 |
Another Dissenter: Atmospheric Scientist Dr. Tim Coleman rejects ‘hysteria’ of global warming
Dr. Tim Coleman
AlabamaWx.com
Friday, October 23, 2009
Global warming, or what is now often reffered to as global climate change, is one of the most polarizing issues of our time. In this article, I will attempt to explain the basic physics of global temperature changes, how we are attempting to measure and predict them, the alleged consequences (and even possible advantages) of global warming, the “solutions” to slow it, and the potential impacts of such measures on our lives.
(NASA)
1. The physics of global temperature.
The sun (shortwave) radiation warms the earth while outgoing (longwave) radiation cools the earth. The energy coming in from the sun is fairly constant, and the energy going out from the earth is proportional to the temperature on earth. The earth’s average temperature is the value that allows an exact balance between incoming shortwave, outgoing longwave, and absorbed and reflected radiation.
“Greenhouse gases”, like carbon dioxide (CO2), absorb some of the outgoing energy, keeping the earth warmer. Interestingly, high clouds do the same thing, while low clouds do the opposite. Some other gases, like sulfur compounds, reflect sunlight and keep the earth cooler. The primary assertion by those who are concerned about anthropogenic (manmade) global warming “AGW” is that the increase in atmospheric CO2 since the industrial revolution began has also caused a warming of surface temperatures through the greenhouse effect, and the warming will continue. However, natural occurrences have also caused changes in CO2 and periodic warming way before the industrial revolution. According to geologists, an ice age once brought glaciers down into the present-day northern U.S. and created the Great Lakes. The earth warmed after that, and it wasn’t a power plant causing it. Scientists also tell us of a warmer time in the past, when sea levels were much higher due to melting polar ice, when the Gulf of Mexico came up to about Montgomery (they have found manatee fossils in Auburn). Again, no power plants. Since people produce CO2 everytime we exhale air, we are also contributing to global warming by breathing. Ok, bad joke.
Also, some phenomena (volcanic eruptions, nuclear bomb tests) emit sulfur compounds and aerosols into the upper atmosphere, that absorb or reflect sunlight and cause cooling in the lower atmosphere. It may also be stated fairly, then, that the decrease in SO2 emissions due to various clean air regulations since the 1970s and the nuclear test ban has also caused warming to the planet. (The 1991 eruption of Mt. Pinatubo produced a 1 degree F cooling over the northern hemisphere in 2 years).
Mt. Pinatubo (USGS/UND)
2. Attempts to measure and predict climate change
The measurement of atmospheric temperature is difficult. Measurements of temperature from across the globe over the past few decades have shown an increase. The amount of increase is debatable, since much of the alleged warming has been over Siberia, and in Russia many weather observation stations apparently went offline with the fall of the USSR. So, measurements in Siberia may not be reliable.
Also, most temperature measurements are taken in cities, where it is warmer anyway, especially at night, due to the urban heat island. On a clear night in the winter, it is sometimes 5 degrees warmer in Birmingham than it is in Snead. So, the temperature at Birmingham does not give an accurate picture of the temperature over central Alabama, but it goes into the surface temperature database, not Snead. Satellites likely give us the best estimates, and they show only a very slight warming. Look at the difference between surface measurements (used by IPCC) and satellite measurements (from UAH) for a developing region in East Africa:
(Christy et al. 2009)
Many climate models, similar in some ways to numerical weather prediction models like the GFS, are run to predict the future climate and its effects on rainfall patterns, local temperatures, and even biological cycles. However, we know how inaccurate our weather prediction models are at times! And, IPCC model-based temperature projections from 2000-2009 are apparently wrong.
(scienceandpublicpolicy.org)
Also, as pointed out by Alabama State Climatologist John Christy in his response to EPA assertions (for his report, click here.), running the IPCC models for the past 30 years shows that they greatly overpredict warming. Christy states “the models overstate the warming that has occurred. The clear implication of this result is that the models have an assumed sensitivity to CO2 that the real world does not.” Christy points out that the big model weakness is cloud cover. Climate models indicate that increasing CO2 causes a decrease in clouds, further warming the earth in a positive feedback. Actually, Roy Spencer of UAH has found that warming the earth increases clouds, so the earth has its own “thermostat” to cool things down if it warms.
3. The alleged consequences and unmentioned advantages of global warming
The global warming hysteria in the media really began to heat up after Hurricane Katrina struck the Gulf Coast. It is true that 2004 and 2005 were very active hurricane years; however, Katrina moved ashore as a Category 3 hurricane, a strength attained by an average of 2-3 hurricanes per year since 1944 in the Atlantic basin. It just so happened that Katrina hit at a location that caused catastrophic damage to New Orleans and the Mississippi Gulf Coast. Immediately, the AGW alarmists sickeningly used this tragedy to further their viewpoint, with Barbara Streisand or some Hollywood person calling it a “Global Warming Emergency”. (Where did they, or Al Gore, get their degrees in climatology?) Despite the quiet hurricane seasons of 2006 through 2009, those claiming AGW had catastrophic consequences seemed energized after the active 2004-05 years.
There has been a lot of debate on the correlation of hurricane activity and atmospheric CO2, but this is hard to correlate since hurricane activity has been variable, with a period of about 60 years per cycle, since the late 1800’s. Hurricanes were numerous 1870-1890, then quiet in the early 1900’s, active again in the 1950’s and 1960’s, quiet from 1970 through 1994, then active most of the time since then. I don’t think the industrial output of the world has been periodic like that.
It has now gotten to the point that almost any major weather event is blamed by someone on global climate change. The snow at a National League Playoff game this year, California wildfires, and some tornadoes, droughts, and floods are blamed on AGW. These types of events have been occurring for hundreds of years. The recent usage of the phrase “global climate change” seems to protect the AGW people; they have their bases covered now. They have even discussed a scenario where global warming and ice melting will cause a problem with the Gulf Stream and an Ice Age in North America. So, even if it gets very cold for many years, they can say it was AGW.
If the most extreme predictions of AGW occur, it would be rough in many ways. Heat waves would occur, some rainfall patterns would change, and agriculture would have to adapt (peach trees might have to be moved to Tennessee, but we could grow oranges I guess). No one mentions the possible advantages of AGW, if it is occurring. Some models apprently indicate that the most intense warming would occur in the polar regions. Is that all bad? Maybe people could grow crops in Siberia and northern Canada, and sea lanes would open for shipping in the Arctic. Winters culd be warmer, lowering some energy bills.
4. “Solutions” to global climate change
Many of the solutions that are supposed to slow down AGW being proposed by environmentalists make sense whether you think AGW is a problem or not. However, politicians in the U.S. and around the world are proposing drastic changes to our energy system that could damage our already weak economy and perhaps lower the standard of living in the United States.
To me, saving energy is generally a good thing. It reduces pollution and saves me money. I have written on saving energy (click here.). I plan to do the same for winter. Also, do you really need a giant SUV to tote your kids around in? Why not just buy a dump truck and take it to a conversion shop? Carpooling, 4×10 workweeks, and telecommuting are also good ideas. Also, please stop throwing plastic bottles in my river…they make garbage cans. And I like the 15 W flourescent light bulbs that produce the equivalent light of a 100 W incandescent bulb.
Modern ways of producing electricity are also nice. Solar power is free, it just costs a fortune in most cases to convert it to electricity (I checked online and a solar panel to charge a digital camera runs over $100, so imagine how much it costs to power your home).
However, we live in 2009. We can not stop driving our cars, and we need electricity. Yet, driving and using electricity are some of the biggest ways we produce CO2 every day (besides breathing). The “cap and trade” bill coming up in Congress will create a market where many power and oil companies will eventually have to buy credits to burn coal or natural gas or oil to produce electricity or refine gasoline. However, the power company or the oil company is a business, and they will probably pass along the cost of those carbon credits to you. The house version of the bill passed in the summer also requires a massive reduction in greenhouse gases over the next few years/decades. Where will the power come from, then?
I suppose we could replace coal-fired plants with nuclear ones, at a cost of billions of dollars (that we will all have to pay). What about solar, or wind? Right now, electricity in Alabama costs about 7 cents per kWh. Solar energy costs about 30 cents per kWh, and wind power can be produced in windy areas (like the northern Plains or Northeast) for 5-7 cents per kWh, but it is not windy enough in most of the Southeast for wind power. Transmission of the power from wind farms or solar panels 1,000 miles way would greatly increase the cost, not only due to the cost of the transmission system (one article estimates $80 billion for the eastern U.S. just in transmission system costs like power lines), but also due to losses of power due to resistance along the power lines. However you slice this, electricity prices would likely increase significantly.
5. Effects on our lives
According to the IPCC, “meaningful climate mitigation” would cost approximately 1.7% of world GDP. Apply this to the U.S., and it would cost us $238 billion per year. Averaged out to $800 per person, or $270 per month for a family of four. And this assumes other countries with rapidly-growing energy use like China and India would follow our lead. The US government has placed lower costs on the “cap and trade” bill, varying from about $100 to $1,000 per year. Here is a quote from President Obama, in an interview with the San Francisco Chronicle in January 2008:
“Under my plan of a cap-and-trade system, electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket,” Obama told the Chronicle . “Coal-powered plants, you know, natural gas, you name it, whatever the plants were, whatever the industry was, they would have to retrofit their operations. That will cost money. They will pass that money on to consumers.”
The AGW debate, and any criticism or resistance to it, often produces outrage. James Hansen, an outspoken climatologist from NASA, recently stated in a letter to The Guardian in England,
“The trains carrying coal to power plants are death trains. Coal-fired power plants are factories of death.”
What? Death trains? I pass by Birmingport on the way to the river often, and I see trains full of coal that goes to Miller or Gorgas or one of the other plants nearby, often on a barge (are those now “death barges” too?), and I would call them life trains, life barges, and factories for life. How would all the premature babies born in Birmingham hospitals, or the heart attack and other critical care patients, live without the electricity that feeds the hospitals? How would we air condition our homes in summer and heat them in winter? I’m sure burning firewood is not more efficient than using a heat pump. And how many lives of the elderly and young were saved by that coal during the heat wave of 2007, or on the morning it dropped to 12 degrees in Birmingham this year?
The bottom line is that we are likely using at least partially inaccurate data, fed into possibly inaccurate models, to predict rapid global warming. Is it possible? Yes. But is it certain, or even likely? We don’t know. And are willing to bet up to $238 billion per year to TRY to slow something down that may not happen, at least not nearly the rate some say it will? And are we willing to do all this knowing that it may not even matter very much if other large nations don’t go along with us?
If you’re worried about global warming too much, you could always buy some farmland in northern Canada in hopes that it will someday be warm, buy a $25,000 (or more) solar panel system for your backyard so if power bills double you can go off grid, or acquire some land across US 98 from the Gulf, in case sea level rises 2 feet and the condos of 2050 will be over there, and your great-grandchildren will be wealthy. In all seriousness, we should do all we can to save energy and protect the environment, but in my opinion, not at the cost of our livelihood or our national security.
My opinions do not necessarily reflect those of my primary employer.
Prison
Planet.tv Members Can Watch
Fall Of The Republic
Right Now Online -
Don't Miss Out! Get
Your Subscription Today!
CANCER CONSPIRACY? Are
"they" suppressing the cure? Will YOU
be the next victim? Learn
the Secret Truth! - READ FULL STORY
-
- Social bookmarks
- Email this article
-
- Print this page
50 Responses to “Another Dissenter: Atmospheric Scientist Dr. Tim Coleman rejects ‘hysteria’ of global warming”
 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | |||||||
| By N2H | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
October 23rd, 2009 at 11:01 am
All of your graphs and words are NO MATCH for the propaganda machine abiding to the agenda that we need less of the bad kind of people sucking in the oxygen and breathing out the poison that is destroying this planet.
Save the Polar Bears!
Feed them AL GORE!
(I like this atricle….I’ll be sure to spread it to some ’round earth’ deniers)
Geylee Reply:
October 23rd, 2009 at 4:13 pm
“Save the polar bears!” “Feed them AL GORE!”
Too funny! I’m laughing right now!
al Reply:
October 24th, 2009 at 8:03 am
perhaps we should stop punching holes in the ionosphere with haarp and turn off cern. the chemtrails are not working too well pals as the herd is awakening and sounding the shofar………..pentecost 2012 ooops love to the rest, al
rik thomas Reply:
October 26th, 2009 at 4:02 am
CERN,,,, yeah, chek out their logo. 666
search for “freeman perspective”
this guy will knock your socks off. he has been on alex show.
man are we being lied to all the way around. but take heart and defend yourself as best you can. better to die with dignity than to die like the average asshole.
s.bonn Reply:
October 25th, 2009 at 11:08 am
yes feed al gore to the polar bears.God bless the polar bears!
October 23rd, 2009 at 12:52 pm
Saving energy and not polluting are good things. Get off the grid and quit letting the gov and big companies rule whats piped to you.
http://www.alternativecashsavings.com
Glen Reply:
October 24th, 2009 at 9:13 am
Thanks for the ADD BOZO
You are just choosing a different PIPE, a more expensive pipe, directly from the same corporations
Example – BP SOLAR
storky Reply:
October 24th, 2009 at 10:10 am
Wrong as usual.
Though BP is one of the top 20 photovoltaic manufacturers (08/2008), it is the only one in the group related to legacy fossil fuel energy production:
01 Sharp Electronics
02 Q-Cells
03 Suntech Power Holdings Ltd.
04 First Solar
05 SolarWorld
06 Sanyo
07 BP Solar
08 Kyocera
09 Motech Industries Inc.
10 Solarfun Power Holdings
11 SunPower Corp.
12 Gintech Energy Corporation
13 E-TON SOLAR TECH
14 Yingli Green Energy
15 CEEG Nanjing PV Tech Co.Ltd.
16 China Sunergy Co. Ltd
17 Mitsubishi
18 Ersol Solar Energy AG
19 Jing Ao Solar Co Ltd.
20 Moser Baer Photovoltaic
The top manufacturer in this list produces 7X the volume of the 20th place manufacturer. BP Solar represents only 5.5% of top 20 photovoltaic cell production.
Research or be forever ignorant.
Glen Reply:
October 24th, 2009 at 10:46 am
As usual the STOOGEY MISSES THE POINT
My response to Ks commercial was to point out that going off the grid just means you pay more for your energy and move your pollution to markedly the same corporate bastards taking the money now.
Also thanks for the list of companies poisoning our atmosphere by “using nitrogen trifluoride (NF3) a greenhouse gas with a global warming potential 17,200 times that of CO2 in the manufacture of these cells.”
Nice Offset potential there I think, lots of new trees.
storky Reply:
October 24th, 2009 at 1:41 pm
“My response to Ks commercial was to point out that going off the grid just means you pay more for your energy and move your pollution to markedly the same corporate bastards taking the money now.”
As demonstrated, you don’t know what the fuck you’re talking about.
“Also thanks for the list of companies poisoning our atmosphere by “using nitrogen trifluoride (NF3) a greenhouse gas with a global warming potential 17,200 times that of CO2 in the manufacture of these cells.”
First off, the use of Nitrogen trifluoride is not unique to photovoltaic cell production — it is predominantly used in the manufacture of microelectronics including microprocessors and LCD displays.
Nitrogen trifluoride is the more environmentally responsible replacement for hexafluoroethane and sulfur hexafluoride — notoriously potent greenhouse gases. Unlike those perfluorocarbons, 96% of the nitrogen trifluoride is consumed in the chip etching process. Of the remaining 4%, half is recovered and reused. Of the volume produced, ~2% escapes into the atmosphere post production marking a dramatic industry wide reduction in greenhouse gas emissions.
In your attempts to discredit alternative energy production and efficient technologies, you look bigger the buffoon that ever. Your stigma remains:
If it’s Glen, its a lie.
Glen Reply:
October 24th, 2009 at 6:12 pm
That’s right stoogey others do it so it’s OK for you too.
That point was the loony suggestion of reducing CO2 by releasing a potent greenhouse gas.
Only you the Shill of the year could see the logic in that.
storky Reply:
October 24th, 2009 at 9:29 pm
You appear unable to comprehend the concept of improving conditions by significantly reducing undesirable consequences. Your fantasy binary world permits only perfection and disallows all else.
Sorry, dim bulb, there is a continuum of consequences ranging from highly desirable to extremely undesirable where incremental improvement is preferred over none at all. You irrationally advocate the less desirable status quo.
toad Reply:
October 25th, 2009 at 12:52 am
nice job storky.
DavidIcketards Eatreptileshit Reply:
October 25th, 2009 at 6:25 pm
‘fossil fuel’–ha ha! What idiots! they still beLIEve the debunked BS that oil came from rotting dinosaurs and vegetation. Google “ABIOTIC” oil- because that’s what it is. The planet Titan, one of the moons of Saturn, has more oil and methane than this world–
http://www.google.com/search?h.....=&aqi=
–but I think it’s a safe bet that no life such as vegetation or animals ever existed there that could have become the oil. Wake Up Sheple!!!
REAPER Reply:
October 25th, 2009 at 10:55 pm
Hey Dave, good article.Here’s something funny:
One puzzle scientists are trying to figure out is why Titan has so much methane in its atmosphere. The gas breaks down in ultraviolet light from the sun, leading scientists to wonder how methane is being resupplied into the moon’s atmosphere.
Answer:Methanogens are microorganisms that produce methane as a metabolic byproduct in anoxic conditions. They were once classified as archaebacteria but archaebacteria have now been reclasified as archaea, a group quite distinct from bacteria. They are common in wetlands, where they are responsible for marsh gas, and in the guts of animals such as ruminants and humans, where they are responsible for the methane content of flatulence.(wikipedia)
That took about 2 minutes to solve…Them thar scientists is stupid. LOL
and i’m out,
REAPER
rik thomas Reply:
October 26th, 2009 at 4:06 am
US does not need all the energy it uses. christ all cities burn street lamps often in daylight etc.
i say, raise the cost of energy and screw america anyway. the average america needs to be removed from the planet anyway. most are too dumb to live. so let the NWO do their thing and give them vaccines so they and -if they are still alive- and their children can stumble down the street slobbering.
October 23rd, 2009 at 1:22 pm
Here is a news flash…….
There is no such thing as “the greenhouse effect”.
The atmosphere has a cooling effect as well as a warming effect. The deceptive term “greenhouse effect” implies only a warming effect, yet gasses behave as a liquid to temperature and while they may warm, they also cool. If they did not then every thing living at equator would be cooked alive at noon on a daily basis. The surface of the moon (which of course has no atmosphere) reaches 123º C in the sun.
CO2 absorbs heat but it cannot trap heat. When it has absorbed heat it expands as do the all the other gasses it is mixed with such as nitrogen, oxygen and water vapour. Do not be fooled by the false claims that CO2 is special or unique in the way it is effected by heat. All gasses absorb and re-emit heat. It does not matter that they do this at various frequencies, all that maters is that they all do it. If they did not they would not be gasses, they would be solid ice. Therefore all gasses absorb and re-emit heat and so must all be greenhouse gasses, if not then none at all.
These mixed gasses when warmed, then rise up through the atmosphere and exchange the heat with colder gasses higher up. The higher they rise the colder it gets. As space is 0 K or – 273º C there is only one possible outcome. All the heat energy received from the sun is re-emitted back into space. You do not need to be a scientist to understand this concept. It is more than attested to by 4, 500,000,000 years of relative temperature stability. If CO2 could trap heat and cause global warming it would have done so already. Perhaps when CO2 was @ 1000 ppm or 2000 ppm or even when it was @ 3000 ppm. Maybe runaway global warming should have occurred when CO2 was 4000, 5000, 6000, or 7000 ppm as it has been in the past. But it has never occurred at these levels so why should we be concerned about 100 ppm increase?
The answer of course, is that we shouldn’t.
Gasses in a greenhouse cannot convect but gasses in the atmosphere can convect. So in a greenhouse there is a “greenhouse effect” but in the atmosphere there is not.
A “greenhouse gas” is a gas inside a greenhouse.
The key is convection which is why you will never hear the topic of convection being properly discussed by proponents of AGW.
Like I said earlier, you do not need to be a scientist to work this out. The truth is hanging there like an over ripe apple waiting to be plucked. All you need to do is reason it through with logic and common sense and the AGW scam as it is will evaporate.
Remember, there is no substance known to man that can trap heat! Think about that for a moment.
For a more detailed look at the AGW deception download this free .pdf.
http://www.spinonthat.com/CO2_files/CO2tdino.pdf
matthew Reply:
October 23rd, 2009 at 2:52 pm
I remember it was the Greenhouse effect when I was in school in the 90’s. That nonsense was the beginning of this nonsense.
whitewash Reply:
October 23rd, 2009 at 7:13 pm
they all talk about co2, if thats the case they should also ban dihydrazine oxide!!!!. it is all over the place!!!!
whitewash Reply:
October 23rd, 2009 at 7:16 pm
it is an other name for(dihydrazine oxide) is WATER H2O, in the 80’s it was acid rain & cabon monoxide!!!!!+coal ash…………..
storky Reply:
October 24th, 2009 at 10:36 am
Sulfur dioxide was successfully regulated to reduce acid rain during the Bush/Quayle Administration.
Though the average annual energy production increased by 35% since 1990, Sulfur Dioxide emissions were reduced by 50%.
Why do you defend polluters?
Glen Reply:
October 24th, 2009 at 6:15 pm
Again Stoogey misses the point
Either you are a fool or a troll, my guess is both.
storky Reply:
October 24th, 2009 at 9:39 pm
Your point is moot — a false premise leads to false conclusions.
Whitewash is trying to establish that concerns over CO2, like other concerns in the past, were false alarms. I demonstrated he was wrong on at least one example.
toad Reply:
October 25th, 2009 at 1:01 am
Storky – I’m not sold that concerns over CO2 ARE legitimate. I haven’t seen where you have demonstrated that. Give it to us again.
Fooch Reply:
October 25th, 2009 at 9:33 pm
It’s Dihydrogen oxygen. 2 Hydrogens, DI-Hydrogen. FYI.
Glen Reply:
October 24th, 2009 at 9:20 am
I think you mean Dihydrogen Oxide
storky Reply:
October 24th, 2009 at 3:27 pm
SBDD
Same bullshit, different day.
Glen Reply:
October 24th, 2009 at 6:16 pm
That pretty much sums up your role on this planet Stoogey
storky Reply:
October 24th, 2009 at 9:51 pm
Actually it seems to sum up Prison Planet generally. Over the course of a couple of years, they’ve gone from interesting source of unconventional news to purveyors of demonstrable bullshit. Its sad actually.
Fooch Reply:
October 25th, 2009 at 9:35 pm
If Prisonplanet is bullshit, then why are you still here? Aren’t there greener pastures?
October 23rd, 2009 at 4:26 pm
There is no more that can be done in the states, its like the titanic hit the iceburg and is sinking fast and instead of getting in the lifeboats yall are bitchin at each other, the ship is not coming back up people. margarita island is full of opportunity cheapest cost of living in the world, 4 cent a gallon gas free health care no taxes, no hurricanes, all food is organic by law. for more info check out http://www.escapethestates.com I have plenty of references from people I have moved down here, jump on the underground railraod and find out what it is like to live in a country that has alot more freedom then the united states. Put your money in a different currency and get out with it and dont look back. soon the dollar will be worth nothing, then you are stuck like a turd in the toilet. thanks for listening, if you need help contact me, My wife and I have plenty of knowledge about living here on margarita island we moved here 3 years ago with 3 small children and 3 dogs. We had to get our kids away from the toxic foods and envirment. We can help you escape the states no matter what situation you are in, venezuela does not abide with extradition laws to the USA.
CTLovesNathanHale Reply:
October 24th, 2009 at 8:19 am
Turncoat piece of shit, that’s what you are — good riddance to you, sir…
October 23rd, 2009 at 4:56 pm
I live in San Diego. When driving to La Jolla from the south you can see two distinct cliff lines where the ancient sea levels were. They are several hundred feet above current sea levels. I guess the dinosaurs raced around in SUV’s? What a travesty of lies. All done as an excuse of our unelected rulers to lower our standard of living to a third world level to more readily merge us into their Satanic “New World Odor”.
J Reply:
October 23rd, 2009 at 6:59 pm
“I guess the dinosaurs raced around in SUV’s?” I brought this up to a treehugger once and he told me with a straight face that dinosaurs are just big cows, and we all know what cows flatulance has done to the planet. He actualy belives that dinosaurs went extinct because of their carbon footprint and we are all doomed if we dont get rid of co2. I think hes been hugging the wrong trees.
whitewash Reply:
October 23rd, 2009 at 11:07 pm
yea he has been hugging the wrong trees alright!!!, the has been hugging the LITTLE TREES!!!!
Quantummonkeybutt Reply:
October 24th, 2009 at 7:24 am
Can I Tell You A Story???
It’s About A Boy Named Jack, Who Sells His Mother’s Cow For 5 Magic ‘Beans’…
As It Turns Out, The ‘Beans’ Grow To Form A Giant ‘Bean-Stalk’, Which Jack Climbs To The Tippy Top, And When Jack Is Plenty ‘High’, He Finds A Castle Controlled By A Very Mean Giant.
Jack Also Finds That The ‘Bean-Stalk’ Has Led Him To Gold, The Singing Harp, And The Goose That Lays The Golden Eggs, Which He Promptly Makes His Own…
The Giant’s Wife Saves Jack From Having His Bones Crushed To Make Bread, But The Singing Harp Gives Him Away, And Jack Has To Flee For His Life, The Giant In Hot Pursuit…
You Probably Know The Rest Of The Story, But Do You Know Its Hidden Meanings???
The Whole Story, Although Few Will Admit It, Is About Cannabis Hemp/’Marijuana’…
Seeds For A Giant Green Stalk (Cannabis) That Leads To Making Beautiful Music (Singing Harp) And A Never-Ending Supply Of Money (Goose That Lays The Golden Eggs), Worthy Of Trading A Whole Cow For, And A Vicious Giant (DEA) That Will Do Anything, Even Destroy Itself, To Stop ‘Jack’ From Having Them For Himself.
My Advice To You Is: Plant More ‘Beans’, And The Next Time You’re Hugging A Tree, Break A Nug Off And Let’s Fire-It-Up!!!!!
QMB
Toking
tobage Reply:
October 25th, 2009 at 3:15 pm
You got it backwards,
THE OWNERS got way too greedy.
So the fossil fuel based consumption machine, doubling as an economic Pyramid scheme, that they road to ASTRONOMICAL wealth and power since 1913….has gone ino the ditch.
Abrupt climate shift…… is real.
The plastics and fossil fuel pollution in the environment making us sick….are real.
Fishin out the ocean..is real.
Ocean acidification…is real.
Ozone thinnng..is real.
Or is all that a HOAX or ALARMISM ..too?
IT’S CALLED PHYSICS. And it doesn’t LIE.
So quit being a stoolie for Big Oil, and by extension…THE OWNERS…on this issue.
You aint helping matters…nor are most FOOLS on this forum who think globoal warming a conspiracy. There are alot of conspirqacies that happen – THIS IS NOT ONE! Got it?
WE simply can NOT ECOLOGICAL afford to have the 6.8 billion people in this CLOSED SYSTEM ……wasting and consuming at these rates…let alone at higher rate…let 9 billion people!
Simply put – our ROOT problem right now is we have to MANY people.
Swine flu anyone????????????????????????????
WE ARE IN A GIANT EUGENICS EXPERIMENT
Buzz Hacksaw Reply:
October 25th, 2009 at 5:48 pm
AGM is a Club of Rome “Boogy Man”.
Buzz
rik thomas Reply:
October 26th, 2009 at 4:09 am
tr eddy
sure, you got it…
October 24th, 2009 at 9:29 am
It just shows the Orwellian roots of everything they say, War is Peace etc.
“The trains carrying coal to power plants are death trains. Coal-fired power plants are factories of death.”
We know CO2 is plant food and plants grow better with more CO2 so the sentence would best read
“The trains carrying coal to power plants are LIFE trains. Coal-fired power plants are factories of LIFE.”
The NWO can’t stand that more CO2 will increase the food production of the world and pull more people out of poverty and starvation than any other “AID” ever given by the west, And it gauls them that they are getting it for FREE.
October 24th, 2009 at 2:23 pm
“Coal-fired power plants are factories of LIFE.”
You’re a fucking moron!
a href=”http://www.thestate.com/746/story/970356.html”>Arsenic leaking into waterways and groundwater.
- – - – - – -
Streams of a poisonous, potentially cancer-causing substance recently were found draining to the Wateree River from SCE&G’s coal-fired power plant in lower Richland County.
Consultants discovered elevated levels of arsenic seeping from an earthen wall along the power plant’s 80-acre coal ash waste pond, just a few miles upstream from Congaree National Park. . .
- – - – - – -
TVA Kingston Ash Pond Failure
- – - – - -
. . . At least 3.1 million cubic feet of fly ash were dumped across hundreds of acres in Roane County after the retention pond breached just before 1 a.m.
Officials say up to 400 acres of land adjacent to the plant are under 4 to 6 feet of material. . .
- – - – - -
Glen Reply:
October 24th, 2009 at 6:24 pm
And how exactly does this relate to CO2 you stooge troll.
CO2 Does NOT cause global warming
And the miscalculation of a few engineers do not change that FACT
storky Reply:
October 24th, 2009 at 9:44 pm
You said “Coal-fired power plants are factories of LIFE.” and I demonstrated the converse.
There’s a whole bunch of shit you don’t get. Are you retarded?
storky Reply:
October 24th, 2009 at 9:58 pm
By the way, what are the consequences of the catastrophic failure of a household solar array?
Compare that to the catastrophic failure of a coal ash retention pond or a nuclear power plant mishap.
October 24th, 2009 at 4:28 pm
Ok, so I don’t know if global warming will be benificial to people or not, it will certainly not help cold-loving species of plant or animal. And I am not an atmospheric scientist or a physicist. What occurred to me, however, is that perhaps 50% of the carbon dioxide sequestered in the earth by 3 or 400 million years of plant activity, which was placed into the atmosphere by volcanic activity over the lifespan of the earth of 4.5 billion years, has been released back into the atmosphere. This carbon dioxide will make the atmosphere more dense, and therefore able to retain more heat. Also, the earth has in general cooled over the last 400 million years as that carbon was sequestered. By that logic, the earth has no choice but to warm, probably substantially.
October 25th, 2009 at 5:10 am
CO2 fluctuates hourly,daily,weekly,mthly,yearly.
it only makes up less than 1 percent of all “greenhouse” gases.
plants grow faster and vigorously,sturdier,healthier….any farmer, nursery, green house grower or “hemp grower” knows this.
i guess since sweden and the un already labelling food’s “carbon footprint”, and theyve figured out that chikns dont pollute as much as pigs n cows….i guess only the elite will have steaks n pork chops in the future. chew on that stoogey.
think about missin out on all those bean burritos
we cant have any of the sheep farting after we cull the herd.
i guess some of the misled dont know history…and what happened to the brown shirts
October 25th, 2009 at 9:29 am
Don’t know much about history
Don’t know much biology
Don’t know much about a science book
Don’t know much about the french I took
But I do know that I love you
And I know that if you love me too
What a wonderful world this would be
October 25th, 2009 at 5:29 pm
just waiting to hear some say we should boil the ocean
October 25th, 2009 at 6:12 pm
Doesnt Al Gore look like a hand puppet ?
October 26th, 2009 at 5:00 am
This is a scam to sell products no one needs. And if they can raise your taxes they get a permanent foothold.