take over their oil as well, we might as well just go to war for oil, at least we would really know what we are fighting for. But then what do we do when that runs out?
Posted by on September 6, 2007 02:34 PMWhy should corporations take 1/2 our money when they can take it all?
Posted by on September 6, 2007 03:07 PMNuclear energy is the only viable altnernative fuel we have to date.
Posted by on September 6, 2007 03:35 PMHow hot can it get? It's at least 10 degrees hotter than 15 years ago. It used to be 85 every day in Summer.
Those damn environmentalists! It's their fault.
Posted by rick on September 6, 2007 03:42 PMRick, five of the ten hottest summers on record were in the 30s. Give the GW stuff a rest.
So this past weekend the RMN did a story on the water table in Nebraska falling because of increased irrigation to grow corn for ethanol. And the price of corn has doubled!! Must be those greedy oil companies. No wait. Its the greedy farmers. No wait. Its the greedy environmentalists. Uh, no, that's not PC. There's got to be a conspiracy here somewhere.
Actually, its just more proof that there's no such thing as a free lunch.
Posted by Bunny Slippers on September 6, 2007 04:04 PMGot a link to prove that claim, Bunny Slippers?
Posted by Tbone on September 6, 2007 04:12 PMI mean, I'm only asking, because in the 5 seconds it took me to google "10 hottest years on record", I found that the 20 hottest years on record are: 2005, 1998, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2001, 1997, 1990, 1995, 1999, 2000, 1991, 1987, 1988, 1994, 1983, 1996, 1944, 1989, 1993.
So I guess I doubt that claim, BS.
http://homepages.wmich.edu/~karowe/UCS%20global%20warming%20fact%20sheet%20January%202006.pdf
"used to be 85 every day in Summer."
Posted by rick on September 6, 2007 03:42 PM
Typical global warming boogeyman spin by the loony left "I'll believe anything I can my panties in a twist with" sheep.
Check the official records, fool. We've barely wavered in temperature posting the last 20 years.
Sheeesh...as bad as 40acres in fabricating BS statistics out of whole cloth to make a point, as hony as it may be.
Posted by on September 6, 2007 05:36 PMWhat if they are right?
What if global warming is real and we do nothing about it? I know it is in the corporate interest for it to be a sham, but what if it is real? If we start to have serious problems and plants and animal species start to die off and the oceans rise, how are they going to blame the lib's and environmentalists for it? The Con's are blaming the libs for Iraq not going well, because if we all said we were winning and never questioned anything we would have won right? Even though Bush started the fiasco it is the lib's fault we haven't won. I'm just curious as to how they will spin it to that it's the Lib's and environmentalists fault.
Posted by on September 6, 2007 06:13 PMMr Millis:
Would it surprise you that diesels were originally made to run on organic materials. In fact the first diesel created ran on peanutbutter. And with the new ULSD out ther required for diesel a mixture of 20% organic fuel works great in the engines.
Do a little more research.
Posted by Harry on September 6, 2007 10:02 PMYes Virginia global warming is real. However what is up for debate right now are the causes; is it man-made or is it cyclical?
Personally I believe it's cyclical.
Posted by Harry on September 6, 2007 10:07 PMWhat if? What if? What if it rained? What if I get run over by a car? What if....
I guess the chances are less than 1% of the total greenhouse affect can control the other 95% that is water vapor and raise the temperature of the earth's atmosphere is such that I'll take my chances on global warming being cyclic and water vapor before I jump on the CO2 bandwagon...It doesn't look like too much of a "what if" to me... And then we have to take into consideration that the United States contributes less than 50% of that. .. what are all these mandates for?
Because we "feel" like good stewards of the earth... I'm all for clean water and air.. I don't think our Supreme Court has the scientific qualifications to call CO2 a pollutant however.....
Anyone ever hear of Carbon Exchange and how plants need CO2 to give off free oxygen... uhhhhh...
And then we go to E85 which cuts down CO2 but drastically increases Ozone, which affects people with lung disorders NOW, not in the year 2050, but right now... some die....
Hydrogen can be used in internal combustion engines. Yes it can't be piped but neither can E85. Hydrogen fuel cells and electric cells are too high tech and takes too much retooling for manufacturing to not distort the auto market...
And I like the new mandates on gas mileage, yet the socialist elite want the manufacturers to switch to Ethanol, which is even less efficient in gas mileage than gasoline..... wow. that took brains..
Suppose you were an idiot, then suppose you were in Congress, but I repeat myself...
-Mark Twain-
Posted by Father OMalley on September 6, 2007 10:48 PMTbone,
Bunny Slippers said "summers"; you provided a link for hottest "years"- there is a difference.
Also, yours was for global temperatures; was his? I don't know; it might have been for just the U.S.
His claim might be BS, but the two of you might be looking at different things.
Posted by Mike on September 6, 2007 10:49 PM"Would it surprise you that diesels were originally made to run on organic materials. In fact the first diesel created ran on peanutbutter."
Harry, I'll bet that was really good for the injectors. Try peanut oil. There's a world of difference.
Posted by clyde on September 6, 2007 11:09 PMHarry:
Thanks a lot, now my car won't start and my kids don't have lunches...
Posted by Charles B on September 7, 2007 07:14 AMSomewhere, there are bankers and oil men laughing at us until they pee their pants.
Posted by on September 7, 2007 09:53 AMFrank,Thank you for researching.
Posted by Keith on September 7, 2007 11:51 PMIf everyone is allowed to get a law passed based on their personal beliefs, preferences and the new health religion, we will soon find ourdelves living in a world where everything is banned, Then, I suppose, they will have no other zealous thing to do to. But they can never live in a wolrd where nothing needs changing, their zealousness won't allow it. So then, by force of whatever sticks in their graw on any particular day they will have no choice but to start in on unbanning the bans and start the whole idiotic cycle of the total fractionalization of scociety yet once again.
Posted by Allen Campbell on September 8, 2007 08:37 AMCharles B
So, what are you looking for? a jump start? a sandwich? I'm sure Harry will help you out. I will be glad to, post your address and I will be right over.
Tbone:
You listed recent some temperatures.....so what? how far back? If you go back 10,000 years, a million, 10 million, a billion, ad infinitum... you will see temperature extremes both up and down that make the ones that you quote minuscule. O a graph of the temputures of only the last geological epoch the the last centuries are hardly noticable and, believe it or not, are on the low end!
Do you guys think the universe is stagnant? Is that what you want? Well good luck, cause it ain't going to happen.
The sea will rise, the sea will fall. It really doesn't matter what the cause is. You guys aleays try to put use " scientific arguments" but only when they suit your wishes.
Human influence....so what? organisms have been influencing the environment to the detriment of other organisms since life began! That is the way it is . period! You can use words like destroy, hurt, harm, pollute, etc the environment or on the other hand, advance evolve, build etc. But all these things are just what selfinterested people use in place of the word CHANGE.
You guys call yourself liberals, yet you are frightened of change!!!!
Are beavers evil? are ants evil? are coral reefs evil. All these creatures and many more "destroy" ( I would say change) the environment to the detriment of what was there previously.
If you know anything about natural history , you must acknowledge that Life has "advanced" from organisms ALTERING (destroying, if you like) THE ENVIRONMENT!
When the anaerobic bacteria proliferated in the Precambrian, they polluted the atmosphere so bad with their excrement (oxygen) that the earth was never the same. Was that change bad? It was "bad"for the anaerobic bacteria, I guess, ( they now only survive in a few places, Oh but they do survive). But was it bad for the earth?? I cannot say, but as for as I am concerned, I think not, I wouldn't be here now except for all that and all the subsequent, pollution.
All the fuzzy little critters you are trying to protect wouldn't even be here if previous organisms had not "destroyed" the environment.
Are you that frightened of change?? or are you that pessimistic?? Change will be bad! It will be differenent, Oh my gosh!!!
ID' say it is 50/50 for me and I can't do a thing about it and neither can you. I don't care if you waste all your time and money like the little Dutch boy, but why do you want to use my time and money? To bring me into your world of fear and darkness? it is just perverse.
AF
"I guess the chances are less than 1% of the total greenhouse affect can control the other 95% that is water vapor and raise the temperature of the earth's atmosphere is such that I'll take my chances on global warming being cyclic and water vapor before I jump on the CO2 bandwagon.."
Some posters need to provide an English translation.
Posted by Truth on September 10, 2007 08:18 AM"I know it is in the corporate interest for it to be a sham"
I expect that if a person never read or viewed anything, if he lived in a mountain cabin with no access to the outside world, he could believe that man-made global warming is only a figment of the liberal imagination.
But of course the fact is that many of the big corporations are taking steps to reduce CO2 emissions, and many, if not most, governments, including liberal stawarts like China and Russia, recognize that it is a valid problem.
But while I'm here I'd like to say "hello" to all the folks living in those mountain cabins. I think it's great that you have computers.
It's a little like the liberal view opposing the invasion of Iraq the way we did. Most people on whatever side now realize the validity of that, only too late.
Posted by Truth on September 10, 2007 08:30 AMhttp://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/graphs/Fig.D.txt
http://www.dailytech.com/Blogger+finds+Y2K+bug+in+NASA+Climate+Data/article8383.htm
Sorry about being slow--gotta life
Nasa has admitted their methodology was flawed and five of the warmest years (not summers--my misstatement) occurred before World War II. Funny how this didn't make the cover of the NYT.
Posted by Bunny Slippers on September 10, 2007 02:49 PM