Politics, Events, and the Weather: A Collection

By: Dr. Ricky Rood , 5:05 AM GMT on September 29, 2011

Share this Blog
9
+

Politics, Events, and the Weather: A Collection

I have ended the series on Sustainability and Climate Change – for now (Sustainability 1, Sustainability 2, Sustainability 3, Sustainability 4). The responses to the series were interesting, and I owe a few notes to people who have written to me.

For some time I have been planning to collect together a summary of (not so) recent events. There are a lot of places that you can find information on weather and climate events, so that will not be my primary focus. My focus will be on some of those other things that are important to climate and climate change. Still, though, it is hard to start without some attention to the weather and climate.

Back in June Jeff Master’s had a blog about 2010-2011 being the host of more extreme weather than any year since 1816. Last week I was at a meeting talking about the Billion Dollar Events and the extreme summer of 2011 (see, Chris Burt, Weather.com, Earth and Sky). An extreme and persisting event is the heat and drought, largely associated with Texas and Oklahoma, but spread throughout the southern parts of the U.S. Here is a graphic from NCDC that is gathering a lot of attention right now.



Figure 1: Each dot represents a day where temperatures met or exceeded 100 degrees F.

The number of days in North Central Texas and the South West corner of Oklahoma where the high has been over 100 degrees F exceeds 70. This comes with extended droughts. The drought stands in contrast to the record floods to the north and east of Texas, in both the Missouri and Mississippi Valleys – and the Ohio.

In this potpourri of a blog, I want to now mention the prototype web site climate.gov. This is a rapidly growing NOAA web site that includes Climate Watch magazine. Here is an article on the summer 2011. climate.gov improves the accessibility to many weather and climatic products that are part of NOAA’s portfolio. It also features original summary articles and access to data and educational material.

So I want to take off in two directions from here. The first is on the politicization of climate. Representative Ralph Hall announced that the Science, Space, and Technology Committee will start an investigation into NOAA and whether or not NOAA is forming an “unauthorized” climate service. This is consistent with: 1) A statement from the American Association for the Advancement of Science that the political attack on climate researchers is, effectively, impeding the scientific process and stalling the advancement of science. (Which the readers of my blogs will know is the goal of the political arguments, hence, a successful strategy.) And 2) Forms a thread back to this entry in 2007, and, well, much longer. (Oreskes video: Merchants of Doubt) This has evolved to the point that Scott Mandia has started a Climate Science Legal Defense Fund to which you are welcome to contribute.



Figure 2: Climate Science Legal Defense Fund


The other direction that I wanted to go was in the spirit of climate “prediction.” A La Nina pattern has resumed in the eastern tropical Pacific; the water is colder than normal. For those who are thinking about climate predictions and the use of climate models in planning, the persistent cold eastern tropical Pacific offers opportunity. Experience suggests that the drought in the southern half of the U.S. will persist, and the risk for floods in the Missouri Valley will be higher than normal. Since we are highly sensitized to the events of summer 2011, and seemingly disinclined to paying for disasters, interest should be high in how to use this information to develop resilience and reduce risk - and cost.

Back to the political thread: Over the years I have written about the role of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in the U.S. approach to climate change. The recap is that the Supreme Court affirmed that the EPA could regulate carbon dioxide as a pollutant. At one point the Obama Administration was inclined to have the EPA to enforce this notion. There was bipartisan opposition, strongly related to whether or not a state or district had jobs related to fossil fuels. In the absence of policy, regulation is often used as a environmental management tool, and in general, this is not desired by anyone. Throughout 2011 there has been push and pull on the EPA. There was a move led by Senators Mitch McConnell and James Inhoff to stop the EPA from enforcing carbon dioxide regulation, and repealing “a 2009 finding by federal scientists that climate change caused by greenhouse gases endangers human health …”. Though this particular effort failed, “Resistance from Democrats is what caused legislation in Congress to collapse during the first two years of the Obama administration even though the president’s party controlled both the House and Senate at the time.” In a complex set of legal actions the Supreme Court ruled against a set of states who were trying to use federal law to curb greenhouse emissions from electrical utilities. As I understand this issue the Obama Administration sided with the utilities against the state efforts at regulation. The net result of these political machinations is that there is one delay after another in the development of EPA rules, and the focus on the EPA as THE point of regulation.

The point I want to make here is that the persistent political resistance achieves the goal of prohibiting the U.S. from developing a unified approach to climate change. Especially with the economic growth remaining stagnant, there is little political motivation in either party to address climate change. There is not foreseeable development of national policy, and the political process is targeted on delaying or destroying any regulation-based approach. There is resistance to funding federal support to promote alternative energy, with the argument that market forces don’t support the need. Economy trumps climate change. And doesn’t this short-focused, tribal politics, ultimately, hurt our economy and competitiveness?

In response to this situation, no political party takes ownership of the climate-change problem. Organizations such as 350.org are holding the political mantle to take action on climate change, with efforts like last weekend’s Moving Planet.

That’s it for now. There is more. Perhaps it is all best summed up by Gary Trudeau in Doonesbury



Figure 3: Doonesbury, September 25, 2011. From Doonesbury.com



r

Reader Comments

Comments will take a few seconds to appear.

Post Your Comments

Please sign in to post comments.

or Join

Not only will you be able to leave comments on this blog, but you'll also have the ability to upload and share your photos in our Wunder Photos section.

Display: 0, 50, 100, 200 Sort: Newest First - Order Posted

Viewing: 379 - 329

Page: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8Blog Index

Quoting JBastardi:
Interesting article about one of the many incorrectly sited NOAA weather stations:

Link

Instead of reading the crap hard-core disinformer Anthony Watts is spreading on his anti-science website WUWT, I highly recommend you to read Ben's interesting articles on the website WOWT instead.

For example this article about weather stations Link
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Ossqss:

360, Imageshack has always been a very good source of science :)

You people just don't get it yet.

You cry about fossil fuels based upon your skepticalscience cut and paste items and have no alternatives that are viable.


It's a screenshot from the video: Bjerknes Lecture,"The biggest Control Knob: Carbon Dioxide in Earth's Climate History".
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting nymore:
no it at the 32 minute mark of the vid.

Then you must mean this graph,

Click for larger image:

Uh-oh


Alley is talking about earlier mismatches. In the video Alley shows that the temperature and CO2 levels are highly correlated throughout the earth’s history but occasionally there were places where temperature changes didn't match CO2 changes, for example in the Miocene.

With new records that improve the match and new dataset all these divergences have gone and the mismatches have mostly dissapeared as shown in the image below.

Click for larger image:

Uh-oh


CO2 is on the top and temperatures is on the bottom. Both images are screenshots from the video.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
And the hydroponics question was real. I read an article about shipping containers being used in cities for growing 'an acres worth' of food in a confined space. I have no idea how true the article was (I suspect it exagerates) or what the problems would be to scale it up. My interst was specifically in that hydroponics should not have run-off and hence would be purely a sunlight/water/CO2 in and fruit/vegtables out operation. Furthr, it cuold be done in the desert, etc in areas where there is not sufficient water for open air growth.
Member Since: June 5, 2006 Posts: 0 Comments: 1220
Quoting nymore:
Maybe for the same reason Greentortuloni got his love of nature from taking large amounts of magic mushrooms as per the last blog post of Dr. Rood. BTW he also asked about growing with hydroponics which if your taking large amounts of 'shrooms I can can guess he wants to grow weed. That doesn't make you bad person


I guess I should clear that up. I mentioned drug use only because as someone who grew up conservative and is still conservative in most of my politics, I felt the need to bridge the gap in my politics between a concern for ecology (and a deep love of trees in particular) with conservtism.

As far as drugs go, I, like a lot of people, took drugs in college. I never grew or sold drugs. It was for a few years of and on and irregularly, I would classify it as experimental. I quit because mostly because it is just something I outgrew.

That said, my first experience with mushrooms was magic - no other word for it. Ken kesey said [paraphrazing]: drugs can open a door but once that door has been opened, you can explore what is through the doorway without drugs.

For me, my memories of trees and nature and the sensation of just being alive are enough. Maybe someday I will try drugs again but for now a beer at the end of the day is enough.
Member Since: June 5, 2006 Posts: 0 Comments: 1220
Quoting monclersdiscount:
canada goose coat
students to canada goose go home to play New Year, the last to go, I push the electric car to go out, A students to help me open the door, I praised his "kids really sensible!"
B students sided with the sentence: ah, through human too!
Haha, in humanity, too damaged a person!
met a guy on the Metro Line. . White skin, big eyes, long TM really nice!
I lust to see the bud ah. . I have come to align the phone, take pictures I'm afraid the moment think of a voice! Results of a coward.
Off when he also found joy, the end of the line so quietly. He was on the elevator, he encountered other people.
So I looked at him in the cow sounded like another tall young people holding hands away Xiangxie.
I am very bored, so give small Q (TX artificial intelligence chat robot) Happy New Year.
I said: Happy New Year
A's: auspicious Year of the Rat!
Remember, for the company, live in a dormitory, once a brother to see me, I said call me when you go downstairs to pick. He actually found himself a moment, and asked him how to find it? He said that swept the underwear on your balcony. I am more confused, are not I a man swept up, swept others, ah! His calm and said: I know you wear underwear not only deformed ...
New Year to eat dinner when her aunt said, had Moncler jackets seven brothers and sisters later died 3
My grandmother said that it must be very sad
She could go on: dead pigs at that time also sad than the death of individuals
Just see a name and on mathematics-related, think





The effects of purple drank folks. Hugs not drugs!
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting nymore:
Maybe from the same place Greentortuloni got his love of nature from taking large amounts of magic mushrooms as per the last blog post of Dr. Rood. BTW he also asked about growing with hydroponics which if your taking large amounts of 'shrooms I can can guess he wants to grow weed. Not that it makes you bad person


LOL, I knew I should not have checked in :-P

Gnight!

Member Since: June 12, 2005 Posts: 6 Comments: 8186
Quoting BaltimoreBrian:
At first I thought that was a slam but he really did say that. I don't approve of illegal drug use period.
I personally don't care if you smoke a little or bang some 'shrooms once in a while but the hard core stuff no. Prescription drugs, man made ones, or hard core naturals no good
Member Since: July 6, 2011 Posts: 0 Comments: 2259
At first I thought that was a slam but he really did say that. I don't approve of illegal drug use period.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting BaltimoreBrian:
#359 why did you choose a handle promoting drug use?
Maybe for the same reason Greentortuloni got his love of nature from taking large amounts of magic mushrooms as per the last blog post of Dr. Rood. BTW he also asked about growing with hydroponics which if your taking large amounts of 'shrooms I can can guess he wants to grow weed. That doesn't make you bad person
Member Since: July 6, 2011 Posts: 0 Comments: 2259
I see some people on this blog still do not know the difference between profit and profit margin. Also throws out figures that I have proved wrong before because the figure has changed several times and there is no way to actually measure with any accuracy.
Member Since: July 6, 2011 Posts: 0 Comments: 2259
#359 why did you choose a handle promoting drug use?
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Xandra:

Do you mean this graph?

Click for larger image:

Uh-oh


It’s simulated temperatures during the last 1000 years with and without anthropogenic forcings and also with weak or strong solar irradiance variations.

It shows very clearly that natural forcings cannot account for the increase in global temperatures in the second half of the 20th century. Thick lines are anthropogenic and natural forcings. Thin lines only natural forcings.

And yes, it’s good science!
no it at the 32 minute mark of the vid.
Member Since: July 6, 2011 Posts: 0 Comments: 2259
Quoting Neapolitan:


Pop quiz: which view is the "extremist" one? The view that all climate scientists are lying socialist morons out to get your last dollar and "make you live in a cave", and that the 40 trillion liters of CO2 we pump into the atmosphere each and every day simply vanishes without a trace? Or the one that says the most profitable industry ever in the history of the world doesn't have a single thing to gain by convincing the gullible that it does not have a definite and provable interest in maintaining its grip on the energy paradigm at all costs?

It seems to me that the Fox-loving denialists are the ones who just don't get it. But they will. I guarantee it. It'll most likely be too late for us. But they will get it.


Do you read what you post?

Take a look......... and take a different approach.

No different than the 6th grade science fair picture of a corrugated idea for diverting ocean currents. . . . . . . .

You know how many scientists are behind your consensus.

Just sayin~ word up~!

Don't be on the Lamb :)

Member Since: June 12, 2005 Posts: 6 Comments: 8186
Quoting Ossqss:


LOL, I hope for that change, and you are simply not right with your extremist view once again.

360, Imageshack has always been a very good source of science :)

You people just don't get it yet.

You cry about fossil fuels based upon your skepticalscience cut and paste items and have no alternatives that are viable. Take a look at the market cap on Apple, and their margins, and use of fossil fuels to make those products you have in front of you.

You simply want people in caves again.

News you can use,,,, it ain't gonna happen.




Pop quiz: which view is the "extremist" one? The view that all climate scientists are lying socialist morons out to get your last dollar and "make you live in a cave", and that the 40 trillion liters of CO2 we pump into the atmosphere each and every day simply vanishes without a trace? Or the one that says the most profitable industry ever in the history of the world doesn't have a single thing to gain by convincing the gullible that it does not have a definite and provable interest in maintaining its grip on the energy paradigm at all costs?

It seems to me that the Fox-loving denialists are the ones who just don't get it. But they will. I guarantee it. It'll most likely be too late for us. But they will get it.
Member Since: November 8, 2009 Posts: 4 Comments: 13625
Quoting Neapolitan:

The last, best hope Obama has to hang onto his eroding base of progressive and thoughtful supporters is to put the kibosh on the insanely destructive Keystone XL pipeline. If he gives into big money Big Energy and okays this debacle-in-waiting like the moderate conservative I fear he's become, his re-election chances plummet even further. We don't want that pipeline. We don't need it. It doesn't help the environment, it doesn't help America, and it certainly won't help lower energy costs. It will only further thicken the wallets of fossil fuel fat cats while pushing the world that much closer and faster to a GW catastrophe.

Good plan, that.


LOL, I hope for that change, and you are simply not right with your extremist view once again.

360, Imageshack has always been a very good source of science :)

You people just don't get it yet.

You cry about fossil fuels based upon your skepticalscience cut and paste items and have no alternatives that are viable. Take a look at the market cap on Apple, and their margins, and use of fossil fuels to make those products you have in front of you.

You simply want people in caves again.

News you can use,,,, it ain't gonna happen.


Member Since: June 12, 2005 Posts: 6 Comments: 8186
Interesting article about one of the many incorrectly sited NOAA weather stations:

Link
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting nymore:
Interesting vid seen it before even he says we have no desk slapping evidence but can infer it is. He shows one graph on the video that shows no correlation with co2 on the same graph it shows maybe somewhat evidence and says both are from good science practices. Which is right.

Do you mean this graph?

Click for larger image:

Uh-oh


It’s simulated temperatures during the last 1000 years with and without anthropogenic forcings and also with weak or strong solar irradiance variations.

It shows very clearly that natural forcings cannot account for the increase in global temperatures in the second half of the 20th century. Thick lines are anthropogenic and natural forcings. Thin lines only natural forcings.

And yes, it’s good science!
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Global warning: climate sceptics are winning the battle


Father of the green movement says scientists lack PR skills to make public listen

By Michael McCarthy, Environment Editor

Climate sceptics are winning the argument with the public over global warming, the world's most celebrated climate scientist, James Hansen of NASA, said in London yesterday.


It is happening even though climate science itself is becoming ever clearer in showing that the earth is in increasing danger from rising temperatures, said Dr Hansen, who heads NASA's Goddard Institute of Space Studies, and is widely thought of as "the father of global warming" – his dramatic alert about climate change in US Senate hearings in July 1988 put the issue on the world agenda.

Since then he has been one of the most outspoken advocates of drastic climate action, and yesterday he also publicly criticised Germany's recent decision to abandon its new nuclear power programme, formerly a key part of German climate measures, in the wake of the Fukushima nuclear disaster in Japan earlier this year.

"I think it was a big mistake," he said. "And I think the Prime Minister [German Chancellor Angela Merkel] knows that, as she's a physicist, but I think the political reality is she couldn't stay in office if she expressed that opinion."

In a briefing at the Royal Society , Dr Hansen was frank about the success with public opinion of what he termed "the climate contrarians", in effectively lessening public concern about global warming. He said: "They have been winning the argument for several years, even though the science has become clearer.

"There's been a very strong campaign by those who want to continue fossil fuel 'business as usual', and the scientific story has not been powerful enough to offset that push."

Part of the problem, he said, was that the climate sceptic lobby employed communications professionals, whereas "scientists are just barely competent at communicating with the public and don't have the wherewithal to do it."

The result was, he said, that in recent years "a gap has opened between what is understood about global warming by the relevant scientific community, and what's known by the people who need to know – and that's the public. However there's nothing that has happened to reduce our scientific conclusion that we are pushing the system into very dangerous territory, in fact that conclusion has become stronger over that same time period."

Asked if anything might re-alert the public to the dangers of climate change, Dr Hansen said: "Mother Nature."

Significant climatic "extreme events" were now occurring over 10 to 15 per cent of the planet annually, whereas between 1950 to 1980 they occurred over less than 1 per cent. He added: "So in places like Texas this year, Moscow last year, and Europe in 2003, the climate change is so big that they are undeniable. Within 10 to 15 years they're going to occur over 15 to 20 per cent of the planet, so people have to notice that the climate is changing."

http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/climate- change/global-warning-climate-sceptics-are-winning -the-battle-2368617.html
Member Since: August 17, 2010 Posts: 1 Comments: 730
Quoting iceagecoming:
A coalition of environmental and ethics groups sued Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and the U.S. State Department on Wednesday over documents relating to a contentious oil pipeline that would link Canada's oil sands to oil refineries in the southern United States.

The groups suspect that the documents, sought through a Freedom of Information Act request filed in December, contain communications between Clinton and a lobbyist representing TransCanada, the company behind the proposed pipeline, known as the Keystone XL project.

The lobbyist in question, Paul Elliott, formerly served as a deputy campaign director for Clinton's failed presidential bid in 2008. The State Department is currently considering whether to grant TransCanada a permit for the Keystone pipeline, without which the project cannot go forward.

Environmental groups staunchly oppose the project, which would service and support the tar sands of Alberta, a highly destructive and polluting fuel source where a tarry oil is squeezed from sand and rock. The materials are strip mined from vast open pits at great expense, with substantial investment of both water and energy and copious atmospheric emissions.

The department expects to render a decision by the end of 2011.

In early January, the State Department initially refused to honor the FOIA request, suggesting that too little information had been provided to isolate the documents. The assertion immediately raised hackles with critics.

The environmental groups appealed, and in a letter dated February 1, the State Department indicated that it accepted the original document request.

Persistent silence on the matter since then prompted the organizations, which include Friends of the Earth, the Center for International Environmental Law and Corporate Ethics International, to file Wednesday's suit.

The groups argue any communication between Clinton and Elliott presents a potential conflict as the State Department considers permitting for the Keystone pipeline. They note, for example, that Clinton has repeatedly expressed a public inclination to approve the project, despite reservations from farmers and ranchers in the pipeline's path and even after the Environmental Protection Agency labeled a draft environmental impact statement for the project inadequate.

"Clearly, TransCanada hired Mr. Elliott to take advantage of his previous service to Hillary Clinton," said Kenny Bruno of Corporate Ethics International, in a statement issued Wednesday afternoon. “We think the public has a right to know in what ways TransCanada and Mr. Elliott have attempted to influence Secretary Clinton’s view of this controversial project."


Even with Clinton being key to the decision, the eco
warriors already know the battle is lost.


As I have stated many times before, we will not regain our representative form of government until we permanently ban ALL professional lobbyist.
Member Since: August 24, 2010 Posts: 0 Comments: 4758
Quoting iceagecoming:
A coalition of environmental and ethics groups sued Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and the U.S. State Department on Wednesday over documents relating to a contentious oil pipeline that would link Canada's oil sands to oil refineries in the southern United States.

The groups suspect that the documents, sought through a Freedom of Information Act request filed in December, contain communications between Clinton and a lobbyist representing TransCanada, the company behind the proposed pipeline, known as the Keystone XL project.

The lobbyist in question, Paul Elliott, formerly served as a deputy campaign director for Clinton's failed presidential bid in 2008. The State Department is currently considering whether to grant TransCanada a permit for the Keystone pipeline, without which the project cannot go forward.

Environmental groups staunchly oppose the project, which would service and support the tar sands of Alberta, a highly destructive and polluting fuel source where a tarry oil is squeezed from sand and rock. The materials are strip mined from vast open pits at great expense, with substantial investment of both water and energy and copious atmospheric emissions.

The department expects to render a decision by the end of 2011.

In early January, the State Department initially refused to honor the FOIA request, suggesting that too little information had been provided to isolate the documents. The assertion immediately raised hackles with critics.

The environmental groups appealed, and in a letter dated February 1, the State Department indicated that it accepted the original document request.

Persistent silence on the matter since then prompted the organizations, which include Friends of the Earth, the Center for International Environmental Law and Corporate Ethics International, to file Wednesday's suit.

The groups argue any communication between Clinton and Elliott presents a potential conflict as the State Department considers permitting for the Keystone pipeline. They note, for example, that Clinton has repeatedly expressed a public inclination to approve the project, despite reservations from farmers and ranchers in the pipeline's path and even after the Environmental Protection Agency labeled a draft environmental impact statement for the project inadequate.

"Clearly, TransCanada hired Mr. Elliott to take advantage of his previous service to Hillary Clinton," said Kenny Bruno of Corporate Ethics International, in a statement issued Wednesday afternoon. “We think the public has a right to know in what ways TransCanada and Mr. Elliott have attempted to influence Secretary Clinton’s view of this controversial project."


Even with Clinton being key to the decision, the eco
warriors already know the battle is lost.

The last, best hope Obama has to hang onto his eroding base of progressive and thoughtful supporters is to put the kibosh on the insanely destructive Keystone XL pipeline. If he gives into big money Big Energy and okays this debacle-in-waiting like the moderate conservative I fear he's become, his re-election chances plummet even further. We don't want that pipeline. We don't need it. It doesn't help the environment, it doesn't help America, and it certainly won't help lower energy costs. It will only further thicken the wallets of fossil fuel fat cats while pushing the world that much closer and faster to a GW catastrophe.

Good plan, that.
Member Since: November 8, 2009 Posts: 4 Comments: 13625
Quoting JBastardi:
Current temps nowhere near the temps of the Medieval Warming Period as shown by another study:

Link

Oh, thanks for the laughs! But a couple of things:

1) Just to clarify, the article, published in June, didn't isn't about the WMP, but rather a period hundreds of years earlier.

2) The article refers to one specific core sample from one particular lake in Switzerland. That is, regional isn't global. That point can't possibly be reinforced often enough.

3) The blurb on the C3Headlines page to which you linked doesn't quite say what the abstract for the underlying article says, does it? The abstract--and hence the paper itself--are talking about temperature variability back then, not absolute temperatures.

4) Most importantly: why do you suppose it is that denialists only accept proxy data when they believe (erroneously, in this case) that those data bolster their pre-conceived POVs? I believe there's a name for that:
Cherry-picking (chair'-ee--pik'-ing) - verb (trans-intrans) 1. the activity of selecting and/or presenting only that data which supports ones point of view, while intentionally omitting and/or de-emphasizing that which does not.

Member Since: November 8, 2009 Posts: 4 Comments: 13625
Quoting JBastardi:
Current temps nowhere near the temps of the Medieval Warming Period as shown by another study:

Link


Regional warming is not global climate.
Member Since: August 24, 2010 Posts: 0 Comments: 4758
A coalition of environmental and ethics groups sued Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and the U.S. State Department on Wednesday over documents relating to a contentious oil pipeline that would link Canada's oil sands to oil refineries in the southern United States.

The groups suspect that the documents, sought through a Freedom of Information Act request filed in December, contain communications between Clinton and a lobbyist representing TransCanada, the company behind the proposed pipeline, known as the Keystone XL project.

The lobbyist in question, Paul Elliott, formerly served as a deputy campaign director for Clinton's failed presidential bid in 2008. The State Department is currently considering whether to grant TransCanada a permit for the Keystone pipeline, without which the project cannot go forward.

Environmental groups staunchly oppose the project, which would service and support the tar sands of Alberta, a highly destructive and polluting fuel source where a tarry oil is squeezed from sand and rock. The materials are strip mined from vast open pits at great expense, with substantial investment of both water and energy and copious atmospheric emissions.

The department expects to render a decision by the end of 2011.

In early January, the State Department initially refused to honor the FOIA request, suggesting that too little information had been provided to isolate the documents. The assertion immediately raised hackles with critics.

The environmental groups appealed, and in a letter dated February 1, the State Department indicated that it accepted the original document request.

Persistent silence on the matter since then prompted the organizations, which include Friends of the Earth, the Center for International Environmental Law and Corporate Ethics International, to file Wednesday's suit.

The groups argue any communication between Clinton and Elliott presents a potential conflict as the State Department considers permitting for the Keystone pipeline. They note, for example, that Clinton has repeatedly expressed a public inclination to approve the project, despite reservations from farmers and ranchers in the pipeline's path and even after the Environmental Protection Agency labeled a draft environmental impact statement for the project inadequate.

"Clearly, TransCanada hired Mr. Elliott to take advantage of his previous service to Hillary Clinton," said Kenny Bruno of Corporate Ethics International, in a statement issued Wednesday afternoon. “We think the public has a right to know in what ways TransCanada and Mr. Elliott have attempted to influence Secretary Clinton’s view of this controversial project."


Even with Clinton being key to the decision, the eco
warriors already know the battle is lost.
Member Since: January 27, 2009 Posts: 25 Comments: 1083
Current temps nowhere near the temps of the Medieval Warming Period as shown by another study:

Link
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting nymore:
I don't care how big Al Gores' house is. I hope everyone works hard and makes fat cash to purchase what they want, be it a Honda or Hummer, studio apartment or McMansion.

You have the do as I say not as I do attitude. If your wondering that is text book hypocrisy. Try leading by example you get more respect that way.

I understand your dismay though, having lost the Keystone XL pipeline deal, not being able to show any global surface temperature increase for the last decade and soon to lose the freedom of information request you have taken enough of a beating lately. I will not kick you when your down and stop with those.

BTW I never said anything about Al Gore I asked what YOU do to actually help solve the so called problem and not continue to contribute to it. Nice straw man argument though, to bad you failed miserably since I and the majority people could not care less about Al Gore as he is largely irrelevant now days and more the punchline at the end of a joke.


The point is that you are confusing the man with the man's ideas. I don't know Nea but i doubt he give's a flying donut about leading or respect for himself as long as the ideas he has are respected.

Whether he is a hypocrit or not, the ideas he stands for are accurate and should be respected or at least debated honestly. A favorite tactic of the appeasers is to attack the man for hypocrisy as if that shows that his ideas are false.

But i suspect you know this and that your argument is soley for yourself.

And Al Gore is widely respected around the world, if not in your circle of intellectual equals.
Member Since: June 5, 2006 Posts: 0 Comments: 1220
Quoting Some1Has2BtheRookie:


Dude! Those aren't boots! That's my hightop tennies! LOL

I did not get the pants. I did get the matching shirt.
Nice
Member Since: July 6, 2011 Posts: 0 Comments: 2259
Quoting nymore:
Nice boots, I guess? They go well with the pants though.


Dude! Those aren't boots! That's my hightop tennies! LOL

I did not get the pants. I did get the matching shirt.
Member Since: August 24, 2010 Posts: 0 Comments: 4758
Nice boots, I guess? They go well with the pants though.
Member Since: July 6, 2011 Posts: 0 Comments: 2259
Quoting Neapolitan:

Not that I'm anywhere near his stature, but it's the same silly equivalence denialists continually use with Al Gore: he can afford to live in a big house, so therefore CO2 isn't warming the planet. Sure, it makes no logical sense whatsoever, but when folks are grasping at straws, I suppose any straw will do...
I don't care how big Al Gores' house is. I hope everyone works hard and makes fat cash to purchase what they want, be it a Honda or Hummer, studio apartment or McMansion.

You have the do as I say not as I do attitude. If your wondering that is text book hypocrisy. Try leading by example you get more respect that way.

I understand your dismay though, having lost the Keystone XL pipeline deal, not being able to show any global surface temperature increase for the last decade and soon to lose the freedom of information request you have taken enough of a beating lately. I will not kick you when your down and stop with those.

BTW I never said anything about Al Gore I asked what YOU do to actually help solve the so called problem and not continue to contribute to it. Nice straw man argument though, to bad you failed miserably since I and the majority people could not care less about Al Gore as he is largely irrelevant now days and more the punchline at the end of a joke.
Member Since: July 6, 2011 Posts: 0 Comments: 2259
Quoting greentortuloni:


Do you get paid by the pound?

I sure hope so; if he is getting paid for each scientifically valid truth he posts, he's surely going to starve to death.
Member Since: November 8, 2009 Posts: 4 Comments: 13625
Quoting iceagecoming:


Can I have a new pair of shoes, these were granpa's from the sixties.



Whatta we want, we don't know, when do we want it, right now, why, who the hell knows.





Now, I am upset! Andy Wharhol assured me he wouldn't make a copy of the shoes I bought from him!
Member Since: August 24, 2010 Posts: 0 Comments: 4758
Quoting Patrap:
Does the Lions being 5 and 0 have a affect on the Warming?

TIA
They gotta get by da PACK!!! And no for the answer,your welcome in advance.
Member Since: June 24, 2007 Posts: 0 Comments: 1479
Quoting Xandra:
Bill McKibben’s Keystone XL Speech at Occupy Wall Street!



Tell President Obama to show oil lobbyists the door and reject the Keystone XL pipeline


Can I have a new pair of shoes, these were granpa's from the sixties.



Whatta we want, we don't know, when do we want it, right now, why, who the hell knows.



Member Since: January 27, 2009 Posts: 25 Comments: 1083
Quoting JBastardi:
Where's the warming?

Link


Do you get paid by the pound?
Member Since: June 5, 2006 Posts: 0 Comments: 1220
Where's the warming?

Link
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Patrap:
Does the Lions being 5 and 0 have a affect on the Warming?

TIA


I reckon it is as good a sign of the collapse as anything. Is Billy Sims stil playing for them?
Member Since: June 5, 2006 Posts: 0 Comments: 1220
Does the Lions being 5 and 0 have a affect on the Warming?

TIA
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting greentortuloni:


What difference does that make?

Not that I'm anywhere near his stature, but it's the same silly equivalence denialists continually use with Al Gore: he can afford to live in a big house, so therefore CO2 isn't warming the planet. Sure, it makes no logical sense whatsoever, but when folks are grasping at straws, I suppose any straw will do...
Member Since: November 8, 2009 Posts: 4 Comments: 13625
Quoting nymore:
So tell us what have you done besides rant on some blogs. I sure that attack on the problem will solve everything. Do you walk or bike everywhere, grow your own food, make your own power or heat your own water?


What difference does that make?
Member Since: June 5, 2006 Posts: 0 Comments: 1220
Quoting JBastardi:


All known science? You must be kidding. If it were science, all scientists would agree. It's nothing but flawed theory.


Oh, wait, JB is defining science now...

1st criterria: it is something everyone arees on..


Any more criteria, pray tell? Would love to hear you try to handle the concepts.

Member Since: June 5, 2006 Posts: 0 Comments: 1220
Quoting overwash12:
OMG! People that want the gov't to run a balanced budget are morons?


The only way I can get your statement out of what I said is to believe the teaparty wants the government to have a balanced budget.... personally I don't think they do but for the sake of argument, ok.

Your point seems to be that if you want a balanced budget, you are not a moron, yes? I think pretty much everyone wants a balanced budget... so no one is a moron? The point being that (assuming that the teaparty actually wants a balanced budget) boths things happen to be true : The teaparty is composed of morans. The teaparty wants a balanced budget. Being right on one issue doesn't make you not a moron.

The teaparty is not, as far as I can see, about less government or rational government, nor is it about effective management of funds. The teaparty is about politics and is using this issue to gain popular support among the bumpersticker set.
Member Since: June 5, 2006 Posts: 0 Comments: 1220
Quoting Some1Has2BtheRookie:


I always enjoy our conversations.
me too sir
Member Since: July 6, 2011 Posts: 0 Comments: 2259
Quoting nymore:
Thank you


I always enjoy our conversations.
Member Since: August 24, 2010 Posts: 0 Comments: 4758
Quoting Some1Has2BtheRookie:


That is a very fair answer. Thank you, for that. I can respect that.
Thank you
Member Since: July 6, 2011 Posts: 0 Comments: 2259
Quoting BaltimoreBrian:


I think Neapolitan is a very good blogger who provides lots of good sourced information from real scientists.
I never said he was not very informed or a poor writer. I asked what is he doing that could actually make a difference.
Member Since: July 6, 2011 Posts: 0 Comments: 2259
Quoting nymore:
No sir it is because there are so many Bibles or beliefs. Are they all right, all wrong or some right and some wrong. I guess that would depend on who you ask everyone thinks the one they believe in is right and the others are wrong.


That is a very fair answer. Thank you, for that. I can respect that.
Member Since: August 24, 2010 Posts: 0 Comments: 4758
Quoting Some1Has2BtheRookie:


Is it wrong, in your opinion, simply because there is not full agreement with its interpretation? ... What I am asking you is if there needs to be 100% agreement for it to be true.
No sir it is because there are so many Bibles or beliefs. Are they all right, all wrong or some right and some wrong. I guess that would depend on who you ask everyone thinks the one they believe in is right and the others are wrong.
Member Since: July 6, 2011 Posts: 0 Comments: 2259
Quoting nymore:
With all due respect sir the answer is yes.


Is it wrong, in your opinion, simply because there is not full agreement with its interpretation? ... What I am asking you is if there needs to be 100% agreement for it to be true.
Member Since: August 24, 2010 Posts: 0 Comments: 4758

Viewing: 379 - 329

Page: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8Blog Index

Top of Page

About RickyRood

I'm a professor at U Michigan and lead a course on climate change problem solving. These articles often come from and contribute to the course.